Isn't there a coop RPG out there called Evolve. People team up to take down player controlled monsters. Perhaps if everything in the world was player controlled that would be a player controlled RPG (PVP)?
Isn't there a coop RPG out there called Evolve. People team up to take down player controlled monsters. Perhaps if everything in the world was player controlled that would be a player controlled RPG (PVP)?
yeah but in the context of this conversation is that what people are really thinking of when they talk about a PvP MMO?
I dont think people in this conversation have given the difference a lot of thought actually. I am not sure what they mean now that I think on it some more
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Isn't there a coop RPG out there called Evolve. People team up to take down player controlled monsters. Perhaps if everything in the world was player controlled that would be a player controlled RPG (PVP)?
yeah but in the context of this conversation is that what people are really thinking of when they talk about a PvP MMO?
I dont think people in this conversation have given the difference a lot of thought actually. I am not sure what they mean now that I think on it some more
I think they are talking about a game like Ultima Online in it's original state. So you are right in pointing out that is a combination of PvE and PvP.
I spend a lot of time just reading post and do not reply to a lot of them. I keep seeing a theme in a lot of discussions that are basically PVP vs PVE. The two types of games do not really go together all that great. When a game is designed around the PVP aspect you have to worry about the classes being balanced, etc...Whereas if you are developing a game for PVE you can have unbalanced classes because you are not competing against the other players.
Here is where I see the problem come in. It is when a developer is developing a game for one or the other styles and then thinks well we should throw in the other to get more customers or gamers. As soon as you introduce that arena PVP into the PVE game you have to constantly change the classes for balance issues. Now instead of players learning a way to play their classes they constantly have to rework their builds and play habits because they buff or nerf this or that every other month. That still isn't really the issue though, the true issue is that instead of the developer working to improve other aspects of the game they are now devoting major time to balance classes over and over that could have been used to tweak bugs or content problems.
Don't get me wrong I am all for a PVP game that is designed from start to finish with that playstyle in mind. I think it hinders PVP players when they are having to worry about the gear treadmill of the PVE games. And having two armor sets isn't the right way to go either. This is why a lot of the games have started saying gear is flat and doesn't help you when you enter PVP. It can be extremely hard to develop a system that works for PVP were nothing gives an advantage and still have some type of PVE system in the game. Can't imagine never getting an armor upgrade or skill upgrade because it would give you an advantage over others.
This is just my opinion on this. Basically I am saying developers should choose a style and stick with it and stop trying to develop the one game that will rule them all.
The bolded part is the root of all problems here. The answer is: you don't have to develop systems where nothing gives you an advantage. The whole point of mmoRPG PvP is to benefit from everything you do in PvE. If you try to balance everything, you've created a moba inside an RPG, and there is a totally different genre with lots of games that does it better.
I don't see a problem here, really. You play PvE part of a game to become stronger and use your powers against enemy players, which you want to be weaker and less skilled than yourself.
The real question, and which very few game has done right, is: Why do we fight against the other players and how does it help me to become even stronger? There has to be some reason to do PvP other than to get gear or 'have some fun'. If you - as a designer - can't think of any, don't implement PvP and focus on creating awesome PvE instead.
Isn't there a coop RPG out there called Evolve. People team up to take down player controlled monsters. Perhaps if everything in the world was player controlled that would be a player controlled RPG (PVP)?
yeah but in the context of this conversation is that what people are really thinking of when they talk about a PvP MMO?
I dont think people in this conversation have given the difference a lot of thought actually. I am not sure what they mean now that I think on it some more
I think they are talking about a game like Ultima Online in it's original state. So you are right in pointing out that is a combination of PvE and PvP.
so yeah its a tricky conversation
I THINK what people mean is free for all PvP vs controlled area PvP (like Fallen Earth) but I am not completely sure actually
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I would like to say I've always enjoyed dueling in games. I've enjoyed that a lot more than when I've tried open world PvP or instanced PvP so far. It was something to do when you were bored and didn't really matter all that much. Often I would be sitting at a dungeon entrance in World of Warcraft and one of my party members would challenge me to a dual. I also had it from random people who I were killing mobs in the same area as me.
