Honestly, this is usually solved by having 2 serversets. Let the carebears have their own servers and the problem is solved.
It increases the potential number of players as well, only possible problem is that each group might complain because they think content aimed at the other group takes too much work.
Some people are of course against this because they think that a game only should have 1 serverset that is the way they prefer but choices are generally a good thing and it is not hard to implement either.
Otherwise you do get the risk that the devs try to make both groups happy on the same server and that only leads to bad compromises that makes neither group happy.
While this is the usual solution, its not the best for a game like ArcheAge. It already has it's own solution. Jail. Griefers, gankers, pirates etc... all have to run the risk of being caught and put in jail for long periods of time. While this won't matter to some it will to others. Sure this doesn't make carebears immune to being ganked while harvesting but if that is what they want there are plenty of other games that will cater to their need to collect timber unmolested.
Honestly, this is usually solved by having 2 serversets. Let the carebears have their own servers and the problem is solved.
It increases the potential number of players as well, only possible problem is that each group might complain because they think content aimed at the other group takes too much work.
Some people are of course against this because they think that a game only should have 1 serverset that is the way they prefer but choices are generally a good thing and it is not hard to implement either.
Otherwise you do get the risk that the devs try to make both groups happy on the same server and that only leads to bad compromises that makes neither group happy.
This can be done in some mmos, where pvp is only a addition a posteriori without any impact or relevance to the world. In AA this isn't possible.
AA was not made neither to hardcore pvpers or carebears. Its target public is the "average" player, the L2, UO, Aion and EVE fan, that can handle and enjoy a light world pvp well and still appreciate the pve.
I don't understand how this "east good, west bad" bullshit works. Are us westerners all somehow just risk averse carebears? moreso than the chinese in the east who have their own EVE server all to themselves who RARELY fight but instead keep to their own space and pve all day?
Get your head out of your ass then ask the question again without this silly East vs. West mentality.
As a "westerner" I enjoy high risk so long as it comes with an appropiate reward, that's why I play EVE and will be playing ArcheAge aswell. I'm not a rare breed among "westerners" but there will always be people who just want to partake in the pve aspects of a game because they just genuinely do not enjoy pvp (some of them are russian too hurr hurr)
You seem to be confused.
Nobody is saying that the westerners are bad. The majority of the players on the West do not wish to partake in PvP. I am on the west and I do like to partake. If a game was released with just PvE it would do alot better on the west rather than a game that just had PvP (provided that it was a decent game).
But you're wrong...we already have an example of a game that runs like ArcheAge where the majority of players are westerners who are not risk averse and love pvp. Where are you stats that the "Majority" of westerners do not wish to partake in PvP? Don't get confused with by a vocal minority of players.
Remember that people who even take time to post in forums, official or otherwise, are a minority themselves. Most players just play the damn game they like.
Honestly, this is usually solved by having 2 serversets. Let the carebears have their own servers and the problem is solved.
It increases the potential number of players as well, only possible problem is that each group might complain because they think content aimed at the other group takes too much work.
Some people are of course against this because they think that a game only should have 1 serverset that is the way they prefer but choices are generally a good thing and it is not hard to implement either.
Otherwise you do get the risk that the devs try to make both groups happy on the same server and that only leads to bad compromises that makes neither group happy.
This can be done in some mmos, where pvp is only a addition a posteriori without any impact or relevance to the world. In AA this isn't possible.
AA was not made neither to hardcore pvpers or carebears. Its target public is the "average" player, the L2, UO, Aion and EVE fan, that can handle and enjoy a light world pvp well and still appreciate the pve.
EVE? Light world pvp? Almost the entire premise of the game is player conflict. They have some PvE so people can make ISK to build/buy ships and modules but other than that the game is driven by pvp.
I don't think you know your games very well because EVE and UO were not just "light world pvp" games.
I haven't played it a lot, but I think you are all worrying over nothing. PvP is the central feature of the game, without it there is very little to attract players to the game and it will die very quickly.
