Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Is the game still Open PvP?


Pathfinder Online

1 to 50 of 103 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

Before I go and start a "Open PvP is a really bad idea thread" I want to be sure this is the path the devs are taking.

Obviously, I think it's an awful idea to have this as the 'default' game system. Play Lineage 2 or any other Open PvP game and you'll see why this is a bad idea.

Am I condeming it? Not at all. But a flag-system for the basic servers should be the norm. Let's have PvP servers as well, but I know that I am the only one of my friends who will bother trying the finished game at all on an Open PvP scale, on the off chance that somehow this time it'll work.

Because I really don't think it will. No matter how smart the devs are, you give someone the option to be a douchebag, they'll be a douchebag. That's basically what it means to be a 'criminal' in these games. Doing something primarily for your own benefit at the expense of another.

If it's a *choice* it makes all the difference. Give an Xp penalty to having your PVP flag down, I don't care, as long as I can choose to turn off the "please gank me, and take some of my stuff, destroying the rest" button.

Darn, I ended up ranting about it anyways.

Goblin Squad Member

Yes. If that worries you, allow me to offer you my business card.

Goblin Squad Member

Blindeye wrote:
Obviously, I think it's an awful idea to have this as the 'default' game system. Play Lineage 2 or any other Open PvP game and you'll see why this is a bad idea.

What about Eve? If I play Eve Online, will I see that this is a bad idea?

And I think we disagree on how you define the word "condemn". Yessir. Disagree.

Goblin Squad Member

Blindeye wrote:

Before I go and start a "Open PvP is a really bad idea thread" I want to be sure this is the path the devs are taking.

Obviously, I think it's an awful idea to have this as the 'default' game system. Play Lineage 2 or any other Open PvP game and you'll see why this is a bad idea.

Am I condeming it? Not at all. But a flag-system for the basic servers should be the norm. Let's have PvP servers as well, but I know that I am the only one of my friends who will bother trying the finished game at all on an Open PvP scale, on the off chance that somehow this time it'll work.

Because I really don't think it will. No matter how smart the devs are, you give someone the option to be a douchebag, they'll be a douchebag. That's basically what it means to be a 'criminal' in these games. Doing something primarily for your own benefit at the expense of another.

If it's a *choice* it makes all the difference. Give an Xp penalty to having your PVP flag down, I don't care, as long as I can choose to turn off the "please gank me, and take some of my stuff, destroying the rest" button.

Darn, I ended up ranting about it anyways.

Yes it is going to be open PVP, and in general the mechanics, design etc... as far as territorial control etc... Just plain will not logically work without PVP enabled. The general concept of actually being able to make a settlement, enforce the laws, claim harvesting areas, set up opperations on that end etc... just plain cannot work with the idea of non-flagged players. As well if PVP the game actually needs to be designed for such, and thus not work without it. Much like how age of connan pretty much died the second they made non-pvp servers.

Liniage, I would say the biggest flaw with it in PVP was the extreme difference in power levels between new and veteran players. In PFO they do not intend for the game to be lopsided enough that even the best geared player, would be able to consistantly take on 10 newbies alone, and win every time. Ryan has even made a statement that he does not intend for a level 1 player to lose to a level 20 player 100% of the time (now obviously higher skills do need to grant an advantage, but there is a difference between the advantages of say having max skills in games like eve, where a new character using the right time, strategy and such, can take out someone with 10x their skills, and a game like WoW where a vet can AFK for a half an hour while being attacked by someone 15 levels lower, and not even have reason to worry as the newbie has no chance to hurt him.

Goblin Squad Member

Also, there will be only one server in this game.


You gotta rethink how you play mmos before you start off in Pathfinder Online (if you are not used to this kind of games). You can't run around solo grinding mobs without a care in the world. Find yourself a group of nice guys to hang out with, go on adventures, hunt bandits, or just defend your territory.

Goblin Squad Member

Some Key Thought Provoking Ideas:

• The guy being a "criminal" in the game, is the same guy providing someone else with someone to hunt.

• Parity between a "Vet" and a "Newb" will enable McNoobish to handle his own.

• Citing how other games failed to balance open PvP isn't really a good basis of expectations. The PFO developers have a good idea of what did and didn't work in just about every major MMO produced in the last 15 years. They can innovate on the past.

