First, i would like to say that this one is the first editorial i agree with on months. Grats to MMORPG.com
Originally posted by tkobo i could no more convince the FFA PvP crowd of the kind of player said games far too often attract than I could convince certain "Fan" types their game of choice is poor. And like those fan types , many of the FFA PvP crowd will choose to take offense at the simple truth. Fortunately, games like Shadowbane,AC(the darktide server ) , Roma Victor,Eve etc,, give prime examples in MMO history of the destructive nature of far too many players of said oriented games.Even that holy grail of PvP for many enthusiasts,old UO, in which an exploiting PvPer killed a DEV during an event ,simply becuase he found a way he could. As does the subscription and retention numbers for said games even when compared against the dismal numbers of other NON-PvP oriented MMOs. Playing a FFA or very open PvP MMO is very much like playing on an open server for a FPS.The amount of people you run into that are simply out to cause annoyance or grief to others as their path to fun is simply too high.
oh boy, you are so wrong. EVE playerbase is incredible big if you take into account the marketting they have done. they havent bought incredible reviews from gamespot or flood prime time with TV advertisements. still, their numbers are growing since launch, 4 years ago.
But i guess you left out the pvp game that could completely destroy your theory. Linage is a pvp game, and until the release of WoW was the mmorpg with most subscriptions by a wide margin. uppps, i guess you didnt want anybody bringing it up, did you?
but please, do not consider your position and keep spending your time raiding the same dungeon over and over and over and over till the end of time
I'm not sure yet where I stand on the whole FFA PvP thing, but I can say for certain that people are not interested in a Risk v Reward system. You only need to look at the popular games right now and see how easy they are. Even single player games have features like "auto-aim" and on-the-fly saves to make life easier for the player. The reason for this?
The vast majority of players don't want to sit doing the same thing for hours. Either in one game or in a handful. We're moving away from the time of the hardcore gamer.
I know what you're thinking. You're thinking "but I know <character> in <game> who logs 4 zillion hours every week and he's the best player I've ever seen" but these days that's the exception rather than the rule.
What people seem to be looking for now is something that they can pick up at random and find something to do quickly in, PvE or PvP. They don't want to grind, and that's fair enough. But then obviously they don't want to cover the same ground to make back any items or XP they lost the last time they played.
I'm not saying I agree with this, but it is true. Look at how Everquest has changed to suit the more casual gamers, and EQ had some of the most hardcore players I ever saw (my longest camp was 39 straight hours waiting for Stormfeather - look him up!). We got the LFG tool a couple of years ago, we got instanced missions around the same time, we got maps so people could get places faster, we got new abilities to make us take less damage, the list goes on. But the times are changing, and games need to make themselves more accessible for both short- and long-term play.
The problem is people are very childish when it comes to gaming. They don't want to risk anything, but they want big gains. And other than reputation, you won't get that through PvP.
But then do we want the "perfect game" to come out anyway? Because if it did we'd all be playing it, and then there would be so many people on the servers that trying to do anything would be near impossible!
I dont think a risk reward system is ideal. Lets look at it at face value. There are two extremes to MMOs: The hard core gamer without a life and the unreliable uninterested careless noob ( to use WoW jargon) most of which have no repsect to the community. Both are unwanted for various obvious reasons. The ideal game should encourage people to have a life besides gaming and not burn it. Only then will the player never be bored or lose interest. With a risk reward system the hard core gamers will rule. From a social perspective this is BAD. Gaming is fun and a world should be present where everyone counts and can make a difference and a newbie can make his/her way up and not feel discouraged by the already existing elite. On the other hand we do not want worlds where idiots and bullies can make their way up cause there is absolutely no consqeuence to their stupid or bad actions. Besides this lets wake up guys, if we want to act as mature gamers, casual play is what we should promote in our society.
What I think people really want in MMO is more freedom and inidivuality. It is not very motivating to work hard for a tier and loose it in a jiffy to some idiot, OR on the other hand to see someone who does not deserve it having the same tier. It is also not motivating that you cannot customise your possesions and make them at least look different from those of others. You want a risk reward system? sure but not to risk loot and possessions. Rather remove or activate access to possessions and areas according to your actions. Blizzard dealt this through using honor and reputation. However it is all very strict and censored. As a wow player myself, sometimes I really hate not being able to gank one of my own race for they really deserve it. You know what I mean! Bullies and lack of respect! Some stupid alliance paly ganking low levels for fun cause s/he aint good to match his/her own levels. WoW's weakest point? Hehe, sure - lack of justice - and there you have it!
To wannabe or not to wannabe? Hey I know the answer and it is not 42!
I think we can all agree that the raw number of players interested in some form of pvp has increased radically over the last 4-5 years. This is partly due to the overall number of players quadrupling in that timeframe, but partly also due to a much higher percentage of players preferring a game where there is some form of pvp involved.
I would not go so far as to say that some form of pvp is essential to an MMORPG at this point; but it's very close. Making a successful game without any pvp will be very difficult in today's market.
I've been playing pvp games for eight years now. In that time, I have noticed a trend of players to prefer deeper and more involved forms of pvp as they continue play. For instance, players who start with wholely consentual pvp games will tend to trend toward less consentual formats over time. Not every player will, but a large number will.
Also interestingly, there seems to almost *never* be any drift back in the other way. People who get involved in nonconsentual pvp don't drift back toward consentual pvp or no pvp, unless they are forced to by a lack of nonconsentual games on the market. This creates a gradual aggregation of players into a group preferring more complex and less consentual pvp systems.
----
I think people are reacting in a knee-jerk fashion when they hear "pvp" in the same sentence with "risk". Yes, there were some early implementations that were too harsh for the average player. But what's being suggested in the original article is not really that recreating the initial state of UO or AC1-Darktide would create a new megalith of a game! Those games paved the road in many ways, but we have hopefully learned a few things since then.
What players are looking for, I think, more than just "risk", is "meaning". WOW battlegrounds are the ultimate meaningless pvp. There is a new little game out called Dawnspire - go take a peek, it's a fun game. Every character has the same building blocks, so there is no leveling. Every match is between 2-16 people with bots evening out the sides. Every match takes about 10-20 minutes. There is no risk, no real reward, no leveling, no *lasting effects* from the pvp at all. Sound familiar? It's the WOW battleground system, removed from the context of the leveling in the outside world.
It's a fun game, for a bit. But like WOW's bgs, it lacks any real reason to play it for any length of time. It lacks any depth, any lasting power, because in the long run what the players do won't have any persistence. Winning or losing is meaningless because nobody really cares. One has only to look at how many people were just going AFK in WOW battlegrounds to see how little players cared about the actual matches!
Now, people in this thread have beat on Shadowbane quite a lot. And...rightly so, in many ways. The game was buggy, almost painfully so, and very content incomplete. We all know that. But almost all of my MOST intense MMORPG experiences occurred in that game! Almost every moment that I have had in eight years of online gaming where I felt like what I was doing really mattered, where I really *cared* about the outcome, are from Shadowbane.
I have a real love-hate relationship with that game. For all the things that it most certainly did do wrong, it got some things very right, too. I would love to feel that intensity again - feel that caring about what is going on, feel the comraderie between friends whose combined efforts make things happen, feel the ultimate highs from victories that mean something - and yes, the crushing weight of a loss that really hurts, too. I'd just like them without the requirement that I play 80 hours a week and get up for 4am battles several days a week.
