Originally posted by Malkavian As to your second, regarding Randomization being a reason for the lack of popularity with PvP. I thought I understood what you were saying. So I had to disagree with you. I believe it is the opposite, rather than making PvP undesirable it is becoming more of a "turn on" to PvP for some of the reasons I stated earlier. Now to the best of my knowledge, PvP is Player v Player. Yet you argue your point is "the randomness factor is what makes PvP disliked. Not the concept of playing against a human opponent" ??? So when you say PvP, you mean to say PvE (Player v Environment) which again to the best of my knowledge is AI? Please clarify what it is you are indeed referring to for my benefit, if not others.
What is the biggest complaint... and as best as I can tell the only complaint against PvP? I've been PKed!
Let's take these 2 situations.
A: A player sits at a known camp, pulling mobs for 3 and half hours on end. He can single pull them never has any problems.
2: A player sits at a known camp, pulling mobs for 3 and half hours on end. Then a another character runs up behind them, pokes them in the back, kills them and runs off laughing.
So what has the example 2 added that A did not? Randomness. Player 2 is upset that he was killed by a player, he's upset that his activity was randomly interrupted beyond his level of control.
It's the "random" element that people don't like, they want to have a predictable game experience while playing. This is why few besides Billus8 will complain about DAoC's RvR system, it has no impact on your daily gaming experience. But people hate SB, EQ PvP severs...ect because the PKers are out in force.
You said you enjoy this randomness, Good for you. But I was illustrating that there are allot of reason to have a PvP system. In fact I think the benefits of one out weight the PK factor.
Here's the short list:
1. being able to police yourself without a GM 2. A higher common level of respect between players since few will risk making enemies needlessly 3. Common enemies bring people together (better communities) 4. variety, PvP adds "sub games" to the game, like killing the PKers, or patrolling guild lowbe zones. Protecting cities..ect
And you can never forget, that something must prevent you from getting everything you want. If there is not a system of pellets you'll get board and stop playing. In most games, the restricting factor is time.
I like to see a system where time isn't the restriction, it's something more skill based... witch implies a PvP solution.
-----
Let's also consider few more examples
C: A player sits at a known camp and pulling mobs for 3 and half hours on end. Then another player pulls a mob near, it aggro's and kills the camper. (this is indirect PvP, only without PvP you can do a thing to defend yourself, and least you can get higher level people to help kill the PKers)
A player sits at a known camp and pulling mobs for 3 and half hours on end. Then another character sits down in your camp. After calling each "sons of a motherless goat" and "your father smells of eder berries" you decide it's best to move one, losing your camp. (indirect PvP once again, you have no recourse)
C and D are indirect PvP, people can grief you in any game. It's every bit as likely to happen in non-PvP games and PvP ones. I've been PKed less in full PvP games, than I've had my camps stolen or been KSed in EQ. Yet the fear of bing randomly dead, is considered greater than this type of harassment.
E: A player sits at a known camp, pulling mobs for 3 and half hours on end. Then a random mob aggro and kills them.
F: A player sits at a known camp, pulling mobs for 3 and half hours on end. Then the game decides to kill you for sitting in one spot to long.
How is E and F any different than PvP? E used to happened more than I'd like to say in EQ. Yet having the game kill you is somehow less dramatic than a player. This I don't understand.
As I said before, many people want to predictable result. They do not want a game that is overly random. Either PvP or PvE. I think once AI's are like playing people, PvP will be more accepted since people will be easier opponents.
Or there will be a huge demand to bring back EQ like games... could go either way.
I hope this clears things up.
-=-=-=-=- "The beauty of MMORPGS is the merging of gaming and chatrooms. EQ is really just AOL merged with a fantasy game." - billus8
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% Test learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=- Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
1. I was under the impression when you were refering to PvP for the most part, it was a NON Forced environment. Like DAOC or UO (With Trammel Facet) where they have designated areas, (that you choose to go to) if you wish to participate in PvP. Now i realise the majority of your explanations are refering to a Forced Environment, which inturn makes all the more sense
2. In my opinion the best Forced PvP MMORPG would be, Ultime Online: The Golden Years. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Thanx for the explenation. I agree with you now.
- Malkavian
"When you find yourself falling into madness... Dive." - Malkavian Proverb
"When you find yourself sinking into Madness, dive"
Glove, you were absolutely right when you chose a sardonic analogy to kick off this post. It got the PvP debate going in full force, much to the chagrin of some.
Let me state for the record that I enjoy PvP, especially the RvR and BG concept implemented in DAoC. I have had my posterior handed to me on a platter more times than I care to remember, but I don't have a problem with that. BGs and RvR are a blast, and one reason (I believe) is that most everyone there wants to be there. PCs are immensely more difficult opponents than computer driven mobs for precisely the reasons pointed out here: PvE is very predictable.
The reason players can sit and pull mobs at a camp for 3 1/2 hours is they know exactly how to kill them and that it will work every time. I soloed my EQ necro about 8 levels in South Karana because I sat there for several days and consistently pulled the bard Vhalen Nostrolo. He did the same thing every time and I chose to use that reliability to level safely. Not the most exciting thing, but my goal was experience. PvP will never work this way. Even the dumbest PC will eventually learn to try a different method of attack after getting killed 10 times in a row.
My biggest problem with PvP in most games today (and granted I have not played all games) is that it is a tough road to get to the "honor among thieves" level where PCs respect other PCs, at least in my experience. Young characters in a PvP world regularly have to contend with the PKdoods. When SB debuted, several people I know quit outright because gangs of higher levels were waiting at the exit to the newbie island to gank anyone who entered. Eventually, I spoke to people who got into groups where trust was established and group power was wielded, but it took a good bit of tenacious gameplay, enduring numerous deaths to get there. Those who love this kind of game stuck around, but I contend that most players don't want to have to put up with this for weeks just so they can find out if the game is worth playing.
I still say that most of today's MMOGers are drawn to the social and leveling aspects of the genre. It will take a revolutionary manifestation of PvP to get these people to readily jump into a full-blown PvP world. The idea of 1hr PvP = 4hrs PvE is interesting, but I can see gankers abusing it. I mean why would they ever attack a Forest Ettin when a lower level PC gives them 4x the experience? Not that it's a bad idea...there are many novel approaches. However, I haven't seen one that really makes the MMOG experience empty without it. The closest I have seen is the BG concept of DAoC where Realm players of a certain level range are forced to cooperate to take over the keep. Another fun game that is pure PvP is WWIIOL, but its lack of character advancement and clunky social interfaces (squadrons and radio) make it play more like a giant FPS where no one's character is ever much better than it was when he first started.
PvP is the soul and essence of most games. In fact, I'd say that computer games in general and MMOGs in particular are the odd men out, in that they offer a chance to play against a non human opponent. Look at any other game, from football to Monopoly to bowling to hopscotch, and you'll most always find people playing against one another. However, you won't see a Little League team take the field against the New York Yankees. People want to compete with those against whom they have a fighting chance. This is one reason why PvP in MMOGs, IMHO, has been largely a failure. As I mentioned before, the powergamers will always hold the advantage over the casual players, and most people don't have 18hrs a day to dedicate to a computer game.
If the playing field could be balanced in a way that PvP and PvE meshed well, the resulting game would be a smash. The problem seems to be that no one has hit upon that magic formula as of yet. Oh, and Malk, you're right in that the original UO was probably the best forced PvP environment, at least that I played.
I could write a book on PvP as well, but I know everyone gets tired of my longwindedness, so I'll end this post here, conceding that I have about 100 more points that space and time will not permit me to make.
Oh, and thanks to those who actually read my previous post and commented intelligently on it. I know when someone is trying to bait me, and I'm neither cowed by misplaced arrogance nor tempted by petty taunts and ad hominem attacks. To paraphrase a certain new wave pioneer, I used to be disgusted, but now I'm merely amused. I've been at this a long time, too.
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate. (written on the SW:G CD)
Originally posted by Koltrane Glove, you were absolutely right when you chose a sardonic analogy to kick off this post. It got the PvP debate going in full force, much to the chagrin of some.
I still treat this thread as a troll-attempt on Glove's part. You yourself made reference in this thread to some other thread going on about PvP.. as far as I'm concerned, if you have one already going, you can keep using that.
