FFA PvP is automatic deal breaker for me. I dont care how good the game is otherwise, simply will not do it, and thats fine, different strokes for different folks.
However, historically speaking, FFA PvP games do pretty dismally bad.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
The game looks fantastic. I love deep challenging crafting. I simply cannot accept being ganked and having my hard work stolen from me. I wish I could consider the game but I simply refuse to subject myself to gank squads. I have played DAOC for over 10 years. My wife still plays.I'm addicted to realm vs realm warfare. Just not gankers taking my hard work away from me and wasting the days I spent making great items. I hope this feature is reconsidered.
PvP, loss, gain, harshness, is largely built-into the premise of the game. Its the time period and low fantasy setting. Also, I wouldn't call the crafting deep and challenging. Sufficient, improving? yes. As far as I can tell, its simple enough to remake anything you have. In fact, I make two of something just in case.
A gankfest? If that's what you call cutting a tree while somebody shoves a sword up your keister. Absolutely gonna happen, but that's not really what the game is geared up for...risk is not limited to a single party or player. Larger scale battles are where it counts, and ultimately solo-play becomes "riskier".
On a slight deviation, the GV forums have a growing discussion about character levels (gear & stats), and generally speaking, what that means as far as gameplay. For example, "can a level 20 player hold their own against a level 100 player?" If you want to take a look: http://forum.gloriavictisgame.com/showthread.php?tid=8428
The developers are often involved in these discussions, so it may be helpful to understand some of their philosophy, particularly when it comes to battle (eluding to the op's concerns about ganking). The desire is to be largely "skill-based", and even some of the best players in the game are thwarted by good combat.
There will be ganking, but there are a number of incentives to look for challenging pvp, so as not to ruin the game experience of low or unwanting players. Will you get attacked when gathering? Yes. So pay attention. The camera is free to look around as you gather. I feel this makes even the most boring task exciting.
If all the carebears would band together in these game you'd then have a chance to change your virtual world.... People need to understand that the solo player will never have a chance against those who group... And if you are against grouping you're putting yourself on the shit end of the stick to begin with. Basically you're agreeing to be slaughtered...
Band together, organize guilds, change your world for the better...
Maybe the gankers are just more dedicated, maybe they deserve to win... Unless, you get up and fight!
The game is obviously not for you then right? You like the idea of a game but not how it is set up so you want it to be totally different on the simple basis of you not wanting to play it with its rule set so it must be changed for YOU! o_O
I never understand these posts, and they do nothing but twist devs when this shit is posted on mass causing the game to die later on and mainly due to forum whining.
Oh and because YOU disagree with his thoughts he is not allowed to post or what ? OMFG common sense please..............
Do what purpose? There should be a purpose shouldn't there? Does he just need to vent? If so, why not vent in private?
And what exactly are you hoping to get out of your retorts?
Eve is a successful mmo, that's what this game is shooting for. Comparing it to mo or df is pretty appropriate since it's a similar concept, but gloria gas better design then both games. More geared towards a broader audience.
The loot thing might turn some people off, but as someone said, these kind of games are about grouping together, it is not a single player game. There will always people looking to kill other players, if you don't like open pvp, you probably don't like looting of players. If there is open pvp, it's unfair to the winner to not reap some reward for victory, also without the risk of loss, you would not get the same heart pumping moments in fights. Revenge isn't as sweet without the spoils of war.
To each there own, no one should think their views are so much more righteous then anothers.
That said, I'd still suggest anyone looking for a well thought out, immersive, mmorpg like the good old mmos, try out Gloria Victis.
So we should not express opinions ? Is that what you are struggling to say ?
Saying that you hope a feature is changed because you don't like it is a little beyond expressing an opinion. It's frustrating because there are a community of MMO players that enjoy player looting, and every game you have a subset of people such as yourself that come and tell us this feature should change simply because you don't like it, instead of going and playing a game you like not designed with player looting.