• The only XP will be you sitting in the chair, earning real time experience in how to fight and maneuver, craft and trade, organize and govern. Everything your characters will learn they won't have to kill goblins or boars to access that knowledge.

• One server, One realm, where scalable levels of risk and reward will be available. Want to play it safe, stay close to the NPC sponsored civilization. Don't mind fighting and dying for your loot, welcome to the deep woods with the rest of us.

Goblin Squad Member

This blog: To Live and Die in the River Kingdoms explains most of this.

In a nutshell: A sandbox mmorpg requires all of PvP, PvE, Economy, Open-world interactions to integrate, otherwise it's closer to themepark content; ie if People are the No.1 Content then that's potentially much more dynamic than AI mobs can hope to replicate.

The key argument you have is that if you allow players to act like xyz, they'll devolve the whole game into xyz. Generally video-games seem to suffer this problem severely. The other Themepark PvE mmorpgs avoid the problem, they don't solve it. As a result those games are limited interaction/social experiences I've found.

MMORPGs are intended to be steadily evolving virtual worlds, if you limit those interactions of players, it speeds up the time with which players will find the static content becomes stale. Or in other words a new game has a fresh experience makes for a better choice, when your investment in a single game can't generate new/exciting stories beyond what you already found in the first 3-6 months of a game. Time to move on.

So pvp or even the presence of pvp in open-world has a lot of potential value. Just a question of implementation to balance it's influence so it's not full-scale FFA grief-fest. Ie the players are the main content, is potentially way more interesting than AI, but within very carefully worked out limits.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think if PFO wasn't open PVP, that would take away it's whole raison d'être. PVP is a core mechanic and I think it's not only gonna work as a competitive mechanic like in many other MMOs where you have instanced battlegrounds (I so loathe that system), but it's a natural part of your ingame-life. Danger lurks everywhere - not in the sense of constant grieving but in the sense that, well a world like this has its dangers. Finito. Just because it's open PVP doesn't mean it's only a hardcore PVP game for competitive players that don't do anything else their whole life.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Simply put there are two types of games. Those that cater to Open World PVPers, and those that don't.

As a non-griefing open world PVPer I can say that games that don't turn the majority of the map into a non-consensual open world PVP area never offer partial substitutes I find satisfying, because Open World PVP is prettymuch an all or nothing thing. Little zones areas or flags you can turn on and off can not be used to wage full scale wars in a game environment that offers nearly complete freedom in how you want to play your character.

Simply put, if you are not willing to try open world PVP this game will not be catered to you. If you are bold enough to attempt it though, we'd be glad to have you as a part of the PFO community.

It's your choice but please don't try to destroy this game for the community willing to play an open world PVP game who already gave hundreds of thousands of dollars of Kickstarter money knowing that Open World PVP had been promised.

Goblin Squad Member

Agreed with the above: It's going to be open PvP, on one world: There is no pure PvE option. However, don't let that stop you from making it a PvE game if you want to.

I'll admit, I'm not super-happy with this design either; I played EvE Online for a bit, and the all-PvP part really bugged me. However, with some hindsight and perspective, I've realized that what bugged me wasn't the ABILITY to gank anyone, it was that so many players did that. It wasn't the design of the game, it was what that design said about people in general. Go watch The Dark Knight or read some Nietzsche; that's what EvE Online seemed to be saying.

However, PFO also will have a few things EvE doesn't: Bounties if you're murdered (ganked in relatively "safe" zones) and a built-in Alignment system, to name two.

This is a sandbox game: You can do almost anything you want to do. If you don't want to fight other players, you don't have to; there will be plenty of monsters and dungeons. However, you do have to keep in mind that other players can and will fight you. To paraphrase Firefly: "A horse helps you get a job, a sword helps you keep it."

And to quote the most important lesson newbies learn in EvE Online:

Only Carry Stuff You Can Afford To Lose.

Oh, one last note: If you're worried about losing almost all of your stuff when you die, don't worry so much. If you haven't played EvE, PFO will have a similar equipment economy, namely that decent gear is pretty cheap. Getting a full set of useful combat gear isn't very expensive; it's the super-good combat gear that costs a pretty penny, and that's only used in serious battles/duels/dungeons. Again, if you don't want to lose a lot when you die, don't carry a lot of stuff around.

