Oh I know this thread won't be popular but someone has to say it.

Our So called "Sandbox" or "Open Ended" MMOs Give players more freedom with safe zones included.

Guys don;t get me wrong I love FFA pvp areas with player looting/Decay and all that cool alliance territory stuff.

But im also aware that not everyone likes to be freaking ganked the second they walk from a town.

Some people like the freedom and complexity of a sandboxish mmo without the fear of getting Pwn'd every second.

Some people want to play these games and Rp and be social and not have to worry about thieves and what not.

I know how restricted full pvp games could be on those players. Hell, I an a ganker and pirate.

Safe zones give new players a chance to learn and people that like Pve, crafts and social stuff like RP and building a little house freedom to play the way they want.

Now you may say "Well that restricts my game play as a pvper". Let me ask you, Is it really so bad for these people to play the way they want and not have pvp forced on them? Sandbox games are about freedom right? why is it ok for us to force gameplay mechanics and restrictions on them?

How is 10-20% of the game world being a safe or safer zone hurting you from big alliance battles, roaming pvp and piracy in more dangerous areas?

Look at Eve it has Empire space (Safer areas) people have the freedom to get into trade, industry and Pve without having combatant pvp forced on them.

Now look at a game like Darkfall, do you think that game is ok limiting the poor crafters to cities and tower areas? jesus they get ganked right away, that's not freedom imo. If someone wants to be an explorer and do some Pvp content they get ganked it suxs.

Like I said, you guys know I love pvp and imo if a game has harsh areas I think everyone should atleast look around and see if they like the risk. If they do try and find they dislike the risk then they should have the freedom to live out thier characters lives in some sort of peace.

Thanks for reading.

Eve pulled off the perfect mix of Safe and Never safe.

Wish other MMO Developers would take a look over here. Pvp Only games with little to no safe areas are pointless for all but those who want to gank and Dont mind beeing ganked. If it Bothers you a little then the game is Unplayable.

What eve does right.

Large Safe area(As long as your not Stupid).

Lots of FFA area, Low sec.

Lots of Team and FFA area. Null sec.

In Null sec you can Build everything you need, Build massive starbases and Beat the crap outa each other in What? 700 person battles?

Everyone gets a area they can play in. All play styles are coverd. What more could you want from a MMO?

Originally posted by Ekibiogami

Eve pulled off the perfect mix of Safe and Never safe.

Wish other MMO Developers would take a look over here. Pvp Only games with little to no safe areas are pointless for all but those who want to gank and Dont mind beeing ganked. If it Bothers you a little then the game is Unplayable.

What eve does right.

Large Safe area(As long as your not Stupid).

Lots of FFA area, Low sec.

Lots of Team and FFA area. Null sec.

In Null sec you can Build everything you need, Build massive starbases and Beat the crap outa each other in What? 700 person battles?

Everyone gets a area they can play in. All play styles are coverd. What more could you want from a MMO?

Yep, This is one of the reason I love Eve and also waiting on a game called Earthrise (im sure you heard of it).

That game will have Safer areas similar to Eve.

Assuming the starter players have some sort of progression to get through (gear, levels, stats, etc) it only makes sense to have safe zones.  Even nature allows for "safe zones": When a bear or lion cub is born, the mother looks after it.  Even fish lay their eggs in shallow water or among plants or something so the fry have a chance to grow up away from the bigger fish.

However, like nature, the risk shouldn't be 0.  Even new players should occasionally have to deal with the unexpected.  Perhaps a higher level player is sometimes able to take command of or create low level mobs to stalk new players, or secretly set traps that teleport them outside the safe zone.  Some little surprises like that would fun, but to just throw them to the wolves right off the bat isn't hardcore or cool, it's just poor game mechanics.

Yeah, Safe zones are needed imo.

I don't think anyone likes getting wtfpwned the second they start the game lol.

I would have liked something along the lines of the DAOC setup , but  with player loot in the frontier areas.

Originally posted by Czzarre

I would have liked something along the lines of the DAOC setup , but  with player loot in the frontier areas.

I don;t know if I want safe areas to be that large. Imo Safer zones should take up around 20-25% of the map at the most.

I never liked games that shoved pvpers in the far off corner of the map so people could forget about them.

Originally posted by JGMIII

Oh I know this thread won't be popular but someone has to say it.

Our So called "Sandbox" or "Open Ended" MMOs Give players more freedom with safe zones included.

Guys don;t get me wrong I love FFA pvp areas with player looting/Decay and all that cool alliance territory stuff.

But im also aware that not everyone likes to be freaking ganked the second they walk from a town.

Some people like the freedom and complexity of a sandboxish mmo without the fear of getting Pwn'd every second.

