Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Very short version:

I want to feel like a unit in "Starcraft" or "Supreme Commander", where all 7 NPC forces are building each an entity controlled by its own cetral AI.

TM, ICS, Asintec, Syndicate on player side,
Pelistal, Nuimquol and thelodica on NPC side.

The planet NIA has to be like a huge skirmish map with the players AND npcs building up bases, defending them and destroying others (PvP)

Players will start working for the goals of the AI, on alpha island that is defending the installations from roaming NPCs, supporting the local NPC faction with materials, repairing destroyed defense structures, and earning NIC and reputation by doing so.
Building up the energy transfer station and selling energy back to earth (backstory!)

Beta expansions are lead by player corporations, basicly doing the same without the lead of the human faction AI. PvE and PvP will not have much difference on battle style as both can happen everywhere you go.

Both partys will have to face both sides of the game - the PvE player will have to expect other players to attack them, while the pvp players have to face the possibilitys of an NPC ambush. It couldn't get more balanced as that.

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Annihilator wrote:

Both partys will have to face both sides of the game - the PvE player will have to expect other players to attack them, while the pvp players have to face the possibilitys of an NPC ambush. It couldn't get more balanced as that.

Of course it couldn't get more balanced, because you've completely removed one side of the equation: there is nothing to balance, as everyone will be doing the same thing.

I notice that some posters in this thread have the notion that "letting us attack anyone we want, when we want" somehow enriches the PvE game. It doesn't. You're just asking for the ability to farm PvE players.

For that matter, the addition of more NPC bots (and structures, and so on) wouldn't help the PvE people either: a dedicated PvE player couldn't kill them anyway, or, supposing he could, he'd still lose out to the PvP guys with their better range, targeting, locking, and so on.

The bottom line: if you want to keep people interested in the non-PvP side of things, you will have to give them something that PvPers cannot have.

All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful - Kohelet Rabbah 7:16

"My transaction log shows all my NIC was from selling kernals.  All of it."
"Savin's outrage tears are the best tears." - Anonymous ***

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

L1fe3looD wrote:
Wraithbane wrote:

PvE should should be just that, PvE. Mixing PvE and PvP is just asking for ganking and griefing. Thats one of the most certain paths to a narrow niche market(and limited profit).

Not that I'm against the fact that the company needs money to survive, I realize there are responsibilities and I would certainly want the people who make this game possible to get a great pay day, but it's not just about money. the moment you start making a game for profit alone, it's simply dead. What you're asking for in this paragraph is essentially your standard mmo, with no consequences, no REAL skill, and no intelligence required.

It doesn't matter how advanced "AI" will get, because it's still a program, and it's never truly random. The only thing that can make PVE truly challenging is the randomness that comes from other players possibly helping/ruining/stealing/killing/changing the field of play.

Also, there is no way PVE can be without the dangers of PVP because you're then truly guaranteeing that the market will primarily come from that and that alone. All the mods/mins/nic you could ask for just by running missions with complete 100% safety? That's truly game-breaking, especially with the free market setup.

Just like this game isn't EVE, it isn't WoW either, and it shouldn't be. Why not create something unique that balances the best of both worlds, and make something truly different, but that works and actually makes people WANT to play it? It can be done, but not by copying already done stuff that doesn't work like that.


Believe me, I've heard this all before. You make some good points, but the reality is, when you mix PvE and PvP in the same zone, things go down hill fast. Perhaps you are familiar with one of the goonies sayings that illustrate this? "We don't want to ruin the game, we want to ruin *your* game".  As long as there are people like that around, its not wise to mix the different modes.

What IS game breaking to me(and many others no doubt) is forced PvP. I have NO interest what so ever in any "challenge" that may come from having to look over my shoulder all the damn time. It gets very tiring. I started out in UO(near launch), and I've long since had my fill of gankfest games.  I'm hoping that Perpetuum will not head down that path.

I spent 5 plus years in EVE, because CCP had the common sense to leave well enough alone. I've watched as Concord and the high sec rule set evolved(to protect CCP's business model).  Even as pro PvP as CCP was, they realized that CareBears greatly out numbered the PvP crowd. 

Pre Incursion, they let us go about our business, and didn't do much that would interfere with what we wished to do. That changed in Incursions, which is why I ended my sub. I suspect I'm far from the only one.  Bottom line, this is a business, and keeping PvE and PvP separate makes good business sense.

