Originally posted by LordOfPit PvP for the Masses? Simply putting those words together brings back memories of the kindergarten sandbox. Not something I'm looking for in any game.
Two kids playing house and then a third kid comes up and pees in the sand next to them. When the first kid starts crying, the second kid calls for the teacher. Meanwhile the third kid is screaming, "Shut up! I'm roleplaying a villain." The entire time kids four and five are filling up the other kid shoes with sand and using them to smash the plastic pails and shovels to bits.
Yeah, not what most people have on their list of optimal play experiences.
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
Originally posted by LordOfPit PvP for the Masses? Simply putting those words together brings back memories of the kindergarten sandbox. Not something I'm looking for in any game.
Two kids playing house and then a third kid comes up and pees in the sand next to them. When the first kid starts crying, the second kid calls for the teacher. Meanwhile the third kid is screaming, "Shut up! I'm roleplaying a villain." The entire time kids four and five are filling up the other kid shoes with sand and using them to smash the plastic pails and shovels to bits.
Yeah, not what most people have on their list of optimal play experiences.
in my version theres 25 sandboxes and only one villian, and additionally the kids in the sandboxes have the ability to fortify their sandbox with guards and insure their toys. As a final measure the villian kid is marked with special paint so all the other kids will see them coming from a mile off.
the odds of this villian ruining your day just went down dramatically, but dont forget hes out there..plotting and planning to piss in your sandbox should you let your guard down.
To be considered hardcore , one must start it's journey by paying a sub fee for his/hers MMO. Once that's completed ,you'll be already 75% done at becoming a full pledge hardcore MMO player.
Originally posted by LordOfPit PvP for the Masses? Simply putting those words together brings back memories of the kindergarten sandbox. Not something I'm looking for in any game.
Two kids playing house and then a third kid comes up and pees in the sand next to them. When the first kid starts crying, the second kid calls for the teacher. Meanwhile the third kid is screaming, "Shut up! I'm roleplaying a villain." The entire time kids four and five are filling up the other kid shoes with sand and using them to smash the plastic pails and shovels to bits.
Yeah, not what most people have on their list of optimal play experiences.
LOL!! Thats one of the best descriptions of Goonies I've seen in a long time. ^^ The existence of such people is why such a game will never be main stream.
Originally posted by LordOfPit PvP for the Masses? Simply putting those words together brings back memories of the kindergarten sandbox. Not something I'm looking for in any game.
Two kids playing house and then a third kid comes up and pees in the sand next to them. When the first kid starts crying, the second kid calls for the teacher. Meanwhile the third kid is screaming, "Shut up! I'm roleplaying a villain." The entire time kids four and five are filling up the other kid shoes with sand and using them to smash the plastic pails and shovels to bits.
Yeah, not what most people have on their list of optimal play experiences.
LOL!! Thats one of the best descriptions of Goonies I've seen in a long time. ^^ The existence of such people is why such a game will never be main stream.
True.
That's why only thing to have something close to open pvp is for it to not really be fully open.
Only way to have viable "open" pvp and have more than few thousands of players is to have something similar to EvE.
Having part of game (majority propably) practially without pvp and smaller part of game beign pvp allowed. So where is this open? PvP area don't have to be instanced like it is in most current mmoprg's (battlegrounds).
Border of no-pvp and pvp land can be in open world easily and players would have a choice to go there (+ risk / reward system like EvE for going there) and leave and have "peace" whenever they want.
Originally posted by LordOfPit PvP for the Masses? Simply putting those words together brings back memories of the kindergarten sandbox. Not something I'm looking for in any game.
Two kids playing house and then a third kid comes up and pees in the sand next to them. When the first kid starts crying, the second kid calls for the teacher. Meanwhile the third kid is screaming, "Shut up! I'm roleplaying a villain." The entire time kids four and five are filling up the other kid shoes with sand and using them to smash the plastic pails and shovels to bits.
Yeah, not what most people have on their list of optimal play experiences.
in my version theres 25 sandboxes and only one villian, and additionally the kids in the sandboxes have the ability to fortify their sandbox with guards and insure their toys. As a final measure the villian kid is marked with special paint so all the other kids will see them coming from a mile off.
the odds of this villian ruining your day just went down dramatically, but dont forget hes out there..plotting and planning to piss in your sandbox should you let your guard down.
