Originally posted by Bidwood I love you guys. I think it's really a vocal minority of gamers who read this thread and are unwilling to see it for what it is: What a group of gamers want from a future game - not what they want to impose on the rest of the world.
Who are you intending to "dispel these full PvP myths" to?
This is what has me wondering also. There is zero info in the OP on what the 'vocal minority' want, just arguments against those who do not enjoy FFA PvP and what the OP believes are 'myths'. They aren't myths, they are point of views from those who do not wish to participate in these types of games.
If this is clear to begin with (and I believe it is since no PvP'er would say any of these myths to not play a PvP game), why even bother trying to debunk them if all you're trying to do is 'inform' ppl on what it is you want. Contradictory.
I missed it because I found it entirely pointless. While I actually agree with all but one of his points, all this sums up to is him trying to convince people who AREN'T into full PvP to essentially not be against full PvP. Some people don't like full PvP, and they have very legitimate reasons for disliking it that aren't going to change based on whatever myths the OP did dispel.
I think i get what you're saying then. I did not look at it from this perspective.
You're saying he is dispelling these "myths" in a hope that some of the people who hold these viewpoints will see that the PvP mindset isn't what they thought and as a result they will embrace the FFA PVP mentality?
My take on it was that, there are often a lot of backhanded comments on forums about PvP enthusiasts and why we like certain things and why we don't like certain things. Just as some of our people will carelessly call the PVE lovers "carebears" and other derogatory things.
I thought he was trying to explain how maybe we aren't just psychopaths out to ruin everyone's fun because we like to pvp and maybe we are only sometimes unwilling to compromise because we just don't enjoy certain types of games.
Who knows what is in the heart of an OP though.
And i can't disagree that it was pointless.
Whether his intent was as you say, to convert people.
Or as I originally thought, to simply increase the level of understanding on the forums.
It certainly did not seem to do either. But maybe he'll show back up and let us know which way his intentions were at least.
I missed it because I found it entirely pointless. While I actually agree with all but one of his points, all this sums up to is him trying to convince people who AREN'T into full PvP to essentially not be against full PvP. Some people don't like full PvP, and they have very legitimate reasons for disliking it that aren't going to change based on whatever myths the OP did dispel.
I think i get what you're saying then. I did not look at it from this perspective.
You're saying he is dispelling these "myths" in a hope that some of the people who hold these viewpoints will see that the PvP mindset isn't what they thought and as a result they will embrace the FFA PVP mentality?
My take on it was that, there are often a lot of backhanded comments on forums about PvP enthusiasts and why we like certain things and why we don't like certain things. Just as some of our people will carelessly call the PVE lovers "carebears" and other derogatory things.
I thought he was trying to explain how maybe we aren't just psychopaths out to ruin everyone's fun because we like to pvp and maybe we are only sometimes unwilling to compromise because we just don't enjoy certain types of games.
Who knows what is in the heart of an OP though.
And i can't disagree that it was pointless.
Whether his intent was as you say, to convert people.
Or as I originally thought, to simply increase the level of understanding on the forums.
It certainly did not seem to do either. But maybe he'll show back up and let us know which way his intentions were at least.
Those are fair points, and I agree with you that there are a lot of backhanded comments on both ends, and PvP seems to entail people who are just out to ruin fun. He really did a good job in convincing me that that particular mindset was just silly, so if nothing else he did keep to his word in educating us.
If I've read one of these pro-PVP threads, I've read a 1000 of them...
I know there are sportmanslike and honourable PVP'ers in the world. They are just not in the majority.
The "myths" about full PVP cannot be dispelled, because they are not myths, they are all true !
The common attitude in MMO PVP seems to be: "If you landed in a fair fight, you're doing it wrong"
There are far too many "PVP'ers" who derive maximum satisfaction from facerolling their targets, whether it be due to murdering carebears, or level/gear superiority, or number superiority, or straight-out hacks/cheats via 3rd-party software, or any combination of the aforementioned.
That is the behaviour that created the "myths", and which sustains and strengthens them every time the conditions allow it.
There seems to be two prevalent false assumptions going on in this thread:
1. Everyone plays mmos primarily for combat.
2. Risking loss and death are the only way to place value on what you do in an mmo.
Both these statements are false. Many people primarily play mmos for other reasons than combat. I get my combat fix in fighting games. When I want to immerse myself in a player driven world, I play mmos.
Crafting an item just to be ganked and have it stolen does not make the gameplay exciting for me. Risk of loss is not a motivation for many mmo players. My best mmo experiences are when I collaborated with other players to achieve a common goal such as making a live event or a multi tiered crafted item. Creativity is its own reward as well regarding decoration, outfits, etc. And exploration has its benefits as well.
