A debate and consideration of radicals "vs" puritans (video)

6

Just to continue the debate on the whole faction concept, many players suggested it, so I decided to talk about it! Radicals "vs" Puritans?


What do you think? - Not just from a lore point of view but a game point of view.

Store Page
Share
6 comments
A debate and consideration of radicals "vs" puritans (video)
Your Thoughts? Please login to place your opinion. Not a member yet? Register here and now!
1 year 132 days ago
+1

Beard, ever the diplomat :D - Keep up the good posts.

1 year 132 days ago
+2

Another fine video Hydra!  There's a lot of argument over the PvP aspects of I.M., a feature that Neocore themselves seem to be unsure about. If I remember correctly, they have it planned for the last upgrade before the full release, as per the road map, but clearly stating that it will be tested at that time, only to be finally added after taking in our feedback (which is really nice of them). 


Ctiger makes good points in terms of how PvP can mess with balancing and the scope of the game as a whole. Nitpicking out of the little officially stated on the subject, there is mention of Puritan and Radical alignments and invasion of player owned Inquisitorial Fortresses. This seems -in my opinion- to be hinting at a Dark Souls style PvP model which could be interesting, given adequate polish, but at the same time I believe it should not be punishing the players who don't want to participate in it -the open world should have enough content even without PvP anyway- by having it forced on them or/and losing progression in some capacity. 


Personally I could well do without it, but I can't say I am outright against it. Blizzard took a long time bringing PvP into D3, and even when they did they had it confined to an arena style thing. I certainly wouldn't mind if such a thing existed in I.M. but I really don't think it HAS to be there. Co-op content seems much more suited to this style of game -again in my opinion- but I certainly wouldn't mind a proper, clearly defined PvP system that won't result in dulling down the classes or the rest of the content in that matter. 

 

1 year 132 days ago
+2
Airsick Hydra

No worries. Even though we disagree on the PvP thing, I know we both want to see a really awesome game at the end of all this.

1 year 132 days ago
+1
ctiger

I'm sure there will be many others with similar experiences of failed games and the same concerns. We will have to just agree to disagree on this one as i'm sure you have realized we sit on opposite sides of the fence on this one :) 


It is a very fair point regarding balance, I agree that it's something to consider as it takes constant review and probably considerable hours and months to refine. Certainly some games have failed at it, some however have succeeded. During the alpha I think it's a good time and opportunity to test the feature and see if it is the former or the latter, and if it doesn't work - they have already said it won't be included in the final product.

 Good talks - Also no comments were aimed at you my friend :) only at a "vibe"

1 year 132 days ago
+2
ctiger

I concur. I played enough games where PVE was ruined because of changes to chase a (mythological) PVP balance. Which in itself is futile because PVPers are quite clever dissecting the game mechanics and come up with a new meta.

1 year 132 days ago
+4

Just to put it out there, I do not hate PvP games. As it happens, I am an officer in a top World of  Warplanes clan. Quite simply, I do not think it is worth the time & effort to try to make this game, which is at its heart PvE with coop, into something that tries to cater to all tastes. For me it is like eating at a Chinese restaurant that also serves Japanese food...both end up being mediocre.


The other thing that troubles me, which has only been barely touched upon, is game balance. Trying to balance PvE mechanics with PvP will most likely cause chaos, as any change will effect both modes with different results. A vicious circle of endless changes back and forth will result and mostly likely drive off players.  Additionally, there are few games that can manage to sustain both PvP & PvE modes. Look at the Armored Warfare fiasco, just about everyone who is still left plays PvE.....PvP is dead.


Bottom line for me: the vast majority of us are here for the awesome 40K themed, open world experience that has been promised. Adding PvP to this kind of game is just an attempt to "broaden the audience". I just don't think it is worth the time and effort. The game should not fall into the trap of trying to be "all things to all people". Instead it should do one thing, and do that one thing, really really well.


Finally, to address the "social aspect" of the game, a PvP mode is entirely unnecessary. Giving players the opportunity to participate in coop activities within the open world of the game and form their own alliances/cabals, should provide those that want it with all the social interaction they desire.