Then we should all be thankful you don't build sandboxes or MMOs.
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
Originally posted by LordOfPit PvP for the Masses? Simply putting those words together brings back memories of the kindergarten sandbox. Not something I'm looking for in any game.
Two kids playing house and then a third kid comes up and pees in the sand next to them. When the first kid starts crying, the second kid calls for the teacher. Meanwhile the third kid is screaming, "Shut up! I'm roleplaying a villain." The entire time kids four and five are filling up the other kid shoes with sand and using them to smash the plastic pails and shovels to bits.
Yeah, not what most people have on their list of optimal play experiences.
in my version theres 25 sandboxes and only one villian, and additionally the kids in the sandboxes have the ability to fortify their sandbox with guards and insure their toys. As a final measure the villian kid is marked with special paint so all the other kids will see them coming from a mile off.
the odds of this villian ruining your day just went down dramatically, but dont forget hes out there..plotting and planning to piss in your sandbox should you let your guard down.
Then we should all be thankful you don't build sandboxes or MMOs.
please...i dont accept no risk anymore than i accept no rules.
Not exactly pvp, its rvr (but some call it pvp, so thats why I am posting this), but a way to add "pvp" is:
Add open rvr (no instancies, no flag system, no duel).
One side/team/country/race vs. other one.
You can't give damage to your team/race/country......
So, if someone is killing you, your friends or just a random guy from your team WILL help you. Just by playing the game your friends will help you, because the game is about one team fighting against another, so, your friend has to kill guys from other team (a thing that the guy killing you, is).
I didnt read all of this, but I really like the sound of where Runguard is coming from. I think a game based on alignments/dieties would be an excellent pvp bases
In reality, 99% of all wars is in the name of God.
The only way to make PvP mainstream is to remove all stats/powers from gear as well as levels. Everyone is on equal footing, no advantages other than personal skill...and no rewarding items for it. most people dont want to take part in a pvp system that is reward based because then its a grind. most want to pvp for FUN, not for a grind...and if its a grind, they avoid it.
It is just not possible because mainstream is pve.
Hardcore pvp requires a certain type of mindset/temperment that is not compatible with everyone - most people rage really hard when they gets killed and don't want to learn the reason why they get killed and get better.
It is the same reason why there is always a lot more people that watch sports than play sports.
It is just not possible because mainstream is pve.
Hardcore pvp requires a certain type of mindset/temperment that is not compatible with everyone - most people rage really hard when they gets killed and don't want to learn the reason why they get killed and get better.
It is the same reason why there is always a lot more people that watch sports than play sports.
It's a curious way of putting it, but it tends to work, eh? Folks want to kill rather than be killed. That's a reason, imho, that the majority of content, again imho, is as easy as it is. It's also a reason, imho, that certain people are ready to rip the heads off of other players when something goes wrong.
People want to be the heroes, but they do not want to be tested heroes. They just want to be heroes. Sure, there are those that want to feel tested - but the mainstream is not about that.
Now, there's nothing wrong about that - they're just games, people are playing for fun - they should be able to have that fun. So there's nothing really wrong with that...
...but it's definitely going to be one of the reasons that PvP in that sense will not be mainstream.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
in an effort to bring back some of the challenge to pvers, since in my system you gain all your pvp protection abilities from your gods and you also gain your resurection abilities from them. Death penalties are also the realm of the gods
what this mean is that if you die too much to mobs you might lose some of your protections. This means nothing of course if you dont die to a villan. If you do die to a villan and youve been dying too much, as a lesson to be a better player some of your protections could be recinded or reduced. It starts with gold and ends with an item.
so weve got that spectre of an evil player lurking around waiting to strike, even though the probabality is very low, it doesnt matter. low probabability fear works just as good.
and we augment that fear with a death system that rather than punish you directly, reduces your protections slightly with each death, which provides oppurntunity for villians to capatilize on your lack of survivability.
thats what we need. no reason why players cant be part of the penalty.
yea those are my terms for players who like to kill their fellow players. The exception to this is the killing of these villians which is acceptable for "good" players.
a good player gone bad if you will. The hunters and the hunted. Good times for all.
if you can get the right ratio of these players you can give them tools to "launch offensives" using npc mobs and themselves against certain targets ( not players) and we have a truely dynamic event system, since theres a person at the helm.
the key is getting the ratio correct ( 25 good to 1 bad)
yea those are my terms for players who like to kill their fellow players. The exception to this is the killing of these villians which is acceptable for "good" players.
a good player gone bad if you will. The hunters and the hunted. Good times for all.
