no thanks. that type of system caters to griefers - which is exactly what I ran into in Eve before I stopped playing it. Cruise around in HighSec space, mining an asteroid, and some pirate who already has a large negative rep for ganking noobs comes in and 1-shots you because the penalties to him are meh and he is bored and likes to gank new players.
Give this game time and you will see the same thing. You see it in any game that uses this model, even on WoW PVP servers. Then enjoy being corpse camped and killed over and over or prevented from rezing... down this path lies darkness and is of no interest to me. For that reason alone I'd skip this game.
If the entire game was heading to open world PvP... forced PvP. I think SoE would have said something by now as that is a direction that hits a very specific and small group compared to people who just like PvE or like a mix bag like WoW where you can pick when to PvP. I still hope they do the controled PvP, like WoW or DAoC. Sometimes I like to relax when I play and just do some PvE or harvest some nodes. I hate PvPing over who gets the tin node.
Landmark - I think it will be flagging/guild type stuff, and I could see having a pvp world/server, but not sure if that would work well.
EQN - I think it will just be classic EQ type servers, maybe along with the type of PvP in Landmark, where you can guild/flag.
I don't see a all pvp, all the time for everyone, no matter what anyone has said, or what anyone has gleaned from a tweet. I watched panels, and I think the above is going to end up being pretty accurate. They talked about being able to create scenario type stuff and having battles in it, with destructible content (which, I think you will be able to scale how destructible it is, hp wise and such).
Yes... my theory has been confirmed by Smedley. I still don't see where the trolling comes into it. But then again with all of the rhetoric about "forced" PVP, I wonder if some people feel like they've been forced to participate in this thread.
Nothing was confirmed by Smedly, it's a bold faced lie if anything the only thing that is confirmed on the official site is that their will be different specialty servers, PvE, PvP, Role-playing as show on here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=f6w1BGsgLjQ
Originally posted by Pednick Nothing was confirmed by Smedly, it's a bold faced lie if anything the only thing that is confirmed on the official site is that their will be different specialty servers, PvE, PvP, Role-playing as show on here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=f6w1BGsgLjQ
After watching this video I am not worried about an open world forced PvP situation. Not saying their wont be a server for that as SoE seems to be looking to make servers to cover many play styles. If there isnt a PvE server I will be shocked lol. I personally hope for a server that has an area where you can go to PvP like DAoC but where player/guilds build it themselves.
Originally posted by Bidwood Yes... my theory has been confirmed by Smedley. I still don't see where the trolling comes into it. But then again with all of the rhetoric about "forced" PVP, I wonder if some people feel like they've been forced to participate in this thread.
Is this the same kind of "confirmed" where there aren't any actual links and where the "proof" lies in reading between the lines of some very plain statements made by a developer? Because that's the best kind of proof, I think.
EQN will have PvE, PvP and RP servers. They aren't going to focus on a single world PvP system like Eve. Even if they have "one server", there will be PvE, PvP and RP phases or instances.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by Bidwood Yes... my theory has been confirmed by Smedley. I still don't see where the trolling comes into it. But then again with all of the rhetoric about "forced" PVP, I wonder if some people feel like they've been forced to participate in this thread.
Is this the same kind of "confirmed" where there aren't any actual links and where the "proof" lies in reading between the lines of some very plain statements made by a developer? Because that's the best kind of proof, I think.
EQN will have PvE, PvP and RP servers. They aren't going to focus on a single world PvP system like Eve. Even if they have "one server", there will be PvE, PvP and RP phases or instances.
I'm not so sure that will be the case with EQN. The are making a sandbox. Emergent game play. Systems like commerce, the transporting of goods. Polotics, territory control and the like.
On top of that SOE's biggest grossing game is 100% PvP. Planetside 2 has 6 million players. I do not look for them to cater to the "I wont do it" crowd. You can't build a social sanbox built around "I wont do it.!" it's like a conflict of interest...
EQN:L is a different story there will most certainly be all types of servers. "Build your own mmo."