Open world PvP in WoW felt so pointless and boring to me. There was no way to avoid being killed and with no death penalty I would just quickly respawn and rejoin the fight. It was almost never ending. Instanced PvP had the same type of feeling to it, but at least you got something out of it. Open world PvP in UO was frustrating because you would constantly lose everything you had spend lots of time to acquire. I would say it was the most enjoyable next to dueling consensually. At least if you died you didn't respawn and get back in an almost never ending battle.
I would like to say I've always enjoyed dueling in games. I've enjoyed that a lot more than when I've tried open world PvP or instanced PvP so far. It was something to do when you were bored and didn't really matter all that much. Often I would be sitting at a dungeon entrance in World of Warcraft and one of my party members would challenge me to a dual. I also had it from random people who I were killing mobs in the same area as me.
Open world PvP in WoW felt so pointless and boring to me. There was no way to avoid being killed and with no death penalty I would just quickly respawn and rejoin the fight. It was almost never ending. Instanced PvP had the same type of feeling to it, but at least you got something out of it. Open world PvP in UO was frustrating because you would constantly lose everything you had spend lots of time to acquire. I would say it was the most enjoyable next to dueling consensually. At least if you died you didn't respawn and get back in an almost never ending battle.
I never understood the desire some people have to pvp with people who at that point in time do not want to pvp in return.
There are some people who literally WANT that. they are going out of their way to find people who are not wanting to engage in pvp and looking for games that allow them to hunt for said people.
never understood that.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I never understood the desire some people have to pvp with people who at that point in time do not want to pvp in return.
There are some people who literally WANT that. they are going out of their way to find people who are not wanting to engage in pvp and looking for games that allow them to hunt for said people.
never understood that.
You do not understand your very own self-fabricated "facts"? Interesting... Maybe that's the reason?
Most PVP folk just want to PVP. In that regard, FFAPVP removes all the hurdle that is usually accompanied with searching for PVP - you can engage anything you find.
Straightforwarded, accessible, everywhere.
It is rather simple, and that is where I do not understand why people like you try so hard to create so much unnecessary drama around it.
The problem is there is no PvP anymore is gankers trolls and the types who werent held enough as kids or picked on in school that get pleasure from griefing people all day. Those people and their ilk are the reasons why so called 'hardcore PvP' games will never ever be anything more than wastelands a week after theyre launched. Hell they dont even have to be 'hardcore' just ANY game where PvP is allowed everywhere with little to no consequences.
Even with Life is Feudal which has a pretty harsh penalty for being a ganker troll. People can make multiple characters and just do it until their slots run out or they get bored. Add that to the ability to make a fresh spawn with pretty powerful stats and skills and it makes the whole penalty mechanic moot. Its sort of works now because most servers just ban guys that do it, but once the MMO hits that wont be the case and it just means the MMO will crash and burn like every other PvP game before it.
As for the mixing and matching VOLUNTARY flagging ANYWHERE could be the answer, but the so called PvP crowd doesnt like that (mostly because it exposes them too much). But the logic is flawed, if people are TRULY looking for a (fair) fight then they can ride around flagged all the time and find other people who are also flagged and seemingly willing to fight as well. Just make the mechanic so that you have to be flagged for a certain amount of time continuously before you can attack another flagged person. That way it keeps losers who want to just attack a flagged person from doing so from a peaceful setting. Which most of the troll ganker losers would do. In other words to PvP you would have to be continually flagged for 15, 30, 60 minutes before you could attack another flagged person, and you could never ever attack a peaceful setting person n matter where they were. But obviously if for 'lore' reasons a certain zone was always PvP then that would be a mot issue because you would then auto flag, which if it were a risk reward which was truly a risk reward situation soft core PvP PvErs would still take the risk. That type of zone would also nullify the timer. But with zones like that the troll gankers would just camp them and no actual open world PvP would take place because it wouldnt have to.
Thats why I sad there is no real PvP anymore because no one looks for fair fights they look for fights they have a 99% surety of winning which generally means attacking unarmed people with no armor in the game while you are wearing the best armor you can buy or make and the best weapons.
I never understood the desire some people have to pvp with people who at that point in time do not want to pvp in return.
There are some people who literally WANT that. they are going out of their way to find people who are not wanting to engage in pvp and looking for games that allow them to hunt for said people.
never understood that.
You do not understand your very own self-fabricated "facts"? Interesting... Maybe that's the reason?