As the game stands now, there are many different servers with many different rule-sets. Pick a Carebear or duel only server if you don't enjoy PK full loot. When the game goes full on MMO I hope full body loot stays in the game. I think PvP should have consequence.
"If it keeps up, man will atrophy all his limbs but the push-button finger."
The game is obviously not for you then right? You like the idea of a game but not how it is set up so you want it to be totally different on the simple basis of you not wanting to play it with its rule set so it must be changed for YOU! o_O
I never understand these posts, and they do nothing but twist devs when this shit is posted on mass causing the game to die later on and mainly due to forum whining.
Oh and because YOU disagree with his thoughts he is not allowed to post or what ? OMFG common sense please..............
Do what purpose? There should be a purpose shouldn't there? Does he just need to vent? If so, why not vent in private?
And what exactly are you hoping to get out of your retorts?
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Just so bizarre to me that there is even a market for pvp games such as this.
EVE I understand a little because there are such terrible options for space games.
But otherwise it is a game depending on gaining followers by offering them PvP with as little skill as possible. Suck at the game? That's ok, just get more players! Only have a few friends? That's cool, backstab them!
PvP in MMOs has always had inherent limitations on how much player input can be accepted. When there are hundreds of players possible in an area, you can't be doing such skill intensive stuff as aiming or complicated movement mechanics. Games are struggling to make PvP appealing with such limitations.
Some games do manage to make it work though. Every game I have ever played that I thought managed to make PvP interesting did it by making groups work together to become much more effective - looking at WAR's excellent balance, DAoC's entire design, or GW2's WvW before the community ruined it with cheating. I think player looting is directly opposed to such team based play, as it makes group engagements quickly become too expensive to support.
Anyone that has played EVE should be able to relate. What has happened in EVE is that there is next to no competitive combat. A corp may gate camp all day waiting for someone to jump though. They stay away from engagements where there is any shadow of a doubt as to the outcome. Those enormous battles that occur are the insanely rare result of an alliance getting so bored they make a play for power. I have participated in EVE on all sides of these engagements - the winning side of large fights, the losing side, the gate campers, and the explorer caught in the camp. Throughout it all, I can tell you the full loss/player looting mechanics have made a game you do not play. You log in, you may creep, you may work on industry, but you spend 99.9% of your time waiting around for someone to take a risk you can capitalize on.
When I see a game offering player looting, I suspect the developer has found the task of "good" pvp too daunting, and that they are trying to offer a cheesy gimmick to make people interested. Don't fall for it.
Pvp is just a real cheap way to build a game,there is little content needed.
Poster above got a lot fo points correct including my same gut feeling that Eve only survives because there is such poor choice in space games.That is likely also the reason CR is moving in with SC ,he can make a 50% game and still beat all competition.
Pvp just has too much negativity that goes with it.I think that is why Arena type shooters survive because there is no longevity to frustrate of piss you off,you just go in shoot for a while then leave the server. We see games like this trying to be a hybrid ,create some rpg aspects but in reality it is just a real weak fps with no map design to support good pvp.
Most people i feel are fooled by that SHELL,a game that looks on the outside like something amazing,but once you start playing it's like...abandoned ship.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Open pvp could work if they had permadeath as a consequence for murdering at random, but the same bullies that go around in groups to kill solo pvp players and crafters will scream bloody murder at the thought that they themselves would face a risk. Even thought they say its the other side that are "carebears".
One thing to keep in mind, which people who aren't used to these types of games fail to grasp so often, with player looting games is that gear is expendable. You aren't going to "spend days making great items" in most cases. You may invest quite a bit of time getting your crafting skills high enough to make those great items, but for the most part once you reach that point making them takes pretty minimal effort. After a couple months the game tends to become saturated with at least "good" if not "great" gear to the point where your average player has dozens, sometimes hundreds of backup sets.
This wins the thread....