I hope that helps.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Open world PVP? So its gonna be a gankfest like AOC and Aion? Constantly going through one class change(read Nerf) after the other becuase some noob got ripped by another class while he failed at his own? Good luck with that, and welcome to Free to Play....

Goblin Squad Member

Vexous wrote:
Open world PVP? So its gonna be a gankfest like AOC and Aion? Constantly going through one class change(read Nerf) after the other becuase some noob got ripped by another class while he failed at his own? Good luck with that, and welcome to Free to Play....

^It's skill-progression with archetype paths, not class system == as AoC/Aion.

So the OP made one post on thread and one post ever? Not sure how constructive this thread is...

To add a reference on social organization:

Nobel Conference 2008- Robin I. M. Dunbar if you have a spare hour, it's some great science. Maybe even applicable to MMORPGs?

5-15-50-150... Obviously dependent on how much time ppl have to socialize online/with their hobbists/with friends etc...

Goblin Squad Member

Vexous, have you ever played/watched videos of EvE Online? Yes, it can turn into a gankfest, but the gankers pay a stiff price; murder isn't cheap. Well, it is out in the boonies far from town, but you're taking your life into your hands out there anyway. Bring some friends and keep your eyes sharp.

In PFO, if you're unlawfully ganked, you can put a bounty on the attacker. That means that the next person to kill the murderer gets the bounty. More importantly, the next person to kill the murderer CAN DO SO WITH NO PENALTY. So yes, you may have just lost some valuable stuff, but if you put so much as a 10gp bounty on the murderer's head, he'll never be able to sleep safe again.

So, yes, it will be more PvP focused, but that doesn't mean you have to be a PvP nut to play. Just don't carry what you can't afford to lose, and don't head out into the wilderness alone unless you really know what you're doing.


I am really not sure how the bounty system will work out. If you are rich it will be fine i guess. But if you are struggling saving up for something you want, get ganked and lose a lot of stuff, i dont know how eager you will be to pay a lot of gold for some random guy to die, setting you further back into the game. Just seems like a double loss to me.

What we will probably see is people banding together whenever they venture into dangerous territory. Hopefully this will make for some really good gameplay. Caravans, bandits, mercenaries , scouts, spies, alliances, wars etc.

Goblin Squad Member

A lot of gold? That's the beauty of the bounty system as currently designed: It doesn't matter if it's 1000gp or just 1gp, at least the target is marked as "having a bounty" and can be killed once, anywhere, completely legally. Sure, most bounty hunter wouldn't take a 1gp bounty, but some might; plus, if someone ganks him once, he can't bounty them; in fact, they'd collect your bounty!

Goblin Squad Member

As someone who completely ignores the PvP aspect of other MMOs I have this to say about the direction of PFO:

I cannot wait for it!

Let me repeat that. I NEVER engage in PvP in other MMOs. I am very much looking forward to getting my hands on PFO.

PFO looks to have PvP that actually has a reason for existing. That to me makes all the difference in the world.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

Arbalester wrote:
Vexous, have you ever played/watched videos of EvE Online? Yes, it can turn into a gankfest, but the gankers pay a stiff price; murder isn't cheap.

Burn Jita.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I kid you not guys, I'm seriously hoping this works. But, after seeing game communities utterly wiped out due to pvp making any sort of pve next to impossible, the words "open world" just makes me cringe.

Right off the bat you'll drive away a ton of potential customers site unseen because of it. You also get stuck with playing in a group and life being what it is, sometimes the groups schedule and yours just doesn't hook up well. Essentially, by doing this they're already limiting their market, and in todays MMO world that usually ends up with a ton of word of mouth advertising thats all bad. Usually right before the game goes Free to Play.

The obvious counter to my argument is of course,"Maybe this game just isn't for you! Get the #^&* out noob!" Fair enough, but that also leads to a lot people doing just that and the game going into the Free and Unsupported category....

Still, this is Paizo and they turn out some amazing stuff. Heres to hoping they can work this one.

Goblin Squad Member

Vexous wrote:
Usually right before the game goes Free to Play.

Except they are going to launch with a free to play option. As well as a subscription option.

So saying that a title going F2P is a sign of failure will not apply to PFO.

