Trending Games | Pirate101 | World of Warcraft | EverQuest | Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,899,771 Users Online:0
Games:751  Posts:6,268,500
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 Angry Birds Epic Anime Trumps Anmynor Anno Online Applo Arcane Hearts Arcane Legends ArchLord ArcheAge Archeblade Archlord X Ascend: Hand of Kul 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 Boot Hill Heroes Borderlands 2 Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel Bound by Flame Bounty Bay Online Brain Storm Bravada Bravely Default Bravely Second 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 Cast & Conquer Castle Empire Castlot Celtic Heroes Champions Online Champions of Regnum Chaos Online Child of Light 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 Cyberpunk 2077 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 Souls 2 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 Dead Island Dead Island 2 Dead Island: Riptide Deco Online Deep Down Deepworld Defiance Deicide Online Dekaron Demons at the Horizon Desert Operations Destiny Diablo 3 Diamonin Digimon Battle Dino Storm Disciple Divergence Divina Divine Souls Divinity: Original Sin Dofus Dominus Online Dragon Age: Inquisition Dragon Ball Online Dragon Born Online Dragon Crusade Dragon Empires Dragon Eternity Dragon Fin Soup 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 Drakengard 3 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 Dungeon of the Endless 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 4 Fallout Online Family Guy Online Fantage Fantasy Earth Zero Fantasy Realm Online Fantasy Tales Online Fantasy Worlds: Rhynn Faunasphere Faxion Online Fearless Fantasy Ferentus Ferion Fiesta Online Final Fantasy Type-0 HD Final Fantasy XI Final Fantasy XIV Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn Firefall Fists of Fu Florensia Flyff Football Manager Live Football Superstars Force of Arms Forge Forsaken Uprising 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 Heart Forth Alicia 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 & Legends: Conquerors of Kolhar Heroes in the Sky Heroes of Atlan 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 Icewind Dale: Enhanced Edition 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 Era Kings and Legends Kings of the Realm KingsRoad Kitsu Saga Kiwarriors Knight Age Knight Online Knights of Dream City Kothuria Kung Foo! Kunlun Online Kyn L.A.W. LEGO Universe La Tale Land of Chaos Online Landmark Lands of Hope: Redemption 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 Lichdom: Battlemage 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 Lords of the Fallen 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 Mass Effect 4 MechWarrior Online Megaten Meridian 59 : Evolution Merlin MetalMercs Metaplace Metin 2 MicroVolts Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor Midkemia Online Might & Magic Heroes: Kingdoms Might & Magic X: Legacy 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 Moonrise Mordavia Mortal Online Mourning My Lands Myst Online: URU Live Myth Angels Online Myth War Myth War 2 Mythborne 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 Oort Online 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 Persona V Phantasy Star Online 2 Phantasy Star Universe Phoenix Dynasty Online Phylon Pi Story Picaroon Pillars of Eternity 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 Pokémon X and Y PoxNora Prime World Prime: Battle for Dominus Priston Tale Priston Tale II Prius Online Prodigy Project Blackout Project Gorgon Project Powder Project Titan Forums Project Wiki Project Zomboid Puzzle Pirates Quest for Infamy Quickhit Football
R-S
R2 Online RAN Online RF Online ROSE Online Rage of 3 Kingdoms Ragnarok Online Ragnarok Online II RaiderZ Rail Nation Rakion Rappelz RappelzSEA Ravenmarch Realm Fighter Realm of Sierra 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 Risen 3: Titan Lords 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 Sacred 3 Sagramore Salem SaySayGirls Scarlet Blade Scions of Fate Seal Online: Evolution Second Chance Heroes Second Life Secret of the Solstice Seed Serenia Fantasy Seven Seas Saga Seven Souls Online Sevencore Shadow Realms Shadow of Legend Shadowbane Shadowgate 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 South Park: The Stick of Truth 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 Starbound Stargate Worlds Starlight Story Starpires State of Decay SteelWar Online Stone Age 2 Stormfall: Age of War Stormthrone Storybricks Stronghold Kingdoms Styx: Master of Shadows Sudden Attack Supremacy 1914 Supreme Destiny Sword Girls Sword of Destiny: Rise of Aions SwordX Swords of Heavens Swordsman
T-Z
TERA TS Online TUG 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 Terraria Thang Online The 4th Coming The Agency The Aurora World The Banner Saga The Black Watchmen The Chronicle The Chronicles of Spellborn The Crew The Division The Epic Might The Hammers End The Incredible Adventures of Van Helsing The Incredible Adventures of Van Helsing 2 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 The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 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 Torment: Tides of Numenera Total Domination Transformers Universe Transistor Transverse 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 Warflare Wargame1942 Warhammer 40,000: Eternal Crusade Warhammer 40K: Dark Millennium Online Warhammer Online: Wrath of Heroes Warkeepers Warrior Epic Wartune Wasteland 2 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 Xenoblade Chronicles: X 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

EverQuest Next

EverQuest Next 

General Discussion  » Concept: How EQN could have open-world PVP and strongly limit griefing

10 Pages First « 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 » Last Search
190 posts found
  Bidwood

Novice Member

Joined: 2/26/13
Posts: 555

 
OP  7/13/13 1:22:35 PM#81
Originally posted by Piiritus
Originally posted by Panzerbase
Your typical I need the maximum number of easy ganks thread to prove my self worth. 

Cannot agree more.

 

Where are you getting this from?

