Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Sandbox PvP - Why has no one copied EVE?
Boneserino
Member UncommonPosts: 1,768
In my ongoing quest to get into the minds of the open world pvp player, a recurring thought keeps coming into my head.
It seems many times when I am in a discussion about why open PvP games never seem to do well, the inevitable poster will always step up and cite EVE as an example of open FFA PvP that has succeeded. And I have to agree it has. But why EVE and so damn few others?
Well it seems the obvious answer is that there is some fundamental difference between EVE, and other open PvP games. And it seems to me like I have simply been ignoring the obvious.
In most of the suggested PvP models that players have been asking for, you are playing as a character. A single individual in a virtual world. When you PvP, your character goes out in the world and puts it all on the line. And depending on the penalties, death can be pretty severe. And this can be frustrating when you are trying to progress, but continue to simply hit a wall of death. When you have one character, and you are constantly dying, it gets rather pointless quickly.
Now the difference with EVE is that even though you are PvP'ing, you are not really risking your character. Essentially your character is not an individual but a conglomeration of what you have created. If you lose a ship, that might be one of ten or a hundred that you have. It is like going to battle and losing a finger, or getting a scar. Yes, you came out of that encounter on the bad end, but you are only scratched, not defeated.
Anyway, my point to all of this is why not make other games work similarly? Instead of just being an army of one, why should you not be able to say have multiple types of characters? Miners, scavengers, offensive players, defensive players, crafting players? You chose the player you wish to play at the time, depending on the situation. Make it like maintaining an army. If one character dies you must replace them through economic means. Same as EVE. You lose a ship, you buy a new one. I think this form of PvP, which seems to be more of risk / reward situation would appeal to more people, because it gives you more options, rather than just sending your one and only avatar out to die against a higher skilled opponent.
In any case I think that is where EVE derives its success from. Simply using EVE as a PvP model that works, therefore all types of PvP can and should be successful is a flawed argument. It works because of its uniqueness. I can't think of any other PvP model that is similar to it. Why?
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Comments
I would site Prepeptum as a example where people are not risking their character and it really hasn't done all that well as a game.
For the first 5-6 years of EVE's life it really was little more than a sleeper title. The developers where small enough and energetic enough to keep improving the game despite it's small but dedicated player base. It's only the last few years it has really taken off and in many regrades to the detriment of what made the game great in the first place. It didn't hurt that almost all of the game is procedurally generated making it much lighter on the pocket book to create content for.
There are a lot of reasons EvE is the success it is but I'm not sure people risking ships rather than a character is one of them.
First of all eve is by far not the first open world pvp game that was succesful!
Second maybe eves pvp mechanics are working but its a game pure for geeks you love it or its boring like hell .
For me Neocron was the only open world pvp game that could cut it.
Then I will rephrase that to say the one that has been successful the longest. And also the one most quoted by PvP proponents.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
The closest thing I can think of to EVE is probably Darkfall UW.
I have a feeling more sandbox games are on the way!
Whether on purpose or not Perpetuum copied a lot of stuff from Eve. It doesn't seem to have given them any great amount of sales, even considering the game is put together very well.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
If your going to compair PVP to eve you should at least play eve and find out how PVP works. You have clearly not played eve or you would know that when your ship is destroyed you end up in a pod and if your pod is destroyed "you get poded" you die and get revived as a clone. Now depending on how long its been sense you upgraded your clone there could be little consiquence or you could loss day, weeks, or months of skill development. So don't post your ignoance with-
"Now the difference with EVE is that even though you are PvP'ing, you are not really risking your character. Essentially your character is not an individual but a conglomeration of what you have created. If you lose a ship, that might be one of ten or a hundred that you have."
Oh ya most people don't have "hundreds of ships"
Again you show your ignorance and indicate you have vary little experance playing eve if any.
if you do play join a clan and get out of the noob sectors and see what the real eve is about.
Again wrong ultima online is the longest succesful open world pvp game ever.
Personaly i never played it but its still played upon today :O
I was not really aware of Perpetuum, but it seems more like an EVE clone rather than a copy of game play, which is what I was suggesting.
You have peaked my interest on Perpetuum though, thnx!
Judging by some of the comments though it seems people enjoy it, so probably many reasons why it has not been successful, just as EVE has been successful.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
LOL ok Kraizy you win.
Really has nothing to do with the point of my post tho.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Reading Comprehension.
I did play EVE, not for very long granted. I don't understand the hostility in your post ? Where is that coming from?
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
it has to do with you post your argument was that eve is succesfull to its ship loosing design and that you dont loose or that your character doesnt has to die. Ultima and Neocron are games where you play with a character and there were succesfull.
And my hole point is i dont think that the mechanics in a open world pvp game how pvp is deployed is the reason for its success.
One point of note is that for many players, attachment to one's character and a desire to seek renown and form lasting relationships is of considerable importance. Making characters into a form of inventory of faces could detract from that and possibly engender a kind of detachment. It is a role-playing genre we are talking about here. Character-driven elements are somewhat central to the kind of invested gameplay that most mmorpgs aim for.
Personally I would not want to play a game that allowed me to swap characters in and out for different situations. Then again, a big appeal that mmorpgs hold for me is trying to forge my way in a world with my strengths and despite my weaknesses, adapting to situations as the role I am playing, rather than just thinking about winning at gameplay systems.
http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/PerfArt
Having to put something on the line when you undock is one of the reasons I like EVE, but that's not the important bit that other game devs need to be copying. What CCP has done well is create a system where the endgame revolves around player owned space. Having something worth fighting for is just as, if not more important then having to put something on the line when you go into a fight. This is why EVE is still going strong, because its players don't have to rely on ccp's development schedule to keep experiencing new content.
You don't see more of it because it takes a special kind of crazy to get hundreds of people to want to alarm clock a fight at 3 am so they can log on and defend a timer, or just be reachable and drop whatever they're doing to log in and take advantage of an opportunity or defend against someone else attempting to do so. This kind of player is not the casual that many developers seem to want to cater to these days. You can try something like ArcheAge is doing and limit keep fights to certain times. I think they're doing that at least. But that rings kind of hollow to me and it seems like it would eliminate a lot of tactics an attacker can do that should be feasible. I don't know what elder scrolls is doing with their keep battles but those seem like shit that doesn't really matter in the long run anyways. Near as I can tell you're not fighting for a home for you and yours, but rather so some guy can have a title.
Agreed.
However I think that in the case of a PvP type of game, the essence of the game is about player confrontation. Certainly players have gained renown in EVE also. There are other games of the type where you can gain renown.
I think what I am really getting at is, does being able to build and use varying types of characters, add more variety and challenge, and interesting gameplay, versus the old, I will max out this character and make him a god, type of gameplay?
Because I think that is a lot of what EVE offers.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
I believe that security levels does a lot for eve. People know where they can be semi safe and where they are fair game. It seems a lot of sandbox pvpers want an open PvP world with no safe zones which will alienate a big portion of the player base that eve still caters to.
My only problem with eve is the combat. Pve is boring forcing me into a constant search for PvP. I believe that eve has some great ideas behind it that is hindered by a poorly implemented combat system. Obviously that is my opinion and I am sure there are those that enjoy its combat.
One of the many things that makes EvE work is travel. Generally the more dangerous route, or area, the more ISK can be made be it resources, missions or whatever. Risk vs reward.
Player politics are also a major part of the game. Thats not something a dev can't create. They can only add the tools, its up to the players to make that part of the game a success.
It is an interesting question. I'm not looking for a PvP game personally, but I do see it cited by a few games in development (eg:Pathfinder). I think the problem is that EvE isn't just a diffierent species of game, it's a different genus, family, order ... it's not yet clear that mixing and matching EvE concepts with other games will work without making a complete clone of it.
Agree both your points are strong suits in EVE's favor.
As for politics would you consider the success of this aspect might have something to do with the fact that people are able to create more than one ship, and are generally playing for the purpose of improving their fleet as a whole, versus I just have this one ship and I want to make it the biggest and baddest in the galaxy? Does it make the game less player centric and more conducive to game politics?
I think if you are simply focused on one character, it merely becomes mainly about that character and not what is happening in the world.
In EVE you are creating characters (ships) and improving them in order to be able to influence the world around you.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
And I would quite simply have to disagree.
About the last part that is.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
This may sound crazy but I think one of EVE's real winning decisions is having space divided into high, low, and null-sec. It seems like other OWPVP games completely neglect or overlook the benefit of having a system like EVE's that caters to a range of interests while still allowing players the freedom to shape the world. From a casual observer (and short-time player) of the game, EVE holds itself up as an internally consistent actual world, where PVP is a means to an end unlike some games where it seems the world is simply a big arena for people to fight inside. It may be a fine distinction but it's still evident to me.
EVE is no less hardcore for having relatively safer areas and, apparently, a lot of their subscribers enjoy the game without ever venturing into less secure space. Why other games and designers believe that their worlds must be entirely no-holds-barred killzone fragfests from the moment you log in is beyond me. You'll stay very niche and ultra hardcore if your game fails to give new players time to acclimate and get invested in your game (without being cannon fodder for weeks).
PVP in Eve isn't really that great. It's good enough, and contributes well to the rest of the game, but it's not something that many people like. Eve is popular with a very select group of people, that just happen to be fairly world-wide.
You make me like charity