You guys are right, Mature players play wow, war or other wow clones. The problem is that earth rise will be just like them, but the only different is that it will be a shooter. So the only way it can succeed is if it can compete with the other wow clones.
this made me lol seeing as WoW has 10 year olds playing.... When mortal online will come out, a lot of players will play it because it will be the most different mmorpg. Plus, there is no grind if you readed about it. You max in 2 weeks and do what ever you want after. For the players who dont like pvp, dont worry, there is a perfect flagging system done way better then darkfall online.
not sure about maxing in 2 weeks, but i will play this one, for it resembles elder scrolls oblivion, which i loved. At the end of the day or year for an mmorpg since the long term is what its all about, fallen earth will have to keep up on adding content like new dungeons and dungeons and dungeons and dungeons.What else? If they dont update too fast and we know they are not rich like wow to update that fast, the power lvl players, the players who buy the game early will quit early just after they finish to do all the quest they can do. An other problem is that in those pve focus games, some want to grind. Adding more content add more grind. Newbs will get sick of grinding while the others will keep up. If the devs update too fast or are not too fast, newbs will swtich game. ubers will also swtich game to play a game with more content.
this fact holds true for ANY mmo For earth rise, i dont see pvp a way to keep players playing for ever. thats what an mmorpg is about. Not getting the most subscribers possible for the 1st months, but keep them in the game for ever. Age of conan had a lot of subs at the beggining and dropped to 70k. What if they still dropping.
AoC is a poor example, the launch was flawed from the start, same as vanguard. Most of them might go back to wow or other clones. Because once fallen earth is not better, they will go back to a better one. fallen earth is more sandboxy then WoW, targeted at a different audience. I don't like it, but it does not mean i will turn to a "WoW clone" which is a term you are severly over using Most of the DF players will join MO because i see most of them in the MO foruma already. A game like MO dont need to add dungeons after dungeons after dungeons or whatever since we the players update the game. Politic , war, what ever. all i have seen in the MO forums from DF players is a lot of whining about the PVP system, so i believe the majority of them will stay in DF.
" If you make a 18+ mmorpg relate for mature, the rules is to make it a sandbox world, full loot and open pvp"
Excuse me, but wtf are you smoking? Full loot and open PvP is for mature people?
Did you take a look at DFs population? It's full of immature teenagers acting in the worst possible way imaginable.
I didnt said that Darkfall was good either. In faq, i hate darkfall online. Why? The pvp is the most sucky pvp i never did. You mash and mash and mash anything and at the end, combat are boring. 1on1 could last like 5 to 10 boring minutes. I mean one on one only. A war could last more then 20-30 boring minutes and the whole game is not fun.
Full loot is well placed. Open world pvp and the huge world is well placed too. Thats why the game is still alive, but the combat system sux and i dont play that game anymore. The main reason why i dont play is because it promote macroers, no life grinders. I grind on my job. Not in a game so i left.
like i said, i dont play mmorpg's at the moment because i play multiplayer fps games like battlefield 2. I play a game for pvp only. nothing else, but if i play an mmorpg, dont want to get the same feeling like when i play battlefield 2. I want to get more immersed in an other world that have kind of the same risk vs reward as real life without permanent death, jail or stuff that we dont want to go trought in real life like our parents in that world lol.
Anyway, what i dislike the most like i said is that grind. in mortal online, i heard that after 2 weeks, you can max your primary skills that will make you be ready for pvp. Then, i will join a clan and getting back my gears after death wont be a grind i bet. It wont be boring either and MO is not base on grind, but on player skills.
Basically, an mmorpg made for me is a sandbox world, full loot, good politic, immersion, open pvp, and before that, the less grind possible so i can be competitive at pvp faster.
You guys are right, Mature players play wow, war or other wow clones. The problem is that earth rise will be just like them, but the only different is that it will be a shooter. So the only way it can succeed is if it can compete with the other wow clones.
this made me lol seeing as WoW has 10 year olds playing.... When mortal online will come out, a lot of players will play it because it will be the most different mmorpg. Plus, there is no grind if you readed about it. You max in 2 weeks and do what ever you want after. For the players who dont like pvp, dont worry, there is a perfect flagging system done way better then darkfall online.
not sure about maxing in 2 weeks, but i will play this one, for it resembles elder scrolls oblivion, which i loved. At the end of the day or year for an mmorpg since the long term is what its all about, fallen earth will have to keep up on adding content like new dungeons and dungeons and dungeons and dungeons.What else? If they dont update too fast and we know they are not rich like wow to update that fast, the power lvl players, the players who buy the game early will quit early just after they finish to do all the quest they can do. An other problem is that in those pve focus games, some want to grind. Adding more content add more grind. Newbs will get sick of grinding while the others will keep up. If the devs update too fast or are not too fast, newbs will swtich game. ubers will also swtich game to play a game with more content.
this fact holds true for ANY mmo For earth rise, i dont see pvp a way to keep players playing for ever. thats what an mmorpg is about. Not getting the most subscribers possible for the 1st months, but keep them in the game for ever. Age of conan had a lot of subs at the beggining and dropped to 70k. What if they still dropping.