 

I put a lot of thought and time into designing a concept that would give people who don't enjoy PVP a way to play this without being griefed constantly. You guys are now making me wish SOE would just forget about you and make it FFA.

  Gallus85

Apprentice Member

Joined: 3/13/11
Posts: 1114

7/13/13 2:42:23 PM#82
Originally posted by Bidwood
When the insults start coming out over a different idea, that is usually a sign that someone is insecure.

The insults may be due to your lack of understanding of what players want.

You proposed idea would be great for a "PVP + Rules server", when people want pvp but don't want a FFA gankfest.  However, there are many people out there that hate pvp and don't want anything to do with it. There are many people out there that want fully unbridled and unhindered pvp.

Your proposal is a sort of middle ground, but is sure to not appeal to people who want either

-A lot of pvp

-No pvp.

So you're missing to big chunks of players with your idea.

When it boils down to it, a lot of people really don't want any sort of pvp.  Also, forcing pvp on people who don't want it isn't conducive of a healthy community.  A great community is one that wants to be a part of the game, not just little bits and pieces of it.

It's the difference between a volunteer and a draftee.  I personally want to pvp a lot, but I want to pvp against other players who enjoy the thrill and challenge of pvp.  Not against some PVE players who just want to mind their own business.  That way I get more challenging and rewarding encounters.

This is all a moot point though, EQN will have different server rule sets, (PVE, FFA PVP, Team PVP, RP, etc etc)  At the very least it will have two server types (PVP and PVE).  Or PVP will be completely seperate from the PVE gameplay (e.g. GW2 tPvP and WvWvW)

Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  ice-vortex

Novice Member

Joined: 5/21/10
Posts: 921

7/13/13 3:05:25 PM#83
Originally posted by Bidwood
When the insults start coming out over a different idea, that is usually a sign that someone is insecure.

Well, their only counter-argument is "we don't want it" which isn't exactly a good argument. They naturally become insecure because the Smedley quotes paint a picture of a game built ground up with world PVP.

  Bidwood

Novice Member

Joined: 2/26/13
Posts: 555

 
OP  7/13/13 3:36:31 PM#84

Originally posted by Gallus85

Originally posted by Bidwood
When the insults start coming out over a different idea, that is usually a sign that someone is insecure.

The insults may be due to your lack of understanding of what players want.

You proposed idea would be great for a "PVP + Rules server", when people want pvp but don't want a FFA gankfest.  However, there are many people out there that hate pvp and don't want anything to do with it. There are many people out there that want fully unbridled and unhindered pvp.

Your proposal is a sort of middle ground, but is sure to not appeal to people who want either

-A lot of pvp

-No pvp.

So you're missing to big chunks of players with your idea.

When it boils down to it, a lot of people really don't want any sort of pvp.  Also, forcing pvp on people who don't want it isn't conducive of a healthy community.  A great community is one that wants to be a part of the game, not just little bits and pieces of it.

It's the difference between a volunteer and a draftee.  I personally want to pvp a lot, but I want to pvp against other players who enjoy the thrill and challenge of pvp.  Not against some PVE players who just want to mind their own business.  That way I get more challenging and rewarding encounters.

This is all a moot point though, EQN will have different server rule sets, (PVE, FFA PVP, Team PVP, RP, etc etc)  At the very least it will have two server types (PVP and PVE).  Or PVP will be completely seperate from the PVE gameplay (e.g. GW2 tPvP and WvWvW)

Originally posted by ice-vortex

Originally posted by Bidwood
When the insults start coming out over a different idea, that is usually a sign that someone is insecure.

Well, their only counter-argument is "we don't want it" which isn't exactly a good argument. They naturally become insecure because the Smedley quotes paint a picture of a game built ground up with world PVP.

 

@Gallus85 - My concept would definitely cater to those who want a lot of PVP. They'd be getting it for sure in the frontier. The people who want NO PVP would be out of luck. But the people who are willing to accept some PVP and can tolerate the occasional griefer would fit right in too. That's perhaps a bigger group than you think.

 

So in other words, it's only the people who have zero tolerance for the risk of griefing that would be left out because there would always be that risk, even in the kingdoms where you're virtually safe from all unconsensual PVP. I believe that group is a minority and really hope SOE leaves them in the dust this time around.

 

@ice-vortex - I see your point. There was actually a lot more support for sandboxes with PVP outside this forum. I think it's going to take SOE a lot of careful change management to explain this to fans of the franchise in a way that won't totally piss them off. I think he has been trying to subtly manage expectations for a long time, but people aren't listening.

 

 

  Aelious

Elite Member

Joined: 9/27/11
Posts: 2481

World > Quest Progression

7/13/13 3:56:19 PM#85
EQN may very well be EvE like, though I doubt it. I believe Smed is a true gamer and is very passionate. If you look at the main events people dislike him over however you see it's times when he's needed to be a President first, gamer second.

PvP is preferred by the minority, that can plainly be seen not just by posts or polls here but in the populations of MMOs across the board. It's not a knock on PvP, it's just reality.

Could EQN be a big shared world where PvP players come before PvE? Sure, anything is possible until the 2nd. Being EQN is a F2P game it would take some stones to do that. SoE would be taking a major loss simply because they didn't want to have seperate servers. Any way you look at it, it doesn't make sense.
  Bidwood

Novice Member

Joined: 2/26/13
Posts: 555

 
OP  7/13/13 4:16:31 PM#86
Originally posted by Aelious
EQN may very well be EvE like, though I doubt it. I believe Smed is a true gamer and is very passionate. If you look at the main events people dislike him over however you see it's times when he's needed to be a President first, gamer second.

