[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sorry to keep bringing up Fury in this forum, but the game looks (I haven't tested it myself yet) and sounds just that damn good.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've already labelled myself as a "PvP hater" (though I really don't like labels like that). But I still have to say that Fury does sound interesting. I will have to check it out once it is released (or at least go into open beta). Who knows... maybe they'll get PvP right.
I'm also eagerly awaiting WAR. Too bad it's so heavily RvR oriented (and that might ultimately turn me away) but... it's Warhammer. I have to give it a shot. Again, maybe they'll get the PvP right.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah WAR looks damn good also!
For the first time in years I feel like getting into two games from the ground up.
(Though I would have tried to get into to open beta for this game had I been paying attention to MMO media back then. 
)
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah WAR looks damn good also!
For the first time in years I feel like getting into two games from the ground up.
[/ QUOTE ]
Psh. Why? It's such a WoW ripoff.
Kidding!
I'm not so hot on fantasy.. so does anyone know if there's any Warhammer 40k games in the works?
It was fun.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not so hot on fantasy.. so does anyone know if there's any Warhammer 40k games in the works?
[/ QUOTE ]
Rumour has it that there is! Published by THQ, developed by Vigil Games.
Thought for the day:
"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment."
=][=
[ QUOTE ]
Rumour has it that there is! Published by THQ, developed by Vigil Games.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sweet! Thanks. Given the nature of the tabletop version I'm sure it will be heavily PVP, but I'm kinda hoping for some individual story content too. May be a crazy wish, but that's how D&D got started...
It was fun.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah WAR looks damn good also!
For the first time in years I feel like getting into two games from the ground up.
[/ QUOTE ]
Psh. Why? It's such a WoW ripoff.
Kidding!
I'm not so hot on fantasy.. so does anyone know if there's any Warhammer 40k games in the works?
[/ QUOTE ]
HA HA!
Honestly though I think blizzard are geniuses for:
1. levarging their existing worldwide fan base with an easy to play mmo, while at the same time catering to hardcore pvpers who want pvp servers and,
2. makeing themselves the most hated and most loved mmo developer (depending on who you ask)
3. a combination of both 2 and 3, is as we speak/type ganering comparions of this new mmo and this new mmo to WoW. Or how different this new mmo or this new mmo is to WoW. This alone, via bad or good press is keeping WoW constantly on everyone's lips.
No matter what you think of WoW or blizzard, the fact that everyone is talking about them for the above 3 reasons I think they are pretty freaking smart.
Now as to what I personally think of WoW the game, the filters on this forum would melt.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
[ QUOTE ]
Sweet! Thanks. Given the nature of the tabletop version I'm sure it will be heavily PVP, but I'm kinda hoping for some individual story content too. May be a crazy wish, but that's how D&D got started...
[/ QUOTE ]
If there is any game that could make me give up my work, family and social life, just so I could play nonstop... this is it. I hope they don't mess it up too bad 
If anything, THQ have proven that they can capture the mood of the 40K universe perfectly. So I'm being cautiously optimistic.
But yeah. Considering how well the various races get along, the game could be heavily PvP oriented.
On the other hand. They could focus on rogue traders who're more adept at getting around without being shot/eaten/corrupted/broken down into biological paste and made into a bridge.
Only time will tell!
Thought for the day:
"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment."
=][=
One thing I keep reading is that 'PvPers are not loyal' and 'they end up going to other games.' This may be true however it is mainly due to the lack of support from the devs, I mean they haven't even fixed what we play this game for since i4? What if you couldn't get any badges since i4, would you still play?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ok, since you want facts...here are some for ya.
1. Well over half of all MMO players worldwide are playing on a server with open non-consensual PvP.
2. Well over 90% of all MMO players are playing a game that allows PvP.
3. There are more players playing pure PvP games (including FPS and RTS games) than all MMO's combined.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can you site the source of these 'facts'?
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes I can, and without the single quotes around the word facts as well.
