What would you do differently from the guys at CCP?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not charge $70 for monocles.
I don't know, I see plenty of legitimate posts!
Don't create a game with only one server. That was one of the major issues with EVE: only one type of gameplay. PFO needs multiple servers to satisfy people who want non-consensual PvP and people who want consensual PvP. That way, we can all get what we want and stop fighting over it before the community gets torn in half over the issue.
Don't create a game with only one server. That was one of the major issues with EVE: only one type of gameplay. PFO needs multiple servers to satisfy people who want non-consensual PvP and people who want consensual PvP. That way, we can all get what we want and stop fighting over it before the community gets torn in half over the issue.
I wouldn't list that as a failure.
Don't create a game with only one server. That was one of the major issues with EVE: only one type of gameplay. PFO needs multiple servers to satisfy people who want non-consensual PvP and people who want consensual PvP. That way, we can all get what we want and stop fighting over it before the community gets torn in half over the issue.I wouldn't list that as a failure.
I would. The fighting I've seen on this board has me convinced that going with only one style of play is a very bad idea. I'd rather see a game with something for both crowds.
I'd have to question the premise of the OP.
Can it be demonstrated that Eve Online has actually in fact, failed? As it lost it's userbase? Have the servers shut down? Just because I might dispise everything there is about a certain game, does not entitle me to call it a "failure". At best, I can only cite it as a game I dislike.
I do not believe that EVE was a failure at all. But the game itself does have flaws, and I believe that those specific flaws are what the OP meant when referring to EVE's failures.
Personally, I found EVE tedious and annoying, and virtually impossible to get into due to that feeling of "being so far behind" the players who had been established for a long time.
I would. The fighting I've seen on this board has me convinced that going with only one style of play is a very bad idea. I'd rather see a game with something for both crowds.
The opinions expressed on this board aren't reflective of the world at large.
The non-consensual PvP on EVE was set up on purpose, everyone knows it exists, and for the most part people will never see griefers or trouble if they don't go into the low-sec areas.
The one world instance works for EVE, their numbers have been increasing slowly over time.
Just because some, even half, even more than that, people don't want non-consensual PvP, doesn't mean EVE's setup is a failure.
Also, having the multi-server aspect like WoW has its own issues. Want to help your friend out on a PvE server? Roll up a new level 1. Oooorrrr pay 25 bucks. Hmmm. At least in EVE if you want to help out, you just fly over to where your friend is. Which is sometimes an adventure in and of itself.
Failures on EVE's part: Advertising gigantic, climactic battles... and then having the servers slow down to still frame as soon as anyone in the gigantic space battle opens fire after a big patch.. And then failing to fix it for ... well, ever. Playtesting!!
Other failures include purposefully gimping certain ships and weapons because they couldn't figure out how to fix them. And saying everything was working as intended, nothing to see here... IE. Not acknowledging problems and addressing them.
I would. The fighting I've seen on this board has me convinced that going with only one style of play is a very bad idea. I'd rather see a game with something for both crowds.The opinions expressed on this board aren't reflective of the world at large.
The non-consensual PvP on EVE was set up on purpose, everyone knows it exists, and for the most part people will never see griefers or trouble if they don't go into the low-sec areas.
The one world instance works for EVE, their numbers have been increasing slowly over time.
Just because some, even half, even more than that, people don't want non-consensual PvP, doesn't mean EVE's setup is a failure.
Also, having the multi-server aspect like WoW has its own issues. Want to help your friend out on a PvE server? Roll up a new level 1. Oooorrrr pay 25 bucks. Hmmm. At least in EVE if you want to help out, you just fly over to where your friend is. Which is sometimes an adventure in and of itself.
Failures on EVE's part: Advertising gigantic, climactic battles... and then having the servers slow down to still frame as soon as anyone in the gigantic space battle opens fire after a big patch.. And then failing to fix it for ... well, ever. Playtesting!!
Other failures include purposefully gimping certain ships and weapons because they couldn't figure out how to fix them. And saying everything was working as intended, nothing to see here... IE. Not acknowledging problems and addressing them.
I didn't say EVE was a failure, the OP did. What I did was put out some things I think EVE did not do well.
