|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis
775
   |
Posted - 2012.12.16 20:38:00 -
[1] - Quote
1CLIP 1KILL wrote:I don't want "non combat" areas. PvP should be the only focus, or preparing for it. If character customization is ever implemented, players should earn the right to use it through PvP. They shouldn't even get a nice room to start.
Flawed assessment, PvE =/= "non combat".
Equally PvE =/= "safe". If someone "feels safe" in a PvE setting they're either actively playing spec'ed to counter what they face in that context and are well practiced, or they're simply deluding themselves.
The former is true of PvP as well. I'm sure there are games where folks like Zitro, Zan, Fivetimes, etc feel safe, and in fact are more or less safe. The better your gear and character skills, and the more efficiently you can use them the safer you become.
One other assessment from the OP that needs revision is the misconception that all development resources are drawn from one pool. Development teams are assigned different areas within which they work and developers are hired/assigned based on the skills required to fulfill their given role within product creation. I like many of the things on the list in the OP, but to assume that working on one aspect of the game directly diminishes focus on another aspect is simply inaccurate.
0.02 ISK
Cross |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis
775
|
Posted - 2012.12.16 21:06:00 -
[2] - Quote
1CLIP 1KILL wrote:Cross Atu wrote:One other assessment from the OP that needs revision is the misconception that all development resources are drawn from one pool. Development teams are assigned different areas within which they work and developers are hired/assigned based on the skills required to fulfill their given role within product creation. I like many of the things on the list in the OP, but to assume that working on one aspect of the game directly diminishes focus on another aspect is simply inaccurate. Good point. I believe there is some crossover, but I have no idea to what degree.
True, the sub-teams certainly will interact and thus the projects can draw to a certain degree, however some of the interactions wouldn't be zero sum. For example a revision to weapons balance from the balance team is going to be game wide and most maps will be usable in more than one mode etc.
Again I'd like to reiterate that I too support prioritization of the other things you listed, I just don't think that the development will mutually exclusive.
As to the concept of PvE zones more generally, I think they're useful for High Sec where people start out (good form of pratice and way to build resources while training skills, new players will likely need this). If there is to be PvE outside of High Sec I'm betting it'll be like PvE in EVE, which makes it PvPvE (as you mentioned previously).
Cheers,
Cross |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis
775
|
Posted - 2012.12.18 10:22:00 -
[3] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:Crm234 wrote:Rf you have commented to a bunch of my post in this thread for 2 pages now, you know what i said or your just hitting the quote button for the sake of it. The turn base comment is for the fact that Turn base combat is a core mechanic of RPG`s and not FPS games and would be ludicrous for anyone to complain on that in a RPG development just like Pve progression in a MMOFPS is ludicrous and breaking the core FPS mechanic. Just like there is a RPG grind there is a FPS grind that is expected of the players. RPG players do missions for SP and FPS players kill others for SP.
What this whole thread is about is to remove Pve or as I said just have it give you ISK. I know firefall exist but to be honest I don't think anyone is taking that game serious as the planet conquering system needs to be in Dust.
No passive SP
No SP from Co op Pve that leads to weapon upgrades in Pvp Or you will just get the average RPG progression no matter the different skill point progression. Everyone will just Pve because they will die less till they have high SP upgrades and clan up and go Raid.
if you mess with the progression of this game you will completely offset the player base. Its time for Eve players to compromise once and adapt to the FPS style. I can't be bothered to respond to this. [/exits thread]
I can 
Dust is something new, there hasn't been another game quite like it before (for a host of reasons) and that requires that assumptions about the meaning of gaming categories be set aside, because D514 doesn't fit them (even the combined ones like "MMOFPSRPG" that CCP has used).
The first paragraph posted bolis down to a comment on two things, one is pacing of game play, the other is opponent control (i.e. are they controled by players ar AI).
As an average hostile player forces will provide a faster paced and more dangerous opposition than an equal number of AI controlled forces. But there's no reason those numbers should be equal. PvE certainly shouldn't mean "play dust without risk", but that's a balance consideration not a question of anything inherent to the game mode. Besides which as I've mentioned above having some place for new players to build up ISK/SP to get them started is good for game health. Honestly it's good for PvP fun value as well because matches flooded with new players in starter fits while you have both player experience and Proto gear makes for lopsided and dull matches. PvP is most fun when it's a real fight, when there's some competitive clash going on, an absence of PvE increases the burden on the matchmaking system to try and prevent boring lopsided matches while also removing a way of playing the game, in essence creating a lose-lose situation.
There are no raids in Dust, and it's unlikely PvE in Dust would be a raid style mechanic because there are no raids in EVE either, which brings me to my closing point.
PC vs Console as a user definition is a fiction, just as is the idea that there is a single style of play preferred by all people who play EVE or fps games. The very assumption that these are categorically different people is inaccurate many people in fact do both, and compromising between those aspects of what they enjoy rather than finding a synergistic method for them just results in a net loss.
0.02 ISK
Cross |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis
775
|
Posted - 2012.12.19 04:13:00 -
[4] - Quote
1CLIP 1KILL wrote:
Thank you for that post. My question is that if the only way to make ISK in EVE was PvP, do you think more people would lose money instead of everyone making it?
Just in response to this idea, the main source of income in EVE isn't PvE or PvP it's not Player versus at all.it's mining (which has a variable chance of being interrupted by both NPCs and Players depending on location, time, etc etc). Point being that the core source of resources into the economy within EVE isn't contained within the PvP/PvE dichotomy.
Now I've no idea what the intent for Dust is, nor am I attempting to make the above a suggestion, simply adding related information. 
Cheers,
Cross |
|
|
| |
|