- Nov 25, 2019
You need to make a PvP game where the shitty players like myself still have fun. Nothing worse than constantly being attached by veteran players who have tons of time in the game over-powering everyone.
No way, people were still plenty toxic back then. There's just more people overall playing now, so that percentage represents a higher number of players.I think the toxicity and mindset of players have changed drastically since then. You can see that in other games where people do everything to make streamers miserable (streamsniping) for example.
I have no faith that the system they were going for would be fun for solo players either.
Rust has become the worst beast. The original Rust was fun for everyone involved. You could cause a lot of mayhem whether you were new or had a 2 week run. Idk why they fucking ruined that.
Has it though? Ultima Online was full of anecdotes about experienced players tormenting newbies by, e.g., building bookcases around their characters so that they would be permanently stuck.
That's also a pretty interesting idea. In general I feel the attacker(s) should always be in a disadvantage.Another solution would be scaling attack damage depending on the gap between player levels. So if your attacker is many levels above you, your attacks do a lot more damage to them and their attacks do a lot less. You could balance it out to create more or less even fights. Ofcourse, player experience with the mechanics matters as well, but that could also be accounted for.
The advantage would be that if a bunch of max level players started attacking a newbie, they would do miniscule damage, making griefing difficult.
Of course, I'm just spitballing here. Who knows what problems this mechanic might bring up.
The pvp people want involves killing other players. No need to be so condescending.I mean, I don't think PvP absolutely has to involve you killing the other player(s). PvP only really has to mean that you're competing with the other player(s), right? Maybe the people who are so against this idea need to realize that there are other ways to compete with people that don't involve killing their characters.
They can point to whatever focus tests they want to.
Wow has an option to enable/disable pvp in all servers. You can change it on the fly. Having pvp enabled gives you certain boosts (like more xp).
Or just do it like wow.why don't they just separate the servers then
I always find it interesting that devs don't like to give options on this front. Us PvE players know how to get the most out of a game that has the option to flag PvP or not. There is a reason why PvE servers still strive in tons of mmorpgs. Because the community and heads of those servers know how to keep people interested. If people get bored of it, they can just transfer off.....not hard
There really aren't any decent, full pvp, non-survival, massively multiplayer games out there. Things like Rust, Age of Conan, and Atlas (lol) have limited server numbers and don't provide an equivalent gameplay experience to other, older pvp-centric games. The other MMORPGs on the market don't have the option for non-instanced pvp (ESO, GW2, FFXIV) or the option to flag pvp is kinda crappy (WoW). But there's no real reason that open pvp and other forms of player competition can't exist side-by-side, it's just that there's an inherent gameplay style that arises when open, player killing-focused pvp is a thing.
I think you are just not looking... At all. Maybe you are part of the problem? Wishing for the PVP-focused MMO, and then NOT playing anything that comes out.
Black Desert doesn't really count. That game is the emobidiment of pay-to-win if you even want to get strong enough to participate in pvp. You need pets to make money at anything resembling a decent rate and the only way to reliably get pets is from the cash shop--and they're $10 lol. Albion is pretty awful and has been struggling for a bit, as is Legends of Aria. It's telling when a fan-run server is more popular than the official ones.I think you are just not looking... At all. Maybe you are part of the problem? Wishing for the PVP-focused MMO, and then NOT playing anything that comes out.
There is Black Desert (PVP all but towns) or Albion (PVP in all but towns/low level areas). Pretty sure the list is much longer.
That quote is pretty much what I came to say. I didn’t get far in the alpha, but from the little I played the whole point of the game seemed to be its pvp and without it I’m not sure for whom this game is for. And as someone who didn’t get far, there were ways to get around the ganking already in the game like random spawn points after death, sanctuaries, and inventory banks in said sanctuaries.yeah you can see people angrily quoting the devs in the comments on their dev blog about pvp
“The spine of the game is player versus player combat. You’ll probably be murdered in New World. So, yes, players will be able to freely kill other players, but we have a number of systems like Sanctuary and Criminal Justice, which add interesting consequence and drama to that experience. I came to realize that the constant press of danger was fundamental to the thrill of the game—making New World a peaceful world would deprive players of the stakes and drama of trying to forge a new life in an uncaring and supernatural wilderness.” - Patrick Gilmore (Studio Director
You aren't playing the game because it asks $10 for the pet? Just buy the pet. WoW asks $15 every month, Runescape asks for $10. However, I am aware of cash-shop in BDO. If have you played the game for long, you might have a better understanding.Black Desert doesn't really count. That game is the emobidiment of pay-to-win if you even want to get strong enough to participate in pvp. You need pets to make money at anything resembling a decent rate and the only way to reliably get pets is from the cash shop--and they're $10 lol. Albion is pretty awful and has been struggling for a bit, as is Legends of Aria. It's telling when a fan-run server is more popular than the official ones.
So, correction I guess: There aren't any good open pvp MMOs other than Old School Runescape I guess?
Not really. There were 2 pvp modes in the game during alpha, the open world stuff that’s getting removed and the outpost sieges which I’m guessing are still there. Basically theres outpost all over the map and guilds are able to purchase them with enough gold. Other guilds are able to challenge your ownership of said plot by scheduling a siege which starts a timer for a pvp match in the map for the plot. The timer is in days and there’s a cooldown attached so everyone is able to prep and recover from sieges before the next one.
Kinda waiting for Amazon to stop developing games tbh. New World and that awful esport game makes me wonder if they will ever be able to output anything good. They would still have Lumberyard. They could just develop that and leave the games to the studios that know how to make them.Always seemed strange to me Amazon was making such a hardcore game that would drive the majority of people away in droves. I had my fun in rust but full loot open PvP is brutal and get's tiresome unless you have a ganksquad. So this is honestly probably a smarter move to appeal to a bigger demographic. However nothing I've seen of this games PVE offering seems compelling enough to attract people long term. We'll see how it shapes up.
Exactly.Ultima Online mostly solved this already. Do an aggressive version of a system that puts bounties on player killers, so you have a lot of people hunting down murderers.
MMO developers are still terrified of allowing for freeform drama between players in 2020? What, do we need another WoW clone? I thought the entirety of the 2010s already showed us that there's nowhere to go with that formula that doesn't result in your players going back to the real thing.
It's so strange that the Souls games put this system in a game primarily played solo, and were very popular, but actual MMOs shy away from it.
We have people in this thread blaming "carebears" instead of the toxic players. The toxicity is unfortunately widespread.
Wow. How to kill any hype your game had in a single paragraph.There has been speculation that we have moved away from PvP, this isn’t the case at all. PvP is important to us and we are committed to ensuring it plays a significant role in our game. To be specific, by PvP we mean, fair fights that are organized, skill based, and opted into by all participants. Not PKing (Player Killing), which is a predatory behavior that relies on exploiting another player’s lack of experience, progress, readiness, or willingness.
So it's like eve where there are pve and pvp zones?Not really. There were 2 pvp modes in the game during alpha, the open world stuff that’s getting removed and the outpost sieges which I’m guessing are still there. Basically theres outpost all over the map and guilds are able to purchase them with enough gold. Other guilds are able to challenge your ownership of said plot by scheduling a siege which starts a timer for a pvp match in the map for the plot. The timer is in days and there’s a cooldown attached so everyone is able to prep and recover from sieges before the next one.