The Elder Scrolls Online

General Antony

General Antony

Vyemm Raider
1,142
3,547
Caliane_sl said:
you don't understand what he said.
And the why.

This comes up in any "hardcore" pvp discussion. I've noted it in many games. having played "hardcore" pvp games, and "softcore", and of course battlegrounds.

Alot of people hate battlegrounds, and for good reason. But a battleground, in an mmos is like a match in Team fortress, or a moba, etc. Its always there and ready to go. if you want pvp action, it is there at the drop of the hat, with 100 and 1000's of opponents to go up against.

A game like Eve or any of there "hardcore" pvp game, which incurs death penalties, creates a pvp system where 9/10 times when the possibility of pvp occurs, you choose to AVOID it. It is the safe move. Pvp only occurs when YOU feel you have the upper hand, and assured victory. and fights are usually quite lopsided, as that is exactly what happens. one guy trys to run, the other guy has no chance of losing so pushed the attack. 1 in 10000, it was a trick or that small guy had friends close to call, and suddenly real action.
pvp in games of this nature actively discourage actually fighting.
do you like forum drama? do you like tension? do you like ganking people how have no chance of fighting back? do you like spreadsheets and no action? Eve is the game for you.


Battlegrounds are ideal for pvpers who want action. want opponents that will fight back regardless of odds.
Granted.. I do not think battlegrounds are perfected or ideal. there is a better solution out there. They do empty the game world. are too isolated. have too little effect on the economy, etc. There is nothing mmo about that. they are just a fps deathmatch, etc minigame IN the Mmo. and that is clearly a problem.
Click to expand...
You have no fucking clue what you are talking about. Non-battleground PVP is about control of resources. If you run every time someone brings 3 groups in lower guk, sure you might live but you've just lost potential item drops that they have now gained. This requires a real game world and not some instanced piece of shit, but if all you do is try to avoid fights you will get fucking rolled every time you can't.
 
Caliane

Caliane

Avatar of War Slayer
14,625
10,138
General Antony_sl said:
You have no fucking clue what you are talking about. Non-battleground PVP is about control of resources. If you run every time someone brings 3 groups in lower guk, sure you might live but you've just lost potential item drops that they have now gained. This requires a real game world and not some instanced piece of shit, but if all you do is try to avoid fights you will get fucking rolled every time you can't.
Click to expand...
oh, so you stayed and fought and lost exp/levels on death, gear on death, AND potential item drops from those resources you were farming?
no you fucking didn't, unless you had clear power advantage in the first place.

I played these games. real fights occur less then 1 in maybe every 2 weeks or months. Challenges to power positions of resources occurs rarely in the first place, as one side has that clear advantage, and no one is dumb enough to just randomly via for it, when the cost is more resource loss.
 
Tuco

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
45,487
73,575
Instanced and randomized battlegrounds is the soft shit of the PVP world. It's like fighting with nerf bats.

That's another reason why a lot of the old school PVP guilds aren't that excited about TESO. It was very compelling that there'd be a huge battleground with a single emperor until we found out that it was instanced and you could freely go into different instances. Nothing to be won, no bragging rights, no losers, no contention, no excitement.
 
shabushabu

shabushabu

Molten Core Raider
1,408
185
Tuco_sl said:
Instanced and randomized battlegrounds is the soft shit of the PVP world. It's like fighting with nerf bats.

That's another reason why a lot of the old school PVP guilds aren't that excited about TESO. It was very compelling that there'd be a huge battleground with a single emperor until we found out that it was instanced and you could freely go into different instances. Nothing to be won, no bragging rights, no losers, no contention, no excitement.
Click to expand...
I will never understand why it is so difficult to make an open world pvp "game". Server option ? World with overlapping of content between factions ? That's really it. Been done before.
 
Heallun

Heallun

Lord Nagafen Raider
1,100
1,073
shabushabu_sl said:
I will never understand why it is so difficult to make an open world pvp "game". Server option ? World with overlapping of content between factions ? That's really it. Been done before.
Click to expand...
It's hard to upscale without a) higher hardware costs and b) the very real possibility of dead servers. Having floating instances (gw2, eso, etc.) where they can create and uncreate instances of zones due to population changes as well as have instances locked to only your group for tighter tuned and more story based experiences. It worked well enough in EQ2, anyway.
 
