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!

SOE is heading in the direction of Eve (And that means open world PVP!)

13468914

Comments

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,262Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by KaosProphet
    Originally posted by syriinx
    Originally posted by SoulTrapOnSelf
    Sandbox.

    I don't even know what the point of this post is.

    Sandbox and PvP are two words which have absolutely no correlation between them.  Saying a game is a sandbox tells you nothing about having PvP of any kind, and saying a game has open world PvP doesnt hint that its a sandbox.

    Not entirely true.  There is, in practice, a strong correlation between 'sandbox' and 'pvp' in online games.  There's no reason why it has to be that way, but there is a history of precedent demonstrating that it usually is - and that's all that 'correlation' means.

    However, 'usually' is not 'always.'  You can have 'sandbox' without 'pvp.'  Not common, but possible.

    I can't think of any pve only sandbox, or pve centric sandbox for that matter.

  • SinellaSinella BudapestPosts: 340Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by bcbully
    Originally posted by KaosProphet
    Originally posted by syriinx
    Originally posted by SoulTrapOnSelf
    Sandbox.

    I don't even know what the point of this post is.

    Sandbox and PvP are two words which have absolutely no correlation between them.  Saying a game is a sandbox tells you nothing about having PvP of any kind, and saying a game has open world PvP doesnt hint that its a sandbox.

    Not entirely true.  There is, in practice, a strong correlation between 'sandbox' and 'pvp' in online games.  There's no reason why it has to be that way, but there is a history of precedent demonstrating that it usually is - and that's all that 'correlation' means.

    However, 'usually' is not 'always.'  You can have 'sandbox' without 'pvp.'  Not common, but possible.

    I can't think of any pve only sandbox, or pve centric sandbox for that matter.

    A Tale in the desert. There is no combat at all in that game.

  • AlleinAllein San Diego, CAPosts: 1,656Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Bidwood
    Originally posted by Iczer

    Point of note is that EVE does in fact have open world pvp but it is far from forced. It is your choice to venture into those dangerous systems of the universe where you could be attacked. If you don't want to get attacked with ease, stick to the areas.

    EVE also has real consequences for pvp actions in those systems that are under police protection. If you attack someone in a protected area of space the NPC cops will be on  you fast and destroy your ship. 

    I like the way you think.

    I think the issue many have is that people like you come off aggressively for no reason "read it and weep." Using OW PVP as a weapon or taunt. You are doing nothing but annoy and anger people, when it would be wiser showing them the way to the promise land.

    OW PVP doesn't mean anything. EVE isn't a FFA OW PVP no consequence game. There are consequences not only by other players, but by the game itself. Obviously there are holes in any system for for the most part EVE does have some sort of structure to PVP.

    I'm not sure how EQN could mimic EVE's system. Find it hard to believe they would cut the world up into PVP or Safe zones that have any meaningful content. Like Freeport is Safe and Lavastorm is PVP. Not a smart move.

    EVE isn't a fantasy rpg and takes place in space. Huge difference in the environment and how things can or can't be cut up to please everyone.

    Even if it was Tier 1-2 is safe, 3-5 is PVP or something like that, a huge amount of unique content would be cut off from too many.

    I see Smedly talking more about how players have more impact on the game in EVE compared to EQ, instead of EQN = EVE. The overall idea or vision and not the literal details.

    Could could as easily talked about SWG and how it's PVP system worked and player impact on the game. It is actually a realistic comparison of how EQN could work. Just because Smedly likes EVE, doesn't mean that he forcing devs to borrow elements from it.

  • AlleinAllein San Diego, CAPosts: 1,656Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by bcbully

    I can't think of any pve only sandbox, or pve centric sandbox for that matter.

    I can't think of any sandbox games... 

    Awesome how we all have our own definitions of everything, yet still try to argue and come to conclusions without any agreement from the start.

    I've seen EQ called a sandbox, it was PVE only for the most part. Then again, I don't consider it a sandbox so the fun continues.

  • RidelynnRidelynn Fresno, CAPosts: 4,171Member Uncommon

    Some people haven't realized that you have to take anything Smedley says, and just ignore it. That dude says whatever he thinks is most popular at the time, and it has absolutely no basis in any form of reality.

    Maybe it will be open world PvP, maybe it won't - but I wouldn't believe the sky is blue if Smedley said so until I saw it for myself.

  • BidwoodBidwood Toronto, ONPosts: 554Member
    not going to ignore Smedley. I love him. he is going to do amazing things to the genre.
  • NotimeforbsNotimeforbs Memphis, TNPosts: 346Member Common
    Originally posted by syriinx
    Originally posted by Bidwood

    Smedley wasn't just writing about what he likes. He explicitly stated "Our belief at SOE is that it’s smarter to head in this direction now rather than waiting." right after talking about Eve Online and how it's a brilliantly executed system.

    No one is ever going to take you seriously when you spout bullshit like this.  You either know you are spouting bullshit (thus trolling), or you are very poor at analyzing things.  You'll notice in the paragraph where he was talking about player driven content, he was talking about things like auction houses, storytelling tools, and player elections.  The only PvP thing he mentioned was battlegrounds.

    In fact, the blog makes open world PvP seem less likely than before because he specifically mentioned battlegrounds.  Yes, he mentioned EvE, but EvE is more than open world PvP.

    I don't really know the history of this entire conversation, and I'm not commenting on that.  But I wanted to point something out:

    EVE Online doesn't really have much outside of open world PvP.  I mean, it does... but the game has PvP at its heart.  Whatever it does have that is PvE, is there for no other reason than to help you obtain some kind of a resource: money, materials, prestige, etc.  The PvE story of the game is pretty much inconsequential to the prospect of allowing Player Interaction, however that may occur.  Every single element of the game is built around the idea that it provides something for the PvP aspect.  The thing about it is, EVE Online takes the idea of what PvP actually means to a whole new level.

    In a standard MMO, PvP generally means when two people engage in combat.  In EVE Online... it's that... plus a whole lot of stuff.  Working the economy is the foundation of the entire game - and it is very much a PvP ordeal.  Gaining territory is a huge deal in that game.  Again, player interaction and PvP.  Placing jobs on the market for others to take.  That's another layer of Player Interaction that develops content on its own - which is what PvP actually means.  Fail to meet that order or somehow screw someone over by not paying, you now have a bounty on your head.  This is again always funneling back to PvP.  No one writes stories about the PvE content, because in comparison... it doesn't even matter.  People write stories about the player interaction, and that's what intrigues people to read about it.  I've read several, and each one is unique and totally inspiring.

    EVE Online is so dramatic and so emotionally invested in by its players because of that foundation that they're not just competing against a computer code.  The risk of doing everything is so high, because everything about the game has you in some way or another dealing with another player.  That allows the player to give out a more honest contextual output.  This is why people play the game, and why currently.... no other MMO really offers a similar experience.

    I think EVE Online hasn't grown because people are turned off by a lot of the interface mechanics of the game.  I think people are genuinely interested in the experience they might have with EVE, but they would rather have that experience with an actual humanistic avatar.  That and the fact that it's a pretty deep and somewhat messy interface with a lot of spreadsheet like stuff going on.

    To be honest - I sincerely believe that those are the only things about EVE Online that keeps it from being the ultimate MMO right now.  And I say that believing it to be the most PvP focused game in every respect of its current incarnation.

    If they allowed you to play an actual character, and run around doing this stuff with a gun and armor or whatever, and then cleaned up the interface a bit... I promise you that it wouldn't be considered a niche game.  The fact that you're in a cockpit of a starship for 95% of the game is the biggest reason why more people don't play EVE Online.  And by more people, I'm talking millions.  It's hard to get attached to something that doesn't have a noticeable personality on it's own.

  • NotimeforbsNotimeforbs Memphis, TNPosts: 346Member Common
    Originally posted by Bidwood
    not going to ignore Smedley. I love him. he is going to do amazing things to the genre.

    And then two years into it, he's going to change his mind and gut the game to make it completely different because what people want is whatever Blizzard is doing in their game.

  • TimothyTierlessTimothyTierless Columnist M, ORPosts: 2,163Member Uncommon
  • nerovipus32nerovipus32 dublinPosts: 2,735Member
    Battlegrounds = death knell for pvp.
  • ThaneThane berlinPosts: 2,230Member Uncommon

    people wanted the sandbox, now they get it?

    let's see if they can handle it in all it's glory, including the gankfest :>

    "I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"

  • Ryoshi1Ryoshi1 Osaka, PAPosts: 139Member
    It should have separate servers PvP and PvE for everyone (I prefer PvP).  In the meantime you can build all you want in eqnl and pvp all you want in day z (ooo so real) :D
  • BidwoodBidwood Toronto, ONPosts: 554Member
    Originally posted by Notimeforbs
    Originally posted by syriinx
    Originally posted by Bidwood

    Smedley wasn't just writing about what he likes. He explicitly stated "Our belief at SOE is that it’s smarter to head in this direction now rather than waiting." right after talking about Eve Online and how it's a brilliantly executed system.

    No one is ever going to take you seriously when you spout bullshit like this.  You either know you are spouting bullshit (thus trolling), or you are very poor at analyzing things.  You'll notice in the paragraph where he was talking about player driven content, he was talking about things like auction houses, storytelling tools, and player elections.  The only PvP thing he mentioned was battlegrounds.

    In fact, the blog makes open world PvP seem less likely than before because he specifically mentioned battlegrounds.  Yes, he mentioned EvE, but EvE is more than open world PvP.

    I don't really know the history of this entire conversation, and I'm not commenting on that.  But I wanted to point something out:

    EVE Online doesn't really have much outside of open world PvP.  I mean, it does... but the game has PvP at its heart.  Whatever it does have that is PvE, is there for no other reason than to help you obtain some kind of a resource: money, materials, prestige, etc.  The PvE story of the game is pretty much inconsequential to the prospect of allowing Player Interaction, however that may occur.  Every single element of the game is built around the idea that it provides something for the PvP aspect.  The thing about it is, EVE Online takes the idea of what PvP actually means to a whole new level.

    In a standard MMO, PvP generally means when two people engage in combat.  In EVE Online... it's that... plus a whole lot of stuff.  Working the economy is the foundation of the entire game - and it is very much a PvP ordeal.  Gaining territory is a huge deal in that game.  Again, player interaction and PvP.  Placing jobs on the market for others to take.  That's another layer of Player Interaction that develops content on its own - which is what PvP actually means.  Fail to meet that order or somehow screw someone over by not paying, you now have a bounty on your head.  This is again always funneling back to PvP.  No one writes stories about the PvE content, because in comparison... it doesn't even matter.  People write stories about the player interaction, and that's what intrigues people to read about it.  I've read several, and each one is unique and totally inspiring.

    EVE Online is so dramatic and so emotionally invested in by its players because of that foundation that they're not just competing against a computer code.  The risk of doing everything is so high, because everything about the game has you in some way or another dealing with another player.  That allows the player to give out a more honest contextual output.  This is why people play the game, and why currently.... no other MMO really offers a similar experience.

    I think EVE Online hasn't grown because people are turned off by a lot of the interface mechanics of the game.  I think people are genuinely interested in the experience they might have with EVE, but they would rather have that experience with an actual humanistic avatar.  That and the fact that it's a pretty deep and somewhat messy interface with a lot of spreadsheet like stuff going on.

    To be honest - I sincerely believe that those are the only things about EVE Online that keeps it from being the ultimate MMO right now.  And I say that believing it to be the most PvP focused game in every respect of its current incarnation.

    If they allowed you to play an actual character, and run around doing this stuff with a gun and armor or whatever, and then cleaned up the interface a bit... I promise you that it wouldn't be considered a niche game.  The fact that you're in a cockpit of a starship for 95% of the game is the biggest reason why more people don't play EVE Online.  And by more people, I'm talking millions.  It's hard to get attached to something that doesn't have a noticeable personality on it's own.

    EXACTLY! I am in love with Eve's game systems but can't get into the look and feel. In a context with an avatar and action combat I would be all over it and so would an army of people.

  • r0guyr0guy ParisPosts: 115Member
    Originally posted by Notimeforbs

    I think EVE Online hasn't grown because people are turned off by a lot of the interface mechanics of the game.  I think people are genuinely interested in the experience they might have with EVE, but they would rather have that experience with an actual humanistic avatar.  That and the fact that it's a pretty deep and somewhat messy interface with a lot of spreadsheet like stuff going on.

    To be honest - I sincerely believe that those are the only things about EVE Online that keeps it from being the ultimate MMO right now.  And I say that believing it to be the most PvP focused game in every respect of its current incarnation.

    If they allowed you to play an actual character, and run around doing this stuff with a gun and armor or whatever, and then cleaned up the interface a bit... I promise you that it wouldn't be considered a niche game.  The fact that you're in a cockpit of a starship for 95% of the game is the biggest reason why more people don't play EVE Online.  And by more people, I'm talking millions.  It's hard to get attached to something that doesn't have a noticeable personality on it's own.

     I think that you're being way too generous to Eve Online. The success of Day Z (with it's horrible interface) and Star Citizen (lack of "humanistic avatar") seem to show that those things arn't deal breakers.

    Eve PVP is great because of the impact it has on politics, the economy, crafting, territory and RolePlay. As gameplay Mechanics go, It has alot of issues that I'm amazed they havn't even bothered trying to fix during the last 10 years.

    Rock-paper-scissors balancing, repetitive and skilless gameplay (target > set optimal orbit > activate high slots > activate med slots), drop down menus and double click movement, all combat revolves around gate-camping for hours on end, disposable alts that negate all death penalties, weird combat mechanics based on transversal velocities instead of the better shield/weapon/energy/positioning management systems from star trek or star wars games, bad balance between harshness of death penalties and ease of avoiding combat with hiding in stations and watching TV until threats get bored and go away, log-off exploits, safespots, warp-core stabilisers... And all that is just off the top of my head.

    I'm happy that Eve online is there to show how PVP can improve all other facets in a game, but if Star Citizen or Elite Dangerous manage to deliver on half of what they are promising, CCP are going to get a swift kick in the teeth.

     

  • dontadowdontadow Detroit, MIPosts: 1,044Member
    Originally posted by Allein

    I would love to see an EVE or "realistic" approach to PVP and player control of the world. At the same time I"m not holding my breath. Smed can say what he wants, but at the end of the day someone else is fronting the bill and expect results. EVE wasn't/isn't a smash hit. If Sony is willing to let EQN grow and develop into something amazing, we are going to have a great game. If they want X players after Y days, we might be in trouble.

    Really don't want to see "just" open world PVP. Yay, I can kill you... There needs to be reason, consequence, and lasting impact from conflict between guilds, cities, players, and whatever factions we create ourselves. No, I hate you because you picked Ogre 5 years ago.

    I think the reason so many dislike PVP is because it is generally pointless and only rewards those that want to screw with others. There needs to be incentives and some form of structure beyond simply flipping the PVP switch. FFA is fun for a time, but never works out in the long run. EVE has a nice balance, but it is also a completely different beast. What works in one game has no impact on another.

    Hoping Landmark gets some sort of "PVP" system to allow for fun conflict and battle which might hopefully lead into the more PVE crowd getting into it leading into EQN. If we are given a lot of freedom within limits, I think players will create a balance to keep jerks in check, while still allowing healthy conflict and competition between players.

    Like I said, not holding my breath, but I am crossing my fingers =)

    Edit: Really want to get away from the whole PVE vs PVP mentality as well. If a game is made well, it should just be everything blended into one experience. A game can cater to almost everyone if done right. When it starts swaying one way or the other, it turns huge numbers of players of way from both sides and gives those like myself that hang out in the middle a crappy experience. I want to enjoy a fully developed PVE world with the ability to battle others "if needed".

    PVP players shouldn't have to go off to a special island to fight nor should it be a meaningless death match or capture the flag. PVP shouldn't be only a side game when bored. PVE players shouldn't have to live in fear of being killed when they have no wish to fight. If the situation arises, they shouldn't be in a lose/lose situation. Hopefully SOE can find that balance.

    As a nonpvper, i agree with this. I don't have a problem with PVP, i have a problem with people thinking that PVP is the answer to everything. If you attack someone in any game, NPC or PC< it needs to be for something or matter. I'm reminded of a story where two soldiers from opposite sides of a war going to the same bar and having drinks afterwards. Most soldiers won't attack someone becasue they are a different race, which is how most games breed PVP. It's not PVP, it's fantasy racism.

    I want a game where if i'm at war with another country, there's are more systems to judge whose winning the war than just who kills more people. I want attrician, supply lines and the ability to put myself into tactically minded PVP and PVE.  I want hte ability to simply cold war my opponents into submission. If someone kills someone, i don't just want penalities, there should be mental isues with killing human beings like yourselfves.

  • SavageHorizonSavageHorizon ParisPosts: 2,062Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Bidwood
    Originally posted by Notimeforbs
    Originally posted by syriinx
    Originally posted by Bidwood

    Smedley wasn't just writing about what he likes. He explicitly stated "Our belief at SOE is that it’s smarter to head in this direction now rather than waiting." right after talking about Eve Online and how it's a brilliantly executed system.

    No one is ever going to take you seriously when you spout bullshit like this.  You either know you are spouting bullshit (thus trolling), or you are very poor at analyzing things.  You'll notice in the paragraph where he was talking about player driven content, he was talking about things like auction houses, storytelling tools, and player elections.  The only PvP thing he mentioned was battlegrounds.

    In fact, the blog makes open world PvP seem less likely than before because he specifically mentioned battlegrounds.  Yes, he mentioned EvE, but EvE is more than open world PvP.

    I don't really know the history of this entire conversation, and I'm not commenting on that.  But I wanted to point something out:

    EVE Online doesn't really have much outside of open world PvP.  I mean, it does... but the game has PvP at its heart.  Whatever it does have that is PvE, is there for no other reason than to help you obtain some kind of a resource: money, materials, prestige, etc.  The PvE story of the game is pretty much inconsequential to the prospect of allowing Player Interaction, however that may occur.  Every single element of the game is built around the idea that it provides something for the PvP aspect.  The thing about it is, EVE Online takes the idea of what PvP actually means to a whole new level.

    In a standard MMO, PvP generally means when two people engage in combat.  In EVE Online... it's that... plus a whole lot of stuff.  Working the economy is the foundation of the entire game - and it is very much a PvP ordeal.  Gaining territory is a huge deal in that game.  Again, player interaction and PvP.  Placing jobs on the market for others to take.  That's another layer of Player Interaction that develops content on its own - which is what PvP actually means.  Fail to meet that order or somehow screw someone over by not paying, you now have a bounty on your head.  This is again always funneling back to PvP.  No one writes stories about the PvE content, because in comparison... it doesn't even matter.  People write stories about the player interaction, and that's what intrigues people to read about it.  I've read several, and each one is unique and totally inspiring.

    EVE Online is so dramatic and so emotionally invested in by its players because of that foundation that they're not just competing against a computer code.  The risk of doing everything is so high, because everything about the game has you in some way or another dealing with another player.  That allows the player to give out a more honest contextual output.  This is why people play the game, and why currently.... no other MMO really offers a similar experience.

    I think EVE Online hasn't grown because people are turned off by a lot of the interface mechanics of the game.  I think people are genuinely interested in the experience they might have with EVE, but they would rather have that experience with an actual humanistic avatar.  That and the fact that it's a pretty deep and somewhat messy interface with a lot of spreadsheet like stuff going on.

    To be honest - I sincerely believe that those are the only things about EVE Online that keeps it from being the ultimate MMO right now.  And I say that believing it to be the most PvP focused game in every respect of its current incarnation.

    If they allowed you to play an actual character, and run around doing this stuff with a gun and armor or whatever, and then cleaned up the interface a bit... I promise you that it wouldn't be considered a niche game.  The fact that you're in a cockpit of a starship for 95% of the game is the biggest reason why more people don't play EVE Online.  And by more people, I'm talking millions.  It's hard to get attached to something that doesn't have a noticeable personality on it's own.

    EXACTLY! I am in love with Eve's game systems but can't get into the look and feel. In a context with an avatar and action combat I would be all over it and so would an army of people.

    So why are you not playing Age Of Wulin? Anyway your prediction about EQNEXT is pretty pathetic considering EQ had open world PVP.  I don't think anyone in this thread is saying EQNEXT won't have some form of PVP or open world PVP servers. You seem to be ignoring this and cherry picking which post you want to answer.

    Coolermaster Cosmos II Case
    Corsair AX1200W Modular PSU
    Intel Core i7 3970X OC 4.50GHz
    Asus P9X79 PRO Intel X7
    16GB (4x4GB) DDR3 PC3-1866MHz
    840 Series 250GB SSDs
    Seagate Barracuda 2TB HDDs
    EVGA SuperClocked GTX TITAN 6GB GDDR5 SLi

  • BidwoodBidwood Toronto, ONPosts: 554Member
    Originally posted by SavageHorizon
    Originally posted by Bidwood
    Originally posted by Notimeforbs
    Originally posted by syriinx
    Originally posted by Bidwood

    Smedley wasn't just writing about what he likes. He explicitly stated "Our belief at SOE is that it’s smarter to head in this direction now rather than waiting." right after talking about Eve Online and how it's a brilliantly executed system.

    No one is ever going to take you seriously when you spout bullshit like this.  You either know you are spouting bullshit (thus trolling), or you are very poor at analyzing things.  You'll notice in the paragraph where he was talking about player driven content, he was talking about things like auction houses, storytelling tools, and player elections.  The only PvP thing he mentioned was battlegrounds.

    In fact, the blog makes open world PvP seem less likely than before because he specifically mentioned battlegrounds.  Yes, he mentioned EvE, but EvE is more than open world PvP.

    I don't really know the history of this entire conversation, and I'm not commenting on that.  But I wanted to point something out:

    EVE Online doesn't really have much outside of open world PvP.  I mean, it does... but the game has PvP at its heart.  Whatever it does have that is PvE, is there for no other reason than to help you obtain some kind of a resource: money, materials, prestige, etc.  The PvE story of the game is pretty much inconsequential to the prospect of allowing Player Interaction, however that may occur.  Every single element of the game is built around the idea that it provides something for the PvP aspect.  The thing about it is, EVE Online takes the idea of what PvP actually means to a whole new level.

    In a standard MMO, PvP generally means when two people engage in combat.  In EVE Online... it's that... plus a whole lot of stuff.  Working the economy is the foundation of the entire game - and it is very much a PvP ordeal.  Gaining territory is a huge deal in that game.  Again, player interaction and PvP.  Placing jobs on the market for others to take.  That's another layer of Player Interaction that develops content on its own - which is what PvP actually means.  Fail to meet that order or somehow screw someone over by not paying, you now have a bounty on your head.  This is again always funneling back to PvP.  No one writes stories about the PvE content, because in comparison... it doesn't even matter.  People write stories about the player interaction, and that's what intrigues people to read about it.  I've read several, and each one is unique and totally inspiring.

    EVE Online is so dramatic and so emotionally invested in by its players because of that foundation that they're not just competing against a computer code.  The risk of doing everything is so high, because everything about the game has you in some way or another dealing with another player.  That allows the player to give out a more honest contextual output.  This is why people play the game, and why currently.... no other MMO really offers a similar experience.

    I think EVE Online hasn't grown because people are turned off by a lot of the interface mechanics of the game.  I think people are genuinely interested in the experience they might have with EVE, but they would rather have that experience with an actual humanistic avatar.  That and the fact that it's a pretty deep and somewhat messy interface with a lot of spreadsheet like stuff going on.

    To be honest - I sincerely believe that those are the only things about EVE Online that keeps it from being the ultimate MMO right now.  And I say that believing it to be the most PvP focused game in every respect of its current incarnation.

    If they allowed you to play an actual character, and run around doing this stuff with a gun and armor or whatever, and then cleaned up the interface a bit... I promise you that it wouldn't be considered a niche game.  The fact that you're in a cockpit of a starship for 95% of the game is the biggest reason why more people don't play EVE Online.  And by more people, I'm talking millions.  It's hard to get attached to something that doesn't have a noticeable personality on it's own.

    EXACTLY! I am in love with Eve's game systems but can't get into the look and feel. In a context with an avatar and action combat I would be all over it and so would an army of people.

    So why are you not playing Age Of Wulin? Anyway your prediction about EQNEXT is pretty pathetic considering EQ had open world PVP.  I don't think anyone in this thread is saying EQNEXT won't have some form of PVP or open world PVP servers. You seem to be ignoring this and cherry picking which post you want to answer.

    Let me be clearer then. I'm not just saying there will be an OWPVP server. That is obvious. I think OWPVP will be the default and 'PVE only' will be a specialty server type, if it exists at all. Smedley seems to think that games like Eve are the only real sustainable type of MMO and SOE is headed there. I have my interpretation. You think it's BS because it hasn't been done by SOE before and spits in the face of conventional wisdom about what works in MMOs. But conventional MMOs aren't working anymore. That's his point. Be prepared for anything.

     

    As for why I'm not playing Age of Wulin. I am sticking to console. So EQN is the holy grail of MMOs headed there.

  • AeliousAelious Portland, ORPosts: 2,853Member Uncommon
    Bidwood

    Having your perspective is great and I can see how you would come to your conclusion based upon what was in Smed's blog. I'm wondering if you really think SoE would be honing it's company to support a universal model that appeals to 20-25% of a potential player base? Going further, with the secret "like SWG" MMO and the two new EQs coming out would they want to compete with themselves like that. They already have PS2, though it's an FPS, so I'm not sure why they would make all follow a OWPvP model and thus shrink thier portfolio.

    They are making big moves like closing 1/2 thier titles, to support the new games they have coming out. Regardless of liking or not liking PvP it leaves the realm of reality IMO for them to force* PvP to a majority of customers that don't want it, especially since they are F2P across the board. I certainly hope they leave more to do in their games than have PvP as the fun thing to do.

    *If content or progression (items included) are behind a requirement to achieve them, players are "forced" to comply. If I want raid gear, I have to raid for example. Locking out areas or giving an advantage to those that PvP forces those that don't want to to engage if they want said advantage. Often the word "encourage" is used but only because it doesn't sounds as bad lol.
  • PhryPhry HampshirePosts: 6,288Member Uncommon
    Seems to me that there is a degree of misunderstanding here, the first one being that 'Sandbox' = 'Open World PvP' and it really doesn't, they really are two completely different things, you can easily have a sandbox game that does not have any PvP in it of any kind. I don't see SOE changing their formula on servers, the default will be PvE and for every 3 of those you might see an RP and a PvP server, and that really is assuming they have a PvP server in the first place. Its good to see more 'Sandbox' features in a game, but i don't think it really helps to confuse 'Sandbox' with PvP, the one is definitely not dependant on the other. image
  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,262Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Phry
    Seems to me that there is a degree of misunderstanding here, the first one being that 'Sandbox' = 'Open World PvP' and it really doesn't, they really are two completely different things, you can easily have a sandbox game that does not have any PvP in it of any kind. I don't see SOE changing their formula on servers, the default will be PvE and for every 3 of those you might see an RP and a PvP server, and that really is assuming they have a PvP server in the first place. Its good to see more 'Sandbox' features in a game, but i don't think it really helps to confuse 'Sandbox' with PvP, the one is definitely not dependant on the other. image

    They are not making a themepark. 

     

    Think politics, territory control, guild wars, alliances in this fully destructable world. 

