Some people here show perfect examples of what I do not like about owPvP surroundings. First come good arguments then namecalling and after a while complaining why the other side gets agressive. Starting out with calling PvEers more or less "whimps" (repeated mention of "PVEers are afraid of this and that), are not able to play, have less skill and so on. It is all about taste and talking for myself, this isn't the surrounding I like to spend my rare free time in.
Spare time has become a precious good and I do not want to waste it in situations I feel like being an adult in the school backyard (see my example of Sacred PvP server vs Sacred Hardcore PvP server). Most others do not like that either. The moment someone comes up with compromises (REAL consequences for PKing) the whining goes on on the other side "but then I can't kill everyone at any time." showing that this person DOES like to grief (even though saying beforehand PvPers want challenge and wouldn't do that. As said before: Games do not have real consequences for ganking. Turning red usuall isn't one. I mean basicly translated it comes up with: Punish the PvPer with PvP! Ganking even makes it easier. He hasn't to go out looking for PvP. Killing lowbes will bring the higher up right to him. He doesn't lose anything, since equipment doesn't matter in many owPvP games and the good equip is on the main char/ in the bank or easily reclaimed. So what? Punishment for being a maniac would be: Imprisonment, banishment, death sentence (without respawn), or some honor system where the char commits suicide due to lack of honor. Those systems are rejected by the PvP side, since it limits their choice. (I am talking about PKing and ganking, not the 'rightful' killing of the opposing side.)
In Rift they took out the autoflag, because people just went in, stood in AoE effects and whops, char flagged and ganked. This shows how secure a system has to be, to prevent jerks from being jerks.
Many of you believe that OWpvp is a playground for max level griefers who scour the starter areas looking for low level victims with the intent of making the quit the game. Thats like saying humans are a destructive race who are not only a danger to themselves but even to their own environment. Yes, humans can be destructive and griefing does occur but does that define it?
The purpose of Open world non-consensual player vs player is not to grief but to take part in random encounters. Lets face it, NPC's are just scripts designed for players to kill over and over again to progress. An Ogre camp in a PvE game, you already know you are going to kill hundreds of them stock up on "Ogre Goods" sell them in town then find something different to kill... wash and repeat. OWpvp say you are on your way to the Ogre camp and somebody arrives just as you are? The blood starts pumping and your hand starts shaking, now you have an interesting situation. You can try to grouping up with him however there is always that possibility that he could wait until you are low to kill you. I play for moments that get the mind thinking and get the blood flowing.
Games like Darkfall where the items are player crafted and equipment doesn't give a huge advantage. There are times where I died and lost everything and on my way back to my stuff I find a corpse with better stuff. Im not saying all games have to be like this but I would like if 6 new games are being developed can atleast 1 have with OWpvp in it?
That's wonderful, but people do grief, and a zone that tries to be pve & pvp does not work. I mug someone and say 'but it makes it exciting for you'. - not if he was trying to pve at the time, that's just annoying. Ow zones should be pvp only and are therefore just big battlegrounds.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Ill only accept owpvp in my games when they place permadeath..thats the only way to see how "hardcore" are the pvp "pros" here..meanwhile for me there are no more than a group of People that want to impose there way of playing on others
Originally posted by hulgar Ill only accept owpvp in my games when they place permadeath..thats the only way to see how "hardcore" are the pvp "pros" here..meanwhile for me there are no more than a group of People that want to impose there way of playing on others
Permadeath AND friendly fire. None of this 'group up and mow down the lone quester' junk.
Almost every post here is about gangs. Let say there is no gangs. It is possible, like I said. So what are your arguments against OWpvp if there is no gangs? And most important why most of you want to play in broken worlds with instances, arenas and etc? I think you are afraid from open world, but maybe I'm wrong.
Here we go again. You just did what I said was one reason of not liking the owPvP clientel: Namecalling (Carebear, chicken and so on, even though you put it out nicely with "you are afraid"). You wont get the one answer, but individual answers. I can pretty much live with an immersive version of owPvP, which would me harsh consequences for murderers (as ingame the chars would murder innocent workers and hunters), like prison or permadeath in extreme cases (Evildoer was beaten and taken to authorities who did just put him to the sword). The lands should be patrolled by guards (randomly to avoid people just timing the patrol line) and if an enemy makes it far behind the enemy lines: So be it!
Another thing: No PvP skills or gear. Everyone works with the same skillset and gear, so people would be equally prepared and noone would be overgeared. Even though I'd love a "Can't attack x lvl lower than you" style. A world of killers isn't immersive to me and others do not want to have to deal with PvP at all. Best would be forced roleplaying in addition.
