Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

The latest devblog. Forced PvP is gone.

189101113

Comments

  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,211
    edited July 10
    Well, without PvP this game seems pointless to me. It will be one more singleplayer MMO in the line. As it is about competition and cooperation. Remove the competition, and there is not need of cooperation. So multiplayer activities become pointless. And I doubt players play MMOs to make alone quests and to grind. To remove the "forced" PvP means, if you want to complete, I can simply ignore you and vice versa. And at some moment the players will ask themselves why they grind if there will not be competition. And then the game is over. Most will return to LoL, Fortnite, Mordhau and etc. Over and over again the developers of a MMORPG fail with the task of open world.

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 14,301
    Iselin said:
    Bloodaxes said:
    Also, I'm sure there is plenty of debacle on that system even from PVPers who don't want to do PVE stuff so let's not forget that it's both ways.


    Yup for sure which I find hilarious since ESO is one of the few games where you can level very comfortably exclusively in PvP so the need for those who just want to be in Cyrodiil all the time to step out is very low compared to most other games. But I find wanting that 10% of the game landscape where the PvP happens to have no-PvP instances even funnier in a game that is so PvE centric.

    I think both are just suffering from PvX envy because we have it all and they don't :)

    I have the Explorer title on all my characters in ESO, this implies staying quite a bit in Cyrodiil and even sneaking into the enemy bases, and I only got killed twice by other players doing so. Cyrodiil is HUGE. The chances to meet others are small if you play smart and do those objectives outside of the rush hours. It's even easier with decent stealth gear, since all classes can stealth in that game.
    Yes I know. As far as PvP zones go, Cyrodiil is probably one of the safest in any MMO for someone who wants to avoid conflict, not only because of its size but because, as you say, they cleverly gave everyone the ability to stealth by just crouching and walking crouched.

    Hell you don't even have to be in the real Cyrodiil, just the noobie tutorial area to get some benefit from it. Just completing the tutorial gets you 3 skill points which are very handy at level 10 and you level up the PvP-only skill lines enough by doing that to be able to acquire the 30 second speed buff skill that lets you zoom around like crazy in PvE as well whether running or mounted.

    Yet there are still many who have never set foot in Cyrodiil and won't. IMO that's just an unreasonable level of aversion to PvP.
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

    "... the "influencers" which is the tech name we call sell outs now..."
    __ Wizardry, 2020
  • RhoklawRhoklaw Member EpicPosts: 7,021
    ikcin said:
    Well, without PvP this game seems pointless to me. It will be one more singleplayer MMO in the line. As it is about competition and cooperation. Remove the competition, and there is not need of cooperation. So multiplayer activities become pointless. And I doubt players play MMOs to make alone quests and to grind. To remove the "forced" PvP means, if you want to complete, I can simply ignore you and vice versa. And at some moment the players will ask themselves why they grind if there will not be competition. And then the game is over. Most will return to LoL, Fortnite, Mordhau and etc. Over and over again the developers of a MMORPG fail with the task of open world.

    I was under the impression that factions were permanently flagged for PvP, but I guesss that isn't the case. I'm not even sure the point of having the 3 factions if that isn't their form of PvP. FFA PvP is definitely not the best alternative, because a game that allows griefing and ganking is by far worse than a game that doesn't.

    So if all they have is sieges and invasions, than it's going to be a rough launch. I just thought they had some sort of PvP available outside of sieges like flagged, faction or something.
    YashaX

  • kitaradkitarad Member EpicPosts: 5,834
    edited July 10
    You cannot avoid PvP in newer games these days so just play within your acceptable parameters. If the game insists on putting you in positions where you're uncomfortable and insufficient protections are afforded from griefing...walk away and watch for updates and improvements. If none come, scratch the game off your list, no loss there. Chances are the game will become lowly populated if your comfort zones are being breached you're not the only one feeling this way.

    Since the explosion of this genre with the help of that juggernaut WoW developers aren't happy with a slice of the pie they want the whole damn pie. So rest assured games that don't do well, will close down. Just make sure you don't support any game that is half assing anything. New World is half assing .

  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,211
    kitarad said:
    Iselin said:
    kitarad said:
    No one saw my post or answered my question. :/

    Why are games like Fortnite or PUBG so popular? Full loot PvP works so do you lose a lot in Fortnite or PUBG and can you get back up fast was my question. I've never played them so have no idea so I am curious and my opinion is that games where you tend to lose a lot of time or gear when full loot PvP is in force will not be successful and wish to know if I am right about these two games.

