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!

Clearing up the *new* Faction Lock

135

Comments

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Sioux City, IAPosts: 3,828Member


    Originally posted by jfoytek

    Originally posted by Sovrath

    Originally posted by jfoytek
    This is a crock,  Every faction should have resources more prevalent in there area and we should have to take risks to enter there area to harvest these resources to make the best crafted items....

    They should see us clear as day and make every attempt to kill us....

    Our deaths should warp us back to our home land far from where we were killed....  And a certain amount of items in your inventory like atleast resources should drop and be lootable....

    This is how you create good open world pvp that translates into never ending end game content...

    But no lets Instance copy these worlds and only allow access to certain kingdoms so all the PvE carebears can have lots of content!


    True but since when are the elder scrolls games hardcore pvp games?

    All of this just sounds to me like some pvp players were just hoping to have a good pvp game regardless of where the IP was before.


    Since when are Elder Scrolls games Multiplayer?  Its an MMO why does the PvE crowd hold the rights to everything? 
    I can name 10 (or more) MMOs to every 1 you name that has only PvE. PvE is very far from having "everything."

    PvP has definitely ruined this game for me, though. So chalk up another PvP-centric game that I will, in all likelihood, avoid.

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR

  • sapphensapphen Madison, NCPosts: 911Member Common
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by sapphen
    Originally posted by Sovrath

    But from the sounds of the more vocal pvp players, It really didn't seem like they were excited over "elder scrolls" so much as the 3 way faction pvp.

    That's the truth.  They gave us a hard time for criticizing the game and now they are freaking out worse than we ever did.  We just wanted more TES in ESO and yet they tried to make us feel like outcasts.

    You really do enjoy this "us vs. them" pseudo-drama in your head don't you? The square pegs in the square holes and the round ones in the round holes... The fact is that I'm not aware of a single ex-DAoC player here who didn't also enjoy TES. You've just always attempted to polarize based on your personal wishes for the game.

    I'm actually laughing my ass off reading some of you claiming victory because they have given you an instanced version of the other zones to explore at 50, where you will see only other 50's from your faction PVEing and will continue to have no interaction with the other alliances (12:30 of the video): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGrflK6An6Y&list=UUpu8dLHavjMi1a5jgT9ycMA

    Your complaints about the ESO implementation of TES have been many and still continue today in other threads "it's still not TES" etc. Now you're acting as if an instance for level 50 solo exploreres is a vindication for your many complaints...

    The game continues to look great and the necessary alliance segregation is alive and well...I love it.

    I didn't claim victory, you can get snappy all you want.  I'm not gonna get pulled into pseudo-drama in a thread because of the thoughts of my head.  I asked for a way to explore and they gave "us" that.  As stated above, I didn't get what I want BUT I respect the compromise and creativity of Zenimax.

    Now I feel the real hate is snowing.  I may be a narcissistic smart-ass but at least I have the curiosity of being civil.
  • dontadowdontadow Detroit, MIPosts: 1,044Member Common

    I feel I will be repeating this alot.

    Elder Scroll is a single player Role playing game with a sophisticated AI that attempts to react realistically to your decisions.  Yes, good NPCs can attack you and you can cause strife with NPCs and steal from them.  They are programmed to react in a way that does not break your emmersion (well they are at least attempted to be programmed that way).

    In an MMO, you can not replace these nPCs with PCs. it doesn't translate. Most MMO players have abandoned the RPG element and don't role play at all. PVP is "death match" to them.  This was not the case in the first, more open, rpgs as the only people who initially attempted to play mmos back in the day were those of us who loved single player rpgs.  So the few minority of us who would love to see more sandbox areas need to realize that the reality of an open world pvp would be one whre most of the games resources have to force people to role play and won't do a good job of it, just creating an unpleasant place to do role playing game stuff.  

     

    I do like Elder Scroll solution. Essentially it makes sense. As i've said a billion tims, open world pvp is the most unemerrsive thing in the world. Unless its call to duty, it doesnt make sense for a non battlefield area (an area that is mainly focused on open warfare) to have people openly attack people while doing everyday adventuring. 

  • TuktzTuktz Atlanta, GAPosts: 299Member

    I think it's a good thing though, because it does open up the whole world to the PVE'ers.

