omg another carebear MMO coming up? this time in sandbox disguise?
Just what the market needs.
Labeling much here eh? Btw, have you even played Everquest and know that it wasn't about PvP? Also, what makes you think that sandbox means FFA PvP gankfest?
omg another carebear MMO coming up? this time in sandbox disguise?
Just what the market needs.
Labeling much here eh? Btw, have you even played Everquest and know that it wasn't about PvP? Also, what makes you think that sandbox means FFA PvP gankfest?
casuals and PvE-only players love themepark MMOs and I'd strongly recommend they stay in that realm.
instead of ruining the meaning of sandbox which is freedom and realism, not artificial gamey restrictions, different "modes" and options.
there is only a slight chance SOE got his right, and actually brings a competitor to EvE set in a fantasy world.
omg another carebear MMO coming up? this time in sandbox disguise?
Just what the market needs.
Labeling much here eh? Btw, have you even played Everquest and know that it wasn't about PvP? Also, what makes you think that sandbox means FFA PvP gankfest?
casuals and PvE-only players love themepark MMOs and I'd strongly recommend they stay in that realm.
instead of ruining the meaning of sandbox which is freedom and realism, not artificial gamey restrictions, different "modes" and options.
there is only a slight chance SOE got his right, and actually brings a competitor to EvE set in a fantasy world.
Sorry but who are you to tell what people can or cannot play? Also, where is realism in FFA PvP? Is realism defined by killing? Don't think so. Realism in a fantasy world then? Maybe I'm too thick to understand this. Also, freedom does not only destroying and killing but also building and exploring. Hope there will be a separate server for FFA PvP where you can do what you like to each other but EQ has never been a PvP game and I hope never will be.
You can't claim realism as a point for pvp or ffa pvp. Unless there are real punishments like griefers upon death are permadead or the character is jailed as in unplayable for X amount of days. After all if you want realism it is only fair we there is some form of punishment for the degenerates of society. It is a pipe dream to think ffa pvp will be anything more than a prison riot. Many people in real life are barely civilized get them the anonymity of an mmo and any chances of maturity are gone. You will have hordes of Ipwnurmom's running around killing then teabagging lowbies and then within months complaining about population.
Originally posted by karat76 You can't claim realism as a point for pvp or ffa pvp. Unless there are real punishments like griefers upon death are permadead or the character is jailed as in unplayable for X amount of days. After all if you want realism it is only fair we there is some form of punishment for the degenerates of society. It is a pipe dream to think ffa pvp will be anything more than a prison riot. Many people in real life are barely civilized get them the anonymity of an mmo and any chances of maturity are gone. You will have hordes of Ipwnurmom's running around killing then teabagging lowbies and then within months complaining about population.
Originally posted by karat76 You can't claim realism as a point for pvp or ffa pvp. Unless there are real punishments like griefers upon death are permadead or the character is jailed as in unplayable for X amount of days. After all if you want realism it is only fair we there is some form of punishment for the degenerates of society. It is a pipe dream to think ffa pvp will be anything more than a prison riot. Many people in real life are barely civilized get them the anonymity of an mmo and any chances of maturity are gone. You will have hordes of Ipwnurmom's running around killing then teabagging lowbies and then within months complaining about population.
So WHY in their right minds would the abandon EQs strength and nerf it with PvP?? And yes EQ did have Dueling and it also had PvP servers. But the game was never balanced for PvP. Classes that were weak in PvE were also weak in PvP. Rogue vs Warrior - Warrior wins. Cleric vs just about anything, cleric wins. Necro vs anything necro wins. And of course the bard rules them all!!
*snip*
They've alluded to not focusing on things that made EQ the game it is. Less gear, level, raid grinding, and definitely not turning into a quest hub game.
Sure there is housing, crafting, and other things to do, but there needs to be some sort of ongoing conflict to keep people entertained and coming back for a challenge. If there is no carrot on the stick (grind), there is less reason for people to return. For many, PVP, even consensual/casual is a great time sink and way to feel immersed in the game. Killing the same named mob over and over gets boring for some.
*snip*
Well personally I'm the opposite. I find PvP boring after awhile. Doing the same thing over and over with little if any strategy. Yes I know there is some as a team but all to often it's poor and just chaos with a little organization.
Where PvE especially with good character diversity becomes a lot more strategic to kill a tough group mob. The gear and the progression is also what I find fun. I've played swtor for about a year off and on mainly cause I like the grouping experience.