Goblin Squad Member

Vexous wrote:

-snip-

Right off the bat you'll drive away a ton of potential customers site unseen because of it. You also get stuck with playing in a group and life being what it is, sometimes the groups schedule and yours just doesn't hook up well. Essentially, by doing this they're already limiting their market, and in todays MMO world that usually ends up with a ton of word of mouth advertising thats all bad. -snip-

Still, this is Paizo and they turn out some amazing stuff. Heres to hoping they can work this one.

The corollary to that is "Why are all MMORPGs solo now/Will we ever see another social MMORPG since the good-old, bad-old days?"

What players want is a "living, breathing world" that phrase is used time and again. If that starts to work I'm sure that sort of word of mouth will buy out any initial "open-pvp only" talk; it's bound to given other fantasy themepark mmorpg tend to reach their peak in a few months. That all said, I'm tempted to think how GW selects players and allows players into Golarion must have a big influence. Eg why would you join a social activity with people who you can't stand/have nothing in common with?


Hello,

I found this game some time ago and have been following it, primarilly precisely because it is attempting to create a true virtual world, as opposed to a collection of mini-games which just happen to reside on the same server.

Fully integrated PvP is a "must-have" component if you want to build a true virtual world.

I hope that the developers are able to turn out a good product here, because there are currently no solid Sandbox MMOs on the market other than Eve.

Here's hoping . . .

-Faohs

Goblin Squad Member

Open World: A game where you are (relatively) unrestricted in where you travel and what you may encounter.

Unrestricted PvP: A game where you are able to be attacked at any time by another player and cannot opt out of that condition.

Full Loot: A game where anything you had on your body when you die is either destroyed or can be taken by another character.

Limited PvP: A game where PvP activity occurs but with restrictions.

Limited Loot: A game where some items you had on your body when you die may be able to be taken by other characters, with restrictions.

Pathfinder Online will be an Open World game with Limited PvP and Limited Loot.

The PvP restrictions will be that there may be some places where you cannot attack or be attacked, there are some places where attacking without the right to do so will trigger a response that will kill you (maybe before you are able to kill your target).

The Loot restrictions will be that you will retain the weapon and armor you were wearing when you died, and if someone other than you attempts to loot your corpse, some or all of the rest of your inventory will be destroyed, but if you can reach your corpse first you can recover everything you had when you died.

We think that these limitations will address the majority of the dysfunctional griefing activities that plague games with Open World Full PvP Full Loot. If they don't we'll keep working on the system until we find a good balance of restrictions and freedom that keeps such antisocial activity to a minimum.

RyanD

Shadow Lodge Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I still don't understand how somebody killing me and looting my corpse, thus destroying my equipment, prevents griefing? It seems like you're making it more efficient for them.


Ryan,

Zone-based PvP is excellent. There are clearly good reasons to have some restrictions to PvP.

Typically, these restrictions come in three forms: (a) server-based, (b) flag-based, and (c) zone-based.

Of the three, zone-based restrictions offer the best way to properly integrate PvP into a game. Segregation of servers simply segregates the population; as we all know, separate ain't equal. Flagging systems break immersion and are easily exploitable.

Zoning works. It creates a system where those who wish to focus on PvE play can do so, while providing plenty of PvP opportunities. More importantly, it integrates these styles of play into a cohesive game whereby one is rewarded by risking PvP, but not forced to do so. Eve does this quite well.

Lootability is also excellent, although many people will disagree. It is an effective money-sink that removes digital capital from the game, thus helping to create a vibrant economy and giving crafters and traders a true place in the game.

I am glad to hear that the developers here understand this.

The hardcore PvE element must understand that, if it is to be a true virtual world, the game cannot revolve around the happiness of a single individual. Although an individual may lose his or her equipment from time to time, the game as a whole benefits by the destruction and transfer of virtual goods.

-Faohs

Goblin Squad Member

Balodek wrote:
I still don't understand how somebody killing me and looting my corpse, thus destroying my equipment, prevents griefing? It seems like you're making it more efficient for them.

So far there's been no statement on equipped items being lost at all when you are killed, they have only mentioned the loss of carried items, and again that only is liable to happen outside of town, as they themselves will be killed almost instantaneously if they try it in NPC territory, and will quickly get themselves KOS if they do it in any charter or settlement's territory.

Goblin Squad Member

Balodek wrote:
I still don't understand how somebody killing me and looting my corpse, thus destroying my equipment, prevents griefing? It seems like you're making it more efficient for them.

I believe the point that Balodek is trying to make is what’s to stop the person who killed you from looting your PC corpse? If the corpse can be looted by the player who killed you, then that is one way of them ‘griefing’ you, as it’s unlikely that you can return from a soul-binding respawn point in time to stop them.

This could be an interesting tactic during warfare, as most players a likely to have a few potions handy for emergencies. An option could be to allow players to place bounties on those who have illegally killed them and/or robbed their corpse.

I’m not saying this is right or wrong as it will encourage players to get access to storage before they venture forth outside of the safety of an NPC or PC settlement, and to only carry what you don’t mind losing. However, to the uninitiated or new player this may be real thorn in their side.

Goblin Squad Member

Ravening wrote:


I’m not saying this is right or wrong as it will encourage players to get access to storage before they venture forth outside of the safety of an NPC or PC settlement, and to only carry what you don’t mind losing. However, to the uninitiated or new player this may be real thorn in their side.

Mainly depending on how obvious GW makes sure to make the flags when leaving high security territory, and based on everything GW has done, they like to be very clear to players what the consiquences of actions are, including PKing and entering lawless lands.

Goblin Squad Member

Balodek wrote:
I still don't understand how somebody killing me and looting my corpse, thus destroying my equipment, prevents griefing?

It's not meant to prevent griefing - it's meant to provide a balance between freedom on the one hand and restrictions to prevent anti-social griefing on the other.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'll be the first to admit that when I first heard about the FFA PvP intended for PFO, I was quite skeptical. Alot of MMO's have tried that before (most with the best of intentions) and alot of them turned into (IMO) nothing more then gank/grief-fests with horrible communities (especialy toward new players).

Yet at the same, I very much enjoy FPS games (and so do alot of other gamers). So it's not PvP itself that really seems to be the problem... just the specific nature of it as implimented in most MMO's and probably the FFA aspect.

Bottom line is that just because previous implimentations of it have fallen short in other MMO's doesn't mean PFO has to suffer the same fate. Especialy if the designers are well aware of the problem...and if you read the Forums here, you'll quickly discover that Ryan and company are extremely well versed in the pitfalls that have befallen other games, are determined to not allow PFO to suffer the same fate, and have practical, very well detailed design mechanisms in place to prevent that from happening.

Now any plan can fall apart when it meets implimentation....but I really think if you read the details of the proposed mechanics, as well as get familiar with many of the folks here who are interested in the game (and will likely be part of shaping the initial player community).... the game in practical terms is really going to be alot less "FFA" then the label implies...and I honestly expect the griefing/ganking factor will be pretty limited.

There may be some (as in any game) ....but alot of the factors that lead to that sort of thing becoming prevalent...just don't seem like they are going to exist in PFO.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

GrumpyMel wrote:
Bottom line is that just because previous implimentations of it have fallen short in other MMO's doesn't mean PFO has to suffer the same fate. Especialy if the designers are well aware of the problem...and if you read the Forums here, you'll quickly discover that Ryan and company are extremely well versed in the pitfalls that have befallen other games, are determined to not allow PFO to suffer the same fate, and have practical, very well detailed design mechanisms in place to prevent that from happening.

Now, I know that the other skyscrapers built from cheese crumbled, were eaten by rats, and collapsed, but I want to assure you that we've taken these problems into account. Pathfinder Tower Of Cheese won't suffer from these problems, thanks to our understanding of the problems inherent in building a multistory building out of cheese.

Goblin Squad Member

A Man In Black wrote:
Now, I know that the other skyscrapers built from cheese crumbled...

Wright brothers.

Goblin Squad Member

4 people marked this as a favorite.
A Man In Black wrote:


Now, I know that the other skyscrapers built from cheese crumbled, were eaten by rats, and collapsed, but I want to assure you that we've taken these problems into account.

Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results: A definition of insanity.

The rational man accepts the world and works within those limitations. The rational man knows that trying to change people's perception is like trying to roll back the tide. It's pointless. To believe otherwise is a definition of insanity.

