[...] RvR design, sandwiched within a PVE world, gave every kind of player the options they needed. It makes no sense, IMO, to toss out one for the other. After all, one is downtime from the other and keeps both fresh.
Your fucking LIFE is downtime from RvR. Aside from that, people who enjoy RvR do not want global downtime from RvR, and if you do, go play another game.
I am starting to doubt the people who argue in favour of adding substantial PvE to the game have ever played any good RvR game. If you do not enjoy protecting territory, navigating hosts of people strategically, and organising classes to well-coordinated group-play, this is not the game for you. Bye.
If you do enjoy all that, how do you think requiring players to battle monsters could ever improve their efforts to realise their group-play objectives? I know it would not necessarily have to hinder them [which is why games like DAOC and Champions of Regnum still exist and have (traces of) active communities], but why ever risk the combination? Yes, progression of the individual [gearing up] should be something that the group should have to pay attention to, but how do challenges against mindless bits realise this any better than battles against actual players could? All content distributed through PvE could just as well be handed out for killing players and achieving objectives of territory control! [Mind you, I specify PvE, because resource-grinding and other non-battle interaction with the environment have a very interesting correlation with RvR because of the potential need to conquer territory to access certain resources (or restrict the enemy from them). The issue here really is only the unnecessary AI, limiting player-interaction.]
DAOC worked just fine and catered to the PVE and PVP crowds. Worked great. Folks have been waiting for a DAOC 2 for years. Years. I do not believe I am alone in believing this.
Now, I do imagine CU will have high standards and succeed, but only with the PVP crowd, which is a smaller crowd. Is "the vision" worth shutting out those other customers? Maybe if money is not the issue.
I wonder if the solution is different types of servers (PVP, PVE, PVP-PVE, etc...).
Hey folks, so back when this was first announced, and I heard there was no PvE, I pictured a boring barren world with a constant pointless war, with no lore, nothing to tether it to any real fight.
A lot like Planetside 2, actually.
I think it was the biggest mistake of this Kickstarter not to elaborate on the "no PvE" thing.
There will be no PvE leveling. All leveling happens in RvR.
But, there will be monsters, and animals, and guards, and soldiers. They exist for CRAFTERS, and as obstacles. Their hides and parts will become raw materials, house decorations, ect. Mj wants dungeons (not just the Depths or mines) in the game for crafting materials and such.
There is a lot of room for PvE that isn't traditional PvE, but is still an NPC monster for you and your buddies to bash on when you aren't warring in the realm.
I do not know to what extent this side of the game will be expanded to, but it DOES exist. Lore DOES exist. This isn't just planetside without guns. I am relieved, to say the least.
Sorry but try as you might, this isn't PvE. If Monsters don't drop loot then whats the point?
SO nothing is worth doing without a reward? Secondly raw materials are loot..
Not really to me there isn't. It is why I lasted less then 2 months in GW2 even though I think it is an amazing game. Loot that is useable and valuable on it's own is why I play RPG's, MMO's and ARPG's. Been that way for me since 1982 when I started playing D&D. Loved the exploration and the journey but enjoyed getting them PHAT LOOTZ way more. And no I don't consider crafting materials loot, I consider them crafting materials. Crafting is something I think is STUPID in RPG's. As a purist who started with the grand daddy of RPGing (D&D) There was no crafting, and too me crafting cheapens the loot system and makes it boring. Again this is personal opinion and you're not entitled to agree with me.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
At the end of the day what is the point of wasting money, time and resources to add PVE into CU when the PVE locusts are just going to burn through it all in a couple of weeks or a month and then move on to the next big PVE adventure.
The PVE zones would all be empty and all that would be left is the core demographic that the game is originally aimed at, who would most likely be missing some cool PVP features because they had to spend the money developing PVE.
DAOC worked just fine and catered to the PVE and PVP crowds. Worked great. Folks have been waiting for a DAOC 2 for years. Years. I do not believe I am alone in believing this.
