This issue with most PvP MMO's is the community. They're most often vile.
It's a niche I tried to get into but I could never get past the horrid community I had to play with.
That pretty much describes it. Look, I have been big into PvP since DAoC was released, it's one of my favorite game modes. But I'm being completely honest here when I say there is no game that will ever be released that can get me to play a full FFA PvP MMO. I have played them before. The last great one was Shadowbane, and the community was still awful. The games fail because they attract the worst portions of society, the lowest rungs.
People who have no outlet for their aggression and problems other than taking it out on random people on the internet a good community does not make. They will never be successful because there are way more people out there that enjoy life than hate everything.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV Have played: You name it If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.
I'm curious where people get this idea that without carebears to kill, we will have nobody to kill. Where does the idea that PvPers dont PvP eachother come from? I'm under the impression that too many people are so narrow minded that they believe that the only form of PvP is ganking defenseless people not looking for a fight.
I wonder if any of these people have actually played a proper PvP game before rather than a game that simply offers PvP servers as a tacked on thing where a bunch of people go and then rage constantly whenever they get killed and refer to every death as being "griefed".
Do you think sieges and similar things consist of a bunch of PvPeers grouping up and attacking a defenseless city full of people PvEing nearby?
The market for MMOs has shown that FFA Full Loot PvP won't work. If you want a viable money making game then you have to give peace a chance. In the end these games aren't set up to build online societies where everyone plays a role and a code of conduct develops as an agreement between the players. Instead they're set up so everyone is the hero and everyone is a warrior. So you've got a combat environment where only might makes right and therefore the whole online society breaks down into chaos. The reason is there are truly no consequences for bad behavior in MMOs.
In real life if you PvP you find yourself arrested and possibly sued. You might get your victim's wallet, but there is a possibility that you'll land in jail. There is also the possibility that you picked on the wrong guy and he turns out to be a Krav Maga expert who proceeds to smear your body all over the pavement like so much jelly. My point is there is an element of risk in real life that doesn't and almost can't exist in MMOs. I mean, who wants to play a game that is like real life after all?
However in an MMO if you're max level and you kill noobs, what happens? Probably nothing. Maybe some other max levels come out to defend the noobs and you get killed, but so what? Log out and come back at another time. You risk no real punishment.
Meanwhile the noobs have more in game risk than the gankers. So eventually the noobs don't log on and the on line community withers on the vine without new blood. The risk is all one way. The ganker's risk is almost nothing, while the noobs risk is everything he has.
The answer? Well I can think of three.
First off do what DAoC did. There are home zones without PvP where you can get your toon to max level without worrying about being ganked. Then there are PvP zones (the frontier) where no matter what level you are you run the risk of being killed if you go out there and you voluntarily assume the risk by going out onto the frontier through a special portal. That takes the "accidental" or "random" gank out of the equation. You went onto the frontier knowningly and voluntarily assuming the risk of getting ganked, killed or zerged. Take all the guesswork out of it.
The second way is to add elements of risk for bad behavior. Make it so someone who PvPs is risking beyond the ire of the no longer existent community. When MMOs first came out forced grouping meant if you behaved badly you could be frozen out of groups so you couldn't level. That kept all but the most socio-pathic in line. Now the risk for FFA PvP needs to be hard wired into the game.
You want to gank noobs, OK. But for every noob you gank a hunter/killer NPC spawns that is programed to hunt you down and kill you. The more you gank, the more NPCs are hunting for you and when they catch up to you not only are you going to die, but your account will be frozen for a number of days that depends on how many noobs you ganked. And maybe those noobs will be able to claim a piece of the ganker's stuff as compensation for the stuff they lost when they were ganked.
To add a further layer let people with max level toons disguise themselves as noobs. That way the ganker doesn't know if he's attacking a helpless noob or a full powered, arse whuppin' machine.
The third is to make a society where there are other occupations besides "warrior." For example the game can be to become an epic blacksmith who can make the greatest weapons in the game. Cross this guy and suddenly everyone is wielding the epic sword of whup arse EXCEPT you and everyone is out to get you because you picked on the guy who makes the epic sword of whup arse. In other words, messing with the economy gets you ostricized from the community and you get no more resources. Thus you wither and die while the society rolls on.