Some people want to play these games and Rp and be social and not have to worry about thieves and what not.

 

I know how restricted full pvp games could be on those players. Hell, I an a ganker and pirate.

Safe zones give new players a chance to learn and people that like Pve, crafts and social stuff like RP and building a little house freedom to play the way they want.

Now you may say "Well that restricts my game play as a pvper". Let me ask you, Is it really so bad for these people to play the way they want and not have pvp forced on them? Sandbox games are about freedom right? why is it ok for us to force gameplay mechanics and restrictions on them?

How is 10-20% of the game world being a safe or safer zone hurting you from big alliance battles, roaming pvp and piracy in more dangerous areas?

 

Look at Eve it has Empire space (Safer areas) people have the freedom to get into trade, industry and Pve without having combatant pvp forced on them.

Now look at a game like Darkfall, do you think that game is ok limiting the poor crafters to cities and tower areas? jesus they get ganked right away, that's not freedom imo. If someone wants to be an explorer and do some Pvp content they get ganked it suxs.

 

Like I said, you guys know I love pvp and imo if a game has harsh areas I think everyone should atleast look around and see if they like the risk. If they do try and find they dislike the risk then they should have the freedom to live out thier characters lives in some sort of peace.

 

Thanks for reading.

 

 

I agree with you 100%.

I also think that those that may be new to the genre would be able to get into pvp at their pace, instead of it being thrust upon them, which would turn off a lot of people who might be on the fence of whether they would like pvp or not.

An example I have few friends that are coming into the mmorpg scene, and never played it, so now they are playing EQ2 till AION comes out in the US. they will join me in that game and slowly introduce them to pvp. Then Hopefully I can get them into Mortal Online or Earthrise. At least they wont be so shocked over the pvp.

SWG had a great system with temporary enemy flags that offered minor risk but then removed because people wanted to kill faction NPCs without circumstances.

Originally posted by Ekibiogami

Eve pulled off the perfect mix of Safe and Never safe.

Wish other MMO Developers would take a look over here. Pvp Only games with little to no safe areas are pointless for all but those who want to gank and Dont mind beeing ganked. If it Bothers you a little then the game is Unplayable.

What eve does right.

Large Safe area(As long as your not Stupid).

Lots of FFA area, Low sec.

Lots of Team and FFA area. Null sec.

In Null sec you can Build everything you need, Build massive starbases and Beat the crap outa each other in What? 700 person battles?

Everyone gets a area they can play in. All play styles are coverd. What more could you want from a MMO?

I don't know how bout gameplay thats fluent and doesn't take forever to learn. How bout combat that isn't boring and slow paced.  These two things are the only downfall of Eve. Its a great niche game and i got nothing but love for it and the people who enjoy it.

Originally posted by Frostbite05

Originally posted by Ekibiogami

Eve pulled off the perfect mix of Safe and Never safe.

Wish other MMO Developers would take a look over here. Pvp Only games with little to no safe areas are pointless for all but those who want to gank and Dont mind beeing ganked. If it Bothers you a little then the game is Unplayable.

What eve does right.

Large Safe area(As long as your not Stupid).

Lots of FFA area, Low sec.

Lots of Team and FFA area. Null sec.

In Null sec you can Build everything you need, Build massive starbases and Beat the crap outa each other in What? 700 person battles?

Everyone gets a area they can play in. All play styles are coverd. What more could you want from a MMO?

 

I don't know how bout gameplay thats fluent and doesn't take forever to learn. How bout combat that isn't boring and slow paced.  These two things are the only downfall of Eve. Its a great niche game and i got nothing but love for it and the people who enjoy it.

He wasn't speaking of the Combat mechanics or learning tutorials.  He likes how Eve has an actually safer section of space that gives players the freedom to choose how and when they want to engage in combatant pvp.

A freedom something like darkfall doesn't give you at all. Anyone that every played DF and got ganked within 30 seconds of leaving a town could appreciate how Eve is set up.

Edit: Bah!!!!!! I didn't even realize that he left himself open with a line like "what more could you want from a MMO" lol. Oh well a bump is a bump.

I have to agree. So far my two favorite games have been DAOC and EVE, and both have large PVE zones coupled with strong PVP areas that people can join when it suits them.

Wish more games took this approach instead of the all or none of DF and MO, or total safety of other games.

Originally posted by JGMIII

Oh I know this thread won't be popular but someone has to say it.

Our So called "Sandbox" or "Open Ended" MMOs Give players more freedom with safe zones included.

Guys don;t get me wrong I love FFA pvp areas with player looting/Decay and all that cool alliance territory stuff.

