While the assassin/bounty system being talked about sounds cool, setting up a bounty is pretty easy to exploit. Player A goes on a killing spree, gets a bounty, then gets his buddy/alt to kill him, collect the bounty, and its win/win for Player A. I like the idea of it, but exploiting the system is the norm on online games.
The best assassination system I have ever seen in an online game was in an old game called Meridian 59. It is a little more "gamey" and less thematic than the bounty system idea above, but it had the best assassination feel to it and is relatively harder to exploit. Basically, there was an NPC players could talk to to opt in on the assassin game. After joining, the player gets a dagger, and after a certain time limit, a name appears on the dagger indicating sign ups are closed and the game is on. The dagger had three jewels on it, which is how many times you could be hit (a stab in the back counted as two hits), and the dagger would only damage two targets: the player whose name was on the dagger and the player who had your name on his dagger. I think if you attacked anyone else with it, it would explode and kill you. After you get a kill, the name on the dagger changes to another player still active in the game. The last player standing won a prize and then the game started again.
It was a lot of fun and tying the "health" to the item meant that a brand new player could compete with someone who had been playing forever. It was all about moving to the target casually and avoiding notice. It was always amusing to watch someone in town bee-line at a target at full speed with their dagger out only to get shanked for their troubles. It also made for an interesting social game, as the easiest way to find the target was to ask around, but asking meant the target knows he can kill you first and eliminate the person hunting him for awhile.
This is honestly one of the very few fun, not griefy systems for anywhere, assassination style pvp that I can think of (at least for a game that isn't all pvp, all the time). It could use some upgrading for TESO, but it seems like it would be a good fit.
While the assassin/bounty system being talked about sounds cool, setting up a bounty is pretty easy to exploit. Player A goes on a killing spree, gets a bounty, then gets his buddy/alt to kill him, collect the bounty, and its win/win for Player A. I like the idea of it, but exploiting the system is the norm on online games.
The best assassination system I have ever seen in an online game was in an old game called Meridian 59. It is a little more "gamey" and less thematic than the bounty system idea above, but it had the best assassination feel to it and is relatively harder to exploit. Basically, there was an NPC players could talk to to opt in on the assassin game. After joining, the player gets a dagger, and after a certain time limit, a name appears on the dagger indicating sign ups are closed and the game is on. The dagger had three jewels on it, which is how many times you could be hit (a stab in the back counted as two hits), and the dagger would only damage two targets: the player whose name was on the dagger and the player who had your name on his dagger. I think if you attacked anyone else with it, it would explode and kill you. After you get a kill, the name on the dagger changes to another player still active in the game. The last player standing won a prize and then the game started again.
It was a lot of fun and tying the "health" to the item meant that a brand new player could compete with someone who had been playing forever. It was all about moving to the target casually and avoiding notice. It was always amusing to watch someone in town bee-line at a target at full speed with their dagger out only to get shanked for their troubles. It also made for an interesting social game, as the easiest way to find the target was to ask around, but asking meant the target knows he can kill you first and eliminate the person hunting him for awhile.
This is honestly one of the very few fun, not griefy systems for anywhere, assassination style pvp that I can think of (at least for a game that isn't all pvp, all the time). It could use some upgrading for TESO, but it seems like it would be a good fit.
There is a stupidly simple solution to this proposed problem.
"A player may not take a bounty contract on another character on that account."
Even better: "A player may only have one character per server per account."
Yeah, I mentioned wanting to play in first person to a buddy of mine who works at ZOS and he looked at me like a crazy person and said the game was definitely engineered with 3rd person being the intended way to play.
I played the PVE in first person for most of the weekend. It was more practical to play in 3rd, sure, but it both felt clunkier and felt less satisfying to do so. So, same as other ES games.
There is a stupidly simple solution to this proposed problem.
"A player may not take a bounty contract on another character on that account."
Even better: "A player may only have one character per server per account."
You missed the "buddy" part. Even if you restricted it away from people on your friends list (or recently on your friends list - if you even bother to use those), there will be players who will just hire themselves out to clear your bounty. Like I said before, the similar system in SWG basically came down to a 50/50 split. I'll let you kill me and you give me half the bounty. The people I killed and put bounties on me just paid me half that money for the privilege of being killed by me.
Also, at least as far as ESO is concerned, there's only one server. And restricting to one character just to make a subgame work would lose more players than it brings in.
While the assassin/bounty system being talked about sounds cool, setting up a bounty is pretty easy to exploit. Player A goes on a killing spree, gets a bounty, then gets his buddy/alt to kill him, collect the bounty, and its win/win for Player A. I like the idea of it, but exploiting the system is the norm on online games.
The best assassination system I have ever seen in an online game was in an old game called Meridian 59. It is a little more "gamey" and less thematic than the bounty system idea above, but it had the best assassination feel to it and is relatively harder to exploit. Basically, there was an NPC players could talk to to opt in on the assassin game. After joining, the player gets a dagger, and after a certain time limit, a name appears on the dagger indicating sign ups are closed and the game is on. The dagger had three jewels on it, which is how many times you could be hit (a stab in the back counted as two hits), and the dagger would only damage two targets: the player whose name was on the dagger and the player who had your name on his dagger. I think if you attacked anyone else with it, it would explode and kill you. After you get a kill, the name on the dagger changes to another player still active in the game. The last player standing won a prize and then the game started again.