That's just three simple things that might make FFA PvP more tolerable. There are other ideas, but you'll probably never see them implemented. It requires imagination to make an online society (which would be stable and cause the game to last a long time) whereas its easy to program special zones for PvP.
So get used to instancing when it comes to PvP. Its simply good business for the devs.
Many a small thing has been made large by the right kind of advertising.
carebears needed in a PVP game is grade A bullshit.
give the deer a gun, THEN go hunt it. That is a real sport
Which reminded me of one of the scenes in crocodile dundee, where he used one of the dead kangaroo's to make it look like one of them had a gun and was shooting back at the hunters, probably still one of the funniest things in it - and there were many
I'm curious where people get this idea that without carebears to kill, we will have nobody to kill. Where does the idea that PvPers dont PvP eachother come from? I'm under the impression that too many people are so narrow minded that they believe that the only form of PvP is ganking defenseless people not looking for a fight.
I wonder if any of these people have actually played a proper PvP game before rather than a game that simply offers PvP servers as a tacked on thing where a bunch of people go and then rage constantly whenever they get killed and refer to every death as being "griefed".
Do you think sieges and similar things consist of a bunch of PvPeers grouping up and attacking a defenseless city full of people PvEing nearby?
You really have two factions of PvPers: PvP for Sport and PvP as Warfare. The Warfare people prefer to engage in fights where they have an advantage and can achieve the most efficient victory. Sport people tend to prefer 'fair' fights or fights where they are at a disadvantage since it gives an extra challenge. In an open world FFA PvP setting the Warfare people tend to prevail and thus carebears become their preferred target.
lol at all the misconceptions on FFA pvpers. From being derranged lunatic psychos IRL to us hating fair fights and only ganking noobies. You really think thats what makes FFA pvp games so fun? Just ganking noobies over and over?
No I wont get used to any instanced shit pvp, while theres still games like Mortal Online or Darkfall around, that even with their low population and bugs are way funner than any AAA game released in the last few years.
And before anyone suggests that separate ruleset servers, NO!!!! In a good sandbox pvp is essential for the economy, if not traders would be worthless, resources would be worthless if anyone can gather them with no risk. Its like most ppl bitching about this have only played on WoW pvp servers lol
I'm curious where people get this idea that without carebears to kill, we will have nobody to kill. Where does the idea that PvPers dont PvP eachother come from? I'm under the impression that too many people are so narrow minded that they believe that the only form of PvP is ganking defenseless people not looking for a fight.
I wonder if any of these people have actually played a proper PvP game before rather than a game that simply offers PvP servers as a tacked on thing where a bunch of people go and then rage constantly whenever they get killed and refer to every death as being "griefed".
Do you think sieges and similar things consist of a bunch of PvPeers grouping up and attacking a defenseless city full of people PvEing nearby?
You really have two factions of PvPers: PvP for Sport and PvP as Warfare. The Warfare people prefer to engage in fights where they have an advantage and can achieve the most efficient victory. Sport people tend to prefer 'fair' fights or fights where they are at a disadvantage since it gives an extra challenge. In an open world FFA PvP setting the Warfare people tend to prevail and thus carebears become their preferred target.
NO
Sport people are NEVER at a disadvantage, their pvp is meant to be as fair as possible. On the other hand, while FFA pvpers can be at an advantage, this is only looking at one side of the coin, while they can also be at a MAYOR disadvantage fighting outnumbered vs "zergs" or ppl in better gear, and this is the real challenge where the more organized but smaller team CAN win against the zerg.
lol at all the misconceptions on FFA pvpers. From being derranged lunatic psychos IRL to us hating fair fights and only ganking noobies. You really think thats what makes FFA pvp games so fun? Just ganking noobies over and over?
It doesn't have to be everyone. Just enough to make it common.
lol at all the misconceptions on FFA pvpers. From being derranged lunatic psychos IRL to us hating fair fights and only ganking noobies. You really think thats what makes FFA pvp games so fun? Just ganking noobies over and over?
It doesn't have to be everyone. Just enough to make it common.
