Trending Games | ArcheAge | Elder Scrolls Online | WildStar | Warhammer 40K: Eternal Crusade

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,790,469 Users Online:0
Games:723  Posts:6,194,107
Recent forum postsRSS
Active threads
Cloud view
List all forums
General Forums
Developers Corner General Discussion
Popular Game Forums
Click a status to find game forum
Game Forums
Click a letter to find game forum
A-C
2029 Online 2112: Revolution 2Moons 4Story 8BitMMO 9 Dragons A Mystical Land A Tale in the Desert III A3 ACE Online ARGO Online Aberoth Absolute Force Online Absolute Terror Achaea Adellion Aerrevan Aetolia, the Midnight Age Age of Armor Age of Conan Age of Empires Online Age of Mourning Age of Wulin Age of Wushu Aida Arenas Aika Aion Albion Online Alganon All Points Bulletin (APB) Allods Online Altis Gates Amazing World Anarchy Online Ancients of Fasaria Andromeda 5 Angels Online Anime Trumps Anmynor Anno Online Applo Arcane Hearts Arcane Legends ArchLord ArcheAge Archeblade Archlord X Asda 2 Asda Story Ashen Empires Asheron's Call Asheron's Call 2 Astera Online Astonia III Astro Empires Astro Lords: Oort CLoud Asura Force Atlantica Online Atriarch Aura Kingdom Aurora Blade Auto Assault Avatar Star Battle Dawn Battle Dawn Galaxies Battle for Graxia Battle of 3 Kingdoms Battle of the Immortals Battlecruiser Online Battlestar Galactica Online Battlestar Reloaded Beyond Protocol Black Aftermath Black Desert Black Gold Black Prophecy Black Prophecy Tactics: Nexus Conflict Blacklight Retribution Blade & Soul Blade Hunter Blade Wars Blazing Throne Bless Blitz 1941 Blood and Jade Bloodlines Champions Bounty Bay Online Brain Storm Brawl Busters. Brick-Force Bright Shadow Bullet Run Business Tycoon Online CTRacer Cabal Online Caesary Call of Camelot Call of Gods Call of Thrones Camelot Unchained Canaan Online Cardmon Hero Cartoon Universe CasinoRPG Castle Empire Castlot Celtic Heroes Champions Online Champions of Regnum Chaos Online Chrono Tales Citadel of Sorcery CitiesXL Citizen Zero City of Decay City of Heroes City of Steam City of Transformers City of Villains Civilization Online Clan Lord Clash of Clans Cloud Nine Club Penguin Colony of War Command & Conquer: Tiberium Alliances Company of Heroes Online Conquer Online Conquer Online 3 Continent of the Ninth (C9) Core Blaze Core Exiles Corum Online Craft of Gods Crimecraft Crimelife 2 Cronous Crota II Crusaders of Solaris Cultures Online Cyber Monster 2 Céiron Wars
D-F
D&D Online DC Universe DK Online DOTA DOTA 2 DUST 514 DV8: Exile Dalethaan Dance Groove Online Dark Age of Camelot Dark Ages Dark Legends Dark Orbit Dark Relic: Prelude Dark Solstice Dark and Light DarkEden Online DarkSpace Darkblood Online Darkest Dungeon Darkfall Darkfall: Unholy Wars Darkwind: War on Wheels Das Tal Dawn of Fantasy Dawntide DayZ Dead Earth Dead Frontier Deco Online Deepworld Defiance Deicide Online Dekaron Demons at the Horizon Desert Operations Destiny Diablo 3 Diamonin Digimon Battle Dino Storm Disciple Divergence Divina Divine Souls Dofus Dominus Online Dragon Ball Online Dragon Born Online Dragon Crusade Dragon Empires Dragon Eternity Dragon Nest Dragon Oath Dragon Pals Dragon Raja Dragon's Call Dragon's Call II Dragon's Prophet DragonSky DragonSoul Dragona Dragonica Dragons and Titans Dream of Mirror Online Dreamland Online Dreamlords: The Reawakening Drift City Duels Dungeon Blitz Dungeon Fighter Online Dungeon Overlord Dungeon Party Dungeon Rampage Dungeon Runners Dynastica Dynasty Warriors Online Dynasty of the Magi EIN (Epicus Incognitus) EVE Online Earth Eternal Earth and Beyond Earthrise Eclipse War Ecol Tactics Online Eden Eternal Edge of Space Einherjar - The Viking's Blood Elder Scrolls Online Eldevin Elf Online Elite: Dangerous Embers of Caerus Emil Chronicle Online Empire Empire & State Empire Craft Empire Universe 3 EmpireQuest Empires of Galldon End of Nations Endless Ages Endless Blue Moon Online Endless Online Entropia Universe EpicDuel Erebus: Travia Reborn Eredan Eternal Blade Eternal Lands Eternal Saga Ether Fields Ether Saga Online Eudemons Online EuroGangster EverEmber Online EverQuest Next EverQuest Online Adventures Evernight Everquest Everquest II Evony Exarch Exorace F.E.A.R. Online Face of Mankind Fairyland Online Fall of Rome Fallen Earth Fallen Sword Fallout Online Family Guy Online Fantage Fantasy Earth Zero Fantasy Realm Online Fantasy Tales Online Fantasy Worlds: Rhynn Faunasphere Faxion Online Ferentus Ferion Fiesta Online Final Fantasy XI Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn Firefall Fists of Fu Florensia Flyff Football Manager Live Football Superstars Force of Arms Forge Forsaken World Fortnite Fortuna Forum for Discussion of Everlight Freaky Creatures Free Realms Freesky Online Freeworld Fung Wan Online Furcadia Fury Fusion Fall
G-L
GalaXseeds Galactic Command Online Game of Thrones: Seven Kingdoms Gameglobe Gate To Heavens Gates of Andaron Gatheryn Gauntlet Gekkeiju Online Ghost Online Ghost Recon Online Gladiatus Glitch Global Agenda Global Soccer Gloria Victis Glory of Gods GoGoRacer Goal Line Blitz Gods and Heroes GodsWar Online Golemizer Golf Star GoonZu Online Graal Kingdoms Granado Espada Online Grand Chase Grand Fantasia Grepolis Grimlands Guild Wars Guild Wars 2 Guild Wars Factions Guild Wars Nightfall H1Z1 Habbo Hotel Hailan Rising HaloSphere2 Haven & Hearth Hawken Hearthstone: Heroes of Warcraft Helbreath Hellgate Hellgate: London Hello Kitty Online Hero Online Hero Zero Hero's Journey Hero: 108 Online HeroSmash Heroes & Generals Heroes in the Sky Heroes of Bestia Heroes of Gaia Heroes of Might and Magic Online Heroes of Thessalonica Heroes of Three Kingdoms Heroes of the Storm Hex Holic Online Hostile Space Hunter Blade Huxley Illutia Illyriad Immortals USA Imperator Imperian Inferno Legend Infestation: Survivor Stories Infinite Crisis Infinity Infinity Iris Online Iron Grip: Marauders Irth Worlds Island Forge Islands of War Istaria: Chronicles of the Gifted Jade Dynasty Jagged Alliance Online Juggernaut Jumpgate Jumpgate Evolution KAL Online Kakele Online Kaos War Karos Online Kartuga Kicks Online King of Kings 3 Kingdom Heroes Kingdom Under Fire II Kingdom of Drakkar Kingory Kings and Legends Kings of the Realm KingsRoad Kitsu Saga Kiwarriors Knight Age Knight Online Knights of Dream City Kothuria Kung Foo! Kunlun Online L.A.W. LEGO Universe La Tale Land of Chaos Online Landmark Lands of Hope: Phoenix Edition LastChaos League of Angels League of Legends - Clash of Fates Legend of Edda: Vengeance Legend of Golden Plume Legend of Katha Legend of Mir 2 Legend of Mir 3 Legendary Champions Lego Minifigures Online Life is Feudal Light of Nova Lime Odyssey Line of Defense Lineage Lineage Eternal: Twilight Resistance Lineage II Linkrealms Loong Online Lord of the Rings Online Lords Online Lost Saga Lucent Heart Lunia Lusternia: Age of Ascension Luvinia World
