The problem is this. Imagine the game publicity reads: "This is a full feature sandbox game that includes crafting, exploration, social, community and FFA PVP features.
Most people read and absorb the entire sentence. However the hard-core PVP reader just sees: "FFA PVP."
That is exactly what he wants to do. The problem is that this is ALL he wants to do - 24/7, 365.
Hunt, kill, loot. All the rest of the game fades into a blur. Quests get tabbed through. Interactions with other players reduce to their being a red dot on the mini-map.
Unlike the other activities of the game, FFA PVP by its nature impacts on everyone, regardless of their likes or dislikes. Hence, the hard core PVP gamers begin to winnow and reduce the population around them, driving from the game those who don't think like them. Even though it is pointed out their rampant activities are reducing server populations, they refuse to accept responsibility, don't care, or are gleeful at the prospect.
EVE survives because they aren't a true FFA PVP game world wide - they have substantial protections for those who want to just PVE.
It is unlikely there will ever be a commercially successful, heavily populated true FFA full loot world PVP game. If "hard core" PVPers want to know why, they need just look in the mirror and their own single-mindedness, lack of empathy and lack of self-control. They buried pre-Trammel UO and have been crushing player freedom since.
Whenever I see a so called pvp player going on about how they just killed another player who wasn't out to pvp I always imagine those guys who bag them selves and then post videos.
It is unlikely there will ever be a commercially successful, heavily populated true FFA full loot world PVP game. If "hard core" PVPers want to know why, they need just look in the mirror and their own single-mindedness, lack of empathy and lack of self-control. They buried pre-Trammel UO and have been crushing player freedom since.
You are giving them too much power. No sane devs will do a pre-trammel UO today. There are so many choices of games that no one needs to suffer pvpers unless they want to.
Originally posted by nomotag It's easy to see why carebears would dislike PKers. You know because the killing.
at this very second there are tens of thousands of carebears living in nullsec space rented from PKers.
Do all carebears dislike all PKers?
You know that sounds a little like a protection racket.
that's exactly what it is.
and both sides enjoy it.
yeah im sure those PVE'r love being extorted from or killed. Im sure they log in every day and say "man i just cannot wait till my payment is due so i renew my protection!"
do people on this forum actually read what they write.
Personally I don't think open world PvP will ever be popular in MMO's. When you look at PvP games that are popular and "work" it's arena based or in non persistant worlds. They are games that a player can jump and out in. Even in wow the most popular form of PvP is the battle grounds. In EVE, most of the PVP was either dueling outside a station or when players decided to dip their toe in the proverbial water, "go roaming" before running back to high sec when they are done.
The problem is that players want to pick and choose where and when they PVP, not only that they want it to be "fair" that is, no gear or buffs to sway the fight one way or another. Unfortunately that goes against what is the accepted progression model of MMOs. I.e. The more you put into the game, the better gear you get. Although FPS have similar rewards and bonuses for players, nothing they give away as perks or weapons as progression rewards is so far over powered or out of reach that a new player may as well log off or get grinding.
But the most obvious thing is that FPS and dota clones belong to a completely different clientele. The majority of LoL, dota and CoD players wouldn't play an MMO.
Originally posted by nomotag It's easy to see why carebears would dislike PKers. You know because the killing.
at this very second there are tens of thousands of carebears living in nullsec space rented from PKers.
Do all carebears dislike all PKers?
You know that sounds a little like a protection racket.
that's exactly what it is.
and both sides enjoy it.
yeah im sure those PVE'r love being extorted from or killed. Im sure they log in every day and say "man i just cannot wait till my payment is due so i renew my protection!"
do people on this forum actually read what they write.
your sarcasm and passive aggression don't hide the fact that you don't know what you're talking about.
renting is neither extorsion nor 'being killed'. i's a mutual agreement. Does your landlord threaten to kill you often?
sov bills are part of nullsec life.
But you said it was a protection racket. That's not the same thing as a land lord. The big one is people running a protection racket do threaten to do bad things to you if you don't pay. Also paying your land lord isn't all that fun either.
EVE found a wonderful thing, the balance between PVP & PVE.
The PVP fan can spend his SP on the latest and greatest in guns and engine skills. They can fly circles around a hummingbird and shoot a gnat off your shoulder from hundreds of kilometers away. BUT, no matter how good they fly, how well they shoot, sooner of later they need that new ship, the fresh ammo, a new load of Drones. So they turn to the PVE'ers for their supplies to continue their fun.
Meanwhile the PVE fans can mine the rarest of resources, research the rarest of blueprints, build all the toys. BUT they need access to nullsec for the resources and so turn to the PVP'er for the mercenaries needed to let them access the resources for their fun.
They NEED each other to be efficient. In so many other 'Sandbox' games the two have almost no interaction save as predator and prey.
I haven't played many MMO's for the simple fact that there is not enough danger/risk involved. I'm not a hardcore PVP'er and really only PVP when forced to but the idea that real danger is out there adds a sense of tension for me that most MMO's cant provide.
I played STALKER online for about 6 months, really a crap game from a performance/graphics perspective but it had open PVP. You could attack anyone but your best bet was to only attack clans you were currently at war with lest you piss your clan mates off by starting a war with every clan. On death you only dropped a random percentage of inventory but never equipped items or armor. Also all equipment had degradation so you couldn't just wear the same armor or weapons forever because it would break and become useless.
It also didn't have leveled zones. You could go anywhere and if you saw a creature to powerful for you to solo you better run. No random killing sprees of every NPC. You could still go anywhere because the tough creatures would move around so sneaking and staying out of aggro area was key.
The only reason I quit playing was because the game had updates with a cash shop which made it almost completely pay to win.
How about am MMO with rotating dynamic PVP zones with warnings for all players that a zone is about to become open PVP or just different security zones similar to EVE.
My dream MMO is Resident Evil/STALKER/Metro/Fallout type setting with monsters not just zombies, more than 1 huge map even if instanced between maps with urban and rural areas similar to DayZ with 500 players on a server so you can get to know friends and enemies. NPC cities and territory/base wars. Extensive crafting, Quests are ok but not I'm the hero of the world type stuff, housing even if instanced, farming, faction based, at least 3, so it's not a complete free for all. Partial loot drops on death, real item degradation, and not perma-death but RANDOM eventual perma-death. You could die 50 times and on death #51 well your time is up and you are dead forever. A world that can just be lived in. End game in MMO's doing the same dungeons and raids over and over is like torture to me. Just me dreaming as I'm sure everyone has there own perfect game. And sorry I am so burnt out on the fantasy setting it makes my skin crawl.....
The easiest solution is to have alternate rule set servers. I am not opposed to PvP'ers having their own servers, and none of my PvE friends are either. What we want is the same type of sandbox elements without the PvP. It worked in Asheron's Call and contrary to popular belief, it worked in Ultima Online (subscriber base went way up after Trammel).
However every time this simple and elegant solution is brought up, the majority of the PvP crowd screams foul. They believe the sudden inclusion of PvE players will come flooding into their game if there is no ruleset server to accommodate the MUCH larger PvE crowd. In reality, every single time, the PvE players stay away and the game fails and fails hard.
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!!!
Originally posted by nomotag It's easy to see why carebears would dislike PKers. You know because the killing.
at this very second there are tens of thousands of carebears living in nullsec space rented from PKers.
Do all carebears dislike all PKers?
You know that sounds a little like a protection racket.
that's exactly what it is.
and both sides enjoy it.
yeah im sure those PVE'r love being extorted from or killed. Im sure they log in every day and say "man i just cannot wait till my payment is due so i renew my protection!"
do people on this forum actually read what they write.
Thats because you don't understand the mechanics involved. Take a small indi corp, heavily into mining and making a few ships, they need resources, and the bulk of the best resources, is in null sec. If they rent space with access to a station where they can refine and build with a decent set of asteroid belts in the system, they can increase their profit margin at an exponential rate. The Alliance, and we are probably talking about an alliance, that owns the station, can gain tax from the refining at their station, and usually by prior agreement, have access to equipment/ships at prices that may well be lower than those in high sec. In return they tend to protect the system because its generating so much profit for them.
It's a balance issue in many ways but most people don't want to lose everything when defeated.
Compare shooter games that drop loot to ones that don't and it's easy to see that there's no contest to which the masses prefer, especially when you add in console gaming. Those games have just as many griefers / noob hunters as a PvP FFA but people keep coming back. CoD wouldn't sell 10m copies if you lost everything you worked hard for like DayZ - but PvP focused players should be rewarded as well.
I say keep PvP FFA but no item loss. Make K/D ratio the measuring stick (like CoD, etc) so that people can see in detail when they examine you how good/committed you are. Offer rare rewards to the best PvP players for their performance, like intimidating pieces of armor and weapons so they can be the badass they want and everyone around them will recognize that as well. This might encourage others to PvP that normally wouldn't.
Of course the PvE experience would be top notch but bloodthirsty PvP'ers need to have fun too. I could keep going but I think I made my point clear.
Edit: Maybe have contests between the best PvP'ers in arenas that give xp to PvE spectators. So that PvP players can get the attention they desire, while PvE'ers are playing cards, earning xp while watching the fights.
It's a balance issue in many ways but most people don't want to lose everything when defeated.
Compare shooter games that drop loot to ones that don't and it's easy to see that there's no contest to which the masses prefer, especially when you add in console gaming. Those games have just as many griefers / noob hunters as a PvP FFA but people keep coming back. CoD wouldn't sell 10m copies if you lost everything you worked hard for like DayZ - but PvP focused players should be rewarded as well.
I say keep PvP FFA but no item loss. Make K/D ratio the measuring stick (like CoD, etc) so that people can see in detail when they examine you how good/committed you are. Offer rare rewards to the best PvP players for their performance, like intimidating pieces of armor and weapons so they can be the badass they want and everyone around them will recognize that as well. This might encourage others to PvP that normally wouldn't.
Of course the PvE experience would be top notch but bloodthirsty PvP'ers need to have fun too. I could keep going but I think I made my point clear.
Edit: Maybe have contests between the best PvP'ers in arenas that give xp to PvE spectators. So that PvP players can get the attention they desire, while PvE'ers are playing cards, earning xp while watching the fights.
There are 3 issues with this though.
1) You dont lose "everything", only what youre carrying at the time, which for an average player is normally equivalent to pocket change in comparison to what they have stashed away in the bank.
2) (kind of ties into 1) Youre losing minor stuff, stuff that you would lose regardless of pvp or not. Generally these types of games have durability loss with no repairs which in the end means you WILL lose your gear no matter what. It will either be taken from you in PvP or it will break from use in PvE. Either way you need a steady flow of replacement gear. These aren't games like WoW where you spend months grinding away for some special piece of gear, only to lose it. We're talkin stuff that you can build dozens of sets of with a bit of effort.
3) Lack of risk. While the reward type system may be enough for some people, specifically those who enjoy PvP with rankings rather than those who simply enjoy the risk vs reward that this type of PvP offers, it wont be enough for everyone. Your average PvPer doesnt give a crap about rankings / leaderboards, or the rewards associated with them. In games like Darkfall for example, one of the big driving factors behind why players enjoy it is the sense of risk.
You know that any time you go out into the world you're running the risk of actually losing something. You might have spent the past hour farming some items you need for crafting and are about to go bank when suddenly you get ambushed and need to make a very important choice of whether or not you can take on your foe and win or if you're better off trying to make a quick escape and how to go about it safely.
A system like the one you mentioned which offers rewards for rankings / achievements offers no real risk. Sure, you might not be the guy who wins that prize, but youre also not losing anything at all. Why even bother trying to outsmart your foe and escape? Why even fight as hard as possible when the odds are against you? There would be no point because hey, you died, oh well free teleport back to the bank loaded with all your stuff. Hell you could just go afk when you know enemies are around and who cares. You'll still have all your stuff and won't have had to waste the time to run back t town. They sent you back for free.
There will either have to be some trade-offs or some creative thinking ( judicial system for example) for both players to co-exist together. There are many smart people that could find a way to connect the dots while keeping both sides happy. It can't be that hard to pull off, creatively speaking.
This isn't my preference as much as an idea to sell millions of copies to the masses in what they seem to prefer.
Edit: PvP shooters dominate PvE shooters, which is the opposite of MMO's. There are some dots that can be connected there somewhere.
Edit #2: It takes me forever to write because I probably delete more than I type so I could be here for hours but to address the risk issue quickly before I leave. One word:
Prison
If you get caught killing a carebear you go to prison, there is some risks in itself there because you could get away with it or get caught. Which would put you in prison where it's similar to DayZ or Rust where you lose everything if defeated. Doesn't have to be a conventional prison, maybe a "Running Man" situation or something and more ways than one to get out alive.
Virtually no MMO developer wants to stray to far from the modern easymode template. That means the carebears are going to be thrown in with the killbears. Neither will like it, as they want different principles of gameplay. But pandering to more players equals more profit, so don't expect a change here any time soon.
There will either have to be some trade-offs or some creative thinking ( judicial system for example) for both players to co-exist together. There are many smart people that could find a way to connect the dots while keeping both sides happy. It can't be that hard to pull off, creatively speaking.
This isn't my preference as much as an idea to sell millions of copies to the masses in what they seem to prefer.
Edit: PvP shooters dominate PvE shooters, which is the opposite of MMO's. There are some dots that can be connected there somewhere.
Edit #2: It takes me forever to write because I probably delete more than I type so I could be here for hours but to address the risk issue quickly before I leave. One word:
Prison
If you get caught killing a carebear you go to prison, there is some risks in itself there because you could get away with it or get caught. Which would put you in prison where it's similar to DayZ or Rust where you lose everything if defeated. Doesn't have to be a conventional prison, maybe a "Running Man" situation or something and more ways than one to get out alive.
The trade off is persistence. In a shooter, when you die, you just find another match and things continue without a lot of worrying about death penalties, what the other guy is taking off your corpse, etc. There will be a new match with new people every time. An MMORPG is the opposite of this. The death penalties matter. In full loot games people get to take stuff from you. In a few minutes you could very well be in the same situation with the same people. For a lot of people this is an unpleasant setup and no amount of rules or player legal systems is going to change it. There is no way to balance the experience. There is no way to balance the experience between the people who are fine with it and the people who are not.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
This issue with most PvP MMO's is the community. They're most often vile.
It's a niche I tried to get into but I could never get past the horrid community I had to play with.
I have found pve raiders to be the most vile and greedy players within the community. They suck the fun out of every game.Crying over being killed in a video game is childish and kind of pathetic.
My take on this, which will be highly tinted by my experience in EVE, is that there really aren't any "carebears" in a PvP Sandbox. Either you're actively fighting other players, or you're supplying people who are. In EVE, even if all you do is trade on the market and haul things around in your freighter and never fire a gun in anger at anyone, you're still part of the sandbox and greasing the gears of war.
And the only reason the market functions at all is because of the wars. The only reason currency has any value is because of the demand created by the wars. The endless parade of ganking, camping, dueling, and sieges is the engine of destruction that prevents all the carebearing from becoming a tiresome race against runaway deflation.
But, what about the carebear's tender feelings? Why would they remain in a setting where they are so unwelcome? The challenge, really. If one is uninterested in the dynamics of PvP combat then one has to be interested in something else. PvP Sandboxes provide a marvelous place to practice actual trading strategies, to work out how to get needed supplies to places where they're in demand, to make the right kind of friends for the right kinds of deals, or just to explore the world and find out where the secret treasures are. If there wasn't PvP, then all the exploration in the world would be for nothing. If there wasn't danger then everything would be a Google search away, and already done to death.
In most theme parks, even felling a dragon can become tedious. In most PvP sandboxes, something as tedious as mining can be a nail-biting, and even thrilling experience!
EVE online is a true FFA Sandbox game that has been sustainable for many years... it does NOT have a "PVE base" and it's the main example as to why your premise is wrong. I'm sick of PVEer acting like the sacred overlords of MMOs. You guys just don't GET open world PVP and you should stop trying to shape every MMO out there to YOUR needs. There's plenty of carebear games.
I played EVE for almost six years. I watched as Concord evolved, and as the high sec ROE changed to protect CCP's business model.
Even though CCP is quite pro Pvp, they aren't fools. More than half of their player base are Carebears, and seldom if ever leave high sec.
I'm an example of just such a Carebear. In all of my time in EVE, I never left high sec, nor attacked any other player, nor ganged with anyone. I just ran missions, mined a bit and collected battleships.
FFA PvP in the modern western markets is a niche market, and becoming more so all the time. If you want FFA full loot gankfests, try the Asian markets. They seem to really love such things.
There will either have to be some trade-offs or some creative thinking ( judicial system for example) for both players to co-exist together. There are many smart people that could find a way to connect the dots while keeping both sides happy. It can't be that hard to pull off, creatively speaking.
This isn't my preference as much as an idea to sell millions of copies to the masses in what they seem to prefer.
Edit: PvP shooters dominate PvE shooters, which is the opposite of MMO's. There are some dots that can be connected there somewhere.
Edit #2: It takes me forever to write because I probably delete more than I type so I could be here for hours but to address the risk issue quickly before I leave. One word:
Prison
If you get caught killing a carebear you go to prison, there is some risks in itself there because you could get away with it or get caught. Which would put you in prison where it's similar to DayZ or Rust where you lose everything if defeated. Doesn't have to be a conventional prison, maybe a "Running Man" situation or something and more ways than one to get out alive.
The problem with any "justice system" in MMO's is that it always acts as an incentive (to a certain type of player) to be as "bad" as possible. These systems are always contrived at best, and the more complex they get, the greater the amount of loopholes and exploits that can be found.
The punishment for being a convicted criminal is almost never serious or significantly negative. If it was, players would quickly complain that it "stops PVP", and besides, it would no doubt lead to a whole meta-game of trying to trick people into attacking and/or killing you "unlawfully" or some other exploit.
EVE online is a true FFA Sandbox game that has been sustainable for many years... it does NOT have a "PVE base" and it's the main example as to why your premise is wrong. I'm sick of PVEer acting like the sacred overlords of MMOs. You guys just don't GET open world PVP and you should stop trying to shape every MMO out there to YOUR needs. There's plenty of carebear games.
I played EVE for almost six years. I watched as Concord evolved, and as the high sec ROE changed to protect CCP's business model.
Even though CCP is quite pro Pvp, they aren't fools. More than half of their player base are Carebears, and seldom if ever leave high sec.
I'm an example of just such a Carebear. In all of my time in EVE, I never left high sec, nor attacked any other player, nor ganged with anyone. I just ran missions, mined a bit and collected battleships.
FFA PvP in the modern western markets is a niche market, and becoming more so all the time. If you want FFA full loot gankfests, try the Asian markets. They seem to really love such things.
It took a huge change in mind-set for me, but I grew to enjoy the "Full Loot" nature of death in EVE. In most games, the amount you lose is always the same. The amount your opponent loses is equally the same. In EVE, the Full Loot nature means you're entirely in control of what you lose. You can gauge your PVP fit to whatever your comfort level. If you are loaded, then bring something really expensive and strong. If you're cheap, or just not in the mood to blow a bunch of ISK bring 10 cheap ships and toss them in the grinder. It started to feel more like a coin-op style game.
Now, I can't recommend EVE PVP as a playstyle. I just don't get people who devote their entire gaming life to finding fights. To me, it'd get really boring. That said, PLEX was invented for precisely those people.
The easiest solution is to have alternate rule set servers. I am not opposed to PvP'ers having their own servers, and none of my PvE friends are either. What we want is the same type of sandbox elements without the PvP. It worked in Asheron's Call and contrary to popular belief, it worked in Ultima Online (subscriber base went way up after Trammel).
However every time this simple and elegant solution is brought up, the majority of the PvP crowd screams foul. They believe the sudden inclusion of PvE players will come flooding into their game if there is no ruleset server to accommodate the MUCH larger PvE crowd. In reality, every single time, the PvE players stay away and the game fails and fails hard.
I'm not a PVP'er, but I think you are missing the point. Without people to gank (i.e., the carebears), you're just left with a small population of gankers (the PVPers). It's like having all wolves and no sheep.
Therefore, if you use an alternate server approach, you still have the PVP'ers issue of no one to gank (but each other).
You'll still have others to kill, maybe not as many but definitely more then zero which is what you'll see because no Triple-A studio will ever do a Pure PvP mmoRPG, expecially in light of forgoing the RPG aspects and creating a MOBA.
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!!!
Imo EVE is only a successful sandbox pvp game due to the potentially massive cost of pvp to the participants and a very good risk system for killing in high sec. If pvp centric games dont have any potential huge loss for pvp then they just turn into gank fests and get populated with those silly 12yo kids that think trolling someone over and over again = power and control.
I would say if it had a system where there was many powerful npc "Guards" that would kos you for killing in their territory, full loot and a strict rep system it would do better than just some fully open pvp game.
Imo pvp games need what EVE has done to be successful, have pvp everywhere, but in some areas (like starter zones) if you kill you loose so much rep you can never go back to that area again without great difficulty. That way the risk to reward wont be worth it to those silly kids that think ganking noobs over and over again in pvp.
Comments
The problem is this. Imagine the game publicity reads: "This is a full feature sandbox game that includes crafting, exploration, social, community and FFA PVP features.
Most people read and absorb the entire sentence. However the hard-core PVP reader just sees: "FFA PVP."
That is exactly what he wants to do. The problem is that this is ALL he wants to do - 24/7, 365.
Hunt, kill, loot. All the rest of the game fades into a blur. Quests get tabbed through. Interactions with other players reduce to their being a red dot on the mini-map.
Unlike the other activities of the game, FFA PVP by its nature impacts on everyone, regardless of their likes or dislikes. Hence, the hard core PVP gamers begin to winnow and reduce the population around them, driving from the game those who don't think like them. Even though it is pointed out their rampant activities are reducing server populations, they refuse to accept responsibility, don't care, or are gleeful at the prospect.
EVE survives because they aren't a true FFA PVP game world wide - they have substantial protections for those who want to just PVE.
It is unlikely there will ever be a commercially successful, heavily populated true FFA full loot world PVP game. If "hard core" PVPers want to know why, they need just look in the mirror and their own single-mindedness, lack of empathy and lack of self-control. They buried pre-Trammel UO and have been crushing player freedom since.
You are giving them too much power. No sane devs will do a pre-trammel UO today. There are so many choices of games that no one needs to suffer pvpers unless they want to.
So your saying people want to be extorted? I guess I can buy that.. It's just odd because well extortion normally isn't fun.
yeah im sure those PVE'r love being extorted from or killed. Im sure they log in every day and say "man i just cannot wait till my payment is due so i renew my protection!"
do people on this forum actually read what they write.
Personally I don't think open world PvP will ever be popular in MMO's. When you look at PvP games that are popular and "work" it's arena based or in non persistant worlds. They are games that a player can jump and out in. Even in wow the most popular form of PvP is the battle grounds. In EVE, most of the PVP was either dueling outside a station or when players decided to dip their toe in the proverbial water, "go roaming" before running back to high sec when they are done.
The problem is that players want to pick and choose where and when they PVP, not only that they want it to be "fair" that is, no gear or buffs to sway the fight one way or another. Unfortunately that goes against what is the accepted progression model of MMOs. I.e. The more you put into the game, the better gear you get. Although FPS have similar rewards and bonuses for players, nothing they give away as perks or weapons as progression rewards is so far over powered or out of reach that a new player may as well log off or get grinding.
But the most obvious thing is that FPS and dota clones belong to a completely different clientele. The majority of LoL, dota and CoD players wouldn't play an MMO.
But you said it was a protection racket. That's not the same thing as a land lord. The big one is people running a protection racket do threaten to do bad things to you if you don't pay. Also paying your land lord isn't all that fun either.
EVE found a wonderful thing, the balance between PVP & PVE.
The PVP fan can spend his SP on the latest and greatest in guns and engine skills. They can fly circles around a hummingbird and shoot a gnat off your shoulder from hundreds of kilometers away. BUT, no matter how good they fly, how well they shoot, sooner of later they need that new ship, the fresh ammo, a new load of Drones. So they turn to the PVE'ers for their supplies to continue their fun.
Meanwhile the PVE fans can mine the rarest of resources, research the rarest of blueprints, build all the toys. BUT they need access to nullsec for the resources and so turn to the PVP'er for the mercenaries needed to let them access the resources for their fun.
They NEED each other to be efficient. In so many other 'Sandbox' games the two have almost no interaction save as predator and prey.
I haven't played many MMO's for the simple fact that there is not enough danger/risk involved. I'm not a hardcore PVP'er and really only PVP when forced to but the idea that real danger is out there adds a sense of tension for me that most MMO's cant provide.
I played STALKER online for about 6 months, really a crap game from a performance/graphics perspective but it had open PVP. You could attack anyone but your best bet was to only attack clans you were currently at war with lest you piss your clan mates off by starting a war with every clan. On death you only dropped a random percentage of inventory but never equipped items or armor. Also all equipment had degradation so you couldn't just wear the same armor or weapons forever because it would break and become useless.
It also didn't have leveled zones. You could go anywhere and if you saw a creature to powerful for you to solo you better run. No random killing sprees of every NPC. You could still go anywhere because the tough creatures would move around so sneaking and staying out of aggro area was key.
The only reason I quit playing was because the game had updates with a cash shop which made it almost completely pay to win.
How about am MMO with rotating dynamic PVP zones with warnings for all players that a zone is about to become open PVP or just different security zones similar to EVE.
My dream MMO is Resident Evil/STALKER/Metro/Fallout type setting with monsters not just zombies, more than 1 huge map even if instanced between maps with urban and rural areas similar to DayZ with 500 players on a server so you can get to know friends and enemies. NPC cities and territory/base wars. Extensive crafting, Quests are ok but not I'm the hero of the world type stuff, housing even if instanced, farming, faction based, at least 3, so it's not a complete free for all. Partial loot drops on death, real item degradation, and not perma-death but RANDOM eventual perma-death. You could die 50 times and on death #51 well your time is up and you are dead forever. A world that can just be lived in. End game in MMO's doing the same dungeons and raids over and over is like torture to me. Just me dreaming as I'm sure everyone has there own perfect game. And sorry I am so burnt out on the fantasy setting it makes my skin crawl.....
The easiest solution is to have alternate rule set servers. I am not opposed to PvP'ers having their own servers, and none of my PvE friends are either. What we want is the same type of sandbox elements without the PvP. It worked in Asheron's Call and contrary to popular belief, it worked in Ultima Online (subscriber base went way up after Trammel).
However every time this simple and elegant solution is brought up, the majority of the PvP crowd screams foul. They believe the sudden inclusion of PvE players will come flooding into their game if there is no ruleset server to accommodate the MUCH larger PvE crowd. In reality, every single time, the PvE players stay away and the game fails and fails hard.
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!!!
Thats because you don't understand the mechanics involved. Take a small indi corp, heavily into mining and making a few ships, they need resources, and the bulk of the best resources, is in null sec. If they rent space with access to a station where they can refine and build with a decent set of asteroid belts in the system, they can increase their profit margin at an exponential rate. The Alliance, and we are probably talking about an alliance, that owns the station, can gain tax from the refining at their station, and usually by prior agreement, have access to equipment/ships at prices that may well be lower than those in high sec. In return they tend to protect the system because its generating so much profit for them.
It's a balance issue in many ways but most people don't want to lose everything when defeated.
Compare shooter games that drop loot to ones that don't and it's easy to see that there's no contest to which the masses prefer, especially when you add in console gaming. Those games have just as many griefers / noob hunters as a PvP FFA but people keep coming back. CoD wouldn't sell 10m copies if you lost everything you worked hard for like DayZ - but PvP focused players should be rewarded as well.
I say keep PvP FFA but no item loss. Make K/D ratio the measuring stick (like CoD, etc) so that people can see in detail when they examine you how good/committed you are. Offer rare rewards to the best PvP players for their performance, like intimidating pieces of armor and weapons so they can be the badass they want and everyone around them will recognize that as well.
This might encourage others to PvP that normally wouldn't.
Of course the PvE experience would be top notch but bloodthirsty PvP'ers need to have fun too. I could keep going but I think I made my point clear.
Edit: Maybe have contests between the best PvP'ers in arenas that give xp to PvE spectators. So that PvP players can get the attention they desire, while PvE'ers are playing cards, earning xp while watching the fights.
There are 3 issues with this though.
1) You dont lose "everything", only what youre carrying at the time, which for an average player is normally equivalent to pocket change in comparison to what they have stashed away in the bank.
2) (kind of ties into 1) Youre losing minor stuff, stuff that you would lose regardless of pvp or not. Generally these types of games have durability loss with no repairs which in the end means you WILL lose your gear no matter what. It will either be taken from you in PvP or it will break from use in PvE. Either way you need a steady flow of replacement gear. These aren't games like WoW where you spend months grinding away for some special piece of gear, only to lose it. We're talkin stuff that you can build dozens of sets of with a bit of effort.
3) Lack of risk. While the reward type system may be enough for some people, specifically those who enjoy PvP with rankings rather than those who simply enjoy the risk vs reward that this type of PvP offers, it wont be enough for everyone. Your average PvPer doesnt give a crap about rankings / leaderboards, or the rewards associated with them. In games like Darkfall for example, one of the big driving factors behind why players enjoy it is the sense of risk.
You know that any time you go out into the world you're running the risk of actually losing something. You might have spent the past hour farming some items you need for crafting and are about to go bank when suddenly you get ambushed and need to make a very important choice of whether or not you can take on your foe and win or if you're better off trying to make a quick escape and how to go about it safely.
A system like the one you mentioned which offers rewards for rankings / achievements offers no real risk. Sure, you might not be the guy who wins that prize, but youre also not losing anything at all. Why even bother trying to outsmart your foe and escape? Why even fight as hard as possible when the odds are against you? There would be no point because hey, you died, oh well free teleport back to the bank loaded with all your stuff. Hell you could just go afk when you know enemies are around and who cares. You'll still have all your stuff and won't have had to waste the time to run back t town. They sent you back for free.
There will either have to be some trade-offs or some creative thinking ( judicial system for example) for both players to co-exist together. There are many smart people that could find a way to connect the dots while keeping both sides happy. It can't be that hard to pull off, creatively speaking.
This isn't my preference as much as an idea to sell millions of copies to the masses in what they seem to prefer.
Edit: PvP shooters dominate PvE shooters, which is the opposite of MMO's. There are some dots that can be connected there somewhere.
Edit #2: It takes me forever to write because I probably delete more than I type so I could be here for hours but to address the risk issue quickly before I leave. One word:
Prison
If you get caught killing a carebear you go to prison, there is some risks in itself there because you could get away with it or get caught. Which would put you in prison where it's similar to DayZ or Rust where you lose everything if defeated. Doesn't have to be a conventional prison, maybe a "Running Man" situation or something and more ways than one to get out alive.
Isn't the "ultimate success" in a FFA-PVP game being the last player left ?
To quote the great king Conan: "To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women."
When you've driven every last player from the server, only then have you truly WON !
The trade off is persistence. In a shooter, when you die, you just find another match and things continue without a lot of worrying about death penalties, what the other guy is taking off your corpse, etc. There will be a new match with new people every time. An MMORPG is the opposite of this. The death penalties matter. In full loot games people get to take stuff from you. In a few minutes you could very well be in the same situation with the same people. For a lot of people this is an unpleasant setup and no amount of rules or player legal systems is going to change it. There is no way to balance the experience. There is no way to balance the experience between the people who are fine with it and the people who are not.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I have found pve raiders to be the most vile and greedy players within the community. They suck the fun out of every game.Crying over being killed in a video game is childish and kind of pathetic.
My take on this, which will be highly tinted by my experience in EVE, is that there really aren't any "carebears" in a PvP Sandbox. Either you're actively fighting other players, or you're supplying people who are. In EVE, even if all you do is trade on the market and haul things around in your freighter and never fire a gun in anger at anyone, you're still part of the sandbox and greasing the gears of war.
And the only reason the market functions at all is because of the wars. The only reason currency has any value is because of the demand created by the wars. The endless parade of ganking, camping, dueling, and sieges is the engine of destruction that prevents all the carebearing from becoming a tiresome race against runaway deflation.
But, what about the carebear's tender feelings? Why would they remain in a setting where they are so unwelcome? The challenge, really. If one is uninterested in the dynamics of PvP combat then one has to be interested in something else. PvP Sandboxes provide a marvelous place to practice actual trading strategies, to work out how to get needed supplies to places where they're in demand, to make the right kind of friends for the right kinds of deals, or just to explore the world and find out where the secret treasures are. If there wasn't PvP, then all the exploration in the world would be for nothing. If there wasn't danger then everything would be a Google search away, and already done to death.
In most theme parks, even felling a dragon can become tedious. In most PvP sandboxes, something as tedious as mining can be a nail-biting, and even thrilling experience!
I played EVE for almost six years. I watched as Concord evolved, and as the high sec ROE changed to protect CCP's business model.
Even though CCP is quite pro Pvp, they aren't fools. More than half of their player base are Carebears, and seldom if ever leave high sec.
I'm an example of just such a Carebear. In all of my time in EVE, I never left high sec, nor attacked any other player, nor ganged with anyone. I just ran missions, mined a bit and collected battleships.
FFA PvP in the modern western markets is a niche market, and becoming more so all the time. If you want FFA full loot gankfests, try the Asian markets. They seem to really love such things.
The problem with any "justice system" in MMO's is that it always acts as an incentive (to a certain type of player) to be as "bad" as possible. These systems are always contrived at best, and the more complex they get, the greater the amount of loopholes and exploits that can be found.
The punishment for being a convicted criminal is almost never serious or significantly negative. If it was, players would quickly complain that it "stops PVP", and besides, it would no doubt lead to a whole meta-game of trying to trick people into attacking and/or killing you "unlawfully" or some other exploit.
It took a huge change in mind-set for me, but I grew to enjoy the "Full Loot" nature of death in EVE. In most games, the amount you lose is always the same. The amount your opponent loses is equally the same. In EVE, the Full Loot nature means you're entirely in control of what you lose. You can gauge your PVP fit to whatever your comfort level. If you are loaded, then bring something really expensive and strong. If you're cheap, or just not in the mood to blow a bunch of ISK bring 10 cheap ships and toss them in the grinder. It started to feel more like a coin-op style game.
Now, I can't recommend EVE PVP as a playstyle. I just don't get people who devote their entire gaming life to finding fights. To me, it'd get really boring. That said, PLEX was invented for precisely those people.
You'll still have others to kill, maybe not as many but definitely more then zero which is what you'll see because no Triple-A studio will ever do a Pure PvP mmoRPG, expecially in light of forgoing the RPG aspects and creating a MOBA.
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!!!
Imo EVE is only a successful sandbox pvp game due to the potentially massive cost of pvp to the participants and a very good risk system for killing in high sec. If pvp centric games dont have any potential huge loss for pvp then they just turn into gank fests and get populated with those silly 12yo kids that think trolling someone over and over again = power and control.
I would say if it had a system where there was many powerful npc "Guards" that would kos you for killing in their territory, full loot and a strict rep system it would do better than just some fully open pvp game.
Imo pvp games need what EVE has done to be successful, have pvp everywhere, but in some areas (like starter zones) if you kill you loose so much rep you can never go back to that area again without great difficulty. That way the risk to reward wont be worth it to those silly kids that think ganking noobs over and over again in pvp.