PvP is preferred by the minority, that can plainly be seen not just by posts or polls here but in the populations of MMOs across the board. It's not a knock on PvP, it's just reality.

Could EQN be a big shared world where PvP players come before PvE? Sure, anything is possible until the 2nd. Being EQN is a F2P game it would take some stones to do that. SoE would be taking a major loss simply because they didn't want to have seperate servers. Any way you look at it, it doesn't make sense.

"PVP is preferred by the minority..."

 

I disagree. The majority wants PVP without constant griefing. I think a lot of those people would be willing to try a revolutionary game where they only get griefed once in a while when they take risks and can have obvious ways to take control of their safety. With the rest of the game being so compelling it keeps them coming back for more.

 

The problem with looking at servers in games with half-assed, poorly conceived PVP: All that tells you is the majority dislikes full PVP the way it has been conceived in the past, as it was always super-conducive to griefing.

 

The other problem with accepting the status quo and giving players exactly what they seem to want: Devs can't keep up with the content churn. Players burn through the content and then leave and play another game, and the devs don't get the ROI you're suggesting. They may be getting 90 per cent of the gaming population, but they're getting them for a limited time and probably only raking in 20 per cent of the potential revenue. It would be better to have 40 per cent of the playerbase all the time and get 90 per cent of the potential revenue from them.

 

This is where I believe EverQuest Next is going: Letting people create content and duke it out over resources, with very well conceived SANDBOX features to limit griefing instead of invisible themepark walls (e.g. EVE). What it boils down to is protecting kingdoms costs money. You can get amazing protection but it's going to cost you lots of taxes and/or resources. There are major starting kingdoms - and paths between them - that are run by NPCs, with maxed-out protection. So innocent people in these areas can essentially play the game with very little chance of being ganked. (Very similar concept to hi-sec in EVE.) They can even expand on these kingdoms and reap that protection by paying taxes. People who are more into the PVP and risk v.s. reward can go out into the 'frontier' area and establish their own kingdoms. But they have to fund the infrastructure/protection out of their own pockets.

 

EQN will be F2P but the potential for monetizing this kind of system is ENORMOUS. I see a ton of whales getting super-addicted to funding their kingdoms and being barrons with their own communities. Losing the kingdom you and your friends worked hard to build to enemy forces that are wearing away at your economy? Not acceptable? No problem - just buy in-game currency and use it to purchase more protection.

 

Edit: The more I think about this, the more clear it seems from a business perspective. It probably made sense to go with PVE-only themeparks in the past when people voted with their monthly subscriptions. But with the shift to F2P, you need ways to monetize games. Dev-generated content is not the answer. Player-generated content is part of it, but even more effective if people pay to protect their assets. It would be a bit of a grind in itself, because, at least on the frontier, vulnerable kingdoms would have be attacked.

 

Why build on the frontier? Resources...  exotic locations... achievements.

  Gallus85

Apprentice Member

Joined: 3/13/11
Posts: 1114

7/13/13 5:23:01 PM#87
Originally posted by Bidwood
Originally posted by Aelious
EQN may very well be EvE like, though I doubt it. I believe Smed is a true gamer and is very passionate. If you look at the main events people dislike him over however you see it's times when he's needed to be a President first, gamer second.

PvP is preferred by the minority, that can plainly be seen not just by posts or polls here but in the populations of MMOs across the board. It's not a knock on PvP, it's just reality.

Could EQN be a big shared world where PvP players come before PvE? Sure, anything is possible until the 2nd. Being EQN is a F2P game it would take some stones to do that. SoE would be taking a major loss simply because they didn't want to have seperate servers. Any way you look at it, it doesn't make sense.

"PVP is preferred by the minority..."

 

I disagree. The majority wants PVP without constant griefing. I think a lot of those people would be willing to try a revolutionary game where they only get griefed once in a while when they take risks and can have obvious ways to take control of their safety. With the rest of the game being so compelling it keeps them coming back for more.

 

The problem with looking at servers in games with half-assed, poorly conceived PVP: All that tells you is the majority dislikes full PVP the way it has been conceived in the past, as it was always super-conducive to griefing.

 

The other problem with accepting the status quo and giving players exactly what they seem to want: Devs can't keep up with the content churn. Players burn through the content and then leave and play another game, and the devs don't get the ROI you're suggesting. They may be getting 90 per cent of the gaming population, but they're getting them for a limited time and probably only raking in 20 per cent of the potential revenue. It would be better to have 40 per cent of the playerbase all the time and get 90 per cent of the potential revenue from them.

 

This is where I believe EverQuest Next is going: Letting people create content and duke it out over resources, with very well conceived SANDBOX features to limit griefing instead of invisible themepark walls (e.g. EVE). What it boils down to is protecting kingdoms costs money. You can get amazing protection but it's going to cost you lots of taxes and/or resources. There are major starting kingdoms - and paths between them - that are run by NPCs, with maxed-out protection. So innocent people in these areas can essentially play the game with very little chance of being ganked. (Very similar concept to hi-sec in EVE.) They can even expand on these kingdoms and reap that protection by paying taxes. People who are more into the PVP and risk v.s. reward can go out into the 'frontier' area and establish their own kingdoms. But they have to fund the infrastructure/protection out of their own pockets.