Most PVP folk just want to PVP. In that regard, FFAPVP removes all the hurdle that is usually accompanied with searching for PVP - you can engage anything you find.
Straightforwarded, accessible, everywhere.
It is rather simple, and that is where I do not understand why people like you try so hard to create so much unnecessary drama around it.
Oh come on, you have to know that there are people who just want to take out other people who won't or can't fight back.
I've witnessed this numerous times. I can't tell you how many times I've jumped into a 2 on 1 or 3 on 1 fight just to help even the odds.
Interesting enough, in some of those examples the person who is being attacked still won't fight back.
To that point and yours, one time in Tera, two players were attacking a single player. I jumped in, the single player didn't fight, just ran away, and I was left fighting the two players.
I dispatched one, had a good go against the other and then they "ran away".
So let's not pretend that all players on an open server are just looking for a fight. Some are, no doubt but others are more interested in creating the drama that happens when they take out unwilling partcipants.
To that point, a player shouldn't be playing on such a server or game unless they "buy into" the whole "I can get attacked anywhere".
I'll add, on the other side of the spectrum, another time in Tera a red player was circling me and then jumping over me as if to intimidate me. We were "feet" away from a safe zone but I waited and sure enough, after he had enough "intimidation time" he attacked me. He didn't win but to his credit he never once ran. He fought until the end.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I never understood the desire some people have to pvp with people who at that point in time do not want to pvp in return.
There are some people who literally WANT that. they are going out of their way to find people who are not wanting to engage in pvp and looking for games that allow them to hunt for said people.
never understood that.
You do not understand your very own self-fabricated "facts"? Interesting... Maybe that's the reason?
Most PVP folk just want to PVP. In that regard, FFAPVP removes all the hurdle that is usually accompanied with searching for PVP - you can engage anything you find.
Straightforwarded, accessible, everywhere.
It is rather simple, and that is where I do not understand why people like you try so hard to create so much unnecessary drama around it.
first off if you read what I said you will notice I never said or suggested 'facts'
second off I am talking SPECIFICALLY about pvp people who are EXPLICTLY looking for people who are not wanting to do pvp at that time and given that I played Darkfall for 4 friggin years I should know what I am talking about.
there were long winded player campaign to get AV to remove or make smaller the safe zones. Now why would someone who wants PVP be interested in that? because they want to pvp the people who do not want to pvp...pretty much explictly so
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
The problem is that players are not held accountable for PvP. Most PVP people want right makes righ. Since you just respawn might doesn't make right... patience does. You could kill Pks day and night and they just come back. Eventually anti-s get unsympathetic to the "sheep's"being harrassed by wolves. Wolves chase off the sheep and you have a low population game.
To me you have to punish the account with jail time in game. Character locked up and the others on said account greyed out. Even if they have other accounts they are eventually jailed, spend money the game or they don't Pk while character is jailed.
You can also go the SWG route with factions and temporary faction flagsm
There is a solution to have PVE and PVP coexist in an mmorpg without breaking classes or class abilities completely. What's unfortunate is that when a game merges both gameplay aspects together usually one suffers. It's extremely difficult to balance PVE classes vs. PVP.
The solution is not fool's proof by any means. I would actually prefer to keep PVP and PVE separate.
In my opinion, I believe if you're going to have PVP gameplay featured in a top heavy PVE game it has to make sense. I feel that you cannot infuse the two ever. That means no world PVP. I would even stretch it to say no team based PVP either.
My idea is to segregate PVP into it's own corner but a fun corner of the game. You could have fighting pits in various cities were players would fight 1v1. You would climb the ladder to reach the ultimate tournament held in the world capitol city. The 1v1 fights would have different categories you could fight in. Melee Vs. Melee, Caster vs. Caster and Melee vs. Caster. As you excel up the ladder in your PVP rank you will get invited to the big PVP tournament were players would be positioned in a bracket based of their PVP rating. It would be single elimination. There would be only one winner. The winner would get x amount of gold, special pvp armor/weapon skins, your own title and a statue in the capitol city marking your achievements as a player. There will be one winner ever season and the previous winner would have to defend their title in order to keep their title and statue rewards.
Anyways, I feel that you PVP on a 1v1 fighting level would be much easier to balance classes that are balanced against the environment than balancing all classes against each class and the environment in a PVE centric game.
Oh come on, you have to know that there are people who just want to take out people who won't or can't fight back.
...so? It does not relate to any what I said.
Just take your example:
Two friends team up and roam around, they find lone low lvl player, they kill him.
And now what you transform it into:
There are those griefers that team up and purposedly seek for targets that can't or won't fight back. I've witnessed this numerous times... and story goes on.
It is YOU who care more than those PVPers, you are creating the drama - proof right in your post.
So I say it again:
Most PVP folk just want to PVP, regardless of what the target is as long as they have a chance to beat it.
Sure, there are griefers but that does not apply to PVP only and is entirely different story.
Oh come on, you have to know that there are people who just want to take out people who won't or can't fight back.
...so? It does not relate to any what I said.
Just take your example:
Two friends team up and roam around, they find lone low lvl player, they kill him.
And now what you transform it into:
There are those griefers that team up and purposedly seek for targets that can't or won't fight back. I've witnessed this numerous times... and story goes on.
It is YOU who care more than those PVPers, you are creating the drama - proof right in your post.
So I say it again:
Most PVP folk just want to PVP, regardless of what the target is as long as they have a chance to beat it.
Sure, there are griefers but that does not apply to PVP only and is entirely different story.
Yeah, and in my example the left over guy turned tail and ran. Had he actually been interested in a fight he would have fought. It was a reasonably even match though I was winning more.
You want to say that (edit I'll remove the "all") pvp players are only seeking fights. And I am saying that's not true there is a mix of players out there who attack for a variety of reasons. Hence why I amended my post and added the example of the red player who was clearly going to lose but he kept at it.
I've played enough pvp games to know that it's a mixed bag. And you have no more proof that "most" pvp players want one thing or another any more than I can say (though wouldn't) most pvp players want to just gank easy targets).
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I would like to say I've always enjoyed dueling in games. I've enjoyed that a lot more than when I've tried open world PvP or instanced PvP so far. It was something to do when you were bored and didn't really matter all that much. Often I would be sitting at a dungeon entrance in World of Warcraft and one of my party members would challenge me to a dual. I also had it from random people who I were killing mobs in the same area as me.
Open world PvP in WoW felt so pointless and boring to me. There was no way to avoid being killed and with no death penalty I would just quickly respawn and rejoin the fight. It was almost never ending. Instanced PvP had the same type of feeling to it, but at least you got something out of it. Open world PvP in UO was frustrating because you would constantly lose everything you had spend lots of time to acquire. I would say it was the most enjoyable next to dueling consensually. At least if you died you didn't respawn and get back in an almost never ending battle.
I never understood the desire some people have to pvp with people who at that point in time do not want to pvp in return.
There are some people who literally WANT that. they are going out of their way to find people who are not wanting to engage in pvp and looking for games that allow them to hunt for said people.
never understood that.
That is true and I actually understand that perspective. They are trying to live out a certain fantasy or get a thrill from it without actually hurting other people in real life. The issue is the person who ends up playing the victim will eventually tire of it.
I can generally live without it that type of thing in game. I'd rather PvP just be for giggles and the focus be on a fun PvE game with fun PvE abilities.
I remember dueling people in EQ as well. In that game most melee classes had no chance against a caster. It was completely unbalanced. I still had fun in the PvE game and had a dual once in a while just for the fun of it. It was pretty much the same way in WoW. Certain classes were really good at PvP, but for the most part the game was focused on PvE in the beginning.
Oh come on, you have to know that there are people who just want to take out people who won't or can't fight back.
...so? It does not relate to any what I said.
Just take your example:
Two friends team up and roam around, they find lone low lvl player, they kill him.
And now what you transform it into:
There are those griefers that team up and purposedly seek for targets that can't or won't fight back. I've witnessed this numerous times... and story goes on.
It is YOU who care more than those PVPers, you are creating the drama - proof right in your post.
So I say it again:
Most PVP folk just want to PVP, regardless of what the target is as long as they have a chance to beat it.
Sure, there are griefers but that does not apply to PVP only and is entirely different story.
I have seen it many times as well
Here is a specific example.