EQ had epic group battles. I mean you had a lot of class diversity and different strategies depending on the group makeup could make for some great battle experiences as well as some epic fails.
Originally posted by azzamasin PvP balancing is possibly the single greatest design principle that lead to the destruction of many MMO's. To this day, you read the front page of mmochampions.com and see Blizzard still nerfing/buffing. Get it right in alpha nad beta and change only what breaks your game, perfectly balanced classes is a pipe dream.
Perfectly balanced games are also boring and not good game design.
So WHY in their right minds would the abandon EQs strength and nerf it with PvP?? And yes EQ did have Dueling and it also had PvP servers. But the game was never balanced for PvP. Classes that were weak in PvE were also weak in PvP. Rogue vs Warrior - Warrior wins. Cleric vs just about anything, cleric wins. Necro vs anything necro wins. And of course the bard rules them all!!
*snip*
They've alluded to not focusing on things that made EQ the game it is. Less gear, level, raid grinding, and definitely not turning into a quest hub game.
Sure there is housing, crafting, and other things to do, but there needs to be some sort of ongoing conflict to keep people entertained and coming back for a challenge. If there is no carrot on the stick (grind), there is less reason for people to return. For many, PVP, even consensual/casual is a great time sink and way to feel immersed in the game. Killing the same named mob over and over gets boring for some.
*snip*
Well personally I'm the opposite. I find PvP boring after awhile. Doing the same thing over and over with little if any strategy. Yes I know there is some as a team but all to often it's poor and just chaos with a little organization.
Where PvE especially with good character diversity becomes a lot more strategic to kill a tough group mob. The gear and the progression is also what I find fun. I've played swtor for about a year off and on mainly cause I like the grouping experience.
EQ had epic group battles. I mean you had a lot of class diversity and different strategies depending on the group makeup could make for some great battle experiences as well as some epic fails.
Yes, it goes both ways. While I never grew tired of DAoC's PVP system, WoW and games that followed had very shallow (pointless) PVP that I grew bored of quickly. If they can get the balance right between the two and tie everything/everyone together meaningfully, I think they would have an amazing game.
I just want something that is fun and engaging, not simply addictive.
The first time killing a big named mob and a few times after are fun, but the thrill goes away quickly for me and it turns into a tedious grind for gear or some other achievement only to move on to the next harder mob. Same applies to capturing a PVP zone or whatever, after a while it is fairly boring.
What I was trying to get at though, was that they are claiming to have created a new genre. So what we've known (good or bad) doesn't really matter anymore. It isn't above PVP vs PVE, it is about 1997-2013 vs the Future. Sandbox and open world are where PC and Console games are heading. Sticking to what we've known is not good enough anymore.
For those that want the traditional PVE grinds or mindless PVP, there are plenty of games out. For those that want something new, hopefully there is EQN and future games to come.
I think games like Ultima Online, Shadowbane, SWG, Vanguard, EVE, and Archeage stand apart from traditional themeparks and WoW type games, even though they have some elements. I'm hoping EQN is the evolution of the former, not the latter.
Originally posted by azzamasin PvP balancing is possibly the single greatest design principle that lead to the destruction of many MMO's. To this day, you read the front page of mmochampions.com and see Blizzard still nerfing/buffing. Get it right in alpha nad beta and change only what breaks your game, perfectly balanced classes is a pipe dream.
Perfectly balanced games are also boring and not good game design.
PvE and PvP are always too different to balance together. Anyone that doesn't balance PvP independently just doesn't understand game design. You just can't hope to apply the same mechanics PvP as you do to PvE when NPCs don't have the same strengths and limitations that players do.
EQ1 always stands out as a shining example of how pve and pvp can work so well together as long as they work differently. The most powerful abilities were subject to greater resists, and some abilities like fear or charm were ineffective against players altogether. With EQ class diversity, often ignorantly referred to as imbalance, the game was very fun and promoted team play as every class was as viable in pvp just like it was in pve.
Originally posted by karat76 You can't claim realism as a point for pvp or ffa pvp. Unless there are real punishments like griefers upon death are permadead or the character is jailed as in unplayable for X amount of days. After all if you want realism it is only fair we there is some form of punishment for the degenerates of society. It is a pipe dream to think ffa pvp will be anything more than a prison riot. Many people in real life are barely civilized get them the anonymity of an mmo and any chances of maturity are gone. You will have hordes of Ipwnurmom's running around killing then teabagging lowbies and then within months complaining about population.
