What PvP Players can look forward to

Me too.
SoTa's fighting, PvE and PvP will be a card game...and you know how we both feel about card games.

 

I have been reading many comments here, I must say....I'm getting worried. SotA is getting alot of attention because of the "Original Sin" of Ultima Online.."THE BEST GAME IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD"....Specifically before publisher 16! The free will to kill "anything, anywhere". Ofcourse, there is an exception within the boundaries of governed towns and cities. It is my strong belief that if SotA would simply adhere to all of the rules of UO "before pub 16" this concept would once again take the title for 2014 and beyond.....For gods sake, why does this game have to get pushed in the genre of everything else! I love PVE/PVP but PVE would not be the same if I did not "fear" running into the wrong person at the wrong time.....I really hope that SoTa does not govern the free will of the players to much or the "Original Sin" will be gone forever....along with all those that grew up in those days...

 

The numbers don't back this up. When UO split worlds, we saw which one all the players flocked to. And the UO devs said that non-consent PvP drove away players. Other MMO devs haven't looked into it, and they said the majority of players simply don't want it, and that there is no market for it.

You can claim that such a game would be massively successful, but there is no evidence that would be the case. Quite the contrary, there is evidence such a game would be a financial failure.

 

There's a couple games out now that are open PK full loot but I've only ever even heard of them from people wanting that kind of environment on this very forum. They're obviously not massively successful - I can't even remember their names. Darkfall maybe?

 

There are no statistics on any numbers on felucca or trammel after the split.

I know felucca had the best time ever after trammel with it's balanced PvP that came with UO:R.

I never entered trammel but my friend played both and he thought it to be quite even numbers on these 2 facets on Europe shard.

Lots of players prefer a non-consensual PvP and full loot and claiming such a game would not be financially successful is taken out of thin air since no AAA company developed a game similar to old UO.

Such a game would not be a WoW killer but be very successful financially.

 

Lineage 1, released next year after UO and still kicking ass, "Between the start in 1998 and August 2012, NCsoft has accumulated USD $1.3 billion in sales from Lineage.In November 2013 NC Soft announced that the game has made USD $1.8 billion"

Lineage 1 old devs made new game is coming "soon" here too, its been so far only in Korea and big hit as well, the ArcheAge: features a zoneless world with third person view. It has a housing system with building erected in the world and not in instanced zones, not only the doors but windows of player houses can usually be opened as well. Furniture and other decorative items are available to be placed inside player houses or in their vicinity with some of them being functional (strawmen allow planting in a radius protecting the plants from stealing or such by other players for example). Trees and crops can be planted, watered and harvested/chopped down. Animal husbandry allows cattle and sheep to be tended to and used as resources.Buildings can be destroyed by other players including castles being attacked with siege weapons such as cannons. City founding is possible by erecting floating city stones which can in turn be attempted to be captured by enemy forces.

EvE online, constantly growing and very player run universe. Since 2003

The upcoming Star Citizen, tho its going to have some prefer slider a bit like in SotA, but it will have open sandboxish living world where players can play as pirates or bountyhunters or enything they want.

Meny new top seller games in steam are about surviving open pvp sandbox wolrd too, or having a feature/end game for it if wanted like Minecraft/Starbound.

Open pvp sandbox is back in busines.

 

Lineage 2 has PvP in set areas and doesn't force non-consensual PvP.

Eve Online had to change their model because non-consensual PvP and griefing was driving away players.

Star Citizen isn't going to force anyone into non-consensual PvP.

 

Im not prefering Lineage 2, but the Lineage 1 what haves big open pvp and siege wars. The first one is much more biger deal, i had chart where it showed it made more money thanWoW 2013, found it This chart dont show sub moneys sadly tho.

EvE Online is still open pvp world, there is indeed starter areas for all races what are more safer.. BUT! people can be still killed there, and there is higher security areas too where is harder to kill.. but you still can even tho you possibly die as well. But my friend sayd that people usualy kill expensive ships there cos its still worth it even if you possible die and lose your own ship. So there is no place where you cant be atacked.

Star Citizen: There is no where in game that is NO PVP... there are just places where doing PVP can be really really bad idea... Not the same thing... You can attack someone in Earth Orbit... But unless he has a bounty on him as a known criminal you are going to likely get Nuked by Law Enforcement and/or the Navy

 

Most things are speculation - pro and con - but something that holds a little water is that there is no guarantee that open PvP community will stick around in this project. So if I were a dev, and I'm not, but if I were I would likely lean towards the side of caution with the features

It's also safe to assume that the splitting of the community will have consequences and effects to their current game design - will that hurt the overall effort - I don't know but would you take the risk

Even if there is a demand for open PvP - the market may be saturated by the time SoTA hits the market - and because SoTA is looking to create a complete world - in addition to the kick starter goals ... the dev process has to see some things through before it even considers a "full blown free for all PvP"

Lastly - and to me - this is the most important - due to their hex system; we really don't know how PvP will be structured - maybe guild war makes more sense for engaging play ... but we won't know until we play it

 

"UO devs said that non-consent PvP drove away players" Drove them where? to Trammel? They quit? What about driving away players because of implementation of consensual PVP?
That is exactly what happened...You do not have the numbers to back up your claim because UO decided to implement changes to satisfy both sides and went where? Down........If UO did not implement "Trammel" and decided to ride out "Felucca" the original land , you would then have the numbers to make such a claim.....
What do you mean "split worlds" ? Adding Trammel? " There is plenty of evidence for such a game being successful.....It is call Ultima Online 2003, quarter million subscribers.....The downfall started with publisher 16 and all of the planning and canceling of upgrades, rules, governing, implementations to an already perfect game.....Ultima at its finest still had plenty of protection for PVE and was a blast.....people just had to learn how to deal with it, just like in "reality"

 

I am pretty sure Darkstarr and RG are well aware of the numbers on who left UO and for what reason. Kinda of silly to argue about number we can only guess when they know first hand.

 

I'm not sure why we are talking about Felucia and Trammel. Again.

I don't see that as affecting SotA that much.

I don't suppose there has been any official announcements from Portalarium during the day? This thread has grown by about 3 pages, but if it's 3 pages of rehashing Felucia and Trammel, I haven't missed anything.

 

It is healthy to beat this horse, I assure you. The devs will appreciate it as "we" are the consumers of the final product...The "Felucca/Trammel" argument has made its way into nearly every MMO today....and no, you havent missed anything

 

This just causes threads with good conversation to be ignored - but beat that horse if you must

 

As long as beating that horse is "non-consensual".......Ill be content

 

In all fairness....It must be tough to make the final call on this, I believe in balance....I have a daughter who loved playing UO and there were times I would hear her scream "HES KILLING ME" "HE TOOK MY FOOD" as she runs crying to her room...

 

Do we know for certain what we still have with respect to PvP? I'm getting questions from the KGB, but I am getting conflicting information. If someone has a reliable link, l'd appreciate it.

 

Not that I'd heard. The only official PvP information is the two stretch goals (contested nodes and castles) both of which were put in place before either Starr or Tracy were on board.

 

Agreed, That does sound silly. I think as a PvPer i should be able to kill every less skilled player i can find , take everything they have as my " reward." After all they shouldn't have come into a risk zone to get mats to craft, or do a quest. The fact is, i wouldn't bother an other player if i didn't get to loot them. Its not just a play stile, I'm just better then they are, so i deserve a "reward"
Oh wait that sounds rather silly too..

 

Not as silly as demanding every reward in the game.