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!

What type of PvP do you want in EQN

12467

Comments

  • ice-vortexice-vortex Xenia, OHPosts: 951Member
    Originally posted by Phry
    Originally posted by Waterlily
    Originally posted by ice-vortex

    In either case, PVE players are seemingly going to be shocked when they realize there isn't the typical loot centric system of gameplay. I mean, if they don't have the ability to run raids and dungeons for items all day, they will just be shouting that there is no end game.

    Pretty sure no one is going to care drama queen.

    If EQNext is forced PVP, EQ players will still play EQ, EQ2 players will still play EQ2 and PVP players will wonder why their game has died like Darkfall has and gets no development support anymore.

    True.

    What is more likely to happen, is that they will use the exact same system they used in EQ1, there really isnt any need or demand to change it. The old, if it aint broke don't fix it, would in fact, be the ideal, at least for Everquest fans.image

    This is exactly why people think the PVE crowd on this forum is unreasonable. Between posts like these, and threads on camping times, and experience loss, it's as if they have their head in the sand.

    When Smedley says:

     

    "I also said in there that it will still be very familiar to you, but what I meant by that statement is that we're changing what an MMO is. MMO means something now, and it means the same thing to everybody because it's the same game. EverQuest, WoW, SWTOR all use the same core loot gameplay, which is kill stuff, get reward, get loot, level up. Very few games have broken out of that mold. One or two have. EVE Online is a great example; it's not standard level-based gameplay, although I'm not saying we're going to a big skill-based system. You're still going to recognize the roleplaying game heritage in it. In EverQuest Next, the world itself is a part of the game. What is the world in these other games? It's a simple backdrop. It's nothing. We are changing that greatly. We're changing what AI is in these games to a degree that we're going to bring life to the world. That to us is the essence of the change that we're making."

     

    ...and people simply don't believe or accept it, is just the height of irrationality.

  • PhryPhry HampshirePosts: 6,296Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Phry
    Originally posted by Waterlily
    Originally posted by ice-vortex

    In either case, PVE players are seemingly going to be shocked when they realize there isn't the typical loot centric system of gameplay. I mean, if they don't have the ability to run raids and dungeons for items all day, they will just be shouting that there is no end game.

    Pretty sure no one is going to care drama queen.

    If EQNext is forced PVP, EQ players will still play EQ, EQ2 players will still play EQ2 and PVP players will wonder why their game has died like Darkfall has and gets no development support anymore.

    True.

    What is more likely to happen, is that they will use the exact same system they used in EQ1, there really isnt any need or demand to change it. The old, if it aint broke don't fix it, would in fact, be the ideal, at least for Everquest fans.image

    Or like they said this will be nothing like EQ1 or EQ2. Pure PvE game with some side PvP that has no impact on any class is all the former games fall under. Much like themepark vrs sandbox. Maybe SoE thinking is they keep their former games to keep that market and EQN to take a grab at sandbox and PvP gamers. 

    Biggest hyped game on mmorpge.com and PvP seems to be the only active threads. I think its time for mmorpg.com to write up something about the topic and really let everyone hash this out before we get any solid info =-) lol My guess is SoE will be doing some type of PvP that will impact PvE, if nothing else in the class balance area. Druid could be a lot of fun in PvP. Not sure how well a Bard would do, would be a PvP king or they would really suck.

    I sincerely doubt that is the case, as for EQ1 etc there was PVP in the game, there were even arena's where you could fight tournaments if you were of a mind to. And there was a certain amount of faction combat, as a dark elf straying too close to a good many places was a recipe to get aggro'd by the guards.  In some ways it was much like the alliance v horde thing in WoW, and open world oddly enough. Its doubtful that SOE would feel any real need to change it, it worked.

  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member

    I hope to God it's a Open World PvP system like EVE-Online just so the amount of scrubs who voted for 9 can get violated repeatedly by people with less constricted views on what makes a game good.

    image
  • CalmOceansCalmOceans BergenPosts: 2,273Member
    Originally posted by ice-vortex

    This is exactly why people think the PVE crowd on this forum is unreasonable. 

    PVE players are the most reasonable of all. I never hear of any PVE player that says there should be no PVP server. PVE players want PVP to have their own server they can enjoy themselves on.

    But it is always the PVP players who refuse to let PVE player have their server and would rather have their niche game die than allow others to enjoy themselves.

  • Trudge34Trudge34 Stevens Point, WIPosts: 392Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Dihoru

    I hope to God it's a Open World PvP system like EVE-Online just so the amount of scrubs who voted for 9 can get violated repeatedly by people with less constricted views on what makes a game good.

    Yeah, sounds totally reasonable and rational. Damn that unreasonable PVE crowd.

    Played: EQ1 (10 Years), Guild Wars, Rift, TERA
    Tried: EQ2, Vanguard, Lord of the Rings Online, Dungeons and Dragons Online, Runes of Magic and countless others...
    Currently Playing: GW2

    Nytlok Sylas
    80 Sylvari Ranger

  • SpottyGekkoSpottyGekko RotterdamPosts: 3,845Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ice-vortex
    Originally posted by Phry
    Originally posted by Waterlily
    Originally posted by ice-vortex

    In either case, PVE players are seemingly going to be shocked when they realize there isn't the typical loot centric system of gameplay. I mean, if they don't have the ability to run raids and dungeons for items all day, they will just be shouting that there is no end game.

    Pretty sure no one is going to care drama queen.

    If EQNext is forced PVP, EQ players will still play EQ, EQ2 players will still play EQ2 and PVP players will wonder why their game has died like Darkfall has and gets no development support anymore.

    True.

    What is more likely to happen, is that they will use the exact same system they used in EQ1, there really isnt any need or demand to change it. The old, if it aint broke don't fix it, would in fact, be the ideal, at least for Everquest fans.image

    This is exactly why people think the PVE crowd on this forum is unreasonable. Between posts like these, and threads on camping times, and experience loss, it's as if they have their head in the sand.

    When Smedley says:

     

    "I also said in there that it will still be very familiar to you, but what I meant by that statement is that we're changing what an MMO is. MMO means something now, and it means the same thing to everybody because it's the same game. EverQuest, WoW, SWTOR all use the same core loot gameplay, which is kill stuff, get reward, get loot, level up. Very few games have broken out of that mold. One or two have. EVE Online is a great example; it's not standard level-based gameplay, although I'm not saying we're going to a big skill-based system. You're still going to recognize the roleplaying game heritage in it. In EverQuest Next, the world itself is a part of the game. What is the world in these other games? It's a simple backdrop. It's nothing. We are changing that greatly. We're changing what AI is in these games to a degree that we're going to bring life to the world. That to us is the essence of the change that we're making."

     

    ...and people simply don't believe or accept it, is just the height of irrationality.

    Do you really believe all this hype ? 

    Is EQNext really the first "next-generation" MMO ?

    "It will be familiar, but also totally different"

    Uhuh....

     

    Frankly, I don't believe a word of it. Perhaps I'll sing a different song after the big reveal, but until then, noway !

  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by Trudge34
    Originally posted by Dihoru

    I hope to God it's a Open World PvP system like EVE-Online just so the amount of scrubs who voted for 9 can get violated repeatedly by people with less constricted views on what makes a game good.

    Yeah, sounds totally reasonable and rational. Damn that unreasonable PVE crowd.

    I couldn't give a toss really, I just find people who want to PVE only to be at best as closed minded as the frothing at the mouth PVP hardcore-ers.

    image
  • Trudge34Trudge34 Stevens Point, WIPosts: 392Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ice-vortex
    Originally posted by Phry
    Originally posted by Waterlily
    Originally posted by ice-vortex

    In either case, PVE players are seemingly going to be shocked when they realize there isn't the typical loot centric system of gameplay. I mean, if they don't have the ability to run raids and dungeons for items all day, they will just be shouting that there is no end game.

    Pretty sure no one is going to care drama queen.

    If EQNext is forced PVP, EQ players will still play EQ, EQ2 players will still play EQ2 and PVP players will wonder why their game has died like Darkfall has and gets no development support anymore.

    True.

    What is more likely to happen, is that they will use the exact same system they used in EQ1, there really isnt any need or demand to change it. The old, if it aint broke don't fix it, would in fact, be the ideal, at least for Everquest fans.image

    This is exactly why people think the PVE crowd on this forum is unreasonable. Between posts like these, and threads on camping times, and experience loss, it's as if they have their head in the sand.

    When Smedley says:

     

    "I also said in there that it will still be very familiar to you, but what I meant by that statement is that we're changing what an MMO is. MMO means something now, and it means the same thing to everybody because it's the same game. EverQuest, WoW, SWTOR all use the same core loot gameplay, which is kill stuff, get reward, get loot, level up. Very few games have broken out of that mold. One or two have. EVE Online is a great example; it's not standard level-based gameplay, although I'm not saying we're going to a big skill-based system. You're still going to recognize the roleplaying game heritage in it. In EverQuest Next, the world itself is a part of the game. What is the world in these other games? It's a simple backdrop. It's nothing. We are changing that greatly. We're changing what AI is in these games to a degree that we're going to bring life to the world. That to us is the essence of the change that we're making."

     

    ...and people simply don't believe or accept it, is just the height of irrationality.

    And yet, when Smed says things like that the PvP crowd takes that as there can only be one way to make that happen. Open world, non-consensual PvP with massive battles and destroying everying! Suck it newbs, go back to your carebear games! Let the real gamers have their game!

    Believe I've heard that argument in every single mmo prelaunch forum x10000.

    Played: EQ1 (10 Years), Guild Wars, Rift, TERA
    Tried: EQ2, Vanguard, Lord of the Rings Online, Dungeons and Dragons Online, Runes of Magic and countless others...
    Currently Playing: GW2

    Nytlok Sylas
    80 Sylvari Ranger

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,486Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by ice-vortex

    This is exactly why people think the PVE crowd on this forum is unreasonable. 

    PVE players are the most reasonable of all. I never hear of any PVE player that says there should be no PVP server. PVE players want PVP to have their own server they can enjoy themselves on.

    But it is always the PVP players who refuse to let PVE player have their server and would rather have their niche game die than allow others to enjoy themselves.

    You didnt read this poll to well. Almost 40% of the people want there to be no PvP at all in this game. Not even a PvP server. I have found rather that there is a sub group in both the PvPers and PvPers that are fair minded and I have found nut bars in both groups. 


    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • ice-vortexice-vortex Xenia, OHPosts: 951Member
    Originally posted by SpottyGekko
    Originally posted by ice-vortex
    Originally posted by Phry
    Originally posted by Waterlily
    Originally posted by ice-vortex

    In either case, PVE players are seemingly going to be shocked when they realize there isn't the typical loot centric system of gameplay. I mean, if they don't have the ability to run raids and dungeons for items all day, they will just be shouting that there is no end game.

    Pretty sure no one is going to care drama queen.

    If EQNext is forced PVP, EQ players will still play EQ, EQ2 players will still play EQ2 and PVP players will wonder why their game has died like Darkfall has and gets no development support anymore.

    True.

    What is more likely to happen, is that they will use the exact same system they used in EQ1, there really isnt any need or demand to change it. The old, if it aint broke don't fix it, would in fact, be the ideal, at least for Everquest fans.image

    This is exactly why people think the PVE crowd on this forum is unreasonable. Between posts like these, and threads on camping times, and experience loss, it's as if they have their head in the sand.

    When Smedley says:

     

    "I also said in there that it will still be very familiar to you, but what I meant by that statement is that we're changing what an MMO is. MMO means something now, and it means the same thing to everybody because it's the same game. EverQuest, WoW, SWTOR all use the same core loot gameplay, which is kill stuff, get reward, get loot, level up. Very few games have broken out of that mold. One or two have. EVE Online is a great example; it's not standard level-based gameplay, although I'm not saying we're going to a big skill-based system. You're still going to recognize the roleplaying game heritage in it. In EverQuest Next, the world itself is a part of the game. What is the world in these other games? It's a simple backdrop. It's nothing. We are changing that greatly. We're changing what AI is in these games to a degree that we're going to bring life to the world. That to us is the essence of the change that we're making."

     

    ...and people simply don't believe or accept it, is just the height of irrationality.

    Do you really believe all this hype ? 

    Is EQNext really the first "next-generation" MMO ?

    "It will be familiar, but also totally different"

    Uhuh....

     

    Frankly, I don't believe a word of it. Perhaps I'll sing a different song after the big reveal, but until then, noway !

    That quote shouldn't have any amount of hype for someone interested in PVE item loot gameplay. If anything, that should be quite the warning that the game won't have it and expecting it is just going to end with disappointment.

  • CalmOceansCalmOceans BergenPosts: 2,273Member
    Originally posted by Dihoru

    I hope to God it's a Open World PvP system like EVE-Online just so the amount of scrubs who voted for 9 can get violated repeatedly by people with less constricted views on what makes a game good.

    You mean the scrubs who supported the game for 14 years and have stuck with the franchise, while some PVP players, who frankly often know anything at all about the game, the world or even the lore, demand to get their way or the highway because troll numero uno, Smedley, made another dumb statement on twitter.

    It's fine if you want PVP, but maybe you should realise, that the people that actually play the franchise, are PVE players.

    The people who supported the game, are mostly PVE players.

    The people who stuck with the game for over a decade, are PVE players.

    If it wasn't for PVE players, EQNext wouldn't exist.

  • Trudge34Trudge34 Stevens Point, WIPosts: 392Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ice-vortex
    Originally posted by SpottyGekko
    Originally posted by ice-vortex
    Originally posted by Phry
    Originally posted by Waterlily
    Originally posted by ice-vortex

    In either case, PVE players are seemingly going to be shocked when they realize there isn't the typical loot centric system of gameplay. I mean, if they don't have the ability to run raids and dungeons for items all day, they will just be shouting that there is no end game.

    Pretty sure no one is going to care drama queen.

    If EQNext is forced PVP, EQ players will still play EQ, EQ2 players will still play EQ2 and PVP players will wonder why their game has died like Darkfall has and gets no development support anymore.

    True.

    What is more likely to happen, is that they will use the exact same system they used in EQ1, there really isnt any need or demand to change it. The old, if it aint broke don't fix it, would in fact, be the ideal, at least for Everquest fans.image

    This is exactly why people think the PVE crowd on this forum is unreasonable. Between posts like these, and threads on camping times, and experience loss, it's as if they have their head in the sand.

    When Smedley says:

     

    "I also said in there that it will still be very familiar to you, but what I meant by that statement is that we're changing what an MMO is. MMO means something now, and it means the same thing to everybody because it's the same game. EverQuest, WoW, SWTOR all use the same core loot gameplay, which is kill stuff, get reward, get loot, level up. Very few games have broken out of that mold. One or two have. EVE Online is a great example; it's not standard level-based gameplay, although I'm not saying we're going to a big skill-based system. You're still going to recognize the roleplaying game heritage in it. In EverQuest Next, the world itself is a part of the game. What is the world in these other games? It's a simple backdrop. It's nothing. We are changing that greatly. We're changing what AI is in these games to a degree that we're going to bring life to the world. That to us is the essence of the change that we're making."

     

    ...and people simply don't believe or accept it, is just the height of irrationality.

    Do you really believe all this hype ? 

    Is EQNext really the first "next-generation" MMO ?

    "It will be familiar, but also totally different"

    Uhuh....

     

    Frankly, I don't believe a word of it. Perhaps I'll sing a different song after the big reveal, but until then, noway !

    That quote shouldn't have any amount of hype for someone interested in PVE item loot gameplay. If anything, that should be quite the warning that the game won't have it and expecting it is just going to end with disappointment.

    That quote was entirely about making the world mean something again and come alive. Anything else taken out of it is looking too far into it.

    Played: EQ1 (10 Years), Guild Wars, Rift, TERA
    Tried: EQ2, Vanguard, Lord of the Rings Online, Dungeons and Dragons Online, Runes of Magic and countless others...
    Currently Playing: GW2

    Nytlok Sylas
    80 Sylvari Ranger

  • ice-vortexice-vortex Xenia, OHPosts: 951Member
    Originally posted by Trudge34
    Originally posted by ice-vortex
    Originally posted by SpottyGekko
    Originally posted by ice-vortex
    Originally posted by Phry
    Originally posted by Waterlily
    Originally posted by ice-vortex

    In either case, PVE players are seemingly going to be shocked when they realize there isn't the typical loot centric system of gameplay. I mean, if they don't have the ability to run raids and dungeons for items all day, they will just be shouting that there is no end game.

    Pretty sure no one is going to care drama queen.

    If EQNext is forced PVP, EQ players will still play EQ, EQ2 players will still play EQ2 and PVP players will wonder why their game has died like Darkfall has and gets no development support anymore.

    True.

    What is more likely to happen, is that they will use the exact same system they used in EQ1, there really isnt any need or demand to change it. The old, if it aint broke don't fix it, would in fact, be the ideal, at least for Everquest fans.image

    This is exactly why people think the PVE crowd on this forum is unreasonable. Between posts like these, and threads on camping times, and experience loss, it's as if they have their head in the sand.

    When Smedley says:

     

    "I also said in there that it will still be very familiar to you, but what I meant by that statement is that we're changing what an MMO is. MMO means something now, and it means the same thing to everybody because it's the same game. EverQuest, WoW, SWTOR all use the same core loot gameplay, which is kill stuff, get reward, get loot, level up. Very few games have broken out of that mold. One or two have. EVE Online is a great example; it's not standard level-based gameplay, although I'm not saying we're going to a big skill-based system. You're still going to recognize the roleplaying game heritage in it. In EverQuest Next, the world itself is a part of the game. What is the world in these other games? It's a simple backdrop. It's nothing. We are changing that greatly. We're changing what AI is in these games to a degree that we're going to bring life to the world. That to us is the essence of the change that we're making."

     

    ...and people simply don't believe or accept it, is just the height of irrationality.

    Do you really believe all this hype ? 

    Is EQNext really the first "next-generation" MMO ?

    "It will be familiar, but also totally different"

    Uhuh....

     

    Frankly, I don't believe a word of it. Perhaps I'll sing a different song after the big reveal, but until then, noway !

    That quote shouldn't have any amount of hype for someone interested in PVE item loot gameplay. If anything, that should be quite the warning that the game won't have it and expecting it is just going to end with disappointment.

    That quote was entirely about making the world mean something again and come alive. Anything else taken out of it is looking too far into it.

    It is pretty clear from that quote EQN will not have "core loot gameplay" that exists in EverQuest or any other themepark game.

    The only hype that quote should generate for is anyone looking for a sandbox.

  • PhryPhry HampshirePosts: 6,296Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by Trudge34
    Originally posted by Dihoru

    I hope to God it's a Open World PvP system like EVE-Online just so the amount of scrubs who voted for 9 can get violated repeatedly by people with less constricted views on what makes a game good.

    Yeah, sounds totally reasonable and rational. Damn that unreasonable PVE crowd.

    I couldn't give a toss really, I just find people who want to PVE only to be at best as closed minded as the frothing at the mouth PVP hardcore-ers.

    A system like Eve online would be acceptable to most PVE players im guessing, although PVP players would probably hate it, at least the type of PVP player that commonly inhabits the fantasy MMO's. They are not used to being Kill on sight if their security status goes bad, or being hunted down/station camped if they manage to get too large a bounty on their heads, and every loss has consequence, whatever you had on you when you died, you lost, either because it was destroyed when you died, or because someone looted your corpse (wreck). So yeah, i'd enjoy an Eve style Fantasy MMO, which btw, Darkfall is not even close to being.image

  • Thebrave246Thebrave246 Carle Place, NYPosts: 174Member
    I want PvP kind of like EQoA, basically when you enter a town and everything you are safe. Once you leave a town or city someone in an opposite faction such as Dark Elf if you are a Wood Elf can attack you. This would make sense, basically you can get attacked good vs evil kind of thing, it only makes sense. Of course sometimes, you don't need to but who knows.. New friend?
  • Trudge34Trudge34 Stevens Point, WIPosts: 392Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ice-vortex
     

    It is pretty clear from that quote EQN will not have "core loot gameplay" that exists in EverQuest or any other themepark game.

    The only hype that quote should generate for is anyone looking for a sandbox.

    Never says that they're taking that out at all. Read it again.

     

    "We're changing what AI is in these games to a degree that we're going to bring life to the world. That to us is the essence of the change that we're making."

    Familiar gameplay will still be there, but it's not going to be the end all focus of the game. They are focused on bringing a living, breathing world to the players. They're moving the focus of the game from the treadmill to diversifying and putting life into the world. Taking everything we know about the game so far, this is the one thing that should be clearest because it is the common theme of any interview involving EQN.

    Played: EQ1 (10 Years), Guild Wars, Rift, TERA
    Tried: EQ2, Vanguard, Lord of the Rings Online, Dungeons and Dragons Online, Runes of Magic and countless others...
    Currently Playing: GW2

    Nytlok Sylas
    80 Sylvari Ranger

  • SomeHumanSomeHuman Austin, TXPosts: 350Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by exwin

    PvE and PvP segregated servers is the best way to go. The open world PvPers get their playground and PvErs get to do their thing.

    Games that force PvE players to PvP don't last long.

    I'm in agreement.  This is a simple solution that many games ignore.  The full-loot PvP'ers like me get what we want, and the peaceful, content-seeking  PvE'ers like me get what we want.  Yes, I fall into both categories.  A toon on each server would be perfect for me.

    Gaming since 1985; Online gaming since 1995; No End in Sight! My YouTube Channel:

  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by AlmightyGod
    Originally posted by exwin

    PvE and PvP segregated servers is the best way to go. The open world PvPers get their playground and PvErs get to do their thing.

    Games that force PvE players to PvP don't last long.

    I'm in agreement.  This is a simple solution that many games ignore.  The full-loot PvP'ers like me get what we want, and the peaceful, content-seeking  PvE'ers like me get what we want.  Yes, I fall into both categories.  A toon on each server would be perfect for me.

    I do hope you guys aren't implying EVE hasn't lived long... a good and balanced (well mostly) game will live, a crap one won't and if they're planning on having a "living world" then dear bittervets prepare for some pvp :).

    image
  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAPosts: 18,462Member Uncommon

    I picked 1.

    I sometimes like to just hang with pve players and chill but I love sieges and open world pvp.

    If I had to choose another "choice" then I would pick ffa pvp.

  • VorthanionVorthanion Laguna Vista, TXPosts: 2,121Member Uncommon
    I chose option 9 as it would be the safest bet for balancing reasons.  I'd go for separate pvp servers, but that could still potentially affect pve balance if they're too lazy to create separate code.

    image
  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    I chose option 9 as it would be the safest bet for balancing reasons.  I'd go for separate pvp servers, but that could still potentially affect pve balance if they're too lazy to create separate code.

    So lazy devs + lazy players = no pvp? o.O

    image
  • WaterlilyWaterlily parisPosts: 2,973Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    I chose option 9 as it would be the safest bet for balancing reasons.  I'd go for separate pvp servers, but that could still potentially affect pve balance if they're too lazy to create separate code.

    Same, it also removes all the crybaby PVP balance threads from the forum.

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member
    Originally posted by sanshi44
    Originally posted by Trudge34

    I'd like it to be 100% PvE based so they can concentrate on making that the best experience it can be without having to "balance" the classes for PvP. Don't think that's realistic, but I'd say the EQ1 model for this would be best. 3 PvP servers with different rule sets and the rest PvE servers. With EQ1 though, many of the classes were not balanced in PvP at all, so it was still a pretty rich PvE experience.

    I'll get my PvP in other games that I currently play.

    Class balance for PvP in EQ2 never affected PvE i beleive because they had a player dmg value and a NPC dmg value so you could balance 1 without effecting the other.

    Correct. Also skills often acted differently in PvP compared to PvE and had different cooldowns depending on whether you were PvP flagged or not.

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member
    Voted 1. Open world PvP can be good, but not everyone wants to be subjected to it 24/7. Keeping it on separate continents (where you have territory control or similar) would be the best option.
  • CukshaikCukshaik north lauderdale, FLPosts: 6Member
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    Pick the option that sounds closest to what you are looking for. We all get that the core model can have things added and taken away from. Adding or removing a flag system as an eg. Please try and read them all before you vote.

    1. Large open world continent for PvE and a large open world continent for PvP. Letting guilds build castles and keeps that can be sieged. Maybe a flag system depending on SoE. Some mixing of PvP and PvE. Lots of open world PvP and tends to feel sandboxish. Kinda like Archeage. 

    2. Ever race plays together in one open world. You pick a faction and PvP for that faction on a PvP map set aside from the PvE area. With castles and keeps that can be sieged (maybe again build by guilds). When your done PvPing you come back to play with everyone from every faction. Something like Rift. 

    3. GW2 Model: You play PvE with your server and no PvP takes place anywhere. Q up and fight 2 other servers in a battleground map thats so large it almost feels like open world but not really. Every few weeks you fight different servers. PvP and PvE never mix.

    4. ESO model: 3 faction model done like DAoC with a twist. Castles and keeps that can be sieged, open world dungeons and a mega dungeon the winning side of the PvP battle gets to use that has phat loot. Has towns with quest hubs and crafting nodes for top level crafting on this battleground. Has so much PvE on the map it feels much more like open world but again not fully. No lowbe hunting. PvP and PvE never mix unless you want to PvE on the PvP map.

    5. DAoC model: 3 factions fight on a battleground with castles and keeps that can be sieged. Instanced dungeon with wicked loot the 3 factions fight to control and own that has phat loot.The race you pick sets what faction you play with. PvP and PvE never mix and you play how you want. And you always fight the same group of guilds from the other factions. You get to know their tactics and this creates a real depth in the PvP but still not really open world.

    6. FFA PvP, everywhere and any where. What else they add like castles and keeps that can be sieged, is up to SoE but its more about PvP can be anywhere. PvP and PvE mix allot and may or may not have a flag system. may or may not have factions and sometimes safe areas. Like SWG, EVE and Linage 2.

    7. WoW model: PvE and PvP servers with contested zones on the PvP servers and more contested PvP zones the higher level you get. Even on PvE servers you must deal with the flag system and forced to PvP, there are some well known methods for doing that.

    8. Other: Explain 

    9. No PvP system at all, lets make it all about PvE so skills and classes never have to be balanced so we have pure PvE. 

    Another thread with old ideas. This game is supposed to be an evolution of the genre, not more of the same. Hence the game getting scrapped multiple times. If people listened to the interviews of Dave Georgeson and such, they would know that this game is supposedly bringing a lot of NEW IDEAS to the table, hence the black box it resides in currently.

    As much as you may want this game to be a little of this, and a little of that, if it is more of the same it will fail and this has been realized by the people making the game. It will be different, or it will fail. Those are really the only two options.

Sign In or Register to comment.