I would also add that western players aren't against PvP per se, Mobas and FPS and games like starcraft are enjoy a large following in the west and even games like WoW have a sizeable PvP community. The problem is that the quality of the MMO's that have made PVP the center of the game design have been poor.
If you look at Darkfall, MO and a number of others, they have been really shoddy and have given people the wrong impression of what PvP actually is. To make matters worse, in games like Rift, WoW, Secret World etc. PvP is added as an afterthought and isn;t particularly meaningful adding to this distorted impression.
If you mention PvP to the average MMO player they think about a low level player being ganked by several players and getting teabagged. Moreover, the absurd macho/elitist culture surrounding PvP hasn't helped. But my point is, there is a large community of PVPers in the west, it's just that MMOs are not the places they go to for their fix. Who can blame them?
It doesn't matter how many carebears flood the forums. If anyone at trion has half a brain they know to cater to the pvp crowd. There's already plenty for the carebears to do while we pvp anyway.
Honestly, this is usually solved by having 2 serversets. Let the carebears have their own servers and the problem is solved.
It increases the potential number of players as well, only possible problem is that each group might complain because they think content aimed at the other group takes too much work.
Some people are of course against this because they think that a game only should have 1 serverset that is the way they prefer but choices are generally a good thing and it is not hard to implement either.
Otherwise you do get the risk that the devs try to make both groups happy on the same server and that only leads to bad compromises that makes neither group happy.
While this is the usual solution, its not the best for a game like ArcheAge. It already has it's own solution. Jail. Griefers, gankers, pirates etc... all have to run the risk of being caught and put in jail for long periods of time. While this won't matter to some it will to others. Sure this doesn't make carebears immune to being ganked while harvesting but if that is what they want there are plenty of other games that will cater to their need to collect timber unmolested.
You could still use that for 2 different serversets. In the carebear version you could have harder justice system and safe areas or something. Not that I plan to play on anything but the regular servers anyways but there is a potential to get a lot of extra players without destroying the game for the rest of us.
It tends otherwise, as OP said, that the more PvE directed group of players will start to demand a lot of things and since they usually is a pretty large group we seen the devs listen in other cases in the past. One word: Trammel.
2 serverset takes a rather small amount of joband is far better then the alternative. In the past we seen many players whine so the devs change the games and then they get bored anyways after a few months and move on while the people who enjoyed the game are stuck with the changes.
Originally posted by stayBlind They should remove the PvP entirely.
Would be better if they remove the pve entirely, like Camelot Unchained will do.
Both solutions suck. You can of course make a great MMO with only PvP or PvE but you have to to plan that from the second you start making the game. It is not something you can take away later unless possibly if the game is 90% or so in one of the playstyles (you could easily take away the PvP from TOR as example but there it is just something very optional they added so they could have it on the featurelist).
In this case they have made the game so you need both, you could probably put less focus on one thing or the other now but not take away it completely or we would get half a game.
Honestly, this is usually solved by having 2 serversets. Let the carebears have their own servers and the problem is solved.
It increases the potential number of players as well, only possible problem is that each group might complain because they think content aimed at the other group takes too much work.
Some people are of course against this because they think that a game only should have 1 serverset that is the way they prefer but choices are generally a good thing and it is not hard to implement either.
Otherwise you do get the risk that the devs try to make both groups happy on the same server and that only leads to bad compromises that makes neither group happy.
While this is the usual solution, its not the best for a game like ArcheAge. It already has it's own solution. Jail. Griefers, gankers, pirates etc... all have to run the risk of being caught and put in jail for long periods of time. While this won't matter to some it will to others. Sure this doesn't make carebears immune to being ganked while harvesting but if that is what they want there are plenty of other games that will cater to their need to collect timber unmolested.
You could still use that for 2 different serversets. In the carebear version you could have harder justice system and safe areas or something. Not that I plan to play on anything but the regular servers anyways but there is a potential to get a lot of extra players without destroying the game for the rest of us.
It tends otherwise, as OP said, that the more PvE directed group of players will start to demand a lot of things and since they usually is a pretty large group we seen the devs listen in other cases in the past. One word: Trammel.
2 serverset takes a rather small amount of joband is far better then the alternative. In the past we seen many players whine so the devs change the games and then they get bored anyways after a few months and move on while the people who enjoyed the game are stuck with the changes.
Trion had said on the Archeage forums that they are not making pve only servers , the game is balance around having pve and pvp players. Pvp can be avoided, contested areas have war and peace timers that turns pvp on and off. Pve players are in alpha right now and doing just fine, some are treasure diving in the open pvp oceans, risk vs reward works when done right.
Honestly, this is usually solved by having 2 serversets. Let the carebears have their own servers and the problem is solved.
It increases the potential number of players as well, only possible problem is that each group might complain because they think content aimed at the other group takes too much work.
Some people are of course against this because they think that a game only should have 1 serverset that is the way they prefer but choices are generally a good thing and it is not hard to implement either.
Otherwise you do get the risk that the devs try to make both groups happy on the same server and that only leads to bad compromises that makes neither group happy.
While this is the usual solution, its not the best for a game like ArcheAge. It already has it's own solution. Jail. Griefers, gankers, pirates etc... all have to run the risk of being caught and put in jail for long periods of time. While this won't matter to some it will to others. Sure this doesn't make carebears immune to being ganked while harvesting but if that is what they want there are plenty of other games that will cater to their need to collect timber unmolested.
You could still use that for 2 different serversets. In the carebear version you could have harder justice system and safe areas or something. Not that I plan to play on anything but the regular servers anyways but there is a potential to get a lot of extra players without destroying the game for the rest of us.
It tends otherwise, as OP said, that the more PvE directed group of players will start to demand a lot of things and since they usually is a pretty large group we seen the devs listen in other cases in the past. One word: Trammel.
2 serverset takes a rather small amount of joband is far better then the alternative. In the past we seen many players whine so the devs change the games and then they get bored anyways after a few months and move on while the people who enjoyed the game are stuck with the changes.
Whats the economy like in ArcheAge? Is it standard mmo AH stuff? Or is it more akin to EVE's free market economy? I guess that would really be what could determine a "solution" to this non-problem.
Everyone can argue day in and day out about the merits of one FFA shard or splitting into FFA and Carebear shards (these arguments are almost daily here on MMORPG as you well know) but I believe it really just depends on the REST of the game outside of that one aspect, especially the economy.
Do you know why high sec miners in EVE keep mining despite the fact that people still suicide gank them frequently? They get paid pretty well to do it, even for high sec-low risk mining. Null sec miners take a huge risk going out there and setting up their ops and they get paid really freaking well to do so, even though they don't want to PVP at the time they know it can happen and the reward is worth it.
That is all it really takes to satisfy carebears, make sure the people who mess with them are aptly punished (EVE's Concord or AA's Jail), or give them a strong reward for taking a larger risk of egagement in non consensual pvp.
Honestly, this is usually solved by having 2 serversets. Let the carebears have their own servers and the problem is solved.
It increases the potential number of players as well, only possible problem is that each group might complain because they think content aimed at the other group takes too much work.
Some people are of course against this because they think that a game only should have 1 serverset that is the way they prefer but choices are generally a good thing and it is not hard to implement either.
Otherwise you do get the risk that the devs try to make both groups happy on the same server and that only leads to bad compromises that makes neither group happy.
While this is the usual solution, its not the best for a game like ArcheAge. It already has it's own solution. Jail. Griefers, gankers, pirates etc... all have to run the risk of being caught and put in jail for long periods of time. While this won't matter to some it will to others. Sure this doesn't make carebears immune to being ganked while harvesting but if that is what they want there are plenty of other games that will cater to their need to collect timber unmolested.
You could still use that for 2 different serversets. In the carebear version you could have harder justice system and safe areas or something. Not that I plan to play on anything but the regular servers anyways but there is a potential to get a lot of extra players without destroying the game for the rest of us.