You wont find a game that pleases everyone, since both options are exclusive to each other. The type of people are different. I for one can't deal with elitist PvEers neither who want to monitor everyone and everything, to go 100%. Those control freaks are just as much a PITA to me, as gankers are. I play a game, so I want to have cool people around me, choices, options (such as the option not to PvP) and a deep system that makes me think. So you can guess I am not happy with the games atm, either. MMOers are to diverse, from raiders who want to go big and have evrything timed over Roleplayers who want o immerse in a world to PvPers who want to compete.
You can please most of the people some times, some of the people most of the times, but not all of the people all of the times.
Almost every post here is about gangs. Let say there is no gangs. It is possible, like I said. So what are your arguments against OWpvp if there is no gangs? And most important why most of you want to play in broken worlds with instances, arenas and etc? I think you are afraid from open world, but maybe I'm wrong.
Dueling honorably? Open world PvP is about ganking. If you find yourself in a fair fight, you are doing it wrong.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
I think you are afraid from open world, but maybe I'm wrong.
I do hope you were just trolling, because that -hardly- passes for anything resembling 'thought'. That aside...
If there were no 'gangs' of murderers and lowbie gankers? Essentially...fair duels on-demand? I'd be perfectly fine with it. But that will likely never happen, and even if it did there would be a group of exploiters going out of their way to try to figure out ways to cheat and kill lowbies or group up. Because pvp'ers, as a general rule, don't want fair fights. They want the surprise kill, or the group kill. Many of them exist only to ruin someone else's playtime and they'll admit this when they're being candid. I got several of them to mention it in the TERA beta, for all the good it did me. But if you could somehow pull it off -and- permaban those who cheated/exploited/found 'creative uses for game mechanics' (read: cheated), I'd be all for it.
Dueling honorably? Open world PvP is about ganking. If you find yourself in a fair fight, you are doing it wrong.
It is about fight, risk and adrenaline. The highest level of fun in games is when you win vs other player. I like to win vs many players, with higher level and gear.
On a side tangent, might I recommend you read about the 8 types of fun? Because you have this idea that there is only one (yours) and 'thats the way it is'. But that's not true at all. It's a good read, I promise.
Originally posted by ikcin First you did not answer to my questions, and second you are talking again for murderers and other nonsense. Let say you are elite PvE player, which even sounds stupid - to be good in PvE you need only a lot of time, not some skills, thinking, or personal charisma, just a time, so nothing in PvE can make you elite, but anyway. So you are elite PvE player, you farm non stop, and have a lot of resources and gold, so you can get the best gear in the game. If gear has no importance, this is very good for PvP but not for PvE players, and vice versa.
Ummm... Did you even read what I wrote? I definatly told you what kind of owPvP game I would play (I played Ryzom, that had owPvP zones IRC and guild PvP for Land and ressources and didn't mind because the community wasn't "Lulz! Me pwnz U, lusa!" and stupid names like "xxMeRoXX0rUSuxx0Rxx" were disallowed) and also that elite PvEers get on my nerves. Again you are degrading PvEers and wondering why they do not want to play with you.
Oh and going after a much higher level mob does involve skill. I was proud as hell when I downed my first Elysium Heckler with my lvl 104 char. Took me like 7 - 10 minutes and one mistake would have killed me, others told me "Na, not possible", but I soloed it anyway.
Also you rule out the main argument ingame. If there are no gankers and gangs, then noone could complain about an optional flagging system. Humans are idiots. If it is possible to do something, someone will do it. So saying "what if there are no gankers and gangs" is like saying "what if noone speeds?". So please reread my post, I wrote what kind of owPvP game I would play, I tried PvP servers in games and they all were the same: Atmosphere of hostility, language like elementary school and ganking/Quest NPC camping.
Would you play an owPvP game when killing innocent people (same faction PvEers) would have dire consequences in the long run?
Open world PVP can work. But most of the times the gankers scare away most players because the devs just didnt think mechanics through well enough.
In the cases that I have seen it work it can be tremendously fun. Like in EVE or in SWG. In SWG it used a flag system, so wasn't mandatory. Some find this silly, but I thought it was more immersive. It is kind of like having civilians that you try not to hurt during war. Fallen Earth uses a variant on that pvp flag system. Although at some point it's devs started to focus more on pvp areas.
I think that many MMO's would be better off with a pvp flag system that lets you pvp anywhere (by choice) instead of mandatory open world pvp. The latter seems to be much harder to implement in a way that attracts many players.
Dueling honorably? Open world PvP is about ganking. If you find yourself in a fair fight, you are doing it wrong.
Dueling honorably? WTF? It is about fight, risk and adrenaline. The highest level of fun in games is when you win vs other player. I like to win vs many players, with higher level and gear. And sometimes I lose ofc. But when I win it is great. And when other ppl talk about my fights, it is cool too. It is not about fair fight. I have no problem with stronger enemies, because I'm not afraid to lose.
There are no good fights in OWPvP - or rather, they are extremely rare. Vast majority of times the engagements are one-sided roflstomps. No fun for either party.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Originally posted by funyahns Because it only takes a handful of idiots to drive off paying customers.
That's the main issue there.
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
I think OP is looking at it wrong. Its what they want to make and how the rest of the parts fit with that frame work.
You can not make a themepark linear progression that is about reaching end game and the reward is a small pat on the back with getting the next level out of 50, 60 or whatever insignificant reminder of progression... then to mix it up with open world pvp and griefing in the middle of their boring exp grind.
If they are going to have open world pvp in MMOs they happen to be sand box mmos with zero lvls.
Yet, games like ESO offer something of a hybrid which sounds good, but at the end of the day its still a themepark with a huge development towards pvpers in end game. The good thing about making open world pvp a foundation is that they do not have to worry about content so much with fun repititve end game or trying to modify the game/engine to handle open world pvp. So hopefully their development pans out well for them making everyone happy that enjoys that style of combat.
For me if a themepark is going to have open world pvp within questing areas then 1. it has to reward pvp with exp. 2. Make it so its easy to still progress with certain mechanics to help the game for example questing in an area near an allegiance that will come to help aligned npcs/ hiring NPCs to guard. 3. Questing is fun and desinged in such a way to reward players and include open world pvp. For example quest objects do not need to be toggled for more than an instant. 4. Change the game to focus more on completion of content rather than exp to get skills, similar to the secret world. And in a way avoiding themepark levels but also allowing for a system that makes quests specific to their reward and can make them challenging depending on the reward.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
But at least nowadays almost any deverloper knows that pvp is a highly, successful mass market, because of games like BF, like MOBAs and like DayZ.. now we just need a few good, and working mass pvp formulas.
e-sport is the pvp formula. Just look at LoL and SC2.
I will not argue with you narius, because it isn't worth it.. you are just not accessible for any arguement how good it is or how true it is. But just for the sake of it.
In the beginning (Doom and that era) there was just death matches, and everything was good.
After that UT introduced Capture the Flag and Domination, and even simple Assault, and those modes were highly successful and spread around the world.(and at that time e-sport come into being).
At the same time Counter Strike and that gaming mode become highly successful.(and were completely different to UT, although both beeing FPS).
At that time multiplayer existed more or less as 8 player games.(coming from the LAN history) Or with RTS just 1-3vs1-3.
After some time games like Battlefield offered 32vs32 and even 64vs64 with their own game modes and were and are highly successful with it.
Over time MOBA(5vs5), Survival(50+ private servers, Minecraft, DayZ), and a lot of other different modes joined the existend modes and all highly successful.
What do i want to say with it? Well.. rather simple there is no ever existing status quo. PvP Multiplayer will evolve all the time, new and different modes, and amount of players will arive, and usually if a new good mode joins the established ones it will be for some time extremely successfull and even overtop some other established, like it is at the moment with MOBAs and Survival. With other words.. there is no pvp formula. It will always evolve and be reinvented all the time... because everyone likes the new fresh offer around the corner, and we are in the very beginning of pvp games, they started very simple (death match, ctf) and evolved more complex(moba, survival) and will continue to get more complex... we not even scratched the top of the iceberg.
And about mass pvp(100++).. it is just not that easy(in comparsion to 5vs5) to get interesting pvp modes, and to overcome some technical problems..
Originally posted by maccarthur2004 Because open PVP expose players to lose/defeat, breaking their ilusions of power and strenght that slaughter of dumb/weaker npcs brings. Open PVP demands a little more atention, mental work, training, study of the character and smartness in general, which alienates the majority of mmo players.
^This. I think one of the biggest problems is that PvE in most games does nothing to prepare the player for the challenge of PvP. PvE AI is horrid in most cases, making accomplishments feel like a cake-walk compared to the first time the player hops into PvP. So people get scared off. Devs need to start making more challenging PvE early on instead of saving it for end game content. That pack of wolves should feel like a threat, not just a living pile of resources. The key is to design around challenge but not make that challenge feel overwhelming. Teach players to play smart from the beginning.
Some people here show perfect examples of what I do not like about owPvP surroundings. First come good arguments then namecalling and after a while complaining why the other side gets agressive. Starting out with calling PvEers more or less "whimps" (repeated mention of "PVEers are afraid of this and that), are not able to play, have less skill and so on. It is all about taste and talking for myself, this isn't the surrounding I like to spend my rare free time in.
Yeap.. some like emotions, some like engaging experience, some not. Just ask or look at football(soccer) fans, or just fans or players of any competive game.. it is about emotions, and sometimes(it will always happen at one point and time) emotions get a little bit out of control.. some are comfortable with it, some not.