As for the issue of porting characters across multiple servers, just because WOW charges doesn't mean PFO has to. If there were only 2-3 servers and you could move characters between them freely, it wouldn't be an issue.
Goblin Squad Member
|
Don't create a game with only one server. That was one of the major issues with EVE: only one type of gameplay. PFO needs multiple servers to satisfy people who want non-consensual PvP and people who want consensual PvP. That way, we can all get what we want and stop fighting over it before the community gets torn in half over the issue.
It isn't necessarily possible in all games. If Eve were created as a PVE world, the game would flat out not function. Areas would fall into control of one side, and then remain permanently uncontested. Territory size would become unlimited because, well the drawback to covering a lot of space is that you can't defend when you are spread to thin.
For the most part games that have separate PVP and PVE servers, have no actual function to PVP beyond what I consider griefing. IE killing with absolutely no motive or incentive beyond the fact that you can, and there is no political consequence for it, because well it's a PVP server, everyone is expected to be serial killers, if you weren't you'd be on a PVE server.
I didn't say EVE was a failure, the OP did. What I did was put out some things I think EVE did not do well.
As for the issue of porting characters across multiple servers, just because WOW charges doesn't mean PFO has to. If there were only 2-3 servers and you could move characters between them freely, it wouldn't be an issue.
Allowing free at will transfers between PVP and PVE servers is also a bad idea. PVP servers are intended to be something that is harder to progress in. It's more or less an intentional handicap, but at least for fairness, everyone else had to deal with the same handicap. Allowing someone to level and gear their character in a PVE server, and then switch to a PVP server. For a comparison, picture a bicycle race and a foot race starting at the same time. Would it be fair for someone to ride a bike for the first 75% of the race, and then hop off his bike, cross over to the running track, and claim he's now on even terms with the runners? (despite being a mile ahead of them and nowhere near as winded).
The part about character porting is a valid point, but on the other issue, just because PvP is at the wayside in WOW doesn't mean it has to be here, even if there is support for PvE. I think trying to mull over the massive divide in the fan base by trying to give both sides something fun is a worthy goal.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The part about character porting is a valid point, but on the other issue, just because PvP is at the wayside in WOW doesn't mean it has to be here, even if there is support for PvE. I think trying to mull over the massive divide in the fan base by trying to give both sides something fun is a worthy goal.
I don't think there is no middle ground, really we have too little information to work with as far as guessing the plan for the game. The dev's have implied that it will be fully possible to progress in the game completely avoiding areas where PVP is likely to ever be seen, and more or less stated that you can accomplish everything within low risk areas.
Of course the lack of reassurance as far as how low risk is low risk and how much less is less reward etc... It is fully plausibe to never have to fight a player in your whole career, in a PVP enabled game. IMO I think there is a huge natural knee jerk reaction from peoples PVP experiences on other games, that causes an automatic assumption that this one will be like them.
This game could be a huge messed up gank fest, or it could be a game in which PVP is so scarce odds of seeing it are 1 in a thousand, unless you go to one of a handful of areas where it is common. Really we have no idea at this point.
I am not saying the hysteria is wrong, but that it is unjustified at this stage of information.
I don't think there is no middle ground, really we have too little information to work with as far as guessing the plan for the game. The dev's have implied that it will be fully possible to progress in the game completely avoiding areas where PVP is likely to ever be seen, and more or less stated that you can accomplish everything within low risk areas.
Of course the lack of reassurance as far as how low risk is low risk and how much less is less reward etc... It is fully plausibe to never have to fight a player in your whole career, in a PVP enabled game. IMO I think there is a huge natural knee jerk reaction from peoples PVP experiences on other games, that causes an automatic assumption that this one will be like them.
This game could be a huge messed up gank fest, or it could be a game in which PVP is so scarce odds of seeing it are 1 in a thousand, unless you go to one of a handful of areas where it is common. Really we have no idea at this point.
I am not saying the hysteria is wrong, but that it is unjustified at this stage of information.
No, we don't have an idea, but it is nice to make suggestions. Hopefully it is plausible to never fight another player (I know I don't want to fight anybody), but at the same time I don't want to turn around and say that because I don't want to fight people you can't. Hopefully more information will come out soon that settles the fighting.