DaoC is a great game however, you could be killed and be back on the battlegrounds in seconds. Now some of you don't mind "Agent Smith" encounters but please try to understand the logic behind partial looting, even if you don't agree with it.
Open pvp could work if they had permadeath as a consequence for murdering at random, but the same bullies that go around in groups to kill solo pvp players and crafters will scream bloody murder at the thought that they themselves would face a risk. Even thought they say its the other side that are "carebears".
I'm pretty sure you will be able to hide in safe zones and craft all day.......
Anything and everything can change at this early stage of development. I wish scrubs would have a little more protection, and ways to protect an item on your equipped character. I love the game and what it can become in the future, but god the player looting/pvp in this game is unforgiving. I'm sure the developers behind Gloria Victis will make the appropriate changes by the time alpha comes to an end.
If they implement a carebear server... then :proud: ... who knows what will happen in time.
One thing to keep in mind, which people who aren't used to these types of games fail to grasp so often, with player looting games is that gear is expendable. You aren't going to "spend days making great items" in most cases. You may invest quite a bit of time getting your crafting skills high enough to make those great items, but for the most part once you reach that point making them takes pretty minimal effort. After a couple months the game tends to become saturated with at least "good" if not "great" gear to the point where your average player has dozens, sometimes hundreds of backup sets.
This wins the thread....
DaoC is a great game however, you could be killed and be back on the battlegrounds in seconds. Now some of you don't mind "Agent Smith" encounters but please try to understand the logic behind partial looting, even if you don't agree with it.
Will you find them, Zod? Will you reclaim what has been lost? Will you find them? lol sorry, couldn't help it.
Just so bizarre to me that there is even a market for pvp games such as this.
EVE I understand a little because there are such terrible options for space games.
But otherwise it is a game depending on gaining followers by offering them PvP with as little skill as possible. Suck at the game? That's ok, just get more players! Only have a few friends? That's cool, backstab them!
PvP in MMOs has always had inherent limitations on how much player input can be accepted. When there are hundreds of players possible in an area, you can't be doing such skill intensive stuff as aiming or complicated movement mechanics. Games are struggling to make PvP appealing with such limitations.
Some games do manage to make it work though. Every game I have ever played that I thought managed to make PvP interesting did it by making groups work together to become much more effective - looking at WAR's excellent balance, DAoC's entire design, or GW2's WvW before the community ruined it with cheating. I think player looting is directly opposed to such team based play, as it makes group engagements quickly become too expensive to support.
Anyone that has played EVE should be able to relate. What has happened in EVE is that there is next to no competitive combat. A corp may gate camp all day waiting for someone to jump though. They stay away from engagements where there is any shadow of a doubt as to the outcome. Those enormous battles that occur are the insanely rare result of an alliance getting so bored they make a play for power. I have participated in EVE on all sides of these engagements - the winning side of large fights, the losing side, the gate campers, and the explorer caught in the camp. Throughout it all, I can tell you the full loss/player looting mechanics have made a game you do not play. You log in, you may creep, you may work on industry, but you spend 99.9% of your time waiting around for someone to take a risk you can capitalize on.
When I see a game offering player looting, I suspect the developer has found the task of "good" pvp too daunting, and that they are trying to offer a cheesy gimmick to make people interested. Don't fall for it.
The combat is quite skill based, and similar to mount and blade, have you played it?
Pvp is just a real cheap way to build a game,there is little content needed.
Poster above got a lot fo points correct including my same gut feeling that Eve only survives because there is such poor choice in space games.That is likely also the reason CR is moving in with SC ,he can make a 50% game and still beat all competition.
Pvp just has too much negativity that goes with it.I think that is why Arena type shooters survive because there is no longevity to frustrate of piss you off,you just go in shoot for a while then leave the server. We see games like this trying to be a hybrid ,create some rpg aspects but in reality it is just a real weak fps with no map design to support good pvp.
Most people i feel are fooled by that SHELL,a game that looks on the outside like something amazing,but once you start playing it's like...abandoned ship.
