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!

We don't need anymore PvP focused sandbox mmos right now.

1246728

Comments

  • TrykenTryken Ultima Online Correspondent Orlando, FLPosts: 63Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Tryken

     

    That's where Ultima shines. You don't feel like a certain aspect of the game is shoved down your throat. In a lot of the newer, PvP-centric games, PvP feels like this very dominating part of the gameplay. And although I'm going to get hate for this, I think both EVE Online and Felucca/Trammel solve these issues.

    Tell that to the newbies who got ganked the second they logged onto the game.

    Ahoy. If you read down my post you'll see I'm talking about post Trammel/Felucca (the two mirror worlds where one is PvP open and the other is not). New players start in Haven.

    You're talking about before that, in which case, you'd be spot on.

  • maplestonemaplestone Ottawa, ONPosts: 3,099Member
    There are already many games I am not playing.  It does not matter to me if there are a few more that I am not playing.
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by Torik
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by Benedikt

    FREEDOM of choice = having a choice to not PVP at all

    i would like to have the "freedom" to dont be shooted by robbers, dont be harmed by car crashes and to float at will...

     

     

    I think you guys have a weird interpretation of the word "freedom".

     

     

     

    There must be hundreds of games where you are not harmed by car crashes and/or you can float at will.  The "not be shot by robbers" part is harder to find examples for since this is one thing most games tend to model more or less realistically if it is part of the game.   Once you realize that you are coding a game, it is easy to put in plenty of "freedoms" that are not available in RL.

    These games aren't real or intended "sandboxes". I was talking only about sandboxes mmos.

     

     

    In that case, you are saying sandbox MMOs take freedom away from players. Why is that a good thing?

    These things aren't "freedom".

     

     

    Choices are not freedom?

    Let's be specific and not play the semantic game. why is taking the choice of pvp away from the players a good thing?

  • BenediktBenedikt PraguePosts: 1,406Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by Benedikt

    FREEDOM of choice = having a choice to not PVP at all

    i would like to have the "freedom" to dont be shooted by robbers, dont be harmed by car crashes and to float at will...

     

    I think you guys have a weird interpretation of the word "freedom".

    freedom of choice was direct quotation from the post i was quoting

     

    do you think that your choice to attack me should trumph my choice of not pvp?

  • BenediktBenedikt PraguePosts: 1,406Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    The freedom of not pvp at all is a lot cheaper to provide than what you want .. and a free market almost guarantee that demand will be filled.

    It's because sandboxes dont usually comes with less amount of realistic mechanics, but with more. And these cuts aren't usually called "freedom", but restrictions/limitations.

    A pure semantic question here. 

    you think that being able to attack anyone anywhere with no or almost no consequences (and yes, consequences which are put into the games with mild exceptions of AoW so far are almost nonexisting) is "realistic"?

    yeah, right.

    you know what, if the game will have realistic consequences (like murderer will be hunted by every npc and pc (if they decide so) in game and when cought,  he will be put in jail for RL years), i will gladly play it.

  • maccarthur2004maccarthur2004 SPosts: 510Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by Torik
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by Benedikt

    FREEDOM of choice = having a choice to not PVP at all

    i would like to have the "freedom" to dont be shooted by robbers, dont be harmed by car crashes and to float at will...

     

     

    I think you guys have a weird interpretation of the word "freedom".

     

     

     

    There must be hundreds of games where you are not harmed by car crashes and/or you can float at will.  The "not be shot by robbers" part is harder to find examples for since this is one thing most games tend to model more or less realistically if it is part of the game.   Once you realize that you are coding a game, it is easy to put in plenty of "freedoms" that are not available in RL.

    These games aren't real or intended "sandboxes". I was talking only about sandboxes mmos.

     

     

    In that case, you are saying sandbox MMOs take freedom away from players. Why is that a good thing?

    These things aren't "freedom".

     

     

    Choices are not freedom?

    Let's be specific and not play the semantic game. why is taking the choice of pvp away from the players a good thing?

    Some things aren't "choices", but reality. Sandboxes try to simulate reality.

    "What we are aiming in ArcheAge is to let the players feel the true fun of MMORPG by forming a community like real life by interacting with other players, whether it be conflict or cooperation." (Jake Song)

    image
  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Benedikt
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004 Originally posted by nariusseldon The freedom of not pvp at all is a lot cheaper to provide than what you want .. and a free market almost guarantee that demand will be filled.
    It's because sandboxes dont usually comes with less amount of realistic mechanics, but with more. And these cuts aren't usually called "freedom", but restrictions/limitations. A pure semantic question here. 
    you think that being able to attack anyone anywhere with no or almost no consequences (and yes, consequences which are put into the games with mild exceptions of AoW so far are almost nonexisting) is "realistic"?

    yeah, right.

    you know what, if the game will have realistic consequences (like murderer will be hunted by every npc and pc (if they decide so) in game and when cought,  he will be put in jail for RL years), i will gladly play it.




    I thought it would be neat if there were godlike entities in the world who would keep a tally of what players did, and gradually start interfering with the player's life through their priests. Players would never see the in game entities, the effects would just start adding up. Then I went off on a tangent about how the godlike entities would interact with each other, and how the players could indirectly interact with the entities and ended with a nap because in my head the game was awesome and there's nothing more relaxing than creating the best game ever in your head.

    Anyway, the problem with what you're saying is that the players who want the FFA PvP thing don't generally want their own "freedom" infringed, so the jail thing probably wouldn't sell.

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

  • maccarthur2004maccarthur2004 SPosts: 510Member
    Originally posted by Benedikt
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by Benedikt

    FREEDOM of choice = having a choice to not PVP at all

    i would like to have the "freedom" to dont be shooted by robbers, dont be harmed by car crashes and to float at will...

     

    I think you guys have a weird interpretation of the word "freedom".

    freedom of choice was direct quotation from the post i was quoting

     

    do you think that your choice to attack me should trumph my choice of not pvp?

     

    No. I am saying that mechanical reality (thing that sandboxes pursue) trumph over personal desires.

    "What we are aiming in ArcheAge is to let the players feel the true fun of MMORPG by forming a community like real life by interacting with other players, whether it be conflict or cooperation." (Jake Song)

    image
  • maccarthur2004maccarthur2004 SPosts: 510Member
    Originally posted by Benedikt
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    The freedom of not pvp at all is a lot cheaper to provide than what you want .. and a free market almost guarantee that demand will be filled.

    It's because sandboxes dont usually comes with less amount of realistic mechanics, but with more. And these cuts aren't usually called "freedom", but restrictions/limitations.

    A pure semantic question here. 

    you think that being able to attack anyone anywhere with no or almost no consequences (and yes, consequences which are put into the games with mild exceptions of AoW so far are almost nonexisting) is "realistic"?[/quote]

     

    No. The actions should have realistic consequences, like in AoW or L2. The mmos without realistic consequences to mindless murders are either flawed or trying to simulate a pure anarchic world.

     

    yeah, right.

    you know what, if the game will have realistic consequences (like murderer will be hunted by every npc and pc (if they decide so) in game and when cought,  he will be put in jail for RL years), i will gladly play it.

    The punishment should be proportional to the harms caused. It's nonsense punish ingame murderers with RL penaltys if the victims dont suffer RL loses.

     

     

     

     

    "What we are aiming in ArcheAge is to let the players feel the true fun of MMORPG by forming a community like real life by interacting with other players, whether it be conflict or cooperation." (Jake Song)

    image
  • BenediktBenedikt PraguePosts: 1,406Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by Benedikt
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by Benedikt

    FREEDOM of choice = having a choice to not PVP at all

    i would like to have the "freedom" to dont be shooted by robbers, dont be harmed by car crashes and to float at will...

     

    I think you guys have a weird interpretation of the word "freedom".

    freedom of choice was direct quotation from the post i was quoting

     

    do you think that your choice to attack me should trumph my choice of not pvp?

     

    No. I am saying that mechanical reality (thing that sandboxes pursue) trumph over personal desires.

    nothing about ffa pvp in pernament world is realistic - do you see a lot of killing on the RL streets? i so far in my mid lenghted life didnt see single murder.

    does it also mean that:

    there should not be any magic in sanbox.

    anytime you die, it should be pernament.

    even a wolf (not to mention bear etc) should kill you in more then 50% of cases.

    growing plants should take months.

    it should take you 10+ minutes to put on plate armor and you should be extremely tired after only tens of minutes of walking in it.

    you should take crap at least twice a day and sleep for cca 8 hrs a day.

    etc etc etc.

     

    please stop telling me what is "realistic" in games.

  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,903Member Uncommon
    The title should read we don't need anymore badly implemented PVP focused MMO's right now. We sure as hell need a well thought out implementation of it in a sandbox game aside from EVE. If you don't want to play as a ship you have no options at all for that.

    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

  • BenediktBenedikt PraguePosts: 1,406Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004

    yeah, right.

    you know what, if the game will have realistic consequences (like murderer will be hunted by every npc and pc (if they decide so) in game and when cought,  he will be put in jail for RL years), i will gladly play it.

    The punishment should be proportional to the harms caused. It's nonsense punish ingame murderers with RL penaltys if the victims dont suffer RL loses.

     

    it is no more RL penalty then it is RL lose. RL penalty would be if i wanted you (the player) to go to RL jail for in-game murder. nothing inproportional about in-game jailtime.

  • maccarthur2004maccarthur2004 SPosts: 510Member
    Originally posted by Benedikt
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by Benedikt
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by Benedikt

    FREEDOM of choice = having a choice to not PVP at all

    i would like to have the "freedom" to dont be shooted by robbers, dont be harmed by car crashes and to float at will...

     

    I think you guys have a weird interpretation of the word "freedom".

    freedom of choice was direct quotation from the post i was quoting

     

    do you think that your choice to attack me should trumph my choice of not pvp?

     

    No. I am saying that mechanical reality (thing that sandboxes pursue) trumph over personal desires.

    nothing about ffa pvp in pernament world is realistic - do you see a lot of killing in the RL streets? i so far in my mid lengthed life didnt see single murder.

    does it also mean that:

    there should not be any magic in sanbox.

    anytime you die, it should be pernament.

    even a wolf (not to mention bear etc) should kill you in more then 50% of cases.

    growing plants should take months.

    it should take you 10+ minutes to wear plate armor and you should be extremely tired after only tens of minutes of walking in it.

    you should take crap at least twice a day and sleep for cca 8 hrs a day.

    etc etc etc.

     

    please stop telling me what is "realistic" in games.

    These things (with exception of magic, that are a addition and not a cut) are the the best way to simulate mechanical realism in sandboxes, inside its time/space scale (e.g: 1 ingame hour = 5 RL minutes). Some things can be only consequences of you being in a different world with different creatures.

     

     

     

     

    "What we are aiming in ArcheAge is to let the players feel the true fun of MMORPG by forming a community like real life by interacting with other players, whether it be conflict or cooperation." (Jake Song)

    image
  • maccarthur2004maccarthur2004 SPosts: 510Member
    Originally posted by Benedikt
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004

    yeah, right.

    you know what, if the game will have realistic consequences (like murderer will be hunted by every npc and pc (if they decide so) in game and when cought,  he will be put in jail for RL years), i will gladly play it.

    The punishment should be proportional to the harms caused. It's nonsense punish ingame murderers with RL penaltys if the victims dont suffer RL loses.

     

    it is no more RL penalty then it is RL lose. RL penalty would be if i wanted you (the player) to go to RL jail for in-game murder. nothing inproportional about in-game jailtime.

    You didn't understand. I said it's nonsense give a character 1 month of suspension (RL time) if his victim lost only 10 minutes of RL time in exp, itens, money, cooldown and so on.

    "What we are aiming in ArcheAge is to let the players feel the true fun of MMORPG by forming a community like real life by interacting with other players, whether it be conflict or cooperation." (Jake Song)

    image
  • DamonVileDamonVile Vancouver, BCPosts: 4,818Member
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004

     

    No. I am saying that mechanical reality (thing that sandboxes pursue) trumph over personal desires.

    Sandbox is about build not simulating reality. PvP has nothing to do with a game being a sandbox or not. Many use it as "content" but it doesn't define it as such.

    The choice to pvp in a sandbox game is just that, something the devs either let you do or they don't. Any argument that a game has to have ffa pvp  or non-consesual pvp is just someone trying to get their own way. And quite frankly " if it isn't my way it's not a real sandbox" is a really lame argument to try and make.

  • BenediktBenedikt PraguePosts: 1,406Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by Benedikt
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004

    yeah, right.

    you know what, if the game will have realistic consequences (like murderer will be hunted by every npc and pc (if they decide so) in game and when cought,  he will be put in jail for RL years), i will gladly play it.

    The punishment should be proportional to the harms caused. It's nonsense punish ingame murderers with RL penaltys if the victims dont suffer RL loses.

     

    it is no more RL penalty then it is RL lose. RL penalty would be if i wanted you (the player) to go to RL jail for in-game murder. nothing inproportional about in-game jailtime.

    You didn't understand. I said it's nonsense give a character 1 month of suspension (RL time) if his victim lost only 10 minutes of RL time in exp, itens, money, cooldown and so on.

    do you know what repeated offense is? :)

    (not to mention that even in rl the punishment is often more harsh then the crime, to "scare off" people thinking about commiting one (e.g. in US stealing 5k+ can get you up to 10 years in prison, without repeated offense, in countries with sharia law they would cut your hand .... etc)

     

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
         If EQ Next goes with PvP, Count me OUT..  I will not buy the game nor play it..  I refuse to pay to play games that devote any time to PvP..  Why?  Pretty simple.. It's impossible to have balanced PvP while still creating a fun and diverse character classes..  Take EQ for example.. It's impossible for a warrior to win a fight against a Necro, Druid or other kiting type classes..  Imagine an Enchanter that mez's your character for 20 minutes?  I think you get the idea..   
  • VossikVossik yourmoms, ALPosts: 24Member

    The ABSOLUTE LAST thing the mmo market needs is another mmo focused on scripted dungeons you and your friends (or whatever asshat seventeen year old the group finder vomits up)  zerg over and over until you either die of boredom, die of frustration over morons, or get the carrot you've been chasing. Then it's on to the next carrot! Why? To justify losing your soul chasing the last one. 

    NO THANK YOU 

     

     

    image

  • Attend4455Attend4455 BirminghamPosts: 161Member
    Originally posted by Margulis

    There's a lot of debate on the Everquest Next forums about whether the game is going to be heavily PvP focused or not and most of this has stemmed from some comments from Smed  that have insinuated a heavy PvP focus of the game.  To what extent that focus is we won't know until the reveal, but still, it makes me think to myself why even think about going that route?  Pretty much every bigger name sandbox currently available (Darkfall, EVE, Mortal Online, etc) and coming down the pipeline (Archeage, The Repopulation) is PvP focused.  Do we seriously need another one like that?  It's pretty well known PvE focused gamers greatly outnumber PvP focused ones, so why continually churn out games for a niche market while that same market is devoid of products for the bigger (PvE)  population?  Makes no sense........ 

    Ultimately the players will decide whether more pvp focused games are successful.

    Personally I'm not looking at EQN after trying EQ2, doesn't mean either of those games are bad in any way, just that I didn't like EQ2.

    I sometimes make spelling and grammar errors but I don't pretend it's because I'm using a phone

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,643Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones

    Originally posted by Adalwulff
    Funny, I was just reading that thread.

     

    We desperately need more PvP games, but they need to be more like DF:UW or EVE.

    Doesn't mean we cant have good PvE, but there is no substitute for playing against another person. Playing against the computer in Raids or other grind fests, gets old real fast.


    In a theme park, ya, that gets old quick. But we're talking about sandboxes. Sandboxes can encompass a lot of other game play that has nothing to do with PvP, and nothing to do with theme park staples, and is rewarding in itself.

    The PvP thing has been tried and done to death. Maybe it's time for a PvE focused sandbox more along the lines of Minecraft than Call of Duty.

     

    It will do well as long as it isn't pitched to the MMO gamer. For example, to let everyone create without others interfering or destroying, you'd pretty much have to have a worldspace that goes on forever or have instancing. The former would need some form of fast travel and the latter is separate from the main worldspace. Whatever solution is used, it will be rallied against by the heavily invested MMO gamer crowd - the ones that post on forums and other MMO gaming channels. IT'S NOT A REAL MMO MY IMMERSION IS BROKEN RAWR

    Free Realms is a PvE MMO sandbox, but probably not to 'real' MMO gamers who want to be able to crap all over the game world... but don't want to deal with other people's crap.

    Actually, there are lots of PvE focused sandbox style games, but they are targeted toward casuals, kids and Moms.

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • maccarthur2004maccarthur2004 SPosts: 510Member
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004

    1- Devs mindset => The devs with more inclination towards sandbox mmos have a same way of think things that makes they pursuit the maximum of "mechanical realism" in their works. So pvp with artificial and unjustified "invulnerabilities" passes little through their heads. Their focus to prevent abuse is more in creating punishments (trying to imitate the reality) instead of that way.

     

    That reason above can explain the sensation of some PVEers  that some pvp focused mmos have more "cool things" (aside pvp, ofc) than your pve focused mmos they are playing. As a example i will mention the AI of the npcs (mobs) in DFUW: It's almost a consensus that DF has the best mob AI of all mmos. And that is paradoxical, since DF is a pvp focused mmo and "shouldn't" invest so much in mobs. But that investment is only a indirect consequence of the devs mindset of trying to make realistic features. I think if the DF developers had the Archeage or even the EVE's budget, they would make a awesome sandbox.

     

     

    "What we are aiming in ArcheAge is to let the players feel the true fun of MMORPG by forming a community like real life by interacting with other players, whether it be conflict or cooperation." (Jake Song)

    image
  • HorusraHorusra maryland, MDPosts: 2,579Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vossik

    The ABSOLUTE LAST thing the mmo market needs is another mmo focused on scripted dungeons you and your friends (or whatever asshat seventeen year old the group finder vomits up)  zerg over and over until you either die of boredom, die of frustration over morons, or get the carrot you've been chasing. Then it's on to the next carrot! Why? To justify losing your soul chasing the last one. 

    NO THANK YOU 

     

     

    The ABSOLUTE LAST thing the mmo market needs is another mmo focused on ganking for you and your friends (or whatever asshat seventeen year old that wants to feel leet)  camping over and over until you either die of boredom, die of frustration over morons, or get the carrot you've been chasing. Then it's on to the next carrot! Why? To justify losing your soul chasing the last one. 

    NO THANK YOU 

  • Attend4455Attend4455 BirminghamPosts: 161Member
    Originally posted by Horusra
    Originally posted by Vossik

    The ABSOLUTE LAST thing the mmo market needs is another mmo focused on scripted dungeons you and your friends (or whatever asshat seventeen year old the group finder vomits up)  zerg over and over until you either die of boredom, die of frustration over morons, or get the carrot you've been chasing. Then it's on to the next carrot! Why? To justify losing your soul chasing the last one. 

    NO THANK YOU 

     

     

    The ABSOLUTE LAST thing the mmo market needs is another mmo focused on ganking for you and your friends (or whatever asshat seventeen year old that wants to feel leet)  camping over and over until you either die of boredom, die of frustration over morons, or get the carrot you've been chasing. Then it's on to the next carrot! Why? To justify losing your soul chasing the last one. 

    NO THANK YOU 

    Everyone is entitled to their opinion and yours is not worth less than mine. Personally I would prefer the ganking, all that raid boredom, carrot on a stick etc makes my eyes glaze over.

    I sometimes make spelling and grammar errors but I don't pretend it's because I'm using a phone

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Attend4455
     

    Everyone is entitled to their opinion and yours is not worth less than mine. Personally I would prefer the ganking, all that raid boredom, carrot on a stick etc makes my eyes glaze over.

    Just as i would prefer no ganking, and instant dungeon.

    Let's vote with our wallets and time, and let the market decide.

     

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard La BarrePosts: 3,544Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit 

    Free Realms is a PvE MMO sandbox, but probably not to 'real' MMO gamers who want to be able to crap all over the game world... but don't want to deal with other people's crap.

    Come on... Free Realms main problem is that it's aimed for kids. It has nothing to do with the game being PvE oriented.

    Actually, there are lots of PvE focused sandbox style games, but they are targeted toward casuals, kids and Moms.

    You said it. We need a PvE with optional (on player choice) PvP sandbox game that is not focused towards kids and moms. Something like what post-Trammel UO was, but with modern technology, and with a major developer doing it and not some utterly bad amateur developer with an ego bigger than his talent (Darkfall, Mortal...).

    Yes, the actual market lacks such a game. Not everyone wants to play a spaceship in EvE online or is able to be immersed in the really old graphics of UO. Those gamers deserve something modern they can call home.

    Playing now: WoW, Landmark, GW2, The Crew, SotA

    Top 3 MMORPGs played: UO, AC1 and WoW

    Honorable mentions: AO, LotRO, SW:TOR and GW2.

    ----------------

    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn. After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that neither does the ability to write.
    So if you notice that I'm no longer answering your nonsense, stop trying... because you just joined my block list.

Sign In or Register to comment.