Originally posted by Loke666 The only way to make open world PvP mainstream is to get rid of the huge gaps in level/power.It is not getting killed that is the problem here, what most players are upset about is getting killed with zero chanse to defend themselves and needing to grind for a month or more to be able to fight on equal terms with most gankers.Mainstream players love PvP in FPS games but not in MMOs.So if you want open world PvP to be as popular you need to seriously change the progression in MMOs. Levels are the first thing that needs to go, an the regular gear progression is the second. The alternative is to have down level mechanics like GW2, leveling down everyone to the zone they are in, that would work as well. People wouldnt have to go to zones where people twice their level could gank them then.The problem with this is that many MMO PvP fans wouldnt want these things, but they would work.
This seems to be a recurring theme. What a typical "Wolf" wants isn't what a typical "Sheep" wants.
Even leveling the playing field isn't going to bring open world pvp to the masses though. Think about it, a "Wolf" is going to spend time learning how to fight. A "Sheep" is going to spend time doing everything else, because that's what they want to do. Even with the ridiculous power disparity leveled, the "Wolf" is still going to kill the "Sheep". It's the same scenario as before, except now the "Wolf" gets to brag about their skill in PvP.
Again, I'm making some broad statements based on the people I know. They don't want their PvE and their PvP to be mixed together. Half of them don't want the PvP at all. It's a baseline preference in how they want to spend their time. They just don't want the whole open world pvp thing.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
The only way to make open world PvP mainstream is to get rid of the huge gaps in level/power.
It is not getting killed that is the problem here, what most players are upset about is getting killed with zero chanse to defend themselves and needing to grind for a month or more to be able to fight on equal terms with most gankers.
Mainstream players love PvP in FPS games but not in MMOs.
So if you want open world PvP to be as popular you need to seriously change the progression in MMOs. Levels are the first thing that needs to go, an the regular gear progression is the second.
The alternative is to have down level mechanics like GW2, leveling down everyone to the zone they are in, that would work as well. People wouldnt have to go to zones where people twice their level could gank them then.
The problem with this is that many MMO PvP fans wouldnt want these things, but they would work.
I completely agree, in a world (which i think open world pvp is a good feature) progression need to be more about options that some linearaty of power. That said, i think most players actually like pvp because they are bored with 10 years of pve. I think what they really want is a solid, and i mean solid system to keep it fair.
think of the griffon in the commons in eq. This thing could sneak up on you at any time and chances are you didnt have a chance to get away (depending on your level). This was gameplay because you had to keep looking over your shoulder if you wanted to stay alive. Pure safety ends up in boredom, and no safety ends up in chaos. I think in the future the hardcore among us will become content for the rest of us.
i have no issues with a marauder going around the zone killing everyone. Its dynamic content. I have issues with there being far to many marauders than the game will actually support.
I dont know Bro- But our game is coming. It might take a few years but the staleness of the copycat themepark market is FINALLY starting to be evident to many... Give it a couple years for a AAA company to get their head out of their ass and realize it as well.
Given what these games cost to create, no investor in their right mind is going to go after what is a narrow niche market. If a game allows (let alone encorages ganking/griefing) its going to seriously niche itself in the modern western markets. If you want FFA (full loot or other wise) check out some of the Asian server games. They tend to be much more tolerate of such.
Originally posted by Gamefun You don't want open world PvP games to go main stream because of the mass load of carebears who whine 24/7. That pretty much nails it.
Damn straight. ^^ But keep this in mind, in regards to Care Bears (who out number PvP types) to paraphrase Bob; "They may be Care Bears, but their money is still green"... ^^
you have to account for the fact that you cant get into a battleground in GW2 as there are queues.
lots of people love pvp, its just implementing a ruleset that gives the appropiate challenge to the appropiate group.
hardcores need it to be more challenging for them
carebears need theor protections.
Care Bears (by and large) simply will not play a game that allows ganking/griefing. There are WAY too many other games that forbid it, for them to bother with such a game.
Originally posted by Loke666 The only way to make open world PvP mainstream is to get rid of the huge gaps in level/power.
It is not getting killed that is the problem here, what most players are upset about is getting killed with zero chanse to defend themselves and needing to grind for a month or more to be able to fight on equal terms with most gankers.
Mainstream players love PvP in FPS games but not in MMOs.
So if you want open world PvP to be as popular you need to seriously change the progression in MMOs. Levels are the first thing that needs to go, an the regular gear progression is the second.
The alternative is to have down level mechanics like GW2, leveling down everyone to the zone they are in, that would work as well. People wouldnt have to go to zones where people twice their level could gank them then.
The problem with this is that many MMO PvP fans wouldnt want these things, but they would work.
This seems to be a recurring theme. What a typical "Wolf" wants isn't what a typical "Sheep" wants.
Even leveling the playing field isn't going to bring open world pvp to the masses though. Think about it, a "Wolf" is going to spend time learning how to fight. A "Sheep" is going to spend time doing everything else, because that's what they want to do. Even with the ridiculous power disparity leveled, the "Wolf" is still going to kill the "Sheep". It's the same scenario as before, except now the "Wolf" gets to brag about their skill in PvP.
Again, I'm making some broad statements based on the people I know. They don't want their PvE and their PvP to be mixed together. Half of them don't want the PvP at all. It's a baseline preference in how they want to spend their time. They just don't want the whole open world pvp thing.
I think that the wolf and sheep is a bad analogy. Many of those what you might see as 'sheep' could play the wolf, but are simply not interested in it. Simply because they don't enjoy preying on the weak. Instead they rather fight other wolves.
And as for mixing pvp and pve. I can see the benefit of both. Mixed because of open world pvp or both seperated. When seperated people get to enjoy interesting PVE at their leasure. Mixed, they can feel the thrill of having to fight at any moment.
But mixed will never grasp a large audience. In my experience many of the mainstream MMO players aren't even what you would call gamers. They never or rarely played games before MMO's and they are generally bad at it because of it. I can't see those ppl enjoy open world pvp.
In open world pvp, there's no such thing as "griefing". You know the rules going in.
You can "call it griefing" but it doesn't make it so.
Thats why so many of these games are destined to fail. I don't want to be griefed and I know that it is built into the rules of the game, so I don't buy the game.
Most of us "sheep" are just players that want to log in and decide what to do without some ganker imposing his will on us. If I want to pvp then I will go to a pvp area or a battleground or something, but I don't want someone to impose their pvp on me while I have other plans. So I just don't buy the game. I gave it one try with Aion but when my questing/leveling got interrupted by too much ganking I cancelled my sub and the company lost revenue.
Originally posted by someforumguy Originally posted by lizardbonesOriginally posted by Loke666The only way to make open world PvP mainstream is to get rid of the huge gaps in level/power.It is not getting killed that is the problem here, what most players are upset about is getting killed with zero chanse to defend themselves and needing to grind for a month or more to be able to fight on equal terms with most gankers.Mainstream players love PvP in FPS games but not in MMOs.So if you want open world PvP to be as popular you need to seriously change the progression in MMOs. Levels are the first thing that needs to go, an the regular gear progression is the second.The alternative is to have down level mechanics like GW2, leveling down everyone to the zone they are in, that would work as well. People wouldnt have to go to zones where people twice their level could gank them then.The problem with this is that many MMO PvP fans wouldnt want these things, but they would work.
This seems to be a recurring theme. What a typical "Wolf" wants isn't what a typical "Sheep" wants. Even leveling the playing field isn't going to bring open world pvp to the masses though. Think about it, a "Wolf" is going to spend time learning how to fight. A "Sheep" is going to spend time doing everything else, because that's what they want to do. Even with the ridiculous power disparity leveled, the "Wolf" is still going to kill the "Sheep". It's the same scenario as before, except now the "Wolf" gets to brag about their skill in PvP. Again, I'm making some broad statements based on the people I know. They don't want their PvE and their PvP to be mixed together. Half of them don't want the PvP at all. It's a baseline preference in how they want to spend their time. They just don't want the whole open world pvp thing. I think that the wolf and sheep is a bad analogy. Many of those what you might see as 'sheep' could play the wolf, but are simply not interested in it. Simply because they don't enjoy preying on the weak. Instead they rather fight other wolves.
