Because real pvp is about LOSS, thats right ... losing. And most people don't have the balls to take the loss of ANYTHING with their characters .Carebears always talk about how PVPers are the ones stroking their epeen . But its the Carebear that is the one guilty of that crime. Its the PVPers that understand how much losing, and the reward, of pvp make a game SO much more than just a quest for the shiny. And you know who stands to gain the most from pvp? Crafters. If the game is done right.
The same old stereotype of the griefer and ganker is what the carebears use to ward off the boogeyman.
Wow.
Sounds like someone needs a hug. And a cup of hot-cocoa.
Uhh.. wrong.
"Real PvP" is however the developers implement it. As long as it's two or more players competing against each other, it's PvP. It's defined in *that* two or more players are battling it out... not in *how* two or more players are battling it out, or the rules or the setting or the tactics used in that battle. Get it?
Once again, as has been stated here, by myself and others, several times now - whether or not you agree with how it's implemented is another thing altogether. But it's not a viable argument that there is no PvP.
Seriously.. Is anyone else finding it disturbing how many heads such a simple concept is flying completely over?
(Edited for more detail and some elaboration)
Lol......I tend to find more humor in it than anything. It's funny how logic works for some. The haters tend to claim that this game offered nothing new and it has no PvP. When in reality the innovation here is the not so traditional (NEW) type of PvP called PvMP.
Fair enough.. But, I mean... We're sharing world space with these people in-game. If such a simple concept as "one player challenging another player = PvP" is completely lost on them.. Who knows what else might be? What's next... A Lore Master is going to run up to a Raid boss, shouting at the Guardians to back off... "Let me tank it!! These robes are magical!!"
-shudders-
But in all seriousness... It is always good fun how some of the rabidly pro open-PvP people will spin the issue 100 different ways to try and "win" the argument - even when the game's setup doesn't suit their playstyle.
My favorites are some who have put it in the context that Turbine somehow goofed and made a mistake with the PvPM setup... as though the designers/devs had *really* intended for a more traditional world PvP system, but somehow they dropped the ball, and one day they realized "OMG... How'd those player-controlled monsters get in here?!"
Lol.....well said. Those boneheads at Turbine.....look at them now. Gonna release a new content area in a week or so......lol. A month after the game was released....LOL. For free...BAHAHHHAAHHAA!!!! They can't do anything right..... : )
What? No pwning? No ganking and stealing someone's hard earned money and possessions? You mean someone may never write a hack that I can pay for with my parents' credit card so that I can win without skill or learning? This game truly sucks.
Give it up.. Maybe there are people out there that don't want to be killed by another player every time we turn around. If you don't like it go back to WoW or EQ or whatever game you prefer.
Because real pvp is about LOSS, thats right ... losing. And most people don't have the balls to take the loss of ANYTHING with their characters .Carebears always talk about how PVPers are the ones stroking their epeen . But its the Carebear that is the one guilty of that crime. Its the PVPers that understand how much losing, and the reward, of pvp make a game SO much more than just a quest for the shiny. And you know who stands to gain the most from pvp? Crafters. If the game is done right.
The same old stereotype of the griefer and ganker is what the carebears use to ward off the boogeyman.
Wow.
Sounds like someone needs a hug. And a cup of hot-cocoa.
Uhh.. wrong.
"Real PvP" is however the developers implement it. As long as it's two or more players competing against each other, it's PvP. It's defined in *that* two or more players are battling it out... not in *how* two or more players are battling it out, or the rules or the setting or the tactics used in that battle. Get it?
Once again, as has been stated here, by myself and others, several times now - whether or not you agree with how it's implemented is another thing altogether. But it's not a viable argument that there is no PvP.
Seriously.. Is anyone else finding it disturbing how many heads such a simple concept is flying completely over?
(Edited for more detail and some elaboration)
Lol......I tend to find more humor in it than anything. It's funny how logic works for some. The haters tend to claim that this game offered nothing new and it has no PvP. When in reality the innovation here is the not so traditional (NEW) type of PvP called PvMP.
Fair enough.. But, I mean... We're sharing world space with these people in-game. If such a simple concept as "one player challenging another player = PvP" is completely lost on them.. Who knows what else might be? What's next... A Lore Master is going to run up to a Raid boss, shouting at the Guardians to back off... "Let me tank it!! These robes are magical!!"
-shudders-
But in all seriousness... It is always good fun how some of the rabidly pro open-PvP people will spin the issue 100 different ways to try and "win" the argument - even when the game's setup doesn't suit their playstyle.
My favorites are some who have put it in the context that Turbine somehow goofed and made a mistake with the PvPM setup... as though the designers/devs had *really* intended for a more traditional world PvP system, but somehow they dropped the ball, and one day they realized "OMG... How'd those player-controlled monsters get in here?!"
