Howdy, Stranger!

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

Full loot PVP MMOs, why do indi developers keep making them?

1202123252629

Comments

  • HatefullHatefull Member EpicPosts: 2,234
    ikcin said:
    ikcin said:
    You just can't wrap your head around the fact that punishing random PVP is just another part of risk vs. reward like you claim you want. You play an outlaw to rob people the risk is you maybe imprisoned if you lose.  

    Gameplay choices to restrict or punish something is not because it's bad but wanting to control gameplay.
    Over and over again. Why you play like outlaw? See you just take a game, and say this is how the things are. Let say you are not an outlaw, and the goal in the game is to beat more players. What will you suggest then? 

    Also risk vs reward. OK. You say the risk for PK should be higher, so what will be the higher reward?
    The reward for PK with full loot is higher. Again and again you are talking about a very specific you issue.  It's the game you built up in your minds issue. 
    No I'm talking about certain features. Now, you probably imagine some game. I do not, as I think abstract, so I do not need my fingers to count.

    OK, the attacker gets full loot as reward if the attack succeed. But if it does not, will the defender take full loot too? Then the reward will be equal, so why the attacker should be punished? Also, let say there is a jail system - which is a stupid thing in general for game design, there are exclusions of course. How the game will entertain the player while he is in the jail? Do not forget - we are talking about games.

    If crafting is bad why punish it by not making resource gather realistic instead of having to wall node to node to waste time?  It's a game play choice.  Why hold out raiders from doing raids but once a week?  Game play choice.

    This is not punishment. It is not even risk. The grind and the waiting are lazy ways to give longevity to the game. Sad, but most developers use exactly these ways.  I'm curious if you see the grind and the waiting as punishment, why you play such games?
    Are you and @Wizardry the same person different accounts? I am honestly starting to think so.

    If you want a new idea, go read an old book.

  • JakobmillerJakobmiller Member UncommonPosts: 333
    Darkfall is in my opinion the best online gaming experience I've ever had. So what failed? No marketing, a terrible company that didn't communicate with their community, lack of sandbox elements.

    What worked in Darkfall? The combat and full loot PvP. That was so intense that it left us shaking due to all the adrenaline. Name one game that provides that experience.
    bcbullyHatefullAlmostLancelot
  • sacredcow4sacredcow4 Member UncommonPosts: 239
    edited March 23
    Darkfall is in my opinion the best online gaming experience I've ever had. So what failed? No marketing, a terrible company that didn't communicate with their community, lack of sandbox elements.

    What worked in Darkfall? The combat and full loot PvP. That was so intense that it left us shaking due to all the adrenaline. Name one game that provides that experience.
    Ultima Online. Darkfall called itself a sandbox, when in reality is was a a giant ffa arena that required grinding. Indie Devs keep missing what a sandbox is and improperly labeling games that have ffa pvp or no levels as a sandbox. Most gamers under 30 have probably never played a real mmorpg sandbox :(

    I tried Darkfall... It was like they took everything that made UO sustainable out and added more of everything that made it tedious. Dark fall was a travel simulator at it's core :/
     I've been here a while...
  • ray12kray12k Member UncommonPosts: 482
    Asherons  Call (Darktide) had pvp done right. full loot and skill based.  If an indi dev. made a game that implemented as much freedom as a game made 20 years ago im sure  it would be a hit.  The problem with most mmorpgs in my opinion are these dam linear quest. WOW IMO dumb downed the genre  and killed the figure the shiat out yourself feel of a game. 
  • ChildoftheShadowsChildoftheShadows Member RarePosts: 1,171
    ray12k said:
    Asherons  Call (Darktide) had pvp done right. full loot and skill based.  If an indi dev. made a game that implemented as much freedom as a game made 20 years ago im sure  it would be a hit.  The problem with most mmorpgs in my opinion are these dam linear quest. WOW IMO dumb downed the genre  and killed the figure the shiat out yourself feel of a game. 
    I didn’t play AC but weren’t players able to use trinkets to prevent some item loss? I think any system that softened the blow would be good for player retention. 
  • JakobmillerJakobmiller Member UncommonPosts: 333
    Darkfall is in my opinion the best online gaming experience I've ever had. So what failed? No marketing, a terrible company that didn't communicate with their community, lack of sandbox elements.