Yeah Im not saying ganking never happens, but from the comments on this thread, its like the ONLY thing ppl think happens in these games.
lol at all the misconceptions on FFA pvpers. From being derranged lunatic psychos IRL to us hating fair fights and only ganking noobies. You really think thats what makes FFA pvp games so fun? Just ganking noobies over and over?
It doesn't have to be everyone. Just enough to make it common.
Yeah Im not saying ganking never happens, but from the comments on this thread, its like the ONLY thing ppl think happens in these games.
its just the only reason a PVP game would need 'carebears'
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
lol at all the misconceptions on FFA pvpers. From being derranged lunatic psychos IRL to us hating fair fights and only ganking noobies. You really think thats what makes FFA pvp games so fun? Just ganking noobies over and over?
It doesn't have to be everyone. Just enough to make it common.
Yeah Im not saying ganking never happens, but from the comments on this thread, its like the ONLY thing ppl think happens in these games.
It's a forum .If you don't empty a dumptruck load of hyperbole into it people think the actual point will be lost ...or something.
well EVE without mining and trading and crafting would a turn based space combat game ...
if there is no PvE there is no reason to fight to defend it. PvE is what feeds PvP, when you separate them (WoW, GuildWars2, etc) then the PvP is meaningless ... thats how i see the sandbox and i completely agree with the OP !
The game that does FFA PvP combat well is the game that does non-combat better than combat. The best PvP is usually found where PvP is just a sideshow, and the real action is somewhere else (roleplay, crafting, etc.)
In all the PvP games I've seen, the ones who have the best FFA PvP had good crafting, good fluff things to do like housing, and creative stuff. Heck, what makes Minecraft a good FFA PvP game is the fact that it isn't even a PvP game by design. It's a crafting game. And you go on down the line to SWG and so on.
You have to give your victims a reason to subject themselves to the occasional gank from time to time. That can only happen if the elements they like are so good, they'll put up with the clan gankers.
__________________________ "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it." --Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints." --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls." --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
There are some people (me included) that simply will not play an mmo with non-consensual pvp. I do not like the type of player that an FFA PVP game attracts, and I do not like having the way I play a game dictated to me by other players.
My suspicion is that most people who play FFA PVP mmo's don't particularly like fair pvp either but enjoy the ability to gank newbies or lowbies.
If I want to play pvp I'll go play a multi-player FPS- at least they normally have a level playing field.
A true full loot sandbox will never keep true carebears.
So there's that.
Including the fact that there's no true sandbox out there. Those that are close or on the right track are hampered down by small dev teams that struggle keeping up with a huge project that creating an online world is.
But yeah any kind of sandbox needs enaugh players to keep going, meaning we will always see some presence of linearity, hand holding and artificial protection. Which is fine as long as the line between samdbox and themepark is not crossed (look at EvE as one of the best examples).
There are some people (me included) that simply will not play an mmo with non-consensual pvp. I do not like the type of player that an FFA PVP game attracts, and I do not like having the way I play a game dictated to me by other players.
My suspicion is that most people who play FFA PVP mmo's don't particularly like fair pvp either but enjoy the ability to gank newbies or lowbies.
If I want to play pvp I'll go play a multi-player FPS- at least they normally have a level playing field.
Have it ever occurred to you that majority of those who like what you call ffa pvp are also playing themepark games with you? Not everyone is so close minded, judgemental and self restricted when it comes to venturing online worlds.
The problem with most FFA sandbox games is that they treat their game as a PvP game first and an RPG second. In most Pen and Paper RPGs, yeah, you CAN wantonly murder someone for lulz... but you probably shouldn't. First issue you'll face is the city guard bringing the hammer down on you. Then, if you survive that, chances are you'll have your assets seized, so say goodbye to anything you owned that existed in the territory of the faction your wronged. (houses, investments, contents of your bank.) Then you have to deal with bounty hunters and guard patrols trying to find you.
When I play a FFA PvP Sandbox RPG, I expect a roleplaying game with freedom, not Call of Duty with swords. Gankers should be punished for killing people for no reason, because that's MURDER. (In the game world.) A well designed game CAN have FFA PvP without becoming a slaughterhouse.