There was a game called underlight that did PvP with penalties right. In the game you would kill any player anywhere. You collapsed into a sphere in the center of the world. You had to go back into the world or reenter the dreamscape which is where you actually played. Then you had to find your corpse and loot it for any equipment you had. There wasn't a LOT of equipment so equipment didn't matter much.
However if you were really bad the world was fairly small and a group of high level players that were given the power by GMs then they could kill you and capture your soul and kill the soul permanently removing you from the game.
So random PvP or Ganking was never an issue. There were wars and if someone did kill you it wasn't that big a deal. Equipment was easily replaced from the guild vault of just kill a few things. However someone harrasses people and makes a problem then a group of players could pass judgement on you and perma kill you.
The power couldn't be abused as only max level players could have it and it could only be bestowed by a GM who could also take it away. In fact in the game all skills had to be trained by other players. So you level up to level 11 and want to get your skills you gotta find another player with training skills would can teach you your new skills usually in exchange for some task or accomplishment.
Yes, it goes both ways. While I never grew tired of DAoC's PVP system, WoW and games that followed had very shallow (pointless) PVP that I grew bored of quickly. If they can get the balance right between the two and tie everything/everyone together meaningfully, I think they would have an amazing game.
I just want something that is fun and engaging, not simply addictive.
The first time killing a big named mob and a few times after are fun, but the thrill goes away quickly for me and it turns into a tedious grind for gear or some other achievement only to move on to the next harder mob. Same applies to capturing a PVP zone or whatever, after a while it is fairly boring.
What I was trying to get at though, was that they are claiming to have created a new genre. So what we've known (good or bad) doesn't really matter anymore. It isn't above PVP vs PVE, it is about 1997-2013 vs the Future. Sandbox and open world are where PC and Console games are heading. Sticking to what we've known is not good enough anymore.
For those that want the traditional PVE grinds or mindless PVP, there are plenty of games out. For those that want something new, hopefully there is EQN and future games to come.
I think games like Ultima Online, Shadowbane, SWG, Vanguard, EVE, and Archeage stand apart from traditional themeparks and WoW type games, even though they have some elements. I'm hoping EQN is the evolution of the former, not the latter.
I think that killing the same mob is tedious but doing the instances in EQ2 where there were a good number of them and they had several random quest goals gave enough variety that I never got bored of it. And I do a lot of pickup groups so each group is a new challenge to get working together and figure out how to make it work.
Not that eq2 was as good as eq and eq had this random quest instance before eq2 by a long shot. The dungeon runs for shards to upgrade equipment never really got boring. And in EQ there were tons of different classes with very unique play styles. So after playing my rogue for awhile there was my druid, my necro, or my enchanter to play.
Vanguard was a good sandbox type game although it was sadly unpolished and had a horrible launch. I think it could have been great with more time and work before launching...
Shadowbane I thought was a very very good pvp game.
EvE I got bored with fairly quickly. SWG had too many bugs and too many huge game changes. I was pretty obsessed with crafting in it at one time.
Ultima online was interesting until I got in the EQ beta then Ultima online was gone from my life. I played eq for around 5 years or so. My main character was approaching 400 days played time... so I guess I was pretty obsessed :P I played a few games that I left eq for but always came back. DaoC, Anachy Online, Asherons call. But none of them kept me for long. Even wow didn't have the same hook that EQ did but alas wow was what killed eq for me. I played wow for long enough that my eq guild disolved and I was unable to get back into it.
Originally posted by azzamasin PvP balancing is possibly the single greatest design principle that lead to the destruction of many MMO's. To this day, you read the front page of mmochampions.com and see Blizzard still nerfing/buffing. Get it right in alpha nad beta and change only what breaks your game, perfectly balanced classes is a pipe dream.
Perfectly balanced games are also boring and not good game design.
PvE and PvP are always too different to balance together. Anyone that doesn't balance PvP independently just doesn't understand game design. You just can't hope to apply the same mechanics PvP as you do to PvE when NPCs don't have the same strengths and limitations that players do.
EQ1 always stands out as a shining example of how pve and pvp can work so well together as long as they work differently. The most powerful abilities were subject to greater resists, and some abilities like fear or charm were ineffective against players altogether. With EQ class diversity, often ignorantly referred to as imbalance, the game was very fun and promoted team play as every class was as viable in pvp just like it was in pve.
