Exactly! This is how iron strong communities grow. Not from a system where you CANT attack people in your dev. defined factions but where you CHOSE NOT TO.
This is a pipe dream... More often than not people will have chose to attack. This idea of a good community growing in such a game is ripe with problems.
The idea is sound sure, but it didn't work in UO nor what followed and it's not going to work here (I"d bet on that). The wolves always out number the prey in these games when all is said and done, hence why opt in systems work better when it comes to community building..SWG vs UO or EVE being a good example..SWG's community wasn't without wolves, plenty were in the PVP guilds, I was one as well. However our impact was only on those who wanted to PVP, breeding a better competitive nature IMO, your competition could more often not properly defend itself.
FFA PVP is a wolves game prey will have a tough go at it without significant help. SO yes that pushes you into groups, out of necessity, a much different motivator, with much different results ( only those you know are seen as friendly) everyone else is a target, or you are theirs.
That is a very basic form of social community in FFA PvP games. After a while alliances grow and there will be consequences for killing someone in your alliance. Just look at Eve in the lawless 0.0 sectors. And with that comes politics and all kind of cool social experiments which cannot exist when the devs define the teams.
Exactly! This is how iron strong communities grow. Not from a system where you CANT attack people in your dev. defined factions but where you CHOSE NOT TO.
This is a pipe dream... More often than not people will have chose to attack. This idea of a good community growing in such a game is ripe with problems.
The idea is sound sure, but it didn't work in UO nor what followed and it's not going to work here (I"d bet on that). The wolves always out number the prey in these games when all is said and done, hence why opt in systems work better when it comes to community building..SWG vs UO or EVE being a good example..SWG's community wasn't without wolves, plenty were in the PVP guilds, I was one as well. However our impact was only on those who wanted to PVP, breeding a better competitive nature IMO, your competition could more often not properly defend itself.
FFA PVP is a wolves game prey will have a tough go at it without significant help. SO yes that pushes you into groups, out of necessity, a much different motivator, with much different results ( only those you know are seen as friendly) everyone else is a target, or you are theirs.
That is a very basic form of social community in FFA PvP games. After a while alliances grow and there will be consequences for killing someone in your alliance. Just look at Eve in the lawless 0.0 sectors. And with that comes politics and all kind of cool social experiments which cannot exist when the devs define the teams.
That's a good way to put it, basic ...as it's community in the most basic form, those closest to you. (IE your guild) and any guild alliances that form) the rest of the game is seen as more or less a no man's land. The idea of a broad community is moot in most examples of this though. Hence why I said what i originally did both to you and my og statement... it kinda of negates the idea of factions.
I just feel FFA PVP brings an element to games that becomes even more restrictive than linear game design in itself. As there is only one path to having fun in most cases, run with a zerg. It also hurts the RPG aspect as well, as it's difficult to find non criminals. It's too lawless for RP, which always has rules in place to stop mass nonsensical killing.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
And to answer your question, yeah... I do believe that a knowledgeable opinion, one that has experienced the matter first hand and has seen the situation from being part of it, is more valuable than one that is just parroting what it has heard other's (equally uninfomed usually) say.
I do believe that while everyone has the right to an opinion, I have the equal right to dismiss it as insipid derivative negative noise that is just parroting negativity to look cool on a forum.
Would I take his, or your for that matter, opinions on anything post teens as valid? Nah. I would say stick to talking about what you both know if you want to be taken seriously and heard.
1) I'm sorry, where did the OP say he was parroting something someone else said?
2) You have done the exact thing ever since Archeage launched. A few days post release you went on and on about how it's the best MMORPG since EQ1. Then you pop in every thread with this condescending attitude to everyone that doesn't hold Archeage as 'pound for pound the most fun in an MMORPG ever'. This is two distinct threads you have opened to discuss the exact same topic. I can't even count the number of threads I have seen closed for doing exactly what you did ("oh, it's a month old...its a different topic"...please.....the topic is the same; you could have easily just responded to your original thread). The question is why did you post those threads? Attention. You make these threads full of hyperbole just to boost your reply account, be popular and look cool on a forum, throwing away any criticism of the game with righteous indignation, terming us all haters.
