I suspect for all sides, it's sometimes a bit tricky to find the right volume between offering a flimsy straw man argument and burning the opposition to the ground.
Welcome to message boards about MMOs. That's pretty much an apt description of 99% of the activity.
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.
Original UO had its charms, and in general I support and want sandbox play.
However there seems to have been an unholy association formed between sandbox and FFA PVP with full/loot. What happened in old UO - and what led to Trammel - was the impact this had on the overall player base and game atmosphere. While arguably everyone can enjoy FFA full loot in some circumstance, having it 24/7 was too much for most people. It also brought out the worst in people, in terms of the taunting and hate /tells. If was a griefers paradise.
Yes yes yes, people will argue "you just need to toughen up! or "its only a game!" But the reality of the matter is that if you have FFA full loot PVP, you are basically putting the direction of your game in the hands of a sub-set of players who flourish in that environment. Unlike crafting or questing, in PVP the players are imposing on each other, in essence taking control of the game experience of other players by killing and looting them. A small subset can have a much larger impact and what you end up with is a race to the bottom as the nastiest part of the player base imposes its will on the others.
"But we want good PVP!" you say. Well, what really happens in FFA full loot is far from that. People in fact want: a) loot; b) not to be looted. So PVP tends towards ganking, e.g. large groups killing smaller or a well-equipped veteran character preying on newer players who are unable to effectively defend themselves. On the group scale, server dynamics tend towards zergs, an unhealthy development for small guilds and individual style players. You also encourage exploits, since the stakes are higher (I can lose my stuff, hence I will use that spin move exploit that insta-restores my health due to an unfixed bug).
In full loot FFA PVP games, the server forums also turn into cess pools dominated by the constant trash talk of a few players or guilds.
Full loot FFA PVP magnifies any flaws in a PVP system. Because the stakes are higher, people rush to play the same cookie-cutter overpowered template. Then, if that is balanced by the developers, they rush to the next one. Naked mages, tank mages, etc. You end up with ninety percent of the forums being dominated by arguments and complaints about the PVP system. Developers end up having to devote a huge and disproportionate amount of time to the PVP system since it has such impact on the rest of the game, and this is to the detriment of working on other parts of the game world systems.
Finally, people need to remember that the mentality of the "hard core" PVPer is that "if I can kill something then I MUST kill something!" Aside from the "red is dead" mentality which basically crushes any meaningful in-game interactions besides swinging a sword at someone's head, you have an impact on the other parts of the environment. For example, in old UO Raph Koster created this vibrant ecosystem model of different animals. It immediately collapsed as players fanned out from town killing anything that moved, whether they needed the hides and meat or not.
So while I agree in principle with how great FFA PVP with full loot can be, lets get real about its track record. It has failed utterly with a mass audience. Most people do NOT want to be coming back with their hard-earned treasure from a lengthy dungeon crawl only to be jumped and despoiled on the road by pWnU and his bunch of 15-year old buddies, who accompany their one-sided victory with profane hate tells. Most people do NOT want to have to join a zerg guild just to ensure they can survive when they leave town. Most people do NOT want to have their entire play experience subject to the whims of the PVP system.
So while I have sympathy for those who enjoy FFA full loot PVP, the fact of the matter is that we have seen how problematic that is. Some games have done well with versions of it, e.g. EVE Online. But in its purest form, original UO, it was turning into a disaster and to avoid that they invented Trammel.
In the final analysis, the full loot FFA PVP community is its own worst enemy. No game world population can flourish when all its direction is placed in the hands of a subset of players who make the rules for everyone else. Crafter, explorer, socializer - everyone must bend the knee to ikEELj00 and his friends. Or even worse, be forced to become them just to play the game.
I disagree with some of your arguments.
For one, I don't believe an inordinate amount of time went into balancing PvP. Thats your opinion, this is mine. Neither can back it up. Also, if the game was well thoughout and balanced, and PvP based, it wouldn't be a waste of resources anyways.
I completely disagree about exploits being rampantly used as a result having more at stake. Regardless of the game, people are exploiting to win. Since playing UO and moving on to MANY other games (both mmo and general multiplayer), I can safely say that the exploiting in UO was no worse than anything I have seen today.
I also feel you are wrong regarding the forums. Forums always turn into a cess-pool of garbage in a competitive game with a mass of players. Heck, even games where there is no PvP you still get garbage on there. UO's forums weren't bad at all. In fact, they were much more civilized than many of the forums I see today.
Also, full loot PvP does not highlight flaws in PvP any more or less than regular PvP. People hate losing. Period. If they do and something is not fair in their eyes expect to see rampant requests for changes. Nearly every MMO I have played had this issue, if not all of them.
One thing you are forgetting to mention is the community that was built up in UO due to the full loot open PvP. Was it true that large groups of PK's preyed on those weaker than them? Absolutely! Was it true that larger groups of "good guys" preyed upon and stalked PK's for bounties or bragging rights, or just to protect guildies? Absolutely! I wasn't the ganker (though at times I did enjoy it), I was the one getting ganked. When I worked my way up in that game to defend and then turn around and kill the habitual reds, it felt great. As a new player, it was intense learning the map and finding areas that were safe to achieve what I wanted. I loved it!
I agree with you 100% its not for everyone. Some people can't handle getting ganked and robbed. I remember being frustrated when theives pulled it off at brit bank and people got my loot that was randomly thrown on the ground lol! They don't need to toughen up, they just need to play another game as its obviously not their play style.
One of the things that I like about full loot open PvP is the economy that seems to flow with it. Supply and demand has more meaning.
So to cap it off, I disagree with many of your points, but feel that there still needs to be an open, full loot, PvP game for those who want it. Peoples opinions should not dictate what other people enjoy. We already have religion for that. There is more than enough room to have your sandbox, and mine. Just don't come treading into mine cause I'll kick your ass if you do
Original UO had its charms, and in general I support and want sandbox play.
However there seems to have been an unholy association formed between sandbox and FFA PVP with full/loot. What happened in old UO - and what led to Trammel - was the impact this had on the overall player base and game atmosphere. While arguably everyone can enjoy FFA full loot in some circumstance, having it 24/7 was too much for most people. It also brought out the worst in people, in terms of the taunting and hate /tells. If was a griefers paradise.
Yes yes yes, people will argue "you just need to toughen up! or "its only a game!" But the reality of the matter is that if you have FFA full loot PVP, you are basically putting the direction of your game in the hands of a sub-set of players who flourish in that environment. Unlike crafting or questing, in PVP the players are imposing on each other, in essence taking control of the game experience of other players by killing and looting them. A small subset can have a much larger impact and what you end up with is a race to the bottom as the nastiest part of the player base imposes its will on the others.
"But we want good PVP!" you say. Well, what really happens in FFA full loot is far from that. People in fact want: a) loot; b) not to be looted. So PVP tends towards ganking, e.g. large groups killing smaller or a well-equipped veteran character preying on newer players who are unable to effectively defend themselves. On the group scale, server dynamics tend towards zergs, an unhealthy development for small guilds and individual style players. You also encourage exploits, since the stakes are higher (I can lose my stuff, hence I will use that spin move exploit that insta-restores my health due to an unfixed bug).
In full loot FFA PVP games, the server forums also turn into cess pools dominated by the constant trash talk of a few players or guilds.
Full loot FFA PVP magnifies any flaws in a PVP system. Because the stakes are higher, people rush to play the same cookie-cutter overpowered template. Then, if that is balanced by the developers, they rush to the next one. Naked mages, tank mages, etc. You end up with ninety percent of the forums being dominated by arguments and complaints about the PVP system. Developers end up having to devote a huge and disproportionate amount of time to the PVP system since it has such impact on the rest of the game, and this is to the detriment of working on other parts of the game world systems.
Finally, people need to remember that the mentality of the "hard core" PVPer is that "if I can kill something then I MUST kill something!" Aside from the "red is dead" mentality which basically crushes any meaningful in-game interactions besides swinging a sword at someone's head, you have an impact on the other parts of the environment. For example, in old UO Raph Koster created this vibrant ecosystem model of different animals. It immediately collapsed as players fanned out from town killing anything that moved, whether they needed the hides and meat or not.
So while I agree in principle with how great FFA PVP with full loot can be, lets get real about its track record. It has failed utterly with a mass audience. Most people do NOT want to be coming back with their hard-earned treasure from a lengthy dungeon crawl only to be jumped and despoiled on the road by pWnU and his bunch of 15-year old buddies, who accompany their one-sided victory with profane hate tells. Most people do NOT want to have to join a zerg guild just to ensure they can survive when they leave town. Most people do NOT want to have their entire play experience subject to the whims of the PVP system.
So while I have sympathy for those who enjoy FFA full loot PVP, the fact of the matter is that we have seen how problematic that is. Some games have done well with versions of it, e.g. EVE Online. But in its purest form, original UO, it was turning into a disaster and to avoid that they invented Trammel.
In the final analysis, the full loot FFA PVP community is its own worst enemy. No game world population can flourish when all its direction is placed in the hands of a subset of players who make the rules for everyone else. Crafter, explorer, socializer - everyone must bend the knee to ikEELj00 and his friends. Or even worse, be forced to become them just to play the game.
I disagree with some of your arguments.
For one, I don't believe an inordinate amount of time went into balancing PvP. Thats your opinion, this is mine. Neither can back it up. Also, if the game was well thoughout and balanced, and PvP based, it wouldn't be a waste of resources anyways.
I completely disagree about exploits being rampantly used as a result having more at stake. Regardless of the game, people are exploiting to win. Since playing UO and moving on to MANY other games (both mmo and general multiplayer), I can safely say that the exploiting in UO was no worse than anything I have seen today.
I also feel you are wrong regarding the forums. Forums always turn into a cess-pool of garbage in a competitive game with a mass of players. Heck, even games where there is no PvP you still get garbage on there. UO's forums weren't bad at all. In fact, they were much more civilized than many of the forums I see today.
Also, full loot PvP does not highlight flaws in PvP any more or less than regular PvP. People hate losing. Period. If they do and something is not fair in their eyes expect to see rampant requests for changes. Nearly every MMO I have played had this issue, if not all of them.
One thing you are forgetting to mention is the community that was built up in UO due to the full loot open PvP. Was it true that large groups of PK's preyed on those weaker than them? Absolutely! Was it true that larger groups of "good guys" preyed upon and stalked PK's for bounties or bragging rights, or just to protect guildies? Absolutely! I wasn't the ganker (though at times I did enjoy it), I was the one getting ganked. When I worked my way up in that game to defend and then turn around and kill the habitual reds, it felt great. As a new player, it was intense learning the map and finding areas that were safe to achieve what I wanted. I loved it!
I agree with you 100% its not for everyone. Some people can't handle getting ganked and robbed. I remember being frustrated when theives pulled it off at brit bank and people got my loot that was randomly thrown on the ground lol! They don't need to toughen up, they just need to play another game as its obviously not their play style.
One of the things that I like about full loot open PvP is the economy that seems to flow with it. Supply and demand has more meaning.
So to cap it off, I disagree with many of your points, but feel that there still needs to be an open, full loot, PvP game for those who want it. Peoples opinions should not dictate what other people enjoy. We already have religion for that. There is more than enough room to have your sandbox, and mine. Just don't come treading into mine cause I'll kick your ass if you do
You sir, expressed all my feelings about UO Full-Loot PvP and how it affects economy and PvE.
I have wondered is there someone behind these guys like Garriot, Molyneux and Romero who just stop them going too far? It seems that there is certain big names, who just end up being too ambitious and not making the quality they used, or maybe I'm just wrong...
Comments
Welcome to message boards about MMOs. That's pretty much an apt description of 99% of the activity.
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.
*represses the urge to quibble*
I disagree with some of your arguments.
For one, I don't believe an inordinate amount of time went into balancing PvP. Thats your opinion, this is mine. Neither can back it up. Also, if the game was well thoughout and balanced, and PvP based, it wouldn't be a waste of resources anyways.
I completely disagree about exploits being rampantly used as a result having more at stake. Regardless of the game, people are exploiting to win. Since playing UO and moving on to MANY other games (both mmo and general multiplayer), I can safely say that the exploiting in UO was no worse than anything I have seen today.
I also feel you are wrong regarding the forums. Forums always turn into a cess-pool of garbage in a competitive game with a mass of players. Heck, even games where there is no PvP you still get garbage on there. UO's forums weren't bad at all. In fact, they were much more civilized than many of the forums I see today.
Also, full loot PvP does not highlight flaws in PvP any more or less than regular PvP. People hate losing. Period. If they do and something is not fair in their eyes expect to see rampant requests for changes. Nearly every MMO I have played had this issue, if not all of them.
One thing you are forgetting to mention is the community that was built up in UO due to the full loot open PvP. Was it true that large groups of PK's preyed on those weaker than them? Absolutely! Was it true that larger groups of "good guys" preyed upon and stalked PK's for bounties or bragging rights, or just to protect guildies? Absolutely! I wasn't the ganker (though at times I did enjoy it), I was the one getting ganked. When I worked my way up in that game to defend and then turn around and kill the habitual reds, it felt great. As a new player, it was intense learning the map and finding areas that were safe to achieve what I wanted. I loved it!
I agree with you 100% its not for everyone. Some people can't handle getting ganked and robbed. I remember being frustrated when theives pulled it off at brit bank and people got my loot that was randomly thrown on the ground lol! They don't need to toughen up, they just need to play another game as its obviously not their play style.
One of the things that I like about full loot open PvP is the economy that seems to flow with it. Supply and demand has more meaning.
So to cap it off, I disagree with many of your points, but feel that there still needs to be an open, full loot, PvP game for those who want it. Peoples opinions should not dictate what other people enjoy. We already have religion for that. There is more than enough room to have your sandbox, and mine. Just don't come treading into mine cause I'll kick your ass if you do
You sir, expressed all my feelings about UO Full-Loot PvP and how it affects economy and PvE.
But, but, but he attacked me when I was low life!
Yes, HE DID, why you cant do the same to him?
Uf that will take me a lot of time...
HERE IS YOUR QUEST!
I have wondered is there someone behind these guys like Garriot, Molyneux and Romero who just stop them going too far? It seems that there is certain big names, who just end up being too ambitious and not making the quality they used, or maybe I'm just wrong...