That one needn't PvP doesn't necessarily prevent one from being affected by it, so your first hint may not be apt. It depends on how cleanly they are divided.
For example, I've played games where the most valuable collectible resources are confined to PvP areas. I've seen posts made by people playing games where character abilities are not differentiated between PvE and PvP, where changes to accommodate the latter overly impaired the former.
The rewards bit is an equally silly argument that also reeks of entitlement. Risk and effort should be rewarded. PVP is inherently riskier. I find it as silly as people complaining about raids having better/exclusive rewards (to give a comparable example without PVP that I have also seen frequently).
In any case, New World's bonuses for flagging up are not negligible but still no biggie, from what I have read in their site:
I agree on your point about skills affecting modes differently. I am not aware of NW having such issues.
100% optional PVP means you can do all PVE content with 0 PVP afaik.
It's equally silly if one feels players should be railroaded into play they don't enjoy in a leisure activity that is supposed to be providing one enjoyment. One can seek riskier and more rewarding PvE, so PvP isn't needed for those inclined to such.
There is absolutely no benefit or reason to mix PvE and PvP, or to make one favoured over the other, in a game meant to equally cater to both audiences. All it does is reduce the enjoyment of all those that play it.
Those solely interested in PvE don't want PvP thrust upon them, or to be limited in their PvE by choosing to avoid it. Those that favour PvP don't enjoy forcing it upon them, at least those in it for the challenge rather than the potential for bullying.
Once the abilities for flagging up are not negligible they can be a biggie as it creates two classes of players, the noble PvPers advantaged over the PvE peons. For those not bothered by that it isn't an issue. For those that are it can be a major one.
I know what optional PvP means. I also know not having to engage in it directly isn't necessarily the same as not being impacted by it directly, making that aspect when it occurs 0% optional. It's not as simple as PvP Attack Susceptibility Yes/No.
There are no areas of New World with better resources or anything else that you need to be PvP flagged to do.
The only impact on PvErs that PvPers can have is which faction controls a zone which is accomplished by PvPing. If you're a member of the faction that controls that zone you get some perks for some PvE activities in that zone, but those perks are minor compared to the individual perks you get for your reputation in that zone which is something you get just by playing in the zone with zero PvP required. You get the same exact faction control zone perks whether you do some PvP or none at all.
You're projecting PvP advantages from other games into New World without really knowing anything about the finer details of how NW works.
I wasn't projecting anything into New World, or speaking specifically about it. That exchange was about my contesting of the assertion that being immune to direct attack in PvP doesn't necessarily preclude being affected by it. Other factors need be considered. It was a general point, not one confined to New World, and included examples from other games I'm familiar with rather than guesses about one I am not.
Anyway, on to NW specifics.
It seems that what you saying that PvP determines which faction controls an area, and those of the controlling faction get a bonus whether they personally PvP or not. Accordingly those of the non-controlling faction lose out on that bonus whether they PvP or not. Individual perks from your personal reputation in that guild are greater and unrelated to faction control.
So, the bottom line appears to me from what you said, based on your much greater knowledge of NW, is one can be indirectly affected by PvP in the game regardless of interest or participation in it.
Despite my prior ignorance of the details my general comments turned out not all that far off the mark in my view. Perhaps I misinterpreted something and my analysis is flawed. Having no personal direct experience with the game makes that quite possible. If that is the case I welcome being corrected, ideally specifically so.
No you're not affected so much by the PvP as you are by your faction choice. PvP is just the mechanism for a faction to gain control of a zone but it doesn't have to be.
If there were no PvP whatsoever in the game and instead there were a PvE way of gaining control of a territory - sum of the reputation of all faction members in that zone for example - the result would be identical: members of the controlling faction would get the buff in that territory and members of the other two factions would not.
Alight. It sounds decent then. If my computer was stronger I'd be inclined to check it out for myself so I could see how it works out directly.
Either way it sounds like plenty are having fun with the game. It's nice to see.
You are correct on one thing you previously mentioned though: any game with both PvE and PvP that use the same skills for both will always have disagreement between PvErs and PvPers about what needs to be nerfed and what needs to be buffed.
It's already happening in NW after a brief 2-week beta.
For 5 player expeditions (instanced dungeons) the healing Life Staff used by one healer is barely adequate to cover the healing needs of the party. IMO it needs a buff for that purpose.
