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!

So let me get this straight, some of you want...

2456712

Comments

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,279Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Redemp
    Originally posted by bcbully
    Originally posted by Aelious

    "So we’re changing it, and the way we’re doing that is making the world a part of the game. Right now worlds are Hollywood facades, just a place you go to kill the thing. It’s pretty, it helps the mood and the story but it doesn’t take part in the story in a meaningful way and that’s what we’re changing.

    You’ll be able to destroy, massive, massive parts of this world, almost all of it. You can light the forest on fire; we have ambition with this thing. We want it to be something where the world you log into, might not be the world you log into in five days. What you saw in WoW’s Cataclysm could take place because someone cast a spell that is powerful enough to do something major."

     

    Take that for what you will.  Not sure what "almost all of it" means but I took it to mean the terrain.  Where PvP is actually happening I'm sure there will be structure destruction.

     

    "What you saw in WoW’s Cataclysm could take place because someone cast a spell that is powerful enough to do something major."

     

    Aaaaas long as other people consent right... dont want to hurt any video game people...

     You're being inflammatory just for the sake of it Bc, that's a dangerous ledge to walk on.

       There's not much specificity in the quote, it very well could indeed mean player made structures can and will be destroyed in PvP. On the flip side it very well could mean that major changes as suggested could be contained within pve boundaries.

    That almost sounds like a threat.

     

    Let's be real here. Is what they are asking for even reasonable?

  • uidCausticuidCaustic acworth, GAPosts: 128Member
    Originally posted by H3deon
    there is alot to fear in life, dieing in a video game is not one of them....but yes PvP in MMOs have always been crap, atleast the games Ive played....except afew that only had PvP and could as well not have the MMO tag to begin with

     

    All "Role Players" are over weight furries.

     

    Opinions are fun, yes?

  • strangiato2112strangiato2112 Richmond, VAPosts: 1,538Member Common
    Originally posted by bcbully

    a sandbox where you can build and decorate your houses/castles without fear of pvp.

     

    Smed says everything can be destroyed. 

     

    Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?

    I would rather have to defend my home vs a gnoll attack or my guild hall vs a dragon attack and work together with others instead of against others.

     

  • RedempRedemp Hot Springs, ARPosts: 1,042Member
    Originally posted by bcbully
    Originally posted by Redemp
    Originally posted by bcbully
    Originally posted by Aelious

    "So we’re changing it, and the way we’re doing that is making the world a part of the game. Right now worlds are Hollywood facades, just a place you go to kill the thing. It’s pretty, it helps the mood and the story but it doesn’t take part in the story in a meaningful way and that’s what we’re changing.

    You’ll be able to destroy, massive, massive parts of this world, almost all of it. You can light the forest on fire; we have ambition with this thing. We want it to be something where the world you log into, might not be the world you log into in five days. What you saw in WoW’s Cataclysm could take place because someone cast a spell that is powerful enough to do something major."

     

    Take that for what you will.  Not sure what "almost all of it" means but I took it to mean the terrain.  Where PvP is actually happening I'm sure there will be structure destruction.

     

    "What you saw in WoW’s Cataclysm could take place because someone cast a spell that is powerful enough to do something major."

     

    Aaaaas long as other people consent right... dont want to hurt any video game people...

     You're being inflammatory just for the sake of it Bc, that's a dangerous ledge to walk on.

       There's not much specificity in the quote, it very well could indeed mean player made structures can and will be destroyed in PvP. On the flip side it very well could mean that major changes as suggested could be contained within pve boundaries.

    That almost sounds like a threat.

     

    Let's be real here. Is what they are asking for even reasonable?

     Is what reasonable?

  • Saxx0nSaxx0n PR/Brand Manager BitBox Ltd. Hell, CAPosts: 817Member Uncommon

    Basically Smed has said the backbone of gameplay will be "emergent" which basically means there will not be pve servers or very much content based around ai behavior.

    So instead of getting your group of repetitive loot grinding dungeon min maxxers to go grind mindless raid content you can go kill the guy and his friends that burned your castle down. Chop his head off and put it on a stick for all to see. I promise it will be more gratifying than any shitty pve content you have ever done.

    P.S. Good luck using your slide rulers and min max builds to kill him tho.

  • baphametbaphamet omaha, NEPosts: 2,838Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Redemp
    Originally posted by bcbully Originally posted by Aelious "So we’re changing it, and the way we’re doing that is making the world a part of the game. Right now worlds are Hollywood facades, just a place you go to kill the thing. It’s pretty, it helps the mood and the story but it doesn’t take part in the story in a meaningful way and that’s what we’re changing. You’ll be able to destroy, massive, massive parts of this world, almost all of it. You can light the forest on fire; we have ambition with this thing. We want it to be something where the world you log into, might not be the world you log into in five days. What you saw in WoW’s Cataclysm could take place because someone cast a spell that is powerful enough to do something major."   Take that for what you will.  Not sure what "almost all of it" means but I took it to mean the terrain.  Where PvP is actually happening I'm sure there will be structure destruction.  
    "What you saw in WoW’s Cataclysm could take place because someone cast a spell that is powerful enough to do something major."   Aaaaas long as other people consent right... dont want to hurt any video game people...
     You're being inflammatory just for the sake of it Bc, that's a dangerous ledge to walk on.

       There's not much specificity in the quote, it very well could indeed mean player made structures can and will be destroyed in PvP. On the flip side it very well could mean that major changes as suggested could be contained within pve boundaries.


    ^^ yep, just because almost everything can be destroyed does not necessarily mean there will be ffa open pvp.

    things that are built can be destroyed by NPC's, a dragon can come and burn a player made village (if its not defended) for example.

  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 19,998Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ElderRat
    Originally posted by Kyleran
    Originally posted by colddog04
    Originally posted by Kyleran
    Originally posted by bcbully

    a sandbox where you can build and decorate your houses/castles without fear of pvp.

     

    Smed says everything can be destroyed. 

     

    Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?

    No, I want the Police/Military to protect me if you attempt to wantonly destroy my property and bring you to justice for your criminal behaviors while I reside inside the borders of my home town/country.

    And no, I don't intend to do the policing and fighting, others will do it for me unless I choose to sign up/enlist in the battle.

    Sounds like you need to be taxed for the services.

    There's already MMO's that have employed taxation mechanics, EVE being one of them, (and the best example of really functional system in a PVP game) but even there you don't get much for money, and certainly not the level of protection you expect for what you pay for.  (sort of like real life there too I suppose)

     

    yea if I lived in the EVE universe I would complain about Concord's ability to protect us.  Usually more of a vengeance will be wreaked on the bad guy who killed the poor pilot who was killed.

    Well, if you think about it, that's how justice works in the real world, the police come in after the crime has already occurred and lock up the perpetrators.  It's fear of this retribution that keeps society in check, unless of course you employ your own private security force.

    The military is a better example, but even there your country could be invaded and your army has to fight off the attackers, and you might be called up to defend it.

    Come to think of it, CCP really did come the closest to recreating this system in a game world.

    Guess that's why I like it so much.

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
    "I don't have one life, I have many lives" - Grunty
    Still currently "subscribed" to EVE, and only EVE!!!
    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon

  • DrakynnDrakynn The Pas, MBPosts: 2,030Member
    Originally posted by baphamet

     


    Originally posted by Redemp

    Originally posted by bcbully

    Originally posted by Aelious "So we’re changing it, and the way we’re doing that is making the world a part of the game. Right now worlds are Hollywood facades, just a place you go to kill the thing. It’s pretty, it helps the mood and the story but it doesn’t take part in the story in a meaningful way and that’s what we’re changing. You’ll be able to destroy, massive, massive parts of this world, almost all of it. You can light the forest on fire; we have ambition with this thing. We want it to be something where the world you log into, might not be the world you log into in five days. What you saw in WoW’s Cataclysm could take place because someone cast a spell that is powerful enough to do something major."   Take that for what you will.  Not sure what "almost all of it" means but I took it to mean the terrain.  Where PvP is actually happening I'm sure there will be structure destruction.  
    "What you saw in WoW’s Cataclysm could take place because someone cast a spell that is powerful enough to do something major."   Aaaaas long as other people consent right... dont want to hurt any video game people...
     You're being inflammatory just for the sake of it Bc, that's a dangerous ledge to walk on.

     

       There's not much specificity in the quote, it very well could indeed mean player made structures can and will be destroyed in PvP. On the flip side it very well could mean that major changes as suggested could be contained within pve boundaries.


     

    ^^ yep, just because almost everything can be destroyed does not necessarily mean there will be ffa open pvp.

    things that are built can be destroyed by NPC's, a dragon can come and burn a player made village (if its not defended) for example.

     

     

    Not to mention consensual destruction to make room for something else or deconstruction for materials and other possibilities in a almost fully destructible environment.

  • strangiato2112strangiato2112 Richmond, VAPosts: 1,538Member Common
    Originally posted by Saxx0n

    Basically Smed has said the backbone of gameplay will be "emergent" which basically means there will not be pve servers or very much content based around ai behavior.

     

    I dont think you have any clue what emergent gameplay means.

     

    There could be tons of content based around AI behavior, but players are given the tool to manipulate the AI behavior

    see: Storybricks

  • Saxx0nSaxx0n PR/Brand Manager BitBox Ltd. Hell, CAPosts: 817Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by strangiato2112
    Originally posted by Saxx0n

    Basically Smed has said the backbone of gameplay will be "emergent" which basically means there will not be pve servers or very much content based around ai behavior.

     

    I dont think you have any clue what emergent gameplay means.

     

    There could be tons of content based around AI behavior, but players are given the tool to manipulate the AI behavior

    see: Storybricks

    In the overall scope of a sandbox Storybricks will probably be rather limited. AI will probably be used as a stop gap to prevent game breaking actions from being performed.

    Emergent gameplay is based on human reactions to ingame events and has little to do with Ai. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oq2oxt7Nrxo this eve trailer explains it best.

  • strangiato2112strangiato2112 Richmond, VAPosts: 1,538Member Common
    Originally posted by Saxx0n
    Originally posted by strangiato2112
    Originally posted by Saxx0n

    Basically Smed has said the backbone of gameplay will be "emergent" which basically means there will not be pve servers or very much content based around ai behavior.

     

    I dont think you have any clue what emergent gameplay means.

     

    There could be tons of content based around AI behavior, but players are given the tool to manipulate the AI behavior

    see: Storybricks

    In the overall scope of a sandbox Storybricks will probably be rather limited. AI will probably be used as a stop gap to prevent game breaking actions from being performed.

    Emergent gameplay is based on human reactions to ingame events and has little to do with Ai. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oq2oxt7Nrxo this eve trailer explains it best.

    Storybricks SCREAMS sandbox.

     

    You know what kind of sucked about SWG cities?  how dead they were.  All those houses and buildings for only 5 people running around.  Storybricks has the potential to give our player created cities life.

  • IadienIadien Charleston, WVPosts: 638Member
    Originally posted by strangiato2112
    Originally posted by Saxx0n
    Originally posted by strangiato2112
    Originally posted by Saxx0n

    Basically Smed has said the backbone of gameplay will be "emergent" which basically means there will not be pve servers or very much content based around ai behavior.

     

    I dont think you have any clue what emergent gameplay means.

     

    There could be tons of content based around AI behavior, but players are given the tool to manipulate the AI behavior

    see: Storybricks

    In the overall scope of a sandbox Storybricks will probably be rather limited. AI will probably be used as a stop gap to prevent game breaking actions from being performed.

    Emergent gameplay is based on human reactions to ingame events and has little to do with Ai. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oq2oxt7Nrxo this eve trailer explains it best.

    Storybricks SCREAMS sandbox.

     

    You know what kind of sucked about SWG cities?  how dead they were.  All those houses and buildings for only 5 people running around.  Storybricks has the potential to give our player created cities life.

    I don't understand how anyone can think EQ will force PVP, oh well, they'll know what's up August 2. There's a reason why Storybricks is being used, and it's not because of PVP.

  • zymurgeistzymurgeist Pittsville, VAPosts: 5,212Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Saxx0n
    Originally posted by strangiato2112
    Originally posted by Saxx0n

    Basically Smed has said the backbone of gameplay will be "emergent" which basically means there will not be pve servers or very much content based around ai behavior.

     

    I dont think you have any clue what emergent gameplay means.

     

    There could be tons of content based around AI behavior, but players are given the tool to manipulate the AI behavior

    see: Storybricks

    In the overall scope of a sandbox Storybricks will probably be rather limited. AI will probably be used as a stop gap to prevent game breaking actions from being performed.

    Emergent gameplay is based on human reactions to ingame events and has little to do with Ai. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oq2oxt7Nrxo this eve trailer explains it best.

    Emergent gameplay is people doing things no one planned on. It's not content. It can happen on any type of servers in any type of game during any type of activity. Exploiting is an example of emergent behavior, albeit and undesirable one. You can't design it. You can't design for it.

    "Strong and bitter words indicate a weak cause" ~Victor Hugo

  • SlampigSlampig Chantilly, VAPosts: 2,376Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by bcbully

    a sandbox where you can build and decorate your houses/castles without fear of pvp.

     

    Smed says everything can be destroyed. 

     

    Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?

    Yikes, hardcore "wolf" checking in, better batten down the hatches...

    That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,279Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Slampig
    Originally posted by bcbully

    a sandbox where you can build and decorate your houses/castles without fear of pvp.

     

    Smed says everything can be destroyed. 

     

    Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?

    Yikes, hardcore "wolf" checking in, better batten down the hatches...

    I thought I was a hardcore evil pvp killer until I spent 5 hours in jail for murder in Wushu... Well it was more like 10, I logged off then went to sleep. Woke up with 4:30 minutes to go...

     

    I'm more of a politician and crafter now.

  • azzamasinazzamasin Butler, OHPosts: 3,058Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by bcbully

    a sandbox where you can build and decorate your houses/castles without fear of pvp.

     

    Smed says everything can be destroyed. 

     

    Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?

    Nope I don't want you to ask me for anything.  imageimage

     

    However if there was other people who wanted their stuff broken down or another zone where every's stuff can get torn down then I'm all for it.  As long as I am not forced to get my stuff torn down.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • azzamasinazzamasin Butler, OHPosts: 3,058Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Ecoces

    yes, sorry but if put in the time and effort, into building up my house or whatever i don't want someone to come along and destroy it on a whim.

     

    developers always say stuff they can't back up, would you like me to quote things the developers of Guild Wars 2, Rift, Everquest 2 said that are completely nonsense?

     

    why do you think you should be able to destroy anything another player builds? who are  you? why are you so special that your fun is more important than another players

    This

     

    Dev Speak is a very common term for falsehoods and lies.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • TelondarielTelondariel Ottawa, ONPosts: 1,001Member
    Originally posted by Waterlily

    And another "smedley said" thread.

    I'm making a PVE rabbit hole and going to bed.

    I know, eh?

     

    I think there are a lot of people that are hyping themselves into an unjustified frenzy.  Those are the people that are going to wail the most after the real details come out.  Its all so predictable.  What's that quote about history repeating itself..?

    image
  • KwanseiKwansei HyogoPosts: 334Member
    I think the real question here is how many incarnations of Fippy Darkpaw the 12649939875th it will take to destroy the Qeynos gates.
  • AticusWellesAticusWelles Beverly hills, CAPosts: 152Member
    I want to have a choice of property that is protected by a military force in civilized territory, and property that is unprotected in frontier territory.

    Just like the old west. Want civilized society with private property and safety? Stay on the east coast. Want a frontier lifestyle with hopes of striking it rich, but no guarantees of safety and protection? Head for the west.

    I'm a firm believer that there should be enough land and content in these games to give people a choice. Better rewards in the frontier territory should be accompanied by greater risk in the form of PVP. I like the way Archeage is doing it. But that's just my preferred style. I'm sure its to middle of the road for extreme pvp'ers and extreme pve'ers who both want it their way and don't want any compromise at all.
  • KuanshuKuanshu Des Moines, IAPosts: 272Member
    Originally posted by bcbully

    a sandbox where you can build and decorate your houses/castles without fear of pvp.

     

    Smed says everything can be destroyed. 

     

    Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?

    I participated in Shadowbane beta and there was this player named Luz Arius or something and he wanted FFA non consensual PvP with full looting of corpse and he would go on and on about this and did so for as long as they were in development until he got into the beta test.

    This guy was rather irritating so I figured I would teach him a lesson so I bribed an officer in his guild and he had built his own castle/city comprised of buildings and such. Well to make a long story much shorter this officer could not only delete some of the buildings he had access to the guild vault and we sacked the city as he took down much of the castles defenses.

    Well the development team wasn't happy about this nor was Luz Arius and well they gave him back everything he lost by turning back the server time or something.This wasn't the first thing or last thing that I did whilst beta testing that really pissed off the development team but hey its a beta test and this game was going to be FFA PvP with castle construction and buildings and full looting rights, etc...

    Also, I heard in EVE Online that there was an alliance called Band of Brothers where the director left the alliance and disbanded it along with alot of ships, money and territory.

    Whats to keep this from happening in Everquest Next? Im not concerned about having consent I am concerned about alot of time and energy by many involved into building a castle with buildings only for someone on the inside stealing or worse and take advantage of certain priviledges provided to them because they are an officer or even the guild leader decided to jump ship so to speak.

  • keenberkeenber galwayPosts: 438Member

    Do any of you guys know what a sandbox is? For one thing if i go out into the middle of a forest and burn it down so i can dig a hole just because i want to is sandbox. All so what about natural disasters and Big raid mobs or just mobs with nasty ass aoe spells .

    Simple until august the 2nd we don't know.

  • rodingorodingo Posts: 2,346Member Uncommon
    And this is how hype goes.  Then when the game doesn't turn out on how they speculate, they will blame everyone else for the hype that they took part in generating.

    "If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor

  • MyriaMyria Lowell, MAPosts: 570Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by bcbully

    Do you want me to ask for your consent to destroy you house/castle?

    Nah I want the police to show up when you do, demand you give yourself up, and if you don't kill you dead -- no coming back, ever. If you do give yourself up I want you to be taken before a judge, made to pay restitution (and wouldn't that cause some serious screaming?), and your character forced to spend a few years in the pokey.

     

    See, there's a problem with the whole "realism" argument, because fundamentally what a lot of PvPers want is not realism but a license to do whatever they want. The world doesn't work that way, it never has -- To quote Sly Stalone "Even the old west wasn't the old west!".

  • CalamarCalamar IgualadaPosts: 116Member
    Originally posted by bcbully
    Originally posted by Waterlily

    And another "smedley said" thread.

    I'm making a PVE rabbit hole and going to bed.

    I'm going to stop you by destroying your hole!

     

    Do you mind?

    Time to dress your plate underwear guys.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

Sign In or Register to comment.