Lol.....well said. Those boneheads at Turbine.....look at them now. Gonna release a new content area in a week or so......lol. A month after the game was released....LOL. For free...BAHAHHHAAHHAA!!!! They can't do anything right..... : )
Heheheh
Well, actually... Had LoTRO not gone as well as it did... that "can't do anything right" comment might have been more truth than joke.
I don't know why... I've always thought Turbine had some creative and original designers there with alot of potential. I still think Asheron's Call 2 could have been - and really should have been - a more popular and more successful game. Things just went so wrong for it. That faith was shaken a bit with DDO.. but it's been fully restored with LOTRO.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
What? No pwning? No ganking and stealing someone's hard earned money and possessions? You mean someone may never write a hack that I can pay for with my parents' credit card so that I can win without skill or learning? This game truly sucks.
Give it up.. Maybe there are people out there that don't want to be killed by another player every time we turn around. If you don't like it go back to WoW or EQ or whatever game you prefer.
'fraid not. None of the above.
I don't know if you've ever seen this maneuver.. But there are people - pro open, free-for-all PvP - who will knock WoW as not having a "real" PvP system, because it's so "regulated". They call it carebear, whatever...
Yet... when someone makes the very true argument that the hardcore, free-for-all open PvP people represent a very small portion of the MMO population, that most people don't enjoy PvP that "wide-open" and that's why so few games support it, they'll immediately throw out WoW as proof that more people really do enjoy PvP. Millions!
Of course... you see the dilemma there.
Of course, I savor the opportunity to remind them that, "No.. it means that Millions of people enjoy WoW's implementation of PvP - which is not wide-open, free-for-all"...
They usually go off on some completely different tangent after that...
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
"There are two great powers, and they've been fighting since time began. Every advance in human life, every scrap of knowledge and wisdom and decency we have has been torn by one side from the teeth of the other. Every little increase in human freedom has been fought over ferociously between those who want us to know more and be wiser and stronger, and those who want us to obey and be humble and submit."
John Parry, to his son Will; "The Subtle Knife," by Phillip Pullman
Lol.....well said. Those boneheads at Turbine.....look at them now. Gonna release a new content area in a week or so......lol. A month after the game was released....LOL. For free...BAHAHHHAAHHAA!!!! They can't do anything right..... : )
I'm afraid that's called marketing my friend . They plan these things to lure customers like you into your willingness to buy and play the game (economics anyone?). You must admit though, it's smart ain't it? It makes them look good, instead of a company that makes more money than you can imagine and uses the money to come up with marketing tactics like these (SoE).
I haven't actually played the Monster play so far so I shouldn't say anything. BUT! I am . I think it's a great idea since in for example WoW alot of people choose the class that they think is best for pvp and spend hours and loads of gold getting the "perfect" talent build for pvp, and leaving pve for a second hand choice. If I got it right you can choose a "lame" class in pvp on LOTRO but still pve since you get new skills etc. when you become a monster. So you can still focus on pve and relax with some decent pvp without being owned because of "wrong" choices. Sure you could argue that it's all skills, but that's not the whole truth. So I think it's a good system and I think it will evole alot since it's a pretty new game, leaving those not satisfied just yet satisfied later if they stick around. So, nice work turbine !
just leave the wow noobs... they dont know what a real mmorpg is... and now they are afraid of lotro ganking wow, so they come here and whine about this being a copy of wow... so wow newbs.. stick 2 ur own forum
Well, actually... Had LoTRO not gone as well as it did... that "can't do anything right" comment might have been more truth than joke.
I don't know why... I've always thought Turbine had some creative and original designers there with alot of potential. I still think Asheron's Call 2 could have been - and really should have been - a more popular and more successful game. Things just went so wrong for it. That faith was shaken a bit with DDO.. but it's been fully restored with LOTRO.
I suppose I am one of the lucky ones. Never played AC1,AC2 or DDO, thusly my experience with Turbine is limited to LotRO. I have Turbine way up on a pedestal currently. Everything they have done with this game seems top notch IMO. Additionally, I've always felt a MMO is a work in progress. From what I hear Turbine is good about adding content and it seems they have learned from past mistakes. I don't want to throw out any names, but, SOmE companies seem to never learn.
Well, actually... Had LoTRO not gone as well as it did... that "can't do anything right" comment might have been more truth than joke.
I don't know why... I've always thought Turbine had some creative and original designers there with alot of potential. I still think Asheron's Call 2 could have been - and really should have been - a more popular and more successful game. Things just went so wrong for it. That faith was shaken a bit with DDO.. but it's been fully restored with LOTRO.
I suppose I am one of the lucky ones. Never played AC1,AC2 or DDO, thusly my experience with Turbine is limited to LotRO. I have Turbine way up on a pedestal currently. Everything they have done with this game seems top notch IMO. Additionally, I've always felt a MMO is a work in progress. From what I hear Turbine is good about adding content and it seems they have learned from past mistakes. I don't want to throw out any names, but, SOmE companies seem to never learn.
