Originally posted by darquenblade Originally posted by pirrg I can clearly see that youre one of those players that wants the game mechanics to cater to their every needs. Let me take the opporunity to quote your words: "As a pre-uor Ultima Online player myself, im surprised that you would say something like "not every game needs to be ultima online" when the direct opposite is true. EVERY game should be ultima online, alas not a single game is." Sounds like someone is being a hypocrite. By claiming that 'every game should be like Ultima Online', aren't you essentially asking that EVERY GAME should cater to your needs?
The difference between me and you is that i want a game to cater to everyones needs, not just my own. You strongly oppose a concept you have nothing to do with. If they introduce a PvP server amongst the droves of PvE servers, how on earth would that affect your gameplay?
Im yet to see a PvPer oppose PvE in any game, so i guess you lot are the real "griefers".
_____________________ I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
Originally posted by pirrg I can clearly see that youre one of those players that wants the game mechanics to cater to their every needs.
Let me take the opporunity to quote your words: "As a pre-uor Ultima Online player myself, im surprised that you would say something like "not every game needs to be ultima online" when the direct opposite is true. EVERY game should be ultima online, alas not a single game is." Sounds like someone is being a hypocrite. By claiming that 'every game should be like Ultima Online', aren't you essentially asking that EVERY GAME should cater to your needs?
The difference between me and you is that i want a game to cater to everyones needs, not just my own. You strongly oppose a concept you have nothing to do with. If they introduce a PvP server amongst the droves of PvE servers, how on earth would that affect your gameplay?
Im yet to see a PvPer oppose PvE in any game, so i guess you lot are the real "griefers".
It's not PvP or a PvP server I have a problem with; it's people like you who constantly insist on a certain gameplay element (full, open PvP) that they just aren't going to get. You're simply wasting your breath. HJ will have PvP of some sort, but it will not be the gankfest UO PvP that you so desire. It's that simple. Don't just go assuming that I dislike PvP when it is simply your (and others) houndings to include a type of PvP (that only a minority are fond of) that the game just will not have.
And as to your last comment about never seeing PvPer's complain about PvE--that was a good one. I guess the term 'carebear' just materialized out of the clear blue sky? And I should point you toward this thread, which is currently on the main page of General Discussion as I type this:
Originally posted by darquenblade Originally posted by pirrgOriginally posted by darquenbladeOriginally posted by pirrg I can clearly see that youre one of those players that wants the game mechanics to cater to their every needs. Let me take the opporunity to quote your words: "As a pre-uor Ultima Online player myself, im surprised that you would say something like "not every game needs to be ultima online" when the direct opposite is true. EVERY game should be ultima online, alas not a single game is."Sounds like someone is being a hypocrite. By claiming that 'every game should be like Ultima Online', aren't you essentially asking that EVERY GAME should cater to your needs?The difference between me and you is that i want a game to cater to everyones needs, not just my own. You strongly oppose a concept you have nothing to do with. If they introduce a PvP server amongst the droves of PvE servers, how on earth would that affect your gameplay? Im yet to see a PvPer oppose PvE in any game, so i guess you lot are the real "griefers". It's not PvP or a PvP server I have a problem with; it's people like you who constantly insist on a certain gameplay element (full, open PvP) that they just aren't going to get. You're simply wasting your breath. HJ will have PvP of some sort, but it will not be the gankfest UO PvP that you so desire. It's that simple. Don't just go assuming that I dislike PvP when it is simply your (and others) houndings to include a type of PvP (that only a minority are fond of) that the game just will not have. And as to your last comment about never seeing PvPer's complain about PvE--that was a good one. I guess the term 'carebear' just materialized out of the clear blue sky? And I should point you toward this thread, which is currently on the main page of General Discussion as I type this: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion.cfm/load/forums/loadforum/51/loadthread/45223/setstart/1/loadclass/35
Youre an idiot. Ganking occurs in every pvp setting no matter the ruleset. Its obvious that you loathe open ended pvp the way you rally against it. What would you prefer? The horrible deathmatch pvp we see in guild wars and world of warcraft? And youre calling me a minority? Allow me to laugh.
Lineage2 has the largest ammount of subscribers on the market, and it has open pvp with loot. And how do you know what the game will and wont have? Are you a developer perchance? No i didnt think so. The term carebear is used for people like you whom will take an active stance against anything remotely resembling risk vs reward, it has nothing to do with PvE.
_____________________ I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
Originally posted by darquenblade Originally posted by pirrg I can clearly see that youre one of those players that wants the game mechanics to cater to their every needs. Let me take the opporunity to quote your words: "As a pre-uor Ultima Online player myself, im surprised that you would say something like "not every game needs to be ultima online" when the direct opposite is true. EVERY game should be ultima online, alas not a single game is."Sounds like someone is being a hypocrite. By claiming that 'every game should be like Ultima Online', aren't you essentially asking that EVERY GAME should cater to your needs?