    I am aware that you may lose a fortune in EVE but I also read that type of sting takes very long to set up. I also hear people don't fly what you cannot afford to lose leading me to believe people play very carefully. That was the same in Everquest you played carefully there too and could lose everything if you're not careful in it's early days albeit it was a PvE game.
    For the same reason shooters have been popular for 20 years +: casual 10 minute matches with disposable characters. It has always been a whole different PvP genre with 0 attachment to your character.

    Shooters are a whole different type of game that have no business being discussed in the same thread as RPGs and MMORPGs that are all about character development and attachment to that character.
    You say that but posters like @bcbully and @ikcin keep telling us how the popularity of those games are evidence that FFA full loot PvP is what the masses love and those of us who enjoy MMORPGs don't understand this. We here in this forum are the deluded ones that continue with our mistaken belief and we are simply too stupid to see where the genre is going.

    I think MMORPGs that take a long time to develop your character don't enjoy losing their gear and loot especially when getting them back take months of work. Hence why I tried to ask about Fortnite and PUBG to argue why that system will not fair well for an MMORPG where character development and gear are king.

    I am also at a very big loss why people always argue that PvP and PvE servers just make the PvP servers less popular. When WoW classic opened there were far more PvP servers than PvE servers although many did end up requesting for transfers out of the PvP servers they were getting ganked in. Another untruth revealed by what happened in WoW.

    These developers here did specifically say they are not going to devote the resources to PvP and PvE servers. That is however a different issue but the games that can create both types of servers do benefit from appealing to both types of players. Even DAoC had PvE servers like Gaheris.

    I simply cannot fathom why opt in and out is such an anathema to PvPers.
    Most people do not like the full loot. Also many people do not like the FFA PvP. But you are missing the point. The question is how the game will become better? It is not what people like. Many people play and pay for ridiculously ugly and bad games. So by your logic, let make all the games bad and ugly.

    It is far more complicated than your subjective feelings about some feature in some game.

    People play MMOs for competition and cooperation. As all the other stuff exists in the offline singleplayer games. The problem is that the different people differentiate in their competitiveness and cooperativeness. But that does not mean that by removing the need of cooperation or the competition the game will be better. Quite the opposite. It will become pointless. 

    And the competition have to be forced or most people will not compete, as they are more afraid to lose than willing to win. 
  • BlackAdder77BlackAdder77 Member UncommonPosts: 29
    Lets be honest here. 99% of you all wanting full loot unrestricted PvP would get camped by a naked zerg of 5 allied guilds 5 meters in front of an outpost. Then y'all would cry on the forums for devs to make a change. I am guessing that's what happened at the closed alpha anyway.
    Anyone remember Darkfall Online? Nothing like a naked zerg killing you and taking all your gear with 0 consequences.
    Can any of you guess when PvP started working in no-safe-zone full loot PvP games?
    When the majority left said games.(I.E when the zergfest was not possible anymore)
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,152
    Arriving late in a game, months or even years after its release, and getting ganked and corpse camped without a chance to fight back as soon as you leave the starter area (or even before), isn't competitive. Competition is when both sides have a chance to win, or at least to get away. That here is just bad game design.
    And it's why UO had to add Trammel, why so many forced PvP games with insufficient or abuseable protection mechanics failed and closed down.
    BlackAdder77RhoklawMendelYashaX
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Intel Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER EVO 8GB DDR6 - RAM: 32GB Kingston HyperX Predator DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Samsung U32J590 32" 4K monitor - Second display: Philips 273v 27" monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset - Sound: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.


  • kitaradkitarad Member EpicPosts: 5,834
    edited July 10
    ikcin said:
    kitarad said:
    Iselin said:
    kitarad said:
    No one saw my post or answered my question. :/

    Why are games like Fortnite or PUBG so popular? Full loot PvP works so do you lose a lot in Fortnite or PUBG and can you get back up fast was my question. I've never played them so have no idea so I am curious and my opinion is that games where you tend to lose a lot of time or gear when full loot PvP is in force will not be successful and wish to know if I am right about these two games.

    I am aware that you may lose a fortune in EVE but I also read that type of sting takes very long to set up. I also hear people don't fly what you cannot afford to lose leading me to believe people play very carefully. That was the same in Everquest you played carefully there too and could lose everything if you're not careful in it's early days albeit it was a PvE game.
    For the same reason shooters have been popular for 20 years +: casual 10 minute matches with disposable characters. It has always been a whole different PvP genre with 0 attachment to your character.

    Shooters are a whole different type of game that have no business being discussed in the same thread as RPGs and MMORPGs that are all about character development and attachment to that character.
    You say that but posters like @bcbully and @ikcin keep telling us how the popularity of those games are evidence that FFA full loot PvP is what the masses love and those of us who enjoy MMORPGs don't understand this. We here in this forum are the deluded ones that continue with our mistaken belief and we are simply too stupid to see where the genre is going.

    I think MMORPGs that take a long time to develop your character don't enjoy losing their gear and loot especially when getting them back take months of work. Hence why I tried to ask about Fortnite and PUBG to argue why that system will not fair well for an MMORPG where character development and gear are king.

    I am also at a very big loss why people always argue that PvP and PvE servers just make the PvP servers less popular. When WoW classic opened there were far more PvP servers than PvE servers although many did end up requesting for transfers out of the PvP servers they were getting ganked in. Another untruth revealed by what happened in WoW.

    These developers here did specifically say they are not going to devote the resources to PvP and PvE servers. That is however a different issue but the games that can create both types of servers do benefit from appealing to both types of players. Even DAoC had PvE servers like Gaheris.

    I simply cannot fathom why opt in and out is such an anathema to PvPers.
    Most people do not like the full loot. Also many people do not like the FFA PvP. But you are missing the point. 

    People play MMOs for competition and cooperation. 

    And the competition have to be forced or most people will not compete, as they are more afraid to lose than willing to win. 
    ( Sorry I chomped off bits of your post but in the interest of making my point here you go...)

    Speaks volumes when an advocate acknowledges the problems but barrels on in the name of making the game better. My question is 'for whom' are you making it better. Certainly not for me. 

    I have a lot of games I can play. Currently playing hours and hours in Phantasy Star Online 2. Enjoying playing with others and cooperating. Don't see the need to play your idea of a better game.
    YashaX

  • RhoklawRhoklaw Member EpicPosts: 7,021
    kitarad said:
    ikcin said:
    kitarad said:
    Iselin said:
    kitarad said:
    No one saw my post or answered my question. :/

    Why are games like Fortnite or PUBG so popular? Full loot PvP works so do you lose a lot in Fortnite or PUBG and can you get back up fast was my question. I've never played them so have no idea so I am curious and my opinion is that games where you tend to lose a lot of time or gear when full loot PvP is in force will not be successful and wish to know if I am right about these two games.

    I am aware that you may lose a fortune in EVE but I also read that type of sting takes very long to set up. I also hear people don't fly what you cannot afford to lose leading me to believe people play very carefully. That was the same in Everquest you played carefully there too and could lose everything if you're not careful in it's early days albeit it was a PvE game.
    For the same reason shooters have been popular for 20 years +: casual 10 minute matches with disposable characters. It has always been a whole different PvP genre with 0 attachment to your character.

    Shooters are a whole different type of game that have no business being discussed in the same thread as RPGs and MMORPGs that are all about character development and attachment to that character.
    You say that but posters like @bcbully and @ikcin keep telling us how the popularity of those games are evidence that FFA full loot PvP is what the masses love and those of us who enjoy MMORPGs don't understand this. We here in this forum are the deluded ones that continue with our mistaken belief and we are simply too stupid to see where the genre is going.

    I think MMORPGs that take a long time to develop your character don't enjoy losing their gear and loot especially when getting them back take months of work. Hence why I tried to ask about Fortnite and PUBG to argue why that system will not fair well for an MMORPG where character development and gear are king.

    I am also at a very big loss why people always argue that PvP and PvE servers just make the PvP servers less popular. When WoW classic opened there were far more PvP servers than PvE servers although many did end up requesting for transfers out of the PvP servers they were getting ganked in. Another untruth revealed by what happened in WoW.

    These developers here did specifically say they are not going to devote the resources to PvP and PvE servers. That is however a different issue but the games that can create both types of servers do benefit from appealing to both types of players. Even DAoC had PvE servers like Gaheris.

    I simply cannot fathom why opt in and out is such an anathema to PvPers.
    Most people do not like the full loot. Also many people do not like the FFA PvP. But you are missing the point. 

    People play MMOs for competition and cooperation. 

    And the competition have to be forced or most people will not compete, as they are more afraid to lose than willing to win. 
    ( Sorry I chomped off bits of your post but in the interest of making my point here you go...)

    Speaks volumes when an advocate acknowledges the problems but barrels on in the name of making the game better. My question is 'for whom' are you making it better. Certainly not for me. 

    I have a lot of games I can play. Currently playing hours and hours in Phantasy Star Online 2. Enjoying playing with others and cooperating. Don't see the need to play your idea of a better game.
    This is why I feel Arenas and Battlegrounds or a "separate" area like we find in games like GW2, ESO, DAoC and so on should be sufficient. There is ZERO point in FFA or Full Loot PvP in any MMORPG. None.