If you can't kill it, don't make it mad.

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Very well put, Wraithbane!

Make PvE and PvP dependent on each other, maybe even connect them economically, but don't force one to do the other. Instead, give both of them exclusive goals and opportunities.

All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful - Kohelet Rabbah 7:16

"My transaction log shows all my NIC was from selling kernals.  All of it."
"Savin's outrage tears are the best tears." - Anonymous ***

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

1. I dont consider PO to be a sandbox game - yet it hardly matches any of the criteria, though id love to see it become one someday.

2. PVE has to be everything - a monotonous grind for the ones only wanting to make credits, a solo-experience and a group experience.

3. I completely disagree and have seen this so many times over the last 15 years.
Whenever you make pvp consensual it becomes a farce, worthless, a waste of time, an instanced poo game.

pvp is about dominating and harassing other people - it always was - winning fair games is something else and has nothing in common with pvp - except at least 2 persons with differing goals interfere in something that is not necessary. pvp is necessary since one side has to loose something. therefore - it cannot be consensual by system concept.

The current concept is quiet solid allthough pvp flags shouldnt exist or be able to be carried over to alpha. Generally alpha is too big und beta too small and meaningless.

4. I wouldnt overexaggerate the importance of PVE - what is good pve? wow? scripted ***? hell no. Good pve serves its purpose to gather ressources.

But what keeps people having a solid game base? Thats the social fluff - a bit of everything. And there we are again at the beginning - there isnt any fluff and/or sand in this game yet.

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Well, you're long on unfounded authority, but short on actual argument.

Whenever you make pvp consensual it becomes a farce, worthless, a waste of time, an instanced poo game.

I don't care how many times you've "seen it," please explain to the rest of us how is it that PvP is a farce? It seems quite a few people are enjoying it.

pvp is necessary since one side has to loose something. therefore - it cannot be consensual by system concept.

This makes no sense at all. Please explain how the "concept" of a system (which system? Perpetuum's?  A game?) requires that players be forced to PvP?

The current concept is quiet solid allthough pvp flags shouldnt exist or be able to be carried over to alpha. Generally alpha is too big und beta too small and meaningless.

This appears to contradict what you previously said- I thought we couldn't have consensual PvP?

In short, it's clear that you want to grief other players. But you'll have to find some reasons to support it.

All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful - Kohelet Rabbah 7:16

"My transaction log shows all my NIC was from selling kernals.  All of it."
"Savin's outrage tears are the best tears." - Anonymous ***

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Dude, don't say things like 'explain to the rest of us' ... you only represent yourself. 'The rest of us' are more likely to be embarassed with any form of association with you than sharing your views.

Long on unfounded authority huh ... pot, kettle and black springs to mind.

Annihilator said: Walking careless onto hokko without masking is like jumping into a bathtub with the hungry 30cm piranhas (infestation)
GLiMPSE™'s CoolPoints™ Leaderboard

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

I like the idea of self-functioning AI camps based both on alpha/beta islands (with beta islands being more lucrative). These self sustaining AI camps will be mining and producing bots on a scripted cycle, and if left alone, will continue to build up forces. The AI camp will incremently increase in size and number if the playerbase chooses to ignore it.

There should be a point where the AI camp(s) grow to a point where players HAVE to form up to defeat the enemy bots or curb its growth. Perhaps these AI camps are faction based, and will target each other if they come across each others. This could play well into the story that each faction (npc or player) are trying to establish control over parts of the island. I would love to sit back and enjoy an epic npc faction battle.

Further development down the road could involve specific equipment in these camps that are hindering human progress to obtain energy, and must be captured/destroyed. Also, scripting improvements can be made to AI camps to improve the difficulty level such as setting traps, or using strategies like pincer, blitz, etc.

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Expanding on the Beta island AI camp idea, these camps could play more of a role in shaping battlegrounds. The existence of these camps could force armies to strategize their approaches during intrustion events. For example, an advantageous road to the enemy outpost is flanked by AI camps, and bringing a large army through there will trigger aggro. A smaller group of players can utilize this route for a small advantage. Furthermore, the front line battle scenario will change so that attempts to "kite" the opposing army will be limited due to AI camp placements.

