Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Question for the fans of FFA PvP games
mrudis
Member Posts: 26
What is it specifically you want out of a FFA PvP game?
For instance a lot of people posting for FFA PvP games say they don't like RvR... why? Does the ability to gank some low level newbie that is technically on the same team as you something you really want? Is it the fact that you don't like the idea of teams (teams in the sense of a world with dwarfs and orcs... do you like the idea of dwarves beating each other up rather than their enemy)? Is it for 'realism'... if so would you be for going to jail (or some other harsh punishment) for murdering your own kind?
I understand not liking any kind of PvP flagging system or PvP vs PvE zone system... that makes sense to me. I just don't understand the dislike for RvR that I read (of course maybe I'm completely mistaken).
I'm just really curious because I like having PvP since humans are much better opponents than AI (especially MMO AI), but not sure what's to like about completely FFA PvP unless a newbie is technically as tough as the veteran so they have a chance.
Comments
Because limits are boring. Freedom is interesting.
You can form groups in FFA. You can make allies in FFA. You can wage war against who you wish in FFA. Everyone is FREE to do what they want. FFA just means you're not limited and thus limiting how interesting a game can be. Unfair can be very thrilling, you just have to accept the fact that most of the time... it isn't fair.
Its not a matter of why they like FFA PvP...they just do. Thats fine by me, If they enjoy it then good for them. If I dont enjoy it, I dont play that game/server. Some people like the color green...I dont understand why...but they do.
I will add that not all players who enjoy FFA PvP are there to gank lowbies. IN fact, in my experience on FFA servers in several games, I didnt really see a lot of lowbie ganking ..when it did occur, it was usually by the same people. The majority of players kept to their own levels/skills
Torrential
Torrential: DAOC (Pendragon)
Awned: World of Warcraft (Lothar)
Torren: Warhammer Online (Praag)
I like FFA PVP (when it's done correctly) i.e. people who don't want to participate are able to avoid it; like for example in EVE where you can stick to "safe" high-security space or risk it in "scary" low-security space.
The big draw about FFA PVP is that it makes you pay attention to the game. You don't go afk in the middle of a FFA PVP zone. If someone wanders up to you, you pay attention to them and have to decide if they're a threat and if so whether you should be running or fighting. FFA PVP coupled with harsh death penalties (losing your ship in EVE or losing your equipped items in UO) make for the most exciting adrenaline-fueled gameplay that MMO's can offer.
That said; a purely 100% FFA PVP game is not a good thing; you shouldn't be able to be ganked while afk in a town surrounded by guards or in newbie areas.
Frequently the 'why' is important. Finding out the 'why' can lead to finding new solutions to issues. For instance... maybe a lot of people from the RvR crowd like RvR for a specific reason... that reason might overlap a specific reason why FFA PvP like that... hence there just might be something that actually works for both. But you can't ever find that out if all that is stated is, 'FFA PvP is the best... I hate RvR' (or vis versa).
Everyone throws around terms for everything yet frequently each person takes that term to mean something a little different. And people who are for FFA PvP (or for PvP flagging/zoning... or for RvR... etc)might like most of the stuff about it, but not everything... you don't know unless you ask.
Like my reasons... I like RvR because:
1) I get to fight human opponents, which are far more interesting to fight than AI
2) I don't like the idea (or it happening to me) of a high level ganking a newbie who is in theory on the same team
First of all, i guess it depends which ffa pvp player you ask, they may be different as everything.
So a few things from my point of view:
- i dont like different levels or much difference in levels generally in FFA games, or in any pvp game if you ask me. Without this no lowlevelganking, because the lowlevel can fight back.
Edit:
Look at the most successful FFA games, UO, AC DT, and EvE.. the difference between the levels where not as huge as in other games, but it could even less then in those games. Shadowbane would be another FFA game, but a not so good example in this regards, but anyway you could level up to max. lvl very fast in shadowbane, and in all honestly the lvl up phase in shadowbane was anyway rather useless, they could have skipped it completely without missing something there.
EditEnd
- I have nothing against RvR, but.. i also want the freedom to attack anyone else.. there is really no problem with some kind of RvR setup. But there is a problem, if i cant get rid off(killing) another player, which grief me, which insult me, which annoy me, or is in short just a idiot. I want the freedom to kill such ppl, if i want to.
And another addition here, i also want to choose my enemies and my allies by my self, so some RvR alone is nothing for me, there should always be the possibility for Guild/Clan Wars.
- FFA PvP should also be placed in some kind of Sandbox with some meaningful points to fight over in this sandbox, to change and shape the world through pvp, like cities, resource spots or the like.
And yeap, i agree you withit, that "realism" is one part of it, but let elaborate me this a little more, i like it when there is some meaning in a pvp fight, but i also like it, when the pvp is not just reduced to fighting, it should be competing politics(city, clan, empire), economies(trade wars, and not just about fighting, but the economy play as a whole) and so forth. So any action should have some consequences(here also hinted on risk vs. reward, which is also one part of it) and also accountability, because with all of them you will be get much more sucked into the world, then when you just fight against another guy. It becomes a drama, a breathing world, and the fight becomes much more important, thrilling, and challenging, because you have to lose more than just a simple fight. Another point would be(but is also part of what i have said before) its roleplaying.. you need freedom for roleplaying, without it, it is just shallow jabbering, and is much more some kind of cybersex chat, but not roleplaying. And well FFA is freedom.
Edit2:
Why should i play a mmorpg? If i cannot change the world and form tight communities, which are competing against each other, which play with and against each others on different levels, with all socializing and drama you get out of it. If i just want to fight against someone(or group) i could( and do) play easily some multiplayer games, be it FPS(CS, BF2 or whatever) or some RTS(DoW, DoTA or whatever). The difference between those Multiplayer PvP games, and a FFA PvP MMORPG is, that the FFA PvP MMORPG is a persistent and always changing world, with history of drama, fights and players, whereas the other on is just the fight. And look, in all other MMORPGs you also dont have this, they are rather static, and you could easily skip the complete MMO part out of it. Or how much MMO is the arena fights in WoW as example?
Edit End
But as i said in the beginning, there are a lot of FFA pvp players and different players may have different opionions about it.. that was just my two cents.
Because mobs are dumb, boring, and predictable.... humans are interesting. Well, at least that's the reason pvp is better than pve. FFA is just even more in that direction... complete unpredictability. More realistic. Forces people to band together for protection as well as loot, emphasizing the social aspect of MMOs. And that's just more interesting; less boring. (to me at least... you did ask why).