In open world solo PvE, it's adequate as either the primary or secondary weapon. To me it seems just fine as is.
But when used by a heavily armored Great Axe wielder as the second weapon (they call that the "Paladin" build) in PvP, it's the meta because it heals enough and has very few counters to be dominant combined with the high damage and mobility of the Great Axe. PvPers are calling for a life staff nerf already.
"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
Also being considered are white Drow for DnD, a politically correct move which like so many others adds nothing to the strong theme of the material.
Please... we say civilized speech and actions now. Politically correct is so 20th century.
"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
But I have a few questions still. I think I have to play as a human? Which I can improvise and pretend I'm an elf. But I like to play a dark elf so idk if there will be white hair and black skin?
Only human, but can be transgender - is that a first for mainstream mmos? Also, you can have dark skin and white hair. No pointy ears though.
It may be. I've seen it mentioned in descriptions for games of other genres on Steam, but I don't remember seeing it for MMORPGs.
Not sure you actually need pointy ears to be an elf, certainly for classical DnD but other Elven treatments do not always have them. Also being considered are white Drow for DnD, a politically correct move which like so many others adds nothing to the strong theme of the material.
The Aztecs had something similar to elves but they are more like small faeries a half elf there might be pushing it? End of the day if you are immersion roleplaying you decided what you are. If you are roleplaying with others, just make sure they have a heads up, maybe they can think of a better explanation? I am not sure how much of a fantasy setting this game has, being an Elf might not even be that big a deal, but the pics I have seen so far were all human I think.
Pointed ears for elves seems the by far the most common from media I've experienced, but I'm sure there is plenty otherwise I simply haven't encountered. There is a great deal of folklore I know nothing about at all.
I detest any change made to existing lore or characters motivated by political correctness or contrived diversity. Hopefully if they introduce white skinned Drow it will be through a cleverly done addition rather than revision, and will add more to the game than just aesthetic variance of the race.
It seemed as though NW has magic or at least some kind of mystical force at play from some of the videos I've seen, so with that anything could be possible from a role-play perspective.
In case you are on the fence, would like some insight based on gameplay, I found this beta review really comprehensive. I agree with his every point:
Very level headed beta review.
"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
That one needn't PvP doesn't necessarily prevent one from being affected by it, so your first hint may not be apt. It depends on how cleanly they are divided.
For example, I've played games where the most valuable collectible resources are confined to PvP areas. I've seen posts made by people playing games where character abilities are not differentiated between PvE and PvP, where changes to accommodate the latter overly impaired the former.
The rewards bit is an equally silly argument that also reeks of entitlement. Risk and effort should be rewarded. PVP is inherently riskier. I find it as silly as people complaining about raids having better/exclusive rewards (to give a comparable example without PVP that I have also seen frequently).
In any case, New World's bonuses for flagging up are not negligible but still no biggie, from what I have read in their site:
I agree on your point about skills affecting modes differently. I am not aware of NW having such issues.
100% optional PVP means you can do all PVE content with 0 PVP afaik.
It's equally silly if one feels players should be railroaded into play they don't enjoy in a leisure activity that is supposed to be providing one enjoyment. One can seek riskier and more rewarding PvE, so PvP isn't needed for those inclined to such.
There is absolutely no benefit or reason to mix PvE and PvP, or to make one favoured over the other, in a game meant to equally cater to both audiences. All it does is reduce the enjoyment of all those that play it.
Those solely interested in PvE don't want PvP thrust upon them, or to be limited in their PvE by choosing to avoid it. Those that favour PvP don't enjoy forcing it upon them, at least those in it for the challenge rather than the potential for bullying.
Once the abilities for flagging up are not negligible they can be a biggie as it creates two classes of players, the noble PvPers advantaged over the PvE peons. For those not bothered by that it isn't an issue. For those that are it can be a major one.
I know what optional PvP means. I also know not having to engage in it directly isn't necessarily the same as not being impacted by it directly, making that aspect when it occurs 0% optional. It's not as simple as PvP Attack Susceptibility Yes/No.
There are no areas of New World with better resources or anything else that you need to be PvP flagged to do.
The only impact on PvErs that PvPers can have is which faction controls a zone which is accomplished by PvPing. If you're a member of the faction that controls that zone you get some perks for some PvE activities in that zone, but those perks are minor compared to the individual perks you get for your reputation in that zone which is something you get just by playing in the zone with zero PvP required. You get the same exact faction control zone perks whether you do some PvP or none at all.