    All the explorer type RPG'ers that want to wander the entire world solo can do that now.

    I can imagine some pretty cool story line type PVE stuff at endgame in the other faction zones.

     

    It also leaves the RVR stuff intact.

     

     

    The only people I can see this not appeasing are the ones that want a truly sandbox type world, where you can group/guild with any person from any race.

     

    While I do like that in some games (I'm loving EVE right now), I think I prefer the way they're doing it in this game.

    image
    MMO history - EVE GW2 SWTOR RIFT WAR COH/V EQ2 WOW DAOC
    Tuktz - http://www.heretic.shivtr.com/

  • baphametbaphamet omaha, NEPosts: 2,838Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by AlBQuirky
    Originally posted by Livnthedream
    Originally posted by immodium
    Originally posted by Livnthedream
    Where is the almighty lore push for perma death that every TES game that has come before has had?
    When the lore push to include the option to save your progress at any given time, like previous TES games.

    Oh I see, mechanics that eliminate things you do not like due to impracticality are ok, but mechanics that enforce things you don't are not. I absolutely love how "lore friendly" gets used as just another term for "something I do not like". The absurdity of the fanatics will never cease.

    Are you serious? TES games previously were Single Player RPGs. TES:O is an MMORPG. Previous TES titles allowed for a player to save (not to be confused with logging out), because they could die. I cannot think of one MMO that allows a player to save their game at any point in time and thus load a previously saved game. Do you?

    i think the fact that you could save in TES single player games made its permadeath not really permadeath, so the argument is invalid.

    personally i think its a terrible idea for any themepark to feature permadeath.

    i can see it in a sandbox game that features items that are almost all exclusively craftable.

    but in a themepark style of game that is mostly gear driven, absolutely not.

  • RyowulfRyowulf Greensburg, PAPosts: 668Member

    Its my understanding that it isn't; 

    before 1/3 content

    after all content.

    Each faction land is still broken up into lvl areas (1-10, 11-22, etc). As a 50 lvl you won't be doing any of the content the 1-49 players of that faction have done.  I assume the mobs, ie bunnies and bandits will be 50 lvl.  Then there will be some sort of 50 lvl stuff to do.

    If you want to see all the content you will still have to make alts.

    So congrats you made it to 50. You ran through the hoops and can now go to a 'pretend' clone of the actual faction zone, where you get to see what trees and bunnies look like on the other side of the fence.

  • rygard49rygard49 Huntington Beach, CAPosts: 975Member
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

    PvP has definitely ruined this game for me, though. So chalk up another PvP-centric game that I will, in all likelihood, avoid.

    I think there's plenty of argument that the game is split evenly between PvP/PvE, with the lions share of the features likely coming down on the PvE side of the fence. But that remains to be truly seen until we can play it ourselves. None the less, best of luck finding a game that you'll enjoy (no sarcasm).

  • jfoytekjfoytek tigard, ORPosts: 150Member
    Originally posted by baphamet

     


    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

    Originally posted by Livnthedream

    Originally posted by immodium

    Originally posted by Livnthedream
    Where is the almighty lore push for perma death that every TES game that has come before has had?

    When the lore push to include the option to save your progress at any given time, like previous TES games.
    Oh I see, mechanics that eliminate things you do not like due to impracticality are ok, but mechanics that enforce things you don't are not. I absolutely love how "lore friendly" gets used as just another term for "something I do not like". The absurdity of the fanatics will never cease.
    Are you serious? TES games previously were Single Player RPGs. TES:O is an MMORPG. Previous TES titles allowed for a player to save (not to be confused with logging out), because they could die. I cannot think of one MMO that allows a player to save their game at any point in time and thus load a previously saved game. Do you?

     

    i think the fact that you could save in TES single player games made its permadeath not really permadeath, so the argument is invalid.

    personally i think its a terrible idea for any themepark to feature permadeath.

    i can see it in a sandbox game that features items that are almost all exclusively craftable.

    but in a themepark style of game that is mostly gear driven, absolutely not.

    Sorry but they stated the best gear would be crafted not looted.... So this is a game that feature the best gear exclusively from crafters :)  one of the few things I am really keen on at this point!