But im also aware that not everyone likes to be freaking ganked the second they walk from a town.

Some people like the freedom and complexity of a sandboxish mmo without the fear of getting Pwn'd every second.

Some people want to play these games and Rp and be social and not have to worry about thieves and what not.

 

I know how restricted full pvp games could be on those players. Hell, I an a ganker and pirate.

Safe zones give new players a chance to learn and people that like Pve, crafts and social stuff like RP and building a little house freedom to play the way they want.

Now you may say "Well that restricts my game play as a pvper". Let me ask you, Is it really so bad for these people to play the way they want and not have pvp forced on them? Sandbox games are about freedom right? why is it ok for us to force gameplay mechanics and restrictions on them?

How is 10-20% of the game world being a safe or safer zone hurting you from big alliance battles, roaming pvp and piracy in more dangerous areas?

 

Look at Eve it has Empire space (Safer areas) people have the freedom to get into trade, industry and Pve without having combatant pvp forced on them.

Now look at a game like Darkfall, do you think that game is ok limiting the poor crafters to cities and tower areas? jesus they get ganked right away, that's not freedom imo. If someone wants to be an explorer and do some Pvp content they get ganked it suxs.

 

Like I said, you guys know I love pvp and imo if a game has harsh areas I think everyone should atleast look around and see if they like the risk. If they do try and find they dislike the risk then they should have the freedom to live out thier characters lives in some sort of peace.

 

Thanks for reading.

 

 

Woah... this wasn't something thought I ever hear from you.... I'm amazed.

Originally posted by lornphoenix

Originally posted by JGMIII

Oh I know this thread won't be popular but someone has to say it.

Our So called "Sandbox" or "Open Ended" MMOs Give players more freedom with safe zones included.

Guys don;t get me wrong I love FFA pvp areas with player looting/Decay and all that cool alliance territory stuff.

But im also aware that not everyone likes to be freaking ganked the second they walk from a town.

Some people like the freedom and complexity of a sandboxish mmo without the fear of getting Pwn'd every second.

Some people want to play these games and Rp and be social and not have to worry about thieves and what not.

 

I know how restricted full pvp games could be on those players. Hell, I an a ganker and pirate.

Safe zones give new players a chance to learn and people that like Pve, crafts and social stuff like RP and building a little house freedom to play the way they want.

Now you may say "Well that restricts my game play as a pvper". Let me ask you, Is it really so bad for these people to play the way they want and not have pvp forced on them? Sandbox games are about freedom right? why is it ok for us to force gameplay mechanics and restrictions on them?

How is 10-20% of the game world being a safe or safer zone hurting you from big alliance battles, roaming pvp and piracy in more dangerous areas?

 

Look at Eve it has Empire space (Safer areas) people have the freedom to get into trade, industry and Pve without having combatant pvp forced on them.

Now look at a game like Darkfall, do you think that game is ok limiting the poor crafters to cities and tower areas? jesus they get ganked right away, that's not freedom imo. If someone wants to be an explorer and do some Pvp content they get ganked it suxs.

 

Like I said, you guys know I love pvp and imo if a game has harsh areas I think everyone should atleast look around and see if they like the risk. If they do try and find they dislike the risk then they should have the freedom to live out thier characters lives in some sort of peace.

 

Thanks for reading.

 

 

 

Woah... this wasn't something thought I ever hear from you.... I'm amazed.

Indeed, I am impressed JGMIII. Its leaps and bounds above the class compared to your other thread. 

And I agree with what you said. Open ended game doesnt need to be all about pvp. Open ended means there's a place for everyone. 

I have to agree as well. Though I personally like how Asherons Call did it on there PvE servers. Even if you die to an npc you drop your stuff on a corpse you have to get. To PvP you had to do a small quest (verry quick, verry easy) to turn yourself "Red". Once red you where PvP all the time, anywhere in the world. You had loot drop on death and a 5% reduction in stats (which you had to PvE to clear the stat reduction but it was easy and the PvPers all pretty much agreed on spots that where "no kill zones" to work it off).

I liked that way because it gave the PvE'ers and the PvP'ers the WHOLE world to play in and do what they chose to do. For the most part everyone got along. The only trash talk that usually happened is when a non red dot would mouth off about how they would beat the shit out of the PvPer and that was few and far between. Where AC screwed up was putting in PKlite (pink dots that when they got killed didnt have any DP other than rebuffing).

The great thing was the better PvP guilds always ran public events in the world and it ALWAYS got the non pvpers to go red and join in.

I'm very much in favor of safe zones or the option to opt out of PvP.  PvP can be a lot of fun if it is a fair fight, but constantly getting ganked by people you have no chance of fighting off is no fun at all.

Totally agree.

Thats right, pvp should be fun and not hamper normal gameplay continously. Safe zones are necessary if you have pvp. To not have safe zones you are essentailly rewarding players that continously gank others. Pvp needs to have the appearance of a fair fight, maybe not right away but you'll get the chance for vengance.

Safe zones are not needed. What is needed is a self policing system where you are free to attack whoever you want but there are consequences. Even a ganker will think twice about killing people in cities if the result of doing so is themselves getting swarmed by elite guards every time they enter said city.

---

Originally posted by hinge645
Safe zones are not needed. What is needed is a self policing system where you are free to attack whoever you want but there are consequences. Even a ganker will think twice about killing people in cities if the result of doing so is themselves getting swarmed by elite guards every time they enter said city.

---

EVE Online has the elite guards in the expansive high security areas. Attack someone that you don't have the right to attack and you are immediately set upon by guards. That's why people sometimes put quotes around the phrase "safe zones"; they're not perfectly safe. You can be ganked at any time.

The system you're talking about has many supporters and it has been debated long and hard through the years - but nobody has been able to make it work as far as I know. The side effects and complexities always kill it.

Originally posted by hinge645

Safe zones are not needed. What is needed is a self policing system where you are free to attack whoever you want but there are consequences. Even a ganker will think twice about killing people in cities if the result of doing so is themselves getting swarmed by elite guards every time they enter said city.

Isn't that what a safe or safer zone is? you could kill someone but you get owned by guards or whatever.

In Eve if you kill someone in Empire space you get blown up and lose everything.

Originally posted by JGMIII

Originally posted by hinge645

Safe zones are not needed. What is needed is a self policing system where you are free to attack whoever you want but there are consequences. Even a ganker will think twice about killing people in cities if the result of doing so is themselves getting swarmed by elite guards every time they enter said city.

 

Isn't that what a safe or safer zone is? you could kill someone but you get owned by guards or whatever.

In Eve if you kill someone in Empire space you get blown up and lose everything.

 

/nods It's simply a difference between a hard coded prohibition, you literally cannot attack another player, and a soft coded one, attacking another player has dire consequences. If the consequences are dire and sure enough you may as well have hard coded it. It gets fuzzy when they try to offer some protection and still allow players to succeed in attacking others. You'll find though that when that happens the protection often ends up getting exploited. Like tricking other players into turning red.

but look at EVE.  safe space was never perfectly safe.  even before people learned to tank concord (fixed quickly) they could kill you with a kestrel fitting with cruise missiles.  they lost their kessy, you died.  what this meant is no one picked on noobs, they didn't gank random players, because it wasn't worth losing the kestrel and taking sec status hit.  but freighters filled with goods? that was worth it.

so a safe zone is.. safeish in EVE.  best system i've seen so far.

Originally posted by zymurgeist

Originally posted by JGMIII

Originally posted by hinge645

Safe zones are not needed. What is needed is a self policing system where you are free to attack whoever you want but there are consequences. Even a ganker will think twice about killing people in cities if the result of doing so is themselves getting swarmed by elite guards every time they enter said city.

 

Isn't that what a safe or safer zone is? you could kill someone but you get owned by guards or whatever.

In Eve if you kill someone in Empire space you get blown up and lose everything.

 

 

/nods It's simply a difference between a hard coded prohibition, you literally cannot attack another player, and a soft coded one, attacking another player has dire consequences. If the consequences are dire and sure enough you may as well have hard coded it. It gets fuzzy when they try to offer some protection and still allow players to succeed in attacking others. You'll find though that when that happens the protection often ends up getting exploited. Like tricking other players into turning red.

For me personally I always liked the fact that I had to actually play smart even in safer zones.

for a couple months I stayed in high sec in Eve and I liked that if I played stupid and feel for pirate tricks I would get blown up or forced into an engagement.

Imo even in a safe zone If someone loots my stuff or tries to attack me in someway they deserve to turn red.

I prefer soft coded tbh but thats just me and If a game was hardcoded to not let people get attacked at all in safe zones it wouldn;t bother me much since im more of a low sec kinda guy.

Originally posted by Majinash

but look at EVE.  safe space was never perfectly safe.  even before people learned to tank concord (fixed quickly) they could kill you with a kestrel fitting with cruise missiles.  they lost their kessy, you died.  what this meant is no one picked on noobs, they didn't gank random players, because it wasn't worth losing the kestrel and taking sec status hit.  but freighters filled with goods? that was worth it.

 

so a safe zone is.. safeish in EVE.  best system i've seen so far.

Yeah I agree the way Eve has handled "Safer" areas in game is much better imo.