Ok if thats true, then why is the next upcoming big mmo Guildwars 2 going to have pvp as its big focus, with a world vs world pvp map with keeps in them. Companies wouldnt be doing this if there was no market for pvp, Neverwinter was not going to have pvp in it, wonder why that changed.
Guil Wars 2 is a theme park game (admitted by the company) that focuses more on the PvE (admitted by the company) than the PvP. The PvP is there, but the game is also a free to play game after the initial box, and even more emphasis on their cash shop than their original first title and still a bigger emphasis on the PvE than actual PvP aspects.
If open PvP/world PvP gets implemented in Neverwinter, it needs to be strictly consensual as the game will most likely the single server route. Forced PvP will keep the majority of players away from the game, so that's absolutely no option for Neverwinter, no matter how much you may want it.
What they could do is:
> A PvP-flagging system
> Include PvP zones like DAoC's frontier or WAR's RvR lakes
PvPers are a minority compared to PvE players in MMORPGs, there's virtually no pure PvP MMORPG out there that has been even remotely successful.
Edit: Not to mention that D&D isn't balanced for PvP as far as classes go, it just isn't meant for it.
I think you shouldn't rage so much dude, even when i am annoying its my lifejob
Friend Anglomyr, although you prefer those "evil abominations which say they are not evil" I would advise you to not get heartburn and offer you a link.
You see, a beneficial thread in which everyone was agreeing for arena based combat, or separated pvp zone has turned to a fruitless pvp vs non-pvp thread.
Lets keep our discussions as records for the benefit of community with little spice of humor and sarcasm instead of pointless right/wrong debate.
Friend Anglomyr, although you prefer those "evil abominations which say they are not evil" I would advise you to not get heartburn and offer you a link.
You see, a beneficial thread in which everyone was agreeing for arena based combat, or separated pvp zone has turned to a fruitless pvp vs non-pvp thread.
Lets keep our discussions as records for the benefit of community with little spice of humor and sarcasm instead of pointless right/wrong debate.
I didn't think it as pvp vs non-pvp. I just like annoying people like that (ghosts of the past advance!) I know it annoys others but thread was pretty much dead when I really started to annoy him.
Guil Wars 2 is a theme park game (admitted by the company) that focuses more on the PvE (admitted by the company) than the PvP. The PvP is there, but the game is also a free to play game after the initial box, and even more emphasis on their cash shop than their original first title and still a bigger emphasis on the PvE than actual PvP aspects.
Not really dude , the bigger draw to guildwars 1 was the pvp arenas that guilds assumbled teams for. Pve in guildwars was pretty light, guildwars 2 has alot more pve content but you also have a option to skip it entirely with a chioce to go to max level and just pvp at 80(the level cap). Geargrinding in pve dungeons wont be a focas for this game, Guildwars is a pvp game at heart and thats what a most players that play it will do. I really cant think of mmo I played that has pve only in it. Just go to te websights of the free to plays and pvp will be advertised as a major feature.
Not really dude , the bigger draw to guildwars 1 was the pvp arenas that guilds assumbled teams for. Pve in guildwars was pretty light, guildwars 2 has alot more pve content but you also have a option to skip it entirely with a chioce to go to max level and just pvp at 80(the level cap). Geargrinding in pve dungeons wont be a focas for this game, Guildwars is a pvp game at heart and thats what a most players that play it will do. I really cant think of mmo I played that has pve only in it. Just go to te websights of the free to plays and pvp will be advertised as a major feature.
Guild Wars 1 wasn't an MMO either. And quite frankly, skipping to the end misses the entire point anyways, which already removes any facet of that being a PvP game. Again, the OP is pining for none arena type PvP, and sof ar I don't find that pvP will be any different from arena style for GW2. This doesn't make GW2 anymore of a PvP game than the other games it is emulating in the genre right now as it transitions to MMO.
Guild Wars 1 wasn't an MMO either. And quite frankly, skipping to the end misses the entire point anyways, which already removes any facet of that being a PvP game. Again, the OP is pining for none arena type PvP, and sof ar I don't find that pvP will be any different from arena style for GW2. This doesn't make GW2 anymore of a PvP game than the other games it is emulating in the genre right now as it transitions to MMO.
