Perma death would remove the RPG out of any game, why?
RPG stands for roleplaying, you take on the skills and characteristics, the mental and physical parts of whatever character you play. If you constantly die, or at least die a lot and have to start anew then how can you possibly roleplay that character to any degree? For an old time PnP RPG'er like me just as much development is built into a character personality wise as it is lvl or skill wise, probably even more so.Things that happen during your characters life cycle influence him, people he meet, enemies and friends?
Roleplaying to me is developing those parts of a character, how can you possibly do this in a game were you might only live for days or weeks or even moths, it is to short a time. I am not saying it would not work, most PnP games are indeed permadeath, but please refrain from calling such a system a RPG game, it is not and can never be one. It would be much much closer to a FPS then a RPG however you did it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As Kriminal says: "Pvp makes a game if it is done right, and it hasn't been done right yet..."
But if it has not been done yet then how do you know?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Umbrood Perma death would remove the RPG out of any game, why? RPG stands for roleplaying, you take on the skills and characteristics, the mental and physical parts of whatever character you play. If you constantly die, or at least die a lot and have to start anew then how can you possibly roleplay that character to any degree? For an old time PnP RPG'er like me just as much development is built into a character personality wise as it is lvl or skill wise, probably even more so.Things that happen during your characters life cycle influence him, people he meet, enemies and friends? Roleplaying to me is developing those parts of a character, how can you possibly do this in a game were you might only live for days or weeks or even moths, it is to short a time. I am not saying it would not work, most PnP games are indeed permadeath, but please refrain from calling such a system a RPG game, it is not and can never be one. It would be much much closer to a FPS then a RPG however you did it.
What does roleplaying mean? it does not mean how many friends you have made in the game. It does not mean how many cool items you have collected, or how many enemies you have killed. It is simply your ability to play a role, usually one that you cannot play in real life.
The more freedom a game offers, the more roleplaying is possible. Your statement "Perma death would remove the RPG out of any game" is already proven untrue by the original RPG, known as dungeons and dragons, which was a permadeath game. Dungeons and Dragons is actually better for roleplaying than any mmorpg could possibly be. Since players have far more freedom.
Without permadeath, the game is less 'real' which logically makes it harder to roleplay.
Originally posted by TaskyZZ Everybody always says a PvP game would be the best if done right... So, what is right??? To me, the only way you are going to get RIGHT is if you magically exclude griefers...
Griefers are an essential part of what makes a PVP game more fun. They create conflict by deciding to attack you for whatever reason and so players will be always at risk, which is what makes it fun.
I don't expect you to understand this concept, as you will probably never find the possibility of dying fun. But don't think the fact that you dislike griefers, and will never play a game where griefing might be possible, is in any way going to mean that a PVP game cannot be successful.
*Signature*The Pessimist says the cup is half empty. The Optimist says the cup is half full. The Pragmatist says the cup is half full of air. The Engineer says the cup is operating at 50% capacity. The Psychologist says the cup is your mother. The Punk Kid also says the cup is your mother. The Cricket Player says his cup is definately full. Everyone knows that Pamela Andersons cups are full. The Defendant says it was like that when he found it. Me, I just ask the waitress for a refill.
Pure PvE is boring and tedious. It is also a very contolled environment that limits a players creativity. On the up side it gives players direction and content, a must in any MMO.
Pure PvP can be thrilling and most rewarding but it still needs content and direction. PvP's greatest attribute is keeping an open environment where you never know whats coming next, giving the players creativity a chance to show itself.
EverQuest was my first MMO. It was all PvE. If you take away the people that thought about nothing but L33T L00Ts and power leveling the game had alot to offer. There were many zones to hunt in and a ton of quests for every level, class and race out there. The key to an EQ is when you first play it to relax and enjoy what the game has to offer, not rush through it to the end game missing 80% of what it's about.
The downside to EQ was it's limits. The environment was in complete control of you. A player could not create any type of content in the game and was limited to the mobiles for competition, with the exception of the occasional Uber guild #1 trying to KS Uber guild #2 for L33T item #7. PvE just becomes to unimaginative as you use the same tactics over and over and over for lack of a reason to change them or lack of ingame ability to change them.
Shadowbane PvP was fun, no doubt. It was the first MMO I have played that pushed PvP/GvG conflict to the forefront in a very nonrestrictive environment. Aside from its technical issues I had two problems with the game. 1) No content. You still had to level up in very uninspiring environments. You had to obtain cash to build/maintain your city and equipment yet the best way to do this was farming mobiles that were 30 levels below you. Boring. 2) Loved the actuall PvP but honestly there just wasn't enough of it. My guild often 'hunted' other players for 1-4 hours finding very few enemies to combat. This was mainly due to the size of the landscape and secondly the lack of players as the technical issues ran them off.
I liked Shadowbanes looting policy. Once you killed the enemy all their inventory, excluding worn items, was fair game. The loser also had to pay to repair thier items upon death as they took damage.
If we were to take Shadowbane, fix its technical and siege issues, add some EQ style PvE content/quests and reasons for people to log in more I think we would have a winner. I feel DarkFall is attempting just that but as with all unreleased MMO's it remains to be seen if they can do what they say they are trying to do. For those who say DAoC is just that, I disagree. Tried the game. PvP is fun but mindless and unrewarding. Nice game, nice try but we can do better.
If you want a 'pure' pvp game I think you need to find a non MMO game. Be it FPS or RTS, which I love both types as well as MMO's.
Lastly. PvP often fails longterm because it is simply which side has the most players. Sieges in SB are a perfect example. If you want to keep PvP healthy and interesting it has to have some balance, not 500 vs 100 scenarios where lag and sheer numbers always wins. Group vs group in SB was quite fun and learning from such encounters made you a better player.
Originally posted by Genjing Dying in Unreal Tournament is not true permadeath. Yes you lose the weapons, and stuff you were carrying, but it can be regained in a matter of minutes. There is no significant character development. You can't apply the same rules to a mmorpg. Some of the best moments in mmorpgs involve finding that rare weapon or doing something special/unique... or in PvP case, gaining a reputation. Then bam, permadeath, and you're a level 1/skill-less again? Its not fixable by making leveling and item gaining "cheap" and easy either, that just makes it a shallow game. There is a magical line between pvp in a fps and pvp in a mmorpg. Also, I don't see where this stereotyping of PvE comes from. The only people who want repetitive mobs easy to beat, are powergamers who only aim to be the best. Casual gamers, who are rising in number, want mobs that are fun and interesting to fight. An AI does not have to mimic PC's either, they can emulate animal behavior or have certain tendencies and other behaviors programmed in.
Are you arguing with me or agreeing with me? If youre trying to define permadeath as dieing when you have 500 hrs worth of levels under your belt then yeah, but to everyone else permadeath just means starting over. The workabillity of permadeath depends on how important the levels are and how quickly you level up and no a UT style game isn't the only conditions it would work under.
Noone has tried a permadeath MMORPG game where you level just fairly fast and the levels aren't the end all be all of pvp. Its obvious your trying to define a mmorpg as a sandwhich combat style game again and then say permadeath doesn't work for mmorpgs. Like I said that sandwhich crap doesn't really work for anything long term. The most important issue is even when someone dies, can they get back out there and have just as much fun and be just as competitive against whoever they fight? No there is not a magical line between different game genres. And by trying to claim so then you are making it clear you don't know what a mmorpg is...
Thats right about becoming the level 1 skilless - that means you get to experience all that stuff all over again. And your accomplishments are just that much better with everyone knowing that you haven't even died once yet with that character. The only time it becomes a problem is when the game isn't fun except when you are already capped, like I just said.
Imagine this scenario - A fallout based mmorpg (if youve played fallout before) with permadeath, and fps combat. Fallout's special system provides a really good balance between having somewhat signifigant levels but not making them too important. It also had a great speed for leveling. Even in the turn based version equipment, strategy and luck were more important then what level you were. Make the switch to fps combat and you have wildly unpredictable results where the quick thinking, coordination, and preparedness of the player mostly determine the outcome but levels still give a signifigant advantage. In this scenario I would be willing to bet a good amount of money that a permadeath, pure pvp based game would thrive.
Your missing the point about PVE... Once again there is only 3 ways a Mob can be 1) Predictable and possible to beat, 2) Predictable and impossible to beat or 3) Unpredictable like other people.
If its 1) then once you beat it once you can beat it a million times...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROBABILITY(YOUR STATEMENTS BEING MOTIVATED BY FEAR(I>U)) > .5
Originally posted by Kriminal99 Are you arguing with me or agreeing with me? If youre trying to define permadeath as dieing when you have 500 hrs worth of levels under your belt then yeah, but to everyone else permadeath just means starting over. The workabillity of permadeath depends on how important the levels are and how quickly you level up and no a UT style game isn't the only conditions it would work under. Noone has tried a permadeath MMORPG game where you level just fairly fast and the levels aren't the end all be all of pvp. Its obvious your trying to define a mmorpg as a sandwhich combat style game again and then say permadeath doesn't work for mmorpgs. Like I said that sandwhich crap doesn't really work for anything long term. The most important issue is even when someone dies, can they get back out there and have just as much fun and be just as competitive against whoever they fight? No there is not a magical line between different game genres. And by trying to claim so then you are making it clear you don't know what a mmorpg is... Thats right about becoming the level 1 skilless - that means you get to experience all that stuff all over again. And your accomplishments are just that much better with everyone knowing that you haven't even died once yet with that character. The only time it becomes a problem is when the game isn't fun except when you are already capped, like I just said. Imagine this scenario - A fallout based mmorpg (if youve played fallout before) with permadeath, and fps combat. Fallout's special system provides a really good balance between having somewhat signifigant levels but not making them too important. It also had a great speed for leveling. Even in the turn based version equipment, strategy and luck were more important then what level you were. Make the switch to fps combat and you have wildly unpredictable results where the quick thinking, coordination, and preparedness of the player mostly determine the outcome but levels still give a signifigant advantage. In this scenario I would be willing to bet a good amount of money that a permadeath, pure pvp based game would thrive. Your missing the point about PVE... Once again there is only 3 ways a Mob can be 1) Predictable and possible to beat, 2) Predictable and impossible to beat or 3) Unpredictable like other people. If its 1) then once you beat it once you can beat it a million times...
Do you recall what the last 3 letters in MMORPG stand for? Role Playing Game... NOT massive battle sport.
I hate sandwich combat as much as anyone else; i don't recall suggesting that i liked it anywhere, so i assume you're just lumping me in with a certain crowd; i LIKE pvp, even if i have high hopes for the future of PvE.