Have you an agenda in posting so heavily criticising a game that you have barely even played?
See how ridiculous that question is? Stop it with the cheap tactics.
SO what sets this game and it's later tendencies apart from any other FFA game? Do you not realize most of what we discuss over here has to do with tried and true game mechanics? What is there here to know that you shouldn't already know based on past experience, as well as significant reading on the game?
Would you disagree that no matter what mechanic we're talking about it leads back in some way to PVP?
Would you disagree that to enjoy most of what it has to offer you need a group for personal protection and lively-hood?
Would you disagree the game entails many ways to impact another players experience for the worst?
WOuld you disagree the front end features can be deceptive in terms of what the actual game is about?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Exactly! This is how iron strong communities grow. Not from a system where you CANT attack people in your dev. defined factions but where you CHOSE NOT TO.
This is a pipe dream... More often than not people will have chose to attack. This idea of a good community growing in such a game is ripe with problems.
The idea is sound sure, but it didn't work in UO nor what followed and it's not going to work here (I"d bet on that). The wolves always out number the prey in these games when all is said and done, hence why opt in systems work better when it comes to community building..SWG vs UO or EVE being a good example..SWG's community wasn't without wolves, plenty were in the PVP guilds, I was one as well. However our impact was only on those who wanted to PVP, breeding a better competitive nature IMO, your competition could more often not properly defend itself.
FFA PVP is a wolves game prey will have a tough go at it without significant help. SO yes that pushes you into groups, out of necessity, a much different motivator, with much different results ( only those you know are seen as friendly) everyone else is a target, or you are theirs.
That is a very basic form of social community in FFA PvP games. After a while alliances grow and there will be consequences for killing someone in your alliance. Just look at Eve in the lawless 0.0 sectors. And with that comes politics and all kind of cool social experiments which cannot exist when the devs define the teams.
That's a good way to put it, basic ...as it's community in the most basic form, those closest to you. (IE your guild) and any guild alliances that form) the rest of the game is seen as more or less a no man's land. The idea of a broad community is moot in most examples of this though. Hence why I said what i originally did both to you and my og statement... it kinda of negates the idea of factions.
I just feel FFA PVP brings an element to games that becomes even more restrictive than linear game design in itself. As there is only one path to having fun in most cases, run with a zerg. It also hurts the RPG aspect as well, as it's difficult to find non criminals. It's too lawless for RP, which always has rules in place to stop mass nonsensical killing.
I think you and I have different definitions of community and nonsensical killings. For me the most nonsensical type of killing is where the devs put you in team A and tell you to kill people in team B. Killing for your friends and friends of friends is far less nonsensical to me.
Devs saying that team A is my community and team B is not, is for me pure nonsense as well. I should be able to decide who is and is not in my community, not the devs.
I think this ultimately boils down to ThemePark vs Sandbox players. I fall into the latter cathegory and probably why I prefer FFA PvP to (dev decided) faction PvP.
Have you an agenda in posting so heavily criticising a game that you have barely even played?
See how ridiculous that question is? Stop it with the cheap tactics.
SO what sets this game and it's later tendencies apart from any other FFA game? Do you not realize most of what we discuss over here has to do with tried and true game mechanics? What is there here to know that you shouldn't already know based on past experience, as well as significant reading on the game?
Would you disagree that no matter what mechanic we're talking about it leads back in some way to PVP?
Would you disagree that to enjoy most of what it has to offer you need a group for personal protection and lively-hood?
Would you disagree the game entails many ways to impact another players experience for the worst?
WOuld you disagree the front end features can be deceptive in terms of what the actual game is about?
Was the above in green the reply to me that he just self edited to say "self edit?"
SO what sets this game and it's later tendencies apart from any other FFA... /snip
Jesus, just play it, or maybe go and make a general thread about FFA PvP games in the general forums and use examples of games you actually have played.
If you are gonna talk specifically about AA past L20, at least have played it to a point where your 'opinion' is not just a parroted echo chamber.