Its a pvp game when you have arenas and tournements for them. When you have three servers fighting for control over keeps on a massive pvp map. Your guild can control one of those keeps and your server gets benifits for controlling keeps. Dungeon rewards will be cosmetic upgrades to your gear. Guildwars 1 is considered a mmo and is listed as such. Planetside 2 thats coming out this year some time is a mmo, its a fps/mmo but still consinderd a mmo.
Guild Wars 1 wasn't an MMO either. And quite frankly, skipping to the end misses the entire point anyways, which already removes any facet of that being a PvP game. Again, the OP is pining for none arena type PvP, and sof ar I don't find that pvP will be any different from arena style for GW2. This doesn't make GW2 anymore of a PvP game than the other games it is emulating in the genre right now as it transitions to MMO.
HAHAH guild wars 2 not a PVP game ? The guy / girl trying to discredit me earlyer saying i didnt know anything about game. UHAUHAUH sorry... you are so funny !!!! You probably are roleplaying a clown right now.
You know what, I didn't even get to page 7 (a the time of this posting) before I saw this. Really you KNOW we're not good at it? Just like I KNOW you can't role-play? No, that would be an assumption, based off of a mindset not willing to listen to the setup of this game. I have no idea whether you are or are not a good role-player, so don't assume we complain because we suxx0r in PvP!
If you want somebody to support you:
Know the campaign
Be polite
Now hopefully, you were talked to about this and understand these principles. If not, consider this done. But this goes for everybody on this thread and this forum, myself included.
For everybody's information, the FR is NOT a post-apocolyptical wasteland. It's 100+ years after that horrible event. Yes there's devistation, including some areas that are unstable (called the Plaguelands) which even there supports life, which may or may not mutate into something horrible by "typical" beings'" assessment.
Secondly, as mentioned in many of these posts over and over and over and over again, open world PvP is not a well-supported feature of ANY MMO except Eve online. That may or may not be debated, but what isn't is D&D is NOT THAT KIND OF MMO. D&D is a PnP player-cooperative game made from the ground up as a party-alliance system and recently updated in the 4th ed version to have players balanced to work together as a group even more. Literally fighting one another was not designed in this version, including this MMO porting.
Now, all that written, I DO support PvP, in designated areas where we can choose whether or not to fight. But forcing PvP world wide when the game and system is not designed for it, when we don't have servers but shards, and flaming people trying to get a response is not the way.
Not just grummush, but everybody please learn from this what not to do. Thank you and apologies for any targeting you got for it. But if it helps, consider yourself smote with knowledge if still "attacking."
Now I'll try and get through several more pages before posting.
[QUOTE=grummush;91924]I do realise that alot of you don't want PvP since...obviously...you aren't good at it and don't like to be annoyed while you do your quests and have your own fun! AND i do respect that.
But there is a big potential here to bring the other part of the MMORPG community and make servers with GREAT pvp system to make it a GREAT game for everyone.
I don't think the debate should be about: Is it a coop game or not. MMORPG aren't coop game where you log into a LAN and play with your friends. It is about having a dynamic world where stuff happen.
As i said before, IF there is to have world PVP, there will be non PVP servers so you will have YOUR fun also. But i can tell you that, the other part of MMORPG community want open world PvP, just because it give the games an aspect of competition and it make it more real.
Trust me, in medieval times, you couldn't tell the warlord hunting you:' Hey this is a cooperative world, please leave me alone'. You had to fight for your life, for your familly and for your clan.
Bringing a game closer to reality is simply, the right away to go. Because in the long run, when you finish the 'casette'. What will you do? Wait for expantion and farm for golds? .... Boring ..... Roleplay ? I love to roleplay, but without real social, economic, war implication, it is totally useless. I am not too much into writing poems.[/QUOTE]
Secondly, as mentioned in many of these posts over and over and over and over again, open world PvP is not a well-supported feature of ANY MMO except Eve online. That may or may not be debated, but what isn't is D&D is NOT THAT KIND OF MMO. D&D is a PnP player-cooperative game made from the ground up as a party-alliance system and recently updated in the 4th ed version to have players balanced to work together as a group even more. Literally fighting one another was not designed in this version, including this MMO porting.