The game gets slammed alot (esp. since it was pulled), but Asheron's Call 2 was, to me, an excellent game. It was ahead of its time graphically speaking, it totally broke the mold on the typical "high fantasy" genre.. in that... it wasn't high-fantasy. No elves, dwarves, gnomes, halflings... nothing. Completely unique races (other than Human)... It had *so* much going for it.
They just dropped the ball early on and could never recover; MMO players being as unforgiving as they are, this isn't unusual. It was true back then, it's even more true now with all the other MMOs out there.
I see alot of AC2 in LoTRO. The majestic views, the sprawling landscapes, the huge landmass... the interesting sights (actually labeled on the map as "points of interest" in AC2). The music system echoes of what they had in AC2. The deed system can be traced back to it in a way. The interface is *very* close to it (despite the claims that they "ripped off WoW's" - they didn't)
There's alot of people still holding on to hope that, with some success from LoTRO, perhaps, they might bring AC2 back - even if in a limited capacity.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
I must be old, but to me the phrase "No PvP" means that one player can't attack another player.
I understand that younger players think that PvP is all about ganking lowbies, but LOTRO has Monster Play. One player can attack another player. It is Player vs Player.
Normally I am an either all or none when it comes to PvP. I would rather a game be pure PvP with player looting, xp from PKs, and XP loss, or have no PvP in it. I think Monster play is a unique alternative to just jamming PvP into an MMORPG.
I'm pretty sure when people stir around the words "No PvP", they don't actually mean there isn't any aspect of the game that allows one player to attack another player. They basically mean, "The PvP is there, it just sucks".
Now to define how PvP sucks in this game would require a whole other post (I personally recommend a whole forum), since you will get countless of people discussing this issue.
But generally, why do people say PvP sucks in LoTRO? Well, it doesn't live up to par with it's fellow MMORPGs who have a decent PvP system (EVE, DoAC, UO, etc). Now I won't go into much details but I think it can be agreed that LoTRO PvP needs some work (from rumors I have heard, Turbine is planning to improve the PvP). I mean, they wouldn't HAVE a PvP system in place when they know there are way better alternatives in the market right now. It's obviously Turbine's way of saying, yes, there WILL be a better PvP engine implemented in the future, right now, this is PvMP - just to give you a little taste. This can be good news for people who enjoy PvP or bad news who actually came to LoTR because they hated being ganked. It's all about personal perspective.
I must be old, but to me the phrase "No PvP" means that one player can't attack another player.
I understand that younger players think that PvP is all about ganking lowbies, but LOTRO has Monster Play. One player can attack another player. It is Player vs Player.
Normally I am an either all or none when it comes to PvP. I would rather a game be pure PvP with player looting, xp from PKs, and XP loss, or have no PvP in it. I think Monster play is a unique alternative to just jamming PvP into an MMORPG.
I'm pretty sure when people stir around the words "No PvP", they don't actually mean there isn't any aspect of the game that allows one player to attack another player. They basically mean, "The PvP is there, it just sucks".
Now to define how PvP sucks in this game would require a whole other post (I personally recommend a whole forum), since you will get countless of people discussing this issue.
But generally, why do people say PvP sucks in LoTRO? Well, it doesn't live up to par with it's fellow MMORPGs who have a decent PvP system (EVE, DoAC, UO, etc). Now I won't go into much details but I think it can be agreed that LoTRO PvP needs some work (from rumors I have heard, Turbine is planning to improve the PvP). I mean, they wouldn't HAVE a PvP system in place when they know there are way better alternatives in the market right now. It's obviously Turbine's way of saying, yes, there WILL be a better PvP engine implemented in the future, right now, this is PvMP - just to give you a little taste. This can be good news for people who enjoy PvP or bad news who actually came to LoTR because they hated being ganked. It's all about personal perspective.
-Vin
There's alot of presumption in your post.
First, to presume you know what people mean when they say "no PvP" - It's a good guess, but nothing concrete. People have posted their opinions on why they don't think it's PvP, and they've had nothing to do with the fundamental meaning of what PvP is. One person cited inconsistencies with the story/lore, for example. What does that have to do with it being one player challenging another? Nothing. Still, that's one example of how people are trying to discount it.
You also presume - and seem to hint at - Turbine expanding PvP out of the PvMP setting.. that it's a "preview of things to come". Again... where's your basis for this? Why can't improving the PvP simply mean expanding on what's there already within the context of PvMP? You also respond to your own pesumption as though it's fact in your last comment... about it being "good news" or 'bad news", when there's no indication that it's "news" at all.
It's great for supposition and hypothetical discussion, but it's not based in any kind of fact that can be verified. The only real fact is that there is PvMP, and that some people - arguably the ones who prefer the wide-open "gank anyone anywhere" style of PvP - don't like it.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
I must be old, but to me the phrase "No PvP" means that one player can't attack another player.
