Stop being so freakin apprehensive of the player vs player dynamic
They are not apprehensive of the player vs player dynamic, they are apprehensive of assholes.
They want to log in and have some fun not have to deal with someone who needs to let their issues out in a video game.
The more they can minimize their exposure to such people the better their time can be. Not saying that those people don't infect pve mmo's but their impact is felt a little less.
Maybe you should understand the people you are talking about instead of just posting a manifesto that doesn't get to the heart of the matter.
"they don't want to play with you". Or at least undesirables, whoever they may be.
Case closed.
LOL
More like they want to log in and have some fun not have to deal with a bunch of randomly generated computer named BOTs currenly camping a quest MOB, rare spawn, world boss.
The more they can minimize their exposure to these bots and those gold spammers the better their time can be. They do infect PvE mmo's, but their impact is felt much more, cuz no one can effectively address the issue except the empowered player through a working PvP dynamic!
Maybe you should respond more effectively to much more comprehensive, well thought out, and extensive post then simply dismissing it as a manifesto on behalf of PvPers; If it is a manifesto it is on behalf of each and every MMORPG gamer that has dealt with very poor PvE game design that allows other companies and individuals to ruin the game as they cannot effectively enforce policy in their game.
The real undesireables are not players as much as they are randomly generated computer named BOTs, that are not controlled by a program as a MOB would be in a PvE setting; yet within a PvE setting there is absolutely nothing the player nor the development company can do about them!
Why are all the naysayers so apprehensive, concerned, and afraid of PvP in an MMORPG when it has been an integral part of the evolution of this genre?
(I ain't quiting the entire post, too long but go up and read it, it is interesting and welll written)
Yes, PvP have been an important part of the genre and it should be. However there must be a meaning to PvP, having thousands of players acting like serial killers for no other reason than to loot the corpses doesn't really make that much sense.
There have been several meaningful PvP solutions in the past, like DaoCs war that ended with burning the enemy cities or Lineage underestimated version where guilds/bloodpledges declared war on eachother and fought them. Eves system works as well but I think it works better in space then in a fantasy game.
One interesting solution would be letting players create own countries and letting others align them to the countries, then those countries would war with eachother over resources, status and territory. Only drawback is that you need mechanics to stop a server being controlled by 1 or possibly 2 huge countries, like having a kingdom tax rate based on size or some other way to make smaller kingdoms who is risky more rewarding.
But there are plenty of other ways to handle PvP as well. The real problem is when you allow loads of players to kill everything you see, because that isn't very realistic. Few if any societies have ever allowed something like that at least for as long as the written word have existed and fantasy MMOs are based a technological time period from about year 0-1600, one would expect societies to evolve in at least somewhat similar ways there as well.
Frankly, ganking is pretty boring and adds little to a MMO while war and cutthroat politics on the other hand is very interesting. That doesn't mean that a game should forbid extremely warlike kingdoms or outlaws but those would be shunned and hunted by other more civilized societies.
One good thing would to have a kingdom tax so you upgrade your kingdom there more successful your citizens (both players and npcs) are. That would encourage players to protect their people.
Just having chaotic FFA PvP is not something new and games with it have never done that great either. PvP needs to evolve to interest more players.
Why are all the naysayers so apprehensive, concerned, and afraid of PvP in an MMORPG when it has been an integral part of the evolution of this genre?
Any examples where a game has long term success and has OW FFA PVP or any system that doesn't stick PVP off in an instance or it's own little corner? Almost all mmorpgs have PVP, yet it isn't The Game in most situations. PVE is the focus with PVP being optional in most cases. I love PVP, but don't find the non-optional form to be the best approach to keeping a game healthy for a good while.
Face it folks PvE isn't even remotely challenging as it once was when you got hit in the face by a median level NPC Necromancer's punch in Everquest for more damage then a max level Player Character Monk could muster for most of their unarmed attacks. This wasn't even remotely immersive, yet it was challenging :P
I totally agree, PVE has been pretty boring for me for almost all of my gaming years. Can be fun and challenging to a point, but doesn't give the thrill of PVP.
Players had to group in original EQ simply because even conned MOBs were as strong as optimally twinked player characters of the same level. MOBs linked up and worked better (especially in dungeons) and aggro range was carefully considered due to MOB linking and trains.
Grouping in MMORPGs these days isn't as important as it was back in the day. Constant whining from casual players has reduced MMORPGs to nothing more then hand holding and grab assed folly at best.
This doesn't have to be the case in EQN. So far their words would have me thinking it won't be the same old solo cake walk, but we'll have to wait and see.
PvP ended up becoming more center stage in WoW because PvE had been played to the hilt in the current engine and couldn't be more immersive nor challenging without totally revamping and releasing a new product.
This applies to everyone or you? I admit I didn't play WoW that many years, but PVE was always The focus. Many of us did run BGs as well, but playing capture the flag and king of the hill isn't exactly thrilling either. When something has a scoreboard attached, I fail to see the challenge.