Benefits of a corp establishing control over outpost is control over 1)farming this outpost (which would require a substantial amount of players online, thus generating corp activity)
2) as someone mentioned, these could give temporary benefits to the outpost, such as increase in facility ratios, or perhaps area buff affects

My thoughts on AI camps on both alpha/beta islands can appeal to both PVE'ers and PVP'ers. A big part of this is, as someone mentioned, increasing artificial intelligence so that it seems like we are fighting a worthy opponent, as opposed to endless zombie farm.

35 (edited by Alfredson 2011-01-22 11:19:07)

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Since I am bored at work, I might as well continue and add more thoughts for you guys to consider.

I am sure that you guys have talked about player-made items and have no immediate plans for the near future. I would like to say that numerous T4 items are now being created. Other items will definitely come in the game in the future, but it seems like there are no strong "goals" for industry players. I am thinking that for those who concentrate solely on production, there should be an advantage (other than lower costs) over those who contribute fewer points and can produce the same thing. Perhaps branded items with slight stat improvements

Building on the "no strong goals" comment, perhaps there could be corporation goals. Recently, Allods added guild features where the guild can level up, and have access to different things. For the time being, I can only think of special insignia on the bot. A guild can level up by corporation members doing missions and earning reputation.

Over a long period of time, there could be slight increases in one or two stats which will give a slight advantage to members. Of course, gaining these stat improvements will take a long time (not something a hardcore group can grind in two weeks) and will be a big factor when opposing armies are equally matched. At the same time, a new corp facing an established corp could win if 1) assuming same army size 2) same skill level of players 3) same bots, they have better strategy. The idea is to improve so called "end game" by giving players a sense that it is a constant growth, not just in terms of extensions and NIC.


This idea isn't very well thought out, so other people feel free to criticize


p.s. sorry for posting so much in a row

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

More Assignments ,. LOTS more..

(1) Assignment terminals (Phone booth) type of thing, where you can see other players hanging around. And corp specific terminals that we could only access with high standing.

(2) Obviously some chain type assignments that reward a prototype at the end,. something like bulk order deeds from Ultima Online perhaps,..

(3) Kernals are cool, but I think there is something special about getting some cash on a npc kill,. perhaps a bounty like eve,. and higher standing with blue will reward more cash on a green kill,. or something like that.

(4) Increase the area size of some spawn's,. sitting in one spot gets a bit boring,. be nice to see the spawn force me to move around more.

(5) revisit the type of plates put on your NPC's , Its vary boring to see the same type of defensive outfit on the npc's,. (red has seismic) etc ..

(6) remove the static Kernal prices,. and kill the low level kernal cash cow,. 50% drop on the lvl 1 assignment mobs so newer players have more freedom in the obvious area's, and provide something for older players to go after. It gets really depressing to see that noob spawn we spent our first days on is still one of the best places to grind cash.

(7) Bounty assignments should have random places the npc's spawn, if someone else kills it the mission still completes..

(8) I would like a free cookie if you use any of the above ideas.

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Savin, the current system is quiet solid since it incororates a mixture of (non)consensuality. You can decide when to go to beta - but hopefully - have something to gain and something to loose - that is good.

From a system related point of view:

The underlying system says you can choose, but if you get attacked and defend you get flagged and you cannot choose anymore. This is a workaround for the implementation since being able to escape on secure alpha feels lame - but being forced to withdraw without defending is also - this workaround feels flawy - hence the idea to make people able to zone to alpha with pvp flag. They can withdraw but, have a chance to escape, but could still be hunted down.

Now then again this would feel flawy because the flagged ones would have the odds against them. These flaws make it feel artificial and calculable.

So to make it coherent there would need to be no safe alpha.

From a pvp related point of view:

You talk of griefing as if it was something bad - and pvp was something unrelated to accomplishing your goals or making the goals of your opponent impossible.

To make this coherent again - there cannot be any consensuality. This is contradictory by system. As soon as someone agrees to take losses - there are no losses - as soon as someone doesnt care about dying in this conflict or not being able to achieve his goals - these goals are null making the conflict a farce - since it is not neccesary.

My own benefit over somone elses is the core of human conflicts - this is the basis of pvp.


Now for pvp in game systems:

In non-sandbox games this is being realized by instanced or isolated pvp surroundings. Its fine - there is no other goal.

Now in a sandbox game, where the game basically is what people make out of it - there should be the freedom to do what you want - granted you find a way to do so. Relating to pvp this would mean no artificial pvp restrictions. There would be the possibility to grief someone - if you if you have the means to do so - or there would be the possibility to go everywhere unharmed - if you have the means to do so.