M-Q
MU Online Mabinogi Maestia: Rise of Keledus MagiKnights Magic Barrage Magic World Online Manga Fighter MapleStory Martial Heroes Marvel Heroes Marvel Super Hero Squad Online Marvel: Avengers Alliance MechWarrior Online Megaten Meridian 59 : Evolution Merlin MetalMercs Metaplace Metin 2 MicroVolts Midkemia Online Might & Magic Heroes: Kingdoms MilMo Minecraft Mini Fighter Minions of Mirth Ministry of War Monato Esprit Monkey King Online Monkey Quest Monster & Me Monster Madness Online MonsterMMORPG Moonlight Online: Tales of Eternal Blood Mordavia Mortal Online Mourning My Lands Myst Online: URU Live Myth Angels Online Myth War Myth War 2 Mytheon Mythic Saga Mythos N.E.O Online NIDA Online Nadirim Naviage: The Power of Capital Navy Field Need for Speed World Nemexia Neo's Land NeoSteam Neocron Nether Neverwinter Nexus: The Kingdom Of The Winds NinjaTrick NosTale Novus Aeterno Oberin Odin Quest Odyssey RPG Ogre Island Omerta 3 Online Boxing Manager Onverse Order & Chaos Online Order of Magic Original Blood Origins Return Origins of Malu Orion's Belt Otherland Forums OverSoul Overkings Oz Online Oz World Pandora Saga Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen Panzar Parabellum Parallel Kingdom Parfait Station Path of Exile Pathfinder Online Perfect World Perpetuum Online Phantasy Star Online 2 Phantasy Star Universe Phoenix Dynasty Online Phylon Pi Story Picaroon Pirate Galaxy Pirate Storm Pirate101 PirateKing Online Pirates of the Burning Sea Pirates of the Caribbean Online Pixie Hollow Planeshift Planet Arkadia Planet Calypso PlanetSide 2 Planetside Planets³ Playboy Manager Pocket Legends Pockie Ninja Pockie Pirates Pockie Saints PoxNora Prime World Prime: Battle for Dominus Priston Tale Priston Tale II Prius Online Project Blackout Project Powder Project Titan Forums Project Wiki Puzzle Pirates Quickhit Football
R-S
R2 Online RAN Online RF Online ROSE Online Rage of 3 Kingdoms Ragnarok Online Ragnarok Online II RaiderZ Rakion Rappelz RappelzSEA Ravenmarch Realm Fighter Realm of the Mad God Realm of the Titans Realms Online Reclamation Red Stone Red War: Edem's Curse Regnum Online Remnant Knights Renaissance Repulse Requiem: Memento Mori Rift RiotZone Rise Rise of Dragonian Era Rise of Empire Rise of the Tycoon Rising of King Risk Your Life Rivality Rockfree Rohan: Blood Feud Role Play Worlds Roll n Rock Roma Victor Romadoria Rosh Online Roto X Rubies of Eventide Ruin Online Rumble Fighter Runes of Magic Runescape Rust Rusty Hearts Ryzom S4 League SAGA SD Gundam Capsule Fighter Online SMITE SUN Sagramore Salem SaySayGirls Scarlet Blade Scions of Fate Seal Online: Evolution Second Life Secret of the Solstice Seed Serenia Fantasy Seven Seas Saga Seven Souls Online Sevencore Shadow of Legend Shadowbane Shadowrun Online Shaiya Shards Online Shattered Galaxy Sho Online Shot Online Shroud of the Avatar SideQuest Siege on Stars Sigonyth: Desert Eternity Silkroad Online Skyblade Skyforge SmashMuck Champions Smoo Online Soldier Front Soul Master Soul Order Online Soul of Guardian Space Heroes Universe Sparta: War of Empires Spellcasters Sphere Spiral Knights Spirit Tales Splash Fighters Squad Wars Star Citizen Star Sonata 2 Star Stable Star Supremacy Star Trek Online Star Trek: Infinite Space Star Wars Galaxies Star Wars: Clone Wars Adventures Star Wars: The Old Republic StarQuest Online Stargate Worlds Starlight Story Starpires State of Decay SteelWar Online Stone Age 2 Stormfall: Age of War Storybricks Stronghold Kingdoms Sudden Attack Supremacy 1914 Supreme Destiny Sword Girls Sword of Destiny: Rise of Aions SwordX Swords of Heavens Swordsman
T-Z
TERA TS Online Tabula Rasa Tactica Online Tales Runner Tales of Fantasy Tales of Pirates Tales of Pirates II Tales of Solaris Talisman Online Tamer Saga Tank Ace Tantra Online Tatsumaki: Land at War Terra Militaris TerraWorld Online Thang Online The 4th Coming The Agency The Aurora World The Black Watchmen The Chronicle The Chronicles of Spellborn The Crew The Division The Hammers End The Legend of Ares The Lost Titans The Matrix Online The Mighty Quest for Epic Loot The Missing Ink The Mummy Online The Myth of Soma The Pride of Taern The Realm Online The Repopulation The Secret World The Sims Online The Strategems The West Theralon There Therian Saga Thrones of Chaos Tibia Tibia Micro Edition Tiger Knight Titan Siege Titans of Time Toontown Online Top Speed Topia Online Torchlight Total Domination Transformers Universe Traveller AR Travia Online Travian Trials of Ascension Tribal Hero Tribal Wars Tribes Universe Trickster Online Trove Troy Online True Fantasy Live Online Turf Battles Twelve Sky Twelve Sky 2 Twilight War Tynon U.B. Funkeys UFO Online URDEAD Online Ultima Forever: Quest for the Avatar Ultima Online Ultima X: Odyssey Ultimate Naruto Ultimate Soccer Boss Uncharted Waters Online Undercover 2: Merc Wars Underlight Unification Wars Universe Online Utopia Valkyrie Sky Vampire Lord Online Vanguard: Saga of Heroes Vanquish Space Vector City Racers Vendetta Online Victory - Age of Racing Vindictus Virtonomics Vis Gladius Visions of Zosimos VoidExpanse Voyage Century Online W.E.L.L. Online WAR (Warhammer Online) WAR2 Glory WYD Global Wakfu War Thunder War of 2012 War of Angels War of Legends War of Mercenaries War of Thrones War of the Immortals WarFlow Waren Story Wargame1942 Warhammer 40,000: Eternal Crusade Warhammer 40K: Dark Millennium Online Warhammer Online: Wrath of Heroes Warkeepers Warrior Epic Wartune WebLords Wild West Online WildStar Wind of Luck WindSlayer 2 Wings of Destiny Wish Wizard101 Wizardry Online Wizards and Champions Wonder King Wonderland Online World Golf Tour World of Battles World of Darkness World of Heroes World of Kung Fu World of Pirates World of Speed World of Tanks World of Tanks Generals World of Warcraft World of Warplanes World of Warships World of the Living Dead WorldAlpha Wurm Online Xenocell Xiah Xsyon Xulu YS Online Yitien ZU Online Zentia Zero Online Zero Online: The Andromeda Crisis Zodiac Online Zombies Ate My Pizza eRepublik

MMORPG.com Discussion Forums

General Discussion

General Discussion 

The Pub at MMORPG.COM  » We don't need anymore PvP focused sandbox mmos right now.

34 Pages First « 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 » Last Search
677 posts found
  Holophonist

Hard Core Member

Joined: 2/15/09
Posts: 2001

7/12/13 12:43:24 PM#461
Originally posted by lizardbones


Originally posted by JeremyBowyer
What's with this idea that a game has to appeal to both pvp and non-pvp people? If you have pvp and non-pvp servers, the game is probably bad, if you have designated pvp zones, the game is probably bad, if you have and opt out pvp system, the game is probably bad, if you have instanced pvp, the game is probably bad. And all of this is coming from somebody who wants a good SANDBOX game, so that's what I mean by bad, bad for me.In other words, I don't think you can please everybody. By definition they want something I don't want. Their deal breakers are my deal makers.There's simply no way that the idea of ffa pvp in a game with good pve, nation building, deep crafting system etc is so niche that there aren't enough people to support it. Look at how many people in this thread prefer open world pvp?


I would think it's because most people aren't just PvP or just PvE MMORPG players. The people who are only interested in PvP will play PvP games, like League of Legends, DOTA2 or Team Fortress 2. Those games have a pure PvP experience. Even Planetside 2 is a pure PvP experience, but set in a more persistent world. Everyone else wants something different.

You can look at the number of people in this thread but that don't amount to a hill of beans out in the world. We have two hundred people or less posting on these forums every day. There are millions of people playing MMORPG. This one thread doesn't represent anything.

Keep watching ArcheAge as it waters itself down in order to appeal to enough people to survive. They only spent twenty five million dollars. If they don't appeal to the people who want a PvE focused game, or a game that somehow balances PvE and PvP elements, they are going to spiral down the drain just like all the other games that think there's millions to be made in a niche market.

 

Wrong on basically all accounts. People who want "pvp games" want mmoRPGs with pvp in them because we want a sense of risk and reward. We want to care about what we're doing. Competitive games like sc2, quake, tf2 are literally the opposite of what we want. We want there to be consequences to our actions. Just because there are only hundreds of people posting here compared to the millions playing doesnt mean anything. This is a sample of people, it doesnt have to be as big as the population. I would argue that there is a large representation of sandbox fans on these forums compared to the overall market because sandbox fans are more passionate about the subject, which would indicate more player retention of a game done right. Lastly, you mention archeage "balancing pvp and pve elements". That's exactly what we want. We don't want to just pvp all day for no reason. We want a game that has everything. It seems like you guys just aren't listening when we say things. You just assert your waited view of us in your minds as guys who just want to fight all day.
  Benedikt

Tipster

Joined: 12/12/04
Posts: 1294

We live for The One, we die for The One.

7/12/13 12:48:48 PM#462
Originally posted by JeremyBowyer
Wrong on basically all accounts. People who want "pvp games" want mmoRPGs with pvp in them because we want a sense of risk and reward. We want to care about what we're doing. Competitive games like sc2, quake, tf2 are literally the opposite of what we want. We want there to be consequences to our actions. Just because there are only hundreds of people posting here compared to the millions playing doesnt mean anything. This is a sample of people, it doesnt have to be as big as the population. I would argue that there is a large representation of sandbox fans on these forums compared to the overall market because sandbox fans are more passionate about the subject, which would indicate more player retention of a game done right. Lastly, you mention archeage "balancing pvp and pve elements". That's exactly what we want. We don't want to just pvp all day for no reason. We want a game that has everything. It seems like you guys just aren't listening when we say things. You just assert your waited view of us in your minds as guys who just want to fight all day.

yeah, and the sample here on forum clearly shown what they think about pvp only :)

http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/389730/page/1

 

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10429

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

7/12/13 1:36:17 PM#463


Originally posted by JeremyBowyer

Originally posted by lizardbones


Originally posted by JeremyBowyer
What's with this idea that a game has to appeal to both pvp and non-pvp people? If you have pvp and non-pvp servers, the game is probably bad, if you have designated pvp zones, the game is probably bad, if you have and opt out pvp system, the game is probably bad, if you have instanced pvp, the game is probably bad. And all of this is coming from somebody who wants a good SANDBOX game, so that's what I mean by bad, bad for me.In other words, I don't think you can please everybody. By definition they want something I don't want. Their deal breakers are my deal makers.There's simply no way that the idea of ffa pvp in a game with good pve, nation building, deep crafting system etc is so niche that there aren't enough people to support it. Look at how many people in this thread prefer open world pvp?