And as for mixing pvp and pve. I can see the benefit of both. Mixed because of open world pvp or both seperated. When seperated people get to enjoy interesting PVE at their leasure. Mixed, they can feel the thrill of having to fight at any moment.
But mixed will never grasp a large audience. In my experience many of the mainstream MMO players aren't even what you would call gamers. They never or rarely played games before MMO's and they are generally bad at it because of it. I can't see those ppl enjoy open world pvp.
I don't have a better term to classify those people. The one, unifying theme that they have is that they don't want open world pvp. They might like it in battlegrounds, they might even play games that have open world pvp, if they can have a 100% safe area to play in, but they do not want open world pvp in their MMORPG. They don't want to become an open world pvp player. They make up the bulk of the people I know who play video games. The phrase "anti-open world pvp players" is just too long.
So I agree with you on both points, the Wolf/Sheep terms aren't good, and open world pvp isn't something with mass appeal. I don't have a better set of terms though.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Back when i played daoc people scoffed at that game and its rvr citing that mainstream doesnt like rvr..daoc only has 100k subscribers (or something like that..might have been 50k..cant remember)...Certainly they were ahead of their time.
yet here we are with basically daoc2 in the form of guild wars 2 will millions of copies sold and every battleground filled to the brim with players to the poit they are complaining about not being able to get into them and every game.
the truth is simple. Players are cheap dynamic content.
This first round of next gen games (Swtor, TSW, GW2) really missed the mark by not adding Wpvp, and will suffer because of it.
Cheap player driven content.
No. They would suffer for adding open world PvP. The vast majority of the modern gaming population doesn't want it, nor would they tolerate it.
That's not rue at all. Far more people do pvp and pve vs only pve. Look at the three games I listed. Two a suffering now, and we are hearing grumblings about the 3rd all ready.
This is why there are pvp servers and pve servers. You don't want Wpvp roll on a pve server. Problem solved right?
This first round of next gen games (Swtor, TSW, GW2) really missed the mark by not adding Wpvp, and will suffer because of it.
Cheap player driven content.
No. They would suffer for adding open world PvP. The vast majority of the modern gaming population doesn't want it, nor would they tolerate it.
That's not rue at all. Far more people do pvp and pve vs only pve. Look at the three games I listed. Two a suffering now, and we are hearing grumblings about the 3rd all ready.
Can you link to your source for that?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
If you want a open world PvP game to appeal to the masses you have to remove the "starkness of choice." The starkness of choice is what I call the ability for players to be on any side and do so with great fulidity. Instead, IMO, you have to limit people's choice and give them something to fight for: like DAoC, but expand the choice and make those choices more permaent and affecting the world. I could go on, but I don't want to talk about my "baby mmo" and destory my little hobby by giving the ideas to anyone else
Originally posted by rungard Originally posted by lizardbonesopen world pvp isn't something with mass appeal.
not yet.
Back when i played daoc people scoffed at that game and its rvr citing that mainstream doesnt like rvr..daoc only has 100k subscribers (or something like that..might have been 50k..cant remember)...Certainly they were ahead of their time.
yet here we are with basically daoc2 in the form of guild wars 2 will millions of copies sold and every battleground filled to the brim with players to the poit they are complaining about not being able to get into them and every game.
the truth is simple. Players are cheap dynamic content.
In GW2 and in any segregated pvp setup, players are not giving up their ability to choose to PvP in their PvE game. In games where that choice isn't available inside the game, players make that choice when they decide to purchase or not purchase the game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by bcbully Originally posted by WraithoneOriginally posted by bcbullyThis first round of next gen games (Swtor, TSW, GW2) really missed the mark by not adding Wpvp, and will suffer because of it. Cheap player driven content.
No. They would suffer for adding open world PvP. The vast majority of the modern gaming population doesn't want it, nor would they tolerate it. That's not rue at all. Far more people do pvp and pve vs only pve. Look at the three games I listed. Two a suffering now, and we are hearing grumblings about the 3rd all ready.
This is why there are pvp servers and pve servers. You don't want Wpvp roll on a pve server. Problem solved right?