Emergent AI? Many of us are not only highly skeptical of such a boast, we doubt they can actually bring such a dynamic to Everquest Next without it being undermined and turned into a laughable mess by players who enjoy nothing more then trivializing PvE content in each and every new title that hits the market in this genre. It's simply programmed MOBs with a set number of choices and decisions limited to the program. in otherwords, its LIMITED! We, are LIMITLESS!
EQN will either succeed or fail based on this element. You can be skeptical all you want, doesn't change anything. If it sucks it sucks, if it's great, it's great. Will AI in EQN replace players? No. But it can make for a much more entertaining world. No reason "emergent AI" and PVP can't play off one another, it isn't a one or the other situation.
The most challenging and immersive gameplay anyone will experience these days will be against other players. MOBs within their current AI limitations and restrictions (due to technological limitations) are just not going to entertain, nor prove challenging enough overtime as the game progresses. I've played many of the most notable MMORPG titles til a few years ago when I realized the genre had hit a wall, so to speak.
Up for debate. There are many many many terrible gamers out there. Some times I am blown away by how bad people are. AI can pose more of a challenge sometimes. Not to come off as being amazing or anything, but a bad player < good AI. Sadly, bad players seem to be growing in numbers. Going back to what you've said and how easy games have become, many never have to learn to be better at PVE which translates into PVP. Also, most PVP these days is either boring arenas, CTF, KOTH, playing huge games of Tag, Zerg vs Zerg, etc. Not a whole lot of thought involved.
PvP removes the game breakin issues currently plaguing many of the new MMORPGs (i.e. BOTs. farmers, spammers, griefers) by making them KOS by the playerbase enmasse.
Huh? Have you played a Bot free PVP game that was popular? From WoW forward, almost every game has had PVP and Bots. Kill them and they respawn and start a new. Unless you can camp them forever (that won't be exploited vs non-bots at all) you will never win. Why not complain about people buying from the Bots? Companies have been doing better (lol at ESO though) at policing the games, but it is an impossible battle.
Hopefully SOE has some plans to make it more challenging for Bots (dynamic world will be a huge help). Simply not having mobs stand at X spot and respawn every Y minutes will making Botting hard. So will not having levels or vertical progression. Emergent AI that changes tactics will also help. Many things to come.
I've mentioned factions and alignments to really factor in much moreso then it did in Everquest, so as to evolve and foster player conflict, diplomacy, trade, cooperation, and competition. Monster Play in Lord of the Rings Online really exposed me to what I consider to be the future of MMORPGs; where the players play against each other as evil vs good. This alongside the so called emergent AI dynamic could really prove to be revolutionary and game changing for this genre. DAoC showed the value of multiple alliances. Evolve this to include factions/alignments and allow players to interact with MOBs much moreso and the possibilities grow exponentially.
I agree to a point, but look at DAoC now? Despite how fun it was. Even it's FFA OW PVP servers crashed and burned. In a game known for being one of the best PVP experiences ever, OW PVP didn't work. This is also a totally different approach to a game. To have factions and all that, it has to be a PVP game, so far that isn't what they've said about EQN. Again, do you know of any PVP games that have conflict, diplomacy, trade, yadda yadd? Lets exclude EVE has it has unique elements that can't be reproduced in a fantasy mmorpg.
I could go on and on here but the gist of this thread is simply an ongoing debate concerning FFA PvP much like it is in EvE. I'm not an advocate of rampant, reckless, uncontrolled, mayhem that players have associated with FFA PvP. We should all accept PvP as an integral part of this genre as we all should accept the limitations of technology and lack of immersion which have more too often ruined what could have proved to be something much more worthwhile and adventurous by an MMORPG choosing to go the route of PvE.
Unless you slap on a bunch of rules and restrictions, this is unavoidable and will keep most away. This also won't be a FFA. FFA does not work. At least not on the large scale.
Community is something I firmly believe has suffered as a result of poor game design. Without community an MMORPG turns into a multiplayer game. Community can be enhanced within the player controlled dynamic that I had previously mentioned beforehand. Allowing the players much more freedom and influence over the game provides more player involvement, exchange, communication, interaction, etc....Community has been so lacking in so many MMORPGs since the good ol days where we were not only encouraged we were basically forced to interact with each other much moreso.
I agree and it seems to be what EQN is going for. PVP is not needed for community to happen, quite the opposite depending on how the game is designed and managed. Does it add to the experience? Yes, but it doesn't have to be The Experience.
People say casual players have been a plague upon this genre. Whilst I will agree to some degree; I will say it is moreso poor game design and game mechanics. I was one of the many who defined the term powergamer. Until I realized it didn't serve the greater good for one and all involved. Casual play should be the target market, yet dedicated players should be rewarded, yet not to such a degree so as to encourage powergaming and frustrate the majority of players who consist primarily of casual gamers. People gotta live productive lives, yet we are becoming more and more of a technologically driven society. It is the judicious balance of nature and technology that will ultimately prove to foster and evolve humanity into the new world.