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,152
    edited July 10
    Rhoklaw said:
    kitarad said:
    ikcin said:
    kitarad said:
    Iselin said:
    kitarad said:
    No one saw my post or answered my question. :/

    Why are games like Fortnite or PUBG so popular? Full loot PvP works so do you lose a lot in Fortnite or PUBG and can you get back up fast was my question. I've never played them so have no idea so I am curious and my opinion is that games where you tend to lose a lot of time or gear when full loot PvP is in force will not be successful and wish to know if I am right about these two games.

    I am aware that you may lose a fortune in EVE but I also read that type of sting takes very long to set up. I also hear people don't fly what you cannot afford to lose leading me to believe people play very carefully. That was the same in Everquest you played carefully there too and could lose everything if you're not careful in it's early days albeit it was a PvE game.
    For the same reason shooters have been popular for 20 years +: casual 10 minute matches with disposable characters. It has always been a whole different PvP genre with 0 attachment to your character.

    Shooters are a whole different type of game that have no business being discussed in the same thread as RPGs and MMORPGs that are all about character development and attachment to that character.
    You say that but posters like @bcbully and @ikcin keep telling us how the popularity of those games are evidence that FFA full loot PvP is what the masses love and those of us who enjoy MMORPGs don't understand this. We here in this forum are the deluded ones that continue with our mistaken belief and we are simply too stupid to see where the genre is going.

    I think MMORPGs that take a long time to develop your character don't enjoy losing their gear and loot especially when getting them back take months of work. Hence why I tried to ask about Fortnite and PUBG to argue why that system will not fair well for an MMORPG where character development and gear are king.

    I am also at a very big loss why people always argue that PvP and PvE servers just make the PvP servers less popular. When WoW classic opened there were far more PvP servers than PvE servers although many did end up requesting for transfers out of the PvP servers they were getting ganked in. Another untruth revealed by what happened in WoW.

    These developers here did specifically say they are not going to devote the resources to PvP and PvE servers. That is however a different issue but the games that can create both types of servers do benefit from appealing to both types of players. Even DAoC had PvE servers like Gaheris.

    I simply cannot fathom why opt in and out is such an anathema to PvPers.
    Most people do not like the full loot. Also many people do not like the FFA PvP. But you are missing the point. 

    People play MMOs for competition and cooperation. 

    And the competition have to be forced or most people will not compete, as they are more afraid to lose than willing to win. 
    ( Sorry I chomped off bits of your post but in the interest of making my point here you go...)

    Speaks volumes when an advocate acknowledges the problems but barrels on in the name of making the game better. My question is 'for whom' are you making it better. Certainly not for me. 

    I have a lot of games I can play. Currently playing hours and hours in Phantasy Star Online 2. Enjoying playing with others and cooperating. Don't see the need to play your idea of a better game.
    This is why I feel Arenas and Battlegrounds or a "separate" area like we find in games like GW2, ESO, DAoC and so on should be sufficient. There is ZERO point in FFA or Full Loot PvP in any MMORPG. None.

    I personally dislike arenas like you can find in WoW, I call that "PvP in a bowl" and find it very boring. I rather play games like Overwatch for that kind of thrill. BGs are fun when properly designed though.
    Cyrodiil in ESO isn't exactly a BG though, it's a PvP zone just like you had frontiers in DAoC.

    And for FFA PvP to work, there need to be VERY harsh consequences for being a serial killer, and also a cheat proof system to detect it. Don't make serial killing impossible, but make the offender's life so hard that they will think twice before ruining their character for a long, long time.
    There should also be a big difference between conquering or protecting resources, wars between guilds, and going to a newbie zone to kill just because you can (specially if it's your own faction newbie zone !).
    Then yes, FFA PvP could work. But it requires a developer with some balls and a brain.
    RhoklawkitaradYashaX
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Intel Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER EVO 8GB DDR6 - RAM: 32GB Kingston HyperX Predator DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Samsung U32J590 32" 4K monitor - Second display: Philips 273v 27" monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset - Sound: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.


  • YashaXYashaX Member EpicPosts: 2,553
    Rhoklaw said:
    kitarad said:
    ikcin said:
    kitarad said:
    Iselin said:
    kitarad said:
    No one saw my post or answered my question. :/

    Why are games like Fortnite or PUBG so popular? Full loot PvP works so do you lose a lot in Fortnite or PUBG and can you get back up fast was my question. I've never played them so have no idea so I am curious and my opinion is that games where you tend to lose a lot of time or gear when full loot PvP is in force will not be successful and wish to know if I am right about these two games.

    I am aware that you may lose a fortune in EVE but I also read that type of sting takes very long to set up. I also hear people don't fly what you cannot afford to lose leading me to believe people play very carefully. That was the same in Everquest you played carefully there too and could lose everything if you're not careful in it's early days albeit it was a PvE game.
    For the same reason shooters have been popular for 20 years +: casual 10 minute matches with disposable characters. It has always been a whole different PvP genre with 0 attachment to your character.

    Shooters are a whole different type of game that have no business being discussed in the same thread as RPGs and MMORPGs that are all about character development and attachment to that character.
    You say that but posters like @bcbully and @ikcin keep telling us how the popularity of those games are evidence that FFA full loot PvP is what the masses love and those of us who enjoy MMORPGs don't understand this. We here in this forum are the deluded ones that continue with our mistaken belief and we are simply too stupid to see where the genre is going.

    I think MMORPGs that take a long time to develop your character don't enjoy losing their gear and loot especially when getting them back take months of work. Hence why I tried to ask about Fortnite and PUBG to argue why that system will not fair well for an MMORPG where character development and gear are king.

    I am also at a very big loss why people always argue that PvP and PvE servers just make the PvP servers less popular. When WoW classic opened there were far more PvP servers than PvE servers although many did end up requesting for transfers out of the PvP servers they were getting ganked in. Another untruth revealed by what happened in WoW.

    These developers here did specifically say they are not going to devote the resources to PvP and PvE servers. That is however a different issue but the games that can create both types of servers do benefit from appealing to both types of players. Even DAoC had PvE servers like Gaheris.

    I simply cannot fathom why opt in and out is such an anathema to PvPers.
    Most people do not like the full loot. Also many people do not like the FFA PvP. But you are missing the point. 

    People play MMOs for competition and cooperation. 

    And the competition have to be forced or most people will not compete, as they are more afraid to lose than willing to win. 
    ( Sorry I chomped off bits of your post but in the interest of making my point here you go...)

    Speaks volumes when an advocate acknowledges the problems but barrels on in the name of making the game better. My question is 'for whom' are you making it better. Certainly not for me. 

    I have a lot of games I can play. Currently playing hours and hours in Phantasy Star Online 2. Enjoying playing with others and cooperating. Don't see the need to play your idea of a better game.
    This is why I feel Arenas and Battlegrounds or a "separate" area like we find in games like GW2, ESO, DAoC and so on should be sufficient. There is ZERO point in FFA or Full Loot PvP in any MMORPG. None.

    I personally dislike arenas like you can find in WoW, I call that "PvP in a bowl" and find it very boring. I rather play games like Overwatch for that kind of thrill. BGs are fun when properly designed though.
    Cyrodiil in ESO isn't exactly a BG though, it's a PvP zone just like you had frontiers in DAoC.

    And for FFA PvP to work, there need to be VERY harsh consequences for being a serial killer, and also a cheat proof system to detect it. Don't make serial killing impossible, but make the offender's life so hard that they will think twice before ruining their character for a long, long time.
    There should also be a big difference between conquering or protecting resources, wars between guilds, and going to a newbie zone to kill just because you can (specially if it's your own faction newbie zone !).
    Then yes, FFA PvP could work. But it requires a developer with some balls and a brain.
    Especially in a game that has distinct factions, I really don't think you should be able to kill people in your own faction. 
    kitarad
    ....
  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,211
    In any game you should not be able to kill people :) But you are de facto against open world sandbox games. So you are against the games driven by the players. 

    While I believe the best design for a MMORPG is the open world. 

    Also FFA PvP with PK penalty is not FFA anymore.  It is an absurd situation where the action is allowed, but penalized.

    Anyway we cannot reach an agreement. Personally I know few dozens of people who preordered the NW. And now they sorry as, I will quote: The PvP is shit, and the game is very beautiful, but completely pointless.
  • YashaXYashaX Member EpicPosts: 2,553
    ikcin said:
    In any game you should not be able to kill people :) But you are de facto against open world sandbox games. So you are against the games driven by the players. 

    While I believe the best design for a MMORPG is the open world. 

    Also FFA PvP with PK penalty is not FFA anymore.  It is an absurd situation where the action is allowed, but penalized.

    Anyway we cannot reach an agreement. Personally I know few dozens of people who preordered the NW. And now they sorry as, I will quote: The PvP is shit, and the game is very beautiful, but completely pointless.


    Yes I think it is important to not lump "pvp" into one barrel. Obviously the spectrum of pvp ranges from people like you who think freedom to just murder anyone with no penalty or restrictions is good game play, all the way to people who think pvp is only good in a completely balanced and controlled environment.

     
    bcbully
    ....
  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 7,336
    Rhoklaw said:
    kitarad said:
    ikcin said:
    kitarad said:
    Iselin said:
    kitarad said:
    No one saw my post or answered my question. :/

    Why are games like Fortnite or PUBG so popular? Full loot PvP works so do you lose a lot in Fortnite or PUBG and can you get back up fast was my question. I've never played them so have no idea so I am curious and my opinion is that games where you tend to lose a lot of time or gear when full loot PvP is in force will not be successful and wish to know if I am right about these two games.

    I am aware that you may lose a fortune in EVE but I also read that type of sting takes very long to set up. I also hear people don't fly what you cannot afford to lose leading me to believe people play very carefully. That was the same in Everquest you played carefully there too and could lose everything if you're not careful in it's early days albeit it was a PvE game.
    For the same reason shooters have been popular for 20 years +: casual 10 minute matches with disposable characters. It has always been a whole different PvP genre with 0 attachment to your character.

    Shooters are a whole different type of game that have no business being discussed in the same thread as RPGs and MMORPGs that are all about character development and attachment to that character.
    You say that but posters like @bcbully and @ikcin keep telling us how the popularity of those games are evidence that FFA full loot PvP is what the masses love and those of us who enjoy MMORPGs don't understand this. We here in this forum are the deluded ones that continue with our mistaken belief and we are simply too stupid to see where the genre is going.

    I think MMORPGs that take a long time to develop your character don't enjoy losing their gear and loot especially when getting them back take months of work. Hence why I tried to ask about Fortnite and PUBG to argue why that system will not fair well for an MMORPG where character development and gear are king.

    I am also at a very big loss why people always argue that PvP and PvE servers just make the PvP servers less popular. When WoW classic opened there were far more PvP servers than PvE servers although many did end up requesting for transfers out of the PvP servers they were getting ganked in. Another untruth revealed by what happened in WoW.

    These developers here did specifically say they are not going to devote the resources to PvP and PvE servers. That is however a different issue but the games that can create both types of servers do benefit from appealing to both types of players. Even DAoC had PvE servers like Gaheris.

    I simply cannot fathom why opt in and out is such an anathema to PvPers.
    Most people do not like the full loot. Also many people do not like the FFA PvP. But you are missing the point. 

    People play MMOs for competition and cooperation. 

    And the competition have to be forced or most people will not compete, as they are more afraid to lose than willing to win. 
    ( Sorry I chomped off bits of your post but in the interest of making my point here you go...)

    Speaks volumes when an advocate acknowledges the problems but barrels on in the name of making the game better. My question is 'for whom' are you making it better. Certainly not for me. 

    I have a lot of games I can play. Currently playing hours and hours in Phantasy Star Online 2. Enjoying playing with others and cooperating. Don't see the need to play your idea of a better game.
    This is why I feel Arenas and Battlegrounds or a "separate" area like we find in games like GW2, ESO, DAoC and so on should be sufficient. There is ZERO point in FFA or Full Loot PvP in any MMORPG. None.

    I personally dislike arenas like you can find in WoW, I call that "PvP in a bowl" and find it very boring. I rather play games like Overwatch for that kind of thrill. BGs are fun when properly designed though.
    Cyrodiil in ESO isn't exactly a BG though, it's a PvP zone just like you had frontiers in DAoC.

    And for FFA PvP to work, there need to be VERY harsh consequences for being a serial killer, and also a cheat proof system to detect it. Don't make serial killing impossible, but make the offender's life so hard that they will think twice before ruining their character for a long, long time.
    There should also be a big difference between conquering or protecting resources, wars between guilds, and going to a newbie zone to kill just because you can (specially if it's your own faction newbie zone !).
    Then yes, FFA PvP could work. But it requires a developer with some balls and a brain.

    Cyrodill is just a large BG ,  Frontiers dwarfs Cyrodill its not even close
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 14,301
    edited July 15
    Scorchien said:

    Cyrodill is just a large BG ,  Frontiers dwarfs Cyrodill its not even close
    You have a weird definition of BGs if you think Cyrodiil is one. 24/7 365 day a year persistent zones are not BGs.

    The only thing that resets in Cyrodiil be it monthly or weekly, depending on which campaign, is the leader boards. Even when that resets none of the keep ownership nor anything else in the zone resets. It carries on being persistent.
    YashaX
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

    "... the "influencers" which is the tech name we call sell outs now..."
    __ Wizardry, 2020
  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 7,336
    edited July 15
    Iselin said:
    Scorchien said:

    Cyrodill is just a large BG ,  Frontiers dwarfs Cyrodill its not even close
    You have a weird definition of BGs if you think Cyrodiil is one. 24/7 365 day a year persistent zones are not BGs.