There are some people (me included) that simply will not play an mmo with non-consensual pvp. I do not like the type of player that an FFA PVP game attracts, and I do not like having the way I play a game dictated to me by other players.
My suspicion is that most people who play FFA PVP mmo's don't particularly like fair pvp either but enjoy the ability to gank newbies or lowbies.
If I want to play pvp I'll go play a multi-player FPS- at least they normally have a level playing field.
Have it ever occurred to you that majority of those who like what you call ffa pvp are also playing themepark games with you? Not everyone is so close minded, judgemental and self restricted when it comes to venturing online worlds.
I am sure they are, but the majority of people who play themeparks are not playing FFA PVP games. That is because they are a niche game- or as you might put it with quite absurd hyperbole and hubris, they are not played by all those 'close minded, judgemental and self restricted people'.
People don't like what they don't like- throw some supercilious tantrum about it if it makes you feel better.
There are some people (me included) that simply will not play an mmo with non-consensual pvp. I do not like the type of player that an FFA PVP game attracts, and I do not like having the way I play a game dictated to me by other players.
My suspicion is that most people who play FFA PVP mmo's don't particularly like fair pvp either but enjoy the ability to gank newbies or lowbies.
If I want to play pvp I'll go play a multi-player FPS- at least they normally have a level playing field.
Have it ever occurred to you that majority of those who like what you call ffa pvp are also playing themepark games with you? Not everyone is so close minded, judgemental and self restricted when it comes to venturing online worlds.
I am sure they are, but the majority of people who play themeparks are not playing FFA PVP games. That is because they are a niche game- or as you might put it with quite absurd hyperbole and hubris, they are not played by all those 'close minded, judgemental and self restricted people'.
People don't like what they don't like- throw some supercilious tantrum about it if it makes you feel better.
Well it was you who pointed out you don't play games with non-consensual pvp because you don't like people who play them. Yet they may as well be all around you in your favourite game and you don't even know it. The irony.
It is you going on a hyperbole Implying you played ffa pvp games (whatever that means) extensively and that you know all of the people playing them, suspecting they are all lesser human beings who enjoy ganking newbies, which is obviously not true.
You're just being ignorant in your judgement. Saying that is no hyperbole. That is what you are doing.
Could it be that you had bad experience with a handful of people and then projected this on the other thousands of sandbox loving players who may as well be much nicer than your avarage pve loving themepark player? Or would you also like to claim that all themepark players are angels who would never curse your mother, roll on your loot and kill you?
You also said you don't like other people dictate how you play your game. If there's irony in this world than this has to be it. It may strike you a bit, but you play man-made and controlled scripted games that are nothing but dictating how you can play. The people you play your PvE scripts with, they all dictate how you play. Surely, you will now point out, cooperating and dictating are not the same thing. Yes and no. It just depends how you decide about it.
And it happens that you can cooperate in a con-consensual pvp games too. It's your choice. It's even more so your choice than it is in PvE games. In other words it's your own fault if you decide no to, and to run away instead while pointing fingers.
There are some people (me included) that simply will not play an mmo with non-consensual pvp. I do not like the type of player that an FFA PVP game attracts, and I do not like having the way I play a game dictated to me by other players.
My suspicion is that most people who play FFA PVP mmo's don't particularly like fair pvp either but enjoy the ability to gank newbies or lowbies.
If I want to play pvp I'll go play a multi-player FPS- at least they normally have a level playing field.
Have it ever occurred to you that majority of those who like what you call ffa pvp are also playing themepark games with you? Not everyone is so close minded, judgemental and self restricted when it comes to venturing online worlds.
I am sure they are, but the majority of people who play themeparks are not playing FFA PVP games. That is because they are a niche game- or as you might put it with quite absurd hyperbole and hubris, they are not played by all those 'close minded, judgemental and self restricted people'.
People don't like what they don't like- throw some supercilious tantrum about it if it makes you feel better.
Well it was you who pointed out you don't play games with non-consensual pvp because you don't like people who play them. Yet they may as well be all around you in your favourite game and you don't even know it. The irony.