AoC is a poor example, the launch was flawed from the start, same as vanguard. Most of them might go back to wow or other clones. Because once fallen earth is not better, they will go back to a better one. fallen earth is more sandboxy then WoW, targeted at a different audience. I don't like it, but it does not mean i will turn to a "WoW clone" which is a term you are severly over using Most of the DF players will join MO because i see most of them in the MO foruma already. A game like MO dont need to add dungeons after dungeons after dungeons or whatever since we the players update the game. Politic , war, what ever. all i have seen in the MO forums from DF players is a lot of whining about the PVP system, so i believe the majority of them will stay in DF.
If you readed that quote or you are about to read it, replace earth rise with fallen earth please. It was my mistake because those 2 named kind of the same.
When i 1st heard about fallen earth, i thought it was the game that could replace darkfall online and compute vs mortal online. After i checked their forum, i made a post with some question. I heard that it was not a sandbox game, i heard that it was pve over pvp and 1/3 zone of the whole world is where you can pvp only. Just like the wildness from runescape, but without full loot. So pvp in that game will be a grind like wow or a quake war. I think this game will stay at a low number of subs. Its a game for 18+ so dont expect kids to play. You knew that most of the followers would be aldult so why dont you want to follow the old days? If you make a 18+ mmorpg relate for mature, the rules is to make it a sandbox world, full loot and open pvp. Without that, kids wont even play it because their parents wont buy it for them. The adult wont play it because they are too hold to go on. They want the same fun was before and me either. And when kids will be 18+, they would be too old to play the same kind of mmorpg so they would want to try something else like mortal online or darkfall online. Fallen earth, you going down. About me, i never played UO in my life or archeron call and eve online, but i did try Darkfall online. At the moment, its the best mmorpg out there, but since its not a rich company, there is a lot of problem and that kept me away from that game. Because of that, i dont play mmorpg anymore. So with that faq, i believe that once an open pvp sandbox full loot game without glitch, fast paced enough, to date will be out, i think this game will be very popular and darkfall online is already doing good with their subs. I still love you fallout 3.
dude learn to spell and get your grammar right....all this did was give me a headache
Full loot pvp is awful for business. The previous poster summed it up nicely.
EVE disproved this statement. full loot when done right has been successful. its just done wrong most of the time.
Full loot isn't Eve, where do you get that idea from? Unless the person ejects of course, but that's rare.
Eve has insurance, while it may not cover nearly enough, it does cover some. And most of the "loot" is destroyed when the ship dies, not left on the corpse (wreck).
And of course, Eve PvP is mostly a gank fest, with the stupid rule of "Not Blue Shoot It" being the norm, and the average fight being between 1 person and many.
I don't know why people are saying Fallen Earth decided to "take out" full loot PvP.
I was following Fallen Earth since very early / pre-beta and there was never an intention to have full loot pvp. The idea kept being dredged up by 16 year old cry babies who have no clue how to make a game that people actually want to play. But the dev's themselves never endorsed it. The Devs did say they would consider it, but they indicated that they would do it.
And I think this is a wise decision. Full Loot PvP games aren't really fun to play. As noted even EvE isn't really full loot PvP.
Fallen Earth looks like a good game to me and I think they made the right decision not to give in to a few forum idiots who wanted full loot pvp.
I don't know why people are saying Fallen Earth decided to "take out" full loot PvP.
I was following Fallen Earth since very early / pre-beta and there was never an intention to have full loot pvp. The idea kept being dredged up by 16 year old cry babies who have no clue how to make a game that people actually want to play. But the dev's themselves never endorsed it. The Devs did say they would consider it, but they indicated that they would do it. And I think this is a wise decision. Full Loot PvP games aren't really fun to play. As noted even EvE isn't really full loot PvP. Fallen Earth looks like a good game to me and I think they made the right decision not to give in to a few forum idiots who wanted full loot pvp.
How do you know that a full loot game is not fun to play when? I never played eve online. You think its not fun because the best the devs who start with less money add full loot option. Many who got money or should i say all of them dont make their games open world pvp and full loot. Only small budget company. Even mortal online is a small budget company so it also have some chance to failed just like darkfall online.
If some mainstream rich company would want to try to add full loot open world pvp and the less grind possible so we could jump on the game at once, i bet one of these game would actually work and maintain a large number of subs.
" If you make a 18+ mmorpg relate for mature, the rules is to make it a sandbox world, full loot and open pvp"
Excuse me, but wtf are you smoking? Full loot and open PvP is for mature people?
Did you take a look at DFs population? It's full of immature teenagers acting in the worst possible way imaginable.
I didnt said that Darkfall was good either. In faq, i hate darkfall online. Why? The pvp is the most sucky pvp i never did. You mash and mash and mash anything and at the end, combat are boring. 1on1 could last like 5 to 10 boring minutes. I mean one on one only. A war could last more then 20-30 boring minutes and the whole game is not fun.