  • AeliousAelious Portland, ORPosts: 2,853Member Uncommon
    Phry

    I agree and looking back at the blog Smed isn't making that a concrete connection either. This is the whole paragraph that was partially quoted here:

    "In my opinion the solution is focusing a lot more on letting players make and be content for each other. Battlegrounds are an excellent example of an Evergreen style of content where it’s the players themselves that actually create the content. Auction houses are another example. So are things like storytelling tools in SWG.. or the brilliant music system in LOTRO. Building systems into the games that let the players interact with each other in new and unique ways gives us the ability to watch as the players do stuff we never anticipated. We’ll see a lot more creativity in action if the players are at the center of it. Imagine an MMORPG of a massive city.. and the Rogue’s guild is entirely run by players. Where the city has an entire political system that is populated by players who were elected by the playerbase."

    It's not just PvP, it's giving the players an ability to create content. Landmark is starting this already though no mob or quest creation mechanics are in. Does it also mean PvP? Yes and that's a great thing but not only.
  • ReklawReklaw Am.Posts: 6,474Member Uncommon

    SOE is heading in the direction of EVE (And that means open world PVP!)

     

    Hmmm let's hope not. And I doubt it. SOE is a commercial gamecompany. Sure they might have a few niche targetted games but I doubt they ae going to use their biggest IP for niche players.

    I think OP's best bet will be Indie/Kickstarter/Early Acces games, just don't count on a commercial game company to create a open world PVP game. Unless it's like a flag system which to me is the only way open world PVP will work for the masses both old school as new players.

  • GruugGruug Chillicothe, ILPosts: 1,311Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Bidwood

    Read it and weep. I've been a broken record on this, but the writing on the wall says there's going to be open world PVP in a brilliantly executed system like Eve Online.

    Smedley's blog post covers a lot, but here are some of the highlights:

    "A lot has been made about how much we’re pushing this concept of “Sandbox” mmos being the future. Not a lot has been said about what that means."

    "In my opinion the solution is focusing a lot more on letting players make and be content for each other. Battlegrounds are an excellent example of an Evergreen style of content where it’s the players themselves that actually create the content. ... Building systems into the games that let the players interact with each other in new and unique ways gives us the ability to watch as the players do stuff we never anticipated. We’ll see a lot more creativity in action if the players are at the center of it. Imagine an MMORPG of a massive city.. and the Rogue’s guild is entirely run by players. Where the city has an entire political system that is populated by players who were elected by the playerbase."

    "There’s a great example of this today with Eve Online. It’s a brilliantly executed system where the players are pretty much in charge of the entire game. Sure there is a lot of content for players to do, but anything that’s important in the game is done by the players. This is a shining example of how this kind of system can thrive.

    Our belief at SOE is that it’s smarter to head in this direction now rather than waiting."

    Is anyone from the other side of the fence ready to admit this is happening?

    Edit: Sorry, that was bad form. Here is the blog post:

    http://smedsblog.com/2014/02/11/the-sandbox-mmo/

     

    Edit:

     

    Me:

    @j_smedley love the blog. is SOE heading in that direction for PVP too? When will we learn more about that? Fingers crossed.

    Smedley:

    @sir_bidwood yes

     

    Read between the lines much. Neither the blog nor  the two Twitter post you posted mention anything about OPEN WORLD pvp. The context of the post was more along the lines of freedom of content  creation to the players without intervention from the developers. In a nutshell, that does not mean it applies to what you might call "freedom to gank" by players. Go back and ask Smed if he intends to introduce total free form pvp (open world) or not. I bet his answer would be totally different.

     

    Let's party like it is 1863!

  • flizzerflizzer Manchester, NHPosts: 1,550Member Uncommon
    What a horrible design decision that would be.  Talk about insuring Everquest Next fails .   Now having some PvP and allowing PvE players to do their thing in peace is another matter.   
  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,262Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by flizzer
    What a horrible design decision that would be.  Talk about insuring Everquest Next fails .   Now having some PvP and allowing PvE players to do their thing in peace is another matter.   

    They are not making a themepark. I know that is your only frame of reference, but hang in there you will like what they do ;)

13468914
Sign In or Register to comment.