What players have on the PvP/PvE servers is the ability to choose. They can flag themselves for PvP if they want, but only if they want. On open world pvp servers, that choice is made before choosing a server. That's why there are more PvE servers with the option to flag than there are PvP servers in games where that choice is offered.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I think the holy grail is pvp for the masses. This is the only way to make a dangerous vibrant world. At some point players have to be the content. In order to have open world pvp that the masses will accept we need a very good ruleset. You also need to make sure that the pvp itself provides gameplay value to all the players, good and evil.Here is ehat i would do in a fantasy game to achieve pvp for the masses. We start the game with the player choosing a deity. Unlike other games the deity is very important as it is the core of the pvp system. There would be a number of gods to choose from but you could only initially choose good gods.Each of the gods grants certain powers to their followers, so you choose the god that best suits you. When youve made your choice you exchange your servitude (go kill evil stuff etc) for special god powers which are based on how valuable *Faction) you are to your god.So you can earn a gods respect by doing good things in the game (killing monsters, evil players), and likewise you can lose respect for doing things the gods dont like such as killing good aligned players.So you start out in the world as good and you have choices to make. You technically can do whatever you want but there are consequences to actions. You will also be equipped with a friendly fire button to prevent accidents.If you choose to be good you gain ranks in good and with every rank you gain more special advantages. For instance a higher ranking player on the good side might have more resurrection options than a lower rank player, and have more special combat abilities, soulbinding equipment and inventory protection options derived from serving that god. The higher rank you are the more options you get. Incentive to be good.If you choose to be bad and kill players the evil system kicks in. The evil side is a very hard road to which ensures that only the most dedicated players wish to become that. Every good player you kill decreases your good pool by a lot and after a rampage or two you become evil. A few things happen when you turn evil. The mistake all mmos make is that they allow evil with no consequences and give no few incentives to be good. Your race changes to the dark version of the race. So an elf turns into a dark elf. This is so you can be easily differentiated from the good players. You can no longer access anything on the good side and are KOS to all good guards. This is to make your life more challenging and make sense in the game world. Your professions skillset becomes the evil version (paladin becomes a shadowknight). Your skillset becomes less protective and more offensive by default. You have no god to resurrect you, so you have to find a god before you die to enable this. If you die before finding one, one will find you at random. (pure challenge) Nothing is free with evil. Everything requires a toll of some sort. There has to be severe tolls on evil to ensure there arent too many players. It is supposed to be difficult. Your equipment and posessions are not as well protected as your good counterparts. You trade protection for power by becoming evil. Evil is not for wussies, its for the hardcore who love this kind of stuff. Of course only the truly hardcore will like that they have less protections than their good counterparts.Like the good side above evil also has ranks and you can improve some of these issues above with gaining favor with an evil god, but evil gods generally offer power and dont offer much charity.Evil is designed to be hard, outnumbered and difficult to play. Ideally we want to keep the number of evil players as a small proportion of the total players. We also want the evil players to become part of the gameplay for good players .by tracking and hunting them.The problem with all mmos who feature world pvp is that they fail to properly challenge hardcore pvpers and properly protect pveers. This model fixes that issue...in my opinion.How would you change openworld pvp to make it palatable for the masses?
In GW2 and in any segregated pvp setup, players are not giving up their ability to choose to PvP in their PvE game. In games where that choice isn't available inside the game, players make that choice when they decide to purchase or not purchase the game.
This. If people have choice, overwhelming majority will choose NOT to engage in world PvP. They choose a game where they are not harrassed and hunted.
This is also partly why UO is never coming back.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
In GW2 and in any segregated pvp setup, players are not giving up their ability to choose to PvP in their PvE game. In games where that choice isn't available inside the game, players make that choice when they decide to purchase or not purchase the game.
This. If people have choice, overwhelming majority will choose NOT to engage in world PvP. They choose a game where they are not harrassed and hunted.
This is also partly why UO is never coming back.
I would accomidate that as well in the system. I would call it the order of pacification or something and becoming part of the order basically turns off your pvp switch. With a class system like GW2 it would work fine. You would need to do a lengthy quest to change it back. Likewise there would be order of the eagle, which would be the evil hunters, and upon entering that order you lose few protections but gain tracking and more anti evil abilities. Thee would be a couple of other orders to suit all tastes.
it can all be accomplished within the context of the game. Seperation is the easiest answer..but not the right answer.