It was a lot of fun and tying the "health" to the item meant that a brand new player could compete with someone who had been playing forever. It was all about moving to the target casually and avoiding notice. It was always amusing to watch someone in town bee-line at a target at full speed with their dagger out only to get shanked for their troubles. It also made for an interesting social game, as the easiest way to find the target was to ask around, but asking meant the target knows he can kill you first and eliminate the person hunting him for awhile.
This is honestly one of the very few fun, not griefy systems for anywhere, assassination style pvp that I can think of (at least for a game that isn't all pvp, all the time). It could use some upgrading for TESO, but it seems like it would be a good fit.
There is a stupidly simple solution to this proposed problem.
"A player may not take a bounty contract on another character on that account."
Even better: "A player may only have one character per server per account."
This doesn't solve running up a bounty and having your friend collect it for free and share the money with you.
Age of Wushu had a bounty system, and if you really wanted you could have a friend collect the bounty and share it. But the money wasn't really the major point of the system. It was the jail time that someone gets after a constable kills them, which goes up as the bounty goes up. Hell if they PK enough and have enough infamy they could get beheaded and their character is gone for good.
There really isn't a good way to stop people from collecting their own bounty with a friend. However the way it worked in AoW, was only a constable could collect the bounty and it was not an easily toggleable thing, you had to pay to do it and it had a cooldown. So if someone became a constable just to collect that bounty, they are then targets of the outlaws and will have to deal with being PKed more often.
Sure some might take advantage if something was in ESO with the dark brotherhood, but you gotta ask yourself... does it matter? From an immersion standpoint you can still use the system to play an assassin/anti-assassin. So what if someone collects some extra gold now and then. Put a limit on how often the same person can collect on the same criminal and its just a small loss for including a really cool feature.
I'll tell you one thing, in AoW when I put a bounty on someone and later on it informed me that they were arrested. I didn't give a shit who got the reward, it was worth it to goto the jail cell and see them lose a few hours of gameplay for being a dickhead. Sometimes I even sat and drank wine outside their jail cell, just for fun.
edit: Also its worth noting, if the bounty is high enough and their infamy is high enough... they can literally goto jail for like 4 REAL TIME days. So by all fucking means, let your friend kill you for a stupid bounty. You lose FOUR DAYS of gameplay for probably less gold than you would have made in those four days.
While the assassin/bounty system being talked about sounds cool, setting up a bounty is pretty easy to exploit. Player A goes on a killing spree, gets a bounty, then gets his buddy/alt to kill him, collect the bounty, and its win/win for Player A. I like the idea of it, but exploiting the system is the norm on online games.
The best assassination system I have ever seen in an online game was in an old game called Meridian 59. It is a little more "gamey" and less thematic than the bounty system idea above, but it had the best assassination feel to it and is relatively harder to exploit. Basically, there was an NPC players could talk to to opt in on the assassin game. After joining, the player gets a dagger, and after a certain time limit, a name appears on the dagger indicating sign ups are closed and the game is on. The dagger had three jewels on it, which is how many times you could be hit (a stab in the back counted as two hits), and the dagger would only damage two targets: the player whose name was on the dagger and the player who had your name on his dagger. I think if you attacked anyone else with it, it would explode and kill you. After you get a kill, the name on the dagger changes to another player still active in the game. The last player standing won a prize and then the game started again.
It was a lot of fun and tying the "health" to the item meant that a brand new player could compete with someone who had been playing forever. It was all about moving to the target casually and avoiding notice. It was always amusing to watch someone in town bee-line at a target at full speed with their dagger out only to get shanked for their troubles. It also made for an interesting social game, as the easiest way to find the target was to ask around, but asking meant the target knows he can kill you first and eliminate the person hunting him for awhile.
This is honestly one of the very few fun, not griefy systems for anywhere, assassination style pvp that I can think of (at least for a game that isn't all pvp, all the time). It could use some upgrading for TESO, but it seems like it would be a good fit.
There is a stupidly simple solution to this proposed problem.
"A player may not take a bounty contract on another character on that account."
Even better: "A player may only have one character per server per account."
This doesn't solve running up a bounty and having your friend collect it for free and share the money with you.
I guess I don't see a problem with having friends in low places.
If you've got a buddy in the guild, and arrange some way to split the bounty, what's the problem with that?
Like... That's why we make friends. To reap benefits.
"Damn! Joe got his buddy to collect that bounty on him. I'm going to make friends with Kyle, so next time I can tell Kyle to make sure he gets the contract and no shenanigans happen... Better yet, I'll join the guild, so I can mess Joe's day up!"
This is probably why I haven't had any fun in MMO recently. Let me, or us, the player(s) solve problems. Don't put in unnecessary restrictions. Eve does this. It works rather well.
I imagine the potential playerbase for an MMO where you can kill other players and take their stuff with barely a consequence is not nearly high enough to warrant an AAA budget. You want Wild West, you won't find it outside of aging MMOs with legacy populations and indies.
Indies who seem to fail before they even get out of beta, as the trend seems to be.
They are mad if they want people to be playing in third person perspective. Straight up insane. The third person animations and view in the game is *dreadful* - it plays far better in first person, even with the restricted view angle.