I understand that younger players think that PvP is all about ganking lowbies, but LOTRO has Monster Play. One player can attack another player. It is Player vs Player.
Normally I am an either all or none when it comes to PvP. I would rather a game be pure PvP with player looting, xp from PKs, and XP loss, or have no PvP in it. I think Monster play is a unique alternative to just jamming PvP into an MMORPG.
I'm pretty sure when people stir around the words "No PvP", they don't actually mean there isn't any aspect of the game that allows one player to attack another player. They basically mean, "The PvP is there, it just sucks".
Now to define how PvP sucks in this game would require a whole other post (I personally recommend a whole forum), since you will get countless of people discussing this issue.
But generally, why do people say PvP sucks in LoTRO? Well, it doesn't live up to par with it's fellow MMORPGs who have a decent PvP system (EVE, DoAC, UO, etc). Now I won't go into much details but I think it can be agreed that LoTRO PvP needs some work (from rumors I have heard, Turbine is planning to improve the PvP). I mean, they wouldn't HAVE a PvP system in place when they know there are way better alternatives in the market right now. It's obviously Turbine's way of saying, yes, there WILL be a better PvP engine implemented in the future, right now, this is PvMP - just to give you a little taste. This can be good news for people who enjoy PvP or bad news who actually came to LoTR because they hated being ganked. It's all about personal perspective.
-Vin
There's alot of presumption in your post.
First, to presume you know what people mean when they say "no PvP" - It's a good guess, but nothing concrete. People have posted their opinions on why they don't think it's PvP, and they've had nothing to do with the fundamental meaning of what PvP is. One person cited inconsistencies with the story/lore, for example. What does that have to do with it being one player challenging another? Nothing. Still, that's one example of how people are trying to discount it.
You've made some presumptions too..I'm only referring/responding to what the OP said, not anything later. He stated Player vs Player is "One player [that] can attack another player" , which LoTRO does offer, so we can safely say LoTRO has PvP.
Ok, now "No PvP" means two things: 1) The term is literal, there actually isn't Player vs. Player, and 2) The PvP aspect exists, but it lacks aspects to which PvP players find essential; basically it's a matter of opinion.
So, my point was, that the OP misunderstood when people say there is "No PvP". However, I have made one assumption, and that is the OP did ignore idiots who actually claimed there was no actual Player vs Player (#1) and he is talking about people who claim there is "No PvP" according to my #2.
You also presume - and seem to hint at - Turbine expanding PvP out of the PvMP setting.. that it's a "preview of things to come". Again... where's your basis for this? Why can't improving the PvP simply mean expanding on what's there already within the context of PvMP? You also respond to your own pesumption as though it's fact in your last comment... about it being "good news" or 'bad news", when there's no indication that it's "news" at all.
Isn't that what I basically said, that they ARE going to expand on PvMP (which is PvP, because a "monster" is player controlled, you probably got mixed up somewhere with the terminology).
Actually, there are news that PvMP is being improved..
"<amlug> I've personally put in some nasty surprises for truely adventurous players. Also, we are continuing to improve and support monster play and landscape solo play for end game users. We do not want you twiddling your thumbs waiting for something to do! "
That was from a dev chat about a month ago. So I can say that can be good news or bad news. It's great for supposition and hypothetical discussion, but it's not based in any kind of fact that can be verified. The only real fact is that there is PvMP, and that some people - arguably the ones who prefer the wide-open "gank anyone anywhere" style of PvP - don't like it.
Actually, I try to make my threads as factual as possible.
I think you either misread my post, or I'm being unclear. I'll try to work on my wording.
I must be old, but to me the phrase "No PvP" means that one player can't attack another player.
I understand that younger players think that PvP is all about ganking lowbies, but LOTRO has Monster Play. One player can attack another player. It is Player vs Player.
Normally I am an either all or none when it comes to PvP. I would rather a game be pure PvP with player looting, xp from PKs, and XP loss, or have no PvP in it. I think Monster play is a unique alternative to just jamming PvP into an MMORPG.
I'm pretty sure when people stir around the words "No PvP", they don't actually mean there isn't any aspect of the game that allows one player to attack another player. They basically mean, "The PvP is there, it just sucks".
Now to define how PvP sucks in this game would require a whole other post (I personally recommend a whole forum), since you will get countless of people discussing this issue.
But generally, why do people say PvP sucks in LoTRO? Well, it doesn't live up to par with it's fellow MMORPGs who have a decent PvP system (EVE, DoAC, UO, etc). Now I won't go into much details but I think it can be agreed that LoTRO PvP needs some work (from rumors I have heard, Turbine is planning to improve the PvP). I mean, they wouldn't HAVE a PvP system in place when they know there are way better alternatives in the market right now. It's obviously Turbine's way of saying, yes, there WILL be a better PvP engine implemented in the future, right now, this is PvMP - just to give you a little taste. This can be good news for people who enjoy PvP or bad news who actually came to LoTR because they hated being ganked. It's all about personal perspective.
