Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Keaggan

Crowfall: Not A Pvp Mmo

Recommended Posts

I was being facetious


☆ We are in a positive posting drought, so just post. Be the change you want the forums to be. Go wild. Just follow your positive posting star. ☆
☆:*´¨`*:.•.¸¸.•´¯`•.♥.•´¯`•.¸¸.•..:*´¨`*:.☆

(¯`’•.¸*♫♪♥(✿◠‿◠)♥♫♪*¸.•’´¯) Member of the Pro-ACE Club (¯`’•.¸*♫♪♥(✿◠‿◠)♥♫♪*¸.•’´¯)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you are saying Tully is lying or doesn't understand the game he is helping to  create?   Mkk

 

Tully, March 23rd:

 

I think 1/3rd of my postcount is telling people that we aren't turning into a PvE / casual / broad audience game. I'm starting to think people just don't listen to me    :(

 

 

Appears PvPcentric might mean everything revolves around PvP.   

 

Where was it stated that there would be activity w/ no risk, other than in the EK's?   The EK's do not make it a PvE game, imo

 

Maybe I wasn't clear, but my point was that terms like PVP and PVE do not mean one specific thing. 

 

That is why I was suggesting (without hope) that we should see different terminology used as the old/current system is pretty crappy.

 

Is CF a "PVE" game when using the WoW themepark definition? Of course not.

 

But you can not deny that Players will be playing against the Environment. As the Seasons change, the experience beyond direct player interaction will become more difficult. Be it The Hunger, monsters, warmth, natural disasters or whatever else they have in store. Simply going from Point A to Point B could be hard, with or without other players popping out and stabbing us in the face. To me this is PVE, regardless if the overall game is focused on PVP.

 

I didn't say that there would be "no risk." This is the problem. I mention PVE and you jump to "no risk." Where in reality, "PVE" in CF will be risky. Participating in the economy will be risky. Same goes for the political side. 

 

Terms with too much baggage need to be replaced with something current and meaningful that applies to the actual product and design.

 

If not, it turns into subjective definitions and semantics. Is there some mathematical equation to figure out the PVE content threshold before a PVP game turns PVE? This sounds silly, but basically is what I'm seeing people talk about. If Stabby time > 50% = PVP?

 

Games should just be games, but we as humans must slap labels, tags, definitions, and put them in boxes to make us feel good.

 

If we are going to bother defining and debating on what something is or isn't, we should at least have terms that make sense and can be agreed upon on some level by the majority.

 

At the end of the day, I see CF as a PVP game at its basic form. To me this is a very shallow way to look at it as it has the potential for a lot of depth and complexity that isn't easily summed up with something as vague as PVP.

 

I can just as easily call WoW a PVP game depending on where someone spends their time. I'd argue that WoW =/= CF, but maybe I'm wrong?

Edited by allein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand what the OP is trying to say.   However, I'm not so sure that many really thought otherwise.   

 

This game is the spiritual, if not actual successor to SB.    SB, while being a MMO where PVP happened ( lots and lots and lots of it ).   The meta game within SB was political.   I don't remember who said it first, but it's been said often. War (or in-game pvp) is just another tool within the game of thrones.

 

Where most other PVP oriented games get it wrong is that they don't incorporate this meta-game into the overall picture until late in the development stage.     

 

Knowing the products that Warden (aka Todd ) and Tyrant ( aka Gordon ) have put out.   Their vision of this meta-game, created games (like Shadowbane).  It took the power away from the NPC's within the game world and gave it directly to the players.  The players choose their leaders.   Those PC Player-Leaders are analogous to .counts, earls, dukes, kings, queens and empresses.    Their decisions, while mostly pvp oriented, also change the fundamental nature of the game.     It's political, it's meta.   

 

I trust that in this area, above all others, that Artcraft will get it right.      And in this way, the OP is correct.   Crowfall will not be about PVP.   But PVP will be a major part of the gameplay.

Edited by Kirel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I wasn't clear, but my point was that terms like PVP and PVE do not mean one specific thing. 

 

That is why I was suggesting (without hope) that we should see different terminology used as the old/current system is pretty crappy.

 

Is CF a "PVE" game when using the WoW themepark definition? Of course not.

 

But you can not deny that Players will be playing against the Environment. As the Seasons change, the experience beyond direct player interaction will become more difficult. Be it The Hunger, monsters, warmth, natural disasters or whatever else they have in store. Simply going from Point A to Point B could be hard, with or without other players popping out and stabbing us in the face. To me this is PVE, regardless if the overall game is focused on PVP.

 

I didn't say that there would be "no risk." This is the problem. I mention PVE and you jump to "no risk." Where reality, "PVE" in CF will be risky.

 

Terms with too much baggage need to be replaced with something current and meaningful that applies to the actual product and design.

 

If not, it turns into subjective definitions and semantics. Is there some mathematical equation to figure out the PVE content threshold before a PVP game turns PVE? This sounds silly, but basically is what I'm seeing people talk about. If Stabby time > 50% = PVP?

 

Games should just be games, but we as humans must slap labels, tags, definitions, and put them in boxes to make us feel good.

 

If we are going to bother defining and debating on what something is or isn't, we should at least have terms that make sense and can be agreed upon on some level by the majority.

 

At the end of the day, I see CF as a PVP game at its basic form. To me this is a very shallow way to look at it as it has the potential for a lot of depth and complexity that isn't easily summed up with something as vague as PVP.

My question is even simpler really.  If a dev says it is NOT PvE, why is anyone trying to redefine it?  Come up with another term?  IF the term makes sense to the devs, what really IS the issue?  Tully was right , I guess, no one listens to him.


Maybe it not about the happy ending. Maybe it's about the story.

RIP Doc Gonzo "to anyone...speak your mind...defend your position...be prepared for an Argument and enjoy the process of the discussion...that's all part of any good Forum experience"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is even simpler really.  If a dev says it is NOT PvE, why is anyone trying to redefine it?  Come up with another term?  IF the term makes sense to the devs, what really IS the issue?  Tully was right , I guess, no one listens to him.

 

Just because a term makes sense on some level, doesn't mean it isn't a poor term.

 

Instead of limiting it to just MMORPG, they went with "Throne War Simulator" and "GOT meets EVE." Both of which can be interpreted multiple different ways (and have been) but they are attempts by the dev to describe the game without simply going PVP, the end.

 

If someone asked you do describe CF, you'd simple go "PVP" and feel confident the other person would know exactly what you mean? That is the limit to the complexity/depth of CF?

 

As I said above (edited after you quoted), WoW is a MMORPG that also has PVP. I would never put CF and WoW in the same category if I had better terms.

 

I have no clue what Tully defines "PVE" as. He could call it "Cheese" and I would first think he is being silly, but second, ask what "Cheese" means.

 

My point remains, that all this back and worth is a result of not having common ground to stand on. Sure we could just agree that CF = PVP and call it a day. But isn't that what these forums are for? Mindless bickering and trying to force our views and opinions upon others? I'm right, you're wrong and all that?

 

For me, the issue is we aren't (hopefully) a bunch of mindless sheep that think the same thing. We are all trying to discuss concepts that are larger then shallow terms and since we aren't on the same page, we will continue to have such discussions going in circles forever. Fun I guess.

Edited by allein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, your post OP. "players are the most important part of the game", but player vs player isn't the most important? I don't think you thought this through player-P.

 

The dynamic interaction of human players in worlds can be much more than just combat between people. I don't know why combat is all people think about. 


The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.

- Nietzsche

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because a term makes sense on some level, doesn't mean it isn't a poor term.

 

Instead of limiting it to just MMORPG, they went with "Throne War Simulator" and "GOT meets EVE." Both of which can be interpreted multiple different ways (and have been) but they are attempts by the dev to describe the game without simply going PVP, the end.

 

 

 

The explanation for that in case anyone is wondering:

 

Todd a few days ago:

 

You know, we really struggled with this one.  I actually don't like the Hollywood style of pitching something, "It's like AVATAR meets LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN!", seems really goofy.

 

and then we did it anyway.  Because after a year of trying, we still couldn't figure out how to pitch the game in a single sentence.

 

The goal of a pitch line is to generate interest, to make it easy for potential audience members to filter themselves in or out based on the question, "is this something that I might be interested in?"

 

From that standpoint, the line works.  If you are into the idea of how elements from Game of Thrones might be mixed with elements from Eve Online, then you might be interested in Crowfall.  If not, then you probably won't be.

 

We came up with this pitch line when we created our kickstarter page, because we needed a single (short) sentence to entice people to check out the KS project page.  I figured we would retire it after that, but we still don't have anything better, so we carried it over to the main site.  


Maybe it not about the happy ending. Maybe it's about the story.

RIP Doc Gonzo "to anyone...speak your mind...defend your position...be prepared for an Argument and enjoy the process of the discussion...that's all part of any good Forum experience"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The dynamic interaction of human players in worlds can be much more than just combat between people. I don't know why combat is all people think about. 

 

Because many come from SB and DF which are instanced lobby games where combat happens 99.9% of the time....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The explanation for that in case anyone is wondering:

 

Todd a few days ago:

 

You know, we really struggled with this one.  I actually don't like the Hollywood style of pitching something, "It's like AVATAR meets LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN!", seems really goofy.

 

and then we did it anyway.  Because after a year of trying, we still couldn't figure out how to pitch the game in a single sentence.

 

The goal of a pitch line is to generate interest, to make it easy for potential audience members to filter themselves in or out based on the question, "is this something that I might be interested in?"

 

From that standpoint, the line works.  If you are into the idea of how elements from Game of Thrones might be mixed with elements from Eve Online, then you might be interested in Crowfall.  If not, then you probably won't be.

 

We came up with this pitch line when we created our kickstarter page, because we needed a single (short) sentence to entice people to check out the KS project page.  I figured we would retire it after that, but we still don't have anything better, so we carried it over to the main site.  

 

Their reasoning makes sense, but "GOT meets EVE" is a lot broader than PVP to me. Clearly CF isn't every part of GOT or EVE, but someone with any sort of familiarity with either will probably start making logical connections.

 

PVP on the other hand is a very broad, vague, generalized, whatever term that does not encompass or fairly represent what CF (or any game) is really about.

 

It will have PVP of many shades, but that is just the tip of the iceberg from where I'm standing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their reasoning makes sense, but "GOT meets EVE" is a lot broader than PVP to me. Clearly CF isn't every part of GOT or EVE, but someone with any sort of familiarity with either will probably start making logical connections.

 

PVP on the other hand is a very broad, vague, generalized, whatever term that does not encompass or fairly represent what CF (or any game) is really about.

 

It will have PVP of many shades, but that is just the tip of the iceberg from where I'm standing.

I agree with that.  There are "other" facets.   I guess I am going back to day one of the forums when speculation was whether it was PvE or PvP.   When the campaigns were revealed there was MASS RIOTING  ( ok even before that )   because the PVE crowd does not see PVP as a part of any of their play where PVP accepts that PVE will be a part to some extend.  To use the PVE term to define CF is sometimes a dangerous thing as it will be defined as " a game able to be played w/ no player vs player combat at all. "    That is what alot of the PVE crowd is used to and really really wants.   A game w/no risk from other players, a game that everyone can eventually win.   


Maybe it not about the happy ending. Maybe it's about the story.

RIP Doc Gonzo "to anyone...speak your mind...defend your position...be prepared for an Argument and enjoy the process of the discussion...that's all part of any good Forum experience"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with that.  There are "other" facets.   I guess I am going back to day one of the forums when speculation was whether it was PvE or PvP.   When the campaigns were revealed there was MASS RIOTING  ( ok even before that )   because the PVE crowd does not see PVP as a part of any of their play where PVP accepts that PVE will be a part to some extend.  To use the PVE term to define CF is sometimes a dangerous thing as it will be defined as " a game able to be played w/ no player vs player combat at all. "    That is what alot of the PVE crowd is used to and really really wants.   A game w/no risk from other players, a game that everyone can eventually win.   

 

I love PVE players that just can't stand to see PVP represented as a core function of the game. I mean, how can you prefer enemies that have the same attack patterns and tactics EVERY time over the rush of not knowing what a player is going to come at you with? 

 

I suppose I shouldn't diss it TOO hard. Everyone has their own preferred playstyles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I compare what we've been told of Crowfall with other games I've played, on a PvP/PvE scale it looks like this :

 

pvP8CDS.png?1

I don't see CoD.  Please adjust the graphic please.  I can't figure out if I want to play Crowfall or not with out it!  ;)


[@--(o.O)@]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with that.  There are "other" facets.   I guess I am going back to day one of the forums when speculation was whether it was PvE or PvP.   When the campaigns were revealed there was MASS RIOTING  ( ok even before that )   because the PVE crowd does not see PVP as a part of any of their play where PVP accepts that PVE will be a part to some extend.  To use the PVE term to define CF is sometimes a dangerous thing as it will be defined as " a game able to be played w/ no player vs player combat at all. "    That is what alot of the PVE crowd is used to and really really wants.   A game w/no risk from other players, a game that everyone can eventually win.   

 

Agreed and I fully understand why we all defend what we have feels about. Those trying to change the core design to fit their wants which go completely against the spirit of the game should follow the Exit signs out of the building.

 

CF is not a "PVE game" but it is a lot more than just a "PVP game." Which may or may not be where the OP was sort of coming from. Hence my sad hope that there could be entirely new terms that represent this a little easier for all parties involved.

Edited by allein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see CoD.  Please adjust the graphic please.  I can't figure out if I want to play Crowfall or not with out it!   ;)

 

You have to add it! I have never played and have no idea if there's any AI NPC or other PvE in it.  :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you make one that incorporates player "skill"?  :ph34r:

 

No! I don't want half of the forum users to throw stones at me!  :D

 

"I think the game that takes the most skill overall is WoW... "

Edited by courant101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The devs have stated pvp will be a major part of crowfall, but not the only element. The title of this thread should have been crowfall is not strictly a pvp game. If it were just pvp there would be no crafting, resources, eks, or the hunger and the npc monsters that come with it. Does that mean crowfall is not a pvp game? No. Pvp is the main focus. Just with some other elements thrown in to enhance the game. But in no way is crowfall a pve game. Maybe a new category of gaming is evolving with crowfall thst warrants a name change. Maybe not. Arguing back and forth about this is pointless though. Crowfall is crowfall. Any other names for or categorizing it as mean nothing to me. Although my opinion is just that. Mine lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...