Originally posted by ChrisMattern Originally posted by Darkchronic Will someone please to me why the fuck some retard decided to kill people who don't like PvP 'carebears'?
Because the kill-whores decided they needed a name that made people who didn't like being repeatedly ganked and robbed sound unreasonable.
Chris Mattern
Thank you Chris, A LOGICAL POST!
I sure as hell don't look like that.
--------------------------------------- No Userbar here, sorry to disappoint.
Also, one thing people don't seem to understand about PvP is that the world essentially governs itself. The idiots tend to flock together, and the more mature players do as well. In AC, I played on a white server. I went perma-PK (going red, without ever going white) at level 75. There was a large PvP community on the server I played on. You ended up knowing everyone's names. PvP played a huge part even in white guilds. Guilds would war against other guilds, and each guild had its idiots.
I'll use some examples to further prove my point about how PvP politics govern themselves. Politics with guilds made AC sooooo fun.
Guild 1 is warring with Guild 2. Guild 3 is neutral and has friends in both... Guild 1 and 2 KOS+L eachother.. Guild 3 isn't KOS to anyone. Its members are on an individual basis with each of the guilds. If certain people in either 1 or 2 have personal problems with anyone in 3, they're free to attack, and vice versa... the guilds as a whole don't dislike eachother.
Say you're in Guild 1. There is a guy you really can't stand in your guild.. he annoys the hell out of you, but you can't attack him. He does something to just absolutely piss you off... you're in a 2vs1 one day against someone of Guild 2, and you're forced to fight along side the guy you don't like. Finally, he breaks the last straw, and you say "Forget this..." so you turn on him. You and the other guy kill him... but, you don't like the other guy still, and he -is- of the rival guild.. So, you and him fight. Whoever wins that fight doesn't matter.. it's irrellevant to the point I'm making.
Now.. the guy in your guild goes to the officers of the guild and says you turned on him and killed him with the help of the guy from the other guild. Luckily, you're well liked in this guild and are one of their best PvPers. So, you threaten to leave the guild if this idiot stays. They kick him out for being an idiot in general, and because they don't want to lose you.
(We'll just call him Idiot) Idiot goes to Guild 3. Guild 2 won't take him because they don't like him because of some stuff he's done during 1 and 2's war. Suddenly, he's attacking 1 and 2 left and right. Guild 3 doesn't want to get in the middle of the war, and kicks him out. Idiot is now a loner. He either joins a no-name guild or does his own thing. Problem taken care of.
Idiots essentially take themselves out in a setting like this. They become non-factors. Granted, you can't take out every idiot by doing this. Some of the idiots are really good PvPers, and your guild may need them. This is just an example. Just because you're guilded with someone doesn't mean you have to like them. And the above example was given based off of things that happened on a -white- server. Meaning a non fully PvP server. Some of the best fun can happen on non-PvP servers.
I found once, that some of the people I'd fought against turned out to be cooler than a lot of people I'd been guilded with. I ended up leaving my guild for theirs, and found a better environment by doing so.
The game is what you make of it. Politics develope on their own in games like this. No system that game creators put into a game can match player-driven politics. If PvP were optional, yet still FFA, things would be so much more interesting in games. All a game has to do, is create a /duel option for people who don't want to go perma-PK in games, and the ability to switch PvP on and off with a short repeatable quest or something (similar to AC's praying at the two altars).
If PvP were optional, yet still fun enough to play a large part in the game as well as guild politics, games would be great. I can't wait till a game actually gets the proper balance between the two like old AC was.
Originally posted by chs5138 My question is why do people who don't like FFA PvP, play FFA PvP games? Saying that griefers/gankers are the reason why you got chased away isn't really true. The truth is the game was never really for you in the first place. If Shadowbane 2 were to come out tomorrow with no bugs there would be plenty of subscribers (of people who really enjoy FFA PvP). The problem is there would also be a lot of people who don't really fit the audience that this type of game is marketed too. They will get ganked and some will quit, and some will complain to the devs. The devs will change something makeing the people mad who fit the games audience and some will leave. It's people who really shouldn't be playing the game anyway that really hurts FFA PvP MMOs
Companies don't change thier game because the complainers aren't happy. They change the game because they don't want the complaners to leave. If the company didn't want the so called carebears in there game they wouldn't change a thing, they'd just laugh that they bought the game in the fist place.
FFA PvP is a small market, that's why it's dieing out.
Go to any game out there today and you will find a large percentage of pvp oriented players/guilds. Yes the reason games are blending pvp and pve/questing is to open to a larger audience. Yet at the same time if you can't handle a game where pvp is possible no matter where you go in the "world," except for a very few safe zones maybe for farmers/crafters etc. then you need to learn to build better toons. If your getting zerged by other guilds you have to learn politics and form alliances.
Play in your little make-believe doll house if you like, but when you step off of your nicely made little plot o' land grab some balls and come play with those of us who like a challenge beyond that of beating an AI.
Originally posted by Entreri28 Oh good, someone that doesn't enjoy challenge. Why do you even care about posting in a pvp thread if you don't like it?
FFA PvP in a MMORPG is NOT a challenge. It's generally an uneven contest one way or another, and it has the added drawback of encouraging griefing. It has NO redeeming features...FULL STOP.
PS. I thought the thread was about the DEATH of FFA PvP...that's why I'm here...to see, and revel in it!
^^^
This is what we in Shadowbane call a carebear
^^^
And this is what we in the REAL WORLD call conceit and arrogance...
Face it, it's people like you with your namecalling and arrogant disregard for other players, that have screwed FFA PvP out of existence.
DIE FFA PvP DIE!!
(EDIT: Oh, and I wouldn't have replied to this at all...but then I read ALL your other posts)
Well after reading through 6 pages I can definately feel that people got a lot of hate that is going both ways lol.
Anyway, I think that FFA PvP isn ot really dying, in my opinion it is more of an evolutionary process. What I mean is ever since the beginning there were two types of MMO (sandbox - UO and closed - EQ) both types were made for different players and as time passed sandbox MMOs kind of faded away, but there are still there; the best example of one would be EVE Online. On the other hand EQ type games are flurishing right now and they taking a lot of steps of evolution, WoW being the latest version of such evolution. IMO evenutally people will get tired of closed type of MMOs because there is aways only so many monsters you can kill; another factor is that people mature and seek more inticing ways to play the game and closed types of MMOs dont really provide that. Right now average age of an MMO community in US is around 17 years old, in 3 - 4 years that age statistically is expected to increase to 23; and we will see that as the number of people who were playing MMOs ever since high school will move into their mid 20s there will be a very large increase in sandbox types of MMOs; and the very essence of sandbox MMO is player created content and player conflict; and that is when we will see FFA PvP will make its come back.
I am sure at this point, fanboys will scream that their game is the best; and some will say that I am implying that you need to be mature in order to like those games but they are already 2X and they dont like it. However when I say mature, I am not talking about how old are you, but rather how long you were playing MMOs, you will find that older (people who played longest) MMO players are much more geared toward open PvP.
Just one more thing, to answer a WoW fanboy post on the first page; WoWs PvP system is very far from great, because it doesnt do anything (except for your PvP rank that is easly farmed in BGs). I am against ganking however, IMO people should be allowed to fight, in non instanced terretories and they should be allowed to leave their mark. Because winning a BG or ganking someone is plain stupid.
i would have to agree based on what i'm seeing that a majority of the market is not interested in ffa pvp. i think pvp players and pve players are really two different types, and this has yet to be fully understoond. devs are designing a general mmorpg game based on some some context with the idea of a wide market.
the problem is that pvpers need that excitment/threat atmosphere to make it worth while. the end result for them is the ability to pwn all!! this is the category i fit in. i don't wanna play and grind for months with no point. i want to loot the best weapon, or get enough credits to buy one. i want to continually build my character for player combat. for me, there is no real thrill in fighting npc's, and thus i am not really interested in a game that reallly only has that to offer.
on the flipside, pve'rs seem to get something out of the game that i don't understand. it's very valid and they enjoy a non threatening environment to play in. great visual graphics and a nice social atmosphere seems to be an important element to the game for them.
ultimately i feel we pvpers are being left behind, as we must be outnumbered by the non pvp crowd. i do beleive it will take one well thought out mmorpg that is totally pvp based, with involved crafting systems and a player driven economy to draw most pvp players to one game, where they can lose themselves in what they love most.