 

EQN will be F2P but the potential for monetizing this kind of system is ENORMOUS. I see a ton of whales getting super-addicted to funding their kingdoms and being barrons with their own communities. Losing the kingdom you and your friends worked hard to build to enemy forces that are wearing away at your economy? Not acceptable? No problem - just buy in-game currency and use it to purchase more protection.

 

Edit: The more I think about this, the more clear it seems from a business perspective. It probably made sense to go with PVE-only themeparks in the past when people voted with their monthly subscriptions. But with the shift to F2P, you need ways to monetize games. Dev-generated content is not the answer. Player-generated content is part of it, but even more effective if people pay to protect their assets. It would be a bit of a grind in itself, because, at least on the frontier, vulnerable kingdoms would have be attacked.

 

Why build on the frontier? Resources...  exotic locations... achievements.

A few problems with your reasoning.

1.  You're assuming there is an actual large PVP centric group of gamers that would make up for the loss of PVE heavy players for MMORPGs.  This can be demonstrated to be false by looking at the popularity of pvp centric games and looking at MMORPs that offer servers for PVP and PVE players seperately.

In EQ and EQ2 the amount of PVE servers dwarfed the PVP servers in both size of active population and total amount of the servers required to hold the PVP players.

Mortal Online, Darkfall and other PVP centric MMORPGs have an extremely niche and small following.  One of the most established (and in my opinion the most well done) forced pvp experiences, eve, draws a user base of about 500k-400k, which is commendable, but no where near warrants the amount of time/money SOE has put into EQN.

Looking at other games like WoW, the amount of PVP players are the stark minority vs the size of the PVE playerbase.

So PVE players vastly out number the PVP population regardless of how you look at it.

2. The PVP population itself is split in to many different categories of preferences and styles.  

Some love the thrill of the gank and prefer unhindered open world FFA PVP with no consequences other than what other players make for them (player controlled policing)

Some prefer completely balanced tournament style PVP where each team is equal in size and preferably are close/equal in gear/level ratings.

Some people prefer Team PVP where they're automatically friends with some factions/races/classes and automatically enemies with others.  

Take Aion for an example, which was a forced team pvp game, and you can see where PVP players reacted negatively to PVP restrictions.  At one point they decided they needed to not have open world PVE/PVP, and got rid of "Rifting", where you could go PVP in your enemy's PVE lands.  They got rid of this mechanic and then had central, separate PVP areas (aka Abyss *Basically your "frontier" idea) as the only PVP areas and it was met with extreme backlash from the PVP community of the game.

Some people prefer FFA pvp with rule sets like murder flags, jail time, etc.

3.  You can have player created content, non-content churning, risk VS reward game play WITHOUT  ANY PVP AT ALL.  This should be apparent but many people including yourself seem to have a hard time grasping this.

 

The bottom line.

Your idea completely alienates PVE players all together.  Then you created a scenario that only appeals to a portion of the PVP population.

People like you or I may enjoy this kind of experience, but understand that it's not realistic for EQN.  Niche of Niche is not the goal of a multi-million dollar flagship product. F2P works best when it appeals to a broad audience and attracts a huge surplus of players.  That way the money lost from every player that didn't buy the game is offset by the larger pool of players and the ones that choose to spend more.

Anyway, nice try but it isn't going to happen lol.

Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  Bidwood

Novice Member

Joined: 2/26/13
Posts: 555

 
OP  7/13/13 5:40:25 PM#88
Originally posted by Gallus85
Originally posted by Bidwood
Originally posted by Aelious
EQN may very well be EvE like, though I doubt it. I believe Smed is a true gamer and is very passionate. If you look at the main events people dislike him over however you see it's times when he's needed to be a President first, gamer second.

PvP is preferred by the minority, that can plainly be seen not just by posts or polls here but in the populations of MMOs across the board. It's not a knock on PvP, it's just reality.

Could EQN be a big shared world where PvP players come before PvE? Sure, anything is possible until the 2nd. Being EQN is a F2P game it would take some stones to do that. SoE would be taking a major loss simply because they didn't want to have seperate servers. Any way you look at it, it doesn't make sense.

"PVP is preferred by the minority..."

 

I disagree. The majority wants PVP without constant griefing. I think a lot of those people would be willing to try a revolutionary game where they only get griefed once in a while when they take risks and can have obvious ways to take control of their safety. With the rest of the game being so compelling it keeps them coming back for more.

 

The problem with looking at servers in games with half-assed, poorly conceived PVP: All that tells you is the majority dislikes full PVP the way it has been conceived in the past, as it was always super-conducive to griefing.

 

The other problem with accepting the status quo and giving players exactly what they seem to want: Devs can't keep up with the content churn. Players burn through the content and then leave and play another game, and the devs don't get the ROI you're suggesting. They may be getting 90 per cent of the gaming population, but they're getting them for a limited time and probably only raking in 20 per cent of the potential revenue. It would be better to have 40 per cent of the playerbase all the time and get 90 per cent of the potential revenue from them.

 

This is where I believe EverQuest Next is going: Letting people create content and duke it out over resources, with very well conceived SANDBOX features to limit griefing instead of invisible themepark walls (e.g. EVE). What it boils down to is protecting kingdoms costs money. You can get amazing protection but it's going to cost you lots of taxes and/or resources. There are major starting kingdoms - and paths between them - that are run by NPCs, with maxed-out protection. So innocent people in these areas can essentially play the game with very little chance of being ganked. (Very similar concept to hi-sec in EVE.) They can even expand on these kingdoms and reap that protection by paying taxes. People who are more into the PVP and risk v.s. reward can go out into the 'frontier' area and establish their own kingdoms. But they have to fund the infrastructure/protection out of their own pockets.