You're projecting PvP advantages from other games into New World without really knowing anything about the finer details of how NW works.
I wasn't projecting anything into New World, or speaking specifically about it. That exchange was about my contesting of the assertion that being immune to direct attack in PvP doesn't necessarily preclude being affected by it. Other factors need be considered. It was a general point, not one confined to New World, and included examples from other games I'm familiar with rather than guesses about one I am not.
Anyway, on to NW specifics.
It seems that what you saying that PvP determines which faction controls an area, and those of the controlling faction get a bonus whether they personally PvP or not. Accordingly those of the non-controlling faction lose out on that bonus whether they PvP or not. Individual perks from your personal reputation in that guild are greater and unrelated to faction control.
So, the bottom line appears to me from what you said, based on your much greater knowledge of NW, is one can be indirectly affected by PvP in the game regardless of interest or participation in it.
Despite my prior ignorance of the details my general comments turned out not all that far off the mark in my view. Perhaps I misinterpreted something and my analysis is flawed. Having no personal direct experience with the game makes that quite possible. If that is the case I welcome being corrected, ideally specifically so.
No you're not affected so much by the PvP as you are by your faction choice. PvP is just the mechanism for a faction to gain control of a zone but it doesn't have to be.
If there were no PvP whatsoever in the game and instead there were a PvE way of gaining control of a territory - sum of the reputation of all faction members in that zone for example - the result would be identical: members of the controlling faction would get the buff in that territory and members of the other two factions would not.
Alight. It sounds decent then. If my computer was stronger I'd be inclined to check it out for myself so I could see how it works out directly.
Either way it sounds like plenty are having fun with the game. It's nice to see.
If your computer can play ESO it should be able to handle NW. My experience has been that NW is less demanding on my system than ESO.
Nope. As this game doesn't offer much to a PVE player i refunded on Steam and bought Lost Ark starting package (which i may refund as well after i'll have seen the game in some beta test).
I'm at around 40 hours played and I haven't PVPed yet. That's more than almost any PVE game in a decade for me. I suppose it depends on your type of PVE.
*Edit, they also had the main PVE quest line turned off as to not spoil it if that it more your style.
Oh did they?
I hadn't noticed, I followed it to the first town, not sure if its the main quests or more like the starter of it did some in town and mostly did mission board quests and syndicate quests.
Sounds good to me I like a good main story line!
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
But I have a few questions still. I think I have to play as a human? Which I can improvise and pretend I'm an elf. But I like to play a dark elf so idk if there will be white hair and black skin?
Only human, but can be transgender - is that a first for mainstream mmos? Also, you can have dark skin and white hair. No pointy ears though.
It may be. I've seen it mentioned in descriptions for games of other genres on Steam, but I don't remember seeing it for MMORPGs.
Not sure you actually need pointy ears to be an elf, certainly for classical DnD but other Elven treatments do not always have them. Also being considered are white Drow for DnD, a politically correct move which like so many others adds nothing to the strong theme of the material.
The Aztecs had something similar to elves but they are more like small faeries a half elf there might be pushing it? End of the day if you are immersion roleplaying you decided what you are. If you are roleplaying with others, just make sure they have a heads up, maybe they can think of a better explanation? I am not sure how much of a fantasy setting this game has, being an Elf might not even be that big a deal, but the pics I have seen so far were all human I think.
Pointed ears for elves seems the by far the most common from media I've experienced, but I'm sure there is plenty otherwise I simply haven't encountered. There is a great deal of folklore I know nothing about at all.
I detest any change made to existing lore or characters motivated by political correctness or contrived diversity. Hopefully if they introduce white skinned Drow it will be through a cleverly done addition rather than revision, and will add more to the game than just aesthetic variance of the race.
It seemed as though NW has magic or at least some kind of mystical force at play from some of the videos I've seen, so with that anything could be possible from a role-play perspective.
If you look at Tolkien, Elves pointy ears must have been very minor, never mentioned in descriptions of the races in books, but mentioned as a possibility/probability by Tolkien in a letter he wrote. The Elves you see in the films are spot on, somewhat pointed but not like really pointed DnD Elves.
