Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Why don't more sandbox/open world MMOs like Ashes of Creation add PVE servers?

1246

Comments

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,870
    Phry said:
    Kyleran said:
    danwest58 said:
    Ashes will not have PVE servers because the game itself is built around PVP and change.   What they need to make sure they balance is the PKing debuffs with allowing PVP in the open world.   I think they need some work on the PVP idea.   For example the SWG Flagging system is great.    However it has its flaws like allowing people to not be flagged and zerg a castle during a siege.   

    How I would fix this is use the SWG Flagging system,  BUT in a node that is undersiege I would make everyone in that node flagged for PVP.   The reason I would do that is because if you are in that zone during PVP you should be flagged and not protected by being in PVE mode.  That I feel would be a good compromise.  

    I would also make certain areas full out PVP areas so if you are there you will be flagged but I wouldnt make it so critical to PVE play that it forces PVE players into PVP areas.   I would make these areas lucrative like higher amounts of resources vs the PVE areas, but if a player does not want to engage in PVP and wants to get the same PVE resources just at a little slower rate then OK.  They will take risk with their caravans, but I think reducing the ganking and greifing PVP play should come in mind.  That does not mean that there will not be PVE players like myself in PVP areas getting more resources.  I will be there.  BUT I am going to bring friends who will own the solo or the 2 gankers in the area.  Its called friends and if I bring 4 or 5 very good PVPers and you alone try to PK me, well so sad so sorry when they kill you.  :)


     
    Here's the thing, unflagged resource gathers can play real havoc with the economy as there is no way for flagged players to control access to them.

    Contributes to hyperinflation, breeds botters who can only be stopped by mods, and a host of other issues.

    If a game is trying to create a functioning economy having those who can influence but not be impacted in turn is a poor idea. 
    When there are people gaining resources without restriction it tends to drive values down, not up, what does drive values up is when something stops or restricts those resources being gathered/sold, for reference, see Eve Online.
    See, economics is complicated,  takes much to explain. In game currency is a resource in many games, EVE is a great example where botters are driving inflation as they are farming anomalies which provide direct ISK payouts. 

    Even in null sec where they can be attacked they thrive, and most of the high sec ones are untouchable.

    While in theory ore, or wood should go down in price, rare is the MMORPG where I've seen that to be true, likely due to insufficient money drains.

    Also, even if true, what if I as miner do not want to see prices drop, and would prefer to kill the competition to keep my ore prices higher?
    Gdemami[Deleted User]

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • AethaerynAethaeryn Member RarePosts: 3,150
    My son plays in a sandbox. . builds whatever he wants and doesn't kill anyone.  Saying you have to have complete freedom for it to be a sandbox is a bit absurd.  You can't climb every mountain. . you can't dig everywhere.  There are many things that are restricted in a sandbox game.   I enjoy PvP but I don't consider it a requirement of a sandbox game by definition.  To a lot of people it is important.

    I think the reason there aren't PvE servers is that it would get VERY boring very fast.  I often wanted a Darkfall PvE experience. . but then I realized. . what would be the point?    While I disagree that PvP is necessary for a sandbox I do think that the PvP becomes a large part of the content in these games.  It would seem extra unnatural to not be able to engage in combat (especially if someone is griefing you).  I just don't buy the it's not a sandbox without me being able to kill anyone any time argument. . life is the ultimate sandbox but there are restrictions on behaviour (created by consequences) that can't be recreated in a video game. . so artificial restrictions are fine by me to balance that out (i.e. karma systems, limited looting etc.)

    Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!

  • SlyLoKSlyLoK Member RarePosts: 2,698
    Ego. Simple. The devs don't do it because they don't want to admit their vision is flawed or in the minority.

    Honestly I can only remember EA coming to their senses with UO by adding Trammel.
    GdemamiPonzini
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,003
    I think the reason not only the games mentioned but a lot of other PvP-centric games as well don't have PvE servers is simply because the Devs are themselves focused on PvP.  I've seem a few PvP games that would make great PvE games if they simply added PvE only zones but that's not what the Devs envisioned for those games.  

    I think the most successful games do both and there are players in some of them who very rarely or never PvP, just as there are players who seldom or very rarely PvE but they all have that option in those types of games.
    [Deleted User]

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • TheScavengerTheScavenger Member EpicPosts: 3,321
    Aethaeryn said:
    My son plays in a sandbox. . builds whatever he wants and doesn't kill anyone.  Saying you have to have complete freedom for it to be a sandbox is a bit absurd.  You can't climb every mountain. . you can't dig everywhere.  There are many things that are restricted in a sandbox game.   I enjoy PvP but I don't consider it a requirement of a sandbox game by definition.  To a lot of people it is important.

    I think the reason there aren't PvE servers is that it would get VERY boring very fast.  I often wanted a Darkfall PvE experience. . but then I realized. . what would be the point?    While I disagree that PvP is necessary for a sandbox I do think that the PvP becomes a large part of the content in these games.  It would seem extra unnatural to not be able to engage in combat (especially if someone is griefing you).  I just don't buy the it's not a sandbox without me being able to kill anyone any time argument. . life is the ultimate sandbox but there are restrictions on behaviour (created by consequences) that can't be recreated in a video game. . so artificial restrictions are fine by me to balance that out (i.e. karma systems, limited looting etc.)
    Well, he CAN. he'd just be put in prison until he isn't a minor, and then still might be transferred to prison

    I wonder if pvpers would like that. Where they kill someone and then their character is in prison for 20 years and then they can play again. They do always say something about realism in their sandbox game, that sure be realistic

    More likely however is the MMO has too limited funds for PvE content and relies too much on PvP to create pseudo-fake content. The only exception thus far has been EVE, but EVE has a TON of PVE content and "safer" areas. The vast majority of people that play don't even leave high-sec, which shows how big the PvE community is for MMOs. But that started off pretty lite too, but it sure grew into something amazing.

    My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB: 

    https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul



  • Dixi01Dixi01 Member UncommonPosts: 54
    As I understand, MMO developers in F2P games gaining major part of income from  Player Killers, gankers, and other scum type players, who like to kill defenseless players, and who are not interested in any PvE activities, so they just buy overpowered gear in game shop. Creating just one PvE server will remove majority of victims from PvP servers.
    As as result, many game dev's thinks, that it's unprofitable to create separate PvE servers.
    MMO games, that are more oriented on stable income from regular subscription, and not on cash shop, to my disappointment, are all in the past.
  • DijonCyanideDijonCyanide Member UncommonPosts: 586
    If it is a mmo that offers only PvP servers but has PvE content & is a free/buy-to-play game I only buy items/services I know I won't lose in-game.  I rarely will buy anything or much though playing a game under that scenario ... my example for this is EVE Online & that is a game I think has a lot going for it but since I have no interest in PvP it never holds my interest for long.  Another one I really enjoyed a couple of years ago when I tried was the Battlestar Galactica Online.  Pure PvP so I never invested any real money, but was a fun game till some PvPer came along "ganking".

    I have had no problem in the past, nor would I still, subscribing to a mmo if it offers enough of what I like, I feel like I can progress at a decent pace, & I'm having fun.  There are so many more good quality mmos released now though compared to back-in-the-day when subscriber based mmos was the focus over free/buy-to-play mmos with micro-transactions.

    I've never had a problem with micro-transactions minus the now prevalent gambling aspect that it has become currently.  I simply want to know what I'm buying.  Heck, some of the mmos don't even post the statistics & odds of their in-game gambling. 
  • HengistHengist Member RarePosts: 1,304
    Why is there a feeling of entitlement that all games must appeal to every single player?


    I understand the argument that a potentially larger pool of players can be a good thing, but the reality is that very few games are going to sell something that a large pool of people will be passionate about, and will continue to spend money on. What's the problem with certain games saying: "You know what, we're going to build some amazing PvP", and other games say "we're going to build the best themepark experience we can for people"?

    The real issue? The self entitlement you see all of forums: "Just add something more for me." I'd love to see a developer stand up and say "Hey, glad you are interested, but that just isn't us, if you really want xyz feature, this isn't the game for you."

    When studios focus on something, and really focus, there seems like there is a much greater chance that they succeed, and become beloved by their target market. Games that try to be everything to everyone, often end up being nothing to anyone, and are the games most consumers know lack staying power or quality. Dev's just bite off more than they can chew. 

    Deliver a high quality experience, to a niche market, and you'll have an absolute hit. It may not appeal to everyone, but it'll end up sticking around. 

    It is semi-amusing seeing all the folks who spend time suggesting that games should change a core focus to meet their needs. Very few people realize that they may not be the core audience, and honestly, the game is better off without their dollars, which are destined to be short term, and not the audience that is apt to spend a longer time enjoying (and spending for) said game.

  • MoiraeMoirae Member RarePosts: 3,318
    Because then they wouldn't make as much money  due to the insane costs of pay to win pvp. 
  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Member EpicPosts: 5,999
    Dixi01 said:
    Dev's do not create PvE servers because:

    1. Most PvP'ers are actually griefers gankes and donators. They are coming to a game not for fair PvP but to enjoy killing defenseless players. Same time they do bring good income via in game shop, since they usually too lazy to play normal PvE part of a game.
    If dev's will split those groups of players to different servers, they afraid to loose a lot of PvP gankers. Why they do not consider that for each ganker lost they might gain several PvE players - I dunno.

    2. Majority of PvE players usually likes to play the game "normal way" without buying game currency or cool stuff in a shop, since it spoils fun of in game progress. So they pay subscription only, and might buy some cosmetic items, while PvPers like to toss a lot of cash to be "1st and overpowered".

    3. PvE servers usually require more content. For PvP dev's can create basic environment, some typical stupid "go fetch or kill 10 rats" quest line, with quests that leads to PvP confrontation soon, and says that the game is ready.
    1) those  players will still have eachother

    2) POE is a pve game that sells lots of stuff - you made this argument up

    3) the OP isn't asking for more content, just consensual pvp
  • TillerTiller Member LegendaryPosts: 11,399
    Phry said:
    Kyleran said:
    danwest58 said:
    Ashes will not have PVE servers because the game itself is built around PVP and change.   What they need to make sure they balance is the PKing debuffs with allowing PVP in the open world.   I think they need some work on the PVP idea.   For example the SWG Flagging system is great.    However it has its flaws like allowing people to not be flagged and zerg a castle during a siege.   

    How I would fix this is use the SWG Flagging system,  BUT in a node that is undersiege I would make everyone in that node flagged for PVP.   The reason I would do that is because if you are in that zone during PVP you should be flagged and not protected by being in PVE mode.  That I feel would be a good compromise.  

    I would also make certain areas full out PVP areas so if you are there you will be flagged but I wouldnt make it so critical to PVE play that it forces PVE players into PVP areas.   I would make these areas lucrative like higher amounts of resources vs the PVE areas, but if a player does not want to engage in PVP and wants to get the same PVE resources just at a little slower rate then OK.  They will take risk with their caravans, but I think reducing the ganking and greifing PVP play should come in mind.  That does not mean that there will not be PVE players like myself in PVP areas getting more resources.  I will be there.  BUT I am going to bring friends who will own the solo or the 2 gankers in the area.  Its called friends and if I bring 4 or 5 very good PVPers and you alone try to PK me, well so sad so sorry when they kill you.  :)


     
    Here's the thing, unflagged resource gathers can play real havoc with the economy as there is no way for flagged players to control access to them.

    Contributes to hyperinflation, breeds botters who can only be stopped by mods, and a host of other issues.

    If a game is trying to create a functioning economy having those who can influence but not be impacted in turn is a poor idea. 
    When there are people gaining resources without restriction it tends to drive values down, not up, what does drive values up is when something stops or restricts those resources being gathered/sold, for reference, see Eve Online.
    This argument is not realistic. GW2 has a very active and great economy with realistic prices, in fact the best I have seen in an MMO in ages. It is what I would consider a fair market, all supply/demand driven, including gems. Then you have BDO which is a big what the actual fuck? lol.
    MadFrenchie
    SWG Bloodfin vet
    Elder Jedi/Elder Bounty Hunter
     
  • TillerTiller Member LegendaryPosts: 11,399
    pve would eliminate it from the sandbox category.
    Either joking...or you know nothing about mmos lol.
    SWG Bloodfin vet
    Elder Jedi/Elder Bounty Hunter
     
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 32,600
    pve would eliminate it from the sandbox category.
    A tale in the desert would like to have a word with you.
    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • TillerTiller Member LegendaryPosts: 11,399
    I think the reason not only the games mentioned but a lot of other PvP-centric games as well don't have PvE servers is simply because the Devs are themselves focused on PvP.  I've seem a few PvP games that would make great PvE games if they simply added PvE only zones but that's not what the Devs envisioned for those games.  

    I think the most successful games do both and there are players in some of them who very rarely or never PvP, just as there are players who seldom or very rarely PvE but they all have that option in those types of games.
    I remember SWG had the flagging system, that worked for the most part. TEF riders used to troll the folks who were perma overt by dropping a heal on someone else flagged. It made it fun since you never knew if that afk guy over there on the steps to Theed spamming his store wasn't gonna jump in. Then there were those accidental TEFs from buffs that the poor docs and entertainers experienced lol .

    SOE did finally add pvp battleground areas on Rori for their GCW update. They were popular for maybe a week and then everyone went back to random open world pvp and TEF riding. I think large PvP zones within the game world works, but I also think you should be able to flag up and jump right into a fight whenever if you choose. Ganking some unsuspecting noob picking flowers in their garden may be funny, but it's not the best mechanics for a sustainable and healthy pvp/pve environment. Those guys just leave and you are left with the kinds of people you see in BDO chat (which I have perma muted myself).

    Octagon7711
    SWG Bloodfin vet
    Elder Jedi/Elder Bounty Hunter
     
  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,012
    TheAmir said:
    Every time I see a new MMO being developed that has the "OWPVP" feature, I immediately cross it off my list, no matter how promising the PVE may look. I've played PVP games enough to know what they turn into--and that's why the majority never see huge sub numbers. Most players really don't want to get ganked over and over when they're trying to play a game. And so far, I've never seen a company come up with a way to allow PVP'ers to have their ganking fun while PVE'ers can do their own thing without getting harassed...unless there are separate servers.  Ironically, the PVP servers on those MMOs are always the lowest populated servers...so, yeah.

    Anyway, scratch AOC off the list *shrug*
    Thats because most OWPVP games try to cater to the PVP full Loot crowd as Meaning full PVP.   This is a bad idea look at LOA and why this game cannot find enough players to play it.   Now OW PVP is not a problem if you make it so that you dont focus on the bad PVP behavior.   Ashes is trying to make it so that if someone wants to have that bad behavior they can but they end up losing stats the more corruption they have.   Do you think a player will gank players over and over again if their stats can degrade down to a level 1, and if they are killed you can take everything on them including their gear?   And the only thing they might get from you is 5% of your crafting resources if you have crafting resources on you?   No most players are not going to do that.

    Add to that AOC is making Bounty hunters in the game so gankers end up getting hunted all the time and risk a lot.  

    If done right the PVP will not turn this game into a gank box.  The problem is both sides need to give the developers time because if PVP is done right it can enhance the game.  
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,870
    danwest58 said:
    TheAmir said:
    Every time I see a new MMO being developed that has the "OWPVP" feature, I immediately cross it off my list, no matter how promising the PVE may look. I've played PVP games enough to know what they turn into--and that's why the majority never see huge sub numbers. Most players really don't want to get ganked over and over when they're trying to play a game. And so far, I've never seen a company come up with a way to allow PVP'ers to have their ganking fun while PVE'ers can do their own thing without getting harassed...unless there are separate servers.  Ironically, the PVP servers on those MMOs are always the lowest populated servers...so, yeah.

    Anyway, scratch AOC off the list *shrug*
    Thats because most OWPVP games try to cater to the PVP full Loot crowd as Meaning full PVP.   This is a bad idea look at LOA and why this game cannot find enough players to play it.   Now OW PVP is not a problem if you make it so that you dont focus on the bad PVP behavior.   Ashes is trying to make it so that if someone wants to have that bad behavior they can but they end up losing stats the more corruption they have.   Do you think a player will gank players over and over again if their stats can degrade down to a level 1, and if they are killed you can take everything on them including their gear?   And the only thing they might get from you is 5% of your crafting resources if you have crafting resources on you?   No most players are not going to do that.

    Add to that AOC is making Bounty hunters in the game so gankers end up getting hunted all the time and risk a lot.  

    If done right the PVP will not turn this game into a gank box.  The problem is both sides need to give the developers time because if PVP is done right it can enhance the game.  
    What is a bit wonky is they punish non combatants (drop more loot, lose more exp) who don't fight back more heavily than those who do.

    Thinking of all of the times I've been ganked while at low heath fighting a NPC this seems like a poor idea at first glance.

    Now the Mordred server in DAOC dealt with this by clearing the NPCs aggro table so the person attacked could disengage. 

    Also the player attacked had their health bar restored to 100% which mostly worked.

    The one exception was if a player was very low in health a single high damage alpha strike could kill them.

    Stealthers including archers often took advantage of this. I would wait patiently until a group over pulled then fire away.
    [Deleted User]

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Tiller said:
    Phry said:
    Kyleran said:
    danwest58 said:
    Ashes will not have PVE servers because the game itself is built around PVP and change.   What they need to make sure they balance is the PKing debuffs with allowing PVP in the open world.   I think they need some work on the PVP idea.   For example the SWG Flagging system is great.    However it has its flaws like allowing people to not be flagged and zerg a castle during a siege.   

    How I would fix this is use the SWG Flagging system,  BUT in a node that is undersiege I would make everyone in that node flagged for PVP.   The reason I would do that is because if you are in that zone during PVP you should be flagged and not protected by being in PVE mode.  That I feel would be a good compromise.  

    I would also make certain areas full out PVP areas so if you are there you will be flagged but I wouldnt make it so critical to PVE play that it forces PVE players into PVP areas.   I would make these areas lucrative like higher amounts of resources vs the PVE areas, but if a player does not want to engage in PVP and wants to get the same PVE resources just at a little slower rate then OK.  They will take risk with their caravans, but I think reducing the ganking and greifing PVP play should come in mind.  That does not mean that there will not be PVE players like myself in PVP areas getting more resources.  I will be there.  BUT I am going to bring friends who will own the solo or the 2 gankers in the area.  Its called friends and if I bring 4 or 5 very good PVPers and you alone try to PK me, well so sad so sorry when they kill you.  :)


     
    Here's the thing, unflagged resource gathers can play real havoc with the economy as there is no way for flagged players to control access to them.

    Contributes to hyperinflation, breeds botters who can only be stopped by mods, and a host of other issues.

    If a game is trying to create a functioning economy having those who can influence but not be impacted in turn is a poor idea. 
    When there are people gaining resources without restriction it tends to drive values down, not up, what does drive values up is when something stops or restricts those resources being gathered/sold, for reference, see Eve Online.
    This argument is not realistic. GW2 has a very active and great economy with realistic prices, in fact the best I have seen in an MMO in ages. It is what I would consider a fair market, all supply/demand driven, including gems. Then you have BDO which is a big what the actual fuck? lol.
    That's one thing I remember about GW2, too.  The economy was very, very fine-tuned and it made purchasing items a much more enjoyable process.
    Tiller

    image
  • MMOExposedMMOExposed Member RarePosts: 7,394
    I wana know as well

    Philosophy of MMO Game Design

  • barasawabarasawa Member UncommonPosts: 618
    Kyleran said:
    Phry said:
    Kyleran said:
    danwest58 said:
    Ashes will not have PVE servers because the game itself is built around PVP and change.   What they need to make sure they balance is the PKing debuffs with allowing PVP in the open world.   I think they need some work on the PVP idea.   For example the SWG Flagging system is great.    However it has its flaws like allowing people to not be flagged and zerg a castle during a siege.   

    How I would fix this is use the SWG Flagging system,  BUT in a node that is undersiege I would make everyone in that node flagged for PVP.   The reason I would do that is because if you are in that zone during PVP you should be flagged and not protected by being in PVE mode.  That I feel would be a good compromise.  

    I would also make certain areas full out PVP areas so if you are there you will be flagged but I wouldnt make it so critical to PVE play that it forces PVE players into PVP areas.   I would make these areas lucrative like higher amounts of resources vs the PVE areas, but if a player does not want to engage in PVP and wants to get the same PVE resources just at a little slower rate then OK.  They will take risk with their caravans, but I think reducing the ganking and greifing PVP play should come in mind.  That does not mean that there will not be PVE players like myself in PVP areas getting more resources.  I will be there.  BUT I am going to bring friends who will own the solo or the 2 gankers in the area.  Its called friends and if I bring 4 or 5 very good PVPers and you alone try to PK me, well so sad so sorry when they kill you.  :)


     
    Here's the thing, unflagged resource gathers can play real havoc with the economy as there is no way for flagged players to control access to them.

    Contributes to hyperinflation, breeds botters who can only be stopped by mods, and a host of other issues.

    If a game is trying to create a functioning economy having those who can influence but not be impacted in turn is a poor idea. 
    When there are people gaining resources without restriction it tends to drive values down, not up, what does drive values up is when something stops or restricts those resources being gathered/sold, for reference, see Eve Online.
    See, economics is complicated,  takes much to explain. In game currency is a resource in many games, EVE is a great example where botters are driving inflation as they are farming anomalies which provide direct ISK payouts. 

    Even in null sec where they can be attacked they thrive, and most of the high sec ones are untouchable.

    While in theory ore, or wood should go down in price, rare is the MMORPG where I've seen that to be true, likely due to insufficient money drains.

    Also, even if true, what if I as miner do not want to see prices drop, and would prefer to kill the competition to keep my ore prices higher?
    Now that you mention it, I recall all three times I've tried to play Eve. Each time I'd make a character, and within a half hour at most, Still in the starting area, a big freaking ship warps in and kills me, and pods me! A noob with nothing podded in a High Sec starting zone. 
    In frustration, I go to another faction and try a new character. Same bloody thing! 
    I go through all the factions, get podded every time in noobyland, and give up. 
    This happened the exact same way ALL THREE TIMES I'VE TRIED EVE !

    If there are bots there, they must be high levels, because the gankers kill anything they think is an easy kill, even in High Security areas.  Unless of course it's the gankers bots. 


    Lost my mind, now trying to lose yours...

  • barasawabarasawa Member UncommonPosts: 618
    danwest58 said: Which LOA are you referring to?
    TheAmir said:
    Every time I see a new MMO being developed that has the "OWPVP" feature, I immediately cross it off my list, no matter how promising the PVE may look. I've played PVP games enough to know what they turn into--and that's why the majority never see huge sub numbers. Most players really don't want to get ganked over and over when they're trying to play a game. And so far, I've never seen a company come up with a way to allow PVP'ers to have their ganking fun while PVE'ers can do their own thing without getting harassed...unless there are separate servers.  Ironically, the PVP servers on those MMOs are always the lowest populated servers...so, yeah.

    Anyway, scratch AOC off the list *shrug*
    Thats because most OWPVP games try to cater to the PVP full Loot crowd as Meaning full PVP.   This is a bad idea look at LOA and why this game cannot find enough players to play it.   Now OW PVP is not a problem if you make it so that you dont focus on the bad PVP behavior.   Ashes is trying to make it so that if someone wants to have that bad behavior they can but they end up losing stats the more corruption they have.   Do you think a player will gank players over and over again if their stats can degrade down to a level 1, and if they are killed you can take everything on them including their gear?   And the only thing they might get from you is 5% of your crafting resources if you have crafting resources on you?   No most players are not going to do that.

    Add to that AOC is making Bounty hunters in the game so gankers end up getting hunted all the time and risk a lot.  

    If done right the PVP will not turn this game into a gank box.  The problem is both sides need to give the developers time because if PVP is done right it can enhance the game.  

    Lost my mind, now trying to lose yours...

  • barasawabarasawa Member UncommonPosts: 618
    Frode789 said:
    AoC is striking a fine balance between good PvE content and good PvP content. It won't be a PK gankfest (thank god), but PvP hardcore fans will find tons of various ways of enjoying PvP. It will feature an open world PvP set, with flagging when you attack people. You can even become a bounty hunter (requires a quest ++ first), in which you hunt the corrupt =) If you do not like PvP, there will be lots of traditional content as well. And if you are afraid of being constantly ganked, remember that people that attack and kill you (if you do not defend yourself), will become flagged and corrupt. It will carry various negative effects, such as risk of losing items etc. I'm sure they will find a good balance. 

    Relax, a lot of info is coming soon when they lift the NDA too. =) 
    That won't stop any of them. They'll just have multiple characters, and when one gets corrupted, and IF they want to remove that for some reason, they'll just hand off all their equipment to another character, or put it in  a stash, and get killed until the corruption is gone, since they say the only way to reduce corruption is to die. Either that or delete the character after transferring loot to help bootstrap their new murderer. 

    Also, the 3x XP debt, unless it actually reduces character level, won't be much, if any, issue for them. A lot of them don't care, and if they're max level and it doesn't reduce their level, then it's totally a joke.

    Even if the corruption goes Account Wide, they'll just set up multiple accounts if they are able to, but I didn't see anything that says it's account wide. 

    If no NPC will trade with them, that's not going to stop them either, they'll just use another character as a store mule.

    Sure, some of them are too lazy to do the steps to avoid nullify the penalties but the main griefers will.  

    This isn't even a wild prediction as this same behavior has been very well documented in numerous games. 

    UngoodcraftseekerKnytta

    Lost my mind, now trying to lose yours...

  • UngoodUngood Member LegendaryPosts: 7,534
    barasawa said:
    Frode789 said:
    AoC is striking a fine balance between good PvE content and good PvP content. It won't be a PK gankfest (thank god), but PvP hardcore fans will find tons of various ways of enjoying PvP. It will feature an open world PvP set, with flagging when you attack people. You can even become a bounty hunter (requires a quest ++ first), in which you hunt the corrupt =) If you do not like PvP, there will be lots of traditional content as well. And if you are afraid of being constantly ganked, remember that people that attack and kill you (if you do not defend yourself), will become flagged and corrupt. It will carry various negative effects, such as risk of losing items etc. I'm sure they will find a good balance. 

    Relax, a lot of info is coming soon when they lift the NDA too. =) 
    That won't stop any of them. They'll just have multiple characters, and when one gets corrupted, and IF they want to remove that for some reason, they'll just hand off all their equipment to another character, or put it in  a stash, and get killed until the corruption is gone, since they say the only way to reduce corruption is to die. Either that or delete the character after transferring loot to help bootstrap their new murderer. 

    Also, the 3x XP debt, unless it actually reduces character level, won't be much, if any, issue for them. A lot of them don't care, and if they're max level and it doesn't reduce their level, then it's totally a joke.

    Even if the corruption goes Account Wide, they'll just set up multiple accounts if they are able to, but I didn't see anything that says it's account wide. 

    If no NPC will trade with them, that's not going to stop them either, they'll just use another character as a store mule.

    Sure, some of them are too lazy to do the steps to avoid nullify the penalties but the main griefers will.  

    This isn't even a wild prediction as this same behavior has been very well documented in numerous games. 

    Yup..

    PKers, Griefers, Gankers, whatever you want to call these scum, will just be jerks in any game that will let them.. destroy the game's community and attraction, so that current players leave, and new players are driven off by the stigma that PKers have given the game, and the game becomes a ghost town swiftly.

    The few that remain, will be hard core PvP/PKers, and all the wanna-be's, gankers and trolls will cry on forums that there is no good PK PvP games out there for them to play.

    And the circle will continue.. which is why most Open World PvP games are mainly dead.
    craftseeker
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.

  • linadragonlinadragon Member RarePosts: 589
    It is because adding PVE elements into these games takes more development time and many devs either don't have the time/money or don't want to invest the time/money. They keep spewing their crap about "emergent gameplay", but realistically it just turns into a gankbox circlejerk. 

    Like others I agree that SWG did things right with their flagging system. They also had planets (we can call them zones for other mmorpgs) that were PVP only and completely avoidable. They were sandbox and mixed the elements of PVP and PVE extremely well and frankly it has been unrivaled even to this day at this point.

    Everyone seems to keep falling short of what SWG did and continually make excuses for sloppy design and bad PVP elements. We also have astronomically bad design all around anymore in MMORPGS and while I love the genre in many ways it has become so dulled and streamlined that there is no real thought. Few pay attention to the journey, there is little to no work in themepark MMORPGs needs until you ride the gear treadmill at end game so you can do a few of the new expansion raids.... 

    We don't see it because people seem to forget good design elements of the past and apply them in better ways now. We want a better version of SWG (non NGE though please) like systems and not something that is PVE only or PVP only, but we want that consensual stuff that used to exist due to avoidable planets/zones and the flagging system. When you used to see someone is SWG that walked around with the PVP flag on daily it was a "Wow that guys a badass" sort of moment because you were welcoming everyone to come attack you at any point, but it was YOUR CHOICE and it wasn't FORCED on you like it is in so many of today's sandbox games. 
  • linadragonlinadragon Member RarePosts: 589
    danwest58 said:
    Ashes will not have PVE servers because the game itself is built around PVP and change.   What they need to make sure they balance is the PKing debuffs with allowing PVP in the open world.   I think they need some work on the PVP idea.   For example the SWG Flagging system is great.    However it has its flaws like allowing people to not be flagged and zerg a castle during a siege.   

    How I would fix this is use the SWG Flagging system,  BUT in a node that is undersiege I would make everyone in that node flagged for PVP.   The reason I would do that is because if you are in that zone during PVP you should be flagged and not protected by being in PVE mode.  That I feel would be a good compromise.  

    I would also make certain areas full out PVP areas so if you are there you will be flagged but I wouldnt make it so critical to PVE play that it forces PVE players into PVP areas.   I would make these areas lucrative like higher amounts of resources vs the PVE areas, but if a player does not want to engage in PVP and wants to get the same PVE resources just at a little slower rate then OK.  They will take risk with their caravans, but I think reducing the ganking and greifing PVP play should come in mind.  That does not mean that there will not be PVE players like myself in PVP areas getting more resources.  I will be there.  BUT I am going to bring friends who will own the solo or the 2 gankers in the area.  Its called friends and if I bring 4 or 5 very good PVPers and you alone try to PK me, well so sad so sorry when they kill you.  :)


     
    Or just go back to the oldschool SWG solution of flagging for PVP SWG style and have that affect the game world in the same way. It isn't hard to make there still be PVP in the same world, but have it be consensual. 
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,870
    barasawa said:
    Kyleran said:
    Phry said:
    Kyleran said:
    danwest58 said:
    Ashes will not have PVE servers because the game itself is built around PVP and change.   What they need to make sure they balance is the PKing debuffs with allowing PVP in the open world.   I think they need some work on the PVP idea.   For example the SWG Flagging system is great.    However it has its flaws like allowing people to not be flagged and zerg a castle during a siege.   

    How I would fix this is use the SWG Flagging system,  BUT in a node that is undersiege I would make everyone in that node flagged for PVP.   The reason I would do that is because if you are in that zone during PVP you should be flagged and not protected by being in PVE mode.  That I feel would be a good compromise.  

    I would also make certain areas full out PVP areas so if you are there you will be flagged but I wouldnt make it so critical to PVE play that it forces PVE players into PVP areas.   I would make these areas lucrative like higher amounts of resources vs the PVE areas, but if a player does not want to engage in PVP and wants to get the same PVE resources just at a little slower rate then OK.  They will take risk with their caravans, but I think reducing the ganking and greifing PVP play should come in mind.  That does not mean that there will not be PVE players like myself in PVP areas getting more resources.  I will be there.  BUT I am going to bring friends who will own the solo or the 2 gankers in the area.  Its called friends and if I bring 4 or 5 very good PVPers and you alone try to PK me, well so sad so sorry when they kill you.  :)


     
    Here's the thing, unflagged resource gathers can play real havoc with the economy as there is no way for flagged players to control access to them.

    Contributes to hyperinflation, breeds botters who can only be stopped by mods, and a host of other issues.

    If a game is trying to create a functioning economy having those who can influence but not be impacted in turn is a poor idea. 
    When there are people gaining resources without restriction it tends to drive values down, not up, what does drive values up is when something stops or restricts those resources being gathered/sold, for reference, see Eve Online.
    See, economics is complicated,  takes much to explain. In game currency is a resource in many games, EVE is a great example where botters are driving inflation as they are farming anomalies which provide direct ISK payouts. 

    Even in null sec where they can be attacked they thrive, and most of the high sec ones are untouchable.

    While in theory ore, or wood should go down in price, rare is the MMORPG where I've seen that to be true, likely due to insufficient money drains.

    Also, even if true, what if I as miner do not want to see prices drop, and would prefer to kill the competition to keep my ore prices higher?
    Now that you mention it, I recall all three times I've tried to play Eve. Each time I'd make a character, and within a half hour at most, Still in the starting area, a big freaking ship warps in and kills me, and pods me! A noob with nothing podded in a High Sec starting zone. 
    In frustration, I go to another faction and try a new character. Same bloody thing! 
    I go through all the factions, get podded every time in noobyland, and give up. 
    This happened the exact same way ALL THREE TIMES I'VE TRIED EVE !

    If there are bots there, they must be high levels, because the gankers kill anything they think is an easy kill, even in High Security areas.  Unless of course it's the gankers bots. 


    Your story seems far fetched, especially in light of the specific prohibition against.it.

    https://support.eveonline.com/hc/en-us/articles/203209712-Rookie-Griefing

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






Sign In or Register to comment.