I would think it's because most people aren't just PvP or just PvE MMORPG players. The people who are only interested in PvP will play PvP games, like League of Legends, DOTA2 or Team Fortress 2. Those games have a pure PvP experience. Even Planetside 2 is a pure PvP experience, but set in a more persistent world. Everyone else wants something different.

You can look at the number of people in this thread but that don't amount to a hill of beans out in the world. We have two hundred people or less posting on these forums every day. There are millions of people playing MMORPG. This one thread doesn't represent anything.

Keep watching ArcheAge as it waters itself down in order to appeal to enough people to survive. They only spent twenty five million dollars. If they don't appeal to the people who want a PvE focused game, or a game that somehow balances PvE and PvP elements, they are going to spiral down the drain just like all the other games that think there's millions to be made in a niche market.


 


Wrong on basically all accounts.


People who want "pvp games" want mmoRPGs with pvp in them because we want a sense of risk and reward. We want to care about what we're doing. Competitive games like sc2, quake, tf2 are literally the opposite of what we want. We want there to be consequences to our actions.

Just because there are only hundreds of people posting here compared to the millions playing doesnt mean anything. This is a sample of people, it doesnt have to be as big as the population. I would argue that there is a large representation of sandbox fans on these forums compared to the overall market because sandbox fans are more passionate about the subject, which would indicate more player retention of a game done right.

Lastly, you mention archeage "balancing pvp and pve elements". That's exactly what we want. We don't want to just pvp all day for no reason. We want a game that has everything. It seems like you guys just aren't listening when we say things. You just assert your waited view of us in your minds as guys who just want to fight all day.




First, punctuation is your friend, and the friend of anyone trying to read your posts. You don't even have to use periods, just hit the enter key every once in awhile.

Second, I can understand wanting some form of risk versus reward. That makes perfect sense. You don't seem to be capable of entertaining the idea of having risks and rewards without the use of PvP. For that matter, I would guess you aren't capable of entertaining the idea of risks and rewards using FFA PvP.

Third, you are assuming that "Sandbox Fans" and "FFA PvP Fans" are the same group of people. They are not. There is certainly some overlap there, but it's entirely possible to not be a fan of FFA PvP, but also be a fan of sandbox style game play.

Fourth, I'm not sure you understood what I said about ArcheAge, and some research (which I did) would have told you what I was talking about. You could have come back with a very good retort about how ArcheAge isn't really watering the crafting down, but rather shifting the risk of crafting from the customers to the crafters. You could have even pointed out how what I was talking about had nothing to do with PvP at all. Instead you went off on whatever that tangent was you went off on about "We" and "You guys". It's kind of annoying coming up with better retorts against my posts than the people who seem to disagree with them.

Finally, who is this group you've labeled, "We"? Who is this group you've labeled, "You guys"?

**

You should look at that link just above my post. That will show you what kind of people are posting here on these forums. Which of those groups is the "We" and which of those groups is the "You guys".

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  Muke

Hard Core Member

Joined: 1/04/07
Posts: 1534

7/12/13 1:37:34 PM#464
Originally posted by Margulis

There's a lot of debate on the Everquest Next forums about whether the game is going to be heavily PvP focused or not and most of this has stemmed from some comments from Smed  that have insinuated a heavy PvP focus of the game.  To what extent that focus is we won't know until the reveal, but still, it makes me think to myself why even think about going that route?  Pretty much every bigger name sandbox currently available (Darkfall, EVE, Mortal Online, Age of Wushu etc) and coming down the pipeline (Archeage, The Repopulation) is PvP focused.  Do we seriously need another one like that?  It's pretty well known PvE focused gamers greatly outnumber PvP focused ones, so why continually churn out games for a niche market while that same market is devoid of products for the bigger (PvE)  population?  Makes no sense........ 

Apparently marketing research shows you wrong otherwise noone would play those games.

"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"

  Holophonist

Hard Core Member

Joined: 2/15/09
Posts: 2001

7/12/13 2:06:52 PM#465


First, punctuation is your friend, and the friend of anyone trying to read your posts. You don't even have to use periods, just hit the enter key every once in awhile.


I think I got my point across, despite the fact that I was posting it from my phone at work. Besides wtf it's just 3 moderately sized paragraphs. I don't think anybody would read that post and think there's anything overtly wrong with it irrespective of the content.
 


Second, I can understand wanting some form of risk versus reward. That makes perfect sense. You don't seem to be capable of entertaining the idea of having risks and rewards without the use of PvP. For that matter, I would guess you aren't capable of entertaining the idea of risks and rewards using FFA PvP.


Why do you assume I'm not capable of understanding that you can have risk/reward without pvp? I never indicated that. When I say we want risk vs. reward, that's me telling you how ridiculous it is to tell us that we should play LoL or tf2 etc. It's not that we want to fight all of the time. FFA PvP just happens to be the most natural way to have that. It's much more organic than any item loss or degradation system I've seen. It also adds an element of competition. If you want to suggest a system that offers the same benefits, I'm all ears.



Third, you are assuming that "Sandbox Fans" and "FFA PvP Fans" are the same group of people. They are not. There is certainly some overlap there, but it's entirely possible to not be a fan of FFA PvP, but also be a fan of sandbox style game play.


What is it with people on the internet always arguing over semantics? Sandbox fans will in general prefer open world pvp compared to non-sandbox fans. open world pvp is an innately sandbox feature. Technically everybody here is a sandbox fan in some ways and not a sandbox fan in others. In the context of this debate it's clear who I'm talking about: Sandbox fans = the people in this discussion that are arguing for open world pvp in a sandbox game.



Fourth, I'm not sure you understood what I said about ArcheAge, and some research (which I did) would have told you what I was talking about. You could have come back with a very good retort about how ArcheAge isn't really watering the crafting down, but rather shifting the risk of crafting from the customers to the crafters. You could have even pointed out how what I was talking about had nothing to do with PvP at all. Instead you went off on whatever that tangent was you went off on about "We" and "You guys". It's kind of annoying coming up with better retorts against my posts than the people who seem to disagree with them.


How am I misunderstanding the point? You're saying that ArcheAge started off as more of a sandbox game, but will continue to water itself down to appeal to more people because you're saying people don't forced pvp... or something to that effect. One of the things you mentioned that they could do to help mitigate this is to have a balance between pvp and pve. I'm pointing out that there's no difference between that and what we want. So you're saying "if they don't do X, they'll spiral down the drain like all of the other games that think there's millions to be made in a niche market." I'm telling you that X is what we're looking for.


You can't seem to grasp the idea that we aren't looking for a game that just has pvp. We're looking for a game that has both. The people here who are arguing against open world pvp are arguing for a game that has just pve. They (you?) don't want a balance of pvp and pve, they want to have their pve game and either have a separate pvp server or pvp zones or pvp flagging. That's not a balance of pvp and pve.