 

EQN will be F2P but the potential for monetizing this kind of system is ENORMOUS. I see a ton of whales getting super-addicted to funding their kingdoms and being barrons with their own communities. Losing the kingdom you and your friends worked hard to build to enemy forces that are wearing away at your economy? Not acceptable? No problem - just buy in-game currency and use it to purchase more protection.

 

Edit: The more I think about this, the more clear it seems from a business perspective. It probably made sense to go with PVE-only themeparks in the past when people voted with their monthly subscriptions. But with the shift to F2P, you need ways to monetize games. Dev-generated content is not the answer. Player-generated content is part of it, but even more effective if people pay to protect their assets. It would be a bit of a grind in itself, because, at least on the frontier, vulnerable kingdoms would have be attacked.

 

Why build on the frontier? Resources...  exotic locations... achievements.

A few problems with your reasoning.

1.  You're assuming there is an actual large PVP centric group of gamers that would make up for the loss of PVE heavy players for MMORPGs.  This can be demonstrated to be false by looking at the popularity of pvp centric games and looking at MMORPs that offer servers for PVP and PVE players seperately.

In EQ and EQ2 the amount of PVE servers dwarfed the PVP servers in both size of active population and total amount of the servers required to hold the PVP players.

Mortal Online, Darkfall and other PVP centric MMORPGs have an extremely niche and small following.  One of the most established (and in my opinion the most well done) forced pvp experiences, eve, draws a user base of about 500k-400k, which is commendable, but no where near warrants the amount of time/money SOE has put into EQN.

Looking at other games like WoW, the amount of PVP players are the stark minority vs the size of the PVE playerbase.

So PVE players vastly out number the PVP population regardless of how you look at it.

2. The PVP population itself is split in to many different categories of preferences and styles.  

Some love the thrill of the gank and prefer unhindered open world FFA PVP with no consequences other than what other players make for them (player controlled policing)

Some prefer completely balanced tournament style PVP where each team is equal in size and preferably are close/equal in gear/level ratings.

Some people prefer Team PVP where they're automatically friends with some factions/races/classes and automatically enemies with others.  

Take Aion for an example, which was a forced team pvp game, and you can see where PVP players reacted negatively to PVP restrictions.  At one point they decided they needed to not have open world PVE/PVP, and got rid of "Rifting", where you could go PVP in your enemy's PVE lands.  They got rid of this mechanic and then had central, separate PVP areas (aka Abyss *Basically your "frontier" idea) as the only PVP areas and it was met with extreme backlash from the PVP community of the game.

Some people prefer FFA pvp with rule sets like murder flags, jail time, etc.

3.  You can have player created content, non-content churning, risk VS reward game play WITHOUT  ANY PVP AT ALL.  This should be apparent but many people including yourself seem to have a hard time grasping this.

 

The bottom line.

Your idea completely alienates PVE players all together.  Then you created a scenario that only appeals to a portion of the PVP population.

People like you or I may enjoy this kind of experience, but understand that it's not realistic for EQN.  Niche of Niche is not the goal of a multi-million dollar flagship product. F2P works best when it appeals to a broad audience and attracts a huge surplus of players.  That way the money lost from every player that didn't buy the game is offset by the larger pool of players and the ones that choose to spend more.

Anyway, nice try but it isn't going to happen lol.

 

Way too many claims about what people want without a lot of numbers to back them up.

 

I'm not willing to accept server populations in existing MMOs because most have failed to implement PVP successfully.

  Gallus85

Apprentice Member

Joined: 3/13/11
Posts: 1114

7/13/13 5:57:44 PM#89
Originally posted by Bidwood

 

Way too many claims about what people want without a lot of numbers to back them up.

 

I'm not willing to accept server populations in existing MMOs because most have failed to implement PVP successfully.

You're just being blatantly ignorant to reality.

I backed up my claims with numerous examples and I can provide many more.

UO was forced PVP and a peak player population of 100k.  When Trammel launched with the Renaissance expansion it brought non consensual PVP ruleset and then achieved a 250k peek player base. 150% improvement when they offered non-consensual PVP.

Then you simply say "they never did it right".  By what standards?  People enjoy all sorts of different things.  What you may hate another person may love.  The system you dreamed up in your head is a system many PVPers would loath and zero pure PVE players would enjoy.

The fact of the matter is that all sorts of PVP games have launched over the years, with many different styles and rule sets.  FFA pvp, FFA pvp with rules, Team PVP, arena PvP, 3 way RvRvR pvp and all of these have launched in all sorts of different flavors and none of them have surpassed the popularity of PVE.

Why?  I can tell you why.  It's not a fault of the PVP system, it's the fact that that a much larger player population wants nothing* to do with PVP.

Do the research before you speak.  You sound like you've lived under a rock for the past 15 years lol.  Seriously, I'm a huge competitive PVPer, don't think that I* personally dislike your idea.  I'm just educating you on why it's not realistic.

Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  ice-vortex

Novice Member

Joined: 5/21/10
Posts: 921

7/13/13 5:59:53 PM#90
Originally posted by Aelious
EQN may very well be EvE like, though I doubt it. I believe Smed is a true gamer and is very passionate. If you look at the main events people dislike him over however you see it's times when he's needed to be a President first, gamer second.

PvP is preferred by the minority, that can plainly be seen not just by posts or polls here but in the populations of MMOs across the board. It's not a knock on PvP, it's just reality.

Could EQN be a big shared world where PvP players come before PvE? Sure, anything is possible until the 2nd. Being EQN is a F2P game it would take some stones to do that. SoE would be taking a major loss simply because they didn't want to have seperate servers. Any way you look at it, it doesn't make sense.

If sandbox PVPers are a minority, what are sandbox PVEers? Every PVE game people have put forth in this type of argument has been a themepark game. The two game styles are completely different. The only popular PVE sandbox games are extremely casual such as Minecraft, Second Life, and Free Realms. Is that really the type of player base anyone here wants to attract?

The only example of a PVE sandbox that isn't casual with any kind of popularity was Star Wars Galaxies from a decade ago. If one wants to look at the current MMORPG player base to determine what will or will not be successful, looking at a Star Wars IP game from a decade ago that peaked at less than what EVE has now and started rapidly declining just as quickly as all the themepark PVE games today is hardly the best plan. They even tried to turn it into a themepark to stop the decline.

  Gallus85

Apprentice Member

Joined: 3/13/11
Posts: 1114

7/13/13 6:06:47 PM#91
Originally posted by ice-vortex
Originally posted by Aelious
EQN may very well be EvE like, though I doubt it. I believe Smed is a true gamer and is very passionate. If you look at the main events people dislike him over however you see it's times when he's needed to be a President first, gamer second.

PvP is preferred by the minority, that can plainly be seen not just by posts or polls here but in the populations of MMOs across the board. It's not a knock on PvP, it's just reality.

Could EQN be a big shared world where PvP players come before PvE? Sure, anything is possible until the 2nd. Being EQN is a F2P game it would take some stones to do that. SoE would be taking a major loss simply because they didn't want to have seperate servers. Any way you look at it, it doesn't make sense.

If sandbox PVPers are a minority, what are sandbox PVEers? Every PVE game people have put forth in this type of argument has been a themepark game. The two game styles are completely different. The only popular PVE sandbox games are extremely casual such as Minecraft, Second Life, and Free Realms. Is that really the type of player base anyone here wants to attract?

The only example of a themepark sandbox that isn't casual with any kind of popularity was Star Wars Galaxies from a decade ago. If one wants to look at the current MMORPG player base to determine what will or will not be successful, looking at a game from a decade ago hat peaked at less than what EVE has now and started rapidly declining just as quickly as all the themepark PVE games today is hardly the best plan. They even tried to turn it into a themepark to stop the decline.

Free realms has like 8 million users.  I think SOE would be tickled to death to get that many players for EQN.

The point is that no forced PVP game has ever matched the popularity of PVE games.  EQN will have open world pvp, already confirmed, but there will be PVE only servers.  That's the major point being made.

It's not* going to force PVP on players.  They know that would only hurt it's chances of success.

Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  Lokero

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 4/30/06
Posts: 340

7/13/13 6:11:09 PM#92
Originally posted by nerovipus32
This game will only have one server. The day of the shards are dead.

Haha, keep dreaming...

I wish(and hope) you are right though.  Hardly any MMOs to date have managed to stick with the one server universe.

  Aelious

Elite Member

Joined: 9/27/11
Posts: 2481

World > Quest Progression

7/13/13 6:11:17 PM#93
Nice angle but the sandbox element has nothing to do with PvP/PvE preferences. Even then EQN is to be a "sandbox-ish" title, not a pure sandbox so it can have aspects of both.

There are entirely too many variables to come to a concrete assessment on this. The info that is there shows PvP as a minority but when aspect that other titles just haven't done it right there is really no way to prove it or discredit it, it becomes a fantasy aspect.
  Gallus85

Apprentice Member

Joined: 3/13/11
Posts: 1114

7/13/13 6:24:02 PM#94
Originally posted by Aelious
Nice angle but the sandbox element has nothing to do with PvP/PvE preferences. Even then EQN is to be a "sandbox-ish" title, not a pure sandbox so it can have aspects of both.

There are entirely too many variables to come to a concrete assessment on this. The info that is there shows PvP as a minority but when aspect that other titles just haven't done it right there is really no way to prove it or discredit it, it becomes a fantasy aspect.

Exactly, I'd say a game like Skyrim is a "Sandbox" game.  The world completely open to explore right from the start, you can be/do anything you want, it's completely open and free.  More freedom than most games give you anyway, and it's a completely PVE experience.

I suspect EQN will be more advanced (city / house building, intricate crafting system, etc etc), but I think it will follow a lot of the same mechanics and ideas we see in a game like Skyrim.  I think the kiddies on here call it a "Sandpark", because for it to be a "Sandbox" it would have to be EQN + garry's mode or Minecraft creative mode, which we know isn't going to be happening.

Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  ice-vortex

Novice Member

Joined: 5/21/10
Posts: 921

7/13/13 6:36:13 PM#95
Originally posted by Gallus85
Originally posted by ice-vortex
Originally posted by Aelious
EQN may very well be EvE like, though I doubt it. I believe Smed is a true gamer and is very passionate. If you look at the main events people dislike him over however you see it's times when he's needed to be a President first, gamer second.

PvP is preferred by the minority, that can plainly be seen not just by posts or polls here but in the populations of MMOs across the board. It's not a knock on PvP, it's just reality.

Could EQN be a big shared world where PvP players come before PvE? Sure, anything is possible until the 2nd. Being EQN is a F2P game it would take some stones to do that. SoE would be taking a major loss simply because they didn't want to have seperate servers. Any way you look at it, it doesn't make sense.