But if what you suggest comes in to being, it will simply be a massively multiplayer FPS or Action game. NOT an RPG. RPG's are based on storylines and character development. It doesn't have to be levels or equipment, the development can be a personal connection to your character, or memories and experiences. Yes you can start over, but the fact is many people just don't like it. Maybe they reached a certain part of a storyline, and wanted to see what happens next? In an RPG, you are the hero/protagonist of the story. And those characters never truly die.
I'm seeing a lot of other posts that make it seem like PvP is the only way to play now. With that logic, Final Fantasy, Dragon Warrior, Fallout, Baldur's Gate, etc etc are boring and easy. As you just said if you can beat it once, you can beat it a million times right? So whats the point of doing it at all?
I've played Fallout. There are many choices you make in the game, that could lead to death. Mistakes can be made as well if you're not careful. Anyone would be pissed if they accidentally got on the wrong side of the Enclave, died and had to start over at the beginning. Yea its still fun; i beat that game more than once, but wth, you know?
And even if all stages of a game are fun, even when starting over, what need would there be to have permadeath? What you're describing is like a permadeath version of Face of Mankind... though apparantly no one wants permadeath anyway. Its a FPS with all that skill and coordination you like, and a newbie with enough skill can take out a high rank. In fact there isn't even a skill or leveling system in the game. There are no "mobs", its PvP. Yet the majority still doesn't want permadeath. Why? Because a large part of the game involves influencing others through reputation or being in command, creating storylines and events. This is something that is neither sandwich combat nor something that you can experience immediately just by creating a new character. Unfortunately, you're the one that doesn't understand what a mmoRPG is.
I didn't miss the point about PvE either. I agree that it boils down to those 3, i was saying that gamers want #3, when most mmorpgs are using #1. Only that #3 doesn't have to be a digital copy of the way a player plays, and is thus a different kind of challenge. It could be lots of unpredictable weak mobs... or 1 super strong unpredictable mob, etc; in PvP, everyones on an equal scale. PvE can mix things up.
Originally posted by Genjing Do you recall what the last 3 letters in MMORPG stand for? Role Playing Game... NOT massive battle sport. I hate sandwich combat as much as anyone else; i don't recall suggesting that i liked it anywhere, so i assume you're just lumping me in with a certain crowd; i LIKE pvp, even if i have high hopes for the future of PvE. But if what you suggest comes in to being, it will simply be a massively multiplayer FPS or Action game. NOT an RPG. RPG's are based on storylines and character development. It doesn't have to be levels or equipment, the development can be a personal connection to your character, or memories and experiences. Yes you can start over, but the fact is many people just don't like it. Maybe they reached a certain part of a storyline, and wanted to see what happens next? In an RPG, you are the hero/protagonist of the story. And those characters never truly die. I'm seeing a lot of other posts that make it seem like PvP is the only way to play now. With that logic, Final Fantasy, Dragon Warrior, Fallout, Baldur's Gate, etc etc are boring and easy. As you just said if you can beat it once, you can beat it a million times right? So whats the point of doing it at all? I've played Fallout. There are many choices you make in the game, that could lead to death. Mistakes can be made as well if you're not careful. Anyone would be pissed if they accidentally got on the wrong side of the Enclave, died and had to start over at the beginning. Yea its still fun; i beat that game more than once, but wth, you know? And even if all stages of a game are fun, even when starting over, what need would there be to have permadeath? What you're describing is like a permadeath version of Face of Mankind... though apparantly no one wants permadeath anyway. Its a FPS with all that skill and coordination you like, and a newbie with enough skill can take out a high rank. In fact there isn't even a skill or leveling system in the game. There are no "mobs", its PvP. Yet the majority still doesn't want permadeath. Why? Because a large part of the game involves influencing others through reputation or being in command, creating storylines and events. This is something that is neither sandwich combat nor something that you can experience immediately just by creating a new character. Unfortunately, you're the one that doesn't understand what a mmoRPG is. I didn't miss the point about PvE either. I agree that it boils down to those 3, i was saying that gamers want #3, when most mmorpgs are using #1. Only that #3 doesn't have to be a digital copy of the way a player plays, and is thus a different kind of challenge. It could be lots of unpredictable weak mobs... or 1 super strong unpredictable mob, etc; in PvP, everyones on an equal scale. PvE can mix things up.
See that is exactly the type of reasoning that I am talking about. You can't define MMORPG to be whatever YOU think it should be and then go on to argue with other people based on that.
MMORPG yes the RPG stands for role playing game. All that means is you play a role thats the only thing necessary to be classified as an mmorpg. And you play a role in every game ever made. It doesn't mean you can't play a role as a blood sport contender. By this classification UT is an RPG.
If you want to give it the alternative definition (a bad thing to do given its not named as such) that it has simulated character development with little mathematical levels rather than just the actual players ability to get better then you still can't rule out blood sport games because being a blood sport game doesn't necessitate not having levels. Also there are fps'es with levels that are just as succesful as other fpses (enemy territory, purge jihad, the mmofpses)
In either case there is no magical line. The only magical line is if you try and define mmorpg just to be what WOULD make permadeath no longer work just so you can win the argument. I lumped you with other sandwich combat players because you were trying to claim that permadeath wouldnt work in mmorpgs. Weather its sandwich combat or excessive pointless levels, the point remains that you are trying to define mmorpg to be something it is not.
Now it sounds like your trying to define MMORPG as no permadeath... ok lol. People start over all the time in MMORPG games to reexperience everyting. Neocron is a perfect example of this, it has fairly short leveling times (but not that short) You could probably cap a character in a week or two easily. (In a day or two if there was always people to team with which there isnt) People start new characters there all the time out of boredom. And starting over doesn't necessitate that you lose your identity either so don't base your argument on it. What makes an MMORPG from an FPS is having towns, item creation, other tradeskills, etc. The fact that the role you play is more defined.
The argument is PVP is the only way to KEEP a game fun and give it a much higher level of replayability. This is necessary to justify having a game where you continue to pay the company monthly... You play one player games, and PVE to beat it the first time. The problem is in PVE in online games no amount of single player content is going to be enough to justify having a pay by the month game because players play through such single player content much faster than it is made. So to counteract this they just stretch out a small amount of content over hundreds of virtually indistinguishable levels where you fight the same mobs with different colors and names until you realize how stupid it is and stop. Bottom line is single player games = ok, PVE in pay by month online games = not ok.
Unless they make it just like single player games so you go through it really fast, but then everyone would just do everything and quit really fast.
Once you learn what gets you killed and what doesn't in fallout then you can beat it a million times without dieing, except luck plays a big part in that game so its a bit more like gambling...
About FACE OF MANKIND.... Dont presume to make an argument just based on what people say they would like. Alot of people as I have said do not know how to reason properly. Half of those peopel are likely to be thinking- permadeath = dieing and losing large number of levels = bad, despite the fact that FOM has no levels. And not even realize that this is there thought process. And your argument as to why you think why is flawed as well... As I said permadeath doesn't necessitate loss of identity.
About the last paragraph, PVP can be exactly the same - besides the unpredictabillity of that persons skill level they can have any range of in game levels as well. Therefore if PVE reached that point it would just be the same as PVP. With the only difference that even if the little mobs were programmed to talk smack it wouldn't bother you because they weren't real. But then communication between people fighting isn't a necessity either so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROBABILITY(YOUR STATEMENTS BEING MOTIVATED BY FEAR(I>U)) > .5
But arent there plenty of games like this out there allready? I am sure I have heard of games like CS or quake or whatnot, it seems to be what exactly what people here are looking for. Indeed CS is a RPG to, as you aquire money and that gives you a little edge. Seems about the level of edge suggested, so why not play it? Introduce your own RPG elements to that game or something.
And honestly, "griefers make the game fun becuase they add excitement", really? Think about that statement for a second. Raise hands anyone who thinks that is true, or even know someone who thinks that, or even heard of it before, if only as a rumour, aside from here. There is no wonder the world looks as it do really, who would want to inflict pain onto others for pure joy? Excuse me but that spells "broken DNA string" a mile away. These people need councel before they bring a mp5 to school/work.
And yes indeed DnD or any pen and paper RPG is permadeath, but rarely do you die to a bugged GM or a friend backstabbing you for no reason other then to roll naked in peanutbutter yelling his lungs out "PWND". In these games you have a certain degree of control, in computer games you have none.
Actually the first thing you need to do to make a permadeath game is to release a 100% flawless game, without a single bug that could kill you. When that happens, in like 100-200 years or so I am sure this discussion will arise again.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right... first of all, i am defining MMORPG not just on what I think, but on a classical definition of the term. If you take it word for word so literally, then yes every single game in which the main character is not the real you, is an rpg. That is not how the industry, or even most gamers define it. Lets just throw out the ideas of levels and exp and loot completely; there is an inherently different focus in an rpg and a fps. The reason Final Fantasy is fun is completely different from the reason Counterstrike is fun. That is the magical line i'm talking about. I'll admit that i'm a bit off topic, since i actually do agree that a real pvp game focusing on fun and skill, despite being more of an action mmo instead of mmorpg, over levels would be good; but its mainly permadeath i don't like.
As for Neocron, many of Face of Mankind's fans are from there. So i wouldn't be so quick to assume that half of FoM's community dislikes permadeath simply because they don't know better. You can't say you're right just by assuming everyone else is ignorant. Starting over is one thing, but permanently losing is altogether something else. Look at the massively multiplayer pvp thats being set up in DnL and Darkfall, among others. People will have positions of power, defend property and have real influence. You said it doesn't necessarily mean a loss of identity. If all that just carries over to your next new character: "I am Jonathan, i was your leader and ruler of this city, Johnathan, before, but i had to start over! Obey me again!"Then whats the point of permadeath? If they WANT to start over let them, but if its more an inconvenience, then its pointless. It doesn't matter how fun the early part is... if whatever stage of the game you're in is fun as well (as it should be), who would enjoy forcefully stopping at that point? The fact is, most people just don't like permadeath. Games should be fun no matter what level you are, thats correct, but being forced to start over? Its a video game... people like being in control, as carebearish as that may sound.
As for PvP being the only true endless replay... that is true... but PvE only runs out fast if you're powergaming. I used to play 2 hours a day in MUDS and that i considered a lot. Now, that amount of time makes me a laughingstock in todays mmorpgs. The goal of PvE is not supposed be making it to the end, and as long as people are not sitting at their pc for 8-12 hours a day (though is their right), content should not run out that fast.
One could say that the current sucky state of PvE is directly because of powergamers; by hitting the end and complaining loudly, Devs are forced to slow down the action for casual gamers, and create grind to slow pacing down. There are more casual gamers in the market these days though; so in my opinion, i fully expect to see PvE that completely does away with the static sandwich mob, live events that make both PvP and PvE story-driven, and a world that changes with time.
As for the last PvE part, if PvE and PvP offers the same challenge, then a game that offers both should be well off, since both have their own pros and cons.
EdiT:
Also, it sounds like WC3 mod for CS is what you're describing; gain levels fast, permadeath, weapons and armor easy to regain, skill based PvP.
Originally posted by rentantilus Everytime you hear someone say, "PvP and permadeath are bad ideas!" you always hear them make reference to "being level 1 again" or "losing all your skills" as the two main reasons. What we're all talking about by "doing it right" (meaning PvP and permadeath) is putting them in a game that doesn't have levels, and where the difference in skill between a newbie and an experienced character isn't as vast as the rift between a level 1 and a level 100 character. For example, a character with 100 skill points in sword would only be about twice as adept as someone with 0 skill points, not 100 times more able. Sounds lame, eh? Like you're two year old uber character might get his ass kicked by three or four newbies, right? Yep, that's the point. When you take away the levels and make skills handy, not required, you can make a truly PvP game that incorporates permadeath. THEN you'll start to see real roleplaying instead of level grinding. I really need everyone to go with me on this for just a moment... make the following leaps of logic: "Role-playing" is entirely possible, probably even better, outside of a class/level structure. The reason most of you are bored with existing MMORPGs is because there's not enough risk. Sure, it's neat to have a maxed out character for a few weeks, but after that, the luster wears off and what are you? Some big guy with the best sword in the game who can kill anything in one hit... snore. What happens when you finally DO find something that can offer you a challenge? Well, you'll probably kill it, but even if you don't, you'll just lose a bit of gold, maybe a fraction of your total experience, and a few items that you can easily retrieve by dashing back to the spot and looting your own corpse. AI will never be as fun to play against than another human being.
If you have skill points, you are advancing your character. That is pretty much the same thing as leveling, so you might as well take that out too, right? Also, if you are only twice as good at level 100 (yes, level) as someone at Level 0, then what is the point of even getting to level 100. Why not just have everyone be able to kill evereyone else with one hit? Because it would be boring.
Face it. If you have people investing time in their characters to advance them, you are leveling, only with a prettier name. What you are describing is a 3D chatroom. Maybe you should try Second Life. Im sure you would love it. Thats not an insult, but a recommendation.
Very few people actually roleplay anymore. Yes, its sad, but it's true. I have never actually seen anyone roleplay in any MMORPGs I've played. I even play live-action roleplaying games where no one roleplays, and you have Paladins running around telling monsters to go f*ck themselves. The local game center I go to has an AD&D group who do nothing but hack and slash their way through dungeons and argue about rules. So maybe I'm a little jaded to "roleplaying", which many PvPers dont like to do.
Originally posted by geld Griefers are an essential part of what makes a PVP game more fun. They create conflict by deciding to attack you for whatever reason and so players will be always at risk, which is what makes it fun. I don't expect you to understand this concept, as you will probably never find the possibility of dying fun. But don't think the fact that you dislike griefers, and will never play a game where griefing might be possible, is in any way going to mean that a PVP game cannot be successful.
I don't mind dying in an MMORPG, and I am a pro perma death person. I think it would add a much needed air of excitement to every encounter.
I also do not mind PvP, but griefers ruin the game. I do not see how you think griefers are an essential part of the game???
I played EQ for one and a half years, and always on the Rallos Zek server (PvP server). I am a pro PvP player as well. I believe it can be done right too, but the griefers have got to go. Never had a lot of problems with griefing on Rallos Zek because of the 4 level range requirement.
But in games like UO and ShadowBane, one person can easily spoil anothers persons fun. Very easily.
Maybe you and I just have a different definition fo the term griefer...
Griefers are the enemy. Without griefers there is no enemy, you are all friends, especially on a game like EQ, as you mentioned. Who is your enemy? and don't say the randomly spawning creatures, as they are just cannon fodder, put in place to make it easier for you to gain levels.
What we need is racial allignments. Meaning each player is part of a racial faction, and killing a player of that faction will reduce your standing with that faction, even if you are a member of that faction. That way races can actually be enemies with each other. So all enemy races will be griefers to you. But players who are griefers in your own faction will pretty soon be thrown out of that faction and have to fend for themselves. That way you can actually tell who is a griefer, so you can grief them back.
So what I'm saying is the only problem with griefers is when they can kill anyone they want at anytime without worrying about that persons faction coming after them. That is unrealistic. If stronger players know who killed weaker members of their faction they can go out and hunt them, and kill them. The ultimate punishment if it's permadeath.
*Signature*The Pessimist says the cup is half empty. The Optimist says the cup is half full. The Pragmatist says the cup is half full of air. The Engineer says the cup is operating at 50% capacity. The Psychologist says the cup is your mother. The Punk Kid also says the cup is your mother. The Cricket Player says his cup is definately full. Everyone knows that Pamela Andersons cups are full. The Defendant says it was like that when he found it. Me, I just ask the waitress for a refill.
Originally posted by geld People have the same responses all the time. Go play an FPS if you want to PVP. But this will not stop the requests for a pure PVP mmorpg. People like me have played mmorpgs and enjoyed the concept of playing a roleplaying game with many other players online. Many of us have played FPSes and have enjoyed the competitive fast paced action, but we also enjoy character development, the feeling of achievement and the social aspects of mmorpgs. Most mmorpgs have stuck to a tried and true concept of creating a happy friendly world where everyone has to get on with each other while they battle the randomly spawning enemies who have no identity, so there is no remorse in killing them. A gamer like me can only play such a game for a short while, until the game feels unrealistic, repetitive and boring. Conflict is what we seek, without conflict nothing that is done has any meaning. What use is that powerful sword if you cannot use it to defend your homeland from a real threat? Whats the use of amassing a huge wealth if you cannot use it to take control of the world? I do understand there are people who don't want to/ will never have anything to do with PVP. But stating that a pure PVP game will never work because I don't like PVP is a terribly flawed argument. Do you want to try and stop other people from having fun? I don't particularly like Baseball, so do I go into a discussion forum about Baseball and try to convince people that it's a terrible game? Of course not. You are of course welcome to state that you don't like PVP, as I am stating right now I don't like PVE, and cannot ever again play an mmorpg that is non PVP. But a pure PVP mmorpg will be very successul (if done right). That I can pretty much guarantee.
Well said.
The conflict is what we seek. A game with so called "PvP" doesn't make that game a PvP game.
There has to be a consensus or a motivation for people to seek PvP.
And such motivation can only rises when their is consequence for an action.
More dramatic the consequence is the more there is a consensus to seek the action.
Now this might not be a new revelation to many, you might nonetheless be surprised to see how few developers nail this right.
There already are PvP games. Planetside and any other games against other players, battelnet. Not to mention DaoC, RvR is the whole point of the game once you become a high level. Also if there was a sole PvP game the weak ones who keep dieing would quit leaviing very few players left to play, defeating the whole purpose. Also PvP takes away sooo much of the social/grouping aspects needed for leveling, cant be dont only by PvP its impractical. The only solution for these problems is a skill based game where you dont lose anything in PvP but allso have a record or something that makes people want to not die in PvP but also doesnt make them fear it too much.
Kriminal: Right... first of all, i am defining MMORPG not just on what I think, but on a classical definition of the term. If you take it word for word so literally, then yes every single game in which the main character is not the real you, is an rpg. That is not how the industry, or even most gamers define it. Lets just throw out the ideas of levels and exp and loot completely; there is an inherently different focus in an rpg and a fps. The reason Final Fantasy is fun is completely different from the reason Counterstrike is fun. That is the magical line i'm talking about. I'll admit that i'm a bit off topic, since i actually do agree that a real pvp game focusing on fun and skill, despite being more of an action mmo instead of mmorpg, over levels would be good; but its mainly permadeath i don't like. As for Neocron, many of Face of Mankind's fans are from there. So i wouldn't be so quick to assume that half of FoM's community dislikes permadeath simply because they don't know better. You can't say you're right just by assuming everyone else is ignorant. Starting over is one thing, but permanently losing is altogether something else. Look at the massively multiplayer pvp thats being set up in DnL and Darkfall, among others. People will have positions of power, defend property and have real influence. You said it doesn't necessarily mean a loss of identity. If all that just carries over to your next new character: "I am Jonathan, i was your leader and ruler of this city, Johnathan, before, but i had to start over! Obey me again!"Then whats the point of permadeath? If they WANT to start over let them, but if its more an inconvenience, then its pointless. It doesn't matter how fun the early part is... if whatever stage of the game you're in is fun as well (as it should be), who would enjoy forcefully stopping at that point? The fact is, most people just don't like permadeath. Games should be fun no matter what level you are, thats correct, but being forced to start over? Its a video game... people like being in control, as carebearish as that may sound. As for PvP being the only true endless replay... that is true... but PvE only runs out fast if you're powergaming. I used to play 2 hours a day in MUDS and that i considered a lot. Now, that amount of time makes me a laughingstock in todays mmorpgs. The goal of PvE is not supposed be making it to the end, and as long as people are not sitting at their pc for 8-12 hours a day (though is their right), content should not run out that fast. One could say that the current sucky state of PvE is directly because of powergamers; by hitting the end and complaining loudly, Devs are forced to slow down the action for casual gamers, and create grind to slow pacing down. There are more casual gamers in the market these days though; so in my opinion, i fully expect to see PvE that completely does away with the static sandwich mob, live events that make both PvP and PvE story-driven, and a world that changes with time. As for the last PvE part, if PvE and PvP offers the same challenge, then a game that offers both should be well off, since both have their own pros and cons. EdiT:
Also, it sounds like WC3 mod for CS is what you're describing; gain levels fast, permadeath, weapons and armor easy to regain, skill based PvP.
Well actually if you look more carefully you see that counterstrike and final fantasy are NOT fun for different reasons. In both games you work towards a goal. In final fanatasy you get closer to that goal by gaining levels, equipment, etc and progressing through the game. In Counterstrike you get closer to that goal by gaining money, equipment and getting better coordination in real life. They are both fun because you are working towards imagined or real respect you will receive by accomplishing things in the game. In single player games it is sometimes called a feeling of self worth, but its really the same thing.
The only thing different between them is the obstacles in place to get to the goal. The types of games that can exist do so in a continuom (sp?) not in discrete groups. The names are just things we give them to make it easier to differentiate. What you are trying to do is confine MMORPGs to what they already have been so far (which is lame imo). Well if you don't like it you can call the games that people like me want to create whatever you want to. We will continue to call them mmorpg because the name fits.
My point about the people being ignorant is just them SAYING they wont like it doesn't mean they ACTUALLY wouldn't like it. If the game had permadeath and then failed that would be a different story. That hasn't happened. Like Ive been saying it depends on the exact conditions of the game. I am eagerly awaiting FOM as well and I don't know for sure what all the conditions will be like, and even if I did I wouldn't know a 100% weather permadeath would work under them. I however have the best reasoned argument as to when permadeath is going to work, and I am probably right. However tommorow all the rules of the universe may completely change for all I know. But most of their arguments can be plainly seen to not make sense however.
Lets keep in mind that you are trying to claim that permadeath wouldnt work in any mmorpg. Diablo 2 Hardcore is a counterexample of this. (the switch from M to MM would not effect the result) Hardcore mode in this game is a heck of a lot more popular than normal mode. Producing examples where permadeath wouldn't or doesn't work doesn't do anything because you are trying to claim something cannot exist and yet it does.
This right there should tell you that there is something wrong with your reasoning. But.. Permadeath without loss of identity would mean someone would have to start over at a lower level and with less equipment. UT btw has permadeath without loss of identity. However I never said you were right that noone likes permadeath WITH loss of identity either, simply that permadeath doesn't necessitate it so it was a pointless argument. Like I said Diablo 2 is a counter example of this.
But by the way you are talking you are demonstrating that you are not even thinking correctly about this. I would wager that you are still attributing things to permadeath that are not necessary to it. Im not calling you stupid by this, its human nature to do it until a person learns otherwise, but take a step back for a second. In a game with permadeath, people would not necessarily be participating in pvp at the drop of a hat. Picture the Wild West for a moment, and think about the level of permadeath that criminals faced when messing around with the law. People fought over huge problems, but there was more talk about it than actually ever happened. Permadeath doesn't mean having to start over every 2 seconds, but noone lives forever. In FOM the main argument against permadeath was that some people who weren't worried losing their position would whack people who had high position just for the heck of it. The counterargument was that people of high position should be able to afford bodyguards and clones (an extra life) so they could not be killed easily by people of limited means. The truth is it could be made to work either way and just depends on the particulars of the game design.
Its not just that people like to be in control. They like to know what to expect, so even if they aren't in control of everything, they can at least somewhat control what happens to them by knowing the consequences of their actions.
Even in the case of casual gamers, developers of one mmorpg company cannot make content faster than it would be used. PVE is just not a legitimate base for an online game. And again if PVE mobs were made as unpredictable as people then the ONLY single difference would be that the mob cannot make you feel things as strongly as another person can in that position. Good or bad. So if by pros and cons you mean just weighing between the possibility of gaining that persons respect or being heckled by a person and not feeling hardly anything at all then ok but those are the only such pros and cons....
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROBABILITY(YOUR STATEMENTS BEING MOTIVATED BY FEAR(I>U)) > .5
CS and FF "are both fun because you are working towards imagined or real respect you will receive by accomplishing things in the game". What? I didn't play FF7 to gain level 99 with all limits, just to defeat Sephiroth and feel like a big man. There was an involving storyline and character interaction that is just a plain different type of fun than what you get from taking out 4 guys with 1 HE grenade. The fun in FF7 wasn't the accomplishment, it was the journey. And they are not the same type of fun just because you feel satisfaction or self worth afterwards either. Under those rules, sex and basketball are in the same category.
With this in mind, just let me say that i hate the way mmorpgs are right now, and they definitely need a change. But my reason for "confining MMORPGs" as you say, is because I don't think the name fits what you were describing. And here we'll just have to agree to disagree really... since interpreting a phrase is really just up to the individual... but i'll just say that Half-Life can be called a Role-playing action adventure. You RP Gordon Freeman, and go about in action adventure style. But no one calls it that, its a just a FPS, man. One name fits imo, another doesn't.
As for Diablo 2, i don't remember hardcore mode being more popular than normal... and i bought it the day it came out. The whole obsession with this game was about gaining super items, and going on Diablo/Baal runs. In a mode where losing would mean loss of those precious items, i find it hard to believe.
Also, you said "people would not necessarily be participating in pvp at the drop of a hat", but your past examples were essentially describing a game heavily focusing on PvP combat.And in such a game, people WILL die. And you keep referring to mythical gaming conditions where everyone understands risks and are willing to take them occasionally. But what we'll likely see is CS style campers that are so paranoid as to be amazingly annoying to play with. There will not be epic confrontations. There will be lots of hiding and ganking and cheapness. I can't argue with you about this game, because even you don't know exactly how it works; but player behavior can be predicted.
"The counterargument was that people of high position should be able to afford bodyguards and clones (an extra life) so they could not be killed easily by people of limited means". So if you're high ranking, and none of your bodyguards are online, then you can't do anything? There are real life bindings that hinder permadeath, especially when you'll have to depend on others.
Trials of Ascension has permadeath; but even they don't have the guts to say one death, goodbye. You make a good point about control, but things happen in games that we can't control. Me falling off a chair, my power going out, my keyboard breaking. And just knowing the consequences of my actions won't do either; sometimes i like experimenting or going up against something i'm not likely to beat, just to give it a shot. Permadeath gives us a hesitation and reluctance to attempt the extraordinary, a minor problem that we deal with in real life.
As for PvE, content doesn't have to mean new continents, new monsters, or even new items; It could be a specific scenario played out with whats already in the game, like a story arc that places a large enemy army in an encampment, or a boss monster that will require many many people working together to take down. TV writers can plan out a new episode every week for months and even seasons ahead. Its possible for a mmorpg too.
And lastly, another pro of PvE is that you don't have to wait for an opponent/teammate to show up, or worry about them backing out and wasting your time, disconnecting or anything like that.
Originally posted by Genjing CS and FF "are both fun because you are working towards imagined or real respect you will receive by accomplishing things in the game". What? I didn't play FF7 to gain level 99 with all limits, just to defeat Sephiroth and feel like a big man. There was an involving storyline and character interaction that is just a plain different type of fun than what you get from taking out 4 guys with 1 HE grenade. The fun in FF7 wasn't the accomplishment, it was the journey. And they are not the same type of fun just because you feel satisfaction or self worth afterwards either. Under those rules, sex and basketball are in the same category. With this in mind, just let me say that i hate the way mmorpgs are right now, and they definitely need a change. But my reason for "confining MMORPGs" as you say, is because I don't think the name fits what you were describing. And here we'll just have to agree to disagree really... since interpreting a phrase is really just up to the individual... but i'll just say that Half-Life can be called a Role-playing action adventure. You RP Gordon Freeman, and go about in action adventure style. But no one calls it that, its a just a FPS, man. One name fits imo, another doesn't. As for Diablo 2, i don't remember hardcore mode being more popular than normal... and i bought it the day it came out. The whole obsession with this game was about gaining super items, and going on Diablo/Baal runs. In a mode where losing would mean loss of those precious items, i find it hard to believe. Also, you said "people would not necessarily be participating in pvp at the drop of a hat", but your past examples were essentially describing a game heavily focusing on PvP combat.And in such a game, people WILL die. And you keep referring to mythical gaming conditions where everyone understands risks and are willing to take them occasionally. But what we'll likely see is CS style campers that are so paranoid as to be amazingly annoying to play with. There will not be epic confrontations. There will be lots of hiding and ganking and cheapness. I can't argue with you about this game, because even you don't know exactly how it works; but player behavior can be predicted. "The counterargument was that people of high position should be able to afford bodyguards and clones (an extra life) so they could not be killed easily by people of limited means". So if you're high ranking, and none of your bodyguards are online, then you can't do anything? There are real life bindings that hinder permadeath, especially when you'll have to depend on others. Trials of Ascension has permadeath; but even they don't have the guts to say one death, goodbye. You make a good point about control, but things happen in games that we can't control. Me falling off a chair, my power going out, my keyboard breaking. And just knowing the consequences of my actions won't do either; sometimes i like experimenting or going up against something i'm not likely to beat, just to give it a shot. Permadeath gives us a hesitation and reluctance to attempt the extraordinary, a minor problem that we deal with in real life. And lastly, another pro of PvE is that you don't have to wait for an opponent/teammate to show up, or worry about them backing out and wasting your time, disconnecting or anything like that.
Yes they are the same kind of fun, its the exact same emotion. In the case of a 1 player game what is happening is that you are remembering some time when you accomplished something and someone smiled at you for it. By playing through the game you are looking forward to this even though often times noone is usually going to respect you for it and when you do beat it nothing happens. The reason its still fun is because you know that there is a chance that someone would think what your accomplishment was cool and sometimes they do. Also in game non player characters can motivate you to continue playing if they are done right. In the case of multiplayer games there are real people that respect you in the end. Thats the only difference.
There are slightly different variations of this from person to person for example some people think (subconsiously) figuring things out is the way to get respect. Other people have learned that there are always exciting people waiting to meet and interact with them in new places. etc etc. But the root of it all is the sight of someone smiling at you and the emotion that goes with it. Your subconsious mind controls emotions and it reasons purely inductively as to what actions are the quickest way to being happiness which means you have no control over what makes you happy or what doesn't. It attaches a small amount of "happiness" to the memories it thinks are the right path and this is how it controls your actions.
So the point is, YES they are the same kind of fun. No there is not some magical line dividing different kinds of games, we only name them different things to make it easier for us. Every aspect a game can have exists in a continum not in discrete groups. Otherwise there wouldn't be games being created every 5 seconds that reviewers claim strattle different genres. And yes basketball and sex contain the same emotions. Sex also contains physical pleasure, but thats something pretty much unique to sex and maybe drugs.
Ok fine so don't call a pure pvp based game or permadeath pvp game mmorpgs. Who cares what its called. Diablo 2 hardcore became more and more popular the longer the game was out. Of course its not going to be the most popular when the game first comes out because you can't even start a hardcore character until you beat the game. But go play now and you will see. Hardcore mode is a whole new level of challenge, and everything you do in it means a whole lot more. People especially like this mode once they have already beaten the game in normal mode because it gives the game a whole new life.
Ok ... PVP means one thing and one thing only: Player versus player. Permadeath means one thing and one thing only: That you have to start over when you die. Neither of these imply that people have to fight left and right. Neither of these cause any of the things you say either. In one game maybe they do but leveling and gaining items is cheap. In another game maybe leveling is slower but people are very reluctant to fight, and level ones cant beat level 20's... There are a bunch of different ways to do it.
Weather there are griefers, or whatever depends solely on the other conditions of the game. They can be controlled by the design of the game. Stop thinking of the worst case scenario for a permadeath game and then saying "OH there ya have it no permadeath game could be fun"...
Once again in the FOM case, I was under the impression that only when the high ranking person was to travel would he need body guards and he could just advertise and grab some off the street who needed cash. But once again you are trying to assign specific conditions to evaluate when the question is can it be done? Unless you have some reason why it is physically impossible for a permadeath system to work based on NOTHING other than the definition of permadeath then why are you arguing?
No permadeath does not mean you would be reluctant to try something you haven't tried before. This depends on how much you would be losing if you died. In fact it would probably be more of a cure for dealing with the problem in real life. Once again if all you would lose is your weapons then it doesn't matter if you die... And once you get used to permadeath you get used to this game of starting over and seeing how far you can get. Unless you are losing 20 hrs until you can compete and play the game normally again its not a big deal. Don't you see this is the alternative to stretched out content and time sinks. It can be replaced by quick leveling, quick economic gain etc and permadeath to keep you cycling up and down.
Ok so yeah if you can't find anyone to PVP with thats a downside vs PVE. But the point is if the mobs are as unpredictable as people then everyone complaining about PVP now would be complaining about the mobs then.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROBABILITY(YOUR STATEMENTS BEING MOTIVATED BY FEAR(I>U)) > .5
These essay posts are getting tiresome to write so i'm just going to wimp out. I conclude that permadeath is possible but requires an unlikely structure that no one has thought of yet; and as a result may not exist. It is my personal opinion that its towards the impossible side. But ya never kno.
As for the whole fun RPG/FPS thing, yes, they are the same emotion, the same type of brain activity. Yet some people like some genre's and not others. Why? They are different. I may not be able to explain it better but it is. Its the same reason some poeple like reading books more than playing bball, or vice versa. By saying no magical lines exist, you're saying all video gamers should like all genres, and some super game that combines the best elements of every game will be loved by everyone. It doesn't work that way. One man's treasure is another man's trash etc etc. The magical line is created by gamers based on personal preference.
Yes they are the same kind of fun, its the exact same emotion. In the case of a 1 player game what is happening is that you are remembering some time when you accomplished something and someone smiled at you for it. By playing through the game you are looking forward to this even though often times noone is usually going to respect you for it and when you do beat it nothing happens. The reason its still fun is because you know that there is a chance that someone would think what your accomplishment was cool and sometimes they do. Also in game non player characters can motivate you to continue playing if they are done right. In the case of multiplayer games there are real people that respect you in the end. Thats the only difference.
[/b][/quote]
Thats like saying that watching "The shining" and "The big lebowski" appeals to the same emotions, or that you are reading Stephen King and Terry Pratchett for the same reason. Games are only an interactive form of entertainment, pretty much like books or movies. And to this day I have never ever read a book or watched a movie to gain respect.
And the notion that emotion or enjoyment out of game can only come from respect from others is rather sad. All respect is earned and of all varietys there are the one you gain from games are the most irrelevant. Allthough I now understand your thirst for PvP better as that is very much based on respect and no where do you find more 1337 talkers that try to gain fame, respect and/or notoriety by better other people.
There are a million things one can do in ones life to gain liking and respect from others and killing people in a virtual world is pretty much at the bottom of that list, even more so what you gain that way is virtual as well.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PvP game should be more dependant on the skill of the the player who is playing and not on how many mobs/players he/she killed. Like make the PvP combat system similar to Mortal Combat system. Then if you are a newbie you can still kick somenbody's ass if you have the skill to do it. Even is the other guy has a "Sword of One Hit Kill" you can dodge it and attack from behind and stuff like that. This combat system would make it more fun for newbies, and a veteran character maybe be just better from all the experience the person gained from fighting in real time, and not his character Exp Points.
-- Everything in the world has a reason, but not every reason in the world has its everything. --
-- Everything in the world has a reason, but not every reason in the world has its everything. --
Originally posted by rentantilus Yes, you would still be "advancing" a character under a pure skill point system. And no, it's not the same thing as levelling. A "level" is an arbitrary amount of experience points, usually gained from chopping the heads off of monsters, that gives you more arbitrary abilities. How does wasting one hundred orcs make your character better at crafting helmets, make him able to take more falling damage, or raise his charisma? These are all what I consider the arbitrary bonuses of levelling. What I mean by "skill system" isn't just a pool of points you get to allocate when you kill enough orcs and level; what I mean is a system that tracks how good at each skill your character is. Those skills would all be raised by how often he or she uses them (tracking both the frequency, environment, tools used, and several other factors to help prevent bots). That's a "skill system," not SWG's pathetic excuse for one. If having 100 skill points in a skill was only about twice as good as having 0, you'd better bet your last gold coin that people would still rush to improve their skills. Why not have everyone be able to kill everyone else in one hit? Because that's dumb. I don't really understand your leap of logic there, how you got from a skill-based system with a shorter stretch between newbie and veteran to that. We'll move on, though. By shortening the distance between newbie and veteran, you achieve a few key points: It negates the need for a grind because new players won't be just speedbumps to veterans. It negates high-level stagnation because veterans won't be able to stand there and confidently take on a mob of 100 newbies, secure in the knowledge that they can't possibly hurt him. It makes other game options more viable and appealing, like permadeath, which brings back the one thing we're all missing from current MMORPGs: risk. That's right, NO game out right now has any real risk involved to our characters. Death is just a quick teleport back to a safe zone and maybe the loss of some gold, equipment, and/or experience. Blah, boring. Permadeath brings the excitement back, forcing players to plan carefully, group together, and (gasp!) actually run when things are going badly! Folks, not all great stories are about victories. What sounds more heroic: "Yeah, my uber tank beat the dragon after i died and respawned a few times," or "Remember my space marine character who died holding back the alien horde so everyone else could escape?" And, as with all of my posts, here's the assumed disclaimer: If a MMORPG comes out that includes a truly organic skill system, permadeath, and has no classes or levels, it's not like EverQuest is going to instantly go out of business. Those familiar old RP-free level grinds will always be there for you to waste your time and money on, folks. What's the harm in a truly revolutionary game coming out?
You do have valid points, but you have to remember that not everyone likes the same kind of games you do, and not everyone is bored with the level grind. Its pretty damn presumtuous to assume that. At the same time, not eveyone wants to sit and plan their battles ahead of time. Some people dont have much time to devote to games, and so want to get right in on the action. So permadeath isnt the ultimate solution for everyone.
Now I see what you are talking about with skill points. Thanks for clarifying that. I think you might like a game called Endless Ages. You advance in skills instead of general levels. If you melee alot, you will get points in melee. If you construct things, you will get points in constructing. Its pretty small, so there is a pretty good community.
My point with the comment about everyone killing everyone else with one shot, is that if you have people advance, veterans will be at a better advantage when it comes to combat, whether its twice as good or 100 times as good. So if you are going to nerf combat advancement, you might as well take it away completely. And as you said, fighting orcs doesnt let you build a better helmet, but after months of fighting them, you should sure as hell be alot better at combat than when you started out, otherwise it doesnt make sense. Alot of people like to see major advancement in their characters, and compare that to when they started. If i spent 3 months with one character, I dont want to say "Wow he can do 4 points of damage instead of 2." You should be rewarded for time spent in a game. Thats the point of most MMORPGs, however, that doesnt mean it has to be. I do agree with you that we need a new kind of MMORPG, but I dont agree with all of your ideas. That doesnt make me your enemy...
What I would love to see is a system that allows combat injuries. Like if someone swings a sword and hits your arm, your character reacts, and the arm becomes useless, if at least for a while. Then you would lose skill with fighting with that arm, and would have to train again to bring it back to what it used to...
UO was pure pvp when it released. before the new land, cant think of the name, not Fellucia, the other one. It was like walk out the door and get Cop Por'd to death.
Originally posted by rentantilus I know not everyone is bored with the current MMORPG industry, specifically the level grind, but certainly enough people are to fill the forums here at www.mmorpg.com and half a dozen other MMO websites with complaints, ideas, and demands for something fresh and new out of the industry. I'm just calling it as I see it. If someone knows they don't have "much time to devote to games," I find it highly unlikely that they're avid MMORPG fans, considering these kinds of games require vastly more attention than any other style of video game, especially considering the monthly fee. The type of game I'm proposing would cater to the serious MMORPG player, not the average person who only has a few minutes on their lunchbreak to play Tetris. If someone is so cramped for time that they just want to "get right in on the action," I also don't think they'd enjoy an MMORPG that required several weeks, even months of regular play to get a character to a competetive level of ability. People like that probably prefer quick deathmatch types of games like CounterStrike, Tribes, or Unreal. I don't agree with your last statement at all. "Nerfing" advancement doesn't make it useless, just puts less emphasis on it. Let's consider this example: two characters are created and have exactly equal attributes. One character is played a lot more than the other (a month or two), gaining a decent amount of skills in unarmed combat. This guy is going to be doing, let's say, 20 points of damage per punch. The unplayed character would do only 12. Sure, the veteran might feel slighted that he's not punching holes in brick walls just because he's played longer, but if the two were to fight one on one, the newbie would most likely lose. Does a veteran of a few months in the game really need to be dishing out 200+ points of damage per punch to feel more skilled than a newbie? If the answer is yes, it's only because all of the current MMORPGs do it that way; it's one of those philosophies we really need to change, else all of the problems the industry has will continue to exist until someone does start thinking outside the box.
How come you only reply to things which you disagree with, and do it in a way which is insulting to the poster? You completely ignored half of what I wrote, even when I tried to help you find games that you would like.
It seems as tough you scan through posts, and pick out setnences that you dont agree with, without reading the whole post.
Comments
Perma death would remove the RPG out of any game, why?
RPG stands for roleplaying, you take on the skills and characteristics, the mental and physical parts of whatever character you play. If you constantly die, or at least die a lot and have to start anew then how can you possibly roleplay that character to any degree? For an old time PnP RPG'er like me just as much development is built into a character personality wise as it is lvl or skill wise, probably even more so.Things that happen during your characters life cycle influence him, people he meet, enemies and friends?
Roleplaying to me is developing those parts of a character, how can you possibly do this in a game were you might only live for days or weeks or even moths, it is to short a time. I am not saying it would not work, most PnP games are indeed permadeath, but please refrain from calling such a system a RPG game, it is not and can never be one. It would be much much closer to a FPS then a RPG however you did it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everybody always says a PvP game would be the best if done right...
So, what is right???
To me, the only way you are going to get RIGHT is if you magically exclude griefers...
I can not help to wonder about this one to.
As Kriminal says: "Pvp makes a game if it is done right, and it hasn't been done right yet..."
But if it has not been done yet then how do you know?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I with you on this one rentantilus. I have often thought the same things you are now openly talking about.
The level grind is the slow grind of death for this genera. I believe we must try another way.
What does roleplaying mean? it does not mean how many friends you have made in the game. It does not mean how many cool items you have collected, or how many enemies you have killed. It is simply your ability to play a role, usually one that you cannot play in real life.
The more freedom a game offers, the more roleplaying is possible. Your statement "Perma death would remove the RPG out of any game" is already proven untrue by the original RPG, known as dungeons and dragons, which was a permadeath game. Dungeons and Dragons is actually better for roleplaying than any mmorpg could possibly be. Since players have far more freedom.
Without permadeath, the game is less 'real' which logically makes it harder to roleplay.
Griefers are an essential part of what makes a PVP game more fun. They create conflict by deciding to attack you for whatever reason and so players will be always at risk, which is what makes it fun.
I don't expect you to understand this concept, as you will probably never find the possibility of dying fun. But don't think the fact that you dislike griefers, and will never play a game where griefing might be possible, is in any way going to mean that a PVP game cannot be successful.
*Signature*The Pessimist says the cup is half empty. The Optimist says the cup is half full. The Pragmatist says the cup is half full of air. The Engineer says the cup is operating at 50% capacity. The Psychologist says the cup is your mother. The Punk Kid also says the cup is your mother. The Cricket Player says his cup is definately full. Everyone knows that Pamela Andersons cups are full. The Defendant says it was like that when he found it. Me, I just ask the waitress for a refill.
I think a good MMO has to have a balance.
Pure PvE is boring and tedious. It is also a very contolled environment that limits a players creativity. On the up side it gives players direction and content, a must in any MMO.
Pure PvP can be thrilling and most rewarding but it still needs content and direction. PvP's greatest attribute is keeping an open environment where you never know whats coming next, giving the players creativity a chance to show itself.
EverQuest was my first MMO. It was all PvE. If you take away the people that thought about nothing but L33T L00Ts and power leveling the game had alot to offer. There were many zones to hunt in and a ton of quests for every level, class and race out there. The key to an EQ is when you first play it to relax and enjoy what the game has to offer, not rush through it to the end game missing 80% of what it's about.
The downside to EQ was it's limits. The environment was in complete control of you. A player could not create any type of content in the game and was limited to the mobiles for competition, with the exception of the occasional Uber guild #1 trying to KS Uber guild #2 for L33T item #7. PvE just becomes to unimaginative as you use the same tactics over and over and over for lack of a reason to change them or lack of ingame ability to change them.
Shadowbane PvP was fun, no doubt. It was the first MMO I have played that pushed PvP/GvG conflict to the forefront in a very nonrestrictive environment. Aside from its technical issues I had two problems with the game. 1) No content. You still had to level up in very uninspiring environments. You had to obtain cash to build/maintain your city and equipment yet the best way to do this was farming mobiles that were 30 levels below you. Boring. 2) Loved the actuall PvP but honestly there just wasn't enough of it. My guild often 'hunted' other players for 1-4 hours finding very few enemies to combat. This was mainly due to the size of the landscape and secondly the lack of players as the technical issues ran them off.
I liked Shadowbanes looting policy. Once you killed the enemy all their inventory, excluding worn items, was fair game. The loser also had to pay to repair thier items upon death as they took damage.
If we were to take Shadowbane, fix its technical and siege issues, add some EQ style PvE content/quests and reasons for people to log in more I think we would have a winner. I feel DarkFall is attempting just that but as with all unreleased MMO's it remains to be seen if they can do what they say they are trying to do. For those who say DAoC is just that, I disagree. Tried the game. PvP is fun but mindless and unrewarding. Nice game, nice try but we can do better.
If you want a 'pure' pvp game I think you need to find a non MMO game. Be it FPS or RTS, which I love both types as well as MMO's.
Lastly. PvP often fails longterm because it is simply which side has the most players. Sieges in SB are a perfect example. If you want to keep PvP healthy and interesting it has to have some balance, not 500 vs 100 scenarios where lag and sheer numbers always wins. Group vs group in SB was quite fun and learning from such encounters made you a better player.
Are you arguing with me or agreeing with me? If youre trying to define permadeath as dieing when you have 500 hrs worth of levels under your belt then yeah, but to everyone else permadeath just means starting over. The workabillity of permadeath depends on how important the levels are and how quickly you level up and no a UT style game isn't the only conditions it would work under.
Noone has tried a permadeath MMORPG game where you level just fairly fast and the levels aren't the end all be all of pvp. Its obvious your trying to define a mmorpg as a sandwhich combat style game again and then say permadeath doesn't work for mmorpgs. Like I said that sandwhich crap doesn't really work for anything long term. The most important issue is even when someone dies, can they get back out there and have just as much fun and be just as competitive against whoever they fight? No there is not a magical line between different game genres. And by trying to claim so then you are making it clear you don't know what a mmorpg is...
Thats right about becoming the level 1 skilless - that means you get to experience all that stuff all over again. And your accomplishments are just that much better with everyone knowing that you haven't even died once yet with that character. The only time it becomes a problem is when the game isn't fun except when you are already capped, like I just said.
Imagine this scenario - A fallout based mmorpg (if youve played fallout before) with permadeath, and fps combat. Fallout's special system provides a really good balance between having somewhat signifigant levels but not making them too important. It also had a great speed for leveling. Even in the turn based version equipment, strategy and luck were more important then what level you were. Make the switch to fps combat and you have wildly unpredictable results where the quick thinking, coordination, and preparedness of the player mostly determine the outcome but levels still give a signifigant advantage. In this scenario I would be willing to bet a good amount of money that a permadeath, pure pvp based game would thrive.
Your missing the point about PVE... Once again there is only 3 ways a Mob can be 1) Predictable and possible to beat, 2) Predictable and impossible to beat or 3) Unpredictable like other people.
If its 1) then once you beat it once you can beat it a million times...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROBABILITY(YOUR STATEMENTS BEING MOTIVATED BY FEAR(I>U)) > .5
Do you recall what the last 3 letters in MMORPG stand for? Role Playing Game... NOT massive battle sport.
I hate sandwich combat as much as anyone else; i don't recall suggesting that i liked it anywhere, so i assume you're just lumping me in with a certain crowd; i LIKE pvp, even if i have high hopes for the future of PvE.
But if what you suggest comes in to being, it will simply be a massively multiplayer FPS or Action game. NOT an RPG. RPG's are based on storylines and character development. It doesn't have to be levels or equipment, the development can be a personal connection to your character, or memories and experiences. Yes you can start over, but the fact is many people just don't like it. Maybe they reached a certain part of a storyline, and wanted to see what happens next? In an RPG, you are the hero/protagonist of the story. And those characters never truly die.
I'm seeing a lot of other posts that make it seem like PvP is the only way to play now. With that logic, Final Fantasy, Dragon Warrior, Fallout, Baldur's Gate, etc etc are boring and easy. As you just said if you can beat it once, you can beat it a million times right? So whats the point of doing it at all?
I've played Fallout. There are many choices you make in the game, that could lead to death. Mistakes can be made as well if you're not careful. Anyone would be pissed if they accidentally got on the wrong side of the Enclave, died and had to start over at the beginning. Yea its still fun; i beat that game more than once, but wth, you know?
And even if all stages of a game are fun, even when starting over, what need would there be to have permadeath? What you're describing is like a permadeath version of Face of Mankind... though apparantly no one wants permadeath anyway. Its a FPS with all that skill and coordination you like, and a newbie with enough skill can take out a high rank. In fact there isn't even a skill or leveling system in the game. There are no "mobs", its PvP. Yet the majority still doesn't want permadeath. Why? Because a large part of the game involves influencing others through reputation or being in command, creating storylines and events. This is something that is neither sandwich combat nor something that you can experience immediately just by creating a new character. Unfortunately, you're the one that doesn't understand what a mmoRPG is.
I didn't miss the point about PvE either. I agree that it boils down to those 3, i was saying that gamers want #3, when most mmorpgs are using #1. Only that #3 doesn't have to be a digital copy of the way a player plays, and is thus a different kind of challenge. It could be lots of unpredictable weak mobs... or 1 super strong unpredictable mob, etc; in PvP, everyones on an equal scale. PvE can mix things up.
See that is exactly the type of reasoning that I am talking about. You can't define MMORPG to be whatever YOU think it should be and then go on to argue with other people based on that.
MMORPG yes the RPG stands for role playing game. All that means is you play a role thats the only thing necessary to be classified as an mmorpg. And you play a role in every game ever made. It doesn't mean you can't play a role as a blood sport contender. By this classification UT is an RPG.
If you want to give it the alternative definition (a bad thing to do given its not named as such) that it has simulated character development with little mathematical levels rather than just the actual players ability to get better then you still can't rule out blood sport games because being a blood sport game doesn't necessitate not having levels. Also there are fps'es with levels that are just as succesful as other fpses (enemy territory, purge jihad, the mmofpses)
In either case there is no magical line. The only magical line is if you try and define mmorpg just to be what WOULD make permadeath no longer work just so you can win the argument. I lumped you with other sandwich combat players because you were trying to claim that permadeath wouldnt work in mmorpgs. Weather its sandwich combat or excessive pointless levels, the point remains that you are trying to define mmorpg to be something it is not.
Now it sounds like your trying to define MMORPG as no permadeath... ok lol. People start over all the time in MMORPG games to reexperience everyting. Neocron is a perfect example of this, it has fairly short leveling times (but not that short) You could probably cap a character in a week or two easily. (In a day or two if there was always people to team with which there isnt) People start new characters there all the time out of boredom. And starting over doesn't necessitate that you lose your identity either so don't base your argument on it. What makes an MMORPG from an FPS is having towns, item creation, other tradeskills, etc. The fact that the role you play is more defined.
The argument is PVP is the only way to KEEP a game fun and give it a much higher level of replayability. This is necessary to justify having a game where you continue to pay the company monthly... You play one player games, and PVE to beat it the first time. The problem is in PVE in online games no amount of single player content is going to be enough to justify having a pay by the month game because players play through such single player content much faster than it is made. So to counteract this they just stretch out a small amount of content over hundreds of virtually indistinguishable levels where you fight the same mobs with different colors and names until you realize how stupid it is and stop. Bottom line is single player games = ok, PVE in pay by month online games = not ok.
Unless they make it just like single player games so you go through it really fast, but then everyone would just do everything and quit really fast.
Once you learn what gets you killed and what doesn't in fallout then you can beat it a million times without dieing, except luck plays a big part in that game so its a bit more like gambling...
About FACE OF MANKIND.... Dont presume to make an argument just based on what people say they would like. Alot of people as I have said do not know how to reason properly. Half of those peopel are likely to be thinking- permadeath = dieing and losing large number of levels = bad, despite the fact that FOM has no levels. And not even realize that this is there thought process. And your argument as to why you think why is flawed as well... As I said permadeath doesn't necessitate loss of identity.
About the last paragraph, PVP can be exactly the same - besides the unpredictabillity of that persons skill level they can have any range of in game levels as well. Therefore if PVE reached that point it would just be the same as PVP. With the only difference that even if the little mobs were programmed to talk smack it wouldn't bother you because they weren't real. But then communication between people fighting isn't a necessity either so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROBABILITY(YOUR STATEMENTS BEING MOTIVATED BY FEAR(I>U)) > .5
But arent there plenty of games like this out there allready? I am sure I have heard of games like CS or quake or whatnot, it seems to be what exactly what people here are looking for. Indeed CS is a RPG to, as you aquire money and that gives you a little edge. Seems about the level of edge suggested, so why not play it? Introduce your own RPG elements to that game or something.
And honestly, "griefers make the game fun becuase they add excitement", really? Think about that statement for a second. Raise hands anyone who thinks that is true, or even know someone who thinks that, or even heard of it before, if only as a rumour, aside from here.
There is no wonder the world looks as it do really, who would want to inflict pain onto others for pure joy? Excuse me but that spells "broken DNA string" a mile away. These people need councel before they bring a mp5 to school/work.
And yes indeed DnD or any pen and paper RPG is permadeath, but rarely do you die to a bugged GM or a friend backstabbing you for no reason other then to roll naked in peanutbutter yelling his lungs out "PWND". In these games you have a certain degree of control, in computer games you have none.
Actually the first thing you need to do to make a permadeath game is to release a 100% flawless game, without a single bug that could kill you. When that happens, in like 100-200 years or so I am sure this discussion will arise again.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have skill points, you are advancing your character. That is pretty much the same thing as leveling, so you might as well take that out too, right?
Also, if you are only twice as good at level 100 (yes, level) as someone at Level 0, then what is the point of even getting to level 100. Why not just have everyone be able to kill evereyone else with one hit? Because it would be boring.
Face it. If you have people investing time in their characters to advance them, you are leveling, only with a prettier name. What you are describing is a 3D chatroom. Maybe you should try Second Life. Im sure you would love it. Thats not an insult, but a recommendation.
Very few people actually roleplay anymore. Yes, its sad, but it's true. I have never actually seen anyone roleplay in any MMORPGs I've played. I even play live-action roleplaying games where no one roleplays, and you have Paladins running around telling monsters to go f*ck themselves. The local game center I go to has an AD&D group who do nothing but hack and slash their way through dungeons and argue about rules. So maybe I'm a little jaded to "roleplaying", which many PvPers dont like to do.
----------------------------
Currently Playing:
DarkWind: War on Wheels
Games Played/Beta Tested
Matrix Online
Auto Assault
Anarchy Online
Everquest 1 & 2
EVE
DarkWind: War on Wheels
I don't mind dying in an MMORPG, and I am a pro perma death person. I think it would add a much needed air of excitement to every encounter.
I also do not mind PvP, but griefers ruin the game. I do not see how you think griefers are an essential part of the game???
I played EQ for one and a half years, and always on the Rallos Zek server (PvP server). I am a pro PvP player as well. I believe it can be done right too, but the griefers have got to go. Never had a lot of problems with griefing on Rallos Zek because of the 4 level range requirement.
But in games like UO and ShadowBane, one person can easily spoil anothers persons fun. Very easily.
Maybe you and I just have a different definition fo the term griefer...
Griefers are the enemy. Without griefers there is no enemy, you are all friends, especially on a game like EQ, as you mentioned. Who is your enemy? and don't say the randomly spawning creatures, as they are just cannon fodder, put in place to make it easier for you to gain levels.
What we need is racial allignments. Meaning each player is part of a racial faction, and killing a player of that faction will reduce your standing with that faction, even if you are a member of that faction. That way races can actually be enemies with each other. So all enemy races will be griefers to you. But players who are griefers in your own faction will pretty soon be thrown out of that faction and have to fend for themselves. That way you can actually tell who is a griefer, so you can grief them back.
So what I'm saying is the only problem with griefers is when they can kill anyone they want at anytime without worrying about that persons faction coming after them. That is unrealistic. If stronger players know who killed weaker members of their faction they can go out and hunt them, and kill them. The ultimate punishment if it's permadeath.
*Signature*The Pessimist says the cup is half empty. The Optimist says the cup is half full. The Pragmatist says the cup is half full of air. The Engineer says the cup is operating at 50% capacity. The Psychologist says the cup is your mother. The Punk Kid also says the cup is your mother. The Cricket Player says his cup is definately full. Everyone knows that Pamela Andersons cups are full. The Defendant says it was like that when he found it. Me, I just ask the waitress for a refill.
Well said.
The conflict is what we seek. A game with so called "PvP" doesn't make that game a PvP game.
There has to be a consensus or a motivation for people to seek PvP.
And such motivation can only rises when their is consequence for an action.
More dramatic the consequence is the more there is a consensus to seek the action.
Now this might not be a new revelation to many, you might nonetheless be surprised to see how few developers nail this right.
There already are PvP games. Planetside and any other games against other players, battelnet. Not to mention DaoC, RvR is the whole point of the game once you become a high level. Also if there was a sole PvP game the weak ones who keep dieing would quit leaviing very few players left to play, defeating the whole purpose. Also PvP takes away sooo much of the social/grouping aspects needed for leveling, cant be dont only by PvP its impractical. The only solution for these problems is a skill based game where you dont lose anything in PvP but allso have a record or something that makes people want to not die in PvP but also doesnt make them fear it too much.
Well actually if you look more carefully you see that counterstrike and final fantasy are NOT fun for different reasons. In both games you work towards a goal. In final fanatasy you get closer to that goal by gaining levels, equipment, etc and progressing through the game. In Counterstrike you get closer to that goal by gaining money, equipment and getting better coordination in real life. They are both fun because you are working towards imagined or real respect you will receive by accomplishing things in the game. In single player games it is sometimes called a feeling of self worth, but its really the same thing.
The only thing different between them is the obstacles in place to get to the goal. The types of games that can exist do so in a continuom (sp?) not in discrete groups. The names are just things we give them to make it easier to differentiate. What you are trying to do is confine MMORPGs to what they already have been so far (which is lame imo). Well if you don't like it you can call the games that people like me want to create whatever you want to. We will continue to call them mmorpg because the name fits.
My point about the people being ignorant is just them SAYING they wont like it doesn't mean they ACTUALLY wouldn't like it. If the game had permadeath and then failed that would be a different story. That hasn't happened. Like Ive been saying it depends on the exact conditions of the game. I am eagerly awaiting FOM as well and I don't know for sure what all the conditions will be like, and even if I did I wouldn't know a 100% weather permadeath would work under them. I however have the best reasoned argument as to when permadeath is going to work, and I am probably right. However tommorow all the rules of the universe may completely change for all I know. But most of their arguments can be plainly seen to not make sense however.
Lets keep in mind that you are trying to claim that permadeath wouldnt work in any mmorpg. Diablo 2 Hardcore is a counterexample of this. (the switch from M to MM would not effect the result) Hardcore mode in this game is a heck of a lot more popular than normal mode. Producing examples where permadeath wouldn't or doesn't work doesn't do anything because you are trying to claim something cannot exist and yet it does.
This right there should tell you that there is something wrong with your reasoning. But.. Permadeath without loss of identity would mean someone would have to start over at a lower level and with less equipment. UT btw has permadeath without loss of identity. However I never said you were right that noone likes permadeath WITH loss of identity either, simply that permadeath doesn't necessitate it so it was a pointless argument. Like I said Diablo 2 is a counter example of this.
But by the way you are talking you are demonstrating that you are not even thinking correctly about this. I would wager that you are still attributing things to permadeath that are not necessary to it. Im not calling you stupid by this, its human nature to do it until a person learns otherwise, but take a step back for a second. In a game with permadeath, people would not necessarily be participating in pvp at the drop of a hat. Picture the Wild West for a moment, and think about the level of permadeath that criminals faced when messing around with the law. People fought over huge problems, but there was more talk about it than actually ever happened. Permadeath doesn't mean having to start over every 2 seconds, but noone lives forever. In FOM the main argument against permadeath was that some people who weren't worried losing their position would whack people who had high position just for the heck of it. The counterargument was that people of high position should be able to afford bodyguards and clones (an extra life) so they could not be killed easily by people of limited means. The truth is it could be made to work either way and just depends on the particulars of the game design.
Its not just that people like to be in control. They like to know what to expect, so even if they aren't in control of everything, they can at least somewhat control what happens to them by knowing the consequences of their actions.
Even in the case of casual gamers, developers of one mmorpg company cannot make content faster than it would be used. PVE is just not a legitimate base for an online game. And again if PVE mobs were made as unpredictable as people then the ONLY single difference would be that the mob cannot make you feel things as strongly as another person can in that position. Good or bad. So if by pros and cons you mean just weighing between the possibility of gaining that persons respect or being heckled by a person and not feeling hardly anything at all then ok but those are the only such pros and cons....
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROBABILITY(YOUR STATEMENTS BEING MOTIVATED BY FEAR(I>U)) > .5
CS and FF "are both fun because you are working towards imagined or real respect you will receive by accomplishing things in the game". What? I didn't play FF7 to gain level 99 with all limits, just to defeat Sephiroth and feel like a big man. There was an involving storyline and character interaction that is just a plain different type of fun than what you get from taking out 4 guys with 1 HE grenade. The fun in FF7 wasn't the accomplishment, it was the journey. And they are not the same type of fun just because you feel satisfaction or self worth afterwards either. Under those rules, sex and basketball are in the same category.
With this in mind, just let me say that i hate the way mmorpgs are right now, and they definitely need a change. But my reason for "confining MMORPGs" as you say, is because I don't think the name fits what you were describing. And here we'll just have to agree to disagree really... since interpreting a phrase is really just up to the individual... but i'll just say that Half-Life can be called a Role-playing action adventure. You RP Gordon Freeman, and go about in action adventure style. But no one calls it that, its a just a FPS, man. One name fits imo, another doesn't.
As for Diablo 2, i don't remember hardcore mode being more popular than normal... and i bought it the day it came out. The whole obsession with this game was about gaining super items, and going on Diablo/Baal runs. In a mode where losing would mean loss of those precious items, i find it hard to believe.
Also, you said "people would not necessarily be participating in pvp at the drop of a hat", but your past examples were essentially describing a game heavily focusing on PvP combat.And in such a game, people WILL die. And you keep referring to mythical gaming conditions where everyone understands risks and are willing to take them occasionally. But what we'll likely see is CS style campers that are so paranoid as to be amazingly annoying to play with. There will not be epic confrontations. There will be lots of hiding and ganking and cheapness. I can't argue with you about this game, because even you don't know exactly how it works; but player behavior can be predicted.
"The counterargument was that people of high position should be able to afford bodyguards and clones (an extra life) so they could not be killed easily by people of limited means". So if you're high ranking, and none of your bodyguards are online, then you can't do anything? There are real life bindings that hinder permadeath, especially when you'll have to depend on others.
Trials of Ascension has permadeath; but even they don't have the guts to say one death, goodbye. You make a good point about control, but things happen in games that we can't control. Me falling off a chair, my power going out, my keyboard breaking. And just knowing the consequences of my actions won't do either; sometimes i like experimenting or going up against something i'm not likely to beat, just to give it a shot. Permadeath gives us a hesitation and reluctance to attempt the extraordinary, a minor problem that we deal with in real life.
As for PvE, content doesn't have to mean new continents, new monsters, or even new items; It could be a specific scenario played out with whats already in the game, like a story arc that places a large enemy army in an encampment, or a boss monster that will require many many people working together to take down. TV writers can plan out a new episode every week for months and even seasons ahead. Its possible for a mmorpg too.
And lastly, another pro of PvE is that you don't have to wait for an opponent/teammate to show up, or worry about them backing out and wasting your time, disconnecting or anything like that.
Yes they are the same kind of fun, its the exact same emotion. In the case of a 1 player game what is happening is that you are remembering some time when you accomplished something and someone smiled at you for it. By playing through the game you are looking forward to this even though often times noone is usually going to respect you for it and when you do beat it nothing happens. The reason its still fun is because you know that there is a chance that someone would think what your accomplishment was cool and sometimes they do. Also in game non player characters can motivate you to continue playing if they are done right. In the case of multiplayer games there are real people that respect you in the end. Thats the only difference.
There are slightly different variations of this from person to person for example some people think (subconsiously) figuring things out is the way to get respect. Other people have learned that there are always exciting people waiting to meet and interact with them in new places. etc etc. But the root of it all is the sight of someone smiling at you and the emotion that goes with it. Your subconsious mind controls emotions and it reasons purely inductively as to what actions are the quickest way to being happiness which means you have no control over what makes you happy or what doesn't. It attaches a small amount of "happiness" to the memories it thinks are the right path and this is how it controls your actions.
So the point is, YES they are the same kind of fun. No there is not some magical line dividing different kinds of games, we only name them different things to make it easier for us. Every aspect a game can have exists in a continum not in discrete groups. Otherwise there wouldn't be games being created every 5 seconds that reviewers claim strattle different genres. And yes basketball and sex contain the same emotions. Sex also contains physical pleasure, but thats something pretty much unique to sex and maybe drugs.
Ok fine so don't call a pure pvp based game or permadeath pvp game mmorpgs. Who cares what its called. Diablo 2 hardcore became more and more popular the longer the game was out. Of course its not going to be the most popular when the game first comes out because you can't even start a hardcore character until you beat the game. But go play now and you will see. Hardcore mode is a whole new level of challenge, and everything you do in it means a whole lot more. People especially like this mode once they have already beaten the game in normal mode because it gives the game a whole new life.
Ok ... PVP means one thing and one thing only: Player versus player. Permadeath means one thing and one thing only: That you have to start over when you die. Neither of these imply that people have to fight left and right. Neither of these cause any of the things you say either. In one game maybe they do but leveling and gaining items is cheap. In another game maybe leveling is slower but people are very reluctant to fight, and level ones cant beat level 20's... There are a bunch of different ways to do it.
Weather there are griefers, or whatever depends solely on the other conditions of the game. They can be controlled by the design of the game. Stop thinking of the worst case scenario for a permadeath game and then saying "OH there ya have it no permadeath game could be fun"...
Once again in the FOM case, I was under the impression that only when the high ranking person was to travel would he need body guards and he could just advertise and grab some off the street who needed cash. But once again you are trying to assign specific conditions to evaluate when the question is can it be done? Unless you have some reason why it is physically impossible for a permadeath system to work based on NOTHING other than the definition of permadeath then why are you arguing?
No permadeath does not mean you would be reluctant to try something you haven't tried before. This depends on how much you would be losing if you died. In fact it would probably be more of a cure for dealing with the problem in real life. Once again if all you would lose is your weapons then it doesn't matter if you die... And once you get used to permadeath you get used to this game of starting over and seeing how far you can get. Unless you are losing 20 hrs until you can compete and play the game normally again its not a big deal. Don't you see this is the alternative to stretched out content and time sinks. It can be replaced by quick leveling, quick economic gain etc and permadeath to keep you cycling up and down.
Ok so yeah if you can't find anyone to PVP with thats a downside vs PVE. But the point is if the mobs are as unpredictable as people then everyone complaining about PVP now would be complaining about the mobs then.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROBABILITY(YOUR STATEMENTS BEING MOTIVATED BY FEAR(I>U)) > .5
These essay posts are getting tiresome to write so i'm just going to wimp out. I conclude that permadeath is possible but requires an unlikely structure that no one has thought of yet; and as a result may not exist. It is my personal opinion that its towards the impossible side. But ya never kno.
As for the whole fun RPG/FPS thing, yes, they are the same emotion, the same type of brain activity. Yet some people like some genre's and not others. Why? They are different. I may not be able to explain it better but it is. Its the same reason some poeple like reading books more than playing bball, or vice versa. By saying no magical lines exist, you're saying all video gamers should like all genres, and some super game that combines the best elements of every game will be loved by everyone. It doesn't work that way. One man's treasure is another man's trash etc etc. The magical line is created by gamers based on personal preference.
Props for outlasting me
[quote]Originally posted by Kriminal99
Yes they are the same kind of fun, its the exact same emotion. In the case of a 1 player game what is happening is that you are remembering some time when you accomplished something and someone smiled at you for it. By playing through the game you are looking forward to this even though often times noone is usually going to respect you for it and when you do beat it nothing happens. The reason its still fun is because you know that there is a chance that someone would think what your accomplishment was cool and sometimes they do. Also in game non player characters can motivate you to continue playing if they are done right. In the case of multiplayer games there are real people that respect you in the end. Thats the only difference.
[/b][/quote]
Thats like saying that watching "The shining" and "The big lebowski" appeals to the same emotions, or that you are reading Stephen King and Terry Pratchett for the same reason. Games are only an interactive form of entertainment, pretty much like books or movies. And to this day I have never ever read a book or watched a movie to gain respect.
And the notion that emotion or enjoyment out of game can only come from respect from others is rather sad. All respect is earned and of all varietys there are the one you gain from games are the most irrelevant. Allthough I now understand your thirst for PvP better as that is very much based on respect and no where do you find more 1337 talkers that try to gain fame, respect and/or notoriety by better other people.
There are a million things one can do in ones life to gain liking and respect from others and killing people in a virtual world is pretty much at the bottom of that list, even more so what you gain that way is virtual as well.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PvP game should be more dependant on the skill of the the player who is playing and not on how many mobs/players he/she killed. Like make the PvP combat system similar to Mortal Combat system. Then if you are a newbie you can still kick somenbody's ass if you have the skill to do it. Even is the other guy has a "Sword of One Hit Kill" you can dodge it and attack from behind and stuff like that. This combat system would make it more fun for newbies, and a veteran character maybe be just better from all the experience the person gained from fighting in real time, and not his character Exp Points.
--
Everything in the world has a reason, but not every reason in the world has its everything.
--
--
Everything in the world has a reason, but not every reason in the world has its everything.
--
You do have valid points, but you have to remember that not everyone likes the same kind of games you do, and not everyone is bored with the level grind. Its pretty damn presumtuous to assume that. At the same time, not eveyone wants to sit and plan their battles ahead of time. Some people dont have much time to devote to games, and so want to get right in on the action. So permadeath isnt the ultimate solution for everyone.
Now I see what you are talking about with skill points. Thanks for clarifying that. I think you might like a game called Endless Ages. You advance in skills instead of general levels. If you melee alot, you will get points in melee. If you construct things, you will get points in constructing. Its pretty small, so there is a pretty good community.
My point with the comment about everyone killing everyone else with one shot, is that if you have people advance, veterans will be at a better advantage when it comes to combat, whether its twice as good or 100 times as good. So if you are going to nerf combat advancement, you might as well take it away completely. And as you said, fighting orcs doesnt let you build a better helmet, but after months of fighting them, you should sure as hell be alot better at combat than when you started out, otherwise it doesnt make sense. Alot of people like to see major advancement in their characters, and compare that to when they started. If i spent 3 months with one character, I dont want to say "Wow he can do 4 points of damage instead of 2." You should be rewarded for time spent in a game. Thats the point of most MMORPGs, however, that doesnt mean it has to be. I do agree with you that we need a new kind of MMORPG, but I dont agree with all of your ideas. That doesnt make me your enemy...
What I would love to see is a system that allows combat injuries. Like if someone swings a sword and hits your arm, your character reacts, and the arm becomes useless, if at least for a while. Then you would lose skill with fighting with that arm, and would have to train again to bring it back to what it used to...
----------------------------
Currently Playing:
DarkWind: War on Wheels
Games Played/Beta Tested
Matrix Online
Auto Assault
Anarchy Online
Everquest 1 & 2
EVE
DarkWind: War on Wheels
How come you only reply to things which you disagree with, and do it in a way which is insulting to the poster? You completely ignored half of what I wrote, even when I tried to help you find games that you would like.
It seems as tough you scan through posts, and pick out setnences that you dont agree with, without reading the whole post.
----------------------------
Currently Playing:
DarkWind: War on Wheels
Games Played/Beta Tested
Matrix Online
Auto Assault
Anarchy Online
Everquest 1 & 2
EVE
DarkWind: War on Wheels