I've lost hope in MMORPGs. Goodbye fellow vets

airhead

 

Originally posted by dirtyjoe78



I am curious since there are rewards for all the different BG's in WoW and those rewards happen to be weapons, armor, trinkets ect, what is the difference in that and fighting over a mine that you can use the mats out of to create armor, weapons, trinkets ect?  Is this not meaningfull enough PvP?  in the end the PvP rewards in WoW are really easy to get if your groups do not suck and it doesn't take an incredable amount of time.  Winning screws your enemy because it forces him to grind mor honor or marks.  So where is the grind? 

 

I really like the form of this question, because it's answer (from my point of view) illustrates to the whole purpose of PvP imo.

Before answering, consider a PvE scenario. Any mob is really just a collection of stats and skills, and behind it is a relatively simply program governing it's behavior. It doesn't take long before you will figure it out, and develop strategy-X that will enable to you win 99.9% of the time, (depending on randomness of each swing and hit, comparison of stats/skills, etc.)

It's actually not much harder than tic-tac-toe. Strategy-X = If you move first first, take the center. If you move second, take the center, unless your opponent took the center, then take a corner. Worst case is a draw, best case you win. This is a boring game btw.

The 'problem' that FFA PVP is meant to solve is this easy PREDICTABILITY. Human opponents create a world of UNPREDICTABILITY, which is variable... nothing like playing tic-tac-toe. Imagine running around in your back yard shooting targets with a paint-ball gun (YAWN), then imagine running around against other humans (STIMULATING). Now in 100 years when AI and technology has increased ten-fold, then maybe pve will become interesting. But for now, ffa-pvp is the most practical solution to the boredom.

So battlegrounds, (and pvmp in lotro same thing btw), is just a little better than PvE. You go to this area, and other humans are doing X (take some castle). You work against them. There are Y classes, each class with the some collection of skills/items. And know this, it will not be long before EVERY human there will be performing the optimal strategy. And once it's found, you do that as well. The goals are usually small and defined... (kill the most to get the most points). Granted, this is better than just pve... but it doesn't really solve the 'problem' (as I see it).

The problem is predictability and limited-AI. And ffa-pvp is currently the most practical way to solve that. Instanced pvp is like sitting down playing a game of chess against another human instead of a computer. It's better, but it still doesn't create an unpredictable virtual world.

PREDICTABILITY implies GRIND. (not just risk, reward, and complexity.... all nice things btw, but if that's ALL you have, it will get boring/grindy).

JK-Kanosi

Originally posted by Cabe2323


It is funny that goneglockin and other FFA PVP centric players believe that the genre ever belonged to them.  The VAST majority of MMO players are PVE centric.  They always have.  Even back in the UO days.  The majority wanted areas where they could be safe and that is why the game was changed.  It wasn't a few whiners that made the game change it was the majority. 
FFA PVP and PVP in general has always been a niche portion of the RPG genre.  The only way that MMO games move away from that is if they move away from the RPG genre. 
FFA PVP and RPG just don't go together.  They are two opposites. 
FFA PVP is all about the skills of the player while fighting another player.  You want the thrill of knowing that you defeated another equally capable player (at least you hope for that).
RPG MMO players are all about creating a character and increasing his abilities stats and equipment.  They want a world to explore and monsters to kill.  A good MMORPG will make your character feel more powerful as you play by increases in levels or in your actual skills.  It will allow you to get better items and encounter tougher monsters.  A great MMORPG will make you feel like the hero of the story.  (which imo we haven't had a GREAT mmo yet, only good and bad ones)
The very fact that RPGs are based on the premise of the longer you play the character the more developed he becomes and the stronger he becomes goes completely against the FFA PVP mechanic. 
In order to have a FFA PVP RPG you would have to do away with all of your character development.  Otherwise you will always have a part of the populous at the disadvantage of lower levels/skills/equipment/etc.  FFA PVP would work great in a game with all the mechanics of the FPS genre.  You can have classes but you can't have levels.  You can have items but they either need to never drop or be pointless if you lose them. 
The only gamers that want a game with the Benefits of RPGs (i.e. greater levels and items) but with FFA PVP are the "Ganker" players.  These players want the ability to inflict pain on other players.  They want the ability to steal other players hardwork but don't want the same to happen to them.  They will claim that they want the same thrill as plain FFA PVPers, but FFA PVPers are happy with no looting. 

I don't think I could say it better myself. However, DAoC has proved that there is another option. You can combine PvP and PvE into one game, but they need to be seperated and people need to be around the same level. PvP also needs to be offered from level 1, not as an end-game mechanic. DAoC did all of this and was successful. There wasn't any higher levels ganking lower levels and PvP was meaningful, since you fought over castles, towers, and more importantly Relics which gave bonuses to the realms who had them. Not sure what kind of PvPers you would call them, but those type of PvPers like RPG's and advancing their characters AND to PvP with others.

Bane82

---

Originally posted by airhead
 

---

Originally posted by dirtyjoe78

---

I am curious since there are rewards for all the different BG's in WoW and those rewards happen to be weapons, armor, trinkets ect, what is the difference in that and fighting over a mine that you can use the mats out of to create armor, weapons, trinkets ect?  Is this not meaningfull enough PvP?  in the end the PvP rewards in WoW are really easy to get if your groups do not suck and it doesn't take an incredable amount of time.  Winning screws your enemy because it forces him to grind mor honor or marks.  So where is the grind? 