It is you going on a hyperbole Implying you played ffa pvp games (whatever that means) extensively and that you know all of the people playing them, suspecting they are all lesser human beings who enjoy ganking newbies, which is obviously not true.
You're just being ignorant in your judgement. Saying that is no hyperbole. That is what you are doing.
Could it be that you had bad experience with a handful of people and then projected this on the other thousands of sandbox loving players who may as well be much nicer than your avarage pve loving themepark player? Or would you also like to claim that all themepark players are angels who would never curse your mother, roll on your loot and kill you?
You also said you don't like other people dictate how you play your game. If there's irony in this world than this has to be it. It may strike you a bit, but you play man-made and controlled scripted games that are nothing but dictating how you can play. The people you play your PvE scripts with, they all dictate how you play. Surely, you will now point out, cooperating and dictating are not the same thing. Yes and no. It just depends how you decide about it.
And it happens that you can cooperate in a con-consensual pvp games too. It's your choice. It's even more so your choice than it is in PvE games. In other words it's your own fault if you decide no to, and to run away instead while pointing fingers.
Great, I love it when you get some antagonistic little smart-ass jumping on someone's opinion desperate for an argument- it is almost like playing an FFA-PVP game.
Originally posted by lizardbones You don't need "carebears" in a PvP MMORPG, but you will need casual PvP players. That's not the same thing as a non-PvP player.
Comments
That pretty much describes it. Look, I have been big into PvP since DAoC was released, it's one of my favorite game modes. But I'm being completely honest here when I say there is no game that will ever be released that can get me to play a full FFA PvP MMO. I have played them before. The last great one was Shadowbane, and the community was still awful. The games fail because they attract the worst portions of society, the lowest rungs.
People who have no outlet for their aggression and problems other than taking it out on random people on the internet a good community does not make. They will never be successful because there are way more people out there that enjoy life than hate everything.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV
Have played: You name it
If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.
carebears needed in a PVP game is grade A bullshit.
give the deer a gun, THEN go hunt it. That is a real sport
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I'm curious where people get this idea that without carebears to kill, we will have nobody to kill. Where does the idea that PvPers dont PvP eachother come from? I'm under the impression that too many people are so narrow minded that they believe that the only form of PvP is ganking defenseless people not looking for a fight.
I wonder if any of these people have actually played a proper PvP game before rather than a game that simply offers PvP servers as a tacked on thing where a bunch of people go and then rage constantly whenever they get killed and refer to every death as being "griefed".
Do you think sieges and similar things consist of a bunch of PvPeers grouping up and attacking a defenseless city full of people PvEing nearby?
The market for MMOs has shown that FFA Full Loot PvP won't work. If you want a viable money making game then you have to give peace a chance. In the end these games aren't set up to build online societies where everyone plays a role and a code of conduct develops as an agreement between the players. Instead they're set up so everyone is the hero and everyone is a warrior. So you've got a combat environment where only might makes right and therefore the whole online society breaks down into chaos. The reason is there are truly no consequences for bad behavior in MMOs.
In real life if you PvP you find yourself arrested and possibly sued. You might get your victim's wallet, but there is a possibility that you'll land in jail. There is also the possibility that you picked on the wrong guy and he turns out to be a Krav Maga expert who proceeds to smear your body all over the pavement like so much jelly. My point is there is an element of risk in real life that doesn't and almost can't exist in MMOs. I mean, who wants to play a game that is like real life after all?
However in an MMO if you're max level and you kill noobs, what happens? Probably nothing. Maybe some other max levels come out to defend the noobs and you get killed, but so what? Log out and come back at another time. You risk no real punishment.
Meanwhile the noobs have more in game risk than the gankers. So eventually the noobs don't log on and the on line community withers on the vine without new blood. The risk is all one way. The ganker's risk is almost nothing, while the noobs risk is everything he has.
The answer? Well I can think of three.
First off do what DAoC did. There are home zones without PvP where you can get your toon to max level without worrying about being ganked. Then there are PvP zones (the frontier) where no matter what level you are you run the risk of being killed if you go out there and you voluntarily assume the risk by going out onto the frontier through a special portal. That takes the "accidental" or "random" gank out of the equation. You went onto the frontier knowningly and voluntarily assuming the risk of getting ganked, killed or zerged. Take all the guesswork out of it.
