Originally posted by laokoko The real problem is the PVE people don't want to play with you.
No! It can't be that simple! It can't possibly be that some people prefer PvE content with optional PvP! Those people are just stupid heads or they don't know how PvP is supposed to work. They just don't KNOW, man!
** edit ** This is sarcasm.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Which open world pvp game have you been frequently/repeatedly griefed in?
All the Open world PvP games I've tried, not a lot, just a few: Everquest, Darkfall, L2. I never played any of them long, or in EQ's case went to a different server. Only flagged a couple times in SWG so I can't count that.
So far OwPvP is not what I'm looking for.
Are you classifying being killed as being griefed. Because if you are you are being massively disingenuous.
Moreover it is perfectly right that you should say "OwPvP is not what I'm looking for", in fact I would go out of my way to back you up for saying as such, each person wants different things from their games.
But we see the same old story here, people with limited (sometimes even zero) play time in OWPVP games, making sweeping statements about said games which are simply incorrect most of the time.
I've extensively played open world pvp games from UO onwards and I can put my time being griefed or griefing to far less tha 1% of my total game time, far, far less in fact. Some will have experienced less, some more, some will be unlucky and get killed a few times in a short space of time and quit. Well that sucks, but that doesn't suddenly mean everyone is getting killed all the time, all the way through their gaming life cycle.
Look, open world pvp games are not "better", it is subjective to the indivdual. Not everyone should like open world games. People who don't like open world games are not carebears or weeklings. But there is a great deal og hyperbole and nonsense in this thread, which seems to be coming from people whith little to no actual experience in what they are talking about.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
When did players start to accept the fact that it's okay for PvP to be completely instanced?
EverQuest II's 2006 Nagafen Server was a World PvP Server. It worked.
SWG's PvP was World PvP. It worked.
Ever since WoW, PvP has become pure trash. And to make matters worse, "World PvP" has become such a loose term that anything that isn't completely structured is considered World PvP, e.g., SWTOR's Ilum - a dedicated area for PvP. This isn't World PvP. It's trash.
I'll tell you why people waste time in these redundant battlegrounds. It's because they are so helpless and consumed with the damn carrot dangling in front of their faces. You want that little piece of reward that everyone will eventually have. It's boring. It's an embarrassment to the genre.
I don't want to see anyone fail. However, it would be a lie to not say I enjoy watching these Instanced PvP games turn into failed FTP games.
SWG combat system worked only because the players had a choice. They had three stages of combat. Civilian, combatant, and special forces. Even before the NGE you had the choice and had to go to the recruiter to switch. More open world pvp games should be like this, would help those that arent 100% into world pvp get a taste of it when they chose and not forced into it.
Thats a huge misconception with most sandboxes that hurts the genre.
Are you classifying being killed as being griefed. Because if you are you are being massively disingenuous.
Moreover it is perfectly right that you should say "OwPvP is not what I'm looking for", in fact I would go out of my way to back you up for saying as such, each person wants different things from their games.
But we see the same old story here, people with limited (sometimes even zero) play time in OWPVP games, making sweeping statements about said games which are simply incorrect most of the time.
I've extensively played open world pvp games from UO onwards and I can put my time being griefed or griefing to far less tha 1% of my total game time, far, far less in fact. Some will have experienced less, some more, some will be unlucky and get killed a few times in a short space of time and quit. Well that sucks, but that doesn't suddenly mean everyone is getting killed all the time, all the way through their gaming life cycle.
Look, open world pvp games are not "better", it is subjective to the indivdual. Not everyone should like open world games. People who don't like open world games are not carebears or weeklings. But there is a great deal og hyperbole and nonsense in this thread, which seems to be coming from people whith little to no actual experience in what they are talking about.
Yea are guaranteed to get one of the following default replies if you say yo udon't like OWPvP:
"you have not played enough"
"you've played the wrong game"
"you are doing it wrong"
Thing is, you can say that about anything - about instanced PvP for example. Not only that but all of the three are ad hominems. They are insufficient to disprove what the commenter said.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
When did players start to accept the fact that it's okay for PvP to be completely instanced?
EverQuest II's 2006 Nagafen Server was a World PvP Server. It worked.
SWG's PvP was World PvP. It worked.