[ QUOTE ]
1. Well over half of all MMO players worldwide are playing on a server with open non-consensual PvP.
[/ QUOTE ]
First of, take a look at this chart:
Distribution by MMO
Then consider that all of the Lineage 1 and 2 servers are open PvP and almost half of the WoW servers are.
WoW servers
The actual numbers are 106 (PvP & RPPvP) versus 115 (Normal & RP) however, its interesting to note that the PvP category has twice as many servers that have high populations as non-PvP servers (33 versus 16). The total numbers still work out to about 50 percent, since the non-PvP servers have 19 more medium (64 to 45) population servers. The most interesting statistic I found when doing some digging was that the server type with the highest percentage of high population servers was RPPvP, with 4 of the 6 servers labeled this way with high populations.
For more info on WoW break downs you can look at this chart:
WoW server population and type
Now, the stats on the MMOG Chart graph are from June 06 and since then WoW has grown quite a bit larger, but purely based on those stats we can see that L1, L2, and WoW PvP accounts for 48.85% alone. Add in UO (1.1%) DAOC (1.0%) and EVE (1.0%) and you get to 51.95%.
[ QUOTE ]
2. Well over 90% of all MMO players are playing a game that allows PvP.
[/ QUOTE ]
This one is even easier since all WoW servers allow PvP and they are such a large portion of the market. I don't _think_ there are any MMO's with a percentage share greater than 1% that don't allow PvP.
[ QUOTE ]
3. There are more players playing pure PvP games (including FPS and RTS games) than all MMO's combined.
[/ QUOTE ]
Based on this data:
Chart here
We can see that there is something less than 14 million MMO players. Its a little harder to garner hard statistics on the number of FPS and RTS gamers online, since they aren't all connecting to same company run servers. However, we know that there are many many people running servers, in fact there is an entire business around building and hosting servers for gaming clans.
Google Search
And we know that significant portions of people who buy games like BF2 (9 million copies sold) bought it exclusively for multiplayer. All told about 14% of all games sold are FPS games and another 12% or so are RTS.
Sales by genre 2005
The data above doesn't separate other "strategy" type games *30.8%) from RTS's so the 12% number is estimated. Given that those number represent more people in one year than have ever played an MMO its pretty obvious where the market is. If you include console numbers in the mix its even more skewed because Xbox Live is heavily FPS (mostly Halo) dominated. All in all MMO's are actually a small part of the gaming, even purely PC gaming, numbers. In fact, in many gaming companies the idea of MMO's was losing favor until Blizzard hit it big with WoW.
Thorizdin
Lords of the Dead
Old School Legends
[ QUOTE ]
One thing I keep reading is that 'PvPers are not loyal' and 'they end up going to other games.' This may be true however it is mainly due to the lack of support from the devs, I mean they haven't even fixed what we play this game for since i4? What if you couldn't get any badges since i4, would you still play?
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I would. Then again, I do not really badge.
I'm not sure why it always seems to become badges vs. PvP. Both sides tend to accuse someone who doesn't agree with them of being from the other group. Aren't there players out there besides just badgers and PvP'ers?
Not to attract the hate-- if you need someone to hate, keep on keeping on-- I'm just commenting that I find it curious.
Damn! someone beat me to it.
[ QUOTE ]
lol JackButler
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure why it always seems to become badges vs. PvP. Both sides tend to accuse someone who doesn't agree with them of being from the other group. Aren't there players out there besides just badgers and PvP'ers?
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't like PvP. I also think badge hunting is pretty senseless. What does that make me? 
Thought for the day:
"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment."
=][=
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One thing I keep reading is that 'PvPers are not loyal' and 'they end up going to other games.' This may be true however it is mainly due to the lack of support from the devs, I mean they haven't even fixed what we play this game for since i4? What if you couldn't get any badges since i4, would you still play?
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I would. Then again, I do not really badge.
I'm not sure why it always seems to become badges vs. PvP. Both sides tend to accuse someone who doesn't agree with them of being from the other group. Aren't there players out there besides just badgers and PvP'ers?