---

---

 
I really like the form of this question, because it's answer (from my point of view) illustrates to the whole purpose of PvP imo.
Before answering, consider a PvE scenario. Any mob is really just a collection of stats and skills, and behind it is a relatively simply program governing it's behavior. It doesn't take long before you will figure it out, and develop strategy-X that will enable to you win 99.9% of the time, (depending on randomness of each swing and hit, comparison of stats/skills, etc.)
It's actually not much harder than tic-tac-toe. Strategy-X = If you move first first, take the center. If you move second, take the center, unless your opponent took the center, then take a corner. Worst case is a draw, best case you win. This is a boring game btw.
The 'problem' that FFA PVP is meant to solve is this easy PREDICTABILITY. Human opponents create a world of UNPREDICTABILITY, which is variable... nothing like playing tic-tac-toe. Imagine running around in your back yard shooting targets with a paint-ball gun (YAWN), then imagine running around against other humans (STIMULATING). Now in 100 years when AI and technology has increased ten-fold, then maybe pve will become interesting. But for now, ffa-pvp is the most practical solution to the boredom.
So battlegrounds, (and pvmp in lotro same thing btw), is just a little better than PvE. You go to this area, and other humans are doing X (take some castle). You work against them. There are Y classes, each class with the some collection of skills/items. And know this, it will not be long before EVERY human there will be performing the optimal strategy. And once it's found, you do that as well. The goals are usually small and defined... (kill the most to get the most points). Granted, this is better than just pve... but it doesn't really solve the 'problem' (as I see it).
The problem is predictability and limited-AI. And ffa-pvp is currently the most practical way to solve that. Instanced pvp is like sitting down playing a game of chess against another human instead of a computer. It's better, but it still doesn't create an unpredictable virtual world.
PREDICTABILITY implies GRIND. (not just risk, reward, and complexity.... all nice things btw, but if that's ALL you have, it will get boring/grindy).

---

Have you played chess with "Big Blue"? supposedly the most powerful AI out there, it even beat the world's best chess player... so much for predictability huh? Now if they can add it to computer games then we won't have to worry, since both PvPers and PvErs would band together to destroy the AI mobs trying to take over the MMO world lol!

Bane82

---

Originally posted by Jeff44

Well said, unfortunately, you will never hear them admit what they REALLY want (gank unsuspecting lowbies to sell their loot, or corpse camp because they have nothing better to do in their sad pathetic lives.)
Someone posted a link to what it seems to be the poster child of FFA PvPers, he certainly has the typical behavior of one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeEl2GE8Tfo
 

Thanks for posting that link, Bane.
I laughed while watching it, then it hit me:
These are the people that millions are depending on to work towards making our country a better place and to fund future social security benefits.
At that point, I cried.
 

---

I know what you mean... but if you want to see someone worse... type in Chris Crocker on YouTube lol! It's sad what some people with no talent will do for fame. Even sadder that we actually allow them to have fame. I know a bunch of theater actors that would want to kill that kid for giving actors a bad name

JK-Kanosi

Originally posted by airhead


 
Originally posted by dirtyjoe78



I am curious since there are rewards for all the different BG's in WoW and those rewards happen to be weapons, armor, trinkets ect, what is the difference in that and fighting over a mine that you can use the mats out of to create armor, weapons, trinkets ect?  Is this not meaningfull enough PvP?  in the end the PvP rewards in WoW are really easy to get if your groups do not suck and it doesn't take an incredable amount of time.  Winning screws your enemy because it forces him to grind mor honor or marks.  So where is the grind? 

 

I really like the form of this question, because it's answer (from my point of view) illustrates to the whole purpose of PvP imo.

Before answering, consider a PvE scenario. Any mob is really just a collection of stats and skills, and behind it is a relatively simply program governing it's behavior. It doesn't take long before you will figure it out, and develop strategy-X that will enable to you win 99.9% of the time, (depending on randomness of each swing and hit, comparison of stats/skills, etc.)

It's actually not much harder than tic-tac-toe. Strategy-X = If you move first first, take the center. If you move second, take the center, unless your opponent took the center, then take a corner. Worst case is a draw, best case you win. This is a boring game btw.

The 'problem' that FFA PVP is meant to solve is this easy PREDICTABILITY. Human opponents create a world of UNPREDICTABILITY, which is variable... nothing like playing tic-tac-toe. Imagine running around in your back yard shooting targets with a paint-ball gun (YAWN), then imagine running around against other humans (STIMULATING). Now in 100 years when AI and technology has increased ten-fold, then maybe pve will become interesting. But for now, ffa-pvp is the most practical solution to the boredom.

So battlegrounds, (and pvmp in lotro same thing btw), is just a little better than PvE. You go to this area, and other humans are doing X (take some castle). You work against them. There are Y classes, each class with the some collection of skills/items. And know this, it will not be long before EVERY human there will be performing the optimal strategy. And once it's found, you do that as well. The goals are usually small and defined... (kill the most to get the most points). Granted, this is better than just pve... but it doesn't really solve the 'problem' (as I see it).

The problem is predictability and limited-AI. And ffa-pvp is currently the most practical way to solve that. Instanced pvp is like sitting down playing a game of chess against another human instead of a computer. It's better, but it still doesn't create an unpredictable virtual world.

PREDICTABILITY implies GRIND. (not just risk, reward, and complexity.... all nice things btw, but if that's ALL you have, it will get boring/grindy).

I agree, but a game with griefing is a game destined to fail. You can have FFA PvP, but it needs to simulate real life to be successful. Griefing only happens in a game that support Anarchy. Games are remarkably similar to real life in that everything relies on the economy and form of government. In a sandbox FFA PvP game, the strongest survive. The strongest are those who band together and start building community. The most successful communities are those that are most fair. So while you might have tribes of griefers (bandits) running around, your local Republic ran city will crush them and drive them out of their land fairly quickly. The thing is that you can't have a loot based economy in a FFA PvP game.

So if a government isn't formed in a sandbox FFA PvP game fairly quickly, then that game will fail from all of the griefing being done. People get tired of being camped, doesn't matter who you are. Once you are tired of getting camped, you log out and cancel. If it looks like justice is being served to the griefers, then people will keep playing. There has to be a balance. Balance is what we have in real life. This is why you don't have people sitting outside of town killing off people as they pull out onto the highway. So really, a good FFA PvP game won't have a whole lot of PvP in it. So in essense, the best PvP game would be an FPS game.

vajuras

its impossible to have a productive discussion here we need to make a distinction here is Lineage 2 not FFA PVP? Is EVE Online FFA PVP? Because the posters saying FFA PVP failed sound like the biggest newbies to this genre too me seeing as how Lineage 2 has over a million subs and hundreds of servers running here in US.