I am not saying this appeals to everyone. Saying its in the minority is irrelevant.
Thank you for stating the above. As I was reading this thread I kept waiting to see if someone would make this point before my having to, but I am happy to see there are others who can ably make the point.
Contrary to the belief of many of these OW FFA PvP advocates, for many MMORPG gamers, combat and conflict is not the focus or main reason they play the game. For many it is simply something else they do during their journey, but by no means is it the most desirable or enjoyable thing to do. For many its is simply a piece of the puzzle that accomplishes a means to the end. It is an MMORPG after all, not an FPS.
Fact is, many MMORPG gamers play the game for story and lore. They want to immerse themselves in a living breathing fantasy world. This is why there is lore, a story line, and beautifully detailed worlds to explore. They want to craft, play the economy, develop and nurture lasting friendships, and perhaps contribute to building a guild house, town or decorate a house.
The real myth to the PvE vs PvP debate, is that every sandbox game must have OW FFA PvP. A sandbox game is entirely capable of being either PvE oriented or combat oriented. That would be all dependant on the targeted player base. Another myth lies in the assumption that a sandbox can be developed to cater to both play styles. The FFA PvP advocates, however, will continue to further the myth simply because in PvP opposing players ARE the content, in PvE NPC's represent content.
I have said it before and I will say it again, attempts to develop an MMORPG that will ever be satisfactory to both the PvE and hardcore OW FFA PvP is nothing but a pipe dream. It will never happen. Like night and day, hot and cold, yes and no ... they are polar opposites and the only reason developers even consider the effort to incorporate both play styles in their games is for maximization of profits.
Lastly, as much as I would love EQN to have consensual PvP for lasting value, I have an equal desire for it to be OW FFA PvP. Why? Because it will totally negate the argument of many of these pro FFA PvP folk who insist that the only reason an FFA PvP game has not succeeded is because it hasn't been done by a AAA developer. The release and eventual failure, or niche branding, of EQN would finally lay this myth to rest.
The "myths" about full PVP cannot be dispelled, because they are not myths, they are all true !
The common attitude in MMO PVP seems to be: "If you landed in a fair fight, you're doing it wrong"
There are far too many "PVP'ers" who derive maximum satisfaction from facerolling their targets, whether it be due to murdering carebears, or level/gear superiority, or number superiority, or straight-out hacks/cheats via 3rd-party software, or any combination of the aforementioned.
That is the behaviour that created the "myths", and which sustains and strengthens them every time the conditions allow it.
There are some PVE players, maybe quite a lot, that derive satisfaction from just facerolling the easy mode dungeons that are so ubiquitous in games these days.
These aren't the types of players I would want to really listen to when it comes to ideas on game design and mechanics. I certainly would not ever assume they are representative of the entire PVE loving, dungeon running community.
There are a lot of skillful PVE players that put in a lot of effort into clearing challenging content. Whether that is the majority or not is irrelevant though, I try to have a respect for what they do and not lump them all together as one large unskilled mass of people.
And i'm not accusing you of doing that. Your post just sparked the thought that the two PVP and PVE groups are comparable in this way.
Originally posted by Apraxis Ok. I am the hauler in EvE with shipments of 150 million isk+ in a Iteron Mark V (8 million isk ship incl. fitting). I am well aware of risk... and the reward of it. I am well worth it to be suicide ganked.. as long as they would know that i am that much overloaded.I am also the low sec miner in EvE risking his ship and his work. (although it isn't worth it nowadays because the risk vs. reward is rather unbalanced these days in EvE.. or with other words high sec ore is to much worth in comparsion to low sec ore). And yes null sec is in the most part a lot safer and you get rewarded more. But this is maybe just another indicator that the risk vs. reward in EvE is somewhat out of balance. (Just a statistic. Mining high sec in comparsion to low sec. You may earn 20% more mining in low sec. but with the trade off that you can't do it afk, that you will most likely attacked every 20 min. and withit lose most probably 50% of everything you have done. But that just implies that Risk vs. Reward is out of balance in EvE, and not that the theory of Risk vs. Reward is faulty)But of course it is part of the game to minimize risk and maximize profit. It is part of the risk vs. reward agenda.And the incentive to supply people or go for risky business is(as risk vs. reward implies) to get more money out of it.And i am a pvp player. But nowaday you don't usually earn anything with pvp in EvE. At least most of the time. You just have to invest a lot of isk.
If it's more profitable to mine in high sec space, that's because of the players. It's also a fundamental flaw in OW/FFA PvP. Players just want to kill stuff. It doesn't matter if the stuff is mobs or other players. They just want to kill it. Not for profit mind you, but because they want to kill stuff. What you've described is the bloodthirsty nature of Eve's PvP impacting the economy of the game for individuals. I said, "individuals", because if it were not more profitable for large corps to be in low sec space, then they wouldn't be there.