Not to attract the hate-- if you need someone to hate, keep on keeping on-- I'm just commenting that I find it curious.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sure there are others out there besides badgers but they dont really both more pvpers as much as badgers.
For example I kill a badger I get an ear full about how they're only there for badges and blah blah so I keep killing them then get petitioned.
Where when I kill a PvEr, a majority of them just click respawn and are on their way.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure why it always seems to become badges vs. PvP. Both sides tend to accuse someone who doesn't agree with them of being from the other group. Aren't there players out there besides just badgers and PvP'ers?
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't like PvP. I also think badge hunting is pretty senseless. What does that make me?
[/ QUOTE ]
Well you're from virtue so Im going to go out on a limb here and say you're in RPer
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ok, since you want facts...here are some for ya.
1. Well over half of all MMO players worldwide are playing on a server with open non-consensual PvP.
2. Well over 90% of all MMO players are playing a game that allows PvP.
3. There are more players playing pure PvP games (including FPS and RTS games) than all MMO's combined.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can you site the source of these 'facts'?
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes I can, and without the single quotes around the word facts as well.
[ QUOTE ]
1. Well over half of all MMO players worldwide are playing on a server with open non-consensual PvP.
[/ QUOTE ]
First of, take a look at this chart:
Distribution by MMO
Then consider that all of the Lineage 1 and 2 servers are open PvP and almost half of the WoW servers are.
WoW servers
The actual numbers are 106 (PvP & RPPvP) versus 115 (Normal & RP) however, its interesting to note that the PvP category has twice as many servers that have high populations as non-PvP servers (33 versus 16). The total numbers still work out to about 50 percent, since the non-PvP servers have 19 more medium (64 to 45) population servers. The most interesting statistic I found when doing some digging was that the server type with the highest percentage of high population servers was RPPvP, with 4 of the 6 servers labeled this way with high populations.
For more info on WoW break downs you can look at this chart:
WoW server population and type
Now, the stats on the MMOG Chart graph are from June 06 and since then WoW has grown quite a bit larger, but purely based on those stats we can see that L1, L2, and WoW PvP accounts for 48.85% alone. Add in UO (1.1%) DAOC (1.0%) and EVE (1.0%) and you get to 51.95%.
[ QUOTE ]
2. Well over 90% of all MMO players are playing a game that allows PvP.
[/ QUOTE ]
This one is even easier since all WoW servers allow PvP and they are such a large portion of the market. I don't _think_ there are any MMO's with a percentage share greater than 1% that don't allow PvP.
[ QUOTE ]
3. There are more players playing pure PvP games (including FPS and RTS games) than all MMO's combined.
[/ QUOTE ]
Based on this data:
Chart here
We can see that there is something less than 14 million MMO players. Its a little harder to garner hard statistics on the number of FPS and RTS gamers online, since they aren't all connecting to same company run servers. However, we know that there are many many people running servers, in fact there is an entire business around building and hosting servers for gaming clans.
Google Search
And we know that significant portions of people who buy games like BF2 (9 million copies sold) bought it exclusively for multiplayer. All told about 14% of all games sold are FPS games and another 12% or so are RTS.
Sales by genre 2005
The data above doesn't separate other "strategy" type games *30.8%) from RTS's so the 12% number is estimated. Given that those number represent more people in one year than have ever played an MMO its pretty obvious where the market is. If you include console numbers in the mix its even more skewed because Xbox Live is heavily FPS (mostly Halo) dominated. All in all MMO's are actually a small part of the gaming, even purely PC gaming, numbers. In fact, in many gaming companies the idea of MMO's was losing favor until Blizzard hit it big with WoW.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well done, but be wary of anything from mmogchart. And that last line is classic. No matter what we think of WoW, Blizzard did in fact save MMOs from going the way of the dodo bird, or at least made it look MUCH better for a game publisher to try and develop an MMO.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure why it always seems to become badges vs. PvP. Both sides tend to accuse someone who doesn't agree with them of being from the other group. Aren't there players out there besides just badgers and PvP'ers?
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't like PvP. I also think badge hunting is pretty senseless. What does that make me?
[/ QUOTE ]
Well you're from virtue so Im going to go out on a limb here and say you're in RPer
[/ QUOTE ]
To quote my bio: Will RP if RPed at.
But does RP rule out badger (tihi) or PvPer? In WoW, I play on a RPPvP server!
Anyway. I wouldn't call myself a RPer really. Or any other fancy label. I just like to play the game... is that so wrong?
Thought for the day:
"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment."
=][=
[ QUOTE ]
I don't like PvP. I also think badge hunting is pretty senseless. What does that make me?
[/ QUOTE ]
Lost. The role-playing forum is a few down from here.
[ QUOTE ]
For example I kill a badger I get an ear full about how they're only there for badges and blah blah so I keep killing them then get petitioned.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hoj, this is the part I don't get. Why do you keep killing them until you get petitioned?
I mean, yes-- I agree-- a badger in a PvP zone needs to realize they're in a PvP zone. You kill them, they get upset, and you've proved your point: you have forced them to acknowledge they're in a PvP zone.
But killing them over and over until they petition you? Why? They're not a challenge to you, and probably not a threat to you, and so it's unlikely they're going to suddenly cut loose with their insane PvP skills and give you the good fight that I would imagine you want.
It's kinda like kicking a puppy, hoping it will turn into a werewolf, until the ASPCA shows up and hands you a summons.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ok, since you want facts...here are some for ya.
1. Well over half of all MMO players worldwide are playing on a server with open non-consensual PvP.
2. Well over 90% of all MMO players are playing a game that allows PvP.
3. There are more players playing pure PvP games (including FPS and RTS games) than all MMO's combined.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can you site the source of these 'facts'?
[/ QUOTE ]
Yep, still no sources, but I can believe them though. The key word is "worldwide" The U.S. MMORPG market is very different than a lot of the asian markets in what sells. Just another reason like I said you need different "versions" to appeal to different markets.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, the US market is _not_ substantially different from the world market. WoW is still a US centric game, despite the influx of Asian gamers (and farmers) the US is still a very significant portion of the population.
On March 7, 2007, Blizzard announced that the subscriber base for World of Warcraft had reached a new milestone, with 8.5 million players worldwide there are more than 2 million players in North America, 1.5 million players in Europe, and 3.5 million players in China.
More importantly for my position is the fact that the realm list I pointed to in my last post doesn't even include the Asian servers. If you want to see a complete list of the servers go here:
World Realm List
Thorizdin
Lords of the Dead
Old School Legends
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't like PvP. I also think badge hunting is pretty senseless. What does that make me?
[/ QUOTE ]
Lost. The role-playing forum is a few down from here.
[/ QUOTE ]
*points at the topic* Why? This one's even adressed to me.
Thought for the day:
"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment."
=][=
[ QUOTE ]
Sure there are others out there besides badgers but they dont really both more pvpers as much as badgers.
For example I kill a badger I get an ear full about how they're only there for badges and blah blah so I keep killing them then get petitioned.
Where when I kill a PvEr, a majority of them just click respawn and are on their way.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've had a few of these instances. Once or twice if I'm heading into a PVP zone for badges I'll declare it so in broadcast, saying something along the lines of "don't mind me -- just here for the badges." Sometimes spoilsports will still come after me for the easy reputation points, but for the most part it works.
I do have to ask, and please don't take it like I'm flaming you, but if someone says they're just there for badges.. why can't you leave them alone? It's a courtesy thing, and I understand resenting someone who goes about it rudely, but I can't imagine they all do.
It was fun.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For example I kill a badger I get an ear full about how they're only there for badges and blah blah so I keep killing them then get petitioned.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hoj, this is the part I don't get. Why do you keep killing them until you get petitioned?
I mean, yes-- I agree-- a badger in a PvP zone needs to realize they're in a PvP zone. You kill them, they get upset, and you've proved your point: you have forced them to acknowledge they're in a PvP zone.
But killing them over and over until they petition you? Why? They're not a challenge to you, and probably not a threat to you, and so it's unlikely they're going to suddenly cut loose with their insane PvP skills and give you the good fight that I would imagine you want.
It's kinda like kicking a puppy, hoping it will turn into a werewolf, until the ASPCA shows up and hands you a summons.
[/ QUOTE ]
If they're an orange name why not kill them? Am I not there to PvP? As for killing them till they petition me, it's humerous that they are really going to cry to a dev that I killed them in a PvP zone.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't like PvP. I also think badge hunting is pretty senseless. What does that make me?
[/ QUOTE ]
Lost. The role-playing forum is a few down from here.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ah, so there are in fact only three categories into which all CoX gamers fall into. Good to know.
It was fun.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm having a really, really hard time believing nobody knows what Jack's talking about. It's true that it's hard to define what level of [blank]holery is unacceptable without descending into suffocating legalese, and I agree that Jack has used some (shall we say) sweeping generalizations in his rhetoric, but is everyone really going to act like they don't know what kind of conduct he's talking about?
Really?
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes. Because the standard is entirely subjective. Apparently, the rules of conduct as they stand right now are not good enough for some and they would rather the "standard of conduct" be raised.
So lets say that the Devs (the only actual authority here) decide that certain behaviors are now going to become petitionable offenses. Super. But there are going to be people who think the standard is *still* not high enough and complain to no end that they are being "griefed", when in actuality, they are not being griefed, simply personally offended because someone is not playign "fair" or according the the extra rules they've tdetermined should be enforced in their heads.
I think Jack's logic is horrible and, in my opinion, he is behaving like an obtuse moron and purposfully using hyperbole and BS to obfuscate the fact that the behaviors he described are not "griefing", at least not under the current set of rules handed down by the makers of this game.
[ QUOTE ]
...3. pvp play is inarguably more engaging, visceral, and immediate than pve play -- which doesn't mean pve isnt fun. grinding through a "narrative" can be entertaining, but honestly id really rather just watch the movie.
4. loot sucks. theres no way around this.
5. dont devs want to be innovative, to do something original, rather than the do same old thing everybody else does? sure, its a business and you got to make a living, but when did game design become widget production?
[/ QUOTE ]
Lol... I love these 'inarguable' statements...
# 5 I'll start with the last one. I thought CoH was pretty innovative. It managed to grab a selection of players by being the non-MMO (no loot, no PvP, instancing, sk, etc). Sure the world has moved on, but that's life in gaming, technology, etc. Now, that's not to say that an active dev team shouldn't strive for more innovation, mind you.
#4 Your feelings towards loot is similare to others feelings towards PvP. Some people love the idea of Uber loot and of the auction houses. They love 'winning' a good auction, or getting a better pay for their effort. Some of these people have acutally posted in this thread. There are a lot of others who hate the idea of loot, though.
#3 PvP more engaging, eh? I've tried PvP a few times. I have found it boring. After less than an hour of play the entire zone fell into a very tedious cycle of I beat you, you beat me, lather, rinse, repeat. I am not a PvP hater. That is, it's not the idea of PvP or the fear of getting beaten that keeps me from it. I just don't find it as 'engaging' as running missions, especially TF's and events, with a good, well oiled, and friendly team.
Now, I'm not being sarcastic at all when I say the following: Sell me on PvP. I am interested in figuring out what in the world many of you are talking about when it comes to player generated content and hours of engaging fun. I don't count getting ganked, exploited, and smack-talked, and then returning the favour ad nauseum as content. It may very well be that I am missing something. That's why I'm seriously appealing to the PvP crowd here.
From a PvEer to the PvPers: sell me on PvP. Talking down about my favourite way of playing isn't going to do it. Telling me how great other games that do PvP are doing isn't going to sell me. (Especially since I've tried several and didn't enjoy them a fraction of the amount that I do CoH).