Some folks say that the general public could never handle real risk and reward games. That losing hurts too much. I think we're TRAINED from childhood to enjoy that sort of pressure, from our first experiences in Little League. Your school coaches can talk about how it's about how you play, not winning and losing til they are blue in the face - but ask most competitors if they care if they win, and they'll say YES! That feeling builds - competition becomes more important as children move through junior high, high school, and into college as young adults. Winning and losing are part of every competition, and competition is an enormous part of our culture.
No, you can't cram full pvp into an EQ style game without creating a mess, any more than you could hand uzis to teams of basketball players without creating a scenario where there is simply too much loss for the game to be fun anymore. But create a scenario where the loss, while light and recoverable, is still something that we care deeply about - and there, you will have a winning game design.
Its very telling to me, how many people who support the FFA or very open PvP system are taking offense by making it sound like i said ALL somewhere .
So, ill sum it up very simply,though i doubt this will change their stance, as its much easier to feign being the victim than use reason.
Regular NON-PvP based MMO = trained monkeys sitting at computers, pushing buttons to be rewarded/entertained by pretty flashing lights, with a few who choose to simply entertain themselves by throwing crap at everything and everyone in the room.
FFA or very open PvP base MMO = trained monkeys sitting at conmputers, pushing bittons to be rewarded /entertained by pretty flashing lights, with a LARGE PERCENTAGE who choose to entertain themselves by throwing crap at everything and everyone in the room.
As for the whole "but look at some FFA or very open PvP games have been successful" stance ,they are ONLY measured successful by the same old incredibly low standards the same old incredibly inept dev teams have set of a few 100k "being a success".
Sadly, many of them (devs) still peddle that line, and hence many MMO players still buy that hype sold them by said devs of how "successful" mmos are.BUT the sad fact is WoW which made far more mistakes than it should have is the ONLY game that came anywhere near getting and holding the customer base it should have.
All the other games, despite what the inept dev teams tell you, have sadly underperformed and continue to do so.WITH PvP based games being in the lower end of that underperformance.
Of course some people will cling to the hype they are sold, and wont even bother to think, until the another game comes along that is close to made right and again scores in the millions customer base wise.And even then,some of those who bought the old hype will still choose to cling to those old lies.
Shadowbane isnt a free game that most people still wont play becuase it is a success.Just imagine, if you can, how many people would play WoW if it was a free game.
Ah Keith the editorial slanted heavily in the pro-pvp favor. The simple fact is pvp can make or break a game. Do it too much and you will lose the casual players, do it too little and the hardcore types become unhappy. PvP is not a requirement for a successful game, just look at EQ1 and City of Heroes/Villains. They have pvp but it's rather limited and not really that actively participated in. Yet, both games are still running along with plenty of subs. Not 8+ million subs to be sure, but pre-WoW their numbers would be considered "successful" easily. Take games that are heavy into pvp, Lineage 2 and EVE come to mind, and you see they have good subscription numbers, just they seem to be centralized outside of north america. Lineage 2 is quite popular in asia but didn't nearly hit it off as well in the states. EVE is a well made game, but isn't boasting huge sub numbers. Both of these games are more in their own little "niche" and are geared towards the more hardcore pvp types in that niche. Let's look at WoW and their huge amount of severs. Of the 221 servers (not including test servers and such) there are 104 pvp servers (RP or otherwise). This means that 117 servers are non-all out pvp, but a more restricted pvp ruleset. This would clearly show that although many like pvp, there is a huge customer base for a "pvp when I want" gamestyle. Personally I thought DAoC had the best pvp system to date. Too bad they sold out to EA.
Hey DrowNoble,
I totally agree I did slant this VERY heavily pro-pvp. I am a PvPer anyway you look at it. I currently play WoW in an ALL PvE guild. I loath WoW's PvP but I think from a gaming stand point it is an incredible piece of software!
I want to address some of the things that you mentioned. World of Warcraft is a true double edged sword. On one side it has cut the tendons of the PvP community and on the other side it has cut through the PvE market opening up room for the PvP market to explode. WoW has said in MANY different articles that their major focus is creating a lasting game with plenty to do WHICH includes PvP. They have pumped millions of dollars into PvP concepts and ideas and to this point in this writers opinion they have just created another grind for gear.
In my "How to Kill a Giant" article I talk about a range of topics NOT JUST FFA PvP like many people are mentioning here. I want to make sure you guys understand that the concepts I mention are the small rock I speak of when I talk about killing the giant. FFA PvP is not the answer BUT it can hold clues to a much broader answer.
I will tell you that I believe the way to make a game is give the player control of the land. Sure there has to be rules in which there are in life but the rules should be able to be broken. This concept is known as dynamic worlds. A world in which the devs are onlookers and the players shape their world. This is done by player run warfare (sieges not just PvP) Player run towns and economies. WoW limits what players can do and you never change anything in the world. I kill Gruul and 7 days later he is back, it is worthless and meaningless. When I say players shape the land they must fight for resources that over time become limited, they fight for their guilds towns that are being sieged by other nomadic tribes.
These concepts set in place and worked out correctly will allow players to immerse themselves in an environment that changes with the politics. That is a true MMO, interaction, political warfare and a world shaped by the players NOT the devs.
Notice: The reviews expressed in this post are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the reviews of MMORPG.com or its management.
risk Vs. reward does not work in normal games. the risk becomes fighting people an eighth of your strength real risk there.
I fell any game designed around risk and reward will fail. just because that would not fell like a game at all.
That is not at all what we are talking about here. We are not talking about mis matched ganking we are talking about player run cities able to be sieged. We are talking about living in a ever changing world where alliances are formed and broken, wars are fought, guilds are born then taken out.
To say risk and reward does not work is the hight of ignorance because you are saying that the concept of you working toward a goal should not be paid off in the end. It is like saying I want to kill 500000000 mobs and never level.
Notice: The reviews expressed in this post are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the reviews of MMORPG.com or its management.
That is not at all what we are talking about here. We are not talking about mis matched ganking we are talking about player run cities able to be sieged. We are talking about living in a ever changing world where alliances are formed and broken, wars are fought, guilds are born then taken out.
To say risk and reward does not work is the hight of ignorance because you are saying that the concept of you working toward a goal should not be paid off in the end. It is like saying I want to kill 500000000 mobs and never level.
welcome to wurm.
I find it amazing that by 2020 first world countries will be competing to get immigrants.
From the original articleOriginally posted by Mayson
For years now players have been saying that once they got a taste of the competitive nature of PvP, they wanted more. The truth of the matter is that the community is out growing the stale, redundant PvP that many companies are cramping down the throats of their players. Its no longer just PvP the community craves but it is the entire concept of risk and reward.
I am curious what datapoint you have to support that people desire risk vs reward? From my vantage point there isn't any outside some hardcore types speaking for the unspoken masses.
Personally I don't think some risk vs reward mechanics are going to blow the lid off the MMO industry. In fact I think it will actually do more harm than good to a solid title. At least any North American/Euro title.
I think what many players want, not all, is a pvp system that pvp's when they want to.
