The Golden Age of MMO PvP was PlanetSide 1. Open world Consensual PvP with full loot of weapons and ammo, not armour. I enjoyed that game, because I had the freedom to RP as a Healer / Repairer (Combat Medic / Combat Engineer). I didn't like PlanetSide 2 because it separated the functionality (Healing and Repairing) into opposing classes. FPS gamers complained that a support class (a Healer / Repairer) was too Over Powered OP. It was spoiling their fun of instaKills.
PvP players ruined MMO PvP by not playing PlanetSide 1. Becuase what they truly want in an MMO PvP is no other PvPers and only PvEer. So we end up with games like Albion Online, that entice PvEer into a pool of sharks (who are afraid of other sharks). The only thing holding back MMO PvP is PvPers. Who Cry to developers to make their PvP easier for them.
RPG (Tab Targeting) was never "Face Roll". FPS gamers just couldn't win at it, they needed something dumber (Twitch + Lag) to win at. But even that wasn't enough, because they only found other PvPers in game, and they didn't want that.
PvPer need to be honest, they don't want an MMO PvP, they want a PvE hunting ground.
Pardon any spelling errors
Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven Boy: Why can't I talk to Him? Mom: We don't talk to Priests. As if it could exist, without being payed for. F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing. Even telemarketers wouldn't think that. It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
By definition... if you have CHOSEN to play a game with PvP you have in effect consented to it. It's not like someone went into your home, downloaded the game, made an account, and pulled a gun and forced you to play such a game.
Now if I went into a fully PvE game and somehow hacked it so I could kill players.. THAT would be non-consentual PvP.
I don't think PvP is a hidden feature that people are unaware of when they buy it.
I don't think the presence of PvP or even it's inclusion as the primary content driver of the game means that people necessarily are consenting to it by stepping into the game world.
Your consent is implied when you step into a PvP area. Allowing the "consent is implied" mentality to lead to feature after feature added to these games purely to enable the griefing of people who choose NOT to leave the safe areas has brought nothing positive to the genre.
People should be able to take calculated risks for calculated rewards. The game shouldn't thrust the risks upon them simply for playing the game. At least not for every PvP game ever because the appeal of such titles is far more limited.
By definition... if you have CHOSEN to play a game with PvP you have in effect consented to it. It's not like someone went into your home, downloaded the game, made an account, and pulled a gun and forced you to play such a game.
Now if I went into a fully PvE game and somehow hacked it so I could kill players.. THAT would be non-consentual PvP.
I don't think PvP is a hidden feature that people are unaware of when they buy it.
I don't think the presence of PvP or even it's inclusion as the primary content driver of the game means that people necessarily are consenting to it by stepping into the game world.
Your consent is implied when you step into a PvP area. Allowing the "consent is implied" mentality to lead to feature after feature added to these games purely to enable the griefing of people who choose NOT to leave the safe areas has brought nothing positive to the genre.
People should be able to take calculated risks for calculated rewards. The game shouldn't thrust the risks upon them simply for playing the game. At least not for every PvP game ever because the appeal of such titles is far more limited.
If the game had no "safe areas" you consent to pvp by playing the game. By stepping into the game (which is entirely a pvp area) you have consented to pvp.
Again, there is no such thing as non-consensual pvp.
What people seem seem to be asking for is the ability to WITHDRAW consent at the time of their choosing and have the game mandate that all other players honor their request.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
1. Power disparity. Nobody has gotten it through their heads this needs to be much lower in competitive PvP scenarios for them to be any fun at all for people on the wrong side of that power disparity.
2. The "Hardcore" Community. Many existing PvP games have given undue representation to elements of the community that perceive any ability of people to choose how much PvP they want to be subjected to or avoid unwanted PvP as a "dumbing down" of the game and give these players mechanics intentionally designed to allow them to grief these players within the supposedly safer areas of the game.
3. Nobody has ever invested any significant amount of money into an Open World PvP sandbox. The only such title that has significant resources is EVE, which got it's significant resources by being insanely successful for a title that started as indie because people absolutely LOVED what they had to offer.
It's like if people tried the first few prototype airplanes, watched them crashed, and then said. "Whelp, that was a waste of time. These airplanes are never going to be a thing. Let's just give up."
How stupid that would be when the market demand is clearly so huge. Look at the top hyped games. All of them except Pantheon are promising Open World PvP as a major focus of the game. Most of them with full loot.
If the "true MMORPG fans" get their way this genre is only going to continue on it's slow decline straight into the ground. You can only grind raids for so long before repetitive PvE grinding becomes so boring you never want to do it again. Ever. The constantly evolving threat of other players is the answer to the boring repetitive PvE grind that people are clearly getting tired of.
Eldurian said - It's like if people tried the first few prototype airplanes, watched
them crashed, and then said. "Whelp, that was a waste of time. These
airplanes are never going to be a thing. Let's just give up."
I've never quite understood these threads, or most of the discussions that revolve around PVP. As long as there are MMORPGs there are going to be MMORPGs made that fill a PVP niche. There will also be servers and modes offered that fill that itch. Don't like it? don't play games centered around it, don't join matches or servers for it. Problem solved.
mhm ... great advice you give there. I would think this advice to be obviously flawed when not playing these games is exactly what players have been doing regarding games featuring this type of non-consensual OWPvP game play resulting with these game's quickly decreasing server populations resulting in the games' eventual deaths. Why, pray tell, do you think none of these games, with the exception of perhaps Eve and Darkfall, never last? And even those games have small niche, and dwindling, gaming populations.
Your solution doesn't solve the problem, it exacerbates it.
Btw, I thought you had blocked me. I knew you couldn't stay away. Don't worry. You are not alone in regard. You, and others, may not like what have to say at times, but you all have to respect the fact that I speak to truth.
By definition... if you have CHOSEN to play a game with PvP you have in effect consented to it. It's not like someone went into your home, downloaded the game, made an account, and pulled a gun and forced you to play such a game.
Now if I went into a fully PvE game and somehow hacked it so I could kill players.. THAT would be non-consentual PvP.
I don't think PvP is a hidden feature that people are unaware of when they buy it.
I don't think the presence of PvP or even it's inclusion as the primary content driver of the game means that people necessarily are consenting to it by stepping into the game world.
Your consent is implied when you step into a PvP area. Allowing the "consent is implied" mentality to lead to feature after feature added to these games purely to enable the griefing of people who choose NOT to leave the safe areas has brought nothing positive to the genre.
People should be able to take calculated risks for calculated rewards. The game shouldn't thrust the risks upon them simply for playing the game. At least not for every PvP game ever because the appeal of such titles is far more limited.
We aren't forced to kill or to be killed constantly in the real world just because it's possible for any random stranger to pull a knife or a gun on us.
Right this moment the incoming pvp mmorpg's are crowd funded so yeah,no confidence to fund them themselves and very low budgets. So devs have angled to NO RISK development,so do we really need to debate what kind of effort comes from NO RISK?
PVP belongs where that is the ONLY reason people enter a game,example arena Deathmatch such as mobas,Overwatch/Quake etc etc. Role playing is a whole different animal,you need a world and tools to support a world,it takes a lot more development than simply flagging players to pvp.As well a role playing world map/s will be vastly different than quality pvp maps.
Point being in a mmorpg you will 100% of the time have inferior pvp ,so why bother going that route?I can think of one reason why,devs see LOTS of target areas to support a cash shop in mmrpg's that do not exist in normal pvp games.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Let's not debate terms here. It's a waste of time.
A lot of people dislike PvP in which they do not have to hit "yes" on a duel request, or actively toggle a PvP flag, or specifically step into a sanctioned PvP match. They choose to call this non-consensual PvP.
Debating semantics about whether they did or didn't consent isn't going to make them suddenly enjoy this kind of PvP.
Therefore this debate is a waste of time. I'm happy to just call it non-consensual PvP and say that non-consensual PvP has a lot of positive applications and is not a bad mechanic. Forcing it on people who choose to stay away from the areas that don't have it is.
We can refer to it through the codeword kittens if that will help.
You shouldn't force kittens on people trying to stick to kitten free areas.
Let's not debate terms here. It's a waste of time.
A lot of people dislike PvP in which they do not have to hit "yes" on a duel request, or actively toggle a PvP flag, or specifically step into a sanctioned PvP match. They choose to call this non-consensual PvP.
Debating semantics about whether they did or didn't consent isn't going to make them suddenly enjoy this kind of PvP.
Therefore this debate is a waste of time. I'm happy to just call it non-consensual PvP and say that non-consensual PvP has a lot of positive applications and is not a bad mechanic. Forcing it on people who choose to stay away from the areas that don't have it is.
We can refer to it through the codeword kittens if that will help.
You shouldn't force kittens on people trying to stick to kitten free areas.
And again if people voluntarily go to an area known to have kittens they shouldn't complain that the area does in fact have kittens. Going around in such an area and stating that they shouldn't have to see kittens without consenting to see them is silly.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Everquest was kind of a PvP game in the sense it had contested, non-instanced, zones. You can train each other and people competed for spawns. Pantheon Rise of the Fallen may be like this.
The devs said that while one can train mobs on players (a player is running by screaming with a horde of mobs and they start attacking those around him) if they find that players are purposefully doing this they will deal with that player.
So it it seems they don't want this type of environment for their game.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
@Slapshot1188 - If there weren't relatively safe and peaceful areas and times throughout human history, our species may not have survived long. I'm interested in making MMORPGs more logical and realistic, more reflective or the real world and actual, recorded and observable human behavior.
And again if people voluntarily go to an area known to have kittens they shouldn't complain that the area does in fact have kittens. Going around in such an area and stating that they shouldn't have to see kittens without consenting to see them is silly.
I agree with that. I just think mechanics such as war decs, suicide ganking, can flipping etc. have primarily served to bring kittens to people who don't want kittens and that's done a huge disservice to PvP games.
When you step into the danger zone all bets are off.
This thread is a perfect example of the problem with PvP in MMORPGs. And that problem is that many people playing MMORPGs simply do not understand the meaning of what game play in an MMORPG entails.
Many of the posts in this thread continue to allude to claims such as all we need for a good MMORPG is to get rid of gear and levels. Little do these posters realize that a game without gears and levels is not an MMORPG by the truest definition of the genre. A PVP game without gears and levels is an FPS platform shooter game not an MMORPG.
Another claim that you hear often is that MMORPGs need PvP because PvE presents no challenge. The solution to this claim is not the need for more PvP. The solution to this claim is the development of a smarter and more challenging AI mechanic in MMORPGs. Make PvE MMORPGs with better more challenging AI, and there would be no need for this so called challenging game play many PvPers claim as their reason for the necessary existance of PvP in MMORPGs.
90% of PvP in MMORPGs consists of nothing but ganking, trolling and trash talking. That's not what I and many others would consider fun and engaging cooperative game play. On the contrary, its more often than not an annoying and game breaking mechanic that in short order drives people away from games leaving those games to die a slow but certain death.
Another misconception that PvPers have about PvEers is that they are all carebears who are weak and afraid to engage, yet nothing could be further from the truth. Its a computer game people ...
PvE players do not fear PvP, they are annoyed by it.
Ok let us start by clearing something up, you don't get to just change the definition of what is and what is not a MMORPG.
Side note, if you do a search you can find some pretty humorous definitions of MMORPG.
So contrary to YOUR OPINION, no you do not need gear stats and levels to be a true MMORPG, at least by those two reliable sources.
Now I take issue with your statement; "90% of PvP in MMORPGs consists of nothing but ganking, trolling and trash talking". I would like to know where you got this statistic? Or is this just another opinion based on your personal experience? Because mine, and I would like to think (although I won't be so arrogant as to speak for them) several others on the forums have had vastly different experiences. I enjoy PvP, and while I tend to be mediocre at it, I have a weird ability to not take it personally and to get over being ganked.
Speaking to ganking. Yes, it happens, and yes it is not the most fun you can have with PvP, but in my experience, there is usually someone around that is more than willing to put a stop to it. The exception being Eve, if you want to solo PvP in Eve, you get what you get and it won't be fun. However, I have seldom had that bad of a time, even in the hay day of Lineage 2, when we had Red Army running around that could and usually did clear whole zones, they often just came through, issued ass beatings and then moved on. So while I agree that ganking does happen, and it can end up in a camping situation, it is not nearly as catastrophic as some would want the world to believe.
Speaking more to your last paragraph and comments, you speak for the entire PvE community? I do PvE as well, and I enjoy it at least as much as I do PvP, and my opinions are exactly contrary to yours. Also backed up with facts, which you have yet to do.
If you are stating your opinions you should state it as such and not try to speak from a platform of fact. Especially when there are very few facts out there to support what you are saying.
It would do you well understand the content of a poster's post before responding to it. No where in any of my posts did I opine that gear stats and levels were necessary to a true MMORPG. On the contrary, I specifically stated that they were not. I also never stated that I speak for the entire PvE community. As a matter of fact i specifically stated that i did not represent the neither the PvE nor the PvP community. I appreciate the notion that some of you may want to declare me the spokesperson for the PvE community. I, however, am far from that. I am simply speaking for myself and expressing an opinion based on the hundreds, if not, thousands of PvE vs PvP threads that seemingly pop up every couple of weeks or so on every gaming forum. This is not a new topic. None of this should be breaking news to anyone.
Lastly, your opinion based on your biased PvP-centric preferences is well noted. I understand there is a portion of the gaming demographic that enjoy PvP, of which you appear to be a part of. I have also been around these PvE vs PvP threads long enough to know that you will not be the last PvP-centric poster that my post will offend. There will be more. It doesn't take much to trigger you PvP-centirc folks. I only hope that, unlike yourself, they are able to contain their emotions long enough to be able to read, and comprehend, my post before posting inaccuracies as to the content of my posts.
First, No, I am in no way offended. Your assertion that you did not say the specific things I refute is false. You should re-read your post and know what YOU are talking about for attempting to portray me as ignorant.
Here, let me help you out. This is a quote out of your post:
Little do these posters realize that a game without gears and levels is not an MMORPG by the truest definition of the genre. A PVP game without gears and levels is an FPS platform shooter game not an MMORPG.
You said that in case you forgot. Turns out, the posters know more than you, and weird can prove it. So you are wrong there. See the references I posted in response to that opinion above.
Also, I went through and pointed out that I do PvP and PvE, another point which you either read and forgot or just failed to read the post entirely. Try fish oil for the former, to help with your obviously lacking memory, or just read the entire post, so again, you have some idea what you are talking about.
I guess this is the point where I should, as you have done, resort to barely veiled personal attacks, but I will avoid that, as it is counter to the discussion. Another lesson you should learn.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
And again if people voluntarily go to an area known to have kittens they shouldn't complain that the area does in fact have kittens. Going around in such an area and stating that they shouldn't have to see kittens without consenting to see them is silly.
I agree with that. I just think mechanics such as war decs, suicide ganking, can flipping etc. have primarily served to bring kittens to people who don't want kittens and that's done a huge disservice to PvP games.
When you step into the danger zone all bets are off.
But nodding to his earlier comment, if a player buys and logs into a game that has "war decs, suicide ganking", "can flipping (?)" the they have agreed to this type of game.
In short, it's sort of a "non-discussion" as one can buy games that don't have pvp and never get suicide ganked.
One never has to deal with any sort of pvp if one doesn't want to.
This is not to say that things like suicide ganking can't have better mechanics behind them so that a player truly risks something if they are play in that matter but the choice of being in a pvp game is up to the player.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
But if PvPers want to be able to become gods in games and go around randomly killing people for sport, even crushing them like insects for no rhyme or reason, they can't expect those type of pvp games to ever appeal to a wide audience.
But if PvPers want to be able to become gods in games and go around randomly killing people for sport, even crushing them like insects for no rhyme or reason, they can't expect those type of pvp games to ever appeal to a wide audience.
I don't think they do. But I also don't think they care.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
But if PvPers want to be able to become gods in games and go around randomly killing people for sport, even crushing them like insects for no rhyme or reason, they can't expect those type of pvp games to ever appeal to a wide audience.
I don't think they do. But I also don't think they care.
Maybe not. I can't say what the majority of them are thinking or feeling.
But nodding to his earlier comment, if a player buys and logs into a game that has "war decs, suicide ganking", "can flipping (?)" the they have agreed to this type of game.
In short, it's sort of a "non-discussion" as one can buy games that don't have pvp and never get suicide ganked.
One never has to deal with any sort of pvp if one doesn't want to.
This is not to say that things like suicide ganking can't have better mechanics behind them so that a player truly risks something if they are play in that matter but the choice of being in a pvp game is up to the player.
One big thing is that people aren't aware of all aspects of the game coming in. Especially in EVE it takes awhile to learn all of the options for griefing you that exist. For a lot of newbs they find out about things like suicide ganking, wardecs, and can flipping the hard way. It is almost never a positive experience for them. The argument that they "implied consent" by buying the game isn't going to bring them back. And it's not going to reimburse CCP the subscription money of people who would be more interested in playing EVE and other similar titles if not for such mechanics.
I mean... I felt safest when I was in null sec, found low sec to be more engaging but fairly safe, and was on high alert any time I flew through high sec as a member of a corporation large enough to get noticed by the high sec war dec corps...
And then we wonder why people have such visceral reactions when they hear terms like Open World PvP and Full Loot Drop. If my only experience of PvP in these games was high-sec PvP I'd probably feel the same.
We're ruining our own genre so we can feel more hardcore. We're like those guys who buy a full sized truck and pay full sized truck fuel costs so they can feel more manly when they drive around in their commuter vehicle they never use to actually haul anything. What's wrong with having carebears in our community? Why are we tossing away additional players and additional subscriptions to the games we love so we can get "More PvP" when you can go raid an enemy system for a good fight at any given time of the day?
It would do you well understand the content of a poster's post before responding to it. No where in any of my posts did I opine that gear stats and levels were necessary to a true MMORPG. On the contrary, I specifically stated that they were not. I also never stated that I speak for the entire PvE community. As a matter of fact i specifically stated that i did not represent the neither the PvE nor the PvP community. I appreciate the notion that some of you may want to declare me the spokesperson for the PvE community. I, however, am far from that. I am simply speaking for myself and expressing an opinion based on the hundreds, if not, thousands of PvE vs PvP threads that seemingly pop up every couple of weeks or so on every gaming forum. This is not a new topic. None of this should be breaking news to anyone.
Lastly, your opinion based on your biased PvP-centric preferences is well noted. I understand there is a portion of the gaming demographic that enjoy PvP, of which you appear to be a part of. I have also been around these PvE vs PvP threads long enough to know that you will not be the last PvP-centric poster that my post will offend. There will be more. It doesn't take much to trigger you PvP-centirc folks. I only hope that, unlike yourself, they are able to contain their emotions long enough to be able to read, and comprehend, my post before posting inaccuracies as to the content of my posts.
First, No, I am in no way offended. Your assertion that you did not say the specific things I refute is false. You should re-read your post and know what YOU are talking about for attempting to portray me as ignorant.
Here, let me help you out. This is a quote out of your post:
Little do these posters realize that a game without gears and levels is not an MMORPG by the truest definition of the genre. A PVP game without gears and levels is an FPS platform shooter game not an MMORPG.
You said that in case you forgot. Turns out, the posters know more than you, and weird can prove it. So you are wrong there. See the references I posted in response to that opinion above.
Also, I went through and pointed out that I do PvP and PvE, another point which you either read and forgot or just failed to read the post entirely. Try fish oil for the former, to help with your obviously lacking memory, or just read the entire post, so again, you have some idea what you are talking about.
I guess this is the point where I should, as you have done, resort to barely veiled personal attacks, but I will avoid that, as it is counter to the discussion. Another lesson you should learn.
That is what MMORPGs are currently, not an assertion of what I personally advocate MMORPGs should be, and below is my post clearly stating as much in this very thread ...
No one is specifically advocating for levels, power gaps, and/or grind in MMORPGs. Levels and power gaps may not be required to make an RPG or MMORPG but journey, story, and character progression are fundamental to the essence from which the MMORPG genre was founded. Again, without those all you have is a PvP FPS platform shooter.
If your argument is to state that an MMORPG should be consistent with those qualities inherent to FPS shooters and MOBA's, in that gamers in MMORPGs should be able to log in and at level one be able to compete with players who have been playing the game for months, if not years, then you are misguided as to the principle and philosophy of MMORPG game play. Which does not surprise me because I am a firm believer in that the reason these debates continue to come up in MMORPG game forums is because the MMORPG genre has been bastardized to such an extent that a portion of the gamer population simply do not understand what the term MMORPG, as it was originally conceptualized and developed, means.
In short, levels, power gaps, and/or grind should not define or symbolize MMORPG game play. Journey, story, and progression are what define MMORPG game play. The fact that the MMORPG genre has not evolved beyond levels, power gaps, and/or grind have nothing to do with the genre and everything to do with game developers who have not met the challenge of evolving and progressing the genre from the state in which they were presented nearly three decades ago.
Keeping up with, and staying apprised of the posts in a thread of which poster you are going to criticize and comment is recommended if you do not what to be cast in a shallow, non-comprehensible, manner.
Regarding your claim to do both PvP and PvE, that is neither here nor there with me so I don't know why that is even relevant to me. Fact of the matter being that in this very thread you have postured a position that is very much pro PvP-centric so why should that be ignored. Should I assume that you are not PvP-centric when the context of your post project as much throughout this thread?
For you, I would likewise try recommending fish oil for your condition, however, your case has nothing to do with memory and everything to do with lack of comprehension and hurt feelings. If I were you I would place less focus on a cure for the non-existent inadequacies of others and bit more attention on yourself and your shortcomings.
That is the sad darn truth. PvP in MMOs is having a fun fight every few dozens hours of time invested in the game and the rest of the time either being stat stomped by someone or stat stomping someone else.
Most MMO PvPers are living off the high of that one time they had a good fight. Pushing through dozens of hours of drudgery just to get another one.
Contrast that with games like Halo, SMITE, and StarCraft. Fun fights are the norm instead of the exception because people are on a fairly even level.
Open World MMOs will never have a totally level playing field. There is always going to be 15 v 2s and that's just part of those games. Honestly the diplomacy is part of what makes them engaging. Part of the reason you would opt for an MMO over a MOBA. But you don't have to aggravate that by making stat disparities so high that you can potentially have two players face off where the stronger one can kill the other one in less than half a dozen hits while it would take dozens of hits for the weaker one to kill the stronger one.
I don't care what you have done in game you never "deserve" that. You've never "earned" that. You can earn the right to beat people really hard through long hours of practice and detailed knowledge of the game. Not killing 1,000,000,000,000 NPCs by running through the same old rotations over and over and over.
Well said. And yes, that is the basic problem. When you PvP in most MMOs you will have to kill or be killed many times for every really good fight.
It really doesn't matter if anyone "deserve" the right to easily beat 90% of the players without a sweat, it still makes combat boring and predictable so the whole thing is moot.
And it frankly is not fun to reach the top either, most fights are still boring even if you win on auto in them. The whole D&D idea that an experienced warrior can survive being hit by an axe 20 times as many as a new character in the same armor means PvP becomes tedious
If the hitpoints and damage stayed about the same but you get new skills and abilities that are helpful it could get interesting but as long as MMOs use levels and raise the HP with said levels PvP will suck.
I guess you could scale down like GW2 but in a PvP focused games I don't see the point of doing that. In a PvE focused game that have some PvP it works to some degree at least but maybe you just should have skipped it altogether in that case or just use arenafights where you get matched by level and gear if you feel you must have a little PvP in the game.
But nodding to his earlier comment, if a player buys and logs into a game that has "war decs, suicide ganking", "can flipping (?)" the they have agreed to this type of game.
In short, it's sort of a "non-discussion" as one can buy games that don't have pvp and never get suicide ganked.
One never has to deal with any sort of pvp if one doesn't want to.
This is not to say that things like suicide ganking can't have better mechanics behind them so that a player truly risks something if they are play in that matter but the choice of being in a pvp game is up to the player.
One big thing is that people aren't aware of all aspects of the game coming in.
I appreciate that but it's difficult for me to say "oh well, they didn't do their research I suppose they can gripe".
My first game was Lineage 2 and in truth I had no intention of actually playing an online game, I just wanted to see what they were like.
I read everything I could before I went in and discovered there was a hard grind (which turned out to be a non-issue) and that it was open pvp.
So I knew that going in, accepted that I would be targeted straight away and discovered that actually wasn't the case and that it didn't really happen all that often.
The point being, I did look into what I was getting into. No reason that reasonable people can't do the same.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Lot of interesting feedback, but few people I think actually responded to the point. I'm not arguing against any PvP, I know that it has a place in our games. I played on the Black Server in Asheron's Call beta and then Darkfall at release. I led the leading guild on the Iseult server in DaOC and we had a blast dominating the server. And I had a great time in Cyrodil fighting for my faction in Elder Scrolls Online. But in every one of those games, PvP was consensual in the gaming environment I chose.
Nowadays, the trend is to mix everyone together. FFS, in ArcheAge you're not even safe from your own faction, making faction a kind of meaningless concept. In Black Desert Online you can't avoid PvP in any of the popular grinds spots. Both of those games featured compelling trading, farming and trading models, but they were all marred by the nonconsensual PvPers looking to spoil your day in the name of a "good fight". That kind of gameplay was never about "a good fight", it was a proxy for aggression disguised by the anonymity of the Internet. The more they ruined your day, the more glee the gankers generated. And as someone who totally got why PvP was fun in the formats I enjoyed above, I never understood the pleasure derived from this type of opportunistic, griefing gameplay.
I said the time for PvP has come and gone. By that, I meant that we don't need it mixed in with our MMO experience any more. Some people want it, that's fine, they should be able to get it from several of the PvP only games coming out in the future. But it doesn't represent innovative gameplay and it's not the preference of the majority of the population, it's in many cases just a cheap way of avoiding having to code decent AI. So we had it for years added as a somewhat afterthought to our MMOs. I'm not asking for PvP to be removed because of my "personal preference". I'm just saying that it's time to give both communities what each wants rather than making one subservient to the other. As it stands now, the PvPers get everything they want in games like AA and BDO, while the PvEers just have to take it. This is only one of the many reasons those games are struggling, but it's an important one. It's why I left both, even though I thought AA was one of the most fun MMOs I'd ever played in all aspects other than PvP.
I just hope that developers start moving in a different direction. Instead of trying to be all things to all people, develop your game for the audience of your choice and tune it for that type of play. If you MUST have both PvP and PvE in the same game world, make it consensual only so that only those who choose to PvP are exposed to it. The only reason that PvPers can complain about this model is because they yearn to kill those who don't want to fight. If it's really just a good fight they want, if they are being honest, then they should be happy playing with others just like them, who will give them "a good fight".
Men do not stop playing because they grow old. They grow old because they stop playing. -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
I think the solution for good pvp in mmorpgs is to add many skills that are only useful in pvp that way it doesn't effect pve but you can make pvp more balanced... a great use are stuns.. disarms.. and debuffs in general .... or buffs giving a tank 200% defense increase buff for 30 sec,1.3 minutes cool down... that way a tank can be useful in group pvp... using agrro on the archers... and disrupting them with stuns... another good pvp skill is damage reflect... mobs usually have huge hp pools so it wont be useful in pve,,, but in pvp a warrior could use it at the right timing to turn a deadly dagger assassin type back stab critical hit into that players own death... Another thing.. make it that normal hits without skills barely do damage in pvp.. but are the bread and butter of pve.. And for all of this to work you need to add casting time and the ability to cancel skills and skill animation.. this is what will make pros different the noobs... A pro dagger class player will bait the reflect damage skill from the warrior,use agility buffs to avoid his slow ass and when the duration is over own him... A pro archer will always think of positioning,since he is sqwishy and lets say his damage scales with distance,then a lower class tank can take an archer out if he catches him...will stun lock him and add slows while using the 200% increase defense buff againts arrows.... And all of this is not a fantasy... It was done in lineage2... in its golden days...yes gear had an effect.. but you could most certainly beat some classes if you know their weakness or by playing your skills smart\baiting the opponents best buffs\skills.
Basically clicking away text windows ruins every MMO, try to have fun instead of rushing things. Without story and lore all there is left is a bunch of mechanics. Reply Add Multi-Quote
Comments
PvP players ruined MMO PvP by not playing PlanetSide 1. Becuase what they truly want in an MMO PvP is no other PvPers and only PvEer. So we end up with games like Albion Online, that entice PvEer into a pool of sharks (who are afraid of other sharks). The only thing holding back MMO PvP is PvPers. Who Cry to developers to make their PvP easier for them.
RPG (Tab Targeting) was never "Face Roll". FPS gamers just couldn't win at it, they needed something dumber (Twitch + Lag) to win at. But even that wasn't enough, because they only found other PvPers in game, and they didn't want that.
PvPer need to be honest, they don't want an MMO PvP, they want a PvE hunting ground.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
I don't think the presence of PvP or even it's inclusion as the primary content driver of the game means that people necessarily are consenting to it by stepping into the game world.
Your consent is implied when you step into a PvP area. Allowing the "consent is implied" mentality to lead to feature after feature added to these games purely to enable the griefing of people who choose NOT to leave the safe areas has brought nothing positive to the genre.
People should be able to take calculated risks for calculated rewards. The game shouldn't thrust the risks upon them simply for playing the game. At least not for every PvP game ever because the appeal of such titles is far more limited.
If the game had no "safe areas" you consent to pvp by playing the game. By stepping into the game (which is entirely a pvp area) you have consented to pvp.
Again, there is no such thing as non-consensual pvp.
What people seem seem to be asking for is the ability to WITHDRAW consent at the time of their choosing and have the game mandate that all other players honor their request.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Eldurian said - It's like if people tried the first few prototype airplanes, watched
them crashed, and then said. "Whelp, that was a waste of time. These
airplanes are never going to be a thing. Let's just give up."
That is so true.
mhm ... great advice you give there. I would think this advice to be obviously flawed when not playing these games is exactly what players have been doing regarding games featuring this type of non-consensual OWPvP game play resulting with these game's quickly decreasing server populations resulting in the games' eventual deaths. Why, pray tell, do you think none of these games, with the exception of perhaps Eve and Darkfall, never last? And even those games have small niche, and dwindling, gaming populations.
Your solution doesn't solve the problem, it exacerbates it.
Btw, I thought you had blocked me. I knew you couldn't stay away. Don't worry. You are not alone in regard. You, and others, may not like what have to say at times, but you all have to respect the fact that I speak to truth.
We aren't forced to kill or to be killed constantly in the real world just because it's possible for any random stranger to pull a knife or a gun on us.
So devs have angled to NO RISK development,so do we really need to debate what kind of effort comes from NO RISK?
PVP belongs where that is the ONLY reason people enter a game,example arena Deathmatch such as mobas,Overwatch/Quake etc etc.
Role playing is a whole different animal,you need a world and tools to support a world,it takes a lot more development than simply flagging players to pvp.As well a role playing world map/s will be vastly different than quality pvp maps.
Point being in a mmorpg you will 100% of the time have inferior pvp ,so why bother going that route?I can think of one reason why,devs see LOTS of target areas to support a cash shop in mmrpg's that do not exist in normal pvp games.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
A lot of people dislike PvP in which they do not have to hit "yes" on a duel request, or actively toggle a PvP flag, or specifically step into a sanctioned PvP match. They choose to call this non-consensual PvP.
Debating semantics about whether they did or didn't consent isn't going to make them suddenly enjoy this kind of PvP.
Therefore this debate is a waste of time. I'm happy to just call it non-consensual PvP and say that non-consensual PvP has a lot of positive applications and is not a bad mechanic. Forcing it on people who choose to stay away from the areas that don't have it is.
We can refer to it through the codeword kittens if that will help.
You shouldn't force kittens on people trying to stick to kitten free areas.
And again if people voluntarily go to an area known to have kittens they shouldn't complain that the area does in fact have kittens. Going around in such an area and stating that they shouldn't have to see kittens without consenting to see them is silly.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
The devs said that while one can train mobs on players (a player is running by screaming with a horde of mobs and they start attacking those around him) if they find that players are purposefully doing this they will deal with that player.
So it it seems they don't want this type of environment for their game.
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 agree with that. I just think mechanics such as war decs, suicide ganking, can flipping etc. have primarily served to bring kittens to people who don't want kittens and that's done a huge disservice to PvP games.
When you step into the danger zone all bets are off.
Here, let me help you out. This is a quote out of your post:
Little do these posters realize that a game without gears and levels is not an MMORPG by the truest definition of the genre. A PVP game without gears and levels is an FPS platform shooter game not an MMORPG.
You said that in case you forgot. Turns out, the posters know more than you, and weird can prove it. So you are wrong there. See the references I posted in response to that opinion above.
Also, I went through and pointed out that I do PvP and PvE, another point which you either read and forgot or just failed to read the post entirely. Try fish oil for the former, to help with your obviously lacking memory, or just read the entire post, so again, you have some idea what you are talking about.
I guess this is the point where I should, as you have done, resort to barely veiled personal attacks, but I will avoid that, as it is counter to the discussion. Another lesson you should learn.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
But nodding to his earlier comment, if a player buys and logs into a game that has "war decs, suicide ganking", "can flipping (?)" the they have agreed to this type of game.
In short, it's sort of a "non-discussion" as one can buy games that don't have pvp and never get suicide ganked.
One never has to deal with any sort of pvp if one doesn't want to.
This is not to say that things like suicide ganking can't have better mechanics behind them so that a player truly risks something if they are play in that matter but the choice of being in a pvp game is up to the player.
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
Can you give me the long list of PvE MMORPG games that are incoming, are not crowd funded and have a large budget?
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I don't think they do. But I also don't think they care.
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
Maybe not. I can't say what the majority of them are thinking or feeling.
One big thing is that people aren't aware of all aspects of the game coming in. Especially in EVE it takes awhile to learn all of the options for griefing you that exist. For a lot of newbs they find out about things like suicide ganking, wardecs, and can flipping the hard way. It is almost never a positive experience for them.
The argument that they "implied consent" by buying the game isn't going to bring them back. And it's not going to reimburse CCP the subscription money of people who would be more interested in playing EVE and other similar titles if not for such mechanics.
I mean... I felt safest when I was in null sec, found low sec to be more engaging but fairly safe, and was on high alert any time I flew through high sec as a member of a corporation large enough to get noticed by the high sec war dec corps...
And then we wonder why people have such visceral reactions when they hear terms like Open World PvP and Full Loot Drop. If my only experience of PvP in these games was high-sec PvP I'd probably feel the same.
We're ruining our own genre so we can feel more hardcore. We're like those guys who buy a full sized truck and pay full sized truck fuel costs so they can feel more manly when they drive around in their commuter vehicle they never use to actually haul anything. What's wrong with having carebears in our community? Why are we tossing away additional players and additional subscriptions to the games we love so we can get "More PvP" when you can go raid an enemy system for a good fight at any given time of the day?
That is what MMORPGs are currently, not an assertion of what I personally advocate MMORPGs should be, and below is my post clearly stating as much in this very thread ...
No one is specifically advocating for levels, power gaps, and/or grind in MMORPGs. Levels and power gaps may not be required to make an RPG or MMORPG but journey, story, and character progression are fundamental to the essence from which the MMORPG genre was founded. Again, without those all you have is a PvP FPS platform shooter.
If your argument is to state that an MMORPG should be consistent with those qualities inherent to FPS shooters and MOBA's, in that gamers in MMORPGs should be able to log in and at level one be able to compete with players who have been playing the game for months, if not years, then you are misguided as to the principle and philosophy of MMORPG game play. Which does not surprise me because I am a firm believer in that the reason these debates continue to come up in MMORPG game forums is because the MMORPG genre has been bastardized to such an extent that a portion of the gamer population simply do not understand what the term MMORPG, as it was originally conceptualized and developed, means.
In short, levels, power gaps, and/or grind should not define or symbolize MMORPG game play. Journey, story, and progression are what define MMORPG game play. The fact that the MMORPG genre has not evolved beyond levels, power gaps, and/or grind have nothing to do with the genre and everything to do with game developers who have not met the challenge of evolving and progressing the genre from the state in which they were presented nearly three decades ago.
Keeping up with, and staying apprised of the posts in a thread of which poster you are going to criticize and comment is recommended if you do not what to be cast in a shallow, non-comprehensible, manner.
Regarding your claim to do both PvP and PvE, that is neither here nor there with me so I don't know why that is even relevant to me. Fact of the matter being that in this very thread you have postured a position that is very much pro PvP-centric so why should that be ignored. Should I assume that you are not PvP-centric when the context of your post project as much throughout this thread?
For you, I would likewise try recommending fish oil for your condition, however, your case has nothing to do with memory and everything to do with lack of comprehension and hurt feelings. If I were you I would place less focus on a cure for the non-existent inadequacies of others and bit more attention on yourself and your shortcomings.
Well said. And yes, that is the basic problem. When you PvP in most MMOs you will have to kill or be killed many times for every really good fight.
It really doesn't matter if anyone "deserve" the right to easily beat 90% of the players without a sweat, it still makes combat boring and predictable so the whole thing is moot.
And it frankly is not fun to reach the top either, most fights are still boring even if you win on auto in them. The whole D&D idea that an experienced warrior can survive being hit by an axe 20 times as many as a new character in the same armor means PvP becomes tedious
If the hitpoints and damage stayed about the same but you get new skills and abilities that are helpful it could get interesting but as long as MMOs use levels and raise the HP with said levels PvP will suck.
I guess you could scale down like GW2 but in a PvP focused games I don't see the point of doing that. In a PvE focused game that have some PvP it works to some degree at least but maybe you just should have skipped it altogether in that case or just use arenafights where you get matched by level and gear if you feel you must have a little PvP in the game.
That's silly. Imagine if no one would make an RPG action because, "RPGs are turn-based, period."
There is nothing about either control schemes or visual perspective that prefers any given game type.
I appreciate that but it's difficult for me to say "oh well, they didn't do their research I suppose they can gripe".
My first game was Lineage 2 and in truth I had no intention of actually playing an online game, I just wanted to see what they were like.
I read everything I could before I went in and discovered there was a hard grind (which turned out to be a non-issue) and that it was open pvp.
So I knew that going in, accepted that I would be targeted straight away and discovered that actually wasn't the case and that it didn't really happen all that often.
The point being, I did look into what I was getting into. No reason that reasonable people can't do the same.
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
Lot of interesting feedback, but few people I think actually responded to the point. I'm not arguing against any PvP, I know that it has a place in our games. I played on the Black Server in Asheron's Call beta and then Darkfall at release. I led the leading guild on the Iseult server in DaOC and we had a blast dominating the server. And I had a great time in Cyrodil fighting for my faction in Elder Scrolls Online. But in every one of those games, PvP was consensual in the gaming environment I chose.
Nowadays, the trend is to mix everyone together. FFS, in ArcheAge you're not even safe from your own faction, making faction a kind of meaningless concept. In Black Desert Online you can't avoid PvP in any of the popular grinds spots. Both of those games featured compelling trading, farming and trading models, but they were all marred by the nonconsensual PvPers looking to spoil your day in the name of a "good fight". That kind of gameplay was never about "a good fight", it was a proxy for aggression disguised by the anonymity of the Internet. The more they ruined your day, the more glee the gankers generated. And as someone who totally got why PvP was fun in the formats I enjoyed above, I never understood the pleasure derived from this type of opportunistic, griefing gameplay.
I said the time for PvP has come and gone. By that, I meant that we don't need it mixed in with our MMO experience any more. Some people want it, that's fine, they should be able to get it from several of the PvP only games coming out in the future. But it doesn't represent innovative gameplay and it's not the preference of the majority of the population, it's in many cases just a cheap way of avoiding having to code decent AI. So we had it for years added as a somewhat afterthought to our MMOs. I'm not asking for PvP to be removed because of my "personal preference". I'm just saying that it's time to give both communities what each wants rather than making one subservient to the other. As it stands now, the PvPers get everything they want in games like AA and BDO, while the PvEers just have to take it. This is only one of the many reasons those games are struggling, but it's an important one. It's why I left both, even though I thought AA was one of the most fun MMOs I'd ever played in all aspects other than PvP.
I just hope that developers start moving in a different direction. Instead of trying to be all things to all people, develop your game for the audience of your choice and tune it for that type of play. If you MUST have both PvP and PvE in the same game world, make it consensual only so that only those who choose to PvP are exposed to it. The only reason that PvPers can complain about this model is because they yearn to kill those who don't want to fight. If it's really just a good fight they want, if they are being honest, then they should be happy playing with others just like them, who will give them "a good fight".
Men do not stop playing because they grow old. They grow old because they stop playing. -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
or buffs giving a tank 200% defense increase buff for 30 sec,1.3 minutes cool down... that way a tank can be useful in group pvp... using agrro on the archers... and disrupting them with stuns... another good pvp skill is damage reflect... mobs usually have huge hp pools so it wont be useful in pve,,, but in pvp a warrior could use it at the right timing to turn a deadly dagger assassin type back stab critical hit into that players own death...
Another thing.. make it that normal hits without skills barely do damage in pvp.. but are the bread and butter of pve..
And for all of this to work you need to add casting time and the ability to cancel skills and skill animation.. this is what will make pros different the noobs...
A pro dagger class player will bait the reflect damage skill from the warrior,use agility buffs to avoid his slow ass and when the duration is over own him...
A pro archer will always think of positioning,since he is sqwishy and lets say his damage scales with distance,then a lower class tank can take an archer out if he catches him...will stun lock him and add slows while using the 200% increase defense buff againts arrows....
And all of this is not a fantasy...
It was done in lineage2... in its golden days...yes gear had an effect.. but you could most certainly beat some classes if you know their weakness or by playing your skills smart\baiting the opponents best buffs\skills.
Basically clicking away text windows ruins every MMO, try to have fun instead of rushing things. Without story and lore all there is left is a bunch of mechanics.
Reply
Add Multi-Quote