 

EVE Online grew from less then 5k subs to over 200k subs crushing cookie cutter EQ-rewrappers like City Of Heroes (which has DECLINED since launch along with DDO and probably smacking LOTRO too)

Asheron's Call 1 Darktide is most populated server

Hell even UO is still kicking with probbably nearly a hundred servers up

 there is only 1 FFA PVP MMO I know of that was a commercial failure which was Shadowbane- a game that released with a metacritic of 75. not a good score to recruit subs its down there with Vanguard at 68 (www.metacritic.com)

FFA PVP has not failed until you guys realize that all of your arguments will simply fall on death ears til the year 3000+

If you want to make an effective case against it- play the MMO in question longer then 3 months. Point out the flaws. Then your rants will be worth reading. but right now I hjavent read one single convincing post against it. You guys either cant count or just love to rant all day long about nothing....

airhead

Originally posted by JK-Kanosi


 
Originally posted by airhead


 
Originally posted by dirtyjoe78



I am curious since there are rewards for all the different BG's in WoW and those rewards happen to be weapons, armor, trinkets ect, what is the difference in that and fighting over a mine that you can use the mats out of to create armor, weapons, trinkets ect?  Is this not meaningfull enough PvP?  in the end the PvP rewards in WoW are really easy to get if your groups do not suck and it doesn't take an incredable amount of time.  Winning screws your enemy because it forces him to grind mor honor or marks.  So where is the grind? 

 

I really like the form of this question, because it's answer (from my point of view) illustrates to the whole purpose of PvP imo.

Before answering, consider a PvE scenario. Any mob is really just a collection of stats and skills, and behind it is a relatively simply program governing it's behavior. It doesn't take long before you will figure it out, and develop strategy-X that will enable to you win 99.9% of the time, (depending on randomness of each swing and hit, comparison of stats/skills, etc.)

It's actually not much harder than tic-tac-toe. Strategy-X = If you move first first, take the center. If you move second, take the center, unless your opponent took the center, then take a corner. Worst case is a draw, best case you win. This is a boring game btw.

The 'problem' that FFA PVP is meant to solve is this easy PREDICTABILITY. Human opponents create a world of UNPREDICTABILITY, which is variable... nothing like playing tic-tac-toe. Imagine running around in your back yard shooting targets with a paint-ball gun (YAWN), then imagine running around against other humans (STIMULATING). Now in 100 years when AI and technology has increased ten-fold, then maybe pve will become interesting. But for now, ffa-pvp is the most practical solution to the boredom.

So battlegrounds, (and pvmp in lotro same thing btw), is just a little better than PvE. You go to this area, and other humans are doing X (take some castle). You work against them. There are Y classes, each class with the some collection of skills/items. And know this, it will not be long before EVERY human there will be performing the optimal strategy. And once it's found, you do that as well. The goals are usually small and defined... (kill the most to get the most points). Granted, this is better than just pve... but it doesn't really solve the 'problem' (as I see it).

The problem is predictability and limited-AI. And ffa-pvp is currently the most practical way to solve that. Instanced pvp is like sitting down playing a game of chess against another human instead of a computer. It's better, but it still doesn't create an unpredictable virtual world.

PREDICTABILITY implies GRIND. (not just risk, reward, and complexity.... all nice things btw, but if that's ALL you have, it will get boring/grindy).

 

I agree, but a game with griefing is a game destined to fail. You can have FFA PvP, but it needs to simulate real life to be successful. Griefing only happens in a game that support Anarchy. Games are remarkably similar to real life in that everything relies on the economy and form of government. In a sandbox FFA PvP game, the strongest survive. The strongest are those who band together and start building community. The most successful communities are those that are most fair. So while you might have tribes of griefers (bandits) running around, your local Republic ran city will crush them and drive them out of their land fairly quickly. The thing is that you can't have a loot based economy in a FFA PvP game.

So if a government isn't formed in a sandbox FFA PvP game fairly quickly, then that game will fail from all of the griefing being done. People get tired of being camped, doesn't matter who you are. Once you are tired of getting camped, you log out and cancel. If it looks like justice is being served to the griefers, then people will keep playing. There has to be a balance. Balance is what we have in real life. This is why you don't have people sitting outside of town killing off people as they pull out onto the highway. So really, a good FFA PvP game won't have a whole lot of PvP in it. So in essense, the best PvP game would be an FPS game.

This is true. FFA-PVP creates another set of problems...

The means and mechanics to create and enforce a player-created and player-run government have to be in the game. And maybe even more game mechanics not mentioned. But on the whole, I think this is a more realistic goal than strong AI.  (and I work in AI ... can't believe I'm saying that...?). AI is just plain hard. A lot harder than anyone might think who hasn't spent a lot of time trying to do something.

CHESS is an extremely confined and defined environment, and consider the work it took to create Big Blue? A virtual world? with different motivations, moves, etc. I thought Ryzom did a nice thing with their animal behavior... just a tad bit of unpredictability. But NPCs? Battle strategies? What if mobs had Clausewitz's 'On War' in their head? Organized and fought like Patton in the desert? We are so far away from stuff like that it's not even an option.

In games now, mobs stand and face a certain direction. Just stand there. WTF are they doing? ...nothing...

You got to be like RainMan to play most MMOs made today.