But I guess thanks for also arguing with yourself on top of the things I said?



Finally, who is this group you've labeled, "We"? Who is this group you've labeled, "You guys"?


We = people advocating for open world pvp. You guys = people who are arguing against it. Did you actually have trouble with that? Or are you just so desperate for valid points to make that you're throwing this out there just like the punctuation remark?



** You should look at that link just above my post. That will show you what kind of people are posting here on these forums. Which of those groups is the "We" and which of those groups is the "You guys".


We = Sandbox Both


You guys = Sandbox PvE

  Greez

Apprentice Member

Joined: 4/03/13
Posts: 104

7/12/13 3:09:52 PM#466
I think we could always use more high quality games in all areas...
  Dihoru

Elite Member

Joined: 1/11/06
Posts: 2697

7/12/13 3:21:48 PM#467
I am gonna go out here on a ledge and say sandboxes with pure PVE are less popular than sandboxes with both pvp and pve on the same shard blended in a smart way. I mean people who said "sandbox pvp" would jump ship almost immediately to a well balanced well built omni sandbox whereas PVE purists seem intent on having PVP and PVE servers not a mix (which just to be clear is not "both" , it is either PVP or PVE and it is both an asinine and immature view of things and showcases the mentality which led to... well the rise of themeparks and in time also the rise of F2P, kinda funny how two wrongs made a right as well).

  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19248

7/12/13 4:23:32 PM#468
Originally posted by JeremyBowyer
 

 

Wrong on basically all accounts. People who want "pvp games" want mmoRPGs with pvp in them because we want a sense of risk and reward. We want to care about what we're doing. Competitive games like sc2, quake, tf2 are literally the opposite of what we want. We want there to be consequences to our actions. Just because there are only hundreds of people posting here compared to the millions playing doesnt mean anything. This is a sample of people, it doesnt have to be as big as the population. I would argue that there is a large representation of sandbox fans on these forums compared to the overall market because sandbox fans are more passionate about the subject, which would indicate more player retention of a game done right. Lastly, you mention archeage "balancing pvp and pve elements". That's exactly what we want. We don't want to just pvp all day for no reason. We want a game that has everything. It seems like you guys just aren't listening when we say things. You just assert your waited view of us in your minds as guys who just want to fight all day.

Nah i hear what you want.

But a) i don't want the same thing and b) it is a fair game to point out how few of you are out there.

And you think you are the only one who "care about what you are doing"? Tell that to paragon and all the progressive themepark guild. Don't tell me they don't care. They just don't care about the same thing as you do.

 

  Holophonist

Hard Core Member

Joined: 2/15/09
Posts: 2001

7/12/13 4:47:10 PM#469
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by JeremyBowyer
 

 

Wrong on basically all accounts. People who want "pvp games" want mmoRPGs with pvp in them because we want a sense of risk and reward. We want to care about what we're doing. Competitive games like sc2, quake, tf2 are literally the opposite of what we want. We want there to be consequences to our actions. Just because there are only hundreds of people posting here compared to the millions playing doesnt mean anything. This is a sample of people, it doesnt have to be as big as the population. I would argue that there is a large representation of sandbox fans on these forums compared to the overall market because sandbox fans are more passionate about the subject, which would indicate more player retention of a game done right. Lastly, you mention archeage "balancing pvp and pve elements". That's exactly what we want. We don't want to just pvp all day for no reason. We want a game that has everything. It seems like you guys just aren't listening when we say things. You just assert your waited view of us in your minds as guys who just want to fight all day.

Nah i hear what you want.

But a) i don't want the same thing and b) it is a fair game to point out how few of you are out there.

And you think you are the only one who "care about what you are doing"? Tell that to paragon and all the progressive themepark guild. Don't tell me they don't care. They just don't care about the same thing as you do.

 

NO. Holy shit guys, learn to read IN CONTEXT. I'm saying a lot of people assume that us sandbox pvp guys just want pvp. That we just want to fight guys. It's why people accuse us of being griefers/pk's and it's why so many people suggest we go play LoL or have "pvp zones" because some of you are too obtuse to realize that we want is an integrated system, a world where there's a threat of pvp because we feel it enriches the game. That's what I mean when I say you're not listening. And you're just strengthening my argument with this crap.

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10429

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

7/12/13 6:06:44 PM#470


Originally posted by JeremyBowyer

First, punctuation is your friend, and the friend of anyone trying to read your posts. You don't even have to use periods, just hit the enter key every once in awhile.


I think I got my point across, despite the fact that I was posting it from my phone at work. Besides wtf it's just 3 moderately sized paragraphs. I don't think anybody would read that post and think there's anything overtly wrong with it irrespective of the content.
 


Second, I can understand wanting some form of risk versus reward. That makes perfect sense. You don't seem to be capable of entertaining the idea of having risks and rewards without the use of PvP. For that matter, I would guess you aren't capable of entertaining the idea of risks and rewards using FFA PvP.


Why do you assume I'm not capable of understanding that you can have risk/reward without pvp? I never indicated that. When I say we want risk vs. reward, that's me telling you how ridiculous it is to tell us that we should play LoL or tf2 etc. It's not that we want to fight all of the time. FFA PvP just happens to be the most natural way to have that. It's much more organic than any item loss or degradation system I've seen. It also adds an element of competition. If you want to suggest a system that offers the same benefits, I'm all ears.



Third, you are assuming that "Sandbox Fans" and "FFA PvP Fans" are the same group of people. They are not. There is certainly some overlap there, but it's entirely possible to not be a fan of FFA PvP, but also be a fan of sandbox style game play.


What is it with people on the internet always arguing over semantics? Sandbox fans will in general prefer open world pvp compared to non-sandbox fans. open world pvp is an innately sandbox feature. Technically everybody here is a sandbox fan in some ways and not a sandbox fan in others. In the context of this debate it's clear who I'm talking about: Sandbox fans = the people in this discussion that are arguing for open world pvp in a sandbox game.


Fourth, I'm not sure you understood what I said about ArcheAge, and some research (which I did) would have told you what I was talking about. You could have come back with a very good retort about how ArcheAge isn't really watering the crafting down, but rather shifting the risk of crafting from the customers to the crafters. You could have even pointed out how what I was talking about had nothing to do with PvP at all. Instead you went off on whatever that tangent was you went off on about "We" and "You guys". It's kind of annoying coming up with better retorts against my posts than the people who seem to disagree with them.



