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!

SOE is heading in the direction of Eve (And that means open world PVP!)

BidwoodBidwood Toronto, ONPosts: 554Member

Read it and weep. I've been a broken record on this, but the writing on the wall says there's going to be open world PVP in a brilliantly executed system like Eve Online.

Smedley's blog post covers a lot, but here are some of the highlights:

"A lot has been made about how much we’re pushing this concept of “Sandbox” mmos being the future. Not a lot has been said about what that means."

"In my opinion the solution is focusing a lot more on letting players make and be content for each other. Battlegrounds are an excellent example of an Evergreen style of content where it’s the players themselves that actually create the content. ... Building systems into the games that let the players interact with each other in new and unique ways gives us the ability to watch as the players do stuff we never anticipated. We’ll see a lot more creativity in action if the players are at the center of it. Imagine an MMORPG of a massive city.. and the Rogue’s guild is entirely run by players. Where the city has an entire political system that is populated by players who were elected by the playerbase."

"There’s a great example of this today with Eve Online. It’s a brilliantly executed system where the players are pretty much in charge of the entire game. Sure there is a lot of content for players to do, but anything that’s important in the game is done by the players. This is a shining example of how this kind of system can thrive.

Our belief at SOE is that it’s smarter to head in this direction now rather than waiting."

Is anyone from the other side of the fence ready to admit this is happening?

Edit: Sorry, that was bad form. Here is the blog post:

http://smedsblog.com/2014/02/11/the-sandbox-mmo/

 

Edit:

 

Me:

@j_smedley love the blog. is SOE heading in that direction for PVP too? When will we learn more about that? Fingers crossed.

Smedley:

@sir_bidwood yes

«13456714

Comments

  • AlleinAllein San Diego, CAPosts: 1,666Member Uncommon

    I would love to see an EVE or "realistic" approach to PVP and player control of the world. At the same time I"m not holding my breath. Smed can say what he wants, but at the end of the day someone else is fronting the bill and expect results. EVE wasn't/isn't a smash hit. If Sony is willing to let EQN grow and develop into something amazing, we are going to have a great game. If they want X players after Y days, we might be in trouble.

    Really don't want to see "just" open world PVP. Yay, I can kill you... There needs to be reason, consequence, and lasting impact from conflict between guilds, cities, players, and whatever factions we create ourselves. No, I hate you because you picked Ogre 5 years ago.

    I think the reason so many dislike PVP is because it is generally pointless and only rewards those that want to screw with others. There needs to be incentives and some form of structure beyond simply flipping the PVP switch. FFA is fun for a time, but never works out in the long run. EVE has a nice balance, but it is also a completely different beast. What works in one game has no impact on another.

    Hoping Landmark gets some sort of "PVP" system to allow for fun conflict and battle which might hopefully lead into the more PVE crowd getting into it leading into EQN. If we are given a lot of freedom within limits, I think players will create a balance to keep jerks in check, while still allowing healthy conflict and competition between players.

    Like I said, not holding my breath, but I am crossing my fingers =)

    Edit: Really want to get away from the whole PVE vs PVP mentality as well. If a game is made well, it should just be everything blended into one experience. A game can cater to almost everyone if done right. When it starts swaying one way or the other, it turns huge numbers of players of way from both sides and gives those like myself that hang out in the middle a crappy experience. I want to enjoy a fully developed PVE world with the ability to battle others "if needed".

    PVP players shouldn't have to go off to a special island to fight nor should it be a meaningless death match or capture the flag. PVP shouldn't be only a side game when bored. PVE players shouldn't have to live in fear of being killed when they have no wish to fight. If the situation arises, they shouldn't be in a lose/lose situation. Hopefully SOE can find that balance.

  • tom_goretom_gore TamperePosts: 1,796Member Uncommon

    If you think there will only be FFA open world PvP servers in EQ Next (like in EVE), you will be sorely mistaken.

    There will be several rulesets and yes, there will probably be open world PvP servers too.