This first round of next gen games (Swtor, TSW, GW2) really missed the mark by not adding Wpvp, and will suffer because of it.
Cheap player driven content.
No. They would suffer for adding open world PvP. The vast majority of the modern gaming population doesn't want it, nor would they tolerate it.
That's not rue at all. Far more people do pvp and pve vs only pve. Look at the three games I listed. Two a suffering now, and we are hearing grumblings about the 3rd all ready.
This is why there are pvp servers and pve servers. You don't want Wpvp roll on a pve server. Problem solved right?
Very true. But thats seldom enough for some types. It seriously cuts down on their selection of potential victims. ^^ Open world PvP (with optional PvE servers) is why I've tried some of the Asian imports. Absent that option, I simply take my time and money to another game.
The question was: What would YOU do to make open World PVP blah, blah, blah-
Some people seeem to take that as an invitation to explain why THEY wouldnt play a PVP game. Or why it "wouldnt work" (Cost , LOL- Cmon these games cost LESS to make today once you get rid of cut scenes and voice overs)
Anyhow- You dont like PVP, YOU wont spend money on it It wont work you say- We dont CARE. This was a thread for discussion of how it COULD work, thanbks. Derailing because YOU dont like to PVP is not an excuse.
Originally posted by Loke666 The only way to make open world PvP mainstream is to get rid of the huge gaps in level/power.
It is not getting killed that is the problem here, what most players are upset about is getting killed with zero chanse to defend themselves and needing to grind for a month or more to be able to fight on equal terms with most gankers.
Mainstream players love PvP in FPS games but not in MMOs.
So if you want open world PvP to be as popular you need to seriously change the progression in MMOs. Levels are the first thing that needs to go, an the regular gear progression is the second.
The alternative is to have down level mechanics like GW2, leveling down everyone to the zone they are in, that would work as well. People wouldnt have to go to zones where people twice their level could gank them then.
The problem with this is that many MMO PvP fans wouldnt want these things, but they would work.
This seems to be a recurring theme. What a typical "Wolf" wants isn't what a typical "Sheep" wants.
Even leveling the playing field isn't going to bring open world pvp to the masses though. Think about it, a "Wolf" is going to spend time learning how to fight. A "Sheep" is going to spend time doing everything else, because that's what they want to do. Even with the ridiculous power disparity leveled, the "Wolf" is still going to kill the "Sheep". It's the same scenario as before, except now the "Wolf" gets to brag about their skill in PvP.
Again, I'm making some broad statements based on the people I know. They don't want their PvE and their PvP to be mixed together. Half of them don't want the PvP at all. It's a baseline preference in how they want to spend their time. They just don't want the whole open world pvp thing.
Yes, but I think a lot of the reason why they dont want open world PvP is based on how the standard MMO mechanics are made.
It is more or less made to grief players who have zero chanse of fighting back, if you solved that you would have a lot easier time introducing an open world PvP game.
Most griefers are not really wolfs though, more hyenas and many of them dont want an even fight at all. Heck, they might die. If they indeed wanted an even fight they wouldnt grief noobs in the first place.
Even this system would not please all PvE fans though but it would open up for one open world PvP game large enough to compete with at least medium sized PvE games. Now I cant think of any open world PvP game besides Eve with more than maybe 50Kplayers.
Comments
This seems to be a recurring theme. What a typical "Wolf" wants isn't what a typical "Sheep" wants.
Even leveling the playing field isn't going to bring open world pvp to the masses though. Think about it, a "Wolf" is going to spend time learning how to fight. A "Sheep" is going to spend time doing everything else, because that's what they want to do. Even with the ridiculous power disparity leveled, the "Wolf" is still going to kill the "Sheep". It's the same scenario as before, except now the "Wolf" gets to brag about their skill in PvP.