I agree with everything you said. Especially as a day 1 launch EQ veteran.
There were slight imbalances in EQ, but slight imbalances (within a 10% curve) is good for a game. It promotes adaptation and innovation. A good pvp game is not perfectly balanced. But it's not too imbalanced.
sure you can, SWG Pre-CU was a very PVE oriented sandbox(oh please argue with me that its not a sandbox). Sandbox does automatically mean FFA PVP, nor does it mean no PVP at all either.
thats the problem with this forum is people on it don't even know what a sandbox game is.
SWG was also not a very good game. When people praise SWG, it was only a handful of features that they praise. People love to wallow in nostalgia.
um ok what you said had nothing to do with anything i posted, glad you felt you had to get your opinion on SWG out there though because im sure everyone on this forum cares what you think of SWG.
Im not expecting either of the extremes,I think it'll be balanced.Nor do I think it'll be a full on sandbox or themepark,but a mix of both.
As for PVP,I think they will relegate it to open pvp areas/zones.
I have been wondering what kind of pvp they're going to do. They might do an open world FFA pvp, but it would be regulated to a select few servers since the FFA open world pvp crowd, people like myself, are a stark minority compared to the PVE player base.
All of it's speculation right now, but this is supposed to be their prized crown of a game. Focusing too much on PVP would cause the PVE game to suffer and when it comes down to it, the bulk of the game's revenue is going to come from PVE fans.
At launch, I foresee 1 of these options happening:
1. There are a few FFA PvP servers right at launch, and it won't be a huge pvp system or be a huge part of the game. You can kill others outside of towns or other safe areas. Looting would not be Full loot. Would be a single inventory item or coin only. Rest of servers have only duels for pvp.
2. No pvp at all.
3. No FFA PvP servers, but you can initiate arena type gladiator fights in town arenas on all servers. It's 100% optional, just for fun.
My perfect EQN vision would have some sort of huge open world PvP with non-instanced house/town/city/fortress building, controlling resources and have siege warfare (On top of great open world PVE), but I'm not going to even think that the game is going in that direction right now. Everquest is first and foremost a PVE franchise so far, so I don't have any reason to think they're going to do a 180 and turn into a massive PVP FFA fest of my dreams.
Personally, I wouldnt mind a well done crime system. But I think there would need to be incentive -- I came up with an idea but its probably just a niche idea. Say you get put to "murderer" status in the game because you've been ganking too many people or ganked someone in what is labeled a safe zone or whatever. You lose 3 pieces of gear randomly when you die. But if thats the only thing that can happen, no one would gank, ever. So what is the incentive? Well you get 1 random piece of gear for the people are you are killing. They can also do some prison type thing where you're locked out of the game or something, I dont know
I also wouldnt mind since Crafting will probably provide the best gear in the game and not end-game Raids, that there be high value crafting materials/resources in a PvP enabled zone. So that its not just a PvE hugfest where everyone can get everything easily. Want that material to craft a sexy new item? Go in that PvP enabled zone. Have fun getting it. You can even group with friends/guildmates to help your process. This creates a player generated, fun sandbox experience and almost like a mini battleground, which I think would be fun. Also serves as an artificial time sink.
They can also have it so some raid bosses drop unique stuff you need for crafting too. So there would be incentive to partake in a zone that has PvP enabled in it, and partake in killing a Raid Boss to get that rare crafting material you need. Don't want to do either? Well then I guess you didnt want that piece of armor or weapon that badly.
Personally, I wouldnt mind a well done crime system. But I think there would need to be incentive -- I came up with an idea but its probably just a niche idea. Say you get put to "murderer" status in the game
But if thats the only thing that can happen, no one would gank, ever. So what is the incentive? Well you get ....
Want that material to craft a sexy new item? Go in that PvP enabled zone. Have fun getting it.
. Don't want to do either? Well then I guess you didnt want that piece of armor or weapon that badly.
There you have it folks yet again, consequence for "ganking" sexy title and a slap on the wrist. Want to be play PvE style, sorry you have to put up with ganking or get a group of PvP players to protect you while you do what you could do in a PvE game without the aggravation.
This is not "balancing PvE and PvP" it is treating PvE play as a bunch of serfs to be exploited by a PvP aristocracy.