    What worked in Darkfall? The combat and full loot PvP. That was so intense that it left us shaking due to all the adrenaline. Name one game that provides that experience.
    Ultima Online. Darkfall called itself a sandbox, when in reality is was a a giant ffa arena that required grinding. Indie Devs keep missing what a sandbox is and improperly labeling games that have ffa pvp or no levels as a sandbox. Most gamers under 30 have probably never played a real mmorpg sandbox :(

    I tried Darkfall... It was like they took everything that made UO sustainable out and added more of everything that made it tedious. Dark fall was a travel simulator at it's core :/
    Yeah, sadly too young for Ultima Online. The politics and teamplay made Darkfall for me. 
    I bet I would have loved Ultima.
  • ChildoftheShadowsChildoftheShadows Member RarePosts: 1,171
    Darkfall is in my opinion the best online gaming experience I've ever had. So what failed? No marketing, a terrible company that didn't communicate with their community, lack of sandbox elements.

    What worked in Darkfall? The combat and full loot PvP. That was so intense that it left us shaking due to all the adrenaline. Name one game that provides that experience.
    Ultima Online. Darkfall called itself a sandbox, when in reality is was a a giant ffa arena that required grinding. Indie Devs keep missing what a sandbox is and improperly labeling games that have ffa pvp or no levels as a sandbox. Most gamers under 30 have probably never played a real mmorpg sandbox :(

    I tried Darkfall... It was like they took everything that made UO sustainable out and added more of everything that made it tedious. Dark fall was a travel simulator at it's core :/
    Yeah, sadly too young for Ultima Online. The politics and teamplay made Darkfall for me. 
    I bet I would have loved Ultima.
    Maybe, maybe not. I couldn’t get into it due to how you controlled the character and graphics style. That makes a difference to me and it’s unfortunate because UO had everything else I wanted. When DF came along it wasn’t the prettiest, but the style was good enough and character control was top notch. 
    AlBQuirky
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,065
    Darkfall is in my opinion the best online gaming experience I've ever had. So what failed? No marketing, a terrible company that didn't communicate with their community, lack of sandbox elements.

    What worked in Darkfall? The combat and full loot PvP. That was so intense that it left us shaking due to all the adrenaline. Name one game that provides that experience.
    Ultima Online. Darkfall called itself a sandbox, when in reality is was a a giant ffa arena that required grinding. Indie Devs keep missing what a sandbox is and improperly labeling games that have ffa pvp or no levels as a sandbox. Most gamers under 30 have probably never played a real mmorpg sandbox :(

    I tried Darkfall... It was like they took everything that made UO sustainable out and added more of everything that made it tedious. Dark fall was a travel simulator at it's core :/
    Yeah, sadly too young for Ultima Online. The politics and teamplay made Darkfall for me. 
    I bet I would have loved Ultima.
    Maybe, maybe not. I couldn’t get into it due to how you controlled the character and graphics style. That makes a difference to me and it’s unfortunate because UO had everything else I wanted. When DF came along it wasn’t the prettiest, but the style was good enough and character control was top notch. 
    UO was the best in 1996. No longer in 2006, and even less in 2016.
    And even UO had to urgently patch in Trammel (PvE world) in order to stop the player bleeding due to the permanent mindless ganking that made playing anything other than a PvP character almost impossible.
    KyleranManWithNoTan
    "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: Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming - RAM: 16GB Kingston HyperX Savage 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: Philips 40PUK6809 4K 3D TV - Second display: Philips 273v 27" gaming monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset and Razer Hydra controllers - Soundcard: 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.

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,065
    ray12k said:
    Asherons  Call (Darktide) had pvp done right. full loot and skill based.  If an indi dev. made a game that implemented as much freedom as a game made 20 years ago im sure  it would be a hit.  The problem with most mmorpgs in my opinion are these dam linear quest. WOW IMO dumb downed the genre  and killed the figure the shiat out yourself feel of a game. 
    In AC1 you could use easy to get items, like massive mana charges, to cover all your valuables and make them zero chance to drop on death.

    And even then, the game would have failed without the PvE servers. DT at its peak population was less than 8% of the total player base, any many played DT occasionally, having their mains on a PvE server.

    But you're right, the way Turbine did it was right. Give the minority a PvP server, and let the majority enjoy the game away from those who roleplay psychos on the PvP server. That's how UO was also forced to do it finally. That's how it should be done if you want your game to succeed.
    ChildoftheShadows
    "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: Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming - RAM: 16GB Kingston HyperX Savage 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: Philips 40PUK6809 4K 3D TV - Second display: Philips 273v 27" gaming monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset and Razer Hydra controllers - Soundcard: 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.

  • bcbullybcbully Member EpicPosts: 9,821
    AAAMEOW said:
    AAAMEOW said:
    I want full loot for the sake of realism vs. artificial barriers.
    But I also want a Justice System that punishes repeated "crime" and a wide scope of Factions.

    I think there's a huge market-in-waiting for a game that doesn't have rampant PKing, but does have freedom and the ability to play it out without artificial barriers.
    People'll just whine if they are punished for pking and looting people.
    Some would. Tough shjt. If you're going to lose players, lose the ones that will keep that downward spiral going.
    And all games lose players. The question is how many.
    It's just my experience playing this type of game.  Anytime the developer put punishment for gankers, the forum is full of whining on the forum.

    That being said, I heard numerous times GW2 is too easy on this forum.  But all I hear is QQing on GW2 forum that the expansion is too hard.

    But what kind of punishment you have in mind for gankers in FFA full loot game?
    Not for one minute do I believe you played “this type” of game that was made in the last 15 years. Your assumption on the topic are way off. 

    Punishment - jail, prison, death (terrible debuff that last for days). All I enforced by player bounty hunters


    Wushu by far has the best justice system I believe the genre has seen. Complete with jail breaks bribery beheadings etc.
    Their system allowed culture to be formed. In this FFA world we all knew right from wrong.

    What some here are missing is pvp without risk and reward is meaningless.  Why kill a lowbie and risk hours in jail. Now what if your at war with the faction, or guild the lowbie is in? What if he’s transporting goods? Is the risk worth the reward?
  • ray12kray12k Member UncommonPosts: 482
    ray12k said:
    Asherons  Call (Darktide) had pvp done right. full loot and skill based.  If an indi dev. made a game that implemented as much freedom as a game made 20 years ago im sure  it would be a hit.  The problem with most mmorpgs in my opinion are these dam linear quest. WOW IMO dumb downed the genre  and killed the figure the shiat out yourself feel of a game. 
    In AC1 you could use easy to get items, like massive mana charges, to cover all your valuables and make them zero chance to drop on death.

    And even then, the game would have failed without the PvE servers. DT at its peak population was less than 8% of the total player base, any many played DT occasionally, having their mains on a PvE server.

    But you're right, the way Turbine did it was right. Give the minority a PvP server, and let the majority enjoy the game away from those who roleplay psychos on the PvP server. That's how UO was also forced to do it finally. That's how it should be done if you want your game to succeed.
    I take it you didnt play darktide much. keep loosing high value stones and it will hurt your pocket. The fact that all servers in ac eventually added pvp content proves that its a great feature for the genre. PVE mmorpgs are pretty much dead on release IMO. The gaming world has moved on to a more competitive player base. That's why mobile is making so much money on shitty games. People want to win and progress at a competitive level. But I do agree that developers should have  extreme pvp and casual pvp servers.

    Just my opinion. Probably biased as well =P
    bcbully
  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,206
    edited March 26
    Hatefull said:

    Ok, so you want to compare games like CS, COD, etc to MMORPGs? Great that makes zero sense. In a pvp game where the ONLY thing to do is PvP such as most shooters, all MOBA's (that I am aware of) to an MMORPG where you can hunt PvE, craft, gather and you think that the PvP in an MMORPG, a PKer should not be punished? Then where is the risk vs reward that you claim you want? If I can run around PKing crafters all day with no real chance of being punished there is no risk whatsoever, only reward, which btw will become boring as all hell in very short order.
    [mod edit] In the most MMOs, the so called craftsmen are just common players, as all craft. So what is that specific game you point? OK, let say there the craftsmen are some specific weaker class. As the risk for them will be obviously higher there are various ways to reduce it. From instanced rule - the craftsmen cannot PvP and been PKed, to OW rules - the craftsmen could hire other players as guards. Then the reward for such a group will be higher. As for the punishment - instead to increase the risk, it is possible to decrease the reward. So, in a full loot game, the player who PK will not get any loot. There are various ways to fix a problem. [mod edit]
    Post edited by Vaross on
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,065
    ray12k said:
    ray12k said:
    Asherons  Call (Darktide) had pvp done right. full loot and skill based.  If an indi dev. made a game that implemented as much freedom as a game made 20 years ago im sure  it would be a hit.  The problem with most mmorpgs in my opinion are these dam linear quest. WOW IMO dumb downed the genre  and killed the figure the shiat out yourself feel of a game. 
    In AC1 you could use easy to get items, like massive mana charges, to cover all your valuables and make them zero chance to drop on death.