-Vin
There's alot of presumption in your post.
First, to presume you know what people mean when they say "no PvP" - It's a good guess, but nothing concrete. People have posted their opinions on why they don't think it's PvP, and they've had nothing to do with the fundamental meaning of what PvP is. One person cited inconsistencies with the story/lore, for example. What does that have to do with it being one player challenging another? Nothing. Still, that's one example of how people are trying to discount it.
You've made some presumptions too..I'm only referring/responding to what the OP said, not anything later. He stated Player vs Player is "One player [that] can attack another player" , which LoTRO does offer, so we can safely say LoTRO has PvP.
Ok, now "No PvP" means two things: 1) The term is literal, there actually isn't Player vs. Player, and 2) The PvP aspect exists, but it lacks aspects to which PvP players find essential; basically it's a matter of opinion.
So, my point was, that the OP misunderstood when people say there is "No PvP". However, I have made one assumption, and that is the OP did ignore idiots who actually claimed there was no actual Player vs Player (#1) and he is talking about people who claim there is "No PvP" according to my #2.
You also presume - and seem to hint at - Turbine expanding PvP out of the PvMP setting.. that it's a "preview of things to come". Again... where's your basis for this? Why can't improving the PvP simply mean expanding on what's there already within the context of PvMP? You also respond to your own pesumption as though it's fact in your last comment... about it being "good news" or 'bad news", when there's no indication that it's "news" at all.
Isn't that what I basically said, that they ARE going to expand on PvMP (which is PvP, because a "monster" is player controlled, you probably got mixed up somewhere with the terminology).
Actually, there are news that PvMP is being improved..
"<amlug> I've personally put in some nasty surprises for truely adventurous players. Also, we are continuing to improve and support monster play and landscape solo play for end game users. We do not want you twiddling your thumbs waiting for something to do! "
That was from a dev chat about a month ago. So I can say that can be good news or bad news. It's great for supposition and hypothetical discussion, but it's not based in any kind of fact that can be verified. The only real fact is that there is PvMP, and that some people - arguably the ones who prefer the wide-open "gank anyone anywhere" style of PvP - don't like it.
Actually, I try to make my threads as factual as possible.
I think you either misread my post, or I'm being unclear. I'll try to work on my wording.
-Vin
Fair enough... I *was* only on my first cup of coffee when I read it...
>.>
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Comments
Sounds like someone needs a hug. And a cup of hot-cocoa.
Uhh.. wrong.
"Real PvP" is however the developers implement it. As long as it's two or more players competing against each other, it's PvP. It's defined in *that* two or more players are battling it out... not in *how* two or more players are battling it out, or the rules or the setting or the tactics used in that battle. Get it?
Once again, as has been stated here, by myself and others, several times now - whether or not you agree with how it's implemented is another thing altogether. But it's not a viable argument that there is no PvP.
Seriously.. Is anyone else finding it disturbing how many heads such a simple concept is flying completely over?
(Edited for more detail and some elaboration)
Lol......I tend to find more humor in it than anything. It's funny how logic works for some. The haters tend to claim that this game offered nothing new and it has no PvP. When in reality the innovation here is the not so traditional (NEW) type of PvP called PvMP.
Fair enough.. But, I mean... We're sharing world space with these people in-game. If such a simple concept as "one player challenging another player = PvP" is completely lost on them.. Who knows what else might be? What's next... A Lore Master is going to run up to a Raid boss, shouting at the Guardians to back off... "Let me tank it!! These robes are magical!!"
-shudders-
But in all seriousness... It is always good fun how some of the rabidly pro open-PvP people will spin the issue 100 different ways to try and "win" the argument - even when the game's setup doesn't suit their playstyle.
My favorites are some who have put it in the context that Turbine somehow goofed and made a mistake with the PvPM setup... as though the designers/devs had *really* intended for a more traditional world PvP system, but somehow they dropped the ball, and one day they realized "OMG... How'd those player-controlled monsters get in here?!"
Lol.....well said. Those boneheads at Turbine.....look at them now. Gonna release a new content area in a week or so......lol. A month after the game was released....LOL. For free...BAHAHHHAAHHAA!!!! They can't do anything right..... : )
http://www.straightdope.com/
Give it up.. Maybe there are people out there that don't want to be killed by another player every time we turn around. If you don't like it go back to WoW or EQ or whatever game you prefer.
Sounds like someone needs a hug. And a cup of hot-cocoa.
Uhh.. wrong.
"Real PvP" is however the developers implement it. As long as it's two or more players competing against each other, it's PvP. It's defined in *that* two or more players are battling it out... not in *how* two or more players are battling it out, or the rules or the setting or the tactics used in that battle. Get it?