    UO,Shadowbane,SWG,Darkfall,MO,Wurm Online,Secretworld,GW,GW2,PotBS,LotR,Atlantica Online,WWII Online,WoT,Battlestar Galactica,Planetside2,Perpetuum,Fallen Earth,Runescape,WoW,Eve,Xsylon,Dragon Prophet, Salem

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,614Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by sapphen
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by sapphen
    Originally posted by Sovrath

    But from the sounds of the more vocal pvp players, It really didn't seem like they were excited over "elder scrolls" so much as the 3 way faction pvp.

    That's the truth.  They gave us a hard time for criticizing the game and now they are freaking out worse than we ever did.  We just wanted more TES in ESO and yet they tried to make us feel like outcasts.

    You really do enjoy this "us vs. them" pseudo-drama in your head don't you? The square pegs in the square holes and the round ones in the round holes... The fact is that I'm not aware of a single ex-DAoC player here who didn't also enjoy TES. You've just always attempted to polarize based on your personal wishes for the game.

    I'm actually laughing my ass off reading some of you claiming victory because they have given you an instanced version of the other zones to explore at 50, where you will see only other 50's from your faction PVEing and will continue to have no interaction with the other alliances (12:30 of the video): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGrflK6An6Y&list=UUpu8dLHavjMi1a5jgT9ycMA

    Your complaints about the ESO implementation of TES have been many and still continue today in other threads "it's still not TES" etc. Now you're acting as if an instance for level 50 solo exploreres is a vindication for your many complaints...

    The game continues to look great and the necessary alliance segregation is alive and well...I love it.

    I didn't claim victory, you can get snappy all you want.  I'm not gonna get pulled into pseudo-drama in a thread because of the thoughts of my head.  I asked for a way to explore and they gave "us" that.  As stated above, I didn't get what I want BUT I respect the compromise and creativity of Zenimax.

    Now I feel the real hate is snowing.  I may be a narcissistic smart-ass but at least I have the curiosity of being civil.

    "That's the truth.  They gave us a hard time for criticizing the game and now they are freaking out worse than we ever did.  We just wanted more TES in ESO and yet they tried to make us feel like outcasts."

    Let me see if have it straight... derogatory exagerations made about an anonymous "they" is civil, but specifics directed at the individual who made the remarks is not?

    Thanks for clearing that up for me.

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Sioux City, IAPosts: 3,828Member


    Originally posted by baphamet
    i think the fact that you could save in TES single player games made its permadeath not really permadeath, so the argument is invalid.
    People still TES single player games with a self-imposed permadeath option. They turn off auto save and do not save at any point in time. They play their characters until they are dead. I think, and I could mistaken, it is called "DID", or "Dead Is Dead."

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR

  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread PshPosts: 5,501Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

    Originally posted by baphamet
    i think the fact that you could save in TES single player games made its permadeath not really permadeath, so the argument is invalid.

    People still TES single player games with a self-imposed permadeath option. They turn off auto save and do not save at any point in time. They play their characters until they are dead. I think, and I could mistaken, it is called "DID", or "Dead Is Dead."

    You can do that in ESO as well. When you die, you delete.

  • dontadowdontadow Detroit, MIPosts: 1,044Member Common
    Originally posted by colddog04
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

    Originally posted by baphamet
    i think the fact that you could save in TES single player games made its permadeath not really permadeath, so the argument is invalid.

    People still TES single player games with a self-imposed permadeath option. They turn off auto save and do not save at any point in time. They play their characters until they are dead. I think, and I could mistaken, it is called "DID", or "Dead Is Dead."

    You can do that in ESO as well. When you die, you delete.

    Yeah, I have been playign since arena and never heard of anyone else doing that. Still, any game can be played like that, just make a new character when you die. Role playing is what you make it. Though I will go with whatever myth in the land stops me from permdying. 

     

  • monarc333monarc333 New York, NYPosts: 611Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by monarc333

    "No agitators and race mixers here: When you are leveling up and going about your business in your land, at no point will you see anyone from the opposing faction. No one gets flagged for pvp or anything like that. Like I stated before, enemies exploring your territory will be in a “their faction only” copy of it. Really this is just to appease people who only want to explore the game without sacrificing the segregation of the factions."

    This is a HUGE dissapointment to me. I mean its a major game killer to me. I would consider myself a ES addict. My love for the games knows no bounds. This change however, makes zero sense to me. Its fine if you want pvp in a seperate zone. We've had that before and it works, for the most part. But not having that faction to faction interaction thoughout the world just makes it lonely, stale and uninspiriring. I dont see why they cant give people under lvl 50 pvp immunity in these zones. Let the 50s duke it out in the zones if they want to.

    Ahhh man, so upset with this. W/e Jormag is spawning, time to kill him for the millionth time.

    The DAoC model is about the war being focused on one map. This makes for deeper more epic battles. Take the 15 gourps spread out all over the place and put them on one map and now you have a war. Thats fun.

    Oh dont get me wrong I love the wvw/faction epic battles. Its one of the best things i've heard about ESO. My main complaint was more of the exploration of factions zones with no one but your own faction there. It seems they are making it like this to avoid pvp in the leveling zones. My suggestion would be to have it only lvl 50 for pvp in those zones. I would take any option other than total segregation from 2/3s of the populace.

  • mightyjoxermightyjoxer San Jose, CAPosts: 34Member

    Actually I think you misunderstood my question Iselin

    Originally posted by mightyjoxer
     

    Ok so here are some of my questions about faction lock.

    Let's say person A is level 50 and has unlocked Faction 1-3-2 in that order.

    and person B has unlocked Faction 1-2

    Will A and B be able to play together on Faction 2 if it is the third unlocked faction for A?

    I ask this because sounds to me like there is a loot discrepancy between second faction unlock and third faction unlock loot.

    Once you make the choice the entire zone opens up to your character to explore. Matt did say that the loot you will get in the other zones will be really good, and after finishing the 2nd, you unlock the third. When you unlock the third zone that will give some of the best loot in the game.

    can be found here http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/821/feature/7227

    Next Will person A exclude person B from grouping/partying because they haven't unlocked factions?

    Can see it now "LFG for 3rd faction party"

    Either way I am going to try the game. I think that is why most of us are here on the forums talking about it before it has even gone live.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGrflK6An6Y&list=UUpu8dLHavjMi1a5jgT9ycMA 12:30 of the video.

     

    My question is if person A + B were same faction.  The video didn't say anything about the loot. It didn't answer any of my questions. I am assuming(which makes me an ass lol) that you read my post quickly and thought I meant people from different factions playing together. Thanks for trying and for the new video which I had not seen yet.

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Sioux City, IAPosts: 3,828Member


    Originally posted by colddog04

    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

    Originally posted by baphamet
    i think the fact that you could save in TES single player games made its permadeath not really permadeath, so the argument is invalid.
    People still TES single player games with a self-imposed permadeath option. They turn off auto save and do not save at any point in time. They play their characters until they are dead. I think, and I could mistaken, it is called "DID", or "Dead Is Dead."
    You can do that in ESO as well. When you die, you delete.
    But is the other also true? Can a player load up a save when they die in an MMO? The point is about having both available, not one or the other :)

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR

  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread PshPosts: 5,501Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

     


    Originally posted by colddog04

    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

    Originally posted by baphamet
    i think the fact that you could save in TES single player games made its permadeath not really permadeath, so the argument is invalid.

    People still TES single player games with a self-imposed permadeath option. They turn off auto save and do not save at any point in time. They play their characters until they are dead. I think, and I could mistaken, it is called "DID", or "Dead Is Dead."
    You can do that in ESO as well. When you die, you delete.
    But is the other also true? Can a player load up a save when they die in an MMO? The point is about having both available, not one or the other :)

    In an MMORPG, your progress is always saved onto their servers. You can't go backwards in time, but you can certainly delete your character if you die giving you a sense of permadeath.

  • rygard49rygard49 Huntington Beach, CAPosts: 975Member
    Originally posted by jfoytek

    Well I am sorry to break this too you but PvP really began in UO pre Trammel, every old school long term hardcore pvper that was alive then and still plays MMO's hails from UO and will look back at the days of the GM mage as the pinnacle of most of there pvp....  And Shadowbane was a masterpiece a game completely geared toward pvp but hype dragged its playerbase away to WoW and SWG.... 

