Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
To all the pvp threads
ShavaKa
Member UncommonPosts: 91
No. Lets leave the murder culture out of this one - there's enough war in real life.
That being said: war provides opportunities to 1st world luxuries like Pepsi and vacuum cleaners that look like luxury cars.
What have you been able to do with pvp politically that hasn't been guild motivated?
I'm sick of seeing no political aspects of war and diplomacy etc, in that the player characters take on a higher responsibility at end game that actually affect things politically.
Instead of being fed expansion pack after expansion pack of the same crap over and over again, how about expanding what already exists?
Comments
I think he's talking about PvP with meaning
A political system goes a long way to adding meaningful pvp.
OP take a look at Age of Wushu's political system. After a FFA then 1v1 tournament each school votes on a Head Master, to put it simply. Alliances were formed and destroyed during these tournaments.
I could only dream that EQN will meaningful pvp of this ilk. I have no faith in the current team to deliver though. They would rather RP as furries than build a trade route...
Yes, PVP with meaning and a true culture system would be nice.
I will look into this Wushu.
I wasn't aware the team were furries. o.O
I want that escape to be as real as possible, the worst part about free games is the community... I don't want to escape into a pool of no reason because anonymous entropy destroyed a potentially great concept - take Life is Feudal for example: it will probably decay into nothing more than what any mmo of its type has become in the past - because putting people into a carnival creates a self destructive chaos - combine that with current culture and it becomes a playground of mass hysteria over virtual loot and competitive aspects that mirror real life sports and media pop culture...And it will never change.
But I make the argument, because players can be so much more when they don't want to be more, just by having the option. The big red shiny button.
Let me guess.
You have watched a few youtube videos showing combat.
You haven't watched any of the weekly developer video updates.
You are not part of the Landmark closed Beta.
You do not follow the forums.
You do not read twitter posts by the devs.
To put it short, you haven't got a clue about the game but have made up your mind about where and what the game is based on seeing a youtube video and being ignorant of anything else related to development.
Sound about right?
Yeah it's a silly mess. Dev team is making a crap game with a good AI and Lore system and that's the synthesis of it. It's falling apart over there as each addition to Landmark makes it more evident that this far away game will be uninspiring. The mere distance of launch makes it irrelevant if nothing else.
How about not implementing PVP at all.
Stop trying to go after the MOBA crowd.
It's too late for that. In Landmark Beta I have played the combat system and it's inspired by MOBA games. It's a mouselook targeting system with the specials tied to the lmb and rmb. Movement is built into the combat and the bunny hopping comments are accurate.
I think they built a wall of features in some meeting and now that they are trying to assemble those features the result is a bad stew. EQNext will suffer rather than gain from the voxel thing, as the trade off for using voxels is crude visuals. Since they don't really want EQN to be a builder the result will be some building with bad visuals globally. The voxel system is also partly responsible for the Disney art, which adds to the problems of the overall visual problems this game will have.
And I have to wonder why PvP is the big emphasis when you have this amazing AI system. Will there really be that much Player control of zones based on PvP? I kind of doubt it considering the theme park attitude they are increasingly adopting for EQNext (now that they have landmark to be the actual sandbox).
becareful now..if you state facts about the game youll be attacked by fan boies ! and its not true !
lol I know. I wish it wasn't true but every time I get new information on this game it's worse than what I had hoped. I believed their descriptions until the product (as it exists thus far) made the SOE devs into liars.
PvP isn't the emphasis. COMBAT is the emphasis and the best way to test combat is to let the players have hands on as soon as possible. For instance, the lack of nay restrictions on heroic movements or any tie in with combat is clear due to everyone bouncing around. Bring in a link where heroic movement and jumping have an energy cost and you will see the combat change.
Where did you pull that opinion from? I know of nothing about the exact set-up of EQN as they haven't mentioned it.
Well, if they were actual facts and not guesses based upon bad information there wouldn't be any grounds for "fan boies" to attack said information. Unfortunately some posters extrapolate a ton of information from nothing and use it to fit an argument, ironically, about a game they supposedly care nothing about. Strange to me but people will do what they will.
MOBA inspired combat? Yes, it's intentional.
Will the combat seen right now in Landmark be the final iteration? No
Are visuals subjective? Yes
Was the "heroic" look of the model art intended for the first two iterations of EQN, not just because of the voxel engine? Yes
Themepark attitude? Wha?
There is probably a bigger reason to PvP in EQN, given the way the AI works.
I honestly think I'm feeding at this point, too many red flags.
I think this title, if they pull off the AI/faction groups aspect of the game, could make PvP into something very meaningful. Something down to a skirmish between Dryads and Dark Elves could start a PvP struggle with actual objectives, which would be furthering the influence of one faction over the other in that particular area. If a guild decides that they want the Dark Elves to conquer a certain area they can not only help by killing the Dryads, but also other players helping the Dryads. How far that can be pushed before forcing the system to lay the hammer down, if it would, is not known. The system, that we've heard of that is, could make that possible.
It's yet to be seen how far players can oppose the main storyline, Rallying Calls, other than just not participating or removing resources needed to complete some of the steps. Maybe some specific RC made of opposing player factions at that moment in the story could have open results depending on a PvP outcome.
This all assumes it would be on a PvP server. Maybe not but I highly doubt they would institute non consensual PvP.
If I wanted to read SOE bullet points I could just go to the website. You shouldn't care anything about something that isn't out yet, you are just ramping up dreams and justifying that by kicking at people who don't agree with you. Why don't you argue the merits and not attack the posters. I'll assume you meant the other poster and not me, but deviating away from the actual details of the game as they are known to this point makes no sense to me. I'm just a potential customer they first gained with hype and then lost with details about the product.
EQNext looks to me like a failure under construction. Sorry that tweaks your ass, but to me it's just a disappointment in a game I wanted to like.
I'm not attacking anyone, I mentioned scenarios that don't make sense to me. I want to stay with the facts known about the game as well but not everyone has all the information. Which is fine... unless wrong or missing information is used as a way to say how bad the game is going to be. There is no merit in that and there is no way to have a meaningful discussion. If someone doesn't want to like a game that really doesn't bother me but I would hope those who take the time to post do so honestly with correct information. Then again, a single piece of information can seem like one person as great news and another as absolutely atrocious. That's life I guess.
...That's essentially what being smug is. Acting like you're so blatantly right that even the thought of someone disagreeing with you is appallingly stupid and comical. you have a good chance of bullying them into believing you.
Back at the 2010 SoE Fan faire, Smedley was quoted as saying EQ Next would have "PvP done right". Obviously this was quite a while ago, things change. With this in mind, though, it sounds like PvP has been a priority since early developmental days.
Like it or not, PvP sells. Only certain types of players dislike PvP. ALL types of players like PvP. Smed would be foolish not to include it. PvP was originally not "done right" in EQ2, I'm sure a lesson was learned there. Not saying PvP is "right" now by any means, but a bigger focus was given to it much later after launch.
...That's essentially what being smug is. Acting like you're so blatantly right that even the thought of someone disagreeing with you is appallingly stupid and comical. you have a good chance of bullying them into believing you.
I have to agree with you that there is some interpretation involved, and that is subjective. Extrapolation is only part of it because they have actually shown combat and a few other things at this point. There is no way that the rest of the game will be somehow so different from what they have shown that it won't at least fit somewhat into the possible radius of what they have projected. Based on what I have seen I'm disappointed.
Too late, it's a huge part of the game's plans according to Smed.
Most of your list is just dev talk i.e. complete bullshit these days. Beating hype up based on that is not the best thing to do imo.
Indeed, it's mostly part of every game and usually generic as any pvp system goes. Player kills Player, gets stuff, is motivated by stuff and competition aspects, gets silly achievements - no recognition otherwise because of cross-server with random players that never remember you unless you're in a 500 player guild or you role play the politics.
What if you didn't have to keep grinding the carrot on a stick and instead were given a chance to really affect the environment and its people by expanding what's already there with new responsibilities as an option.
Within the sovereign reign, your decisions change the way NPCs and Players interact with the environment.
If the AI is already in place, why not a political AI system that players can be a part of? Or even be capable of changing the dynamics through a government and see its changes - new NPCs show up, new types of trade, new quests, new structures/government, new threats emerge etc. Everything politically economic changes for that province. NPCs/players can rise up and rebel etc. War does much more than pvp, it can affect PVE as well.
I can see this kind of component completely replacing x-pacs, but not like WoWs dramatic change after cataclysm. Something more smooth that doesn't kill the vanilla flavor.
I have based my opinion on first hand gameplay, first hand conversations with the devs and being very involved in the community and continued development cycle of the game.
The point I was trying to make is, when you have 2 people discussing a subject, do you give more validity to someone who is involved in what they are talking about or someone that offers a passing derogatory comment? There are no guarantee's but I personally will listen to someone who has actually played a game more then someone who has not. Is that crazy or bullshit?