It tends otherwise, as OP said, that the more PvE directed group of players will start to demand a lot of things and since they usually is a pretty large group we seen the devs listen in other cases in the past. One word: Trammel.
2 serverset takes a rather small amount of joband is far better then the alternative. In the past we seen many players whine so the devs change the games and then they get bored anyways after a few months and move on while the people who enjoyed the game are stuck with the changes.
Trion had said on the Archeage forums that they are not making pve only servers , the game is balance around having pve and pvp players. Pvp can be avoided, contested areas have war and peace timers that turns pvp on and off. Pve players are in alpha right now and doing just fine, some are treasure diving in the open pvp oceans, risk vs reward works when done right.
I did not say that the servers should be PvE only (in fact I said in another post that taking away all PvP wouldn't work).
What I said was that you can have 1 serverset that is more focused on one thing and another more focused on the other. For example longer peace timers and harder justical system on the more PvE friendly and possibly somewhat tougher PvE on it as well.
I don't understand how this "east good, west bad" bullshit works. Are us westerners all somehow just risk averse carebears?
This is exactly what i saw during my time in Aion actually. The Korean servers were bustling with PVP regardless of risk. The Western players were unwilling to participate unless they knew they'd win prior to engaging. Losing an entire days worth of PVP points on one death seemed to affect us a lot more than them.
That's just one example of course and an unfair comparison since Koreans live for PVP, but it's what i experienced.
Dont mind open world PvP as long as its Faction vs Faction and not FFA/GuildVsGuild because I would actually like the ability to form my own Guild, and not be forced to join a guild just for PvP. in GW2 I am in my own Guild with my own guild name and all for RPing.
As everyone knows, archeage is a sandbox pvp focused game. It's endgame is all about the risk X reward system provided by the disputes of trade routes, packs, castles, mining spots and so on, what is intended to create a social experience far more lively and complex than what we are used in the mainstream western mmos (except EVE).
Because this, Archeage have world pvp planned from its very root and entangled in all its features, like the trade missions, the justice system and the piracy. So, world pvp cant be simply plucked off the game and it still continue to be a great mmo. Archeage with word pvp plucked off would become crap.
However, this mmo seens to arouse interest from carebears! I dont know the reason for this, if is the lack of information about the game or some other thing i cant understand (e.g: a hope that developers dumb down the mmo and reduce or remove its risks), and this is particularly source of concern to the people that awaited AA for almost 4 years for what it is intended to be when announced: a fantasy sandbox AAA mmo inspired in UO.
In my opinion, AA will only do well here in the west if it keep itself as a "different" mmo, with risks X reward, social tools and meaningful pvp, since is it what many players are waiting for and cant find in the countless AAA linear themepark mmos that is around. The carebear crowd already have plenty of AAA mmos to play and is somewhat "unfair" they wanting a complete domination in the genre, with no even a crumb to the pvp crowd.
AA will do very well in Russia because the playerbase wants a Lineage 3 and AA seens to fill well that role.
Anyone who uses the immature word "Carebear" is ignorant in my opinion. Your very very narrow world view is foreign to me. This game caters to both PVE people and PVP. You can be darn sure, if it was all PVP folks and NO PVE people, the game would not succeed in the way in the way Trionworlds wants it too.
Not everyone is going to do what they want them to do, think the way you want them to do or act the way you want them to do. PVE people are attracted to AA in the same way, anyone IS! That's just common sense! I'm in a guild of both PVE & PVP people and we escort each other when a person is in PVP territory. You are being unbelievably SELFISH in wanting only PVP people being in the game without any "carebears" I shake my head at you...
A publisher can't change the game on the scale this thread is talking about. The developers in Korea will never change the game that much for the western players unless it goes huge and it's clear that's what millions of people want.
A heavy pvp game isn't going to do that, so your game is probably safe.
How about let players have both their PVE AND hardcore PVP without some elitist alienating a WHOLE demographic of mmo players just to make himself feel better at the end of the day.
This isn't highschool where the "I'm better than you" circles can't sit at the same lunchroom table. Some of us enjoy both hardcore pvp, open world, and pve.
In my opinion, AA will only do well here in the west if it keep itself as a "different" mmo, with risks X reward, social tools and meaningful pvp, since is it what many players are waiting for and cant find in the countless AAA linear themepark mmos that is around. The carebear crowd already have plenty of AAA mmos to play and is somewhat "unfair" they wanting a complete domination in the genre, with no even a crumb to the pvp crowd.
AA will do very well in Russia because the playerbase wants a Lineage 3 and AA seens to fill well that role.
Actually there's not a single high quality sandbox game a carebear can enjoy at the moment, not sure if there's even a low quality one atm. I'm under the impression that Landmark will be such a title, a high quality sandbox with no forced pvp(?), but it's ways off still, wont be released until 2015/16. So no, carebears dont have single AAA sandbox yet, and they want one, if the recent forum activity suggest anything.
Your main problem is that the Korean version is developing into a more themeparkish game and as such the themeparkish updates are coming to west as well. The open world PvP side of things doesn't work once everyone is sitting in a hub waiting for queue to pop or trying to complete dailies asap while avoiding PvP.
So nope, the "carebears" of the east are ruining the game.
In my opinion, AA will only do well here in the west if it keep itself as a "different" mmo, with risks X reward, social tools and meaningful pvp, since is it what many players are waiting for and cant find in the countless AAA linear themepark mmos that is around. The carebear crowd already have plenty of AAA mmos to play and is somewhat "unfair" they wanting a complete domination in the genre, with no even a crumb to the pvp crowd.
AA will do very well in Russia because the playerbase wants a Lineage 3 and AA seens to fill well that role.
Actually there's not a single high quality sandbox game a carebear can enjoy at the moment, not sure if there's even a low quality one atm.
Darkfall perhaps?
I'm under the impression that Landmark will be such a title, a high quality sandbox with no forced pvp(?), but it's ways off still, wont be released until 2015/16. So no, carebears dont have single AAA sandbox yet, and they want one, if the recent forum activity suggest anything.
Time will tell who was right; hindsight is 20/20. I want to see how well a triple A quality sandbox game with no PvP does. We might think after a while "this is so boring, maybe PvP wasn't such a bad idea after all."
Originally posted by cyberpunkhobo Which game would you rather play?
1) A dream, open-world, PvP sandbox full of nothing but the hardest of hardcore PvPers--griefers, gankers, duelists, challenge enthusiasts, whatever you want to call them--or
2) The exact same game with a significantly larger population. The only difference being that you have to let some carebears play.
You'd be foolish to choose the first option, both as a player and a game developer. Carebears, in and of themselves, really only benefit the MMOs that they play. It's catering to their every design whim that can have detrimental effects. But don't hold the desire of game companies to make as much money as possible against the carebears playing your game; for the most part, they're simply providing you with prey for the slaughter.
It's not as if we aren't allowing the carebears to play.
The problem is with the carebears, they can't play unless the game is changed. I have no problem playing with carebears.
Originally posted by Loke666
Honestly, this is usually solved by having 2 serversets. Let the carebears have their own servers and the problem is solved.
It increases the potential number of players as well, only possible problem is that each group might complain because they think content aimed at the other group takes too much work.
Some people are of course against this because they think that a game only should have 1 serverset that is the way they prefer but choices are generally a good thing and it is not hard to implement either.
Otherwise you do get the risk that the devs try to make both groups happy on the same server and that only leads to bad compromises that makes neither group happy.
This could work.
How very noble of you.
The problem is NOT the mentality of PvE players or PvP players (Griefers and carebares as they like to call each other). The problem is there has yet to be a pvp focused mmo that makes PvP actually have consequence for anyone except the newer players. In eve for example you can attempt to scam people risk free, there is no consequence for you doing it, if there was risk v reward for being a dick, if there was actual consequence for engaging in the spawn camping of players who due to game mechanics have no ability to fight back then and only then would a PvP based mmo actually work.
