Curse

warcrap · Jan 05, 2008, 03:59 AM // 03:59

i couldn't find anywhere else to post this so i used suggestions as it is most relevant for this.

also im sure anet can think of a way to control these types of things so it wont be abused like for instance "no water behind the rocks" "they poisoned proof their water" because we certainly wouldn't like a million people doing these things all at once!

now this is easy simply suggest your own type of player controlled environment in gw2 (pce) i have a few of them myself here they are(these suggestions aren't out of the blue i took some time writing them down in Microsoft word 2003.

good vs evil supply sabotage: well since gw2 will probably be good vs evil (dwyana vs grenth) my suggestions is that somebody from the evil side sneak into the good side to poison their water supply so if anyone tried swimming in the lake they would suffer a negative health degeneration effect.

cry me a river: since gw2 will offer fully persistent worlds how about somebody climbs up to the top of a mountain and uses a lightning spell, earth spell, warrior attack, etc to destroy a bunch of rocks which leads to a massive flow of water creating a river for all the town players to use for swimming, fishing, and maybe even trigger a few quest (fetch that npc a bucket of water).

the falls: so again a player makes a big climb upward to destroy a dam created over time by natural causes so after a few days water becomes trapped behind it so a player gathers a group to destroy the dam which will create a huge waterfall then eventually an even huger lake which will be really deep where players could swim down their to find a big underwater monster with a nice drop (weapon,armor,cape,amulets,sword,etc) or all the water creates a hole which triggers a dungeon full of traps,secrets,and puzzles,maze,etc,and a tough boss which will take a huge group to kill and a long time.

burn baby burn!!:so a mage goes to a nearby forest and decides to burn all the trees with a fire spell which triggers a quest and adds a bounty to that player, so other players go accept a quest from an npc ordering to find and kill the player who burned the forest if the group is successful they receive a reward(cash,armor,xp,etc) also another quest is triggered, now that the forest is burned an npc asks a generous player to collect the remaining logs that survived the fire.

the castle still stands:a player finds a castle far away from towns and players the castle is a huge heavily guarded complex with many floors so the player finally sneaks his way to the top were an ancient hidden treasure is so the player goes through a huge door fights a huge ass dragon(alone) and finally steals the treasure so then after he has escaped the player gives the treasure to the king of any town and receives a reward so now that town has enough money for better houses, shops, supplies, and to make everything look bigger and high class and everything cost less with friendlier npc not suffering from poverty and that player becomes famous and loved by everybody.

so that is all i can think of for now i have refrained from using gw2 suggestion sticky because i would like to here suggestions from other players.
lets hope they don't find a reason to lock this because i think it is a very good suggestion for gw2.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As long as no matter what the case, a person still has some way of getting from start to finish of the game without absolutely having to do something related to these quests...

/signed

I do believe I read somewhere that in GW2, certain player actions will affect the environment. Any quests that open up should be purely optional, and if the action impedes a player in any way, there should always be at least one surefire way to get past it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXACTLY PLAYER CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENTS SHOULD JUST BE AN OPTIONAL BIT OF THE GAME AND THEIR SHOULD ALWAYS BE A WAY TO IGNORE THIS AND JUST GET ON WITH THE GAME!!

Biostem · Jan 05, 2008, 04:43 AM // 04:43

I really don't want to see my gameplay impacted very much by what other players do. It's all well and good to change things in your own instance of the world, but please don't leave the fate of my characters in another person's hands.

I could foresee players making sure a particular event doesn't happen so as to drive up the price of items they got from doing the quest, or taking steps to ensure certain events do occur so as to force other players to go a route they want.

A persistent environment pretty much means you have to ensure the status quo so that a player joining the game today has the same opportunities as the one whose been playing since the game was released.

I would rather see a combination of persistent and instanced areas, like what City of Heroes does; you travel around in the "over world" and enter missions at certain locations. Those missions are then instanced for your party alone.

A better option would be to have different versions of some areas, and your character gains access to those areas by completing certain quests. So for instance, you may do the quest to flood a town. Now, when you enter that town *you* get the flooded version (as does everyone else that did that quest). If you did the quest to set fire to a forest, then when you enter the area w/ the forest, it is burnt up. As an addendum to this feature, there'd have to be a way to do quests to switch to the other versions.

Also, someone from the "good side" poisoning a water supply doesn't sound very appropriate...

Lord Darksoul · Jan 05, 2008, 05:28 AM // 05:28

Doubt it'll happen, but I wouldn't mind some freak attacks and such. Something the mods control, weather effects and certain random events that happen for a few days every month. Add something new, a bunch of undead enemies sneak into a new coast city, and a new quest-line appears for characters to go wipe them out.

Stuff like that, I'd rather not have other players go poison my water or light my forests on fire.

TheLordOfBlah · Jan 05, 2008, 07:37 AM // 07:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by warcrap

good vs evil supply sabotage: well since gw2 will probably be good vs evil (dwyana vs grenth)

grenth isnt evil..

Zahr Dalsk · Jan 05, 2008, 11:03 AM // 11:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheLordOfBlah

grenth isnt evil..

Exactly.

Abaddon was evil (and also a lot more awesome than the other gods). Kormir, while not evil, is certainly a leecher. Which is worse than evil in my opinion. Grenth is not evil.

warcrap · Jan 05, 2008, 06:22 PM // 18:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zahr Dalsk

Exactly.

Abaddon was evil (and also a lot more awesome than the other gods). Kormir, while not evil, is certainly a leecher. Which is worse than evil in my opinion. Grenth is not evil.

ok my bad but thats not the point the point is what would you like to see as a player controlled environment.

Zahr Dalsk · Jan 05, 2008, 10:15 PM // 22:15

/not signed

Invasive and made of fail. Just like the PUG encouragement thread.

prism2525 · Jan 06, 2008, 12:00 AM // 00:00

it's just a problem cos ppl would abuse it (unless implemented in a way to prevent abuse like a nice /report function).

/signed if with anti-abuse measures, heavy anti-abuse measures.

warcrap · Jan 06, 2008, 12:21 AM // 00:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biostem

I really don't want to see my gameplay impacted very much by what other players do. It's all well and good to change things in your own instance of the world, but please don't leave the fate of my characters in another person's hands.

I could foresee players making sure a particular event doesn't happen so as to drive up the price of items they got from doing the quest, or taking steps to ensure certain events do occur so as to force other players to go a route they want.

A persistent environment pretty much means you have to ensure the status quo so that a player joining the game today has the same opportunities as the one whose been playing since the game was released.

I would rather see a combination of persistent and instanced areas, like what City of Heroes does; you travel around in the "over world" and enter missions at certain locations. Those missions are then instanced for your party alone.

A better option would be to have different versions of some areas, and your character gains access to those areas by completing certain quests. So for instance, you may do the quest to flood a town. Now, when you enter that town *you* get the flooded version (as does everyone else that did that quest). If you did the quest to set fire to a forest, then when you enter the area w/ the forest, it is burnt up. As an addendum to this feature, there'd have to be a way to do quests to switch to the other versions.

Also, someone from the "good side" poisoning a water supply doesn't sound very appropriate...

im sure pce will only be about 3% of the entire game.

Jaythen Tyradel · Jan 06, 2008, 12:33 AM // 00:33

WoW had something like this happen about a year ago. IIRC, a new quest players could take on caused some players to become "infected". This "infection" hurt health but to a higher level player it was a minor nuisance, however, for lower level players it was instantly fatal.
Some of the players thought it would be fun to "infect" WHOLE TOWNS of lower players causing widespread death and caused whole towns to be abandoned until the effects wore off.
The whole ideas sounds funny from a readers point of view, however, this fun can cause hardship or frustration to other players.
Your ideas sound fun in theory, but unless truly thought out so not to cause grievance among other players..

/notsigned

Holly Herro · Jan 06, 2008, 12:38 AM // 00:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaythen Tyradel

WoW had something like this happen about a year ago. IIRC, a new quest players could take on caused some players to become "infected". This "infection" hurt health but to a higher level player it was a minor nuisance, however, for lower level players it was instantly fatal.
Some of the players thought it would be fun to "infect" WHOLE TOWNS of lower players causing widespread death and caused whole towns to be abandoned until the effects wore off.
The whole ideas sounds funny from a readers point of view, however, this fun can cause hardship or frustration to other players.
Your ideas sound fun in theory, but unless truly thought out so not to cause grievance among other players..

/notsigned

Hakkar the Blood lord FTW!

It was actually a pet that was infected ran out into Orgrimmar and infected everyone there. People ported etc and infected more.

Stoneys Rock · Jan 06, 2008, 08:22 PM // 20:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaythen Tyradel

WoW had something like this happen about a year ago. IIRC, a new quest players could take on caused some players to become "infected". This "infection" hurt health but to a higher level player it was a minor nuisance, however, for lower level players it was instantly fatal.
Some of the players thought it would be fun to "infect" WHOLE TOWNS of lower players causing widespread death and caused whole towns to be abandoned until the effects wore off.
The whole ideas sounds funny from a readers point of view, however, this fun can cause hardship or frustration to other players.
Your ideas sound fun in theory, but unless truly thought out so not to cause grievance among other players..

/notsigned

you can't compare this idea to that of a bug.
Besides aren't they implementing this sort of thing anyway? The example I heard was something with a bridge e.g. stop the dragon breaking the bridge not doing that results in protect the workers while they attempt to fix the bridge. It'd sure keep repeatable quests intresting.

Shayne Hawke · Jan 06, 2008, 11:59 PM // 23:59

As long as no matter what the case, a person still has some way of getting from start to finish of the game without absolutely having to do something related to these quests...

/signed

I do believe I read somewhere that in GW2, certain player actions will affect the environment. Any quests that open up should be purely optional, and if the action impedes a player in any way, there should always be at least one surefire way to get past it.

Kanyatta · Jan 07, 2008, 12:21 AM // 00:21

Do you think that all players are good-natured and would never do anything wrong? If that is the way it was, this would be a great idea, but there would be so much exploitation and abuse, it wouldn't be fun or purposeful at all.

/notsigned

warcrap · Jan 07, 2008, 01:48 AM // 01:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanyatta

Do you think that all players are good-natured and would never do anything wrong? If that is the way it was, this would be a great idea, but there would be so much exploitation and abuse, it wouldn't be fun or purposeful at all.

/notsigned

player controlled environments should be completely optional and their should always be a way to ignore it and get on with the game!!

warcrap · Jan 07, 2008, 09:09 PM // 21:09

i would like to see anet take advantage of persistent worlds by adding interaction to it.
which would probably make anet the first to introduce something like it.