Simple. Restricting anything related to pvp in sanbox games - makes pvp a farce.

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Dude, don't say things like 'explain to the rest of us' ... you only represent yourself. 'The rest of us' are more likely to be embarassed with any form of association with you than sharing your views.

Duuude, don't get so angry. It gets better after graduation, you'll see.

The underlying system says you can choose, but if you get attacked and defend you get flagged and you cannot choose anymore. This is a workaround for the implementation since being able to escape on secure alpha feels lame

You're arguing that it "feels" lame- surely you understand that your impression does not prove anything about the "system." This is just an over-inflated way of saying that you want to grief people, and should not be a pariah because of it.

Now then again this would feel flawy because the flagged ones would have the odds against them. These flaws make it feel artificial and calculable.
So to make it coherent there would need to be no safe alpha.

This makes no sense at all. The game is "coherent" already, the system is viable; again, you say it "feels" flawed because you want to kill other players at your whim.

As soon as someone agrees to take losses - there are no losses - as soon as someone doesnt care about dying in this conflict or not being able to achieve his goals - these goals are null making the conflict a farce - since it is not neccesary.

Do you understand the concept of "game?" If this is your definition of farce, then perhaps we should shoot the losing teams in soccer matches?

My own benefit over somone elses is the core of human conflicts - this is the basis of pvp.

Ahh, now we come to the root of the problem: you suffer from a spectacularly dumb philosophy.

If it's your opinion that PvP should be non-consensual, that's fine: stop being afraid and hiding behind bad philosophy. Stand up, be proud of who you are, and tell the world that you want to make others bend to your will, and ruin the game for those who refuse.

All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful - Kohelet Rabbah 7:16

"My transaction log shows all my NIC was from selling kernals.  All of it."
"Savin's outrage tears are the best tears." - Anonymous ***

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Alfredson wrote:

I like the idea of self-functioning AI camps based both on alpha/beta islands (with beta islands being more lucrative). These self sustaining AI camps will be mining and producing bots on a scripted cycle, and if left alone, will continue to build up forces. The AI camp will incremently increase in size and number if the playerbase chooses to ignore it.

This is an interesting idea (at the moment, it reminds me of the upcoming Rift tongue). But where do the economic-minded players fit in? Won't someone who's spent all his EP in industry or mining be at a serious disadvantage. He'd have to start an alt in order to fight these NPCs, or establish the same system as currently stands in beta: he could only gather resources under the protection of combat-minded corpmates.

All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful - Kohelet Rabbah 7:16

"My transaction log shows all my NIC was from selling kernals.  All of it."
"Savin's outrage tears are the best tears." - Anonymous ***

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

I would like there to be more assignments !

I would also like a mix of assignments at the terminals and outposts.  Each terminal or outpost to have level 1, 2, 3, and 4 assignments.

If possible not to have to travel >4.2k for an assignment.  Having to do this for some of the lev2 assignments from the outposts is very frustrating and time consuming.  So much so, I really doubt that many people do them at all.

Other than that - keep up the good work smile

Regards - Jangor

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Savin, please stay on topic.

I'm asking what you expect from PvE as PvE player,
not how to balance PvP and PvE.

Are you satisfied with "Get to point A, kill X NPCs and deliver something"-Assignments?
Are you satisfied with npcs spawns placed in pits like animals, just there to be macro-farmed?
...

Forum Rule #5
Pyramid quoting, quoting excessive amounts of text or quoting without any senseful reply is forbidden. Only quote that is necessary to show what your reply refers to.

42 (edited by Dromsex 2011-01-22 16:21:53)

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Savin, your implications are wrong and the way your putting them up only concludes your trolling. Fair enough - go study systems design and come back. Im not telling anything about me - im telling you how things work since people exist. Its an old story, nothing new here.

In PO PVE seems to be designed to just feed the economy which then again feeds pvp and buts the emphasis on pvp with a worthwile economy. Thats fine for me.

I wouldnt mind some other pve encounters for groups other then just being determined by numbers - so some sort of tactics needed could be nice if its an addition.

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Recognizer wrote:

I'm asking what you expect from PvE as PvE player,
not how to balance PvP and PvE.

Are you satisfied with "Get to point A, kill X NPCs and deliver something"-Assignments?
Are you satisfied with npcs spawns placed in pits like animals, just there to be macro-farmed?

