Again what you have decided is open world is not the generally accepted one. It is your own manifesto. The debate will always me being talking about something else because you only accept you view of open world.
We are talking about video games but we are talking about roles. If you are playing an online RPG to kill random players you are playing a psycho. Just like if I play NBA game as big man I play the role of center or power forward. Again not a hard concept.
You are talking about your own view of open world. I am talking about open world as well. You just have different unwavering views of MMORPG. Certainly not talking about FFA loot in a themepark.
I am talking about the reason why FFA looting is bad and should be avoid in MMORPG as long as their is no accountability. This is my opinion just like you can think FFA killing should be done. I had the view as well at one point.
RPG does not mean roles that players choose, but the roles that game provides. There are games where you can play the role of a psychopath. But most MMOs are not such. So that role is only in your imagination.
OW is sandbox, that is how it works. A world open for changes. Or if you disagree, well you know what I mean, so I do not see why you use examples from instanced games to prove OW does not work. This is ridiculous.
FFA looting is not bad. It could be in a certain game, where it is in conflict with other rules, features and goals implemented. That is actually what we should debate - when FFA PvP works, when it does not, and why. Instead you say - it is bad, period, and prove that with generalized examples from the games you have played. Then you want me to agree. Buy I do not. As your examples just prove that OW PvP does not work in certain circumstances. And that is not the same as if it does not work in general.
Again - we need abstract thinking here to make any progress.
Vermillion_Raventhal said: "I am talking about the reason why FFA looting is bad and should be avoid in MMORPG as long as their is no accountability."
ikcin said: "Instead you say - it is bad, period,..."
I think I see the problem here.
Crazy thing is that I am for FFA PVP. I just believe if you are going to play an outlaw/psycho you should be hunted by NPC bounty hunters. You should be imprisoned, executed and banished somewhere far if caught. Seems fair to me.
I’m for it too. Played Darkfall for years and love it. The problem is not enough people can stick around to support it long term so we have to make sacrifices or we won’t get any of it. Unless we want survival games. It works there because it doesn’t require dedicated servers and allow a lower pop.
I think best punishment for PK aka red player is send them off to a isolated sub server special for red players .
Honestly i did some red hunting in past and most of those red like rats , they hide well and take a lots time and work just to take them down , but they come back in no time .
90% or red are trolls with only few red have honor to be respected
If there is going to be an extreme punishment like that then developers can just very well not include the system and leave it at that. There isn't a point to put in/develop a system so that players can use it and then banish them.
I like the suggested idea of increasing penalties that people mentioned where a player gets more and more penalties, maybe even sent to a jail for alternate game play, and then they have to deal with harsh consequences as an outlaw.
I do think that there needs to be a way for a player to redeem themselves.
I don't think it's extreme punishment , basically if you red and get hunt down in normal server then you will get send to sub server (i think you know what sub server mean) , you can't go back to normal server to do bad stuff again , but your friend can go to that sub server to play with you . It's not jail isolated type
That sub server like a lawless zone where you don't get punish for kill or be killed .
If you think it extreme then to get out of sub server you need to pay gold to apology for the one you PK
Again what you have decided is open world is not the generally accepted one. It is your own manifesto. The debate will always me being talking about something else because you only accept you view of open world.
We are talking about video games but we are talking about roles. If you are playing an online RPG to kill random players you are playing a psycho. Just like if I play NBA game as big man I play the role of center or power forward. Again not a hard concept.
You are talking about your own view of open world. I am talking about open world as well. You just have different unwavering views of MMORPG. Certainly not talking about FFA loot in a themepark.
I am talking about the reason why FFA looting is bad and should be avoid in MMORPG as long as their is no accountability. This is my opinion just like you can think FFA killing should be done. I had the view as well at one point.
RPG does not mean roles that players choose, but the roles that game provides. There are games where you can play the role of a psychopath. But most MMOs are not such. So that role is only in your imagination.
OW is sandbox, that is how it works. A world open for changes. Or if you disagree, well you know what I mean, so I do not see why you use examples from instanced games to prove OW does not work. This is ridiculous.
FFA looting is not bad. It could be in a certain game, where it is in conflict with other rules, features and goals implemented. That is actually what we should debate - when FFA PvP works, when it does not, and why. Instead you say - it is bad, period, and prove that with generalized examples from the games you have played. Then you want me to agree. Buy I do not. As your examples just prove that OW PvP does not work in certain circumstances. And that is not the same as if it does not work in general.
Again - we need abstract thinking here to make any progress.
Vermillion_Raventhal said: "I am talking about the reason why FFA looting is bad and should be avoid in MMORPG as long as their is no accountability."
ikcin said: "Instead you say - it is bad, period,..."
I think I see the problem here.
Crazy thing is that I am for FFA PVP. I just believe if you are going to play an outlaw/psycho you should be hunted by NPC bounty hunters. You should be imprisoned, executed and banished somewhere far if caught. Seems fair to me.
Yes, but as both you and I keep saying, the game needs to be designed for the punishment so that it actually works. That's the key. Funny thing is, by designing the game for this, you actually add to it and make it a better, more complete, game world.
So it is not bad in general, it will be fine if it is punished - do you see the controversy? Why it have to be punished if it is not bad? In fact you both claim it is bad - because it did not work in game "x" and game "y" you have played. So it must be punished. And you are obviously wrong. You talk about game mechanics as moral issue. Which is ridiculous.
PK is punished in the most MMOs where it is allowed. Obviously many developers think like you - mistake the game with the role. So, does the penalty stop the PK? No. Instead it often prevents the OW PvP. The people who want to PK still do it, because they simply do not care about the consequences, as they RP or they are just bored. And the rational players just do not PvP, as they care about the consequences.
The funny thing is that you call me ignorant. As you completely ignore everything I say. And you stuck on the record - bad - punish.
You may be right about certain games, but you are terribly wrong about the games in general.
Everyone is punished if they die. It is full loot pvp game after all. And you can have other form of pvp in game too like guild or faction war. So you still have open world pvp.
And the whole point is to stop too many ganking. Because you don't want too much of it. There are people play the game to pve. How much they pve is beside the question. But you don't want half of the server to be outlawed so it make sense you put restriction on to it.
Again what you have decided is open world is not the generally accepted one. It is your own manifesto. The debate will always me being talking about something else because you only accept you view of open world.
We are talking about video games but we are talking about roles. If you are playing an online RPG to kill random players you are playing a psycho. Just like if I play NBA game as big man I play the role of center or power forward. Again not a hard concept.
You are talking about your own view of open world. I am talking about open world as well. You just have different unwavering views of MMORPG. Certainly not talking about FFA loot in a themepark.
I am talking about the reason why FFA looting is bad and should be avoid in MMORPG as long as their is no accountability. This is my opinion just like you can think FFA killing should be done. I had the view as well at one point.
RPG does not mean roles that players choose, but the roles that game provides. There are games where you can play the role of a psychopath. But most MMOs are not such. So that role is only in your imagination.
OW is sandbox, that is how it works. A world open for changes. Or if you disagree, well you know what I mean, so I do not see why you use examples from instanced games to prove OW does not work. This is ridiculous.
FFA looting is not bad. It could be in a certain game, where it is in conflict with other rules, features and goals implemented. That is actually what we should debate - when FFA PvP works, when it does not, and why. Instead you say - it is bad, period, and prove that with generalized examples from the games you have played. Then you want me to agree. Buy I do not. As your examples just prove that OW PvP does not work in certain circumstances. And that is not the same as if it does not work in general.
Again - we need abstract thinking here to make any progress.
Vermillion_Raventhal said: "I am talking about the reason why FFA looting is bad and should be avoid in MMORPG as long as their is no accountability."
ikcin said: "Instead you say - it is bad, period,..."
I think I see the problem here.
Crazy thing is that I am for FFA PVP. I just believe if you are going to play an outlaw/psycho you should be hunted by NPC bounty hunters. You should be imprisoned, executed and banished somewhere far if caught. Seems fair to me.
Yes, but as both you and I keep saying, the game needs to be designed for the punishment so that it actually works. That's the key. Funny thing is, by designing the game for this, you actually add to it and make it a better, more complete, game world.
So it is not bad in general, it will be fine if it is punished - do you see the controversy? Why it have to be punished if it is not bad? In fact you both claim it is bad - because it did not work in game "x" and game "y" you have played. So it must be punished. And you are obviously wrong. You talk about game mechanics as moral issue. Which is ridiculous.
PK is punished in the most MMOs where it is allowed. Obviously many developers think like you - mistake the game with the role. So, does the penalty stop the PK? No. Instead it often prevents the OW PvP. The people who want to PK still do it, because they simply do not care about the consequences, as they RP or they are just bored. And the rational players just do not PvP, as they care about the consequences.
The funny thing is that you call me ignorant. As you completely ignore everything I say. And you stuck on the record - bad - punish.
You may be right about certain games, but you are terribly wrong about the games in general.
You just keep ignoring the details of what I've said and throwing out things from left field that don't apply. And it's the same story with Vermillian_Raventhal's comments. I'm not wasting time explaining it all to you again and again, nor am I going to go through your posts and point out the many things that don't apply, or the many intentional misconceptions you use to muddy the waters.
Again what you have decided is open world is not the generally accepted one. It is your own manifesto. The debate will always me being talking about something else because you only accept you view of open world.
We are talking about video games but we are talking about roles. If you are playing an online RPG to kill random players you are playing a psycho. Just like if I play NBA game as big man I play the role of center or power forward. Again not a hard concept.
You are talking about your own view of open world. I am talking about open world as well. You just have different unwavering views of MMORPG. Certainly not talking about FFA loot in a themepark.
I am talking about the reason why FFA looting is bad and should be avoid in MMORPG as long as their is no accountability. This is my opinion just like you can think FFA killing should be done. I had the view as well at one point.
RPG does not mean roles that players choose, but the roles that game provides. There are games where you can play the role of a psychopath. But most MMOs are not such. So that role is only in your imagination.
OW is sandbox, that is how it works. A world open for changes. Or if you disagree, well you know what I mean, so I do not see why you use examples from instanced games to prove OW does not work. This is ridiculous.
FFA looting is not bad. It could be in a certain game, where it is in conflict with other rules, features and goals implemented. That is actually what we should debate - when FFA PvP works, when it does not, and why. Instead you say - it is bad, period, and prove that with generalized examples from the games you have played. Then you want me to agree. Buy I do not. As your examples just prove that OW PvP does not work in certain circumstances. And that is not the same as if it does not work in general.
Again - we need abstract thinking here to make any progress.
Vermillion_Raventhal said: "I am talking about the reason why FFA looting is bad and should be avoid in MMORPG as long as their is no accountability."
ikcin said: "Instead you say - it is bad, period,..."
I think I see the problem here.
Crazy thing is that I am for FFA PVP. I just believe if you are going to play an outlaw/psycho you should be hunted by NPC bounty hunters. You should be imprisoned, executed and banished somewhere far if caught. Seems fair to me.
Yes, but as both you and I keep saying, the game needs to be designed for the punishment so that it actually works. That's the key. Funny thing is, by designing the game for this, you actually add to it and make it a better, more complete, game world.
So it is not bad in general, it will be fine if it is punished - do you see the controversy? Why it have to be punished if it is not bad? In fact you both claim it is bad - because it did not work in game "x" and game "y" you have played. So it must be punished. And you are obviously wrong. You talk about game mechanics as moral issue. Which is ridiculous.
PK is punished in the most MMOs where it is allowed. Obviously many developers think like you - mistake the game with the role. So, does the penalty stop the PK? No. Instead it often prevents the OW PvP. The people who want to PK still do it, because they simply do not care about the consequences, as they RP or they are just bored. And the rational players just do not PvP, as they care about the consequences.
The funny thing is that you call me ignorant. As you completely ignore everything I say. And you stuck on the record - bad - punish.
You may be right about certain games, but you are terribly wrong about the games in general.
You just keep ignoring the details of what I've said and throwing out things from left field that don't apply. And it's the same story with Vermillian_Raventhal's comments. I'm not wasting time explaining it all to you again and again, nor am I going to go through your posts and point out the many things that don't apply, or the many intentional misconceptions you use to muddy the waters.
Most of us have caught on awhile ago on other threads of this chap's agenda and do not rise to the baiting which seems to happen like clockwork but it always manages to ensnare new participants. I always watch with amusement when it finally dawns on folk but it took awhile for people here to realise but basically it is pointless. Like banging your head on wall you'll get nowhere best strategy is to ignore the poster.
Again what you have decided is open world is not the generally accepted one. It is your own manifesto. The debate will always me being talking about something else because you only accept you view of open world.
We are talking about video games but we are talking about roles. If you are playing an online RPG to kill random players you are playing a psycho. Just like if I play NBA game as big man I play the role of center or power forward. Again not a hard concept.
You are talking about your own view of open world. I am talking about open world as well. You just have different unwavering views of MMORPG. Certainly not talking about FFA loot in a themepark.
I am talking about the reason why FFA looting is bad and should be avoid in MMORPG as long as their is no accountability. This is my opinion just like you can think FFA killing should be done. I had the view as well at one point.
RPG does not mean roles that players choose, but the roles that game provides. There are games where you can play the role of a psychopath. But most MMOs are not such. So that role is only in your imagination.
OW is sandbox, that is how it works. A world open for changes. Or if you disagree, well you know what I mean, so I do not see why you use examples from instanced games to prove OW does not work. This is ridiculous.
FFA looting is not bad. It could be in a certain game, where it is in conflict with other rules, features and goals implemented. That is actually what we should debate - when FFA PvP works, when it does not, and why. Instead you say - it is bad, period, and prove that with generalized examples from the games you have played. Then you want me to agree. Buy I do not. As your examples just prove that OW PvP does not work in certain circumstances. And that is not the same as if it does not work in general.
Again - we need abstract thinking here to make any progress.
Vermillion_Raventhal said: "I am talking about the reason why FFA looting is bad and should be avoid in MMORPG as long as their is no accountability."
ikcin said: "Instead you say - it is bad, period,..."
I think I see the problem here.
Crazy thing is that I am for FFA PVP. I just believe if you are going to play an outlaw/psycho you should be hunted by NPC bounty hunters. You should be imprisoned, executed and banished somewhere far if caught. Seems fair to me.
Yes, but as both you and I keep saying, the game needs to be designed for the punishment so that it actually works. That's the key. Funny thing is, by designing the game for this, you actually add to it and make it a better, more complete, game world.
So it is not bad in general, it will be fine if it is punished - do you see the controversy? Why it have to be punished if it is not bad? In fact you both claim it is bad - because it did not work in game "x" and game "y" you have played. So it must be punished. And you are obviously wrong. You talk about game mechanics as moral issue. Which is ridiculous.
PK is punished in the most MMOs where it is allowed. Obviously many developers think like you - mistake the game with the role. So, does the penalty stop the PK? No. Instead it often prevents the OW PvP. The people who want to PK still do it, because they simply do not care about the consequences, as they RP or they are just bored. And the rational players just do not PvP, as they care about the consequences.
The funny thing is that you call me ignorant. As you completely ignore everything I say. And you stuck on the record - bad - punish.
You may be right about certain games, but you are terribly wrong about the games in general.
You just can't wrap your head around the fact that punishing random PVP is just another part of risk vs. reward like you claim you want. You play an outlaw to rob people the risk is you maybe imprisoned if you lose.
Gameplay choices to restrict or punish something is not because it's bad but wanting to control gameplay.
Again what you have decided is open world is not the generally accepted one. It is your own manifesto. The debate will always me being talking about something else because you only accept you view of open world.
We are talking about video games but we are talking about roles. If you are playing an online RPG to kill random players you are playing a psycho. Just like if I play NBA game as big man I play the role of center or power forward. Again not a hard concept.
You are talking about your own view of open world. I am talking about open world as well. You just have different unwavering views of MMORPG. Certainly not talking about FFA loot in a themepark.
I am talking about the reason why FFA looting is bad and should be avoid in MMORPG as long as their is no accountability. This is my opinion just like you can think FFA killing should be done. I had the view as well at one point.
RPG does not mean roles that players choose, but the roles that game provides. There are games where you can play the role of a psychopath. But most MMOs are not such. So that role is only in your imagination.
OW is sandbox, that is how it works. A world open for changes. Or if you disagree, well you know what I mean, so I do not see why you use examples from instanced games to prove OW does not work. This is ridiculous.
FFA looting is not bad. It could be in a certain game, where it is in conflict with other rules, features and goals implemented. That is actually what we should debate - when FFA PvP works, when it does not, and why. Instead you say - it is bad, period, and prove that with generalized examples from the games you have played. Then you want me to agree. Buy I do not. As your examples just prove that OW PvP does not work in certain circumstances. And that is not the same as if it does not work in general.
Again - we need abstract thinking here to make any progress.
Vermillion_Raventhal said: "I am talking about the reason why FFA looting is bad and should be avoid in MMORPG as long as their is no accountability."
ikcin said: "Instead you say - it is bad, period,..."
I think I see the problem here.
Crazy thing is that I am for FFA PVP. I just believe if you are going to play an outlaw/psycho you should be hunted by NPC bounty hunters. You should be imprisoned, executed and banished somewhere far if caught. Seems fair to me.
Yes, but as both you and I keep saying, the game needs to be designed for the punishment so that it actually works. That's the key. Funny thing is, by designing the game for this, you actually add to it and make it a better, more complete, game world.
So it is not bad in general, it will be fine if it is punished - do you see the controversy? Why it have to be punished if it is not bad? In fact you both claim it is bad - because it did not work in game "x" and game "y" you have played. So it must be punished. And you are obviously wrong. You talk about game mechanics as moral issue. Which is ridiculous.
PK is punished in the most MMOs where it is allowed. Obviously many developers think like you - mistake the game with the role. So, does the penalty stop the PK? No. Instead it often prevents the OW PvP. The people who want to PK still do it, because they simply do not care about the consequences, as they RP or they are just bored. And the rational players just do not PvP, as they care about the consequences.
The funny thing is that you call me ignorant. As you completely ignore everything I say. And you stuck on the record - bad - punish.
You may be right about certain games, but you are terribly wrong about the games in general.
You just keep ignoring the details of what I've said and throwing out things from left field that don't apply. And it's the same story with Vermillian_Raventhal's comments. I'm not wasting time explaining it all to you again and again, nor am I going to go through your posts and point out the many things that don't apply, or the many intentional misconceptions you use to muddy the waters.
Most of us have caught on awhile ago on other threads of this chap's agenda and do not rise to the baiting which seems to happen like clockwork but it always manages to ensnare new participants. I always watch with amusement when it finally dawns on folk but it took awhile for people here to realise but basically it is pointless. Like banging your head on wall you'll get nowhere best strategy is to ignore the poster.
I know already but I will continue to debate until I am bored.
Everyone is punished if they die. It is full loot pvp game after all. And you can have other form of pvp in game too like guild or faction war. So you still have open world pvp.
And the whole point is to stop too many ganking. Because you don't want too much of it. There are people play the game to pve. How much they pve is beside the question. But you don't want half of the server to be outlawed so it make sense you put restriction on to it.
Some games have death penalty, some have not. Also, again, punishment is different of risk. You make a special rule, that must prevent some attitude. But this is a game. Why the hell the developer will implement the PK if he will punish it? You make a game, implement PK there, and then you say: OK, now players must not PK. This is obviously stupid, or very incompetent.
You have the same problem as all above - you think about a certain game or games, you have played.
Why do you keep saying developer are punishing pk though. If you want to pk without consequence you should just play wow.
If you are asking why gankers should take more loss to people getting ganked... I'm not sure if I said they should...
But overall I think there should be mechanism to stop "too many ganking". Because you don't want people getting ganked 50 times a day that they can't pve at all. And you don't want a game where half of the server are gankers.
Again what you have decided is open world is not the generally accepted one. It is your own manifesto. The debate will always me being talking about something else because you only accept you view of open world.
We are talking about video games but we are talking about roles. If you are playing an online RPG to kill random players you are playing a psycho. Just like if I play NBA game as big man I play the role of center or power forward. Again not a hard concept.
You are talking about your own view of open world. I am talking about open world as well. You just have different unwavering views of MMORPG. Certainly not talking about FFA loot in a themepark.
I am talking about the reason why FFA looting is bad and should be avoid in MMORPG as long as their is no accountability. This is my opinion just like you can think FFA killing should be done. I had the view as well at one point.
RPG does not mean roles that players choose, but the roles that game provides. There are games where you can play the role of a psychopath. But most MMOs are not such. So that role is only in your imagination.
OW is sandbox, that is how it works. A world open for changes. Or if you disagree, well you know what I mean, so I do not see why you use examples from instanced games to prove OW does not work. This is ridiculous.
FFA looting is not bad. It could be in a certain game, where it is in conflict with other rules, features and goals implemented. That is actually what we should debate - when FFA PvP works, when it does not, and why. Instead you say - it is bad, period, and prove that with generalized examples from the games you have played. Then you want me to agree. Buy I do not. As your examples just prove that OW PvP does not work in certain circumstances. And that is not the same as if it does not work in general.
Again - we need abstract thinking here to make any progress.
Vermillion_Raventhal said: "I am talking about the reason why FFA looting is bad and should be avoid in MMORPG as long as their is no accountability."
ikcin said: "Instead you say - it is bad, period,..."
I think I see the problem here.
Crazy thing is that I am for FFA PVP. I just believe if you are going to play an outlaw/psycho you should be hunted by NPC bounty hunters. You should be imprisoned, executed and banished somewhere far if caught. Seems fair to me.
Yes, but as both you and I keep saying, the game needs to be designed for the punishment so that it actually works. That's the key. Funny thing is, by designing the game for this, you actually add to it and make it a better, more complete, game world.
So it is not bad in general, it will be fine if it is punished - do you see the controversy? Why it have to be punished if it is not bad? In fact you both claim it is bad - because it did not work in game "x" and game "y" you have played. So it must be punished. And you are obviously wrong. You talk about game mechanics as moral issue. Which is ridiculous.
PK is punished in the most MMOs where it is allowed. Obviously many developers think like you - mistake the game with the role. So, does the penalty stop the PK? No. Instead it often prevents the OW PvP. The people who want to PK still do it, because they simply do not care about the consequences, as they RP or they are just bored. And the rational players just do not PvP, as they care about the consequences.
The funny thing is that you call me ignorant. As you completely ignore everything I say. And you stuck on the record - bad - punish.
You may be right about certain games, but you are terribly wrong about the games in general.
You just keep ignoring the details of what I've said and throwing out things from left field that don't apply. And it's the same story with Vermillian_Raventhal's comments. I'm not wasting time explaining it all to you again and again, nor am I going to go through your posts and point out the many things that don't apply, or the many intentional misconceptions you use to muddy the waters.
Most of us have caught on awhile ago on other threads of this chap's agenda and do not rise to the baiting which seems to happen like clockwork but it always manages to ensnare new participants. I always watch with amusement when it finally dawns on folk but it took awhile for people here to realise but basically it is pointless. Like banging your head on wall you'll get nowhere best strategy is to ignore the poster.
To be honest, I admire folks' attempts to "enlighten" said person. Sometimes, it just takes awhile to realize that there is no light socket in which to replace the bulb
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
You just can't wrap your head around the fact that punishing random PVP is just another part of risk vs. reward like you claim you want. You play an outlaw to rob people the risk is you maybe imprisoned if you lose.
Gameplay choices to restrict or punish something is not because it's bad but wanting to control gameplay.
Over and over again. Why you play like outlaw? See you just take a game, and say this is how the things are. Let say you are not an outlaw, and the goal in the game is to beat more players. What will you suggest then?
Also risk vs reward. OK. You say the risk for PK should be higher, so what will be the higher reward?
I think all the argument stem from certain games have outlaw system. Where population is divided by outlaw and peaceful. Not all games have that. Some don't have that distinct division.
I think what people meant is "wolf" death penalty should be higher. Not necessary pk.
You just can't wrap your head around the fact that punishing random PVP is just another part of risk vs. reward like you claim you want. You play an outlaw to rob people the risk is you maybe imprisoned if you lose.
Gameplay choices to restrict or punish something is not because it's bad but wanting to control gameplay.
Over and over again. Why you play like outlaw? See you just take a game, and say this is how the things are. Let say you are not an outlaw, and the goal in the game is to beat more players. What will you suggest then?
Also risk vs reward. OK. You say the risk for PK should be higher, so what will be the higher reward?
The reward for PK with full loot is higher. Again and again you are talking about a very specific you issue. It's the game you built up in your minds issue.
In most FFA PVP games you have world building and clan building as the goal. I have never heard of a MMORPG where the only goal is to beat other players. Most PVP who are going to run around doing Quake style PVP are not playing MMORPG because honestly they suck gameplay wise. Too many technical limitations, power gaps, grind and other limitations that usually come with the genre. Easier to play battle royal, FPS, MOBA that will have less limitations and loss. They get straight to the point.
You again are talking about something imagined only in you head vs. people talking about typical general theoretical and hypothetical MMORPG ideas
You just can't wrap your head around the fact that punishing random PVP is just another part of risk vs. reward like you claim you want. You play an outlaw to rob people the risk is you maybe imprisoned if you lose.
Gameplay choices to restrict or punish something is not because it's bad but wanting to control gameplay.
Over and over again. Why you play like outlaw? See you just take a game, and say this is how the things are. Let say you are not an outlaw, and the goal in the game is to beat more players. What will you suggest then?
Also risk vs reward. OK. You say the risk for PK should be higher, so what will be the higher reward?
I think all the argument stem from certain games have outlaw system. Where population is divided by outlaw and peaceful. Not all games have that. Some don't have that distinct division.
I think what people meant is "wolf" death penalty should be higher. Not necessary pk.
Dang, if developers were applying what that guy says (not you, the person you quote, I have him on ignore and can only read him in quotes), every single MMORPG would play like quake arena or unreal tournament, but with the disadvantages of the power gap. That would be so utterly bad games it's not even funny... and the few who have trying something even remotely approaching that miserably failed.
I've been wondering how long it will take him to discover there are entire genres, literally hundreds maybe thousands of games that allow him to behave exactly like he's wanting.
You just keep ignoring the details of what I've said and throwing out things from left field that don't apply. And it's the same story with Vermillian_Raventhal's comments. I'm not wasting time explaining it all to you again and again, nor am I going to go through your posts and point out the many things that don't apply, or the many intentional misconceptions you use to muddy the waters.
What I'm ignoring? I ask you a simple question - if you claim the PK is not bad why you want to punish it?
If crafting is bad why punish it by not making resource gather realistic instead of having to wall node to node to waste time? It's a game play choice. Why hold out raiders from doing raids but once a week? Game play choice.
Do you understand that people have different levels of interest in PVP? Yes or no.
Do you understand that unrestrained PVP will drive vast majority of other PVP types? Yes or no.
Do you understand that in games with mixed PVE and PVP gameplay that 99% of the player base want PVP overpowers and dominates other playstyle choices? Yes or no.
You know you can not force anyone to craft or force anyone to PVE in most cases. You can force someone to PVP. Those who can not do what they want will eventually quit. It is not a hard concept. If you step suggesting a game where you do nothing but kill other players, no crafting or PVE then I don't even know what the point would be.
You just can't wrap your head around the fact that punishing random PVP is just another part of risk vs. reward like you claim you want. You play an outlaw to rob people the risk is you maybe imprisoned if you lose.
Gameplay choices to restrict or punish something is not because it's bad but wanting to control gameplay.
Over and over again. Why you play like outlaw? See you just take a game, and say this is how the things are. Let say you are not an outlaw, and the goal in the game is to beat more players. What will you suggest then?
Also risk vs reward. OK. You say the risk for PK should be higher, so what will be the higher reward?
You just can't wrap your head around the fact that punishing random PVP is just another part of risk vs. reward like you claim you want. You play an outlaw to rob people the risk is you maybe imprisoned if you lose.
Gameplay choices to restrict or punish something is not because it's bad but wanting to control gameplay.
Over and over again. Why you play like outlaw? See you just take a game, and say this is how the things are. Let say you are not an outlaw, and the goal in the game is to beat more players. What will you suggest then?
Also risk vs reward. OK. You say the risk for PK should be higher, so what will be the higher reward?
Ok, so you want to compare games like CS, COD, etc to MMORPGs? Great that makes zero sense. In a pvp game where the ONLY thing to do is PvP such as most shooters, all MOBA's (that I am aware of) to an MMORPG where you can hunt PvE, craft, gather and you think that the PvP in an MMORPG, a PKer should not be punished? Then where is the risk vs reward that you claim you want? If I can run around PKing crafters all day with no real chance of being punished there is no risk whatsoever, only reward, which btw will become boring as all hell in very short order.
Again, you present weak arguments, strawmen, because you keep wanting to change what is, into your version of what is and you are simply wrong as you don't understand the basic concepts of games as they are right now. You need risk Vs reward on all sides of the design.
The gatherer is hoping to get what he needs to make the epic gear, the PKer is hoping to kill him so she can have the loot for herself, and the bounty hunter is hoping to catch and defeat the Pk in order to get her reward. They are all taking a risk in the hope of a reward.
In a straight up PvP game, where the ONLY goal is to defeat the other team (or person) the risk is pitting your skill vs theirs and hoping to win. Its called competition and its been around since right after masturbation were discovered. Look it up.
At any rate, comparing PvP games to MMORPGs with PvP is asinine.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
You just can't wrap your head around the fact that punishing random PVP is just another part of risk vs. reward like you claim you want. You play an outlaw to rob people the risk is you maybe imprisoned if you lose.
Gameplay choices to restrict or punish something is not because it's bad but wanting to control gameplay.
Over and over again. Why you play like outlaw? See you just take a game, and say this is how the things are. Let say you are not an outlaw, and the goal in the game is to beat more players. What will you suggest then?
Also risk vs reward. OK. You say the risk for PK should be higher, so what will be the higher reward?
The reward for PK with full loot is higher. Again and again you are talking about a very specific you issue. It's the game you built up in your minds issue.
No I'm talking about certain features. Now, you probably imagine some game. I do not, as I think abstract, so I do not need my fingers to count.
OK, the attacker gets full loot as reward if the attack succeed. But if it does not, will the defender take full loot too? Then the reward will be equal, so why the attacker should be punished? Also, let say there is a jail system - which is a stupid thing in general for game design, there are exclusions of course. How the game will entertain the player while he is in the jail? Do not forget - we are talking about games.
If crafting is bad why punish it by not making resource gather realistic instead of having to wall node to node to waste time? It's a game play choice. Why hold out raiders from doing raids but once a week? Game play choice.
This is not punishment. It is not even risk. The grind and the waiting are lazy ways to give longevity to the game. Sad, but most developers use exactly these ways. I'm curious if you see the grind and the waiting as punishment, why you play such games?
Are you and @Wizardry the same person different accounts? I am honestly starting to think so.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Darkfall is in my opinion the best online gaming experience I've ever had. So what failed? No marketing, a terrible company that didn't communicate with their community, lack of sandbox elements.
What worked in Darkfall? The combat and full loot PvP. That was so intense that it left us shaking due to all the adrenaline. Name one game that provides that experience.
Darkfall is in my opinion the best online gaming experience I've ever had. So what failed? No marketing, a terrible company that didn't communicate with their community, lack of sandbox elements.
What worked in Darkfall? The combat and full loot PvP. That was so intense that it left us shaking due to all the adrenaline. Name one game that provides that experience.
Ultima Online. Darkfall called itself a sandbox, when in reality is was a a giant ffa arena that required grinding. Indie Devs keep missing what a sandbox is and improperly labeling games that have ffa pvp or no levels as a sandbox. Most gamers under 30 have probably never played a real mmorpg sandbox
I tried Darkfall... It was like they took everything that made UO sustainable out and added more of everything that made it tedious. Dark fall was a travel simulator at it's core
Asherons Call (Darktide) had pvp done right. full loot and skill based. If an indi dev. made a game that implemented as much freedom as a game made 20 years ago im sure it would be a hit. The problem with most mmorpgs in my opinion are these dam linear quest. WOW IMO dumb downed the genre and killed the figure the shiat out yourself feel of a game.
Asherons Call (Darktide) had pvp done right. full loot and skill based. If an indi dev. made a game that implemented as much freedom as a game made 20 years ago im sure it would be a hit. The problem with most mmorpgs in my opinion are these dam linear quest. WOW IMO dumb downed the genre and killed the figure the shiat out yourself feel of a game.
I didn’t play AC but weren’t players able to use trinkets to prevent some item loss? I think any system that softened the blow would be good for player retention.
Darkfall is in my opinion the best online gaming experience I've ever had. So what failed? No marketing, a terrible company that didn't communicate with their community, lack of sandbox elements.
What worked in Darkfall? The combat and full loot PvP. That was so intense that it left us shaking due to all the adrenaline. Name one game that provides that experience.
Ultima Online. Darkfall called itself a sandbox, when in reality is was a a giant ffa arena that required grinding. Indie Devs keep missing what a sandbox is and improperly labeling games that have ffa pvp or no levels as a sandbox. Most gamers under 30 have probably never played a real mmorpg sandbox
I tried Darkfall... It was like they took everything that made UO sustainable out and added more of everything that made it tedious. Dark fall was a travel simulator at it's core
Yeah, sadly too young for Ultima Online. The politics and teamplay made Darkfall for me. I bet I would have loved Ultima.
Darkfall is in my opinion the best online gaming experience I've ever had. So what failed? No marketing, a terrible company that didn't communicate with their community, lack of sandbox elements.
What worked in Darkfall? The combat and full loot PvP. That was so intense that it left us shaking due to all the adrenaline. Name one game that provides that experience.
Ultima Online. Darkfall called itself a sandbox, when in reality is was a a giant ffa arena that required grinding. Indie Devs keep missing what a sandbox is and improperly labeling games that have ffa pvp or no levels as a sandbox. Most gamers under 30 have probably never played a real mmorpg sandbox
I tried Darkfall... It was like they took everything that made UO sustainable out and added more of everything that made it tedious. Dark fall was a travel simulator at it's core
Yeah, sadly too young for Ultima Online. The politics and teamplay made Darkfall for me. I bet I would have loved Ultima.
Maybe, maybe not. I couldn’t get into it due to how you controlled the character and graphics style. That makes a difference to me and it’s unfortunate because UO had everything else I wanted. When DF came along it wasn’t the prettiest, but the style was good enough and character control was top notch.
I want full loot for the sake of realism vs. artificial barriers. But I also want a Justice System that punishes repeated "crime" and a wide scope of Factions.
I think there's a huge market-in-waiting for a game that doesn't have rampant PKing, but does have freedom and the ability to play it out without artificial barriers.
People'll just whine if they are punished for pking and looting people.
Some would. Tough shjt. If you're going to lose players, lose the ones that will keep that downward spiral going. And all games lose players. The question is how many.
It's just my experience playing this type of game. Anytime the developer put punishment for gankers, the forum is full of whining on the forum.
That being said, I heard numerous times GW2 is too easy on this forum. But all I hear is QQing on GW2 forum that the expansion is too hard.
But what kind of punishment you have in mind for gankers in FFA full loot game?
Not for one minute do I believe you played “this type” of game that was made in the last 15 years. Your assumption on the topic are way off.
Punishment - jail, prison, death (terrible debuff that last for days). All I enforced by player bounty hunters
Wushu by far has the best justice system I believe the genre has seen. Complete with jail breaks bribery beheadings etc. Their system allowed culture to be formed. In this FFA world we all knew right from wrong.
What some here are missing is pvp without risk and reward is meaningless. Why kill a lowbie and risk hours in jail. Now what if your at war with the faction, or guild the lowbie is in? What if he’s transporting goods? Is the risk worth the reward?
Asherons Call (Darktide) had pvp done right. full loot and skill based. If an indi dev. made a game that implemented as much freedom as a game made 20 years ago im sure it would be a hit. The problem with most mmorpgs in my opinion are these dam linear quest. WOW IMO dumb downed the genre and killed the figure the shiat out yourself feel of a game.
In AC1 you could use easy to get items, like massive mana charges, to cover all your valuables and make them zero chance to drop on death.
And even then, the game would have failed without the PvE servers. DT at its peak population was less than 8% of the total player base, any many played DT occasionally, having their mains on a PvE server.
But you're right, the way Turbine did it was right. Give the minority a PvP server, and let the majority enjoy the game away from those who roleplay psychos on the PvP server. That's how UO was also forced to do it finally. That's how it should be done if you want your game to succeed.
I take it you didnt play darktide much. keep loosing high value stones and it will hurt your pocket. The fact that all servers in ac eventually added pvp content proves that its a great feature for the genre. PVE mmorpgs are pretty much dead on release IMO. The gaming world has moved on to a more competitive player base. That's why mobile is making so much money on shitty games. People want to win and progress at a competitive level. But I do agree that developers should have extreme pvp and casual pvp servers.
Comments
Ironically I think most of them are subscription or premium base.
And the whole point is to stop too many ganking. Because you don't want too much of it. There are people play the game to pve. How much they pve is beside the question. But you don't want half of the server to be outlawed so it make sense you put restriction on to it.
And it's the same story with Vermillian_Raventhal's comments.
I'm not wasting time explaining it all to you again and again, nor am I going to go through your posts and point out the many things that don't apply, or the many intentional misconceptions you use to muddy the waters.
Once upon a time....
Gameplay choices to restrict or punish something is not because it's bad but wanting to control gameplay.
If you are asking why gankers should take more loss to people getting ganked... I'm not sure if I said they should...
But overall I think there should be mechanism to stop "too many ganking". Because you don't want people getting ganked 50 times a day that they can't pve at all. And you don't want a game where half of the server are gankers.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
I think what people meant is "wolf" death penalty should be higher. Not necessary pk.
In most FFA PVP games you have world building and clan building as the goal. I have never heard of a MMORPG where the only goal is to beat other players. Most PVP who are going to run around doing Quake style PVP are not playing MMORPG because honestly they suck gameplay wise. Too many technical limitations, power gaps, grind and other limitations that usually come with the genre. Easier to play battle royal, FPS, MOBA that will have less limitations and loss. They get straight to the point.
You again are talking about something imagined only in you head vs. people talking about typical general theoretical and hypothetical MMORPG ideas
Do you understand that people have different levels of interest in PVP? Yes or no.
Do you understand that unrestrained PVP will drive vast majority of other PVP types? Yes or no.
Do you understand that in games with mixed PVE and PVP gameplay that 99% of the player base want PVP overpowers and dominates other playstyle choices? Yes or no.
You know you can not force anyone to craft or force anyone to PVE in most cases. You can force someone to PVP. Those who can not do what they want will eventually quit. It is not a hard concept. If you step suggesting a game where you do nothing but kill other players, no crafting or PVE then I don't even know what the point would be.
Again, you present weak arguments, strawmen, because you keep wanting to change what is, into your version of what is and you are simply wrong as you don't understand the basic concepts of games as they are right now. You need risk Vs reward on all sides of the design.
The gatherer is hoping to get what he needs to make the epic gear, the PKer is hoping to kill him so she can have the loot for herself, and the bounty hunter is hoping to catch and defeat the Pk in order to get her reward. They are all taking a risk in the hope of a reward.
In a straight up PvP game, where the ONLY goal is to defeat the other team (or person) the risk is pitting your skill vs theirs and hoping to win. Its called competition and its been around since right after masturbation were discovered. Look it up.
At any rate, comparing PvP games to MMORPGs with PvP is asinine.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
What worked in Darkfall? The combat and full loot PvP. That was so intense that it left us shaking due to all the adrenaline. Name one game that provides that experience.
I tried Darkfall... It was like they took everything that made UO sustainable out and added more of everything that made it tedious. Dark fall was a travel simulator at it's core
I bet I would have loved Ultima.
Punishment - jail, prison, death (terrible debuff that last for days). All I enforced by player bounty hunters
Wushu by far has the best justice system I believe the genre has seen. Complete with jail breaks bribery beheadings etc.
Their system allowed culture to be formed. In this FFA world we all knew right from wrong.
What some here are missing is pvp without risk and reward is meaningless. Why kill a lowbie and risk hours in jail. Now what if your at war with the faction, or guild the lowbie is in? What if he’s transporting goods? Is the risk worth the reward?
Just my opinion. Probably biased as well =P