Sorry to correct you on this, but Ultima Online, Dark Age of Camelot, Lineage 2, Mortal Online and Darkfall also have some pretty nifty world pvp.
I do agree on the fact that D&D is all about teamplay. I rather see a good PvE game with assigned pvp-areas than a broken world pvp game.
Still with the D&D ruleset and FR setting, you can create safezones. Guards, wanted posters, jails, etc all would make sense. It's all about risk versus reward in pvp.
For everybody's information, the FR is NOT a post-apocolyptical wasteland. It's 100+ years after that horrible event. Yes there's devistation, including some areas that are unstable (called the Plaguelands) which even there supports life, which may or may not mutate into something horrible by "typical" beings'" assessment.
Well, not FR entirely, but as for Neverwinter and its outlying areas, it is pretty dangerous from what I've read with Gauntlgrym and Neverwinter novels. Being a frontier in a region where zombies rise from the ashy remains of the land and whatnot.
Arena PvP or BG systems is a joke. There is a need for open world PvP in a mmorpg. It is not even a question to be asked. There should be non pvp server and pvp server to fit the need of everyone.
BUT in a PvP server, restriction to BGs and Duel is totally..... WoWish, familly value, non competitive, non interesting.
Please only suggest about systems. If you are against PvP, go in a non PvP server.
In MMORPG maybe there is, but not in a group/cooperation centered game like Neverwinter with strict class divisions. Not to mention high level players going after low level players.
WOW is an open world PVP with its faction system.
PK's are simply not worth it. It's frustrating, annoying and no-fun.
The only game that open world PvP can even be called successful is EVE Online and that's kept in check because there are a lot of checks and balances. Every other game that has focused heavily on PvP and PK style gameplay has failed utterly, so saying there is a need for it seems to be a huge misnomer.
OK, here is another take on open pvp...
Considering its a post-apocalyptic world where spellplague is rampant, and every area is dangerous with abominations, only safe place being city walls - think about the morale of residents when they see adventurers backstabbing each other instead of co-operating and saving people.
Why would they give you quests?
And you think the Mayor of cities would allow you to brandish weapons and terrorize the citizens in such a world where human (and others) co-operation is necessary ... sheesh.
I would say its better if you are thrown out of city for even brandishing weapons unless city is under attack!
I do realise that alot of you don't want PvP since...obviously...you aren't good at it and don't like to be annoyed while you do your quests and have your own fun! AND i do respect that.
But there is a big potential here to bring the other part of the MMORPG community and make servers with GREAT pvp system to make it a GREAT game for everyone.
I don't think the debate should be about: Is it a coop game or not. MMORPG aren't coop game where you log into a LAN and play with your friends. It is about having a dynamic world where stuff happen.
As i said before, IF there is to have world PVP, there will be non PVP servers so you will have YOUR fun also. But i can tell you that, the other part of MMORPG community want open world PvP, just because it give the games an aspect of competition and it make it more real.
Trust me, in medieval times, you couldn't tell the warlord hunting you:' Hey this is a cooperative world, please leave me alone'. You had to fight for your life, for your familly and for your clan.
Bringing a game closer to reality is simply, the right away to go. Because in the long run, when you finish the 'casette'. What will you do? Wait for expantion and farm for golds? .... Boring ..... Roleplay ? I love to roleplay, but without real social, economic, war implication, it is totally useless. I am not too much into writing poems.
People who want open world PVP ARENT the minority, they are the majority. The difference is that they won't go on forum and express their interest of it. You have to attract most of them by challenging them differently then just saying, hey let's play AD&D ! What i like about this community yet is that it is non-trolling, great! But it seem that it doesnt want any challenge either........:eek:
Guil Wars 2 is a theme park game (admitted by the company) that focuses more on the PvE (admitted by the company) than the PvP. The PvP is there, but the game is also a free to play game after the initial box, and even more emphasis on their cash shop than their original first title and still a bigger emphasis on the PvE than actual PvP aspects.