I personally would not care for FFA PvP, because in my experience, it leads to conformity and questionable playing methods. By conformity, I mean people will no longer play as what they want to play, but whatever "build" works best. Suddenly, everyone looks the same and uses the same skills and strategies. That, to me, is part of the reason PvP is dying; people's unwillingness to learn how to play their character and their desire to be the most effective.
Also, in games where there is ranking and competitive spirit, there are the pathetic losers who feel the need to gain an edge on their opponents. Cheaters, glitchers, botters, currency-purchasers, etc etc. Let's not even pretend like we don't know what I'm talking about here; ranking ruins more games than anything else in my eyes. In FPS's, there's maphacks, and aimhacks, and speed hacks and stuff used by the basement dwelling teenager who thinks that being #1 on Counterstrike is the most important thing in life. Rather than just having fun with the game, and seeing where they stand naturally, they'd rather cheat and exploit ranking systems for bragging rights.
That's why, in my opinion, the problem isn't even neccesarily the games, but the gamers themselves. If gamers weren't so unwilling to play games nowadays, there wouldn't be these kinds of problems. Without sites like www.ige.com, or power-leveling sites, or eBay where people can cell phat lewt for real life currency, or just generally lazy and pathetic people, PvP would be more fun and more fulfilling. Also, the fact that many people who play MMO's look at them like a second job or a chore is a problem. If people knew how to have fun with what they've got, it would be a more rewarding experience for everyone.
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
I'm sticking to my original post on this one. You don't want a fair fight so you lean on levels and loot. I too have been on the short end of a contest in FPS and RTS games. It's a fairly common practice called HANDICAPPING. The fact remains, however, that the FFA PvP crowd only wants to be on the more side, every single time they fight.
To be honest, I pray every day that I'll see one of these "Xtreme" "Hardcore" FFA PvPers get beaten, robbed, and raped by about 20 armed skinheads on steriods. Then, when the skins have left, I'll go up to the broken bleeding mass of a human being and say "Hey man, this is FFA PvP. You should have been ready for a fight!!" Then I'd probably piss on their cooling corpse while whistling the Carebear theme song.
You can tell me that real life can't be compared to a game and all that. But let me ask you this. Are these games totally seperate from real life, or just extensions of real life? This is an old arguement in the MUD community and the center of this discussion.
I posted on something similar to this on the Vanguard forums. Basically, my opinion was that for FFA PVP to be functional, that server needs to be permadeath.
In the interest of avoiding RSS, I will cut and paste.
"It is for this reason that I am very interested in the Permadeath server. This server, by the way, should be 100% unrestricted PVP.
Let me tell you about a internet MMOG I played called Bootleggers. Some of you here may have even played it.
In Bootleggers, you could kill anybody. At any time. For any reason at all. All that limited you was the amount of bullets you had, and bullets were somewhat expensive. And the higher level your mark was, the more bullets he took to kill.
Here's the gist. If you failed, or if somebody saw you do it, you would be dead. Because almost every person of worth in Bootleggers was the member of a gang... or as we know it, a "guild". The friends of the deceased would have you killed. And I mean DEAD. In Bootleggers, all the money you gained, cars you bought, your levels, even your very screen name... all gone when you die.
Now, this isn't much consolation to the deceased... but the higher level you were, the harder you were to kill. So it would take a high level to kill you anyway. And the other high levels were leery of risking their lives to kill unless a major gang war was taking place.
So what happened was, in a fully freeform PVP environment, hardly anyone killed for pleasure. It was always a matter of justice or vengeance. Anyone who started up a character to grief would find out it simply wasn't worth it. And the first time you griefed, it was your last, unless you were extremely lucky and nobody witnessed the crime.
PVP controlled itself. But this can only happen if there is a fear of death involved, and if death is a very real thing.
Anyhow, my two cents. I think a Permadeath server, should the Devs decide to implement one, would have the greatest community in all of the MMOG universe, simply because I've never seen as much care for fellow players as I saw in that simple browser MMOG that was Bootleggers. People actually cared about their guildmates, and even newbies, gave them money and weapons to protect themselves, took people under their wing, etc. I had a great time playing that game.
The closest I've ever seen a graphical MMORPG come to this was EVE Online, which I consider THE PVP MMO on the market right now. EVE does PVP very close to perfect.
Just IMHO."
The Greyhammer Timeline (Games Played > 1 month)
1999 >-- Everquest -- Dark Age of Camelot -- Everquest -- Anarchy Online -- Everquest -- Star Wars Galaxies -- Final Fantasy XI -- Everquest -- World of Warcraft -- Everquest 2 -- EVE Online --> 2006
Playing Navy Field (www.navyfield.com) and waiting for Vanguard.
Here is the major flaw in your PvP (perma-death) world:
Organized guilds will have free reign on killing newbies. Newbies who havent found a guild to join in that server would be like sheep to be slaughtered. Newbies having a hard time, so they quit. MMORPG developers not getting enough new player base to pay for development. ....
The way i look at it , there are games that offer open PVP . There are also games which don't allow any form of open PVP . Easy solution for any who don't want to PVP , do some research on the game you plan to play . If it dosent sound to your liking why play it ? If there is anything worse than being ganked / griefed , its constantly seeing (carebears) <~~~~~~~~ yes i said it . Sitting on forums moaning about things in a game they don't like. Yeah i guess im complaining about complainers . But why should a game constantly be nerfed ? mostly due to those who complain about subjects such as this . The devs made the game they made , Its not hard to get information about a Game . Do so and the problem is solved .
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Well forget it. I'm not gonna bother posting another big constructive post about PvP, because it seems like only a couple people are reading it.
The reason PvP gets a bad rap is because of people insulting people who don't like PvP. The thing people don't realize is that the people who snap right back and call those PvPers idiots are just as bad.
All of you are the reason PvP is dying. Complainers. If people stopped complaining about -both sides-, FFA PvP might still be out there.
A gaming company needs to stop catering to both sides. It only makes things worse because then PvPers and PvEers both get upset. PvE people complain because PvP is too hard. They want everything handed to them. PvPers complain because now PvP is dumbed down and they can't have fun anymore because there's no challenge.
Gaming companies need to stick to their guns from now on. Stop catering to one side or the other. They'd have more happy people that way, instead of both sides complaining about one thing or the other.
Originally posted by chs5138 My question is why do people who don't like FFA PvP, play FFA PvP games? Saying that griefers/gankers are the reason why you got chased away isn't really true. The truth is the game was never really for you in the first place. If Shadowbane 2 were to come out tomorrow with no bugs there would be plenty of subscribers (of people who really enjoy FFA PvP). The problem is there would also be a lot of people who don't really fit the audience that this type of game is marketed too. They will get ganked and some will quit, and some will complain to the devs. The devs will change something makeing the people mad who fit the games audience and some will leave. It's people who really shouldn't be playing the game anyway that really hurts FFA PvP MMOs
Companies don't change thier game because the complainers aren't happy. They change the game because they don't want the complaners to leave. If the company didn't want the so called carebears in there game they wouldn't change a thing, they'd just laugh that they bought the game in the fist place.
FFA PvP is a small market, that's why it's dieing out.
well lets think about something for a second
A company makes an FFA PvP game that has a target audience of...lets say 30k people. Then lets say 15-20k people who are not in your target audience but decide to try the game out. Now obviously something has to give...you either say "stfu" and lose 15-20k customers or you either compromise or give in to their demands knowing that while you will lose some of your initially targeted player base, most of them will likely stay because it is the only option they have.
My point is this...people should know what type of game fits their playstyle...and for those that feel compelled to try a new game out then why complain to the devs to change the game into something it's not. If 10-15k of that 15-20k players (non in the target audience) wouldn't play a game that obviously wasn't for them in the first place then the devs probably wouldn't be as concerned.
I'd rather have 5 servers of 1-2k concurrent PvPers than 10 servers of 5000 filled with people who don't fit that game type
Originally posted by Entreri28 Oh good, someone that doesn't enjoy challenge. Why do you even care about posting in a pvp thread if you don't like it?
FFA PvP in a MMORPG is NOT a challenge. It's generally an uneven contest one way or another, and it has the added drawback of encouraging griefing. It has NO redeeming features...FULL STOP.
PS. I thought the thread was about the DEATH of FFA PvP...that's why I'm here...to see, and revel in it!
^^^
This is what we in Shadowbane call a carebear
^^^
And this is what we in the REAL WORLD call conceit and arrogance...
Face it, it's people like you with your namecalling and arrogant disregard for other players, that have screwed FFA PvP out of existence.
DIE FFA PvP DIE!!
(EDIT: Oh, and I wouldn't have replied to this at all...but then I read ALL your other posts)
^^^^^
And this is what we in the real world call not being able to take a joke
This is also what we in the real world call ignorant stereotyping as you are putting me into a pretty small group of players. I don't send hate tells...when I receive I laugh at them but if I win a fight I just go about my business and if I lose a fight I shrug it off and say oh well.
Apart from you missing the my attempt at humor (which on forums/internet communication can be admittedly difficult)...your attempt at seeming clever was poorly done because you completely misused the words conceit and arrogance. Even assuming that my post had not been joking, in no way is "This is what we call a carebear" showing inflated pride or a condescending attitude
P.S.
Hadz wrote "Oh and I wouldn't have replied at all but then I read all your other posts"
Originally posted by kuzseamer i would have to agree based on what i'm seeing that a majority of the market is not interested in ffa pvp. i think pvp players and pve players are really two different types, and this has yet to be fully understoond. devs are designing a general mmorpg game based on some some context with the idea of a wide market. the problem is that pvpers need that excitment/threat atmosphere to make it worth while. the end result for them is the ability to pwn all!! this is the category i fit in. i don't wanna play and grind for months with no point. i want to loot the best weapon, or get enough credits to buy one. i want to continually build my character for player combat. for me, there is no real thrill in fighting npc's, and thus i am not really interested in a game that reallly only has that to offer. on the flipside, pve'rs seem to get something out of the game that i don't understand. it's very valid and they enjoy a non threatening environment to play in. great visual graphics and a nice social atmosphere seems to be an important element to the game for them. ultimately i feel we pvpers are being left behind, as we must be outnumbered by the non pvp crowd. i do beleive it will take one well thought out mmorpg that is totally pvp based, with involved crafting systems and a player driven economy to draw most pvp players to one game, where they can lose themselves in what they love most.
Very good post
There are 2 very different play styles. While 1 side does definitely outnumber the other there is still a solid base of the FFA PvP people.
I enjoy the challenge of open ended pvp with risks and rewards. Other people enjoy questing or a solid community of players. The problem is games are trying to appeal to both markets which just doesn't work.
Originally posted by Jimmy_Scythe I'm sticking to my original post on this one. You don't want a fair fight so you lean on levels and loot. I too have been on the short end of a contest in FPS and RTS games. It's a fairly common practice called HANDICAPPING. The fact remains, however, that the FFA PvP crowd only wants to be on the more side, every single time they fight. To be honest, I pray every day that I'll see one of these "Xtreme" "Hardcore" FFA PvPers get beaten, robbed, and raped by about 20 armed skinheads on steriods. Then, when the skins have left, I'll go up to the broken bleeding mass of a human being and say "Hey man, this is FFA PvP. You should have been ready for a fight!!" Then I'd probably piss on their cooling corpse while whistling the Carebear theme song. You can tell me that real life can't be compared to a game and all that. But let me ask you this. Are these games totally seperate from real life, or just extensions of real life? This is an old arguement in the MUD community and the center of this discussion.
wow...for whomever was talking about in game griefers/gankers haveing some kind of a personality disorder this is the guy you should be focusing on. I seriously hope you were joking with this statement, but if not then seriously you need psychological counseling. You may laugh at this or call me crazy, but thoughts like "I hope that someone I've never met before gets beaten, robbed, and raped and then I'll piss on their body because I don't like what they do in a fictional game" are not right. This type of thinking is deranged and sadistic and obviously not normal.
You absolutely can not compare a game to real life because quite simply a game is a game in a fantasy world
The web definition of Game
-A game is a recreational activity involving one or more players. This can be defined by A) a goal that the players try to reach, some set of rules that determines what the players can or can not do. Games are played primarily for entertainment or enjoyment, but may also serve an educational or simulational role
The definition of Real Life
The phrase real life is generally used to mean life outside of an environment that is generally seen as contrived or fantastical, such as a movie or MMORPG. It is also sometimes used synonymously with real world to mean one's existence after he or she is done with schooling and is no longer supported by parents
You can debate this all you want, but by simple common sense (and by actual definition) they are nothing alike. Tell me, if you play Grand Theft Auto do you go out and shoot people with an AK-47 in Real Life? If you play that game Driver (I think it's called) do you go out in real life and be the driver for criminals doing robbery.
You are basing your assumptions on nothing, this is what is known as ignorance.
ignorant- unaware because of a lack of relevant information or knowledge
PvP, including FFA PvP, are not dying. They are sleeping.
Truth of the matter is; the MMORPG industry is a baby industry. And by baby, I mean it is a very young industry.
And like the video game industry; it started out with some original, unique games, that will always be loved by a few. But then there were the games that "sold", the mainstream games. Which were usually very simplistic, and easy going.
There was no depth, but they sold.
When you're new to an industry(that is, the player being new), you go for simplicity. It's like a baby taking it's first steps. You're not going to join a marathon, you just want to take things casual, and learn the ropes.
But then, just walking will stop being a challenge, and you'll start to run, then you'll start to compete with other "babies", and before you know it. You're addicted to challenges and competition(PvP).
Everquest was the "babies" game. It's main emphasis was not about true challenge. It was about learning the foundation of MMORPG's.
Now the MMORPG industry is expanding, at a ginormous rate. Video games as a whole are expanding. So the influx of new players are...that's right, "babies". So you pick games that are catered to them. IE: World of Warcraft.
The most nauseatingly simplistic, and unchallenging game on the face of this planet. I mean hell, it even has a kid-life look and feel to it.
Why's it so popular? Because it's simple, and the "newbies" are very much at home at it. The newcomers find their home in simplicity. You don't want to run against a marathoner when you're just learning how to walk.
Mind you. Games like the original Doom, were the World of Warcraft of FPS. A popular, simplistic game. Not even able to compare in any shape or form to games like Half Life 2.
Why aren't Gamers still demanding simplistic 2-d, unchallenging FPS's? Because they grew up, and now want a challenge.
Same will happen to the MMORPG industry. I've played dozens of MMORPG's; pretty much every mainstream western one you've heard of. And about 15 eastern ones.
After the first two, and playing over 4 years, I wanted more to it. Roughly 7 years later, I'm still not subscribing to a MMORPG. Reason being? I want something with depth, and a challenge.
I don't want a game like WoW(irony) where all you do is take errands, level up, and do un-fulfilling PvP.
Or even a game that simulates AC1-DT(How I loved my time on that server. But none-the-less, it's too simplistic and needs more depth now).
The MMORPG industry has become stagnant for the most part. The revolutionary games that have promised so much innovation(So far those games being Horizons, and Mourning), but failed to deliver.
And the popular games, like WoW, bring nothing to the plate.
Frankly, we need a company, and a group of developers with some balls, that will take a risk, and bring us something new, fresh, fun, and original.
MMORPG, are the ultimate social RPG(Role-playing game, the act of taking on a role). The ability to take on a role is something that should be unrestricted. It should simulate a certain style of life. If you're going to have a modern day MMORPG something akin to GTA. You got to allow people to take up all facets of modern life. From things as simple as owning a pizza, a pub, or being a deliveryman. Or a gangster, going around causing trouble, taking the "easy route" in life. But of course with the possibility of your rival PvP counterpat(A player controlled cop), busting you, or shooting you. Or even one of your own trusted gangmembers taking you out. Or if you're a cop, becoming a dirty cop. Laundering money, using blackmail, and taking someone out that may be getting too much on your trail.
And that's where FFA PvP comes into play. FFA PvP is the idea of removing restrictions. It's not persay adding a facet of gameplay. It's removing a facet of gameplay(The invisible barrier of protection).
The future of MMORPG's is allowing a much broader, and larger availability of roles. It's to allow an outlet for people to presume their dreams. It's to allow a 45 year old man that in all his life has been a narrow & straight citizen, good father, husband; to become a infamous and hated bandit.
That's the whole idea. And that's the future.
"Fear not death; for the sooner we die, the longer shall we be immortal."
Originally posted by Greyhammer I posted on something similar to this on the Vanguard forums. Basically, my opinion was that for FFA PVP to be functional, that server needs to be permadeath. In the interest of avoiding RSS, I will cut and paste. "It is for this reason that I am very interested in the Permadeath server. This server, by the way, should be 100% unrestricted PVP.
Let me tell you about a internet MMOG I played called Bootleggers. Some of you here may have even played it.
In Bootleggers, you could kill anybody. At any time. For any reason at all. All that limited you was the amount of bullets you had, and bullets were somewhat expensive. And the higher level your mark was, the more bullets he took to kill.
Here's the gist. If you failed, or if somebody saw you do it, you would be dead. Because almost every person of worth in Bootleggers was the member of a gang... or as we know it, a "guild". The friends of the deceased would have you killed. And I mean DEAD. In Bootleggers, all the money you gained, cars you bought, your levels, even your very screen name... all gone when you die.
Now, this isn't much consolation to the deceased... but the higher level you were, the harder you were to kill. So it would take a high level to kill you anyway. And the other high levels were leery of risking their lives to kill unless a major gang war was taking place.
So what happened was, in a fully freeform PVP environment, hardly anyone killed for pleasure. It was always a matter of justice or vengeance. Anyone who started up a character to grief would find out it simply wasn't worth it. And the first time you griefed, it was your last, unless you were extremely lucky and nobody witnessed the crime.
PVP controlled itself. But this can only happen if there is a fear of death involved, and if death is a very real thing.
Anyhow, my two cents. I think a Permadeath server, should the Devs decide to implement one, would have the greatest community in all of the MMOG universe, simply because I've never seen as much care for fellow players as I saw in that simple browser MMOG that was Bootleggers. People actually cared about their guildmates, and even newbies, gave them money and weapons to protect themselves, took people under their wing, etc. I had a great time playing that game.
The closest I've ever seen a graphical MMORPG come to this was EVE Online, which I consider THE PVP MMO on the market right now. EVE does PVP very close to perfect.
Just IMHO."
Permadeath is stupid IMO, spend however much time getting your character leveled up and equiped and if he dies then that's it...you have to go through the whole process again. I can deal with replaceing items and equipment but levels are something else. To gain levels you have to do something that very few PvPer wants to do and that is PvE. And if the leveling is anything like most MMO's out there then it can take months to get back to where you were before you died. Lets say it takes you 2 months to get back up to the level you were at pre-death. That means you are basically spending $25-30 over the next 2 months to play a game in which you don't want to play it. Even using the Shadowbane model where you can easily get up to a good PvP level within a few days it doesn't work. Everyone will likely be on the same playing field as far as Character level/equipment, but now still the more skilled team is likely to lose atleast 1 guy. Lets say it was a 20v20 fight. 1 side is more skilled than the other, but 20 people all target one of their members. That player is going to die and so even though he and his team were more skilled, he now has to spend a few days doing a part of a game that he hates.
Also to me a game can't be strictly FFA PvP and be good. There needs to be something bigger like RvR, GvG (basically some kind of siege on another guild) in a fight like this characters are going to die and that is unavoidable. This tends to lead to even more "zerging" or avoidance of fights.
Originally posted by chs5138 edited for brevitywow...for whomever was talking about in game griefers/gankers haveing some kind of a personality disorder this is the guy you should be focusing on. I seriously hope you were joking with this statement, but if not then seriously you need psychological counseling. You may laugh at this or call me crazy, but thoughts like "I hope that someone I've never met before gets beaten, robbed, and raped and then I'll piss on their body because I don't like what they do in a fictional game" are not right. This type of thinking is deranged and sadistic and obviously not normal.
You absolutely can not compare a game to real life because quite simply a game is a game in a fantasy world.
You have just summed up a big reason why I have MMO burnout. I started with WoW when it came out and between this and three other MMOs, I have to say these anti-PvP greifers are what takes the cake. No one likes to be bullied around. Fine. But there are those that go over the top and paint every PvPer as some loser that lives in mom's basement and has a real-life blood lust because they got pwnt on a video game in a way they don't like.
In a way, they are worse than the greifers they fight against. Greifers are what they are. They have no illusions, nor do thier victims. Strong anti-PvPers think they are fighting for a level of civility and nobility when really all they are doing is pushing people away from their favorite MMO or MMO website over deeds in a fantasy world. They are trying to bully those that choose PvP, just as PvP griefers bully PvErs. They do the same thing the griefers do on this subject: pick on someone else because of a choice of playstyle.
Some said it earlier, there are some people that take all of this way to seriously. It's one of the reasons I quit. I don't feel like giving $15/month to a community of whiners, whether they're complaining about PvP; PvE; I'm rock, scissors needs to learn2play, nerf paper; or whatever the flavor is this week. Ironically enough, the one MMO I tried that has no monthly fee, Guild Wars, has the least drama in this subject. But I digress.
It is a v-i-d-e-o g-a-m-e. Your significant other will not divorce you if you fail to get the rare blue epic +600 Sword of Low Self-Esteem or whatever. The bank will not default on the mortgage if you get ganked. Yes, PvP can be frustrating. And there are legitimate reasons for doing PvE only. If you're a PvErt, great! If you're a PvPer, great! If you like a little of both, great! If you like stripping all your armor and nakey dancing in front of other random players, great! If you'd rather turn off the computer and read a book, great! People have this amazing gift of choosing what they do in thier spare time. Nonetheless, there are trolls out there that want to bend a game to thier sole view of how it should be. And they exist on both sides of the debate.
The good news is there are more MMOs that (hopefully) will offer instanced PvE, FFA PvP, and everything in-between. MMOers will have more choices and maybe choose to have fun instead of finding an excuse to start and perpetuate forum drama.
Imagine that. A video game where people have fun with what they have instead of fighting all the time. Am I asking for too much of an MMO community?
wow...for whomever was talking about in game griefers/gankers haveing some kind of a personality disorder this is the guy you should be focusing on. I seriously hope you were joking with this statement, but if not then seriously you need psychological counseling. You may laugh at this or call me crazy, but thoughts like "I hope that someone I've never met before gets beaten, robbed, and raped and then I'll piss on their body because I don't like what they do in a fictional game" are not right. This type of thinking is deranged and sadistic and obviously not normal.
Actually, this was meant to be ironic. I wanted to display the mentality of the "you knew what the deal was when you came here" arguement. This is the logical conclusion of the "be ready for fight at all times" rebuttal.
chs5138 also Wrote:
Tell me, if you play Grand Theft Auto do you go out and shoot people with an AK-47 in Real Life? If you play that game Driver (I think it's called) do you go out in real life and be the driver for criminals doing robbery.
GTA and Driv3r are both single player games. If I kill or rob someone in those games, I haven't really hurt anyone since they're just bots controlled by the computer. In an MMORPG, the people I victimize are real, flesh and blood people on the other end of the line. If I rob you in real life, I've taken something that you've worked hard for. If I rob you in an MMORPG, I've also taken something you've worked for. In real life, I may be in a desperate situation and feel that I have to mug someone just to survive. In an MMORPG, the only reason I would kill someone is just to ruin their day and piss them off. This would be kinda like me going out to beat the hell out of a random midget, just because I can. Come to think of it, it's exactly like that. Now tell you tell me, Which is the worse mentality?
Originally posted by hadz ^^^ And this is what we in the REAL WORLD call conceit and arrogance... Face it, it's people like you with your namecalling and arrogant disregard for other players, that have screwed FFA PvP out of existence. DIE FFA PvP DIE!! (EDIT: Oh, and I wouldn't have replied to this at all...but then I read ALL your other posts)
^^^^^
And this is what we in the real world call not being able to take a joke
This is also what we in the real world call ignorant stereotyping as you are putting me into a pretty small group of players. I don't send hate tells...when I receive I laugh at them but if I win a fight I just go about my business and if I lose a fight I shrug it off and say oh well.
Apart from you missing the my attempt at humor (which on forums/internet communication can be admittedly difficult)...your attempt at seeming clever was poorly done because you completely misused the words conceit and arrogance. Even assuming that my post had not been joking, in no way is "This is what we call a carebear" showing inflated pride or a condescending attitude
P.S.
Hadz wrote "Oh and I wouldn't have replied at all but then I read all your other posts"
....want a cookie?
No, I don't need a cookie but thanks for asking, what I was saying was: I wouldn't have bothered much about that one post but then I got your gist from other posts and all I saw was arrogance and conceitedness (and yes, I know what they mean).
Anyway, IF you were joking...IF!...then I appologize. I can take a joke, but next time, when you're joking, with a one-line dismissive statement personally calling someone, who was just stating facts, a name that is widely held as a derisive term, then maybe you should put a or a after it so that people will know (and won't question whether you're calling it a joke after the fact).
All right? Champ? (See...that there is condescension...but the tongue smiley after it makes it a joke . And that was sarcasm, but the wink after it makes sure that everyone knows that. )
Comments
what's wrong with carebear it's a cool name
Because the kill-whores decided they needed a name that made people who didn't like being repeatedly ganked and robbed sound unreasonable.
Chris Mattern
Thank you Chris, A LOGICAL POST!
I sure as hell don't look like that.
---------------------------------------
No Userbar here, sorry to disappoint.
Also, one thing people don't seem to understand about PvP is that the world essentially governs itself. The idiots tend to flock together, and the more mature players do as well. In AC, I played on a white server. I went perma-PK (going red, without ever going white) at level 75. There was a large PvP community on the server I played on. You ended up knowing everyone's names. PvP played a huge part even in white guilds. Guilds would war against other guilds, and each guild had its idiots.
I'll use some examples to further prove my point about how PvP politics govern themselves. Politics with guilds made AC sooooo fun.
Guild 1 is warring with Guild 2. Guild 3 is neutral and has friends in both... Guild 1 and 2 KOS+L eachother.. Guild 3 isn't KOS to anyone. Its members are on an individual basis with each of the guilds. If certain people in either 1 or 2 have personal problems with anyone in 3, they're free to attack, and vice versa... the guilds as a whole don't dislike eachother.
Say you're in Guild 1. There is a guy you really can't stand in your guild.. he annoys the hell out of you, but you can't attack him. He does something to just absolutely piss you off... you're in a 2vs1 one day against someone of Guild 2, and you're forced to fight along side the guy you don't like. Finally, he breaks the last straw, and you say "Forget this..." so you turn on him. You and the other guy kill him... but, you don't like the other guy still, and he -is- of the rival guild.. So, you and him fight. Whoever wins that fight doesn't matter.. it's irrellevant to the point I'm making.
Now.. the guy in your guild goes to the officers of the guild and says you turned on him and killed him with the help of the guy from the other guild. Luckily, you're well liked in this guild and are one of their best PvPers. So, you threaten to leave the guild if this idiot stays. They kick him out for being an idiot in general, and because they don't want to lose you.
(We'll just call him Idiot) Idiot goes to Guild 3. Guild 2 won't take him because they don't like him because of some stuff he's done during 1 and 2's war. Suddenly, he's attacking 1 and 2 left and right. Guild 3 doesn't want to get in the middle of the war, and kicks him out. Idiot is now a loner. He either joins a no-name guild or does his own thing. Problem taken care of.
Idiots essentially take themselves out in a setting like this. They become non-factors. Granted, you can't take out every idiot by doing this. Some of the idiots are really good PvPers, and your guild may need them. This is just an example. Just because you're guilded with someone doesn't mean you have to like them. And the above example was given based off of things that happened on a -white- server. Meaning a non fully PvP server. Some of the best fun can happen on non-PvP servers.
I found once, that some of the people I'd fought against turned out to be cooler than a lot of people I'd been guilded with. I ended up leaving my guild for theirs, and found a better environment by doing so.
The game is what you make of it. Politics develope on their own in games like this. No system that game creators put into a game can match player-driven politics. If PvP were optional, yet still FFA, things would be so much more interesting in games. All a game has to do, is create a /duel option for people who don't want to go perma-PK in games, and the ability to switch PvP on and off with a short repeatable quest or something (similar to AC's praying at the two altars).
If PvP were optional, yet still fun enough to play a large part in the game as well as guild politics, games would be great. I can't wait till a game actually gets the proper balance between the two like old AC was.
Companies don't change thier game because the complainers aren't happy. They change the game because they don't want the complaners to leave. If the company didn't want the so called carebears in there game they wouldn't change a thing, they'd just laugh that they bought the game in the fist place.
FFA PvP is a small market, that's why it's dieing out.
I despise the word Carebear. Now before you call me that understand that I play or have played most of the current and older games and I enjoy PVP.
I think the term carebear is just another way of putting someone down who does not see the world as you do.
People like different things and to call them a "NAME" just shows how shallow the person is.
Any way when I see someone use or call a person a carebear I think that person is childish, immature, and arrogant.
Support Bacteria, its the only culture some people have.
You people make me lmao.
Go to any game out there today and you will find a large percentage of pvp oriented players/guilds. Yes the reason games are blending pvp and pve/questing is to open to a larger audience. Yet at the same time if you can't handle a game where pvp is possible no matter where you go in the "world," except for a very few safe zones maybe for farmers/crafters etc. then you need to learn to build better toons. If your getting zerged by other guilds you have to learn politics and form alliances.
Play in your little make-believe doll house if you like, but when you step off of your nicely made little plot o' land grab some balls and come play with those of us who like a challenge beyond that of beating an AI.
FFA PvP in a MMORPG is NOT a challenge. It's generally an uneven contest one way or another, and it has the added drawback of encouraging griefing. It has NO redeeming features...FULL STOP.
PS. I thought the thread was about the DEATH of FFA PvP...that's why I'm here...to see, and revel in it!
^^^
This is what we in Shadowbane call a carebear
^^^
And this is what we in the REAL WORLD call conceit and arrogance...
Face it, it's people like you with your namecalling and arrogant disregard for other players, that have screwed FFA PvP out of existence.
DIE FFA PvP DIE!!
(EDIT: Oh, and I wouldn't have replied to this at all...but then I read ALL your other posts)
Well after reading through 6 pages I can definately feel that people got a lot of hate that is going both ways lol.
Anyway, I think that FFA PvP isn ot really dying, in my opinion it is more of an evolutionary process. What I mean is ever since the beginning there were two types of MMO (sandbox - UO and closed - EQ) both types were made for different players and as time passed sandbox MMOs kind of faded away, but there are still there; the best example of one would be EVE Online. On the other hand EQ type games are flurishing right now and they taking a lot of steps of evolution, WoW being the latest version of such evolution. IMO evenutally people will get tired of closed type of MMOs because there is aways only so many monsters you can kill; another factor is that people mature and seek more inticing ways to play the game and closed types of MMOs dont really provide that. Right now average age of an MMO community in US is around 17 years old, in 3 - 4 years that age statistically is expected to increase to 23; and we will see that as the number of people who were playing MMOs ever since high school will move into their mid 20s there will be a very large increase in sandbox types of MMOs; and the very essence of sandbox MMO is player created content and player conflict; and that is when we will see FFA PvP will make its come back.
I am sure at this point, fanboys will scream that their game is the best; and some will say that I am implying that you need to be mature in order to like those games but they are already 2X and they dont like it. However when I say mature, I am not talking about how old are you, but rather how long you were playing MMOs, you will find that older (people who played longest) MMO players are much more geared toward open PvP.
Just one more thing, to answer a WoW fanboy post on the first page; WoWs PvP system is very far from great, because it doesnt do anything (except for your PvP rank that is easly farmed in BGs). I am against ganking however, IMO people should be allowed to fight, in non instanced terretories and they should be allowed to leave their mark. Because winning a BG or ganking someone is plain stupid.
i would have to agree based on what i'm seeing that a majority of the market is not interested in ffa pvp. i think pvp players and pve players are really two different types, and this has yet to be fully understoond. devs are designing a general mmorpg game based on some some context with the idea of a wide market.
the problem is that pvpers need that excitment/threat atmosphere to make it worth while. the end result for them is the ability to pwn all!! this is the category i fit in. i don't wanna play and grind for months with no point. i want to loot the best weapon, or get enough credits to buy one. i want to continually build my character for player combat. for me, there is no real thrill in fighting npc's, and thus i am not really interested in a game that reallly only has that to offer.
on the flipside, pve'rs seem to get something out of the game that i don't understand. it's very valid and they enjoy a non threatening environment to play in. great visual graphics and a nice social atmosphere seems to be an important element to the game for them.
ultimately i feel we pvpers are being left behind, as we must be outnumbered by the non pvp crowd. i do beleive it will take one well thought out mmorpg that is totally pvp based, with involved crafting systems and a player driven economy to draw most pvp players to one game, where they can lose themselves in what they love most.
I personally would not care for FFA PvP, because in my experience, it leads to conformity and questionable playing methods. By conformity, I mean people will no longer play as what they want to play, but whatever "build" works best. Suddenly, everyone looks the same and uses the same skills and strategies. That, to me, is part of the reason PvP is dying; people's unwillingness to learn how to play their character and their desire to be the most effective.
Also, in games where there is ranking and competitive spirit, there are the pathetic losers who feel the need to gain an edge on their opponents. Cheaters, glitchers, botters, currency-purchasers, etc etc. Let's not even pretend like we don't know what I'm talking about here; ranking ruins more games than anything else in my eyes. In FPS's, there's maphacks, and aimhacks, and speed hacks and stuff used by the basement dwelling teenager who thinks that being #1 on Counterstrike is the most important thing in life. Rather than just having fun with the game, and seeing where they stand naturally, they'd rather cheat and exploit ranking systems for bragging rights.
That's why, in my opinion, the problem isn't even neccesarily the games, but the gamers themselves. If gamers weren't so unwilling to play games nowadays, there wouldn't be these kinds of problems. Without sites like www.ige.com, or power-leveling sites, or eBay where people can cell phat lewt for real life currency, or just generally lazy and pathetic people, PvP would be more fun and more fulfilling. Also, the fact that many people who play MMO's look at them like a second job or a chore is a problem. If people knew how to have fun with what they've got, it would be a more rewarding experience for everyone.
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
I'm sticking to my original post on this one. You don't want a fair fight so you lean on levels and loot. I too have been on the short end of a contest in FPS and RTS games. It's a fairly common practice called HANDICAPPING. The fact remains, however, that the FFA PvP crowd only wants to be on the more side, every single time they fight.
To be honest, I pray every day that I'll see one of these "Xtreme" "Hardcore" FFA PvPers get beaten, robbed, and raped by about 20 armed skinheads on steriods. Then, when the skins have left, I'll go up to the broken bleeding mass of a human being and say "Hey man, this is FFA PvP. You should have been ready for a fight!!" Then I'd probably piss on their cooling corpse while whistling the Carebear theme song.
You can tell me that real life can't be compared to a game and all that. But let me ask you this. Are these games totally seperate from real life, or just extensions of real life? This is an old arguement in the MUD community and the center of this discussion.
I posted on something similar to this on the Vanguard forums. Basically, my opinion was that for FFA PVP to be functional, that server needs to be permadeath.
In the interest of avoiding RSS, I will cut and paste.
"It is for this reason that I am very interested in the Permadeath server. This server, by the way, should be 100% unrestricted PVP.
Let me tell you about a internet MMOG I played called Bootleggers. Some of you here may have even played it.
In Bootleggers, you could kill anybody. At any time. For any reason at all. All that limited you was the amount of bullets you had, and bullets were somewhat expensive. And the higher level your mark was, the more bullets he took to kill.
Here's the gist. If you failed, or if somebody saw you do it, you would be dead. Because almost every person of worth in Bootleggers was the member of a gang... or as we know it, a "guild". The friends of the deceased would have you killed. And I mean DEAD. In Bootleggers, all the money you gained, cars you bought, your levels, even your very screen name... all gone when you die.
Now, this isn't much consolation to the deceased... but the higher level you were, the harder you were to kill. So it would take a high level to kill you anyway. And the other high levels were leery of risking their lives to kill unless a major gang war was taking place.
So what happened was, in a fully freeform PVP environment, hardly anyone killed for pleasure. It was always a matter of justice or vengeance. Anyone who started up a character to grief would find out it simply wasn't worth it. And the first time you griefed, it was your last, unless you were extremely lucky and nobody witnessed the crime.
PVP controlled itself. But this can only happen if there is a fear of death involved, and if death is a very real thing.
Anyhow, my two cents. I think a Permadeath server, should the Devs decide to implement one, would have the greatest community in all of the MMOG universe, simply because I've never seen as much care for fellow players as I saw in that simple browser MMOG that was Bootleggers. People actually cared about their guildmates, and even newbies, gave them money and weapons to protect themselves, took people under their wing, etc. I had a great time playing that game.
The closest I've ever seen a graphical MMORPG come to this was EVE Online, which I consider THE PVP MMO on the market right now. EVE does PVP very close to perfect.
Just IMHO."
The Greyhammer Timeline (Games Played > 1 month)
1999 >-- Everquest -- Dark Age of Camelot -- Everquest -- Anarchy Online -- Everquest -- Star Wars Galaxies -- Final Fantasy XI -- Everquest -- World of Warcraft -- Everquest 2 -- EVE Online --> 2006
Playing Navy Field (www.navyfield.com) and waiting for Vanguard.
Here is the major flaw in your PvP (perma-death) world:
Organized guilds will have free reign on killing newbies.
Newbies who havent found a guild to join in that server would be like sheep to be slaughtered.
Newbies having a hard time, so they quit.
MMORPG developers not getting enough new player base to pay for development.
....
Seems like the carebears take the games way to seriously and starts crying when they loose ingame stuff, just look at Jimmy_Scythes comment.
The way i look at it , there are games that offer open PVP . There are also games which don't allow any form of open PVP . Easy solution for any who don't want to PVP , do some research on the game you plan to play . If it dosent sound to your liking why play it ? If there is anything worse than being ganked / griefed , its constantly seeing (carebears) <~~~~~~~~ yes i said it . Sitting on forums moaning about things in a game they don't like. Yeah i guess im complaining about complainers . But why should a game constantly be nerfed ? mostly due to those who complain about subjects such as this . The devs made the game they made , Its not hard to get information about a Game . Do so and the problem is solved .
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Well forget it. I'm not gonna bother posting another big constructive post about PvP, because it seems like only a couple people are reading it.
The reason PvP gets a bad rap is because of people insulting people who don't like PvP. The thing people don't realize is that the people who snap right back and call those PvPers idiots are just as bad.
All of you are the reason PvP is dying. Complainers. If people stopped complaining about -both sides-, FFA PvP might still be out there.
A gaming company needs to stop catering to both sides. It only makes things worse because then PvPers and PvEers both get upset. PvE people complain because PvP is too hard. They want everything handed to them. PvPers complain because now PvP is dumbed down and they can't have fun anymore because there's no challenge.
Gaming companies need to stick to their guns from now on. Stop catering to one side or the other. They'd have more happy people that way, instead of both sides complaining about one thing or the other.
Companies don't change thier game because the complainers aren't happy. They change the game because they don't want the complaners to leave. If the company didn't want the so called carebears in there game they wouldn't change a thing, they'd just laugh that they bought the game in the fist place.
FFA PvP is a small market, that's why it's dieing out.
well lets think about something for a second
A company makes an FFA PvP game that has a target audience of...lets say 30k people. Then lets say 15-20k people who are not in your target audience but decide to try the game out. Now obviously something has to give...you either say "stfu" and lose 15-20k customers or you either compromise or give in to their demands knowing that while you will lose some of your initially targeted player base, most of them will likely stay because it is the only option they have.
My point is this...people should know what type of game fits their playstyle...and for those that feel compelled to try a new game out then why complain to the devs to change the game into something it's not. If 10-15k of that 15-20k players (non in the target audience) wouldn't play a game that obviously wasn't for them in the first place then the devs probably wouldn't be as concerned.
I'd rather have 5 servers of 1-2k concurrent PvPers than 10 servers of 5000 filled with people who don't fit that game type
FFA PvP in a MMORPG is NOT a challenge. It's generally an uneven contest one way or another, and it has the added drawback of encouraging griefing. It has NO redeeming features...FULL STOP.
PS. I thought the thread was about the DEATH of FFA PvP...that's why I'm here...to see, and revel in it!
^^^
This is what we in Shadowbane call a carebear
^^^
And this is what we in the REAL WORLD call conceit and arrogance...
Face it, it's people like you with your namecalling and arrogant disregard for other players, that have screwed FFA PvP out of existence.
DIE FFA PvP DIE!!
(EDIT: Oh, and I wouldn't have replied to this at all...but then I read ALL your other posts)
^^^^^
And this is what we in the real world call not being able to take a joke
This is also what we in the real world call ignorant stereotyping as you are putting me into a pretty small group of players. I don't send hate tells...when I receive I laugh at them but if I win a fight I just go about my business and if I lose a fight I shrug it off and say oh well.
Apart from you missing the my attempt at humor (which on forums/internet communication can be admittedly difficult)...your attempt at seeming clever was poorly done because you completely misused the words conceit and arrogance. Even assuming that my post had not been joking, in no way is "This is what we call a carebear" showing inflated pride or a condescending attitude
P.S.
Hadz wrote "Oh and I wouldn't have replied at all but then I read all your other posts"
....want a cookie?
Very good post
There are 2 very different play styles. While 1 side does definitely outnumber the other there is still a solid base of the FFA PvP people.
I enjoy the challenge of open ended pvp with risks and rewards. Other people enjoy questing or a solid community of players. The problem is games are trying to appeal to both markets which just doesn't work.
wow...for whomever was talking about in game griefers/gankers haveing some kind of a personality disorder this is the guy you should be focusing on. I seriously hope you were joking with this statement, but if not then seriously you need psychological counseling. You may laugh at this or call me crazy, but thoughts like "I hope that someone I've never met before gets beaten, robbed, and raped and then I'll piss on their body because I don't like what they do in a fictional game" are not right. This type of thinking is deranged and sadistic and obviously not normal.
You absolutely can not compare a game to real life because quite simply a game is a game in a fantasy world
The web definition of Game
-A game is a recreational activity involving one or more players. This can be defined by A) a goal that the players try to reach,
some set of rules that determines what the players can or can not do. Games are played primarily for entertainment or enjoyment, but may also serve an educational or simulational role
The definition of Real Life
The phrase real life is generally used to mean life outside of an environment that is generally seen as contrived or fantastical, such as a movie or MMORPG. It is also sometimes used synonymously with real world to mean one's existence after he or she is done with schooling and is no longer supported by parents
You can debate this all you want, but by simple common sense (and by actual definition) they are nothing alike. Tell me, if you play Grand Theft Auto do you go out and shoot people with an AK-47 in Real Life? If you play that game Driver (I think it's called) do you go out in real life and be the driver for criminals doing robbery.
You are basing your assumptions on nothing, this is what is known as ignorance.
ignorant- unaware because of a lack of relevant information or knowledge
PvP, including FFA PvP, are not dying.
They are sleeping.
Truth of the matter is; the MMORPG industry is a baby industry. And by baby, I mean it is a very young industry.
And like the video game industry; it started out with some original, unique games, that will always be loved by a few. But then there were the games that "sold", the mainstream games. Which were usually very simplistic, and easy going.
There was no depth, but they sold.
When you're new to an industry(that is, the player being new), you go for simplicity. It's like a baby taking it's first steps. You're not going to join a marathon, you just want to take things casual, and learn the ropes.
But then, just walking will stop being a challenge, and you'll start to run, then you'll start to compete with other "babies", and before you know it. You're addicted to challenges and competition(PvP).
Everquest was the "babies" game. It's main emphasis was not about true challenge. It was about learning the foundation of MMORPG's.
Now the MMORPG industry is expanding, at a ginormous rate. Video games as a whole are expanding. So the influx of new players are...that's right, "babies". So you pick games that are catered to them. IE: World of Warcraft.
The most nauseatingly simplistic, and unchallenging game on the face of this planet. I mean hell, it even has a kid-life look and feel to it.
Why's it so popular? Because it's simple, and the "newbies" are very much at home at it. The newcomers find their home in simplicity. You don't want to run against a marathoner when you're just learning how to walk.
Mind you. Games like the original Doom, were the World of Warcraft of FPS. A popular, simplistic game. Not even able to compare in any shape or form to games like Half Life 2.
Why aren't Gamers still demanding simplistic 2-d, unchallenging FPS's? Because they grew up, and now want a challenge.
Same will happen to the MMORPG industry. I've played dozens of MMORPG's; pretty much every mainstream western one you've heard of. And about 15 eastern ones.
After the first two, and playing over 4 years, I wanted more to it. Roughly 7 years later, I'm still not subscribing to a MMORPG. Reason being? I want something with depth, and a challenge.
I don't want a game like WoW(irony) where all you do is take errands, level up, and do un-fulfilling PvP.
Or even a game that simulates AC1-DT(How I loved my time on that server. But none-the-less, it's too simplistic and needs more depth now).
The MMORPG industry has become stagnant for the most part. The revolutionary games that have promised so much innovation(So far those games being Horizons, and Mourning), but failed to deliver.
And the popular games, like WoW, bring nothing to the plate.
Frankly, we need a company, and a group of developers with some balls, that will take a risk, and bring us something new, fresh, fun, and original.
MMORPG, are the ultimate social RPG(Role-playing game, the act of taking on a role). The ability to take on a role is something that should be unrestricted. It should simulate a certain style of life. If you're going to have a modern day MMORPG something akin to GTA. You got to allow people to take up all facets of modern life. From things as simple as owning a pizza, a pub, or being a deliveryman. Or a gangster, going around causing trouble, taking the "easy route" in life. But of course with the possibility of your rival PvP counterpat(A player controlled cop), busting you, or shooting you. Or even one of your own trusted gangmembers taking you out. Or if you're a cop, becoming a dirty cop. Laundering money, using blackmail, and taking someone out that may be getting too much on your trail.
And that's where FFA PvP comes into play. FFA PvP is the idea of removing restrictions. It's not persay adding a facet of gameplay. It's removing a facet of gameplay(The invisible barrier of protection).
The future of MMORPG's is allowing a much broader, and larger availability of roles. It's to allow an outlet for people to presume their dreams. It's to allow a 45 year old man that in all his life has been a narrow & straight citizen, good father, husband; to become a infamous and hated bandit.
That's the whole idea. And that's the future.
"Fear not death; for the sooner we die, the longer shall we be immortal."
Permadeath is stupid IMO, spend however much time getting your character leveled up and equiped and if he dies then that's it...you have to go through the whole process again. I can deal with replaceing items and equipment but levels are something else. To gain levels you have to do something that very few PvPer wants to do and that is PvE. And if the leveling is anything like most MMO's out there then it can take months to get back to where you were before you died. Lets say it takes you 2 months to get back up to the level you were at pre-death. That means you are basically spending $25-30 over the next 2 months to play a game in which you don't want to play it. Even using the Shadowbane model where you can easily get up to a good PvP level within a few days it doesn't work. Everyone will likely be on the same playing field as far as Character level/equipment, but now still the more skilled team is likely to lose atleast 1 guy. Lets say it was a 20v20 fight. 1 side is more skilled than the other, but 20 people all target one of their members. That player is going to die and so even though he and his team were more skilled, he now has to spend a few days doing a part of a game that he hates.
Also to me a game can't be strictly FFA PvP and be good. There needs to be something bigger like RvR, GvG (basically some kind of siege on another guild) in a fight like this characters are going to die and that is unavoidable. This tends to lead to even more "zerging" or avoidance of fights.
You have just summed up a big reason why I have MMO burnout. I started with WoW when it came out and between this and three other MMOs, I have to say these anti-PvP greifers are what takes the cake. No one likes to be bullied around. Fine. But there are those that go over the top and paint every PvPer as some loser that lives in mom's basement and has a real-life blood lust because they got pwnt on a video game in a way they don't like.
In a way, they are worse than the greifers they fight against. Greifers are what they are. They have no illusions, nor do thier victims. Strong anti-PvPers think they are fighting for a level of civility and nobility when really all they are doing is pushing people away from their favorite MMO or MMO website over deeds in a fantasy world. They are trying to bully those that choose PvP, just as PvP griefers bully PvErs. They do the same thing the griefers do on this subject: pick on someone else because of a choice of playstyle.
Some said it earlier, there are some people that take all of this way to seriously. It's one of the reasons I quit. I don't feel like giving $15/month to a community of whiners, whether they're complaining about PvP; PvE; I'm rock, scissors needs to learn2play, nerf paper; or whatever the flavor is this week. Ironically enough, the one MMO I tried that has no monthly fee, Guild Wars, has the least drama in this subject. But I digress.
It is a v-i-d-e-o g-a-m-e. Your significant other will not divorce you if you fail to get the rare blue epic +600 Sword of Low Self-Esteem or whatever. The bank will not default on the mortgage if you get ganked. Yes, PvP can be frustrating. And there are legitimate reasons for doing PvE only. If you're a PvErt, great! If you're a PvPer, great! If you like a little of both, great! If you like stripping all your armor and nakey dancing in front of other random players, great! If you'd rather turn off the computer and read a book, great! People have this amazing gift of choosing what they do in thier spare time. Nonetheless, there are trolls out there that want to bend a game to thier sole view of how it should be. And they exist on both sides of the debate.
The good news is there are more MMOs that (hopefully) will offer instanced PvE, FFA PvP, and everything in-between. MMOers will have more choices and maybe choose to have fun instead of finding an excuse to start and perpetuate forum drama.
Imagine that. A video game where people have fun with what they have instead of fighting all the time. Am I asking for too much of an MMO community?
Guild Wars is still an MMO.
chs5138 Wrote:
wow...for whomever was talking about in game griefers/gankers haveing some kind of a personality disorder this is the guy you should be focusing on. I seriously hope you were joking with this statement, but if not then seriously you need psychological counseling. You may laugh at this or call me crazy, but thoughts like "I hope that someone I've never met before gets beaten, robbed, and raped and then I'll piss on their body because I don't like what they do in a fictional game" are not right. This type of thinking is deranged and sadistic and obviously not normal.
Actually, this was meant to be ironic. I wanted to display the mentality of the "you knew what the deal was when you came here" arguement. This is the logical conclusion of the "be ready for fight at all times" rebuttal.
chs5138 also Wrote:
Tell me, if you play Grand Theft Auto do you go out and shoot people with an AK-47 in Real Life? If you play that game Driver (I think it's called) do you go out in real life and be the driver for criminals doing robbery.
GTA and Driv3r are both single player games. If I kill or rob someone in those games, I haven't really hurt anyone since they're just bots controlled by the computer. In an MMORPG, the people I victimize are real, flesh and blood people on the other end of the line. If I rob you in real life, I've taken something that you've worked hard for. If I rob you in an MMORPG, I've also taken something you've worked for. In real life, I may be in a desperate situation and feel that I have to mug someone just to survive. In an MMORPG, the only reason I would kill someone is just to ruin their day and piss them off. This would be kinda like me going out to beat the hell out of a random midget, just because I can. Come to think of it, it's exactly like that. Now tell you tell me, Which is the worse mentality?
^^^^^
And this is what we in the real world call not being able to take a joke
This is also what we in the real world call ignorant stereotyping as you are putting me into a pretty small group of players. I don't send hate tells...when I receive I laugh at them but if I win a fight I just go about my business and if I lose a fight I shrug it off and say oh well.
Apart from you missing the my attempt at humor (which on forums/internet communication can be admittedly difficult)...your attempt at seeming clever was poorly done because you completely misused the words conceit and arrogance. Even assuming that my post had not been joking, in no way is "This is what we call a carebear" showing inflated pride or a condescending attitude
P.S.
Hadz wrote "Oh and I wouldn't have replied at all but then I read all your other posts"
....want a cookie?
No, I don't need a cookie but thanks for asking, what I was saying was: I wouldn't have bothered much about that one post but then I got your gist from other posts and all I saw was arrogance and conceitedness (and yes, I know what they mean).
Anyway, IF you were joking...IF!...then I appologize. I can take a joke, but next time, when you're joking, with a one-line dismissive statement personally calling someone, who was just stating facts, a name that is widely held as a derisive term, then maybe you should put a
or a 
after it so that people will know (and won't question whether you're calling it a joke after the fact).
All right? Champ?
(See...that there is condescension...but the tongue smiley after it makes it a joke 
. And that was sarcasm, but the wink after it makes sure that everyone knows that. 
)