Now, I do imagine CU will have high standards and succeed, but only with the PVP crowd, which is a smaller crowd. Is "the vision" worth shutting out those other customers? Maybe if money is not the issue.
I wonder if the solution is different types of servers (PVP, PVE, PVP-PVE, etc...).
Niche' game is niche'.
They've been saying this is going to cater to a smaller crowd since prior to Kickstarter.
Not really to me there isn't. It is why I lasted less then 2 months in GW2 even though I think it is an amazing game. Loot that is useable and valuable on it's own is why I play RPG's, MMO's and ARPG's. Been that way for me since 1982 when I started playing D&D. Loved the exploration and the journey but enjoyed getting them PHAT LOOTZ way more. And no I don't consider crafting materials loot, I consider them crafting materials. Crafting is something I think is STUPID in RPG's. As a purist who started with the grand daddy of RPGing (D&D) There was no crafting, and too me crafting cheapens the loot system and makes it boring. Again this is personal opinion and you're not entitled to agree with me.
In regards to DnD i've always been in the exact opposite camp. Where I think the Gold and loot system is one of the single WORST aspects of that game. At root your gold and items are just a secondary experience bar, and you've already got one of those. I much prefer to Tome of Awesome variants, where they do away with the need to spend 20,000 gold(enough to buy most cities) merely to get another +1 to your attack.
ANYWAY. To get back on topic though, No CU is NOT a PvE game. I know some people will tell you that is does have PvE, but they are mostly playing semantics. The game does not and will not have PvE in any traditional sense of the word. That's OK.
For people who don't want to play a game without PvE. That's also Ok, I'm not going to play Cu's white knight and try to win you over. If the game is good it will find it's own audience, if it's bad it'll fail regardless of whether it has PvE or not.
I've always been of the opinion that in games, like all forms of media, a truly great work transcends genera. If CU is good enough, it'll even get some normally PvE players.
Comments
I am starting to doubt the people who argue in favour of adding substantial PvE to the game have ever played any good RvR game. If you do not enjoy protecting territory, navigating hosts of people strategically, and organising classes to well-coordinated group-play, this is not the game for you. Bye.
If you do enjoy all that, how do you think requiring players to battle monsters could ever improve their efforts to realise their group-play objectives?
I know it would not necessarily have to hinder them [which is why games like DAOC and Champions of Regnum still exist and have (traces of) active communities], but why ever risk the combination? Yes, progression of the individual [gearing up] should be something that the group should have to pay attention to, but how do challenges against mindless bits realise this any better than battles against actual players could? All content distributed through PvE could just as well be handed out for killing players and achieving objectives of territory control! [Mind you, I specify PvE, because resource-grinding and other non-battle interaction with the environment have a very interesting correlation with RvR because of the potential need to conquer territory to access certain resources (or restrict the enemy from them). The issue here really is only the unnecessary AI, limiting player-interaction.]
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
The PVE zones would all be empty and all that would be left is the core demographic that the game is originally aimed at, who would most likely be missing some cool PVP features because they had to spend the money developing PVE.
Niche' game is niche'.
They've been saying this is going to cater to a smaller crowd since prior to Kickstarter.
In regards to DnD i've always been in the exact opposite camp. Where I think the Gold and loot system is one of the single WORST aspects of that game. At root your gold and items are just a secondary experience bar, and you've already got one of those. I much prefer to Tome of Awesome variants, where they do away with the need to spend 20,000 gold(enough to buy most cities) merely to get another +1 to your attack.
ANYWAY. To get back on topic though, No CU is NOT a PvE game. I know some people will tell you that is does have PvE, but they are mostly playing semantics. The game does not and will not have PvE in any traditional sense of the word. That's OK.
For people who don't want to play a game without PvE. That's also Ok, I'm not going to play Cu's white knight and try to win you over. If the game is good it will find it's own audience, if it's bad it'll fail regardless of whether it has PvE or not.
I've always been of the opinion that in games, like all forms of media, a truly great work transcends genera. If CU is good enough, it'll even get some normally PvE players.