Yes casuals should be the target, while providing content for everyone else as well. It isn't easy to design a game for casuals and FFA PVP.
Stop being so freakin apprehensive of the player vs player dynamic and lets come to some consensus within the realization of the fact we really need each other to move forward in this genre. The development company cannot be expected to enforce policy in their own games. It is high time the players should be empowered within appropriate game design with the right game mechanics to work together to create community involvement which will effectively address the problems currently plaguing MMORPGs at this time in this genre. The only way to do this is to allow PvP to perform the role it was always meant to; To foster peace and prosperity through conflict, diplomacy, trade, cooperation, competition, etc...so players can realize justice is ultimately served by one and all. Instead of being the harshest of critics and skeptics often bringing ruin to many MMORPGs; lets work with the developers much moreso during the development phase so the developer can realize how much moreso the player is needed to enforce and uphold policy during gameplay. PVP along with emergent AI PvE is the only way!
Any examples or ideas to have this work? For me, if it was possible, it would already be a reality. It makes sense and sounds great on paper, applied to a game, it falls on it's face. Unless you can magically force everyone to follow "your" rules and play accordingly, FFA doesn't work. What you get are games like DF. SOE isn't going for a "do what you want to each other" game that caters to a small audience. They are doing a "do what is fun to you" game that isn't what FFA PVP fans might want.
FFA PVP doesn't work, accept it. PVP servers and Opt-In PVP on normal servers can and do work. Hence why most games function this way. Can it be improved? Of course, just as anything can. Saying FFA PVP is the ONLY option is silly. If it was, all games would have it since it is the "only" option. You might not like a game because it lacks FFA PVP, but I'm betting thousands/millions do.
Face that what "you" want isn't what every single gamer out in gaming land wants. I love FFA PVP. At the same time, I accept that it just doesn't work for most people or for a game to be thriving, growing, and not some niche little thing that just exists in the corner. I'd rather have a good game, then a bad one that lets me kill whomever I want.
WAR 40k or Camelot Unchained might be what you are looking for. But so far, they both look like niche PVP games that won't have players invested for years down the line. Just more log in, PEW PEW, log out.
Unfortunately, gamers don't like to play nice and have shiny toys. Everyone wants to stomp on each others gardens. Regardless if you can go kill them, get a bounty on their head or whatever. Alienating a huge chunk of the community so you can be happy isn't going to happen. So far, EQN (to be on topic) hasn't come off as a FFA or even PVP game. Would be crazy to think it won't have PVP in some form, but if at SOE Live they go "Surprise EQN is OW FFA PVP" they would be laughed off the stage.
Originally posted by jacker1991 Wonder how long it will take for gankers to drive away most of the costumers. Should be interesting to watch.
Gankers and Griefers exist in your imagination
3 words: Improvise Adapt Overcome
AKA, everyone has to play the way you want. If I want to farm and craft and some guy runs through and kills me, takes all my stuff, burns my house to the ground, I'm supposed to change my entire reason for playing? Makes no sense.
FFA PVP doesn't work, accept it. PVP servers and Opt-In PVP on normal servers can and do work. Hence why most games function this way. Can it be improved? Of course, just as anything can. Saying FFA PVP is the ONLY option is silly. If it was, all games would have it since it is the "only" option. You might not like a game because it lacks FFA PVP, but I'm betting thousands/millions do.
Face that what "you" want isn't what every single gamer out in gaming land wants. I love FFA PVP. At the same time, I accept that it just doesn't work for most people or for a game to be thriving, growing, and not some niche little thing that just exists in the corner. I'd rather have a good game, then a bad one that lets me kill whomever I want.
WAR 40k or Camelot Unchained might be what you are looking for. But so far, they both look like niche PVP games that won't have players invested for years down the line. Just more log in, PEW PEW, log out.
Unfortunately, gamers don't like to play nice and have shiny toys. Everyone wants to stomp on each others gardens. Regardless if you can go kill them, get a bounty on their head or whatever. Alienating a huge chunk of the community so you can be happy isn't going to happen. So far, EQN (to be on topic) hasn't come off as a FFA or even PVP game. Would be crazy to think it won't have PVP in some form, but if at SOE Live they go "Surprise EQN is OW FFA PVP" they would be laughed off the stage.
You summed it up pretty good. EQN is SOE's big next-gen flagship MMO. There's no way they're going to make it a forced OW FFA PVP game lol. It will have PVP no doubt, maybe even at launch (maybe not), but to think that it's being designed as some sort of niche PVP experience is a laughable proposition that's completely detached from reality and matches up with nothing that we've learned so far about EQN.
Action orientated combat that is Tabless, will allow for open world PvP...just wait and see.
At the end of the day if you get ganked, it's not because someone tab-targetted cheesed you, but simply because you got outplayed. Zerged by a group? Get your own group going.
Open world is very possible and highly likely to work in EQN due to the fact that tab targetting is gone.
Action orientated combat that is Tabless, will allow for open world PvP...just wait and see.
At the end of the day if you get ganked, it's not because someone tab-targetted cheesed you, but simply because you got outplayed. Zerged by a group? Get your own group going.
Open world is very possible and highly likely to work in EQN due to the fact that tab targetting is gone.
Any type of combat allows for OW PVP. Tab, skill shot, front cone, whatever. Some ways can make more "skill" to be needed, but removing tab doesn't change a whole lot.
Ganked by "my" definition implies that you had little to no chance, leaning strongly to none. (5 vs 1, jumped at 50% health, or better yet while at low health and engaged with a mob, while spawning/zoning in, etc). Not 1 vs 1 and one person lost in a "fair" fight.
Again, Zerg for me refers to mindless large numbers of people just follwoing each other around like locusts. No strategy or thought, just red = dead. Small or even large group oriented combat with communication and team work is something completely different. Not just masses of characters throwing themselves at each other. But I do agree a group is a good idea
EQN could easily have OW PVP, just as every single mmorpg could for the most part. It isn't a matter of can it, more would it work. As in, would it be able to not scare off everyone but that small percent of FFA OW PVP fanatics and be sustainable for a long time. SOE is banking their future on EQN, a niche game won't keep the lights on.
Love the people that say action combat takes more skill....those are the call of duty peeps coming to mmo's and they got schooled in tab targeting cause they sucked at using their skills properly.
I love how people want a sandbox game yet cry they want controled or even no pvp options. that is not a sandbox folks.
I for one would love to have an OW PVP EQ game with consequences for mindless ganking such as security status and areas where its not welcome ala high sec in Eve.
More like they want to log in and have some fun not have to deal with a bunch of randomly generated computer named BOTs currenly camping a quest MOB, rare spawn, world boss.
The more they can minimize their exposure to these bots and those gold spammers the better their time can be. They do infect PvE mmo's, but their impact is felt much more, cuz no one can effectively address the issue except the empowered player through a working PvP dynamic!
Maybe you should respond more effectively to much more comprehensive, well thought out, and extensive post then simply dismissing it as a manifesto on behalf of PvPers; If it is a manifesto it is on behalf of each and every MMORPG gamer that has dealt with very poor PvE game design that allows other companies and individuals to ruin the game as they cannot effectively enforce policy in their game.
The real undesireables are not players as much as they are randomly generated computer named BOTs, that are not controlled by a program as a MOB would be in a PvE setting; yet within a PvE setting there is absolutely nothing the player nor the development company can do about them!
The case is never closed!
I think you are incorrect as there are many pve players who don't pvp precisely because of bad attitude "pvp players'. Telling them to essentially "deal with it" is not going to get you anywhere.
Incidentally, my taste runs toward ffa pvp and I even think that permadeath is an attractive option. So I'm not some player predominantly espousing pve. I've seen enough bad pvp players (and the crying, oh the crying) to see why some people have washed their hands of the pvp community even though there are some very good pvp players out there.
And I don't think your post to be well thought out. I'll reference Allein's "well thought out post". And Gallus85.
And bots are a whole other matter.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I have been playing MMOs for a very long time, and i allways play pvp servers and i must say after all these years i have learned somthing.
We need a real reason to pvp these days. I love FFA pvp and i love open world but in todays games just killing each other for the sake of killing gets old real quick. and fankly it gets boring.
We need somthing to fight over and it needs to be worth it, and no im not talking GW2 zerg wars over some fort that changes hands 50 times a day. im talking about fighting over shit that matters, and somthing you keep for awhile.
Since a Mob in EQN should be on the same relative strength then a player character i don't see why open PvP is out of the way. But ffa kos pvp does not works because it lacks REASON besides just for killing and loot.
With the Storybricks emergent AI and Faction you could add a REASON for you killing other player.
Say you have two Towns in game that are at war against each other. Now you could align to one of the Towns and then you are able to fight any Player who aligns to the other Town. It would give reason why you kill other people. but it will save those who don't want to participate. You could even add a third Town who both players can align additional to the first two, but if you attack someone who is aligned to that third city and your enemy city you get punished by the third citiy because you attacked an ally.
Now add more Town, Faction, maybe even player created factions and it can get to another Level of PVP. People could chose different through the PvE gameplay, maybe they become Archenemies, maybe they don't like another but not outright kos, because some of your factions would be hurt if you kill. Maybe someone is neutral because it has the same benefits and consequences. And others are friendly cause you have many similar Factions.
