AoC, at one time yes but not now with the introduction of full corpse looting.
And where did you hear this exactly?
I know we have been asking for a specific FFA ruleset that has some form of item looting (not just blood money) but as far as I know they still haven't confirmed anything.
Even if they did decide to add this ruleset, I can guarantee there will be normal (non ffa and non item looting) rulesets and that they also will be in higher numbers with the FFA item looting server being an exception, not the norm.
And to answer the poll - PVP in MMO's is extremely important to me. I find PVE only MMO's only last me a month of two before I've done everything I can & have moved on (lack of depth, challenge,politics, conflict variety, excitement etc), where-as MMO's with PVP can keep my going for years.
I won't play a MMO without PvP, I think of it along the same lines as what a lot say about playing a FPS when they want PvP, I play RPG's when I want quality quests and a storyline. I like MMO PvP better than FPS because it tends to be more tactical and less twitch oriented. Although if someone makes a new Mechwarrior I'd be happy to go back to that for my player killing fun.
It depends on the game how much but PVP detracts from any MMORPG game. Notice I said mmoRPG not MMOG.
PVP is for team V team games but not RPG games. Remember back to when you played P&P games, other than when you were PO by a fellow player did you ever fight another player? NO. that because all P&P RPGs were COOP games. Yes, BattleTECH and WH2k were team battles but if you played a ShadowRUN, MechWARRIOR, D&D, CC or any other Role Playing Game and you played as a team to fight a commen enemy.
Remember playing DOOM? What made the game a classic, was it the doom matches?.. No it was that you played COOP to beat the game.
How many of you played Dukenukem 3, What made that game such a ledgend, was it the ability to play in dukematches? No it was that you could start a lan game and play COOP to beat the game.
Diablo1/2 Was PVP important? Heck no, what was important was getting a good team of roughly the same lvl players and COOP fighting your way to Diablo then beating him on the head with Wirt's leg ...
The point, PVP in a RPG is there to give players that don't play well with others something too do, but at best it only detracts from the game. Now don't get me wrong PVP does have it's place, I love BF2, COD, CS and am playing Quakewars, you know game styles where PVP actully belongs.
Also I am looking forward too Force of Arms which if everything goes as proposed will be an good PVP MMOG and let me get back into the driver seat of a mech/herc. FOA is not a RPG but is listed on this site and if you like PVP games I would suggest you keep an eye on it.
I tried TR and while it is a good game it was not diffrent enough for me too add it to my rotation list. Others will find it offers some fun gameplay
It depends on the game how much but PVP detracts from any MMORPG game. Notice I said mmoRPG not MMOG.
I appreciate your making that crucial distinction, and I would like to draw some attention to it. I am referring to PvP in games such as Everquest, WoW, WAR, Star Trek Online, etc.
I think the distinction was made in the original post, in particular mentioning "FPS." The poll results so far are not what I would have anticipated. I am also interested to see where this discussion leads us and whether we can reach any conclusion about PvP.
That is, what features and aspects of PvP do gamers want? What type of rule system? Environmental or instanced PvP. Many other topics.
----- WoW and fast food = commercial successes. I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.
It depends on the game how much but PVP detracts from any MMORPG game. Notice I said mmoRPG not MMOG. PVP is for team V team games but not RPG games. Remember back to when you played P&P games, other than when you were PO by a fellow player did you ever fight another player? NO. that because all P&P RPGs were COOP games. Yes, BattleTECH and WH2k were team battles but if you played a ShadowRUN, MechWARRIOR, D&D, CC or any other Role Playing Game and you played as a team to fight a commen enemy. Remember playing DOOM? What made the game a classic, was it the doom matches?.. No it was that you played COOP to beat the game. How many of you played Dukenukem 3, What made that game such a ledgend, was it the ability to play in dukematches? No it was that you could start a lan game and play COOP to beat the game. Diablo1/2 Was PVP important? Heck no, what was important was getting a good team of roughly the same lvl players and COOP fighting your way to Diablo then beating him on the head with Wirt's leg ... The point, PVP in a RPG is there to give players that don't play well with others something too do, but at best it only detracts from the game.
That's all from your PVE'rs perspective. PVE IMO is just there as a means of advancement to PVP.
I loved doom, quake, unreal, duke nukem etc co-op, but it got repetitive after you beat it a few times - just as PVE in MMO's does...then it was up to the deathmatch to hold my interest.
Same with Diablo, it was a great co-op game but after a while I went searching for a dynamic, REAL challenge that can only be provided by other players; hell, I still play Diablo today, and it's definitely not for the PVE content.
UO, AC, Tibia, Meridian 59 - what kept me playing them for years? It sure wasn't the PVE!
Notice the part in red - I think that sums up your biased view quite nicely, translation "PVP'ers are all gankers and griefers boo hoo".
PVP is an integral part of MMORPG's - hell, even WOW worked this much out, WAR and AOC only further prove this point.
When I started playing The Realm online back in 1999 I thought online communities were the greatest thing. I would game until 3 AM on school nights for weeks on end running the Labyrinth for loot. (GBoNs FTW!!!1).
Then a friend of mine introduced me to pvp and my perspective changed. At first I was scared about losing and I would get these insane adreneline rushes. As time went on it turned into an addiction. I would continuosly challenge people or jump them. Tournaments and pickpocketing became the thing for me. Every game since then've aimed for PvP. In Asheron's Call, Shadowbane, WoW, and even Runescape.
ATM I am currently playing Fury which has pretty fast paced and fun PvP.
Originally posted by LeJohn It depends on the game how much but PVP detracts from any MMORPG game. Notice I said mmoRPG not MMOG. PVP is for team V team games but not RPG games. Remember back to when you played P&P games, other than when you were PO by a fellow player did you ever fight another player? NO. that because all P&P RPGs were COOP games. Yes, BattleTECH and WH2k were team battles but if you played a ShadowRUN, MechWARRIOR, D&D, CC or any other Role Playing Game and you played as a team to fight a commen enemy.
Your post lost its effect when you said everyone always played COOP in P&P. What about Live Action Roleplayers that used their skill and wits to fight each other? what about MtG? What about scrabble, monopoly, and Checkers?
It depends on the game how much but PVP detracts from any MMORPG game. Notice I said mmoRPG not MMOG. PVP is for team V team games but not RPG games. Remember back to when you played P&P games, other than when you were PO by a fellow player did you ever fight another player? NO. that because all P&P RPGs were COOP games. Yes, BattleTECH and WH2k were team battles but if you played a ShadowRUN, MechWARRIOR, D&D, CC or any other Role Playing Game and you played as a team to fight a commen enemy. Remember playing DOOM? What made the game a classic, was it the doom matches?.. No it was that you played COOP to beat the game. How many of you played Dukenukem 3, What made that game such a ledgend, was it the ability to play in dukematches? No it was that you could start a lan game and play COOP to beat the game. Diablo1/2 Was PVP important? Heck no, what was important was getting a good team of roughly the same lvl players and COOP fighting your way to Diablo then beating him on the head with Wirt's leg ...
The point, PVP in a RPG is there to give players that don't play well with others something too do, but at best it only detracts from the game. Now don't get me wrong PVP does have it's place, I love BF2, COD, CS and am playing Quakewars, you know game styles where PVP actully belongs.
I often hear the comparison between mmorpgs and pen & paper rpgs. I think that while there can be similar elements involved, mmorpgs are quite a different animal. The main difference is in the numbers involved. Instead of five people sitting round a table, working together, you have hundreds or even thousands of people making up a world.
So you may have a party of five working together on a particular adventure, but they might meet a rival party prepared to fight to be the ones to achieve the same goal. For the game to be about thousands of people all working together for the same goal is pretty unrealistic in that kind of world.
PvP does not mean an end to co-operation. If anything, done properly, it creates a greater need for co-operation. You're unlikely to make better friends than in a game where you have a lot to lose - sure, you'll have enemies too, but conflict creates stories when you're role-playing.