I had a feeling I'd wake up today and find some half-baked explanation by Glove as to why it was an actual attempt at a serious discussion.. thoughts of hasty little Koltrane Emails flyyyyying through the night.. "bail me out here, pleeeease!"
As for actually READING all of your annoyingly-verbose posts: (and I thought *I* was bad in that department) I don't like PvP in MMOGs. (I do like to hear about its failures.. and, even better, any possible movements to remove it from the MMOGs I play) I have a couple shooters installed that do it far better, and a few more sitting on the shelves that do it just as well if not better. Yay, I can sit in Earth and Beyond and listen to L150 Progen Warriors brag about wiping out L101 Jenquai Explorers in the arena.. or I can sit in Star Wars Galaxies and watch some 13 year old with an AT-ST and 3 Rancors kill and then brag about killing some guy with barely 2-3 levels into Novice Marksman. If I want to shoot at annoying kids like that, I'll load up Battlefield: 1942 or Tribes 2 or Ghost Recon and even the playing field. Why read 14 paragraphs of your text on it when my own views on it are summed up so quickly?
I think that that's the biggest problem with PVP in MMORPGs. It's not balanced. Not balance in a sense of class vs class but balance in a sense of level vs level.
Take any FPS game out there. All players are on equal footing. PvP works in those games because everyone is equal and it takes actual player skill (or lag) to best someone in a 1 on 1 fight.
Now take any MMORPG out there. If you're 10-15 levels above someone else you can take about 5 or 6 of them without breaking a sweat (slight exaggeration). Hell, in some MMORPGS you don't even need to use spells or special skills. Just turn on "Auto Attack" and go get a beer. In my opinion, any MMORPG that strives to have a good PvP model needs to take that into account.
You need to balance the levels. Now I'm not saying that a level 5 char should be able to beat a level 20 char but what would possibly work is restricting PvP. Restricting players from attacking someone 5 levels and bellow their char. Or if the game has special PvP zones, divide the zones so that in zone A only players who's character is level 1-10 can PvP. Zone B levels 10-20 and so on. That might at least even out the field somewhat and get some people interested in PvP instead of those people quitting in frustration because they got "pwnt" by a player who's 50 levels above them as soon as they left the guard zone.
I love PvP but I can also see when PvP is not working. In any game PvP servers have about 1/8th of the population of a non PvP server. The reason for that is because the current PvP rules just don't work. Something needs to be done to fix it so that PvP can be enjoyed by other people and not just a select few.
Originally posted by heartless I think that that's the biggest problem with PVP in MMORPGs. It's not balanced. Not balance in a sense of class vs class but balance in a sense of level vs level. Take any FPS game out there. All players are on equal footing. PvP works in those games because everyone is equal and it takes actual player skill (or lag) to best someone in a 1 on 1 fight.
I absolutely have to agree with you on that point. That's the sort of things I've been pointing out.
The BIG-4 of this year (Lineage2, WoW, EQ2, UX) will all be plagued with level vs level balance issue. I mean it's not even balance, it's no balance at all.
level 5 guy can't simply compete with say level 20 guy. It's predictable. Thus no particular surprise when level 20 guy takes on level 5 guy.
Koltrane (and anyone else that has been reading entire posts),
The 4X in PvP, I tend to think of DF like zones for this example. DAoC avoids this since a someone 30 levels below you in only worth 1rp. But if you gave exp for pvp, I'd think a similar rule system would be needed, you don't get exp for killing mobs 30 levels under you.
In fact I wish more of DAoC was like DF. Yes, I've PKed in there many, many times yet it's my favorite place in the game, and one of favorite MMORPG experiences?
Being high level in allot of ways is like being a super hero, you no longer fear mobs, you trace around in your glowing armor, cape flowing the wind, while you stride up and down hallways protecting lowbes. I've spend in hours in DF doing nothing more than patrols, rezzing and assisting lowbe's with over pulls. I'll get tells "so-and-so just killed me at intersection" And off I go to try to track down a PKer. This is great fun, and it creates's a since of community and accomplishment, what good is it to be level 50 if there is no need to use it to some advantage?
As a lowbe I love DF since the exp and money are so much better than anywhere else, and if you die or are PKed it's normally only a few minutes until a friendly high level character runs by than will rez me.
SB had many experiences like this, but in SB you had to get in a guild to get it.
PK's happen, it's a hard concept to accept. I hated it, bad the 1st couple time, then I figured out I didn't have to take it. I could enlist others to help me, or I'd move somewhere else. It is a hassle, but as I said, this type of harassment PKing happening even in EQ. (Training, KSing, Ninja looting...ect) At least in PvP you can police yourself.
"The elimination of PvP does not eliminate harassment by players. It nearly eliminates your ability to retaliate with the hope that not permitting PvP will deter harassment."
Why is being KSed, or trained more acceptable.. or even different than being PKed?
Yes level vs level isn't balance... what would a level mean if it was?
Skill based games are trying to level this a bit, but the less meaningfully you make levels the more the game becomes a FPS. I think guild wars is trying to make a stab at this, by allow players to gain news skills with "level" but not necessarily more powerfully ones.
I blame EQ for the poor results on PvP.
1st of all EQ mad a such a bad attempt at PvP that it turned the clock backwards. Secondly EQ made camping something for 3 and half hours the status-quo. This is horrid, no game should mean doing the same repetitious task for such a long period of time. If the expectation of having hours of game-time uninterrupted in any way as a standard, a little randomness in your gameplay wouldn't be so upsetting.
I think the single biggest Mistake of any PvP centric MMORPG is to allow more than character... or at least more than one name.
Consider this, when people PK you, you remember them. (unless it's DAoC witch hides names from you) Let's say someone the 1st week a gamer powerlevels, so they can kill newbe's in hordes. On week 2 they start a new character and no-one is the wiser. Is this good for the community? No, I think all your characters should have the same name, your account name. You can have as many characters as you like, but you need to consider what will happen if you go on a PK spree... and that's 100 people gunning for you for the rest of the time you attempt to play the game.. unless you cancel your account and start over witch I think is the appropriate penalty for being a PKer.
If people weren't allowed to have PK alts, I think it happen allot less.
DAoC has what I consider sterle PvP. The problem with it is, it eliminates some of the more interesting PvP situations.... diplomacy. (I could go on here, but I think you can see quickly how players towns and settlements would make and break deals with other, it adds allot of depth to a game)
PvP brings out the very best players and very worst. Generally the worst comes out before the best.
I think very slowly we're seeing a tend towards more PvP in games. Hopefully someone will stumble onto more ways to make PvP fun... and PvE less painful.
Thank you for reading this over completely
-=-=-=-=- "The beauty of MMORPGS is the merging of gaming and chatrooms. EQ is really just AOL merged with a fantasy game." - billus8
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% Test learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=- Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
Koltrane (and anyone else that has been reading entire posts),
The 4X in PvP, I tend to think of DF like zones for this example. DAoC avoids this since a someone 30 levels below you in only worth 1rp. But if you gave exp for pvp, I'd think a similar rule system would be needed, you don't get exp for killing mobs 30 levels under you.
In fact I wish more of DAoC was like DF.
I agree...Darkness Falls (for you non DAoCers, DF is a RvR dungeon in DAoC) is probably the most interesting place in all of DAoC (I haven't purchased ToA yet) and adds a great dynamic to the game.
Yes, I've PKed in there many, many times yet it's my favorite place in the game, and one of favorite MMORPG experiences?
Being high level in allot of ways is like being a super hero, you no longer fear mobs, you trace around in your glowing armor, cape flowing the wind, while you stride up and down hallways protecting lowbes. I've spend in hours in DF doing nothing more than patrols, rezzing and assisting lowbe's with over pulls. I'll get tells "so-and-so just killed me at intersection" And off I go to try to track down a PKer. This is great fun, and it creates's a since of community and accomplishment, what good is it to be level 50 if there is no need to use it to some advantage?
You bring up a good point here. This is where I find high levels PKing low levels absolutely acceptable - in avenging others. If I am a level 50 pally and I see a level 30 monk kill a level 10 wizzy, I have neither compunction nor remorse about taking the PKer down, regardless of his reasons. If he was merely RPing, then my vengeful attack adds to the RP experience. If he was merely griefing, then that's even sweeter.
PK's happen, it's a hard concept to accept. I hated it, bad the 1st couple time, then I figured out I didn't have to take it. I could enlist others to help me, or I'd move somewhere else. It is a hassle, but as I said, this type of harassment PKing happening even in EQ. (Training, KSing, Ninja looting...ect) At least in PvP you can police yourself.
And that's fine for those who want that type of gameplay. My problem with it is that my character is likely to be lower than a number of PKers because I don't have as much time to dedicate to playing as others do. Given that, I'd rather spend my time in PvE or a controlled PvP environment where the social and progressive aspects of the game are still available to me.
What I don't understand is the downright hostility toward non PvPers from those who choose PvP. PvP fanboys are constantly trolling boards and other areas, deriding nonPvPers as "carebears" or worse. It's extremely juvenile, and that attitude probably has a lot to do with the reason many have left unbridled PvP for a more controlled world. I think (just MHO) that one reason a lot of these ganklovers are chapped is because the majority of PvEers are easier prey than the hardened PvPers that inhabit their server (not that they are less skilled, but are less confrontational at first, giving the predatory PvPer an advantage). The argument that PvEers are ruining the game by "forcing" the publishers to make the game less PvP friendly only holds water if there are no pure PvP options.
As an additional note, the PvP community is not above crying foul, even when the rules are being followed. The EQ PvP servers used to be such that a PKer could loot the players corpse (everything - money, items, armor, weapons). Then it became only one item per kill to which the victor was entitled. Even that changed and now, all EQ PvP servers are cash only (unless I'm mistaken...there may still be one item loot server).
Why is being KSed, or trained more acceptable.. or even different than being PKed?
It isn't more acceptable, but death in most current MMOGs carries a greater consequence than losing a kill. Granted, having the Ancient Cyclops snaked out from under you after you camped the spawn for three days is pretty damned nasty, but the de facto rules which have evolved into policy on many games allow for redress in the form of /appeals etc. I know of a girl who was a top level wizzy in UO. She got mad at a few folks, so she charmed a dragon and marched it into their town. EA suspended her account and banned her. One could argue she was working within the rules of the game, and she was, but her action was considered illegal by the GMs and she was ousted.
KSing and training are considered a breach of ToC, and are thus actionable by appeal. PKing is not. In fact, it is quite the opposite. If I appeal a PK on a PvP server, the response will likely be, "Change servers."
I blame EQ for the poor results on PvP.
I agree that EQ's implementation of PvP was/is poor, but I just can't lay the blame for the entire industry at SOE's feet.
Secondly EQ made camping something for 3 and half hours the status-quo. This is horrid, no game should mean doing the same repetitious task for such a long period of time.
I agree and this blame I can lay at the feet of SOE.
I think the single biggest Mistake of any PvP centric MMORPG is to allow more than character... or at least more than one name.
Amen to that! Some PKers want to have their cake and eat it, too. They accomplish this with Jekyll and Hyde personas. No one knows that Shanidar, the noble warrior and Ygimon, the craven rogue are actually the same person IRL. Their actions should have consequences that follow them throughout the game, or at least the same server.
PvP brings out the very best players and very worst. Generally the worst comes out before the best.
On some, I'm still waiting for the best to emerge .
I think very slowly we're seeing a tend towards more PvP in games. Hopefully someone will stumble onto more ways to make PvP fun... and PvE less painful.
I would like to see that myself.
Thank you for reading this over completely
Sure. I don't have a problem with actually reading posts before I make comments.
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate. (written on the SW:G CD)
I agree...Darkness Falls (for you non DAoCers, DF is a RvR dungeon in DAoC) is probably the most interesting place in all of DAoC (I haven't purchased ToA yet) and adds a great dynamic to the game.
Yes, I've PKed in there many, many times yet it's my favorite place in the game, and one of favorite MMORPG experiences?
You bring up a good point here. This is where I find high levels PKing low levels absolutely acceptable - in avenging others. If I am a level 50 pally and I see a level 30 monk kill a level 10 wizzy, I have neither compunction nor remorse about taking the PKer down, regardless of his reasons. If he was merely RPing, then my vengeful attack adds to the RP experience. If he was merely griefing, then that's even sweeter.
We can agree there are good implementations of PvP when PvP is fun.
And that's fine for those who want that type of gameplay. My problem with it is that my character is likely to be lower than a number of PKers because I don't have as much time to dedicate to playing as others do. Given that, I'd rather spend my time in PvE or a controlled PvP environment where the social and progressive aspects of the game are still available to me.
I think there should always be some non-PvP areas in a PvP game. Something like 80% PvP 20% not. But it seems to be all PvP or nothing. DAoC took a whack at a middle ground... it's o.k. But it needs help.
What I don't understand is the downright hostility toward non PvPers from those who choose PvP. PvP fanboys are constantly trolling boards and other areas, deriding nonPvPers as "carebears" or worse. It's extremely juvenile, and that attitude probably has a lot to do with the reason many have left unbridled PvP for a more controlled world. I think (just MHO) that one reason a lot of these ganklovers are chapped is because the majority of PvEers are easier prey than the hardened PvPers that inhabit their server (not that they are less skilled, but are less confrontational at first, giving the predatory PvPer an advantage). The argument that PvEers are ruining the game by "forcing" the publishers to make the game less PvP friendly only holds water if there are no pure PvP options.
I think this is easily understandable. People that like killing others for fun for hours on end, and also want them to be 40 levels under them so it's not a fair fight are generally young males between 12-24. So it's no surprise that act juvenile.
And also as you point out, if your going to PK someone you want that person to whine about it. It's allot more fun.
I'm not arguing that PvE are ruining (or helping) anything. Where there is a market someone will make a product for that market. I argue it's not possible for one game type to ruin all games for the others.
My first post was in response to billus8, and his silly reasons why PvP is broken. Why do non-PvPers need to convince others that PvP isn't fun? If you want to talk about what you think needs to change to make PvP more fun, I'm all ears. But to just condemn others for enjoying something (anything), that isn't harming you in some way, is wrong and self-rightous.
As an additional note, the PvP community is not above crying foul, even when the rules are being followed. The EQ PvP servers used to be such that a PKer could loot the players corpse (everything - money, items, armor, weapons). Then it became only one item per kill to which the victor was entitled. Even that changed and now, all EQ PvP servers are cash only (unless I'm mistaken...there may still be one item loot server).
People hate changes to the game, PvP or PvE.
Minors can seldom take what they dish out.
I'd like to see a study on how long PKers keep playing PvP games once they have a bad reputation and can't go near another group anywhere in the game. I think that's why allot of PKers don't like well implemented PvP much.
It isn't more acceptable, but death in most current MMOGs carries a greater consequence than losing a kill. Granted, having the Ancient Cyclops snaked out from under you after you camped the spawn for three days is pretty damned nasty, but the de facto rules which have evolved into policy on many games allow for redress in the form of /appeals etc. I know of a girl who was a top level wizzy in UO. She got mad at a few folks, so she charmed a dragon and marched it into their town. EA suspended her account and banned her. One could argue she was working within the rules of the game, and she was, but her action was considered illegal by the GMs and she was ousted.
I've trained people before. I won't go into the whys, but the GM's never did a thing, you have to prove I was trying to grief them, if you play dumb nothing can be proven.
I've greifed people in allot of different ways inside the rules of EQ for reasons I won't go into. Once again GM's never did a thing.
You can never relay on GM's to fight your battles, they won't. There is no such thing as a camp in EQ. While KSing is a volition you have to prove it, often without witnesses. Anything not aggroed on your is fair game.
It's allot better when you can take matters into your own hands... not that you need to, this almost never happens in PvP centric games.
KSing and training are considered a breach of ToC, and are thus actionable by appeal. PKing is not. In fact, it is quite the opposite. If I appeal a PK on a PvP server, the response will likely be, "Change servers."
Once again it comes down a issue of proof. I can't tell you how many times I've run Gore to KC. Loads of fun, I laugh the whole time. So I'm not "trying" to kill people, can anyone blame me for trying to get away yet? Loads will die. And no the GM's won't do much about it.
GM's have little to no power.
I gave up trying to talk them about level 30, and started taking manners into my own hands.
I think the single biggest Mistake of any PvP centric MMORPG is to allow more than character... or at least more than one name.
Amen to that! Some PKers want to have their cake and eat it, too. They accomplish this with Jekyll and Hyde personas. No one knows that Shanidar, the noble warrior and Ygimon, the craven rogue are actually the same person IRL. Their actions should have consequences that follow them throughout the game, or at least the same server.
I'm going to leave this here in hope others will see it.
PvP brings out the very best players and very worst. Generally the worst comes out before the best.
On some, I'm still waiting for the best to emerge .
Trust me, some of the greatest people you'd ever want to know play PvP centric games. As I've said there are allot more reasons to play PvP.
-=-=-=-=- "The beauty of MMORPGS is the merging of gaming and chatrooms. EQ is really just AOL merged with a fantasy game." - billus8
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% Test learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=- Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
Interesting post, and might I just say, you guys type TOO much. And as a hardcore PvPer, I take offense to the statement that we for no apparant reason just flame carebears. Now, I have seen cases, and in some I find it understandable, I get rather pissed when a PVP oriented game gets weakened, and the game is completely slain, overall, that really pisses me off, why? Well, I havent found a good PvP game since darktide on AC1. And hey, I dont care what the carebears do, they can have their EQ, and all the other games, buts its been a year too many since a good PvP game came out, and overall, i've found too many cases of some carebear whining and crying, and ruining the game.
As for level restriction on PKing, restriction on griefing etc. Why? Why not let the players take care of themselves. I mean overall i liked pking on AC1 to for 1. Gain infamy, (i loved it when people cried my name when I ran into town) 2. Gain goodies, that were actually used, or were just for cash. Now, sometimes i'd help newbies, sometimed i'd kill them, but overall it didnt really matter, because they didnt lose much of anything.
Now, would I grief? It depends, I was mainly a PKer for gain, but if somone I knew, and that person was an utter jackass, or did me wrong in the past, I wasnt one to forget.
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
Originally posted by Negative71 At this point, none of your babble is going to elicit a civil response from me. Short, long.. all tripe, BUCKAROO.
I gave up on anything civil from you a long time ago. In all your blather in this thread, you have only one time made a comment that was germane to the topic at hand. The balance has been to spew snide shots at individual posters. I was hoping for a little more from you.
You see, I have actually read all your posts. You, by your own admission, have not read mine. How you can actually expect me and others to take you seriously when you deride and chastise people for posts you haven't even bothered to fully read is beyond me.
If you feel the need to continue to post in this thread, I would ask you to stick to the topic at hand, that being the merits of PvP in the MMOG genre. I don't expect you to do so, but at least I can make the request.
Again, keeping it short in an endeavor to keep you from becoming a sad panda.
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate. (written on the SW:G CD)
Interesting post, and might I just say, you guys type TOO much.
Yeah, you're absolutely right, but I'm attempting to fully make my point, as are Malkavian, Glove, et al. I'd rather type too much and be clear than not enough and be misunderstood. And believe it or not, I leave a bunch of stuff out.
And as a hardcore PvPer, I take offense to the statement that we for no apparant reason just flame carebears.
No offense is intended unless you are one of the many (and there are many) PvPers who constantly take potshots in the form of insults and taunts at anyone who isn't a hardcore PvPer. If that is the case then I take issue with you. I have posed the question in other threads and it appears that most people get upset with whiny babies who water down a game. However, I have seen a number of flame threads attacking people who have never once attempted to alter a PvP game experience. Have you never seen a post to this effect?
"...and for all you carebear p*ssies in EQ, you had better stay out of my game or I'll own your carebear ass!" (idiotic leetspeak intentionally omitted)
Now, I have seen cases, and in some I find it understandable, I get rather pissed when a PVP oriented game gets weakened, and the game is completely slain, overall, that really pisses me off, why? Well, I havent found a good PvP game since darktide on AC1. And hey, I dont care what the carebears do, they can have their EQ, and all the other games, buts its been a year too many since a good PvP game came out, and overall, i've found too many cases of some carebear whining and crying, and ruining the game.
Is this happening a bunch? If so, can you give me some examples (besides EQ splitting into Tram and Fel). I'm not trying to test you nor do I doubt you - I honestly don't know where this is happening. If it is occurring as you say, then I would be equally upset, but I just don't know of any bare knucks PvP games that have become weakened by a vocal minority of whiners, though apparently there are some, because this has rubbed a lot of PvPers raw.
As for level restriction on PKing, restriction on griefing etc. Why? Why not let the players take care of themselves.
Is there an instance where doing this has been an unconditional success, from both a popularity and financial standpoint? I thought Shadowbane was a pure PvP game where the players had to police themselves, and last I heard it was losing players by the bucketful, even those who like PvP. I never played SB, so I don't know why everyone has left. Is this one of the games that was nerfed because crybabies forced UbiSoft's hand?
I mean overall i liked pking on AC1 to for 1. Gain infamy, (i loved it when people cried my name when I ran into town) 2. Gain goodies, that were actually used, or were just for cash. Now, sometimes i'd help newbies, sometimed i'd kill them, but overall it didnt really matter, because they didnt lose much of anything.
Time is something, at least in my opinion, and I lose a bunch of it every time some PKer decides to ambush me while I'm fighting a mob. Being forced to start from my bind point and run five minutes to my body only to be stomped again by a high level griefer is not fun and is a waste of time. I choose to play a game where I control what I do, not some powergamer who decides he's going to take me out just because I haven't put in 50+ hours of gameplay. This is why I choose nonPvP. I don't go into a PvP world and try to change it, yet it seems that people still want to call me a carebear because I don't want to step into their world and get continuously slapped around. I don't understand the hostility - honestly I don't.
Now, would I grief? It depends, I was mainly a PKer for gain, but if somone I knew, and that person was an utter jackass, or did me wrong in the past, I wasnt one to forget.
I don't consider PKing someone who did you wrong griefing. However, I think taking out newbies for gain or whatever is pretty poor. If you really love the thrill of fighting another human, why not take on someone equal to you? At least they have a fighting chance.
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate. (written on the SW:G CD)
Is there an instance where doing this has been an unconditional success, from both a popularity and financial standpoint? I thought Shadowbane was a pure PvP game where the players had to police themselves, and last I heard it was losing players by the bucketful, even those who like PvP. I never played SB, so I don't know why everyone has left. Is this one of the games that was nerfed because crybabies forced UbiSoft's hand?
SB has allot of great game theories. The biggest reason people left by the bucketloads had little or nothing to do with it's implementation of PvP. It had allot to do with the SB.exe errors. On the box it claimed you could have full fledged guild warfare but once you got more than about 20 people on the screen you'd be looking at your desktop.
The game seems rather hackable, people seem to be cheating allot. I remember people could make themselves GM's and would teleport enemy players out into the middle of the Ocean.
There is a huge lack of content in SB. PvE gets old after awhile, but so does PvP. This is the core reason why I stopped playing. You can only siege and be sieged so many times. You can only farm lizards to get gold to pay for your shop that just like a 100 others game so many times. SB really needs more PvE content, and more to PvP than just destroying others cities. It may have it now? I really don't know.
Koltrane use as many words as you feel your thought warrant. Don't wash down ideas for the sake of length. Good ideas are worth reading in their entirety.
-=-=-=-=- "The beauty of MMORPGS is the merging of gaming and chatrooms. EQ is really just AOL merged with a fantasy game." - billus8
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% Test learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=- Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
Glove u quoted that pvp gets old after a while. I dont care if u like pvp or not but you have to admit this....what would get old faster-pvp which is constantly changing due to an actual live person playing your foe??? or an automated monster in which is programmed to do the same things over and over and over again. If Im attacking a monster in many of these games and I run a bit and hide will that monster detect me? NO, not in any games that im aware of. But a human will. If this seems less "fun" to you and you prefer absolutely zero pvp Im sorry I just cant comprehend your thoughts. But then again Ive never played any of the MMOS unless they had pvp.
Well, reason I quit SB was because actually, not because of too much PvP, but because lack of, when your in a guild, that is allied with another guild, that has little enemies, cant randomly attack anyone, and they accept next to everyone in....It gets boring, you end up just killing trolls.
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
Any activity gets old given enough time. I'm sorry but it's a fundamental law, granted some get old allot quicker than others.
This isn't to say anything bad or good about anything, it's just the way it is.
IMHO: I get board with PvE when I sit in the same spot, see the same, look at the same mobs, use the same button sequences, and have no risk of dieing for to long.
How long to long is depends on mood and time of day.
PvP gets old when: I can't find anyone to PvP with (it takes two to PvP), your not allowed to attack certain peoples. (treaties), when your at a complete disadvantage (such as RvR when there are 100 members of one realm and yours only has 10 or so out. Or 200 people are lined up to take out your city and you have 20 to defend it), when you are a complete advantage, being on the Zerg end of things isn't any more fun for me than the reverse... actually I like being the underdog a bit, it means more of a challenge for me. But if I have no hope of winning, I don't play.
The single biggest problem with PvP is all the waiting and getting around. In PvE you don't (I hope) spend as much time trying to find someone/someones, or wait on them to show up.
Time of day, day of week..ect all effect this. Different games try to compensate for this effect differently. But all in all, good PvP match ups are often hard to find in allot of PvP games.
No matter how much you like anything, if that was the only thing you did for a long period of time it would get old. This is why the best games will provide a large varity of activities to participate in.
-=-=-=-=- "The beauty of MMORPGS is the merging of gaming and chatrooms. EQ is really just AOL merged with a fantasy game." - billus8
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% Test learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=- Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
the way i see it pvp option in all games is fine therefore everyone is happy.Ya dont wanna pvp dont if you do click the pvp option.I like pvp its fun but i dont wanna see it forced on paying custormers if ya want true pvp go play a godwar mud.
"the way i see it pvp option in all games is fine therefore everyone is happy.Ya dont wanna pvp dont if you do click the pvp option.I like pvp its fun but i dont wanna see it forced on paying custormers if ya want true pvp go play a godwar mud. "
Paying customers are there by choice, if they dont like the game setup, they dont have to pay, I quit EQ because I didnt like the way it was, if out comes a PvP game, they dont have to pay, thats a solution, and a option.
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
that i do agree but the gaming companys dont look at it like that when a gaming company makes a game all they see is money signs so they gonna fix the game up so everybodys likes it pvper and non-pvpers included. thats all that matters in mmorpgs now is money. I miss the old muds they was all free so it didnt matter.
I feel the reason that pvp is at a sluggish state is because the new players are getting younger and younger and they cant handle pvp. Im not aware of the marketing that goes along with selling MMOS but the increase in pc's in the home and the decline in activity in youths of america shows this could be the cause. Also to be good in pvp you have to be somewhat intelligent and Im sure thats why alot of you guys that diss pvp on ur posts just arent to damn bright. Ive never played a MMO that dint have pvp but Id be willing to bet fighting them monsters all day sure would boost your ego and fame in your rl. lol
I for one enjoy pvp it fun and challenging but the only thing i do hate about it is the constant bashing that comes from 90% of the pvper they get cocky and always talkin smack and it gets annoyin.Im not dissen pvp every mmorpg i play has pvp in em.
Comments
What is the biggest complaint... and as best as I can tell the only complaint against PvP? I've been PKed!
Let's take these 2 situations.
A: A player sits at a known camp, pulling mobs for 3 and half hours on end. He can single pull them never has any problems.
2: A player sits at a known camp, pulling mobs for 3 and half hours on end. Then a another character runs up behind them, pokes them in the back, kills them and runs off laughing.
So what has the example 2 added that A did not? Randomness. Player 2 is upset that he was killed by a player, he's upset that his activity was randomly interrupted beyond his level of control.
It's the "random" element that people don't like, they want to have a predictable game experience while playing. This is why few besides Billus8 will complain about DAoC's RvR system, it has no impact on your daily gaming experience. But people hate SB, EQ PvP severs...ect because the PKers are out in force.
You said you enjoy this randomness, Good for you. But I was illustrating that there are allot of reason to have a PvP system. In fact I think the benefits of one out weight the PK factor.
Here's the short list:
1. being able to police yourself without a GM
2. A higher common level of respect between players since few will risk making enemies needlessly
3. Common enemies bring people together (better communities)
4. variety, PvP adds "sub games" to the game, like killing the PKers, or patrolling guild lowbe zones. Protecting cities..ect
And you can never forget, that something must prevent you from getting everything you want. If there is not a system of pellets you'll get board and stop playing. In most games, the restricting factor is time.
I like to see a system where time isn't the restriction, it's something more skill based... witch implies a PvP solution.
-----
Let's also consider few more examples
C: A player sits at a known camp and pulling mobs for 3 and half hours on end. Then another player pulls a mob near, it aggro's and kills the camper. (this is indirect PvP, only without PvP you can do a thing to defend yourself, and least you can get higher level people to help kill the PKers)
C and D are indirect PvP, people can grief you in any game. It's every bit as likely to happen in non-PvP games and PvP ones. I've been PKed less in full PvP games, than I've had my camps stolen or been KSed in EQ. Yet the fear of bing randomly dead, is considered greater than this type of harassment.
E: A player sits at a known camp, pulling mobs for 3 and half hours on end. Then a random mob aggro and kills them.
F: A player sits at a known camp, pulling mobs for 3 and half hours on end. Then the game decides to kill you for sitting in one spot to long.
How is E and F any different than PvP? E used to happened more than I'd like to say in EQ. Yet having the game kill you is somehow less dramatic than a player. This I don't understand.
As I said before, many people want to predictable result. They do not want a game that is overly random. Either PvP or PvE. I think once AI's are like playing people, PvP will be more accepted since people will be easier opponents.
Or there will be a huge demand to bring back EQ like games... could go either way.
I hope this clears things up.
-=-=-=-=-
"The beauty of MMORPGS is the merging of gaming and chatrooms. EQ is really just AOL merged with a fantasy game." - billus8
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% Test learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=-
Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
2 Points.
1. I was under the impression when you were refering to PvP for the most part, it was a NON Forced environment. Like DAOC or UO (With Trammel Facet) where they have designated areas, (that you choose to go to) if you wish to participate in PvP. Now i realise the majority of your explanations are refering to a Forced Environment, which inturn makes all the more sense
2. In my opinion the best Forced PvP MMORPG would be, Ultime Online: The Golden Years. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Thanx for the explenation. I agree with you now.
- Malkavian
"When you find yourself falling into madness... Dive." - Malkavian Proverb
"When you find yourself sinking into Madness, dive"
Glove, you were absolutely right when you chose a sardonic analogy to kick off this post. It got the PvP debate going in full force, much to the chagrin of some.
Let me state for the record that I enjoy PvP, especially the RvR and BG concept implemented in DAoC. I have had my posterior handed to me on a platter more times than I care to remember, but I don't have a problem with that. BGs and RvR are a blast, and one reason (I believe) is that most everyone there wants to be there. PCs are immensely more difficult opponents than computer driven mobs for precisely the reasons pointed out here: PvE is very predictable.
The reason players can sit and pull mobs at a camp for 3 1/2 hours is they know exactly how to kill them and that it will work every time. I soloed my EQ necro about 8 levels in South Karana because I sat there for several days and consistently pulled the bard Vhalen Nostrolo. He did the same thing every time and I chose to use that reliability to level safely. Not the most exciting thing, but my goal was experience. PvP will never work this way. Even the dumbest PC will eventually learn to try a different method of attack after getting killed 10 times in a row.
My biggest problem with PvP in most games today (and granted I have not played all games) is that it is a tough road to get to the "honor among thieves" level where PCs respect other PCs, at least in my experience. Young characters in a PvP world regularly have to contend with the PKdoods. When SB debuted, several people I know quit outright because gangs of higher levels were waiting at the exit to the newbie island to gank anyone who entered. Eventually, I spoke to people who got into groups where trust was established and group power was wielded, but it took a good bit of tenacious gameplay, enduring numerous deaths to get there. Those who love this kind of game stuck around, but I contend that most players don't want to have to put up with this for weeks just so they can find out if the game is worth playing.
I still say that most of today's MMOGers are drawn to the social and leveling aspects of the genre. It will take a revolutionary manifestation of PvP to get these people to readily jump into a full-blown PvP world. The idea of 1hr PvP = 4hrs PvE is interesting, but I can see gankers abusing it. I mean why would they ever attack a Forest Ettin when a lower level PC gives them 4x the experience? Not that it's a bad idea...there are many novel approaches. However, I haven't seen one that really makes the MMOG experience empty without it. The closest I have seen is the BG concept of DAoC where Realm players of a certain level range are forced to cooperate to take over the keep. Another fun game that is pure PvP is WWIIOL, but its lack of character advancement and clunky social interfaces (squadrons and radio) make it play more like a giant FPS where no one's character is ever much better than it was when he first started.
PvP is the soul and essence of most games. In fact, I'd say that computer games in general and MMOGs in particular are the odd men out, in that they offer a chance to play against a non human opponent. Look at any other game, from football to Monopoly to bowling to hopscotch, and you'll most always find people playing against one another. However, you won't see a Little League team take the field against the New York Yankees. People want to compete with those against whom they have a fighting chance. This is one reason why PvP in MMOGs, IMHO, has been largely a failure. As I mentioned before, the powergamers will always hold the advantage over the casual players, and most people don't have 18hrs a day to dedicate to a computer game.
If the playing field could be balanced in a way that PvP and PvE meshed well, the resulting game would be a smash. The problem seems to be that no one has hit upon that magic formula as of yet. Oh, and Malk, you're right in that the original UO was probably the best forced PvP environment, at least that I played.
I could write a book on PvP as well, but I know everyone gets tired of my longwindedness, so I'll end this post here, conceding that I have about 100 more points that space and time will not permit me to make.
Oh, and thanks to those who actually read my previous post and commented intelligently on it. I know when someone is trying to bait me, and I'm neither cowed by misplaced arrogance nor tempted by petty taunts and ad hominem attacks. To paraphrase a certain new wave pioneer, I used to be disgusted, but now I'm merely amused. I've been at this a long time, too.
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate. (written on the SW:G CD)
A: 73% E: 73% S: 40% K: 13%
-----
Old timer.
I still treat this thread as a troll-attempt on Glove's part. You yourself made reference in this thread to some other thread going on about PvP.. as far as I'm concerned, if you have one already going, you can keep using that.
I had a feeling I'd wake up today and find some half-baked explanation by Glove as to why it was an actual attempt at a serious discussion.. thoughts of hasty little Koltrane Emails flyyyyying through the night.. "bail me out here, pleeeease!"
As for actually READING all of your annoyingly-verbose posts: (and I thought *I* was bad in that department) I don't like PvP in MMOGs. (I do like to hear about its failures.. and, even better, any possible movements to remove it from the MMOGs I play) I have a couple shooters installed that do it far better, and a few more sitting on the shelves that do it just as well if not better. Yay, I can sit in Earth and Beyond and listen to L150 Progen Warriors brag about wiping out L101 Jenquai Explorers in the arena.. or I can sit in Star Wars Galaxies and watch some 13 year old with an AT-ST and 3 Rancors kill and then brag about killing some guy with barely 2-3 levels into Novice Marksman. If I want to shoot at annoying kids like that, I'll load up Battlefield: 1942 or Tribes 2 or Ghost Recon and even the playing field. Why read 14 paragraphs of your text on it when my own views on it are summed up so quickly?
____________________
-- Death to picture-sigs. --
____________________
More irony!
It's like forum PvP.
I think that that's the biggest problem with PVP in MMORPGs. It's not balanced. Not balance in a sense of class vs class but balance in a sense of level vs level.
Take any FPS game out there. All players are on equal footing. PvP works in those games because everyone is equal and it takes actual player skill (or lag) to best someone in a 1 on 1 fight.
Now take any MMORPG out there. If you're 10-15 levels above someone else you can take about 5 or 6 of them without breaking a sweat (slight exaggeration). Hell, in some MMORPGS you don't even need to use spells or special skills. Just turn on "Auto Attack" and go get a beer. In my opinion, any MMORPG that strives to have a good PvP model needs to take that into account.
You need to balance the levels. Now I'm not saying that a level 5 char should be able to beat a level 20 char but what would possibly work is restricting PvP. Restricting players from attacking someone 5 levels and bellow their char. Or if the game has special PvP zones, divide the zones so that in zone A only players who's character is level 1-10 can PvP. Zone B levels 10-20 and so on. That might at least even out the field somewhat and get some people interested in PvP instead of those people quitting in frustration because they got "pwnt" by a player who's 50 levels above them as soon as they left the guard zone.
I love PvP but I can also see when PvP is not working. In any game PvP servers have about 1/8th of the population of a non PvP server. The reason for that is because the current PvP rules just don't work. Something needs to be done to fix it so that PvP can be enjoyed by other people and not just a select few.
____________________
-- Death to picture-sigs. --
____________________
I absolutely have to agree with you on that point. That's the sort of things I've been pointing out.
The BIG-4 of this year (Lineage2, WoW, EQ2, UX) will all be plagued with level vs level balance issue. I mean it's not even balance, it's no balance at all.
level 5 guy can't simply compete with say level 20 guy. It's predictable. Thus no particular surprise when level 20 guy takes on level 5 guy.
Koltrane (and anyone else that has been reading entire posts),
The 4X in PvP, I tend to think of DF like zones for this example. DAoC avoids this since a someone 30 levels below you in only worth 1rp. But if you gave exp for pvp, I'd think a similar rule system would be needed, you don't get exp for killing mobs 30 levels under you.
In fact I wish more of DAoC was like DF. Yes, I've PKed in there many, many times yet it's my favorite place in the game, and one of favorite MMORPG experiences?
Being high level in allot of ways is like being a super hero, you no longer fear mobs, you trace around in your glowing armor, cape flowing the wind, while you stride up and down hallways protecting lowbes. I've spend in hours in DF doing nothing more than patrols, rezzing and assisting lowbe's with over pulls. I'll get tells "so-and-so just killed me at intersection" And off I go to try to track down a PKer. This is great fun, and it creates's a since of community and accomplishment, what good is it to be level 50 if there is no need to use it to some advantage?
As a lowbe I love DF since the exp and money are so much better than anywhere else, and if you die or are PKed it's normally only a few minutes until a friendly high level character runs by than will rez me.
SB had many experiences like this, but in SB you had to get in a guild to get it.
PK's happen, it's a hard concept to accept. I hated it, bad the 1st couple time, then I figured out I didn't have to take it. I could enlist others to help me, or I'd move somewhere else. It is a hassle, but as I said, this type of harassment PKing happening even in EQ. (Training, KSing, Ninja looting...ect) At least in PvP you can police yourself.
"The elimination of PvP does not eliminate harassment by players. It nearly eliminates your ability to retaliate with the hope that not permitting PvP will deter harassment."
Why is being KSed, or trained more acceptable.. or even different than being PKed?
Yes level vs level isn't balance... what would a level mean if it was?
Skill based games are trying to level this a bit, but the less meaningfully you make levels the more the game becomes a FPS. I think guild wars is trying to make a stab at this, by allow players to gain news skills with "level" but not necessarily more powerfully ones.
I blame EQ for the poor results on PvP.
1st of all EQ mad a such a bad attempt at PvP that it turned the clock backwards. Secondly EQ made camping something for 3 and half hours the status-quo. This is horrid, no game should mean doing the same repetitious task for such a long period of time. If the expectation of having hours of game-time uninterrupted in any way as a standard, a little randomness in your gameplay wouldn't be so upsetting.
I think the single biggest Mistake of any PvP centric MMORPG is to allow more than character... or at least more than one name.
Consider this, when people PK you, you remember them. (unless it's DAoC witch hides names from you) Let's say someone the 1st week a gamer powerlevels, so they can kill newbe's in hordes. On week 2 they start a new character and no-one is the wiser. Is this good for the community? No, I think all your characters should have the same name, your account name. You can have as many characters as you like, but you need to consider what will happen if you go on a PK spree... and that's 100 people gunning for you for the rest of the time you attempt to play the game.. unless you cancel your account and start over witch I think is the appropriate penalty for being a PKer.
If people weren't allowed to have PK alts, I think it happen allot less.
DAoC has what I consider sterle PvP. The problem with it is, it eliminates some of the more interesting PvP situations.... diplomacy. (I could go on here, but I think you can see quickly how players towns and settlements would make and break deals with other, it adds allot of depth to a game)
PvP brings out the very best players and very worst. Generally the worst comes out before the best.
I think very slowly we're seeing a tend towards more PvP in games. Hopefully someone will stumble onto more ways to make PvP fun... and PvE less painful.
Thank you for reading this over completely
-=-=-=-=-
"The beauty of MMORPGS is the merging of gaming and chatrooms. EQ is really just AOL merged with a fantasy game." - billus8
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% Test learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=-
Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
How about so you can comment intelligently on it?
Hope this post was short enough for you, buckaroo.
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate. (written on the SW:G CD)
A: 73% E: 73% S: 40% K: 13%
-----
Old timer.
I agree...Darkness Falls (for you non DAoCers, DF is a RvR dungeon in DAoC) is probably the most interesting place in all of DAoC (I haven't purchased ToA yet) and adds a great dynamic to the game.
You bring up a good point here. This is where I find high levels PKing low levels absolutely acceptable - in avenging others. If I am a level 50 pally and I see a level 30 monk kill a level 10 wizzy, I have neither compunction nor remorse about taking the PKer down, regardless of his reasons. If he was merely RPing, then my vengeful attack adds to the RP experience. If he was merely griefing, then that's even sweeter.
And that's fine for those who want that type of gameplay. My problem with it is that my character is likely to be lower than a number of PKers because I don't have as much time to dedicate to playing as others do. Given that, I'd rather spend my time in PvE or a controlled PvP environment where the social and progressive aspects of the game are still available to me.
What I don't understand is the downright hostility toward non PvPers from those who choose PvP. PvP fanboys are constantly trolling boards and other areas, deriding nonPvPers as "carebears" or worse. It's extremely juvenile, and that attitude probably has a lot to do with the reason many have left unbridled PvP for a more controlled world. I think (just MHO) that one reason a lot of these ganklovers are chapped is because the majority of PvEers are easier prey than the hardened PvPers that inhabit their server (not that they are less skilled, but are less confrontational at first, giving the predatory PvPer an advantage). The argument that PvEers are ruining the game by "forcing" the publishers to make the game less PvP friendly only holds water if there are no pure PvP options.
As an additional note, the PvP community is not above crying foul, even when the rules are being followed. The EQ PvP servers used to be such that a PKer could loot the players corpse (everything - money, items, armor, weapons). Then it became only one item per kill to which the victor was entitled. Even that changed and now, all EQ PvP servers are cash only (unless I'm mistaken...there may still be one item loot server).
It isn't more acceptable, but death in most current MMOGs carries a greater consequence than losing a kill. Granted, having the Ancient Cyclops snaked out from under you after you camped the spawn for three days is pretty damned nasty, but the de facto rules which have evolved into policy on many games allow for redress in the form of /appeals etc. I know of a girl who was a top level wizzy in UO. She got mad at a few folks, so she charmed a dragon and marched it into their town. EA suspended her account and banned her. One could argue she was working within the rules of the game, and she was, but her action was considered illegal by the GMs and she was ousted.
KSing and training are considered a breach of ToC, and are thus actionable by appeal. PKing is not. In fact, it is quite the opposite. If I appeal a PK on a PvP server, the response will likely be, "Change servers."
I agree that EQ's implementation of PvP was/is poor, but I just can't lay the blame for the entire industry at SOE's feet.
I agree and this blame I can lay at the feet of SOE.
Amen to that! Some PKers want to have their cake and eat it, too. They accomplish this with Jekyll and Hyde personas. No one knows that Shanidar, the noble warrior and Ygimon, the craven rogue are actually the same person IRL. Their actions should have consequences that follow them throughout the game, or at least the same server.
On some, I'm still waiting for the best to emerge
.
I would like to see that myself.
Sure. I don't have a problem with actually reading posts before I make comments.
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate. (written on the SW:G CD)
A: 73% E: 73% S: 40% K: 13%
-----
Old timer.
I agree...Darkness Falls (for you non DAoCers, DF is a RvR dungeon in DAoC) is probably the most interesting place in all of DAoC (I haven't purchased ToA yet) and adds a great dynamic to the game.
Yes, I've PKed in there many, many times yet it's my favorite place in the game, and one of favorite MMORPG experiences?
You bring up a good point here. This is where I find high levels PKing low levels absolutely acceptable - in avenging others. If I am a level 50 pally and I see a level 30 monk kill a level 10 wizzy, I have neither compunction nor remorse about taking the PKer down, regardless of his reasons. If he was merely RPing, then my vengeful attack adds to the RP experience. If he was merely griefing, then that's even sweeter.
We can agree there are good implementations of PvP when PvP is fun.
And that's fine for those who want that type of gameplay. My problem with it is that my character is likely to be lower than a number of PKers because I don't have as much time to dedicate to playing as others do. Given that, I'd rather spend my time in PvE or a controlled PvP environment where the social and progressive aspects of the game are still available to me.
I think there should always be some non-PvP areas in a PvP game. Something like 80% PvP 20% not. But it seems to be all PvP or nothing. DAoC took a whack at a middle ground... it's o.k. But it needs help.
What I don't understand is the downright hostility toward non PvPers from those who choose PvP. PvP fanboys are constantly trolling boards and other areas, deriding nonPvPers as "carebears" or worse. It's extremely juvenile, and that attitude probably has a lot to do with the reason many have left unbridled PvP for a more controlled world. I think (just MHO) that one reason a lot of these ganklovers are chapped is because the majority of PvEers are easier prey than the hardened PvPers that inhabit their server (not that they are less skilled, but are less confrontational at first, giving the predatory PvPer an advantage). The argument that PvEers are ruining the game by "forcing" the publishers to make the game less PvP friendly only holds water if there are no pure PvP options.
I think this is easily understandable. People that like killing others for fun for hours on end, and also want them to be 40 levels under them so it's not a fair fight are generally young males between 12-24. So it's no surprise that act juvenile.
And also as you point out, if your going to PK someone you want that person to whine about it. It's allot more fun.
I'm not arguing that PvE are ruining (or helping) anything. Where there is a market someone will make a product for that market. I argue it's not possible for one game type to ruin all games for the others.
My first post was in response to billus8, and his silly reasons why PvP is broken. Why do non-PvPers need to convince others that PvP isn't fun? If you want to talk about what you think needs to change to make PvP more fun, I'm all ears. But to just condemn others for enjoying something (anything), that isn't harming you in some way, is wrong and self-rightous.
As an additional note, the PvP community is not above crying foul, even when the rules are being followed. The EQ PvP servers used to be such that a PKer could loot the players corpse (everything - money, items, armor, weapons). Then it became only one item per kill to which the victor was entitled. Even that changed and now, all EQ PvP servers are cash only (unless I'm mistaken...there may still be one item loot server).
People hate changes to the game, PvP or PvE.
Minors can seldom take what they dish out.
I'd like to see a study on how long PKers keep playing PvP games once they have a bad reputation and can't go near another group anywhere in the game. I think that's why allot of PKers don't like well implemented PvP much.
It isn't more acceptable, but death in most current MMOGs carries a greater consequence than losing a kill. Granted, having the Ancient Cyclops snaked out from under you after you camped the spawn for three days is pretty damned nasty, but the de facto rules which have evolved into policy on many games allow for redress in the form of /appeals etc. I know of a girl who was a top level wizzy in UO. She got mad at a few folks, so she charmed a dragon and marched it into their town. EA suspended her account and banned her. One could argue she was working within the rules of the game, and she was, but her action was considered illegal by the GMs and she was ousted.
I've trained people before. I won't go into the whys, but the GM's never did a thing, you have to prove I was trying to grief them, if you play dumb nothing can be proven.
I've greifed people in allot of different ways inside the rules of EQ for reasons I won't go into. Once again GM's never did a thing.
You can never relay on GM's to fight your battles, they won't. There is no such thing as a camp in EQ. While KSing is a volition you have to prove it, often without witnesses. Anything not aggroed on your is fair game.
It's allot better when you can take matters into your own hands... not that you need to, this almost never happens in PvP centric games.
KSing and training are considered a breach of ToC, and are thus actionable by appeal. PKing is not. In fact, it is quite the opposite. If I appeal a PK on a PvP server, the response will likely be, "Change servers."
Once again it comes down a issue of proof. I can't tell you how many times I've run Gore to KC. Loads of fun, I laugh the whole time. So I'm not "trying" to kill people, can anyone blame me for trying to get away yet? Loads will die. And no the GM's won't do much about it.
GM's have little to no power.
I gave up trying to talk them about level 30, and started taking manners into my own hands.
I think the single biggest Mistake of any PvP centric MMORPG is to allow more than character... or at least more than one name.
Amen to that! Some PKers want to have their cake and eat it, too. They accomplish this with Jekyll and Hyde personas. No one knows that Shanidar, the noble warrior and Ygimon, the craven rogue are actually the same person IRL. Their actions should have consequences that follow them throughout the game, or at least the same server.
I'm going to leave this here in hope others will see it.
PvP brings out the very best players and very worst. Generally the worst comes out before the best.
On some, I'm still waiting for the best to emerge .
Trust me, some of the greatest people you'd ever want to know play PvP centric games. As I've said there are allot more reasons to play PvP.
-=-=-=-=-
"The beauty of MMORPGS is the merging of gaming and chatrooms. EQ is really just AOL merged with a fantasy game." - billus8
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% Test learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=-
Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
Interesting post, and might I just say, you guys type TOO much. And as a hardcore PvPer, I take offense to the statement that we for no apparant reason just flame carebears. Now, I have seen cases, and in some I find it understandable, I get rather pissed when a PVP oriented game gets weakened, and the game is completely slain, overall, that really pisses me off, why? Well, I havent found a good PvP game since darktide on AC1. And hey, I dont care what the carebears do, they can have their EQ, and all the other games, buts its been a year too many since a good PvP game came out, and overall, i've found too many cases of some carebear whining and crying, and ruining the game.
As for level restriction on PKing, restriction on griefing etc. Why? Why not let the players take care of themselves. I mean overall i liked pking on AC1 to for 1. Gain infamy, (i loved it when people cried my name when I ran into town) 2. Gain goodies, that were actually used, or were just for cash. Now, sometimes i'd help newbies, sometimed i'd kill them, but overall it didnt really matter, because they didnt lose much of anything.
Now, would I grief? It depends, I was mainly a PKer for gain, but if somone I knew, and that person was an utter jackass, or did me wrong in the past, I wasnt one to forget.
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
How about so you can comment intelligently on it?
Hope this post was short enough for you, buckaroo.
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate. (written on the SW:G CD)
A: 73% E: 73% S: 40% K: 13%
OK, so you can't take a hint. Let me spell it out for you:
At this point, none of your babble is going to elicit a civil response from me. Short, long.. all tripe, BUCKAROO.
____________________
-- Death to picture-sigs. --
____________________
I gave up on anything civil from you a long time ago. In all your blather in this thread, you have only one time made a comment that was germane to the topic at hand. The balance has been to spew snide shots at individual posters. I was hoping for a little more from you.
You see, I have actually read all your posts. You, by your own admission, have not read mine. How you can actually expect me and others to take you seriously when you deride and chastise people for posts you haven't even bothered to fully read is beyond me.
If you feel the need to continue to post in this thread, I would ask you to stick to the topic at hand, that being the merits of PvP in the MMOG genre. I don't expect you to do so, but at least I can make the request.
Again, keeping it short in an endeavor to keep you from becoming a sad panda.
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate. (written on the SW:G CD)
A: 73% E: 73% S: 40% K: 13%
-----
Old timer.
Yeah, you're absolutely right, but I'm attempting to fully make my point, as are Malkavian, Glove, et al. I'd rather type too much and be clear than not enough and be misunderstood. And believe it or not, I leave a bunch of stuff out.
No offense is intended unless you are one of the many (and there are many) PvPers who constantly take potshots in the form of insults and taunts at anyone who isn't a hardcore PvPer. If that is the case then I take issue with you. I have posed the question in other threads and it appears that most people get upset with whiny babies who water down a game. However, I have seen a number of flame threads attacking people who have never once attempted to alter a PvP game experience. Have you never seen a post to this effect?
"...and for all you carebear p*ssies in EQ, you had better stay out of my game or I'll own your carebear ass!" (idiotic leetspeak intentionally omitted)
Is this happening a bunch? If so, can you give me some examples (besides EQ splitting into Tram and Fel). I'm not trying to test you nor do I doubt you - I honestly don't know where this is happening. If it is occurring as you say, then I would be equally upset, but I just don't know of any bare knucks PvP games that have become weakened by a vocal minority of whiners, though apparently there are some, because this has rubbed a lot of PvPers raw.
Is there an instance where doing this has been an unconditional success, from both a popularity and financial standpoint? I thought Shadowbane was a pure PvP game where the players had to police themselves, and last I heard it was losing players by the bucketful, even those who like PvP. I never played SB, so I don't know why everyone has left. Is this one of the games that was nerfed because crybabies forced UbiSoft's hand?
Time is something, at least in my opinion, and I lose a bunch of it every time some PKer decides to ambush me while I'm fighting a mob. Being forced to start from my bind point and run five minutes to my body only to be stomped again by a high level griefer is not fun and is a waste of time. I choose to play a game where I control what I do, not some powergamer who decides he's going to take me out just because I haven't put in 50+ hours of gameplay. This is why I choose nonPvP. I don't go into a PvP world and try to change it, yet it seems that people still want to call me a carebear because I don't want to step into their world and get continuously slapped around. I don't understand the hostility - honestly I don't.
I don't consider PKing someone who did you wrong griefing. However, I think taking out newbies for gain or whatever is pretty poor. If you really love the thrill of fighting another human, why not take on someone equal to you? At least they have a fighting chance.
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate. (written on the SW:G CD)
A: 73% E: 73% S: 40% K: 13%
-----
Old timer.
-=-=-=-=-
"The beauty of MMORPGS is the merging of gaming and chatrooms. EQ is really just AOL merged with a fantasy game." - billus8
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% Test learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=-
Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
Glove u quoted that pvp gets old after a while. I dont care if u like pvp or not but you have to admit this....what would get old faster-pvp which is constantly changing due to an actual live person playing your foe??? or an automated monster in which is programmed to do the same things over and over and over again. If Im attacking a monster in many of these games and I run a bit and hide will that monster detect me? NO, not in any games that im aware of. But a human will. If this seems less "fun" to you and you prefer absolutely zero pvp Im sorry I just cant comprehend your thoughts. But then again Ive never played any of the MMOS unless they had pvp.
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
Any activity gets old given enough time. I'm sorry but it's a fundamental law, granted some get old allot quicker than others.
This isn't to say anything bad or good about anything, it's just the way it is.
IMHO: I get board with PvE when I sit in the same spot, see the same, look at the same mobs, use the same button sequences, and have no risk of dieing for to long.
How long to long is depends on mood and time of day.
PvP gets old when: I can't find anyone to PvP with (it takes two to PvP), your not allowed to attack certain peoples. (treaties), when your at a complete disadvantage (such as RvR when there are 100 members of one realm and yours only has 10 or so out. Or 200 people are lined up to take out your city and you have 20 to defend it), when you are a complete advantage, being on the Zerg end of things isn't any more fun for me than the reverse... actually I like being the underdog a bit, it means more of a challenge for me. But if I have no hope of winning, I don't play.
The single biggest problem with PvP is all the waiting and getting around. In PvE you don't (I hope) spend as much time trying to find someone/someones, or wait on them to show up.
Time of day, day of week..ect all effect this. Different games try to compensate for this effect differently. But all in all, good PvP match ups are often hard to find in allot of PvP games.
No matter how much you like anything, if that was the only thing you did for a long period of time it would get old. This is why the best games will provide a large varity of activities to participate in.
-=-=-=-=-
"The beauty of MMORPGS is the merging of gaming and chatrooms. EQ is really just AOL merged with a fantasy game." - billus8
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% Test learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=-
Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
"the way i see it pvp option in all games is fine therefore everyone is happy.Ya dont wanna pvp dont if you do click the pvp option.I like pvp its fun but i dont wanna see it forced on paying custormers if ya want true pvp go play a godwar mud. "
Paying customers are there by choice, if they dont like the game setup, they dont have to pay, I quit EQ because I didnt like the way it was, if out comes a PvP game, they dont have to pay, thats a solution, and a option.
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
I feel the reason that pvp is at a sluggish state is because the new players are getting younger and younger and they cant handle pvp. Im not aware of the marketing that goes along with selling MMOS but the increase in pc's in the home and the decline in activity in youths of america shows this could be the cause. Also to be good in pvp you have to be somewhat intelligent and Im sure thats why alot of you guys that diss pvp on ur posts just arent to damn bright. Ive never played a MMO that dint have pvp but Id be willing to bet fighting them monsters all day sure would boost your ego and fame in your rl. lol