The difference between me and you is that i want a game to cater to everyones needs, not just my own. You strongly oppose a concept you have nothing to do with. If they introduce a PvP server amongst the droves of PvE servers, how on earth would that affect your gameplay? Im yet to see a PvPer oppose PvE in any game, so i guess you lot are the real "griefers".
It's not PvP or a PvP server I have a problem with; it's people like you who constantly insist on a certain gameplay element (full, open PvP) that they just aren't going to get. You're simply wasting your breath. HJ will have PvP of some sort, but it will not be the gankfest UO PvP that you so desire. It's that simple. Don't just go assuming that I dislike PvP when it is simply your (and others) houndings to include a type of PvP (that only a minority are fond of) that the game just will not have. And as to your last comment about never seeing PvPer's complain about PvE--that was a good one. I guess the term 'carebear' just materialized out of the clear blue sky? And I should point you toward this thread, which is currently on the main page of General Discussion as I type this: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion.cfm/load/forums/loadforum/51/loadthread/45223/setstart/1/loadclass/35
Youre an idiot. Ganking occurs in every pvp setting no matter the ruleset. Its obvious that you loathe open ended pvp the way you rally against it. What would you prefer? The horrible deathmatch pvp we see in guild wars and world of warcraft? And youre calling me a minority? Allow me to laugh.
Lineage2 has the largest ammount of subscribers on the market, and it has open pvp with loot. And how do you know what the game will and wont have? Are you a developer perchance? No i didnt think so. The term carebear is used for people like you whom will take an active stance against anything remotely resembling risk vs reward, it has nothing to do with PvE.
Ooohh..namecalling now is it? And yes, I'm calling you a minority. If you aren't, where are all of these great open full loot PvP games? Give me the big list. If it's so popular, why DOESN'T every MMO follow the UO template? I'll tell you--because it was unpopular.
And we're grasping at straws here if we're going to mention Lineage 2. Are we talking about the Asian game market here? Last I checked, we weren't. It's a completely different animal. And before you go saying that Lineage 2 has a fanbase over here, it's completely inconsiquential compared to it's Asian fanbase. I wouldn't necessarily call 65,000 subs very impressive compared to all those 'carebear' games out there. On a side note, I've asked this question to many people before, but every one of them fails to answer me. If Lineage 2 has what you like, why aren't you playing that?
How do I know that the game won't have full open PvP? Because implementing something like that would shift the entire focus of the game, making it entirely different than what it is intended to be. If you would actually read about the game (the Journey System, the Game Master element, etc.) you might actually see how really PvP of any kind is the last thing on their minds right now.
Oh, and good job ignoring that link I posted that completely discredited your comment on PvPers not being apposed to PvE.
And continue to call me an idiot, or any other name for that matter. It's making you look quite mature indeed.
Originally posted by pirrg The difference between me and you is that i want a game to cater to everyones needs, not just my own. You strongly oppose a concept you have nothing to do with. If they introduce a PvP server amongst the droves of PvE servers, how on earth would that affect your gameplay?Im yet to see a PvPer oppose PvE in any game, so i guess you lot are the real "griefers".
Just for the record, David Whatley (producer) has already indicated that there the possibility exists for multiple rulesets to satisfy different types of players. While there aren't any significant details regarding PvP and such, it sounds like there could be different servers catering to different playstyles, even within the realm of PvP. Here's the quote from the IGN interview:
David Whatley: Hero's Journey is heavily weighted towards cooperative play; however, we plan to have PvP play in the game as well. The exact nature of this is still being decided, and because we can create multiple versions of the world with different rules easily, we can have unique versions to cover just about everyone's tastes. The thing to keep in mind is that when we design something like PvP, we do so with exceeding care. It has to not just be "in there"; it has to be balanced, interesting and fun. We'll talk more about PvP plans as we get closer.
HJ-Xadrian Hero's Journey GameMaster - Fighting for the rights of badgers everywhere. www.play.net/hj/
Originally posted by pirrg The difference between me and you is that i want a game to cater to everyones needs, not just my own. You strongly oppose a concept you have nothing to do with. If they introduce a PvP server amongst the droves of PvE servers, how on earth would that affect your gameplay?
Im yet to see a PvPer oppose PvE in any game, so i guess you lot are the real "griefers".
Just for the record, David Whatley (producer) has already indicated that there the possibility exists for multiple rulesets to satisfy different types of players. While there aren't any significant details regarding PvP and such, it sounds like there could be different servers catering to different playstyles, even within the realm of PvP. Here's the quote from the IGN interview:
David Whatley: Hero's Journey is heavily weighted towards cooperative play; however, we plan to have PvP play in the game as well. The exact nature of this is still being decided, and because we can create multiple versions of the world with different rules easily, we can have unique versions to cover just about everyone's tastes. The thing to keep in mind is that when we design something like PvP, we do so with exceeding care. It has to not just be "in there"; it has to be balanced, interesting and fun. We'll talk more about PvP plans as we get closer.
Well, if we are to go by this, it looks like there is a chance for a server accomodating your play style pirrg, and if there is, then I will be the first to apologize to you. Unlike many people on this site, I can admit when I'm wrong (although that hasn't been proven yet).
I still think that the likelyhood of a full loot (which is really the only part of your PvP dynamic I do not agree with) PvP system is rather slim, as it just ends up being too touchy of a gameplay mechanic. I don't understand how taking away what someone spent hours achieving can be considered fun. Even if someone deserved it (because they were a ganker), in the end all you are doing is commiting the same act that they are guilty of. If a system like this were to be truly 'heroic', it would allow the player who killed the griefer the ability to give back the griefer's ill-gained loot to the person/people they stole it from. As it stands, whoever 'griefed the griefer' would simply be stealing items that had already been stolen. Not really heroic.
As I said before pirrg, if they implement an open PvP, full looting server then I will apologize immenely for claiming that they would never do it. However, I wish you would also try and see where I am coming from on the subject of a full-looting PvP system before you criticize me. PvP I am fine with (even open PvP), but a system that allows you to take away the hard earned work of another player is one that tends to do little but breed hard feelings and mistrust between players.
EDIT: Actually, if you want, I wouldn't mind entering a discussion with you on how you could truly include heroic elements into open/full looting PvP style gameplay. How would you have it done?
I think both of you shouldn't be looking at the 'Heroic' element of PvP that simply doesn't exist so far and instead look at the design rule for Hero's Journey: More fun, less tedium.
What fun would it be for the person on the PvP server who just wants a challenge to suddenly get pwned by some guy 10+ levels over them and take all their stuff? Not fun at all. They just want to fight the guy, not get totally ganked. Being ganked constantly would be horribly tedious for the person trying to recover, and it certainly wouldn't it be fun.
My thoughts on PvP in HJ: Let's say you are on a PvP server. Now, let's make it so PvP CANNOT happen at a whim. Basically, you can't fight in common areas. Rather, PvP would happen in instancing.
How so? The Journey System, people. What if one player was on the side of the Triumvirate and another player was on a side opposing the Triumvirate, and the Journey System makes them both an instance where they have to do stuff against each faction? For example, both players are dropped in the instance. One player's objective is to spy on the Triumvirate and obtain information for their faction. The other player's duty, however, is to make sure that no spies get in or out, and to stop the spies in any way they can. It's not traditional PvP in the sense of killing each other, but it's still PvP because you are trying to thwart each other, and in the process becoming more of a hero for your faction.
Originally posted by Renian I think both of you shouldn't be looking at the 'Heroic' element of PvP that simply doesn't exist so far and instead look at the design rule for Hero's Journey: More fun, less tedium. What fun would it be for the person on the PvP server who just wants a challenge to suddenly get pwned by some guy 10+ levels over them and take all their stuff? Not fun at all. They just want to fight the guy, not get totally ganked. Being ganked constantly would be horribly tedious for the person trying to recover, and it certainly wouldn't it be fun. My thoughts on PvP in HJ: Let's say you are on a PvP server. Now, let's make it so PvP CANNOT happen at a whim. Basically, you can't fight in common areas. Rather, PvP would happen in instancing. How so? The Journey System, people. What if one player was on the side of the Triumvirate and another player was on a side opposing the Triumvirate, and the Journey System makes them both an instance where they have to do stuff against each faction? For example, both players are dropped in the instance. One player's objective is to spy on the Triumvirate and obtain information for their faction. The other player's duty, however, is to make sure that no spies get in or out, and to stop the spies in any way they can. It's not traditional PvP in the sense of killing each other, but it's still PvP because you are trying to thwart each other, and in the process becoming more of a hero for your faction.
Well, for the record, I wouldn't put the full loot pvp system in the game if I were in charge anyway, for reasons that I have stated already. I'm simply wishing to have a hypothetical discussion with the OP on how such an inherently flawed system could be made better, or more 'heroic'. Basically, I'm wanting to have a conversation with him and not a flamefest, which it was starting to become.
Will HJ have such open pvp/full loot server available? I don't think so, and nor do you Ren. But honestly we don't really know (since Simu seems to want to make a PvP element that will satisfy most everybody). Also, no one from Simu is jumping out and saying 'hell no' either.
True Darq, but it may be a wise idea also to think outside the box when it comes to PvP. If they do something completely different and handle PvP in a way that no one has seen before, even the most hardcore PvPer may like it better.
Originally posted by darquenblade Originally posted by HJ-XadrianOriginally posted by pirrgThe difference between me and you is that i want a game to cater to everyones needs, not just my own. You strongly oppose a concept you have nothing to do with. If they introduce a PvP server amongst the droves of PvE servers, how on earth would that affect your gameplay? Im yet to see a PvPer oppose PvE in any game, so i guess you lot are the real "griefers". Just for the record, David Whatley (producer) has already indicated that there the possibility exists for multiple rulesets to satisfy different types of players. While there aren't any significant details regarding PvP and such, it sounds like there could be different servers catering to different playstyles, even within the realm of PvP. Here's the quote from the IGN interview:David Whatley: Hero's Journey is heavily weighted towards cooperative play; however, we plan to have PvP play in the game as well. The exact nature of this is still being decided, and because we can create multiple versions of the world with different rules easily, we can have unique versions to cover just about everyone's tastes. The thing to keep in mind is that when we design something like PvP, we do so with exceeding care. It has to not just be "in there"; it has to be balanced, interesting and fun. We'll talk more about PvP plans as we get closer. Well, if we are to go by this, it looks like there is a chance for a server accomodating your play style pirrg, and if there is, then I will be the first to apologize to you. Unlike many people on this site, I can admit when I'm wrong (although that hasn't been proven yet). I still think that the likelyhood of a full loot (which is really the only part of your PvP dynamic I do not agree with) PvP system is rather slim, as it just ends up being too touchy of a gameplay mechanic. I don't understand how taking away what someone spent hours achieving can be considered fun. Even if someone deserved it (because they were a ganker), in the end all you are doing is commiting the same act that they are guilty of. If a system like this were to be truly 'heroic', it would allow the player who killed the griefer the ability to give back the griefer's ill-gained loot to the person/people they stole it from. As it stands, whoever 'griefed the griefer' would simply be stealing items that had already been stolen. Not really heroic. As I said before pirrg, if they implement an open PvP, full looting server then I will apologize immenely for claiming that they would never do it. However, I wish you would also try and see where I am coming from on the subject of a full-looting PvP system before you criticize me. PvP I am fine with (even open PvP), but a system that allows you to take away the hard earned work of another player is one that tends to do little but breed hard feelings and mistrust between players. EDIT: Actually, if you want, I wouldn't mind entering a discussion with you on how you could truly include heroic elements into open/full looting PvP style gameplay. How would you have it done?
Again mate its not about accomodating "my" playstyle mate, its about the greater good and the longevity of the game. Its not about the actual "loot" either. Its about having a working and simple risk versus reward system. I can see youve pictured some sort of deathmatch server where everyone is jumpin eachother 24/7 but that would be the case under this ruleset. Let me explain.
If youve played Ultima Online you would know that despite its open pvp and loot system, player killers usually wouldnt venture outside their houses in fear of getting ganked. The vast majority of the playerbase were blue players and the game was actually very safe for normal players. Why? Because the penalties of murdering players on a steady basis were severe to say the least. Unconsensual pvp should indeed be punished severely.
But at the same time, consensual pvp needs to have excitement and reward, otherwise it becomes boring and tedious. What im trying to say is that without a risk versus reward system, heros journey will become another world of warcraft or guild wars when it comes to pvp. Mindless deathmatch.
Like ive said before, its not up to the game to decide wether youre a hero or not its up to your fellow players. If you vanquish an infamous murderer at great risk of dying yourself, how do you think youll look in the eyes of his victims and everyone else whom loathe him?
_____________________ I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
Again mate its not about accomodating "my" playstyle mate, its about the greater good and the longevity of the game. Its not about the actual "loot" either. Its about having a working and simple risk versus reward system. I can see youve pictured some sort of deathmatch server where everyone is jumpin eachother 24/7 but that would be the case under this ruleset. Let me explain.
If youve played Ultima Online you would know that despite its open pvp and loot system, player killers usually wouldnt venture outside their houses in fear of getting ganked. The vast majority of the playerbase were blue players and the game was actually very safe for normal players. Why? Because the penalties of murdering players on a steady basis were severe to say the least. Unconsensual pvp should indeed be punished severely.
But at the same time, consensual pvp needs to have excitement and reward, otherwise it becomes boring and tedious. What im trying to say is that without a risk versus reward system, heros journey will become another world of warcraft or guild wars when it comes to pvp. Mindless deathmatch.
Like ive said before, its not up to the game to decide wether youre a hero or not its up to your fellow players. If you vanquish an infamous murderer at great risk of dying yourself, how do you think youll look in the eyes of his victims and everyone else whom loathe him?
Well, the reason I refer to it as "your" type of playstyle is that, in all honesty, no matter how for the greater good you think it is, is IS your playstyle, because that's what you like.
Although I never have played UO (I'm new to these games relatively), the picture you paint of it is vastly different from what I've heard most people say about it. I think you're one of the only people I know of that has not described UO's PvP as a chaotic gankfest (not that I say I'm doubting you).
One thing that I find curious is that you say that this type of playstyle would be for the greater good and longevity of the game. In your opinion, if this type of playstyle is so crucial for these games, why has no one really implemented it since UO? The reason this style of game has kind of faded into the background is because the number of people that disliked it outnumbered the people that did. You stated yourself that the number of 'blue' players in UO (I'm assuming that means non-pk) outnumbered the others.
And while I must say that your heroic scenario is a good one (vanquishing the evil pk'er), I think most people into this style of play wouldn't even care. You see, while you may have noble intentions, you are a minority in that regard. This is the MAIN reason why players who prefer PvE have such a negative view of PvP players. Their attitude. Now I am no longer grouping you into this category, as I do not think you are that way, but in my experiences (and many others), PvPers are a rude, obnoxious bunch, who don't really care for fair play much at all. Which brings me to another point--PvP encounters are hardly ever fair. In my PvP experiences, I have never been attacked by someone that I had even a remote chance of defeating. Many PvPers will only enter a confrontation if they KNOW they are going to win. I try to participate in fair PvP with folks around my level, but usually they'll just run (knowing there's a chance they'll lose). Where's the fun, the challenge, in that? You may be the minority, but most players in PvP centered games are cowards and bullies (at least that's how they act).
Originally posted by darquenblade Originally posted by pirrg Again mate its not about accomodating "my" playstyle mate, its about the greater good and the longevity of the game. Its not about the actual "loot" either. Its about having a working and simple risk versus reward system. I can see youve pictured some sort of deathmatch server where everyone is jumpin eachother 24/7 but that would be the case under this ruleset. Let me explain. If youve played Ultima Online you would know that despite its open pvp and loot system, player killers usually wouldnt venture outside their houses in fear of getting ganked. The vast majority of the playerbase were blue players and the game was actually very safe for normal players. Why? Because the penalties of murdering players on a steady basis were severe to say the least. Unconsensual pvp should indeed be punished severely. But at the same time, consensual pvp needs to have excitement and reward, otherwise it becomes boring and tedious. What im trying to say is that without a risk versus reward system, heros journey will become another world of warcraft or guild wars when it comes to pvp. Mindless deathmatch. Like ive said before, its not up to the game to decide wether youre a hero or not its up to your fellow players. If you vanquish an infamous murderer at great risk of dying yourself, how do you think youll look in the eyes of his victims and everyone else whom loathe him?Well, the reason I refer to it as "your" type of playstyle is that, in all honesty, no matter how for the greater good you think it is, is IS your playstyle, because that's what you like. Although I never have played UO (I'm new to these games relatively), the picture you paint of it is vastly different from what I've heard most people say about it. I think you're one of the only people I know of that has not described UO's PvP as a chaotic gankfest (not that I say I'm doubting you). One thing that I find curious is that you say that this type of playstyle would be for the greater good and longevity of the game. In your opinion, if this type of playstyle is so crucial for these games, why has no one really implemented it since UO? The reason this style of game has kind of faded into the background is because the number of people that disliked it outnumbered the people that did. You stated yourself that the number of 'blue' players in UO (I'm assuming that means non-pk) outnumbered the others. And while I must say that your heroic scenario is a good one (vanquishing the evil pk'er), I think most people into this style of play wouldn't even care. You see, while you may have noble intentions, you are a minority in that regard. This is the MAIN reason why players who prefer PvE have such a negative view of PvP players. Their attitude. Now I am no longer grouping you into this category, as I do not think you are that way, but in my experiences (and many others), PvPers are a rude, obnoxious bunch, who don't really care for fair play much at all. Which brings me to another point--PvP encounters are hardly ever fair. In my PvP experiences, I have never been attacked by someone that I had even a remote chance of defeating. Many PvPers will only enter a confrontation if they KNOW they are going to win. I try to participate in fair PvP with folks around my level, but usually they'll just run (knowing there's a chance they'll lose). Where's the fun, the challenge, in that? You may be the minority, but most players in PvP centered games are cowards and bullies (at least that's how they act).
UO was a gankfest but only for those whom actively engaged in guild wars or factional pvp and again, thats a conscious choice they made and thus arent entitled to complain about getting ganked. The simple reason to why no one has implemented full pvp is due to the developers fears that it will alienate a large portion of their playerbase and scare them away.
I agree that its a bold stance to take, but one that is necessary for the genre to evolve beyond the generic npc-harvest games we see popping up each and every day. While the number of blue people outnumbered the red in UO, that doesnt mean the blue people didnt pvp. On the contrary, 99% of those whom engaged in consensual pvp were blues whom were in warring guilds or factions.
On your point that people whom are into hardcore pvp wouldnt care if a high profile pker was to be killed, you are one hundred percent wrong. Coming from eve online ive seen many players proclaimed hero's by the playerbase when their tormentors were punished in one way or another.
Your last point isnt really something i can argue about suffice to say that most games provide you with the tools to stop grief behaviour and cowardice (in the form of ignore buttons and webs/stuns/roots or what have you) but that has to do with basic game mechanics and would derail the discussion from the topic at hand. Either way, i agree that PvP has its share of rotten apples but that applies to both camps. You see it more in pvpers because PvP brings out more emotions then PvE and at the same time puts a face on your tormentor/victim.
_____________________ I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
Good points, pirrng. I think you may have misunderstood me a bit on one point however. I wasn't stating that the community wouldn't care if a hated ganker were killed--I was stating that I believed that most of the hardcore PvP communtity wouldn't care about being the hero.
I may be wrong about this too, but you must understand that on the whole I have had a very negative PvP experience, where it seems you have had a mostly positive one. When it comes down to it, neither one of us is right, and neither one of us is wrong. Our opinions, as with anything, are shaped by our own personal experiences. Actually, I would very much enjoy the type of PvP environment you describe, if only it could be found.
Originally posted by darquenblade Good points, pirrng. I think you may have misunderstood me a bit on one point however. I wasn't stating that the community wouldn't care if a hated ganker were killed--I was stating that I believed that most of the hardcore PvP communtity wouldn't care about being the hero. I may be wrong about this too, but you must understand that on the whole I have had a very negative PvP experience, where it seems you have had a mostly positive one. When it comes down to it, neither one of us is right, and neither one of us is wrong. Our opinions, as with anything, are shaped by our own personal experiences. Actually, I would very much enjoy the type of PvP environment you describe, if only it could be found.
Ah i see what you mean mate. From my extensive experience of pvp having tried nearly every pvp MMO on the market, i can tell you that you're wrong on that point. There will always be skilled PvPers whom take it upon themselves to stop those whom pray on the meek, myself included. The "hardcore PvPers" will undoubtedly only engage in contested pvp such as faction wars and wars between guilds. This type of playstyle would also be encouraged by severe death penalties for murderers (uncontested pvpers)
I too have had negative pvp experiences, more then a few infact and every time i simply brush it off because in the end its just a game. Ive found that the key to thoroughly enjoy yourself in such an enviorment is to surround yourself with quality people. Joining a nice guild with friendly people is absolutely essential in full pvp games.
_____________________ I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
Originally posted by MisfitZ You are being narrowminded. Not every game needs to be Ultima Online. The truth is, I'm glad they didn't try FFA PvP. That's probably the most difficult aspect of an MMo to implement without ruining the game. It requires many other features, just to support it. Too much time and energy is devoted to tweaking a system that has been flawed in every game that has had it. Simutronics has chosen a different route for their game. I feel comfortable with the material they have presented on their game so far, despite my preference for PvP games.
As a pre-uor Ultima Online player myself, im surprised that you would say something like "not every game needs to be ultima online" when the direct opposite is true. EVERY game should be ultima online, alas not a single game is. Instead, we have npc harvest clones such as eq2/wow/guildwars/tabularasa/d&d online and just about every other MMO on the market or in development today.
Then go play Ultima Online.
The fact that UO had major flaws is undisputable.
Was it enjoyable? Absolutely.
Was it exploitable? Absolutely.
Was it a great system conceptually that turned out to be completely broken? Again, absolutely.
When UO was being designed, the producers figured that the players, given the freedom to govern themselves and their own interactions, would police themselves. As any of us who played the game know, that is not what happened.
Sure, it wasn't the chaotic gankfest that some people seem to remember it as, but it was most certainly a system without proportionate consequences for your (negative) actions.
So, like I said, I'm glad they're steering away from FFA PvP with looting. Slapping that feature on a game like HJ is like putting a jet engine on an '82 Chevette. There just isn't enough of a frame to support it. Ultima suffered from it, and the backlash ruined the game.
Now, it would be cool if there was an arena with FFA PvP and looting. Or at least a controlled environment where entry was consensual.
----------------------------- Listen Asmodeeus, seven years ago, Ultima Online didn't even have those pathetic "quests" that you refer to or those "professions" of ninja, samurai, necromancer, and paladin. Nor did it have any of the neon crap, or bug mounts. It didn't even have any "combat moves." You turned on attack and jousted with simplistic swings. It was a better game then. if you can't guess why then just uninstall the thing and move along. - Crabby
Originally posted by MisfitZ You are being narrowminded. Not every game needs to be Ultima Online. The truth is, I'm glad they didn't try FFA PvP. That's probably the most difficult aspect of an MMo to implement without ruining the game. It requires many other features, just to support it. Too much time and energy is devoted to tweaking a system that has been flawed in every game that has had it. Simutronics has chosen a different route for their game. I feel comfortable with the material they have presented on their game so far, despite my preference for PvP games.
As a pre-uor Ultima Online player myself, im surprised that you would say something like "not every game needs to be ultima online" when the direct opposite is true. EVERY game should be ultima online, alas not a single game is. Instead, we have npc harvest clones such as eq2/wow/guildwars/tabularasa/d&d online and just about every other MMO on the market or in development today.
Then go play Ultima Online.
The fact that UO had major flaws is undisputable.
Was it enjoyable? Absolutely.
Was it exploitable? Absolutely.
Was it a great system conceptually that turned out to be completely broken? Again, absolutely.
When UO was being designed, the producers figured that the players, given the freedom to govern themselves and their own interactions, would police themselves. As any of us who played the game know, that is not what happened.
Sure, it wasn't the chaotic gankfest that some people seem to remember it as, but it was most certainly a system without proportionate consequences for your (negative) actions.
So, like I said, I'm glad they're steering away from FFA PvP with looting. Slapping that feature on a game like HJ is like putting a jet engine on an '82 Chevette. There just isn't enough of a frame to support it. Ultima suffered from it, and the backlash ruined the game.
Now, it would be cool if there was an arena with FFA PvP and looting. Or at least a controlled environment where entry was consensual.
I admit that pre-t2a/uor UO was a bit extreme for casual gamers. NOTHING was broken with uo's system though. The PvP was FAR from FFA and the players did infact govern themselves. How did ultima suffer from it when its been going strong for 7 years. The open pvp didnt ruin the game, the catering of carebears from OSI did.
I loathe anything even resembling arena pvp though and i truly hope that isnt a route the devs chose to walk down.
_____________________ I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
As a player of the original UO from beta on for a while, and then again as a Counsilor during the same time frame (prior to the counsilor scam/betrayal/uproar) I can tell you from first hand experience, it was a big gankfest.
Now some folks like that, but it made it dire on newbies to go exploring without getting whacked for no reason by a quick Por
Originally posted by HJ-Archaegeo As a player of the original UO from beta on for a while, and then again as a Counsilor during the same time frame (prior to the counsilor scam/betrayal/uproar) I can tell you from first hand experience, it was a big gankfest. Now some folks like that, but it made it dire on newbies to go exploring without getting whacked for no reason by a quick Por
Like i said, pre-trammel it was a gankfest, no denying it. Post trammel it became much better, players learned to police themselves and player killers usually only came out when nearly everyone were asleep.
_____________________ I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
Originally posted by SIMU-MELISSA Not sure about shadows ... but I saw the first of our body morphing sliders in today. It was groooovy. BEEEEEEFCAAAAKE ... scrawny ... BEEEEEFCAAAAKE ... scrawny. Sweet.
--- oops ... I meant to post this in the screenshot folder. Sorry about that.
_____________________ I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
PVP in ultima was nice although i never did it ... it gave some excitement because you could just be at the wrong place at the wrong time (Like real life) and other players would usually warn others if there was pkers around... It being the first mmorpg i've ever played and probably the best i have not played a mmorpg that fun as a whole since.
Qoute: "I neva *ucked anybody over in my life, who didn't have it comin' to 'im, you got that? All I have in this world is my balls, and my word, and I don't break 'em for no one, jou understand?" Tony Montana
I think a lot of people have the wrong idea about open PvP because it's generally viewed as nothing but a gank fest. That doesn't have to be the case however. For those of you unfamiliar with Lineage 2, it has open PvP with loot drops on death, but it's not a non-stop gank fest. Why? because just like the UO system, you suffer serious penalties for killing someone who doesn't fight back. Your name turns red and you gain karma, which means it's open season on your @ss and your chances of dropping items if you die is very high. You also become KOS to guards so you can forget about visiting any towns. To work off the karma you either have to die (often multiple times depending on how much karma you have) or kill monsters around your level. Good luck hunting mobs with other players running around while your name is red.
The great thing about that system is players are always on the look out for PK's with red names because they hope for a good drop when they kill them, and your name doesn't turn red if you kill a red player so you basically have nothing to lose and they have everything to lose. So the players do actually police the game.
Why even have such a PvP system in the first place? Well let me ask you this... have you ever been hunting and someone ran up and KS'd or ran you out of a room you were camping by killing all the mobs or did something similar that really pissed you off because it was rude and inconsiderate? I'm sure most of you have had that happen. Well in a non-open PvP game, there's very little you can do except whine about it, but in an open PvP game (like Lineage 2) there is something you can do about it. So it's not about wanting to be a griefer or ganker, it's about empowering the player to stand up for him/her self when need be. And it's especially nice when you run across RMT farmers who are ruining a great game like HJ and you have the power to put a stop to them.
Comments
The difference between me and you is that i want a game to cater to everyones needs, not just my own. You strongly oppose a concept you have nothing to do with. If they introduce a PvP server amongst the droves of PvE servers, how on earth would that affect your gameplay?
Im yet to see a PvPer oppose PvE in any game, so i guess you lot are the real "griefers".
_____________________
I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
The difference between me and you is that i want a game to cater to everyones needs, not just my own. You strongly oppose a concept you have nothing to do with. If they introduce a PvP server amongst the droves of PvE servers, how on earth would that affect your gameplay?
Im yet to see a PvPer oppose PvE in any game, so i guess you lot are the real "griefers".
It's not PvP or a PvP server I have a problem with; it's people like you who constantly insist on a certain gameplay element (full, open PvP) that they just aren't going to get. You're simply wasting your breath. HJ will have PvP of some sort, but it will not be the gankfest UO PvP that you so desire. It's that simple. Don't just go assuming that I dislike PvP when it is simply your (and others) houndings to include a type of PvP (that only a minority are fond of) that the game just will not have.
And as to your last comment about never seeing PvPer's complain about PvE--that was a good one. I guess the term 'carebear' just materialized out of the clear blue sky? And I should point you toward this thread, which is currently on the main page of General Discussion as I type this:
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion.cfm/load/forums/loadforum/51/loadthread/45223/setstart/1/loadclass/35
Youre an idiot. Ganking occurs in every pvp setting no matter the ruleset. Its obvious that you loathe open ended pvp the way you rally against it. What would you prefer? The horrible deathmatch pvp we see in guild wars and world of warcraft? And youre calling me a minority? Allow me to laugh.