Originally posted by Pednick Nothing was confirmed by Smedly, it's a bold faced lie if anything the only thing that is confirmed on the official site is that their will be different specialty servers, PvE, PvP, Role-playing as show on here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=f6w1BGsgLjQ
In that video they ask gamers to say what type of server would you like. Here is what I want =-)
Faction Server
1. 3 PvP factions you can choose to join
2. All factions can team together for PvE content outside contested map
3. No PvP in PvE areas
4. PvP map that you become flagged when you enter, much like DAoC or GW2 RvR/WvW maps
5. Contested PvP map has Keeps and Castles to take over and defend that effect your faction in a positive way
6. Guild Wars: Contested map has an area that guilds can make fortifications that can be take out by other factions and defended. Must be maintained by the guild.
7. Taking out enough keeps and guild fortifications grant you access to special dungeon
8. Contested map has towns that are quest hubs (dailies) each faction can take over and control to earn special rewards.
I'm still waiting to hear how the mentioned battlegrounds are going to fit into this OW PvP only "theory" that has been "confirmed."
Played: EQ1 (10 Years), Guild Wars, Rift, TERA Tried: EQ2, Vanguard, Lord of the Rings Online, Dungeons and Dragons Online, Runes of Magic and countless others... Currently Playing: GW2
Originally posted by Bidwood Yes... my theory has been confirmed by Smedley. I still don't see where the trolling comes into it. But then again with all of the rhetoric about "forced" PVP, I wonder if some people feel like they've been forced to participate in this thread.
Is this the same kind of "confirmed" where there aren't any actual links and where the "proof" lies in reading between the lines of some very plain statements made by a developer? Because that's the best kind of proof, I think.
EQN will have PvE, PvP and RP servers. They aren't going to focus on a single world PvP system like Eve. Even if they have "one server", there will be PvE, PvP and RP phases or instances.
I'm not so sure that will be the case with EQN. The are making a sandbox. Emergent game play. Systems like commerce, the transporting of goods. Polotics, territory control and the like.
On top of that SOE's biggest grossing game is 100% PvP. Planetside 2 has 6 million players. I do not look for them to cater to the "I wont do it" crowd. You can't build a social sanbox built around "I wont do it.!" it's like a conflict of interest...
EQN:L is a different story there will most certainly be all types of servers. "Build your own mmo."
Sandbox does not equal PvP. Star Wars Galaxies was a sandbox, or very sandboxy, but it wasn't an always on, PvP everywhere PvP game.
However, if we're going to look at clues in SOE's statements, let's look at the poll, where one of the specialty server options is "PvP".
If "PvP" is a "specialty" option, what is the normal, not specialty option? Not PvP. PvE.
SOE is not going to restrict player choice. They are going to have multiple servers. Allowing player choice means having PvP servers, certainly. But it doesn't mean forcing all players into a single rule set.
**
Of course, as is typical with developers, they aren't really explaining anything in great detail yet. Maybe all the servers will be "specialty" servers. Maybe they'll have specialty continents, but one server. Who knows.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Read it and weep. I've been a broken record on this, but the writing on the wall says there's going to be open world PVP in a brilliantly executed system like Eve Online.
Smedley's blog post covers a lot, but here are some of the highlights:
"A lot has been made about how much we’re pushing this concept of “Sandbox” mmos being the future. Not a lot has been said about what that means."
"In my opinion the solution is focusing a lot more on letting players make and be content for each other. Battlegrounds are an excellent example of an Evergreen style of content where it’s the players themselves that actually create the content. ... Building systems into the games that let the players interact with each other in new and unique ways gives us the ability to watch as the players do stuff we never anticipated. We’ll see a lot more creativity in action if the players are at the center of it. Imagine an MMORPG of a massive city.. and the Rogue’s guild is entirely run by players. Where the city has an entire political system that is populated by players who were elected by the playerbase."
"There’s a great example of this today with Eve Online. It’s a brilliantly executed system where the players are pretty much in charge of the entire game. Sure there is a lot of content for players to do, but anything that’s important in the game is done by the players. This is a shining example of how this kind of system can thrive.
Our belief at SOE is that it’s smarter to head in this direction now rather than waiting."
Is anyone from the other side of the fence ready to admit this is happening?