Not really dude , the bigger draw to guildwars 1 was the pvp arenas that guilds assumbled teams for. Pve in guildwars was pretty light, guildwars 2 has alot more pve content but you also have a option to skip it entirely with a chioce to go to max level and just pvp at 80(the level cap). Geargrinding in pve dungeons wont be a focas for this game, Guildwars is a pvp game at heart and thats what a most players that play it will do. I really cant think of mmo I played that has pve only in it. Just go to te websights of the free to plays and pvp will be advertised as a major feature.
Well at least I got to page 7 at this thread's life.
Look, again, my personal view is I support PvP just not this game as a world-wide support. If games such as GW 2 were made for PvP that's where you do it, but it seems like there are places for PvE options. Unless they are targeted if they choose NOT to skip to the end, it's not world-wide PvP. If one would argue that it's PvP with PvE sections, then the same argument stahnds with this game and it's a non-sandbox with persistent world parts and PvP sections.
And in 2013, those PvP sections will be supported by those who want to PvP and not by those who don't.
Well, not FR entirely, but as for Neverwinter and its outlying areas, it is pretty dangerous from what I've read with Gauntlgrym and Neverwinter novels. Being a frontier in a region where zombies rise from the ashy remains of the land and whatnot.
Which makes it an area not world PvP. No problem with designated AREA PvP's. If the whole game was mainly made to combat others then fine, have the PvE part for the minorities. But if it's a majority PvE with unstable parts for the rest, then it's mainly PvE whether it's theme park, sandbox or what have you.
Again, which makes it an area not world PvP. No problem with designated AREA PvP's. If the whole game was mainly made to combat others then fine, have the PvE part for the minorities. But if it's a majority PvE with unstable parts for the rest, then it's mainly PvE whether it's theme park, sandbox or what have you.
Simplest solution is to add guildhalls, guildcities, playerhousing and such. Then add limitless stream of npc invaders and all the boys and girls will be too busy with defending their homes. They will forget all about pvp
I am roleplayer and mostly PvE. That being said I loved some of the PvP in Neverwinter Nights 1 that was on select servers. The key to these servers success was they were closely monitored by player developers and had great story lines. These were servers with wide open PvP in someways the the penalty for crossing the line by ganking or spawn point camping was harsh. Don't know if anybody remembers the Neverwinter Nights 1 servers "Three Towns" or "Realm of the Lost legion".
PvP was rare but the threat of PvP was always in the back of ones mind. Made the PvE game even more exciting.
I am roleplayer and mostly PvE. That being said I loved some of the PvP in Neverwinter Nights 1 that was on select servers. The key to these servers success was they were closely monitored by player developers and had great story lines. These were servers with wide open PvP in someways the the penalty for crossing the line by ganking or spawn point camping was harsh. Don't know if anybody remembers the Neverwinter Nights 1 servers "Three Towns" or "Realm of the Lost legion".
PvP was rare but the threat of PvP was always in the back of ones mind. Made the PvE game even more exciting.
Fully supported it. Of course if the development was done with PvP back-story in mind then it makes sense. Adding a world-wide PvP after game release is not feasible (sorry if not know to others, but PvP will not be released at launch in late 2012 and added sometime in early 2013.)
Then to get back on track regarding PvP with constructive ideas. I still refer to my previous post (Page 5, bottom of the page). Also, I am still of the idea that PvP should be something done on the side for PKers and PK hunters to enjoy, and that game "balance" should not ruin PvE for the sake of PvP.
Fully supported it. Of course if the development was done with PvP back-story in mind then it makes sense. Adding a world-wide PvP after game release is not feasible (sorry if not know to others, but PvP will not be released at launch in late 2012 and added sometime in early 2013.)
Indeed that's true. Adding PvP to some part of the world might be possible. That's why we need PvP servers. But you are right, they might be thinking about BGs.
Indeed that's true. Adding PvP to some part of the world might be possible. That's why we need PvP servers. But you are right, they might be thinking about BGs.
Again, problem is this is not a server game, it's a shard game, automatically splintering off when the population is too big. Now if I'm wrong about this and there's enough demand for it, by all means, have a PvP only server like the days of EQ and other MMO's onward. I don't remember my Meridian 59 days, so i can't say if PvP was on that MMORPG, but other games that were out were not MMO's or did not have PvP.
I don't know if this counts as "open" or not, but what about a system like Champions?
If you're not familiar with it, anybody can challenge anybody else to a duel but the person being challenged has the choice of declining and avoiding the battle entirely.
You can't really be PK griefed, but you can still fight in the streets at the drop of a hat with a willing opponent.
I don't know if this counts as "open" or not, but what about a system like Champions?
If you're not familiar with it, anybody can challenge anybody else to a duel but the person being challenged has the choice of declining and avoiding the battle entirely.
You can't really be PK griefed, but you can still fight in the streets at the drop of a hat with a willing opponent.
And this is the part where I admit I'm confused and ask:
What constitutes "open world PvP?" Is it the ability to be attacked at any time anywhere (even if not by anyone) or the ability to challenge anybody at any time? Or is it something else?
Just a little topic about PVP again. If there is to have open world pvp, what do you think the best system would be ?
Here is an example of a great system, in my point of view:
- Notoriety System. You have for example, 5 kills before to be flagged red ( murderer ) and then you can not enter town. ( That is where a housing system is great, or guild keep ).
-Your kill count can go away if you defend town from a great threat ( example ). Lich attack town, you help the militia so if give your notoriety point.
- Kill count goes away with time etc...
Please suggest here, don't talk about anything else.
OJ
I really don't like that sort of PVP system, I personally always play mmo's on PVP servers and like to be able to gank anyone including my own faction if possible, the idea of getting flagged for killing someone is not something i would enjoy... sometimes in WOW i would spend the hole day grifing low-lvls just for the fun of it.
I hope they include instanced PVP zones with 10vs10\ 20vs20\ 40vs40,arenas 2vs2\3vs3\5vs5 teams and open-world PVP.
PVP is a must for me, hope they deliver.
P.s- LOVED THE PAX GAMEPLAY VIDEO.
HAHAH guild wars 2 not a PVP game ? The guy / girl trying to discredit me earlyer saying i didnt know anything about game. UHAUHAUH sorry... you are so funny !!!! You probably are roleplaying a clown right now.
Hey, if you want to call carebear PvP in arenas PvP, go for it. I do love people that call a heavy PvE game a heavy PvP game. It's always fun watching this as they try to grasp at straws. But the only one who has been a clown and being laughed at in this entire thread has been you.
And this is the part where I admit I'm confused and ask:
What constitutes "open world PvP?" Is it the ability to be attacked at any time anywhere (even if not by anyone) or the ability to challenge anybody at any time? Or is it something else?
A PVPer would say that "Open World PVP" is you can be attacked at any time by another player. IE you are always flagged on, and there is no safe area.
The problem I have is the fact NW will be 1 server for both PvE and PvP.
Why do I think that? Because I play CO & STO.
I Have a hard time believing that there will be only one server, NW will be a huge sucess if the game isnt riddled in bugs at launch...
Action MMO's with quality is what is lacking in the MMO industry.
After what i saw in the pax video if the rest of the game looks that solid we will have plenty of servers to play with... plx don't release the game without PVP it will be a dealbreaker for many.
I Have a hard time believing that there will be only one server, NW will be a huge sucess if the game isnt riddled in bugs at launch...
Action MMO's with quality is what is lacking in the MMO industry.
After what i saw in the pax video if the rest of the game looks that solid we will have plenty of servers to play with... plx don't release the game without PVP it will be a dealbreaker for many.
You obviously haven't played any of Cryptic's other games if you believe they can't do just one server.
I Have a hard time believing that there will be only one server, NW will be a huge sucess if the game isnt riddled in bugs at launch...
Action MMO's with quality is what is lacking in the MMO industry.
After what i saw in the pax video if the rest of the game looks that solid we will have plenty of servers to play with... plx don't release the game without PVP it will be a dealbreaker for many.
Cryptic can have a only 1 server. What they do is instance areas, but the server is always the same. I like it and I think they do a great job with it.
They have said that PvP will be later (possibly post release). If they go with open World PvP they will loose just as many players (if not more) than if they did not.
Cryptic can have a only 1 server. What they do is instance areas, but the server is always the same. I like it and I think they do a great job with it.
They have said that PvP will be later (possibly post release). If they go with open World PvP they will loose just as many players (if not more) than if they did not.
OK, just like in GW 1, havent played GW2 yet didnt like GW1:(
They can have guards in towns that kill any that try to Attack another player,
but permit PVP in some non-instanced areas... Action MMO without some kind of world-PVP doesnt seem atractive.
At the very least enable some parts of the world to have PVP without being competitive"BG and arenas" so that I may be able to gank others while they try to quest, I know it sounds bad but I love to gank and most especially i love getting revenge for being killed while questing.
When a high lvl player starts ganking lower-lvl players or any lvl player there is always someone eager to play the good guy and the ganker also has friends and in no time we have hole guilds killing each other and thats lots of fum.
Yeah thaty's why I kept saying shard not server. Cryptic may very likely have ONE NEVERWINTER SERVER split into shards but not selectable. Sorta like instanced areas in DDO and other games. Thus making world PvP not a good idea for the people who are low level and/or do not want PvP and why I supported PvP zones instead.
Personally I want to see for D&D 5-6 person teams against each other in a dungeon off to get a prize, like Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. I believe in the Myagi fighting method: "...fighting not good. But if must fight, win."
Comments
Guil Wars 2 is a theme park game (admitted by the company) that focuses more on the PvE (admitted by the company) than the PvP. The PvP is there, but the game is also a free to play game after the initial box, and even more emphasis on their cash shop than their original first title and still a bigger emphasis on the PvE than actual PvP aspects.
What they could do is:
> A PvP-flagging system
> Include PvP zones like DAoC's frontier or WAR's RvR lakes
PvPers are a minority compared to PvE players in MMORPGs, there's virtually no pure PvP MMORPG out there that has been even remotely successful.
Edit: Not to mention that D&D isn't balanced for PvP as far as classes go, it just isn't meant for it.
Friend Anglomyr, although you prefer those "evil abominations which say they are not evil" I would advise you to not get heartburn and offer you a link.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Don't_feed_the_Troll
You see, a beneficial thread in which everyone was agreeing for arena based combat, or separated pvp zone has turned to a fruitless pvp vs non-pvp thread.
Lets keep our discussions as records for the benefit of community with little spice of humor and sarcasm instead of pointless right/wrong debate.
I didn't think it as pvp vs non-pvp. I just like annoying people like that (ghosts of the past advance!) I know it annoys others but thread was pretty much dead when I really started to annoy him.
Not really dude , the bigger draw to guildwars 1 was the pvp arenas that guilds assumbled teams for. Pve in guildwars was pretty light, guildwars 2 has alot more pve content but you also have a option to skip it entirely with a chioce to go to max level and just pvp at 80(the level cap). Geargrinding in pve dungeons wont be a focas for this game, Guildwars is a pvp game at heart and thats what a most players that play it will do. I really cant think of mmo I played that has pve only in it. Just go to te websights of the free to plays and pvp will be advertised as a major feature.
Guild Wars 1 wasn't an MMO either. And quite frankly, skipping to the end misses the entire point anyways, which already removes any facet of that being a PvP game. Again, the OP is pining for none arena type PvP, and sof ar I don't find that pvP will be any different from arena style for GW2. This doesn't make GW2 anymore of a PvP game than the other games it is emulating in the genre right now as it transitions to MMO.
Its a pvp game when you have arenas and tournements for them. When you have three servers fighting for control over keeps on a massive pvp map. Your guild can control one of those keeps and your server gets benifits for controlling keeps. Dungeon rewards will be cosmetic upgrades to your gear. Guildwars 1 is considered a mmo and is listed as such. Planetside 2 thats coming out this year some time is a mmo, its a fps/mmo but still consinderd a mmo.
HAHAH guild wars 2 not a PVP game ? The guy / girl trying to discredit me earlyer saying i didnt know anything about game. UHAUHAUH sorry... you are so funny !!!!
If you want somebody to support you:
- Know the campaign
- Be polite
Now hopefully, you were talked to about this and understand these principles. If not, consider this done. But this goes for everybody on this thread and this forum, myself included.For everybody's information, the FR is NOT a post-apocolyptical wasteland. It's 100+ years after that horrible event. Yes there's devistation, including some areas that are unstable (called the Plaguelands) which even there supports life, which may or may not mutate into something horrible by "typical" beings'" assessment.
Secondly, as mentioned in many of these posts over and over and over and over again, open world PvP is not a well-supported feature of ANY MMO except Eve online. That may or may not be debated, but what isn't is D&D is NOT THAT KIND OF MMO. D&D is a PnP player-cooperative game made from the ground up as a party-alliance system and recently updated in the 4th ed version to have players balanced to work together as a group even more. Literally fighting one another was not designed in this version, including this MMO porting.
Now, all that written, I DO support PvP, in designated areas where we can choose whether or not to fight. But forcing PvP world wide when the game and system is not designed for it, when we don't have servers but shards, and flaming people trying to get a response is not the way.
Not just grummush, but everybody please learn from this what not to do. Thank you and apologies for any targeting you got for it. But if it helps, consider yourself smote with knowledge if still "attacking."
Now I'll try and get through several more pages before posting.
[QUOTE=grummush;91924]I do realise that alot of you don't want PvP since...obviously...you aren't good at it and don't like to be annoyed while you do your quests and have your own fun! AND i do respect that.
But there is a big potential here to bring the other part of the MMORPG community and make servers with GREAT pvp system to make it a GREAT game for everyone.
I don't think the debate should be about: Is it a coop game or not. MMORPG aren't coop game where you log into a LAN and play with your friends. It is about having a dynamic world where stuff happen.
As i said before, IF there is to have world PVP, there will be non PVP servers so you will have YOUR fun also. But i can tell you that, the other part of MMORPG community want open world PvP, just because it give the games an aspect of competition and it make it more real.
Trust me, in medieval times, you couldn't tell the warlord hunting you:' Hey this is a cooperative world, please leave me alone'. You had to fight for your life, for your familly and for your clan.
Bringing a game closer to reality is simply, the right away to go. Because in the long run, when you finish the 'casette'. What will you do? Wait for expantion and farm for golds? .... Boring ..... Roleplay ? I love to roleplay, but without real social, economic, war implication, it is totally useless. I am not too much into writing poems.[/QUOTE]
Sorry to correct you on this, but Ultima Online, Dark Age of Camelot, Lineage 2, Mortal Online and Darkfall also have some pretty nifty world pvp.
I do agree on the fact that D&D is all about teamplay. I rather see a good PvE game with assigned pvp-areas than a broken world pvp game.
Still with the D&D ruleset and FR setting, you can create safezones. Guards, wanted posters, jails, etc all would make sense. It's all about risk versus reward in pvp.
Well at least I got to page 7 at this thread's life.
Look, again, my personal view is I support PvP just not this game as a world-wide support. If games such as GW 2 were made for PvP that's where you do it, but it seems like there are places for PvE options. Unless they are targeted if they choose NOT to skip to the end, it's not world-wide PvP. If one would argue that it's PvP with PvE sections, then the same argument stahnds with this game and it's a non-sandbox with persistent world parts and PvP sections.
And in 2013, those PvP sections will be supported by those who want to PvP and not by those who don't.
Thanks.
Which makes it an area not world PvP. No problem with designated AREA PvP's. If the whole game was mainly made to combat others then fine, have the PvE part for the minorities. But if it's a majority PvE with unstable parts for the rest, then it's mainly PvE whether it's theme park, sandbox or what have you.