One of the most inaccurate statements I've ever seen about this game.
The level design is amazingly suited for very strategic attacks.
The combat in this game is much more skill based then I think you guys understand, have you played chivalry? Or mount and blade? Or mortal online?
Mount and blade and chivalry are very succeful titles, and some have huge communities dedicated to a mod that tries to achieve what gloria is making. Mount and blade crpg. Mortal despite its terrible reviews still had a few thousand people trying it when it released on steam.
Games like ark, rust, Reign of kings, all have huge booms when first let in to early access, but die due to lack of depth, and that where gloria is going to bring more to the table.
With good territory control, similar to one of the most popular games ever, planet side.
Combat to support it.
Great crafting.
And base building.
With ships, and mounts, and quests.
Full loot could not deter to many from all these alluring aspects, I feel you people are out of touch with what players really want.
One thing to keep in mind, which people who aren't used to these types of games fail to grasp so often, with player looting games is that gear is expendable. You aren't going to "spend days making great items" in most cases. You may invest quite a bit of time getting your crafting skills high enough to make those great items, but for the most part once you reach that point making them takes pretty minimal effort. After a couple months the game tends to become saturated with at least "good" if not "great" gear to the point where your average player has dozens, sometimes hundreds of backup sets.
This wins the thread....
DaoC is a great game however, you could be killed and be back on the battlegrounds in seconds. Now some of you don't mind "Agent Smith" encounters but please try to understand the logic behind partial looting, even if you don't agree with it.
What's interesting here is the elimination of the "crafting game". I believe the people often referred to as "carebears" are made up of subsets of players including those who play predominately to gather and/or craft.
Instead of justifying full loot PVP by explaining how the risk is minimized through low value goods, kaiser3282's statement actually highlights a second reason these players may not want to participate. One being risk of loss through non-consensual PVP and two being unrewarding crafting systems. Unless the actual act of crafting itself is somehow rewarding enough, there doesn't seem to be much reason for these types of players to play in such a game.
One thing to keep in mind, which people who aren't used to these types of games fail to grasp so often, with player looting games is that gear is expendable. You aren't going to "spend days making great items" in most cases. You may invest quite a bit of time getting your crafting skills high enough to make those great items, but for the most part once you reach that point making them takes pretty minimal effort. After a couple months the game tends to become saturated with at least "good" if not "great" gear to the point where your average player has dozens, sometimes hundreds of backup sets.
This wins the thread....
DaoC is a great game however, you could be killed and be back on the battlegrounds in seconds. Now some of you don't mind "Agent Smith" encounters but please try to understand the logic behind partial looting, even if you don't agree with it.
What's interesting here is the elimination of the "crafting game". I believe the people often referred to as "carebears" are made up of subsets of players including those who play predominately to gather and/or craft.
Instead of justifying full loot PVP by explaining how the risk is minimized through low value goods, kaiser3282's statement actually highlights a second reason these players may not want to participate. One being risk of loss through non-consensual PVP and two being unrewarding crafting systems. Unless the actual act of crafting itself is somehow rewarding enough, there doesn't seem to be much reason for these types of players to play in such a game.
All a game needs to support players like this is a functional economy. Which Gloria design already shows will be something that is supported. And there will be places where these players can be safe.
Also, the gsme is not full loot. It's only partial loot. Players have a finite amount of time to take your items, therefore you do not lose everything upon death.
Systems like this were used in traditional rpgs and they were very popular. A partial loot system creates a sense of loss, but not so devastating that a players drive is stolen. On the contrary, it enforces most players as its a goal to be reobtained.
Also, coupled with how gear is looted, awarded through daily events, and I imagine later through quests, as well as crafted goods, players will be able to focus on the main aspect of this game, the pvp.
Pvp is a big focus of this game, thE design is set in such a way as well, thar pvp is rewarding in its self, so theRe will be plenty of separation between hunters and fighters based on geographiy. Pvp will happen around capturable towns, and gather is done in the areas all over the map. So a player has choice of what they want to participate in.
Also, games like this are about planning, strategy, and tactics. So if you're running around by yourself with your best gear and tons of valuables. ..you deserve to lose them. This game teaches people weighing there options and making choices and paying consequences or reaping rewards based on those choices.
Without a looting system, these choices will not pack the same punch as they could or should to evoke the proper player reaction. This game, is also for adults. Who appreciate these types of dynamics.
Comments
However, historically speaking, FFA PvP games do pretty dismally bad.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
A gankfest? If that's what you call cutting a tree while somebody shoves a sword up your keister. Absolutely gonna happen, but that's not really what the game is geared up for...risk is not limited to a single party or player. Larger scale battles are where it counts, and ultimately solo-play becomes "riskier".
On a slight deviation, the GV forums have a growing discussion about character levels (gear & stats), and generally speaking, what that means as far as gameplay. For example, "can a level 20 player hold their own against a level 100 player?" If you want to take a look:
http://forum.gloriavictisgame.com/showthread.php?tid=8428
The developers are often involved in these discussions, so it may be helpful to understand some of their philosophy, particularly when it comes to battle (eluding to the op's concerns about ganking). The desire is to be largely "skill-based", and even some of the best players in the game are thwarted by good combat.
Band together, organize guilds, change your world for the better...
Maybe the gankers are just more dedicated, maybe they deserve to win... Unless, you get up and fight!
CAREBEAR STARE!!!!
The loot thing might turn some people off, but as someone said, these kind of games are about grouping together, it is not a single player game. There will always people looking to kill other players, if you don't like open pvp, you probably don't like looting of players. If there is open pvp, it's unfair to the winner to not reap some reward for victory, also without the risk of loss, you would not get the same heart pumping moments in fights. Revenge isn't as sweet without the spoils of war.
To each there own, no one should think their views are so much more righteous then anothers.
That said, I'd still suggest anyone looking for a well thought out, immersive, mmorpg like the good old mmos, try out Gloria Victis.
"If it keeps up, man will atrophy all his limbs but the push-button finger."
Frank Lloyd Wright
$10,000,000.00 US Dollars.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
EVE I understand a little because there are such terrible options for space games.
But otherwise it is a game depending on gaining followers by offering them PvP with as little skill as possible. Suck at the game? That's ok, just get more players! Only have a few friends? That's cool, backstab them!
PvP in MMOs has always had inherent limitations on how much player input can be accepted. When there are hundreds of players possible in an area, you can't be doing such skill intensive stuff as aiming or complicated movement mechanics. Games are struggling to make PvP appealing with such limitations.
Some games do manage to make it work though. Every game I have ever played that I thought managed to make PvP interesting did it by making groups work together to become much more effective - looking at WAR's excellent balance, DAoC's entire design, or GW2's WvW before the community ruined it with cheating. I think player looting is directly opposed to such team based play, as it makes group engagements quickly become too expensive to support.
Anyone that has played EVE should be able to relate. What has happened in EVE is that there is next to no competitive combat. A corp may gate camp all day waiting for someone to jump though. They stay away from engagements where there is any shadow of a doubt as to the outcome. Those enormous battles that occur are the insanely rare result of an alliance getting so bored they make a play for power. I have participated in EVE on all sides of these engagements - the winning side of large fights, the losing side, the gate campers, and the explorer caught in the camp. Throughout it all, I can tell you the full loss/player looting mechanics have made a game you do not play. You log in, you may creep, you may work on industry, but you spend 99.9% of your time waiting around for someone to take a risk you can capitalize on.
When I see a game offering player looting, I suspect the developer has found the task of "good" pvp too daunting, and that they are trying to offer a cheesy gimmick to make people interested. Don't fall for it.
Poster above got a lot fo points correct including my same gut feeling that Eve only survives because there is such poor choice in space games.That is likely also the reason CR is moving in with SC ,he can make a 50% game and still beat all competition.