    And even then, the game would have failed without the PvE servers. DT at its peak population was less than 8% of the total player base, any many played DT occasionally, having their mains on a PvE server.

    But you're right, the way Turbine did it was right. Give the minority a PvP server, and let the majority enjoy the game away from those who roleplay psychos on the PvP server. That's how UO was also forced to do it finally. That's how it should be done if you want your game to succeed.
    I take it you didnt play darktide much. keep loosing high value stones and it will hurt your pocket. The fact that all servers in ac eventually added pvp content proves that its a great feature for the genre. PVE mmorpgs are pretty much dead on release IMO. The gaming world has moved on to a more competitive player base. That's why mobile is making so much money on shitty games. People want to win and progress at a competitive level. But I do agree that developers should have  extreme pvp and casual pvp servers.

    Just my opinion. Probably biased as well =P
    It's nice when you stick to facts. PvP content in AC1 was added just like PvP content exists in WoW or other games. It was never forced, and never even close to be mandatory to get the best equipment and get to the top level of power of the game, to the opposite actually.
    And if PvE MMORPGs are pretty much "dead on release", how comes WoW still exists (and still with a subscription) ? How comes games like GW2 and ESO thrive ?
    I call bullshit on that.
    "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: Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming - RAM: 16GB Kingston HyperX Savage 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: Philips 40PUK6809 4K 3D TV - Second display: Philips 273v 27" gaming monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset and Razer Hydra controllers - Soundcard: 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.

  • MaurgrimMaurgrim Member RarePosts: 1,246
    Never thought my post would go this far.
    ChildoftheShadowsPhaserlightHatefullManWithNoTan
  • ChildoftheShadowsChildoftheShadows Member RarePosts: 1,171
    Maurgrim said:
    Never thought my post would go this far.
    To be fair it’s been derailed beyond
    recognition. 
    HatefullKyleranAlBQuirky
  • ray12kray12k Member UncommonPosts: 482
    ray12k said:
    ray12k said:
    Asherons  Call (Darktide) had pvp done right. full loot and skill based.  If an indi dev. made a game that implemented as much freedom as a game made 20 years ago im sure  it would be a hit.  The problem with most mmorpgs in my opinion are these dam linear quest. WOW IMO dumb downed the genre  and killed the figure the shiat out yourself feel of a game. 
    In AC1 you could use easy to get items, like massive mana charges, to cover all your valuables and make them zero chance to drop on death.

    And even then, the game would have failed without the PvE servers. DT at its peak population was less than 8% of the total player base, any many played DT occasionally, having their mains on a PvE server.

    But you're right, the way Turbine did it was right. Give the minority a PvP server, and let the majority enjoy the game away from those who roleplay psychos on the PvP server. That's how UO was also forced to do it finally. That's how it should be done if you want your game to succeed.
    I take it you didnt play darktide much. keep loosing high value stones and it will hurt your pocket. The fact that all servers in ac eventually added pvp content proves that its a great feature for the genre. PVE mmorpgs are pretty much dead on release IMO. The gaming world has moved on to a more competitive player base. That's why mobile is making so much money on shitty games. People want to win and progress at a competitive level. But I do agree that developers should have  extreme pvp and casual pvp servers.

    Just my opinion. Probably biased as well =P
    It's nice when you stick to facts. PvP content in AC1 was added just like PvP content exists in WoW or other games. It was never forced, and never even close to be mandatory to get the best equipment and get to the top level of power of the game, to the opposite actually.
    And if PvE MMORPGs are pretty much "dead on release", how comes WoW still exists (and still with a subscription) ? How comes games like GW2 and ESO thrive ?
    I call bullshit on that.
    ???? are you living under a rock? facts are non pvp mmorpg games are dead on release. gw 2 has pvp, wow has pvp  and even eso has limited pvp....  PVE only mmorpgs are a dying breed.  Gamers taste have changed. 
    HatefullGdemami
  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member RarePosts: 1,156
    edited March 23
    bcbully said:
    AAAMEOW said:
    AAAMEOW said:
    I want full loot for the sake of realism vs. artificial barriers.
    But I also want a Justice System that punishes repeated "crime" and a wide scope of Factions.

    I think there's a huge market-in-waiting for a game that doesn't have rampant PKing, but does have freedom and the ability to play it out without artificial barriers.
    People'll just whine if they are punished for pking and looting people.
    Some would. Tough shjt. If you're going to lose players, lose the ones that will keep that downward spiral going.
    And all games lose players. The question is how many.
    It's just my experience playing this type of game.  Anytime the developer put punishment for gankers, the forum is full of whining on the forum.