The irrational man refuses to accept that the world cannot be changed. The irrational man is determined to find a way to reach a new shore, and if the first attempt fails, the irrational man comes up with a new plan and a different approach and tries again. The irrational man believes the world can be bent to serve his needs, instead of vice versa.

My team is filled with irrational men and women. We've been told for years that our schemes were doomed to fail - often by very well meaning people trying to help us avoid getting hurt.

But we kept doing irrational things. And the world kept changing to meet our needs, instead of vice versa.

I made a world linked to a game where the players had more control over the story than the designers. And I championed making radical changes to Dungeons & Dragons. Then I gave it away for free.

Lisa made a game where you played the monsters. And a game where you bought the components a handful at a time. And she made a game that competed directly with Dungeons & Dragons.

Mark worked on a team of less than 30 people who built an MMO in a genre that had never produced a successful evergreen franchise. He created a way to stream data through an MMO that didn't rely on a SQL server. And he built a robotic arm that plays chess in his basement.

All progress is the province of irrational men.

I am a very, very irrational man.

Sczarni Goblin Squad Member

A Man In Black wrote:
Now, I know that the other skyscrapers built from cheese crumbled...

As an inventor, Edison made 1,000 unsuccessful attempts at inventing the light bulb.

Henry Ford failed and went broke five times before he succeeded.

The first few animals to go into space died

Babe Ruth is famous for his past home run record, but for decades he also held the record for strikeouts. He hit 714 home runs and struck out 1,330 times in his career (about which he said, "Every strike brings me closer to the next home run.").

Hank Aaron went 0 for 5 his first time at bat with the Milwakee Braves.

Johnny Unitas's first pass in the NFL was intercepted and returned for a touchdown. Joe Montana's first pass was also intercepted. And while we're on quarterbacks, during his first season Troy Aikman threw twice as many interceptions (18) as touchdowns (9) . . . oh, and he didn't win a single game.

Should these have stopped after 3 attempts because 'it failed every other time, even if my idea is different'?

Goblin Squad Member

Nice!

As has been so aptly put by others. There is a huge difference between Concept, Design and Implimentation.

There are alot of concepts that are perfectly viable that have failed when paired with poor designs or poor implimentations or both.

If one goes in blind to past failures then you are at a disadvantage. If one goes in with an understanding of past failures (whether your own or others) then that provides you a leg up that those previous attempts didn't have.

The reason why I'm cautiously optomistic in this case is because GW has demonstrated that they have a thorough understanding of the problems involved and the reasons other MMO's have run into problems in this area.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

Ryan Dancey wrote:
I am a very, very irrational man.

So were the people who made Mortal Online, POTBS, Shadowbane, and Darkfall.

I am keen to see how PFO plans to address the failings of previous games, especially later when solutions can get into specifics. I'm not much impressed by people bragging about how irrational they are, because this particular sort of MMO is littered with dead-on-arrival games that failed to offer any fun to anyone but the ones on top of the cutthroat heap.

Cpt_kirstov wrote:
As an inventor, Edison made 1,000 unsuccessful attempts at inventing the light bulb.

Then it's perfectly reasonable to expect Edison to show you his lightbulb works before getting excited about it.

Silver Crusade Goblin Squad Member

A Man In Black wrote:
Ryan Dancey wrote:
I am a very, very irrational man.

So were the people who made Mortal Online, POTBS, Shadowbane, and Darkfall.

I am keen to see how PFO plans to address the failings of previous games, especially later when solutions can get into specifics. I'm not much impressed by people bragging about how irrational they are, because this particular sort of MMO is littered with dead-on-arrival games that failed to offer any fun to anyone but the ones on top of the cutthroat heap.

Cpt_kirstov wrote:
As an inventor, Edison made 1,000 unsuccessful attempts at inventing the light bulb.
Then it's perfectly reasonable to expect Edison to show you his lightbulb works before getting excited about it.

Perhaps you missed the point. EvE. Pathfinder. Magic the Gathering. All were crazy ideas, in a land of failed ventures. They made it work. And it takes an irrational man to try the impossible and make it work.

Goblin Squad Member

Alexander_Damocles wrote:
A Man In Black wrote:
Ryan Dancey wrote:
I am a very, very irrational man.

So were the people who made Mortal Online, POTBS, Shadowbane, and Darkfall.

I am keen to see how PFO plans to address the failings of previous games, especially later when solutions can get into specifics. I'm not much impressed by people bragging about how irrational they are, because this particular sort of MMO is littered with dead-on-arrival games that failed to offer any fun to anyone but the ones on top of the cutthroat heap.

Cpt_kirstov wrote:
As an inventor, Edison made 1,000 unsuccessful attempts at inventing the light bulb.
Then it's perfectly reasonable to expect Edison to show you his lightbulb works before getting excited about it.
Perhaps you missed the point. EvE. Pathfinder. Magic the Gathering. All were crazy ideas, in a land of failed ventures. They made it work. And it takes an irrational man to try the impossible and make it work.

You're being too reasonable to someone peddling rhetoric. In fact Ryan's answered in kind, albeit generously!

@A Man In Black: If you have specific questions and concerns, would be good to hear them! I think some of the general ones have been answered already and the more specific ones reach a point where we just have to see if they work and how they work in practice. :)

Goblinworks Executive Founder

A Man In Black wrote:


Then it's perfectly reasonable to expect Edison to show you his lightbulb works before getting excited about it.

It's also perfectly rational to look at Edison's track record and invest in his work based on that.

Goblin Squad Member

And it's to be expected that there will be people telling Edison that he's a fool for trying...

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
And it's to be expected that there will be people telling Edison that he's a fool for trying...

One thing further worth pointing out, Edison didn't invent the first light-bulb. Just as GW isn't going to make the first open PVP sandbox. Edison invented the first commercially viable low cost light bulb.

Goblin Squad Member

Well if you read the blogs and dig into the forum posts a bit, I think you'll find that GW has been remarkably detailed about thier plans so for. At the same time you have to understand that the game is still in the process of being designed....so certain details are going to have to wait until more of the systems have been fully flushed out. But frankly, I haven't seen any other Developers, especialy not any of the larger ones being so open about thier design ideas and so engaging of the community in discussions as GW has been.

Most others you won't here squat about the design until the games in beta...and then it's a carefully edited blog post or pod cast, with next to zero interactivity with the fan base. The guys here at GW actualy engage in 2 way discussions with thier fan base, discuss specific concepts and mechanics while thier still designing the game. The last time I saw that level of interactivity from game developers was probably back in the 80's or early 90's.


If we stick only to rock solid, hard core, never experimenting techniques, we would never progress anywhere. I applaud GW and Ryan for his irrational pursuit of something amazing.
Honestly, if you are looking for a totally straight faced, cards close to the chest, completely marketable WOW clone, you've come to the wrong game, and the wrong community of gamers.

To quote Thomas Edison himself: "Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something."

We ready to move on, now?

Goblin Squad Member

Darkrunner wrote:

If we stick only to rock solid, hard core, never experimenting techniques, we would never progress anywhere. I applaud GW and Ryan for his irrational pursuit of something amazing.

Honestly, if you are looking for a totally straight faced, cards close to the chest, completely marketable WOW clone, you've come to the wrong game, and the wrong community of gamers.

To quote Thomas Edison himself: "Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something."

We ready to move on, now?

As a hardcore telsa fan... all this Pro-Edison talk is making me cringe, but I do agree with the spirit of the sentiment.

Goblin Squad Member

Onishi wrote:
As a hardcore telsa fan... all this Pro-Edison talk is making me cringe, but I do agree with the spirit of the sentiment.

Yeah, when it comes to the distribution of electricity across the grid I am VERY thankful Tesla won.

Goblin Squad Member

A Man In Black wrote:


I am keen to see how PFO plans to address the failings of previous games

I am keen to hear your list of the failings of previous games!

RyanD

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:
A Man In Black wrote:


I am keen to see how PFO plans to address the failings of previous games

I am keen to hear your list of the failings of previous games!

RyanD

I would be willing to bet that the majority of them revolve around connan's abuses via full loot mixed with high level variations (IE high level ungeared mages blasting lowbies without gear)

Both of which you guys have already more or less anticipated from 3 angles

1. Less impact of level (IE a level 20, will not likely be able to beat an unlimited amount of sub 10 characters as would be the case in many MMO's)

2. Killing being more or less implausible within secure territory (either via NPC or player territory). IE high sec npc territory killers will be more or less immidiately killed by NPC guards, a PKer in a settlements territory will quickly be kill on sight by the inhabitants of the settlement, thus making the real danger being the unpatrolled areas, to which weaker players are not forced to go by any means.

3. The game isn't full loot. Killing someone only obtains some of their carried items. None of the gear at all is lost based on current descriptions. Meaning quite frankly, If the hypothetical and feared scenerio of getting killed right as you leave town happens... what exactly is the point for a griefer, ignoring the fact that they get killed immidiately after by either marshals or players, they get... umm... maybe a handful of potions you bought for the trip? You won't have anything worth stealing until you are on your way back, Griefers aren't going to bother with the work for nothing.

Also before bringing up WoW in the argument that greifers working for no profit, that mostly comes down to category 1. In general the WoW griefers that I saw, almost all of them were level 60's hanging out in 40 and below areas. Griefers will generally not bother with a 30 minute hike out somewhere, to grief for 2 minutes, they won't generally bother unless they expect it to take a good long time before someone powerful enough to bring them down shows up. Which at least from my understanding of the power level intentions in PFO... will be as fast as 5 or so of the lower level characters, gang up on the jerk. Oh also the sandbox nature eliminates the entire concept of level categorized zones as well. IE there is no logical reason why an area would be a 5-10 area, there is no guarantee of enemies or resources being sorted in a straight line of progression at all.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My two cents, I'm a huge fan of this idea and I think there is definitely a better than decent chance for this to become one of my favourite games of all time.
However, I really don't like PvP. This is just a personal opinion, though and I don't think that the game should have no PvP options - even I enjoy the occasional duel with a friend - but I strongly suggest having separate PvP and non-PvP servers. On the former, PvP combat is allowed at any time, anywhere or however such things are normally handled while on the latter, PvP is limited to duels, players who have voluntarily flagged themselves for it, etc.
If you really want PvP to be, for lack of a better word, mandatory then I'd suggest looking at one of the few games I do like that doesn't have separate PvP and non-PvP servers, Pirates of the Burning Sea. More than that, PvP is one of the primary aspects of the game. Still, there is plenty else to do and it can be avoided for those who do not want it with varying degrees of ease.

Basically, in no way will I enjoy a game - no matter how great it may be in every other manner - if I have to constantly be on the lookout for attacks at any time, because I play games to relax and MMOs to relax with friends, and that sort of atmosphere makes it very difficult to do so.

EDIT: Perhaps I'm being a bit too pessimistic here. I should say, I highly doubt that I will enjoy a game that has few to no restrictions on PvP. There are four games in which I have experienced PvP: World of Warcraft (on PvE and RP servers, so battlegrounds and other instanced events) which I didn't like simply because I sucked at it, DC Universe Online (the one game in which I tried a PvP server) where I hated not being able to level up past 5, due to getting killed every time I was trying to just mind my own business and explore/quest/grind, Runescape where I tried PvP exactly twice and never did it again because losing all my stuff was b#$@@&%s, and Pirates of the Burning Sea which I actually enjoyed. It can be annoying, but there's also a certain degree of excitement when on a low level character and you have to either risk going through dangerous PvP zones (which provides a more direct excitement of trying to avoid certain death) or take long routes around them (which lends excitement due to things constantly changing). Still, there is Runescape's problem of losing investments, but it is mediated in several ways, one of which being that certain kinds of items can't be lost.

Goblin Squad Member

As has been (thoroughly!) discussed elsewhere, if there's a non-PvP server, then most of the rest of the game elements on that server will be meaningless - and I bet it would be a very short time before the players on that server began clamoring for "content".

Taldor

Not if they're making the content, as seems to be suggested in what descriptions of the project we have so far.
Also, I point to my other suggestion of having PvP zones instead of servers. Perhaps, closer to settled, civilized areas character-to-character PvP becomes discouraged/prohibited (but more than simply in major cities themselves, please). If an area is going through significant strife, these safe areas become smaller or even disappear until they can be reestablished. I hesitate to make too many assumptions about plans for what will and won't be included, so I won't go any further for now.

Really, all I want is for some degree of control or limitations on PvP so that I can relax and enjoy the game without having to run every time I see another player or huddle in the corner of a city until I've gotten fully leveled and geared.

1 to 50 of 103 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Paizo Licensed Products / Pathfinder Online / Is the game still Open PvP? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.