Edit: Sorry, that was bad form. Here is the blog post:
While this is for Landmark, I think they are pretty much talking about the same thing as Smedly.
Let players decide what they want to do. If people want to PVP, land and tools will be provided to create something. If people want to avoid PVP, they easily can. Players that want to attack others that don't want to play that way are out of luck.
They've already said they don't want to make "grieferquest." Without really limiting and punishing those that participate, there isn't an easy way to have OW PVP without some degree of "griefing." People will find a way. This seems to go against everything they've said so far.
They want people to have fun, their way, not how the devs want or how other players want.
Yeah it's a bit of a no-brainer to let people play the way they want and I'm glad SoE agrees, for Landmark that we know of. I'm still certain there will be OWPvP islands and of course claims but with Landmark this means not limiting resources, but maybe content...
Since players make the content in a Landmark there's no reason why structures and nice content wouldn't be build on PvP islands, thus requiring one to go there to see that creation. It's all up to the players.
What's not up to the players is advancement and achievements for activities, which seem where the "progression" is heading for Landmarks final iteration. If this is the case I hope they have a PvP path just as deep and rewarding as the crafting, building ones. No details yet so we'll see.
Its possible to make the world open pvp and be a pver that does not get involved.
1)players must be worth something to the territory owner and worth protecting. Owners will usually be the more hardcore guilds and alliances. Also they must not be worth killing indiscriminately as in if they die they still contribute to the wealth of the owners but start off producing less if the territory they are on is conquered. In short you need to make killing as few citizens as possible during a conquest of territory the best strategy with both sides leaving average players that happen to be living on the land alone. If a player decides to join the fight they should stop producing wealth for the territory at all.
2)There needs to be a npc police that defend players or at least help them escape bandits who wish to grief within a range of a police post.
Anyways there is more to it but I will not waste my time writing it out for no one to read. I will write more if someone is interested.
Its possible to make the world open pvp and be a pver that does not get involved.
1)players must be worth something to the territory owner and worth protecting. Owners will usually be the more hardcore guilds and alliances. Also they must not be worth killing indiscriminately as in if they die they still contribute to the wealth of the owners but start off producing less if the territory they are on is conquered. In short you need to make killing as few citizens as possible during a conquest of territory the best strategy with both sides leaving average players that happen to be living on the land alone. If a player decides to join the fight they should stop producing wealth for the territory at all.
2)There needs to be a npc police that defend players or at least help them escape bandits who wish to grief within a range of a police post.
Anyways there is more to it but I will not waste my time writing it out for no one to read. I will write more if someone is interested.
PVErs potentially being killed seems fairly involved to me. Sounds good in theory, but in reality would never work unless everyone wanted to play a particular way, while SOE has made it pretty clear they want players to play however they want as long as it isn't causing other to have a bad time.
If there are "police" roaming the world stopping all attacks, it would be pointless to even allow it. While an opt-in system is much easier to implement and doesn't scare off as many people on either side of the fence. Want to PVP, go ahead, don't want to, don't. Very simple. Being part of the conflict could have rewards and benefits not obtainable by those playing it safe, but not so much that they are playing a poor mans version of the game (what PVPers usually have).
You are also assuming players can own parts of the world. While I hope players/guilds can control land, it should be non-story involved areas. I'm doubting a guild will be able to control Lavastorm for example. Could be controllable sectors in Lavastorm, but not the entire place, nor have huge impact on overall gameplay of others.
Lots of ways they can go about it, my biggest concern is there being a point to PVP. If it is just "I don't like you" or "I'm red, you're blue", I'd rather not have PVP in the open at all.
If you think there will only be FFA open world PvP servers in EQ Next (like in EVE), you will be sorely mistaken.
There will be several rulesets and yes, there will probably be open world PvP servers too.
The difference is, only those who like PvP will play on those servers. No easy prey for you
You are completely missing what makes Eve tick. Eve works because everyone is in the same world, and there is a place for pvp and pve within that world. The economy of Eve is driven by pvp but requires a lot of pve players to supply everything. It's that dynamic that makes Eve work.
If a sandbox game that has pvp is to thrive, it needs the wolves and sheep. It doesn't work with just wolves.