The problem with anything done for "civilised action" (you made that up Iselin, never heard of it unless it is a US thing?) is that the writing has to do gymnastics to accommodate changes which add nothing to the lore and strength of the theme. We see the same thing when characters keep changing alliances in WoW to suit the set up of the next expansion. It just makes for a poor story.
Now if they do come out with this for the Drow and come up with something amazing to explain it and add to the lore and setting I will be applauding. I don't think such a change has to be made, but if you do it well you should get praise. if they do something like say "they were there all along" I will be yawning and just having a laugh about it.
You do have to be careful with "anything could be possible from a role-play perspective" but as long as everybody RPing together knows what others are doing and is Ok with it then fine. An Elf seems fine, they exist in some form in both Mesoamerican and Native American cultures, but sorry I will not be roleplaying with a Dalek because that's what someone fancies being.
That one needn't PvP doesn't necessarily prevent one from being affected by it, so your first hint may not be apt. It depends on how cleanly they are divided.
For example, I've played games where the most valuable collectible resources are confined to PvP areas. I've seen posts made by people playing games where character abilities are not differentiated between PvE and PvP, where changes to accommodate the latter overly impaired the former.
The rewards bit is an equally silly argument that also reeks of entitlement. Risk and effort should be rewarded. PVP is inherently riskier. I find it as silly as people complaining about raids having better/exclusive rewards (to give a comparable example without PVP that I have also seen frequently).
In any case, New World's bonuses for flagging up are not negligible but still no biggie, from what I have read in their site:
I agree on your point about skills affecting modes differently. I am not aware of NW having such issues.
100% optional PVP means you can do all PVE content with 0 PVP afaik.
It's equally silly if one feels players should be railroaded into play they don't enjoy in a leisure activity that is supposed to be providing one enjoyment. One can seek riskier and more rewarding PvE, so PvP isn't needed for those inclined to such.
There is absolutely no benefit or reason to mix PvE and PvP, or to make one favoured over the other, in a game meant to equally cater to both audiences. All it does is reduce the enjoyment of all those that play it.
Those solely interested in PvE don't want PvP thrust upon them, or to be limited in their PvE by choosing to avoid it. Those that favour PvP don't enjoy forcing it upon them, at least those in it for the challenge rather than the potential for bullying.
Once the abilities for flagging up are not negligible they can be a biggie as it creates two classes of players, the noble PvPers advantaged over the PvE peons. For those not bothered by that it isn't an issue. For those that are it can be a major one.
I know what optional PvP means. I also know not having to engage in it directly isn't necessarily the same as not being impacted by it directly, making that aspect when it occurs 0% optional. It's not as simple as PvP Attack Susceptibility Yes/No.
There are no areas of New World with better resources or anything else that you need to be PvP flagged to do.
The only impact on PvErs that PvPers can have is which faction controls a zone which is accomplished by PvPing. If you're a member of the faction that controls that zone you get some perks for some PvE activities in that zone, but those perks are minor compared to the individual perks you get for your reputation in that zone which is something you get just by playing in the zone with zero PvP required. You get the same exact faction control zone perks whether you do some PvP or none at all.
You're projecting PvP advantages from other games into New World without really knowing anything about the finer details of how NW works.
I wasn't projecting anything into New World, or speaking specifically about it. That exchange was about my contesting of the assertion that being immune to direct attack in PvP doesn't necessarily preclude being affected by it. Other factors need be considered. It was a general point, not one confined to New World, and included examples from other games I'm familiar with rather than guesses about one I am not.
Anyway, on to NW specifics.
It seems that what you saying that PvP determines which faction controls an area, and those of the controlling faction get a bonus whether they personally PvP or not. Accordingly those of the non-controlling faction lose out on that bonus whether they PvP or not. Individual perks from your personal reputation in that guild are greater and unrelated to faction control.
So, the bottom line appears to me from what you said, based on your much greater knowledge of NW, is one can be indirectly affected by PvP in the game regardless of interest or participation in it.
Despite my prior ignorance of the details my general comments turned out not all that far off the mark in my view. Perhaps I misinterpreted something and my analysis is flawed. Having no personal direct experience with the game makes that quite possible. If that is the case I welcome being corrected, ideally specifically so.
No you're not affected so much by the PvP as you are by your faction choice. PvP is just the mechanism for a faction to gain control of a zone but it doesn't have to be.
