A simple solution to the Open World Full Loot PvP conundrum. In 2 sentences.

Interesting example considering that pure white cloth in UO was worth millions. If you could only obtain it by being in PVP areas, then for sure PVP guilds would own the market for it much like powerscrolls and corner a very lucrative market ensuring that no one but them have access to it.

 

Arguably, ALL of UO happened under EA; the game was both developed and released after EA had acquired Origin. And the Renaissance expansion that split Trammel and Felucca (also developed by Origin) was arguably the last expansion released before Garriott quit Origin.

All of which is to say that your recollection of history is a bit rusty.

Again, don't over-interpret that quote.

 

They already have incentives like this in Ultima Online currently, I believe. One example is the Scroll of Transcendence. http://www.uoguide.com/Scroll_of_Transcendence. You get two to five times the reward in Fel, as you do in Tram. However, judging by your experiences and the current state of affairs with UO, it seems that such an approach has not improved matters much. In fact, there seems to be a good amount of evidence that some players want to avoid this style of play entirely--regardless the rewards--and, that's their choice. The root of their choice, appears to be a fundamental preference in the allowing voluntary versus involuntary interaction--such as duels, and stealing, respectively. In other words, can another player do something to my character that I cannot prevent? The incentive for answering this question affirmatively is, solely, that you are afforded the same 'freedom' towards others.

In most MMOs since UO, players have been able to elect the PVP style of play as a voluntary set of behaviours towards their characters. Unfortunately, the common solution to this problem has been to isolate people using servers specifically dedicated to such behaviours. This has resulted in themes (PVP focused, PVE focused, etc) being applied across the entire MMORPG genre. You get these implementations, respectively, in a host of different companies. However, doing this tends to restrict player behaviours--like grouping with your friends. What if some of your friends decide they do not wish to be on a PVP server? Or, at some point you decide to change your focus from one to the other? What if your friends play on different servers--which do you choose? How does one keep the PVP choice fair--and how do we avoid people abusing PVP flag switching? These are all questions that hopefully OPO will be able to address fairly for both ends of the PVP, and PVE spectrum.

On a slight tangent: From my perspective, the purpose of OPO is to allow individuals to play with like minded people, and without the aforementioned restrictions. If you choose to play in OPO with PVP set to on, you should get all the experiences you would expect. I think if this is successfully implemented we may see the end of server transfers, having to select a specific server or subset of friends, etc. Think about all the fees people have paid just to switch between servers and such; OPO will, it seems, remove that. And, why do this? Just for an improved customer experience. Pretty amazing.

As for specifics--e.g., loot, how to incentivise people to get involved in PVP and such--all I can offer is 'wait and see'. There is very limited information on many of the features at this point--including combat--but I would expect that materials on this topic are coming. The fact is we don't know anything about the systems in play here--all we do know is that at this point people will be able to opt out of PVP. That's their choice, and it is included with SotA. It's ok to discuss that idea and be concerned with it, but ultimately there's nothing yet to be too critical of. Let's see what happens on/after December 15th.

-- And, just to be clear, in this instance I'm speaking here as a player with the same access to information as the general public, not as a moderator.

 

More like RG working for EA couldn't pull this off. And neither could any other game developer, before or since, BTW; I'm not aware of a single game that was able to get PvE players to opt into, and enjoy, PvP in large numbers. Not even a game like Dark Souls, targeted at hardcore players and famous for not holding the player's hand and some times being outright brutal, was able to get PvE players to accept PvP that way; despite it's PvP having some hard limits on how often a player could be attacked, most players opted to play offline, and of the ones that played online a reasonable number (myself included) were ready to bring down our internet connections at the first sign of an invader (thus sending back the invader and preventing the PvP attack).

Depends on what you consider failure. If I ever feel like I have to enable PvP in order to progress, or even to just see all PvE content, I will consider the game to have failed and leave the online version to play exclusively offline from that point onwards.

That being said, having different rewards for PvP and PvE is fine, as long as they are equivalent. For example, PvP gets a red Infinite+1 sword, PvE gets a blue Infinite+1 sword, both are functionally equivalent but players can tell at a glance which content the character got through in order to obtain his weapon.