If sandbox PVPers are a minority, what are sandbox PVEers? Every PVE game people have put forth in this type of argument has been a themepark game. The two game styles are completely different. The only popular PVE sandbox games are extremely casual such as Minecraft, Second Life, and Free Realms. Is that really the type of player base anyone here wants to attract?

The only example of a themepark sandbox that isn't casual with any kind of popularity was Star Wars Galaxies from a decade ago. If one wants to look at the current MMORPG player base to determine what will or will not be successful, looking at a game from a decade ago hat peaked at less than what EVE has now and started rapidly declining just as quickly as all the themepark PVE games today is hardly the best plan. They even tried to turn it into a themepark to stop the decline.

Free realms has like 8 million users.  I think SOE would be tickled to death to get that many players for EQN.

The point is that no forced PVP game has ever matched the popularity of PVE games.  EQN will have open world pvp, already confirmed, but there will be PVE only servers.  That's the major point being made.

It's not* going to force PVP on players.  They know that would only hurt it's chances of success.

Free Realms had 20 million players last we heard and it is their game, why would they try to compete with themselves? Trying to repeat Free Realms by making another Free Realms is about as possible as creating another World of Warcraft by copying World of Warcraft. All they would end up doing at most would be to transfer their Free Realm player base from one game to another which equates to zero net gains.

Your point is moot. It is far more complicated than the PVE vs PVP you are trying to distill it down to. There haven't exactly been any overly successful PVE games released on the western market the last few years. Just like there haven't been any overly successful themepark games. Why? Because that market is already monopolized by a single game and the market is saturated with games trying to pick up the remainders.

There is absolutely zero evidence that having PVE-only sandbox will somehow increase its chance of success.

  ice-vortex

Novice Member

Joined: 5/21/10
Posts: 921

7/13/13 6:42:38 PM#96
Originally posted by Gallus85
Originally posted by Aelious
Nice angle but the sandbox element has nothing to do with PvP/PvE preferences. Even then EQN is to be a "sandbox-ish" title, not a pure sandbox so it can have aspects of both.

There are entirely too many variables to come to a concrete assessment on this. The info that is there shows PvP as a minority but when aspect that other titles just haven't done it right there is really no way to prove it or discredit it, it becomes a fantasy aspect.

Exactly, I'd say a game like Skyrim is a "Sandbox" game.  The world completely open to explore right from the start, you can be/do anything you want, it's completely open and free.  More freedom than most games give you anyway, and it's a completely PVE experience.

I suspect EQN will be more advanced (city / house building, intricate crafting system, etc etc), but I think it will follow a lot of the same mechanics and ideas we see in a game like Skyrim.  I think the kiddies on here call it a "Sandpark", because for it to be a "Sandbox" it would have to be EQN + garry's mode or Minecraft creative mode, which we know isn't going to be happening.

You are confusing open world and sandbox. All sandboxes are open world, but not all open world games are sandboxes. Skyrim has questlines with a linear story, the epitome of what a themepark is. A single player game is also a completely different player  base. People who play Skyrim aren't going to be happy with spending three hours carving out a hill just for a spot to place a building. Just as people who want to raid aren't going to want to spend three hours carving out a hill to place a building.

  Gallus85

Apprentice Member

Joined: 3/13/11
Posts: 1114

7/13/13 6:46:07 PM#97
Originally posted by ice-vortex

Free Realms had 20 million players last we heard and it is their game, why would they try to compete with themselves? Trying to repeat Free Realms by making another Free Realms is about as possible as creating another World of Warcraft by copying World of Warcraft. All they would end up doing at most would be to transfer their Free Realm player base from one game to another which equates to zero net gains.

Your point is moot. It is far more complicated than the PVE vs PVP you are trying to distill it down to. There haven't exactly been any overly successful PVE games released on the western market the last few years. Just like there haven't been any overly successful themepark games. Why? Because that market is already monopolized by a single game and the market is saturated with games trying to pick up the remainders.

There is absolutely zero evidence that having PVE-only sandbox will somehow increase its chance of success.

My point is not moot.  You're just not educated on the subject.  Free Realms is not competition for an enthusiast level game like EQN.

GW2 was overly successful.  SWTOR (as bad as many of us think it was) went F2P and has like 2 or 3 million users now and is printing money lol.

Aion has millions of users in asian and hundreds of thousands of players in US.

There have been plenty of successes outside of WoW.

Also, I never said that EQN was going to be PVE-Only sandbox.  That would be silly since Smedley already said it was going to have pvp.  However, it will also have PVE servers.  There's no reason why it won't and wouldn't make sense from a business standpoint.

Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  ice-vortex

Novice Member

Joined: 5/21/10
Posts: 921

7/13/13 7:10:47 PM#98
Originally posted by Gallus85
Originally posted by ice-vortex

Free Realms had 20 million players last we heard and it is their game, why would they try to compete with themselves? Trying to repeat Free Realms by making another Free Realms is about as possible as creating another World of Warcraft by copying World of Warcraft. All they would end up doing at most would be to transfer their Free Realm player base from one game to another which equates to zero net gains.

Your point is moot. It is far more complicated than the PVE vs PVP you are trying to distill it down to. There haven't exactly been any overly successful PVE games released on the western market the last few years. Just like there haven't been any overly successful themepark games. Why? Because that market is already monopolized by a single game and the market is saturated with games trying to pick up the remainders.