If there were no PvP whatsoever in the game and instead there were a PvE way of gaining control of a territory - sum of the reputation of all faction members in that zone for example - the result would be identical: members of the controlling faction would get the buff in that territory and members of the other two factions would not.
Alight. It sounds decent then. If my computer was stronger I'd be inclined to check it out for myself so I could see how it works out directly.
Either way it sounds like plenty are having fun with the game. It's nice to see.
If your computer can play ESO it should be able to handle NW. My experience has been that NW is less demanding on my system than ESO.
Mmhhh... I can play ESO in 4K with everything maxed out, but for NW to max out every setting is have to fall back to 1440p or I'll get some serious slow downs in cities. In 1440p though I'm always over 60fps.
I'm sure you heard this before, but 4K res monitors are a risky move for gaming, unless you spend insane amount on hardware. 1080p is fine for me, 1440p if you don't mind lower frames overall and don't mind upgrading your PC more often.
tzervo said: The player is free to choose whatever content they want to consume, and are rewarded appropriately.
This right here is the most bullshit line ever to exist in MMO's
Total Ass Bullshit.
Make the content, and make the rewards all even, if someone enjoys something, they should not need some extra BS Carrots or what have you, to get them to go play it.
If you enjoy raids, great, enjoy the raids, but that other person doing map exploration, or jump puzzles, or whatever, should be able to get the same rewards doing what they enjoy.
If you enjoy PvP, great, enjoy PvP, but that player doing PvE, should be able to get the same rewards.
Total all Bullshit when people play off "My content should reward more" fuck that, if you enjoy doing it, that is part of the reward, you don't need shiny shit added to it.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
tzervo said: The player is free to choose whatever content they want to consume, and are rewarded appropriately.
This right here is the most bullshit line ever to exist in MMO's
Total Ass Bullshit.
Make the content, and make the rewards all even, if someone enjoys something, they should not need some extra BS Carrots or what have you, to get them to go play it.
If you enjoy raids, great, enjoy the raids, but that other person doing map exploration, or jump puzzles, or whatever, should be able to get the same rewards doing what they enjoy.
If you enjoy PvP, great, enjoy PvP, but that player doing PvE, should be able to get the same rewards.
Total all Bullshit when people play off "My content should reward more" fuck that, if you enjoy doing it, that is part of the reward, you don't need shiny shit added to it.
Aww you must be from one of those "everyone is a winner"
generations....
Jokes aside, AFAIK for example New World offers fairly equal rewards
for all, whatever you are into group PvE, PvP or crafting.
Honestly I
would like to see some risk/reward mechanics implemented to add to
PvP stakes. Also more PvP missions variety. For example PvP missions
rewarding you with higher gathering yields, higher chance for rare
mats.
Honestly I
would like to see some risk/reward mechanics implemented to add to
PvP stakes. Also more PvP missions variety. For example PvP missions
rewarding you with higher gathering yields, higher chance for rare
mats.
I'm not against that idea, but it has to remain in balance with the augmented risk involved in being flagged for PvP. You risk getting killed, ganked, zerged, and therefore waste some time, so in return you indeed deserve an augmented reward proportional to the risk of time loss involved.
What you gather during that mission should be lootable on death. Lets say you would be getting 150% of the usual yields from nodes in the PvP mission area.
This right here is the most bullshit line ever to exist in MMO's
Total Ass Bullshit.
Make the content, and make the rewards all even, if someone enjoys something, they should not need some extra BS Carrots or what have you, to get them to go play it.
If you enjoy raids, great, enjoy the raids, but that other person doing map exploration, or jump puzzles, or whatever, should be able to get the same rewards doing what they enjoy.
If you enjoy PvP, great, enjoy PvP, but that player doing PvE, should be able to get the same rewards.
Total all Bullshit when people play off "My content should reward more" fuck that, if you enjoy doing it, that is part of the reward, you don't need shiny shit added to it.
If you really were all about the fun you would not care about the comparative rewards and would not make a fuss about it like you do here. Rewards adjusted to the risk/difficulty promote fairness for those that do care and want a good metric on their performance. I call BS on your BS.
No, IF you were all about the fun, you would not care about the rewards either.
But you don't, you only care about the rewards... so saying a game should be about fun, or whatever the hell is just a total Bullshit factor.