How am I misunderstanding the point? You're saying that ArcheAge started off as more of a sandbox game, but will continue to water itself down to appeal to more people because you're saying people don't forced pvp... or something to that effect. One of the things you mentioned that they could do to help mitigate this is to have a balance between pvp and pve. I'm pointing out that there's no difference between that and what we want. So you're saying "if they don't do X, they'll spiral down the drain like all of the other games that think there's millions to be made in a niche market." I'm telling you that X is what we're looking for.


You can't seem to grasp the idea that we aren't looking for a game that just has pvp. We're looking for a game that has both. The people here who are arguing against open world pvp are arguing for a game that has just pve. They (you?) don't want a balance of pvp and pve, they want to have their pve game and either have a separate pvp server or pvp zones or pvp flagging. That's not a balance of pvp and pve.


But I guess thanks for also arguing with yourself on top of the things I said?


Finally, who is this group you've labeled, "We"? Who is this group you've labeled, "You guys"?



We = people advocating for open world pvp. You guys = people who are arguing against it. Did you actually have trouble with that? Or are you just so desperate for valid points to make that you're throwing this out there just like the punctuation remark?


** You should look at that link just above my post. That will show you what kind of people are posting here on these forums. Which of those groups is the "We" and which of those groups is the "You guys".



We = Sandbox Both


You guys = Sandbox PvE




Some minimal punctuation and grammar are always appreciated by the people who read through these posts. They may not say it, but it is appreciated.

I can totally understand that you like games like Eve. Heck, I like games like Eve, though I don't particularly like Eve.

Also, I said, "entertain", not, "understand". Totally different meaning. I know you can understand what's being said. You just can't or won't entertain the thought that ~some~ of what you're saying is wrong.

There are a lot of ways to implement PvP in a sandbox game. You have expressed the opinion that FFA PvP is the only right way to do it. There is no "right" way to do it, only the way a person prefers it done. SWG implemented factional PvP with PvP flags and by all accounts it worked out great. They had a lot of other really bad problems with the game, but PvP wasn't one of them. If OW/FFA PvP was the only right way to implement PvP in a sandbox game, SWG would have had one more issue on the long list of issues, but it didn't. So there are at least two ways to implement PvP in a sandbox game that players will be happy with. There are probably at least a few others.

If we look around and see that there are examples of games with OW/FFA PvP in existence, it's not a stretch to think a developer might try to build a sandbox game with something a little different, something that isn't OW/FFA PvP. Maybe it's different servers, maybe it's just the ability to flag or not for PvP, I don't know. Seems likely that it won't be Medieval Fantasy Eve though.

**

I never told anyone to go play LoL. I said the people who only want PvP are already playing LoL. Because, you know, it's all PvP, all the time.

Just in case it comes up, I also never accused anyone of being a ganker and that's why they like OW/FFA PvP.

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10429

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

7/12/13 6:09:17 PM#471


Originally posted by Dihoru
I am gonna go out here on a ledge and say sandboxes with pure PVE are less popular than sandboxes with both pvp and pve on the same shard blended in a smart way. I mean people who said "sandbox pvp" would jump ship almost immediately to a well balanced well built omni sandbox whereas PVE purists seem intent on having PVP and PVE servers not a mix (which just to be clear is not "both" , it is either PVP or PVE and it is both an asinine and immature view of things and showcases the mentality which led to... well the rise of themeparks and in time also the rise of F2P, kinda funny how two wrongs made a right as well).


There are no pure PvE games. Except maybe The Secret World, but even there players can enter battlegrounds. I would be willing to bet that the people who want a Sandbox PvE game aren't looking at a pure PvE game, they just want a game where the PvE is optional, or at least happens in an expected area or time.

For instance, PvE and PvP zones, or PvP flags, that type of thing.

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  DarkOmega

Novice Member

Joined: 2/06/07
Posts: 29

7/12/13 6:15:08 PM#472

But let's be fair, you've already got a bunch of sandbox PvP mmo's to choose from and us PvE gamers have basically zero.  So, in this regard (sandboxes) - we're way overdue for something to play.

I think your confused as to what a pvp sandbox is. There are barely any pvp sandbox mmo's that are worthy of the name. Eve is about the only one I can think of that is truly sandbox. There might be 1 or 2 more that I haven't heard of/played but that's about it. A themepark with some afterthought sandbox elements doesn't make a sandbox.

Due to the nature of a sandbox game, unless your unleashing AI akin to Skynet into the game you will not get much of a PVE sandbox, least not that'll last more then a couple months before all the content is completely done.

  Dihoru

Elite Member

Joined: 1/11/06
Posts: 2697

7/12/13 6:25:16 PM#473
Originally posted by lizardbones

 


Originally posted by Dihoru
I am gonna go out here on a ledge and say sandboxes with pure PVE are less popular than sandboxes with both pvp and pve on the same shard blended in a smart way. I mean people who said "sandbox pvp" would jump ship almost immediately to a well balanced well built omni sandbox whereas PVE purists seem intent on having PVP and PVE servers not a mix (which just to be clear is not "both" , it is either PVP or PVE and it is both an asinine and immature view of things and showcases the mentality which led to... well the rise of themeparks and in time also the rise of F2P, kinda funny how two wrongs made a right as well).



There are no pure PvE games. Except maybe The Secret World, but even there players can enter battlegrounds. I would be willing to bet that the people who want a Sandbox PvE game aren't looking at a pure PvE game, they just want a game where the PvE is optional, or at least happens in an expected area or time.

For instance, PvE and PvP zones, or PvP flags, that type of thing.

 

There are no pure PVE sandboxes because they're rubbish but people still want them because they'd rather fight for territory with AIs or face swarm attacks (or zergs) by AI controlled characters. This is by the way an actual thing, I saw someone one here say Tabula Rasa (Lord British's defunct MMO) would've been great if they stuck to the initial aggressive AI and it would've been an PVE sandbox.

 

Basically people who want a pure PVE sandbox want all combat to be vs AI regardless how stale or just plain dumb it may be.

Also the castration of PVP by having it occur only in arenas/battlegrounds or select servers while it doesn't make a sandbox a true PVE sandbox it is still damn close.

