Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Lead Game Designer on Everquest Next Debunks Non-Consent PVP

KhayotixKhayotix Somewhere, FLPosts: 220Member Uncommon

First off there were too many PvP and PvE threads fighting over what Everquest Next is going to be, so instead of answering each one, I made my own thread.

So I grew slighty concerned as well as some of my guild-mates about the idea of the EQ IP being changed from a PvE Centric game to a Non Consensual PVP game.

I opted to Ask a number of the Developers.

The Lead Game Designer  answered, and here it is:

 

 

So there you have it folks a Bad design decision. Now this most likely means that PvP will continue to be all the rage on the PvP Servers(as it has ALWAYS been) and PvE'ers will continue to be safe from torment while enjoying their gaming experience.

image
«13456712

Comments

  • TheJodaTheJoda chicago, ILPosts: 467Member
    Not much really said at all.......You can read that 100's different ways.

    ....Being Banned from MMORPG's forums since 2010, for Trolling the Trolls!!!

  • AnthurAnthur StolbergPosts: 686Member Uncommon
    Those SOE guys should definately consider a political career. Say something without saying really anything. ;)
  • KhayotixKhayotix Somewhere, FLPosts: 220Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by TheJoda
    Not much really said at all.......You can read that 100's different ways.

    It can only be read in the context of the question being answered. That is will it be forced on players who do not want it. The answer, That would be a poor design decision.

    I understand people want to live in their little world of believing they are right, but that gets old when the truth hammer hits you and they still deny it.

    image
  • Storm_CloudStorm_Cloud MalmoPosts: 369Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by TheJoda
    Not much really said at all.......You can read that 100's different ways.

    Agreed, but from a business perspective, you can read into it that non-consent pvp means players will quit. It's that simple. That's not good for business.

    However, open world pvp, means you can have it anywhere, but with a flag system like SWG had it limit the amount of players down to those that consent to being pvp'd, and also offers a carrot to those that does not consent because they always will have the opportunity to attack a pvp player,  (first strike) which may bring more into pvp, atleast, if only temporary but if the carrot tastes good then they may go for it again. :)

     

  • killion81killion81 A City, MIPosts: 985Member Uncommon
    Obviously the dev considered something in the post he replied to "bad game design".  The original post made no mention of bad game design, only concerns.
  • LustmordLustmord Mt. Gilead, OHPosts: 1,095Member Uncommon
    Probably just means they will have a large safe zone, and an optional wilderness with open pvp that players will want to go to for whatever reason.
  • Ice-QueenIce-Queen USA, GAPosts: 2,451Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Saryhl

    First off there were too many PvP and PvE threads fighting over what Everquest Next is going to be, so instead of answering each one, I made my own thread.

    So I grew slighty concerned as well as some of my guild-mates about the idea of the EQ IP being changed from a PvE Centric game to a Non Consensual PVP game.

    I opted to Ask a number of the Developers.

    The Lead Game Designer  answered, and here it is:

     

     

    So there you have it folks a Bad design decision. Now this most likely means that PvP will continue to be all the rage on the PvP Servers(as it has ALWAYS been) and PvE'ers will continue to be safe from torment while enjoying their gaming experience.

    That's the way it should be. Myself, I like pvp servers preferably RP-Pvp servers. I like the pvp and pve server approach. That way i can play on a pvp server and enjoy, and those that prefer not to be bothered with pvp can play on their pve servers and enjoy. I don't see why people gripe about it. Perhaps because they can't force someone who doesn't like and/or isn't good at pvp to be ganked by them continuously. It's usually s%$#y pvp'er that whine about not being able to gank people.

    image

    What happens when you log off your characters????.....
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
    Dark Age of Camelot

  • TibbzTibbz Houston, TXPosts: 619Member
    Originally posted by Anthur
    Those SOE guys should definately consider a political career. Say something without saying really anything. ;)

    LOL i was thinking the same thing.

    we can bet a dollar to a doughnut that we will see PVP and PVE servers as always.  (though we may even see PVP FFA, PVP Faction and PVE servers) 

    image
  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,279Member Uncommon

    You kidding right?

     

    "We avoid bad decisions"

    Thank god they will not listen to you people who want another themepark with housing, in a world with no risk reward, where you are safe to insult act an ass and not get touched because you don't consent.

     

    that's what that statement means to me.

  • Storm_CloudStorm_Cloud MalmoPosts: 369Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by bcbully

    You kidding right?

     

    "We avoid bad decisions"

    Thank god they will not listen to you people who want another themepark with housing, in a world with no risk reward, where you are safe to insult act an ass and not get touched because you don't consent.

     

    that's what that statement means to me.

    LOL!

    Of course it does... image

  • ReallyNow10ReallyNow10 Pile It High Town, LAPosts: 2,010Member Common
    Originally posted by TheJoda
    Not much really said at all.......You can read that 100's different ways.

    I read that as "non-consensual PVP" = "bad design decision"

  • LustmordLustmord Mt. Gilead, OHPosts: 1,095Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ReallyNow10
    Originally posted by TheJoda
    Not much really said at all.......You can read that 100's different ways.

    I read that as "non-consensual PVP" = "bad design decision"

     

    That's not what I read.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

    Smedley is being channeled by everyone else on the team now. They aren't saying anything specific at all, and people are free to interpret what they say nearly any way they want.

