Even if its only guild leaders who make these decisions, their effects are experienced by everyone. Say an enemy guild decides to siege your castle, you never took part in this decision, but you still get to experience an epic battle defending your base.
To say mmorpg pvp is only casual is wrong, its a matter of perspective. For the lone farmer thats getting ganked by 3 bandit players, the pvp would be on hard mode. But at the same time, the 3 gankers are playing on easy mode. Its not like a MOBA where the experience is the same for all. Ultimately you decide how much pvp depth you want to experience in these games and how many friends you bring.
Well the original point was that the majority of gameplay in that type of PVP game is shallow because any potential depth is overwhelmed by shallow systems (progression or population advantages). Your counterpoint was politics, but then it was pointed out how that's not gameplay for the majority of players.
It is gameplay (decisions and effect) that creates the fun patterns that constitute the main way players enjoy games (Koster, 2004.) Without decisions, it's not gameplay; it's merely a tidal force that stacks the deck one way or another and predetermines the victor entirely outside your control -- which is why no it's not fun and that battle isn't epic (it's just one side or the other having the stacked deck and going through the motions to carry out the infrequent decisions of the minority.)
Citing the 3v1 fails to take an objective/analytical look at what's going on:
In a 3v1 fight, one factor dominated the outcome: population. Bringing more friends is a shallow factor, yet so powerful that it will usually trump all other factors.
Whereas in a 1v1 fight, those other factors matter. The exact mix of skills involved varies from game to game (ambush skill, aim skill, TF2's rocket-jumping, MMORPG's ability-rotations, SC2's macro/micro, etc) but in a well-designed game players will be challenged to develop multiple distinct skillsets related to playing the game well, and that's deep gameplay.
So yes, MMORPG PVP is casual. Instead of being games where skill is highly rewarded, they're games where your skill is largely irrelevant due to shallow factors like population or progression. That's casual PVP.
The majority of gameplay? You do know not everyone plays sandbox games for pvp right? Some people just like to play the market, some like building, others crafting. To say all these systems are "shallow" because they dont encourage fair pvp every second is just idiotic. The PVP might be more shallow than an e sport game, but the game as a whole has a lot more depth. Its like me saying CS GO is a shallow game because it doesnt have crafting....
You seem to think that anyone with even a slight population advantage is gonna win automatically, and this may be true in traditional themepark mmos with levels and epic gear, but I already said why those types of games wouldnt make good sandboxes. In games like the original darkfall, it was very possible for a team of very coordinated players take on 3x the odds, since the type of player that seeks safety within a zerg usually isnt very skilled. And that sounds pretty epic to me, and would require the underdog team to develop skillsets like strong teamwork, just like in an e sport game.
And I wouldnt really call mmorpg pvp casual, since a casual game is something you can just jump in and play immediately, where in a mmorpg you have to grind your character up, gear him up, etc. before being able to pvp. Just call it "unfair pvp".
Narius, you should know that I can see that you've posted, but not what you've posted. I've blocked you, and now, coming to these forums is far more pleasant.
Should have done that ages ago, he might as well be a bot, just spamming the same idiotic shit in every thread trying to derail it.
The majority of gameplay? You do know not everyone plays sandbox games for pvp right? Some people just like to play the market, some like building, others crafting. To say all these systems are "shallow" because they dont encourage fair pvp every second is just idiotic. The PVP might be more shallow than an e sport game, but the game as a whole has a lot more depth. Its like me saying CS GO is a shallow game because it doesnt have crafting....
You seem to think that anyone with even a slight population advantage is gonna win automatically, and this may be true in traditional themepark mmos with levels and epic gear, but I already said why those types of games wouldnt make good sandboxes. In games like the original darkfall, it was very possible for a team of very coordinated players take on 3x the odds, since the type of player that seeks safety within a zerg usually isnt very skilled. And that sounds pretty epic to me, and would require the underdog team to develop skillsets like strong teamwork, just like in an e sport game.
And I wouldnt really call mmorpg pvp casual, since a casual game is something you can just jump in and play immediately, where in a mmorpg you have to grind your character up, gear him up, etc. before being able to pvp. Just call it "unfair pvp".
A straw man fallacy is when you make your argument not based on what the other person has actually said, but based on some imaginary nonsense you made up:
I wasn't commenting on non-PVP features. This thread is about PVP and that's what I've been talking about. I've pointed out that if PVP was the reason you were playing these games, you'd experience shallow gameplay and most of your time wouldn't be spent PVPing (even though that was your focus.)