And no, for people like that, they can just fucking with whatever the devs think they should be doing, if the Devs want PvP to be king shit of the game, then so be it, and for people that just want the rewards, they should be forced to do whatever the fuck the Devs want them to for it.. be damned if they like it or not.
If there is a premise that you can play what you enjoy, then the rewards should be equal.
Otherwise.. Deal with the Suck and Like it.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
This right here is the most bullshit line ever to exist in MMO's
Total Ass Bullshit.
Make the content, and make the rewards all even, if someone enjoys something, they should not need some extra BS Carrots or what have you, to get them to go play it.
If you enjoy raids, great, enjoy the raids, but that other person doing map exploration, or jump puzzles, or whatever, should be able to get the same rewards doing what they enjoy.
If you enjoy PvP, great, enjoy PvP, but that player doing PvE, should be able to get the same rewards.
Total all Bullshit when people play off "My content should reward more" fuck that, if you enjoy doing it, that is part of the reward, you don't need shiny shit added to it.
If you really were all about the fun you would not care about the comparative rewards and would not make a fuss about it like you do here. Rewards adjusted to the risk/difficulty promote fairness for those that do care and want a good metric on their performance. I call BS on your BS.
New World has actually been wrestling with this for the past year with respect to PvP flagging.
Last summer if you flagged for PvP you got a 20% XP boost for everything you did so many players flagged for the boost and avoided PvP altogether because at that time there was either no XP for PvP kills or it was minimal (I forget which.) All they really wanted was the +20% to level faster and actually PvPing just slowed you down and that defeated the purpose of flagging for the boost.
In Alpha this past year they removed that buff totally and boosted the XP for PvP kills based on how long the player you killed had been alive (i.e. almost no XP for killing a recently killed player.)
For the recent beta they made the flagging XP boost 5% and left the PK XP the same. From what I saw this year compared to last, flagging is not being used for the XP boost any longer. Flagging means you actually do want to PvP.
They're still tinkering with it but it seemed to me they got it just about right now.
"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
If you enjoy raids, great, enjoy the raids, but that other person doing map exploration, or jump puzzles, or whatever, should be able to get the same rewards doing what they enjoy.
If you enjoy PvP, great, enjoy PvP, but that player doing PvE, should be able to get the same rewards.
Total all Bullshit when people play off "My content should reward more" fuck that, if you enjoy doing it, that is part of the reward, you don't need shiny shit added to it.
If you really were all about the fun you would not care about the comparative rewards and would not make a fuss about it like you do here. Rewards adjusted to the risk/difficulty promote fairness for those that do care and want a good metric on their performance. I call BS on your BS.
I believe PvE should be how all gear is earned. I despise games where everyone ends up with the same set at the end... the Tier 2 Caster PvE set or the Tier 4 Melee PvP set. DAoC had it right. All gear was found or made through PvE and a persons character had gear tailored to their play style.
On a side note. Of all the people who spent the last year bashing this game during development, how many do you think are playing it?
On a side note. Of all the people who spent the last year bashing this game during development, how many do you think are playing it?
Only the ones who changed their mind
I refunded after last year's beta, gave it a second chance this year and am not refunding this time... /shrug.
I can also think of at least one person here who spent the past several months praising and defending the game who tried this beta and refunded.
Things change, the game changes, people change, It's really no biggie if how you feel or what you say about the game changes over time.
"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
Mmhhh... I can play ESO in 4K with everything maxed out, but for NW to max out every setting is have to fall back to 1440p or I'll get some serious slow downs in cities. In 1440p though I'm always over 60fps.
I'm sure you heard this before, but 4K res monitors are a risky move for gaming, unless you spend insane amount on hardware. 1080p is fine for me, 1440p if you don't mind lower frames overall and don't mind upgrading your PC more often.
I'm playing most of my games in 4K, and the others in 2440p which works just fine with upscaling on my 4K monitor. I couldn't go back to anything lower now that I tasted the comfort of a 32" 4K monitor.
ESO seems to have randomly works better on some hard configurations then others. Sometimes even running better on lower specs PCs. Its a crap shoot with ESO. My 1080 special edition ran ESO better at 4k then my 2060 Super.
Mmhhh... I can play ESO in 4K with everything maxed out, but for NW to max out every setting is have to fall back to 1440p or I'll get some serious slow downs in cities. In 1440p though I'm always over 60fps.
