Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Will it be full open-world PVP?
Bidwood
Member Posts: 554
Smedley said this is going to be the biggest sandbox MMO ever and most of the world - much of which will be player-created - can be destroyed... like the world you see today could be much different five days later...
How can I destroy most of the world, including player creations, if other players aren't able to defend it?
I see this being a game with lots of conflict between players, which is incredibly exciting - provided the combat is engaging enough. (e.g. action-based.)
Remember - this is a parallel world to EQ1 and 2, which gives SOE license to turn the gameplay upside down.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I certainly dont mind having my buildings / housing destroyed .. however if im offline and a wake up the next morning and its all gone in a matter of just a few hours then its a problem ...
I believe some type of offline defence is in order and also it shouldnt take 3 seconds to totally destruct my creations ..
this is where I felt asherons call 2 really got it right. They had different types of servers of course but the most fun I had in that game was on the realm pvp server I forget the name now. You could basically attack anyone , anywhere that wasnt in your faction and the world around you was just mostly ruined small towns. A enhanced version of this would be a lot of fun where you have to rebuild the world but other players can also destroy it as well. The only main issue with this is many MANY everquest fans have no intention of doing any pvp at all and if you do not offer pve servers you can kiss any chance of making any money off this game goodbye. All you have to do is look at current sandbox pvp styled games like darkfall , mortal , Xsyon, shadowbane etc and see where all those are now.
A server for factional pvp im sure will release with this game but I highly doubt they will not release pve servers also. Smed likes to troll for publicity . Thats why you seen the perma death trolling comments on his twitter , I would take anything that man says with a grain of salt , hes not going to kill his business making a only open world pvp game and risk losing half his staff to layoffs.
I think the most effective "offline defence" in the world I described above is... you build partnerships with other players and they fend off attackers.
I am okay with PvE servers coexisting with PvP but wonder how they really get a foothold on branding themselves with "emergent gameplay" and sandbox innovation without PvP in the game...
The other game where I liked how the faction PvP played out was DC Universe Online. You really get a sense of being on a team and the "us VS them" feeling.
But again, if they really want to go sandbox and break free of the conventional MMO mold, I see the full-world PvP as part of that. It might mean alienating some of the traditional playerbase to get a foothold in new markets.
I guess we'll see.
I enjoyed DCUO myself , the pvp was kinda fun but....the glitching for many many months pretty much killed that games pvp system until it went free to play. Also have you personally ever played everquest 2 pvp on nagafen? man its rough..... eq2 has probably the very worst pvp ive ever played in a game , and Ive played pvp in almost all games since DAOC. Wards and level upon levels of stronger spells and abilities make that crap almost unplayable to anyone that doesnt have a level 90 main toon to fund twink alts. While I can agree pvp is needed for any game to really shine this day and age when content is bland and players have to create their own. Full open world pvp would really kill it this game faster than anything if they take the route of eq and eq2 for their pvp system.
Though I do find it very very funny , eq2 didnt even release with pvp and it took them years to make battlegrounds on the pve servers . Yet they have the perfect story of good vs evil races and classes with a built in pvp conflict of wars spanning thousands of years. Maybe a compromise of realm vs realm zones with keeps like GW2 , DAOC, and WAR? that could turn out really potentially fun and really steal from the GW2 crowd that love realm vs realm.
Cause Smedley has said MMOs are pretty much stuck in a rut - that even EQ1 and 2 are guilty of this - and need to be more innovative and focus on "emergent gameplay" which includes more sandbox elements. For me, a cornerstone of the pure form of "sandbox" means open-world PvP with meaningful consequences. Of course, there are many directions you can take it.
Thats it?
Thats not very assuring.. I hope they have some kind of system set up other than "Hey bro, watch my stuff".
Thanks for all your thoughts!
I haven't actually played Everquest before and wasn't really interested until I heard they were going sandbox and realized this could end up on the Playstation 4.
I didn't play DCUO until after it went F2P on the PS3. Wasn't really a fan of the DC Universe setting, but I decided to give it a try. I was really impressed with the rock-paper-scissors gameplay allowing skilled players to take down vets. That's good PVP in my opinion - where you can win by using your head and reflexes even if you don't have tonnes of hours to sink into levelling up.