    The difference is, only those who like PvP will play on those servers. No easy prey for you ;)

     

  • ExcessionExcession NottinghamPosts: 367Member Uncommon

    Smedley mentions battlegrounds, storytelling tool's, music systems, auction houses, and Eve, and you read that as open world pvp?

    ok.....

    A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.

  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,572Member Uncommon

    I'll believe it when I see it.

  • FinalFikusFinalFikus Chicago, ILPosts: 906Member
    Originally posted by Allein

    I would love to see an EVE or "realistic" approach to PVP and player control of the world. At the same time I"m not holding my breath. Smed can say what he wants, but at the end of the day someone else is fronting the bill and expect results. EVE wasn't/isn't a smash hit. If Sony is willing to let EQN grow and develop into something amazing, we are going to have a great game. If they want X players after Y days, we might be in trouble.

    Really don't want to see "just" open world PVP. Yay, I can kill you... There needs to be reason, consequence, and lasting impact from conflict between guilds, cities, players, and whatever factions we create ourselves. No, I hate you because you picked Ogre 5 years ago.

    I think the reason so many dislike PVP is because it is generally pointless and only rewards those that want to screw with others. There needs to be incentives and some form of structure beyond simply flipping the PVP switch. FFA is fun for a time, but never works out in the long run. EVE has a nice balance, but it is also a completely different beast. What works in one game has no impact on another.

    Hoping Landmark gets some sort of "PVP" system to allow for fun conflict and battle which might hopefully lead into the more PVE crowd getting into it leading into EQN. If we are given a lot of freedom within limits, I think players will create a balance to keep jerks in check, while still allowing healthy conflict and competition between players.

    Like I said, not holding my breath, but I am crossing my fingers =)

    Edit: Really want to get away from the whole PVE vs PVP mentality as well. If a game is made well, it should just be everything blended into one experience. A game can cater to almost everyone if done right. When it starts swaying one way or the other, it turns huge numbers of players of way from both sides and gives those like myself that hang out in the middle a crappy experience. I want to enjoy a fully developed PVE world with the ability to battle others "if needed". Hopefully SOE can find that balance.

    The bad parts of pvp is developer intervention.

    Too many people come into the game in a hard core mind set rather than playing the game first and letting the mindset develop naturally. Which is fine, except, if they're not winning they lose motivation to play.  PVP in a role playing game is the same as an fps. ie..hardcore.

    In other words, pvp is rigged. Literally.

    "If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"

  • FinalFikusFinalFikus Chicago, ILPosts: 906Member
    Originally posted by tom_gore

    If you think there will only be FFA open world PvP servers in EQ Next (like in EVE), you will be sorely mistaken.

    There will be several rulesets and yes, there will probably be open world PvP servers too.

    The difference is, only those who like PvP will play on those servers. No easy prey for you ;)

     

    They didn't make a destructible landscape for crafters. It''s gonna be sieges and war, pain and glory. It's not 1999 anymore.  Prepare. Hopefully it wont be more circular pvp, but war and peace.

    "If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"

  • tom_goretom_gore TamperePosts: 1,796Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by FinalFikus
    Originally posted by tom_gore

    If you think there will only be FFA open world PvP servers in EQ Next (like in EVE), you will be sorely mistaken.

    There will be several rulesets and yes, there will probably be open world PvP servers too.

    The difference is, only those who like PvP will play on those servers. No easy prey for you ;)

     

    They didn't make a destructible landscape for crafters. It''s gonna be sieges and war, pain and glory. It's not 1999 anymore.  Prepare. Hopefully it wont be more circular pvp, but war and peace.

    I understand very well the possibilities of PvP in EQN environment and make no mistake, I'll for sure be participating in PvP one way or another. Hopefully it will be on a guild vs. guild basis, but if that's not available, I'm going to pop into the open world PvP servers, too.

    I was just trying to chill the people who think open PvP will be the only ruleset in EQN. It won't.

     

  • SephastusSephastus New Brunswick, NJPosts: 448Member Uncommon

    Those trying to see this as their typical PvP are going to be very surprised. First, I hadn't understood the concept of "tiers" until I saw it in action. Current'y, there are 5 confirmed tiers in game, with a possible six, as seen from the crafting/gathering/building side of EQN Landmark Alpha. There is very little that can give away what tier your character is actually at, and when switching continents/servers, you have the same POE as all other players, new or old alike, where (currently) you can't grief other players.

     

    So, the "open PvP" that many are talking about, will most likely not be the "Gank fest" that is typical of any MMO without level restrictions. If you go and try to just attack those leaving the initial zone, you would have absolutely no idea if it is a veteran player, with tier 5 armor & weapons and 20 fully developed classes under his belt, or a brand new player just learning the ropes.

     

    On a fair 1 vs 1 situation, or even, in a situation where you could get the ire and immediate reprisal of a mob, ganking and griefing with be self policing.

     

    Another good thing about EQN: You are NOT restricted to your starting server. You can switch at will, and if you are tired of your PvE server, you can always join a PvP server to let off some steam, and then go back to your PvE server... That means, that those that WANT PvP, but want to be first properly geared for it, do not HAVE to make their character on a PvP server, and suffer through all the lackluster, "carebear" crying, sadistic players, that only get their highs from overpowering their opponent without a real challenge attached. I foresee the PvP servers as the real proving ground of those at the top of their game, who will want good challenges from other players.

  • TelondarielTelondariel Ottawa, ONPosts: 1,001Member
    Originally posted by Bidwood

    Read it and weep. I've been a broken record on this, but the writing on the wall says there's going to be open world PVP in a brilliantly executed system like Eve Online.

    Smedley's blog post covers a lot, but here are some of the highlights:

    "A lot has been made about how much we’re pushing this concept of “Sandbox” mmos being the future. Not a lot has been said about what that means."

    "In my opinion the solution is focusing a lot more on letting players make and be content for each other. Battlegrounds are an excellent example of an Evergreen style of content where it’s the players themselves that actually create the content. ... Building systems into the games that let the players interact with each other in new and unique ways gives us the ability to watch as the players do stuff we never anticipated. We’ll see a lot more creativity in action if the players are at the center of it. Imagine an MMORPG of a massive city.. and the Rogue’s guild is entirely run by players. Where the city has an entire political system that is populated by players who were elected by the playerbase."

    "There’s a great example of this today with Eve Online. It’s a brilliantly executed system where the players are pretty much in charge of the entire game. Sure there is a lot of content for players to do, but anything that’s important in the game is done by the players. This is a shining example of how this kind of system can thrive.

    Our belief at SOE is that it’s smarter to head in this direction now rather than waiting."

    Is anyone from the other side of the fence ready to admit this is happening?

    Edit: Sorry, that was bad form. Here is the blog post:

    http://smedsblog.com/2014/02/11/the-sandbox-mmo/

    Oh.  You are inferring again with this tired old horse that you kept flogging last summer.

     

    Can you please point out where open world PvP was mentioned in there?  Because your thread title is misleading.

     

    EQ has always had a server or two that was dedicated to PvP.  Smed has said that PvP is an important aspect to EQN.  Can you just assume that there will be a PvP server in EQN?  Absolutely, based on history and and based on Smed's assertion that it will be a part of the game world. 

     

    But, as you keep bringing up, no, open world non-consensual PvP on all servers is not going to happen.

    image
  • Ender4Ender4 milwaukee, WIPosts: 2,253Member

    Yeah they have been pretty clear that they don't want to force players into social interactions against their will many times. There will be a couple PvP servers and then maybe a couple areas on normal servers flagged for PvP but that is it. Just too many people that think someone killing them 'ruins' their gameplay and not enough that understand that conflict enhances the gameplay.

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,281Member Uncommon

    Have you watched 5 ten yr olds on xbox live playing minecraft? They are pvp'n. 

     

     

  • BaselineBaseline Sloan, NYPosts: 503Member
    Originally posted by Ender4

    Yeah they have been pretty clear that they don't want to force players into social interactions against their will many times.

    Those people shouldn't be playing MMO's.

    Raph Koster said it best about original SWG; everyone was interdependent. If you were a combat guy, you had to go to the cantina to heal your fatigue (listening to entertainers), player entertainers gained skill and tips from healing these players, crafters sold to the combat players and the entertainers, combat players supplied the crafters with materials.

    We have run so far away from that living breathing world idea of an online game toward this degenerate "I'll do it all myself! Even the combat! I don't want to need a healer and tank friend to go get muh kill on! I want to be tanky DPS with self-heals!"

    I just saw that crap on the wildstar boards. "Which class has best self-heals?". Makes me want to vomit.

    And at the end of the day, what it all boils down to is the "community" having too much of a say. Ohh god my fears, interacting with other people, I play video games so I don't have to do that! Don't take me out of my comfort zone! Ohh god! I might actually have to find a good healer or tank or DPS to do this content, you're forcing me to play with other people in a ..... multiplayer game!

    This is why the only game I'm actively subscribed to at the moment is EVE. Clearly defined roles. I can say "I know that guy is a good x, that guy is a great x, that guy is the best at x".

    Most of these MMO's coming out today do absolutely nothing to forge friendships, community, and team spirit, like the older games did, and THOSE systems in a game are more important than any stupid colorful dress or flaming helmet.

  • KatillaKatilla Nashua, NHPosts: 682Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Ender4

    Yeah they have been pretty clear that they don't want to force players into social interactions against their will many times. There will be a couple PvP servers and then maybe a couple areas on normal servers flagged for PvP but that is it. Just too many people that think someone killing them 'ruins' their gameplay and not enough that understand that conflict enhances the gameplay.

    i personally hate open world PVP.... I play games to group and quest and hate it when i'm ganked by some bored high level character that likes to pick on the lowbies.

  • BidwoodBidwood Toronto, ONPosts: 554Member
    Interesting. I'm hearing lots of people say they don't want it, but the actual denial has toned down a lot. I guess people are reading between the lines on what it means for SOE to move in the direction of Eve Online.
  • MukeMuke BredaPosts: 2,172Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Bidwood

    Read it and weep. I've been a broken record on this, but the writing on the wall says there's going to be open world PVP in a brilliantly executed system like Eve Online.

    Smedley's blog post covers a lot, but here are some of the highlights:

    "A lot has been made about how much we’re pushing this concept of “Sandbox” mmos being the future. Not a lot has been said about what that means."

    "In my opinion the solution is focusing a lot more on letting players make and be content for each other. Battlegrounds are an excellent example of an Evergreen style of content where it’s the players themselves that actually create the content. ... Building systems into the games that let the players interact with each other in new and unique ways gives us the ability to watch as the players do stuff we never anticipated. We’ll see a lot more creativity in action if the players are at the center of it. Imagine an MMORPG of a massive city.. and the Rogue’s guild is entirely run by players. Where the city has an entire political system that is populated by players who were elected by the playerbase."

    "There’s a great example of this today with Eve Online. It’s a brilliantly executed system where the players are pretty much in charge of the entire game. Sure there is a lot of content for players to do, but anything that’s important in the game is done by the players. This is a shining example of how this kind of system can thrive.

    Our belief at SOE is that it’s smarter to head in this direction now rather than waiting."

    Is anyone from the other side of the fence ready to admit this is happening?

    Edit: Sorry, that was bad form. Here is the blog post:

    http://smedsblog.com/2014/02/11/the-sandbox-mmo/

    I doubt SOE will do open world PVP EVE-style.

    Imagine what would happen if a player kills someone and takes their stuff with them.

    Talk about Darkfall, like EVE that game has/had their fans, but SOE can't expect the masses to like that game then as the majority is used to risk-free PVP, which EVE is not.

    Smed does not let EQN become a total sandbox like EVE is, he wants to be in charge of everything.

     

    "going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"

  • VorthanionVorthanion Laguna Vista, TXPosts: 2,121Member Uncommon
    There are a hell of a lot more players who don't like Eve Online than those that do.  Copying their format is consigning yourself to mediocrity at best.  Then again, they have a bevy of niche games under their corporate umbrella and aren't afraid to put yet another non-genre changing game under it.

    image
  • koboldfodderkoboldfodder Danbury, DEPosts: 390Member Uncommon

    I am awful at PVP, but SWG pvp and EQ's zek servers were some of the best MMO experiences I had.  Maybe it was SWG's vast, open worlds or EQ's one item+coin loot in a game where items were the only thing that mattered, but it added so much more to the game than a regular blue server.

     

    Sequestering people into "battlegrounds" is a bad idea.   PVP should be there as a means to an end, not as something to get tokens to get armor.  That adds nothing to the game.

     

     

  • BidwoodBidwood Toronto, ONPosts: 554Member
    Originally posted by Muke
    Originally posted by Bidwood

    Read it and weep. I've been a broken record on this, but the writing on the wall says there's going to be open world PVP in a brilliantly executed system like Eve Online.

    Smedley's blog post covers a lot, but here are some of the highlights:

    "A lot has been made about how much we’re pushing this concept of “Sandbox” mmos being the future. Not a lot has been said about what that means."

    "In my opinion the solution is focusing a lot more on letting players make and be content for each other. Battlegrounds are an excellent example of an Evergreen style of content where it’s the players themselves that actually create the content. ... Building systems into the games that let the players interact with each other in new and unique ways gives us the ability to watch as the players do stuff we never anticipated. We’ll see a lot more creativity in action if the players are at the center of it. Imagine an MMORPG of a massive city.. and the Rogue’s guild is entirely run by players. Where the city has an entire political system that is populated by players who were elected by the playerbase."

    "There’s a great example of this today with Eve Online. It’s a brilliantly executed system where the players are pretty much in charge of the entire game. Sure there is a lot of content for players to do, but anything that’s important in the game is done by the players. This is a shining example of how this kind of system can thrive.

    Our belief at SOE is that it’s smarter to head in this direction now rather than waiting."

    Is anyone from the other side of the fence ready to admit this is happening?

    Edit: Sorry, that was bad form. Here is the blog post:

    http://smedsblog.com/2014/02/11/the-sandbox-mmo/

    I doubt SOE will do open world PVP EVE-style.

    Imagine what would happen if a player kills someone and takes their stuff with them.

    Talk about Darkfall, like EVE that game has/had their fans, but SOE can't expect the masses to like that game then as the majority is used to risk-free PVP, which EVE is not.

    Smed does not let EQN become a total sandbox like EVE is, he wants to be in charge of everything.

     

    I believe they can tie PVP to the "life of consequence" pillar to bring some order to the chaos. I have some ideas about how...  but they've put a lot of thought into it as they're aiming to revolutionize the genre.

     

    BTW here's a news site that interpreted Smedley's blog post to be about PVP too:

    http://www.computerandvideogames.com/449286/sandbox-mmos-like-everquest-next-are-the-future-says-soe-president/

  • Dreamo84Dreamo84 Niagara Falls, NYPosts: 3,437Member Uncommon

    Why do PvPers have a problem with there being separate servers for open PvP and consensual PvP? Do they really just like to gank people who don't want to fight until they quit?

    SoE is too smart to go with forced PvP. There will be PvP servers though I am sure. I would bet good money on PvP not being forced.

    Even Richard Garriot did away with that in SOTA even though that was something he Kickstarted with. There's simply no reason to not make PvP optional other than to greif PvEers.

    image
  • BidwoodBidwood Toronto, ONPosts: 554Member
    Originally posted by Fendel84M

    Why do PvPers have a problem with there being separate servers for open PvP and consensual PvP? Do they really just like to gank people who don't want to fight until they quit?

    SoE is too smart to go with forced PvP. There will be PvP servers though I am sure. I would bet good money on PvP not being forced.

    Even Richard Garriot did away with that in SOTA even though that was something he Kickstarted with. There's simply no reason to not make PvP optional other than to greif PvEers.

    I don't think we can rest too much on traditional MMO paradigms. Smedley is saying the traditional MMOs aren't sustainable, and that players need to be content for each other. Like with Eve Online.  I believe PVP is an integral part of that. And I believe that's why the devs haven't just put this topic to rest - because it will be a massive shock to their existing fans and needs to be managed carefully. (You're welcome.)

  • SinsaiSinsai Reno, NVPosts: 236Member Uncommon

    I see it for a Server but not he entire game.

     

    Plus this has already been answered last Summer by Darrin McPhersonLead Designer for EQNext, here's a link to one article pertaining to it where he states "while I cannot comment directly on this concern I can say that we avoid bad design decision."

     

    http://eqnwire.com/2013/06/26/eqnext-game-wont-be-centered-around-non-consensual-pvp/

     

    image

  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Algo Star SystemPosts: 651Member Uncommon

    Why is it the ultimate wet dream for some PvP'ers to have a game be exclusively Open World PvP? Is having a PvP server not enough?

     

    Any how, Open World PVP can only truly work on a mainstream level if there are consequences for sociopath behavior.

     

    It would be interesting to see Customer Support reps actually be in game Authorities.  If someone is ganking or doing other antisocial behavior a player would have to navigate their character to the authority office and report it. The Customer Support reps could then go out in the world and make arrests.  They can put out bounties for the capture of offender.

     

    There also needs to be a way to circumvent people doing messed up things and logging off. 

     

    I'm all for Open World PVP as long as it isn't a safe haven for dickheads who hide behind their keyboards while they're abusive.

  • junzo316junzo316 Raleigh, NCPosts: 1,684Member Uncommon
    I could see SOE making a game like Eve.  I doubt, however, that it will have a budget or resources like EQ.  EQ will have PvE and PvP servers as is typical for such games.  Smed is smart enough to not mess with that formula when it comes to a mainstream title like EQ.
  • LatronusLatronus Lexington Park, MDPosts: 692Member
    Originally posted by Byrhofen

    Smedley mentions battlegrounds, storytelling tool's, music systems, auction houses, and Eve, and you read that as open world pvp?

    ok.....

    I was thinking the same thing.   

    image
  • MinscMinsc Burford, ONPosts: 1,271Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by FlyByKnight

    Why is it the ultimate wet dream for some PvP'ers to have a game be exclusively Open World PvP? Is having a PvP server not enough?

     

    Any how, Open World PVP can only truly work on a mainstream level if there are consequences for sociopath behavior.

     

    It would be interesting to see Customer Support reps actually be in game Authorities.  If someone is ganking or doing other antisocial behavior a player would have to navigate their character to the authority office and report it. The Customer Support reps could then go out in the world and make arrests.  They can put out bounties for the capture of offender.

     

    There also needs to be a way to circumvent people doing messed up things and logging off. 

     

    I'm all for Open World PVP as long as it isn't a safe haven for dickheads who hide behind their keyboards while they're abusive.

    I've been subbed to EVE-Online for 10 years, I played UO from launch up until they split the server into pvp and non-pvp. In EVE and UO both I never went looking for PVP. If someone attacked me in either of those games I would fight back and often that would escalate into 2 sides duking it out in a big group. The fact that pvp could happen at any time is what mattered. It's called Emergent Gameplay and it's the reason why Sandboxes can stay new and fresh while all other themparks become stagnant after a short time. It's the reason why a 10-year old game like EVE is still gaining subscribers while most themeparks start bleeding subs within 6 months.

«13456714
Sign In or Register to comment.