Well basicly its a reputation system, that is know in some games, but instead gaining reputation only with NPC, your chosen alignments dictates how your reputation is towards other players
and thats how it works in real life aswell, we don't kill each other cause we are connected through different "factions" be it you city,state,country,religious believe, ethical view, society, whatever name it. If you break your "faction" you get most likely be punished. But if you attack a common enemy no one cares or you even get rewarded (well these days only through military but in ancient days it was more simple)
Maybe someone noticed the market has more than enough themeparks already.
I have 5 themeparks installed that's enough. Give me the sandbox player driven stuff
thank god it will be a real sandbox with pve servers
Soe have a full PvP sandbox in the works in H1Z1, with EQN they have shown they are aiming for as much broad market appeal as they can get, so like the guy above says they will likely have PvE servers, and like a lot of people are saying they will have PvP ones. They have openly stated that "The experience will vary from server to server" So that means multiple servers, no super server tech, so you can pretty much be sure they will have multiple rulesets too.
They know this game could if managed right be their cash cow for a LONG time they wont want to limit their audience in any way with EQN.
Interesting to see the renewed interest in my old thread and the people who believe in it.
I wonder if H1Z1 is the testing ground for EQN? If it explodes with popularity and dwarfs SOE's other MMOs in terms of profitability will that influence the decisions around EQN? I wonder why the devs still haven't talked about it?
Originally posted by Bidwood Interesting to see the renewed interest in my old thread and the people who believe in it.
I wonder if H1Z1 is the testing ground for EQN? If it explodes with popularity and dwarfs SOE's other MMOs in terms of profitability will that influence the decisions around EQN? I wonder why the devs still haven't talked about it?
While I'd love for H1Z1 to take off, I've yet to see anything that will make it worth playing for anyone beyond the shoot first ask questions never crowd. Great to see companies attempting to blend FPS and mmorpg, but the first few (DayZ, Rust, WarZ, etc) haven't been that great. H1Z1 looks to take it a step further, but from the crowd following it (including myself) and what the devs have said, nothing standing out as special. Tossing a similar system into Norrath isn't going to make it work either.
Apples to Pine Nuts, but keep dreaming that PVP dream
Originally posted by Horusra Love the people that say action combat takes more skill....those are the call of duty peeps coming to mmo's and they got schooled in tab targeting cause they sucked at using their skills properly.
I've been playing mmos since before tab targeting existed. Imagine typing what you wanted to do and to whom every step of the way...
While going through the rotation, using macros, using a million skills correctly does take some "skill", the addition of having to use terrain, movement, positioning, aiming, etc on top of all that takes it up a notch.
Both systems are much more then just tab or not to tab.
Personally, standing relatively still, going down the skill bar and staring at bars is not that exciting. Never has and never will be for me. I blame the devs for that though.
I'd rather have 1 attack and 1 block and have to run around and use every move to it's fullest then have tab target + 50 skills to hit one after another.
To each their own, but neither is superior and both have their moments. All depends on how a game is designed.
The more tab-less games I play, the more and more I can't stand it. Was fun, but being active in more entertaining then my fingers having skill muscle memory. Can't wait to see how "emergent AI" plays into all of this. Mobs that are mobile, react, defend, engage > static stand in a spot and get "skilled" to death ones.
What would be the reason Smed wouldn't just directly say 'there will be open world pvp'?
Looks to me more like generalities meant to hype the game so that the reader reads into it what they want. Therefore you do not alienate any potential audience.
As with most games, I'll have to play it to know what its all about.
Just like dynamic content in WAR, Rift and GW2, the reality didn't come close to my conception.
Just like AoC's combat, EQ2's housing, VGs - well almost everything - what I envisioned from press releases played out differently in reality.
I expect no less here.
I have learned after 10 + years - never put faith in advertising.
Why do PvPers have a problem with there being separate servers for open PvP and consensual PvP? Do they really just like to gank people who don't want to fight until they quit?
Because it means that PVP server will be nothing more than PVE one, with flagging enabled. We want an real PVP system, which is only achievable if the whole game is designed around it.
For example, most korean MMOs dont have PVE-only servers, but PVP there isnt hardcore either.
Its better for the game and the community if they focus on one server type.
Why do PvPers have a problem with there being separate servers for open PvP and consensual PvP? Do they really just like to gank people who don't want to fight until they quit?
Because it means that PVP server will be nothing more than PVE one, with flagging enabled. We want an real PVP system, which is only achievable if the whole game is designed around it.
For example, most korean MMOs dont have PVE-only servers, but PVP there isnt hardcore either.
Its better for the game and the community if they focus on one server type.
I'd rather have a choice of server in a sub-par game than an awesome game where I'm forced to pvp.
Pvp communities are the worst of the worst, why would anyone want to nurture something that toxic?
PvP definitely does have that potential to create "evergreen" content as he says. As long as the people actually intrinsically care about the PvP.
Aka: you want to defend that castle because you and your guild put a lot of time and effort into getting it and upgrading the place. You want to hold the top PvP positions because they give you and your mates a lot of reknown. The alliance rules regarding PKing are to be upheld because it would otherwise damage your reputation etc. etc.
In that regard, I'm not sure why he's talking about "battlegrounds".
I'm not against instanced battlegrounds by themselves, but they're one of the forms of PvP that reset and loop and therefore people usually start just grinding them out for the rewards. They're not quite as "evergreen".
However, maybe he has a different idea about the term "battleground".
Originally posted by Bunnyking
Pvp communities are the worst of the worst, why would anyone want to nurture something that toxic?
You say that like it's a given for every single one out there.
But if you can get over the fact that PvP communities will indeed have rivalries going on and that there's nothing wrong with that, then many PvP communities will be amongst the most lively and interesting ones to be in.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
I still don't get why there's no developer come up with a groundbased PvE/OWPvP hybrid like EvE is, as the solution is actually quiet easy, if you seperate the world into two islands.
You make one island with lots of PvE-content and a PvE-ruleset, and the other island would be where players/guilds/alliances can fight each other to the death over the ressources needed to craft the shiny items needed to beat the toughest dungeons.
This solution makes the OWPvP-island necessary and interesting for the PvP-players and those people who chose not to engage in PvP can stay safe on the PvE-island and mind their own business.
I'm still waiting for a MMORPG like that and it basically resembles the systems of EvE Online, where 75% of the players never leave the security of high-sec.
Comments
Gankers and Griefers exist in your imagination
3 words: Improvise Adapt Overcome
LOL
More like they want to log in and have some fun not have to deal with a bunch of randomly generated computer named BOTs currenly camping a quest MOB, rare spawn, world boss.
The more they can minimize their exposure to these bots and those gold spammers the better their time can be. They do infect PvE mmo's, but their impact is felt much more, cuz no one can effectively address the issue except the empowered player through a working PvP dynamic!
Maybe you should respond more effectively to much more comprehensive, well thought out, and extensive post then simply dismissing it as a manifesto on behalf of PvPers; If it is a manifesto it is on behalf of each and every MMORPG gamer that has dealt with very poor PvE game design that allows other companies and individuals to ruin the game as they cannot effectively enforce policy in their game.
The real undesireables are not players as much as they are randomly generated computer named BOTs, that are not controlled by a program as a MOB would be in a PvE setting; yet within a PvE setting there is absolutely nothing the player nor the development company can do about them!
The case is never closed!
Yes, PvP have been an important part of the genre and it should be. However there must be a meaning to PvP, having thousands of players acting like serial killers for no other reason than to loot the corpses doesn't really make that much sense.
There have been several meaningful PvP solutions in the past, like DaoCs war that ended with burning the enemy cities or Lineage underestimated version where guilds/bloodpledges declared war on eachother and fought them. Eves system works as well but I think it works better in space then in a fantasy game.
One interesting solution would be letting players create own countries and letting others align them to the countries, then those countries would war with eachother over resources, status and territory. Only drawback is that you need mechanics to stop a server being controlled by 1 or possibly 2 huge countries, like having a kingdom tax rate based on size or some other way to make smaller kingdoms who is risky more rewarding.
But there are plenty of other ways to handle PvP as well. The real problem is when you allow loads of players to kill everything you see, because that isn't very realistic. Few if any societies have ever allowed something like that at least for as long as the written word have existed and fantasy MMOs are based a technological time period from about year 0-1600, one would expect societies to evolve in at least somewhat similar ways there as well.
Frankly, ganking is pretty boring and adds little to a MMO while war and cutthroat politics on the other hand is very interesting. That doesn't mean that a game should forbid extremely warlike kingdoms or outlaws but those would be shunned and hunted by other more civilized societies.
One good thing would to have a kingdom tax so you upgrade your kingdom there more successful your citizens (both players and npcs) are. That would encourage players to protect their people.
Just having chaotic FFA PvP is not something new and games with it have never done that great either. PvP needs to evolve to interest more players.
FFA PVP doesn't work, accept it. PVP servers and Opt-In PVP on normal servers can and do work. Hence why most games function this way. Can it be improved? Of course, just as anything can. Saying FFA PVP is the ONLY option is silly. If it was, all games would have it since it is the "only" option. You might not like a game because it lacks FFA PVP, but I'm betting thousands/millions do.
Face that what "you" want isn't what every single gamer out in gaming land wants. I love FFA PVP. At the same time, I accept that it just doesn't work for most people or for a game to be thriving, growing, and not some niche little thing that just exists in the corner. I'd rather have a good game, then a bad one that lets me kill whomever I want.
WAR 40k or Camelot Unchained might be what you are looking for. But so far, they both look like niche PVP games that won't have players invested for years down the line. Just more log in, PEW PEW, log out.
Unfortunately, gamers don't like to play nice and have shiny toys. Everyone wants to stomp on each others gardens. Regardless if you can go kill them, get a bounty on their head or whatever. Alienating a huge chunk of the community so you can be happy isn't going to happen. So far, EQN (to be on topic) hasn't come off as a FFA or even PVP game. Would be crazy to think it won't have PVP in some form, but if at SOE Live they go "Surprise EQN is OW FFA PVP" they would be laughed off the stage.
AKA, everyone has to play the way you want. If I want to farm and craft and some guy runs through and kills me, takes all my stuff, burns my house to the ground, I'm supposed to change my entire reason for playing? Makes no sense.
You summed it up pretty good. EQN is SOE's big next-gen flagship MMO. There's no way they're going to make it a forced OW FFA PVP game lol. It will have PVP no doubt, maybe even at launch (maybe not), but to think that it's being designed as some sort of niche PVP experience is a laughable proposition that's completely detached from reality and matches up with nothing that we've learned so far about EQN.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
Action orientated combat that is Tabless, will allow for open world PvP...just wait and see.
At the end of the day if you get ganked, it's not because someone tab-targetted cheesed you, but simply because you got outplayed. Zerged by a group? Get your own group going.
Open world is very possible and highly likely to work in EQN due to the fact that tab targetting is gone.
Any type of combat allows for OW PVP. Tab, skill shot, front cone, whatever. Some ways can make more "skill" to be needed, but removing tab doesn't change a whole lot.
Ganked by "my" definition implies that you had little to no chance, leaning strongly to none. (5 vs 1, jumped at 50% health, or better yet while at low health and engaged with a mob, while spawning/zoning in, etc). Not 1 vs 1 and one person lost in a "fair" fight.
Again, Zerg for me refers to mindless large numbers of people just follwoing each other around like locusts. No strategy or thought, just red = dead. Small or even large group oriented combat with communication and team work is something completely different. Not just masses of characters throwing themselves at each other. But I do agree a group is a good idea
EQN could easily have OW PVP, just as every single mmorpg could for the most part. It isn't a matter of can it, more would it work. As in, would it be able to not scare off everyone but that small percent of FFA OW PVP fanatics and be sustainable for a long time. SOE is banking their future on EQN, a niche game won't keep the lights on.
thank god it wll be a real sandbox
Maybe someone noticed the market has more than enough themeparks already.
I have 5 themeparks installed that's enough. Give me the sandbox player driven stuff
I love how people want a sandbox game yet cry they want controled or even no pvp options. that is not a sandbox folks.
I for one would love to have an OW PVP EQ game with consequences for mindless ganking such as security status and areas where its not welcome ala high sec in Eve.
I think you are incorrect as there are many pve players who don't pvp precisely because of bad attitude "pvp players'. Telling them to essentially "deal with it" is not going to get you anywhere.
Incidentally, my taste runs toward ffa pvp and I even think that permadeath is an attractive option. So I'm not some player predominantly espousing pve. I've seen enough bad pvp players (and the crying, oh the crying) to see why some people have washed their hands of the pvp community even though there are some very good pvp players out there.
And I don't think your post to be well thought out. I'll reference Allein's "well thought out post". And Gallus85.
And bots are a whole other matter.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
I have been playing MMOs for a very long time, and i allways play pvp servers and i must say after all these years i have learned somthing.
We need a real reason to pvp these days. I love FFA pvp and i love open world but in todays games just killing each other for the sake of killing gets old real quick. and fankly it gets boring.
We need somthing to fight over and it needs to be worth it, and no im not talking GW2 zerg wars over some fort that changes hands 50 times a day. im talking about fighting over shit that matters, and somthing you keep for awhile.
Since a Mob in EQN should be on the same relative strength then a player character i don't see why open PvP is out of the way. But ffa kos pvp does not works because it lacks REASON besides just for killing and loot.
With the Storybricks emergent AI and Faction you could add a REASON for you killing other player.
Say you have two Towns in game that are at war against each other. Now you could align to one of the Towns and then you are able to fight any Player who aligns to the other Town. It would give reason why you kill other people. but it will save those who don't want to participate. You could even add a third Town who both players can align additional to the first two, but if you attack someone who is aligned to that third city and your enemy city you get punished by the third citiy because you attacked an ally.
Now add more Town, Faction, maybe even player created factions and it can get to another Level of PVP. People could chose different through the PvE gameplay, maybe they become Archenemies, maybe they don't like another but not outright kos, because some of your factions would be hurt if you kill. Maybe someone is neutral because it has the same benefits and consequences. And others are friendly cause you have many similar Factions.
Well basicly its a reputation system, that is know in some games, but instead gaining reputation only with NPC, your chosen alignments dictates how your reputation is towards other players
and thats how it works in real life aswell, we don't kill each other cause we are connected through different "factions" be it you city,state,country,religious believe, ethical view, society, whatever name it. If you break your "faction" you get most likely be punished. But if you attack a common enemy no one cares or you even get rewarded (well these days only through military but in ancient days it was more simple)
thank god it will be a real sandbox with pve servers
Soe have a full PvP sandbox in the works in H1Z1, with EQN they have shown they are aiming for as much broad market appeal as they can get, so like the guy above says they will likely have PvE servers, and like a lot of people are saying they will have PvP ones. They have openly stated that "The experience will vary from server to server" So that means multiple servers, no super server tech, so you can pretty much be sure they will have multiple rulesets too.
They know this game could if managed right be their cash cow for a LONG time they wont want to limit their audience in any way with EQN.
I wonder if H1Z1 is the testing ground for EQN? If it explodes with popularity and dwarfs SOE's other MMOs in terms of profitability will that influence the decisions around EQN? I wonder why the devs still haven't talked about it?
While I'd love for H1Z1 to take off, I've yet to see anything that will make it worth playing for anyone beyond the shoot first ask questions never crowd. Great to see companies attempting to blend FPS and mmorpg, but the first few (DayZ, Rust, WarZ, etc) haven't been that great. H1Z1 looks to take it a step further, but from the crowd following it (including myself) and what the devs have said, nothing standing out as special. Tossing a similar system into Norrath isn't going to make it work either.
Apples to Pine Nuts, but keep dreaming that PVP dream
I've been playing mmos since before tab targeting existed. Imagine typing what you wanted to do and to whom every step of the way...
While going through the rotation, using macros, using a million skills correctly does take some "skill", the addition of having to use terrain, movement, positioning, aiming, etc on top of all that takes it up a notch.
Both systems are much more then just tab or not to tab.
Personally, standing relatively still, going down the skill bar and staring at bars is not that exciting. Never has and never will be for me. I blame the devs for that though.
I'd rather have 1 attack and 1 block and have to run around and use every move to it's fullest then have tab target + 50 skills to hit one after another.
To each their own, but neither is superior and both have their moments. All depends on how a game is designed.
The more tab-less games I play, the more and more I can't stand it. Was fun, but being active in more entertaining then my fingers having skill muscle memory. Can't wait to see how "emergent AI" plays into all of this. Mobs that are mobile, react, defend, engage > static stand in a spot and get "skilled" to death ones.
What would be the reason Smed wouldn't just directly say 'there will be open world pvp'?
Looks to me more like generalities meant to hype the game so that the reader reads into it what they want. Therefore you do not alienate any potential audience.
As with most games, I'll have to play it to know what its all about.
Just like dynamic content in WAR, Rift and GW2, the reality didn't come close to my conception.
Just like AoC's combat, EQ2's housing, VGs - well almost everything - what I envisioned from press releases played out differently in reality.
I expect no less here.
I have learned after 10 + years - never put faith in advertising.
Because it means that PVP server will be nothing more than PVE one, with flagging enabled. We want an real PVP system, which is only achievable if the whole game is designed around it.
For example, most korean MMOs dont have PVE-only servers, but PVP there isnt hardcore either.
Its better for the game and the community if they focus on one server type.
I'd rather have a choice of server in a sub-par game than an awesome game where I'm forced to pvp.
Pvp communities are the worst of the worst, why would anyone want to nurture something that toxic?
PvP definitely does have that potential to create "evergreen" content as he says. As long as the people actually intrinsically care about the PvP.
Aka: you want to defend that castle because you and your guild put a lot of time and effort into getting it and upgrading the place. You want to hold the top PvP positions because they give you and your mates a lot of reknown. The alliance rules regarding PKing are to be upheld because it would otherwise damage your reputation etc. etc.
In that regard, I'm not sure why he's talking about "battlegrounds".
I'm not against instanced battlegrounds by themselves, but they're one of the forms of PvP that reset and loop and therefore people usually start just grinding them out for the rewards. They're not quite as "evergreen".
However, maybe he has a different idea about the term "battleground".
You say that like it's a given for every single one out there.
But if you can get over the fact that PvP communities will indeed have rivalries going on and that there's nothing wrong with that, then many PvP communities will be amongst the most lively and interesting ones to be in.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
I still don't get why there's no developer come up with a groundbased PvE/OWPvP hybrid like EvE is, as the solution is actually quiet easy, if you seperate the world into two islands.
You make one island with lots of PvE-content and a PvE-ruleset, and the other island would be where players/guilds/alliances can fight each other to the death over the ressources needed to craft the shiny items needed to beat the toughest dungeons.
This solution makes the OWPvP-island necessary and interesting for the PvP-players and those people who chose not to engage in PvP can stay safe on the PvE-island and mind their own business.
I'm still waiting for a MMORPG like that and it basically resembles the systems of EvE Online, where 75% of the players never leave the security of high-sec.