Not even nearly enough, sincerely. I don't want to grind gold to purchase my gear of choice; I want to earn it through PvE.
(PvE, in this specific instance, includes crafting, but not necessarily trading; I'm planning to be self-sufficient in the game, regardless of how many crafting skills a character can master or how many characters we can have per account. I already have two copies of the game for that exact reason, and I'm willing to purchase more if needed to ensure self-sufficiency. I'm not against trading, I do it when it's convenient, but I don't find interacting with a player-based market actually fun, and I won't have my enjoyment of the game held hostage by the availability of crafted items on the market.)

At the same time, last word I've seen from the dev team about PvP and PvE rewards is that, apart from cosmetic / trophy rewards, players will be able to get anything that is available through PvP also through pure PvE. And the way it was said, I doubt Chris and RG were talking about purchasing the rewards from a PvP player.

(Written recaps at http://forsakenvirtues.com/2013/04/18/recap-developer-chat-41813-pve-focus/ and http://forsakenvirtues.com/2013/04/25/recap-developer-chat-4-25-13-focus-housing-guilds-sandbox/ , with a link to the respective videos on the top of the respective recaps.)

 

OK, man - o - man, Im gonna post in here "throws on flak vest and helmet" the reason i think that open pvp is more dangerous than PVE, is that i can sit back and watch AI do its thing over and over again, i know what its going to do eventually, example: the thief watches the bladed trap swing back and forth across the dungeon floor, he times it and runs through, unscathed! Same goes with AI (PVE) but with another person it is hard to determine what a (REAL) person is going to do. that is the excitement of PVP! I have nothing against anyone that wants to PVE, sometimes i just want to do PVE for story and exploration, but if i really want to get a rush, Ill jump into pvp where i have no clue what the other person is going to do! So the point im getting at, is that i dont want to have to change my play or totally have without. as a PVPr/PK - Killer. Becuase others just want PVE, the "slider" will help that i expect? and if RG wants to tempt me to go fight another player to get something special, higher value more importance, then i take that challenge! In turn i hope that they have something special for PVErs as well, that would only be fair, but dont hate on me because, #1 im not afraid to go into PVP zone to get it, and #2 i also go to PVE to get the other, everyone has an option! To me that is fair! As far as Full looting, im good with that, as far as Not so full looting im fine with that too, as far as no looting well if you dont want to lose stuff then you probably shouldnt be there, i should get something like experience at least for taking the risk. At any moment in PVP i could be the one that gets killed or loses stuff as well. No biggie eventually ill get geared back up and find you!

NO PVP---------------------------------------PVP- <---- My slider position.

 

I was an enormous fan of the open, free-for-all PvP system of UO - I still believe it's the greatest game every made for any system, period.

I'd love to see that in SotA, but realistically it'll probably be a blend of that and the more recent on/off switch-different server style that most MMORPG's employ now.

Can't wait for Alpha!!!

---
Sir Maximus/Moxxx/The End.
Guilds: FDA, -X-
Chesapeake server, Ultima Online

 

Wow! This thread sort of blew up.


A lot of great information, but I suppose my follow up question or prod, would be how will this apply to 'criminal actions' against non-consenting parties, such as pick-pocketing, lockpicking or house-robbery- and will there be any sort of implementation of any of these types of mechanics.

tl:dr- Will I be able to play a 'career criminal'?

 

I can't stop laughing at Wyse's image

 

Yup

 

I disagree with the image in one aspect: devs are often enthusiastic about open PvP, at least in the games I lurk in the forums. It seems to be the management, and investors, that tend to look at open PvP as toying with failure.

Fun image regardless

 

Good Point, I get told that all the Time, heh

 

I may recyle this one a few more times, if you don't mind. This one had me laughing for an hour.

 

First post lol.

What a majority of poeple appear to crave is an updated version of UO with all the modern technology the gaming industry has to offer - else you wouldnt be here.

I've been reading these boards re PvP, Looting Issues, Item Loss, 'Decks' of skills (which idiot thought that up by the way?) etc - You people seem to really complicate the issue when there is such a simple fix.

Utima Online
Look a the Pre-UOR set up: Full loot, protected towns (guard whack), no uber-super items/artifacts - everyone could craft the same items (if they invested the time in the skills).