For me, good role-play requires choice - that is a great strength of the pen & paper games. If you want to butcher a fellow party member, that is up to you. You probably wouldn't, but the option is a real one. Having a game mechanic restricting you in this way is not an aid for role-play and creates relationships based on a false reality.
I'm not a great PvPer in these games. In fact I'm almost certain to refuse if someone challenges me to a duel for no reason. However, I like what you get that goes along with PvP - the danger, the closer community (with those on your side), the politics and the player driven story lines, but most of all, the choice.
I've said it before I always liked DAoC's take on pvp. The idea of stealing a relic, that grants a buff to everyone everywhere of your faction, made for some great battles. Often my guild would tell everyone, regardless of level, to get to the relic keep ASAP. The idea was that even if you couldnt harm the 50's, we could lag them out while our defenses firm up.
Of course in that game, RvR as they called it was completely optional. You could get to 50, work on Master/Champion Levels and ignore pvp if you chose. Sad when EA bought them out though.
There will always be the extremists that won't care what you do. The hardcore pvpers want more pvp and think that any game without pvp "sucks" and that any game can only get "better" with pvp. The pve'ers (or carebears as the hardcore types say) do not care about pvp at all and it wouldn't matter how balanced or rewarding the pvp is. They simply would not be interested.
I think a game needs to have solid FUN pve first, with some pvp added for extra "spice". If you eliminate pvp or have too much of it, you're going to alienate a lot of people.
I'm not anti-carebear but I still find the vocal anti-PvP demographic a bit of an enigma. I have been playing video games for over 20 years and the computer opponent AI is barely any better now than it was then. Playing against other players, for me, has always been the most fun. There is just so much more emotion involved. Yes there are 'lows' that go along with the highs but they were never the kind that one took personally. Win or lose, games like M.U.L.E., Archon, or One on One were always fun. Single player games to me, at best, give a kind of luke warm fuzzy feeling.
Then when PvP in MMOs came along, people actually take losing personally. Getting PK'ed and having their stuff looted sparks a feeling akin to being robbed and sexually violated. I'm not trying to dismiss the reaction but I just don't understand it. So what? Get back in the saddle and go get revenge...
Nonetheless, it is discussions like these that reinforce the fact that PvP and PvE are two distinct audiences with a bit of overlap in the middle. Devs need to identify who they are targetting and stay faithful to them.
You know what, I absolutely love intelligent, well-designed PVE. That's why high on my wish-list for MMORPGs is a dynamic world with NPCs progressing on their own, a dynamic quest system to go with it and so on. I don't ever go out of my way to *find* PVP and am always busy with the PVE side of things like exploring, questing or resource gathering...
However, I have to say nothing gets my blood pumping like some good unavoidable PVP
Yes, I am an odd beast in that regard. I seldom if ever attack another player, but I've found that the risk of getting attacked while I'm exploring or questing is an added dimension of thrill for me...
Though, I must admit I am not fond of FFA anywhere anytime; either "relatively secure" regions (a la EVE) or an RVR setting would be my choice.
There is PvP, and there isn't PvP. PvP can be good when consensual in my opinion. We coudl go on for hours on another stupid "Carebear VS Hardcore" rant, but lets not. To each his own, don't foist your likes on others.
I think it's the objective of your past self to make you cringe.
There is PvP, and there isn't PvP. PvP can be good when consensual in my opinion. We coudl go on for hours on another stupid "Carebear VS Hardcore" rant, but lets not. To each his own, don't foist your likes on others.
Unfortunately the "Hardcore" try to own the term PvP. And for that crowd it is about dominance, therefore if they can't foist their likes on others its pointless.
Unfortunately they are either too dense or too dishonest to even attempt to make the distinction. Player versus Player simply means exactly that. I am going against a real person not an AI.
The issue of enforcing your will upon another person in a virtual world is a separate issue. And frankly a far more complex and problematic one. Anyone with half a brain knows this just by looking at all the wars though out human history.
Polls like this one mean very little because they do not distinguish between PvP and enforcing your will upon someone else. But many people purposely conflate the two together and even go so far as to put their fingers in their hears and scream "I am not listening" when it is brought up.