Archages jail system is a small very small step in the right direction, the vast majority of people get a 10 min time out, a few get something harsher. But actual penalties that matter vs actual rewards that matter, encouraging people to fight people on their power level, and allowing people to reach that are the key to making a good PvP mmo.
Mobas are overtaking mmos for a reason, players love the unpredictable they just want it packaged in a way that gives them a fair shot.
Make it so there is reward for taking on a risky fight and actual consequence for being the giant in the sandbox stomping on the newbies and it could work.
Or leave the PvP Paradigm as it is, a circle jerk for the people who have been playing the longest.
However, this mmo seens to arouse interest from carebears! I dont know the reason for this.
You sound like.. this is a bad thing. Like a blasphemy.
You do realize if a game interests only people like you, it won't be that succesful, right? You also do realize when all sheep leaves the game, wolf vs. wolf ain't that.. interesting?
There are lots of ffa pvp games right now, but nobody plays them, maybe only hardcore rabid fans. If AA becomes one of that games, nobody will play it too. That simple.
Stages of a new mmo: 1) It's just beta. It still has plenty of time before release. 2) It just launched. Give it time. WoW wasn't built in a day. 3) We don't need you anyway. 4) F2P announced. 5)Huge influx of players. 6) Look how much has changed. 7) Cash shop is the only thing developed lately. 8) It has been a long journey and we thank everyone who was part of it. Shutting down in 3 months. (Courtesy of Robokapp.)
So you mighty hardcore-pvp-players are deeply afraid of this big and evil carebear-crowd?
Who are these "carebears"?
You mean the same "carebears" who destroyed Darkfall? Seriously?
This whole sandbox-open-hardcore-pvp-argument is shit - what you really want is this: Outlevel other players and then gank them. Obviously this leads to four problems:
1. Players rush through content (early access, etc.) instead of enjoying the game and then complain about the lack of endgame.
2. Players only seeking PvP, if they have an unfair advantage, which is the exact opposite of PvP (think about it).
3. The rest of the community is appalled by the overall behaviour of the gankers.
4. Less fun, because in the end you always need some weak "carebears" to gank
Verdict:
It is the same like with every other MMO. If they have a good system, they should just stick to their system. The MMO-crowd is famous for complaining all games to death. However, blaming the hypothetical casual-noob-carebear-players is getting a little boring.
Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need.
imo we should never blame players when devs make bad decisions that ruin MMOs.
We shouldn't blame the judgmental whiney carebears any more than we should blame the judgmental whining open world pvp ganker types.
We all sling the mud at the others and blame them for horrible design decisions and ruining games and dead servers. But PVP players and PVE players aren't really the problem. Thats just an oversimplification by people with way too much bias.
Comments
While this is the usual solution, its not the best for a game like ArcheAge. It already has it's own solution. Jail. Griefers, gankers, pirates etc... all have to run the risk of being caught and put in jail for long periods of time. While this won't matter to some it will to others. Sure this doesn't make carebears immune to being ganked while harvesting but if that is what they want there are plenty of other games that will cater to their need to collect timber unmolested.
This can be done in some mmos, where pvp is only a addition a posteriori without any impact or relevance to the world. In AA this isn't possible.
AA was not made neither to hardcore pvpers or carebears. Its target public is the "average" player, the L2, UO, Aion and EVE fan, that can handle and enjoy a light world pvp well and still appreciate the pve.
But you're wrong...we already have an example of a game that runs like ArcheAge where the majority of players are westerners who are not risk averse and love pvp. Where are you stats that the "Majority" of westerners do not wish to partake in PvP? Don't get confused with by a vocal minority of players.
Remember that people who even take time to post in forums, official or otherwise, are a minority themselves. Most players just play the damn game they like.
EVE? Light world pvp? Almost the entire premise of the game is player conflict. They have some PvE so people can make ISK to build/buy ships and modules but other than that the game is driven by pvp.
I don't think you know your games very well because EVE and UO were not just "light world pvp" games.
I completely agree
Played-Everything
Playing-LoL
You could still use that for 2 different serversets. In the carebear version you could have harder justice system and safe areas or something. Not that I plan to play on anything but the regular servers anyways but there is a potential to get a lot of extra players without destroying the game for the rest of us.
It tends otherwise, as OP said, that the more PvE directed group of players will start to demand a lot of things and since they usually is a pretty large group we seen the devs listen in other cases in the past. One word: Trammel.
2 serverset takes a rather small amount of joband is far better then the alternative. In the past we seen many players whine so the devs change the games and then they get bored anyways after a few months and move on while the people who enjoyed the game are stuck with the changes.
Correct.
Trion had said on the Archeage forums that they are not making pve only servers , the game is balance around having pve and pvp players. Pvp can be avoided, contested areas have war and peace timers that turns pvp on and off. Pve players are in alpha right now and doing just fine, some are treasure diving in the open pvp oceans, risk vs reward works when done right.
Whats the economy like in ArcheAge? Is it standard mmo AH stuff? Or is it more akin to EVE's free market economy? I guess that would really be what could determine a "solution" to this non-problem.
Everyone can argue day in and day out about the merits of one FFA shard or splitting into FFA and Carebear shards (these arguments are almost daily here on MMORPG as you well know) but I believe it really just depends on the REST of the game outside of that one aspect, especially the economy.
Do you know why high sec miners in EVE keep mining despite the fact that people still suicide gank them frequently? They get paid pretty well to do it, even for high sec-low risk mining. Null sec miners take a huge risk going out there and setting up their ops and they get paid really freaking well to do so, even though they don't want to PVP at the time they know it can happen and the reward is worth it.
That is all it really takes to satisfy carebears, make sure the people who mess with them are aptly punished (EVE's Concord or AA's Jail), or give them a strong reward for taking a larger risk of egagement in non consensual pvp.
I did not say that the servers should be PvE only (in fact I said in another post that taking away all PvP wouldn't work).
What I said was that you can have 1 serverset that is more focused on one thing and another more focused on the other. For example longer peace timers and harder justical system on the more PvE friendly and possibly somewhat tougher PvE on it as well.
This is exactly what i saw during my time in Aion actually. The Korean servers were bustling with PVP regardless of risk. The Western players were unwilling to participate unless they knew they'd win prior to engaging. Losing an entire days worth of PVP points on one death seemed to affect us a lot more than them.
That's just one example of course and an unfair comparison since Koreans live for PVP, but it's what i experienced.
I just want Faction vs Faction PvP system.
Dont mind open world PvP as long as its Faction vs Faction and not FFA/GuildVsGuild because I would actually like the ability to form my own Guild, and not be forced to join a guild just for PvP. in GW2 I am in my own Guild with my own guild name and all for RPing.
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
Anyone who uses the immature word "Carebear" is ignorant in my opinion. Your very very narrow world view is foreign to me. This game caters to both PVE people and PVP. You can be darn sure, if it was all PVP folks and NO PVE people, the game would not succeed in the way in the way Trionworlds wants it too.
Not everyone is going to do what they want them to do, think the way you want them to do or act the way you want them to do. PVE people are attracted to AA in the same way, anyone IS! That's just common sense! I'm in a guild of both PVE & PVP people and we escort each other when a person is in PVP territory. You are being unbelievably SELFISH in wanting only PVP people being in the game without any "carebears" I shake my head at you...
A publisher can't change the game on the scale this thread is talking about. The developers in Korea will never change the game that much for the western players unless it goes huge and it's clear that's what millions of people want.
A heavy pvp game isn't going to do that, so your game is probably safe.
How about let players have both their PVE AND hardcore PVP without some elitist alienating a WHOLE demographic of mmo players just to make himself feel better at the end of the day.
This isn't highschool where the "I'm better than you" circles can't sit at the same lunchroom table. Some of us enjoy both hardcore pvp, open world, and pve.