Cabe2323

Originally posted by vajuras


its impossible to have a productive discussion here we need to make a distinction here is Lineage 2 not FFA PVP? Is EVE Online FFA PVP? Because the posters saying FFA PVP failed sound like the biggest newbies to this genre too me seeing as how Lineage 2 has over a million subs and hundreds of servers running here in US.
 Lineage 2 has been a failure in the western culture.  EvE is an anomoly.  It isn't an RPG so it has no place in this conversation. 
EVE Online grew from less then 5k subs to over 200k subs crushing cookie cutter EQ-rewrappers like City Of Heroes (which has DECLINED since launch along with DDO and probably smacking LOTRO too)
City of Heroes has actually held a pretty steady 150K plus subscribers.  LOTRO is considered currently one of the most popular western MMOs. 
Asheron's Call 1 Darktide is most populated server
I played AC1 for 4.5 years and DT was never the most populated server.   It was also the only PT server while the rest were all PVE servers. 
Hell even UO is still kicking with probbably nearly a hundred servers up
UO's fans hated the PVP aspect and got the game changed to have safe zones. 
 there is only 1 FFA PVP MMO I know of that was a commercial failure which was Shadowbane- a game that released with a metacritic lower then Vanguard. Go figure.... Simple math here
FFA PVP has not failed until you guys realize that all of your arguments will simply fall on death ears til the year 3000+
You still haven't named one single FFA PVP commercially succesful Western MMO game.  Sure EVE is pretty successful in the growth area, but it still has less subscribers then EQ2, WoW, LOTRO, and Final Fantasy XI.  Heck EvE still hasn't reached the peaks hit by EQ1 or DAoC.
If you want to make an effective case against it- play the MMO in question longer then 3 months. Point out the flaws. Then your rants will be worth reading. but right now I hjavent read one single convincing post against it. You guys either cant count or just love to rant all day long about nothing....
I have played pretty much ever P2P Western MMO ever released.  I have played a lot of Eastern MMOs as well.  I have played Betas, Alphas, free trials, and more. 
The fact remains that there has been no successful restriction free PVP game ever released in the Western Market. 

 

Cabe2323

Originally posted by vajuras


its impossible to have a productive discussion here we need to make a distinction here is Lineage 2 not FFA PVP? Is EVE Online FFA PVP? Because the posters saying FFA PVP failed sound like the biggest newbies to this genre too me seeing as how Lineage 2 has over a million subs and hundreds of servers running here in US.
 
EVE Online grew from less then 5k subs to over 200k subs crushing cookie cutter EQ-rewrappers like City Of Heroes (which has DECLINED since launch along with DDO and probably smacking LOTRO too)
Asheron's Call 1 Darktide is most populated server
Hell even UO is still kicking with probbably nearly a hundred servers up
 there is only 1 FFA PVP MMO I know of that was a commercial failure which was Shadowbane- a game that released with a metacritic of 75. not a good score to recruit subs its down there with Vanguard at 68 (www.metacritic.com)
FFA PVP has not failed until you guys realize that all of your arguments will simply fall on death ears til the year 3000+
If you want to make an effective case against it- play the MMO in question longer then 3 months. Point out the flaws. Then your rants will be worth reading. but right now I hjavent read one single convincing post against it. You guys either cant count or just love to rant all day long about nothing....

OK too answer about playing for more then 3 months lets talk about the flaws of the genre. 

Asheron's Call 1 (about the only FFA PVP full loot game that got it close to right) had a ton of problems with their design.  Strafe casting was a bug that the developers decided to just implement instead of fixing.  This allowed god moding for years and allowed caster classes to pretty much be the dominate class.  Turbine realized that they needed to implement away to allow people weapons and armor that would not drop because the full loot was a problem.  Griefers spent a ton of time camping people and stealing all of their gear (I know because friends of mine were some of the people doing it).  Basically when you logged onto DT your first hour would be running away from the noobie starter zone to hope to get away from the level 30-50ish person camping the area.  Even in AC1 which was more skill based , stats were a problem.  Especially with the usage of XP chains.  That allowed people to get to massively high levels and then proceed to max out their magic and melee defense.  This made characters like this unkillable by lower level players.  Combine that with the fact that in it's heyday Darktide was run by one massive PK guild (Blood) that were guerilla style attacked  by smaller anti-pk guilds (the people that would try to protect new players).  Blood ran the largest XP chains and had the best hunting spots locked down.  This made it extremely difficult for anyone who didn't like Blood's style of gameplay from ever becoming competitive with them.   

I started playing Asheron's Call 1 in November 1999 and I stopped when I transferred to Iceland in early 2004. 

 

Drone

I couldn't agree more with this posting,  What is really worth playing these days?

Everything is laid out on a silver platter for gamers these days.  You go through a sequence of quests and repetitive mob killing to receive another quest that is the exact same.  Levels are the only way mmorpgs are created now.  What happened to the UO mold.  A game of PVP, that didn't require you to kill 100000 mobs and play the game like some story book,  You could be a murderer  anyone you wanted and it was just accepted.  MMORPGS just aren't worth playing these days,  they're all the same idea with different graphics.  For someone who has played in 1998 UO and seen the transition of games since that time,  its pretty sad. 

Are these games even worth a month of my time?

 

Bane82

---

Originally posted by Serling

But then he won't be able to loot the mythicals "pwnzors" sword off players, or wear Magical armor in the battle field that shows off how big his e-peen is... not without looking like an idiot at least.

LOL!  So true!  I wonder how many of these self-professed "manly gamers" would handle 1 week of Marine Corps boot camp? 
People that whine about not having any challenges in life aren't looking in the right places.

---

Well I wouldn't be able to profess whether I can handle Marine boot camp either. However I have taken over 2 years of martial arts (Tae Kwon do and Ju Jitu) and while I know it's not the same, there was still a lot of pain, a lot of flips and a lot of fun... sigh... I'm planning on going back to ju jitsu once I get another job to pay for it.

vajuras

lineage 2 has hundreds of servers up around the US (indie run, L2J that wikipedia states is legal). even the official server is about 120k subs. City of heroes is down to 139k subs last quarterly report.

EVE online is doing quite well for a Space MMO. I am sure LOTRO is getting smacked down by it there is just no doubt in my mind

you guys are ranting over silly stuff. plus you got more excuses then a hooker thats gotten arrested by a cop.

stop ranting and let this thread die already....