K

Kharza-kzad_sl

shitlord
1,080
0
I'll bet they will do "pvp servers" for those that enjoy contested areas for questing and such, though I realize the above posts want more.

I spend the majority of my mmo time pvping, but I do so in warzones because it at least attempts to make things a contest of wit and skill. At least numbers are the same, if not the rest of it (operatives should just go into arenas alone, they don't need the other 3). I like to improve as a player, and you don't get that in the random asshattery of a pvp server.

The server option also helps a little to get those of like mind together, and away from the regular servers. It shouldn't be that much work, and the benefits are there.
 
B

Bacon_sl

shitlord
91
0
Kharza-kzad_sl said:
I'll bet they will do "pvp servers" for those that enjoy contested areas for questing and such, though I realize the above posts want more.

I spend the majority of my mmo time pvping, but I do so in warzones because it at least attempts to make things a contest of wit and skill. At least numbers are the same, if not the rest of it (operatives should just go into arenas alone, they don't need the other 3). I like to improve as a player, and you don't get that in the random asshattery of a pvp server.

The server option also helps a little to get those of like mind together, and away from the regular servers. It shouldn't be that much work, and the benefits are there.
Click to expand...
I thought they were pimping their one "mega server" to make our giny's tickle(?)
 
T

Troll_sl

shitlord
1,703
6
Hey! Come fill out a survey for our game that'll only take 5 hours to complete!

Because I care enough about your shitty game to do that!
 
Sylas

Sylas

<Bronze Donator>
3,133
2,797
Caliane_sl said:
you don't understand what he said.
And the why.

This comes up in any "hardcore" pvp discussion. I've noted it in many games. having played "hardcore" pvp games, and "softcore", and of course battlegrounds.

Alot of people hate battlegrounds, and for good reason. But a battleground, in an mmos is like a match in Team fortress, or a moba, etc. Its always there and ready to go. if you want pvp action, it is there at the drop of the hat, with 100 and 1000's of opponents to go up against.

A game like Eve or any of there "hardcore" pvp game, which incurs death penalties, creates a pvp system where 9/10 times when the possibility of pvp occurs, you choose to AVOID it. It is the safe move. Pvp only occurs when YOU feel you have the upper hand, and assured victory. and fights are usually quite lopsided, as that is exactly what happens. one guy trys to run, the other guy has no chance of losing so pushed the attack. 1 in 10000, it was a trick or that small guy had friends close to call, and suddenly real action.
pvp in games of this nature actively discourage actually fighting.
do you like forum drama? do you like tension? do you like ganking people how have no chance of fighting back? do you like spreadsheets and no action? Eve is the game for you.


Battlegrounds are ideal for pvpers who want action. want opponents that will fight back regardless of odds.
Granted.. I do not think battlegrounds are perfected or ideal. there is a better solution out there. They do empty the game world. are too isolated. have too little effect on the economy, etc. There is nothing mmo about that. they are just a fps deathmatch, etc minigame IN the Mmo. and that is clearly a problem.
Click to expand...
carebear spotted. Everything you just said is true only for you and vagina's like you.
 
D

Dmitry

368
0
Crowing_sl said:
I filled out their survey and basically ripped the game to pieces.
Click to expand...
I think many people did the same. I notice that they have gone silent since the end of the beta. On balance, everywhere I have seen has been fairly negative in term of how they felt the beta went. Wonder if they are smarting. I hope they take the criticism as constructive. Most people want the game to be good and are just sort of frustrated in the sense of "how do you screw up a game based on the most successful RPg series of all time."
 
Tuco

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
45,487
73,575
Someone needs to make an infographic of all the deviations between skyrims gameplay and teso.
 
Variise

Variise

N00b
497
17
I wanted to toss my 2c in on instancing and general game design direction. I lot of games seem to be going the instance route over open world. Heck that's how most of them have been since the console dominating the gaming market.

It appears to be a combination of client hardware required for X number of users at a certain detail level, game engine, server side hardware and bandwidth. The three biggest things I think is the overall shit Internet infrastructure in North America (limits what you can keep server side), Microsoft giving a collective "meh" to DirectX because DX11 is super over the top for their own console so why would anyone need better and finally game engines that were essentially designed around the console/mobile market because fuck the PC Master Race.

I honestly I think we are collectively somewhat delusional in thinking we can get any company no matter how independent in giving us our cake and let us eat it too. Although some are trying, see Cloud Imperium Games. With the way things are currently it's just not possible and as I pointed out I don't think we can rest that on the shoulders of game developers alone. It's SNAFU.
 