The "risk vs reward" mechanics in Eve aren't broken, they just aren't geared towards solo play in the high risk areas.
Also, if it does make fiscal sense for corps to mine en mass in high sec space, then it will devalue the ores mined in high sec space, making it more profitable to mine in low sec space again, even for solo players.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I have said it before and I will say it again, attempts to develop an MMORPG that will ever be satisfactory to both the PvE and hardcore OW FFA PvP is nothing but a pipe dream. It will never happen. Like night and day, hot and cold, yes and no ... they are polar opposites and the only reason developers even consider the effort to incorporate both play styles in their games is for maximization of profits.
Totally disagree. All you need is a strong pvp environment that is fair and balanced, and to periodically introduce good raids for people. I know it sounds easier said than done, but its nowhere near impossible.
I have said it before and I will say it again, attempts to develop an MMORPG that will ever be satisfactory to both the PvE and hardcore OW FFA PvP is nothing but a pipe dream. It will never happen. Like night and day, hot and cold, yes and no ... they are polar opposites and the only reason developers even consider the effort to incorporate both play styles in their games is for maximization of profits.
Totally disagree. All you need is a strong pvp environment that is fair and balanced, and to periodically introduce good raids for people. I know it sounds easier said than done, but its nowhere near impossible.
You're right, it is easier said than done. Which might be the reason why it has never been done. When it is ever done, then it will cease to be impossible. Until then, it will remain impossible. The proof is on my side. Your proof is nothing but, again, a pipe dream.
Totally disagree. All you need is a strong pvp environment that is fair and balanced, and to periodically introduce good raids for people. I know it sounds easier said than done, but its nowhere near impossible.
Don't sound like your "disagreement" actually matters. There is no such game.
The only full pvp games are pvp-only games like MOBAs, and WoT.
Totally disagree. All you need is a strong pvp environment that is fair and balanced, and to periodically introduce good raids for people. I know it sounds easier said than done, but its nowhere near impossible.
Don't sound like your "disagreement" actually matters. There is no such game.
The only full pvp games are pvp-only games like MOBAs, and WoT.
By certain logic, airplanes are impossible.
Humans lived on the earth for a great many years unable to fly. Many even thought human flight impossible. They may have used the fact that no human was flying as a proof.
I don't enjoy ffa open world pvp. Why is that such a big problem for people who do? Should I make a crafting version of this thread? Maybe then you'll see how obtuse the op is.
I don't enjoy ffa open world pvp. Why is that such a big problem for people who do? Should I make a crafting version of this thread? Maybe then you'll see how obtuse the op is.
Who had a big problem with you not liking pvp? What post?
I haven't seen anyone act like that here, but if someone said they have a problem with you not pvping, you gotta remember sometimes you're going to get trolled.
Also, I would be interested in a crafting version. I spend a lot of time crafting in some games. I'm interested in hearing what myths surround us.
I just replied to like 40 posts but lost almost all of the responses in the clipboard. So frustrating. Sorry if this comes across as a cheap substitute, but I just wanted to thank the many people who have offered constructive feedback on this. I was discouraged by the first couple of pages of responses, but after catching up realized there are a ton of people who agree about the myths.
Because this question has come up a lot, the purpose of the thread is not to convince anyone to play or support full PVP games. It's to raise awareness about what the people who want them are actually asking for, because it's clear from many counter-arguments in other threads that there is a lack of understanding and we are all lumped together into the "griefer" category.
"Full" PVP is a term I coined in this thread and is more than just "FFA PVP". It's PVP implemented along with all of the other game systems as a meaningful, integral part of the game allowing good design decisions to be made with it. I see the at least the following types of players, including combinations of them, attracted to this game (note this is NOT a complete list, just an ad hoc one to give you an idea of the scope of the market for full PVP):
1.) Those who PK for resources/territory/tactical advantage/achievements - I believe DocBrody brought this up. For some folks, it's not personal. You just have something shiny they want. This is League of Legends, which is the most-played game in the world.
2.) Those who PK to grief other players - Judging by the responses, I think some of you will be surprised to see me acknowledge this one. I never meant to sweep griefers under the rug with myth #1. I just meant to show that there are enough people who want full PVP games where griefers are part of the ecosystem that we don't need you if you don't see the value. You're actually doing a huge disservice to rest of us by accusing us of being griefers and living to harrass unwilling participants. They would love the full PVP game, but they are only a small part of the playerbase.
3.) The chivalrous knights The people who get off fighting PKs and defending the next two groups:
4.) People who like to PVE or do commerce in a world with full PVP - Risk v.s. reward factors in. Can I beat that dragon and take its sword before someone attacks? Will someone snipe me when the battle ends? Have to be careful - there is a lot of risk involved, but the reward is so much sweeter because of it. More than a few of these people have taken me under their wing and given me equipment, supplies and tips - even in Darkfall.
5.) Survivors This is the category I belong to. For me, the risk is often the reward. I love having to watch my back and use cunning to either escape or defeat people who try to take me down. I don't really care if they're trying to grief me or if they just want my loot for the tactical advantage. It doesn't matter because they are both content for me: intelligent, powerful enemies. Of course, this is only fun in games where skill is a factor in evading or defeating the enemy. Ultima Online comes to mind, where effective use of the "hide" skill could make the difference between life or death and help you escape from enemies that you have zero chance of defeating. There was also the very mortal skill and stat caps which prevented anyone from getting too strong. And lootable equipment meant nobody could gain an insurmountable upper-hand to food-process other players.
I remember saying I was a survivor-type once, and another person on the forum basically said "That's great, but you're a minority." ('Minority' being the most over- and mis-used term on this forum.) I left the conversation thinking they were right, until I came across DayZ. What started off as a zombie survival quasi-MMO with open-world FFA PVP based on a mod for another game has ballooned into something with 1.7 million players that is getting its own standalone version, with Sony and Microsoft fighting over who gets the console exclusive version - a playerbase that will no doubt rake in a million more. Survival gameplay against other players is very much emergent gameplay and there is a lot of money to be had here.
And here's where myth #1 really applies. Survivors are content for people who PK for a tactical advantage and people who PK just for the sake of griefing - and vice versa!!! So there's an ecosystem out there of player preferences that works really well together and can thrive just fine and be profitable without any "victims" - people who loath the consequences of full PVP. That's why many of us don't care if victims play at all - and it would actually be easier on our ears and eyes if they didn't.
Fans of PVP are waiting around for the "return of the king" so to speak. PVPers who aren't well-versed in MMOs may not even realize they want it until they see it: A triple-A virtual world with full PVP and well-designed systems that don't hand all of the keys to the castle to the griefers. We need relatively safe areas in the game, like hi-sec, and a smart justice system, so types 3, 4 and 5 can actually have fun. We need excellent PVE so type 4 sticks around instead of giving up and going to WoW. These are just a few examples of why you need full PVP integrated with other well-designed game systems to really have a successful MMO with open-world PVP.
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn Originally posted by FoomerangI don't enjoy ffa open world pvp. Why is that such a big problem for people who do? Should I make a crafting version of this thread? Maybe then you'll see how obtuse the op is.
Who had a big problem with you not liking pvp? What post?
Also, I would be interested in a crafting version. I spend a lot of time crafting in some games.
The hundreds of posts basically saying if you don't enjoy it, then you must not understand it. I get it. I get why people like it. I understand the feeling of meaningful PvP. This is only one of many threads like this started daily about this topic. Why is that?
WOW has pvp servers. PvE is more popular. There is a post about the numbers before. Eve is AAA, and it is a niche game.
What a freaking internet clown hehe.
Right now wow eu.
2* full pvp servers Vs 1 full pve server.
23* high pvp servers Vs 14* high pve servers
seems like pve is niche and people want to pvp.
While this is entertaining... and I will totally admit very amusing.
The US list is much the same... altho once you scroll down to "low" its entirely made up of PvP servers except for one.. "Garona" which seems pretty appropriate in name somehow...
Originally posted by FoomerangI don't enjoy ffa open world pvp. Why is that such a big problem for people who do? Should I make a crafting version of this thread? Maybe then you'll see how obtuse the op is.
Who had a big problem with you not liking pvp? What post?
Also, I would be interested in a crafting version. I spend a lot of time crafting in some games.
The hundreds of posts basically saying if you don't enjoy it, then you must not understand it. I get it. I get why people like it. I understand the feeling of meaningful PvP. This is only one of many threads like this started daily about this topic. Why is that?
I guess I have just missed those posts.
If I see any in the future i'll try to hop in the thread and argue with them.
I am not going to go into some long diatribe about why you are wrong because you're probably not interested in reading my rebuttal anyway so all I am going to say is I disagree with every point in your post because I have 14+ years of experience that prove otherwise. So quit trying to pass your preferred and biased playstyle off on someone like me who doesn't want it.
Originally posted by Bidwood 4.) People who like to PVE or do commerce in a world with full PVP- Risk v.s. reward factors in. Can I beat that dragon and take its sword before someone attacks? Will someone snipe me when the battle ends? Have to be careful - there is a lot of risk involved, but the reward is so much sweeter because of it. More than a few of these people have taken me under their wing and given me equipment, supplies and tips - even in Darkfall.
I'll address point #4, since it is kind of the root of all other points.
Some find that level of risk vs reward too much. And it has been my experience that enough PvPers do NOT seek an equitable risk vs reward to make games like this not fun for me. I do not play games to get my adrenaline pumping. In the rare cases I do, I find single player "sneak type" games much better at it. A shot of adrenaline here or there is OK, but a constant barrage of it is not fun for me. I get tired and log off much sooner than a game without such demands.
I do not find fun in having something I worked hours for taken away or diminished by some random PvP act. It makes it so I have no desire to log back in. I definitely do not play MMOs to "prove my worth" to other players or be their own personal game content.
I understand that some players desire this kind of game play experience. I think they should have it available. However, nothing you can say will change my mind about why I dislike it. Call me whatever names you feel you should, "carebear", "immature", "wimp", whatever.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Totally disagree. All you need is a strong pvp environment that is fair and balanced, and to periodically introduce good raids for people. I know it sounds easier said than done, but its nowhere near impossible.
Don't sound like your "disagreement" actually matters. There is no such game.
The only full pvp games are pvp-only games like MOBAs, and WoT.
By certain logic, airplanes are impossible.
Humans lived on the earth for a great many years unable to fly. Many even thought human flight impossible. They may have used the fact that no human was flying as a proof.
They were in error.
By what logic? We know from Bernoulli's equation, long time before the invention of the airplane, that flying with fixed wings are possible.
Again, the proof is in the games. Random opinions matter very little in the MMO market.
Because this question has come up a lot, the purpose of the thread is not to convince anyone to play or support full PVP games. It's to raise awareness about what the people who want them are actually asking for, because it's clear from many counter-arguments in other threads that there is a lack of understanding and we are all lumped together into the "griefer" category.
I am a fan of FFA PVP and play several MMOs with it, and I disagree with almost everything you've written so far, so please don't pretend you speak for everyone.
To address each of your points:
1. You just want to grief me.
Most MMOs that have open world PVP have it poorly implemented. Take, for example AION, where players reach level 30 and then are subjected to pointless attacks from level 60s (outside of the Abyss) as they try to level. Saying this doesn't happen is just lying to yourself, because everyone else isn't buying it.
2. “Why should I be forced to play your way? No one is forcing you to PVE.”
This is something that a lot of PVPers like you will never figure out until the day you incur penalties for a defeat in combat that results from someone baking bread on the battlefield.
3. It’s PVP v.s. PVE and people who enjoy PVP are a niche.
In MMORPGs, the PVP crowd is a niche crowd. That's not a bad thing. Crafters are, too. So are raiders. In most MMORPGs, the majority do not participate in PVP.
4. Okay - but the majority of people want PVP on their terms.
That's not a myth. It's the truth. Open world PVP is usually an ongoing war. It is not a team-based match with a set start, confined arena, and 15 minute tiner. In any war you want to make sure the deck is stacked in your favor. If you don't, you're doing it wrong.
No idea why 5 and 6 are here as there is nothing myth or fact about them. They are proposed ideas. Padding?
7. Look around at the limited number of PVP servers on popular games. This is proof that the market for open-world PVP games is niche.
You say the issue there is that in all of those games the PVP is just tacked on. While I disagree in the case of GW2, AOC and several other MMOs, that's not even an issue really. Look at the subscriber based of most open world PVP MMOs in the Western market compared to the PVE ones. Here, your argument is going to be that most are poorly made, right?
So if the PvE gamers aren't playing the PVP MMORPGs and you contend that they have a low pop because the PVPers don't like what the PVP MMORPGs are offering, then are you really trying to 'dispel the myth' with your personal assumption that there is some silent majority that wants open world PVP in their MMORPG and is just waiting for the right one to come along?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Humans lived on the earth for a great many years unable to fly. Many even thought human flight impossible. They may have used the fact that no human was flying as a proof.
They were in error.
By what logic? We know from Bernoulli's equation, long time before the invention of the airplane, that flying with fixed wings are possible.
Again, the proof is in the games. Random opinions matter very little in the MMO market.
Bernoulli was not the first human.
Are we actually disagreeing? Can you clarify your point maybe?
Mine was that the absence of a thing is not proof the thing cannot exist. That is a logical statement and the only point I was making.
Comments
This is what has me wondering also. There is zero info in the OP on what the 'vocal minority' want, just arguments against those who do not enjoy FFA PvP and what the OP believes are 'myths'. They aren't myths, they are point of views from those who do not wish to participate in these types of games.
If this is clear to begin with (and I believe it is since no PvP'er would say any of these myths to not play a PvP game), why even bother trying to debunk them if all you're trying to do is 'inform' ppl on what it is you want. Contradictory.
I think i get what you're saying then. I did not look at it from this perspective.
You're saying he is dispelling these "myths" in a hope that some of the people who hold these viewpoints will see that the PvP mindset isn't what they thought and as a result they will embrace the FFA PVP mentality?
My take on it was that, there are often a lot of backhanded comments on forums about PvP enthusiasts and why we like certain things and why we don't like certain things. Just as some of our people will carelessly call the PVE lovers "carebears" and other derogatory things.
I thought he was trying to explain how maybe we aren't just psychopaths out to ruin everyone's fun because we like to pvp and maybe we are only sometimes unwilling to compromise because we just don't enjoy certain types of games.
Who knows what is in the heart of an OP though.
And i can't disagree that it was pointless.
Whether his intent was as you say, to convert people.
Or as I originally thought, to simply increase the level of understanding on the forums.
It certainly did not seem to do either. But maybe he'll show back up and let us know which way his intentions were at least.
Those are fair points, and I agree with you that there are a lot of backhanded comments on both ends, and PvP seems to entail people who are just out to ruin fun. He really did a good job in convincing me that that particular mindset was just silly, so if nothing else he did keep to his word in educating us.
If I've read one of these pro-PVP threads, I've read a 1000 of them...
I know there are sportmanslike and honourable PVP'ers in the world. They are just not in the majority.
The "myths" about full PVP cannot be dispelled, because they are not myths, they are all true !
The common attitude in MMO PVP seems to be: "If you landed in a fair fight, you're doing it wrong"
There are far too many "PVP'ers" who derive maximum satisfaction from facerolling their targets, whether it be due to murdering carebears, or level/gear superiority, or number superiority, or straight-out hacks/cheats via 3rd-party software, or any combination of the aforementioned.
That is the behaviour that created the "myths", and which sustains and strengthens them every time the conditions allow it.
Thank you for stating the above. As I was reading this thread I kept waiting to see if someone would make this point before my having to, but I am happy to see there are others who can ably make the point.
Contrary to the belief of many of these OW FFA PvP advocates, for many MMORPG gamers, combat and conflict is not the focus or main reason they play the game. For many it is simply something else they do during their journey, but by no means is it the most desirable or enjoyable thing to do. For many its is simply a piece of the puzzle that accomplishes a means to the end. It is an MMORPG after all, not an FPS.
Fact is, many MMORPG gamers play the game for story and lore. They want to immerse themselves in a living breathing fantasy world. This is why there is lore, a story line, and beautifully detailed worlds to explore. They want to craft, play the economy, develop and nurture lasting friendships, and perhaps contribute to building a guild house, town or decorate a house.
The real myth to the PvE vs PvP debate, is that every sandbox game must have OW FFA PvP. A sandbox game is entirely capable of being either PvE oriented or combat oriented. That would be all dependant on the targeted player base. Another myth lies in the assumption that a sandbox can be developed to cater to both play styles. The FFA PvP advocates, however, will continue to further the myth simply because in PvP opposing players ARE the content, in PvE NPC's represent content.
I have said it before and I will say it again, attempts to develop an MMORPG that will ever be satisfactory to both the PvE and hardcore OW FFA PvP is nothing but a pipe dream. It will never happen. Like night and day, hot and cold, yes and no ... they are polar opposites and the only reason developers even consider the effort to incorporate both play styles in their games is for maximization of profits.
Lastly, as much as I would love EQN to have consensual PvP for lasting value, I have an equal desire for it to be OW FFA PvP. Why? Because it will totally negate the argument of many of these pro FFA PvP folk who insist that the only reason an FFA PvP game has not succeeded is because it hasn't been done by a AAA developer. The release and eventual failure, or niche branding, of EQN would finally lay this myth to rest.
There are some PVE players, maybe quite a lot, that derive satisfaction from just facerolling the easy mode dungeons that are so ubiquitous in games these days.
These aren't the types of players I would want to really listen to when it comes to ideas on game design and mechanics. I certainly would not ever assume they are representative of the entire PVE loving, dungeon running community.
There are a lot of skillful PVE players that put in a lot of effort into clearing challenging content. Whether that is the majority or not is irrelevant though, I try to have a respect for what they do and not lump them all together as one large unskilled mass of people.
And i'm not accusing you of doing that. Your post just sparked the thought that the two PVP and PVE groups are comparable in this way.
If it's more profitable to mine in high sec space, that's because of the players. It's also a fundamental flaw in OW/FFA PvP. Players just want to kill stuff. It doesn't matter if the stuff is mobs or other players. They just want to kill it. Not for profit mind you, but because they want to kill stuff. What you've described is the bloodthirsty nature of Eve's PvP impacting the economy of the game for individuals. I said, "individuals", because if it were not more profitable for large corps to be in low sec space, then they wouldn't be there.
The "risk vs reward" mechanics in Eve aren't broken, they just aren't geared towards solo play in the high risk areas.
Also, if it does make fiscal sense for corps to mine en mass in high sec space, then it will devalue the ores mined in high sec space, making it more profitable to mine in low sec space again, even for solo players.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Totally disagree. All you need is a strong pvp environment that is fair and balanced, and to periodically introduce good raids for people. I know it sounds easier said than done, but its nowhere near impossible.
You're right, it is easier said than done. Which might be the reason why it has never been done. When it is ever done, then it will cease to be impossible. Until then, it will remain impossible. The proof is on my side. Your proof is nothing but, again, a pipe dream.
Don't sound like your "disagreement" actually matters. There is no such game.
The only full pvp games are pvp-only games like MOBAs, and WoT.
By certain logic, airplanes are impossible.
Humans lived on the earth for a great many years unable to fly. Many even thought human flight impossible. They may have used the fact that no human was flying as a proof.
They were in error.
I don't enjoy ffa open world pvp. Why is that such a big problem for people who do? Should I make a crafting version of this thread? Maybe then you'll see how obtuse the op is.
What a freaking internet clown hehe.
Right now wow eu.
2* full pvp servers Vs 1 full pve server.
23* high pvp servers Vs 14* high pve servers
seems like pve is niche and people want to pvp.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Who had a big problem with you not liking pvp? What post?
I haven't seen anyone act like that here, but if someone said they have a problem with you not pvping, you gotta remember sometimes you're going to get trolled.
Also, I would be interested in a crafting version. I spend a lot of time crafting in some games. I'm interested in hearing what myths surround us.
I just replied to like 40 posts but lost almost all of the responses in the clipboard. So frustrating. Sorry if this comes across as a cheap substitute, but I just wanted to thank the many people who have offered constructive feedback on this. I was discouraged by the first couple of pages of responses, but after catching up realized there are a ton of people who agree about the myths.
Because this question has come up a lot, the purpose of the thread is not to convince anyone to play or support full PVP games. It's to raise awareness about what the people who want them are actually asking for, because it's clear from many counter-arguments in other threads that there is a lack of understanding and we are all lumped together into the "griefer" category.
"Full" PVP is a term I coined in this thread and is more than just "FFA PVP". It's PVP implemented along with all of the other game systems as a meaningful, integral part of the game allowing good design decisions to be made with it. I see the at least the following types of players, including combinations of them, attracted to this game (note this is NOT a complete list, just an ad hoc one to give you an idea of the scope of the market for full PVP):
1.) Those who PK for resources/territory/tactical advantage/achievements
- I believe DocBrody brought this up. For some folks, it's not personal. You just have something shiny they want. This is League of Legends, which is the most-played game in the world.
2.) Those who PK to grief other players
- Judging by the responses, I think some of you will be surprised to see me acknowledge this one. I never meant to sweep griefers under the rug with myth #1. I just meant to show that there are enough people who want full PVP games where griefers are part of the ecosystem that we don't need you if you don't see the value. You're actually doing a huge disservice to rest of us by accusing us of being griefers and living to harrass unwilling participants. They would love the full PVP game, but they are only a small part of the playerbase.
3.) The chivalrous knights
The people who get off fighting PKs and defending the next two groups:
4.) People who like to PVE or do commerce in a world with full PVP
- Risk v.s. reward factors in. Can I beat that dragon and take its sword before someone attacks? Will someone snipe me when the battle ends? Have to be careful - there is a lot of risk involved, but the reward is so much sweeter because of it. More than a few of these people have taken me under their wing and given me equipment, supplies and tips - even in Darkfall.
5.) Survivors
This is the category I belong to. For me, the risk is often the reward. I love having to watch my back and use cunning to either escape or defeat people who try to take me down. I don't really care if they're trying to grief me or if they just want my loot for the tactical advantage. It doesn't matter because they are both content for me: intelligent, powerful enemies. Of course, this is only fun in games where skill is a factor in evading or defeating the enemy. Ultima Online comes to mind, where effective use of the "hide" skill could make the difference between life or death and help you escape from enemies that you have zero chance of defeating. There was also the very mortal skill and stat caps which prevented anyone from getting too strong. And lootable equipment meant nobody could gain an insurmountable upper-hand to food-process other players.
I remember saying I was a survivor-type once, and another person on the forum basically said "That's great, but you're a minority." ('Minority' being the most over- and mis-used term on this forum.) I left the conversation thinking they were right, until I came across DayZ. What started off as a zombie survival quasi-MMO with open-world FFA PVP based on a mod for another game has ballooned into something with 1.7 million players that is getting its own standalone version, with Sony and Microsoft fighting over who gets the console exclusive version - a playerbase that will no doubt rake in a million more. Survival gameplay against other players is very much emergent gameplay and there is a lot of money to be had here.
And here's where myth #1 really applies. Survivors are content for people who PK for a tactical advantage and people who PK just for the sake of griefing - and vice versa!!! So there's an ecosystem out there of player preferences that works really well together and can thrive just fine and be profitable without any "victims" - people who loath the consequences of full PVP. That's why many of us don't care if victims play at all - and it would actually be easier on our ears and eyes if they didn't.
Fans of PVP are waiting around for the "return of the king" so to speak. PVPers who aren't well-versed in MMOs may not even realize they want it until they see it: A triple-A virtual world with full PVP and well-designed systems that don't hand all of the keys to the castle to the griefers. We need relatively safe areas in the game, like hi-sec, and a smart justice system, so types 3, 4 and 5 can actually have fun. We need excellent PVE so type 4 sticks around instead of giving up and going to WoW. These are just a few examples of why you need full PVP integrated with other well-designed game systems to really have a successful MMO with open-world PVP.
Who had a big problem with you not liking pvp? What post?
Also, I would be interested in a crafting version. I spend a lot of time crafting in some games.
The hundreds of posts basically saying if you don't enjoy it, then you must not understand it. I get it. I get why people like it. I understand the feeling of meaningful PvP. This is only one of many threads like this started daily about this topic. Why is that?
While this is entertaining... and I will totally admit very amusing.
The US list is much the same... altho once you scroll down to "low" its entirely made up of PvP servers except for one.. "Garona" which seems pretty appropriate in name somehow...
I guess I have just missed those posts.
If I see any in the future i'll try to hop in the thread and argue with them.
This, totally agree!
Some find that level of risk vs reward too much. And it has been my experience that enough PvPers do NOT seek an equitable risk vs reward to make games like this not fun for me. I do not play games to get my adrenaline pumping. In the rare cases I do, I find single player "sneak type" games much better at it. A shot of adrenaline here or there is OK, but a constant barrage of it is not fun for me. I get tired and log off much sooner than a game without such demands.
I do not find fun in having something I worked hours for taken away or diminished by some random PvP act. It makes it so I have no desire to log back in. I definitely do not play MMOs to "prove my worth" to other players or be their own personal game content.
I understand that some players desire this kind of game play experience. I think they should have it available. However, nothing you can say will change my mind about why I dislike it. Call me whatever names you feel you should, "carebear", "immature", "wimp", whatever.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
By what logic? We know from Bernoulli's equation, long time before the invention of the airplane, that flying with fixed wings are possible.
Again, the proof is in the games. Random opinions matter very little in the MMO market.
I am a fan of FFA PVP and play several MMOs with it, and I disagree with almost everything you've written so far, so please don't pretend you speak for everyone.
To address each of your points:
1. You just want to grief me.
Most MMOs that have open world PVP have it poorly implemented. Take, for example AION, where players reach level 30 and then are subjected to pointless attacks from level 60s (outside of the Abyss) as they try to level. Saying this doesn't happen is just lying to yourself, because everyone else isn't buying it.
2. “Why should I be forced to play your way? No one is forcing you to PVE.”
This is something that a lot of PVPers like you will never figure out until the day you incur penalties for a defeat in combat that results from someone baking bread on the battlefield.
3. It’s PVP v.s. PVE and people who enjoy PVP are a niche.
In MMORPGs, the PVP crowd is a niche crowd. That's not a bad thing. Crafters are, too. So are raiders. In most MMORPGs, the majority do not participate in PVP.
4. Okay - but the majority of people want PVP on their terms.
That's not a myth. It's the truth. Open world PVP is usually an ongoing war. It is not a team-based match with a set start, confined arena, and 15 minute tiner. In any war you want to make sure the deck is stacked in your favor. If you don't, you're doing it wrong.
No idea why 5 and 6 are here as there is nothing myth or fact about them. They are proposed ideas. Padding?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Bernoulli was not the first human.
Are we actually disagreeing? Can you clarify your point maybe?
Mine was that the absence of a thing is not proof the thing cannot exist. That is a logical statement and the only point I was making.
Gosh .. people can't even do a simple search.
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/389472/page/2
Scroll down to #78. The pie chart clearly shows that pve has a higher population.