Actually there's not a single high quality sandbox game a carebear can enjoy at the moment, not sure if there's even a low quality one atm. I'm under the impression that Landmark will be such a title, a high quality sandbox with no forced pvp(?), but it's ways off still, wont be released until 2015/16. So no, carebears dont have single AAA sandbox yet, and they want one, if the recent forum activity suggest anything.
Your main problem is that the Korean version is developing into a more themeparkish game and as such the themeparkish updates are coming to west as well. The open world PvP side of things doesn't work once everyone is sitting in a hub waiting for queue to pop or trying to complete dailies asap while avoiding PvP.
So nope, the "carebears" of the east are ruining the game.
Darkfall perhaps?
Time will tell who was right; hindsight is 20/20. I want to see how well a triple A quality sandbox game with no PvP does. We might think after a while "this is so boring, maybe PvP wasn't such a bad idea after all."
How very noble of you.
The problem is NOT the mentality of PvE players or PvP players (Griefers and carebares as they like to call each other). The problem is there has yet to be a pvp focused mmo that makes PvP actually have consequence for anyone except the newer players. In eve for example you can attempt to scam people risk free, there is no consequence for you doing it, if there was risk v reward for being a dick, if there was actual consequence for engaging in the spawn camping of players who due to game mechanics have no ability to fight back then and only then would a PvP based mmo actually work.
Archages jail system is a small very small step in the right direction, the vast majority of people get a 10 min time out, a few get something harsher. But actual penalties that matter vs actual rewards that matter, encouraging people to fight people on their power level, and allowing people to reach that are the key to making a good PvP mmo.
Mobas are overtaking mmos for a reason, players love the unpredictable they just want it packaged in a way that gives them a fair shot.
Make it so there is reward for taking on a risky fight and actual consequence for being the giant in the sandbox stomping on the newbies and it could work.
Or leave the PvP Paradigm as it is, a circle jerk for the people who have been playing the longest.
You sound like.. this is a bad thing. Like a blasphemy.
You do realize if a game interests only people like you, it won't be that succesful, right? You also do realize when all sheep leaves the game, wolf vs. wolf ain't that.. interesting?
There are lots of ffa pvp games right now, but nobody plays them, maybe only hardcore rabid fans. If AA becomes one of that games, nobody will play it too. That simple.
Stages of a new mmo: 1) It's just beta. It still has plenty of time before release. 2) It just launched. Give it time. WoW wasn't built in a day. 3) We don't need you anyway. 4) F2P announced. 5)Huge influx of players. 6) Look how much has changed. 7) Cash shop is the only thing developed lately. 8) It has been a long journey and we thank everyone who was part of it. Shutting down in 3 months. (Courtesy of Robokapp.)
So you mighty hardcore-pvp-players are deeply afraid of this big and evil carebear-crowd?
Who are these "carebears"?
You mean the same "carebears" who destroyed Darkfall? Seriously?
This whole sandbox-open-hardcore-pvp-argument is shit - what you really want is this: Outlevel other players and then gank them. Obviously this leads to four problems:
1. Players rush through content (early access, etc.) instead of enjoying the game and then complain about the lack of endgame.
2. Players only seeking PvP, if they have an unfair advantage, which is the exact opposite of PvP (think about it).
3. The rest of the community is appalled by the overall behaviour of the gankers.
4. Less fun, because in the end you always need some weak "carebears" to gank
Verdict:
It is the same like with every other MMO. If they have a good system, they should just stick to their system. The MMO-crowd is famous for complaining all games to death. However, blaming the hypothetical casual-noob-carebear-players is getting a little boring.
Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need.
This MMO allready doomed and ruined by Asian design ....
It will not work on the european market...
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
imo we should never blame players when devs make bad decisions that ruin MMOs.
We shouldn't blame the judgmental whiney carebears any more than we should blame the judgmental whining open world pvp ganker types.
We all sling the mud at the others and blame them for horrible design decisions and ruining games and dead servers. But PVP players and PVE players aren't really the problem. Thats just an oversimplification by people with way too much bias.