I imagine the potential playerbase for an MMO where you can kill other players and take their stuff with barely a consequence is not nearly high enough to warrant an AAA budget. You want Wild West, you won't find it outside of aging MMOs with legacy populations and indies.
Indies who seem to fail before they even get out of beta, as the trend seems to be.
Actually this might be the year we get some AAA sandbox/PVP/full-loot MMO's. Archeage and Black Desert are looking very promising.
Darkfall tried its best to be one, I enjoyed it a lot. But the population is really low now, since most of them are changing over to Mortal Online. Which surpsingly has grown and improved a great deal. I spent a few weeks on it a month ago and had a great time. Got killed and had to run around naked a few times. Got pick pocketed once for a few gold, which at the time was a FORTUNE for me. Found the guy doing it who would hide near an NPC that gave a few gold for turning in zombie heads and he would then nick the person right after they turned in if they traded for gold (smaller stack) instead of silver (100 per gold). Pickpocket rules in that game make it safe if you carry large stacks. So I baited him by trading for a gold, which he stole and that gives permission to freely kill him, which was a good 15 minute chase around town... which I actually didn't fully kill him, he mis-judged a jump when I chased him up to the roof tops and he fell to his death. I was then able to loot his corpse for all the gold he had been stealing... hell I even was able to skin his corpse and go make a hat out of it.
Crazy shit like that just doesn't happen in most MMOs.
I imagine the potential playerbase for an MMO where you can kill other players and take their stuff with barely a consequence is not nearly high enough to warrant an AAA budget. You want Wild West, you won't find it outside of aging MMOs with legacy populations and indies.
Indies who seem to fail before they even get out of beta, as the trend seems to be.
There is always a consequence for killing players in these kinds of games. I thought the discussion people had here made that pretty damn clear. Either you will be isolated from the rest of the MMO world by becoming a bandit/pirate or you will be hunted by people and NPC's who want your bounty. In almost every game where player killing was a big feature, murderers and gankers could only exist as outcasts with huge blaring icons next to their name that informed everyone around them that they were assholes not to be trusted.
Ultimately I personally play MMO's to interact with other people and I prefer fighting other people as well so I wouldn't mind it if the MMO genre started developing the ideas around player killing systems in the open world some more. I think it's nuts that we haven't had a proper AAA sandbox title yet.
They are mad if they want people to be playing in third person perspective. Straight up insane. The third person animations and view in the game is *dreadful* - it plays far better in first person, even with the restricted view angle.
I mostly prefer 3rd person, but ESO 3rd person does have issues. For one, they need to let you adjust the over-the-should offset and angle behind you head (I prefer centered with the right up/down angling).
The animations are hit and miss imo. The jump animation (and mechanics) are awful, but generally are in ES games. They have some nice touches tho. Depending on the height you jump/fall from, you may do the sort of superhero knee down landing or roll. But overall they do need to work on the fluidity.
There is always a consequence for killing players in these kinds of games. I thought the discussion people had here made that pretty damn clear. Either you will be isolated from the rest of the MMO world by becoming a bandit/pirate or you will be hunted by people and NPC's who want your bounty. In almost every game where player killing was a big feature, murderers and gankers could only exist as outcasts with huge blaring icons next to their name that informed everyone around them that they were assholes not to be trusted.
Ultimately I personally play MMO's to interact with other people and I prefer fighting other people as well so I wouldn't mind it if the MMO genre started developing the ideas around player killing systems in the open world some more. I think it's nuts that we haven't had a proper AAA sandbox title yet.
As I said a few posts up, check out Archeage and Black Desert.
There is always a consequence for killing players in these kinds of games. I thought the discussion people had here made that pretty damn clear. Either you will be isolated from the rest of the MMO world by becoming a bandit/pirate or you will be hunted by people and NPC's who want your bounty. In almost every game where player killing was a big feature, murderers and gankers could only exist as outcasts with huge blaring icons next to their name that informed everyone around them that they were assholes not to be trusted.
Ultimately I personally play MMO's to interact with other people and I prefer fighting other people as well so I wouldn't mind it if the MMO genre started developing the ideas around player killing systems in the open world some more. I think it's nuts that we haven't had a proper AAA sandbox title yet.
As I said a few posts up, check out Archeage and Black Desert.
I've heard of them, but I have a strong aversion to korean MMO's as I have never been able to play one for longer than a month
I remember one instance in AC which has some metaphor for this discussion.
In AC the PvP bounty system was player controlled. Players would post bounties on a forum, other players would post that they were taking the bounty and would attempt to bag that character. Usually the hunters operated in teams, since the AC PvP system was baller and the really good folks were... Really good.
Some big bad guy was griefing for a few months in a quest area. He was camping a one way portal and had racked up a rather large bounty. One day some one said they were taking him on, and a few minutes later posted the required proof of kill. Another bounty was posted on the bad guy, and the same hunter collected it within an hour. After a third time, suspicions rose. Research proved the hunter was an alt of the bad guy, and he was exploiting the system. Us hunters were not down with that.
About thirty of us banded together, scoured the community and internet to dig up all the information we could, and then we ruined his day. We had a 24/7 camp at his house, his patrons house, both of their lifestone's, and their monarch's favorite hunting ground. After three days, his monarch kicked him from their clan, he paid the hunters twice what he had collected through the shenanigans, and posted a formal apology on the communities official forums.