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10429

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

7/12/13 6:37:41 PM#474


Originally posted by Dihoru

Originally posted by lizardbones  

Originally posted by Dihoru I am gonna go out here on a ledge and say sandboxes with pure PVE are less popular than sandboxes with both pvp and pve on the same shard blended in a smart way. I mean people who said "sandbox pvp" would jump ship almost immediately to a well balanced well built omni sandbox whereas PVE purists seem intent on having PVP and PVE servers not a mix (which just to be clear is not "both" , it is either PVP or PVE and it is both an asinine and immature view of things and showcases the mentality which led to... well the rise of themeparks and in time also the rise of F2P, kinda funny how two wrongs made a right as well).
There are no pure PvE games. Except maybe The Secret World, but even there players can enter battlegrounds. I would be willing to bet that the people who want a Sandbox PvE game aren't looking at a pure PvE game, they just want a game where the PvE is optional, or at least happens in an expected area or time. For instance, PvE and PvP zones, or PvP flags, that type of thing.  
There are no pure PVE sandboxes because they're rubbish but people still want them because they'd rather fight for territory with AIs or face swarm attacks (or zergs) by AI controlled characters. This is by the way an actual thing, I saw someone one here say Tabula Rasa (Lord British's defunct MMO) would've been great if they stuck to the initial aggressive AI and it would've been an PVE sandbox.

 

Basically people who want a pure PVE sandbox want all combat to be vs AI regardless how stale or just plain dumb it may be.

Also the castration of PVP by having it occur only in arenas/battlegrounds or select servers while it doesn't make a sandbox a true PVE sandbox it is still damn close.




What you're saying isn't really any different than the people who say that all the FFA PvP people are gankers. You're simplifying something that isn't very simple.

DAoC seems to do pretty well, and it had a combination of PvE and PvP zones. People were really very happy to go out and engage in a lot of PvP, but they just didn't want to be shopping for new armor and get trampled under a stampede of players from another realm in the vendor's stall.

There are perfectly reasonable ways to setup PvP in games that don't involve not allowing the choice to participate. It's just not necessary. Even CCP recognized this. That's why they changed or updated the rules with high sec space. It allows people to PvP when they want to PvP, and to PvE when they want to PvE.

A game with little or no PvP won't sell very well. This was part of TSW's problem (I think). A game that doesn't give players much choice about when they engage in PvP won't do very well either. This is the problem with Darkfall and Mortal Online. Though, DF and MO do have some other issues, especially MO. A game that gives individual players choices, that gives them some control over when they engage in PvP will do much better. This would be Eve and post Trammel UO. SWG would be in this category too, though like DF and MO, SWG had some pretty big issues.

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  Holophonist

Hard Core Member

Joined: 2/15/09
Posts: 2001

7/12/13 7:35:32 PM#475


Some minimal punctuation and grammar are always appreciated by the people who read through these posts. They may not say it, but it is appreciated.


Well practically speaking, if you're responding to multiple points, it's a lot better to break your responses up like this so the person reading it can understand what you're responding to. I think that's much more important than whatever autocorrect failures I had from my phone which you could probably decipher within the context of whatever it was I was saying anyway.



I can totally understand that you like games like Eve. Heck, I like games like Eve, though I don't particularly like Eve.


Also, I said, "entertain", not, "understand". Totally different meaning. I know you can understand what's being said. You just can't or won't entertain the thought that ~some~ of what you're saying is wrong.



It's kind of hard to entertain the idea if it's never been brought up to me, don't you think? It's hard enough to get you guys to even understand what we want, let alone for you to understand it and then come up with a reasonable counter offer. Present a reasonable substitute for ffa pvp as a source of risk/reward and I'll entertain the idea.



There are a lot of ways to implement PvP in a sandbox game. You have expressed the opinion that FFA PvP is the only right way to do it. There is no "right" way to do it, only the way a person prefers it done.


Depends on what you mean. I never said anybody's opinion about what they prefer to play is wrong. But ffa pvp is more sandbox than non-ffa pvp. That's not an opinion.



SWG implemented factional PvP with PvP flags and by all accounts it worked out great. They had a lot of other really bad problems with the game, but PvP wasn't one of them. If OW/FFA PvP was the only right way to implement PvP in a sandbox game, SWG would have had one more issue on the long list of issues, but it didn't. So there are at least two ways to implement PvP in a sandbox game that players will be happy with. There are probably at least a few others.


Again, I never said the only kind of pvp that people enjoy is ffa pvp. That would be a ridiculous thing to say. So you showing an example of a popular game that had opt-in pvp really doesn't mean anything. Also, from what I understand the rest of that game was EXTREMELY sandboxy, particularly professions. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here to be honest.



If we look around and see that there are examples of games with OW/FFA PvP in existence, it's not a stretch to think a developer might try to build a sandbox game with something a little different, something that isn't OW/FFA PvP. Maybe it's different servers, maybe it's just the ability to flag or not for PvP, I don't know. Seems likely that it won't be Medieval Fantasy Eve though.


Very few games have done fantasy sandbox with ffa pvp well... in fact almost none have. Hell, barely any have even done it poorly. They have not at all been given the chance/budget that non-sandbox games have been given. If there were a high budget fantasy sandbox game with ffa pvp (but natural restrictions like guards, notoriety, bounties etc), deep crafting and pve, city building/sieging, etc you'd be crazy to think that would be an enormous success. Look at eve for goodness sake. Everything about that game screams anti-new player. It's incredibly daunting to get into, it's harsh, it's... a little boring, and even that game is wildly successful, especially considering how stable its success is.



**

I never told anyone to go play LoL. I said the people who only want PvP are already playing LoL. Because, you know, it's all PvP, all the time.

Just in case it comes up, I also never accused anyone of being a ganker and that's why they like OW/FFA PvP.


Then why even bring it up? Nobody here is asking for an instanced arcade pvp only game like LoL et al.

  Greez

Apprentice Member

Joined: 4/03/13
Posts: 104

7/12/13 7:47:57 PM#476
Originally posted by lizardbones

A game with little or no PvP won't sell very well. This was part of TSW's problem (I think). A game that gives individual players choices, that gives them some control over when they engage in PvP will do much better. This would be Eve and post Trammel UO. SWG would be in this category too, though like DF and MO, SWG had some pretty big issues.

WoW and Rift sell just fine and they are in the "little to no PvP" group for me. Saying that it was part of TSW's problem is worthless, there are so many factors in why a game does or doesn't sell, on the PvE side alone, that you can say pretty much anything and it's equally unproven.

EVE is a PvP driven game, let's not pretend that it isn't. Sure, you can avoid PvP but you'll have a diminished experience and you'll be grossly dependent on PvPers doing anything regardless. That is not balanced.

SWG is a better example and most of its issues were rather easy to fix. Unfortunately, it was butchered to death...

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10429

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

7/12/13 8:11:01 PM#477


Originally posted by Greez

Originally posted by lizardbones A game with little or no PvP won't sell very well. This was part of TSW's problem (I think). A game that gives individual players choices, that gives them some control over when they engage in PvP will do much better. This would be Eve and post Trammel UO. SWG would be in this category too, though like DF and MO, SWG had some pretty big issues.
WoW and Rift sell just fine and they are in the "little to no PvP" group for me. Saying that it was part of TSW's problem is worthless, there are so many factors in why a game does or doesn't sell, on the PvE side alone, that you can say pretty much anything and it's equally unproven.