Personally, I wouldnt mind a well done crime system. But I think there would need to be incentive -- I came up with an idea but its probably just a niche idea. Say you get put to "murderer" status in the game
But if thats the only thing that can happen, no one would gank, ever. So what is the incentive? Well you get ....
Want that material to craft a sexy new item? Go in that PvP enabled zone. Have fun getting it.
. Don't want to do either? Well then I guess you didnt want that piece of armor or weapon that badly.
There you have it folks yet again, consequence for "ganking" sexy title and a slap on the wrist. Want to be play PvE style, sorry you have to put up with ganking or get a group of PvP players to protect you while you do what you could do in a PvE game without the aggravation.
This is not "balancing PvE and PvP" it is treating PvE play as a bunch of serfs to be exploited by a PvP aristocracy.
Well, considering they have constantly said the game isnt going to be like EQ1/EQ2, and its being labeled as a Sandbox -- How do you prefer you get gear? Anyone and everyone can just walk into every zone, grab it, and leave? There isnt going to be some deep end-game PvE focus in this game. They want to avoid themepark end-games.
No one is saying you need to have the best gear in the game. I constantly hear people say "slow travel adds to the sense of danger/etc in the game" So what's wrong with going into a PvP enabled zone that has a crafting material in it? I never said all the best gear will require you to get every component in a PvP enabled zone.
Personally, I wouldnt mind a well done crime system. But I think there would need to be incentive -- I came up with an idea but its probably just a niche idea. Say you get put to "murderer" status in the game
But if thats the only thing that can happen, no one would gank, ever. So what is the incentive? Well you get ....
Want that material to craft a sexy new item? Go in that PvP enabled zone. Have fun getting it.
. Don't want to do either? Well then I guess you didnt want that piece of armor or weapon that badly.
There you have it folks yet again, consequence for "ganking" sexy title and a slap on the wrist. Want to be play PvE style, sorry you have to put up with ganking or get a group of PvP players to protect you while you do what you could do in a PvE game without the aggravation.
This is not "balancing PvE and PvP" it is treating PvE play as a bunch of serfs to be exploited by a PvP aristocracy.
I have to agree. As big as a PVPer as I am, I don't think I'm going to get my hopes up for EQN being an amazing pvp game, and if it does have any pvp, I don't expect to see anything past basic support for it.
Sure, we might want a throw back to our hay days of LoK, UO, Shadowbane, DAoC, SWG, etc etc, but lets be realistic in our expectations here.
There isnt going to be some deep end-game PvE focus in this game. They want to avoid themepark end-games.
What are you smoking? The EQ franchise is a hugely PVE based game. EQN will no doubt have an amazing amount of PVE content being the driving factor of the game.
PVE does not automatically = Themepark . FFA PVP does not = Sandbox.
I love pvp, but I wouldn't count on their flagship next-gen, game changer being void of PVE and being a huge PVP fest lol.
Comments
Labeling much here eh? Btw, have you even played Everquest and know that it wasn't about PvP? Also, what makes you think that sandbox means FFA PvP gankfest?
casuals and PvE-only players love themepark MMOs and I'd strongly recommend they stay in that realm.
instead of ruining the meaning of sandbox which is freedom and realism, not artificial gamey restrictions, different "modes" and options.
there is only a slight chance SOE got his right, and actually brings a competitor to EvE set in a fantasy world.
Sorry but who are you to tell what people can or cannot play? Also, where is realism in FFA PvP? Is realism defined by killing? Don't think so. Realism in a fantasy world then? Maybe I'm too thick to understand this. Also, freedom does not only destroying and killing but also building and exploring. Hope there will be a separate server for FFA PvP where you can do what you like to each other but EQ has never been a PvP game and I hope never will be.
Completely agree.
I'll second that!!!
Well personally I'm the opposite. I find PvP boring after awhile. Doing the same thing over and over with little if any strategy. Yes I know there is some as a team but all to often it's poor and just chaos with a little organization.
Where PvE especially with good character diversity becomes a lot more strategic to kill a tough group mob. The gear and the progression is also what I find fun. I've played swtor for about a year off and on mainly cause I like the grouping experience.
EQ had epic group battles. I mean you had a lot of class diversity and different strategies depending on the group makeup could make for some great battle experiences as well as some epic fails.