    That being said, I heard numerous times GW2 is too easy on this forum.  But all I hear is QQing on GW2 forum that the expansion is too hard.

    But what kind of punishment you have in mind for gankers in FFA full loot game?
    Not for one minute do I believe you played “this type” of game that was made in the last 15 years. Your assumption on the topic are way off. 

    Punishment - jail, prison, death (terrible debuff that last for days). All I enforced by player bounty hunters


    Wushu by far has the best justice system I believe the genre has seen. Complete with jail breaks bribery beheadings etc.
    Their system allowed culture to be formed. In this FFA world we all knew right from wrong.

    What some here are missing is pvp without risk and reward is meaningless.  Why kill a lowbie and risk hours in jail. Now what if your at war with the faction, or guild the lowbie is in? What if he’s transporting goods? Is the risk worth the reward?
    I'm playing one now.  Legend of Aria.  Developer made gankers life more inconvenient by making their travel longer, and they complained.  People also discussed stat loss on forum, and gankers complain.

    Ikcn are complaining why gankers death penalty should be harsher.  People complain.  There are people complaining about stat loss in UO now(still), and want it removed.

    Granted there are also people supporting tougher punishment for wolf. 

    But you are right.  I didn't play much FFA full loot MMO.  I play mostly themepark before, and just jumped ship.
  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member RarePosts: 1,156
    ray12k said:
    ray12k said:
    ray12k said:
    Asherons  Call (Darktide) had pvp done right. full loot and skill based.  If an indi dev. made a game that implemented as much freedom as a game made 20 years ago im sure  it would be a hit.  The problem with most mmorpgs in my opinion are these dam linear quest. WOW IMO dumb downed the genre  and killed the figure the shiat out yourself feel of a game. 
    In AC1 you could use easy to get items, like massive mana charges, to cover all your valuables and make them zero chance to drop on death.

    And even then, the game would have failed without the PvE servers. DT at its peak population was less than 8% of the total player base, any many played DT occasionally, having their mains on a PvE server.

    But you're right, the way Turbine did it was right. Give the minority a PvP server, and let the majority enjoy the game away from those who roleplay psychos on the PvP server. That's how UO was also forced to do it finally. That's how it should be done if you want your game to succeed.
    I take it you didnt play darktide much. keep loosing high value stones and it will hurt your pocket. The fact that all servers in ac eventually added pvp content proves that its a great feature for the genre. PVE mmorpgs are pretty much dead on release IMO. The gaming world has moved on to a more competitive player base. That's why mobile is making so much money on shitty games. People want to win and progress at a competitive level. But I do agree that developers should have  extreme pvp and casual pvp servers.

    Just my opinion. Probably biased as well =P
    It's nice when you stick to facts. PvP content in AC1 was added just like PvP content exists in WoW or other games. It was never forced, and never even close to be mandatory to get the best equipment and get to the top level of power of the game, to the opposite actually.
    And if PvE MMORPGs are pretty much "dead on release", how comes WoW still exists (and still with a subscription) ? How comes games like GW2 and ESO thrive ?
    I call bullshit on that.
    ???? are you living under a rock? facts are non pvp mmorpg games are dead on release. gw 2 has pvp, wow has pvp  and even eso has limited pvp....  PVE only mmorpgs are a dying breed.  Gamers taste have changed. 
    Must be some really niche mmo.  Because most major MMO have some form of pvp.  At least in the form of arena or battleground.
  • bcbullybcbully Member EpicPosts: 9,821
    ray12k said:
    ray12k said:
    Asherons  Call (Darktide) had pvp done right. full loot and skill based.  If an indi dev. made a game that implemented as much freedom as a game made 20 years ago im sure  it would be a hit.  The problem with most mmorpgs in my opinion are these dam linear quest. WOW IMO dumb downed the genre  and killed the figure the shiat out yourself feel of a game. 
    In AC1 you could use easy to get items, like massive mana charges, to cover all your valuables and make them zero chance to drop on death.

    And even then, the game would have failed without the PvE servers. DT at its peak population was less than 8% of the total player base, any many played DT occasionally, having their mains on a PvE server.

    But you're right, the way Turbine did it was right. Give the minority a PvP server, and let the majority enjoy the game away from those who roleplay psychos on the PvP server. That's how UO was also forced to do it finally. That's how it should be done if you want your game to succeed.
    I take it you didnt play darktide much. keep loosing high value stones and it will hurt your pocket. The fact that all servers in ac eventually added pvp content proves that its a great feature for the genre. PVE mmorpgs are pretty much dead on release IMO. The gaming world has moved on to a more competitive player base. That's why mobile is making so much money on shitty games. People want to win and progress at a competitive level. But I do agree that developers should have  extreme pvp and casual pvp servers.