There is absolutely zero evidence that having PVE-only sandbox will somehow increase its chance of success.

My point is not moot.  You're just not educated on the subject.  Free Realms is not competition for an enthusiast level game like EQN.

GW2 was overly successful.  SWTOR (as bad as many of us think it was) went F2P and has like 2 or 3 million users now and is printing money lol.

Aion has millions of users in asian and hundreds of thousands of players in US.

There have been plenty of successes outside of WoW.

Also, I never said that EQN was going to be PVE-Only sandbox.  That would be silly since Smedley already said it was going to have pvp.  However, it will also have PVE servers.  There's no reason why it won't and wouldn't make sense from a business standpoint.

I didn't say it would be competition for an enthusiast level game like EQN, but you are the one that said SOE would love to have 8 million people for EQN like Free Realms has. The problem is there is no evidence of this mythical 'enthusiast' sandbox PVE crowd. The best anyone can come up with is Star Wars Galaxies from over a decade ago which peaked at 500k subscribers.

I would call GW2 and SWTOR successful, but not overly so. We don't even know the active player base of GW2. 2-3 million players is pretty good for SWTOR compared to other PVE themeparks that are f2p. However, I don't think a short term burst of success is what SOE is after or they would have made it a WoW-clone.

I don't expect the 'world's largest sandbox' to have multiple shards. I expect one massive shard per region. Otherwise, it won't have enough players to fill up that world. From a business stand point, trying to appeal to everyone just means you won't appeal to anyone. If the game isn't built around PVP, they won't attract the PVPers. If it isn't built around PVE, they won't attract the PVEers. Unless there are literally two parallel games being developed, someone is going to get the short straw.

  Gallus85

Apprentice Member

Joined: 3/13/11
Posts: 1114

7/13/13 7:28:44 PM#99
Originally posted by ice-vortex

You are confusing open world and sandbox. All sandboxes are open world, but not all open world games are sandboxes. Skyrim has questlines with a linear story, the epitome of what a themepark is. A single player game is also a completely different player  base. People who play Skyrim aren't going to be happy with spending three hours carving out a hill just for a spot to place a building. Just as people who want to raid aren't going to want to spend three hours carving out a hill to place a building.

I'm not confusing anything.  The term sandbox is vague and means many things to many different people.  Skyrim has "quest lines" but you can progress through the game in any way you pleasem, with or without them.  Quests are just tools to present lore and stories to the player.  You can mix player generated content and quests and it would still be a "sandbox".  The key is in the presentation.  Like Skyrim, you can play the game for 1000 hours and never touch a single quest line and still have plenty of things todo.

 You can choose to be a thief that just pick pockets people all day and the mechanics of the game will progress your character even if that's the only thing you choose to do.

A sandbox game can have quests.  A sandbox game can be void of crafting.  There are many ways to use the terms and the most universal is simply a game with a lot of freedom allowed to the player in how he or she plays.  What those freedoms are and what mechanics are in the game past that are completely subjective.

UO is considered a sandbox but very often when people describe a sandbox it sounds nothing like UO.  Likewise when other people describe what sandbox means to them, they will describe Vanguard's FFA pvp server to the letter lol.

Hope this helps you.

Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL

  ice-vortex

Novice Member

Joined: 5/21/10
Posts: 921

7/13/13 7:35:23 PM#100
Originally posted by Gallus85
Originally posted by ice-vortex

You are confusing open world and sandbox. All sandboxes are open world, but not all open world games are sandboxes. Skyrim has questlines with a linear story, the epitome of what a themepark is. A single player game is also a completely different player  base. People who play Skyrim aren't going to be happy with spending three hours carving out a hill just for a spot to place a building. Just as people who want to raid aren't going to want to spend three hours carving out a hill to place a building.

I'm not confusing anything.  The term sandbox is vague and means many things to many different people.  Skyrim has "quest lines" but you can progress through the game in any way you pleasem, with or without them.  Quests are just tools to present lore and stories to the player.  You can mix player generated content and quests and it would still be a "sandbox".  The key is in the presentation.  Like Skyrim, you can play the game for 1000 hours and never touch a single quest line and still have plenty of things todo.

 You can choose to be a thief that just pick pockets people all day and the mechanics of the game will progress your character even if that's the only thing you choose to do.

A sandbox game can have quests.  A sandbox game can be void of crafting.  There are many ways to use the terms and the most universal is simply a game with a lot of freedom allowed to the player in how he or she plays.  What those freedoms are and what mechanics are in the game past that are completely subjective.

UO is considered a sandbox but very often when people describe a sandbox it sounds nothing like UO.  Likewise when other people describe what sandbox means to them, they will describe Vanguard's FFA pvp server to the letter lol.

Hope this helps you.

An open world is a type of video game level design where a player can roam freely through a virtual world and is given considerable freedom in choosing how or when to approach objectives.[1] The term "free roam" is also used, as is "sandbox" and "free-roaming".[2][3] "Open world" and "free-roaming" suggest the absence of artificial barriers,[4] in contrast to the invisible walls and loading screens that are common in linear level designs. An "open world" game does not necessarily imply a sandbox. In a true "sandbox", the player has tools to modify the world themselves and create how they play.[5] Generally open world games still enforce some restrictions in the game environment, either due to absolute technical limitations or in-game limitations (such as locked areas) imposed by a game's linearity.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_world

Btw, your description of Skyrim could almost fit perfectly with describing World of Warcraft.

10 Pages First « 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 » Last Search