First and foremost for this is the griefers/gankers. Not all people who are really into pvp are griefers, as the common stereotype goes. However, as the pvp rules get more "loose" and becomre more FFA you will get the jackholes who do nothing but kill lowbies, grief someone completing a quest, kill someone while they fighting an npc or whatever. I can tell you it is frustrating as all hell to spend time, sometimes hours, working on a quest only to have someone 3X your level come kill you or the mob just out of spite. When WoW dropped the DK system, you have seen a spike in 70's going to smaller starter towns and killing every npc in sight. Why do this, they gain nothing from it. Only thing accomplished is ruining the gametime of the lowbies just trying to get their quests done.
I've said it before but I will repeat it here. To me, pvp should be about the challenge of defeating a human opponent, someone who is roughly equal in level/gear/whatever to my toon. I get more satisfaction taking down someone like that than mass-slaughtering lowbies or killing their low-level npc merchants. I mean if I have virtually no chance of dying, where's the excitement in that? No Risk and No Reward to be sure.
Another issue is that North American gamers tend to prefer less hardcore pvp than asian gamers. Lineage 2 really big in asia, not so much in the States. It is probably impossible to make a game that would appeal to the different tastes of asian and american pvp gamers.
Instead of pvp and various tweaking of pvp systems there of, I think having personal housing and such is the way to go for games. CoX has the supergroup bases, EQ2 has personal housing as examples. Heck my wizard in EQ2 has paid for a lot of mastercrafted stuff for my other toons just with all the furnature he's made.
Phenomenal post Owyn. Your insight really added to this thread. Everyone should take a good look at your post for a good description of the things we are experiencing in PvP and in gaming in general.
Tkobo, you are just "one of them" to me. You show hypocrisy and fallacy at every turn and your argument stems from a preconceived notion that you have no intention of changing. Don't insinuate that our responses are very "telling". Noone believes that you are Sherlock Holmes and through our disagreement can somehow deduce that your opinion has been correct all along. The reason we disagree with you is because...quite possibly we think you are wrong. The reason I am getting aggressive with you is because you are a sarcastic, presumptious, and narrow minded poster who is shunning an entire section of the gaming community with overt generalizations and false ideaologies.
At any rate....keep on trucking I guess...
www.revolutiong.com Stand up and take part in the evolution of MMORPG's.
Phenomenal post Owyn. Your insight really added to this thread. Everyone should take a good look at your post for a good description of the things we are experiencing in PvP and in gaming in general.
Tkobo, you are just "one of them" to me. You show hypocrisy and fallacy at every turn and your argument stems from a preconceived notion that you have no intention of changing. Don't insinuate that our responses are very "telling". Noone believes that you are Sherlock Holmes and through our disagreement can somehow deduce that your opinion has been correct all along. The reason we disagree with you is because...quite possibly we think you are wrong. The reason I am getting aggressive with you is because you are a sarcastic, presumptious, and narrow minded poster who is shunning an entire section of the gaming community with overt generalizations and false ideaologies.
At any rate....keep on trucking I guess...
Like i already said.
Its very telling to me, how many people who support the FFA or very open PvP system are taking offense by making it sound like i said ALL somewhere .
Phenomenal post Owyn. Your insight really added to this thread. Everyone should take a good look at your post for a good description of the things we are experiencing in PvP and in gaming in general.
Tkobo, you are just "one of them" to me. You show hypocrisy and fallacy at every turn and your argument stems from a preconceived notion that you have no intention of changing. Don't insinuate that our responses are very "telling". Noone believes that you are Sherlock Holmes and through our disagreement can somehow deduce that your opinion has been correct all along. The reason we disagree with you is because...quite possibly we think you are wrong. The reason I am getting aggressive with you is because you are a sarcastic, presumptious, and narrow minded poster who is shunning an entire section of the gaming community with overt generalizations and false ideaologies.
At any rate....keep on trucking I guess...
I wasn't going to say anything about this earlier, but since you are pointing fingers at people, here is something you said earlier in this thread.
Originally posted by Lindorn
[quote]
As far as your claim that PvPers in an open environment are far too destructive to the community and the game itself. Well....thanks really Mr. original. Thanks for subscribing to the most overadopted and underproven carebear ideology toward PvPers. Way to stereotype us and support the heinous view that we are some sort of "disease" on our environment. I write articles about people like you....and it always gets a good laugh out of a true gamer.
Framing someone up as a carebear and not a 'true gamer' as you put goes a long way to stereotyping, even if you are a bit offhanded about it. Pretty much the same thing you are railing on someone for in a pot/kettle kind of way if you know what I mean.
I'm just saying you might want to put the safety on that accusation pistol for a while before you tuck it back into your belt.
Sorry Mayson et al, I don't buy your arguments. You have beliefs, but where are the facts? Show me some actual numbers that show that a great number of players of MMOs want more risk for their reward. I agree that there must be SOME risk, otherwise the reward is meaningless [everyone gets to be student of the month/week] - I don't buy that PvP is the way to provide that risk.
If people want risk, they can "play" the stock market; they can play FPS; they can play poker online.
As a PhD student in Psychology, you should be able to deduce that people who play MMOs as opposed to FPS become attached to their characters. They see their character as some extension of themself. Even without the extreme of permadeath -the ultimate <legal> risk for a character- most people don't like their character to die, and in fact work very hard to avoid it. If a character dies often, especially at the hands of another character, the player will not want to continue playing that game. If players don't want to play, they won't continue to subscribe.
Again, as a psych student you should know that most people are risk-adverse. This makes biological sense - gene carriers for risky behavior live fast and die young [enough reproduce to keep the genes in the population; technology has made it so that many people survive who would not have in the past]. Those who live through their testosterone choked years learn -sometimes the hard way, through injury or death of another- not to take as many risks. Human nature has evolved for thousands of years - understanding it can make games better, disregarding it will not.
I agree that PvP - that is, playing against another human instead of some [usually woefully inadequate] AI - can be fun, but for most people only where there is little or no risk to what they have invested in the game. FPS, chess, F2P poker are fun forms of PvP because you only risk your reputation; MMOs providing consentual PvP can be fun because you decide what to risk and when to risk it; MMOs with FFA PvP are not fun for most people because risk is forced on them. Nobody plays to lose*
*except boxers who are "taking a fall" where the gain of wealth is greater than the loss of reputation <short term, anyway -"I coulda been a contenda">
Second thumbs up for Uncus Well said/ I see a lot of theory and a lot of opinions and beliefs in this thread, but like Uncus said, I don't see a lot of proof.
WoW is proof. Half the servers are non-PvP. But then the other half ARE PvP, so there is clearly a market. But the one ridiculous statement is that any form of PvP will kill WoW. Take away half the servers and you still have a monster.
But we'll get the proof regarding this idea of PvP's popularity soon enough with the next round of MMORPGs.
In this corner - Tabula Rasa, new license but with Richard Garriott hype is a non-issue. PvE dominant experience, limited (if any) PvP.
In the other corner - Age of Conan. Famous license and an experienced PvP-favoring company.
And also in the other corner - Warhammer Online. Not quite as famous license but also a very experienced company with a well known PvP game.
It will be interesting to see how these games do against each other and WoW. Which will do best? PvE or PvP-based games?
But it's also interesting to note that none of them seem to be using the 'Risk your gains' mechanic suggested in the article. Maybe they are reluctant to take up radical game mechanics with such big stakes, or maybe they're thought about it and realize that some radical ideas don't work.
Wow i totally agree with mayson and disagree with uncus
There are no "facts" about more people wanting risk vs reward its an opinion shared by many ive talked to specially in wow.(show me a some fact that they dont?)
Wow is not proof....wow is a well made game, made by a well known company, with a well known ip, advertised on tv, and cost alot of money. It has nothing to do with people not wanting more "risk" pvp.
As for people being risk adverse, that statement is probably true, but people arent themselves online. They do things online they normally wouldnt do in real life.
"Mmos as opposed to fps"....You cant compare mmo and fps.....you can compare mmo fps and multiplayer fps, then your statement would be correct. As for losers not wanting to play that is correct....but you can make faction/guild losses and not player. This is a problem game designing can fix. Players dont want to lose items because in most mmo's it takes too much time to aquire items.
In my opinion risk vs reward type pvp games would do better without levels hence leveling the playing field. An example for a better risk reward game for me would be planetside(or wiionline) With multiple planets where your guild owned and built the cities and you fought for land and resources. No need for levels...tatics, skill, and base design are used to achieve money and a chance for some kind of world domination.
Yea because we all know Shadowbane is just so popular by letting you destroy entire player cities that are empty because a majority of that cities players are asleep. I severely doubt a rewards / risk system is going to kill wow. I had my fill of rewards / risk style games with UO back in the 90s where just walking outside the city could lose you an entire days worth of work.
Honestly I wonder sometimes who comes up with this stuff? I guess its a good thing its an editorial and not a fact.
I will admit that this style of game play is not for everyone. However consider yourself a minority from this point out. Before you hit the reply button, read the rest of what I am about to say
Shadowbane had many things that worked well but programming and fundamental errors caused its demise NOT the people getting upset because they lost things. The way you implement something like player cities and asset destruction is by making items readily available without the countless hours of work it takes in games like WoW to obtain. This system implemented into World of Warcraft would not work because WoW is a PvE based game with careful undertones of PvP. WoW has ignited the PvP based and its the same base that will carry the industry for years to come.
We'll just have agree to disagree. My friends love pvp and they loved shadow bane at first till they got tired of the ganking, the zerging, and finally just f'd over their own city and quit the game.
While I will agree there is a large enough pvp community to enjoy this risk vs rewards, gank, loot free for all fun and make it profitable for a game company or two that wants to go that way I do not for see it ever taking down WoW. PvP players are either purely FFA PVPers (gank/lootesr) or the meaningful pvp where accomplishing some task by killing worthy opponents (like the warhammer and i suppose the AoC community), there is no happy medium that'll keep all those PvPers and perspective pvpers (from the vast pve crowd) happy. Its either all or nothing. We've seen that proven over and over again in the constant we need more Free for all pvp looting / perma death posts of the last year. Which also proves atleast ot me that I am NOT a minority considering how many people argue against this style of gameplay and frankly if you'd of said that to my face in RL I'd of made you eat those words as a long standing MMO vet and RPG pnp vet.
WoW is a pve game like you said and its largest groups of players are corewise even if they PVP because they want the gear are primarily PVE players. You can say I'm wrong but I'm merely basing this off the people I know that PvP grinded their butts off in that game, they did it for the gear & the faction but they really like the raiding / pve content more than anything.
PvP needs to be reinvented and given that innovative upgrade but I don't think a risk / rewards system tacted on to it without making someone work for what they have in the first place is ever going to be that popular. You'll always have the hardcore players wanting something they can work for and youll have the average & casual players workign harder to keep up and have those items too. Then when said average or casual player loses their stuff they will be angry and if it happens often enough (which we all knwo it will) they will leave and they'll find something else.
If a game goes this way you can bet that I won't go that way I had my fill of murdering guilds and groups just trying to survive as a lowly miner in UO or a lowly adventurer ages ago. I deal with real life all day the last thing I want to do is play a game thats gearing its mechanics to a more realistic feel. I'm quite happy with the idea of Warhammer's PvP it gives me that RPG Im fighting for my people to kill the enemy happy glowy feel and i'm quite happy with that.
the fact you even dare frigging insult me and call me a minority in my opinion ... ...just proves even more so why I think most of the editorial staff on this website are jaded and listen to nothing but what THEY feel and nothing else. They don't take into consideration all the things being said only their own. Frankly MMORPG.com has just slid down another notch in my favorite place to go when im no busy in game or working.
(goes into full rant) the fact your a staff member / writer of any sort sickens me and if they had a report insult by staff writer button I'd so be hitting it.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
Daffid are you insinuating that because stereotypes exist there are not folks out there that actually fit the description? If a flaming activist liberal accuses an independent of being a conservative a-hole because he is anti-abortion and continually ignores the guys valid argument in order that he can push an agenda....FURTHERMORE claiming that every word the guy uses to attempt to support his belief in a LOGICAL conversation is "telling" of what a conservative whackcase is......then the guy turns around and says "you haven't listened to a word I've said and you've labeled me based upon a belief that I have with no deeper analysis than that....I'M not the stereotype....YOU ARE". In that scenario or one opposite on the political spectrum would you then accuse the ladder of being a hypocrite?
If so then you don't seem to understand the structure of logical argument. If not then your post above me is null and void as you've contradicted yourself.
This guy has made generalized arguments with no proof whatsoever to back up his statements. His entire argument is based upon the idea that FFA games attract a certain kind of audience and couldn't possibly serve another purpose than becoming a cesspool for l33t dewds. The people who subscribe to such lackluster ideologies and shun PvP simply because it isn't their way are the type of carebears that the stereotypes were made for TO BEGIN WITH. What we are talking about isn't hypocrisy it's the truth. Read anything I've ever written anywhere and you'll find I'm not the standard griefer.......look at this guy's argument and it deviates very little from every other anti PvP "activist" you'll find around here or anywhere else. I hope this explanation sufficiently stomps your appraisal of this situation into the ground.
I find it comical though how you come here to call me out about fingerpointing even though the fingerpointing started with the guy you are defending. So it seems not even you can walk in here without a chip on your shoulder. This is the exact problem anyone like me has with trying to break into thick skulls. You are all shut off to the concept before the conversation even begins.
I do not fall into a stereotype and you or anyone else is ill-suited to prove that I do. However, a majority of the people who criticize my beliefs about gaming without even considering the validity of my arguments and the extensive experience on which they are based generally DO fall into a stereotype of their own. I can't stand the losers on either side of the fence....and the fact that there is a fence to begin with is the fault of people like that.
www.revolutiong.com Stand up and take part in the evolution of MMORPG's.
And btw anyone who insinuates that because a lot of people play WoW (Im not including people who played WoW as their first game) that it must be the superior method of design might as well insinuate that a lonely prisoner in a dungeon really likes bread and water for every meal.
www.revolutiong.com Stand up and take part in the evolution of MMORPG's.
The fact that there are so many replies and so much disagreement shows us all one thing, there is not a 100% fact either way. I agree that my OPINIONS are PvP based. I also would hope that we can have a logical respectful conversation about these issues. Me calling someone's play style a minority style is hardly an insult. If you took it the wrong way I apologize but it was not intended to insult.
As for the rest of these replies, we must understand that communication and listening to each other is the key to enlightenment. My views are the expression of my years of working in the gaming industry, leading very successful guilds and talking to thousands of gamers and developers.
As for the psychological portion that someone mentioned, I would like to point out that there is an extensive network that forms beliefs. The reason I mention beliefs is because the argument at hand is one of beliefs. The fabric of our opinions are based on experiences and situations that have dictated our lives. The network of beliefs are much like the intricacies of a spiders web. Many beliefs are tied into each other forming a network of fixed opinions about events and situations. How this pertains to MMOs is based on the person's experience in the given construct. This does not mean that if you get ganked you hate PvP. It does mean that if you have negative experiences you are more apt to side on the face of negativity. There is alot more in gamer psychology that I will write about in the coming weeks and months.
I will say that it is important to understand that people will have many opinions on how or what games can do to implement better dynamics. I implore you all to keep an open mind as you read everyone's post, I will do the same.
Notice: The reviews expressed in this post are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the reviews of MMORPG.com or its management.
I'll put some words in Mayson's mouth. A lot of you that are staunchly supporting an opposite opinion to that expressed in this article are wallowing in your own logical fallacies. One guy stated that he hated walking outside in UO and losing a day's work......yet you will all go into a 40 man Molten Core run and spend 6 hours wiping repeatedly until your raid leader can't take it anymore and calls it a night? The truth of the matter is most of you anti PvP types aren't concerned with what you lose as much as how you lose it. It is my personal belief that you just can't handle an intelligent, adaptive, and developing NON AI enemy dominating you. Why would you? Hell you can play WoW all day and fight the AI mobs which do the same thing over.....and over......and over......and over........Hell it requires no challenge....AND once you've wiped enough to figure out how to do X random raid....you just do it once a week until everyone gets the gear they need to feel accomplished in a game that requires no adaptation or skill whatsoever.
Risk and reward is a prominent concept of a dynamic world. It is my belief that the more development companies move away from stringent limitations and regurgitated raid and PvE content in their games, the more they are stepping into the next era of gaming. For me it isnt just about PvP.....its about the accountability and realism that comes with PvP.
And please....dont argue that you aren't playing games for realism and that you are playing for "fun". You are playing for entertainment.....and entertainment is art.....and all art immitates LIFE. Games, like movies and books tell us things about ourselves and immerse us in a different world. Players must be allowed to create the flow of their own stories in games like these, and in order to do so limitations such as long grinds and addictive gear based PvE content will have to go the way of the do-do.....
These are methods that companies use to keep you consistently paying for a subscription.....What happened to making the most intense and fascinating game we've ever seen? Have we forgotten that this pinnacle is what all art should strive for?
Just to set the facts straight 1 IM NOT A GUY learn to read profiles and 2 I don't raid because the idea is absolutely ridiculous to me. If you wanna come after me then come after me but don't pussy foot about it. Oh and btw I do play games for fun its one of the reasons I quit WoW after the first six months it just wasn't FUN in MY opinion. If its not fun then its not entertaining.
This whole thread was started on the idea of killing off wow and I dont think a game of this type that the original article started on would KILL WOW. Hurt wow? Maybe hurt its english speaking population. Kill it? No. It'll take another game of a popular developer that offers a concept thats NEW while still playing to all the good points of PvE and PvP games without forcing people to be 'ganked' for the sake of someone else's fun.
And to the staff writer your so full of Crap honestly. Enlightment my ***.. if you were enlightened you wouldn't flub someone's opinion as a minority. Infact I probably wouldn't of bothered even posting to this thread a second time once i said my first lil tiny statement if you hadn't of insulted my opinion into the 'minority bin" which its not a minority opinion. None of the opinions on this topic are minority.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
Lol gotta love the old shadowbane argument or the old pvp games have failed argument, how many REAL pvp games have been made? 2 or 3? how many PVE games have been made thousands and just a few shine...
i totally agree with the writer
Nothing in this world compares to the feeling of danger, the conflicts betwen ppl and the community response, like when u are in ffa pvp zone and u got some guy close to u and ur thinking is he planning to attack me
And all the alliances and wars...
It makes the whole game feel more like it is controlled by the players and it is more immersive like when one guild member attacks a member from another guild and that causes a war u feel like your writing history
One of the best experiences i had in a MMO was in Neocron boy that was so nice
I'm impressed, no matter in which forum, game or guild I am the concept is always the same: people always go in defence mode!!! The whole topic of the article seemed clear to me - Will there ever be a wow-killer? - for the answer to be yes, there are two main worlds that need to be explored. First one is wow itself. What makes it good in people's eyes? What makes it bad? Second is what does each of us gamers want, irrispective of gender, race, stereotype, minority, majority ... After a carefull analysis of what is listed you might notice that in reality all share similar opinions but they are just looking with different perspectives, probably due to different experiences and exposure and why not different tastes and thoughts. In my opinion no one should ever mock an idea cause s/he thinks its a minority or irrelevant. Often such ideas have the keys to something different and who knows possibly to the answer that same person was looking for but not finding cause s/he is too blinded by his/her own arguments and too busy defending them.
To wannabe or not to wannabe? Hey I know the answer and it is not 42!
Comments
First, i would like to say that this one is the first editorial i agree with on months. Grats to MMORPG.com
oh boy, you are so wrong. EVE playerbase is incredible big if you take into account the marketting they have done. they havent bought incredible reviews from gamespot or flood prime time with TV advertisements. still, their numbers are growing since launch, 4 years ago.
But i guess you left out the pvp game that could completely destroy your theory. Linage is a pvp game, and until the release of WoW was the mmorpg with most subscriptions by a wide margin. uppps, i guess you didnt want anybody bringing it up, did you?
but please, do not consider your position and keep spending your time raiding the same dungeon over and over and over and over till the end of time
I'm not sure yet where I stand on the whole FFA PvP thing, but I can say for certain that people are not interested in a Risk v Reward system. You only need to look at the popular games right now and see how easy they are. Even single player games have features like "auto-aim" and on-the-fly saves to make life easier for the player. The reason for this?
The vast majority of players don't want to sit doing the same thing for hours. Either in one game or in a handful. We're moving away from the time of the hardcore gamer.
I know what you're thinking. You're thinking "but I know <character> in <game> who logs 4 zillion hours every week and he's the best player I've ever seen" but these days that's the exception rather than the rule.
What people seem to be looking for now is something that they can pick up at random and find something to do quickly in, PvE or PvP. They don't want to grind, and that's fair enough. But then obviously they don't want to cover the same ground to make back any items or XP they lost the last time they played.
I'm not saying I agree with this, but it is true. Look at how Everquest has changed to suit the more casual gamers, and EQ had some of the most hardcore players I ever saw (my longest camp was 39 straight hours waiting for Stormfeather - look him up!). We got the LFG tool a couple of years ago, we got instanced missions around the same time, we got maps so people could get places faster, we got new abilities to make us take less damage, the list goes on. But the times are changing, and games need to make themselves more accessible for both short- and long-term play.
The problem is people are very childish when it comes to gaming. They don't want to risk anything, but they want big gains. And other than reputation, you won't get that through PvP.
But then do we want the "perfect game" to come out anyway? Because if it did we'd all be playing it, and then there would be so many people on the servers that trying to do anything would be near impossible!
I dont think a risk reward system is ideal. Lets look at it at face value. There are two extremes to MMOs: The hard core gamer without a life and the unreliable uninterested careless noob ( to use WoW jargon) most of which have no repsect to the community. Both are unwanted for various obvious reasons. The ideal game should encourage people to have a life besides gaming and not burn it. Only then will the player never be bored or lose interest. With a risk reward system the hard core gamers will rule. From a social perspective this is BAD. Gaming is fun and a world should be present where everyone counts and can make a difference and a newbie can make his/her way up and not feel discouraged by the already existing elite. On the other hand we do not want worlds where idiots and bullies can make their way up cause there is absolutely no consqeuence to their stupid or bad actions. Besides this lets wake up guys, if we want to act as mature gamers, casual play is what we should promote in our society.