No, we don't have an idea, but it is nice to make suggestions. Hopefully it is plausible to never fight another player (I know I don't want to fight anybody), but at the same time I don't want to turn around and say that because I don't want to fight people you can't. Hopefully more information will come out soon that settles the fighting.
Agreed. :) I, myself, do not care for PVP. (BAD experiences) But if that's your thing, you enjoy. Just please do not drag me into it! :D
Re: PVP- Is there a reason it cannot be like the ORIGINAL EQ game? At that time, if you wanted your particular PC to be a PVP PC, you simply chose to be so. (No changing your mind later, IIRC) And from that point you essentially went around with a big glowing bulls eye over your head that told all of the OTHER PVP'ers you were a fair target. :) BUT, those of us who did not care for that option simply opted out. And you could not be attacked by another PC unless you CHOSE to accept a duel. And we all ran around on the same server(s). Is that not still a viable option?
Re: PVP- Is there a reason it cannot be like the ORIGINAL EQ game? At that time, if you wanted your particular PC to be a PVP PC, you simply chose to be so. (No changing your mind later, IIRC) And from that point you essentially went around with a big glowing bulls eye over your head that told all of the OTHER PVP'ers you were a fair target. :) BUT, those of us who did not care for that option simply opted out. And you could not be attacked by another PC unless you CHOSE to accept a duel. And we all ran around on the same server(s). Is that not still a viable option?
That does sound like a good idea.
Chief Technical Officer
|
I'd have to question the premise of the OP.
Can it be demonstrated that Eve Online has actually in fact, failed? As it lost it's userbase? Have the servers shut down? Just because I might dispise everything there is about a certain game, does not entitle me to call it a "failure". At best, I can only cite it as a game I dislike.
I can't speak definitively on behalf of the OP, but I see a difference between calling it a failure and saying that it has failings (which would be a more appropriate word in the subject). Even the CEO of CCP recognizes that EVE has failings.
Ryan and Mark are very familiar with EVE, and have their own opinions about what it does well, and where it can be improved, and you can be assured that they'll bring all of their education on that topic to make Pathfinder Online the best it can be. But speaking publicly about a lot of those lessons would be inappropriate at best.
We all make mistakes. The only error is in not learning from them.
I wouldn't list that as a failure.
I wouldn't either. And furthermore, I would ask why people seem to simply assume that there must be PvP or PvE in the first place. A lack of imagination, if you ask me.
Now, if there are both PvP and PvE on the same server, what makes people think that the two can't be kept separate? For a smaller-population (in theory, certainly at first) game world, a single server seems a no-brainer, and I really can't think of a legitimate reason why it could be anything but a good thing.
Let's not let whiny, selfish, negative nancies ruin what has every chance to be a wonderful adventure.
I can't speak definitively on behalf of the OP, but I see a difference between calling it a failure and saying that it has failings (which would be a more appropriate word in the subject). Even the CEO of CCP recognizes that EVE has failings.
Ryan and Mark are very familiar with EVE, and have their own opinions about what it does well, and where it can be improved, and you can be assured that they'll bring all of their education on that topic to make Pathfinder Online the best it can be. But speaking publicly about a lot of those lessons would be inappropriate at best.
Vic,
You are correct. English is not my first language and failure is a poor choice of word. I am a player of EVE myself and love this game, yet it is far from perfect.
Hence, I would like to know what in the dev team's opinion are Eve weakest point and what would you do differently?
I have an opinion on this which I will give in another thread.
Regards
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Hence, I would like to know what in the dev team's opinion are Eve weakest point and what would you do differently?
Any answer we give would be subjective and limited. We both know lots of folks at CCP and there's no value in our taking shots at the thing that pays their bills.
We are not making EVE Online, and the differences between our game and EVE will be greater than their similarities.
Hence, I would like to know what in the dev team's opinion are Eve weakest point and what would you do differently?
Any answer we give would be subjective and limited. We both know lots of folks at CCP and there's no value in our taking shots at the thing that pays their bills.
We are not making EVE Online, and the differences between our game and EVE will be greater than their similarities.
This is an excellent answer and it makes me more hopeful for this game overall.