Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
02-05-2010, 05:37 PM
External structures to create persistent "meaning" to smaller-scale PvP content is overrated. There is a fundamental problem with all such setups, which is the issue of what to do when one side wins. You either reset and play again (in which case, there goes your persistence) or the game is over and everybody packs up their bags and goes home.

What keeps a game alive in the long term is deep and entertaining gameplay at the actual player interaction level (i.e. combat and scenarios), not some external scoreboard that's keeping track of who's winning an ultimately unwinnable conflict. Especially, don't fall for the trap of creating an involuntarily stressful situation for players by "forcing" them to constantly attend to the growing demands of the artificially-imposed "crisis".

My two cents. I know enough from fans of games like WAR that many people are never going to be able to rid themselves of the illusion that complexity is somehow better for a game than elegance.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
02-05-2010, 05:38 PM
An Eve type open PvP will kill this particular player base. I do enjoy Eve and their customer service and game is incredible. Their PvP system is absulutely awesome but only for the hardcore PvP fan. The player base that this particular game is marketing to is more diverse and therefore PvP needs to be more appealing to a wider range and age. If they were to combine a ****/WoW style PvP system it would be EPIC
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:35 AM.