What I think people really want in MMO is more freedom and inidivuality. It is not very motivating to work hard for a tier and loose it in a jiffy to some idiot, OR on the other hand to see someone who does not deserve it having the same tier. It is also not motivating that you cannot customise your possesions and make them at least look different from those of others. You want a risk reward system? sure but not to risk loot and possessions. Rather remove or activate access to possessions and areas according to your actions. Blizzard dealt this through using honor and reputation. However it is all very strict and censored. As a wow player myself, sometimes I really hate not being able to gank one of my own race for they really deserve it. You know what I mean! Bullies and lack of respect! Some stupid alliance paly ganking low levels for fun cause s/he aint good to match his/her own levels. WoW's weakest point? Hehe, sure - lack of justice - and there you have it!
To wannabe or not to wannabe? Hey I know the answer and it is not 42!
I fell any game designed around risk and reward will fail. just because that would not fell like a game at all.
I find it amazing that by 2020 first world countries will be competing to get immigrants.
I think we can all agree that the raw number of players interested in some form of pvp has increased radically over the last 4-5 years. This is partly due to the overall number of players quadrupling in that timeframe, but partly also due to a much higher percentage of players preferring a game where there is some form of pvp involved.
I would not go so far as to say that some form of pvp is essential to an MMORPG at this point; but it's very close. Making a successful game without any pvp will be very difficult in today's market.
I've been playing pvp games for eight years now. In that time, I have noticed a trend of players to prefer deeper and more involved forms of pvp as they continue play. For instance, players who start with wholely consentual pvp games will tend to trend toward less consentual formats over time. Not every player will, but a large number will.
Also interestingly, there seems to almost *never* be any drift back in the other way. People who get involved in nonconsentual pvp don't drift back toward consentual pvp or no pvp, unless they are forced to by a lack of nonconsentual games on the market. This creates a gradual aggregation of players into a group preferring more complex and less consentual pvp systems.
----
I think people are reacting in a knee-jerk fashion when they hear "pvp" in the same sentence with "risk". Yes, there were some early implementations that were too harsh for the average player. But what's being suggested in the original article is not really that recreating the initial state of UO or AC1-Darktide would create a new megalith of a game! Those games paved the road in many ways, but we have hopefully learned a few things since then.
What players are looking for, I think, more than just "risk", is "meaning". WOW battlegrounds are the ultimate meaningless pvp. There is a new little game out called Dawnspire - go take a peek, it's a fun game. Every character has the same building blocks, so there is no leveling. Every match is between 2-16 people with bots evening out the sides. Every match takes about 10-20 minutes. There is no risk, no real reward, no leveling, no *lasting effects* from the pvp at all. Sound familiar? It's the WOW battleground system, removed from the context of the leveling in the outside world.
It's a fun game, for a bit. But like WOW's bgs, it lacks any real reason to play it for any length of time. It lacks any depth, any lasting power, because in the long run what the players do won't have any persistence. Winning or losing is meaningless because nobody really cares. One has only to look at how many people were just going AFK in WOW battlegrounds to see how little players cared about the actual matches!
Now, people in this thread have beat on Shadowbane quite a lot. And...rightly so, in many ways. The game was buggy, almost painfully so, and very content incomplete. We all know that.
I have a real love-hate relationship with that game.
Some folks say that the general public could never handle real risk and reward games. That losing hurts too much. I think we're TRAINED from childhood to enjoy that sort of pressure, from our first experiences in Little League. Your school coaches can talk about how it's about how you play, not winning and losing til they are blue in the face - but ask most competitors if they care if they win, and they'll say YES! That feeling builds - competition becomes more important as children move through junior high, high school, and into college as young adults. Winning and losing are part of every competition, and competition is an enormous part of our culture.
No, you can't cram full pvp into an EQ style game without creating a mess, any more than you could hand uzis to teams of basketball players without creating a scenario where there is simply too much loss for the game to be fun anymore.
Owyn
Commander, Defenders of Order
http://www.defendersoforder.com
Its very telling to me, how many people who support the FFA or very open PvP system are taking offense by making it sound like i said ALL somewhere .
So, ill sum it up very simply,though i doubt this will change their stance, as its much easier to feign being the victim than use reason.
Regular NON-PvP based MMO = trained monkeys sitting at computers, pushing buttons to be rewarded/entertained by pretty flashing lights, with a few who choose to simply entertain themselves by throwing crap at everything and everyone in the room.
FFA or very open PvP base MMO = trained monkeys sitting at conmputers, pushing bittons to be rewarded /entertained by pretty flashing lights, with a LARGE PERCENTAGE who choose to entertain themselves by throwing crap at everything and everyone in the room.
As for the whole "but look at some FFA or very open PvP games have been successful" stance ,they are ONLY measured successful by the same old incredibly low standards the same old incredibly inept dev teams have set of a few 100k "being a success".
Sadly, many of them (devs) still peddle that line, and hence many MMO players still buy that hype sold them by said devs of how "successful" mmos are.BUT the sad fact is WoW which made far more mistakes than it should have is the ONLY game that came anywhere near getting and holding the customer base it should have.
All the other games, despite what the inept dev teams tell you, have sadly underperformed and continue to do so.WITH PvP based games being in the lower end of that underperformance.
Of course some people will cling to the hype they are sold, and wont even bother to think, until the another game comes along that is close to made right and again scores in the millions customer base wise.And even then,some of those who bought the old hype will still choose to cling to those old lies.
Shadowbane isnt a free game that most people still wont play becuase it is a success.Just imagine, if you can, how many people would play WoW if it was a free game.
I totally agree I did slant this VERY heavily pro-pvp. I am a PvPer anyway you look at it. I currently play WoW in an ALL PvE guild. I loath WoW's PvP but I think from a gaming stand point it is an incredible piece of software!
I want to address some of the things that you mentioned. World of Warcraft is a true double edged sword. On one side it has cut the tendons of the PvP community and on the other side it has cut through the PvE market opening up room for the PvP market to explode. WoW has said in MANY different articles that their major focus is creating a lasting game with plenty to do WHICH includes PvP. They have pumped millions of dollars into PvP concepts and ideas and to this point in this writers opinion they have just created another grind for gear.
In my "How to Kill a Giant" article I talk about a range of topics NOT JUST FFA PvP like many people are mentioning here. I want to make sure you guys understand that the concepts I mention are the small rock I speak of when I talk about killing the giant. FFA PvP is not the answer BUT it can hold clues to a much broader answer.
I will tell you that I believe the way to make a game is give the player control of the land. Sure there has to be rules in which there are in life but the rules should be able to be broken. This concept is known as dynamic worlds. A world in which the devs are onlookers and the players shape their world. This is done by player run warfare (sieges not just PvP) Player run towns and economies. WoW limits what players can do and you never change anything in the world. I kill Gruul and 7 days later he is back, it is worthless and meaningless. When I say players shape the land they must fight for resources that over time become limited, they fight for their guilds towns that are being sieged by other nomadic tribes.