Um.... I find that mind boggling. Sure, I can look at UO and the Reds there - they were playing the villain. To an extent, one could say the same about pirates in EVE. However, all of the folks fighting wars in EVE? Nope. All those folks that are involved in games where there are factions at war? Nope. Not a chance.
I mean - you're literally saying that the players are EVIL. That's just mind boggling.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
If you are truly hardcore you don't want hardcore Open world PvP games to go mainstream. When an Open world PvP game goes mainstream you end up with a lot of nerfs to take out the brutality of the game. I don't mean like the Tram/Fel split I mean like item insurance, no perma deaths, no full looting, reds get to go to town still, no jail system...
Mainstream is simply bad for hardcore open world PvP.
You seem to equate mainstream and carebear. It doesn't have to be one and the same. Darkfall: Unholy Wars, it's your new salvation kids. Hopefully, if they deliver on what they promise.
You seem to equate mainstream and carebear. It doesn't have to be one and the same. Darkfall: Unholy Wars, it's your new salvation kids. Hopefully, if they deliver on what they promise.
Originally posted by ShakyMo The eve system. But with player characters and more action orientated combat.
Originally posted by Prenho
Just use the flag-pk and guild war systems from Lineage, it is perfect, the best system I've seen for an OWPVP MMO.
But NONE of the aforementioned 3 games are considered "mainstream".
EVE is the most well-known out of the 3 however it is still pretty niche, even amount MMOers.
To be "mainstream" is to imply that it has the capability to attract most mmo crowds and even some that are not from mmo background.
The problem with open pvp is, people who play something like The D&D or LoTRO, or the large amount of population in WoW who either don't pvp or have only played limited form of pvp will not like a system where you can get attacked anywhere (even in towns) and get looted - because that's what open pvp means, and no amount of "system" is going to change that.
Even if those people can deal with the getting killed, most average pvpers won't be able to deal with the idea of losing gear or other things.
And they are the majority. They are the "mainstream". They don't want to stress or challenged or having to watch their backs all the time, they just wanted to play something to chill and waste time.
You can't convince someone that "hey man losing items is fun!" or "hey man you will get killed for just standing around idling, and it is fun!". That's why hardcore pvp mmo will never be mainstream.
One easy way to make an openworld PvP game mainstream... open a PvE server..
Open world PvP is just not what most MMO players want to begin with. If you make an openworld PvP game good enough that it attracts "mainstreamers" (to call them one way), it will not be because of PvP, but in spite of it.
One easy way to make an openworld PvP game mainstream... open a PvE server..
Open world PvP is just not what most MMO players want to begin with. If you make an openworld PvP game good enough that it attracts "mainstreamers" (to call them one way), it will not be because of PvP, but in spite of it.
But some pvp ideas only work with pvp, in the non open pvp game you would end with a very different game.
Imagine world war 2 online without open world pvp, how that would work? you would play as ww2 soldiers hunting animals, would race using their tanks and planes?. Add instancied pvp, so you have many small battlefield size maps with small amount of players on it? You would maybe end with more maps than the amount of capturable stuff in the game.
yea those are my terms for players who like to kill their fellow players. The exception to this is the killing of these villians which is acceptable for "good" players.
a good player gone bad if you will. The hunters and the hunted. Good times for all.
Um.... I find that mind boggling. Sure, I can look at UO and the Reds there - they were playing the villain. To an extent, one could say the same about pirates in EVE. However, all of the folks fighting wars in EVE? Nope. All those folks that are involved in games where there are factions at war? Nope. Not a chance.
I mean - you're literally saying that the players are EVIL. That's just mind boggling.
evil is just the theme for that team. players are probabally not "evil" but they play the bad guys. Thus , as is NOT the case in todays mmo's, they need to look, act and be treated the part. The same goes for good guys.
they are the dynamic players because they give some intelligence to the environment. i say keep them few and give them some tools.
yea those are my terms for players who like to kill their fellow players. The exception to this is the killing of these villians which is acceptable for "good" players.
a good player gone bad if you will. The hunters and the hunted. Good times for all.