    This could mean they aren't going to implement non-consensual PvP, or it could mean they are going to implement it, but in a way that avoids what they see as bad design decisions.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • GiffenGiffen Lacey, WAPosts: 268Member Uncommon
    Did anyone really believe the trolls who were pushing their full nonconsensual pvp game?  EQ devs aren't stupid.  Hell just go watch Evercracked and see what the original devs on EQ1 thought of pvp...and they were right then as the current devs are right now...it is a bad game design decision.
  • adderVXIadderVXI st cloud, MNPosts: 639Member Uncommon
    Why cant we just have a flagging system like SWG was?  All those people wanting the pvp excitement can have it.  That would cut out the killing of level 2 people in starter areas though which is perhaps the real goal. 

    Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.

    George Washington

  • TheJodaTheJoda chicago, ILPosts: 467Member
    ...I wasn't aware so many people had crystal balls at home.

    ....Being Banned from MMORPG's forums since 2010, for Trolling the Trolls!!!

  • Storm_CloudStorm_Cloud MalmoPosts: 369Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by adderVXI
    Why cant we just have a flagging system like SWG was?  All those people wanting the pvp excitement can have it.  That would cut out the killing of level 2 people in starter areas though which is perhaps the real goal. 

    I've been trying to make ppl listen by suggesting the same thing, just look on the first page and in other threads.

    That system is the best possible one, that will make most ppl happy, and it's the closest we will get to open world pvp.

     

    The problem is that nobody listens. lol

     

  • SiugSiug TallinnPosts: 1,236Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by bcbully

    You kidding right?

     

    "We avoid bad decisions"

    Thank god they will not listen to you people who want another themepark with housing, in a world with no risk reward, where you are safe to insult act an ass and not get touched because you don't consent.

     

    that's what that statement means to me.

    Why are you so upset? Have you played EQ and know what this game is about? EQN should be new EQ, not Age of Wushu or whatever in EQ skin. To able to gank people was never a core part of EQ.

  • adderVXIadderVXI st cloud, MNPosts: 639Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Storm_Cloud
    Originally posted by adderVXI
    Why cant we just have a flagging system like SWG was?  All those people wanting the pvp excitement can have it.  That would cut out the killing of level 2 people in starter areas though which is perhaps the real goal. 

    I've been trying to make ppl listen by suggesting the same thing, just look on the first page and in other threads.

    That system is the best possible one, that will make most ppl happy, and it's the closest we will get to open world pvp.

     

    The problem is that nobody listens. lol

     

    Your right, the only people that could be unhappy with that set up is the aholes that want to gank pve'ers over and over. 

    Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.

    George Washington

  • MaquiameMaquiame Posts: 799Member Uncommon
    Everquest was never and will never be mainly about pvp. I gotta ask why are you pvpers not just all over the Camelot boards where you belong? Or playing Wushu or Darkfall?

    image

    Any mmo worth its salt should be like a good prostitute when it comes to its game world- One hell of a faker, and a damn good shaker!

  • FaarmMercyFaarmMercy Washington DC, DCPosts: 32Member

    EVE doesn't have FFA PVP, either. Most people stay in high-sec.

    Personally, I wouldn't mind it if most of the players stayed around the racial starter cities (assuming they have those, ala EQ1). You'd have thriving economies built around the likes of Freeport, Qeynos, Kelethin, et. all.

    Want to build your own city and empire with your guildmates? Well, there should be some risk involved. Risk vs. Reward is a good way to balance it.

  • LustmordLustmord Mt. Gilead, OHPosts: 1,095Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Maquiame
    Everquest was never and will never be mainly about pvp. I gotta ask why are you pvpers not just all over the Camelot boards where you belong? Or playing Wushu or Darkfall?

    I am playing Darkfall, but that shouldn't curb my excitement for EQN, should it?

     

  • Storm_CloudStorm_Cloud MalmoPosts: 369Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by adderVXI
    Originally posted by Storm_Cloud
    Originally posted by adderVXI
    Why cant we just have a flagging system like SWG was?  All those people wanting the pvp excitement can have it.  That would cut out the killing of level 2 people in starter areas though which is perhaps the real goal. 

    I've been trying to make ppl listen by suggesting the same thing, just look on the first page and in other threads.

    That system is the best possible one, that will make most ppl happy, and it's the closest we will get to open world pvp.

     

    The problem is that nobody listens. lol

     

    Your right, the only people that could be unhappy with that set up is the aholes that want to gank pve'ers over and over. 

    Exactly! :)

     

  • DullahanDullahan Posts: 2,057Member Uncommon
    I'm sure every time someone wants to destroy something they will go through a series of honor duels.


  • SavageHorizonSavageHorizon ParisPosts: 2,081Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by bcbully

    You kidding right?

     

    "We avoid bad decisions"

    Thank god they will not listen to you people who want another themepark with housing, in a world with no risk reward, where you are safe to insult act an ass and not get touched because you don't consent.

     

    that's what that statement means to me.

    Lol, i'm going to enjoy reading your rage come the 2/8/13, seriously if you think EQN is going to be tuned into some PVP love fest then you are mistaken. EQN will have PVP but it will be on PVP severs or, this is how it's always been. Forget about EQN being something we have never seen before, that's all well and good but that doesn't effect how they split the servers.

    The problem that you have is if they split the servers then it means that the game is not built around PVP. Smed turning the EQ IP into a PVP IP is like you never wanting to play a PVP game again.

    Coolermaster Cosmos II Case
    Corsair AX1200W Modular PSU
    Intel Core i7 3970X OC 4.50GHz
    Asus P9X79 PRO Intel X7
    16GB (4x4GB) DDR3 PC3-1866MHz
    840 Series 250GB SSDs
    Seagate Barracuda 2TB HDDs
    EVGA SuperClocked GTX TITAN 6GB GDDR5 SLi

«13456712
Sign In or Register to comment.