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!

Lead Game Designer on Everquest Next Debunks Non-Consent PVP

168101112

Comments

  • LacedOpiumLacedOpium Posts: 1,010Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by rutaq
    Originally posted by LacedOpium

     

    Wow ... not much debate coming from the "forced non-consensual" PvP crowd after this tweet.  It is very nice to see we've arrived at a consensus.  I just hope the hard core non consensual folk are all ok. 

     

    Hey hardcore PvPer, there is no need to be disillusioned!  There will still be PvP.  It just wont be forced, and that is a good thing.

     

    /taps them on the head

     

      Laced..., nothing personal but it is a bit of a stretch to take an opened tweet as fact to prove that the game will NOT have the PvP style that you dislike.  You seem a bit emotional about things and your many posts are just a repeat of your observation / supposed fact.   

    Sadly SOE has been vague enough that any informed PvP players or so called "Hardcore PvPers" aren't going to waste time debating something that has so little evidence either way.

     

    Time will tell what EQN will be but for now at least it seems to be something different...

     

     

     

     

    Rutaq ... nothing personal but it is obvious that the only emotional one here is you.  I am fully cognizant of the fact that the truth in my posts are biting and hit hard at the core of the pro "forced non consensual" PvP argument.  They are intentionally written that way for maximum effect.  As a result, I fully expect to be singled out and targeted for cheap shots just as you have done in your post.   

    Appealing for me to stop hurting your feelings by calling my "many" posts "emotional" and "repeats" of "supposed facts" is elementary child psychology.  It is basically a cry for me to stop posting such hurtful posts, even though by admission you have nothing to add to the debate.  Try debating the point and save the cheap shots.  You'll come across as being much more credible by doing so.   

  • Electro057Electro057 Guelph, ONPosts: 658Member
    Originally posted by Ecoces

    and honestly i don't care if it breaks your immersion if it ruins another players fun. As i said in another post why does your fun and your immersion take precedent over another persons fun? who are you and why are  you so special? do you pay more for the service than i do so thus your fun is more important than mine?

    Well depending on how much both of you have invested in the cash shop he just might pay more for the service....Though really you ideally both pay nothing for this 'free' service.

    But that's really just a moot point and doesn't have any real value at all....I don't think this tweet means anything, and even if it does I'm sure that everyone will be able to play the game their own way. I doubt they're going to force a singular playstyle upon us an if they do and that playstyle isn't to your liking it's not like we can change the game. Rather we can just play something else and move on with our lives. In the end it really doesn't matter.

    --Custom Rig: Pyraxis---
    NZXT Phantom 410 Case
    Intel Core i5-4690 Processor - Quad Core, 6MB Smart Cache, 3.5GHz
    Asus Sabertooth Z87 Motherboard
    Asus GeForce GTX 760 Video Card - 2GB GDDR5, PCI-Express 3.0
    Kingston HyperX Fury Blue 16GB

  • EcocesEcoces Chicago, ILPosts: 879Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by FaarmMercy

    I'm going to copy/paste my post from the other thread, because I feel it is fitting in this one as well.

    Originally posted by FaarmMercy
    Originally posted by RoyalPhunk

    Lets take EvE, in my mind the most hard core PVP game, even there PVP is not forced on PVE'rs. Is there some danger in empire, sure you could be war decced or suicide killed but most of these things are avoidable with minimal effort, all in all if I want to avoid PVP in EvE I can do it without even working too hard. I do not think its impossible to develop a system that accomplishes the same goal in other games.

    Archeage for example has this designed in a similar way, part of the world is open PVP part of it is not. You can still commit crimes in the PVE areas but you can be attacked when doing so, branded as a pirate and put in jail or chased by every guard in every area. In EvE they made it suicide to kill someone in a non PVP zone and thats what they would have to do in EQN. You can still commit the act (Sandbox) but you will absolutely pay for it.

    Without this kind of thinking put into its design not a sandbox. Restrictions on what you can do are un-sandbox in the MMO space, and because of that you will never have a PVE sandbox as it is envisioned by mmo standards simple because what PVE players are will to accept only goes so far and certainly doesn't stretch into sandbox territory. Feel free to go play minecraft though that is the closest thing I can think of that meets your definition of a PVE sandbox.

    Lastly I will mention that PVE games are disposable 1 month dungeon crawlers and expect for one game, have zero longevity. I think longevity is what Sony is aiming for with this. They will have to do it right, respect that not everyone wants to PVP, but don't fully prevent it from being possible. Sandboxes have to have good economies, good economies come from things being destroyed, even PVEr's things.

    Exactly this!

    My friends, no one wants to force PVP upon those looking for exclusive PVE in their gameplay. Feast your eyes upon this map.

    http://go-dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/verite/influence.png

    That big black blob is the middle is known as high-sec. There, it's (relatively) safe for your casual spacefarer to go about his business without being ganked (this is also where a vast majority of the player base can be found). The outskirts of the map are where player empires are built, and where the richest resources are found.

    Personally, with Smed being such an EVE fan, I would not be surprised if EQN follows this model (and I also hope hope hope for a single server), but I'd also add that it would be cool if these pockets of civilization were actually built around the racial starter cities. We'd have our old Qeynos, Freeport, Kelethin, et. all, and most folks would generally stick to these bastions of civilization, venturing into the wilds in groups for short times, or building their crafting empire from within the (relative) safety of the city walls. It would make the main cities really feel like giant hubs of activity.

    Meanwhile, those adventurous spirits unafraid of the untamed wilderness could erect their own little oasis towns in the wastes of the Desert of Ro, or bandit hideouts nestled deep within the woods of Kithicor.

    Would it be possible to get ganked if you're not playing safe? Of course! But that's the point. You cannot expect this game to have a functioning economy if adventurers were not replacing their gear on a regular basis. It's simple economics. Supply and demand!

    Not only do you need a steady demand to keep the economy going, but this is very literally the LIFE BLOOD of the crafting profession. Without a need to supply would be adventurers with gear, how would a crafter ever sell his wares?

    Simple answer, he wouldn't.

    Most of EVE's player base lives in the security of high-sec, just as I hope most of Norrath's population lives in and around the major racial starting cities. This is a GOOD thing! It creates the sense of a living, breathing city (still open to the possibility of a back-alley shanking in the shadier sections of town... I'm looking at YOU, Freeport), while also creating the very real sense of adventure and excitement we all experienced in our first adventurers traveling the great expanses of Antonica and Faydwer (and Odus... I guess...).

    If Smed is taking his ques from EVE, then there will be something there for all of us, my friends, PVPer and PVE-er alike. Let us end these silly anti-social, neckbeardy, passive-aggressive jabs at one another, and bask in the possibilities of a Brave New Norrath!

     

    so as a non PVPer i can't explore 70% (or more) of the world? er yeah no thanks. Here is a better compromise you play how you want on your PVP server and I will play how i want on my PVE or Consensual PVP server.

     

    best PVP system is the SWG system, where you join Factions and can be Covert(get some benefits of the faction but can't be attacked) or OVert(get all benefits of a faction but can be attacked on site) on that faction ... or be neutral completely and not have to worry about the war at all.

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

    You kidding right?

     

    "We avoid bad decisions"

    Thank god they will not listen to you people who want another themepark with housing, in a world with no risk reward, where you are safe to insult act an ass and not get touched because you don't consent.

     

    that's what that statement means to me.

    Well in my experience a game devoted to PvE centric activities has a lot less of that type of behavior.  If your speaking I nthe context of PvP players as a demographic that would be a truer statement Bc, but if an MMO is centered around community interaction that sort of behavior is a lot less prevalent and the player base as a whole is a lot more tolerant of others.  No offense but as a PvP player you're context is about PvP'ers perceived attitudes but in my world that sort of behavior is rare.  Plenty of PvE centric game designs with heavy emphasis on community is way more forgiving and a lot less rude.

    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

  • gylnnegylnne South Hutchinson, KSPosts: 320Member
    Originally posted by Maquiame
    Everquest was never and will never be mainly about pvp. I gotta ask why are you pvpers not just all over the Camelot boards where you belong? Or playing Wushu or Darkfall?

    I kind of wondered this myself.

    And makes one wonder if the only reason they are here is to find new low lvls to gank.:P

    I love a good pvp game but I also love a good pve game as well.

    When I get tired of beating on real people I login to my favorite pve game and explore.

    The Everquest world has always been pve at it's core and does not make any sense to change that with Everquest Next.

  • azzamasinazzamasin Butler, OHPosts: 3,058Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by adderVXI
    Why cant we just have a flagging system like SWG was?  All those people wanting the pvp excitement can have it.  That would cut out the killing of level 2 people in starter areas though which is perhaps the real goal. 

    Many of us would like that or separate rule set servers but the PvP crowd, by and large, will never meet In the middle.  For that demographic it is either their way or the highway.

    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

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,463Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by adderVXI
    Why cant we just have a flagging system like SWG was?  All those people wanting the pvp excitement can have it.  That would cut out the killing of level 2 people in starter areas though which is perhaps the real goal. 

    Many of us would like that or separate rule set servers but the PvP crowd, by and large, will never meet In the middle.  For that demographic it is either their way or the highway.

    Same could be said for PvEers, Sandbox gamers, themepark gamers... wait thats seems to be the way gamers are.


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


  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,915Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kyleran

    Anyone else see the irony of a SOE Developer, famous for SWG and some others making the statement that they avoid making bad design decisions?

    I'd say as a company they are right up there at the top in this department.

     

    This guy wasn't the lead on SWG, so i can't see the irony in that,  I'd also assume he's talking about his team and not SOE as a whole.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,915Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by adderVXI
    Why cant we just have a flagging system like SWG was?  All those people wanting the pvp excitement can have it.  That would cut out the killing of level 2 people in starter areas though which is perhaps the real goal. 

    Many of us would like that or separate rule set servers but the PvP crowd, by and large, will never meet In the middle.  For that demographic it is either their way or the highway.

    Same could be said for PvEers, Sandbox gamers, themepark gamers... wait thats seems to be the way gamers are.

    Exactly...

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  • Electro057Electro057 Guelph, ONPosts: 658Member
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by adderVXI
    Why cant we just have a flagging system like SWG was?  All those people wanting the pvp excitement can have it.  That would cut out the killing of level 2 people in starter areas though which is perhaps the real goal. 

    Many of us would like that or separate rule set servers but the PvP crowd, by and large, will never meet In the middle.  For that demographic it is either their way or the highway.

    Same could be said for PvEers, Sandbox gamers, themepark gamers... wait thats seems to be the way gamers are.

    Exactly...

    That's pretty much just people, including you and myself. It doesn't only apply to video gamers, just people. Look at politics for example. You can provide as much facts and solid logic but if a person is rooted in their opinion strong enough it doesn't matter.

    --Custom Rig: Pyraxis---
    NZXT Phantom 410 Case
    Intel Core i5-4690 Processor - Quad Core, 6MB Smart Cache, 3.5GHz
    Asus Sabertooth Z87 Motherboard
    Asus GeForce GTX 760 Video Card - 2GB GDDR5, PCI-Express 3.0
    Kingston HyperX Fury Blue 16GB

  • usuckmmorpgcomusuckmmorpgcom c, KYPosts: 1,348Member
    Originally posted by DamonVile

    This site is full of delusional people.  There will be lots of people that believe that ffa pvp is going to be the only option up until the time where they try and attack someone and can't.

    Then it will be off the the forums to call the game another fail mmo.

    Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!

  • HabitualFrogStompHabitualFrogStomp SydneyPosts: 281Member

    I would have no problem with those who want to facilitate the PVE only playstyle, if those who did so were actually consistent with that aim. We often find that PVE games are more littered with pretentious and rotten filth than you would expect to find on most PVP servers. The PVE'er wants the drama and excitement of PVP just as much as anyone else does. The reason they don't PVP is because they can only play the game on their own terms, and lack the sack to put their money where their mouth is. We find it in the worlds biggest douchebag who sits in front of the AH in his raid armor for 3 months straight, challenging anyone who would not appear to be a threat in a fight (namely noobs who've played the game for 2 and a half hours) to duels. We find it in the general world chat where the same 15 idiots ramble day after day 18 hours a day in their infinite emo-gothism, swiftly abusing and harassing any who dare speak without acknowledging them as supreme master of the universe first. We find it in the habitual ninja thief who would wait in the shadows while you clear trash mobs for 30 minutes, only to swoop in and steal your named at the last possible second while telling you to L2Play.