Simplest solution is to add guildhalls, guildcities, playerhousing and such. Then add limitless stream of npc invaders and all the boys and girls will be too busy with defending their homes. They will forget all about pvp
I am roleplayer and mostly PvE. That being said I loved some of the PvP in Neverwinter Nights 1 that was on select servers. The key to these servers success was they were closely monitored by player developers and had great story lines. These were servers with wide open PvP in someways the the penalty for crossing the line by ganking or spawn point camping was harsh. Don't know if anybody remembers the Neverwinter Nights 1 servers "Three Towns" or "Realm of the Lost legion".
PvP was rare but the threat of PvP was always in the back of ones mind. Made the PvE game even more exciting.
Fully supported it. Of course if the development was done with PvP back-story in mind then it makes sense. Adding a world-wide PvP after game release is not feasible (sorry if not know to others, but PvP will not be released at launch in late 2012 and added sometime in early 2013.)
Indeed that's true. Adding PvP to some part of the world might be possible. That's why we need PvP servers. But you are right, they might be thinking about BGs.
Again, problem is this is not a server game, it's a shard game, automatically splintering off when the population is too big. Now if I'm wrong about this and there's enough demand for it, by all means, have a PvP only server like the days of EQ and other MMO's onward. I don't remember my Meridian 59 days, so i can't say if PvP was on that MMORPG, but other games that were out were not MMO's or did not have PvP.
If you're not familiar with it, anybody can challenge anybody else to a duel but the person being challenged has the choice of declining and avoiding the battle entirely.
You can't really be PK griefed, but you can still fight in the streets at the drop of a hat with a willing opponent.
And this is the part where I admit I'm confused and ask:
What constitutes "open world PvP?" Is it the ability to be attacked at any time anywhere (even if not by anyone) or the ability to challenge anybody at any time? Or is it something else?
I really don't like that sort of PVP system, I personally always play mmo's on PVP servers and like to be able to gank anyone including my own faction if possible, the idea of getting flagged for killing someone is not something i would enjoy... sometimes in WOW i would spend the hole day grifing low-lvls just for the fun of it.
I hope they include instanced PVP zones with 10vs10\ 20vs20\ 40vs40,arenas 2vs2\3vs3\5vs5 teams and open-world PVP.
PVP is a must for me, hope they deliver.
P.s- LOVED THE PAX GAMEPLAY VIDEO.
Hey, if you want to call carebear PvP in arenas PvP, go for it. I do love people that call a heavy PvE game a heavy PvP game. It's always fun watching this as they try to grasp at straws. But the only one who has been a clown and being laughed at in this entire thread has been you.
A PVPer would say that "Open World PVP" is you can be attacked at any time by another player. IE you are always flagged on, and there is no safe area.
I Have a hard time believing that there will be only one server, NW will be a huge sucess if the game isnt riddled in bugs at launch...
Action MMO's with quality is what is lacking in the MMO industry.
After what i saw in the pax video if the rest of the game looks that solid we will have plenty of servers to play with... plx don't release the game without PVP it will be a dealbreaker for many.
You obviously haven't played any of Cryptic's other games if you believe they can't do just one server.
Cryptic can have a only 1 server. What they do is instance areas, but the server is always the same. I like it and I think they do a great job with it.
They have said that PvP will be later (possibly post release). If they go with open World PvP they will loose just as many players (if not more) than if they did not.
They can have guards in towns that kill any that try to Attack another player,
but permit PVP in some non-instanced areas... Action MMO without some kind of world-PVP doesnt seem atractive.
At the very least enable some parts of the world to have PVP without being competitive"BG and arenas" so that I may be able to gank others while they try to quest, I know it sounds bad but I love to gank and most especially i love getting revenge for being killed while questing.
When a high lvl player starts ganking lower-lvl players or any lvl player there is always someone eager to play the good guy and the ganker also has friends and in no time we have hole guilds killing each other and thats lots of fum.
Personally I want to see for D&D 5-6 person teams against each other in a dungeon off to get a prize, like Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. I believe in the Myagi fighting method: "...fighting not good. But if must fight, win."