Cabe2323

Originally posted by vajuras


lineage 2 has hundreds of servers up around the US (indie run, L2J that wikipedia states is legal). even the official server is about 120k subs. City of heroes is down to 139k subs last quarterly report.
EVE online is doing quite well for a Space MMO. I am sure LOTRO is getting smacked down by it there is just no doubt in my mind
you guys are ranting over silly stuff. plus you got more excuses then a hooker thats gotten arrested by a cop.
stop ranting and let this thread die already....

Just because you feel in your mind that PVP games are doing so well doesn't make it so.  The market has spoken and the market wants MMO games that have relatively little risk associated with their PVP.  That is what the Majority wants. 

You might personally love full loot ffa pvp and everyone you know might as well but the majority of gamers (shown by which games in the western market are popular) do not. 

Bane82

---

Originally posted by vajuras
lineage 2 has hundreds of servers up around the US (indie run, L2J that wikipedia states is legal). even the official server is about 120k subs. City of heroes is down to 139k subs last quarterly report.
EVE online is doing quite well for a Space MMO. I am sure LOTRO is getting smacked down by it there is just no doubt in my mind
you guys are ranting over silly stuff. plus you got more excuses then a hooker thats gotten arrested by a cop.
stop ranting and let this thread die already....

---

You lost me as soon as you mentioned (indie run) which means emu's. Sorry but I have no respect for emu devs who are purposely breaking the law and getting themselves into trouble. Even the emu devs trying to do a pre-CU SWG, as much as I miss SWG Pre-CU I would never join one. Wikipedia may say it's legal, but I'd have my doubts (especially considering anyone and everyone can change info on wikipedia). Now if you were using statistics from legal P2P games or even legal F2P games, I might look at your argument in a different light. But I could never take statistics from Emus seriously, especially since Emu's, just like FFA PvP caters to a particular niche of players.

This quote from Cabe sums it up nicely "You might personally love full loot ffa pvp and everyone you know might as well but the majority of gamers (shown by which games in the western market are popular) do not. "

Cabe2323

Originally posted by Bane82


 

Originally posted by vajuras

lineage 2 has hundreds of servers up around the US (indie run, L2J that wikipedia states is legal). even the official server is about 120k subs. City of heroes is down to 139k subs last quarterly report.

EVE online is doing quite well for a Space MMO. I am sure LOTRO is getting smacked down by it there is just no doubt in my mind

you guys are ranting over silly stuff. plus you got more excuses then a hooker thats gotten arrested by a cop.

stop ranting and let this thread die already....

 

You lost me as soon as you mentioned (indie run) which means emu's. Sorry but I have no respect for emu devs who are purposely breaking the law and getting themselves into trouble. Even the emu devs trying to do a pre-CU SWG, as much as I miss SWG Pre-CU I would never join one. Wikipedia may say it's legal, but I'd have my doubts (especially considering anyone and everyone can change info on wikipedia). Now if you were using statistics from legal P2P games or even legal F2P games, I might look at your argument in a different light. But I could never take statistics from Emus seriously, especially since Emu's, just like FFA PvP caters to a particular niche of players.

Especially since one of the largest Lineage 2 emu servers was shut down by the FBI because they are illegal.  There is nothing legal about running an emulated server of someone else's Intellectual property unless you have permission from that company to do so.

Cabe2323

Originally posted by vajuras


 
Originally posted by Cabe2323


 
Originally posted by vajuras


lineage 2 has hundreds of servers up around the US (indie run, L2J that wikipedia states is legal). even the official server is about 120k subs. City of heroes is down to 139k subs last quarterly report.
EVE online is doing quite well for a Space MMO. I am sure LOTRO is getting smacked down by it there is just no doubt in my mind
you guys are ranting over silly stuff. plus you got more excuses then a hooker thats gotten arrested by a cop.
stop ranting and let this thread die already....

Just because you feel in your mind that PVP games are doing so well doesn't make it so.  The market has spoken and the market wants MMO games that have relatively little risk associated with their PVP.  That is what the Majority wants. 

 

You might personally love full loot ffa pvp and everyone you know might as well but the majority of gamers (shown by which games in the western market are popular) do not. 

 

the majority of gamers want easy mode just look at World of Warcraft.

we can keep arguing to the year 2050+ i really dont care I love EVE online and many others do as well.

this thread sucks. I'm tired of FFA pvpers whinning there is no damn games. I'm tired of pve'ers/carebear/ or whatever you guys consider yourselves crying about getting ganked

everyone just shut up lol

I am glad that you enjoy EvE.  But for someone who wants the discussion to end you keep posting to the thread.  I am sorry that the facts do not support your view of the MMO Western Market.  Maybe you would be happier in the Eastern market where FFA PVP and looting is more commonplace? 

Ohaan

Originally posted by Cabe2323


 
Originally posted by vajuras


its impossible to have a productive discussion here we need to make a distinction here is Lineage 2 not FFA PVP? Is EVE Online FFA PVP? Because the posters saying FFA PVP failed sound like the biggest newbies to this genre too me seeing as how Lineage 2 has over a million subs and hundreds of servers running here in US.
 
EVE Online grew from less then 5k subs to over 200k subs crushing cookie cutter EQ-rewrappers like City Of Heroes (which has DECLINED since launch along with DDO and probably smacking LOTRO too)
Asheron's Call 1 Darktide is most populated server
Hell even UO is still kicking with probbably nearly a hundred servers up
 there is only 1 FFA PVP MMO I know of that was a commercial failure which was Shadowbane- a game that released with a metacritic of 75. not a good score to recruit subs its down there with Vanguard at 68 (www.metacritic.com)
FFA PVP has not failed until you guys realize that all of your arguments will simply fall on death ears til the year 3000+
If you want to make an effective case against it- play the MMO in question longer then 3 months. Point out the flaws. Then your rants will be worth reading. but right now I hjavent read one single convincing post against it. You guys either cant count or just love to rant all day long about nothing....

