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!

Will it be full open-world PVP?

1468910

Comments

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Don't think they will go with this new fangled mega server nonsense
  • DraedzDraedz United States, VAPosts: 47Member

    In a game called Shadowbane, you could build and destroy other peoples cities.  People built these cities near areas they enjoyed to farm etc.  In order for the city to be destroyed, an opposing player / city would have to put a "bane" on your city.  It was a huge rock that had a glow and was just outside of your city.  You could discuss with the opposing players why they want to siege, and maybe resolve a conflict diplomatically, or you could set a time for the siege to go live ( by interfacing with the Bane / rock outside of your city).  There was a time window as well, I don't remember but it might have been 3 hours or so.

    The eventual downfall and overall boredom came to the game when massive alliances were formed, however, up until that point it was very fun and there were lots of politics involved.

  • jonrd463jonrd463 Tacoma, WAPosts: 598Member
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Let's see western mmos by concurrent players

    1 Wow - mostly pve Benefited from coming out at the right time, with a boatload of legacy fandom to kickstart it (to steal a phrase)

    2 gw2 - about 2/3rds pve B2P is attractive for a lot of people, as is WvW. The game's strength is still its PVE content
    3 ps2 - all pvp Appeals to the Battlefield/COD demographic with its subject matter, thereby attracting people who likely have no interest in a fantasy-based PVP deathmatch (see the relatively low numbers in Darkfall for proof)
    4 eve - mostly pvp A game unlike any other game out there. Extremely niche and would be hard to pull off in any other setting than the one in which it already exists.

     
    Below them a bunch of mostly pve games that clone wow.

    Wow has the pve market sewn up. The 3 most successful mmos after wow are considerably more pvp orientated.


    Different game settings also contribute to their successes.

    If EQ3 turned out to be full loot FFA PVP, my prediction is that the PVEers will say "Eh, no thanks. I'll stick with EQ2 (or go to a new PVE game)". It might attract the Darkfall crowd in the meantime, turning the game into a barren shithole with maybe 50,000 players and server merges within a month or two of release.

    "You'll never win an argument with an idiot because he is too stupid to recognize his own defeat." ~Anonymous

  • strangiato2112strangiato2112 Richmond, VAPosts: 1,538Member Common
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Let's see western mmos by concurrent players

    1 Wow - mostly pve
    2 gw2 - about 2/3rds pve
    3 ps2 - all pvp
    4 eve - mostly pvp
    Below them a bunch of mostly pve games that clone wow.

    Wow has the pve market sewn up. The 3 most successful mmos after wow are considerably more pvp orientated.

    Notice you arent mentioning SWTOR which certainly has more concurrent than EvE given their subs are almost even.  Im also quite skeptical as to ps2 being that high of a population.  And of course Neverwinter is up there too, at least at the moment while its new.

     

    Also, the PvE sandbox is much more wide open and PvErs are getting very, very annoyed at all sandboxes being PvP.

  • strangiato2112strangiato2112 Richmond, VAPosts: 1,538Member Common
    Im in the camp that hopes there are no PvP servers or even PvP options.  That way they dont have to devote any time whatsoever to it.  this is how EQ1 ended up once they saw that the market was overwhelmingly PvE
  • ice-vortexice-vortex Xenia, OHPosts: 951Member
    Originally posted by strangiato2112
    Im in the camp that hopes there are no PvP servers or even PvP options.  That way they dont have to devote any time whatsoever to it.  this is how EQ1 ended up once they saw that the market was overwhelmingly PvE

    Smedley already said people wanting open world PVP are going to be very happy with EQNext, so there goes your hope.

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Strangia
    Perhaps, but its not like ea haven't already proved rather interesting at masaging the figures with both swtor and war. Nevermind flat out lying about sim city 5 and its supposed needs to be networked as calculations done server side.
  • KostKost Vancouver, BCPosts: 1,975Member

    PvP was a niche market 10 years ago, today it is an overwhelming majority compared to PvE.

    People need to get with the times. 

  • jonrd463jonrd463 Tacoma, WAPosts: 598Member
    Originally posted by Kost

    PvP was a niche market 10 years ago, today it is an overwhelming majority compared to PvE.

    People need to get with the times. 

     

    Care to share your statistical data?

    "You'll never win an argument with an idiot because he is too stupid to recognize his own defeat." ~Anonymous

  • SwagsurfinSwagsurfin Waco, TXPosts: 29Member

    God I miss Zek. Wars between Black Prophecy, Hate, and Tides of Wrath outside the overthere and misty thicket :)

  • ScambugScambug TortugaPosts: 389Member

    They will surely have different server types. PvE, PvP, RP, HC (I hope, with full loot etc.).

    I don't wanna get too hyped up for this one though, knowing SOE and seeing how they're already shooting themselves in the foot with their arrogant pre reveal claims... I wouldn't be surprised if this just turned out to be one big disappointment.

    But here's trying to stay positive and giving them the benefit of the doubt.

  • swedagoswedago GrevePosts: 72Member Uncommon

    Open world PvP is not something the majority of MMO players want.  Just because you are the loudest does not make you the greater percentage.  You have doubts?  Look at any games pvp servers....  They are the minorities.

     

     

    image
  • DudehogDudehog Newark, DEPosts: 112Member
    Originally posted by swedago

    Open world PvP is not something the majority of MMO players want.  Just because you are the loudest does not make you the greater percentage.  You have doubts?  Look at any games pvp servers....  They are the minorities.

     

     

    WoW has a ton of pvp servers. Even on the pve servers people are running bgs and arenas. WoW is constantly tweaking pvp and they add new pvp features each xpac because it's important to many players. PvP is a huge part of the most successful mmo ever.

    EVE online, which is a hardcore pvp sandbox, is a huge success and continues growing almost 10 years after release.

    MMO players love pvp. It's not niche. You're just ignorant and have no idea what you're talking about. The question of whether people like pvp or not is not a matter of opinion. The facts are the facts.  And yes, EQN is gonna have pvp. It's gonna be open world. And you're just gonna have to deal with it , Newbert.

     

  • jonrd463jonrd463 Tacoma, WAPosts: 598Member
    Originally posted by Dudehog
    Originally posted by swedago

    Open world PvP is not something the majority of MMO players want.  Just because you are the loudest does not make you the greater percentage.  You have doubts?  Look at any games pvp servers....  They are the minorities.

     

     

    WoW has a ton of pvp servers. Even on the pve servers people are running bgs and arenas. WoW is constantly tweaking pvp and they add new pvp features each xpac because it's important to many players. PvP is a huge part of the most successful mmo ever.

    EVE online, which is a hardcore pvp sandbox, is a huge success and continues growing almost 10 years after release.

    MMO players love pvp. It's not niche. You're just ignorant and have no idea what you're talking about. The question of whether people like pvp or not is not a matter of opinion. The facts are the facts.  And yes, EQN is gonna have pvp. It's gonna be open world. And you're just gonna have to deal with it , Newbert.

     

    Not all PvP is created equal. I loathe the idea of open world FFA PvP, but I also loved battlegrounds when I used to play WoW. Hell, I even enjoyed the old school Tarren Mill vs. Southshore melees. But I played on a PvE server, where PvP meant you chose to flag up and roll with it, and battlegrounds are obviously all about PvP.

     

    It was consentual PvP, where I had the power to choose not to participate when all I wanted to do at any given moment was run quests or farm mats. That's what sticks in the craw of the hardcore PVPer. Unless you get your free for all always-on PVP, your ability to piss people off is drastically reduced.

     

    Personally, I'm all for that.

    "You'll never win an argument with an idiot because he is too stupid to recognize his own defeat." ~Anonymous

  • aspekxaspekx Brandon, FLPosts: 2,167Member

    EVE is a success and in comparison with the size of the original company and its current state it could be said to be a huge success. but only in comparison with its origins, not in comparison with other games.

     

    PvP servers in most of the games i have played over the years have contained a minority population. they tend to be some of the first to be shut down as a game's community begins to shrink.

     

    there is no way SOE is going to bank the success of its longest lasting and most popular IP solely on FFA PvP, let alone full loot. having said that, there is most definitely a market for this. even a niche market is still one worth paying attention to especially in this case where FFA PvP'rs have been dying for a worthwhile game that allowed them the fun they want to have.

     

    just as it would make no sense for EQNext to have nothing but FFA PvP it would also make absolutely no sense for them not to at least try to cater to this market by offering servers dedicated to FFA PvP.

     

    i don't think this is an either/or situation. it seems obvious to me, and hopefully to SOE, that both communities can be served with the same game. but we shall see.

    "There are at least two kinds of games.
    One could be called finite, the other infinite.
    A finite game is played for the purpose of winning,
    an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play."
    Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse

  • DudehogDudehog Newark, DEPosts: 112Member
    Originally posted by aspekx

    EVE is a success and in comparison with the size of the original company and its current state it could be said to be a huge success. but only in comparison with its origins, not in comparison with other games.

      

     

    Wrong. EVE has 500k paying subscribers. SWTOR, for example, has less than 500k paying subscribers. EVE is a hit compared to any other mmo out there (excluding WoW obviously). This is a fact, not opinion.  I can't understand why people make these statements when we all have access to Google and can look up the actual numbers. 

     

     

    http://www.polygon.com/2013/5/7/4309866/star-wars-the-old-republic-revenue-doubled-free-to-play

     

    http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/02/28/eve-online-hits-500-000-subscribers-heads-into-second-decade/

  • BidwoodBidwood Toronto, ONPosts: 554Member
    bcbully are you with me on this? we need the pvp as part of the true sandbox system.
  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Dudehog

    While I agree eve is a huge success, its 10 years old and still one of the too mmos.

    It actually has less players than ps2 - 750,000 unique weekly logins (though I suspect eve players play for longer sessions), and probably gw2, but its hard to tell arenanet don't put our figures.
  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    I wonder if they do something like perpetuum where the equivelent of high sec is actually total security, no pvp at all.
  • BidwoodBidwood Toronto, ONPosts: 554Member
    so happy to see a few people defending the pvp concept. this game could be HUGE if it gets this right. i am disappointed by how the industry has gone wrong over so many years. that is where the innovation will come in. i think when the dev team were sitting aroud the table talking about the pillars of the holy grail mmo, they probably talked about makimg open world pvp work and make it fun for gamers.

    as for the size of the market, i believe SOE can afford to take the risk because tis game will be on playstation 4 and people will flock to it. we are talking players who are starved for mmos because there arent many optioms on console or people who are new to mmos who habent been brainwashed by the mainstream paradigm where pvp is unnaturally turned off to placate the generation of gamers wo have been griefed in poorly conceived pvp systems.
  • FaelsunFaelsun Brandon, MSPosts: 492Member
    Originally posted by Panther2103
    Originally posted by Bidwood
    Originally posted by General_Dru-Zod

    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 ..

    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.

    Thats it?

    Thats not very assuring..  I hope they have some kind of system set up other than "Hey bro, watch my stuff".

    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?

    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). 

    Well they will probably use some kind of phasing I imagine, who knows there are plenty of options today. However when I played UO you could get your property stolen when you were off.

    On another note I find it humorous that your "idea" would basically take the last 15 years of mmo development, ignore it and just use game rules from Usurper BBS.

  • vveaver_onlinevveaver_online stockholmPosts: 273Member Uncommon

    If it does not have Open world free pvp, it is not, and will not, can never be called sandbox. 

     

    Open free form, player harrasment is part of a sandbox experience., 

     

    Pve players can go play themepark games, it fits the "pve" crowd.

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member
    Originally posted by fardreamer

    If it does not have Open world free pvp, it is not, and will not, can never be called sandbox. 

     

    Open free form, player harrasment is part of a sandbox experience., 

     

    Pve players can go play themepark games, it fits the "pve" crowd.

    Just because previous sandboxes have had un-consensual PvP, does not mean that the two are mutually inclusive.  You can most certainly have a sandbox without PvP. 

    In fact, the inclusion of un-consensual PvP is probably the main reason for the commercial failings of most sandbox games.  I doubt SoE will bank its biggest IP on a proven failure.  If they have it, it will be on a segregated server.

  • sanshi44sanshi44 BrisbanePosts: 1,085Member Uncommon
    I can garantee there be PvE servers aswell as PvP servers (most likly a few different types of PvP servers aswell) there is no debating this, One of the post made awhile back said that EQN was designed with PvP in mind so its definetly focused on and not on the back burners like it was in EQ1 and 2 however they wont ignore the crowd of players wanting just PvE. So therefore they have both PvE and PvP servers they definetly have enough player based for muiltipal server types. What i hope they do not have is instanced PvP like battle grounds from WoW i dont like instances PvP or PvE kinda break immersion, I do hope on PvP servers they have some kinda PvP politic system with city building and seiging would be nice to see.
  • jonrd463jonrd463 Tacoma, WAPosts: 598Member
    Originally posted by fardreamer

    If it does not have Open world free pvp, it is not, and will not, can never be called sandbox. 

     

    Open free form, player harrasment is part of a sandbox experience., 

     

    Pve players can go play themepark games, it fits the "pve" crowd.

    When I was a kid playing in the sandbox at the neighborhood park, I don't recall ever seeing anyone killing someone and taking their stuff.  Societal mores prevented that from happening, because it just isn't something that's done, and if it ever DID happen, serious life-altering consequences would fall on the perpetrator.

     

    The problem with FFA, full loot PVP is that there is no real danger for the PKer in the game space. Societal mores take a back seat to internet sociopathy. There's no consequence, other than the off chance the victim has friends bigger and badder than the PKer. In the real world, we call that "law enforcement", and there's no analogue in an MMO. Archeage is tackling the problem in a curious way, and it'll be interesting to see how that pans out.

     

    When FFA PVP games provide a way for the lone player to level the playing field a bit against a gank squad, then I'll join the chorus. For now, as long as SOE includes a PVE server, preferably with enforced RP rules and the ability to engage in consensual PVP, I'll be happy.

    "You'll never win an argument with an idiot because he is too stupid to recognize his own defeat." ~Anonymous

This discussion has been closed.