Denaut

Denaut

Trump's Staff
2,739
1,279
Although what you said is true, it goes deeper than that. Instancing is easier (and cheaper) in pretty much every way through all aspects of MMO game development than making an open world. It pre-solves all sorts of design and technical problems in a single stroke at a low cost.

Economics is a bitch when it comes to making games.
 
K

Kharza-kzad_sl

shitlord
1,080
0
BTW the large crowd problems should be quite mitigated by ati's mantle api. I've not played with it myself but the primary benefit I've read about is that you can do huge amounts of draw calls. If I were making any sort of mmo right now I'd go mantle primary and just let the dx and gl branches be slow. It is just too much of an asspain trying to do silly tricks to cram several characters into a single draw call.

Hopefully nvidia has something similar in the works, or just writes mantle driver layers. ATI is down with that, as the API is open for other hardware vendors.
 
Variise

Variise

N00b
497
17
Kharza-kzad_sl said:
BTW the large crowd problems should be quite mitigated by ati's mantle api. I've not played with it myself but the primary benefit I've read about is that you can do huge amounts of draw calls. If I were making any sort of mmo right now I'd go mantle primary and just let the dx and gl branches be slow. It is just too much of an asspain trying to do silly tricks to cram several characters into a single draw call.

Hopefully nvidia has something similar in the works, or just writes mantle driver layers. ATI is down with that, as the API is open for other hardware vendors.
Click to expand...
This is actually a very good point. Not sure how much work it would take to make current and nearly released MMOs make use of it through. Glide no longer exists for a good reason and it's quite possible Mantle will go that way too. In the long term it's far more likely that it will get cut up and turn into the next PhysX. Nothing wrong with that either. Anything is better than the miserable slump PCs are in atm. However MS needs to go die in a fire. I'm already hearing rumors that the next Windows OS will be identical to the one used in their future console. Oh what could possibly go wrong with the PC at that point. My head is full of Fuck just thinking about that BS.
 
Denaut

Denaut

Trump's Staff
2,739
1,279
Kharza-kzad_sl said:
BTW the large crowd problems should be quite mitigated by ati's mantle api. I've not played with it myself but the primary benefit I've read about is that you can do huge amounts of draw calls. If I were making any sort of mmo right now I'd go mantle primary and just let the dx and gl branches be slow. It is just too much of an asspain trying to do silly tricks to cram several characters into a single draw call.

Hopefully nvidia has something similar in the works, or just writes mantle driver layers. ATI is down with that, as the API is open for other hardware vendors.
Click to expand...
That would help, and client performance is absolutely an issue, but it is less of an issue than it used to be. The major problem with many players doing stuff at once near each other is the network traffic.

Edited to Add:To be a little more detailed, client and rendering issues are local and improve as processing power improves locally. These kinds of issues are also worked on by nearly all games and thus have more resources going towards them.

Too much Network traffic with a central server is generally an MMORPG issue on the other hand. This problem is a bit trickier for 2 reasons, 1 is that improving network speeds is an expensive infrastructure issue that goes well beyond the scope of even the entire gaming industry. The second reason is that network traffic is an N^2 problem. In that every player you add to a system where all players can affect each other (say a siege battle) adds network traffic by an increasing amount.

Now, lots of improvements have been made tech wise, and you can design a game around being light on network traffic. However, a classic sword and board game, without slower tab target style combat, is going to be especially high on the network traffic.
 
Miele

Miele

Lord Nagafen Raider
916
48
Variise_sl said:
This is actually a very good point. Not sure how much work it would take to make current and nearly released MMOs make use of it through. Glide no longer exists for a good reason and it's quite possible Mantle will go that way too. In the long term it's far more likely that it will get cut up and turn into the next PhysX. Nothing wrong with that either. Anything is better than the miserable slump PCs are in atm. However MS needs to go die in a fire. I'm already hearing rumors that the next Windows OS will be identical to the one used in their future console. Oh what could possibly go wrong with the PC at that point. My head is full of Fuck just thinking about that BS.
Click to expand...
I thought MS was on a good path with Win7, then I saw Win8. My wife upgraded to 8.1 and everything was FUBAR, so she had to restore the system to 8.0. Fucking amazing. An OS for consoles to be used on PCs is... retarded?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.