    DaoC ended up the refuge of the pvper as there wasnt much else to play, besides Mortal Online and Darkfall who I give them credit for trying both had some great concepts both were plagued with bugs...

    And Wurm is just the unknown Gem, how a game the quality of wurm has gone by with so little public knowledge of its existence is just a shame!

    Original UO = Best PvP ever. And in the early days, GM mages were no match for a halberd wielding thief who stole all their reagents.

    Corp Por - Fizzle - Corp Por - Fizzle - WTF? - Kal Ort Por - Fizzle - Dead.

    Shadowbane was indeed a PvP masterpiece as well. Fully built player run cities, massive open world combat, minimal leveling grind to get into end game... man what a great game that was.

    DAoC would be my third favorite PvP game, but my favorite PvP model for a themepark styled MMO.

  • adam_noxadam_nox hays, KSPosts: 2,036Member Uncommon

    It seems somewhat likely that what they are doing is killing 2 birds.  The first being faction lock.  The second being endgame content.  They can reuse area maps for endgame content, saving themselves a lot of time creating new areas.  It is brilliant, even if you don't like it. 

     

    It seems plausible, given their ulterior motivation (endgame), that we could see open PvP in these areas, sort of like darkness falls.  What form and under what circumstances, remains to be seen, but it just seems likely to me.

  • jfoytekjfoytek tigard, ORPosts: 150Member
    Originally posted by rygard49
    Originally posted by jfoytek

    Well I am sorry to break this too you but PvP really began in UO pre Trammel, every old school long term hardcore pvper that was alive then and still plays MMO's hails from UO and will look back at the days of the GM mage as the pinnacle of most of there pvp....  And Shadowbane was a masterpiece a game completely geared toward pvp but hype dragged its playerbase away to WoW and SWG.... 

    DaoC ended up the refuge of the pvper as there wasnt much else to play, besides Mortal Online and Darkfall who I give them credit for trying both had some great concepts both were plagued with bugs...

    And Wurm is just the unknown Gem, how a game the quality of wurm has gone by with so little public knowledge of its existence is just a shame!

    Original UO = Best PvP ever. And in the early days, GM mages were no match for a halberd wielding thief who stole all their reagents.

    Corp Por - Fizzle - Corp Por - Fizzle - WTF? - Kal Ort Por - Fizzle - Dead.

    Shadowbane was indeed a PvP masterpiece as well. Fully built player run cities, massive open world combat, minimal leveling grind to get into end game... man what a great game that was.

    DAoC would be my third favorite PvP game, but my favorite PvP model for a themepark styled MMO.

    o/

    UO,Shadowbane,SWG,Darkfall,MO,Wurm Online,Secretworld,GW,GW2,PotBS,LotR,Atlantica Online,WWII Online,WoT,Battlestar Galactica,Planetside2,Perpetuum,Fallen Earth,Runescape,WoW,Eve,Xsylon,Dragon Prophet, Salem

  • tokinitokini third hut on the leftPosts: 341Member Common
    Originally posted by WellzyC
    Originally posted by tokini
    Originally posted by WellzyC

    A mostly people free zone is the point. People who want to experience the content and explore can, and us who want faction pride and faction lock (sort of) get that too.

    plus all the town npcs and quests are intact, so its not like it will be en empty zone by any means

    how can you say this isnt a good compromise?

    wouldnt it create more 'pride' to actually defend your lands, or invade others in the name of your faction?

    im not trying to argue, i just dont get how this method they are using somehow solidifies 'faction pride'.  just the mere idea of seeing an enemy faction player diminishes pride?

    shouldnt all the npc's be extremely hostile, as well? why would they give any sort of quest to an enemy faction member?

     

    You don't see enemy players, thats my point. Please read the entire post

    i DID read the entire post, what im asking is, why does seeing other playersin 'your' area somehow diminsh faction pride?

  • jfoytekjfoytek tigard, ORPosts: 150Member
    Originally posted by tokini
    Originally posted by WellzyC
    Originally posted by tokini
    Originally posted by WellzyC

    A mostly people free zone is the point. People who want to experience the content and explore can, and us who want faction pride and faction lock (sort of) get that too.

    plus all the town npcs and quests are intact, so its not like it will be en empty zone by any means

    how can you say this isnt a good compromise?

    wouldnt it create more 'pride' to actually defend your lands, or invade others in the name of your faction?

    im not trying to argue, i just dont get how this method they are using somehow solidifies 'faction pride'.  just the mere idea of seeing an enemy faction player diminishes pride?

    shouldnt all the npc's be extremely hostile, as well? why would they give any sort of quest to an enemy faction member?

     

    You don't see enemy players, thats my point. Please read the entire post

    i DID read the entire post, what im asking is, why does seeing other playersin 'your' area somehow diminsh faction pride?

    personally I have attempted to figure this out too only thing I can come up with is that!

    PvE'ers dont want to see the other faction because well there the enemy and they know that there suppose to attack and attempt to kill their enemy....

    Alas that would require PvP and this scares them to simplest way around this is just to make the other faction invisible via an instanced copy of the zone where we can give the yellow bellys more mobs to play with....

    UO,Shadowbane,SWG,Darkfall,MO,Wurm Online,Secretworld,GW,GW2,PotBS,LotR,Atlantica Online,WWII Online,WoT,Battlestar Galactica,Planetside2,Perpetuum,Fallen Earth,Runescape,WoW,Eve,Xsylon,Dragon Prophet, Salem

  • sapphensapphen Madison, NCPosts: 911Member Common
    Originally posted by Iselin

    "That's the truth.  They gave us a hard time for criticizing the game and now they are freaking out worse than we ever did.  We just wanted more TES in ESO and yet they tried to make us feel like outcasts."

    Let me see if have it straight... derogatory exagerations made about an anonymous "they" is civil, but specifics directed at the individual who made the remarks is not?

    Thanks for clearing that up for me.

    There is no 'they vs. we' attacks here.  I don't know why you would take offense to that unless that "us vs. them" drama is really in your head. I wasn't referring to you or "everyone who's defended the game against the evil ESO haters"  but to the posters who are ACTUALLY freaking out and defended the game.

    Originally posted by
    Honestly, I wasnt super excited about this mmo but now............well now........if this is the stupid direction development is going.....then I hope this piece of shit burns with the rest of them.
    Originally posted by
    Now, Matt Firor most llikely didn't want this stupid crap, BUT, guess what? He's still there... he hasn't resigned.. As far as I'm concerned, that's his official stamp of approval on the destruction of any hope of good RvR that this game may have had.
    Originally posted by
    Way to ruin another MMO, you win and the community and realm pride loses.  maybe I will start a vicious and slanderous campaign to get this changed back.  Seriously considering my choice to play knowing the development can be changed by a bunch of vocal bitchers and complainers.
    TOTALLY PISSED!
  • TuktzTuktz Atlanta, GAPosts: 299Member
    Originally posted by tokini
    Originally posted by WellzyC
    Originally posted by tokini
    Originally posted by WellzyC

    A mostly people free zone is the point. People who want to experience the content and explore can, and us who want faction pride and faction lock (sort of) get that too.

    plus all the town npcs and quests are intact, so its not like it will be en empty zone by any means

    how can you say this isnt a good compromise?

    wouldnt it create more 'pride' to actually defend your lands, or invade others in the name of your faction?

    im not trying to argue, i just dont get how this method they are using somehow solidifies 'faction pride'.  just the mere idea of seeing an enemy faction player diminishes pride?

    shouldnt all the npc's be extremely hostile, as well? why would they give any sort of quest to an enemy faction member?

     

    You don't see enemy players, thats my point. Please read the entire post

    i DID read the entire post, what im asking is, why does seeing other playersin 'your' area somehow diminsh faction pride?

     

    It's lose-lose.

     

    If you see enemy players in your pve zone that you can't attack, that destroys immerssion big time.

    If you see enemy players in your pve zone, and you can both attack eachother (open faction pvp), that makes the whole GAME rvr which wouldn't work either. It's been shown time after time again, that for games that want BIG playerbases, the majority enjoying have the CHOICE when to PVP, not to have it on all the time. There's also a big portion that will only EVER pve, and never check out PVP.

     

    Mind you this opinion is coming from someone who is diehard looking forward to a 100% RVR game (CU). It's just the truth that the massive amount of casual players out there want to log in, do a couple quests, and not worry about some player that plays 24/7 walking up while they're questing them and destroying them over and over.

     

    To me it makes total sense that an alliance would protect it's borders so much so, that enemies couldn't get past the "front lines". THe military protects certain boundaries and chokepoints to keep their homeland/civilians safe.

    image
    MMO history - EVE GW2 SWTOR RIFT WAR COH/V EQ2 WOW DAOC
    Tuktz - http://www.heretic.shivtr.com/

  • tokinitokini third hut on the leftPosts: 341Member Common
    Originally posted by jfoytek
    Originally posted by tokini
    Originally posted by WellzyC
    Originally posted by tokini
    Originally posted by WellzyC

    A mostly people free zone is the point. People who want to experience the content and explore can, and us who want faction pride and faction lock (sort of) get that too.

    plus all the town npcs and quests are intact, so its not like it will be en empty zone by any means

    how can you say this isnt a good compromise?

    wouldnt it create more 'pride' to actually defend your lands, or invade others in the name of your faction?

    im not trying to argue, i just dont get how this method they are using somehow solidifies 'faction pride'.  just the mere idea of seeing an enemy faction player diminishes pride?

    shouldnt all the npc's be extremely hostile, as well? why would they give any sort of quest to an enemy faction member?

     

    You don't see enemy players, thats my point. Please read the entire post

    i DID read the entire post, what im asking is, why does seeing other playersin 'your' area somehow diminsh faction pride?

    personally I have attempted to figure this out too only thing I can come up with is that!

    PvE'ers dont want to see the other faction because well there the enemy and they know that there suppose to attack and attempt to kill their enemy....

    Alas that would require PvP and this scares them to simplest way around this is just to make the other faction invisible via an instanced copy of the zone where we can give the yellow bellys more mobs to play with....

    i guess so, i can personally take or leave open pvp, but im just not getting why preventing other players (or in thiscase not seeing them) from enterinmg 'my' area in stills more pride.

     

    i would think defending my land, never letting my capitol get 'conquered' would instill more pride than this bizarre form of xenophobia.

     

  • tokinitokini third hut on the leftPosts: 341Member Common
    Originally posted by Tuktz
    Originally posted by tokini
    Originally posted by WellzyC
    Originally posted by tokini
    Originally posted by WellzyC

    A mostly people free zone is the point. People who want to experience the content and explore can, and us who want faction pride and faction lock (sort of) get that too.

    plus all the town npcs and quests are intact, so its not like it will be en empty zone by any means

    how can you say this isnt a good compromise?

    wouldnt it create more 'pride' to actually defend your lands, or invade others in the name of your faction?

    im not trying to argue, i just dont get how this method they are using somehow solidifies 'faction pride'.  just the mere idea of seeing an enemy faction player diminishes pride?

    shouldnt all the npc's be extremely hostile, as well? why would they give any sort of quest to an enemy faction member?

     

    You don't see enemy players, thats my point. Please read the entire post

    i DID read the entire post, what im asking is, why does seeing other playersin 'your' area somehow diminsh faction pride?

     

    It's lose-lose.

     

    If you see enemy players in your pve zone that you can't attack, that destroys immerssion big time.

    If you see enemy players in your pve zone, and you can both attack eachother (open faction pvp), that makes the whole GAME rvr which wouldn't work either. It's been shown time after time again, that for games that want BIG playerbases, the majority enjoying have the CHOICE when to PVP, not to have it on all the time. There's also a big portion that will only EVER pve, and never check out PVP.

     

    Mind you this opinion is coming from someone who is diehard looking forward to a 100% RVR game (CU). It's just the truth that the massive amount of casual players out there want to log in, do a couple quests, and not worry about some player that plays 24/7 walking up while they're questing them and destroying them over and over.

     

    To me it makes total sense that an alliance would protect it's borders so much so, that enemies couldn't get past the "front lines". THe military protects certain boundaries and chokepoints to keep their homeland/civilians safe.

    i get what you are saying, especially about someone who just wants to pve without being bothered.

     

    my question, again, is how this adds to faction pride...i guess im just not seeing it. any 'pride' will be gained by defeating the enemy in RvR, how not seeing anyone in my zone, when their exclusion from my zone has nothing to do with what i have accomplished would make me more prideful just escapes me.

Sign In or Register to comment.