Um.... I find that mind boggling. Sure, I can look at UO and the Reds there - they were playing the villain. To an extent, one could say the same about pirates in EVE. However, all of the folks fighting wars in EVE? Nope. All those folks that are involved in games where there are factions at war? Nope. Not a chance.
I mean - you're literally saying that the players are EVIL. That's just mind boggling.
evil is just the theme for that team. players are probabally not "evil" but they play the bad guys. Thus , as is NOT the case in todays mmo's, they need to look, act and be treated the part. The same goes for good guys.
they are the dynamic players because they give some intelligence to the environment. i say keep them few and give them some tools.
Well, even if we step aside from the players as EVIL and go with the characters as EVIL - you're still locking yourself into a game where EVERYBODY is on the same side, aside from these EVIL characters - no? As in, there's peace throughout the world - except for this bad lot, eh?
I suppose I just come at it from the angle of territory control, fighting over resources, etc, etc, etc. Each side considers the other side...the bad side.
Guild A is fighting Guild B over X spot of land... is far different than there are no guilds, there is no land, and Random Guy 1 decided to kill fellow Random Guy 2.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Comments
Two kids playing house and then a third kid comes up and pees in the sand next to them. When the first kid starts crying, the second kid calls for the teacher. Meanwhile the third kid is screaming, "Shut up! I'm roleplaying a villain." The entire time kids four and five are filling up the other kid shoes with sand and using them to smash the plastic pails and shovels to bits.
Yeah, not what most people have on their list of optimal play experiences.
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
in my version theres 25 sandboxes and only one villian, and additionally the kids in the sandboxes have the ability to fortify their sandbox with guards and insure their toys. As a final measure the villian kid is marked with special paint so all the other kids will see them coming from a mile off.
the odds of this villian ruining your day just went down dramatically, but dont forget hes out there..plotting and planning to piss in your sandbox should you let your guard down.
LOL!! Thats one of the best descriptions of Goonies I've seen in a long time. ^^ The existence of such people is why such a game will never be main stream.
True.
That's why only thing to have something close to open pvp is for it to not really be fully open.
Only way to have viable "open" pvp and have more than few thousands of players is to have something similar to EvE.
Having part of game (majority propably) practially without pvp and smaller part of game beign pvp allowed. So where is this open? PvP area don't have to be instanced like it is in most current mmoprg's (battlegrounds).
Border of no-pvp and pvp land can be in open world easily and players would have a choice to go there (+ risk / reward system like EvE for going there) and leave and have "peace" whenever they want.
Only way propably.
Then we should all be thankful you don't build sandboxes or MMOs.
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
please...i dont accept no risk anymore than i accept no rules.
Not exactly pvp, its rvr (but some call it pvp, so thats why I am posting this), but a way to add "pvp" is:
Add open rvr (no instancies, no flag system, no duel).
One side/team/country/race vs. other one.
You can't give damage to your team/race/country......
So, if someone is killing you, your friends or just a random guy from your team WILL help you. Just by playing the game your friends will help you, because the game is about one team fighting against another, so, your friend has to kill guys from other team (a thing that the guy killing you, is).
I didnt read all of this, but I really like the sound of where Runguard is coming from. I think a game based on alignments/dieties would be an excellent pvp bases
In reality, 99% of all wars is in the name of God.
The only way to make PvP mainstream is to remove all stats/powers from gear as well as levels. Everyone is on equal footing, no advantages other than personal skill...and no rewarding items for it. most people dont want to take part in a pvp system that is reward based because then its a grind. most want to pvp for FUN, not for a grind...and if its a grind, they avoid it.
Openworld pvp will never be mainstream.
It is just not possible because mainstream is pve.
Hardcore pvp requires a certain type of mindset/temperment that is not compatible with everyone - most people rage really hard when they gets killed and don't want to learn the reason why they get killed and get better.
It is the same reason why there is always a lot more people that watch sports than play sports.
It's a curious way of putting it, but it tends to work, eh? Folks want to kill rather than be killed. That's a reason, imho, that the majority of content, again imho, is as easy as it is. It's also a reason, imho, that certain people are ready to rip the heads off of other players when something goes wrong.
People want to be the heroes, but they do not want to be tested heroes. They just want to be heroes. Sure, there are those that want to feel tested - but the mainstream is not about that.
Now, there's nothing wrong about that - they're just games, people are playing for fun - they should be able to have that fun. So there's nothing really wrong with that...