    You will not play an MMO on the market today that is not comprised of these types of players, anything else would be the exception. We all know it, but some how we've come to accept the notion that forced PVP is bad and it hurts harmless little noobs who just want to play the game. Please. Those harmless little noobs are most likely you, the PVE'er, who just wants to spread the contents of your soiled and festering maxipad to yet another game, and we the PVP'ers are doing the game world a service by preventing you from doing so by beating the utter shit out of you wherever you dare show your face.

    That's just an alternate perspective. Im sure some innocent noobs do get harmed in the process. I would like to apologize to said noobs for any harm done.

     

  • AeliousAelious Portland, ORPosts: 2,854Member Uncommon
    Those... less than desirable individuals would still find safe places to hide out and troll others if that's their wish. I'd much rather them troll a general chat, where I can select "ignore" or decline a dual challenge and laugh as I search the auction house.

    Unfortunate individuals are everywhere, in every server type of every MMO and even every forum. Having PvP in an MMO isn't going to change that. The lengths at which to try would make the situation worse.
  • xxxxxx1xxxxxx1 San Antonio, TXPosts: 91Member
    I think EQN will be a faction-based  hybrid PVP/PVE open world in a single shard server. If that is true, this will certainly blow my mind.
  • hMJemhMJem Marysville, WAPosts: 465Member
    Originally posted by Piiritus
    Originally posted by bcbully

    You kidding right?

     

    "We avoid bad decisions"

    Thank god they will not listen to you people who want another themepark with housing, in a world with no risk reward, where you are safe to insult act an ass and not get touched because you don't consent.

     

    that's what that statement means to me.

    Why are you so upset? Have you played EQ and know what this game is about? EQN should be new EQ, not Age of Wushu or whatever in EQ skin. To able to gank people was never a core part of EQ.

    They've stated 789324x this isnt going to be like Everquest 3 or Everquest 1 +2 in HD high def graphics.. If you go in expecting that, you'll be let down. They've only said it a million times. They say Everquest Next is going to be so different from EQ1/EQ2 that it isnt going to kill those games because its different.

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member
    Sounds like they are going with a heavily moderated form of open world PvP, akin to Age of Wushu.
  • EcocesEcoces Chicago, ILPosts: 879Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by adderVXI
    Why cant we just have a flagging system like SWG was?  All those people wanting the pvp excitement can have it.  That would cut out the killing of level 2 people in starter areas though which is perhaps the real goal. 

    Many of us would like that or separate rule set servers but the PvP crowd, by and large, will never meet In the middle.  For that demographic it is either their way or the highway.

    Same could be said for PvEers, Sandbox gamers, themepark gamers... wait thats seems to be the way gamers are.

    Exactly...

    actually thats not true at all, many PVE'rs and Consensual PVP supporters im sure would be fine with giving FFA PVPers a separate server so they can enjoy themselves.

     

    in fact this HAS been brought up many times in this thread and others on this very forum, yet what is the typical response? "oh separate servers mean the PVP is tacked on and that sucks so no thanks".

     

    PVE'rs and Consensual PVPers are open to compromise, its the FFA PVPers that want everyone to be killable at anytime and thats it everything else is tacked on PVP.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,463Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Ecoces
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by adderVXI
    Why cant we just have a flagging system like SWG was?  All those people wanting the pvp excitement can have it.  That would cut out the killing of level 2 people in starter areas though which is perhaps the real goal. 

    Many of us would like that or separate rule set servers but the PvP crowd, by and large, will never meet In the middle.  For that demographic it is either their way or the highway.

    Same could be said for PvEers, Sandbox gamers, themepark gamers... wait thats seems to be the way gamers are.

    Exactly...

    actually thats not true at all, many PVE'rs and Consensual PVP supporters im sure would be fine with giving FFA PVPers a separate server so they can enjoy themselves.

     

    in fact this HAS been brought up many times in this thread and others on this very forum, yet what is the typical response? "oh separate servers mean the PVP is tacked on and that sucks so no thanks".

     

    PVE'rs and Consensual PVPers are open to compromise, its the FFA PVPers that want everyone to be killable at anytime and thats it everything else is tacked on PVP.

    According to THIS poll, almost 40% of gamers dont want PvP to be in the game in any form, my guess that would be your easy going PvEers. Not that I blame them as PvP of any form means classes and skills balanced for PvP and that steps on the toes of PvE gamers. Gamers like what they like and we all are a picky bunch.


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


  • Saxx0nSaxx0n PR/Brand Manager BitBox Ltd. Hell, CAPosts: 804Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Piiritus
    Originally posted by bcbully

    You kidding right?

     

    "We avoid bad decisions"

    Thank god they will not listen to you people who want another themepark with housing, in a world with no risk reward, where you are safe to insult act an ass and not get touched because you don't consent.

     

    that's what that statement means to me.

    Why are you so upset? Have you played EQ and know what this game is about? EQN should be new EQ, not Age of Wushu or whatever in EQ skin. To able to gank people was never a core part of EQ.

    There were 4 servers at launch of EQ. One of those servers was Rallos Zek which was full loot everyone red pvp. Tell my group that was working together to level in North Ro that hardcore pvp was never a core part.

    Great times when those little Halfling bastards would round up all the sand giants and train us. The first time they did it they caught us with our pants down and the whole group was crushed by the giants and then the little halflings would come loot us dry. Til we wisened up and would bush whack them as they attempted the same tactic in following days and chase them all the way back to Rivervale. 

    Good times for all and dynamic and exciting.

    The gank was always a part of EQ...

     

    edit- This behavior will always exist. It is in our nature. We have binocular vision and canine teeth and they are not designed for pve.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Ecoces Originally posted by Distopia Originally posted by Nanfoodle Originally posted by azzamasin Originally posted by adderVXI Why cant we just have a flagging system like SWG was?  All those people wanting the pvp excitement can have it.  That would cut out the killing of level 2 people in starter areas though which is perhaps the real goal. 
    Many of us would like that or separate rule set servers but the PvP crowd, by and large, will never meet In the middle.  For that demographic it is either their way or the highway.
    Same could be said for PvEers, Sandbox gamers, themepark gamers... wait thats seems to be the way gamers are.
    Exactly...
    actually thats not true at all, many PVE'rs and Consensual PVP supporters im sure would be fine with giving FFA PVPers a separate server so they can enjoy themselves.   in fact this HAS been brought up many times in this thread and others on this very forum, yet what is the typical response? "oh separate servers mean the PVP is tacked on and that sucks so no thanks".   PVE'rs and Consensual PVPers are open to compromise, its the FFA PVPers that want everyone to be killable at anytime and thats it everything else is tacked on PVP.
    According to THIS poll, almost 40% of gamers dont want PvP to be in the game in any form, my guess that would be your easy going PvEers. Not that I blame them as PvP of any form means classes and skills balanced for PvP and that steps on the toes of PvE gamers. Gamers like what they like and we all are a picky bunch.


    If anyone is wondering, if you want to see the polls on this site, follow this link:
    http://www.mmorpg.com/features.cfm/view/polls

    I remembered a poll on PvE and PvP and found the results from that link.
    What's more important, PvE or PvP? 15,471 respondents
    5.7% PvP
    14.8% PvE
    PvP focus with a little PvE 10.5%
    PvE focus with a little PvP 34.8%
    Equal focus on both 34.2%

    Overall, at least on this site, PvE content is considered more important, regardless of the game. It's not likely that the people on this site are going to get behind the idea of a PvP focused EQN. That doesn't mean EQN won't be PvP focused, but the preference on this site is going to be PvE, not PvP.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • AkerbeltzAkerbeltz Vitoria-GasteizPosts: 161Member Uncommon

    Above all, I'm a roleplayer. In this sense, I cannot conceive a game that calls itself mmoRPG without open world PvP.

     

    I see that much more often than desired people associate OWPvP with combat exclusively, which is quite short sighted in my view. OWPvP and sandbox foundations provide the only viable way of long-term enjoyment and longevity without falling in the "power-creep" and "gear-treadmill" pits: that is player generated content a/o plots.

     

    The decadence of mmorpg, among other things, started with the segregation of PVE and PvP and its consolidation as an standard among gamers (very especially among the ones that are not oldskool RPs a/o started in the genre in the post WoW-BC era, after all they haven't known any other model. Oh, and the so-called casuals).

     

    When you segregate PVE and PvP a game stops being RPG, automatically, to become another thing. In my view, none of the so-called MMORPGs have been RPGs, they are more like easy mode arcades through "images in motion" with a collection of PvP instanced battlegrounds and a chat. Definitely, taking casual for plain "stupid" and "lazy" has done a lot of damage to the genre; and worst than that, a large portion of the public accepting that as normal and even nice. You could be a casual in the UO days too (I was one), some people tend to forget that...

     

    Anyway, I accept that for the sake of the casuals' money some compromise must be made. My bet would be PvP flag/unflag system in a "lame" server. I mean, a "casual" or "ezymode" server. No segregation. Please. We've had enough of that crap. I hope Smed is suggesting something like this in his quote.

     

    By the way, I take advantage of the situation to announce how sick I am of the "ganking hysteria". In spite of having been more of a victim than a perpetrator, I never understood all this drama. In my UO days, I remember me and other guys being harassed by a bunch of nasty sons of a bleep in the Jelom area, we would join muscle to counterattack, make a roleplay plot and all, pay them back and loot their stinking corpses. We got to be friends and even got to befriend the "gankers" and prepare RPG events with them. Those were the days were the trend was to be sociable and look for sinergies to solve your particular in-game "problems" and not expect the devs to dumb down or segregate game systems.

     

    And don't take my post badly, I know I might be the last of a dying breed...

     

    Regards

     

     

     

     

    Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

  • DullahanDullahan Posts: 2,059Member Uncommon

    Is this thread really still going?  Its called a conjecture people, and it was a really bad one.


  • DejoblueDejoblue Youngstown, OHPosts: 296Member Uncommon
    Looks like SOE is pointing us in this direction, heh. They are sending EQ forum posters to this thread.
     
    EQ Community Manager Dexella "There's actually a discussion about PvP in EverQuest Next going on at MMORPG (which you can read here).
     
  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by dejoblue
    Looks like SOE is pointing us in this direction, heh. They are sending EQ forum posters to this thread.   EQ Community Manager Dexella "There's actually a discussion about PvP in EverQuest Next going on at MMORPG (which you can read here).   Source: https://forums.station.sony.com/eq/index.php?threads/smed-co-betraying-the-core-esense-of-eq.200903/page-5

    VICTORY!

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • BenediktBenedikt PraguePosts: 1,406Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Ecoces
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by adderVXI
    Why cant we just have a flagging system like SWG was?  All those people wanting the pvp excitement can have it.  That would cut out the killing of level 2 people in starter areas though which is perhaps the real goal. 

    Many of us would like that or separate rule set servers but the PvP crowd, by and large, will never meet In the middle.  For that demographic it is either their way or the highway.

    Same could be said for PvEers, Sandbox gamers, themepark gamers... wait thats seems to be the way gamers are.

    Exactly...

    actually thats not true at all, many PVE'rs and Consensual PVP supporters im sure would be fine with giving FFA PVPers a separate server so they can enjoy themselves.

     

    in fact this HAS been brought up many times in this thread and others on this very forum, yet what is the typical response? "oh separate servers mean the PVP is tacked on and that sucks so no thanks".

     

    PVE'rs and Consensual PVPers are open to compromise, its the FFA PVPers that want everyone to be killable at anytime and thats it everything else is tacked on PVP.

    According to THIS poll, almost 40% of gamers dont want PvP to be in the game in any form, my guess that would be your easy going PvEers. Not that I blame them as PvP of any form means classes and skills balanced for PvP and that steps on the toes of PvE gamers. Gamers like what they like and we all are a picky bunch.

    only difference is that if you tell those 40% of gamers "ok, we will go with separate pvp and pve servers and with pve and pvp versions of skills and spells, so they can be balanced independently", i am pretty sure they will be absolutely ok with that, while if you say that to the ffa crowd, they will refuse. why? because they know that population of ffa servers will be a lot lower if there are also pve or consensual pvp servers.

Sign In or Register to comment.