Again, I'm making some broad statements based on the people I know. They don't want their PvE and their PvP to be mixed together. Half of them don't want the PvP at all. It's a baseline preference in how they want to spend their time. They just don't want the whole open world pvp thing.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I completely agree, in a world (which i think open world pvp is a good feature) progression need to be more about options that some linearaty of power. That said, i think most players actually like pvp because they are bored with 10 years of pve. I think what they really want is a solid, and i mean solid system to keep it fair.
think of the griffon in the commons in eq. This thing could sneak up on you at any time and chances are you didnt have a chance to get away (depending on your level). This was gameplay because you had to keep looking over your shoulder if you wanted to stay alive. Pure safety ends up in boredom, and no safety ends up in chaos. I think in the future the hardcore among us will become content for the rest of us.
i have no issues with a marauder going around the zone killing everyone. Its dynamic content. I have issues with there being far to many marauders than the game will actually support.
Given what these games cost to create, no investor in their right mind is going to go after what is a narrow niche market. If a game allows (let alone encorages ganking/griefing) its going to seriously niche itself in the modern western markets. If you want FFA (full loot or other wise) check out some of the Asian server games. They tend to be much more tolerate of such.
Damn straight. ^^ But keep this in mind, in regards to Care Bears (who out number PvP types) to paraphrase Bob; "They may be Care Bears, but their money is still green"... ^^
Care Bears (by and large) simply will not play a game that allows ganking/griefing. There are WAY too many other games that forbid it, for them to bother with such a game.
I think that the wolf and sheep is a bad analogy. Many of those what you might see as 'sheep' could play the wolf, but are simply not interested in it. Simply because they don't enjoy preying on the weak. Instead they rather fight other wolves.
And as for mixing pvp and pve. I can see the benefit of both. Mixed because of open world pvp or both seperated. When seperated people get to enjoy interesting PVE at their leasure. Mixed, they can feel the thrill of having to fight at any moment.
But mixed will never grasp a large audience. In my experience many of the mainstream MMO players aren't even what you would call gamers. They never or rarely played games before MMO's and they are generally bad at it because of it. I can't see those ppl enjoy open world pvp.
Thats why so many of these games are destined to fail. I don't want to be griefed and I know that it is built into the rules of the game, so I don't buy the game.
Most of us "sheep" are just players that want to log in and decide what to do without some ganker imposing his will on us. If I want to pvp then I will go to a pvp area or a battleground or something, but I don't want someone to impose their pvp on me while I have other plans. So I just don't buy the game. I gave it one try with Aion but when my questing/leveling got interrupted by too much ganking I cancelled my sub and the company lost revenue.
This first round of next gen games (Swtor, TSW, GW2) really missed the mark by not adding Wpvp, and will suffer because of it.
Cheap player driven content.
No. They would suffer for adding open world PvP. The vast majority of the modern gaming population doesn't want it, nor would they tolerate it.
I think that the wolf and sheep is a bad analogy. Many of those what you might see as 'sheep' could play the wolf, but are simply not interested in it. Simply because they don't enjoy preying on the weak. Instead they rather fight other wolves.
And as for mixing pvp and pve. I can see the benefit of both. Mixed because of open world pvp or both seperated. When seperated people get to enjoy interesting PVE at their leasure. Mixed, they can feel the thrill of having to fight at any moment.
But mixed will never grasp a large audience. In my experience many of the mainstream MMO players aren't even what you would call gamers. They never or rarely played games before MMO's and they are generally bad at it because of it. I can't see those ppl enjoy open world pvp.
I don't have a better term to classify those people. The one, unifying theme that they have is that they don't want open world pvp. They might like it in battlegrounds, they might even play games that have open world pvp, if they can have a 100% safe area to play in, but they do not want open world pvp in their MMORPG. They don't want to become an open world pvp player. They make up the bulk of the people I know who play video games. The phrase "anti-open world pvp players" is just too long.
So I agree with you on both points, the Wolf/Sheep terms aren't good, and open world pvp isn't something with mass appeal. I don't have a better set of terms though.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
not yet.
Back when i played daoc people scoffed at that game and its rvr citing that mainstream doesnt like rvr..daoc only has 100k subscribers (or something like that..might have been 50k..cant remember)...Certainly they were ahead of their time.
yet here we are with basically daoc2 in the form of guild wars 2 will millions of copies sold and every battleground filled to the brim with players to the poit they are complaining about not being able to get into them and every game.
the truth is simple. Players are cheap dynamic content.
That's not rue at all. Far more people do pvp and pve vs only pve. Look at the three games I listed. Two a suffering now, and we are hearing grumblings about the 3rd all ready.
This is why there are pvp servers and pve servers. You don't want Wpvp roll on a pve server. Problem solved right?
Can you link to your source for that?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Look at the part I highlighted.
That's your answer as to why you can't have what you want.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Games:
Currently playing:Nothing
Will play: Darkfall: Unholy Wars
Past games:
Guild Wars 2 - Xpiher Duminous
Xpiher's GW2
GW 1 - Xpiher Duminous
Darkfall - Xpiher Duminous (NA) retired
AoC - Xpiher (Tyranny) retired
Warhammer - Xpiher
Back when i played daoc people scoffed at that game and its rvr citing that mainstream doesnt like rvr..daoc only has 100k subscribers (or something like that..might have been 50k..cant remember)...Certainly they were ahead of their time.
yet here we are with basically daoc2 in the form of guild wars 2 will millions of copies sold and every battleground filled to the brim with players to the poit they are complaining about not being able to get into them and every game.
the truth is simple. Players are cheap dynamic content.
In GW2 and in any segregated pvp setup, players are not giving up their ability to choose to PvP in their PvE game. In games where that choice isn't available inside the game, players make that choice when they decide to purchase or not purchase the game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
That's not rue at all. Far more people do pvp and pve vs only pve. Look at the three games I listed. Two a suffering now, and we are hearing grumblings about the 3rd all ready.
This is why there are pvp servers and pve servers. You don't want Wpvp roll on a pve server. Problem solved right?
What players have on the PvP/PvE servers is the ability to choose. They can flag themselves for PvP if they want, but only if they want. On open world pvp servers, that choice is made before choosing a server. That's why there are more PvE servers with the option to flag than there are PvP servers in games where that choice is offered.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I still think someone should bring back "log in as a mob" like EQ had for a short time.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/play-as-a-monster-in-everquest-2823441
You could earn some kinda points, like graduating up to a new level of mobs, or earn vanity pets like the mobs you play or somethin...
</p
This
This. If people have choice, overwhelming majority will choose NOT to engage in world PvP. They choose a game where they are not harrassed and hunted.
This is also partly why UO is never coming back.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
I would accomidate that as well in the system. I would call it the order of pacification or something and becoming part of the order basically turns off your pvp switch. With a class system like GW2 it would work fine. You would need to do a lengthy quest to change it back. Likewise there would be order of the eagle, which would be the evil hunters, and upon entering that order you lose few protections but gain tracking and more anti evil abilities. Thee would be a couple of other orders to suit all tastes.
it can all be accomplished within the context of the game. Seperation is the easiest answer..but not the right answer.
Very true. But thats seldom enough for some types. It seriously cuts down on their selection of potential victims. ^^ Open world PvP (with optional PvE servers) is why I've tried some of the Asian imports. Absent that option, I simply take my time and money to another game.
The question was: What would YOU do to make open World PVP blah, blah, blah-
Some people seeem to take that as an invitation to explain why THEY wouldnt play a PVP game. Or why it "wouldnt work" (Cost , LOL- Cmon these games cost LESS to make today once you get rid of cut scenes and voice overs)
Anyhow- You dont like PVP, YOU wont spend money on it It wont work you say- We dont CARE. This was a thread for discussion of how it COULD work, thanbks. Derailing because YOU dont like to PVP is not an excuse.
Yes, but I think a lot of the reason why they dont want open world PvP is based on how the standard MMO mechanics are made.
It is more or less made to grief players who have zero chanse of fighting back, if you solved that you would have a lot easier time introducing an open world PvP game.
Most griefers are not really wolfs though, more hyenas and many of them dont want an even fight at all. Heck, they might die. If they indeed wanted an even fight they wouldnt grief noobs in the first place.
Even this system would not please all PvE fans though but it would open up for one open world PvP game large enough to compete with at least medium sized PvE games. Now I cant think of any open world PvP game besides Eve with more than maybe 50Kplayers.