OK too answer about playing for more then 3 months lets talk about the flaws of the genre. 

 

These are not flaws of the genre;  these are flaws of AC1 - big difference. You are just cherry picking the facts the support your opinion. The issues mentioned are game specific not genre specific.

 

Asheron's Call 1 (about the only FFA PVP full loot game that got it close to right) had a ton of problems with their design.  Strafe casting was a bug that the developers decided to just implement instead of fixing.  This allowed god moding for years and allowed caster classes to pretty much be the dominate class.  Turbine realized that they needed to implement away to allow people weapons and armor that would not drop because the full loot was a problem.  Griefers spent a ton of time camping people and stealing all of their gear (I know because friends of mine were some of the people doing it).  Basically when you logged onto DT your first hour would be running away from the noobie starter zone to hope to get away from the level 30-50ish person camping the area.  Even in AC1 which was more skill based , stats were a problem.  Especially with the usage of XP chains.  That allowed people to get to massively high levels and then proceed to max out their magic and melee defense.  This made characters like this unkillable by lower level players.  Combine that with the fact that in it's heyday Darktide was run by one massive PK guild (Blood) that were guerilla style attacked  by smaller anti-pk guilds (the people that would try to protect new players).  Blood ran the largest XP chains and had the best hunting spots locked down.  This made it extremely difficult for anyone who didn't like Blood's style of gameplay from ever becoming competitive with them.   

I started playing Asheron's Call 1 in November 1999 and I stopped when I transferred to Iceland in early 2004. 

Darktide is a subset of AC1 - a PvP ruleset overlayed onto a primarily PvE design. This is the typical method of implementing PvP in today's MMO and IMO the worst. In addition to issues of integrating the two styles (a whole other discussion), supporting a PvP subset can consume a disproportionate quantity of resources. PvP design is balance intensive and highly bug-sensitive. PvE design is not but does require constant content development to replace the content that is 'disposable' due to out-levelling of it.

It shouldn't take a genius to figure out that implementing a PvP subset can be a huge resource sink for a predominantly PvE project. Every time the developers implement new content they have to double check it against PvP features to ensure that balance is maintained. That is why many PvP 'purists' would like a PvP specific MMO: not because they are elitists but because they don't want yet another mediocre, watered down, dual-feature game.

 

Cola

Sad thing is the console market is advancing so fast.

MMORPGs keep taking several steps backward

Cabe2323

Originally posted by Ohaan

Originally posted by Cabe2323


 
Originally posted by vajuras


its impossible to have a productive discussion here we need to make a distinction here is Lineage 2 not FFA PVP? Is EVE Online FFA PVP? Because the posters saying FFA PVP failed sound like the biggest newbies to this genre too me seeing as how Lineage 2 has over a million subs and hundreds of servers running here in US.
 
EVE Online grew from less then 5k subs to over 200k subs crushing cookie cutter EQ-rewrappers like City Of Heroes (which has DECLINED since launch along with DDO and probably smacking LOTRO too)
Asheron's Call 1 Darktide is most populated server
Hell even UO is still kicking with probbably nearly a hundred servers up
 there is only 1 FFA PVP MMO I know of that was a commercial failure which was Shadowbane- a game that released with a metacritic of 75. not a good score to recruit subs its down there with Vanguard at 68 (www.metacritic.com)
FFA PVP has not failed until you guys realize that all of your arguments will simply fall on death ears til the year 3000+
If you want to make an effective case against it- play the MMO in question longer then 3 months. Point out the flaws. Then your rants will be worth reading. but right now I hjavent read one single convincing post against it. You guys either cant count or just love to rant all day long about nothing....

OK too answer about playing for more then 3 months lets talk about the flaws of the genre. 

 

These are not flaws of the genre;  these are flaws of AC1 - big difference. You are just cherry picking the facts the support your opinion. The issues mentioned are game specific not genre specific.

 

Asheron's Call 1 (about the only FFA PVP full loot game that got it close to right) had a ton of problems with their design.  Strafe casting was a bug that the developers decided to just implement instead of fixing.  This allowed god moding for years and allowed caster classes to pretty much be the dominate class.  Turbine realized that they needed to implement away to allow people weapons and armor that would not drop because the full loot was a problem.  Griefers spent a ton of time camping people and stealing all of their gear (I know because friends of mine were some of the people doing it).  Basically when you logged onto DT your first hour would be running away from the noobie starter zone to hope to get away from the level 30-50ish person camping the area.  Even in AC1 which was more skill based , stats were a problem.  Especially with the usage of XP chains.  That allowed people to get to massively high levels and then proceed to max out their magic and melee defense.  This made characters like this unkillable by lower level players.  Combine that with the fact that in it's heyday Darktide was run by one massive PK guild (Blood) that were guerilla style attacked  by smaller anti-pk guilds (the people that would try to protect new players).  Blood ran the largest XP chains and had the best hunting spots locked down.  This made it extremely difficult for anyone who didn't like Blood's style of gameplay from ever becoming competitive with them.   

I started playing Asheron's Call 1 in November 1999 and I stopped when I transferred to Iceland in early 2004. 

Darktide is a subset of AC1 - a PvP ruleset overlayed onto a primarily PvE design. This is the typical method of implementing PvP in today's MMO and IMO the worst. In addition to issues of integrating the two styles (a whole other discussion), supporting a PvP subset can consume a disproportionate quantity of resources. PvP design is balance intensive and highly bug-sensitive. PvE design is not but does require constant content development to replace the content that is 'disposable' due to out-levelling of it.

It shouldn't take a genius to figure out that implementing a PvP subset can be a huge resource sink for a predominantly PvE project. Every time the developers implement new content they have to double check it against PvP features to ensure that balance is maintained. That is why many PvP 'purists' would like a PvP specific MMO: not because they are elitists but because they don't want yet another mediocre, watered down, dual-feature game.

 

Name one RPG that was PVP specific that has done well in the marketplace.   

 

Can't think of one ?  EvE is the only moderately successful PVP Centric game and it isn't even a traditional RPG. 

 

(now keep in mind that I am talking about the western marketplace)

Ohaan

Originally posted by Cabe2323


 
Name one RPG that was PVP specific that has done well in the marketplace.   
 
Can't think of one ?  EvE is the only moderately successful PVP Centric game and it isn't even a traditional RPG. 
(now keep in mind that I am talking about the western marketplace)

There isn't but that wasn't my point.

I'm trying to dispel the idea that the history of MMO PvP is a good indicator of its desirability or feasability in the future. Past titles with PvP have either been half-baked hybrids (AC, EQ, WoW, DAoC, etc) or they have been technical disasters (shadowbane). Overlooking all the other factors and simply blaming the PvP just isn't a fair assessment.

vajuras

 

Originally posted by Cabe2323

Originally posted by vajuras


 
Originally posted by Cabe2323


 
Originally posted by vajuras


lineage 2 has hundreds of servers up around the US (indie run, L2J that wikipedia states is legal). even the official server is about 120k subs. City of heroes is down to 139k subs last quarterly report.
EVE online is doing quite well for a Space MMO. I am sure LOTRO is getting smacked down by it there is just no doubt in my mind
you guys are ranting over silly stuff. plus you got more excuses then a hooker thats gotten arrested by a cop.
stop ranting and let this thread die already....

Just because you feel in your mind that PVP games are doing so well doesn't make it so.  The market has spoken and the market wants MMO games that have relatively little risk associated with their PVP.  That is what the Majority wants. 

 

You might personally love full loot ffa pvp and everyone you know might as well but the majority of gamers (shown by which games in the western market are popular) do not. 

 

the majority of gamers want easy mode just look at World of Warcraft.

we can keep arguing to the year 2050+ i really dont care I love EVE online and many others do as well.

this thread sucks. I'm tired of FFA pvpers whinning there is no damn games. I'm tired of pve'ers/carebear/ or whatever you guys consider yourselves crying about getting ganked

everyone just shut up lol

I am glad that you enjoy EvE.  But for someone who wants the discussion to end you keep posting to the thread.  I am sorry that the facts do not support your view of the MMO Western Market.  Maybe you would be happier in the Eastern market where FFA PVP and looting is more commonplace? 

 

I;ve nerver ever shipped one title that only hit the US { Mod Edit }.

the first game i shipped ever was on the NGage platform and even that lowbudget title hit Spanish and German localizations

There are few MMOs that only hit one country. Even WoW does better overseas

JK-Kanosi

Originally posted by airhead


 
Originally posted by JK-Kanosi


 
Originally posted by airhead


 
Originally posted by dirtyjoe78



I am curious since there are rewards for all the different BG's in WoW and those rewards happen to be weapons, armor, trinkets ect, what is the difference in that and fighting over a mine that you can use the mats out of to create armor, weapons, trinkets ect?  Is this not meaningfull enough PvP?  in the end the PvP rewards in WoW are really easy to get if your groups do not suck and it doesn't take an incredable amount of time.  Winning screws your enemy because it forces him to grind mor honor or marks.  So where is the grind? 

 

I really like the form of this question, because it's answer (from my point of view) illustrates to the whole purpose of PvP imo.

Before answering, consider a PvE scenario. Any mob is really just a collection of stats and skills, and behind it is a relatively simply program governing it's behavior. It doesn't take long before you will figure it out, and develop strategy-X that will enable to you win 99.9% of the time, (depending on randomness of each swing and hit, comparison of stats/skills, etc.)

It's actually not much harder than tic-tac-toe. Strategy-X = If you move first first, take the center. If you move second, take the center, unless your opponent took the center, then take a corner. Worst case is a draw, best case you win. This is a boring game btw.

The 'problem' that FFA PVP is meant to solve is this easy PREDICTABILITY. Human opponents create a world of UNPREDICTABILITY, which is variable... nothing like playing tic-tac-toe. Imagine running around in your back yard shooting targets with a paint-ball gun (YAWN), then imagine running around against other humans (STIMULATING). Now in 100 years when AI and technology has increased ten-fold, then maybe pve will become interesting. But for now, ffa-pvp is the most practical solution to the boredom.

So battlegrounds, (and pvmp in lotro same thing btw), is just a little better than PvE. You go to this area, and other humans are doing X (take some castle). You work against them. There are Y classes, each class with the some collection of skills/items. And know this, it will not be long before EVERY human there will be performing the optimal strategy. And once it's found, you do that as well. The goals are usually small and defined... (kill the most to get the most points). Granted, this is better than just pve... but it doesn't really solve the 'problem' (as I see it).

The problem is predictability and limited-AI. And ffa-pvp is currently the most practical way to solve that. Instanced pvp is like sitting down playing a game of chess against another human instead of a computer. It's better, but it still doesn't create an unpredictable virtual world.

PREDICTABILITY implies GRIND. (not just risk, reward, and complexity.... all nice things btw, but if that's ALL you have, it will get boring/grindy).

 

I agree, but a game with griefing is a game destined to fail. You can have FFA PvP, but it needs to simulate real life to be successful. Griefing only happens in a game that support Anarchy. Games are remarkably similar to real life in that everything relies on the economy and form of government. In a sandbox FFA PvP game, the strongest survive. The strongest are those who band together and start building community. The most successful communities are those that are most fair. So while you might have tribes of griefers (bandits) running around, your local Republic ran city will crush them and drive them out of their land fairly quickly. The thing is that you can't have a loot based economy in a FFA PvP game.

So if a government isn't formed in a sandbox FFA PvP game fairly quickly, then that game will fail from all of the griefing being done. People get tired of being camped, doesn't matter who you are. Once you are tired of getting camped, you log out and cancel. If it looks like justice is being served to the griefers, then people will keep playing. There has to be a balance. Balance is what we have in real life. This is why you don't have people sitting outside of town killing off people as they pull out onto the highway. So really, a good FFA PvP game won't have a whole lot of PvP in it. So in essense, the best PvP game would be an FPS game.