Once again, as has been stated here, by myself and others, several times now - whether or not you agree with how it's implemented is another thing altogether. But it's not a viable argument that there is no PvP.
Seriously.. Is anyone else finding it disturbing how many heads such a simple concept is flying completely over?
(Edited for more detail and some elaboration)
Lol......I tend to find more humor in it than anything. It's funny how logic works for some. The haters tend to claim that this game offered nothing new and it has no PvP. When in reality the innovation here is the not so traditional (NEW) type of PvP called PvMP.
Fair enough.. But, I mean... We're sharing world space with these people in-game. If such a simple concept as "one player challenging another player = PvP" is completely lost on them.. Who knows what else might be? What's next... A Lore Master is going to run up to a Raid boss, shouting at the Guardians to back off... "Let me tank it!! These robes are magical!!"
-shudders-
But in all seriousness... It is always good fun how some of the rabidly pro open-PvP people will spin the issue 100 different ways to try and "win" the argument - even when the game's setup doesn't suit their playstyle.
My favorites are some who have put it in the context that Turbine somehow goofed and made a mistake with the PvPM setup... as though the designers/devs had *really* intended for a more traditional world PvP system, but somehow they dropped the ball, and one day they realized "OMG... How'd those player-controlled monsters get in here?!"
Lol.....well said. Those boneheads at Turbine.....look at them now. Gonna release a new content area in a week or so......lol. A month after the game was released....LOL. For free...BAHAHHHAAHHAA!!!! They can't do anything right..... : )
Heheheh
Well, actually... Had LoTRO not gone as well as it did... that "can't do anything right" comment might have been more truth than joke.
I don't know why... I've always thought Turbine had some creative and original designers there with alot of potential. I still think Asheron's Call 2 could have been - and really should have been - a more popular and more successful game. Things just went so wrong for it. That faith was shaken a bit with DDO.. but it's been fully restored with LOTRO.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
I don't know if you've ever seen this maneuver.. But there are people - pro open, free-for-all PvP - who will knock WoW as not having a "real" PvP system, because it's so "regulated". They call it carebear, whatever...
Yet... when someone makes the very true argument that the hardcore, free-for-all open PvP people represent a very small portion of the MMO population, that most people don't enjoy PvP that "wide-open" and that's why so few games support it, they'll immediately throw out WoW as proof that more people really do enjoy PvP. Millions!
Of course... you see the dilemma there.
Of course, I savor the opportunity to remind them that, "No.. it means that Millions of people enjoy WoW's implementation of PvP - which is not wide-open, free-for-all"...
They usually go off on some completely different tangent after that...
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
This is the silliest argument I have ever heard.
"There are two great powers, and they've been fighting since time began. Every advance in human life, every scrap of knowledge and wisdom and decency we have has been torn by one side from the teeth of the other. Every little increase in human freedom has been fought over ferociously between those who want us to know more and be wiser and stronger, and those who want us to obey and be humble and submit."
John Parry, to his son Will; "The Subtle Knife," by Phillip Pullman
-Vin
Heheheh
Well, actually... Had LoTRO not gone as well as it did... that "can't do anything right" comment might have been more truth than joke.
I don't know why... I've always thought Turbine had some creative and original designers there with alot of potential. I still think Asheron's Call 2 could have been - and really should have been - a more popular and more successful game. Things just went so wrong for it. That faith was shaken a bit with DDO.. but it's been fully restored with LOTRO.
I suppose I am one of the lucky ones. Never played AC1,AC2 or DDO, thusly my experience with Turbine is limited to LotRO. I have Turbine way up on a pedestal currently. Everything they have done with this game seems top notch IMO. Additionally, I've always felt a MMO is a work in progress. From what I hear Turbine is good about adding content and it seems they have learned from past mistakes. I don't want to throw out any names, but, SOmE companies seem to never learn.
http://www.straightdope.com/
Heheheh
Well, actually... Had LoTRO not gone as well as it did... that "can't do anything right" comment might have been more truth than joke.
I don't know why... I've always thought Turbine had some creative and original designers there with alot of potential. I still think Asheron's Call 2 could have been - and really should have been - a more popular and more successful game. Things just went so wrong for it. That faith was shaken a bit with DDO.. but it's been fully restored with LOTRO.
I suppose I am one of the lucky ones. Never played AC1,AC2 or DDO, thusly my experience with Turbine is limited to LotRO. I have Turbine way up on a pedestal currently. Everything they have done with this game seems top notch IMO. Additionally, I've always felt a MMO is a work in progress. From what I hear Turbine is good about adding content and it seems they have learned from past mistakes. I don't want to throw out any names, but, SOmE companies seem to never learn.
The game gets slammed alot (esp. since it was pulled), but Asheron's Call 2 was, to me, an excellent game. It was ahead of its time graphically speaking, it totally broke the mold on the typical "high fantasy" genre.. in that... it wasn't high-fantasy. No elves, dwarves, gnomes, halflings... nothing. Completely unique races (other than Human)... It had *so* much going for it.
They just dropped the ball early on and could never recover; MMO players being as unforgiving as they are, this isn't unusual. It was true back then, it's even more true now with all the other MMOs out there.
I see alot of AC2 in LoTRO. The majestic views, the sprawling landscapes, the huge landmass... the interesting sights (actually labeled on the map as "points of interest" in AC2). The music system echoes of what they had in AC2. The deed system can be traced back to it in a way. The interface is *very* close to it (despite the claims that they "ripped off WoW's" - they didn't)
There's alot of people still holding on to hope that, with some success from LoTRO, perhaps, they might bring AC2 back - even if in a limited capacity.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Now to define how PvP sucks in this game would require a whole other post (I personally recommend a whole forum), since you will get countless of people discussing this issue.
But generally, why do people say PvP sucks in LoTRO? Well, it doesn't live up to par with it's fellow MMORPGs who have a decent PvP system (EVE, DoAC, UO, etc). Now I won't go into much details but I think it can be agreed that LoTRO PvP needs some work (from rumors I have heard, Turbine is planning to improve the PvP). I mean, they wouldn't HAVE a PvP system in place when they know there are way better alternatives in the market right now. It's obviously Turbine's way of saying, yes, there WILL be a better PvP engine implemented in the future, right now, this is PvMP - just to give you a little taste. This can be good news for people who enjoy PvP or bad news who actually came to LoTR because they hated being ganked. It's all about personal perspective.
-Vin
Now to define how PvP sucks in this game would require a whole other post (I personally recommend a whole forum), since you will get countless of people discussing this issue.
But generally, why do people say PvP sucks in LoTRO? Well, it doesn't live up to par with it's fellow MMORPGs who have a decent PvP system (EVE, DoAC, UO, etc). Now I won't go into much details but I think it can be agreed that LoTRO PvP needs some work (from rumors I have heard, Turbine is planning to improve the PvP). I mean, they wouldn't HAVE a PvP system in place when they know there are way better alternatives in the market right now. It's obviously Turbine's way of saying, yes, there WILL be a better PvP engine implemented in the future, right now, this is PvMP - just to give you a little taste. This can be good news for people who enjoy PvP or bad news who actually came to LoTR because they hated being ganked. It's all about personal perspective.
-Vin
There's alot of presumption in your post.
First, to presume you know what people mean when they say "no PvP" - It's a good guess, but nothing concrete. People have posted their opinions on why they don't think it's PvP, and they've had nothing to do with the fundamental meaning of what PvP is. One person cited inconsistencies with the story/lore, for example. What does that have to do with it being one player challenging another? Nothing. Still, that's one example of how people are trying to discount it.
You also presume - and seem to hint at - Turbine expanding PvP out of the PvMP setting.. that it's a "preview of things to come". Again... where's your basis for this? Why can't improving the PvP simply mean expanding on what's there already within the context of PvMP? You also respond to your own pesumption as though it's fact in your last comment... about it being "good news" or 'bad news", when there's no indication that it's "news" at all.
It's great for supposition and hypothetical discussion, but it's not based in any kind of fact that can be verified. The only real fact is that there is PvMP, and that some people - arguably the ones who prefer the wide-open "gank anyone anywhere" style of PvP - don't like it.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Now to define how PvP sucks in this game would require a whole other post (I personally recommend a whole forum), since you will get countless of people discussing this issue.
But generally, why do people say PvP sucks in LoTRO? Well, it doesn't live up to par with it's fellow MMORPGs who have a decent PvP system (EVE, DoAC, UO, etc). Now I won't go into much details but I think it can be agreed that LoTRO PvP needs some work (from rumors I have heard, Turbine is planning to improve the PvP). I mean, they wouldn't HAVE a PvP system in place when they know there are way better alternatives in the market right now. It's obviously Turbine's way of saying, yes, there WILL be a better PvP engine implemented in the future, right now, this is PvMP - just to give you a little taste. This can be good news for people who enjoy PvP or bad news who actually came to LoTR because they hated being ganked. It's all about personal perspective.
-Vin
There's alot of presumption in your post.
First, to presume you know what people mean when they say "no PvP" - It's a good guess, but nothing concrete. People have posted their opinions on why they don't think it's PvP, and they've had nothing to do with the fundamental meaning of what PvP is. One person cited inconsistencies with the story/lore, for example. What does that have to do with it being one player challenging another? Nothing. Still, that's one example of how people are trying to discount it.
You've made some presumptions too..I'm only referring/responding to what the OP said, not anything later. He stated Player vs Player is "One player [that] can attack another player" , which LoTRO does offer, so we can safely say LoTRO has PvP.Ok, now "No PvP" means two things: 1) The term is literal, there actually isn't Player vs. Player, and 2) The PvP aspect exists, but it lacks aspects to which PvP players find essential; basically it's a matter of opinion.
So, my point was, that the OP misunderstood when people say there is "No PvP". However, I have made one assumption, and that is the OP did ignore idiots who actually claimed there was no actual Player vs Player (#1) and he is talking about people who claim there is "No PvP" according to my #2.
You also presume - and seem to hint at - Turbine expanding PvP out of the PvMP setting.. that it's a "preview of things to come". Again... where's your basis for this? Why can't improving the PvP simply mean expanding on what's there already within the context of PvMP? You also respond to your own pesumption as though it's fact in your last comment... about it being "good news" or 'bad news", when there's no indication that it's "news" at all.
Isn't that what I basically said, that they ARE going to expand on PvMP (which is PvP, because a "monster" is player controlled, you probably got mixed up somewhere with the terminology).
Actually, there are news that PvMP is being improved..
"<amlug> I've personally put in some nasty surprises for truely adventurous players. Also, we are continuing to improve and support monster play and landscape solo play for end game users. We do not want you twiddling your thumbs waiting for something to do!
http://www.lordoftheringsonline.net/readarticle.php?article_id=9
That was from a dev chat about a month ago. So I can say that can be good news or bad news.
It's great for supposition and hypothetical discussion, but it's not based in any kind of fact that can be verified. The only real fact is that there is PvMP, and that some people - arguably the ones who prefer the wide-open "gank anyone anywhere" style of PvP - don't like it.
Actually, I try to make my threads as factual as possible.
I think you either misread my post, or I'm being unclear. I'll try to work on my wording
-Vin
Now to define how PvP sucks in this game would require a whole other post (I personally recommend a whole forum), since you will get countless of people discussing this issue.
But generally, why do people say PvP sucks in LoTRO? Well, it doesn't live up to par with it's fellow MMORPGs who have a decent PvP system (EVE, DoAC, UO, etc). Now I won't go into much details but I think it can be agreed that LoTRO PvP needs some work (from rumors I have heard, Turbine is planning to improve the PvP). I mean, they wouldn't HAVE a PvP system in place when they know there are way better alternatives in the market right now. It's obviously Turbine's way of saying, yes, there WILL be a better PvP engine implemented in the future, right now, this is PvMP - just to give you a little taste. This can be good news for people who enjoy PvP or bad news who actually came to LoTR because they hated being ganked. It's all about personal perspective.
-Vin
There's alot of presumption in your post.
First, to presume you know what people mean when they say "no PvP" - It's a good guess, but nothing concrete. People have posted their opinions on why they don't think it's PvP, and they've had nothing to do with the fundamental meaning of what PvP is. One person cited inconsistencies with the story/lore, for example. What does that have to do with it being one player challenging another? Nothing. Still, that's one example of how people are trying to discount it.
You've made some presumptions too..I'm only referring/responding to what the OP said, not anything later. He stated Player vs Player is "One player [that] can attack another player" , which LoTRO does offer, so we can safely say LoTRO has PvP.Ok, now "No PvP" means two things: 1) The term is literal, there actually isn't Player vs. Player, and 2) The PvP aspect exists, but it lacks aspects to which PvP players find essential; basically it's a matter of opinion.
So, my point was, that the OP misunderstood when people say there is "No PvP". However, I have made one assumption, and that is the OP did ignore idiots who actually claimed there was no actual Player vs Player (#1) and he is talking about people who claim there is "No PvP" according to my #2.
You also presume - and seem to hint at - Turbine expanding PvP out of the PvMP setting.. that it's a "preview of things to come". Again... where's your basis for this? Why can't improving the PvP simply mean expanding on what's there already within the context of PvMP? You also respond to your own pesumption as though it's fact in your last comment... about it being "good news" or 'bad news", when there's no indication that it's "news" at all.
Isn't that what I basically said, that they ARE going to expand on PvMP (which is PvP, because a "monster" is player controlled, you probably got mixed up somewhere with the terminology).
Actually, there are news that PvMP is being improved..
"<amlug> I've personally put in some nasty surprises for truely adventurous players. Also, we are continuing to improve and support monster play and landscape solo play for end game users. We do not want you twiddling your thumbs waiting for something to do!
http://www.lordoftheringsonline.net/readarticle.php?article_id=9
That was from a dev chat about a month ago. So I can say that can be good news or bad news.
It's great for supposition and hypothetical discussion, but it's not based in any kind of fact that can be verified. The only real fact is that there is PvMP, and that some people - arguably the ones who prefer the wide-open "gank anyone anywhere" style of PvP - don't like it.
Actually, I try to make my threads as factual as possible.
I think you either misread my post, or I'm being unclear. I'll try to work on my wording
-Vin
Fair enough... I *was* only on my first cup of coffee when I read it...
>.>
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops