Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
[Dev Journal] DK Online: Realm vs Realm PvP Action
SBFord
Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
DK Online developers have partnered with MMORPG.com to bring our readers and exclusive developer diary surrounding the Realm vs Realm feature to be found in game. It's a terrific behind the scenes look complete with brand new screens. Keep reading!
Today we shed light on the Realm vs. Realm PvP battles in DK Online. RvR is a cornerstone of the large-scale PvP options in the game (together with Castle Siege, the guild battle royale for control of a valuable castle). While Castle Siege is intended for organized PvP-focused guilds to have the ultimate challenge against like-minded guilds, we know that not everyone can be a part of those guilds but may still want to experience massive PvP battles. That’s where RvR comes in.
Read more of our exclusive developer diary, DK Online: Realm vs Realm PvP Action.
)
Comments
"""Winning RvR grants an experience and regen buff for all players associated with that faction worldwide—including those that weren’t present for the battle..."
Very nice addition taken straight from Dark Age of Camelot. However, a lot of work needed still. As the developers who coined the term would tell us, "Realm vs Realm," is more than two guilds going at it - the idea of fighting for your realm is that you have a realm to fight for - culture, religion, armor, weapons, architecture, etc., should vary between realms to give players a true sense of US vs Them. Painting Red Team vs Blue Team as realm vs realm is a tad inaccurate. Deadliest Warrior, a great Spike T.V. show, taught a lot of folks just how entertaining it is to see different martial styles versing oneanother.
Tolkien set the example for high fantasy, showing complex differences in culture and race, and pitted them against one another - uniting those who logically would unite (Elves, Northmen, Gondor), against those who represented completely different cultures: orcs, easterlings, and so forth. This variation added to the sense of immersion - something most mmorpgs are missing.
Secondly, 2 "realms" is just not nearly as exciting or imaginative as a 3rd realm wild card. Two realms can be in stalemate, or one horribly outnumbered...add that third realm and man, everyone is looking over their shoulder. Such unpredictability leads toward excitement - excitement keeps players.
Anyway, that being said, a lot of what you're doing looks good. I understand how few developers are deep fantasy readers, and sadly, how bad the industry is these days with depth, and being able to present really immersive games.
First off, you cannot use the term RVR with only two realms. RVR requires at least 3 realms, so all they have in this game is pvp. Another set of brain dead developers. Two realm pvp has been tried lots and it has failed just about every time. Just does not work.
If you think this game will be fun, think again.
Last time I checked RvR implies two. As there are two R's. I was a long time player of DAoC and I have no problem wtih them calling it Realm Vs Realm when that is actually exactly what they are selling. Two realms fighting.
Ozmo you are waaay too strict with your idea's and you are way too quick to judge / put down others.
lol they better change the title quick, gonna get sued. Realm vs. Realm is a TM of Mythic/EA.
http://ageofreckoning.warhammeronline.com/Realm-vs-Realm
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4001:ox3dw6.2.1
this looks like Tera Online with kickass PVP options....sounds sweet. unless Tera decided to implement if first haha.
funny how every new Korean game, or ok, every second new Korean game, is using the Tera battle system now. RaiderZ was first and now there's another one.
what's funnier is that they don't get sued for stealing the interface
I review lots of indie games and MMORPGs
If your logic is that Mythic made RvR and did it with three factions so three factions is needed, consider that they also made Warhammer Online. WAR has two factions with RvR. RvR does not demand a certain number of sides. RvR is more about large scale battles than the number of sides, if you go by what Mythic has said.
I don't know how many MMOs I have played, too many to remember.
I liked Dark Age of Camelot the most, however, Mythic made sure the game would die. They treated their customers poorly. Upon release, too many people found the game difficult [those playing solo found grinding extremely difficult and time consuming - one game reviewer said that no one would ever be able to reach level 50], and the game had too little content at first.
Unlike others, I did not have a problem with updates to DAoC after the original came out, however, I did not like the constant "tweaking" and nerfing, sometimes heavy nerfs. New characters would come out with promises of greatness, only to find out it the characters were no good or soon nerfed. Remember seeing a lot of bone dancers early in RvR, and then none? And, scouts, the first to get nerfed in the game, and it was known as a Super Nerf, which it was. You could tell what characters the devs were playing, as they were the most powerful, until they started playing something else.
I played DAoC for most of a decade, long after it had dried up, even though most good guilds dissapeared or lost almost all members.
At present I much more enjoy World of Tanks. The biggest problem I see with WoT is that some maps are too small for artillery and tank destroyers [the ones where tier 1 and tier 2 learn to play the game on]. More maps are needed that are arty and TD friendly. The graphics have improved, especially if you have a computer that can display all the detail. The best part it is fun, even if most people playing PUG games have no clue how to play, -- at any tier.
If anyone decides to play WoT find a clan.
Intel Core i7 7700K, MB is Gigabyte Z270X-UD5
SSD x2, 4TB WD Black HHD, 32GB RAM, MSI GTX 980 Ti Lightning LE video card
Intel Core i7 7700K, MB is Gigabyte Z270X-UD5
SSD x2, 4TB WD Black HHD, 32GB RAM, MSI GTX 980 Ti Lightning LE video card
Who says RvR has to have three realms? If their is more than one realm facing off against each other then it's RvR.
First off no one but Mythic can use the term RvR because it is trademarked. Second if you add any more factions to a RvR™ type system you dilute the population to much and go from the realm of faction PvP to clan warfare. Now this isnt necessarily bad and I woudlnt mind seeing a new MMO that used this type of PvP but then again you basically remove all pretextes of being in a faction conflict.
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
Warhammer Online is an RvR game with two factions and it was created by the developer that invented the term.
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
This is true, if you consider Mythic to be an entity in company title alone. But the powerhouse creators behind the RvR model for Mythic was not a part of the broken 2 faction design that EA mythic created when the Mythic CEO was forced by shareholders to step down - since the game was an immediate failure.
Wiki states: Origin
In 2001, Mythic Entertainment introduced a new team-based form of PvP combat with the release of Dark Age of Camelot and called it Realm versus Realm.[1][4] In RvR, players of each realm team up to fight against players from the opposing realms in team-based combat."
And while you are correct toi say that you don't theoretically need a third realm - the folks who coined the term RvR (before EA destroyed the company)...had 3 realms and thusly I believe that implies that the model was "intended" for 3 realm immersion.
Granted, again, you are correct because you could have a bug on a log and title it RvR when he fights another bug. The problem is, developers are doing what's easiest, and have been trained to believe that an mmorpg is something that is born to fail - the idea is you get as much investment as possible to market and create a lot of flash, then get players hooked for 1-3 months, and hope you can cover costs, make a profit, then move on to another project while your mmorpg goes F2P for long term profits.
Very frustrating.