---
Ethion
Perfectly balanced games are also boring and not good game design.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
Yes, it goes both ways. While I never grew tired of DAoC's PVP system, WoW and games that followed had very shallow (pointless) PVP that I grew bored of quickly. If they can get the balance right between the two and tie everything/everyone together meaningfully, I think they would have an amazing game.
I just want something that is fun and engaging, not simply addictive.
The first time killing a big named mob and a few times after are fun, but the thrill goes away quickly for me and it turns into a tedious grind for gear or some other achievement only to move on to the next harder mob. Same applies to capturing a PVP zone or whatever, after a while it is fairly boring.
What I was trying to get at though, was that they are claiming to have created a new genre. So what we've known (good or bad) doesn't really matter anymore. It isn't above PVP vs PVE, it is about 1997-2013 vs the Future. Sandbox and open world are where PC and Console games are heading. Sticking to what we've known is not good enough anymore.
For those that want the traditional PVE grinds or mindless PVP, there are plenty of games out. For those that want something new, hopefully there is EQN and future games to come.
I think games like Ultima Online, Shadowbane, SWG, Vanguard, EVE, and Archeage stand apart from traditional themeparks and WoW type games, even though they have some elements. I'm hoping EQN is the evolution of the former, not the latter.
PvE and PvP are always too different to balance together. Anyone that doesn't balance PvP independently just doesn't understand game design. You just can't hope to apply the same mechanics PvP as you do to PvE when NPCs don't have the same strengths and limitations that players do.
EQ1 always stands out as a shining example of how pve and pvp can work so well together as long as they work differently. The most powerful abilities were subject to greater resists, and some abilities like fear or charm were ineffective against players altogether. With EQ class diversity, often ignorantly referred to as imbalance, the game was very fun and promoted team play as every class was as viable in pvp just like it was in pve.
There was a game called underlight that did PvP with penalties right. In the game you would kill any player anywhere. You collapsed into a sphere in the center of the world. You had to go back into the world or reenter the dreamscape which is where you actually played. Then you had to find your corpse and loot it for any equipment you had. There wasn't a LOT of equipment so equipment didn't matter much.
However if you were really bad the world was fairly small and a group of high level players that were given the power by GMs then they could kill you and capture your soul and kill the soul permanently removing you from the game.
So random PvP or Ganking was never an issue. There were wars and if someone did kill you it wasn't that big a deal. Equipment was easily replaced from the guild vault of just kill a few things. However someone harrasses people and makes a problem then a group of players could pass judgement on you and perma kill you.
The power couldn't be abused as only max level players could have it and it could only be bestowed by a GM who could also take it away. In fact in the game all skills had to be trained by other players. So you level up to level 11 and want to get your skills you gotta find another player with training skills would can teach you your new skills usually in exchange for some task or accomplishment.
---
Ethion
I think that killing the same mob is tedious but doing the instances in EQ2 where there were a good number of them and they had several random quest goals gave enough variety that I never got bored of it. And I do a lot of pickup groups so each group is a new challenge to get working together and figure out how to make it work.
Not that eq2 was as good as eq and eq had this random quest instance before eq2 by a long shot. The dungeon runs for shards to upgrade equipment never really got boring. And in EQ there were tons of different classes with very unique play styles. So after playing my rogue for awhile there was my druid, my necro, or my enchanter to play.
Vanguard was a good sandbox type game although it was sadly unpolished and had a horrible launch. I think it could have been great with more time and work before launching...
Shadowbane I thought was a very very good pvp game.
EvE I got bored with fairly quickly. SWG had too many bugs and too many huge game changes. I was pretty obsessed with crafting in it at one time.
Ultima online was interesting until I got in the EQ beta then Ultima online was gone from my life. I played eq for around 5 years or so. My main character was approaching 400 days played time... so I guess I was pretty obsessed :P I played a few games that I left eq for but always came back. DaoC, Anachy Online, Asherons call. But none of them kept me for long. Even wow didn't have the same hook that EQ did but alas wow was what killed eq for me. I played wow for long enough that my eq guild disolved and I was unable to get back into it.
---
Ethion
I agree with everything you said. Especially as a day 1 launch EQ veteran.
There were slight imbalances in EQ, but slight imbalances (within a 10% curve) is good for a game. It promotes adaptation and innovation. A good pvp game is not perfectly balanced. But it's not too imbalanced.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
um ok what you said had nothing to do with anything i posted, glad you felt you had to get your opinion on SWG out there though because im sure everyone on this forum cares what you think of SWG.