In darkfall many users didnt like the idea of safe zones. They wanted safe zones removed or reduced. they were very unhappy with the idea of expanding a safe zone.
now...as a pvp player can someone please explain to me in some intelligent way why pvp want safe zones to be removed or reduced. Who goes into safe zones? well from my view point its people who dont want to pvp. so why would a pvp player care one way or the other about people who dont want to pvp?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Sovrath said: Yeah, and in my example the left over guy turned tail and ran. Had he actually been interested in a fight he would have fought. It was a reasonably even match though I was winning more.
Of course you run when odds are too much against you, quite a sensible thing to do, yet you try to make drama out of it again...
I spend a lot of time just reading post and do not reply to a lot of them. I keep seeing a theme in a lot of discussions that are basically PVP vs PVE. The two types of games do not really go together all that great. When a game is designed around the PVP aspect you have to worry about the classes being balanced, etc...Whereas if you are developing a game for PVE you can have unbalanced classes because you are not competing against the other players.
Here is where I see the problem come in. It is when a developer is developing a game for one or the other styles and then thinks well we should throw in the other to get more customers or gamers. As soon as you introduce that arena PVP into the PVE game you have to constantly change the classes for balance issues. Now instead of players learning a way to play their classes they constantly have to rework their builds and play habits because they buff or nerf this or that every other month. That still isn't really the issue though, the true issue is that instead of the developer working to improve other aspects of the game they are now devoting major time to balance classes over and over that could have been used to tweak bugs or content problems.
Don't get me wrong I am all for a PVP game that is designed from start to finish with that playstyle in mind. I think it hinders PVP players when they are having to worry about the gear treadmill of the PVE games. And having two armor sets isn't the right way to go either. This is why a lot of the games have started saying gear is flat and doesn't help you when you enter PVP. It can be extremely hard to develop a system that works for PVP were nothing gives an advantage and still have some type of PVE system in the game. Can't imagine never getting an armor upgrade or skill upgrade because it would give you an advantage over others.
This is just my opinion on this. Basically I am saying developers should choose a style and stick with it and stop trying to develop the one game that will rule them all.
The bolded part is the root of all problems here. The answer is: you don't have to develop systems where nothing gives you an advantage. The whole point of mmoRPG PvP is to benefit from everything you do in PvE. If you try to balance everything, you've created a moba inside an RPG, and there is a totally different genre with lots of games that does it better.
I don't see a problem here, really. You play PvE part of a game to become stronger and use your powers against enemy players, which you want to be weaker and less skilled than yourself.
The real question, and which very few game has done right, is: Why do we fight against the other players and how does it help me to become even stronger? There has to be some reason to do PvP other than to get gear or 'have some fun'. If you - as a designer - can't think of any, don't implement PvP and focus on creating awesome PvE instead.
Firstly, you and the developers can't begin to assume you know what the player's motivations are for playing the game. Every single person is going to have a different set of motivations. Some might enjoy the story, some might just enjoy the combat, exploring, whatever. This is true for both PvE and PvP - everyone's motivation is different.
Secondly, @k61977 , why do you think nothing in PvP should give an advantage? This is a very wrong assumption to make. Unless every single player is using the exact same class with the exact same gear, weapons, options etc etc then someone is always going to have an advantage. PvPers, in general, do not mind other people have an advantage as long as there is a way to counter that advantage. Only when balancing 1v1 should everything be 100% balanced / equal, but virtually no games bother with this. Even mobas aren't balanced on a 1v1 level.
Thirdly, @deniter "The whole point of mmoRPG PvP is to benefit from everything you do in PvE." What the fuck? I mean seriously, I don't think you thought this statement through. The point of player vs player is to fight other players. Everything else is tangential. PvP gear / ranks / rewards are carrots to keep you playing for longer. Keeps / objectives etc are ways of guiding players to "designed" encounters, i.e. sculpting the pvp to make it more interesting.
What this thread really boils down to is people don't like playing games made by lazy designers. PvP and PvE can (and, imo, should) exist side by side in any MMORPG without causing issues if the designers want it to. There are tons of ways to get around the gear issues, balance issues, ganking / pk'ing, griefing etc etc. The only justification for excluding pvp is either you are creating a niche game of pure pve, or you're lazy.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
In darkfall many users didnt like the idea of safe zones. They wanted safe zones removed or reduced. they were very unhappy with the idea of expanding a safe zone.
now...as a pvp player can someone please explain to me in some intelligent way why pvp want safe zones to be removed or reduced. Who goes into safe zones? well from my view point its people who dont want to pvp. so why would a pvp player care one way or the other about people who dont want to pvp?