EVE is a PvP driven game, let's not pretend that it isn't. Sure, you can avoid PvP but you'll have a diminished experience and you'll be grossly dependent on PvPers doing anything regardless. That is not balanced.

SWG is a better example and most of its issues were rather easy to fix. Unfortunately, it was butchered to death...




SWG probably is the best example, but those other games do have PvP, in more than one venue too. They also offer players a choice. Even in Eve, at least half the players never bother with entering Low Sec space. They have a choice, and the game gives them whatever it is they want, without forcing them to go into Low Sec and making a suicide gank in High Sec really rare.

The important part is giving individual players a choice. SWG would be the system I'd choose as the 'best' too. But I think that as long as whatever system was chosen gave individual players a choice, it would work out OK and reach a wider group of people than just focusing on either a pure PvP or pure PvE experience.

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  Holophonist

Hard Core Member

Joined: 2/15/09
Posts: 2001

7/12/13 8:21:53 PM#478
Originally posted by lizardbones

 


Originally posted by Greez

Originally posted by lizardbones A game with little or no PvP won't sell very well. This was part of TSW's problem (I think). A game that gives individual players choices, that gives them some control over when they engage in PvP will do much better. This would be Eve and post Trammel UO. SWG would be in this category too, though like DF and MO, SWG had some pretty big issues.
WoW and Rift sell just fine and they are in the "little to no PvP" group for me. Saying that it was part of TSW's problem is worthless, there are so many factors in why a game does or doesn't sell, on the PvE side alone, that you can say pretty much anything and it's equally unproven.

 

EVE is a PvP driven game, let's not pretend that it isn't. Sure, you can avoid PvP but you'll have a diminished experience and you'll be grossly dependent on PvPers doing anything regardless. That is not balanced.

SWG is a better example and most of its issues were rather easy to fix. Unfortunately, it was butchered to death...




SWG probably is the best example, but those other games do have PvP, in more than one venue too. They also offer players a choice. Even in Eve, at least half the players never bother with entering Low Sec space. They have a choice, and the game gives them whatever it is they want, without forcing them to go into Low Sec and making a suicide gank in High Sec really rare.

The important part is giving individual players a choice. SWG would be the system I'd choose as the 'best' too. But I think that as long as whatever system was chosen gave individual players a choice, it would work out OK and reach a wider group of people than just focusing on either a pure PvP or pure PvE experience.

 

But again, almost nobody wants a "pure pvp" experience. EvE is a ffa pvp sandbox game. Low sec is more profitable than high sec. Even Darkfall has safezones where you can harvest to your heart's content, you just can't get the same rewards you could get if you went out of the safezone.

  Bidwood

Apprentice Member

Joined: 2/26/13
Posts: 555

7/13/13 4:00:02 PM#479

@JeremyBowyer - I think one of the barriers to this conversation is that the industry has been stuck in a paradigm for the last decade where themeparks dominated and those who are against any form of surprise/unconsensual PVP were fully catered to: No problem, we'll just erect invisible walls that prevent players from doing that.

 

Now that we're seeing a bit of a renaissance in the sandbox area and those games are all the rage, the players who are still in the old paradigm can't understand why the conventional wisdom of yesteryear doesn't apply here. They don't see how mostly-unrestricted PVP can be a mainstream success, because for many years devs have been saying it can't.

 

The key isn't to "turn off" PVP. That's an unnatural state for a sandbox, because player conflict is part of an MMO where everyone can shape the world in meaningful ways. PVP needs to be built it into the other systems in such a way that sand from the sandbox is used to limit griefing and give people safer, less-rewarding ways to play. The traditional approach of just having some invisible wall solve the problem is so not what a sandbox is about.

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10429

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

7/13/13 4:18:45 PM#480


Originally posted by JeremyBowyer

Originally posted by lizardbones  

Originally posted by Greez

Originally posted by lizardbones A game with little or no PvP won't sell very well. This was part of TSW's problem (I think). A game that gives individual players choices, that gives them some control over when they engage in PvP will do much better. This would be Eve and post Trammel UO. SWG would be in this category too, though like DF and MO, SWG had some pretty big issues.
WoW and Rift sell just fine and they are in the "little to no PvP" group for me. Saying that it was part of TSW's problem is worthless, there are so many factors in why a game does or doesn't sell, on the PvE side alone, that you can say pretty much anything and it's equally unproven.   EVE is a PvP driven game, let's not pretend that it isn't. Sure, you can avoid PvP but you'll have a diminished experience and you'll be grossly dependent on PvPers doing anything regardless. That is not balanced. SWG is a better example and most of its issues were rather easy to fix. Unfortunately, it was butchered to death...
SWG probably is the best example, but those other games do have PvP, in more than one venue too. They also offer players a choice. Even in Eve, at least half the players never bother with entering Low Sec space. They have a choice, and the game gives them whatever it is they want, without forcing them to go into Low Sec and making a suicide gank in High Sec really rare. The important part is giving individual players a choice. SWG would be the system I'd choose as the 'best' too. But I think that as long as whatever system was chosen gave individual players a choice, it would work out OK and reach a wider group of people than just focusing on either a pure PvP or pure PvE experience.  
But again, almost nobody wants a "pure pvp" experience. EvE is a ffa pvp sandbox game. Low sec is more profitable than high sec. Even Darkfall has safezones where you can harvest to your heart's content, you just can't get the same rewards you could get if you went out of the safezone.



Well yeah. Not in an MMORPG anyway. Deciding to play an "MMORPG" comes with a different set of expectations than playing something like Planetside 2.

Where people disagree, and where personal preference come into play is how much PvP plays a role in general game play. Not everyone wants a game that is largely driven by PvP, even if they desire risks and rewards in game play.

I think of it like this. In WoW, raiding is the only way to get the 'purple' gear. It's the best stuff in the game, and if you don't raid, you won't get it. There are some mounts that are like that too. There's one path to the rewards. Blizzard realized this setup a lot of their players to basically fail. So they added a comparable set of rewards for instanced PvP. The rewards only applied to PvP, you couldn't use them to raid, but it was enough that many players decided that their end game was going to be PvP. This still left a lot of players out. So Blizzard added or increased things like daily quests. This grabbed a lot of other players. The only players really left out were crafters, but they never really had a place in WoW anyway, so I guess it's all good enough.

The recurring thing is that Blizzard kept adding choices, and that's a good thing. I know that's not necessarily possible with all games because of budget constraints and the like, but it's a good thing.

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

34 Pages First « 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 » Last Search