The game's mechanics don't need to take care of everything. We are intelligent humans, just give us the ability to handle the situation, and we will. Personally, I'd rather the opportunity to have fun and play that kind of playstyle, even if I occasionally have to deal with asshats.
Because there will always be people wearing their ass for a hat. I'm just not down with catering to them.
But you are exactly catering to them with a bounty system. Its not just going to be a few asshats, its going to be everyone, simply because they are taking the shortest route to both getting some money and clearing a inconvenience for them.
The other thing I don't understand is, what is the bounty system really supposed to be doing. You're giving an example of a player doing bad things, and the community punishing him. Killing in RvR is not a bad thing. It is the point of RvR. It is a place to voluntarily go to slaughter and be slaughtered. The better you are at RvR should not incur a penalty.
The bounty system would do what it's supposed to do.
Allowing players who are not skilled enough to fight said better PvP'r, to pay money to exact revenge. That is literally the purpose of the system. The better you are, the less risk you take while actively pvp'ing. So that risk is transferred to the open world.
It does a couple of things:
It allows for: "I suck at fighting, and I'm tired of that guy killing me. I'm going to pay a better fighter to kill him."
It prevents: "I'm so good at PvP, this is boring. No one ever kills me. I'm going to play another game with greater challenge."
It opens up the opportunity for: "I enjoy playing a stealth character, and fighting 1v1 or in small groups. I also enjoy trying to be tactical in an adverse situation."
It creates a sense of community: "Us Dark Brotherhood members need to stick together, if anyone needs any help tracking a mark, let me know."
It creates a money sink.
It creates a money faucet.
It creates a sense of world. Where RvR is not so separated from the rest of the game. It's a part of, instead of apart from.
It simulates a tried and true part of the ES lore and story.
But you are exactly catering to them with a bounty system. Its not just going to be a few asshats, its going to be everyone, simply because they are taking the shortest route to both getting some money and clearing a inconvenience for them.
The other thing I don't understand is, what is the bounty system really supposed to be doing. You're giving an example of a player doing bad things, and the community punishing him. Killing in RvR is not a bad thing. It is the point of RvR. It is a place to voluntarily go to slaughter and be slaughtered. The better you are at RvR should not incur a penalty.
The bounty system is supposed to provide an in game system to replicate the Dark Brotherhood Assassin guild. It's loresy, it's iconic, it is super cheap and easy extra content to make Elder Scroll Online more Elder Scrollsy.
Since RvR is the place to volunatily go to slaughter and be slaughtered, why would you complain that a consequence of it is slaughtering and being slaughtered?
Decomposey on
Before following any advice, opinions, or thoughts I may have expressed in the above post, be warned: I found Keven Costners "Waterworld" to be a very entertaining film.
The bounty system would do what it's supposed to do.
Allowing players who are not skilled enough to fight said better PvP'r, to pay money to exact revenge.
Define revenge. Because if someone wasted my time by killing me I sure as heck wouldn't be quick to give out resources (ie, more of my time) just to have them respawn somewhere. The consequences would have to cover my death + my money at the very least.
Plus, this is assuming my death inconvenienced me as much as his does him, which likely isn't true, since PVP-focused players won't give as much of a crap about dying. It's just part of the process for that play style.
The bounty system would do what it's supposed to do.
Allowing players who are not skilled enough to fight said better PvP'r, to pay money to exact revenge.
Define revenge. Because if someone wasted my time by killing me I sure as heck wouldn't be quick to give out resources (ie, more of my time) just to have them respawn somewhere. The consequences would have to cover my death + my money at the very least.
Plus, this is assuming my death inconvenienced me as much as his does him, which likely isn't true, since PVP-focused players won't give as much of a crap about dying. It's just part of the process for that play style.
Thats why games need a jail system. In AoW it was great to see someone end up in jail for a few REAL TIME days. For something like ESO, they could do jail.... or maybe a limbo/soul world or something lore related where your soul shard is resurrected after some time. Then just have that limbo world be a FFA PVP shitfest that people spend a few hours in.
They are mad if they want people to be playing in third person perspective. Straight up insane. The third person animations and view in the game is *dreadful* - it plays far better in first person, even with the restricted view angle.
I mostly prefer 3rd person, but ESO 3rd person does have issues. For one, they need to let you adjust the over-the-should offset and angle behind you head (I prefer centered with the right up/down angling).
The animations are hit and miss imo. The jump animation (and mechanics) are awful, but generally are in ES games. They have some nice touches tho. Depending on the height you jump/fall from, you may do the sort of superhero knee down landing or roll. But overall they do need to work on the fluidity.
I mean, I'll swap back and forth in a game like Skyrim, but when a lot of the game's combat is about timing and getting out of telegraphed red circles/cones/lines on the ground, having the perspective that comes from 3rd person is a pretty big deal, especially if there's enemies coming from more than one side (ie, PvP and I assume, high-end group content)
Not everyone is going to use the system all the time. Meaning that when it gets used, it will have greater impact to all players involved. Plus, there's a chance said system just doesn't have any importance to you. That doesn't make it unimportant.