    The only thing that resets in Cyrodiil be it monthly or weekly, depending on which campaign, is the leader boards. Even when that resets none of the keep ownership nor anything else in the zone resets. It carries on being persistent.

    There is nothing persistent about Cyrodill outside that zone .. And the reference was to size ..

     Size does matter .. and Cyrodill is very small compared to Frontiers , you can cross Cyrodill in about 9 minutes (correction) on fully trained mount ..
    Post edited by Scorchien on
  • AlbatroesAlbatroes Member LegendaryPosts: 7,205
    I wonder what kind of game this will morph into next, given that the game has already done a 180 since last year. They get another 6-9 months to change the game into a moba or something I guess.
    YashaX
  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 17,642
    As some mentioned,pvp players often talk the talk but don't walk the walk.
    Atlas was intense pvp as it happens in any game and after the dust settled all those in favor were crying foul.
    They din't like losing days,weeks,months of very hard work just to start all over again,i saw it and it is FACT.

    Unlike this game Atlas only offered safe islands but anywhere else it was open season and you had to cross paths at some point or stay on one safe island the entire game.

    This game also has a much smaller grind to get to the pvp point.IDK if somewhere in between keeps pvp players happy but i doubt it,they don't even know what they want.

    What i have witnessed year after year is pvp players are all gung ho as long as they are winning.This is also proven how many years we keep seeing cheat after cheat after cheat,players HATE to lose.

    So back to this game,way less grind,so way less is lost in pvp,also has pve but somehow it is still not good enough?Pvp has been around forever,it appears that the FAST easy in easy out with no loss is what pvp players really want>>Fortnite,Valorant etc etc.Those two games have literally the most shallow game play you i can get,yet they are the two biggest pvp success stories right now.Before that it was PUBG,same shallow game play,know what other  game does the same thing>>>CS GO,also a long time success.

    So pvp players do not want anything complicated,they do not want anything that takes longer than a few minutes to get engaged,they do not want ANY risk at all.So good luck getting anything more than a BR/shooter to meet the demands of pvp players.

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 17,642
    edited July 16
    You and i both know this game is going to see early success,a FAST paced rush,2 months later it will be dead.This is why i give this team credit for recognizing yet another fail.

    So hopefully they can do enough to keep enough players happy long term.

    Know what wouldn't surprise me one bit?They end up dividing the game,a PVE server and a pvp server and change the rules  for pvp to open pvp.I actually hope it happens because it will prove a lot about hardcore pvp players.
    IMO i would 100% can the pvp or give them their own server,turn the other into pve with the exact same content but make the npc invasions way more frequent both open world and on forts.
    The problem is how to divvy the forts among a pve design.

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • xD_GamingxD_Gaming Member EpicPosts: 2,566
    It truly feels like they never even "scoped" out the game and what it actually is. They have no idead imho of what they are doing.
    There is a multiverse inside our minds which millions live.
    Twitter : @xD_Gaming_Merch
    xD Merch : https://bit.ly/2v13MT8
    "Dragons are tilly folly !"
  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,211
    edited July 16
    YashaX said:
    ikcin said:
    In any game you should not be able to kill people :) But you are de facto against open world sandbox games. So you are against the games driven by the players. 

    While I believe the best design for a MMORPG is the open world. 

    Also FFA PvP with PK penalty is not FFA anymore.  It is an absurd situation where the action is allowed, but penalized.

    Anyway we cannot reach an agreement. Personally I know few dozens of people who preordered the NW. And now they sorry as, I will quote: The PvP is shit, and the game is very beautiful, but completely pointless.


    Yes I think it is important to not lump "pvp" into one barrel. Obviously the spectrum of pvp ranges from people like you who think freedom to just murder anyone with no penalty or restrictions is good game play, all the way to people who think pvp is only good in a completely balanced and controlled environment.

     
    Please do not troll, and do not put words in my mouth. First I do not thinк there is killing - PvP is competition, and there are winners and losers. And like any competition, the losers should be much more. That is how the competitions work. 

    Although the competition should be fair. So fair rules for all. I think the players who compete should not be penalized.  

    At the same time there are noobs and bad players. And the game should provide content for them. 

    So I strongly support the design with areas, that provide different risk/reward ratios. 

    And for OW FFA PvP, just forget about things from singleplayer games like levels, NPC quests and etc. Also the OW needs very good integration of the PvP and the PvE. The players have to PvP for PvE, and to PvE for PvP. It is much more easier to make a singleplayer themepark game with many players on the map and few safe multiplayer activities. 
    YashaX
  • BrainyBrainy Member UncommonPosts: 345
    Wizardry said:

    Know what wouldn't surprise me one bit?They end up dividing the game,a PVE server and a pvp server and change the rules  for pvp to open pvp.I actually hope it happens because it will prove a lot about hardcore pvp players.


    I hope they make separate servers for PVE and OWPVP.  Just to shut the PVPers up.  Then you can tell them to go to the OWPVP server when they complain.

    We all know that an OWPVP server without PVE players is a DEAD server.  I remember in UO after giving a PVE Trammel server, Felluca PVP side DIED.  Then in DAOC they had Mordred gankfest server,  completely DEAD.

    These OWPVPers just want a gankfest, once that is gone, they leave with excuses of how the game didnt do xyz perfectly.  Most of them dont want real hardcore competitive PVP against other PVPers.  They want to farm the PVE'ers.
    Iselin
  • tzervotzervo Member RarePosts: 314
    edited July 16
    Brainy said:

    I hope they make separate servers for PVE and OWPVP.  Just to shut the PVPers up.  Then you can tell them to go to the OWPVP server when they complain.

    We all know that an OWPVP server without PVE players is a DEAD server.  I remember in UO after giving a PVE Trammel server, Felluca PVP side DIED.  Then in DAOC they had Mordred gankfest server,  completely DEAD.

    These OWPVPers just want a gankfest, once that is gone, they leave with excuses of how the game didnt do xyz perfectly.  Most of them dont want real hardcore competitive PVP against other PVPers.  They want to farm the PVE'ers.
    Worlds Adrift, Population Zero added PVE-only servers/modes, and Legends of Aria has been switching back and front more times than I care to remember. They died or are close to dying nevertheless. Who woulda thunk, PVE players use the same excuses too.  >:)

    https://massivelyop.com/2018/10/09/worlds-adrift-is-launching-its-pve-server-today-if-the-griefing-put-you-off-give-it-another-look/

    https://massivelyop.com/2019/05/29/worlds-adrift-calls-it-quits-to-close-down-in-july/

    https://www.mmorpg.com/population-zero/news/population-zero-breaks-down-pve-and-pvp-modes-ahead-of-early-access-release-2000117979

    https://steamcharts.com/app/1239430

    while:

    https://massivelyop.com/2020/02/11/albion-online-now-counts-350k-monthly-active-players-plans-major-alliance-changes/
    IselinYashaX
  • BrainyBrainy Member UncommonPosts: 345
    tzervo said:
    Brainy said:

    I hope they make separate servers for PVE and OWPVP.  Just to shut the PVPers up.  Then you can tell them to go to the OWPVP server when they complain.

    We all know that an OWPVP server without PVE players is a DEAD server.  I remember in UO after giving a PVE Trammel server, Felluca PVP side DIED.  Then in DAOC they had Mordred gankfest server,  completely DEAD.

    These OWPVPers just want a gankfest, once that is gone, they leave with excuses of how the game didnt do xyz perfectly.  Most of them dont want real hardcore competitive PVP against other PVPers.  They want to farm the PVE'ers.
    Worlds Adrift, Population Zero added PVE-only servers/modes, and Legends of Aria has been switching back and front more times than I care to remember. They died or are close to dying nevertheless. Who woulda thunk, PVE players use the same excuses too.  >:)

    https://massivelyop.com/2018/10/09/worlds-adrift-is-launching-its-pve-server-today-if-the-griefing-put-you-off-give-it-another-look/

    https://massivelyop.com/2019/05/29/worlds-adrift-calls-it-quits-to-close-down-in-july/

    https://www.mmorpg.com/population-zero/news/population-zero-breaks-down-pve-and-pvp-modes-ahead-of-early-access-release-2000117979

    https://steamcharts.com/app/1239430

    while:

    https://massivelyop.com/2020/02/11/albion-online-now-counts-350k-monthly-active-players-plans-major-alliance-changes/
    Legends of Aria?   Isnt that the game where the devs said they wanted to lure in as many PVE sheep as possible for the PVP players to gank them?  LoL ya PVEers gonna believe them.

    PVE players are starting to get wise to these PVP gankfest games tactics.

    Albion is Free to play, they couldnt even get people to buy the game or sub. These "active players" can all be from china for all I know.  Steam shows 8k in the middle of covid when games have increased numbers right now.


    If I was New World, I would cancel this project name,  take the dev team and the game, release a new named full sandbox PVE game with raiding dungeons in 1-2yrs and watch them rule for a decade with cash growing on trees around their dev studio.
  • BloodaxesBloodaxes Member EpicPosts: 4,266
    Worlds Adrift  :D Man, was that game hot garbage.

Sign In or Register to comment.