Ever since WoW, PvP has become pure trash. And to make matters worse, "World PvP" has become such a loose term that anything that isn't completely structured is considered World PvP, e.g., SWTOR's Ilum - a dedicated area for PvP. This isn't World PvP. It's trash.
I'll tell you why people waste time in these redundant battlegrounds. It's because they are so helpless and consumed with the damn carrot dangling in front of their faces. You want that little piece of reward that everyone will eventually have. It's boring. It's an embarrassment to the genre.
I don't want to see anyone fail. However, it would be a lie to not say I enjoy watching these Instanced PvP games turn into failed FTP games.
We live in a world now where people got trophy's for trying.
Quir: Works the other way though I've seen countless posts on these forums from people that "played" eve, saying the got "constantly ganked" from the moment they entered the game, which as anyone who's actually played knows Is a complete and utter lie.
Also people talking about full loot in darkfall, when you can tell they haven't played because they talk Like they were loosing all this hard earned leet style wow gear.
Originally posted by ShakyMo Quir: Works the other way though I've seen countless posts on these forums from people that "played" eve, saying the got "constantly ganked" from the moment they entered the game, which as anyone who's actually played knows Is a complete and utter lie.
Also people talking about full loot in darkfall, when you can tell they haven't played because they talk Like they were loosing all this hard earned leet style wow gear.
How do you know its a lie? You can get ganked right from the start, constantly even. I played Eve for 2 years and well over 90% of the engagements I was involved in were ganks. The whole game is gank-warfare from my standpoint. Yeah, its "PvP" but its not the kind of PvP I enjoy most.
It could not reach the fun I had in GW1 - or even WAR's scenarios.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Yea are guaranteed to get one of the following default replies if you say yo udon't like OWPvP:
"you have not played enough"
"you've played the wrong game"
"you are doing it wrong"
Thing is, you can say that about anything - about instanced PvP for example. Not only that but all of the three are ad hominems. They are insufficient to disprove what the commenter said.
Perhaps I should attack SWTOR endgame and proclaim that everyone taking part in it spends their entire time flaming each other. That I haven't played TOR for more than 5 minutes in beta and have no idea how the players treat one another, that doesn't matter right.
I've spent a good amount of time in instanced pvp across multiple games and multiple genres and yet I haven't been involved in high end team play in WoW or GW2. Perhaps I should make sweeping comments about the teams that have, perhaps I should say they all talk shit and run around counter clockwise at the start of each match.
I'll just say Quirhid says ad hominems are bad yo, should anyone state that I have insufficient experience on the matter.
Why did you feel the need to qualify the amount of time you spent in EVE in your other post? You said you spent two years in it so you know it was about ganking. Surely you could have only played it for two minutes, got ganked once and then been able to know exactly how many people where invovled in and how often ganking occurred? Oh wait, no that would have been utter bullshit.
"I got killed three times as a noob and quit". Fair enough.
"Everyone gets killed x times by x players over n period". Well you actually have to have a somewhat larger amount of experience in the game to know whether that is the case or not.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
No quir You do not get constantly ganked in hi sec. It is a lie. Sure if your stupid enough to go null sec with no corp and on a new account you will, bit you would have to willfully put yourself in a getting ganked situation.
Why do you think that we have "settled" for instanced PvP. Is it so hard for you to understand that some people actually enjoy more competitive PvP rather than zerg/gank fests?
For me GW1's PvP and WoW's arenas are the most enjoyable style of PvP in MMos.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Perhaps I should attack SWTOR endgame and proclaim that everyone taking part in it spends their entire time flaming each other. That I haven't played TOR for more than 5 minutes in beta and have no idea how the players treat one another, that doesn't matter right.
I've spent a good amount of time in instanced pvp across multiple games and multiple genres and yet I haven't been involved in high end team play in WoW or GW2. Perhaps I should make sweeping comments about the teams that have, perhaps I should say they all talk shit and run around counter clockwise at the start of each match.
I'll just say Quirhid says ad hominems are bad yo, should anyone state that I have insufficient experience on the matter.
Why did you feel the need to qualify the amount of time you spent in EVE in your other post? You said you spent two years in it so you know it was about ganking. Surely you could have only played it for two minutes and been able to form an opinion on just how much ganking goes on right? Oh wait, no that would have been bullshit.