    Just my opinion. Probably biased as well =P
    It's nice when you stick to facts. PvP content in AC1 was added just like PvP content exists in WoW or other games. It was never forced, and never even close to be mandatory to get the best equipment and get to the top level of power of the game, to the opposite actually.
    And if PvE MMORPGs are pretty much "dead on release", how comes WoW still exists (and still with a subscription) ? How comes games like GW2 and ESO thrive ?
    I call bullshit on that.
    ESO because of pvp is at its core. That’s what sets ESO apart for the other mmorpgs  it has great pvp.

    GW2 is on life support because they did everything possible to make pvp meaningless.

    In this era pve as a whole is not sustainable. Tooo many videos too many guilds. No mystery left. No surprise. Millions wasted on a couple months of “content”.
  • bcbullybcbully Member EpicPosts: 9,821

    ray12k said:
    ray12k said:
    ray12k said:
    Asherons  Call (Darktide) had pvp done right. full loot and skill based.  If an indi dev. made a game that implemented as much freedom as a game made 20 years ago im sure  it would be a hit.  The problem with most mmorpgs in my opinion are these dam linear quest. WOW IMO dumb downed the genre  and killed the figure the shiat out yourself feel of a game. 
    In AC1 you could use easy to get items, like massive mana charges, to cover all your valuables and make them zero chance to drop on death.

    And even then, the game would have failed without the PvE servers. DT at its peak population was less than 8% of the total player base, any many played DT occasionally, having their mains on a PvE server.

    But you're right, the way Turbine did it was right. Give the minority a PvP server, and let the majority enjoy the game away from those who roleplay psychos on the PvP server. That's how UO was also forced to do it finally. That's how it should be done if you want your game to succeed.
    I take it you didnt play darktide much. keep loosing high value stones and it will hurt your pocket. The fact that all servers in ac eventually added pvp content proves that its a great feature for the genre. PVE mmorpgs are pretty much dead on release IMO. The gaming world has moved on to a more competitive player base. That's why mobile is making so much money on shitty games. People want to win and progress at a competitive level. But I do agree that developers should have  extreme pvp and casual pvp servers.

    Just my opinion. Probably biased as well =P
    It's nice when you stick to facts. PvP content in AC1 was added just like PvP content exists in WoW or other games. It was never forced, and never even close to be mandatory to get the best equipment and get to the top level of power of the game, to the opposite actually.
    And if PvE MMORPGs are pretty much "dead on release", how comes WoW still exists (and still with a subscription) ? How comes games like GW2 and ESO thrive ?
    I call bullshit on that.
    ???? are you living under a rock? facts are non pvp mmorpg games are dead on release. gw 2 has pvp, wow has pvp  and even eso has limited pvp....  PVE only mmorpgs are a dying breed.  Gamers taste have changed. 
    Quite a few on this site haven’t adjusted well... sad yes I know.
    Gdemami
  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member RarePosts: 1,156
    ray12k said:
    ray12k said:
    ray12k said:
    Asherons  Call (Darktide) had pvp done right. full loot and skill based.  If an indi dev. made a game that implemented as much freedom as a game made 20 years ago im sure  it would be a hit.  The problem with most mmorpgs in my opinion are these dam linear quest. WOW IMO dumb downed the genre  and killed the figure the shiat out yourself feel of a game. 
    In AC1 you could use easy to get items, like massive mana charges, to cover all your valuables and make them zero chance to drop on death.

    And even then, the game would have failed without the PvE servers. DT at its peak population was less than 8% of the total player base, any many played DT occasionally, having their mains on a PvE server.

    But you're right, the way Turbine did it was right. Give the minority a PvP server, and let the majority enjoy the game away from those who roleplay psychos on the PvP server. That's how UO was also forced to do it finally. That's how it should be done if you want your game to succeed.
    I take it you didnt play darktide much. keep loosing high value stones and it will hurt your pocket. The fact that all servers in ac eventually added pvp content proves that its a great feature for the genre. PVE mmorpgs are pretty much dead on release IMO. The gaming world has moved on to a more competitive player base. That's why mobile is making so much money on shitty games. People want to win and progress at a competitive level. But I do agree that developers should have  extreme pvp and casual pvp servers.