Marvelous. You just keep proving what I said above.
They just want to engage ANYONE, ANYWHERE = no safe zones. No other motivation is there, regardless how hard you try to spin it and pretend it is aimed against specific group of players.
I was leveling in my pvp robes when a guy came up and and started attacking me. He was able to kill me so I hit the "back to town" (or whatever the button) and that was the end of that.
Days later I found him in the same area but I had my pvp robes on so I engaged. What did he do? Well first he ran and then he tried to fight back but I killed him.
About 15 minutes later he starts pm'ing me all sorts of threats and complaints and essentially crying up a storm. Clearly he wasn't looking for a fight.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Sovrath said: Yeah, and in my example the left over guy turned tail and ran. Had he actually been interested in a fight he would have fought. It was a reasonably even match though I was winning more.
Of course you run when odds are too much against you, quite a sensible thing to do, yet you try to make drama out of it again...
See...
sure nice try.
I was winnign but he could have turned the tide. And if he died not much would have happened because Tera has a very gentle death penalty. He was fine with two against one but when someone was a bit ahead he turned tail.
Not really much for "the good fight". But keep trying to spin it how you want.
edit: and feel free to check out my L2 example above.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I was winnign but he could have turned the tide. And if he died not much would have happened because Tera has a very gentle death penalty. He was fine with two against one but when someone was a bit ahead he turned tail.
Not really much for "the good fight". But keep trying to spin it how you want.
edit: and feel free to check out my L2 example above.
Never said a thing about good fights, just another injection of yours, even more supporting my argument - you think way much more about it than the other guy
I was winnign but he could have turned the tide. And if he died not much would have happened because Tera has a very gentle death penalty. He was fine with two against one but when someone was a bit ahead he turned tail.
Not really much for "the good fight". But keep trying to spin it how you want.
edit: and feel free to check out my L2 example above.
Never said a thing about good fights, just another injection of yours, even more supporting my argument - you think way much more about it than the other guy
So the other guy in my lineage 2 example, who ran because he wasn't ganking me and then pm'ed me instults and threats wasn't thinking much about it?
your take on humanity seems a bit idealistic.
Again, I'm not saying every pvp'er is some sort of evil ganker ass who takes screeshots of his/her victims and pastes them on his/her wall with an altar of candles surrounding another screen shot of his character but people pvp for different reasons and I've run into all sorts over my years of pvp gaming.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Comments
I dont think people in this conversation have given the difference a lot of thought actually. I am not sure what they mean now that I think on it some more
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I don't see a problem here, really. You play PvE part of a game to become stronger and use your powers against enemy players, which you want to be weaker and less skilled than yourself.
The real question, and which very few game has done right, is: Why do we fight against the other players and how does it help me to become even stronger? There has to be some reason to do PvP other than to get gear or 'have some fun'. If you - as a designer - can't think of any, don't implement PvP and focus on creating awesome PvE instead.
I THINK what people mean is free for all PvP vs controlled area PvP (like Fallen Earth) but I am not completely sure actually
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Open world PvP in WoW felt so pointless and boring to me. There was no way to avoid being killed and with no death penalty I would just quickly respawn and rejoin the fight. It was almost never ending. Instanced PvP had the same type of feeling to it, but at least you got something out of it. Open world PvP in UO was frustrating because you would constantly lose everything you had spend lots of time to acquire. I would say it was the most enjoyable next to dueling consensually. At least if you died you didn't respawn and get back in an almost never ending battle.
There are some people who literally WANT that. they are going out of their way to find people who are not wanting to engage in pvp and looking for games that allow them to hunt for said people.
never understood that.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Most PVP folk just want to PVP. In that regard, FFAPVP removes all the hurdle that is usually accompanied with searching for PVP - you can engage anything you find.
Straightforwarded, accessible, everywhere.
It is rather simple, and that is where I do not understand why people like you try so hard to create so much unnecessary drama around it.
Even with Life is Feudal which has a pretty harsh penalty for being a ganker troll. People can make multiple characters and just do it until their slots run out or they get bored. Add that to the ability to make a fresh spawn with pretty powerful stats and skills and it makes the whole penalty mechanic moot. Its sort of works now because most servers just ban guys that do it, but once the MMO hits that wont be the case and it just means the MMO will crash and burn like every other PvP game before it.
As for the mixing and matching VOLUNTARY flagging ANYWHERE could be the answer, but the so called PvP crowd doesnt like that (mostly because it exposes them too much). But the logic is flawed, if people are TRULY looking for a (fair) fight then they can ride around flagged all the time and find other people who are also flagged and seemingly willing to fight as well. Just make the mechanic so that you have to be flagged for a certain amount of time continuously before you can attack another flagged person. That way it keeps losers who want to just attack a flagged person from doing so from a peaceful setting. Which most of the troll ganker losers would do. In other words to PvP you would have to be continually flagged for 15, 30, 60 minutes before you could attack another flagged person, and you could never ever attack a peaceful setting person n matter where they were. But obviously if for 'lore' reasons a certain zone was always PvP then that would be a mot issue because you would then auto flag, which if it were a risk reward which was truly a risk reward situation soft core PvP PvErs would still take the risk. That type of zone would also nullify the timer. But with zones like that the troll gankers would just camp them and no actual open world PvP would take place because it wouldnt have to.
Thats why I sad there is no real PvP anymore because no one looks for fair fights they look for fights they have a 99% surety of winning which generally means attacking unarmed people with no armor in the game while you are wearing the best armor you can buy or make and the best weapons.
I've witnessed this numerous times. I can't tell you how many times I've jumped into a 2 on 1 or 3 on 1 fight just to help even the odds.
Interesting enough, in some of those examples the person who is being attacked still won't fight back.
To that point and yours, one time in Tera, two players were attacking a single player. I jumped in, the single player didn't fight, just ran away, and I was left fighting the two players.
I dispatched one, had a good go against the other and then they "ran away".
So let's not pretend that all players on an open server are just looking for a fight. Some are, no doubt but others are more interested in creating the drama that happens when they take out unwilling partcipants.
To that point, a player shouldn't be playing on such a server or game unless they "buy into" the whole "I can get attacked anywhere".
I'll add, on the other side of the spectrum, another time in Tera a red player was circling me and then jumping over me as if to intimidate me. We were "feet" away from a safe zone but I waited and sure enough, after he had enough "intimidation time" he attacked me. He didn't win but to his credit he never once ran. He fought until the end.
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
second off I am talking SPECIFICALLY about pvp people who are EXPLICTLY looking for people who are not wanting to do pvp at that time and given that I played Darkfall for 4 friggin years I should know what I am talking about.
there were long winded player campaign to get AV to remove or make smaller the safe zones. Now why would someone who wants PVP be interested in that? because they want to pvp the people who do not want to pvp...pretty much explictly so
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
To me you have to punish the account with jail time in game. Character locked up and the others on said account greyed out. Even if they have other accounts they are eventually jailed, spend money the game or they don't Pk while character is jailed.
You can also go the SWG route with factions and temporary faction flagsm
The solution is not fool's proof by any means. I would actually prefer to keep PVP and PVE separate.
In my opinion, I believe if you're going to have PVP gameplay featured in a top heavy PVE game it has to make sense. I feel that you cannot infuse the two ever. That means no world PVP. I would even stretch it to say no team based PVP either.
My idea is to segregate PVP into it's own corner but a fun corner of the game. You could have fighting pits in various cities were players would fight 1v1. You would climb the ladder to reach the ultimate tournament held in the world capitol city. The 1v1 fights would have different categories you could fight in. Melee Vs. Melee, Caster vs. Caster and Melee vs. Caster. As you excel up the ladder in your PVP rank you will get invited to the big PVP tournament were players would be positioned in a bracket based of their PVP rating. It would be single elimination. There would be only one winner. The winner would get x amount of gold, special pvp armor/weapon skins, your own title and a statue in the capitol city marking your achievements as a player. There will be one winner ever season and the previous winner would have to defend their title in order to keep their title and statue rewards.
Anyways, I feel that you PVP on a 1v1 fighting level would be much easier to balance classes that are balanced against the environment than balancing all classes against each class and the environment in a PVE centric game.
Just take your example:
Two friends team up and roam around, they find lone low lvl player, they kill him.
And now what you transform it into:
There are those griefers that team up and purposedly seek for targets that can't or won't fight back. I've witnessed this numerous times... and story goes on.
It is YOU who care more than those PVPers, you are creating the drama - proof right in your post.
So I say it again:
Most PVP folk just want to PVP, regardless of what the target is as long as they have a chance to beat it.
Sure, there are griefers but that does not apply to PVP only and is entirely different story.
You want to say that (edit I'll remove the "all") pvp players are only seeking fights. And I am saying that's not true there is a mix of players out there who attack for a variety of reasons. Hence why I amended my post and added the example of the red player who was clearly going to lose but he kept at it.
I've played enough pvp games to know that it's a mixed bag. And you have no more proof that "most" pvp players want one thing or another any more than I can say (though wouldn't) most pvp players want to just gank easy targets).
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
I can generally live without it that type of thing in game. I'd rather PvP just be for giggles and the focus be on a fun PvE game with fun PvE abilities.
I remember dueling people in EQ as well. In that game most melee classes had no chance against a caster. It was completely unbalanced. I still had fun in the PvE game and had a dual once in a while just for the fun of it. It was pretty much the same way in WoW. Certain classes were really good at PvP, but for the most part the game was focused on PvE in the beginning.
Here is a specific example.
In darkfall many users didnt like the idea of safe zones. They wanted safe zones removed or reduced. they were very unhappy with the idea of expanding a safe zone.
now...as a pvp player can someone please explain to me in some intelligent way why pvp want safe zones to be removed or reduced. Who goes into safe zones? well from my view point its people who dont want to pvp. so why would a pvp player care one way or the other about people who dont want to pvp?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
See...
I'm seriously confused, both by @k61977 and @deniter ;
Firstly, you and the developers can't begin to assume you know what the player's motivations are for playing the game. Every single person is going to have a different set of motivations. Some might enjoy the story, some might just enjoy the combat, exploring, whatever. This is true for both PvE and PvP - everyone's motivation is different.
Secondly, @k61977 , why do you think nothing in PvP should give an advantage? This is a very wrong assumption to make. Unless every single player is using the exact same class with the exact same gear, weapons, options etc etc then someone is always going to have an advantage. PvPers, in general, do not mind other people have an advantage as long as there is a way to counter that advantage. Only when balancing 1v1 should everything be 100% balanced / equal, but virtually no games bother with this. Even mobas aren't balanced on a 1v1 level.
Thirdly, @deniter "The whole point of mmoRPG PvP is to benefit from everything you do in PvE." What the fuck? I mean seriously, I don't think you thought this statement through. The point of player vs player is to fight other players. Everything else is tangential. PvP gear / ranks / rewards are carrots to keep you playing for longer. Keeps / objectives etc are ways of guiding players to "designed" encounters, i.e. sculpting the pvp to make it more interesting.
What this thread really boils down to is people don't like playing games made by lazy designers. PvP and PvE can (and, imo, should) exist side by side in any MMORPG without causing issues if the designers want it to. There are tons of ways to get around the gear issues, balance issues, ganking / pk'ing, griefing etc etc. The only justification for excluding pvp is either you are creating a niche game of pure pve, or you're lazy.
They just want to engage ANYONE, ANYWHERE = no safe zones. No other motivation is there, regardless how hard you try to spin it and pretend it is aimed against specific group of players.
I was leveling in my pvp robes when a guy came up and and started attacking me. He was able to kill me so I hit the "back to town" (or whatever the button) and that was the end of that.
Days later I found him in the same area but I had my pvp robes on so I engaged. What did he do? Well first he ran and then he tried to fight back but I killed him.
About 15 minutes later he starts pm'ing me all sorts of threats and complaints and essentially crying up a storm. Clearly he wasn't looking for a fight.
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
seriously.... uai mista anderson, uaaaai du ju kiep fightinge!?
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
I was winnign but he could have turned the tide. And if he died not much would have happened because Tera has a very gentle death penalty. He was fine with two against one but when someone was a bit ahead he turned tail.
Not really much for "the good fight". But keep trying to spin it how you want.
edit: and feel free to check out my L2 example above.
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
your take on humanity seems a bit idealistic.
Again, I'm not saying every pvp'er is some sort of evil ganker ass who takes screeshots of his/her victims and pastes them on his/her wall with an altar of candles surrounding another screen shot of his character but people pvp for different reasons and I've run into all sorts over my years of pvp gaming.
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