• This not only put everyone on a level playing field but it ensured crafting skills were always required - if you lost gear you had to buy/make more.
• If you go with super items you never lose, you are going to have to expand the game every 20 minutes to provide people the opportunity to improve gear.
• If you dont like to PvP/Fight, its pretty simple, dont go out of guard zones....or if you do go out of guard zones there has to be reward for your risk.
• PK's receive seriouse penalties for death and killing a PK provides seriouse benefits to whom dealt the killing blow.

All the above features (and many more) made UO the brilliant game it was, obviously this isnt UO but the design principles arent exactly IP (10% aint hard) so there is no reason you cant use them.

There have been numerous small software companies that have attempted to copy the above principles however none have had any seriouse funding, until now. Stop trying to reinvent the wheel, keep it simple and keep it in the image of the original.

Gasket.

OnePvP of Oceania.

 

My feelings exactly, Gasket. Welcome to the community. Happy to be the one to give you your first 'like' on your first post.

 

I view SotA as an opportunity not to create a new UO but to use UO and other games as examples. Hopefully SotA carries the spirit of what made UO good though. Something about being open and sandbox like, having no set character classes etc, being able to craft everything (even beyond UO).

Lord British said they are actually using Ultima 7 as the biggest Ultima inspiration of where this world should go. This is great to hear! Ultima 7 was a great game for exploration, and having the freedom to do whatever you like. Yet Ultima 7 didn't track your virtue like U4 - U6 did, but I think the vast majority of us did play it as if it did (except for the black sword and Lord British)... although I saved the game and reverted back because I didn't want to actually play an Ultima game where I the Avatar just killed Lord British.

**************************
I'm going to suck at SotA though because I don't want to lie to people about where I'm from, nor do I want to compromise the virtues in order to gain information. I don't care if it blows the game for me and I'm not able to complete it right. I want the Ultima experience. I would rather be hated by the people in the cities that hate outsiders then have to lie to gain their trust. The virtue of Honesty is a greater reward. The virtue of honor is a greater reward. So is Compassion, Justice, Spirituality, valor, sacrifice, and humility.

Although I wonder how valor will be taken into account with PvP enabled. I don't want to get killed because I didn't flea from a gank. There are just some strange tactics PKs use that lead me to believe that discretion is the better part of valor.

 

We have basically Richard and Starr -- the guys that created UO -- now unshackled by publisher intervention...and yet they're still not re-creating UO game mechanics exactly, not even the early "glory" days. I think that says it all.

But I still hope they create something that retains that spirit and let quests and selective multiplayer take care of the rest. Just don't be surprised when they reveal the PvP system and newbies will still be protected everywhere they can go.

 

Please post a link, thank you.

 

FYI Im not all about PvP - I love a pretty house/castle just as much as the next player lol.

Let me explain.

I played UO from Beta (I still have the beta CD). For about 5 years atleast I avoided all PvP and amassed a rather large amount of wealth, even by todays standards.

I remember PK's coming to get me whilst I tamed dragons/mares/ww's and the pounding in my chest as I tried to escape, head intact.

Putting too many 'rails' in the game and removing the gaming communities choices robs players of the above experiences.

Hell I still remember a PK named Nikon from Baja (first shard i played on) and that is over 10 years ago! He killed me half a dozen times whilst I tried to gather leather from cows in Delucia.

Does anyone see where I am coming from? If Devs keep trying to please everyone they will please noone.

Open world, with basic rules and allow to players to make their own communities, economies and town centres and deal their own justice - You cant do it all for them, or make it so easy its pointless.

Gasket.

 

Sorry, this idea has been tried in UO, and it didn't work then, why do you think it would work any different today?

I'm trying to think of an "incentive" that would cause me to participate in "hardcore PvP w/open loot" and I can't think of a thing. Go right ahead and put rare resources/items in, I will just ignore them, and witch/moan that the only portion of the player base that has all the rare stuff is HC PvPers, there is no way I can possibly compete with that.

Maybe if you just turn off open loot that might convince me to try it (PvP ya know), but I know you HC PvPer would never go for that, so we are back to where we started.

I think I'll just let Mr RG & Mr SL come up with something, it's looking real good so far.

 

It worked perfectly well UO hence the following on SOTA forums asking for a similar product.


If you dont want to risk the items on your avatar, stay in a guard zone.

Players like you dont want to risk ANYTHING - next thing you dont want to die to AI.
Instead of death we all go for a time out in the 'dead corner' and once the appropriate time has passed we go back and kill that uber lhama with our rusty spoon.

Gasket.