...but it's definitely going to be one of the reasons that PvP in that sense will not be mainstream.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
in an effort to bring back some of the challenge to pvers, since in my system you gain all your pvp protection abilities from your gods and you also gain your resurection abilities from them. Death penalties are also the realm of the gods
what this mean is that if you die too much to mobs you might lose some of your protections. This means nothing of course if you dont die to a villan. If you do die to a villan and youve been dying too much, as a lesson to be a better player some of your protections could be recinded or reduced. It starts with gold and ends with an item.
so weve got that spectre of an evil player lurking around waiting to strike, even though the probabality is very low, it doesnt matter. low probabability fear works just as good.
and we augment that fear with a death system that rather than punish you directly, reduces your protections slightly with each death, which provides oppurntunity for villians to capatilize on your lack of survivability.
thats what we need. no reason why players cant be part of the penalty.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
yea those are my terms for players who like to kill their fellow players. The exception to this is the killing of these villians which is acceptable for "good" players.
a good player gone bad if you will. The hunters and the hunted. Good times for all.
if you can get the right ratio of these players you can give them tools to "launch offensives" using npc mobs and themselves against certain targets ( not players) and we have a truely dynamic event system, since theres a person at the helm.
the key is getting the ratio correct ( 25 good to 1 bad)
Um.... I find that mind boggling. Sure, I can look at UO and the Reds there - they were playing the villain. To an extent, one could say the same about pirates in EVE. However, all of the folks fighting wars in EVE? Nope. All those folks that are involved in games where there are factions at war? Nope. Not a chance.
I mean - you're literally saying that the players are EVIL. That's just mind boggling.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
You seem to equate mainstream and carebear. It doesn't have to be one and the same. Darkfall: Unholy Wars, it's your new salvation kids. Hopefully, if they deliver on what they promise.
Sennheiser
Assist
Thage
Just use the flag-pk and guild war systems from Lineage, it is perfect, the best system I've seen for an OWPVP MMO.
But NONE of the aforementioned 3 games are considered "mainstream".
EVE is the most well-known out of the 3 however it is still pretty niche, even amount MMOers.
To be "mainstream" is to imply that it has the capability to attract most mmo crowds and even some that are not from mmo background.
The problem with open pvp is, people who play something like The D&D or LoTRO, or the large amount of population in WoW who either don't pvp or have only played limited form of pvp will not like a system where you can get attacked anywhere (even in towns) and get looted - because that's what open pvp means, and no amount of "system" is going to change that.
Even if those people can deal with the getting killed, most average pvpers won't be able to deal with the idea of losing gear or other things.
And they are the majority. They are the "mainstream". They don't want to stress or challenged or having to watch their backs all the time, they just wanted to play something to chill and waste time.
You can't convince someone that "hey man losing items is fun!" or "hey man you will get killed for just standing around idling, and it is fun!". That's why hardcore pvp mmo will never be mainstream.
One easy way to make an openworld PvP game mainstream... open a PvE server..
Open world PvP is just not what most MMO players want to begin with. If you make an openworld PvP game good enough that it attracts "mainstreamers" (to call them one way), it will not be because of PvP, but in spite of it.
What can men do against such reckless hate?
But some pvp ideas only work with pvp, in the non open pvp game you would end with a very different game.
Imagine world war 2 online without open world pvp, how that would work? you would play as ww2 soldiers hunting animals, would race using their tanks and planes?. Add instancied pvp, so you have many small battlefield size maps with small amount of players on it? You would maybe end with more maps than the amount of capturable stuff in the game.
evil is just the theme for that team. players are probabally not "evil" but they play the bad guys. Thus , as is NOT the case in todays mmo's, they need to look, act and be treated the part. The same goes for good guys.
they are the dynamic players because they give some intelligence to the environment. i say keep them few and give them some tools.
Well, even if we step aside from the players as EVIL and go with the characters as EVIL - you're still locking yourself into a game where EVERYBODY is on the same side, aside from these EVIL characters - no? As in, there's peace throughout the world - except for this bad lot, eh?
I suppose I just come at it from the angle of territory control, fighting over resources, etc, etc, etc. Each side considers the other side...the bad side.
Guild A is fighting Guild B over X spot of land... is far different than there are no guilds, there is no land, and Random Guy 1 decided to kill fellow Random Guy 2.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%