If you think there will only be FFA open world PvP servers in EQ Next (like in EVE), you will be sorely mistaken.
There will be several rulesets and yes, there will probably be open world PvP servers too.
The difference is, only those who like PvP will play on those servers. No easy prey for you
You are completely missing what makes Eve tick. Eve works because everyone is in the same world, and there is a place for pvp and pve within that world. The economy of Eve is driven by pvp but requires a lot of pve players to supply everything. It's that dynamic that makes Eve work.
If a sandbox game that has pvp is to thrive, it needs the wolves and sheep. It doesn't work with just wolves.
You are very right. The one world/shard/server/game is why EVE works in my mind. If there was 50 "EVEs" it just wouldn't work. In a traditional rpgmmo, people can freely say "screw this server" if they are losing, get caught being a jackass, don't like the players, etc. Especially with many games providing and or selling server switching making it even more enticing for those having a bad experience. There is no 100% buy-in, players always have the option to start over. There is no escape in EVE, at least not anything like other games. You are in it for the long haul and take the good with the bad.
EVE caters to a very particular group of players that love and accept all of it. Unless they want EQN to be a fraction as popular as it could be, a similar system just isn't possible. They will have multiple "EQNs" most likely with different rules and while it could be very "sandbox"ish, it will never be a total free for all game without rules.
They don't seem to be making a "PVP" game or a "PVE" game. They are making a world for players to experience and make their own. I'm hoping both elements are available for those that want one, both or something completely different. I think games like EVE have their place and are great for those that want what it offers, but SOE is aiming much higher with EQN and the majority of gamers don't seem to fit into that niche.
I'm hoping that SOE Live reveals a bit more about PVP and the game in general, but as of now, nothing points to PVP being a foundational element of the game. I have no doubt it will be more important then past EQ games, but unless they build the game from the group up with PVP in mind, it isn't going to work well. If they were doing this, it would seem like they would of touched on it just a tad bit more in the last 8 months, but you never know. They could go "surprise EQN is all about player conflict" but that seems like a stretch.
I think EQN will be a great place for PVP since they've decided to go in the direction of horizontal progression. It will enable a lot better pvp since levels/gear won't == power and everyone will be on a semi-even playing field. It'll be a lot more about builds/counter builds, customization, skill and team work.
It's safe to say that EQN will probably have open world PVP in some form, but it's also safe to say they're not going to be making their top dog game a forced pvp experience. It'll have PVE servers for those who want it, and it'll have PVP servers for those who want it.
Or PVP will be limited to specific PVP areas in the world.
Read it and weep. I've been a broken record on this, but the writing on the wall says there's going to be open world PVP in a brilliantly executed system like Eve Online.
Smedley's blog post covers a lot, but here are some of the highlights:
"A lot has been made about how much we’re pushing this concept of “Sandbox” mmos being the future. Not a lot has been said about what that means."
"In my opinion the solution is focusing a lot more on letting players make and be content for each other. Battlegrounds are an excellent example of an Evergreen style of content where it’s the players themselves that actually create the content. ... Building systems into the games that let the players interact with each other in new and unique ways gives us the ability to watch as the players do stuff we never anticipated. We’ll see a lot more creativity in action if the players are at the center of it. Imagine an MMORPG of a massive city.. and the Rogue’s guild is entirely run by players. Where the city has an entire political system that is populated by players who were elected by the playerbase."
"There’s a great example of this today with Eve Online. It’s a brilliantly executed system where the players are pretty much in charge of the entire game. Sure there is a lot of content for players to do, but anything that’s important in the game is done by the players. This is a shining example of how this kind of system can thrive.
Our belief at SOE is that it’s smarter to head in this direction now rather than waiting."
Is anyone from the other side of the fence ready to admit this is happening?
Edit: Sorry, that was bad form. Here is the blog post:
I really can't wait for this game to release and tank. I'm so sick and tired of hearing about it. More importantly i'm pissed about they're basically pissing all over the EQ IP and everything it represented.
I particularly love the "EVE is an excellent example of how this kind of system can thrive! comment by smed.
Lets see ~550k subs, 60% or better of which are multisubs off the same person.
So realistically we're talking about 250-300k actual playerbase, which has taken ~ 10 years to build up to. They call that an excellent example of success?
All EVE is an excellent example of is how small of a playerbase you can expect in an open world pvp game.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
I'll add my voice, in that, if EQN is a FFA PVP only, then, I'll cancel my all-access account and move on to other games and just be done with SOE for good. I'm sure, I'm not alone on this.
I really can't wait for this game to release and tank. I'm so sick and tired of hearing about it. More importantly i'm pissed about they're basically pissing all over the EQ IP and everything it represented.
I particularly love the "EVE is an excellent example of how this kind of system can thrive! comment by smed.
Lets see ~550k subs, 60% or better of which are multisubs off the same person.
So realistically we're talking about 250-300k actual playerbase, which has taken ~ 10 years to build up to. They call that an excellent example of success?
All EVE is an excellent example of is how small of a playerbase you can expect in an open world pvp game.
Now you done it! The VAST minority are gonna come after you fer sure
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
Originally posted by Gaeluian I'll add my voice, in that, if EQN is a FFA PVP only, then, I'll cancel my all-access account and move on to other games and just be done with SOE for good. I'm sure, I'm not alone on this.
Don't worry it won't be. There might be PVP rule set servers or there might be PVP zones but there is no way a large western corporation with stock holders and board of directors is going to make a strictly PVP game using the companies signature franchise in this market. Anyone who thinks this is even remotely possible just isn't paying attention in the least.
EQN will be about questing and grouping up to kill things in a mostly PVE world just like it always has been. They might shake things up with procedural content and story bricks but at it's core it's going to be a PVE game.
Comments
no thanks. that type of system caters to griefers - which is exactly what I ran into in Eve before I stopped playing it. Cruise around in HighSec space, mining an asteroid, and some pirate who already has a large negative rep for ganking noobs comes in and 1-shots you because the penalties to him are meh and he is bored and likes to gank new players.
Give this game time and you will see the same thing. You see it in any game that uses this model, even on WoW PVP servers. Then enjoy being corpse camped and killed over and over or prevented from rezing... down this path lies darkness and is of no interest to me. For that reason alone I'd skip this game.
Landmark - I think it will be flagging/guild type stuff, and I could see having a pvp world/server, but not sure if that would work well.
EQN - I think it will just be classic EQ type servers, maybe along with the type of PvP in Landmark, where you can guild/flag.
I don't see a all pvp, all the time for everyone, no matter what anyone has said, or what anyone has gleaned from a tweet. I watched panels, and I think the above is going to end up being pretty accurate. They talked about being able to create scenario type stuff and having battles in it, with destructible content (which, I think you will be able to scale how destructible it is, hp wise and such).
"An it harm none, do what thou wilt"
Come on people, the OP is clearly trolling and baiting trying to stir things up.
UO failed with PvP only
M59 failed with PvP only
Why? Because it's a bad business model which is mmorpg suicide.
P.S: Even Garriot's "shroud of the Avatar" isn't open world PvP because even he knows that's not a smart business model.
P.P.S: Also not getting baited anymore from this troll thread and this is my last response to this joke of a thread.
"An it harm none, do what thou wilt"
After watching this video I am not worried about an open world forced PvP situation. Not saying their wont be a server for that as SoE seems to be looking to make servers to cover many play styles. If there isnt a PvE server I will be shocked lol. I personally hope for a server that has an area where you can go to PvP like DAoC but where player/guilds build it themselves.
Is this the same kind of "confirmed" where there aren't any actual links and where the "proof" lies in reading between the lines of some very plain statements made by a developer? Because that's the best kind of proof, I think.
EQN will have PvE, PvP and RP servers. They aren't going to focus on a single world PvP system like Eve. Even if they have "one server", there will be PvE, PvP and RP phases or instances.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I'm not so sure that will be the case with EQN. The are making a sandbox. Emergent game play. Systems like commerce, the transporting of goods. Polotics, territory control and the like.
On top of that SOE's biggest grossing game is 100% PvP. Planetside 2 has 6 million players. I do not look for them to cater to the "I wont do it" crowd. You can't build a social sanbox built around "I wont do it.!" it's like a conflict of interest...
EQN:L is a different story there will most certainly be all types of servers. "Build your own mmo."
In that video they ask gamers to say what type of server would you like. Here is what I want =-)
Faction Server
1. 3 PvP factions you can choose to join
2. All factions can team together for PvE content outside contested map
3. No PvP in PvE areas
4. PvP map that you become flagged when you enter, much like DAoC or GW2 RvR/WvW maps
5. Contested PvP map has Keeps and Castles to take over and defend that effect your faction in a positive way
6. Guild Wars: Contested map has an area that guilds can make fortifications that can be take out by other factions and defended. Must be maintained by the guild.
7. Taking out enough keeps and guild fortifications grant you access to special dungeon
8. Contested map has towns that are quest hubs (dailies) each faction can take over and control to earn special rewards.
Played: EQ1 (10 Years), Guild Wars, Rift, TERA
Tried: EQ2, Vanguard, Lord of the Rings Online, Dungeons and Dragons Online, Runes of Magic and countless others...
Currently Playing: GW2
Nytlok Sylas
80 Sylvari Ranger
Sandbox does not equal PvP. Star Wars Galaxies was a sandbox, or very sandboxy, but it wasn't an always on, PvP everywhere PvP game.
However, if we're going to look at clues in SOE's statements, let's look at the poll, where one of the specialty server options is "PvP".
https://www.everquestnext.com/round-table?poll=specialty-server-choices-eqn
If "PvP" is a "specialty" option, what is the normal, not specialty option? Not PvP. PvE.
SOE is not going to restrict player choice. They are going to have multiple servers. Allowing player choice means having PvP servers, certainly. But it doesn't mean forcing all players into a single rule set.
**
Of course, as is typical with developers, they aren't really explaining anything in great detail yet. Maybe all the servers will be "specialty" servers. Maybe they'll have specialty continents, but one server. Who knows.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I'd love that and would die for a large company to make a game like this, however, my guess is they will have pve and pvp servers.
Incognito
www.incognito-gaming.us
"You're either with us or against us"
Latest Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmneLjMHd_I&list=PL7cdOT0cP_M3szjAEuNRqKqFEeA9UCt1k
While this is for Landmark, I think they are pretty much talking about the same thing as Smedly.
Let players decide what they want to do. If people want to PVP, land and tools will be provided to create something. If people want to avoid PVP, they easily can. Players that want to attack others that don't want to play that way are out of luck.
They've already said they don't want to make "grieferquest." Without really limiting and punishing those that participate, there isn't an easy way to have OW PVP without some degree of "griefing." People will find a way. This seems to go against everything they've said so far.
They want people to have fun, their way, not how the devs want or how other players want.
Since players make the content in a Landmark there's no reason why structures and nice content wouldn't be build on PvP islands, thus requiring one to go there to see that creation. It's all up to the players.
What's not up to the players is advancement and achievements for activities, which seem where the "progression" is heading for Landmarks final iteration. If this is the case I hope they have a PvP path just as deep and rewarding as the crafting, building ones. No details yet so we'll see.
Its possible to make the world open pvp and be a pver that does not get involved.
1)players must be worth something to the territory owner and worth protecting. Owners will usually be the more hardcore guilds and alliances. Also they must not be worth killing indiscriminately as in if they die they still contribute to the wealth of the owners but start off producing less if the territory they are on is conquered. In short you need to make killing as few citizens as possible during a conquest of territory the best strategy with both sides leaving average players that happen to be living on the land alone. If a player decides to join the fight they should stop producing wealth for the territory at all.
2)There needs to be a npc police that defend players or at least help them escape bandits who wish to grief within a range of a police post.
Anyways there is more to it but I will not waste my time writing it out for no one to read. I will write more if someone is interested.
PVErs potentially being killed seems fairly involved to me. Sounds good in theory, but in reality would never work unless everyone wanted to play a particular way, while SOE has made it pretty clear they want players to play however they want as long as it isn't causing other to have a bad time.