The second way is to add elements of risk for bad behavior. Make it so someone who PvPs is risking beyond the ire of the no longer existent community. When MMOs first came out forced grouping meant if you behaved badly you could be frozen out of groups so you couldn't level. That kept all but the most socio-pathic in line. Now the risk for FFA PvP needs to be hard wired into the game.
You want to gank noobs, OK. But for every noob you gank a hunter/killer NPC spawns that is programed to hunt you down and kill you. The more you gank, the more NPCs are hunting for you and when they catch up to you not only are you going to die, but your account will be frozen for a number of days that depends on how many noobs you ganked. And maybe those noobs will be able to claim a piece of the ganker's stuff as compensation for the stuff they lost when they were ganked.
To add a further layer let people with max level toons disguise themselves as noobs. That way the ganker doesn't know if he's attacking a helpless noob or a full powered, arse whuppin' machine.
The third is to make a society where there are other occupations besides "warrior." For example the game can be to become an epic blacksmith who can make the greatest weapons in the game. Cross this guy and suddenly everyone is wielding the epic sword of whup arse EXCEPT you and everyone is out to get you because you picked on the guy who makes the epic sword of whup arse. In other words, messing with the economy gets you ostricized from the community and you get no more resources. Thus you wither and die while the society rolls on.
That's just three simple things that might make FFA PvP more tolerable. There are other ideas, but you'll probably never see them implemented. It requires imagination to make an online society (which would be stable and cause the game to last a long time) whereas its easy to program special zones for PvP.
So get used to instancing when it comes to PvP. Its simply good business for the devs.
Many a small thing has been made large by the right kind of advertising.
Which reminded me of one of the scenes in crocodile dundee, where he used one of the dead kangaroo's to make it look like one of them had a gun and was shooting back at the hunters, probably still one of the funniest things in it - and there were many
You really have two factions of PvPers: PvP for Sport and PvP as Warfare. The Warfare people prefer to engage in fights where they have an advantage and can achieve the most efficient victory. Sport people tend to prefer 'fair' fights or fights where they are at a disadvantage since it gives an extra challenge. In an open world FFA PvP setting the Warfare people tend to prevail and thus carebears become their preferred target.
lol at all the misconceptions on FFA pvpers. From being derranged lunatic psychos IRL to us hating fair fights and only ganking noobies. You really think thats what makes FFA pvp games so fun? Just ganking noobies over and over?
No I wont get used to any instanced shit pvp, while theres still games like Mortal Online or Darkfall around, that even with their low population and bugs are way funner than any AAA game released in the last few years.
And before anyone suggests that separate ruleset servers, NO!!!! In a good sandbox pvp is essential for the economy, if not traders would be worthless, resources would be worthless if anyone can gather them with no risk. Its like most ppl bitching about this have only played on WoW pvp servers lol
NO
Sport people are NEVER at a disadvantage, their pvp is meant to be as fair as possible. On the other hand, while FFA pvpers can be at an advantage, this is only looking at one side of the coin, while they can also be at a MAYOR disadvantage fighting outnumbered vs "zergs" or ppl in better gear, and this is the real challenge where the more organized but smaller team CAN win against the zerg.
It doesn't have to be everyone. Just enough to make it common.
Yeah Im not saying ganking never happens, but from the comments on this thread, its like the ONLY thing ppl think happens in these games.
its just the only reason a PVP game would need 'carebears'
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
It's a forum .If you don't empty a dumptruck load of hyperbole into it people think the actual point will be lost ...or something.
nah ... MOBAs are the real sports.
well EVE without mining and trading and crafting would a turn based space combat game ...
if there is no PvE there is no reason to fight to defend it. PvE is what feeds PvP, when you separate them (WoW, GuildWars2, etc) then the PvP is meaningless ... thats how i see the sandbox and i completely agree with the OP !
The game that does FFA PvP combat well is the game that does non-combat better than combat. The best PvP is usually found where PvP is just a sideshow, and the real action is somewhere else (roleplay, crafting, etc.)