I never said every fight is won automatically, but merely pointed out that these shallow advantages hold immense power in these games. The vast majority of fights are predetermined based on those shallow factors. "This one time I beat 3 people at once" has never been an argument capable of dealing with all the other times that you and others lost because of numerical disadvantage or progression. In Darkfall I landed ~24 melee hits on someone in the time it took them to kill me in ~4 hits. They ended the fight at around 90% health. These are not skill-focused PVP games, they are casual PVP designed to make unskilled players feel good about themselves.
Furthermore if you're excited by the prospect of fighting and winning a 3v1, I have great news: it doesn't require casual PVP! I end up in those situations (sometimes victorious) in many pure PVP games like TF2, and it's a ton of fun, but it's always either my fault or an intentional gamble (because elsewhere on the map I have an equal number of teammates I could've grouped up with, since teams are balanced in pure PVP games.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
As for e-sports WoW, there is no loss in wow pvp. There is nothing you are competing for IN-GAME. rl cash prizes big deal.
Real cash prizes big deal? Well some will think that $250k is a big deal. Probably watched by 1.5M players is pretty big deal for some too.
Competing something in-game seems so insignificant compared to those .. at least for some people.
The difference here is that you dont need to be the 0.01% in order to compete for ingame things whereas you need to dedicate your life to go after big tournament prizes.
As for e-sports WoW, there is no loss in wow pvp. There is nothing you are competing for IN-GAME. rl cash prizes big deal.
Real cash prizes big deal? Well some will think that $250k is a big deal. Probably watched by 1.5M players is pretty big deal for some too.
Competing something in-game seems so insignificant compared to those .. at least for some people.
The difference here is that you dont need to be the 0.01% in order to compete for ingame things whereas you need to dedicate your life to go after big tournament prizes.
Or people can WATCH those who compete for those tournament prizes and have fun. Don't tell me e-sports don't matter to the fans. This is no different than football fans who watch football but don't play.
As for e-sports WoW, there is no loss in wow pvp. There is nothing you are competing for IN-GAME. rl cash prizes big deal.
Real cash prizes big deal? Well some will think that $250k is a big deal. Probably watched by 1.5M players is pretty big deal for some too.
Competing something in-game seems so insignificant compared to those .. at least for some people.
The difference here is that you dont need to be the 0.01% in order to compete for ingame things whereas you need to dedicate your life to go after big tournament prizes.
Or people can WATCH those who compete for those tournament prizes and have fun. Don't tell me e-sports don't matter to the fans. This is no different than football fans who watch football but don't play.
I care as much about e-sport fans as I do about football fans. I already said what I think of WoW players and it's community. And face it, you have better chances of winning the lottery than getting to be an e-sport player and winning a cash prize. I'm talking about in-game competition where everyone gets a chance, where everyone is risking to lose something so they can win something that makes it worth the effort. you don't see this anymore because people can't handle loss or competition.
wow ... you want everyone only to care what you care about?
It is not about you. You don't seem to realize that a lot of people care about e-sports .. and the prize money and the ladders, and the e-sports teams are all part of it.
What about ladders in e-sports? Or just the wins and bragging rights? Don't tell me you think no one cares about that.
All my favorite PvP games have heavy progression, pvp without progression is booring and grindy, like overwatch or CS:go.
Ah yes, you mean, "PvP with me not able to crush heavily disadvantaged players with less levels and gear" is boring and grindy. Kinda nonsensical, don't you think ? Since the very definition of boring and grindy is having to farm levels/gear while being crushed by players with more levels/gear until you can compete. That's why MMORPG PvPers are afraid of FPS games... because they don't have any unfair advantage there.
That's why Open world PvP in MMORPG with long vertical power progression is a bad idea. Horizontal progression with shallow vertical progression is likely the best solution for the genre.
Even in PvE your content doesn't become out leveled. Even now developers are starting to delevel players to play older content. It just begs the question why even have the mass leveling in the first place?
Even in PvE your content doesn't become out leveled. Even now developers are starting to delevel players to play older content. It just begs the question why even have the mass leveling in the first place?
Good question. In fact, may be games should be separated in many modes, pvp and pve, so that each player can find the "optimal" gameplay.
Diablo 3 did this very well. You get a choice of game modes (GR, bounties, normal rifts) and a choice of difficulties.
It is even simpler for PvP, just reduce the importance of the leveling part (or get rid of) and the playing field is level. Many shooters, MOBAs, instanced pvp games do this well.
Even in PvE your content doesn't become out leveled. Even now developers are starting to delevel players to play older content. It just begs the question why even have the mass leveling in the first place?
That's the obvious wall every Themepark arcade mmo runs into when they develop more levels.
The answer is: sandbox mmo's with open world pve-pvp that is NOT level based.
