Page 11 of 16 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 155

Thread: PVP rules

  1. #101
    Xsyon Citizen Gamefreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    221

    Re:PVP rules

    JCatano wrote:
    Gamefreak wrote:
    Wait, what point are you actually trying to prove there?

    Lineage I and II may not necessarily apply to the casual gamer, so to speak, but they do follow a very linear style of mmo gameplay. You buy power ups, you kill monsters, you level up. It's like a traditional korean grind fest. People who play mmos usually associate that sort of gameplay with them, not styles of gameplay found in EvE online, Darkfall, MO or Wurm to name a few.

    What people need is assurance that the game they are preordering will be appealing. With no marketing, a different style of gameplay, no open beta and new types of gaming concepts, this assurance is going to be hard to come by.

    EvE also has a more, how to put it, large development team? It also has many more things under its belt then xsyon can claim to have.

    World of warcraft came off highly successful RTS games that made the series popular before it was even complete. So the assurance there was made before the game was already released. By assurance, I mean assurance in the sense people know it has a higher chance of being a successful game, rather than a failure.
    You said if a game doesn't appeal to the casual gamer, it won't succeed. I gave you examples of ones that have. Pretty simple. All three of those are pretty darn hardcore. PK, loot, and grindy (even with EVE's time-based skill system.)

    Lineage being linear is irrelevant.

    EVE started with a team no bigger than Darkfall (30'ish). Xsyon's page shows 19 developers. Less, but not a massive difference.

    With regard to WoW, I am speaking in terms of it being an MMO. Mass commercial marketing driven by popular icons is a huge reason they have almost 12 million subscriptions. While it likely would have still had a lot of subs without that type of marketing, it certainly wouldn't have been 12 million. Many, many people state WoW as their first MMO and you can bet it's because of Blizzard's marketing strategy for it.
    You highlighted one part of my entire argument and tried to prove me wrong. That was one sentence out of two paragraphs ...

    I'm not going to spend days trying to explain to you what I mean. Not being applicable to the casual gamer is only one of the reasons I listed for its marketing being in jeopardy. People know games that follow linear gameplay in terms of the "normality" of mmos tend to succeed, ones that do not, tend to not succeed so much. Once again, usually.

    You listed games that have succeeded that were not designed for the casual gamer. This is, however, a very small portion of successful games. Most games that succeed are applicable to the casual gamer. Lets say for every 100 games, three that are not applicable to the average gamer succeed. Lets also say that out of 100 games, 60 that are applicable to the average gamer succeed. Are you going to model your game after the idea that has a 3% chance to succeed, or the one that has a 60% chance to succeed. Logic would seem to tell us to choose the one with a 60% chance. Also, this is not like betting on the underdog in a boxing match, if your game is less applicable to the casual gamer, you will attain less money per month because you attract less people. Thus there is no benefit for choosing a game that has no application to the casual gamer. Note that I am not claiming that my percents are anywhere near being accurate, however, the success rate for games that are applicable to the casual gamer is higher than the ones that are not. This was the purpose of the percentiles. So in short, your argument is no more valid than it was when you made your fist comment. That is, not at all.

  2. #102

    Re:PVP rules

    Gamefreak -

    I addressed your entire post in my last reply, highlighting the part that was absolutely wrong. Anyway...

    You started by saying games won't be successful unless casual. After I gave examples of successful "hardcore" games, you started talking about linear gameplay. Finally, you mixed those 2 words into one statement for some sort of point.

    Your casual/linear mantra doesn't explain why Star Wars Galaxies actually lost subscriptions after they revamped it to a "normal" MMO. It doesn't explain UO or Asheron's Call. It doesn't explain the anti-casual, grindtastic asian MMOs which place 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 8th, and 9th on the Forbes MMO earning list. It will never explain EVE (#15 on Forbes). On that note, it does not relate to the fact that there are a number of sandbox, PvP-oriented MMOs in development. No reason to code one if it there isn't a perceived market.

    Here's another fact: Per Raph Koster, most MMOs do not succeed regardless of type. He said it's something like 7% of MMOs developed make a profit. While WoW is #1 in revenue, the majority of the top list are very grindy games along with 3 "hardcore" ones in the top 15 (Lineage I/II and EVE). Sure doesn't sound like casual is the only way to go.

    If a game is good... It's good. If it sucks... It won't ever come close to making that Forbes list.

  3. #103

    Re:PVP rules

    It's pretty much what JCatano said. The reason some of those other "hardcore" MMOs (Darkfall, Mortal Online) "failed" in the eyes of gamers is because the design decisions were very limited or because the game didn't have everything that was promised and/or were buggy.

    The reason Eve is consistently GAINING subscriptions is because there are enough different things for the players to do, there are places for everyone. The Hardcore PVPers get to keep to their low-sec space and the not-so-hardcore players can live in high sec in relative safety.

    Having FFA-PVP is a very quick way to lose potential customers. So many wouldn't even touch Darkfall with a 10 foot pole because of the FFA nature of the game. Combine that with a skill system that encourges macroers, characters with higher skills and stats having a very significant advantage over newbies, and a one-way item progression system. And it's no wonder the game can't hold on to players. New players don't stick and the vets leave because there's nothing to do and no newbies to gank.

  4. #104

    Re:PVP rules

    Darkfall lacked a system that discouraged random griefing and zergs. That was it's main problem, this was of course compounded by the fact that Aventurine (the devs) take too long to do anything about problems.

    Mortal online is just a buggy piece of shit.

    I don't see how this game couldn't appeal to casual gamers though, I mean it doesn't hold your hand and play the game for you like other games (WOW) but I don't see it as a hardcore grindfest either.

  5. #105
    Xsyon Citizen Gamefreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    221

    Re:PVP rules

    To be honest, this game reminds me of wurm online, if any of you guys have heard of that. Of course we can't really be judging this game until it's complete I suppose. It's unfair to judge an unfinished product.

    Also, I didn't say casual was the only way to go. I said non-casual was probably a way that will not succeed, and or would be less probable for success. IE casual is the smarter way to go for a business model. Or if that doesn't work for you, the easiest business model.

    In general we should probably stop trying to give this game judgment right now. Not because it doesn't have flaws or because anyone is right or wrong, it's just not a great time to debate over it. The debate going on in this thread would probably be better done AFTER the game is released, as to not go in circles.

    And yeah, mortal online is a buggy piece of shit. That much I agree with.

    The game doesn't really apply to a casual gamer because of the time that will need to be spent making your character being anything relevant. The key word is "casual", which in most circumstances the game isn't being played to extreme extents, or even what we hardcore gamers would even consider normal.

  6. #106

    Re:PVP rules

    Gamefreak wrote:
    Also, I didn't say casual was the only way to go. I said it was probably a way that will not succeed, and or would be less probable for success. IE the smarter way to go for a business model. Or if that doesn't work for you, the easiest business model.

    In general we should probably stop trying to give this game judgment right now. Not because it doesn't have flaws or because anyone is right or wrong, it's just not a great time to debate over it. The debate going on in this thread would probably be better done AFTER the game is released, as to not go in circles.
    I think you unintentionally contridicted yourself in the first paragraph I quoted.

    I disagree with your view in the second paragraph I quoted. The best time to debate about it is now, before the majority of gamers try it. Because of Mortal Online and Darkfall, A LOT of gamers refuse to preorder and wait for the game to release. An even larger amount wait until people pass judgement of the release. This means that debating about it now and getting the developers attention focused on things that should change is the best course of action because most of the potential customers aren't really giving this game any attention right now.

  7. #107
    Xsyon Citizen Gamefreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    221

    Re:PVP rules

    "It" should be "non casual" in that paragraph

    Woops. Respectively edited :P.

    I see your point there, though.

  8. #108
    Xsyon Citizen Xx1327's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    USA,Florida
    Posts
    406
    Quote Originally Posted by mrcalhou View Post
    Gamefreak wrote:


    I think you unintentionally contridicted yourself in the first paragraph I quoted.

    I disagree with your view in the second paragraph I quoted. The best time to debate about it is now, before the majority of gamers try it. Because of Mortal Online and Darkfall, A LOT of gamers refuse to preorder and wait for the game to release. An even larger amount wait until people pass judgement of the release. This means that debating about it now and getting the developers attention focused on things that should change is the best course of action because most of the potential customers aren't really giving this game any attention right now.
    this guy

  9. #109
    After Life: Players should be given a 2-5 min timer after death allowing possible resurrection via allied player. Else they can choose to walk to nearest Church/Totem for resurrection. After timer is through they may choose to teleport to nearest Aligned church.

    This will presumably prevent exploiting death for extra long distance travel while creating a fair environment.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Onto Penalties: Evil vrs Good. This of course takes my course of thinking back to Ultima-Onlines Faction & Penalty system. Obviously the idea behind Good and Evil is to create a factional war between players. In Ultima Online this was done by creating Chaos and Order ( Lord Britania vrs Lord Blackthorn ) Both wherein defended individual rights but had different ideals. Thus to become true Evil you grief other players losing karma the choice being individual based and not representative of a faction or guild in-whole. Should one of your guild/faction-mate chose Evil you were then required to choose whether you wanted to defend him or consequently make him fend for himself. If you chose to defend him; you may then need to take a few lives lowering your own karma. If he did not initiate the fight with the enemy and they "Flagged grey" on him he will not further karma himself however.

    After an Evil player dies they are penalized skill points by a small % to ea skill.
    After an Innocent player died they lose fame and held goods while having to walk the walk of shame.

    The benefit to being Evil having be able to take the spoils of an easy kill. To become Evil you were required to kill 5 or more innocent players the more you've killed the greater the penalty.

    This system worked the most part for Ultima Online until UOA came out, and bounty hunters were far too difficult to elude while skill loss was overly dramatic, so in conclusion stat loss was removed.

    Next Ultima Online came out with additional factions! 4 in total, and each faction battle for NPC town sigils to control markets yada yada. They added temporary stat loss to keep players from being repeatedly supportive during battles which lasted roughly 5 minutes and each additional death further degraded stats while increasing the cooldown timer.

    While Xsyon has no faction based war we simply rely on Good vrs Evil. Neutral being between the two. Evil is expected to kill to gain some sort of tribe reputation while good and neutral are expected to do something else and not kill random players. What I don't like is being at a complete disadvantage if I want conflict!

    ~~~~~~~ Thusly I propose this ~~~~~~~
    Order: Belief in Absolute Justice, Order, & Rule.

    Chaos: Belief in Individual Expression, Chaos, and Freedom.

    Neutral: Takes no sides.

    Evil: Individual Alignment Change from Killing Innocent Players.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    This will allow Care-bears a safe haven in neutrality while Giving a balanced war on beliefs between two factions. Evil players may / may-not receive a penalty, and be kill-able by any player less they work off their sins by waiting xx hours for ea kill to work-off.

    Anyways Um hrm um.... What were we Talking about?

  10. #110
    My two cents

    Good:
    Random number of skills and random point loss from those skills. 50% easier to regain lost skills till the points equal with what was lost; then normal skill gain beyond that point.
    Good players don't lose items and loss 50% less skills when death results on Tribal Land. 25% health and stamina is rewarded on respawn with a time.
    Spawn to on death: Tribe Totem or the starting location for that character, with 25% Health, zero Stamina.
    Must first give an enforced notification of war to all Good/Netural tribes before entering into war with them. Automatically entered into War with Evil tribes.

    Netural:
    Random number of skills and random point loss from those skills. 25% easier to regain lost skills till the points equal with what was lost; then normal skill gain beyond that point.
    Netrual players don't lose items and 25% less skills when death results on Tribal Land. 13% health and stamina is rewarded on respawn with a time.
    Spawn to on death: Tribe Totem or the starting location for that chracter, with 13% Health and Stamina.
    Must first give an enforced notification of war to all Good/Netural tribes before entering into war with them. Can decide if they wish to war with Evil tribes.

    Evil:
    Random number of skills and random point loss from those skills. Regaining those skills requires 100% work to equal the points lost.
    Evil players don't suffer any skill loss when death results on Tribal Land. On first respawn, evil players get 25% Health and Stamina and is reduced by half on each death after that. (See note)
    Spawn to on death: Tribe Totem or starting location for that character, with 13% Health, 0% Stamina.
    Can war with any tribe without notice.

    Any player killing an evil player more than four times on tribal lands will suffer "kama" reduction, therefore it may be a good idea to die more than four times to force good players to reduce their "Good" ratings.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •