Virtus, can we get some information what kind of these punishments will be ? The stat and skill loss someone mentioned earlier don't sound very effective.
I actully hate open pvp in mmo's becouse people will always ruin it for others like in eve, Eve isent noob friendly becouse of this when some player ask you to pick up there contain to carry something then when you do thay kill you and if xsyon ends up same way then alot wont enjoy it,
also if you want pvp go play counter strike.
So, you come to the xsyon forums and tell the devs to take out open world PvP because you don't like it. THEN you tell us to go play CS? Well guess what there's a lot of people who like open world PvP including me and it's clear the devs have a certain vision for THEIR game.
So how bout you go play WoW if you don't like open world PvP?
QFT
How many delicate flowers have you met in Counterstrike?
I got a case of beer and a chainsaw waiting for me at home after work.
Virtus, can we get some information what kind of these punishments will be ? The stat and skill loss someone mentioned earlier don't sound very effective.
Afraid I have no idea. However, pretty sure he said he will keep modifying it untill the punishments become affective.
As stated Jooky, the lead dev, has insured that ganking etc will not be tolerated and if the punishments are not good enough then they will be increased until it no longer becomes fun to do so.
Heard it before.
The only way to prevent it - is to code it in.
I agree. If ganking will NOT be tolerated, then why not have it coded in? That is the only way to actually insure this. No matter how 'harsh' the penalties may seem to be perceived, there are those with the gankfest mentality that will continue to play the game primarily do to just that - relentless ganking of other players no matter how vexatious the 'penalties' are.
However Kazara, if ones ganking causes one to say... have super slow motion compared to everyone else who could hit you 10 times before you land 1 hit it would greatly deter teh gankers. In other words there is always solution just gotta find it
I agree there will be gankers but the mechanics of the game seem to be going in the direction where its not a battle/fighting/pvp eccentric system which i hope will deter the Darkfall/Mortal 'gank all' mentality and therefore adopt an entirely different crowd... Atleast thats what im hoping for:)
Alignment / reputation systems for PvP never work out as well as they sound on paper on the web sites.
They are always far too forgiving and far too unbalanced.
In every single FFA PvP or alignment/reputation based FFA PvP game since and including UO it's always a lot harder to be "good" and "just," and as such a lot more rare then being "evil" and an "outlaw."
It's always been fairly easy to play the bad guy, and as such FFA PvP systems never work out quite right.
There needs to be a sense of realism that does not exist.
It should be a lot harder, a lot less attractive to be the bad guy, to be the pirate, to be the murderous PK etc. The reward then is in the difficulty and the hardship of that life style, and for all the trouble it brings the reward is freedom and the satisfaction from choosing the "hard" path and still prospering.
I have yet to see a game be able to actually pull it off, and probably never will because MMO developers just don't understand how to make a good aligment / reputation ffa pvp system.
And players like it when evil is easy and there are plenty of targets, but they don't like taking the hard path and being a target for so many.
It's kind of funny that the "good" players in a standard FFA PvP game, the anti-PKs, are the ones who would truly make the best evil/pirate PK's in a FFA PvP game that actually got the alignment system right.
I think more people would enjoy open world PVP if the game mechanics didn't so heavily favor the attacker versus the attackee or PVE'er minding their own business.
DAOC actually had some decent ideas in this regard, if you attacked someone who was engaged in fighting an npc their health immediately reset back to full and the npc's aggro meter reset and it could aggro on to the attacker as well as its orginal target.
It also didn't reward players for killing others that were much lower than them, though I felt the ranges were a bit too broad (10 levels) and should have been cut down to 5. (because as in most MMO's, for some damn reason once you got past that level your spells and hits would inexplicably miss almost entirely making it very hard to kill a higher level player)
So it is possible for a gamemaker to try and come up with anti-ganking mechanics, just because previous attempts have failed doesn't meant Xsyon Dev's can't come up with a winning system.
I recall in Lineage 1 the penalty for going red was quite severe, only a few brave souls were willing to be permared and they were masterful in their gankings. People respected them and when they posted the screenshot of your death on their website you felt proud to be chosen. (they didn't random kill noobs, in fact, they went after the highest level players they could find).
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Virtus, can we get some information what kind of these punishments will be ? The stat and skill loss someone mentioned earlier don't sound very effective.
Afraid I have no idea. However, pretty sure he said he will keep modifying it untill the punishments become affective.
Well this is kinda discouraging...I don't see any reason why these punishments can't be announced. Keeping them in shadow is unfair to both type of players...combatants and non-combatants too. If the punishments won't be effective then the non-combatants will complain saying they were promised to be able to play a ganking-free game....if the punishment will be harsh enough the combatant players will complain saying that they were promised to get an open-PvP game so they shouldn't be penalized to play in their favoured playstyle. Hiding these information only sets up one part of the community for a disappointment.
Virtus, can we get some information what kind of these punishments will be ? The stat and skill loss someone mentioned earlier don't sound very effective.
Afraid I have no idea. However, pretty sure he said he will keep modifying it untill the punishments become affective.
Well this is kinda discouraging...I don't see any reason why these punishments can't be announced. Keeping them in shadow is unfair to both type of players...combatants and non-combatants too. If the punishments won't be effective then the non-combatants will complain saying they were promised to be able to play a ganking-free game....if the punishment will be harsh enough the combatant players will complain saying that they were promised to get an open-PvP game so they shouldn't be penalized to play in their favoured playstyle. Hiding these information only sets up one part of the community for a disappointment.
Actually the lead dev, Jordi, has posted his ideas about this early on. I posted that information here:
The question is whether these rules will be enough? No one really knows but we know the goal of the game is to achieve a balance between open PvP and other aspects of gaming. If these intial rules are not enough then the devs will change it based upon community feedback to achieve that balance.
Not mentioned in the above post is that later in the game (post-prelude) tribal territories will be able to grow in size and shape.
Anyway, open pvp is necessary. It's a 'feature'. How they handle it will be another issue. I hope that most wont put up with a pve-coddled game where one is magically protected when venturing out in the wilds. At the same time, I'd hope that playing an indestructible mass murderer that has aboslutely no consequences for player-killing isn't an option either.
Many, I'd hope, just dont want pvp to be relegated to an overly heavy-hand with broad constraints and penalties being cast on one that engages in non-consensual pvp.
Oakstead, thanks for the info, but this link tells me that the page no longer exists
Strange that the original link no longer works. I did the link again and also bumped the thread to the top of the forum. I hope it has what you are looking for.
Oakstead, thanks for the info, but this link tells me that the page no longer exists
Strange that the original link no longer works. I did the link again and also bumped the thread to the top of the forum. I hope it has what you are looking for.
Thanks, Oakstead.
I've read it,but it doesn' t really answers my questions....all I can see is that "PvP is open but has severe consequences". But what are these consequences? Only 1 thing is mentioned there, evil players can't set up their village as a safe zone....what they wouldn't do anyway lol.
So again, what's the reason for keeping these basic informations in shadow ?
Oakstead, thanks for the info, but this link tells me that the page no longer exists
Strange that the original link no longer works. I did the link again and also bumped the thread to the top of the forum. I hope it has what you are looking for.
Thanks, Oakstead.
I've read it,but it doesn' t really answers my questions....all I can see is that "PvP is open but has severe consequences". But what are these consequences? Only 1 thing is mentioned there, evil players can't set up their village as a safe zone....what they wouldn't do anyway lol.
So again, what's the reason for keeping these basic informations in shadow ?
Personally, I don't think they have many additional plans beyond those listed. They will launch, evaluate the situation, and make changes as needed.
Their "severe consequences" for an evil red character include having big red letters above its head so they can be seen and having them be open to attack by anyone at anylime, even in their own tribe's territory.
One character per account also is a balancing feature since lazy oportunistic ganker types can't hide behind alts but will instead have to play as a brigand with all the consquences and challenges of being "on the run".
So no safe zones for evil characters. Will that be enough? We shall see.
Good characters can raise faction in their tribe and those of their allies. Evil factions won't have that option. At least as I understand it. You could do missions from your own totem or an allie's totem if you have the proper reputation. Also, you aren't Kill On Site, KOS, to every town if you are good. You can wander around without getting ganked all the time.
You also start with limited skills(5 total - 2 combat skills, 2 gathering skills, 1 crafting skill) You will need to learn skills from other players or scavange that random rare book from the wild. If you are good you have more options for having someone teach you the skill. If you are evil everyone hates you. You have to hope someone in your own tribe has the skill you want to learn if you don't already know it.
Are those enough reasons to be good? Only time will tell.
I think it puts a slight advantage on the good player's side. They can team up and take down any reds in their areas. Reds are hostile to everyone, even other reads. There is no gauranting another evil player will help you. Good promotes working together, gaining faction, forming alliances, and sharing skills/resources. Evil, not sure. Guess it promotes stealing. Everyone hates you and it would seem the only easy way to get ahea would be to steal what you need.
people who want pvp everywhere to are just punks want to gank a player when he first logs in for first 5 seconds before he can even figure out where he is at. Poor play and a week player.
From what ive seen the developers of this game are looking to hardcore pvp with players that would never care of ganking a players first day in game. Lets face it you need a zone to setup. One of many reason darkfall and many other games that have listen to the gankers that get their kiddy funs and then leave in a week have failed.
people who want pvp everywhere to are just punks want to gank a player when he first logs in for first 5 seconds before he can even figure out where he is at. Poor play and a week player.
From what ive seen the developers of this game are looking to hardcore pvp with players that would never care of ganking a players first day in game. Lets face it you need a zone to setup. One of many reason darkfall and many other games that have listen to the gankers that get their kiddy funs and then leave in a week have failed.
Actually most people, including me who want PvP everywhere is because this is a sandbox and it's more realistic, most of us just want the old school style of gaming back before the MMO community got flooded with themeparks. Most people who like open world pvp like open competition and to always have to watch their backs in the game it's a lot more fun than knowing that there's hard coded mechanics to keep you safe. Plus fighting an actual player will always be more fun and challenging than fighting a crappy AI that does the same thing everytime and is very predictable.
But hey you can just call all people who like a challenge and open world pvp a bunch of kid punks and are weak players for wanting fun competition and a challenge.
people who want pvp everywhere to are just punks want to gank a player when he first logs in for first 5 seconds before he can even figure out where he is at. Poor play and a week player.
From what ive seen the developers of this game are looking to hardcore pvp with players that would never care of ganking a players first day in game. Lets face it you need a zone to setup. One of many reason darkfall and many other games that have listen to the gankers that get their kiddy funs and then leave in a week have failed.
Actually most people, including me who want PvP everywhere is because this is a sandbox and it's more realistic, most of us just want the old school style of gaming back before the MMO community got flooded with themeparks. Most people who like open world pvp like open competition and to always have to watch their backs in the game it's a lot more fun than knowing that there's hard coded mechanics to keep you safe. Plus fighting an actual player will always be more fun and challenging than fighting a crappy AI that does the same thing everytime and is very predictable.
But hey you can just call all people who like a challenge and open world pvp a bunch of kid punks and are weak players for wanting fun competition and a challenge.
All the old games that had any success had savere consequences to just running around killing people in town. This does not harm sandbox game as its realistic. Go to your mall and start shooting people see what happens to you. The rules in UO before they changed em were balanced and good example of a successfull sandbox game. SO far from what I hear of the rules for this game it will be very similar.
PS
FYI Their is no challenge in walking up to a player just loggin in game trying to read a tutorial and killing em :P
The challenge is forming a clan and battling other clans for territories.
people who want pvp everywhere to are just punks want to gank a player when he first logs in for first 5 seconds before he can even figure out where he is at. Poor play and a week player.
From what ive seen the developers of this game are looking to hardcore pvp with players that would never care of ganking a players first day in game. Lets face it you need a zone to setup. One of many reason darkfall and many other games that have listen to the gankers that get their kiddy funs and then leave in a week have failed.
Actually most people, including me who want PvP everywhere is because this is a sandbox and it's more realistic, most of us just want the old school style of gaming back before the MMO community got flooded with themeparks. Most people who like open world pvp like open competition and to always have to watch their backs in the game it's a lot more fun than knowing that there's hard coded mechanics to keep you safe. Plus fighting an actual player will always be more fun and challenging than fighting a crappy AI that does the same thing everytime and is very predictable.
But hey you can just call all people who like a challenge and open world pvp a bunch of kid punks and are weak players for wanting fun competition and a challenge.
All the old games that had any success had savere consequences to just running around killing people in town. This does not harm sandbox game as its realistic. Go to your mall and start shooting people see what happens to you. The rules in UO before they changed em were balanced and good example of a successfull sandbox game. SO far from what I hear of the rules for this game it will be very similar.
PS
FYI Their is no challenge in walking up to a player just loggin in game trying to read a tutorial and killing em :P
The challenge is forming a clan and battling other clans for territories.
I agree there should be consequences and penalties for killing a good player, BUT there should not be hard coded safe zones. There should be guards for starter zones but not 1 shot guards.
hmm seems there is alot of opinionated people here that think they are the all knowing obi-won
Anyways, Open world pvp is fine, but only if it's done right unlike Age of Conan were it's open world pvp is absolutly horrible. Games like Shadowbane were very good at open world pvp, and it's to bad most MMO's now a days don't take things from the older games and incorperate them into the new ones. The older MMO's were much better designed then the new ones now a days. The only MMO that I have found so far with a true open world pvp feel is Darkfall, and thats pretty much it in terms of open world pvp.. all the rest of the games are all themeparks with flashy graphics, lvling, gear, but no substance. I could be wrong though as it is only my opinion, and from reading ths thread I'm shure there are some of you just itching to burn me on a cross as a witch just for stating how bad MMO's are in general now a days ^_^
I swear people that are commonly referred to as carebeard are the most whiney people around. I don't care what type of PvP a person is in favor of, but those that want FFA PvP are looked down on by these types of players, and they see open PvP as a design flaw. Is it that hard to say that some like limited PvP and some like FFA PvP and go find the game that catters to you. Very few games are open PvP and some of the 'limited PvP' proponent it seems wont be happy untill they stomp them out
I swear people that are commonly referred to as carebeard are the most whiney people around. I don't care what type of PvP a person is in favor of, but those that want FFA PvP are looked down on by these types of players, and they see open PvP as a design flaw. Is it that hard to say that some like limited PvP and some like FFA PvP and go find the game that catters to you. Very few games are open PvP and some of the 'limited PvP' proponent it seems wont be happy untill they stomp them out
The people who post in this thread and don't like open PvP are players who love sandbox games, but can't find one without FFA PvP....there are sandbox games for the PvP players, Darkfall, MO, Eve, Wurm, but there isn't even one sandbox without open PvP. So thats why they (myself included) prefer PvP zones or PvP restrictions by player level or severe consequences on open PvP.
I don't mind open world PvP as long as I have the option to enable myself for PvP when I choose so. Unless this option is implemented, I won't bother with the game.
Comments
Virtus, can we get some information what kind of these punishments will be ? The stat and skill loss someone mentioned earlier don't sound very effective.
QFT
How many delicate flowers have you met in Counterstrike?
I got a case of beer and a chainsaw waiting for me at home after work.
Afraid I have no idea. However, pretty sure he said he will keep modifying it untill the punishments become affective.
I agree. If ganking will NOT be tolerated, then why not have it coded in? That is the only way to actually insure this. No matter how 'harsh' the penalties may seem to be perceived, there are those with the gankfest mentality that will continue to play the game primarily do to just that - relentless ganking of other players no matter how vexatious the 'penalties' are.
However Kazara, if ones ganking causes one to say... have super slow motion compared to everyone else who could hit you 10 times before you land 1 hit it would greatly deter teh gankers. In other words there is always solution just gotta find it
I agree there will be gankers but the mechanics of the game seem to be going in the direction where its not a battle/fighting/pvp eccentric system which i hope will deter the Darkfall/Mortal 'gank all' mentality and therefore adopt an entirely different crowd... Atleast thats what im hoping for:)
Alignment / reputation systems for PvP never work out as well as they sound on paper on the web sites.
They are always far too forgiving and far too unbalanced.
In every single FFA PvP or alignment/reputation based FFA PvP game since and including UO it's always a lot harder to be "good" and "just," and as such a lot more rare then being "evil" and an "outlaw."
It's always been fairly easy to play the bad guy, and as such FFA PvP systems never work out quite right.
There needs to be a sense of realism that does not exist.
It should be a lot harder, a lot less attractive to be the bad guy, to be the pirate, to be the murderous PK etc. The reward then is in the difficulty and the hardship of that life style, and for all the trouble it brings the reward is freedom and the satisfaction from choosing the "hard" path and still prospering.
I have yet to see a game be able to actually pull it off, and probably never will because MMO developers just don't understand how to make a good aligment / reputation ffa pvp system.
And players like it when evil is easy and there are plenty of targets, but they don't like taking the hard path and being a target for so many.
It's kind of funny that the "good" players in a standard FFA PvP game, the anti-PKs, are the ones who would truly make the best evil/pirate PK's in a FFA PvP game that actually got the alignment system right.
I think more people would enjoy open world PVP if the game mechanics didn't so heavily favor the attacker versus the attackee or PVE'er minding their own business.
DAOC actually had some decent ideas in this regard, if you attacked someone who was engaged in fighting an npc their health immediately reset back to full and the npc's aggro meter reset and it could aggro on to the attacker as well as its orginal target.
It also didn't reward players for killing others that were much lower than them, though I felt the ranges were a bit too broad (10 levels) and should have been cut down to 5. (because as in most MMO's, for some damn reason once you got past that level your spells and hits would inexplicably miss almost entirely making it very hard to kill a higher level player)
So it is possible for a gamemaker to try and come up with anti-ganking mechanics, just because previous attempts have failed doesn't meant Xsyon Dev's can't come up with a winning system.
I recall in Lineage 1 the penalty for going red was quite severe, only a few brave souls were willing to be permared and they were masterful in their gankings. People respected them and when they posted the screenshot of your death on their website you felt proud to be chosen. (they didn't random kill noobs, in fact, they went after the highest level players they could find).
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Well this is kinda discouraging...I don't see any reason why these punishments can't be announced. Keeping them in shadow is unfair to both type of players...combatants and non-combatants too. If the punishments won't be effective then the non-combatants will complain saying they were promised to be able to play a ganking-free game....if the punishment will be harsh enough the combatant players will complain saying that they were promised to get an open-PvP game so they shouldn't be penalized to play in their favoured playstyle. Hiding these information only sets up one part of the community for a disappointment.
Actually the lead dev, Jordi, has posted his ideas about this early on. I posted that information here:
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/271470/PvP-Info-From-Lead-Dev-New-info-March-6-2010.html
The question is whether these rules will be enough? No one really knows but we know the goal of the game is to achieve a balance between open PvP and other aspects of gaming. If these intial rules are not enough then the devs will change it based upon community feedback to achieve that balance.
Not mentioned in the above post is that later in the game (post-prelude) tribal territories will be able to grow in size and shape.
Edit: Another attempt at the link:
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/271470/PvP-Info-From-Lead-Dev-New-info-March-6-2010.html
Oakstead, thanks for the info, but this link tells me that the page no longer exists
Oak, your link is broke.
Anyway, open pvp is necessary. It's a 'feature'. How they handle it will be another issue. I hope that most wont put up with a pve-coddled game where one is magically protected when venturing out in the wilds. At the same time, I'd hope that playing an indestructible mass murderer that has aboslutely no consequences for player-killing isn't an option either.
Many, I'd hope, just dont want pvp to be relegated to an overly heavy-hand with broad constraints and penalties being cast on one that engages in non-consensual pvp.
Strange that the original link no longer works. I did the link again and also bumped the thread to the top of the forum. I hope it has what you are looking for.
Thanks, Oakstead.
I've read it,but it doesn' t really answers my questions....all I can see is that "PvP is open but has severe consequences". But what are these consequences? Only 1 thing is mentioned there, evil players can't set up their village as a safe zone....what they wouldn't do anyway lol.
So again, what's the reason for keeping these basic informations in shadow ?
lol, open world PvP is the best aspect and should be in EVERY MMO..
And i guess its a core feature in this game, not sure as i dont follow it and wont play it ^^
Currently Playing Path of Exile
Personally, I don't think they have many additional plans beyond those listed. They will launch, evaluate the situation, and make changes as needed.
Their "severe consequences" for an evil red character include having big red letters above its head so they can be seen and having them be open to attack by anyone at anylime, even in their own tribe's territory.
One character per account also is a balancing feature since lazy oportunistic ganker types can't hide behind alts but will instead have to play as a brigand with all the consquences and challenges of being "on the run".
So no safe zones for evil characters. Will that be enough? We shall see.
Good characters can raise faction in their tribe and those of their allies. Evil factions won't have that option. At least as I understand it. You could do missions from your own totem or an allie's totem if you have the proper reputation. Also, you aren't Kill On Site, KOS, to every town if you are good. You can wander around without getting ganked all the time.
You also start with limited skills(5 total - 2 combat skills, 2 gathering skills, 1 crafting skill) You will need to learn skills from other players or scavange that random rare book from the wild. If you are good you have more options for having someone teach you the skill. If you are evil everyone hates you. You have to hope someone in your own tribe has the skill you want to learn if you don't already know it.
Are those enough reasons to be good? Only time will tell.
I think it puts a slight advantage on the good player's side. They can team up and take down any reds in their areas. Reds are hostile to everyone, even other reads. There is no gauranting another evil player will help you. Good promotes working together, gaining faction, forming alliances, and sharing skills/resources. Evil, not sure. Guess it promotes stealing. Everyone hates you and it would seem the only easy way to get ahea would be to steal what you need.
people who want pvp everywhere to are just punks want to gank a player when he first logs in for first 5 seconds before he can even figure out where he is at. Poor play and a week player.
From what ive seen the developers of this game are looking to hardcore pvp with players that would never care of ganking a players first day in game. Lets face it you need a zone to setup. One of many reason darkfall and many other games that have listen to the gankers that get their kiddy funs and then leave in a week have failed.
Actually most people, including me who want PvP everywhere is because this is a sandbox and it's more realistic, most of us just want the old school style of gaming back before the MMO community got flooded with themeparks. Most people who like open world pvp like open competition and to always have to watch their backs in the game it's a lot more fun than knowing that there's hard coded mechanics to keep you safe. Plus fighting an actual player will always be more fun and challenging than fighting a crappy AI that does the same thing everytime and is very predictable.
But hey you can just call all people who like a challenge and open world pvp a bunch of kid punks and are weak players for wanting fun competition and a challenge.
All the old games that had any success had savere consequences to just running around killing people in town. This does not harm sandbox game as its realistic. Go to your mall and start shooting people see what happens to you. The rules in UO before they changed em were balanced and good example of a successfull sandbox game. SO far from what I hear of the rules for this game it will be very similar.
PS
FYI Their is no challenge in walking up to a player just loggin in game trying to read a tutorial and killing em :P
The challenge is forming a clan and battling other clans for territories.
I agree there should be consequences and penalties for killing a good player, BUT there should not be hard coded safe zones. There should be guards for starter zones but not 1 shot guards.
hmm seems there is alot of opinionated people here that think they are the all knowing obi-won
Anyways, Open world pvp is fine, but only if it's done right unlike Age of Conan were it's open world pvp is absolutly horrible. Games like Shadowbane were very good at open world pvp, and it's to bad most MMO's now a days don't take things from the older games and incorperate them into the new ones. The older MMO's were much better designed then the new ones now a days. The only MMO that I have found so far with a true open world pvp feel is Darkfall, and thats pretty much it in terms of open world pvp.. all the rest of the games are all themeparks with flashy graphics, lvling, gear, but no substance. I could be wrong though as it is only my opinion, and from reading ths thread I'm shure there are some of you just itching to burn me on a cross as a witch just for stating how bad MMO's are in general now a days ^_^
I swear people that are commonly referred to as carebeard are the most whiney people around. I don't care what type of PvP a person is in favor of, but those that want FFA PvP are looked down on by these types of players, and they see open PvP as a design flaw. Is it that hard to say that some like limited PvP and some like FFA PvP and go find the game that catters to you. Very few games are open PvP and some of the 'limited PvP' proponent it seems wont be happy untill they stomp them out
The people who post in this thread and don't like open PvP are players who love sandbox games, but can't find one without FFA PvP....there are sandbox games for the PvP players, Darkfall, MO, Eve, Wurm, but there isn't even one sandbox without open PvP. So thats why they (myself included) prefer PvP zones or PvP restrictions by player level or severe consequences on open PvP.
I don't mind open world PvP as long as I have the option to enable myself for PvP when I choose so. Unless this option is implemented, I won't bother with the game.