Full loot is well placed. Open world pvp and the huge world is well placed too. Thats why the game is still alive, but the combat system sux and i dont play that game anymore. The main reason why i dont play is because it promote macroers, no life grinders. I grind on my job. Not in a game so i left.
like i said, i dont play mmorpg's at the moment because i play multiplayer fps games like battlefield 2. I play a game for pvp only. nothing else, but if i play an mmorpg, dont want to get the same feeling like when i play battlefield 2. I want to get more immersed in an other world that have kind of the same risk vs reward as real life without permanent death, jail or stuff that we dont want to go trought in real life like our parents in that world lol.
Anyway, what i dislike the most like i said is that grind. in mortal online, i heard that after 2 weeks, you can max your primary skills that will make you be ready for pvp. Then, i will join a clan and getting back my gears after death wont be a grind i bet. It wont be boring either and MO is not base on grind, but on player skills.
Basically, an mmorpg made for me is a sandbox world, full loot, good politic, immersion, open pvp, and before that, the less grind possible so i can be competitive at pvp faster.
Im sorry for you, because you are looking for a game in the wrong genre. None of what you want is part of the basic concept of a MMORPG, its only fluff that could be put in one, but not need to be a part of them. You want low grind and pvp ready, i suggest you stick to FPSs, as the main concept of a MMORPG is the advancement of you character (what you call grind) The fun should not start when you reach max level, the fun is the road that lead there (and if no max better)
Also, about the EVE thing, the game is FFA PVP, with partial loot for the winner and full lose to the loser, but you know, the only reason the game is the success it is, is because it catter to the people who is not interested primary in PVP. around half of the players never leave high-sec areas or engage in pvp. you remove the ability to play eve without engaging in pvp or doing it only when you want and the game is closed before the end of the year
" If you make a 18+ mmorpg relate for mature, the rules is to make it a sandbox world, full loot and open pvp"
Excuse me, but wtf are you smoking? Full loot and open PvP is for mature people?
Did you take a look at DFs population? It's full of immature teenagers acting in the worst possible way imaginable.
I didnt said that Darkfall was good either. In faq, i hate darkfall online. Why? The pvp is the most sucky pvp i never did. You mash and mash and mash anything and at the end, combat are boring. 1on1 could last like 5 to 10 boring minutes. I mean one on one only. A war could last more then 20-30 boring minutes and the whole game is not fun.
Full loot is well placed. Open world pvp and the huge world is well placed too. Thats why the game is still alive, but the combat system sux and i dont play that game anymore. The main reason why i dont play is because it promote macroers, no life grinders. I grind on my job. Not in a game so i left.
like i said, i dont play mmorpg's at the moment because i play multiplayer fps games like battlefield 2. I play a game for pvp only. nothing else, but if i play an mmorpg, dont want to get the same feeling like when i play battlefield 2. I want to get more immersed in an other world that have kind of the same risk vs reward as real life without permanent death, jail or stuff that we dont want to go trought in real life like our parents in that world lol.
Anyway, what i dislike the most like i said is that grind. in mortal online, i heard that after 2 weeks, you can max your primary skills that will make you be ready for pvp. Then, i will join a clan and getting back my gears after death wont be a grind i bet. It wont be boring either and MO is not base on grind, but on player skills.
Basically, an mmorpg made for me is a sandbox world, full loot, good politic, immersion, open pvp, and before that, the less grind possible so i can be competitive at pvp faster.
Im sorry for you, because you are looking for a game in the wrong genre. None of what you want is part of the basic concept of a MMORPG, its only fluff that could be put in one, but not need to be a part of them. You want low grind and pvp ready, i suggest you stick to FPSs, as the main concept of a MMORPG is the advancement of you character (what you call grind) The fun should not start when you reach max level, the fun is the road that lead there (and if no max better)
Also, about the EVE thing, the game is FFA PVP, with partial loot for the winner and full lose to the loser, but you know, the only reason the game is the success it is, is because it catter to the people who is not interested primary in PVP. around half of the players never leave high-sec areas or engage in pvp. you remove the ability to play eve without engaging in pvp or doing it only when you want and the game is closed before the end of the year
Well, thats why i dont play mmorpg at the moment.
Did you read about mortal online before you say taht i wont find the kind of game im looking for? In mortal online, the devs always mention that we max our primary skill after 2 weeks. Primary skills will make you be ready to pvp and be competitive. So my quest to be a competitive pvper will be complete after 2 weeks. After that, i can add some extra to be stronger by learning the secondary skills, but i wont care how many time it would take to max the secondary because after the primary, im already competitive. Im really in the game. Im really playing the game and not just working like a real job.
You really need to read more about mortal online and see by yourself how awsome it will be. Matter of faq, you told me to go back to fps game, mortal online is an fps game so thanks to ask me that. The whole game, you are forced to play in FPV and i like it that way. The MO devs believe more in player skills then in no life grinders. They want the skilled players to own the game.
Open pvp sandbox full loot could work. They just have to decide what to do with item replacement/availability. Don't make certain mobs drop the same item over and over again. Make all items in the game easily available and quick to replace. Once a crafting community is established items would be even easier to replace. Ultima Online was pretty good about this. Sure people had vanquishing/high end items but those items didn't make people super mega overpowered. It was how your skill that decided your characters strengths instead of a level number. As long as there is a level treadmill there won't be much of a sandbox in the game.