These concepts set in place and worked out correctly will allow players to immerse themselves in an environment that changes with the politics. That is a true MMO, interaction, political warfare and a world shaped by the players NOT the devs.
Notice: The reviews expressed in this post are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the reviews of MMORPG.com or its management.
Mayson
To say risk and reward does not work is the hight of ignorance because you are saying that the concept of you working toward a goal should not be paid off in the end. It is like saying I want to kill 500000000 mobs and never level.
Notice: The reviews expressed in this post are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the reviews of MMORPG.com or its management.
Mayson
I find it amazing that by 2020 first world countries will be competing to get immigrants.
I am curious what datapoint you have to support that people desire risk vs reward? From my vantage point there isn't any outside some hardcore types speaking for the unspoken masses.
Personally I don't think some risk vs reward mechanics are going to blow the lid off the MMO industry. In fact I think it will actually do more harm than good to a solid title. At least any North American/Euro title.
I think what many players want, not all, is a pvp system that pvp's when they want to.
First and foremost for this is the griefers/gankers. Not all people who are really into pvp are griefers, as the common stereotype goes. However, as the pvp rules get more "loose" and becomre more FFA you will get the jackholes who do nothing but kill lowbies, grief someone completing a quest, kill someone while they fighting an npc or whatever. I can tell you it is frustrating as all hell to spend time, sometimes hours, working on a quest only to have someone 3X your level come kill you or the mob just out of spite. When WoW dropped the DK system, you have seen a spike in 70's going to smaller starter towns and killing every npc in sight. Why do this, they gain nothing from it. Only thing accomplished is ruining the gametime of the lowbies just trying to get their quests done.
I've said it before but I will repeat it here. To me, pvp should be about the challenge of defeating a human opponent, someone who is roughly equal in level/gear/whatever to my toon. I get more satisfaction taking down someone like that than mass-slaughtering lowbies or killing their low-level npc merchants. I mean if I have virtually no chance of dying, where's the excitement in that? No Risk and No Reward to be sure.
Another issue is that North American gamers tend to prefer less hardcore pvp than asian gamers. Lineage 2 really big in asia, not so much in the States. It is probably impossible to make a game that would appeal to the different tastes of asian and american pvp gamers.
Instead of pvp and various tweaking of pvp systems there of, I think having personal housing and such is the way to go for games. CoX has the supergroup bases, EQ2 has personal housing as examples. Heck my wizard in EQ2 has paid for a lot of mastercrafted stuff for my other toons just with all the furnature he's made.
Tkobo, you are just "one of them" to me. You show hypocrisy and fallacy at every turn and your argument stems from a preconceived notion that you have no intention of changing. Don't insinuate that our responses are very "telling". Noone believes that you are Sherlock Holmes and through our disagreement can somehow deduce that your opinion has been correct all along. The reason we disagree with you is because...quite possibly we think you are wrong. The reason I am getting aggressive with you is because you are a sarcastic, presumptious, and narrow minded poster who is shunning an entire section of the gaming community with overt generalizations and false ideaologies.
At any rate....keep on trucking I guess...
www.revolutiong.com
Stand up and take part in the evolution of MMORPG's.
Like i already said.
Its very telling to me, how many people who support the FFA or very open PvP system are taking offense by making it sound like i said ALL somewhere .
Framing someone up as a carebear and not a 'true gamer' as you put goes a long way to stereotyping, even if you are a bit offhanded about it. Pretty much the same thing you are railing on someone for in a pot/kettle kind of way if you know what I mean.
I'm just saying you might want to put the safety on that accusation pistol for a while before you tuck it back into your belt.
Sorry Mayson et al, I don't buy your arguments. You have beliefs, but where are the facts? Show me some actual numbers that show that a great number of players of MMOs want more risk for their reward. I agree that there must be SOME risk, otherwise the reward is meaningless [everyone gets to be student of the month/week] - I don't buy that PvP is the way to provide that risk.
If people want risk, they can "play" the stock market; they can play FPS; they can play poker online.
As a PhD student in Psychology, you should be able to deduce that people who play MMOs as opposed to FPS become attached to their characters. They see their character as some extension of themself. Even without the extreme of permadeath -the ultimate <legal> risk for a character- most people don't like their character to die, and in fact work very hard to avoid it. If a character dies often, especially at the hands of another character, the player will not want to continue playing that game. If players don't want to play, they won't continue to subscribe.
Again, as a psych student you should know that most people are risk-adverse. This makes biological sense - gene carriers for risky behavior live fast and die young [enough reproduce to keep the genes in the population; technology has made it so that many people survive who would not have in the past]. Those who live through their testosterone choked years learn -sometimes the hard way, through injury or death of another- not to take as many risks. Human nature has evolved for thousands of years - understanding it can make games better, disregarding it will not.
I agree that PvP - that is, playing against another human instead of some [usually woefully inadequate] AI - can be fun, but for most people only where there is little or no risk to what they have invested in the game. FPS, chess, F2P poker are fun forms of PvP because you only risk your reputation; MMOs providing consentual PvP can be fun because you decide what to risk and when to risk it; MMOs with FFA PvP are not fun for most people because risk is forced on them. Nobody plays to lose*
*except boxers who are "taking a fall" where the gain of wealth is greater than the loss of reputation <short term, anyway -"I coulda been a contenda">
<p align=center><a target=_blank href=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm><img border=0 src=http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/20.jpg></a></p>;
Second thumbs up for Uncus
Well said/ I see a lot of theory and a lot of opinions and beliefs in this thread, but like Uncus said, I don't see a lot of proof.
WoW is proof. Half the servers are non-PvP. But then the other half ARE PvP, so there is clearly a market. But the one ridiculous statement is that any form of PvP will kill WoW. Take away half the servers and you still have a monster.
But we'll get the proof regarding this idea of PvP's popularity soon enough with the next round of MMORPGs.
In this corner - Tabula Rasa, new license but with Richard Garriott hype is a non-issue. PvE dominant experience, limited (if any) PvP.
In the other corner - Age of Conan. Famous license and an experienced PvP-favoring company.
And also in the other corner - Warhammer Online. Not quite as famous license but also a very experienced company with a well known PvP game.
It will be interesting to see how these games do against each other and WoW. Which will do best? PvE or PvP-based games?
But it's also interesting to note that none of them seem to be using the 'Risk your gains' mechanic suggested in the article. Maybe they are reluctant to take up radical game mechanics with such big stakes, or maybe they're thought about it and realize that some radical ideas don't work.
Wow i totally agree with mayson and disagree with uncus
There are no "facts" about more people wanting risk vs reward its an opinion shared by many ive talked to specially in wow.(show me a some fact that they dont?)
Wow is not proof....wow is a well made game, made by a well known company, with a well known ip, advertised on tv, and cost alot of money. It has nothing to do with people not wanting more "risk" pvp.
As for people being risk adverse, that statement is probably true, but people arent themselves online. They do things online they normally wouldnt do in real life.
"Mmos as opposed to fps"....You cant compare mmo and fps.....you can compare mmo fps and multiplayer fps, then your statement would be correct. As for losers not wanting to play that is correct....but you can make faction/guild losses and not player. This is a problem game designing can fix. Players dont want to lose items because in most mmo's it takes too much time to aquire items.
In my opinion risk vs reward type pvp games would do better without levels hence leveling the playing field. An example for a better risk reward game for me would be planetside(or wiionline) With multiple planets where your guild owned and built the cities and you fought for land and resources. No need for levels...tatics, skill, and base design are used to achieve money and a chance for some kind of world domination.
Own, Mine, Defend, Attack, 24/7
I will admit that this style of game play is not for everyone. However consider yourself a minority from this point out. Before you hit the reply button, read the rest of what I am about to say
Shadowbane had many things that worked well but programming and fundamental errors caused its demise NOT the people getting upset because they lost things. The way you implement something like player cities and asset destruction is by making items readily available without the countless hours of work it takes in games like WoW to obtain. This system implemented into World of Warcraft would not work because WoW is a PvE based game with careful undertones of PvP. WoW has ignited the PvP based and its the same base that will carry the industry for years to come.
We'll just have agree to disagree. My friends love pvp and they loved shadow bane at first till they got tired of the ganking, the zerging, and finally just f'd over their own city and quit the game.
While I will agree there is a large enough pvp community to enjoy this risk vs rewards, gank, loot free for all fun and make it profitable for a game company or two that wants to go that way I do not for see it ever taking down WoW. PvP players are either purely FFA PVPers (gank/lootesr) or the meaningful pvp where accomplishing some task by killing worthy opponents (like the warhammer and i suppose the AoC community), there is no happy medium that'll keep all those PvPers and perspective pvpers (from the vast pve crowd) happy. Its either all or nothing. We've seen that proven over and over again in the constant we need more Free for all pvp looting / perma death posts of the last year. Which also proves atleast ot me that I am NOT a minority considering how many people argue against this style of gameplay and frankly if you'd of said that to my face in RL I'd of made you eat those words as a long standing MMO vet and RPG pnp vet.
WoW is a pve game like you said and its largest groups of players are corewise even if they PVP because they want the gear are primarily PVE players. You can say I'm wrong but I'm merely basing this off the people I know that PvP grinded their butts off in that game, they did it for the gear & the faction but they really like the raiding / pve content more than anything.
PvP needs to be reinvented and given that innovative upgrade but I don't think a risk / rewards system tacted on to it without making someone work for what they have in the first place is ever going to be that popular. You'll always have the hardcore players wanting something they can work for and youll have the average & casual players workign harder to keep up and have those items too. Then when said average or casual player loses their stuff they will be angry and if it happens often enough (which we all knwo it will) they will leave and they'll find something else.
If a game goes this way you can bet that I won't go that way I had my fill of murdering guilds and groups just trying to survive as a lowly miner in UO or a lowly adventurer ages ago. I deal with real life all day the last thing I want to do is play a game thats gearing its mechanics to a more realistic feel. I'm quite happy with the idea of Warhammer's PvP it gives me that RPG Im fighting for my people to kill the enemy happy glowy feel and i'm quite happy with that.
the fact you even dare frigging insult me and call me a minority in my opinion ... ...just proves even more so why I think most of the editorial staff on this website are jaded and listen to nothing but what THEY feel and nothing else. They don't take into consideration all the things being said only their own. Frankly MMORPG.com has just slid down another notch in my favorite place to go when im no busy in game or working.
(goes into full rant) the fact your a staff member / writer of any sort sickens me and if they had a report insult by staff writer button I'd so be hitting it.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
If so then you don't seem to understand the structure of logical argument. If not then your post above me is null and void as you've contradicted yourself.
This guy has made generalized arguments with no proof whatsoever to back up his statements. His entire argument is based upon the idea that FFA games attract a certain kind of audience and couldn't possibly serve another purpose than becoming a cesspool for l33t dewds. The people who subscribe to such lackluster ideologies and shun PvP simply because it isn't their way are the type of carebears that the stereotypes were made for TO BEGIN WITH. What we are talking about isn't hypocrisy it's the truth. Read anything I've ever written anywhere and you'll find I'm not the standard griefer.......look at this guy's argument and it deviates very little from every other anti PvP "activist" you'll find around here or anywhere else. I hope this explanation sufficiently stomps your appraisal of this situation into the ground.
I find it comical though how you come here to call me out about fingerpointing even though the fingerpointing started with the guy you are defending. So it seems not even you can walk in here without a chip on your shoulder. This is the exact problem anyone like me has with trying to break into thick skulls. You are all shut off to the concept before the conversation even begins.
I do not fall into a stereotype and you or anyone else is ill-suited to prove that I do. However, a majority of the people who criticize my beliefs about gaming without even considering the validity of my arguments and the extensive experience on which they are based generally DO fall into a stereotype of their own. I can't stand the losers on either side of the fence....and the fact that there is a fence to begin with is the fault of people like that.
www.revolutiong.com
Stand up and take part in the evolution of MMORPG's.
www.revolutiong.com
Stand up and take part in the evolution of MMORPG's.
As for the rest of these replies, we must understand that communication and listening to each other is the key to enlightenment. My views are the expression of my years of working in the gaming industry, leading very successful guilds and talking to thousands of gamers and developers.
As for the psychological portion that someone mentioned, I would like to point out that there is an extensive network that forms beliefs. The reason I mention beliefs is because the argument at hand is one of beliefs. The fabric of our opinions are based on experiences and situations that have dictated our lives. The network of beliefs are much like the intricacies of a spiders web. Many beliefs are tied into each other forming a network of fixed opinions about events and situations. How this pertains to MMOs is based on the person's experience in the given construct. This does not mean that if you get ganked you hate PvP. It does mean that if you have negative experiences you are more apt to side on the face of negativity. There is alot more in gamer psychology that I will write about in the coming weeks and months.
I will say that it is important to understand that people will have many opinions on how or what games can do to implement better dynamics. I implore you all to keep an open mind as you read everyone's post, I will do the same.
Notice: The reviews expressed in this post are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the reviews of MMORPG.com or its management.
Mayson
Just to set the facts straight 1 IM NOT A GUY learn to read profiles and 2 I don't raid because the idea is absolutely ridiculous to me. If you wanna come after me then come after me but don't pussy foot about it. Oh and btw I do play games for fun its one of the reasons I quit WoW after the first six months it just wasn't FUN in MY opinion. If its not fun then its not entertaining.
This whole thread was started on the idea of killing off wow and I dont think a game of this type that the original article started on would KILL WOW. Hurt wow? Maybe hurt its english speaking population. Kill it? No. It'll take another game of a popular developer that offers a concept thats NEW while still playing to all the good points of PvE and PvP games without forcing people to be 'ganked' for the sake of someone else's fun.
And to the staff writer your so full of Crap honestly. Enlightment my ***.. if you were enlightened you wouldn't flub someone's opinion as a minority. Infact I probably wouldn't of bothered even posting to this thread a second time once i said my first lil tiny statement if you hadn't of insulted my opinion into the 'minority bin" which its not a minority opinion. None of the opinions on this topic are minority.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
i totally agree with the writer
Nothing in this world compares to the feeling of danger, the conflicts betwen ppl and the community response, like when u are in ffa pvp zone and u got some guy close to u and ur thinking is he planning to attack me
And all the alliances and wars...
It makes the whole game feel more like it is controlled by the players and it is more immersive like when one guild member attacks a member from another guild and that causes a war u feel like your writing history
One of the best experiences i had in a MMO was in Neocron boy that was so nice
To wannabe or not to wannabe? Hey I know the answer and it is not 42!