Yes, and I've replied that there could be more than additional assignments and spawns.

No, I'm not satisfied with the assignments and NPCs as they stand; I would like to see other dynamics added to the non-combat portion of the game.

Moreover, it's not irrelevant to point out that PvP and PvE seem to be imbalanced: combat-oriented players are able to complete more assignments and farm more NPCs than non-combat oriented players.

It's a straightforward request to add more dimensionality. I think many PvE players would like to have something for themselves, a bit more reward for having invested all those points in industry.

All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful - Kohelet Rabbah 7:16

"My transaction log shows all my NIC was from selling kernals.  All of it."
"Savin's outrage tears are the best tears." - Anonymous ***

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Dromsex wrote:

I wouldnt mind some other pve encounters for groups other then just being determined by numbers - so some sort of tactics needed could be nice if its an addition.

This is what we were looking for- thank you.

All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful - Kohelet Rabbah 7:16

"My transaction log shows all my NIC was from selling kernals.  All of it."
"Savin's outrage tears are the best tears." - Anonymous ***

45 (edited by Zildjian Repsmith 2011-01-23 00:15:14)

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Savin wrote:

I think PvE'ers would appreciate more content or mechanics that were geared towards their playstyle, and actually included some things that explicitly could not be accomplished by PvPers. A lot of PvE players are just as competitive as PvPers, but prefer to compete in the economic or political arenas- perhaps expanding these areas a bit?

There are many existing single player games that fill this non-PvP niche and the game play becomes predictable in short order, if there is going to be that strong of a demarcation between PvE and PvP then the developers might consider a single player version of Perpetuum. The best model that comes to my mind is Mount and Blade.

Savin wrote:

Creating a centralized exchange might lead to some real competition among manufacturers. Cornering the market is almost impossible now, but if trades in all the terminals were connected, someone might make a run for it.

This is not PvE this is Roleplaying (RP). If someone becomes “King of the Market” well good for them, if that person has a billion Nic, or controls a particular resource on the market it does not affect me in the least. But Perpetuum does lack RP value, and character individuality, which IMHO make MMO’s more interesting from a PvE perspective.

Savin wrote:

Maybe a stock market, where everyone could speculate in the futures of corporations? And what if a corp's value on the exchange had in-game repercussions, such as capping their credit or affecting their interest rates?

Individuals, or groups of individuals that do not engage in PvP, having a direct impact on PvP corporations wealth or ability to do business?
Well O.K...  if I can have a direct impact on all the harvesters littering the landscape on Alpha Island. The ability to drain said harvesters accumulator on Alpha would be a nice way to balance the equation... Quid Pro Quo Clarice!

Savin wrote:

What about a more flexible system of item modifications, similar to the enchantment systems in other games? Players could specialize in certain areas (armor, or missiles, or sensors, etc.) and be able to offer upgrades that others could not.

This would be a good idea if the implementation was for cosmetic or aesthetic purposes. I would gladly pay a crafter to customize my Mech with a skull and crossbones paint job, for the purpose of setting myself apart as an individual.

Savin wrote:

Above all, make the PvE players an integral part of the whole game: reward their specialization. Right now, there's really very little reason for PvPers to go outside their own corps for anything, and that's not the way things should or do work. If a corp wants to be self-sufficient, let it, but at the expense of reduced capabilities.

Fine reward PvE specialization, our corporate crafters would appreciate a buff. But it would be problematic to buff a specialization and then nerf it because the individual joins a corporation. Frankly I am not positive I understand what your implication is here, this is one of your more poorly written paragraphs. And it seems to contradict itself or I lack understanding of your meaning, but I have no problem with PvEers specializing.

Savin wrote:

A lot of PvE players are completionists- we like collecting all of the item recipes- which means that a lot of them lose interest once they've collected them all. Introducing more items is one solution, but eventually you're going to fall behind.

Exactly this is the heart of the issue, it makes no difference whether  the concept is a recipe, Open World Mob, or PvE Instance, the player base will become bored with the new PvE content faster than it can be created by the development team. These ideas have some merit and use, but they are “old hat” and should be used sparingly if Perpetuum wants to raise the bar.

My solution would be viral content, or special edition content that is limited, but something that the player base can look forward to. Give the content a short “shelf life” that matches the attention span of modern consumers, and implement new or tweaked content regularly.

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Zildjian Repsmith wrote:

There are many existing single player games that fill this non-PvP niche and the game play becomes predictable in short order, if there is going to be that strong of a demarcation between PvE and PvP then the developers might consider a single player version of Perpetuum. The best model that comes to my mind is Mount and Blade.

This is your answer? Go play another game? Keep up that attitude, and yes, Perpetuum will be a single player game. I hope you like it.

Zildjian Repsmith wrote:

This is not PvE this is Roleplaying (RP).

This is a false distinction, and utterly irrelevant to the discussion.

Zildjian Repsmith wrote:

If someone becomes “King of the Market” well good for them, if that person has a billion Nic, or controls a particular resource on the market it does not affect me in the least.

I think it should affect you- after all, you, as a member of a corp that is part of an alliance that fights for control of the beta islands, affect the PvE game. As you say, Quid Pro Quo.

Zildjian Repsmith wrote:

Individuals, or groups of individuals that do not engage in PvP, having a direct impact on PvP corporations wealth or ability to do business?
Well O.K...  if I can have a direct impact on all the harvesters littering the landscape on Alpha Island. The ability to drain said harvesters accumulator on Alpha would be a nice way to balance the equation... Quid Pro Quo Clarice!

You already do have an effect (although granted, it's limited right now because nobody is is clever  or skilled enough to take advantage of it) on PvE. But I agree with you that there should be more of a connection between the two, but nothing as short-sighted as draining harvesters: that's just another example of griefing.

I say: continue to introduce resources that can only be gathered in territory that is won in PvP combat- not just epitron, but half a dozen elements, all of them required to make anything T5 or higher. Continue to require kernels from NPC bots that take a combat team to kill. Industrialists should have to pay a premium for the resources that the PvPers win- but PvPers need to start paying a premium to the PvEers, too.

Zildjian Repsmith wrote:

This would be a good idea if the implementation was for cosmetic or aesthetic purposes. I would gladly pay a crafter to customize my Mech with a skull and crossbones paint job, for the purpose of setting myself apart as an individual.

It appears that your definition of "quid pro quo" is "Zildjian gets whatever he wants, but PvE players can only operate when he allows it." The items and abilities that are exclusive to PvE players must be an integral part of the game: otherwise it will remain one-dimensional. I'm describing a much more intricate, challenging game, and you're describing Space Invaders.

Zildjian Repsmith wrote:

Exactly this is the heart of the issue, it makes no difference whether  the concept is a recipe, Open World Mob, or PvE Instance, the player base will become bored with the new PvE content faster than it can be created by the development team.

I agree- so the answer is to make more of the content reliant upon players. Give the game more depth, make it more than blob A versus blob B. PvPers love to sound off about "risk," but they have no clue what real risk is as they traipse around in their free robots, knee deep in unlimited resources and unquenchable money flow.

REAL risk, PvP junkies, is where your corp loses half of its worth when it loses a major battle. REAL risk means you can't afford to keep a few dozen mechs ready-at-hand because you can't afford the storage space. REAL risk means that if you start griefing people, you suddenly can't afford ammo any longer.

Zildjian Repsmith wrote:

My solution would be viral content, or special edition content that is limited, but something that the player base can look forward to. Give the content a short “shelf life” that matches the attention span of modern consumers, and implement new or tweaked content regularly.

This is fine, but you seem to fail to realize that it puts the same burdens that you describe above, if not more, on the developers. At best, it's a short-term answer.

All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful - Kohelet Rabbah 7:16

"My transaction log shows all my NIC was from selling kernals.  All of it."
"Savin's outrage tears are the best tears." - Anonymous ***

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

like i already wrote ingame to you savin - what you expect, is PvE reduced to mining.

you definition of a sandbox game is - no npcs at all, just mining spots. The current PvE is boring as hell and the randomly placed, static and enclosed npc-spawns are nothing more then grinding spots where the only thing you have to accomplish is, that your capstable and your hauler-alt or -friend gets filled with the most efficient item/minute ratio

Perpetuum has a backstory for the npcs - they are the intelligent life form of this planet we are invading - the current situation doesn't reflect that at all. Its feels more like another WoW clone with mindless animal/monster spawns to grind.

Hell even the Tabula Rasa PvE was more fun with the scripted outpost attacks, though it was more hack&slay then anything else. If they didn't spawn the npcs 10m infront of the outposts, the immersion would have been almost perfect.

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

I just wanted to chime in on this, because i really love good PVE (and perpetuum doesn't yet have good PVE in my opinion.)

In my opinion, PVE should be designed so that it would be fun, even if you weren't being rewarded in game from it, then just add the rewards on top. This means looking at games that don't have a persistent character, and basing the PVE content on those.

Using RTS logic would be a good idea for group based encounters. The previously discussed use of scripted actions (alpha island invasions by npcs at scheduled times maybe?) would go well there, as would semi-instanced areas (instanced in that they are technically zoned as a separate island, and persist only as long as there are active players there, but they dont keep other players from coming in to the same instance as you, I believe EQ2 had a few dungeons like that.)

For solo encounters, either the player twitch reaction difficulty or the strategic difficulty needs to be increased, and not just by making the numbers on the targets bigger. I personally intentionally go beyond my efficient farming level to farm T5 heavy mechs solo in urban spawns just so i can really make use of the combined tactical elements of cover, range, ewar, and targeting.

Now how that is done, I could care less about, I loved Tabula Rasa's fast paced punchy FPS based style, and I also love Atlantica's heavily tactical turn based combat. They're both good examples of how to make PVE fun.

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

You make some very good points. I very much enjoyed Tablua Rasa myself(50 sniper and spy). One of the most fun aspects was the base defense against the Bane. As each wave got larger, and higher levels showed up, the pressure mounted to keep them from breaking down the gate field.  I'd LOVE to see the out posts turn into fortress style bases, with weapon emplacements, defense shields and all of the other aspects of a good tactical game.

The creation, expansion and up keep of the fortresses would require crafters/industrialists. The defense would require combat specialists. Thus it would engage everyone who wanted to take part.

The back story might be that the various robotic clans have started to suspect that they have been invaded, and they are starting to move against the invaders(while their own fights among each other continue).  The corps would thus be forced to hold(or take back) the fortress out posts.

If you can't kill it, don't make it mad.

50 (edited by Other 2011-01-23 16:46:57)

Re: What do you expect from PvE in a Sandboxgame

Complexity, specialization and the market as the central focus.

I feel that the entire game should revolve around NIC (sorta like the $ and real life). 

Don't make all resources easily available on all islands.  Maybe make one Alpha Island heavy on Imentium and light on Titan Ore, and the others heavy on other resources and light on others.  This would either force player corps to spread out or specialize in one area.

Increase the variety of components required to build equipment, including subcomponents that need to be manufactured within the components list.

For more advanced equipment there should be specific skills required.  High end equipment should require a specialized skill set to manufacture.  For example 'Advanced Industrial Robot Construction' to build the Riveler.

The more complex and specialized the skill sets required to perform certain functions in the PVE environment the more players will need to rely on each other to accomplish them.

As far as the question of the interplay between PVP and PVE players goes, I generally "carebear" in the game and find it boring to have no interaction with the PVP aspect of the game.  Since most of us are retired Eve players I think there are some good aspect of non-consensual PVP play and some bad aspects of it experienced in that game that can be borrowed for this one.

The ability of PVP players to completely dominate the PVE players in Eve is unbalanced.  The high sec wardecs are the best example of this in Eve.  PVE players were forced to be constantly locked in wardecs with corps loaded with full time greifers.  This is close to game breaking for a lot of PVE'ers and should be thrown out.  Suicide ganks are not game breaking.  It forces PVE players to be alert and intelligent in how they play.  The ability to shoot at a PVE'er in High Sec space with heavy repercussions doesn't have to be game breaking if balanced properly.

PVE players should also have the ability to sneak in and out of Beta Areas without being blown up every time if it is done with a little bit of luck and done intelligently.  The lure to get into these area with increased profits would entice a lot of 'carebear' types to take the risk and give the opportunity to some PVP'er to kill a carebear, making everybody happy.

As far as Assignment runners go... More variety and quantity of missions would be a good start.  The only problem with this is that its a never ending treadmill of more and more content.  There has to be more to it than just grinding NIC for that individual player.  The question is, how does what the assignment runners do help their corporation develop other than just adding nic to its wallet through taxation?  Maybe as corporation standing increases allow that corporation to build in areas previously off limits or the ability to purchase specialized equipment available only from that corporation.

I think the general idea is to increase specialization and complexity so as to force players to rely on each other to accomplish larger tasks.  These larger tasks should generally revolve around the acquisition of NIC in the never ending quest of dominating the game world.