    Just my opinion. Probably biased as well =P
    It's nice when you stick to facts. PvP content in AC1 was added just like PvP content exists in WoW or other games. It was never forced, and never even close to be mandatory to get the best equipment and get to the top level of power of the game, to the opposite actually.
    And if PvE MMORPGs are pretty much "dead on release", how comes WoW still exists (and still with a subscription) ? How comes games like GW2 and ESO thrive ?
    I call bullshit on that.
    ???? are you living under a rock? facts are non pvp mmorpg games are dead on release. gw 2 has pvp, wow has pvp  and even eso has limited pvp....  PVE only mmorpgs are a dying breed.  Gamers taste have changed. 
    I think he is talking about forced PvP/non consesual/full loot etc etc.
     
  • kitaradkitarad Member EpicPosts: 5,264
    edited March 24
    bcbully said:

    ray12k said:
    ray12k said:
    ray12k said:
    Asherons  Call (Darktide) had pvp done right. full loot and skill based.  If an indi dev. made a game that implemented as much freedom as a game made 20 years ago im sure  it would be a hit.  The problem with most mmorpgs in my opinion are these dam linear quest. WOW IMO dumb downed the genre  and killed the figure the shiat out yourself feel of a game. 
    In AC1 you could use easy to get items, like massive mana charges, to cover all your valuables and make them zero chance to drop on death.

    And even then, the game would have failed without the PvE servers. DT at its peak population was less than 8% of the total player base, any many played DT occasionally, having their mains on a PvE server.

    But you're right, the way Turbine did it was right. Give the minority a PvP server, and let the majority enjoy the game away from those who roleplay psychos on the PvP server. That's how UO was also forced to do it finally. That's how it should be done if you want your game to succeed.
    I take it you didnt play darktide much. keep loosing high value stones and it will hurt your pocket. The fact that all servers in ac eventually added pvp content proves that its a great feature for the genre. PVE mmorpgs are pretty much dead on release IMO. The gaming world has moved on to a more competitive player base. That's why mobile is making so much money on shitty games. People want to win and progress at a competitive level. But I do agree that developers should have  extreme pvp and casual pvp servers.

    Just my opinion. Probably biased as well =P
    It's nice when you stick to facts. PvP content in AC1 was added just like PvP content exists in WoW or other games. It was never forced, and never even close to be mandatory to get the best equipment and get to the top level of power of the game, to the opposite actually.
    And if PvE MMORPGs are pretty much "dead on release", how comes WoW still exists (and still with a subscription) ? How comes games like GW2 and ESO thrive ?
    I call bullshit on that.
    ???? are you living under a rock? facts are non pvp mmorpg games are dead on release. gw 2 has pvp, wow has pvp  and even eso has limited pvp....  PVE only mmorpgs are a dying breed.  Gamers taste have changed. 
    Quite a few on this site haven’t adjusted well... sad yes I know.
    The reason ESO works is because there is a choice for people to PvP or not PvP. This seems to escape your notice. I can understand that if you play PvP and enjoy it in a game you might be forgiven for thinking that is the be it and end all of the content. It isn't the reason ESO works and is successful, it is because players can engage in PvE unmolested by gankers and can choose to PvP when they want to. This thread isn't about those type of games however but as usual you are trying to muscle in your point of view and make it sound like it's all about the PvP. The fact is a game has to have both PvP and PvE and there has to be choice in it's participation for it to succeed as an MMORPG as evidenced by ESO and GW2. I am stressing the MMORPG part so please leave your arguments about MOBAs and survival games at the door.
    bcbully said:
    ray12k said:
    ray12k said:
    Asherons  Call (Darktide) had pvp done right. full loot and skill based.  If an indi dev. made a game that implemented as much freedom as a game made 20 years ago im sure  it would be a hit.  The problem with most mmorpgs in my opinion are these dam linear quest. WOW IMO dumb downed the genre  and killed the figure the shiat out yourself feel of a game. 
    In AC1 you could use easy to get items, like massive mana charges, to cover all your valuables and make them zero chance to drop on death.

    And even then, the game would have failed without the PvE servers. DT at its peak population was less than 8% of the total player base, any many played DT occasionally, having their mains on a PvE server.

    But you're right, the way Turbine did it was right. Give the minority a PvP server, and let the majority enjoy the game away from those who roleplay psychos on the PvP server. That's how UO was also forced to do it finally. That's how it should be done if you want your game to succeed.
    I take it you didnt play darktide much. keep loosing high value stones and it will hurt your pocket. The fact that all servers in ac eventually added pvp content proves that its a great feature for the genre. PVE mmorpgs are pretty much dead on release IMO. The gaming world has moved on to a more competitive player base. That's why mobile is making so much money on shitty games. People want to win and progress at a competitive level. But I do agree that developers should have  extreme pvp and casual pvp servers.

    Just my opinion. Probably biased as well =P
    It's nice when you stick to facts. PvP content in AC1 was added just like PvP content exists in WoW or other games. It was never forced, and never even close to be mandatory to get the best equipment and get to the top level of power of the game, to the opposite actually.
    And if PvE MMORPGs are pretty much "dead on release", how comes WoW still exists (and still with a subscription) ? How comes games like GW2 and ESO thrive ?
    I call bullshit on that.
    ESO because of pvp is at its core. That’s what sets ESO apart for the other mmorpgs  it has great pvp.

    GW2 is on life support because they did everything possible to make pvp meaningless.

    In this era pve as a whole is not sustainable. Tooo many videos too many guilds. No mystery left. No surprise. Millions wasted on a couple months of “content”.

    In spite of your attempt to slight GW2 at some point it was very successful or have you forgotten the dreadful start ESO had when it came out. Games evolve and some decline.

  • HatefullHatefull Member EpicPosts: 2,234
    edited March 24
    Darkfall is in my opinion the best online gaming experience I've ever had. So what failed? No marketing, a terrible company that didn't communicate with their community, lack of sandbox elements.

    What worked in Darkfall? The combat and full loot PvP. That was so intense that it left us shaking due to all the adrenaline. Name one game that provides that experience.
    Lineage 2 did for me, so did SWG, Tribes when I was competing, and about any, in my personal opinion, good game does that for me. I get, understand and respect that others may not have the same experiences or reactions to said experiences.
    Gdemami

    If you want a new idea, go read an old book.

  • HatefullHatefull Member EpicPosts: 2,234
    edited March 24
    ikcin said:
    Hatefull said:

    Ok, so you want to compare games like CS, COD, etc to MMORPGs? Great that makes zero sense. In a pvp game where the ONLY thing to do is PvP such as most shooters, all MOBA's (that I am aware of) to an MMORPG where you can hunt PvE, craft, gather and you think that the PvP in an MMORPG, a PKer should not be punished? Then where is the risk vs reward that you claim you want? If I can run around PKing crafters all day with no real chance of being punished there is no risk whatsoever, only reward, which btw will become boring as all hell in very short order.
    I think you are relatively stupid. Sorry for that, it is not insult, just opinion. Some people are relatively smart, and vice versa. In the most MMOs, the so called craftsmen are just common players, as all craft. So what is that specific game you point? OK, let say there the craftsmen are some specific weaker class. As the risk for them will be obviously higher there are various ways to reduce it. From instanced rule - the craftsmen cannot PvP and been PKed, to OW rules - the craftsmen could hire other players as guards. Then the reward for such a group will be higher. As for the punishment - instead to increase the risk, it is possible to decrease the reward. So, in a full loot game, the player who PK will not get any loot. There are various ways to fix a problem. And to claim only one way is possible is just stupid.
    I don't take it as an insult coming from you. You prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are far less intelligent than most. Only someone as ignorant as you could have the arrogance to call someone else stupid, when essentially myself and several others have been pointing out how dumb you really are, in particular when it comes to games.

    Bottom line: you bring nothing to the site, the conversation, or the world as far as I can see. This is disregarding your terrible English of course.
    Post edited by Hatefull on
    kitaradGdemami

    If you want a new idea, go read an old book.

  • ChildoftheShadowsChildoftheShadows Member RarePosts: 1,171
    When a game releases PVP and PVE servers, the population on the PVE servers dwarf the PVP servers 100 to 1.

    When a game releases full loot open world non consensual PVP, you get even a smaller number of people interested in it than the PVP server, because not all PVP players like full loot.

    So what you end up with is a choice when making a game. You either cater to your niche and live with the population issues or you develop the game to a broader audience. How broad is up to the developer of course, but that's just part of the decision process.

    In the case for modern games that "include PVP" as mentioned above, they are not popular because of the PVP. They simply wanted to also lure in that crowd ALONG WITH the pve players. These games are NOT predominantly PVP by any stretch. They are by and large PVE games with PVP activities within them. All of the PVP is 100% avoidable and a vast majority of players will 100% avoid it. If PVP was the reason they were popular they would be PVP games with a bit of PVE. That is clearly not the case.
    Hatefull
Sign In or Register to comment.