Clearly saying "hurr you haven't played enough dude" can be used as a shit attempt at batting away legitimate concerns. But clearly experience of a system you are commenting on does actually matter. And when you make major, sweeping statements which require you to have a decent amount of experience to back them up, well don't be surprised to be shot down if you have limited experience of said systems.
You don't get my meaning. That 5-minute experience makes your statement unlikely, but not wrong. That is why it is insufficient as a counter-argument, because even with your 5-minute experience, you might be right.
Also, I felt I needed to put a number on how much time I played Eve because I feel the same as the guy saying "I get ganked constantly." The game is nothing but ganking. Either you're on the giving end or the receiving end.
Experience from other games helps aswell: I also said within 5-minutes of starting the game, that "Eve's learning skills were stupid and should be removed altogether." Was I wrong?
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
You don't get my meaning. That 5-minute experience makes your statement unlikely, but not wrong. That is why it is insufficient as a counter-argument, because even with your 5-minute experience, you might be right.
Same as: "John can't form a valid comment about employment because he doesn't have a job." Its an informal fallacy.
Also, I felt I needed to put a number on how much time I played Eve because I feel the same as the guy saying "I get ganked constantly." The game is nothing but ganking. Either you're on the giving end or the receiving end.
Experience from other games helps aswell: I also said within 5-minutes of starting the game, that "Eve's learning skills were stupid and should be removed altogether." Was I wrong?
You might be right, you might be wrong, you are essentially guessing/pulling crap out of the air. Unless you have enough experience to actually back up said claims. You need limited experience to say "I don't like this" or "this happened to me". You need somewhat more to be able to say "oh x players do this n of the time" and keep a straight face.
John can comment on employment as much as he likes. If John happened to comment on the day to day activities of a job which he hasn't performed or has very limited experience of. Well then he is likely to have his comments pulled apart by someone with experience in said career.
Sample size/experience is rather important in order to qualify certain statements.
If someone undocks, gets nuked, then quits. Well they are entitled to say "I got ganked and I quit". If though they said "Everyone ganks all the time", well they simply have nowhere near enough experience to know whether or not that is true or not. They may be lucky and guess right, but the reality is, no one will take their comment seriously.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
You might be right, you might be wrong, you are essentially guessing/pulling crap out of the air. Unless you have enough experience to actually back up said claims. You need limited experience to say "I don't like this" or "this happened to me". You need somewhat more to be able to say "oh x players do this n of the time" and keep a straight face.
John can comment on employment as much as he likes. If John happened to comment on the day to day activities of a job which he hasn't performed or has very limited experience of. Well then he is likely to have his comments pulled apart by someone with experience in said career.
Sample size/experience is rather important in order to qualify certain statements.
If someone undocks, gets nuked, then quits. Well they are entitled to say "I got ganked and I quit". If though they said "Everyone ganks all the time", well they simply have nowhere near enough experience to know whether or not that is true or not. They may be lucky and guess right, but the reality is, no one will take their comment seriously.
It really depends. I have a good streak going at the moment although I might only remember the cases where I was right. Like I said, you can often grow your odds with your experience. Still, he got it right: Eve's PvP is mainly about ganking. No matter how he arrived at that conclusion, he got it right.
What you think about him doesn't matter.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Originally posted by ShakyMo Asuran No the use of a timer is redundant in wow. Why not let lwg run all the time and let players decide when to enter and leave.
Not reall as the game is built to allow the players to know when they have thigns coming up, from raid lock outs, instances, bgs, and such. If you have full on zones that were constently contested the bgs would dry up slowly. So the timer allows you to jump into several bgs, instances, and even raids, while waiting for the pvp area to go contested. For people also on a a fixed time frame it is a waste for them to go into a constently contested zone, and then have to leave after spending their entire alloted time in the zone. The times actually frees up their time to partake in more content, without actually missing out on time that could be spent in a contested zone. Also wow is not a game based around pvp at all but a pve game with pvp tacked on, as such the pvp is really more of a method of allowing players that like pvp to play, and yet also give an secondary form of combat that a pver can play when they burn out on pve that day.
It really depends. I have a good streak going at the moment although I might only remember the cases where I was right. Like I said, you can often grow your odds with your experience. Still, he got it right: Eve's PvP is mainly about ganking. No matter how he arrived at that conclusion, he got it right.
What you think about him doesn't matter.
If you want to go around basing your arguments on limited experience and hoping you are right, you go for it. Don't expect anyone to ever take you seriously. Perhaps that is what you do, perhaps you do spend your time commenting on systems and games you have little to no experience with. Fair play to you.
You should note that the people I was debating with, well they didn't "get it right", they were not talking specifically about EVE or ganking in EVE. I suggested that their limited experience with said systems probably had a large part to do with them drawing what I felt to be incorrect conclusions. I also pointed out the danger of making sweeping statements when you are basing them from a point of limited experience of said systems.
So no, basing sweeping statements on limited experience is never a good idea and trying to argue the opposite is idiotic in the extreme.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Issues is more that giefing is pking, but pking is not always griefing. It is the group of players that go out looking to mess with, harrass, and also grief other players via ow-pvp that trully kill ow-pvp as becoming more mainstream. Any game that allows a player to gain an advantage by levels, or power, that they can use to grief lower-level/power character has an issue for mainstream usage. Making it that when you engage in combat with otheer players that your gear, level, and such is reduced into being largely marginalized for how much it will impact your ability to win a fight against another player would be great. As it would make it that literally a lvl one an a capped level character even with a gear difference would have a largely equal chance of winning the encounter.
I would also say that the definition of griefing needs to be defined much more, or the arguement is moot, simply by marit neither side can agree on a definition. to me Griefing is any negative activity that is agressively used to harrass players, such as corpse camping, or willfully hunting low-level characters in lower level zones for the mere fact of harrassing them by killing them in a completely one sided fight. The world might be unfair which is true, but every action has a consiquence for doing it, and such actives should have strick penelities for those that do them. Prime expample you can kill someone in real life, but for doing it you can be tried, and then senticed for that action, even losing your life based on where you are.
Also most instanced pvp is more like a glatiator match, prossional sports, and such than true warfare. It is an match between people, animals, teams that is for entertainment. They are largely fair/even foot fights/events that are used for entainment, but also are regemented for the people to enjoy, while also giving the players rewards (not always mind you.) for participating. NOt sure about anyone else but a football game, soccer, or such that was constently going on would be pretty boring after awhile. An even in ancient times areas might have been contested, but never was warfare constent, normally when night fell the fighting ended regardless of the winner or loser's dessire.
It's just in 90% of post wow mmos its the only pvp available.
If players had decided instanced pvp was the best. There would be more players in spvp than in WvW in gw2 and planetside 2 wouldn't be the huge success it is.
It took developers 8 years, but finally they realised there's a market for players that don't want the tacked on afterthought trash that is wow style pvp.
Originally posted by ShakyMo Players didn't settle for instanced pvp
It's just in 90% of post wow mmos its the only pvp available.
If players had decided instanced pvp was the best. There would be more players in spvp than in WvW in gw2 and planetside 2 wouldn't be the huge success it is.
It took developers 8 years, but finally they realised there's a market for players that don't want the tacked on afterthought trash that is wow style pvp.
Having a market that seeks it, and being the better version is not the same. Many players prefer smaller mmuch more regemented style pvp like bgs, and such, while there are still many that like much more large scale, and constant pvp like ow-pvp. Just the same like anythign the dev's also found that many of the players in games hated the idea of being griefed, and worrying about get ganked by other players in thier game time, but also liked to pvp as such we have instanced pvp that is now mainstream. It also takes much more to make ow-pvp appatizing to mainstream players, as most of those players do not want to be at the mercy of other players for their enjoyment of the game.
Litterally it is two completely different mind-sets that populate two completely different styles of play, neither is trully better or worse, but one is more popular than the other atleast in mmos. Most mmo ow-pvp dies out quite fast, and gets replaced, not by being worse, but by being less desired byy the players that play.
Originally posted by Maelwydd Most of the problems come from the mind set in OPvP games of "This game has PvP so I MUST kill everyone" where I think most people see it as "If I have a reason to kill someone I will, but a level 1 noob isn;t worth engaging with because ther is no skill involved in winning". For me personally the reason I participate in more structured PvP is simply because I PvP as a contest of skill and if there is such an imbalance, either way, then I don't find it interesting. A tough fight where 2 equal sides meet and the winner is because they are better PvP'ers is more interesting to me then a game where a level 80 attacks my as a level 1, I have no chance and usually just let them kill me and get on with things. A personal opinion but I don't get the mentality some people have who like to kill noobs "Because it is PvP". IMO killing a noob ISN'T PvP, that is why I usually don't play such games unless it has been designed well....and not many games are.
Should read:
Most of the problems come from the mind set in OPvP games of "This game has PvP so I am gonna kill everyone because I can....Muwahahahaha!! " where I think possibly, maybe a few people, not really sure, maybe none at all, see it as "If I have a reason to kill someone I will. "
I mean lets be real here....
It might even be something as simple as 98% of the population will only kill someone if they have a good reason, and 2% will kill everything. But that 2% will do it 90% of the time and to lower level players.
Therefore while most don't do it, it still happens frequently.
No, it is definitely skewed the other way. Personally I dont attack anyone that doesn't deserve it or isn't a challenge. But I know I am in the minority. I mean, say whatever bullshit you want, but the whole purpose of having OWPvP is to go around killing other players, which creates that whole scenario that they have to kill everyone they see. It isnt so bad when it is faction based, but FFA PvP is just rediculous.
It really depends. I have a good streak going at the moment although I might only remember the cases where I was right. Like I said, you can often grow your odds with your experience. Still, he got it right: Eve's PvP is mainly about ganking. No matter how he arrived at that conclusion, he got it right.
What you think about him doesn't matter.
If you want to go around basing your arguments on limited experience and hoping you are right, you go for it. Don't expect anyone to ever take you seriously. Perhaps that is what you do, perhaps you do spend your time commenting on systems and games you have little to no experience with. Fair play to you.
You should note that the people I was debating with, well they didn't "get it right", they were not talking specifically about EVE or ganking in EVE. I suggested that their limited experience with said systems probably had a large part to do with them drawing what I felt to be incorrect conclusions. I also pointed out the danger of making sweeping statements when you are basing them from a point of limited experience of said systems.
So no, basing sweeping statements on limited experience is never a good idea and trying to argue the opposite is idiotic in the extreme.
So you don't give anyone any credit even if they were 100% right? Are you pulling seniority or something? I made a thread about this perceived superiority not too long ago... If someone gets it right most of the time, if one wins most of the time, he or she must know something.
You're just burying your head in the sand.
I don't give anyone credit for playing a game for years. They may well still be ignorant about how the game works. My own guesstimation is that 90% of all players have difficulty grasping even the simplest tactics and strategies. Some of them aren't even interested. It doesn't matter how much you play, but how you play. The quality of your experiences matter. If you can jump into top level PvP right away, you probably make very educated statements about the game fairly quickly.
One guy in the League of Legends World Championship finals had played the game for just 2-3 months. The prizepool in that tournament was 3 million dollars if I remember correctly. So that guy clearly had a good sense of what he was doing and how the game should be played although undoubtedly the top level coaching and training also helped.
My point is, if you can make a pretty good assessment of the game in a relatively short amount of time if you have a lot of experience in gaming to draw upon. So if you have played a lot of MMOs you can have a good idea of what works and what doesn't, which tactics and builds are promising and the general idea of the metagame. Are you saying it can't be done?
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Originally posted by mmoDAD When did players start to accept the fact that it's okay for PvP to be completely instanced?EverQuest II's 2006 Nagafen Server was a World PvP Server. It worked.SWG's PvP was World PvP. It worked. Ever since WoW, PvP has become pure trash. And to make matters worse, "World PvP" has become such a loose term that anything that isn't completely structured is considered World PvP, e.g., SWTOR's Ilum - a dedicated area for PvP. This isn't World PvP. It's trash. Servers should go like this:Server #1 PvE (Optional Battlegrounds)Server #2 PvP (World PvP) I'll tell you why people waste time in these redundant battlegrounds. It's because they are so helpless and consumed with the damn carrot dangling in front of their faces. You want that little piece of reward that everyone will eventually have. It's boring. It's an embarrassment to the genre.I don't want to see anyone fail. However, it would be a lie to not say I enjoy watching these Instanced PvP games turn into failed FTP games.
I concur. It's called theme-park MMO experience. That's why I prefer it sandbox and hardcore.
Pvp is pvp. Open world or instanced the play is the same. There are benefits to each, open world feels immersive and huge in scale, often lasts long. However stats of instanced pvp, that is being able to see your stats at the end of each game is a big benefit, and also gets rid of people abusing the system to get pvp gear/rank by having another account there to keep killing for w.e. currency or rank experience.
Get off your high horse. The amount of things fellow "veteran mmo players" (as if that actually means anything) complain about simply amazes me.
Side note i prefer open world hands down, however i wouldnt play a game without instanced pvp, ever. Also vice versa, big reason i dislike gw2 also, wvw is not a replacement by any means.
When I played EVE the idea was, if it's a fair fight, you planned it wrong. (Something I have mentioned before)
You wanted an advantage. If they had ten ships then you wanted twenty. It was about surprise, it was about gaining intellegence, it was about having the right kind of ships and yes it was about having more than your opponent.
In instanced pvp your, side has the same amount of people as the other side, your all about the same level, it is about a fair fight. It's about organization, communication and tactics, and in many cases it is about gear (Which is why gamers are against pay to win)
Now this wouldn't encourage me to play EVE, in other OPvP games, this wasnt the case.
Noone claimed it is for everybody.
I know..........
Do you? I have mentioned how different games deal with this issue, specifically so that they are even for (most of the) people who would not like to participate in this activity, yet you chose to quote just the first line, why?
Comments
The real problem is the PVE people don't want to play with you.
No! It can't be that simple! It can't possibly be that some people prefer PvE content with optional PvP! Those people are just stupid heads or they don't know how PvP is supposed to work. They just don't KNOW, man!
** edit **
This is sarcasm.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Are you classifying being killed as being griefed. Because if you are you are being massively disingenuous.
Moreover it is perfectly right that you should say "OwPvP is not what I'm looking for", in fact I would go out of my way to back you up for saying as such, each person wants different things from their games.
But we see the same old story here, people with limited (sometimes even zero) play time in OWPVP games, making sweeping statements about said games which are simply incorrect most of the time.
I've extensively played open world pvp games from UO onwards and I can put my time being griefed or griefing to far less tha 1% of my total game time, far, far less in fact. Some will have experienced less, some more, some will be unlucky and get killed a few times in a short space of time and quit. Well that sucks, but that doesn't suddenly mean everyone is getting killed all the time, all the way through their gaming life cycle.
Look, open world pvp games are not "better", it is subjective to the indivdual. Not everyone should like open world games. People who don't like open world games are not carebears or weeklings. But there is a great deal og hyperbole and nonsense in this thread, which seems to be coming from people whith little to no actual experience in what they are talking about.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
SWG combat system worked only because the players had a choice. They had three stages of combat. Civilian, combatant, and special forces. Even before the NGE you had the choice and had to go to the recruiter to switch. More open world pvp games should be like this, would help those that arent 100% into world pvp get a taste of it when they chose and not forced into it.
Thats a huge misconception with most sandboxes that hurts the genre.
Yea are guaranteed to get one of the following default replies if you say yo udon't like OWPvP:
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
We live in a world now where people got trophy's for trying.
Their version of competition for fun is skewed.
a yo ho ho
Works the other way though I've seen countless posts on these forums from people that "played" eve, saying the got "constantly ganked" from the moment they entered the game, which as anyone who's actually played knows Is a complete and utter lie.
Also people talking about full loot in darkfall, when you can tell they haven't played because they talk Like they were loosing all this hard earned leet style wow gear.
How do you know its a lie? You can get ganked right from the start, constantly even. I played Eve for 2 years and well over 90% of the engagements I was involved in were ganks. The whole game is gank-warfare from my standpoint. Yeah, its "PvP" but its not the kind of PvP I enjoy most.
It could not reach the fun I had in GW1 - or even WAR's scenarios.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Perhaps I should attack SWTOR endgame and proclaim that everyone taking part in it spends their entire time flaming each other. That I haven't played TOR for more than 5 minutes in beta and have no idea how the players treat one another, that doesn't matter right.
I've spent a good amount of time in instanced pvp across multiple games and multiple genres and yet I haven't been involved in high end team play in WoW or GW2. Perhaps I should make sweeping comments about the teams that have, perhaps I should say they all talk shit and run around counter clockwise at the start of each match.
I'll just say Quirhid says ad hominems are bad yo, should anyone state that I have insufficient experience on the matter.
Why did you feel the need to qualify the amount of time you spent in EVE in your other post? You said you spent two years in it so you know it was about ganking. Surely you could have only played it for two minutes, got ganked once and then been able to know exactly how many people where invovled in and how often ganking occurred? Oh wait, no that would have been utter bullshit.
"I got killed three times as a noob and quit". Fair enough.
"Everyone gets killed x times by x players over n period". Well you actually have to have a somewhat larger amount of experience in the game to know whether that is the case or not.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
You do not get constantly ganked in hi sec. It is a lie. Sure if your stupid enough to go null sec with no corp and on a new account you will, bit you would have to willfully put yourself in a getting ganked situation.
There are people that play eve purely to pve.
Why do you think that we have "settled" for instanced PvP. Is it so hard for you to understand that some people actually enjoy more competitive PvP rather than zerg/gank fests?
For me GW1's PvP and WoW's arenas are the most enjoyable style of PvP in MMos.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
You don't get my meaning. That 5-minute experience makes your statement unlikely, but not wrong. That is why it is insufficient as a counter-argument, because even with your 5-minute experience, you might be right.
Also, I felt I needed to put a number on how much time I played Eve because I feel the same as the guy saying "I get ganked constantly." The game is nothing but ganking. Either you're on the giving end or the receiving end.
Experience from other games helps aswell: I also said within 5-minutes of starting the game, that "Eve's learning skills were stupid and should be removed altogether." Was I wrong?
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
You might be right, you might be wrong, you are essentially guessing/pulling crap out of the air. Unless you have enough experience to actually back up said claims. You need limited experience to say "I don't like this" or "this happened to me". You need somewhat more to be able to say "oh x players do this n of the time" and keep a straight face.
John can comment on employment as much as he likes. If John happened to comment on the day to day activities of a job which he hasn't performed or has very limited experience of. Well then he is likely to have his comments pulled apart by someone with experience in said career.
Sample size/experience is rather important in order to qualify certain statements.
If someone undocks, gets nuked, then quits. Well they are entitled to say "I got ganked and I quit". If though they said "Everyone ganks all the time", well they simply have nowhere near enough experience to know whether or not that is true or not. They may be lucky and guess right, but the reality is, no one will take their comment seriously.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
It really depends. I have a good streak going at the moment although I might only remember the cases where I was right. Like I said, you can often grow your odds with your experience. Still, he got it right: Eve's PvP is mainly about ganking. No matter how he arrived at that conclusion, he got it right.
What you think about him doesn't matter.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Not reall as the game is built to allow the players to know when they have thigns coming up, from raid lock outs, instances, bgs, and such. If you have full on zones that were constently contested the bgs would dry up slowly. So the timer allows you to jump into several bgs, instances, and even raids, while waiting for the pvp area to go contested. For people also on a a fixed time frame it is a waste for them to go into a constently contested zone, and then have to leave after spending their entire alloted time in the zone. The times actually frees up their time to partake in more content, without actually missing out on time that could be spent in a contested zone. Also wow is not a game based around pvp at all but a pve game with pvp tacked on, as such the pvp is really more of a method of allowing players that like pvp to play, and yet also give an secondary form of combat that a pver can play when they burn out on pve that day.
You should note that the people I was debating with, well they didn't "get it right", they were not talking specifically about EVE or ganking in EVE. I suggested that their limited experience with said systems probably had a large part to do with them drawing what I felt to be incorrect conclusions. I also pointed out the danger of making sweeping statements when you are basing them from a point of limited experience of said systems.
So no, basing sweeping statements on limited experience is never a good idea and trying to argue the opposite is idiotic in the extreme.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Issues is more that giefing is pking, but pking is not always griefing. It is the group of players that go out looking to mess with, harrass, and also grief other players via ow-pvp that trully kill ow-pvp as becoming more mainstream. Any game that allows a player to gain an advantage by levels, or power, that they can use to grief lower-level/power character has an issue for mainstream usage. Making it that when you engage in combat with otheer players that your gear, level, and such is reduced into being largely marginalized for how much it will impact your ability to win a fight against another player would be great. As it would make it that literally a lvl one an a capped level character even with a gear difference would have a largely equal chance of winning the encounter.
I would also say that the definition of griefing needs to be defined much more, or the arguement is moot, simply by marit neither side can agree on a definition. to me Griefing is any negative activity that is agressively used to harrass players, such as corpse camping, or willfully hunting low-level characters in lower level zones for the mere fact of harrassing them by killing them in a completely one sided fight. The world might be unfair which is true, but every action has a consiquence for doing it, and such actives should have strick penelities for those that do them. Prime expample you can kill someone in real life, but for doing it you can be tried, and then senticed for that action, even losing your life based on where you are.
Also most instanced pvp is more like a glatiator match, prossional sports, and such than true warfare. It is an match between people, animals, teams that is for entertainment. They are largely fair/even foot fights/events that are used for entainment, but also are regemented for the people to enjoy, while also giving the players rewards (not always mind you.) for participating. NOt sure about anyone else but a football game, soccer, or such that was constently going on would be pretty boring after awhile. An even in ancient times areas might have been contested, but never was warfare constent, normally when night fell the fighting ended regardless of the winner or loser's dessire.
It's just in 90% of post wow mmos its the only pvp available.
If players had decided instanced pvp was the best. There would be more players in spvp than in WvW in gw2 and planetside 2 wouldn't be the huge success it is.
It took developers 8 years, but finally they realised there's a market for players that don't want the tacked on afterthought trash that is wow style pvp.
Having a market that seeks it, and being the better version is not the same. Many players prefer smaller mmuch more regemented style pvp like bgs, and such, while there are still many that like much more large scale, and constant pvp like ow-pvp. Just the same like anythign the dev's also found that many of the players in games hated the idea of being griefed, and worrying about get ganked by other players in thier game time, but also liked to pvp as such we have instanced pvp that is now mainstream. It also takes much more to make ow-pvp appatizing to mainstream players, as most of those players do not want to be at the mercy of other players for their enjoyment of the game.
Litterally it is two completely different mind-sets that populate two completely different styles of play, neither is trully better or worse, but one is more popular than the other atleast in mmos. Most mmo ow-pvp dies out quite fast, and gets replaced, not by being worse, but by being less desired byy the players that play.
No, it is definitely skewed the other way. Personally I dont attack anyone that doesn't deserve it or isn't a challenge. But I know I am in the minority. I mean, say whatever bullshit you want, but the whole purpose of having OWPvP is to go around killing other players, which creates that whole scenario that they have to kill everyone they see. It isnt so bad when it is faction based, but FFA PvP is just rediculous.
So you don't give anyone any credit even if they were 100% right? Are you pulling seniority or something? I made a thread about this perceived superiority not too long ago... If someone gets it right most of the time, if one wins most of the time, he or she must know something.
You're just burying your head in the sand.
I don't give anyone credit for playing a game for years. They may well still be ignorant about how the game works. My own guesstimation is that 90% of all players have difficulty grasping even the simplest tactics and strategies. Some of them aren't even interested. It doesn't matter how much you play, but how you play. The quality of your experiences matter. If you can jump into top level PvP right away, you probably make very educated statements about the game fairly quickly.
One guy in the League of Legends World Championship finals had played the game for just 2-3 months. The prizepool in that tournament was 3 million dollars if I remember correctly. So that guy clearly had a good sense of what he was doing and how the game should be played although undoubtedly the top level coaching and training also helped.
My point is, if you can make a pretty good assessment of the game in a relatively short amount of time if you have a lot of experience in gaming to draw upon. So if you have played a lot of MMOs you can have a good idea of what works and what doesn't, which tactics and builds are promising and the general idea of the metagame. Are you saying it can't be done?
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
I concur. It's called theme-park MMO experience. That's why I prefer it sandbox and hardcore.
It's wow clone mmo pvp
Subtle difference.
Daoc & planetside are themeparks and pvp orientated and have no instancing at all for instance.
Get off your high horse. The amount of things fellow "veteran mmo players" (as if that actually means anything) complain about simply amazes me.
Side note i prefer open world hands down, however i wouldnt play a game without instanced pvp, ever. Also vice versa, big reason i dislike gw2 also, wvw is not a replacement by any means.
Do you? I have mentioned how different games deal with this issue, specifically so that they are even for (most of the) people who would not like to participate in this activity, yet you chose to quote just the first line, why?
Flame on!