Could live with Realm VS Realm but it doesn't scream "sandbox" to me as much as the true open world PVP where everyone has the choice to betray you (with social consequences), so I guess it depends on how closely they go for that ideal?
Originally posted by General_Dru-Zod
I'm just pulling this out of my ass - it seems to fit in with the theme of letting players decide what happens.. what would you propose? Being able to set up NPC defenses?
And where are you getting this information about the Everquest PVP playerbase?
I played on Vallon Zek until the merge and we ALWAYS had a healthy population and enjoyed the PvP.
So don't speak for the Everquest Community.
Maybe there's enough of the current playerbase to fill a few PVP servers but what about all of the servers? I think cronius77 is just pointing out that a number of the current players probably wouldn't play if PVP was forced on them. But I wonder if new players would take their place.
okay know it all who decided they couldnt be respectful with the topic at hand. Why does both EQ and EQ2 have WAY more pve servers than pvp?????? Oh yeah because Im stupid and do not know what im talking about yet played both games on and off for years. You can be rude all you wish and if you think that EQ next is going to be a full loot pvp game you are sadly mistaken. Just go look at ALL the other famous full loot pvp games out there and see where they are . Hell just take the pvp servers in just about every game out there but maybe eve and see how well that works out.
We were throwing out ideas but instead you chose to be rude instead of offering even one sentence of substance.
I think that is a good idea. Either that or just make things that are invulnerable for a certain period of time while offline (to prevent people just creating something then never logging in again).
I don't want to start a whole sandbox definition thread, but I will put in my two cents.
To me pure sandbox = player created everything with no rules almost like the player was the game programmer. If we broke everything that players controlled down into sand molds I'd say pvp is one. Building houses or building would be another mold. Building or having the ability to do anything would be another form of freedom, another mold to form the sand.
Everything that's controlled by the game would be like a rock in the sand you have to build around, an example would be an online auction house/trading house. (I'm not saying whether I think auctions are good)
If you have good tools to build, such as in minecraft, then that's more of a sandbox than Darkfall, which is to me more of a sandbox than 90% of the games out there.
From this you might take it that I'm against PvP or even full loot, and I'm not. I'm just open to different concepts. I'm very open to a PvE or PvP game that's more sandbox than recent games. I'm very open to any game that brings back the memory of EQ, which was my favorite memories of playing MMO's.
What I'd like to see is a game exactly like the original EQ, but with updated graphics and character models, and none of the upgrades like quest arrows, zones that match your level, fast travel to everywhere.
I played PvP on EQ, and pure PvE and I loved both, but I was glad they had separate servers. I'll be happy with either.
Asdar
I hope it means that the PvE will be truly dynamic and non-instanced.
I got tired of full open-world PvP in UO 13+ years ago - nothing new and innovative and different about that.
The whole "open PvP makes our game dynamic" lie is a cop-out used to spend less time and mental energy developing good PvE content that isn't based off repetitive grinding.
Unless EQN has fully dynamic systems/AI based PvE than nothing it does it going to be truly revolutionary or evolutionary.
For a truely Open Destructable World in which any player can attack any player at will, loot their cold dead corpse of all the items they had accumulated and still had on them and on top of that destroy / loot any and all buildings they may have built up over the last several days sound just peachy...
If you truely wish to play in a game such as the aforementioned one I think the following must also be considered or you will have people screaming and whining about certain game aspects:
1) There should only be ONE Class type of character allowed on a particular PvP server. It can be a Warrior, Rogue, Caster, Healer or what ever. If there is ONLY one class on the server then there will be no such thing as one class being more over powered than another.
2) The maximum level for the PvP server would be level 1. If levels were maxed out at 1 then there would be no rush to grind to max level in the least amount of time since you would already be max level soon as you spawnd your newly created character. Each player on the PvP server would be on equal footing from the start and each player would have exactly the same stats so again, everyone would be exactly the same.
3) All armor and weapons may have different cosmetic features but the armor would give no stats, protection or abilities and the weapons which may look different would only do 1 point of damage per hit.
4) There would be a truely amazing character creation tool which would make every character awsome to behold be it either male or female just so you could identify every other person on the server by sight and not by the names floating above their heads.
5) All male characters would have a minimum of 500 pounds of highly exotic looking armor and their weapons would be at least 3 times the height of their character. All female characters would be restricted to armor that had less material than one square of shere toilet paper (in the color of their choice) and again their weapons would be at least 3 times the height of their character.
6) The landscape would be low-rez so the player would not experience to much lag when thousands of awsome looking players hacked their fellow players into tiny bits.
7) There should be no banks and no auction houses. Since this is a full loot PvP server, items have no worth so there is no need to keep anything or sell anything. If a player wishes to store anything then they have to use player created chests which can only be placed in player created houses. Which of course, the houses can be destroyed anytime another player so desires.
8) Only one character per account per player to prevent creating mules for storage.
9) All player created content like houses would have a set amount of "Hit Points". Once enough damage was done the house or building would have a breach and at that time any player could go into the house and loot all the worthless stuff they desire. To restore the house / building it would take enough new materials as to replace all the damage done by the attackers.
10) All player created content like houses / buildings would require various raw materials which the player would have to forage and then refine into basic parts to create what ever it is they desired to create. While foraging materials the player would have to have equiped the proper tool to forage the particular items they desire. If the player has to much material on them then they could be easily encombered and walk slower then normal and of course become easy targets for other would be crafters who could just kill the player with the crafting items on them and strip them of all their hard work.
The list could go on and on and on....
I say let the PvP'ers have their servers and let them enjoy them. Personally I would not like to play in such a world.
Ratero.
Of course it wont be full open world PvP. SoE isnt that stupid.
Im sure there will be a token full PvP server or two though.
I dont think it has to be revolutinary. If they applied pre-CU SWG to a Norrath setting (and didnt release it early) the game would do quite well. If i were SoE that is *exactly* what i would do.
You haven't played AoW yet I see.
EQnext has to be.
My gaming blog
Open World PvP (truly open) is specific to folks who do nothing but play this game. You work a job, go to school, have kids, or all three...then you are going to be food on this server. A lot of the folks with free time love this, however, because they get to bottom feed until the game dies or the server closes/merges - which has happened to most games with world pvp with loot etc.
But, why not have a server like this for folks who have tons of free time on their hands. They can be competitive with each other.
I always thought it would be interesting if you could put your toon in a patrol offline mode when you logged for the night. This could be helpful with late night/early morning keep/city defense.
I'm sorry but that is a horrible idea.
SWG PvE was terribly grindy and simplistic.
Crafting was good, but with a complete lack of dropped loot, the crafters gouged and raped the market w/o any controls or limitations. You either had to craft yourself to make money and buy from other crafters, or grind missions until your eyes bled.
It was an awful, awful system.
Housing was awful in SWG, really the only good parts of that game were the skill system (though 50% or more were broken or completely useless) and the TEF PvP flagging system.
Combat, space, economy, housing, vehicles, mounts, quests, missions... all horrible.
People DO remember why the CU and NGE happened right?
WoW came out and everyone who hadn't already left did leave.
My CE is sitting on a shelf in my parents basement as a reminder of poor game design and trying to do far, far too much without the manpower, money, and/or talent to pull it off.
And it is OUR fault - the players - for not giving the devs time to sort things out.
We were the ones who demanded vehicles and mounts and player housing and GCW and space etc. etc. etc. after launch before they had fixed / rebalanced any of the horrible issues.
Game was half broken and buggy from the start, we rushed the devs into releasing new/more buggy half broken features instead of allowing the game time to mature and get the at-launch features polished.
So yes, if I were SOE I'd pay attention to the history of SWG too.
As a warning of exactly what NOT to do. Time and time again.
From a poor launch to the WORST post-launch management I've ever seen in 13+ years of MMORPG gaming.
From PAX East thread:
[13:20-15:05] - Sandboxing
Georgeson mentions his work on Tribes 2 and the original Planetside and his overall interest in Sandbox games. It is no surprise that EQNext will be a Sandbox game as Smedley has said as much on several occasions.
"The thing about a Sandbox game is that the players can do anything they want to, and go in any path that they want to....This type of aspect has never been seriously pushed in an MMO -- letting people be completely freeform and be able to do the things that they want to do." He then talked about Google Glass and other wireless interfaces other than a keyboard and mouse which could be investigated for future games.
So to me, a big part of being able to do whatever I want to do is being able to attack anyone in game. And before you say "But I want to unattackable." <--- That's more of a restriction than a freedom, so it doesn't fit.