If you(or any other) are not comfortable with that, just stay away from pvp games, or for that matter any competive game. And yes.. i agree in our stressful era some relaxing, not competive, entertainment is required.. but on the same hand that does not mean that everyone don't like it. No game for that matter can please everyone(and it does not even matter if pvp or pve or whatever reason), and if you don't like a game(for whatever reason) just stay away.. problem solved.. and no more need to argue why you don't like it.(of course you can, but it isn't important beside for you personally)
And the same is of course true for pve games.. Not everyone likes them.. but there is really no actual need to talk about, because some do actual like it. So everyone should just stop and asume that any kind of game is for any kind of player, because it is not.
Originally posted by Bladestrom That's wonderful, but people do grief, and a zone that tries to be pve & pvp does not work. I mug someone and say 'but it makes it exciting for you'. - not if he was trying to pve at the time, that's just annoying. Ow zones should be pvp only and are therefore just big battlegrounds.
Another misconception. It does work.. just not for pve only player. And again.. just don't join a pvp game, or a game where pvp is at some point or at some place mandatory. Problem solved.
Ok.. to get a little bit into detail.. why some pve elements are useful for pvp players. Simple put, because they extent the gameplay possiblilities, and may enhance the gaming experience.
Simple example.. you do have creeps(pve mobs) in MOBAs, because they serve a certain purpose.. but no moba player plays mobas just to smash creeps. And exactly the same is true in MMORPGs that certain pve elements enhance the pvp experience.. but bottom line is, it is still a pvp game, and it should not matter for pve players.. because finally this game may not be target to them.
Almost every post here is about gangs. Let say there is no gangs. It is possible, like I said. So what are your arguments against OWpvp if there is no gangs? And most important why most of you want to play in broken worlds with instances, arenas and etc? I think you are afraid from open world, but maybe I'm wrong.
Ofmg.. because just don't like it. Just accept(and that should be true for everyone, and is a always true experience of life) that not everyone does like or have to like exactly the same things as you. Some like rock, other like pop and some other like reggae and some may even like all of them. And the same is true for different kind of games(platformer, racing games, shooter, rpgs), and the same is true for coop(pve) or competitive(pvp) games.
Originally posted by funyahns Because it only takes a handful of idiots to drive off paying customers.
That's the main issue there.
No. The main issue is the target audience. A rock festival will drive off classic fans, but there is no inherent problem with it, classic fans are just the wrong target audience.
Some people here show perfect examples of what I do not like about owPvP surroundings. First come good arguments then namecalling and after a while complaining why the other side gets agressive. Starting out with calling PvEers more or less "whimps" (repeated mention of "PVEers are afraid of this and that), are not able to play, have less skill and so on. It is all about taste and talking for myself, this isn't the surrounding I like to spend my rare free time in.
Yeap.. some like emotions, some like engaging experience, some not. Just ask or look at football(soccer) fans, or just fans or players of any competive game.. it is about emotions, and sometimes(it will always happen at one point and time) emotions get a little bit out of control.. some are comfortable with it, some not.
If you(or any other) are not comfortable with that, just stay away from pvp games, or for that matter any competive game. And yes.. i agree in our stressful era some relaxing, not competive, entertainment is required.. but on the same hand that does not mean that everyone don't like it. No game for that matter can please everyone(and it does not even matter if pvp or pve or whatever reason), and if you don't like a game(for whatever reason) just stay away.. problem solved.. and no more need to argue why you don't like it.(of course you can, but it isn't important beside for you personally)
And the same is of course true for pve games.. Not everyone likes them.. but there is really no actual need to talk about, because some do actual like it. So everyone should just stop and asume that any kind of game is for any kind of player, because it is not.
100% agreed. Never understood why PvXers come to a game of the oppisite layout and complain it is not their style. Many times I thought "Hey! Sounds nice, seems more like a real world and less of a game!" and then stayed away without any complaint because of FFA PvP. Most explanations around this thread are here because the OP asked "Why do you not like it?", whereas you could also ask "Which one is better? Black or green?". For some it seems hard to understand that is sometimes not about fear, skill, reflexes or whatever, but more about preferance. I don't mind dying in PvP, I mind being slaughtered and being disrupted in a non-immersive way. I don't mind friendly competition. In the AO orbital station I had a several minute hit & run fight with another player. It was a close one and afterwarts we talked to each other that it was fun and a good challenge. Same for Sacred on Hardcore PvP server. Duel -> died -> new char and talked about mistakes and strategies. We were more on the same side. I hate to admit it, but I am to old for flamewars ingame.
On of the main problems, as you pointed out, is the fact that everyone seems to feel entitled to every game catering to them, no matter of pure PvEer, PvPvEers or pure PvPers...
Some people here show perfect examples of what I do not like about owPvP surroundings. First come good arguments then namecalling and after a while complaining why the other side gets agressive. Starting out with calling PvEers more or less "whimps" (repeated mention of "PVEers are afraid of this and that), are not able to play, have less skill and so on. It is all about taste and talking for myself, this isn't the surrounding I like to spend my rare free time in.
Yeap.. some like emotions, some like engaging experience, some not. Just ask or look at football(soccer) fans, or just fans or players of any competive game.. it is about emotions, and sometimes(it will always happen at one point and time) emotions get a little bit out of control.. some are comfortable with it, some not.
If you(or any other) are not comfortable with that, just stay away from pvp games, or for that matter any competive game. And yes.. i agree in our stressful era some relaxing, not competive, entertainment is required.. but on the same hand that does not mean that everyone don't like it. No game for that matter can please everyone(and it does not even matter if pvp or pve or whatever reason), and if you don't like a game(for whatever reason) just stay away.. problem solved.. and no more need to argue why you don't like it.(of course you can, but it isn't important beside for you personally)
And the same is of course true for pve games.. Not everyone likes them.. but there is really no actual need to talk about, because some do actual like it. So everyone should just stop and asume that any kind of game is for any kind of player, because it is not.
100% agreed. Never understood why PvXers come to a game of the oppisite layout and complain it is not their style. Many times I thought "Hey! Sounds nice, seems more like a real world and less of a game!" and then stayed away without any complaint because of FFA PvP. Most explanations around this thread are here because the OP asked "Why do you not like it?", whereas you could also ask "Which one is better? Black or green?". For some it seems hard to understand that is sometimes not about fear, skill, reflexes or whatever, but more about preferance. I don't mind dying in PvP, I mind being slaughtered and being disrupted in a non-immersive way. I don't mind friendly competition. In the AO orbital station I had a several minute hit & run fight with another player. It was a close one and afterwarts we talked to each other that it was fun and a good challenge. Same for Sacred on Hardcore PvP server. Duel -> died -> new char and talked about mistakes and strategies. We were more on the same side. I hate to admit it, but I am to old for flamewars ingame.
On of the main problems, as you pointed out, is the fact that everyone seems to feel entitled to every game catering to them, no matter of pure PvEer, PvPvEers or pure PvPers...
Players joining games with mechanics they don't like is the least likely scenario. If a player knows they don't like OWPvP, they aren't likely to play Darkfall. If a player knows they aren't interested in PvE content, they aren't likely to play WoW.
There are players who don't know if they like PvE or PvP yet though. Suppose someone has only played WoW and then tries Darkfall or Mortal Online? A very different experience between those games and the player won't know exactly what their preferences are until they've tried the games.
The people here do not fall into these categories. They aren't playing Darkfall and then raging about the PvP. They are looking at Darkfall and raging about the PvP or looking at LotRO and raging about the non-PvP nature of the game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by funyahns Because it only takes a handful of idiots to drive off paying customers.
That's the main issue there.
Is that really happening? I mean the way it's being presented here? A handful of PvP gankers are driving off people who would otherwise like the game? If so, why is the game setup to allow this to happen? It seems more likely to me that the people being driven off have an incorrect view of the game.
I mean, if the developer doesn't want people to get chain killed, ganked, etc., they would ban the people doing it like Blizzard does on their PvP servers. In an anything goes type of game are players who should like the game being driven off, or are the people who really don't like an anything goes type of game being directed out of a game they don't actually like?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
They are coming. Everywhere you look, from EQN:L to SotA, people are asking for a in depth pvp experience. ESO will be a hit because of Cyrodiil. Most importantly is the new generation of gamers. They want it.
There is no way you can get a 13 year old kid to sit down and do some quests. Everyone from boys to girls in their generation PvPs.
Until someone can come up with something other than quests, and dungeons for PvE content, the demand for that stuff will continue fade.
Thats a nice dream bcbully..but it is just that ..a dream.
Originally posted by maccarthur2004 Because open PVP expose players to lose/defeat, breaking their ilusions of power and strenght that slaughter of dumb/weaker npcs brings. Open PVP demands a little more atention, mental work, training, study of the character and smartness in general, which alienates the majority of mmo players.
Comments
Some people here show perfect examples of what I do not like about owPvP surroundings. First come good arguments then namecalling and after a while complaining why the other side gets agressive. Starting out with calling PvEers more or less "whimps" (repeated mention of "PVEers are afraid of this and that), are not able to play, have less skill and so on. It is all about taste and talking for myself, this isn't the surrounding I like to spend my rare free time in.