A boxing match and a war are two different things, but they are both PvP so to speak. The consequences of the two are quite different. Just because they are both part of the same super set does not mean they are really all that similar except for that part.
Originally posted by gestalt11 Originally posted by Gamewize There is PvP, and there isn't PvP. PvP can be good when consensual in my opinion. We coudl go on for hours on another stupid "Carebear VS Hardcore" rant, but lets not. To each his own, don't foist your likes on others.
Unfortunately the "Hardcore" try to own the term PvP. And for that crowd it is about dominance, therefore if they can't foist their likes on others its pointless. Unfortunately they are either too dense or too dishonest to even attempt to make the distinction. Player versus Player simply means exactly that. I am going against a real person not an AI. The issue of enforcing your will upon another person in a virtual world is a separate issue. And frankly a far more complex and problematic one. Anyone with half a brain knows this just by looking at all the wars though out human history. Polls like this one mean very little because they do not distinguish between PvP and enforcing your will upon someone else. But many people purposely conflate the two together and even go so far as to put their fingers in their hears and scream "I am not listening" when it is brought up. A boxing match and a war are two different things, but they are both PvP so to speak. The consequences of the two are quite different. Just because they are both part of the same super set does not mean they are really all that similar except for that part.
An expertly made analogy. This is what alot of people should listen to.
I think it's the objective of your past self to make you cringe.
It depends on the game how much but PVP detracts from any MMORPG game. Notice I said mmoRPG not MMOG. PVP is for team V team games but not RPG games. Remember back to when you played P&P games, other than when you were PO by a fellow player did you ever fight another player? NO. that because all P&P RPGs were COOP games. Yes, BattleTECH and WH2k were team battles but if you played a ShadowRUN, MechWARRIOR, D&D, CC or any other Role Playing Game and you played as a team to fight a commen enemy. Remember playing DOOM? What made the game a classic, was it the doom matches?.. No it was that you played COOP to beat the game. How many of you played Dukenukem 3, What made that game such a ledgend, was it the ability to play in dukematches? No it was that you could start a lan game and play COOP to beat the game. Diablo1/2 Was PVP important? Heck no, what was important was getting a good team of roughly the same lvl players and COOP fighting your way to Diablo then beating him on the head with Wirt's leg ... The point, PVP in a RPG is there to give players that don't play well with others something too do, but at best it only detracts from the game.
That's all from your PVE'rs perspective. PVE IMO is just there as a means of advancement to PVP.
I loved doom, quake, unreal, duke nukem etc co-op, but it got repetitive after you beat it a few times - just as PVE in MMO's does...then it was up to the deathmatch to hold my interest.
Same with Diablo, it was a great co-op game but after a while I went searching for a dynamic, REAL challenge that can only be provided by other players; hell, I still play Diablo today, and it's definitely not for the PVE content.
UO, AC, Tibia, Meridian 59 - what kept me playing them for years? It sure wasn't the PVE!
Notice the part in red - I think that sums up your biased view quite nicely, translation "PVP'ers are all gankers and griefers boo hoo".
PVP is an integral part of MMORPG's - hell, even WOW worked this much out, WAR and AOC only further prove this point.
Actually NO I am a real PVPer. Most of my game time is split between COD4, BF2/2000, War rock and MW4 (when I can find a server). My favorite MOG is Shattered Galaxy (RVRVR)
If you paid attention to what I said, it is that PVP is absolutely necessary for FPS type games but not necessary for RPG games. I have played MTG from the second edition so I understand and agree that most card games are PVP how ever you miss the difference between playing a game of MTG (equal to single player game) and building a card house (equal to a team game/RPG).
I keep reading all the post where players are rushing to endgame so they can PVP, that alone shows that the game is not a RPG because in a RPG what is important is not the end but the journey. See playing a RPG takes a completely different mindset than playing a non-RPG game. Let’s take any actual RPG game you ever played. Now, how many times have you been kicked out of the game for not actually Role Playing (or at least been warned)? If you say never than you have no frame of reference as you do not understand what a RPG is. That is you play the game but apply your own rules. This is like playing Monopoly but randomly giving ever one the properties or letting them build on them before the own the entire sister properties.
Lastly there is a big difference between PVPers and griefers/gankers and PKers. Although Grifers/gankers like to try and pull the badge of PVP onto them selves to try and bring some honor to their actions it will never work. Pkers are people that, for a lack of a better term, specialize in killing players instead of NPCs thus not all PKers are Gr/Ga but all Gr/Ga are pkers. The bottom line is that if you do not understand the difference then you are not a PVPer. Ie: what is the difference between a solder and a murderer, once you understand that difference then simply equivalent PVPer to solder. And no I am not saying that all Gr/Ga are (use your own expletives) I am only saying that there is a difference in mindset. Rent the movie the “dirty dozen” and see if you can spot the difference.
Now after that long winded reply I will restate, The OP asked how important PVP is to you (me). My reply is for NON-RPG games then it is absolutely a must have. How ever for RPG games the addition of PVP is usually a tactic that the developers use in order to not have to come up with content. A RPG game is all about the content, simply making two teams (realms) and providing battle fields/areas is a cheap way to go because instead of adding content and storyline all the publisher has to do is make a red vrs blue game and change the weapons. The point here is that doing this keeps the game from being a RPG. Anyone that played the Chronicles of Amber would understand this but there we are talking about actually role playing and if you have no understanding of the difference between rolling a druid an playing it in WOW and creating and Role Playing a druid.
Well said LeJohn, I agree with your distinctions between ganker, pk and pvper.
I think part of the problem is it only takes one jackhole to ruin a lot of people's playtime. If someone is enjoying a game, happily quest and then *BAM* some high-level ganks him to show off his "uber 1337 gaming skilz", it will jade him to thinking pvp = griefing. So, although I'm sure that griefers are a vast minority, it doesn't take many of them to sour things for others.
It really surprised me how passionate people are on this issue and how important PvP as a feature in MMORPGs has become. Players are more interested in PvP than I had imagined.
[I try to actively engage in discussion when I create polls, but this Topic does not need me.]
----- WoW and fast food = commercial successes. I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.
Comments
I can answer this one from direct experience.
I thought Tabula Rasa was a fabulous game in beta, but it didn't have enough PvP so I did not buy it.
To people who don't understand why PvP in MMOs is fun: it's all about the teamwork and strategy.
I know we have been asking for a specific FFA ruleset that has some form of item looting (not just blood money) but as far as I know they still haven't confirmed anything.
Even if they did decide to add this ruleset, I can guarantee there will be normal (non ffa and non item looting) rulesets and that they also will be in higher numbers with the FFA item looting server being an exception, not the norm.
And to answer the poll - PVP in MMO's is extremely important to me. I find PVE only MMO's only last me a month of two before I've done everything I can & have moved on (lack of depth, challenge,politics, conflict variety, excitement etc), where-as MMO's with PVP can keep my going for years.
I won't play a MMO without PvP, I think of it along the same lines as what a lot say about playing a FPS when they want PvP, I play RPG's when I want quality quests and a storyline. I like MMO PvP better than FPS because it tends to be more tactical and less twitch oriented. Although if someone makes a new Mechwarrior I'd be happy to go back to that for my player killing fun.
Stop whining and login so I can kill you!
It depends on the game how much but PVP detracts from any MMORPG game. Notice I said mmoRPG not MMOG.
PVP is for team V team games but not RPG games. Remember back to when you played P&P games, other than when you were PO by a fellow player did you ever fight another player? NO. that because all P&P RPGs were COOP games. Yes, BattleTECH and WH2k were team battles but if you played a ShadowRUN, MechWARRIOR, D&D, CC or any other Role Playing Game and you played as a team to fight a commen enemy.
Remember playing DOOM? What made the game a classic, was it the doom matches?.. No it was that you played COOP to beat the game.
How many of you played Dukenukem 3, What made that game such a ledgend, was it the ability to play in dukematches? No it was that you could start a lan game and play COOP to beat the game.
Diablo1/2 Was PVP important? Heck no, what was important was getting a good team of roughly the same lvl players and COOP fighting your way to Diablo then beating him on the head with Wirt's leg
...
The point, PVP in a RPG is there to give players that don't play well with others something too do, but at best it only detracts from the game. Now don't get me wrong PVP does have it's place, I love BF2, COD, CS and am playing Quakewars, you know game styles where PVP actully belongs.
Also I am looking forward too Force of Arms which if everything goes as proposed will be an good PVP MMOG and let me get back into the driver seat of a mech/herc. FOA is not a RPG but is listed on this site and if you like PVP games I would suggest you keep an eye on it.
I tried TR and while it is a good game it was not diffrent enough for me too add it to my rotation list. Others will find it offers some fun gameplay
An so it begins
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.[/CENTER]
I appreciate your making that crucial distinction, and I would like to draw some attention to it. I am referring to PvP in games such as Everquest, WoW, WAR, Star Trek Online, etc.
I think the distinction was made in the original post, in particular mentioning "FPS." The poll results so far are not what I would have anticipated. I am also interested to see where this discussion leads us and whether we can reach any conclusion about PvP.
That is, what features and aspects of PvP do gamers want? What type of rule system? Environmental or instanced PvP. Many other topics.
-----
WoW and fast food = commercial successes.
I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.
That's all from your PVE'rs perspective. PVE IMO is just there as a means of advancement to PVP.
I loved doom, quake, unreal, duke nukem etc co-op, but it got repetitive after you beat it a few times - just as PVE in MMO's does...then it was up to the deathmatch to hold my interest.
Same with Diablo, it was a great co-op game but after a while I went searching for a dynamic, REAL challenge that can only be provided by other players; hell, I still play Diablo today, and it's definitely not for the PVE content.
UO, AC, Tibia, Meridian 59 - what kept me playing them for years? It sure wasn't the PVE!
Notice the part in red - I think that sums up your biased view quite nicely, translation "PVP'ers are all gankers and griefers boo hoo".
PVP is an integral part of MMORPG's - hell, even WOW worked this much out, WAR and AOC only further prove this point.
When I started playing The Realm online back in 1999 I thought online communities were the greatest thing. I would game until 3 AM on school nights for weeks on end running the Labyrinth for loot. (GBoNs FTW!!!1).
Then a friend of mine introduced me to pvp and my perspective changed. At first I was scared about losing and I would get these insane adreneline rushes. As time went on it turned into an addiction. I would continuosly challenge people or jump them. Tournaments and pickpocketing became the thing for me. Every game since then've aimed for PvP. In Asheron's Call, Shadowbane, WoW, and even Runescape.
ATM I am currently playing Fury which has pretty fast paced and fun PvP.
Your post lost its effect when you said everyone always played COOP in P&P. What about Live Action Roleplayers that used their skill and wits to fight each other? what about MtG? What about scrabble, monopoly, and Checkers?
So you may have a party of five working together on a particular adventure, but they might meet a rival party prepared to fight to be the ones to achieve the same goal. For the game to be about thousands of people all working together for the same goal is pretty unrealistic in that kind of world.
PvP does not mean an end to co-operation. If anything, done properly, it creates a greater need for co-operation. You're unlikely to make better friends than in a game where you have a lot to lose - sure, you'll have enemies too, but conflict creates stories when you're role-playing.
For me, good role-play requires choice - that is a great strength of the pen & paper games. If you want to butcher a fellow party member, that is up to you. You probably wouldn't, but the option is a real one. Having a game mechanic restricting you in this way is not an aid for role-play and creates relationships based on a false reality.
I'm not a great PvPer in these games. In fact I'm almost certain to refuse if someone challenges me to a duel for no reason. However, I like what you get that goes along with PvP - the danger, the closer community (with those on your side), the politics and the player driven story lines, but most of all, the choice.
I've said it before I always liked DAoC's take on pvp. The idea of stealing a relic, that grants a buff to everyone everywhere of your faction, made for some great battles. Often my guild would tell everyone, regardless of level, to get to the relic keep ASAP. The idea was that even if you couldnt harm the 50's, we could lag them out while our defenses firm up.
Of course in that game, RvR as they called it was completely optional. You could get to 50, work on Master/Champion Levels and ignore pvp if you chose. Sad when EA bought them out though.
There will always be the extremists that won't care what you do. The hardcore pvpers want more pvp and think that any game without pvp "sucks" and that any game can only get "better" with pvp. The pve'ers (or carebears as the hardcore types say) do not care about pvp at all and it wouldn't matter how balanced or rewarding the pvp is. They simply would not be interested.
I think a game needs to have solid FUN pve first, with some pvp added for extra "spice". If you eliminate pvp or have too much of it, you're going to alienate a lot of people.
If there is no PvP aspect then I won't play for long. My two favorite types of games are multiplayer FPS and PvP mmorpgs.
There is no greater enemy than the one that thinks like you.
I'm not anti-carebear but I still find the vocal anti-PvP demographic a bit of an enigma. I have been playing video games for over 20 years and the computer opponent AI is barely any better now than it was then. Playing against other players, for me, has always been the most fun. There is just so much more emotion involved. Yes there are 'lows' that go along with the highs but they were never the kind that one took personally. Win or lose, games like M.U.L.E., Archon, or One on One were always fun. Single player games to me, at best, give a kind of luke warm fuzzy feeling.
Then when PvP in MMOs came along, people actually take losing personally. Getting PK'ed and having their stuff looted sparks a feeling akin to being robbed and sexually violated. I'm not trying to dismiss the reaction but I just don't understand it. So what? Get back in the saddle and go get revenge...
Nonetheless, it is discussions like these that reinforce the fact that PvP and PvE are two distinct audiences with a bit of overlap in the middle. Devs need to identify who they are targetting and stay faithful to them.
PvP for me plz.
You know what, I absolutely love intelligent, well-designed PVE. That's why high on my wish-list for MMORPGs is a dynamic world with NPCs progressing on their own, a dynamic quest system to go with it and so on. I don't ever go out of my way to *find* PVP and am always busy with the PVE side of things like exploring, questing or resource gathering...
However, I have to say nothing gets my blood pumping like some good unavoidable PVP
Yes, I am an odd beast in that regard. I seldom if ever attack another player, but I've found that the risk of getting attacked while I'm exploring or questing is an added dimension of thrill for me...
Though, I must admit I am not fond of FFA anywhere anytime; either "relatively secure" regions (a la EVE) or an RVR setting would be my choice.
There is PvP, and there isn't PvP. PvP can be good when consensual in my opinion. We coudl go on for hours on another stupid "Carebear VS Hardcore" rant, but lets not. To each his own, don't foist your likes on others.
I think it's the objective of your past self to make you cringe.
Unfortunately they are either too dense or too dishonest to even attempt to make the distinction. Player versus Player simply means exactly that. I am going against a real person not an AI.
The issue of enforcing your will upon another person in a virtual world is a separate issue. And frankly a far more complex and problematic one. Anyone with half a brain knows this just by looking at all the wars though out human history.
Polls like this one mean very little because they do not distinguish between PvP and enforcing your will upon someone else. But many people purposely conflate the two together and even go so far as to put their fingers in their hears and scream "I am not listening" when it is brought up.
A boxing match and a war are two different things, but they are both PvP so to speak. The consequences of the two are quite different. Just because they are both part of the same super set does not mean they are really all that similar except for that part.
Unfortunately they are either too dense or too dishonest to even attempt to make the distinction. Player versus Player simply means exactly that. I am going against a real person not an AI.
The issue of enforcing your will upon another person in a virtual world is a separate issue. And frankly a far more complex and problematic one. Anyone with half a brain knows this just by looking at all the wars though out human history.
Polls like this one mean very little because they do not distinguish between PvP and enforcing your will upon someone else. But many people purposely conflate the two together and even go so far as to put their fingers in their hears and scream "I am not listening" when it is brought up.
A boxing match and a war are two different things, but they are both PvP so to speak. The consequences of the two are quite different. Just because they are both part of the same super set does not mean they are really all that similar except for that part.
An expertly made analogy. This is what alot of people should listen to.
I think it's the objective of your past self to make you cringe.
That's all from your PVE'rs perspective. PVE IMO is just there as a means of advancement to PVP.
I loved doom, quake, unreal, duke nukem etc co-op, but it got repetitive after you beat it a few times - just as PVE in MMO's does...then it was up to the deathmatch to hold my interest.
Same with Diablo, it was a great co-op game but after a while I went searching for a dynamic, REAL challenge that can only be provided by other players; hell, I still play Diablo today, and it's definitely not for the PVE content.
UO, AC, Tibia, Meridian 59 - what kept me playing them for years? It sure wasn't the PVE!
Notice the part in red - I think that sums up your biased view quite nicely, translation "PVP'ers are all gankers and griefers boo hoo".
PVP is an integral part of MMORPG's - hell, even WOW worked this much out, WAR and AOC only further prove this point.
Actually NO I am a real PVPer. Most of my game time is split between COD4, BF2/2000, War rock and MW4 (when I can find a server). My favorite MOG is Shattered Galaxy (RVRVR)
If you paid attention to what I said, it is that PVP is absolutely necessary for FPS type games but not necessary for RPG games. I have played MTG from the second edition so I understand and agree that most card games are PVP how ever you miss the difference between playing a game of MTG (equal to single player game) and building a card house (equal to a team game/RPG).
I keep reading all the post where players are rushing to endgame so they can PVP, that alone shows that the game is not a RPG because in a RPG what is important is not the end but the journey. See playing a RPG takes a completely different mindset than playing a non-RPG game. Let’s take any actual RPG game you ever played. Now, how many times have you been kicked out of the game for not actually Role Playing (or at least been warned)? If you say never than you have no frame of reference as you do not understand what a RPG is. That is you play the game but apply your own rules. This is like playing Monopoly but randomly giving ever one the properties or letting them build on them before the own the entire sister properties.
Lastly there is a big difference between PVPers and griefers/gankers and PKers. Although Grifers/gankers like to try and pull the badge of PVP onto them selves to try and bring some honor to their actions it will never work. Pkers are people that, for a lack of a better term, specialize in killing players instead of NPCs thus not all PKers are Gr/Ga but all Gr/Ga are pkers. The bottom line is that if you do not understand the difference then you are not a PVPer. Ie: what is the difference between a solder and a murderer, once you understand that difference then simply equivalent PVPer to solder. And no I am not saying that all Gr/Ga are (use your own expletives) I am only saying that there is a difference in mindset. Rent the movie the “dirty dozen” and see if you can spot the difference.
Now after that long winded reply I will restate, The OP asked how important PVP is to you (me). My reply is for NON-RPG games then it is absolutely a must have. How ever for RPG games the addition of PVP is usually a tactic that the developers use in order to not have to come up with content. A RPG game is all about the content, simply making two teams (realms) and providing battle fields/areas is a cheap way to go because instead of adding content and storyline all the publisher has to do is make a red vrs blue game and change the weapons. The point here is that doing this keeps the game from being a RPG. Anyone that played the Chronicles of Amber would understand this but there we are talking about actually role playing and if you have no understanding of the difference between rolling a druid an playing it in WOW and creating and Role Playing a druid.
An so it begins
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.[/CENTER]
Well said LeJohn, I agree with your distinctions between ganker, pk and pvper.
I think part of the problem is it only takes one jackhole to ruin a lot of people's playtime. If someone is enjoying a game, happily quest and then *BAM* some high-level ganks him to show off his "uber 1337 gaming skilz", it will jade him to thinking pvp = griefing. So, although I'm sure that griefers are a vast minority, it doesn't take many of them to sour things for others.
It really surprised me how passionate people are on this issue and how important PvP as a feature in MMORPGs has become. Players are more interested in PvP than I had imagined.
[I try to actively engage in discussion when I create polls, but this Topic does not need me.]
-----
WoW and fast food = commercial successes.
I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.