I'm sure you heard this before, but 4K res monitors are a risky move for gaming, unless you spend insane amount on hardware. 1080p is fine for me, 1440p if you don't mind lower frames overall and don't mind upgrading your PC more often.
I'm playing most of my games in 4K, and the others in 2440p which works just fine with upscaling on my 4K monitor. I couldn't go back to anything lower now that I tasted the comfort of a 32" 4K monitor.
ESO seems to have randomly works better on some hard configurations then others. Sometimes even running better on lower specs PCs. Its a crap shoot with ESO. My 1080 special edition ran ESO better at 4k then my 2060 Super.
My 980ti was running it smoothly at 1080p with everything maxed out, and the 2070 super is smooth as a baby's ass in 4K in ESO. A pretty well optimized graphics engine considering the quality of the result for an already older game.
The difference between the 1080 and the 2060 super isn't that big... why did you upgrade ? Unless you really wanted RTX, it's not really worth it in my opinion.
Ray tracing and I got a good deal about a year and a half ago. Also you are wrong its not an upgrade,
The RTX 2060 has 127.7 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the GTX 1080, which means that the memory performance of the RTX 2060 is massively better than the GTX 1080. The GeForce RTX 2060 Super 8GB has 2176 Shader Processing Units and the GeForce GTX 1080 Asus ROG Strix A8G Gaming 8GB has 2560.
Most games I get about 20%+ more FPS + greater detail.
No, IF you were all about the fun, you would not care about the rewards either.
But you don't, you only care about the rewards... so saying a game should be about fun, or whatever the hell is just a total Bullshit factor.
And no, for people like that, they can just fucking with whatever the devs think they should be doing, if the Devs want PvP to be king shit of the game, then so be it, and for people that just want the rewards, they should be forced to do whatever the fuck the Devs want them to for it.. be damned if they like it or not.
If there is a premise that you can play what you enjoy, then the rewards should be equal.
Otherwise.. Deal with the Suck and Like it.
Oh I have no problem dealing with anything, I am not the one complaining about the rewards. I am also not the one to complain about a game having PVP, PVE or raids, I can have fun with any of them
Part of my fun is figuring out how to play optimally a game that I find interesting. Rewards are a part of that fun, albeit not the only one. If a game does not reward harder gameplay such as PVP or raids I will give it a spin but it just won't be my main focus. I adapt without fussing, see my example on E:D: PVP has no point in it so I played it as a PVE game and it was fine. I even advocated using its PVE faction warfare concept elsewhere.
I still find rewarding challenging and risky gameplay to be fair, and those that complain about it as entitled.
So you will Basically follow the path of least resistance.
So much for the lies and bullshit from all the people cry about wanting Challenge.
LOL, all just lies and bullshit... right to the core.
Only game community I ever mat that was not a bunch of lying sacks of dog food, about wanting Challenge, was the DDO community. They said Elite was too easy, so the Devs put in Reaper, which gives the same Favor/Loot rewards as Elite, with just a little more exp, and the players embraced it. They wanted more challenge, they got more challenge, and the same loot rewards, and were happy about it, because they were honest about what they wanted.
Everyone else is like "Oh I just want Challenge" piss off, you don't want challenge, you just want better rewards, stop with the Bullshit already.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Comments
It's already happening in NW after a brief 2-week beta.
For 5 player expeditions (instanced dungeons) the healing Life Staff used by one healer is barely adequate to cover the healing needs of the party. IMO it needs a buff for that purpose.
In open world solo PvE, it's adequate as either the primary or secondary weapon. To me it seems just fine as is.
But when used by a heavily armored Great Axe wielder as the second weapon (they call that the "Paladin" build) in PvP, it's the meta because it heals enough and has very few counters to be dominant combined with the high damage and mobility of the Great Axe. PvPers are calling for a life staff nerf already.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
It seemed as though NW has magic or at least some kind of mystical force at play from some of the videos I've seen, so with that anything could be possible from a role-play perspective.
Proud MMORPG.com member since March 2004! Make PvE GREAT Again!
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
https://biturl.top/rU7bY3
Beyond the shadows there's always light
Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.
Nice, a desert zone. I was wondering if they were going to add a desert.