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
you know i for one am really glad this is not going to be full loot/PvP, i dont really like PvP, the only game i found where i had any enjoyment of that style was Dark age of Camelot, where it was restricted to the realm areas. i dont play / work in a game to make my character the best it can be create friendships etc to walk out and get ganked by some teenaged brat whose only pleasure is sh*ting on others. i play and really enjoy playing with others to complete a goal, and any game that is PvP only is to me as a cross is to a vampire. and i believe that there are a lot of players like me out there, but since we are not as vocal as the PvPers you dont hear about it as much, but money talks, and look at what game styles are making it and what kind are not.
I couldn't agree more. I love pvp but pvp shouldn't be an all or nothing situation. Anyone that says they want full loot pvp isn't gets disregarded in my book. There's always some mental defective that thinks whatever random game you're both playing is too carebear because when someone kills you there isn't a character destroying event.
There were a few games that did this in the past simply because they didn't know better. You won't see another successful game utilize this system. Honestly, not a single one. The genre has matured from that primitive BS and has learned from the mistakes of the past.
If you want to be severely penalized for playing a game how about you send me your address and if you're within driving distance I'll kill you in pvp combat then promptly drive over to your house, punch you in the face, take your wallet, kick your dog, and pack your computer into the back of my car before leaving.
I couldn't agree more. I love pvp but pvp shouldn't be an all or nothing situation. Anyone that says they want full loot pvp isn't gets disregarded in my book. There's always some mental defective that thinks whatever random game you're both playing is too carebear because when someone kills you there isn't a character destroying event. There were a few games that did this in the past simply because they didn't know better. You won't see another successful game utilize this system. Honestly, not a single one. The genre has matured from that primitive BS and has learned from the mistakes of the past. If you want to be severely penalized for playing a game how about you send me your address and if you're within driving distance I'll kill you in pvp combat then promptly drive over to your house, punch you in the face, take your wallet, kick your dog, and pack your computer into the back of my car before leaving.
Well two things...
1) Companies make games based on what they think will make a profit. Thus the number of full loot games is pretty much... a vast minority. Can argue about it all we want on forums.. developers don't make the games based off of forum posts. They are looking at some kind of metric that tells them they won't make money.
2) Full loot in pvp does actually work. The problem is you need to design the game so that it works. Its like the idea of item decay or item loss in a pve game. You can do it.. in a game based on player crafting.. That was Ultima Online for me. I mean its the same either way (full loot or item decay). Most games are based on raids/uber loot and nobody wants to lose their precious.
1 and 2 tie together... because game developers have decided to pretty much stick with what I call the EQ1 core mechanic. As opposed to the UO player economy idea. It was easy for me to craft in UO... I could put out a ton of gear daily and I did. I ran a vendor for 5 years and my prices were low yet I made a ton of profit.
So my perspective is that its a kind of weird mix.. of things.
I don't really think a full open pvp game works in todays market. I like the idea of "settled lands" and "wasteland" where there is an area beyond "the law". In that sense I don't like murder systems because if you died in a wasteland how would anyone know who killed you... You also need a company that is going to fully enforce the ToS/Eula and act on it quickly. The "cheat" base will quickly drive people out of any game with full loot or even just pvp in general.
Still comes back to the same thing. They follow a certain design and it tells them the "core" and the "profit" are not open pvp with full loot. If they change the core design... /shrug
*edited* I have been up about 36 hours on a business project and I tried to make the post into something that made sense. Not sure if I did... but bed time.
you can, but you will not get the big population numbers which equal money.
I wasn't debating the merits of FFA PvP. I was stating that FFA PvP is an independent factor, and isn't associated with either sandbox or theme park games in particular. It can be implemented in any type of MMORPG.
Currently Playing: EVE Online Retired From: UO, FFXI, AO, SWG, Ryzom, GW, WoW, WAR
What a good sandbox game need is exactly NOT full loot PvP.
That is what EVE does so brilliantly; when you destroy your opponent the most of his assets are destroyed (two thirds of his equiped modules and cargo hold content and of course his ship) so the gains for the victorious are minimal. This ensures that while dying is harsh you can not progress fast by running around killing randomly. Sure some people do that still, but it is rarely their main way of income.
More importantly, this kind of system is what drives a functional market and THAT is much more important for a sandbox MMO. What is important for Fallen Earth is if it has item deterioration/destruction or not.
Nobody is aiming for what EVE did. The game started at way below 50k subs and has slowly but steadily gained subscribers. Seems most decision makers are aiming for the 'WoW jackpot', which is extremely difficult and unlikely for most games to accomplish.
Don't forget that the only thing that saved Eve is that it was developed by a smaller company who "stuck it out" until its base grew. What Eve players convieniently ignore when comparing the success of Eve with the success of other games is that, had Eve been developed by one of the larger game houses, it would have been canned years ago for lack of subs.
Today, its is all about the "WoW jackpot", as you say...
Comparing a todate sandbox game to a todate them park is not a good comparason at all so saying that theme park s better because of that is not a good faq. Why?
EQ2 for exemple, i dont know about his developement, but i bet it had been made by an indi company. I never heard of it before, so it might not had been popular. Maybe we can put it at the same lvl as Eve, AC, and the old UO the day EQ 2 was out when wow was not here yet.
Blizzard is a very rich company and it was before wow. They had the money to make the perfect mmorpg. No matter how they decided to do it, it would had still been popular. So they decided to make it like EQ2 and they put all their money in hope that wow will be succeful The wacraft IP is already succeful enough so many will atempt to try. With their money, they can fix really fast any kind of stuff and add new stuff really fast. Balancing, wow devs are very good at this.
Then, we have what? ummm... Darkfall online for exemple. Its an indi company with not much money to maintain an mmorpg. It was popular before it was out, the most anticipate because we all thought it would be more like oblivion, but as an mmorpg with full loot, casual grind and whatever. When it was out, many feature that Tasos said it would be there was not there. So many players like me quitted. The fighting system sux. Melee are weaker then bows and magic. Fighting in melee is like the second option of taking a knife in counter strike while the guns are bows and magic.
Did you ever saw one mmorpg none indi? UO dont count since it had been made by an indi company and EA buy it and ruined it. I dont think so, so thats why we cannot compar them. The day a rich company will think about making a perfect mmorpg with full loot, open pvp and flagging system if it need some, this game will also have the chance to shine like the today sandbox games.
Not sure where people are getting the idea that sandbox = full loot pvp. EVE doesn't even have full loot all of the time. Pre-CU SWG, one of the best sandboxes ever made, wasn't full loot (hell it wasn't even open pvp unless you TEF'd yourself).
Sandbox, very generally, is a game where players can advance however they want, without the restrictions of a level curve. They can even choose not to advance at all, as sandboxes typically have fully developed social gaming elements and allow players to create their own content.
A sandbox can definitely include full loot pvp, but it certainly isn't a staple of the genre.
Comparing a todate sandbox game to a todate them park is not a good comparason at all so saying that theme park s better because of that is not a good faq. Why? EQ2 for exemple, i dont know about his developement, but i bet it had been made by an indi company. I never heard of it before, so it might not had been popular. Maybe we can put it at the same lvl as Eve, AC, and the old UO the day EQ 2 was out when wow was not here yet. Blizzard is a very rich company and it was before wow. They had the money to make the perfect mmorpg. No matter how they decided to do it, it would had still been popular. So they decided to make it like EQ2 and they put all their money in hope that wow will be succeful The wacraft IP is already succeful enough so many will atempt to try. With their money, they can fix really fast any kind of stuff and add new stuff really fast. Balancing, wow devs are very good at this. Then, we have what? ummm... Darkfall online for exemple. Its an indi company with not much money to maintain an mmorpg. It was popular before it was out, the most anticipate because we all thought it would be more like oblivion, but as an mmorpg with full loot, casual grind and whatever. When it was out, many feature that Tasos said it would be there was not there. So many players like me quitted. The fighting system sux. Melee are weaker then bows and magic. Fighting in melee is like the second option of taking a knife in counter strike while the guns are bows and magic. Did you ever saw one mmorpg none indi? UO dont count since it had been made by an indi company and EA buy it and ruined it. I dont think so, so thats why we cannot compar them. The day a rich company will think about making a perfect mmorpg with full loot, open pvp and flagging system if it need some, this game will also have the chance to shine like the today sandbox games.
Please tell me English isn't your primary language...
But I don't need full loot to have a good sandbox experience. SWG pre-cu-nge and Ryzom showed me this.
That does not mean I am opposed to it either, but it has to be implemented well, like in EVE Online. EVE Online is not full loot either, because some items get destroyed in the kill and you are payed out insurance money when you loose your ship ( if you fly something expensive it is peanuts, but still )
If you are interested in subscription or PCU numbers for MMORPG's, check out my site : http://mmodata.blogspot.be/ Favorite MMORPG's : DAoC pre ToA-NF, SWG Pre CU-NGE, EVE Online
Comments
I didnt said that Darkfall was good either. In faq, i hate darkfall online. Why? The pvp is the most sucky pvp i never did. You mash and mash and mash anything and at the end, combat are boring. 1on1 could last like 5 to 10 boring minutes. I mean one on one only. A war could last more then 20-30 boring minutes and the whole game is not fun.
Full loot is well placed. Open world pvp and the huge world is well placed too. Thats why the game is still alive, but the combat system sux and i dont play that game anymore. The main reason why i dont play is because it promote macroers, no life grinders. I grind on my job. Not in a game so i left.
like i said, i dont play mmorpg's at the moment because i play multiplayer fps games like battlefield 2. I play a game for pvp only. nothing else, but if i play an mmorpg, dont want to get the same feeling like when i play battlefield 2. I want to get more immersed in an other world that have kind of the same risk vs reward as real life without permanent death, jail or stuff that we dont want to go trought in real life like our parents in that world lol.
Anyway, what i dislike the most like i said is that grind. in mortal online, i heard that after 2 weeks, you can max your primary skills that will make you be ready for pvp. Then, i will join a clan and getting back my gears after death wont be a grind i bet. It wont be boring either and MO is not base on grind, but on player skills.
Basically, an mmorpg made for me is a sandbox world, full loot, good politic, immersion, open pvp, and before that, the less grind possible so i can be competitive at pvp faster.
C:\Users\FF\Desktop\spin move.gif
If you readed that quote or you are about to read it, replace earth rise with fallen earth please. It was my mistake because those 2 named kind of the same.
C:\Users\FF\Desktop\spin move.gif
dude learn to spell and get your grammar right....all this did was give me a headache
EVE disproved this statement. full loot when done right has been successful. its just done wrong most of the time.
Full loot isn't Eve, where do you get that idea from? Unless the person ejects of course, but that's rare.
Eve has insurance, while it may not cover nearly enough, it does cover some. And most of the "loot" is destroyed when the ship dies, not left on the corpse (wreck).
And of course, Eve PvP is mostly a gank fest, with the stupid rule of "Not Blue Shoot It" being the norm, and the average fight being between 1 person and many.
I don't know why people are saying Fallen Earth decided to "take out" full loot PvP.
I was following Fallen Earth since very early / pre-beta and there was never an intention to have full loot pvp. The idea kept being dredged up by 16 year old cry babies who have no clue how to make a game that people actually want to play. But the dev's themselves never endorsed it. The Devs did say they would consider it, but they indicated that they would do it.
And I think this is a wise decision. Full Loot PvP games aren't really fun to play. As noted even EvE isn't really full loot PvP.
Fallen Earth looks like a good game to me and I think they made the right decision not to give in to a few forum idiots who wanted full loot pvp.
How do you know that a full loot game is not fun to play when? I never played eve online. You think its not fun because the best the devs who start with less money add full loot option. Many who got money or should i say all of them dont make their games open world pvp and full loot. Only small budget company. Even mortal online is a small budget company so it also have some chance to failed just like darkfall online.
If some mainstream rich company would want to try to add full loot open world pvp and the less grind possible so we could jump on the game at once, i bet one of these game would actually work and maintain a large number of subs.
C:\Users\FF\Desktop\spin move.gif
I didnt said that Darkfall was good either. In faq, i hate darkfall online. Why? The pvp is the most sucky pvp i never did. You mash and mash and mash anything and at the end, combat are boring. 1on1 could last like 5 to 10 boring minutes. I mean one on one only. A war could last more then 20-30 boring minutes and the whole game is not fun.
Full loot is well placed. Open world pvp and the huge world is well placed too. Thats why the game is still alive, but the combat system sux and i dont play that game anymore. The main reason why i dont play is because it promote macroers, no life grinders. I grind on my job. Not in a game so i left.
like i said, i dont play mmorpg's at the moment because i play multiplayer fps games like battlefield 2. I play a game for pvp only. nothing else, but if i play an mmorpg, dont want to get the same feeling like when i play battlefield 2. I want to get more immersed in an other world that have kind of the same risk vs reward as real life without permanent death, jail or stuff that we dont want to go trought in real life like our parents in that world lol.
Anyway, what i dislike the most like i said is that grind. in mortal online, i heard that after 2 weeks, you can max your primary skills that will make you be ready for pvp. Then, i will join a clan and getting back my gears after death wont be a grind i bet. It wont be boring either and MO is not base on grind, but on player skills.
Basically, an mmorpg made for me is a sandbox world, full loot, good politic, immersion, open pvp, and before that, the less grind possible so i can be competitive at pvp faster.
Im sorry for you, because you are looking for a game in the wrong genre. None of what you want is part of the basic concept of a MMORPG, its only fluff that could be put in one, but not need to be a part of them. You want low grind and pvp ready, i suggest you stick to FPSs, as the main concept of a MMORPG is the advancement of you character (what you call grind) The fun should not start when you reach max level, the fun is the road that lead there (and if no max better)
Also, about the EVE thing, the game is FFA PVP, with partial loot for the winner and full lose to the loser, but you know, the only reason the game is the success it is, is because it catter to the people who is not interested primary in PVP. around half of the players never leave high-sec areas or engage in pvp. you remove the ability to play eve without engaging in pvp or doing it only when you want and the game is closed before the end of the year
I didnt said that Darkfall was good either. In faq, i hate darkfall online. Why? The pvp is the most sucky pvp i never did. You mash and mash and mash anything and at the end, combat are boring. 1on1 could last like 5 to 10 boring minutes. I mean one on one only. A war could last more then 20-30 boring minutes and the whole game is not fun.
Full loot is well placed. Open world pvp and the huge world is well placed too. Thats why the game is still alive, but the combat system sux and i dont play that game anymore. The main reason why i dont play is because it promote macroers, no life grinders. I grind on my job. Not in a game so i left.
like i said, i dont play mmorpg's at the moment because i play multiplayer fps games like battlefield 2. I play a game for pvp only. nothing else, but if i play an mmorpg, dont want to get the same feeling like when i play battlefield 2. I want to get more immersed in an other world that have kind of the same risk vs reward as real life without permanent death, jail or stuff that we dont want to go trought in real life like our parents in that world lol.
Anyway, what i dislike the most like i said is that grind. in mortal online, i heard that after 2 weeks, you can max your primary skills that will make you be ready for pvp. Then, i will join a clan and getting back my gears after death wont be a grind i bet. It wont be boring either and MO is not base on grind, but on player skills.
Basically, an mmorpg made for me is a sandbox world, full loot, good politic, immersion, open pvp, and before that, the less grind possible so i can be competitive at pvp faster.
Im sorry for you, because you are looking for a game in the wrong genre. None of what you want is part of the basic concept of a MMORPG, its only fluff that could be put in one, but not need to be a part of them. You want low grind and pvp ready, i suggest you stick to FPSs, as the main concept of a MMORPG is the advancement of you character (what you call grind) The fun should not start when you reach max level, the fun is the road that lead there (and if no max better)
Also, about the EVE thing, the game is FFA PVP, with partial loot for the winner and full lose to the loser, but you know, the only reason the game is the success it is, is because it catter to the people who is not interested primary in PVP. around half of the players never leave high-sec areas or engage in pvp. you remove the ability to play eve without engaging in pvp or doing it only when you want and the game is closed before the end of the year
Well, thats why i dont play mmorpg at the moment.
Did you read about mortal online before you say taht i wont find the kind of game im looking for? In mortal online, the devs always mention that we max our primary skill after 2 weeks. Primary skills will make you be ready to pvp and be competitive. So my quest to be a competitive pvper will be complete after 2 weeks. After that, i can add some extra to be stronger by learning the secondary skills, but i wont care how many time it would take to max the secondary because after the primary, im already competitive. Im really in the game. Im really playing the game and not just working like a real job.
You really need to read more about mortal online and see by yourself how awsome it will be. Matter of faq, you told me to go back to fps game, mortal online is an fps game so thanks to ask me that. The whole game, you are forced to play in FPV and i like it that way. The MO devs believe more in player skills then in no life grinders. They want the skilled players to own the game.
C:\Users\FF\Desktop\spin move.gif
Sounds more like a MMOFPS then a MMORPG. I can't see what long term reason for logging in you'd have after maxing in 2 weeks.
OP,
You don't like progression, you only like competition.
You have just defined, that you prefer MMOFPS, and hate MMORPG's.
Why write half a page of ranting, if you are already aware of it?
DB
Edit: and why in the 9 hells do you mention sandbox? Do you have *ANY* idea, what that is? Seemingly not
) Trust me, you'd hate it.
Denial makes one look a lot dumber than he/she actually is.
Open pvp sandbox full loot could work. They just have to decide what to do with item replacement/availability. Don't make certain mobs drop the same item over and over again. Make all items in the game easily available and quick to replace. Once a crafting community is established items would be even easier to replace. Ultima Online was pretty good about this. Sure people had vanquishing/high end items but those items didn't make people super mega overpowered. It was how your skill that decided your characters strengths instead of a level number. As long as there is a level treadmill there won't be much of a sandbox in the game.
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
you know i for one am really glad this is not going to be full loot/PvP, i dont really like PvP, the only game i found where i had any enjoyment of that style was Dark age of Camelot, where it was restricted to the realm areas. i dont play / work in a game to make my character the best it can be create friendships etc to walk out and get ganked by some teenaged brat whose only pleasure is sh*ting on others. i play and really enjoy playing with others to complete a goal, and any game that is PvP only is to me as a cross is to a vampire. and i believe that there are a lot of players like me out there, but since we are not as vocal as the PvPers you dont hear about it as much, but money talks, and look at what game styles are making it and what kind are not.
I couldn't agree more. I love pvp but pvp shouldn't be an all or nothing situation. Anyone that says they want full loot pvp isn't gets disregarded in my book. There's always some mental defective that thinks whatever random game you're both playing is too carebear because when someone kills you there isn't a character destroying event.
There were a few games that did this in the past simply because they didn't know better. You won't see another successful game utilize this system. Honestly, not a single one. The genre has matured from that primitive BS and has learned from the mistakes of the past.
If you want to be severely penalized for playing a game how about you send me your address and if you're within driving distance I'll kill you in pvp combat then promptly drive over to your house, punch you in the face, take your wallet, kick your dog, and pack your computer into the back of my car before leaving.
Well two things...
1) Companies make games based on what they think will make a profit. Thus the number of full loot games is pretty much... a vast minority. Can argue about it all we want on forums.. developers don't make the games based off of forum posts. They are looking at some kind of metric that tells them they won't make money.
2) Full loot in pvp does actually work. The problem is you need to design the game so that it works. Its like the idea of item decay or item loss in a pve game. You can do it.. in a game based on player crafting.. That was Ultima Online for me. I mean its the same either way (full loot or item decay). Most games are based on raids/uber loot and nobody wants to lose their precious.
1 and 2 tie together... because game developers have decided to pretty much stick with what I call the EQ1 core mechanic. As opposed to the UO player economy idea. It was easy for me to craft in UO... I could put out a ton of gear daily and I did. I ran a vendor for 5 years and my prices were low yet I made a ton of profit.
So my perspective is that its a kind of weird mix.. of things.
I don't really think a full open pvp game works in todays market. I like the idea of "settled lands" and "wasteland" where there is an area beyond "the law". In that sense I don't like murder systems because if you died in a wasteland how would anyone know who killed you... You also need a company that is going to fully enforce the ToS/Eula and act on it quickly. The "cheat" base will quickly drive people out of any game with full loot or even just pvp in general.
Still comes back to the same thing. They follow a certain design and it tells them the "core" and the "profit" are not open pvp with full loot. If they change the core design... /shrug
*edited* I have been up about 36 hours on a business project and I tried to make the post into something that made sense. Not sure if I did... but bed time.
Yeah, I'm not sure why people think that "full loot, open PvP" is any way related to the definition of "sandbox."
You can have full loot and open PvP in themepark games, too.
Currently Playing: EVE Online
Retired From: UO, FFXI, AO, SWG, Ryzom, GW, WoW, WAR
you can, but you will not get the big population numbers which equal money.
I wasn't debating the merits of FFA PvP. I was stating that FFA PvP is an independent factor, and isn't associated with either sandbox or theme park games in particular. It can be implemented in any type of MMORPG.
Currently Playing: EVE Online
Retired From: UO, FFXI, AO, SWG, Ryzom, GW, WoW, WAR
What a good sandbox game need is exactly NOT full loot PvP.
That is what EVE does so brilliantly; when you destroy your opponent the most of his assets are destroyed (two thirds of his equiped modules and cargo hold content and of course his ship) so the gains for the victorious are minimal. This ensures that while dying is harsh you can not progress fast by running around killing randomly. Sure some people do that still, but it is rarely their main way of income.
More importantly, this kind of system is what drives a functional market and THAT is much more important for a sandbox MMO. What is important for Fallen Earth is if it has item deterioration/destruction or not.
Don't forget that the only thing that saved Eve is that it was developed by a smaller company who "stuck it out" until its base grew. What Eve players convieniently ignore when comparing the success of Eve with the success of other games is that, had Eve been developed by one of the larger game houses, it would have been canned years ago for lack of subs.
Today, its is all about the "WoW jackpot", as you say...
Comparing a todate sandbox game to a todate them park is not a good comparason at all so saying that theme park s better because of that is not a good faq. Why?
EQ2 for exemple, i dont know about his developement, but i bet it had been made by an indi company. I never heard of it before, so it might not had been popular. Maybe we can put it at the same lvl as Eve, AC, and the old UO the day EQ 2 was out when wow was not here yet.
Blizzard is a very rich company and it was before wow. They had the money to make the perfect mmorpg. No matter how they decided to do it, it would had still been popular. So they decided to make it like EQ2 and they put all their money in hope that wow will be succeful The wacraft IP is already succeful enough so many will atempt to try. With their money, they can fix really fast any kind of stuff and add new stuff really fast. Balancing, wow devs are very good at this.
Then, we have what? ummm... Darkfall online for exemple. Its an indi company with not much money to maintain an mmorpg. It was popular before it was out, the most anticipate because we all thought it would be more like oblivion, but as an mmorpg with full loot, casual grind and whatever. When it was out, many feature that Tasos said it would be there was not there. So many players like me quitted. The fighting system sux. Melee are weaker then bows and magic. Fighting in melee is like the second option of taking a knife in counter strike while the guns are bows and magic.
Did you ever saw one mmorpg none indi? UO dont count since it had been made by an indi company and EA buy it and ruined it. I dont think so, so thats why we cannot compar them. The day a rich company will think about making a perfect mmorpg with full loot, open pvp and flagging system if it need some, this game will also have the chance to shine like the today sandbox games.
C:\Users\FF\Desktop\spin move.gif
Not sure where people are getting the idea that sandbox = full loot pvp. EVE doesn't even have full loot all of the time. Pre-CU SWG, one of the best sandboxes ever made, wasn't full loot (hell it wasn't even open pvp unless you TEF'd yourself).
Sandbox, very generally, is a game where players can advance however they want, without the restrictions of a level curve. They can even choose not to advance at all, as sandboxes typically have fully developed social gaming elements and allow players to create their own content.
A sandbox can definitely include full loot pvp, but it certainly isn't a staple of the genre.
Please tell me English isn't your primary language...
Haven't been following Fallen Earth much.
But I don't need full loot to have a good sandbox experience. SWG pre-cu-nge and Ryzom showed me this.
That does not mean I am opposed to it either, but it has to be implemented well, like in EVE Online. EVE Online is not full loot either, because some items get destroyed in the kill and you are payed out insurance money when you loose your ship ( if you fly something expensive it is peanuts, but still )
If you are interested in subscription or PCU numbers for MMORPG's, check out my site :
http://mmodata.blogspot.be/
Favorite MMORPG's : DAoC pre ToA-NF, SWG Pre CU-NGE, EVE Online
EVE disproved this statement. full loot when done right has been successful. its just done wrong most of the time.
Just limit it to part of the game world. Even EVE has its safe Empire space where the carebears live. Without that, it might be less successful.
But that is fine, you always can head to unregulated space when you feel like it. Just don't whine when you get gatecamped...