Talking to people with loudly expressed opinions based on received wisdom and assumption is tedious and I honestly cba to answer your questions.
Have you an agenda in posting so heavily criticising a game that you have barely even played?
See how ridiculous that question is? Stop it with the cheap tactics.
SO what sets this game and it's later tendencies apart from any other FFA game? Do you not realize most of what we discuss over here has to do with tried and true game mechanics? What is there here to know that you shouldn't already know based on past experience, as well as significant reading on the game?
Would you disagree that no matter what mechanic we're talking about it leads back in some way to PVP?
Would you disagree that to enjoy most of what it has to offer you need a group for personal protection and lively-hood?
Would you disagree the game entails many ways to impact another players experience for the worst?
WOuld you disagree the front end features can be deceptive in terms of what the actual game is about?
Was the above in green the reply to me that he just self edited to say "self edit?"
Yeah
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Have you an agenda in posting so heavily criticising a game that you have barely even played?
See how ridiculous that question is? Stop it with the cheap tactics.
SO what sets this game and it's later tendencies apart from any other FFA game? Do you not realize most of what we discuss over here has to do with tried and true game mechanics? What is there here to know that you shouldn't already know based on past experience, as well as significant reading on the game?
Would you disagree that no matter what mechanic we're talking about it leads back in some way to PVP?
Would you disagree that to enjoy most of what it has to offer you need a group for personal protection and lively-hood?
Would you disagree the game entails many ways to impact another players experience for the worst?
WOuld you disagree the front end features can be deceptive in terms of what the actual game is about?
Was the above in green the reply to me that he just self edited to say "self edit?"
Yeah
I'd really like him to point out all these criticisms I've had of the game. And he never bothered to answer my question. Should I take that as a yes then?
Exactly! This is how iron strong communities grow. Not from a system where you CANT attack people in your dev. defined factions but where you CHOSE NOT TO.
This is a pipe dream... More often than not people will have chose to attack. This idea of a good community growing in such a game is ripe with problems.
The idea is sound sure, but it didn't work in UO nor what followed and it's not going to work here (I"d bet on that). The wolves always out number the prey in these games when all is said and done, hence why opt in systems work better when it comes to community building..SWG vs UO or EVE being a good example..SWG's community wasn't without wolves, plenty were in the PVP guilds, I was one as well. However our impact was only on those who wanted to PVP, breeding a better competitive nature IMO, your competition could more often than not, properly defend itself.
FFA PVP is a wolves game, prey will have a tough go at it without significant help. SO yes that pushes you into groups, out of necessity, a much different motivator, with much different results ( only those you know are seen as friendly) everyone else is a target, or you are theirs.
This.
Otherwise, it devolves into "Hunt and gank" PVP. Where the chest beaters look for the weakest looking players to harass. Nothing strong develops out of that.
SO what sets this game and it's later tendencies apart from any other FFA... /snip
Jesus, just play it, or maybe go and make a general thread about FFA PvP games in the general forums and use examples of games you actually have played.
If you are gonna talk specifically about AA past L20, at least have played it to a point where your 'opinion' is not just a parroted echo chamber.
Talking to people with loudly expressed opinions based on received wisdom and assumption is tedious and I honestly cba to answer your questions.
I am playing it, so far it seems pretty traditional...what have I said that was so bad about AA BTW I guess you missed me saying it was fun, had some of the better tab target combat I"ve tried recently,etc...? I would also like to know where have I loudly expressed anything? Specifically what does that even mean?
ANd weren't you just telling someone else to stop using cheap tactics?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Have you an agenda in posting so heavily criticising a game that you have barely even played?
See how ridiculous that question is? Stop it with the cheap tactics.
SO what sets this game and it's later tendencies apart from any other FFA game? Do you not realize most of what we discuss over here has to do with tried and true game mechanics? What is there here to know that you shouldn't already know based on past experience, as well as significant reading on the game?
Would you disagree that no matter what mechanic we're talking about it leads back in some way to PVP?
Would you disagree that to enjoy most of what it has to offer you need a group for personal protection and lively-hood?
Would you disagree the game entails many ways to impact another players experience for the worst?
WOuld you disagree the front end features can be deceptive in terms of what the actual game is about?
Was the above in green the reply to me that he just self edited to say "self edit?"
Yeah
And these same people are the ones who tell players who quit after a time that they should have done their homework and researched the game 1st. Watched YouTube, read the reviews etc etc. It's whatever works to try to discredit someone's opinion.
EDIT:
That is meant as more of a general statement and not directed specifically at any particular poster. I realize that's how it comes across but not meant that way.
Exactly! This is how iron strong communities grow. Not from a system where you CANT attack people in your dev. defined factions but where you CHOSE NOT TO.
This is a pipe dream... More often than not people will have chose to attack. This idea of a good community growing in such a game is ripe with problems.
The idea is sound sure, but it didn't work in UO nor what followed and it's not going to work here (I"d bet on that). The wolves always out number the prey in these games when all is said and done, hence why opt in systems work better when it comes to community building..SWG vs UO or EVE being a good example..SWG's community wasn't without wolves, plenty were in the PVP guilds, I was one as well. However our impact was only on those who wanted to PVP, breeding a better competitive nature IMO, your competition could more often not properly defend itself.
FFA PVP is a wolves game prey will have a tough go at it without significant help. SO yes that pushes you into groups, out of necessity, a much different motivator, with much different results ( only those you know are seen as friendly) everyone else is a target, or you are theirs.
That is a very basic form of social community in FFA PvP games. After a while alliances grow and there will be consequences for killing someone in your alliance. Just look at Eve in the lawless 0.0 sectors. And with that comes politics and all kind of cool social experiments which cannot exist when the devs define the teams.
That's a good way to put it, basic ...as it's community in the most basic form, those closest to you. (IE your guild) and any guild alliances that form) the rest of the game is seen as more or less a no man's land. The idea of a broad community is moot in most examples of this though. Hence why I said what i originally did both to you and my og statement... it kinda of negates the idea of factions.
I just feel FFA PVP brings an element to games that becomes even more restrictive than linear game design in itself. As there is only one path to having fun in most cases, run with a zerg. It also hurts the RPG aspect as well, as it's difficult to find non criminals. It's too lawless for RP, which always has rules in place to stop mass nonsensical killing.
I think you and I have different definitions of community and nonsensical killings. For me the most nonsensical type of killing is where the devs put you in team A and tell you to kill people in team B. Killing for your friends and friends of friends is far less nonsensical to me.
Devs saying that team A is my community and team B is not, is for me pure nonsense as well. I should be able to decide who is and is not in my community, not the devs.
I think this ultimately boils down to ThemePark vs Sandbox players. I fall into the latter cathegory and probably why I prefer FFA PvP to (dev decided) faction PvP.
ON nonsensical killings I was thinking NWN player worlds and SWG... Everything else pre-cu SWG... Not really a themepark.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Have you an agenda in posting so heavily criticising a game that you have barely even played?
See how ridiculous that question is? Stop it with the cheap tactics.
SO what sets this game and it's later tendencies apart from any other FFA game? Do you not realize most of what we discuss over here has to do with tried and true game mechanics? What is there here to know that you shouldn't already know based on past experience, as well as significant reading on the game?
Would you disagree that no matter what mechanic we're talking about it leads back in some way to PVP?
Would you disagree that to enjoy most of what it has to offer you need a group for personal protection and lively-hood?
Would you disagree the game entails many ways to impact another players experience for the worst?
WOuld you disagree the front end features can be deceptive in terms of what the actual game is about?
Was the above in green the reply to me that he just self edited to say "self edit?"
Yeah
And these same people are the ones who tell players who quit after a time that they should have done their homework and researched the game 1st. Watched YouTube, read the reviews etc etc. It's whatever works to try to discredit someone's opinion.
SO very true.
Edit: at the edit..it came off as pretty general to me and not aimed at anyone.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Have you an agenda in posting so heavily criticising a game that you have barely even played?
See how ridiculous that question is? Stop it with the cheap tactics.
SO what sets this game and it's later tendencies apart from any other FFA game? Do you not realize most of what we discuss over here has to do with tried and true game mechanics? What is there here to know that you shouldn't already know based on past experience, as well as significant reading on the game?
Would you disagree that no matter what mechanic we're talking about it leads back in some way to PVP?
Would you disagree that to enjoy most of what it has to offer you need a group for personal protection and lively-hood?
Would you disagree the game entails many ways to impact another players experience for the worst?
WOuld you disagree the front end features can be deceptive in terms of what the actual game is about?
Was the above in green the reply to me that he just self edited to say "self edit?"
Yeah
And these same people are the ones who tell players who quit after a time that they should have done their homework and researched the game 1st. Watched YouTube, read the reviews etc etc. It's whatever works to try to discredit someone's opinion.
SO very true.
Edit: at the edit..it came off as pretty general to me and not aimed at anyone.
I look at it like this:
If someone says something and it's just plain BS, the issue can be disputed for what it is and the poster looks like a fool on his own. But when I start seeing Deflections and Ad-Homs, Then I know someone is on to something that is close to the truth. If someone had said something inaccurate, that could have been discredited based on what was posted. But when the poster himself is attacked it generally means what they said stands for itself. So it's a shoot the messenger thing. The truth is what it is. If you can't defeat the truth, defeat the one who spoke it with an Add-Hom. Soon as I see Ad-Homs, I know immediately who's got the valid points in the discussion.
Edit: at the edit..it came off as pretty general to me and not aimed at anyone.
I look at it like this:
If someone says something and it's just plain BS, the issue can be disputed for what it is and the poster looks like a fool on his own. But when I start seeing Deflections and Ad-Homs, Then I know someone is on to something that is close to the truth. If someone had said something inaccurate, that could have been discredited based on what was posted. But when the poster himself is attacked it generally means what they said stands for itself. So it's a shoot the messenger thing. The truth is what it is. If you can't defeat the truth, defeat the one who spoke it with an Add-Hom. Soon as I see Ad-Homs, I know immediately who's got the valid points in the discussion.
Well said.. as plainly as it could be put IMO.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Exactly! This is how iron strong communities grow. Not from a system where you CANT attack people in your dev. defined factions but where you CHOSE NOT TO.
This is a pipe dream... More often than not people will have chose to attack. This idea of a good community growing in such a game is ripe with problems.
The idea is sound sure, but it didn't work in UO nor what followed and it's not going to work here (I"d bet on that). The wolves always out number the prey in these games when all is said and done, hence why opt in systems work better when it comes to community building..SWG vs UO or EVE being a good example..SWG's community wasn't without wolves, plenty were in the PVP guilds, I was one as well. However our impact was only on those who wanted to PVP, breeding a better competitive nature IMO, your competition could more often than not, properly defend itself.
FFA PVP is a wolves game, prey will have a tough go at it without significant help. SO yes that pushes you into groups, out of necessity, a much different motivator, with much different results ( only those you know are seen as friendly) everyone else is a target, or you are theirs.
That's really not true at all.
This is a similar system to the one in Lineage 2 and the entire game, at least in the early years, was about guilds coming to the aid of their allies, players party protecting people in guilds at war, and guilds going out and of course "finding trouble".
The problem here is not that the current system allows this, the problem is that the players who don't like it (which is perfectly acceptable) are in the wrong game.
It's ok to have a game that allows this as long as the players are "all in".
But for SOME reason this is the hardest thing for people to understand. And it's not hard.
On a somewhat related note, today I was in an area that was, for a certain amount of time, a war zone. i was killed 3 times by level 50's even though I was only 32. did I stomp and pout and complain that I couldn't level? no. I did what I could do and then opted to come back when the zone wasn't in war. I could have called to guildies but "meh" who cares, and I don't need to drag people to my aid when nothing bad really happened.
And that's because I've opted into the rules.
When players are on board these aren't issues. They are only issues to the players who never should have been in the game in the first place if they were planning on playing in earnest (and not just "seeing" what it was like.)
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
And to answer your question, yeah... I do believe that a knowledgeable opinion, one that has experienced the matter first hand and has seen the situation from being part of it, is more valuable than one that is just parroting what it has heard other's (equally uninfomed usually) say.
I do believe that while everyone has the right to an opinion, I have the equal right to dismiss it as insipid derivative negative noise that is just parroting negativity to look cool on a forum.
Would I take his, or your for that matter, opinions on anything post teens as valid? Nah. I would say stick to talking about what you both know if you want to be taken seriously and heard.
1) I'm sorry, where did the OP say he was parroting something someone else said?
2) You have done the exact thing ever since Archeage launched. A few days post release you went on and on about how it's the best MMORPG since EQ1. Then you pop in every thread with this condescending attitude to everyone that doesn't hold Archeage as 'pound for pound the most fun in an MMORPG ever'. This is two distinct threads you have opened to discuss the exact same topic. I can't even count the number of threads I have seen closed for doing exactly what you did ("oh, it's a month old...its a different topic"...please.....the topic is the same; you could have easily just responded to your original thread). The question is why did you post those threads? Attention. You make these threads full of hyperbole just to boost your reply account, be popular and look cool on a forum, throwing away any criticism of the game with righteous indignation, terming us all haters.
[mod edit]
You are wasting your time grimal. H e is very passive agressive when it comes to his comments and after insulting you he would turn this all around on you and make it appear that you are the one 'trolling' here.
Trust me not worth it. I think almost everyone knows his style of posting and know how good he is in baiting people.
Exactly! This is how iron strong communities grow. Not from a system where you CANT attack people in your dev. defined factions but where you CHOSE NOT TO.
This is a pipe dream... More often than not people will have chose to attack. This idea of a good community growing in such a game is ripe with problems.
The idea is sound sure, but it didn't work in UO nor what followed and it's not going to work here (I"d bet on that). The wolves always out number the prey in these games when all is said and done, hence why opt in systems work better when it comes to community building..SWG vs UO or EVE being a good example..SWG's community wasn't without wolves, plenty were in the PVP guilds, I was one as well. However our impact was only on those who wanted to PVP, breeding a better competitive nature IMO, your competition could more often than not, properly defend itself.
FFA PVP is a wolves game, prey will have a tough go at it without significant help. SO yes that pushes you into groups, out of necessity, a much different motivator, with much different results ( only those you know are seen as friendly) everyone else is a target, or you are theirs.
That's really not true at all.
This is a similar system to the one in Lineage 2 and the entire game, at least in the early years, was about guilds coming to the aid of their allies, players party protecting people in guilds at war, and guilds going out and of course "finding trouble".
The problem here is not that the current system allows this, the problem is that the players who don't like it (which is perfectly acceptable) are in the wrong game.
It's ok to have a game that allows this as long as the players are "all in".
But for SOME reason this is the hardest thing for people to understand. And it's not hard.
On a somewhat related note, today I was in an area that was, for a certain amount of time, a war zone. i was killed 3 times by level 50's even though I was only 32. did I stomp and pout and complain that I couldn't level? no. I did what I could do and then opted to come back when the zone wasn't in war. I could have called to guildies but "meh" who cares, and I don't need to drag people to my aid when nothing bad really happened.
And that's because I've opted into the rules.
When players are on board these aren't issues. They are only issues to the players who never should have been in the game in the first place if they were planning on playing in earnest (and not just "seeing" what it was like.)
My follow up addressed this, that's what I meant by "those you know". They really aren't games for those who want to see a greater community form, they are more tribe vs tribe in nature. Everything feeds into that, now if AA has measures in place to prevent that I'm all ears, but I've not heard about any thus far.
I can only blame one thing for those wrong players being in the wrong game though, marketing and buzzwords. Sandpark, Themebox..etc.. doesn't exactly sound like a war simulator if you catch my drift.
I'm not even saying these things are issues, they are what they are, and they encourage a specific type of behavior/playstyle. Which is perfectly fine, I'm just saying what such mechanics lead to and what one should expect. I just think when players hear Sandpark, they think that means do what you want at your leisure. That's not the case in this game +30. Being there or not I can assess that much. It's a game very much driven by how players treat each other, when FFA PVP is the prime game-play motivator, you get a certain type of experience, hence AA being AA, DF being DF, Eve being Eve. They are meant to be games where wolves have their prey.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Originally posted by Leiloni Just because someone is in your faction in another game that doesn't mean they're on your side. People always will act a certain way and this game at least allows you to give them what they deserve instead of just "dealing with it" when there's guilds or people that you dislike (or that dislike you and your friends for whatever reason). It also allows you to make meaningful alliances with people as well to combat that. It's much more fun and freeing I think. Even small encounters are nice - if you're out grinding mobs for example and someone continually tries to steal your mobs, in other games you get irritated and have to go elsewhere and just avoid him. But in a game that allows PK that guy can't get away with being a jerk because you can just kill him. It's so much better when you think about the possibilities.
If you kill him or start the fight won't you be the person to go to jail if you die?
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Comments
That is a very basic form of social community in FFA PvP games. After a while alliances grow and there will be consequences for killing someone in your alliance. Just look at Eve in the lawless 0.0 sectors. And with that comes politics and all kind of cool social experiments which cannot exist when the devs define the teams.
My gaming blog
That's a good way to put it, basic ...as it's community in the most basic form, those closest to you. (IE your guild) and any guild alliances that form) the rest of the game is seen as more or less a no man's land. The idea of a broad community is moot in most examples of this though. Hence why I said what i originally did both to you and my og statement... it kinda of negates the idea of factions.
I just feel FFA PVP brings an element to games that becomes even more restrictive than linear game design in itself. As there is only one path to having fun in most cases, run with a zerg. It also hurts the RPG aspect as well, as it's difficult to find non criminals. It's too lawless for RP, which always has rules in place to stop mass nonsensical killing.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
1) I'm sorry, where did the OP say he was parroting something someone else said?
2) You have done the exact thing ever since Archeage launched. A few days post release you went on and on about how it's the best MMORPG since EQ1. Then you pop in every thread with this condescending attitude to everyone that doesn't hold Archeage as 'pound for pound the most fun in an MMORPG ever'. This is two distinct threads you have opened to discuss the exact same topic. I can't even count the number of threads I have seen closed for doing exactly what you did ("oh, it's a month old...its a different topic"...please.....the topic is the same; you could have easily just responded to your original thread). The question is why did you post those threads? Attention. You make these threads full of hyperbole just to boost your reply account, be popular and look cool on a forum, throwing away any criticism of the game with righteous indignation, terming us all haters.
[mod edit]
SO what sets this game and it's later tendencies apart from any other FFA game? Do you not realize most of what we discuss over here has to do with tried and true game mechanics? What is there here to know that you shouldn't already know based on past experience, as well as significant reading on the game?
Would you disagree that no matter what mechanic we're talking about it leads back in some way to PVP?
Would you disagree that to enjoy most of what it has to offer you need a group for personal protection and lively-hood?
Would you disagree the game entails many ways to impact another players experience for the worst?
WOuld you disagree the front end features can be deceptive in terms of what the actual game is about?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I think you and I have different definitions of community and nonsensical killings. For me the most nonsensical type of killing is where the devs put you in team A and tell you to kill people in team B. Killing for your friends and friends of friends is far less nonsensical to me.
Devs saying that team A is my community and team B is not, is for me pure nonsense as well. I should be able to decide who is and is not in my community, not the devs.
I think this ultimately boils down to ThemePark vs Sandbox players. I fall into the latter cathegory and probably why I prefer FFA PvP to (dev decided) faction PvP.
My gaming blog
Was the above in green the reply to me that he just self edited to say "self edit?"
Jesus, just play it, or maybe go and make a general thread about FFA PvP games in the general forums and use examples of games you actually have played.
If you are gonna talk specifically about AA past L20, at least have played it to a point where your 'opinion' is not just a parroted echo chamber.
Talking to people with loudly expressed opinions based on received wisdom and assumption is tedious and I honestly cba to answer your questions.
Yeah
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I'd really like him to point out all these criticisms I've had of the game. And he never bothered to answer my question. Should I take that as a yes then?
This.
Otherwise, it devolves into "Hunt and gank" PVP. Where the chest beaters look for the weakest looking players to harass. Nothing strong develops out of that.
I am playing it, so far it seems pretty traditional...what have I said that was so bad about AA BTW I guess you missed me saying it was fun, had some of the better tab target combat I"ve tried recently,etc...? I would also like to know where have I loudly expressed anything? Specifically what does that even mean?
ANd weren't you just telling someone else to stop using cheap tactics?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
And these same people are the ones who tell players who quit after a time that they should have done their homework and researched the game 1st. Watched YouTube, read the reviews etc etc. It's whatever works to try to discredit someone's opinion.
EDIT:
That is meant as more of a general statement and not directed specifically at any particular poster. I realize that's how it comes across but not meant that way.
ON nonsensical killings I was thinking NWN player worlds and SWG... Everything else pre-cu SWG... Not really a themepark.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
SO very true.
Edit: at the edit..it came off as pretty general to me and not aimed at anyone.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I look at it like this:
If someone says something and it's just plain BS, the issue can be disputed for what it is and the poster looks like a fool on his own. But when I start seeing Deflections and Ad-Homs, Then I know someone is on to something that is close to the truth. If someone had said something inaccurate, that could have been discredited based on what was posted. But when the poster himself is attacked it generally means what they said stands for itself. So it's a shoot the messenger thing. The truth is what it is. If you can't defeat the truth, defeat the one who spoke it with an Add-Hom. Soon as I see Ad-Homs, I know immediately who's got the valid points in the discussion.
Well said.. as plainly as it could be put IMO.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
That's really not true at all.
This is a similar system to the one in Lineage 2 and the entire game, at least in the early years, was about guilds coming to the aid of their allies, players party protecting people in guilds at war, and guilds going out and of course "finding trouble".
The problem here is not that the current system allows this, the problem is that the players who don't like it (which is perfectly acceptable) are in the wrong game.
It's ok to have a game that allows this as long as the players are "all in".
But for SOME reason this is the hardest thing for people to understand. And it's not hard.
On a somewhat related note, today I was in an area that was, for a certain amount of time, a war zone. i was killed 3 times by level 50's even though I was only 32. did I stomp and pout and complain that I couldn't level? no. I did what I could do and then opted to come back when the zone wasn't in war. I could have called to guildies but "meh" who cares, and I don't need to drag people to my aid when nothing bad really happened.
And that's because I've opted into the rules.
When players are on board these aren't issues. They are only issues to the players who never should have been in the game in the first place if they were planning on playing in earnest (and not just "seeing" what it was like.)
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
You are wasting your time grimal. H e is very passive agressive when it comes to his comments and after insulting you he would turn this all around on you and make it appear that you are the one 'trolling' here.
Trust me not worth it. I think almost everyone knows his style of posting and know how good he is in baiting people.
My follow up addressed this, that's what I meant by "those you know". They really aren't games for those who want to see a greater community form, they are more tribe vs tribe in nature. Everything feeds into that, now if AA has measures in place to prevent that I'm all ears, but I've not heard about any thus far.
I can only blame one thing for those wrong players being in the wrong game though, marketing and buzzwords. Sandpark, Themebox..etc.. doesn't exactly sound like a war simulator if you catch my drift.
I'm not even saying these things are issues, they are what they are, and they encourage a specific type of behavior/playstyle. Which is perfectly fine, I'm just saying what such mechanics lead to and what one should expect. I just think when players hear Sandpark, they think that means do what you want at your leisure. That's not the case in this game +30. Being there or not I can assess that much. It's a game very much driven by how players treat each other, when FFA PVP is the prime game-play motivator, you get a certain type of experience, hence AA being AA, DF being DF, Eve being Eve. They are meant to be games where wolves have their prey.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Ah yes. Pride.
Unless of course, your faction was losing.
Then it's off to play on your other account of the winning faction...
Many people project their own typical tendencies when thinking about what others may do.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Deep. Looking for a cookie, scooter?
If you kill him or start the fight won't you be the person to go to jail if you die?
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey