So at the olympics we should just give everyone gold medals for participating? Have each contestant compete against an AI since we don't want to hurt anyone's feelings if they lose to another contestant? There has to be a loser for anyone to be a winner, or else what is there to be proud of when you win? I don't get it. I just don't see the fun in that sort of gameplay in an MMORPG, thats what single player games are for; and there's probably a far more engaging story in the single player game.
I'm not representing my country and being paid by sponsors while playing an MMORPG. Remember: every athlete at the Olympics trained for years with the intent of going to the Olympics, which is solely a competive event. In contrast, gamers just downloaded a client from Steam or the game site.
I agree with you that if you play MMORPGs as solo experiences, you'd be better served going offline where the game is built around your actions alone.
But many more people want a chill PvE experience than want a brutal PvP experience in an MMORPG. And any game that caters to both must acknowledge that nobody is playing for points here- it's solely about having fun. If your fun requires snuffing someone else's fun out, but their fun does not, it is natural that devs will err on the side of catering to their tastes more than yours, because that's good business.
This is why most MMORPGs sequester their PvP to instances or separate zones: generally, gamers don't like being forced into a competitive game when they just want to play the cooperative parts.
Let me ask you a couple of questions: 1: Can you think of a single advantage the caravan has... even one? 2: How many times would you have to lose hours of crafting work to PKs such that you'd never use a caravan again?
I pointed out a few different examples rather than just the UO one but I'll entertain:
1) The caravan has the goods, the reason they are being hunted. Why they would need an advantage is a little lost on me. 2) Crafting in a game isn't work to me, if I am looking at a game and thinking of it as work then I've already lost the game.
I am well aware of how these systems have been abused over time for example, huge guilds that travel from game to game and have 50-man raids on said caravan. I don't claim to have the fixes for these issues, but I also don't believe in guild vs guild optional pvp either. If pvp is optional then it will always result in no one ever taking anything useful into combat and therefore, there is never a reward for pvp other than epeen. I would much prefer people banding together to fend off the 50-man raid of their caravan over optional pvp on the caravan and never gaining anything from it.
In asking for an advantage for the caravan what I meant was in a PvP situation the PK has an enormous set of advantages. Given that, why would anyone take on the role of a caravan and fight at a disadvantage?
As for crafting being work - I doubt you've ever crafted in any game just to throw away all of the benefits it should give you (wealth, status, etc).
My problem with PKs isn't that death happen, rather, it is the enormous advantages they bring in games like UO.
For me personally, the frustration was I had no way to counter what the PKs were doing. Even if I managed to kill one of them he could literally be back in minutes fully geared and ready to mess up my evening. Killing them accomplished nothing.
I think it is possible to come up with systems that help counter the advantages that PKs have but I've yet to see a developer do so in a way I find appealing. I think "limited lives" on a PK would do quite a bit to get bounty hunters interested in hunting these guys down - especially if you got a trophy for landing the final kill.
The idea may suck in practice... I dunno, let's come up with something though.
Bah , we took advantage of the PKS thirst on Atlantic at that time by running Fake Caravans ..Was fun as hell , but we were laying traps for PKs all over ... During those times..
UO is a game wherethe tools were/are there for the players to combat the PKs , you just needed to organize and do it ..The reason Pks got an advantage most times is they were better organized than many players , we recognized and changed that..
By 98 we had assembled a good bunch of 7x players ( are core was 8) with other groups involved at times we 20-30 players patrolling g or setting traos for PKs all over Atlantic. Fun times ..
The reason you they had the advantage is ...You let them have it ... We took it away and turned the tables on them ..
It was more fun back then 97-2002 or so than it is now ..
I still , along with my guild do alot of stuff In Felluca, we run dungeons there for rares, drop rates are better , as well as resource and skill gain bonuses, but there is no where near the action there was years ago , but it's just enough that you better have your senses about you, or become a victim ..
That is fun for people who enjoy PvP. Not so fun for people trying to enjoy the game in other ways.
Crafters/life skillers can stay at home without fear of dying, while the PvPers can go out and bring back the materials for the folks at home. There's a place for everyone in these types of games. There is quite a repertoire of PvE focused MMORPGs for the people that disagree, but very very few PvP MMORPGs where us bloodthirsty savages can reside.
The problem with the idea that 'PvPers can bring back materials for the crafters' is that PvPers are also the high level crafters in many games. They go out, gather mats, come back, and use them. Maybe they will give away the low-level stuff. That's a significant downfall to the everyone-can-do-everything system that many games use.
I really don't want to role play a cog in the military industrial machine.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
So at the olympics we should just give everyone gold medals for participating? Have each contestant compete against an AI since we don't want to hurt anyone's feelings if they lose to another contestant? There has to be a loser for anyone to be a winner, or else what is there to be proud of when you win? I don't get it. I just don't see the fun in that sort of gameplay in an MMORPG, thats what single player games are for; and there's probably a far more engaging story in the single player game.
Most athletes compete against themselves. For every track star at the Olympics there are millions that run road races for fun.
If going for a simple jog meant that a faster runner could jump you, knock you down, and take your fit bit and then run off and sell it on eBay how many joggers do you think there would be?
(I mostly responded not because you don't understand that, you clearly do, but because the analogy made me LOL)
I sometimes jog with a .380 Mustang & pepper spray. Any other runners thinking to jump me will be rudely surprised.
Some carebears have teeth...(and always carry a spare clip.)
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
So at the olympics we should just give everyone gold medals for participating? Have each contestant compete against an AI since we don't want to hurt anyone's feelings if they lose to another contestant? There has to be a loser for anyone to be a winner, or else what is there to be proud of when you win? I don't get it. I just don't see the fun in that sort of gameplay in an MMORPG, thats what single player games are for; and there's probably a far more engaging story in the single player game.
Most athletes compete against themselves. For every track star at the Olympics there are millions that run road races for fun.
If going for a simple jog meant that a faster runner could jump you, knock you down, and take your fit bit and then run off and sell it on eBay how many joggers do you think there would be?
(I mostly responded not because you don't understand that, you clearly do, but because the analogy made me LOL)
I sometimes jog with a .380 Mustang & pepper spray. Any other runners thinking to jump me will be rudely surprised.
Some carebears have teeth...(and always carry a spare clip.)
I'd worry about knockdown power with that. But I guess you know your accuracy better than me. And it is hard to conceal carry that .357. Though where I am, everyone can go out publicly loaded for bear now.
I expect the RW pvp stats to start moving up here.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Let me ask you a couple of questions: 1: Can you think of a single advantage the caravan has... even one? 2: How many times would you have to lose hours of crafting work to PKs such that you'd never use a caravan again?
I pointed out a few different examples rather than just the UO one but I'll entertain:
1) The caravan has the goods, the reason they are being hunted. Why they would need an advantage is a little lost on me. 2) Crafting in a game isn't work to me, if I am looking at a game and thinking of it as work then I've already lost the game.
I am well aware of how these systems have been abused over time for example, huge guilds that travel from game to game and have 50-man raids on said caravan. I don't claim to have the fixes for these issues, but I also don't believe in guild vs guild optional pvp either. If pvp is optional then it will always result in no one ever taking anything useful into combat and therefore, there is never a reward for pvp other than epeen. I would much prefer people banding together to fend off the 50-man raid of their caravan over optional pvp on the caravan and never gaining anything from it.
In asking for an advantage for the caravan what I meant was in a PvP situation the PK has an enormous set of advantages. Given that, why would anyone take on the role of a caravan and fight at a disadvantage?
As for crafting being work - I doubt you've ever crafted in any game just to throw away all of the benefits it should give you (wealth, status, etc).
My problem with PKs isn't that death happen, rather, it is the enormous advantages they bring in games like UO.
For me personally, the frustration was I had no way to counter what the PKs were doing. Even if I managed to kill one of them he could literally be back in minutes fully geared and ready to mess up my evening. Killing them accomplished nothing.
I think it is possible to come up with systems that help counter the advantages that PKs have but I've yet to see a developer do so in a way I find appealing. I think "limited lives" on a PK would do quite a bit to get bounty hunters interested in hunting these guys down - especially if you got a trophy for landing the final kill.
The idea may suck in practice... I dunno, let's come up with something though.
Bah , we took advantage of the PKS thirst on Atlantic at that time by running Fake Caravans ..Was fun as hell , but we were laying traps for PKs all over ... During those times..
UO is a game wherethe tools were/are there for the players to combat the PKs , you just needed to organize and do it ..The reason Pks got an advantage most times is they were better organized than many players , we recognized and changed that..
By 98 we had assembled a good bunch of 7x players ( are core was 8) with other groups involved at times we 20-30 players patrolling g or setting traos for PKs all over Atlantic. Fun times ..
The reason you they had the advantage is ...You let them have it ... We took it away and turned the tables on them ..
It was more fun back then 97-2002 or so than it is now ..
I still , along with my guild do alot of stuff In Felluca, we run dungeons there for rares, drop rates are better , as well as resource and skill gain bonuses, but there is no where near the action there was years ago , but it's just enough that you better have your senses about you, or become a victim ..
That is fun for people who enjoy PvP. Not so fun for people trying to enjoy the game in other ways.
Crafters/life skillers can stay at home without fear of dying, while the PvPers can go out and bring back the materials for the folks at home. There's a place for everyone in these types of games. There is quite a repertoire of PvE focused MMORPGs for the people that disagree, but very very few PvP MMORPGs where us bloodthirsty savages can reside.
There's a fundamental reason for that. PvP requires a player to lose. PvE does not.
Yeah, the UO brass already talked about how the game was bleeding subs due to PVP griefers and gankers, and only the implementation of Trammel saved things. I know Origin staffers of the period, and they were tearing their hair out weekly at the clever exploits of g&g crews.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
So at the olympics we should just give everyone gold medals for participating? Have each contestant compete against an AI since we don't want to hurt anyone's feelings if they lose to another contestant? There has to be a loser for anyone to be a winner, or else what is there to be proud of when you win? I don't get it. I just don't see the fun in that sort of gameplay in an MMORPG, thats what single player games are for; and there's probably a far more engaging story in the single player game.
Most athletes compete against themselves. For every track star at the Olympics there are millions that run road races for fun.
If going for a simple jog meant that a faster runner could jump you, knock you down, and take your fit bit and then run off and sell it on eBay how many joggers do you think there would be?
(I mostly responded not because you don't understand that, you clearly do, but because the analogy made me LOL)
I sometimes jog with a .380 Mustang & pepper spray. Any other runners thinking to jump me will be rudely surprised.
Some carebears have teeth...(and always carry a spare clip.)
I'd worry about knockdown power with that. But I guess you know your accuracy better than me. And it is hard to conceal carry that .357. Though where I am, everyone can go out publicly loaded for bear now.
I expect the RW pvp stats to start moving up here.
Trying to find a Rhino .357 to shoot to see if I like it....if so, I'll find a way to conceal carry.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
So at the olympics we should just give everyone gold medals for participating? Have each contestant compete against an AI since we don't want to hurt anyone's feelings if they lose to another contestant? There has to be a loser for anyone to be a winner, or else what is there to be proud of when you win? I don't get it. I just don't see the fun in that sort of gameplay in an MMORPG, thats what single player games are for; and there's probably a far more engaging story in the single player game.
Most athletes compete against themselves. For every track star at the Olympics there are millions that run road races for fun.
If going for a simple jog meant that a faster runner could jump you, knock you down, and take your fit bit and then run off and sell it on eBay how many joggers do you think there would be?
(I mostly responded not because you don't understand that, you clearly do, but because the analogy made me LOL)
I sometimes jog with a .380 Mustang & pepper spray. Any other runners thinking to jump me will be rudely surprised.
Some carebears have teeth...(and always carry a spare clip.)
I'd worry about knockdown power with that. But I guess you know your accuracy better than me. And it is hard to conceal carry that .357. Though where I am, everyone can go out publicly loaded for bear now.
I expect the RW pvp stats to start moving up here.
Trying to find a Rhino .357 to shoot to see if I like it....if so, I'll find a way to conceal carry.
There is quite a repertoire of PvE focused MMORPGs for the people that disagree, but very very few PvP MMORPGs where us bloodthirsty savages can reside.
LOL there are plenty of PVP MMORPGs over the years, just most of them are completely dead or failed. Mortal online 2 is calling your name right now.
Why it seems there are more PVE MMORPGS is because most of them are still alive, or are PVP games that transitioned to PVE over time.
"Meanwhile as soon as you commit a severe crime (PK or lawfull npc
killing) a mission is generated to all the players in the server that
pays a nice sum for your bounty."
This was tried befroe in the past...it fails miserably...Why?...Because players would get the bounty then have another of their accounts or friends go claim the bounty...It doesn't work.
Fundamentally, a bounty attracts people to the criminal. Which gives the criminal exactly what they are looking for -- another fight. That's essentially rewarding the bad behavior.
That may be fine (I'm not for that), but what is the opposite? How does the game reward the law abiding players?
I would say let the PVE player be able to to randomly obtain a buff while PVEing, that lasts a reasonable amount of time. The buff is invisible to others. This buff will activate when attacked by a player and will automatically call down guards that will defend and easily kill the perpetrator. The person who attacked will be lootable.
Buff only works if you are attacked first.
Yeah I would love to hear the risk vs reward argument from these griefers for this mechanic.
PVE'ers have risk because they have to PVE without this buff to get the buff. Griefers have risk, because they don't know when they attack whether or not the person is being guarded. So everyone has a chance for reward, and equivalent risk.
So as a griefer, when you see that lonely miner, ask yourself is it going to be worth it.
Interesting idea, but it doesn't encourage the PvP player from joining the PvE player. A buff only as a mild deterrent to the PvP activity. If this invisible buff is powerful enough, there is a danger that a PvP player could look at obtaining this buff as a 'prerequisite' for starting their PvP.
The nature of PvP is that the PvP player determines when, where, and who will join them. It's a very one-sided dynamic. Where's the same game play that forces the PvE (or RP) game play on another player? How does the PvE player make the PvP player stop what they are doing and help them mine?
Well it doesn't matter if the PVP gets the buff or not, because they have to be attacked first for it to work. It could be made to go away if they attack first or leave the zone. I don't see it being that useful to a ganker.
As far as grouping/social mechanics, I am all about finding creative ways for games to encourage grouping. Socializing and grouping is an important foundation of MMO's in my opinion and I think devs should be incentivizing people working together, and they should solve it from multiple angles.
There is quite a repertoire of PvE focused MMORPGs for the people that disagree, but very very few PvP MMORPGs where us bloodthirsty savages can reside.
LOL there are plenty of PVP MMORPGs over the years, just most of them are completely dead or failed. Mortal online 2 is calling your name right now.
Why it seems there are more PVE MMORPGS is because most of them are still alive, or are PVP games that transitioned to PVE over time.
Swords of Legends Online.
Also Riders of Icarus or Shroud of the Avatar. And note that I am not putting P:G there, although even this fits your bill, because I do not consider it a failure.
Population Zero, Legends of Aria and Worlds Adrift added PVE rulesets and still failed. Jury is still up for New World.
A bad game is bad and will fail, regardless of being PVP or PVE.
Well adding PVE after the fact is a nonstarter for many now. Didn't legends of Aria Dev actually say publicly that they were purposely adding PVE to bait sheep to come play then switch on them? Switching after your game is in the dump, yeah so typical, I have no respect for that.
Also sure if you make a PVE game bad enough it can fail, I will not deny that. But PVE games do seem to have the best track record for MMO's.
There is quite a repertoire of PvE focused MMORPGs for the people that disagree, but very very few PvP MMORPGs where us bloodthirsty savages can reside.
LOL there are plenty of PVP MMORPGs over the years, just most of them are completely dead or failed. Mortal online 2 is calling your name right now.
Why it seems there are more PVE MMORPGS is because most of them are still alive, or are PVP games that transitioned to PVE over time.
Swords of Legends Online.
Also Riders of Icarus or Shroud of the Avatar. And note that I am not putting P:G there, although even this fits your bill, because I do not consider it a failure.
Population Zero, Legends of Aria and Worlds Adrift added PVE rulesets and still failed. Jury is still up for New World.
A bad game is bad and will fail, regardless of being PVP or PVE.
Well adding PVE after the fact is a nonstarter for many now. Didn't legends of Aria Dev actually say publicly that they were purposely adding PVE to bait sheep to come play then switch on them? Switching after your game is in the dump, yeah so typical, I have no respect for that.
Also sure if you make a PVE game bad enough it can fail, I will not deny that. But PVE games do seem to have the best track record for MMO's.
Worlds Adrift did something like, very hardcore gank game at launch which they refused to yield on before release.
Read several reviews from people who prefer such games, gankers even who felt it was way too over the top for even their liking.
So they tried to walk it back, add PVE, safe zones, which drew in very few new players, and drove off the few remaining PVPers as well.
No one won in the end as it shut down in pretty quick time.
The thing is, had it been more forgiving at launch I might have given it a go. By the time they finally did it was too late, I could see there was no saving the game so I didn't bother.
Found a nice farewell video from when the game closed in 2019.
Although those graphics.... normally not a concern to me but...DAOC says hello I think.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I think the problem is that the PvE and PvP crowds fight without ever having a good long discussion about what they enjoy in a game and finding ways to make sure players get what is wanted.
For example, many times PvP players are punished for PvP when I think the better solution is to find what they want and give them more of it. One idea is bounty hunters with a special skillset to find PKs. Keep the PKs busy, I say... too busy to hunt noobs.
Now some people want anti-social things - those guys cannot be helped - but this occurs on both sides of the spectrum. The anti-social PvE players are as much of a problem as PKs, and as such, caving to their demands is bad for a game.
When I think about what I want I come to the realization that I like the idea of PKs (even though I detest PvP) but, it has to be in an environment with enough options to make clever escapes possible AND failing that, I need a way to reach out and punish a PK (place bounties, raise prices upon, etc).
There is no "problem", just different games for different tastes. And most of the times anti-social behaviour translates to "I do not like your playstyle in your game that is made for that playstyle" (note the "most"!)
If devs do not want pkers attacking new players specifically (and devs should want to protect their new players) they can code it out using starter areas or security spaces EVE style and that's it.
Yup , this is the problem .. PVE players need to stay out of PVP games simple as that ..
I think the problem is that the PvE and PvP crowds fight without ever having a good long discussion about what they enjoy in a game and finding ways to make sure players get what is wanted.
For example, many times PvP players are punished for PvP when I think the better solution is to find what they want and give them more of it. One idea is bounty hunters with a special skillset to find PKs. Keep the PKs busy, I say... too busy to hunt noobs.
Now some people want anti-social things - those guys cannot be helped - but this occurs on both sides of the spectrum. The anti-social PvE players are as much of a problem as PKs, and as such, caving to their demands is bad for a game.
When I think about what I want I come to the realization that I like the idea of PKs (even though I detest PvP) but, it has to be in an environment with enough options to make clever escapes possible AND failing that, I need a way to reach out and punish a PK (place bounties, raise prices upon, etc).
There is no "problem", just different games for different tastes. And most of the times anti-social behaviour translates to "I do not like your playstyle in your game that is made for that playstyle" (note the "most"!)
If devs do not want pkers attacking new players specifically (and devs should want to protect their new players) they can code it out using starter areas or security spaces EVE style and that's it.
I don't care for zones, color coded mobs, and the like. I understand why these things exist.
However, that doesn't keep me from wanting open world PvP such that the game is designed in a way where a player could go kill noobs in a starter area but the incentives to spend time doing something else are far greater.
Starter zones are what we get when developers run out of will/ideas.
But that essentially lessens the whole pvp/pk things. If an activity is to be lessened then why have it?
I do like the idea of consequences for a player's actions.
I think it was Brainy, somewhere above, who taled about a debuff.
I always thought that there should be a similar thing where, if a player who vastly out matched another player, were to attack that player, there could be a 30% chance of some sort of retribution curse, or the appearance of an immortal Avatar that would attack the pk'er.
This way the pk'er must really think it through as to whether or not he wants to take that chance.
If there is player killing then it's supposed to be fun because it's part of the game. Doesn't mean that it can't have its challenges though.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I think the problem is that the PvE and PvP crowds fight without ever having a good long discussion about what they enjoy in a game and finding ways to make sure players get what is wanted.
For example, many times PvP players are punished for PvP when I think the better solution is to find what they want and give them more of it. One idea is bounty hunters with a special skillset to find PKs. Keep the PKs busy, I say... too busy to hunt noobs.
Now some people want anti-social things - those guys cannot be helped - but this occurs on both sides of the spectrum. The anti-social PvE players are as much of a problem as PKs, and as such, caving to their demands is bad for a game.
When I think about what I want I come to the realization that I like the idea of PKs (even though I detest PvP) but, it has to be in an environment with enough options to make clever escapes possible AND failing that, I need a way to reach out and punish a PK (place bounties, raise prices upon, etc).
There is no "problem", just different games for different tastes. And most of the times anti-social behaviour translates to "I do not like your playstyle in your game that is made for that playstyle" (note the "most"!)
If devs do not want pkers attacking new players specifically (and devs should want to protect their new players) they can code it out using starter areas or security spaces EVE style and that's it.
I don't care for zones, color coded mobs, and the like. I understand why these things exist.
However, that doesn't keep me from wanting open world PvP such that the game is designed in a way where a player could go kill noobs in a starter area but the incentives to spend time doing something else are far greater.
Starter zones are what we get when developers run out of will/ideas.
But that essentially lessens the whole pvp/pk things. If an activity is to be lessened then why have it?
I do like the idea of consequences for a player's actions.
I think it was Brainy, somewhere above, who taled about a debuff.
I always thought that there should be a similar thing where, if a player who vastly out matched another player, were to attack that player, there could be a 30% chance of some sort of retribution curse, or the appearance of an immortal Avatar that would attack the pk'er.
This way the pk'er must really think it through as to whether or not he wants to take that chance.
If there is player killing then it's supposed to be fun because it's part of the game. Doesn't mean that it can't have its challenges though.
I like the idea of a murdered player, as a ghost (think UO) being able to follow a murderer around and pop out of hiding and land a few attacks at the ghost's discretion. The ghosts on any one murderer would be able to see each other and coordinate.
Also, I'd like players to be able to hire NPCs to find and kill PKS. The more you spend the more effective the NPC can be.
Yeah, I like that as well.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I think the problem is that the PvE and PvP crowds fight without ever having a good long discussion about what they enjoy in a game and finding ways to make sure players get what is wanted.
For example, many times PvP players are punished for PvP when I think the better solution is to find what they want and give them more of it. One idea is bounty hunters with a special skillset to find PKs. Keep the PKs busy, I say... too busy to hunt noobs.
Now some people want anti-social things - those guys cannot be helped - but this occurs on both sides of the spectrum. The anti-social PvE players are as much of a problem as PKs, and as such, caving to their demands is bad for a game.
When I think about what I want I come to the realization that I like the idea of PKs (even though I detest PvP) but, it has to be in an environment with enough options to make clever escapes possible AND failing that, I need a way to reach out and punish a PK (place bounties, raise prices upon, etc).
There is no "problem", just different games for different tastes. And most of the times anti-social behaviour translates to "I do not like your playstyle in your game that is made for that playstyle" (note the "most"!)
If devs do not want pkers attacking new players specifically (and devs should want to protect their new players) they can code it out using starter areas or security spaces EVE style and that's it.
I don't care for zones, color coded mobs, and the like. I understand why these things exist.
However, that doesn't keep me from wanting open world PvP such that the game is designed in a way where a player could go kill noobs in a starter area but the incentives to spend time doing something else are far greater.
Starter zones are what we get when developers run out of will/ideas.
For too many people though their enjoyment is ruining someone els's game...That is their fun....THey dont want a fair fight....They want to dominate against someone that has zero chance of ever killing them....
For too many people though their enjoyment is ruining someone els's game...That is their fun....THey dont want a fair fight....They want to dominate against someone that has zero chance of ever killing them....
If you look at a single fight, yes. If you zoom out, no.
================================
Take the example of the highwaymen and the caravan from the previous page. As Wargfoot mentioned, the caravan has no advantage in that single encounter.
But maybe the caravan has 9 out of 10 successful runs because the map is too large to cover or because of successful scouting and has a huge net positive in gains.
Maybe the scouting/ambush is part of the two sides' skillset, and on a well-balanced game both players take part in that loop investing TIME (and not the naive: "gatherer is the only one who risks because they have the mats" - both invest time) and get some PROFIT out of it (the caravan from a number of successful runs and the PKers from successful ambushes).
================================
A real example: Albion gatherer vs ganker loop. Both have special gear, the ganker to gank/dismount and the gatherer to evade and run away. Skill and awareness will define whether the gatherer or the ganker goes away with the mats. The mats belong to neither until they reach the city. That's the fundamental part of the loop that PVEers can't understand, they think that because they harvested the mats, they belong to them. They ignore the whole loop because it does not fit their playstyle.
"But what if the gatherer is in guild territory and calls on a whole guild?"
================================
Saying in an OW PVP game that some people just like to attack players with 0 chance is very naïve, simplistic and disingenuous - just some players saying "our way of playing your game is better, you must play it our way"
The problem here is that the PKers don't have to attack, and they usually don't unless they have a clear advantage. And help is just a forum message away.
I think the problem is that the PvE and PvP crowds fight without ever having a good long discussion about what they enjoy in a game and finding ways to make sure players get what is wanted.
For example, many times PvP players are punished for PvP when I think the better solution is to find what they want and give them more of it. One idea is bounty hunters with a special skillset to find PKs. Keep the PKs busy, I say... too busy to hunt noobs.
Now some people want anti-social things - those guys cannot be helped - but this occurs on both sides of the spectrum. The anti-social PvE players are as much of a problem as PKs, and as such, caving to their demands is bad for a game.
When I think about what I want I come to the realization that I like the idea of PKs (even though I detest PvP) but, it has to be in an environment with enough options to make clever escapes possible AND failing that, I need a way to reach out and punish a PK (place bounties, raise prices upon, etc).
There is no "problem", just different games for different tastes. And most of the times anti-social behaviour translates to "I do not like your playstyle in your game that is made for that playstyle" (note the "most"!)
If devs do not want pkers attacking new players specifically (and devs should want to protect their new players) they can code it out using starter areas or security spaces EVE style and that's it.
Yup , this is the problem .. PVE players need to stay out of PVP games simple as that ..
Then those devs are consciously creating murder boxes, and we know how popular those are.
You can't hand-waive away the fact that people act more extreme in video games because the consequences for harassing another player via camping and such cannot reach the same level. This is why the while "players will police it!" idea hasn't been seriously considered by dev studios for a long, long time. You can't ignore basic human nature and expect to build a game wherein the mechanics aren't abused by the rotten apples to interrupt the fun of others. Check out New World's city tax system for a non-PvP combat example, even.
And if you're going to include PvE not *specifically* geared towards mere PvP prep, you're going to balance the interests of two types of players. That's not the player's fault imo.
Comments
I agree with you that if you play MMORPGs as solo experiences, you'd be better served going offline where the game is built around your actions alone.
But many more people want a chill PvE experience than want a brutal PvP experience in an MMORPG. And any game that caters to both must acknowledge that nobody is playing for points here- it's solely about having fun. If your fun requires snuffing someone else's fun out, but their fun does not, it is natural that devs will err on the side of catering to their tastes more than yours, because that's good business.
This is why most MMORPGs sequester their PvP to instances or separate zones: generally, gamers don't like being forced into a competitive game when they just want to play the cooperative parts.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Some carebears have teeth...(and always carry a spare clip.)
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I expect the RW pvp stats to start moving up here.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Once upon a time....
LOL there are plenty of PVP MMORPGs over the years, just most of them are completely dead or failed. Mortal online 2 is calling your name right now.
Why it seems there are more PVE MMORPGS is because most of them are still alive, or are PVP games that transitioned to PVE over time.
Well it doesn't matter if the PVP gets the buff or not, because they have to be attacked first for it to work. It could be made to go away if they attack first or leave the zone. I don't see it being that useful to a ganker.
As far as grouping/social mechanics, I am all about finding creative ways for games to encourage grouping. Socializing and grouping is an important foundation of MMO's in my opinion and I think devs should be incentivizing people working together, and they should solve it from multiple angles.
Also sure if you make a PVE game bad enough it can fail, I will not deny that. But PVE games do seem to have the best track record for MMO's.
Read several reviews from people who prefer such games, gankers even who felt it was way too over the top for even their liking.
So they tried to walk it back, add PVE, safe zones, which drew in very few new players, and drove off the few remaining PVPers as well.
No one won in the end as it shut down in pretty quick time.
The thing is, had it been more forgiving at launch I might have given it a go. By the time they finally did it was too late, I could see there was no saving the game so I didn't bother.
Found a nice farewell video from when the game closed in 2019.
Although those graphics.... normally not a concern to me but...DAOC says hello I think.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I do like the idea of consequences for a player's actions.
I think it was Brainy, somewhere above, who taled about a debuff.
I always thought that there should be a similar thing where, if a player who vastly out matched another player, were to attack that player, there could be a 30% chance of some sort of retribution curse, or the appearance of an immortal Avatar that would attack the pk'er.
This way the pk'er must really think it through as to whether or not he wants to take that chance.
If there is player killing then it's supposed to be fun because it's part of the game. Doesn't mean that it can't have its challenges though.
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
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
For too many people though their enjoyment is ruining someone els's game...That is their fun....THey dont want a fair fight....They want to dominate against someone that has zero chance of ever killing them....
And help is just a forum message away.
Once upon a time....
You can't hand-waive away the fact that people act more extreme in video games because the consequences for harassing another player via camping and such cannot reach the same level. This is why the while "players will police it!" idea hasn't been seriously considered by dev studios for a long, long time. You can't ignore basic human nature and expect to build a game wherein the mechanics aren't abused by the rotten apples to interrupt the fun of others. Check out New World's city tax system for a non-PvP combat example, even.
And if you're going to include PvE not *specifically* geared towards mere PvP prep, you're going to balance the interests of two types of players. That's not the player's fault imo.