In all the PvP games I've seen, the ones who have the best FFA PvP had good crafting, good fluff things to do like housing, and creative stuff. Heck, what makes Minecraft a good FFA PvP game is the fact that it isn't even a PvP game by design. It's a crafting game. And you go on down the line to SWG and so on.
You have to give your victims a reason to subject themselves to the occasional gank from time to time. That can only happen if the elements they like are so good, they'll put up with the clan gankers.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
There are some people (me included) that simply will not play an mmo with non-consensual pvp. I do not like the type of player that an FFA PVP game attracts, and I do not like having the way I play a game dictated to me by other players.
My suspicion is that most people who play FFA PVP mmo's don't particularly like fair pvp either but enjoy the ability to gank newbies or lowbies.
If I want to play pvp I'll go play a multi-player FPS- at least they normally have a level playing field.
A true full loot sandbox will never keep true carebears.
So there's that.
Including the fact that there's no true sandbox out there. Those that are close or on the right track are hampered down by small dev teams that struggle keeping up with a huge project that creating an online world is.
But yeah any kind of sandbox needs enaugh players to keep going, meaning we will always see some presence of linearity, hand holding and artificial protection. Which is fine as long as the line between samdbox and themepark is not crossed (look at EvE as one of the best examples).
Have it ever occurred to you that majority of those who like what you call ffa pvp are also playing themepark games with you? Not everyone is so close minded, judgemental and self restricted when it comes to venturing online worlds.
The problem with most FFA sandbox games is that they treat their game as a PvP game first and an RPG second. In most Pen and Paper RPGs, yeah, you CAN wantonly murder someone for lulz... but you probably shouldn't. First issue you'll face is the city guard bringing the hammer down on you. Then, if you survive that, chances are you'll have your assets seized, so say goodbye to anything you owned that existed in the territory of the faction your wronged. (houses, investments, contents of your bank.) Then you have to deal with bounty hunters and guard patrols trying to find you.
When I play a FFA PvP Sandbox RPG, I expect a roleplaying game with freedom, not Call of Duty with swords. Gankers should be punished for killing people for no reason, because that's MURDER. (In the game world.) A well designed game CAN have FFA PvP without becoming a slaughterhouse.
I am sure they are, but the majority of people who play themeparks are not playing FFA PVP games. That is because they are a niche game- or as you might put it with quite absurd hyperbole and hubris, they are not played by all those 'close minded, judgemental and self restricted people'.
People don't like what they don't like- throw some supercilious tantrum about it if it makes you feel better.
Well it was you who pointed out you don't play games with non-consensual pvp because you don't like people who play them. Yet they may as well be all around you in your favourite game and you don't even know it. The irony.
It is you going on a hyperbole Implying you played ffa pvp games (whatever that means) extensively and that you know all of the people playing them, suspecting they are all lesser human beings who enjoy ganking newbies, which is obviously not true.
You're just being ignorant in your judgement. Saying that is no hyperbole. That is what you are doing.
Could it be that you had bad experience with a handful of people and then projected this on the other thousands of sandbox loving players who may as well be much nicer than your avarage pve loving themepark player? Or would you also like to claim that all themepark players are angels who would never curse your mother, roll on your loot and kill you?
You also said you don't like other people dictate how you play your game. If there's irony in this world than this has to be it. It may strike you a bit, but you play man-made and controlled scripted games that are nothing but dictating how you can play. The people you play your PvE scripts with, they all dictate how you play. Surely, you will now point out, cooperating and dictating are not the same thing. Yes and no. It just depends how you decide about it.
And it happens that you can cooperate in a con-consensual pvp games too. It's your choice. It's even more so your choice than it is in PvE games. In other words it's your own fault if you decide no to, and to run away instead while pointing fingers.
The deer isn't the other team, the deer is the ball.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Great, I love it when you get some antagonistic little smart-ass jumping on someone's opinion desperate for an argument- it is almost like playing an FFA-PVP game.
You don't need "carebears" in a PvP MMORPG, but you will need casual PvP players. That's not the same thing as a non-PvP player.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Ah, "Casual PVPer" - new arbitrary label...