The problem with anything done for "civilised action" (you made that up Iselin, never heard of it unless it is a US thing?) is that the writing has to do gymnastics to accommodate changes which add nothing to the lore and strength of the theme. We see the same thing when characters keep changing alliances in WoW to suit the set up of the next expansion. It just makes for a poor story.
Now if they do come out with this for the Drow and come up with something amazing to explain it and add to the lore and setting I will be applauding. I don't think such a change has to be made, but if you do it well you should get praise. if they do something like say "they were there all along" I will be yawning and just having a laugh about it.
You do have to be careful with "anything could be possible from a role-play perspective" but as long as everybody RPing together knows what others are doing and is Ok with it then fine. An Elf seems fine, they exist in some form in both Mesoamerican and Native American cultures, but sorry I will not be roleplaying with a Dalek because that's what someone fancies being.
Total Ass Bullshit.
Make the content, and make the rewards all even, if someone enjoys something, they should not need some extra BS Carrots or what have you, to get them to go play it.
If you enjoy raids, great, enjoy the raids, but that other person doing map exploration, or jump puzzles, or whatever, should be able to get the same rewards doing what they enjoy.
If you enjoy PvP, great, enjoy PvP, but that player doing PvE, should be able to get the same rewards.
Total all Bullshit when people play off "My content should reward more" fuck that, if you enjoy doing it, that is part of the reward, you don't need shiny shit added to it.
Aww you must be from one of those "everyone is a winner" generations....
Jokes aside, AFAIK for example New World offers fairly equal rewards for all, whatever you are into group PvE, PvP or crafting.
Honestly I would like to see some risk/reward mechanics implemented to add to PvP stakes. Also more PvP missions variety. For example PvP missions rewarding you with higher gathering yields, higher chance for rare mats.What you gather during that mission should be lootable on death. Lets say you would be getting 150% of the usual yields from nodes in the PvP mission area.
But you don't, you only care about the rewards... so saying a game should be about fun, or whatever the hell is just a total Bullshit factor.
And no, for people like that, they can just fucking with whatever the devs think they should be doing, if the Devs want PvP to be king shit of the game, then so be it, and for people that just want the rewards, they should be forced to do whatever the fuck the Devs want them to for it.. be damned if they like it or not.
If there is a premise that you can play what you enjoy, then the rewards should be equal.
Otherwise.. Deal with the Suck and Like it.
Last summer if you flagged for PvP you got a 20% XP boost for everything you did so many players flagged for the boost and avoided PvP altogether because at that time there was either no XP for PvP kills or it was minimal (I forget which.) All they really wanted was the +20% to level faster and actually PvPing just slowed you down and that defeated the purpose of flagging for the boost.
In Alpha this past year they removed that buff totally and boosted the XP for PvP kills based on how long the player you killed had been alive (i.e. almost no XP for killing a recently killed player.)
For the recent beta they made the flagging XP boost 5% and left the PK XP the same. From what I saw this year compared to last, flagging is not being used for the XP boost any longer. Flagging means you actually do want to PvP.
They're still tinkering with it but it seemed to me they got it just about right now.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
On a side note. Of all the people who spent the last year bashing this game during development, how many do you think are playing it?
I refunded after last year's beta, gave it a second chance this year and am not refunding this time... /shrug.
I can also think of at least one person here who spent the past several months praising and defending the game who tried this beta and refunded.
Things change, the game changes, people change, It's really no biggie if how you feel or what you say about the game changes over time.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
The RTX 2060 has 127.7 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the GTX 1080, which means that the memory performance of the RTX 2060 is massively better than the GTX 1080. The GeForce RTX 2060 Super 8GB has 2176 Shader Processing Units and the GeForce GTX 1080 Asus ROG Strix A8G Gaming 8GB has 2560.
Most games I get about 20%+ more FPS + greater detail.
So much for the lies and bullshit from all the people cry about wanting Challenge.
LOL, all just lies and bullshit... right to the core.
Only game community I ever mat that was not a bunch of lying sacks of dog food, about wanting Challenge, was the DDO community. They said Elite was too easy, so the Devs put in Reaper, which gives the same Favor/Loot rewards as Elite, with just a little more exp, and the players embraced it. They wanted more challenge, they got more challenge, and the same loot rewards, and were happy about it, because they were honest about what they wanted.
Everyone else is like "Oh I just want Challenge" piss off, you don't want challenge, you just want better rewards, stop with the Bullshit already.