Pvp just has too much negativity that goes with it.I think that is why Arena type shooters survive because there is no longevity to frustrate of piss you off,you just go in shoot for a while then leave the server.
We see games like this trying to be a hybrid ,create some rpg aspects but in reality it is just a real weak fps with no map design to support good pvp.
Most people i feel are fooled by that SHELL,a game that looks on the outside like something amazing,but once you start playing it's like...abandoned ship.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
....Being Banned from MMORPG's forums since 2010, for Trolling the Trolls!!!
kaiser3282 said:
One thing to keep in mind, which people who aren't used to these types of games fail to grasp so often, with player looting games is that gear is expendable. You aren't going to "spend days making great items" in most cases. You may invest quite a bit of time getting your crafting skills high enough to make those great items, but for the most part once you reach that point making them takes pretty minimal effort. After a couple months the game tends to become saturated with at least "good" if not "great" gear to the point where your average player has dozens, sometimes hundreds of backup sets.
DaoC is a great game however, you could be killed and be back on the battlegrounds in seconds. Now some of you don't mind "Agent Smith" encounters but please try to understand the logic behind partial looting, even if you don't agree with it.
Anything and everything can change at this early stage of development. I wish scrubs would have a little more protection, and ways to protect an item on your equipped character. I love the game and what it can become in the future, but god the player looting/pvp in this game is unforgiving. I'm sure the developers behind Gloria Victis will make the appropriate changes by the time alpha comes to an end.
If they implement a carebear server... then :proud: ... who knows what will happen in time.
One of the most inaccurate statements I've ever seen about this game.
The level design is amazingly suited for very strategic attacks.
The combat in this game is much more skill based then I think you guys understand, have you played chivalry? Or mount and blade? Or mortal online?
Mount and blade and chivalry are very succeful titles, and some have huge communities dedicated to a mod that tries to achieve what gloria is making. Mount and blade crpg. Mortal despite its terrible reviews still had a few thousand people trying it when it released on steam.
Games like ark, rust, Reign of kings, all have huge booms when first let in to early access, but die due to lack of depth, and that where gloria is going to bring more to the table.
With good territory control, similar to one of the most popular games ever, planet side.
Combat to support it.
Great crafting.
And base building.
With ships, and mounts, and quests.
Full loot could not deter to many from all these alluring aspects, I feel you people are out of touch with what players really want.
Instead of justifying full loot PVP by explaining how the risk is minimized through low value goods, kaiser3282's statement actually highlights a second reason these players may not want to participate. One being risk of loss through non-consensual PVP and two being unrewarding crafting systems. Unless the actual act of crafting itself is somehow rewarding enough, there doesn't seem to be much reason for these types of players to play in such a game.
Also, the gsme is not full loot. It's only partial loot. Players have a finite amount of time to take your items, therefore you do not lose everything upon death.
Systems like this were used in traditional rpgs and they were very popular. A partial loot system creates a sense of loss, but not so devastating that a players drive is stolen. On the contrary, it enforces most players as its a goal to be reobtained.
Also, coupled with how gear is looted, awarded through daily events, and I imagine later through quests, as well as crafted goods, players will be able to focus on the main aspect of this game, the pvp.
Pvp is a big focus of this game, thE design is set in such a way as well, thar pvp is rewarding in its self, so theRe will be plenty of separation between hunters and fighters based on geographiy. Pvp will happen around capturable towns, and gather is done in the areas all over the map. So a player has choice of what they want to participate in.
Also, games like this are about planning, strategy, and tactics. So if you're running around by yourself with your best gear and tons of valuables. ..you deserve to lose them. This game teaches people weighing there options and making choices and paying consequences or reaping rewards based on those choices.
Without a looting system, these choices will not pack the same punch as they could or should to evoke the proper player reaction. This game, is also for adults. Who appreciate these types of dynamics.