Spare time has become a precious good and I do not want to waste it in situations I feel like being an adult in the school backyard (see my example of Sacred PvP server vs Sacred Hardcore PvP server). Most others do not like that either. The moment someone comes up with compromises (REAL consequences for PKing) the whining goes on on the other side "but then I can't kill everyone at any time." showing that this person DOES like to grief (even though saying beforehand PvPers want challenge and wouldn't do that. As said before: Games do not have real consequences for ganking. Turning red usuall isn't one. I mean basicly translated it comes up with: Punish the PvPer with PvP! Ganking even makes it easier. He hasn't to go out looking for PvP. Killing lowbes will bring the higher up right to him. He doesn't lose anything, since equipment doesn't matter in many owPvP games and the good equip is on the main char/ in the bank or easily reclaimed. So what? Punishment for being a maniac would be: Imprisonment, banishment, death sentence (without respawn), or some honor system where the char commits suicide due to lack of honor. Those systems are rejected by the PvP side, since it limits their choice. (I am talking about PKing and ganking, not the 'rightful' killing of the opposing side.)
In Rift they took out the autoflag, because people just went in, stood in AoE effects and whops, char flagged and ganked. This shows how secure a system has to be, to prevent jerks from being jerks.
The misconception about OWpvp...
Many of you believe that OWpvp is a playground for max level griefers who scour the starter areas looking for low level victims with the intent of making the quit the game. Thats like saying humans are a destructive race who are not only a danger to themselves but even to their own environment. Yes, humans can be destructive and griefing does occur but does that define it?
The purpose of Open world non-consensual player vs player is not to grief but to take part in random encounters. Lets face it, NPC's are just scripts designed for players to kill over and over again to progress. An Ogre camp in a PvE game, you already know you are going to kill hundreds of them stock up on "Ogre Goods" sell them in town then find something different to kill... wash and repeat. OWpvp say you are on your way to the Ogre camp and somebody arrives just as you are? The blood starts pumping and your hand starts shaking, now you have an interesting situation. You can try to grouping up with him however there is always that possibility that he could wait until you are low to kill you. I play for moments that get the mind thinking and get the blood flowing.
Games like Darkfall where the items are player crafted and equipment doesn't give a huge advantage. There are times where I died and lost everything and on my way back to my stuff I find a corpse with better stuff. Im not saying all games have to be like this but I would like if 6 new games are being developed can atleast 1 have with OWpvp in it?
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Permadeath AND friendly fire. None of this 'group up and mow down the lone quester' junk.
Here we go again. You just did what I said was one reason of not liking the owPvP clientel: Namecalling (Carebear, chicken and so on, even though you put it out nicely with "you are afraid"). You wont get the one answer, but individual answers. I can pretty much live with an immersive version of owPvP, which would me harsh consequences for murderers (as ingame the chars would murder innocent workers and hunters), like prison or permadeath in extreme cases (Evildoer was beaten and taken to authorities who did just put him to the sword). The lands should be patrolled by guards (randomly to avoid people just timing the patrol line) and if an enemy makes it far behind the enemy lines: So be it!
Another thing: No PvP skills or gear. Everyone works with the same skillset and gear, so people would be equally prepared and noone would be overgeared. Even though I'd love a "Can't attack x lvl lower than you" style. A world of killers isn't immersive to me and others do not want to have to deal with PvP at all. Best would be forced roleplaying in addition.
You wont find a game that pleases everyone, since both options are exclusive to each other. The type of people are different. I for one can't deal with elitist PvEers neither who want to monitor everyone and everything, to go 100%. Those control freaks are just as much a PITA to me, as gankers are. I play a game, so I want to have cool people around me, choices, options (such as the option not to PvP) and a deep system that makes me think. So you can guess I am not happy with the games atm, either. MMOers are to diverse, from raiders who want to go big and have evrything timed over Roleplayers who want o immerse in a world to PvPers who want to compete.
You can please most of the people some times, some of the people most of the times, but not all of the people all of the times.
Dueling honorably? Open world PvP is about ganking. If you find yourself in a fair fight, you are doing it wrong.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
I do hope you were just trolling, because that -hardly- passes for anything resembling 'thought'. That aside...
If there were no 'gangs' of murderers and lowbie gankers? Essentially...fair duels on-demand? I'd be perfectly fine with it. But that will likely never happen, and even if it did there would be a group of exploiters going out of their way to try to figure out ways to cheat and kill lowbies or group up. Because pvp'ers, as a general rule, don't want fair fights. They want the surprise kill, or the group kill. Many of them exist only to ruin someone else's playtime and they'll admit this when they're being candid. I got several of them to mention it in the TERA beta, for all the good it did me. But if you could somehow pull it off -and- permaban those who cheated/exploited/found 'creative uses for game mechanics' (read: cheated), I'd be all for it.
On a side tangent, might I recommend you read about the 8 types of fun? Because you have this idea that there is only one (yours) and 'thats the way it is'. But that's not true at all. It's a good read, I promise.
Ummm... Did you even read what I wrote? I definatly told you what kind of owPvP game I would play (I played Ryzom, that had owPvP zones IRC and guild PvP for Land and ressources and didn't mind because the community wasn't "Lulz! Me pwnz U, lusa!" and stupid names like "xxMeRoXX0rUSuxx0Rxx" were disallowed) and also that elite PvEers get on my nerves. Again you are degrading PvEers and wondering why they do not want to play with you.
Oh and going after a much higher level mob does involve skill. I was proud as hell when I downed my first Elysium Heckler with my lvl 104 char. Took me like 7 - 10 minutes and one mistake would have killed me, others told me "Na, not possible", but I soloed it anyway.
Also you rule out the main argument ingame. If there are no gankers and gangs, then noone could complain about an optional flagging system. Humans are idiots. If it is possible to do something, someone will do it. So saying "what if there are no gankers and gangs" is like saying "what if noone speeds?". So please reread my post, I wrote what kind of owPvP game I would play, I tried PvP servers in games and they all were the same: Atmosphere of hostility, language like elementary school and ganking/Quest NPC camping.
Would you play an owPvP game when killing innocent people (same faction PvEers) would have dire consequences in the long run?
Open world PVP can work. But most of the times the gankers scare away most players because the devs just didnt think mechanics through well enough.
In the cases that I have seen it work it can be tremendously fun. Like in EVE or in SWG. In SWG it used a flag system, so wasn't mandatory. Some find this silly, but I thought it was more immersive. It is kind of like having civilians that you try not to hurt during war. Fallen Earth uses a variant on that pvp flag system. Although at some point it's devs started to focus more on pvp areas.
I think that many MMO's would be better off with a pvp flag system that lets you pvp anywhere (by choice) instead of mandatory open world pvp. The latter seems to be much harder to implement in a way that attracts many players.
There are no good fights in OWPvP - or rather, they are extremely rare. Vast majority of times the engagements are one-sided roflstomps. No fun for either party.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
That's the main issue there.
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
I think OP is looking at it wrong. Its what they want to make and how the rest of the parts fit with that frame work.
You can not make a themepark linear progression that is about reaching end game and the reward is a small pat on the back with getting the next level out of 50, 60 or whatever insignificant reminder of progression... then to mix it up with open world pvp and griefing in the middle of their boring exp grind.
If they are going to have open world pvp in MMOs they happen to be sand box mmos with zero lvls.
Yet, games like ESO offer something of a hybrid which sounds good, but at the end of the day its still a themepark with a huge development towards pvpers in end game. The good thing about making open world pvp a foundation is that they do not have to worry about content so much with fun repititve end game or trying to modify the game/engine to handle open world pvp. So hopefully their development pans out well for them making everyone happy that enjoys that style of combat.
For me if a themepark is going to have open world pvp within questing areas then 1. it has to reward pvp with exp. 2. Make it so its easy to still progress with certain mechanics to help the game for example questing in an area near an allegiance that will come to help aligned npcs/ hiring NPCs to guard. 3. Questing is fun and desinged in such a way to reward players and include open world pvp. For example quest objects do not need to be toggled for more than an instant. 4. Change the game to focus more on completion of content rather than exp to get skills, similar to the secret world. And in a way avoiding themepark levels but also allowing for a system that makes quests specific to their reward and can make them challenging depending on the reward.
Write bad things that are done to you in sand, but write the good things that happen to you on a piece of marble
I will not argue with you narius, because it isn't worth it.. you are just not accessible for any arguement how good it is or how true it is. But just for the sake of it.
In the beginning (Doom and that era) there was just death matches, and everything was good.
After that UT introduced Capture the Flag and Domination, and even simple Assault, and those modes were highly successful and spread around the world.(and at that time e-sport come into being).
At the same time Counter Strike and that gaming mode become highly successful.(and were completely different to UT, although both beeing FPS).
At that time multiplayer existed more or less as 8 player games.(coming from the LAN history) Or with RTS just 1-3vs1-3.
After some time games like Battlefield offered 32vs32 and even 64vs64 with their own game modes and were and are highly successful with it.
Over time MOBA(5vs5), Survival(50+ private servers, Minecraft, DayZ), and a lot of other different modes joined the existend modes and all highly successful.
What do i want to say with it? Well.. rather simple there is no ever existing status quo. PvP Multiplayer will evolve all the time, new and different modes, and amount of players will arive, and usually if a new good mode joins the established ones it will be for some time extremely successfull and even overtop some other established, like it is at the moment with MOBAs and Survival. With other words.. there is no pvp formula. It will always evolve and be reinvented all the time... because everyone likes the new fresh offer around the corner, and we are in the very beginning of pvp games, they started very simple (death match, ctf) and evolved more complex(moba, survival) and will continue to get more complex... we not even scratched the top of the iceberg.
And about mass pvp(100++).. it is just not that easy(in comparsion to 5vs5) to get interesting pvp modes, and to overcome some technical problems..
^This. I think one of the biggest problems is that PvE in most games does nothing to prepare the player for the challenge of PvP. PvE AI is horrid in most cases, making accomplishments feel like a cake-walk compared to the first time the player hops into PvP. So people get scared off. Devs need to start making more challenging PvE early on instead of saving it for end game content. That pack of wolves should feel like a threat, not just a living pile of resources. The key is to design around challenge but not make that challenge feel overwhelming. Teach players to play smart from the beginning.
Yeap.. some like emotions, some like engaging experience, some not. Just ask or look at football(soccer) fans, or just fans or players of any competive game.. it is about emotions, and sometimes(it will always happen at one point and time) emotions get a little bit out of control.. some are comfortable with it, some not.
If you(or any other) are not comfortable with that, just stay away from pvp games, or for that matter any competive game. And yes.. i agree in our stressful era some relaxing, not competive, entertainment is required.. but on the same hand that does not mean that everyone don't like it. No game for that matter can please everyone(and it does not even matter if pvp or pve or whatever reason), and if you don't like a game(for whatever reason) just stay away.. problem solved.. and no more need to argue why you don't like it.(of course you can, but it isn't important beside for you personally)
And the same is of course true for pve games.. Not everyone likes them.. but there is really no actual need to talk about, because some do actual like it. So everyone should just stop and asume that any kind of game is for any kind of player, because it is not.
Another misconception. It does work.. just not for pve only player. And again.. just don't join a pvp game, or a game where pvp is at some point or at some place mandatory. Problem solved.
Ok.. to get a little bit into detail.. why some pve elements are useful for pvp players. Simple put, because they extent the gameplay possiblilities, and may enhance the gaming experience.
Simple example.. you do have creeps(pve mobs) in MOBAs, because they serve a certain purpose.. but no moba player plays mobas just to smash creeps. And exactly the same is true in MMORPGs that certain pve elements enhance the pvp experience.. but bottom line is, it is still a pvp game, and it should not matter for pve players.. because finally this game may not be target to them.
Ofmg.. because just don't like it. Just accept(and that should be true for everyone, and is a always true experience of life) that not everyone does like or have to like exactly the same things as you. Some like rock, other like pop and some other like reggae and some may even like all of them. And the same is true for different kind of games(platformer, racing games, shooter, rpgs), and the same is true for coop(pve) or competitive(pvp) games.
Bottom line.. not everyone likes the same.
No. The main issue is the target audience. A rock festival will drive off classic fans, but there is no inherent problem with it, classic fans are just the wrong target audience.
100% agreed. Never understood why PvXers come to a game of the oppisite layout and complain it is not their style. Many times I thought "Hey! Sounds nice, seems more like a real world and less of a game!" and then stayed away without any complaint because of FFA PvP. Most explanations around this thread are here because the OP asked "Why do you not like it?", whereas you could also ask "Which one is better? Black or green?". For some it seems hard to understand that is sometimes not about fear, skill, reflexes or whatever, but more about preferance. I don't mind dying in PvP, I mind being slaughtered and being disrupted in a non-immersive way. I don't mind friendly competition. In the AO orbital station I had a several minute hit & run fight with another player. It was a close one and afterwarts we talked to each other that it was fun and a good challenge. Same for Sacred on Hardcore PvP server. Duel -> died -> new char and talked about mistakes and strategies. We were more on the same side. I hate to admit it, but I am to old for flamewars ingame.
On of the main problems, as you pointed out, is the fact that everyone seems to feel entitled to every game catering to them, no matter of pure PvEer, PvPvEers or pure PvPers...
Players joining games with mechanics they don't like is the least likely scenario. If a player knows they don't like OWPvP, they aren't likely to play Darkfall. If a player knows they aren't interested in PvE content, they aren't likely to play WoW.
There are players who don't know if they like PvE or PvP yet though. Suppose someone has only played WoW and then tries Darkfall or Mortal Online? A very different experience between those games and the player won't know exactly what their preferences are until they've tried the games.
The people here do not fall into these categories. They aren't playing Darkfall and then raging about the PvP. They are looking at Darkfall and raging about the PvP or looking at LotRO and raging about the non-PvP nature of the game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Is that really happening? I mean the way it's being presented here? A handful of PvP gankers are driving off people who would otherwise like the game? If so, why is the game setup to allow this to happen? It seems more likely to me that the people being driven off have an incorrect view of the game.
I mean, if the developer doesn't want people to get chain killed, ganked, etc., they would ban the people doing it like Blizzard does on their PvP servers. In an anything goes type of game are players who should like the game being driven off, or are the people who really don't like an anything goes type of game being directed out of a game they don't actually like?
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Thats a nice dream bcbully..but it is just that ..a dream.
this