(For the WoW fanclub: yes, that IS possible and those games ARE out there)
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
That's the obvious wall every Themepark arcade mmo runs into when they develop more levels.
The answer is: sandbox mmo's with open world pve-pvp that is NOT level based.
(For the WoW fanclub: yes, that IS possible and those games ARE out there)
Which of those games are doing better than themeparks? (Not just WOW, but other major ones like ESO, FFXIV, SWTOR, and probably a few others.)
You seem to imply that any design flaw is a critical failure that prevents success.
Design flaws exist in every design. There are always tradeoffs and no design is perfect.
So while it is true that games with levels and themepark content struggle with the shortcoming that content is consumed and levels fragment playerbases, that problem is not a "wall". It's not a critical failure which prevents success. The superior success of most themeparks is evidence of that fact.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Even in PvE your content doesn't become out leveled. Even now developers are starting to delevel players to play older content. It just begs the question why even have the mass leveling in the first place?
That's the obvious wall every Themepark arcade mmo runs into when they develop more levels.
The answer is: sandbox mmo's with open world pve-pvp that is NOT level based.
(For the WoW fanclub: yes, that IS possible and those games ARE out there)
It made sense of you were grinding out levels. Now everything is speed leveling. All levels are carefully balanced so you play similar difficult opponents you whole leveling experience.
Progression points through questing would work just as well for questhub leveling.
Comments
Even that is wrong. WoW is a top e-sports game (http://mmos.com/editorials/the-biggest-esports)
You seem to think that anyone with even a slight population advantage is gonna win automatically, and this may be true in traditional themepark mmos with levels and epic gear, but I already said why those types of games wouldnt make good sandboxes. In games like the original darkfall, it was very possible for a team of very coordinated players take on 3x the odds, since the type of player that seeks safety within a zerg usually isnt very skilled. And that sounds pretty epic to me, and would require the underdog team to develop skillsets like strong teamwork, just like in an e sport game.
And I wouldnt really call mmorpg pvp casual, since a casual game is something you can just jump in and play immediately, where in a mmorpg you have to grind your character up, gear him up, etc. before being able to pvp. Just call it "unfair pvp".
- I wasn't commenting on non-PVP features. This thread is about PVP and that's what I've been talking about. I've pointed out that if PVP was the reason you were playing these games, you'd experience shallow gameplay and most of your time wouldn't be spent PVPing (even though that was your focus.)
- I never said every fight is won automatically, but merely pointed out that these shallow advantages hold immense power in these games. The vast majority of fights are predetermined based on those shallow factors. "This one time I beat 3 people at once" has never been an argument capable of dealing with all the other times that you and others lost because of numerical disadvantage or progression. In Darkfall I landed ~24 melee hits on someone in the time it took them to kill me in ~4 hits. They ended the fight at around 90% health. These are not skill-focused PVP games, they are casual PVP designed to make unskilled players feel good about themselves.
Furthermore if you're excited by the prospect of fighting and winning a 3v1, I have great news: it doesn't require casual PVP! I end up in those situations (sometimes victorious) in many pure PVP games like TF2, and it's a ton of fun, but it's always either my fault or an intentional gamble (because elsewhere on the map I have an equal number of teammates I could've grouped up with, since teams are balanced in pure PVP games.)"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Competing something in-game seems so insignificant compared to those .. at least for some people.
Waiting for:
The Repopulation
Albion Online
It is not about you. You don't seem to realize that a lot of people care about e-sports .. and the prize money and the ladders, and the e-sports teams are all part of it.
What about ladders in e-sports? Or just the wins and bragging rights? Don't tell me you think no one cares about that.
Even in PvE your content doesn't become out leveled. Even now developers are starting to delevel players to play older content. It just begs the question why even have the mass leveling in the first place?
Diablo 3 did this very well. You get a choice of game modes (GR, bounties, normal rifts) and a choice of difficulties.
It is even simpler for PvP, just reduce the importance of the leveling part (or get rid of) and the playing field is level. Many shooters, MOBAs, instanced pvp games do this well.
The answer is: sandbox mmo's with open world pve-pvp that is NOT level based.
(For the WoW fanclub: yes, that IS possible and those games ARE out there)
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
You cannot control how "fair" a fight is with open world pvp.
You seem to imply that any design flaw is a critical failure that prevents success.
Design flaws exist in every design. There are always tradeoffs and no design is perfect.
So while it is true that games with levels and themepark content struggle with the shortcoming that content is consumed and levels fragment playerbases, that problem is not a "wall". It's not a critical failure which prevents success. The superior success of most themeparks is evidence of that fact.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Progression points through questing would work just as well for questhub leveling.