I can think of several instances when I've been PvPing where I would place a bounty, and I'm much like you: "So what, I died. Give me a minute to run back."
But, right after I just went 2v1 and won with a hair of health and some punk comes by and geeks me? I'll throw a few gold on him for raining on my parade.
In a giant furball and the enemy commander squares off with you and turns you to paste? Yeah, send an assassin his way.
As to the consequences beyond death... I've always been a fan of the jail system, but would be more than pleased with just a simple percentage of coins carried, and a temporary XP gain penalty (this is predicated on XP gain being a constant necessity). Some people take issue with the jail system, even though it's very much in the ES theme.
The main threat of the system would be players who are known for being threats in PvP having to look over their shoulder when in crowded places. Imagine the hilarity of being at some kind of community event with a hundred players, and suddenly the top commander for a guild just gets dunked by an assassin who filters back out of the crowd... Everyone else knows there's no threat to them, but holy shit did you just see "Dane the Demented" get shanked? To bad he missed the event, huh!
I imagine the potential playerbase for an MMO where you can kill other players and take their stuff with barely a consequence is not nearly high enough to warrant an AAA budget. You want Wild West, you won't find it outside of aging MMOs with legacy populations and indies.
Indies who seem to fail before they even get out of beta, as the trend seems to be.
This is the key. There is plenty of market for those types of MMOs. That market is not the $200 million budget market. The $200m budget market needs to have mass appeal, and that means sandbox-lite is the best you can hope for in ESO IMO.
Everquest Next Landmark is looking to be a mass appeal sandbox, but that's much more about capturing the love people have for Minecraft and THAT sort of sandbox and not the UO type of sandbox.
I look back on the UO and Rallos Zek servers with fondness but I do not think they would get wide appeal in todays market. It would be nice to have a place where "that population" could go to blow off steam. And have it be popular enough to keep them there. In the end that kind of game play, even if they make what you carry around with you mostly worthless like UO, just turns out to be a giant pain in the ass for the average individual and not worth it.
I look back on the UO and Rallos Zek servers with fondness but I do not think they would get wide appeal in todays market. It would be nice to have a place where "that population" could go to blow off steam. And have it be popular enough to keep them there. In the end that kind of game play, even if they make what you carry around with you mostly worthless like UO, just turns out to be a giant pain in the ass for the average individual and not worth it.
"that population" who still wants that is mostly playing Mortal Online.
I guess we just have different attitudes. If I RvR and someone kills me, so what, I was there in a PvP zone. Expect dickery. However, once I'm done with PvP, I expect to be done with it and do something else. A bounty system will just depress (on average) RvR participation. A few people might find it exciting, but I doubt it would be the vast majority of players who want to RvR.
On a side note, keep in mind the $200 million number thrown around is based solely on one tweet that was deleted after like an hour. And the bastions of journalism the gaming press is has just echoed that on and on.
I'd just like to point out that it's very likely, in said fictional bounty system, that the annoying dickwads who keep ganking you in PvP are also going to be the same annoying dickwads who use and abuse the bounty system in every way possible to continue to grief people outside of PvP.
It would basically turn the Dark Brotherhood into the Dick Gankerlolz.
Which would actually be pretty funny now, that I think about it...everyone would fear and hate the Dark Brotherhood, and no one over 18 (both age and IQ) would ever want to be a part of it, just like in the game lore...
Oh man... there is even an skill line for being emperor that stays with if you manage to be the emperor at least once. That's awesome.
Well if the skill list site is correct, you get some HUGE buffs in that skill line when you are the current emperor. Then if you are no longer the current, they become "former emperor" buffs which aren't as huge. The current ones are shit like 300% mana/magic/stam regen or 400% damage with siege weapons.
For those who haven't seen: http://eldersouls.com/elder-scrolls-online/skills
Not all the numbers are 100% correct, but it gives you an idea of how you can start mixing weapon combinations with different classes.
I like that they're keeping the very ES notion of "Just kinda make your character how you want", but I'm not sure how well it'll hold up to the scrutiny of MMO vets. I suspect the "approved" builds for classes will happen pretty quickly and doing challenging end-game content will mean little variety.
I hope that's not the case, but I've played a lot of MMOs, and it's pretty rare.
I like that they're keeping the very ES notion of "Just kinda make your character how you want", but I'm not sure how well it'll hold up to the scrutiny of MMO vets. I suspect the "approved" builds for classes will happen pretty quickly and doing challenging end-game content will mean little variety.
I hope that's not the case, but I've played a lot of MMOs, and it's pretty rare.
It's going to be based almost entirely on execution. The game currently has no damage numbers or combat log and its being designed so that no one should need that stuff.
The first dungeon has recieved a lot of praise on its mechanics already, especially the final boss. People still will want a healer and tank, although no one has to "ONLY" specialize in tank stuff to be a tank. You mainly just need heavy armor passives and some skills in sword/shield to tank. The game isn't going to really consider if you have 100% maxed out every tanking option possible. The mechanics are very punishing when you mess up, according to those who got further with the PVE. Personally I fought a few soloable bosses that did go through phases and required pretty tight execution.
If you pick assassin as your class, you can just as easily put points into sword/shield and wear heavy armor to be a tank. Some of the assassin skills and passives are even decent for a tank.
I'm really looking forwards to see what can be a viable character. I want to try out a sorcerer with heavy armor (5 piece bonus) with the rest light for some magic regen. Then pick some summoning passives with a staff as main weapon and either 2 handed or dual wield weapon specialization on switch. So you wouldn't be screwed if melee got on you. The only thing I'm worried about is trying to use summons in pvp. Signs point to worthlessness because you can't make them attack anything specific.. (i think) but I kinda still want to try. I dunno why these games (GW2/ESO) have summmons with no way to tell them what to do.. i mean is it so hard to add an attack and stop attacking button?
Oh man, pets were completely worthless in PvP in GW2 back when I played. I'd summon my wolf or my falcon and it'd fly towards the group of enemies and a few seconds later it would be dead. Or even better yet, it'd just get stuck somewhere. I ended up just summoning my pig because it looked hilarious to send a pig after people in the battlefield and that is always something I guess.
Oh man, pets were completely worthless in PvP in GW2 back when I played. I'd summon my wolf or my falcon and it'd fly towards the group of enemies and a few seconds later it would be dead. Or even better yet, it'd just get stuck somewhere. I ended up just summoning my pig because it looked hilarious to send a pig after people in the battlefield and that is always something I guess.
Yeah, buff pets were nicer. Just throw fury on your group and such.
Still a bit leery of this... guess I should apply for beta and just see.
ESO on the other hand, I played the RvR all weekend as soon as I hit level 10.
Question about this comment... how fast is the leveling speed in RvR vis a vis PvE? About the same? Much slower? I ask only because I have a mild PvE allergy and try to stay away from questing and raids as much as possible. Quests give me a mild case of hives, but raids require serious medication to recover from....
PvP is what I do most in MMO's. Questing is just about the most dull thing I can imagine and it's what I endure in order to get to the co-op stuff like raiding/dungeons and PvP
Posts
The best assassination system I have ever seen in an online game was in an old game called Meridian 59. It is a little more "gamey" and less thematic than the bounty system idea above, but it had the best assassination feel to it and is relatively harder to exploit. Basically, there was an NPC players could talk to to opt in on the assassin game. After joining, the player gets a dagger, and after a certain time limit, a name appears on the dagger indicating sign ups are closed and the game is on. The dagger had three jewels on it, which is how many times you could be hit (a stab in the back counted as two hits), and the dagger would only damage two targets: the player whose name was on the dagger and the player who had your name on his dagger. I think if you attacked anyone else with it, it would explode and kill you. After you get a kill, the name on the dagger changes to another player still active in the game. The last player standing won a prize and then the game started again.
It was a lot of fun and tying the "health" to the item meant that a brand new player could compete with someone who had been playing forever. It was all about moving to the target casually and avoiding notice. It was always amusing to watch someone in town bee-line at a target at full speed with their dagger out only to get shanked for their troubles. It also made for an interesting social game, as the easiest way to find the target was to ask around, but asking meant the target knows he can kill you first and eliminate the person hunting him for awhile.
This is honestly one of the very few fun, not griefy systems for anywhere, assassination style pvp that I can think of (at least for a game that isn't all pvp, all the time). It could use some upgrading for TESO, but it seems like it would be a good fit.
There is a stupidly simple solution to this proposed problem.
"A player may not take a bounty contract on another character on that account."
Even better: "A player may only have one character per server per account."
I played the PVE in first person for most of the weekend. It was more practical to play in 3rd, sure, but it both felt clunkier and felt less satisfying to do so. So, same as other ES games.
You missed the "buddy" part. Even if you restricted it away from people on your friends list (or recently on your friends list - if you even bother to use those), there will be players who will just hire themselves out to clear your bounty. Like I said before, the similar system in SWG basically came down to a 50/50 split. I'll let you kill me and you give me half the bounty. The people I killed and put bounties on me just paid me half that money for the privilege of being killed by me.
Also, at least as far as ESO is concerned, there's only one server. And restricting to one character just to make a subgame work would lose more players than it brings in.
This doesn't solve running up a bounty and having your friend collect it for free and share the money with you.
There really isn't a good way to stop people from collecting their own bounty with a friend. However the way it worked in AoW, was only a constable could collect the bounty and it was not an easily toggleable thing, you had to pay to do it and it had a cooldown. So if someone became a constable just to collect that bounty, they are then targets of the outlaws and will have to deal with being PKed more often.
Sure some might take advantage if something was in ESO with the dark brotherhood, but you gotta ask yourself... does it matter? From an immersion standpoint you can still use the system to play an assassin/anti-assassin. So what if someone collects some extra gold now and then. Put a limit on how often the same person can collect on the same criminal and its just a small loss for including a really cool feature.
I'll tell you one thing, in AoW when I put a bounty on someone and later on it informed me that they were arrested. I didn't give a shit who got the reward, it was worth it to goto the jail cell and see them lose a few hours of gameplay for being a dickhead. Sometimes I even sat and drank wine outside their jail cell, just for fun.
edit: Also its worth noting, if the bounty is high enough and their infamy is high enough... they can literally goto jail for like 4 REAL TIME days. So by all fucking means, let your friend kill you for a stupid bounty. You lose FOUR DAYS of gameplay for probably less gold than you would have made in those four days.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I guess I don't see a problem with having friends in low places.
If you've got a buddy in the guild, and arrange some way to split the bounty, what's the problem with that?
Like... That's why we make friends. To reap benefits.
"Damn! Joe got his buddy to collect that bounty on him. I'm going to make friends with Kyle, so next time I can tell Kyle to make sure he gets the contract and no shenanigans happen... Better yet, I'll join the guild, so I can mess Joe's day up!"
This is probably why I haven't had any fun in MMO recently. Let me, or us, the player(s) solve problems. Don't put in unnecessary restrictions. Eve does this. It works rather well.
Indies who seem to fail before they even get out of beta, as the trend seems to be.
Actually this might be the year we get some AAA sandbox/PVP/full-loot MMO's. Archeage and Black Desert are looking very promising.
Darkfall tried its best to be one, I enjoyed it a lot. But the population is really low now, since most of them are changing over to Mortal Online. Which surpsingly has grown and improved a great deal. I spent a few weeks on it a month ago and had a great time. Got killed and had to run around naked a few times. Got pick pocketed once for a few gold, which at the time was a FORTUNE for me. Found the guy doing it who would hide near an NPC that gave a few gold for turning in zombie heads and he would then nick the person right after they turned in if they traded for gold (smaller stack) instead of silver (100 per gold). Pickpocket rules in that game make it safe if you carry large stacks. So I baited him by trading for a gold, which he stole and that gives permission to freely kill him, which was a good 15 minute chase around town... which I actually didn't fully kill him, he mis-judged a jump when I chased him up to the roof tops and he fell to his death. I was then able to loot his corpse for all the gold he had been stealing... hell I even was able to skin his corpse and go make a hat out of it.
Crazy shit like that just doesn't happen in most MMOs.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
There is always a consequence for killing players in these kinds of games. I thought the discussion people had here made that pretty damn clear. Either you will be isolated from the rest of the MMO world by becoming a bandit/pirate or you will be hunted by people and NPC's who want your bounty. In almost every game where player killing was a big feature, murderers and gankers could only exist as outcasts with huge blaring icons next to their name that informed everyone around them that they were assholes not to be trusted.
Ultimately I personally play MMO's to interact with other people and I prefer fighting other people as well so I wouldn't mind it if the MMO genre started developing the ideas around player killing systems in the open world some more. I think it's nuts that we haven't had a proper AAA sandbox title yet.
It's a bit of a disservice to the discussion to assume like that. Especially to assume those points would be dreadfully negative.
It's important to keep in mind that other games have done this kind of system to great success. The proposed system is neither new, nor revolutionary.
I mostly prefer 3rd person, but ESO 3rd person does have issues. For one, they need to let you adjust the over-the-should offset and angle behind you head (I prefer centered with the right up/down angling).
The animations are hit and miss imo. The jump animation (and mechanics) are awful, but generally are in ES games. They have some nice touches tho. Depending on the height you jump/fall from, you may do the sort of superhero knee down landing or roll. But overall they do need to work on the fluidity.
As I said a few posts up, check out Archeage and Black Desert.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
In AC the PvP bounty system was player controlled. Players would post bounties on a forum, other players would post that they were taking the bounty and would attempt to bag that character. Usually the hunters operated in teams, since the AC PvP system was baller and the really good folks were... Really good.
Some big bad guy was griefing for a few months in a quest area. He was camping a one way portal and had racked up a rather large bounty. One day some one said they were taking him on, and a few minutes later posted the required proof of kill. Another bounty was posted on the bad guy, and the same hunter collected it within an hour. After a third time, suspicions rose. Research proved the hunter was an alt of the bad guy, and he was exploiting the system. Us hunters were not down with that.
About thirty of us banded together, scoured the community and internet to dig up all the information we could, and then we ruined his day. We had a 24/7 camp at his house, his patrons house, both of their lifestone's, and their monarch's favorite hunting ground. After three days, his monarch kicked him from their clan, he paid the hunters twice what he had collected through the shenanigans, and posted a formal apology on the communities official forums.
The game's mechanics don't need to take care of everything. We are intelligent humans, just give us the ability to handle the situation, and we will. Personally, I'd rather the opportunity to have fun and play that kind of playstyle, even if I occasionally have to deal with asshats.
Because there will always be people wearing their ass for a hat. I'm just not down with catering to them.
The other thing I don't understand is, what is the bounty system really supposed to be doing. You're giving an example of a player doing bad things, and the community punishing him. Killing in RvR is not a bad thing. It is the point of RvR. It is a place to voluntarily go to slaughter and be slaughtered. The better you are at RvR should not incur a penalty.
Allowing players who are not skilled enough to fight said better PvP'r, to pay money to exact revenge. That is literally the purpose of the system. The better you are, the less risk you take while actively pvp'ing. So that risk is transferred to the open world.
It does a couple of things:
It allows for: "I suck at fighting, and I'm tired of that guy killing me. I'm going to pay a better fighter to kill him."
It prevents: "I'm so good at PvP, this is boring. No one ever kills me. I'm going to play another game with greater challenge."
It opens up the opportunity for: "I enjoy playing a stealth character, and fighting 1v1 or in small groups. I also enjoy trying to be tactical in an adverse situation."
It creates a sense of community: "Us Dark Brotherhood members need to stick together, if anyone needs any help tracking a mark, let me know."
It creates a money sink.
It creates a money faucet.
It creates a sense of world. Where RvR is not so separated from the rest of the game. It's a part of, instead of apart from.
It simulates a tried and true part of the ES lore and story.
The bounty system is supposed to provide an in game system to replicate the Dark Brotherhood Assassin guild. It's loresy, it's iconic, it is super cheap and easy extra content to make Elder Scroll Online more Elder Scrollsy.
Since RvR is the place to volunatily go to slaughter and be slaughtered, why would you complain that a consequence of it is slaughtering and being slaughtered?
Plus, this is assuming my death inconvenienced me as much as his does him, which likely isn't true, since PVP-focused players won't give as much of a crap about dying. It's just part of the process for that play style.
Thats why games need a jail system. In AoW it was great to see someone end up in jail for a few REAL TIME days. For something like ESO, they could do jail.... or maybe a limbo/soul world or something lore related where your soul shard is resurrected after some time. Then just have that limbo world be a FFA PVP shitfest that people spend a few hours in.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I mean, I'll swap back and forth in a game like Skyrim, but when a lot of the game's combat is about timing and getting out of telegraphed red circles/cones/lines on the ground, having the perspective that comes from 3rd person is a pretty big deal, especially if there's enemies coming from more than one side (ie, PvP and I assume, high-end group content)
Not everyone is going to use the system all the time. Meaning that when it gets used, it will have greater impact to all players involved. Plus, there's a chance said system just doesn't have any importance to you. That doesn't make it unimportant.
I can think of several instances when I've been PvPing where I would place a bounty, and I'm much like you: "So what, I died. Give me a minute to run back."
But, right after I just went 2v1 and won with a hair of health and some punk comes by and geeks me? I'll throw a few gold on him for raining on my parade.
In a giant furball and the enemy commander squares off with you and turns you to paste? Yeah, send an assassin his way.
As to the consequences beyond death... I've always been a fan of the jail system, but would be more than pleased with just a simple percentage of coins carried, and a temporary XP gain penalty (this is predicated on XP gain being a constant necessity). Some people take issue with the jail system, even though it's very much in the ES theme.
The main threat of the system would be players who are known for being threats in PvP having to look over their shoulder when in crowded places. Imagine the hilarity of being at some kind of community event with a hundred players, and suddenly the top commander for a guild just gets dunked by an assassin who filters back out of the crowd... Everyone else knows there's no threat to them, but holy shit did you just see "Dane the Demented" get shanked? To bad he missed the event, huh!
This is the key. There is plenty of market for those types of MMOs. That market is not the $200 million budget market. The $200m budget market needs to have mass appeal, and that means sandbox-lite is the best you can hope for in ESO IMO.
Everquest Next Landmark is looking to be a mass appeal sandbox, but that's much more about capturing the love people have for Minecraft and THAT sort of sandbox and not the UO type of sandbox.
"that population" who still wants that is mostly playing Mortal Online.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
On a side note, keep in mind the $200 million number thrown around is based solely on one tweet that was deleted after like an hour. And the bastions of journalism the gaming press is has just echoed that on and on.
It would basically turn the Dark Brotherhood into the Dick Gankerlolz.
Which would actually be pretty funny now, that I think about it...everyone would fear and hate the Dark Brotherhood, and no one over 18 (both age and IQ) would ever want to be a part of it, just like in the game lore...
Anyway...slow news day, I guess.
Well if the skill list site is correct, you get some HUGE buffs in that skill line when you are the current emperor. Then if you are no longer the current, they become "former emperor" buffs which aren't as huge. The current ones are shit like 300% mana/magic/stam regen or 400% damage with siege weapons.
For those who haven't seen: http://eldersouls.com/elder-scrolls-online/skills
Not all the numbers are 100% correct, but it gives you an idea of how you can start mixing weapon combinations with different classes.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I hope that's not the case, but I've played a lot of MMOs, and it's pretty rare.
It's going to be based almost entirely on execution. The game currently has no damage numbers or combat log and its being designed so that no one should need that stuff.
The first dungeon has recieved a lot of praise on its mechanics already, especially the final boss. People still will want a healer and tank, although no one has to "ONLY" specialize in tank stuff to be a tank. You mainly just need heavy armor passives and some skills in sword/shield to tank. The game isn't going to really consider if you have 100% maxed out every tanking option possible. The mechanics are very punishing when you mess up, according to those who got further with the PVE. Personally I fought a few soloable bosses that did go through phases and required pretty tight execution.
If you pick assassin as your class, you can just as easily put points into sword/shield and wear heavy armor to be a tank. Some of the assassin skills and passives are even decent for a tank.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yeah, buff pets were nicer. Just throw fury on your group and such.
Still a bit leery of this... guess I should apply for beta and just see.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
Question about this comment... how fast is the leveling speed in RvR vis a vis PvE? About the same? Much slower? I ask only because I have a mild PvE allergy and try to stay away from questing and raids as much as possible. Quests give me a mild case of hives, but raids require serious medication to recover from....
Most people hate the actual act of the leveling up in these games.
We'd rather just log in an PvP, or do dungeons, or raid, or just go hunt boars. The filling of bars is literally killing this genre of games.
PvP provides the most direct and simplest way to compete.