You know what they say about opinions right?
Im not expecting either of the extremes,I think it'll be balanced.Nor do I think it'll be a full on sandbox or themepark,but a mix of both.
As for PVP,I think they will relegate it to open pvp areas/zones.
I have been wondering what kind of pvp they're going to do. They might do an open world FFA pvp, but it would be regulated to a select few servers since the FFA open world pvp crowd, people like myself, are a stark minority compared to the PVE player base.
All of it's speculation right now, but this is supposed to be their prized crown of a game. Focusing too much on PVP would cause the PVE game to suffer and when it comes down to it, the bulk of the game's revenue is going to come from PVE fans.
At launch, I foresee 1 of these options happening:
1. There are a few FFA PvP servers right at launch, and it won't be a huge pvp system or be a huge part of the game. You can kill others outside of towns or other safe areas. Looting would not be Full loot. Would be a single inventory item or coin only. Rest of servers have only duels for pvp.
2. No pvp at all.
3. No FFA PvP servers, but you can initiate arena type gladiator fights in town arenas on all servers. It's 100% optional, just for fun.
My perfect EQN vision would have some sort of huge open world PvP with non-instanced house/town/city/fortress building, controlling resources and have siege warfare (On top of great open world PVE), but I'm not going to even think that the game is going in that direction right now. Everquest is first and foremost a PVE franchise so far, so I don't have any reason to think they're going to do a 180 and turn into a massive PVP FFA fest of my dreams.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
Personally, I wouldnt mind a well done crime system. But I think there would need to be incentive -- I came up with an idea but its probably just a niche idea. Say you get put to "murderer" status in the game because you've been ganking too many people or ganked someone in what is labeled a safe zone or whatever. You lose 3 pieces of gear randomly when you die. But if thats the only thing that can happen, no one would gank, ever. So what is the incentive? Well you get 1 random piece of gear for the people are you are killing. They can also do some prison type thing where you're locked out of the game or something, I dont know
I also wouldnt mind since Crafting will probably provide the best gear in the game and not end-game Raids, that there be high value crafting materials/resources in a PvP enabled zone. So that its not just a PvE hugfest where everyone can get everything easily. Want that material to craft a sexy new item? Go in that PvP enabled zone. Have fun getting it. You can even group with friends/guildmates to help your process. This creates a player generated, fun sandbox experience and almost like a mini battleground, which I think would be fun. Also serves as an artificial time sink.
They can also have it so some raid bosses drop unique stuff you need for crafting too. So there would be incentive to partake in a zone that has PvP enabled in it, and partake in killing a Raid Boss to get that rare crafting material you need. Don't want to do either? Well then I guess you didnt want that piece of armor or weapon that badly.
There you have it folks yet again, consequence for "ganking" sexy title and a slap on the wrist. Want to be play PvE style, sorry you have to put up with ganking or get a group of PvP players to protect you while you do what you could do in a PvE game without the aggravation.
This is not "balancing PvE and PvP" it is treating PvE play as a bunch of serfs to be exploited by a PvP aristocracy.
Well, considering they have constantly said the game isnt going to be like EQ1/EQ2, and its being labeled as a Sandbox -- How do you prefer you get gear? Anyone and everyone can just walk into every zone, grab it, and leave? There isnt going to be some deep end-game PvE focus in this game. They want to avoid themepark end-games.
No one is saying you need to have the best gear in the game. I constantly hear people say "slow travel adds to the sense of danger/etc in the game" So what's wrong with going into a PvP enabled zone that has a crafting material in it? I never said all the best gear will require you to get every component in a PvP enabled zone.
I have to agree. As big as a PVPer as I am, I don't think I'm going to get my hopes up for EQN being an amazing pvp game, and if it does have any pvp, I don't expect to see anything past basic support for it.
Sure, we might want a throw back to our hay days of LoK, UO, Shadowbane, DAoC, SWG, etc etc, but lets be realistic in our expectations here.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
What are you smoking? The EQ franchise is a hugely PVE based game. EQN will no doubt have an amazing amount of PVE content being the driving factor of the game.
PVE does not automatically = Themepark . FFA PVP does not = Sandbox.
I love pvp, but I wouldn't count on their flagship next-gen, game changer being void of PVE and being a huge PVP fest lol.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL