Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Why do developers continue to push players into factions?
mrcalhou
Member UncommonPosts: 1,444
I'm wondering what everyone's ideas on this topic are.
--------
"Chemistry: 'We do stuff in lab that would be a felony in your garage.'"
The most awesomest after school special T-shirt:
Front: UNO Chemistry Club
Back: /\OH --> Bad Decisions
Comments
Depends really. In some cases it simply fits with the lore and/or IP. For example in WAR, theyve been in factions since the original P&P games, would have completely screwed it up to not have factions (though most dont agree with the way they did the factions anyway).
In some cases, perhaps they feel the need to force conflict on us, as if we wont want to fight eachother (and cant figure out how to) unless they tell us "this is your enemy".
I think factions play an important role in a game. Players may choose to identify with a certain group more than others, and the penalties and rewards of choosing to align with a faction can be fun. With that said, I do believe it would be nice to play a game where you can be independent and interact with factions which are polar opposites of one another. In the upcoming SW:TOR title, I was disappointed that Bounty Hunters and Smugglers were aligned with major factions, instead of placed in a third independent faction, allowing the players to choose/hide/balance their alignment through actions ingame. And I think that concept should have been applied to all classes, but much more difficult and penalizing for classes traditionally apart of a faction.
I think it helps with structure. Its easier to design a game when there are "sides" to be played on. Players tend to flow better in games where there is an enemy instead of simply Kill anything that moves.
Though personally I would prefer a game where there were alot of "Factions" and the "sides" were made up of FLUID ALLIANCES OF FACTIONS.
So long, and thanks for all the fish!
There are a lot of FFA (factionless) games. It's just a preference.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Like a Shadowbane Lore server. That was a blast. Certain classes were only certain races, and some lore such as dwarf lacked a lot of stuff. It was a fun an interesting server.
I like games that many factions one of my initial draws to Fallen Earth, just didn't like the way it is implemented. Personally if its factions it really needs to be three for that dynamic feel. If the only issue with that is in regards to instanced pvp matches, just imagine this one: remove faction as a factor.
I much prefer faction-based PvP. My problem with FFA is it becomes far to gang-based. I'm not very fond of joining and dedicating myself to a guild or corporation, thus in games like Lineage 2, Mortal Online, or even Eve online theres very little for me to do as far as PvP goes, short of staying away from everyone who might go after me.
Faction based games I can at the very least get into PuG's, tag along in sieges, help out friendlies and generally still contribute to my faction in my own way without getting seriously involved with guilds.
I can think of a few things,
It can add "replay" value to the game. Leveled a character in this faction already? Level a character in the other faction.
It can also let you contribute and be part of a faction without having to be in a guild unlike FFA.
And it gives the players a shared identity and a greater concept of rivalry, even across servers.
All men think they're fascinating. In my case, it's justified
because it's themepark.
because 2 is the least number of "sides" you can have in a war. which means faster queues which satisfies the rules of themepark. everything at your finger tips at a moment's notice.
because it's what wow did and you know if wow did it, it is the only way it can be done if you want to make millions of dollars.
LFD tools are great for cramming people into content, but quality > quantity.
I am, usually on the sandbox .. more "hardcore" side of things, but I also do just want to have fun. So lighten up already
I think the bigger question is why do they push players into factions and then don't incoporate systems that really draw players into and make them care about said factions. Most times it's just an arbitrary "Hear, you are on the Red Team and you are on the Blue Team. You hate each other. PvP+ flag on. Now fight".
Give territory control. Allow players to invest time in building up their factions territory. Give them non-combat as well as combat rewards/bonuses for improving their lands. Have more than TWO factions. Introduce NPC factions that have their own goals (and not limit them to just taking the player factions stuff - think like an old school D&D DM and get creative).
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
There's a lot to be said about this.
IN a faction based game, for good or ill, you are on a team and can participate in that team with very little effort. You also know that you have, for the most part, built in allies in case you get into trouble.
I find faction based pvp more "fun" over the ffa pvp even though the ffa pvp does promote closer bonds with your guildmates.
Problem with ffa pvp is that the smaller guys get bullied out of quite a bit and the larger guys get to sit in their velvet lined chais in front of the fire, smoking cigars and drinking brandy and making toasts "to evi!".
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
True but then again servers on faction based games tend to get unbalanced and that in turn effects an even larger player base.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
I would agree (aion I'm looking at you) though if some are to be believed, DAoC had gotten it right.
Still, there is imbalance on ffa pvp games as well.
The uber alliances rolling over individuals and small guilds. I've seen it time and time and time again.
for a while in hindemith server (lineage 2) the players would actually rise up and dethrone the guilds they thought were "bad". I'm sure that has gone by the wayside over the years as the population waned.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
At least on a ffa game the small guild can (parlay ?) with the larger group and come to a mutual agreement that benefits both parties.
If you find yourself on a low pop faction side you will have very few options, and those are unacceptable IMO.
~change sides
~change servers
~server mergers
Both have there ups and downsides.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
This
Yup, this guy said it all. Its not putting people into factions, its putting them into factions and not adding any meat to the bones.
Because this genre is controlled by an elite group that pretty much has decided how the games will play. I have no facts to back this up.
and this
I think that pretty much covers it all.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
because factions is casual, and as of late, the MMO industry is ALL about the casuals....
players dont even have to think, its spoon fed to them. You are here, they are there. go kill them. everyone that is not your enemy is by default your friend, you can group with them just by clicking a button.
factionless games require more involvement from the player. Join a guild, pick who you want to attack, ponder the consecuences, go for it. no easy grouping on a whim, no way to jump in and out.
to summarize
more involvement = bad for casuals.
spoon fed = good for casuals
The choices are open if you are dedocated enough to please or piss off a faction. of course pissing off a faction is much easier than impressing them.
Factions are a good pvp tool but for game lore and background they are the lazy option. I prefer them but only because freeform pvp and no pvp is worse.
Player-made factions have the potential to ruin the game for many. Unless strict limits in size and power are put in. And competition encouraged so that large alliances would be undesirable.
Ready-made factions spare the players of politics and drama. They are convenient and clear. Devs can also give each faction a special look and feel.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
I think Guild Wars 2 needs to be mentioned, because they're going to have a unique system that combines 1 faction PVE with 3 faction PVP.
The open world is entirely PVE, with 5 races all working together to defeat the dragon threat. They're actually going even further than I think anybody else has either and trying to get rid of competition and griefing entirely.
There will also be 3 faction PVP that pits your server against two other servers in a 2-week long battle in a huge battleground that spans 4 zones (1 for each faction and a central one). The battlegrounds will have their own PVP dynamic events as well as things like keeps to take over.
To me the best part is that win/loss standings are kept, and in each new battle you'll be matched up against 2 new servers of comparable strength. This is huge, because it means the dynamics of the battle will change. One time you might be the big server, the next you might be the little, but it always remains challenging. I also suspect that server pride will kick in and that win/loss record is going to be something people really want to fight over. There will also be PVE buffs or bonuses to the winner in case you want something a little more tangible.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
Agree.
I love especially a 3 faction RvR game. Because it often creates more faction balance. I prefer it if there is somewhat fluid allignment options for clans on top of that.
FFA, despite great intentions on devs and possibly even a majority of players that actually want to RP as something other than a developmentally delayed sociopath, tend to devolve into merely FreeForAss PvP.
I somewhat disagree with Quirhid. I think the player made factions in EVE have more often than not been a positive for the community.
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
Except for, you know, the hundreds of games that already had two-faction play before WoW (or even Warcraft) exer existed. Don't let a little thing like history get in the way of a good rant though.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
The thing i hate with factions is that theres almost if not always faction population problems. One faction rules the server, the other one is dead, so whats the point with faction?
Order and Chaos (i bashed them but they finally gave us more info about the update) solved the problem by allowing orcs/undeads+humans/elves be together, quest together, be in the same guild etc. At the first i was like what? But now i like it. As for now, i hate the faction gameplay.
Yawn