If there are "police" roaming the world stopping all attacks, it would be pointless to even allow it. While an opt-in system is much easier to implement and doesn't scare off as many people on either side of the fence. Want to PVP, go ahead, don't want to, don't. Very simple. Being part of the conflict could have rewards and benefits not obtainable by those playing it safe, but not so much that they are playing a poor mans version of the game (what PVPers usually have).
You are also assuming players can own parts of the world. While I hope players/guilds can control land, it should be non-story involved areas. I'm doubting a guild will be able to control Lavastorm for example. Could be controllable sectors in Lavastorm, but not the entire place, nor have huge impact on overall gameplay of others.
Lots of ways they can go about it, my biggest concern is there being a point to PVP. If it is just "I don't like you" or "I'm red, you're blue", I'd rather not have PVP in the open at all.
You are completely missing what makes Eve tick. Eve works because everyone is in the same world, and there is a place for pvp and pve within that world. The economy of Eve is driven by pvp but requires a lot of pve players to supply everything. It's that dynamic that makes Eve work.
If a sandbox game that has pvp is to thrive, it needs the wolves and sheep. It doesn't work with just wolves.
You are very right. The one world/shard/server/game is why EVE works in my mind. If there was 50 "EVEs" it just wouldn't work. In a traditional rpgmmo, people can freely say "screw this server" if they are losing, get caught being a jackass, don't like the players, etc. Especially with many games providing and or selling server switching making it even more enticing for those having a bad experience. There is no 100% buy-in, players always have the option to start over. There is no escape in EVE, at least not anything like other games. You are in it for the long haul and take the good with the bad.
EVE caters to a very particular group of players that love and accept all of it. Unless they want EQN to be a fraction as popular as it could be, a similar system just isn't possible. They will have multiple "EQNs" most likely with different rules and while it could be very "sandbox"ish, it will never be a total free for all game without rules.
They don't seem to be making a "PVP" game or a "PVE" game. They are making a world for players to experience and make their own. I'm hoping both elements are available for those that want one, both or something completely different. I think games like EVE have their place and are great for those that want what it offers, but SOE is aiming much higher with EQN and the majority of gamers don't seem to fit into that niche.
I'm hoping that SOE Live reveals a bit more about PVP and the game in general, but as of now, nothing points to PVP being a foundational element of the game. I have no doubt it will be more important then past EQ games, but unless they build the game from the group up with PVP in mind, it isn't going to work well. If they were doing this, it would seem like they would of touched on it just a tad bit more in the last 8 months, but you never know. They could go "surprise EQN is all about player conflict" but that seems like a stretch.
I think EQN will be a great place for PVP since they've decided to go in the direction of horizontal progression. It will enable a lot better pvp since levels/gear won't == power and everyone will be on a semi-even playing field. It'll be a lot more about builds/counter builds, customization, skill and team work.
It's safe to say that EQN will probably have open world PVP in some form, but it's also safe to say they're not going to be making their top dog game a forced pvp experience. It'll have PVE servers for those who want it, and it'll have PVP servers for those who want it.
Or PVP will be limited to specific PVP areas in the world.
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
Would be great to see...the market is wide open for a sandbox with a owpvp element to it.
Incognito
www.incognito-gaming.us
"You're either with us or against us"
I really can't wait for this game to release and tank. I'm so sick and tired of hearing about it. More importantly i'm pissed about they're basically pissing all over the EQ IP and everything it represented.
I particularly love the "EVE is an excellent example of how this kind of system can thrive! comment by smed.
Lets see ~550k subs, 60% or better of which are multisubs off the same person.
So realistically we're talking about 250-300k actual playerbase, which has taken ~ 10 years to build up to. They call that an excellent example of success?
All EVE is an excellent example of is how small of a playerbase you can expect in an open world pvp game.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Now you done it! The VAST minority are gonna come after you fer sure
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
Don't worry it won't be. There might be PVP rule set servers or there might be PVP zones but there is no way a large western corporation with stock holders and board of directors is going to make a strictly PVP game using the companies signature franchise in this market. Anyone who thinks this is even remotely possible just isn't paying attention in the least.
EQN will be about questing and grouping up to kill things in a mostly PVE world just like it always has been. They might shake things up with procedural content and story bricks but at it's core it's going to be a PVE game.