 

This is true. FFA-PVP creates another set of problems...

The means and mechanics to create and enforce a player-created and player-run government have to be in the game. And maybe even more game mechanics not mentioned. But on the whole, I think this is a more realistic goal than strong AI.  (and I work in AI ... can't believe I'm saying that...?). AI is just plain hard. A lot harder than anyone might think who hasn't spent a lot of time trying to do something.

CHESS is an extremely confined and defined environment, and consider the work it took to create Big Blue? A virtual world? with different motivations, moves, etc. I thought Ryzom did a nice thing with their animal behavior... just a tad bit of unpredictability. But NPCs? Battle strategies? What if mobs had Clausewitz's 'On War' in their head? Organized and fought like Patton in the desert? We are so far away from stuff like that it's not even an option.

In games now, mobs stand and face a certain direction. Just stand there. WTF are they doing? ...nothing...

You got to be like RainMan to play most MMOs made today.

I agree. You could actually create a FFA PvP game like that now. Actually, it already has been done with several games and those are successful. Yeah, there are some turd FFA games out there, like Shadowbane, but SB wasn't a turd due to gameplay. It was a turd because it was a technological failure. AI will take along time to be equivalent to players. Even when it does come, who is to say that it will be popular? People like challenges, but I think people like to win more. So maybe the AI actually implemented will always be just easy enough for us to beat them.

I am an amateur when it comes to programming. In fact, I dropped out of programming and switched majors because it was too complicated for me. So you would know more than I, but couldn't you program options for each mob in the game for the mob to randomly choose? If I programmed a monster to do 1 out of 200 attacks each turn and put their HP's, Mana, and Endurance at the same level as players, wouldn't that make them 200 times less predictable? Right now, like the OP says, mobs are programmed to die. They have less HP's than we do at the same level and in most games don't have special attacks. Those games that do implement special attacks for their NPC's and also have their health, mana, endurance etc equal to the players is actually more challenging. In fact, they are actually fun to fight. While you might win every battle if you know your character and play well, you can easily die to one of those NPC's if you mess up. DAOC programmed scout type mobs in their game to "get help" if they spotted a player. Those scouts were stealthed as well. So they compensated for poor AI with AI good enough to execute specials and get more numbers to subdue the threat.

So I think AI is pretty good in some games right now. Good enough to offer a challenge to the average gamer, but still easy enough to be enjoyable. Of course, the good gamers will find them too easy, because they will figure out a method to killing them, but the same can be said about any kind of PvP as well...except ganking. But again, who really likes ganking in a game? Not many people. A well programmed mob may strike you with 5 different attacks. In a good game, some of those attacks are lethal or open you up for lethal attacks. Each type of mob has a different set of 5 attacks. There are hundreds of different types of mobs in a game. When you put it in this perspective, it almost seems easier on paper to figure out the 9 or so playable classes and kill them. Of course, AI mobs don't usually run around past their area of responsibility like players can, so players off of paper are more challenging. But every playable class is analyzed and broken down by the best players and techniques are taught and learned on how to deal with X class if you are Y. So honestly, PvP is not as challenging as people claim it to be. What makes PvP so great IMHO is RvR with siege warfare. This is because it builds unity and realm pride in a game and  allows  the realms to fight each other over property. As long as the property is changing hands, people will pick up a sword and fight to get it back. That is endless content. However, to be fair to PvEers, the same fun can be had by having a player faction and several NPC factions. The players can siege the NPC factions and the NPC factions can try and get their castles back. So again, non-stop content. PvP is always fun when fighting over land. So is PvE. PvE is fun when fighting for something other than xp.

I just realized I am ranting, so I will stop, haha. I could keep writing and writing, but I will save you the misery. I hope everyone gets my point though. It's not PvP or PvE that is great, but the meaning and challenge behind it. This means that both PvE and PvP can equally offer a lot of fun to be had. It just takes less programming effort to implement PvP, but more effort from the players to keep it going. Whereas PvE takes more effort from programmers, which means less quality AI, but not much effort from players to keep the game going. Two different play styles, both have their merits.

Bane82

---

Originally posted by Cola
Sad thing is the console market is advancing so fast.
MMORPGs keep taking several steps backward

---

What does the console market have to do with this if you don't mind me asking? No I don't play MMO's on console since I think they're too un-flexible at least IMO, I'm just curious as to what you mean

Bane82

---

Originally posted by ryotian
I see this thread has the carebears in uproar as always.... Excellent post soon there will be a day us veterans won't be around to tell all the happy pve'ers 'how things used to be'
There used to be a time we were'nt all split apart into instances.....
There used to be a time when MMORPGs were real, virtual worlds
There used to be a time when we were not split up by levels and classes

---

lol! ok, let's try this

What is Zoning then? if not just a big instance?

MMO's are STILL virtual worlds, what can make or break an MMO as a virtual world is the community (see SWG pre-CU). The only thing that has changed is that rather than policing MMO's for griefers and gankers, Devs decided to simply not allow that behavior period! It saves them the hassle, it saves us the hassle. You can still PvP, you're just no longer allowed to exploit the system... this is bad how?

Hey genius, have you heard of EQ and DAoC? both of these had levels. Yes, DAoC was mainly skill centered but it had levels nonetheless. It also had classes. The only game that came close to not having classes was SWG before they completely ruined it, yes SWG a *gasp* PvE centered game

ryotian

Originally posted by Bane82


 

Originally posted by Cola

Sad thing is the console market is advancing so fast.

MMORPGs keep taking several steps backward

 

What does the console market have to do with this if you don't mind me asking? No I don't play MMO's on console since I think they're too un-flexible at least IMO, I'm just curious as to what you mean

he means that all of us are buying console games and everything else other then MMOs