Lineage2 has the largest ammount of subscribers on the market, and it has open pvp with loot. And how do you know what the game will and wont have? Are you a developer perchance? No i didnt think so. The term carebear is used for people like you whom will take an active stance against anything remotely resembling risk vs reward, it has nothing to do with PvE.
_____________________
I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
Youre an idiot. Ganking occurs in every pvp setting no matter the ruleset. Its obvious that you loathe open ended pvp the way you rally against it. What would you prefer? The horrible deathmatch pvp we see in guild wars and world of warcraft? And youre calling me a minority? Allow me to laugh.
Lineage2 has the largest ammount of subscribers on the market, and it has open pvp with loot. And how do you know what the game will and wont have? Are you a developer perchance? No i didnt think so. The term carebear is used for people like you whom will take an active stance against anything remotely resembling risk vs reward, it has nothing to do with PvE.
Ooohh..namecalling now is it? And yes, I'm calling you a minority. If you aren't, where are all of these great open full loot PvP games? Give me the big list. If it's so popular, why DOESN'T every MMO follow the UO template? I'll tell you--because it was unpopular.
And we're grasping at straws here if we're going to mention Lineage 2. Are we talking about the Asian game market here? Last I checked, we weren't. It's a completely different animal. And before you go saying that Lineage 2 has a fanbase over here, it's completely inconsiquential compared to it's Asian fanbase. I wouldn't necessarily call 65,000 subs very impressive compared to all those 'carebear' games out there. On a side note, I've asked this question to many people before, but every one of them fails to answer me. If Lineage 2 has what you like, why aren't you playing that?
How do I know that the game won't have full open PvP? Because implementing something like that would shift the entire focus of the game, making it entirely different than what it is intended to be. If you would actually read about the game (the Journey System, the Game Master element, etc.) you might actually see how really PvP of any kind is the last thing on their minds right now.
Oh, and good job ignoring that link I posted that completely discredited your comment on PvPers not being apposed to PvE.
And continue to call me an idiot, or any other name for that matter. It's making you look quite mature indeed.
Just for the record, David Whatley (producer) has already indicated that there the possibility exists for multiple rulesets to satisfy different types of players. While there aren't any significant details regarding PvP and such, it sounds like there could be different servers catering to different playstyles, even within the realm of PvP. Here's the quote from the IGN interview:
HJ-Xadrian
Hero's Journey GameMaster - Fighting for the rights of badgers everywhere.
www.play.net/hj/
Just for the record, David Whatley (producer) has already indicated that there the possibility exists for multiple rulesets to satisfy different types of players. While there aren't any significant details regarding PvP and such, it sounds like there could be different servers catering to different playstyles, even within the realm of PvP. Here's the quote from the IGN interview:
Well, if we are to go by this, it looks like there is a chance for a server accomodating your play style pirrg, and if there is, then I will be the first to apologize to you. Unlike many people on this site, I can admit when I'm wrong (although that hasn't been proven yet).
I still think that the likelyhood of a full loot (which is really the only part of your PvP dynamic I do not agree with) PvP system is rather slim, as it just ends up being too touchy of a gameplay mechanic. I don't understand how taking away what someone spent hours achieving can be considered fun. Even if someone deserved it (because they were a ganker), in the end all you are doing is commiting the same act that they are guilty of. If a system like this were to be truly 'heroic', it would allow the player who killed the griefer the ability to give back the griefer's ill-gained loot to the person/people they stole it from. As it stands, whoever 'griefed the griefer' would simply be stealing items that had already been stolen. Not really heroic.
As I said before pirrg, if they implement an open PvP, full looting server then I will apologize immenely for claiming that they would never do it. However, I wish you would also try and see where I am coming from on the subject of a full-looting PvP system before you criticize me. PvP I am fine with (even open PvP), but a system that allows you to take away the hard earned work of another player is one that tends to do little but breed hard feelings and mistrust between players.
EDIT: Actually, if you want, I wouldn't mind entering a discussion with you on how you could truly include heroic elements into open/full looting PvP style gameplay. How would you have it done?
I think both of you shouldn't be looking at the 'Heroic' element of PvP that simply doesn't exist so far and instead look at the design rule for Hero's Journey: More fun, less tedium.
What fun would it be for the person on the PvP server who just wants a challenge to suddenly get pwned by some guy 10+ levels over them and take all their stuff? Not fun at all. They just want to fight the guy, not get totally ganked. Being ganked constantly would be horribly tedious for the person trying to recover, and it certainly wouldn't it be fun.
My thoughts on PvP in HJ: Let's say you are on a PvP server. Now, let's make it so PvP CANNOT happen at a whim. Basically, you can't fight in common areas. Rather, PvP would happen in instancing.
How so? The Journey System, people. What if one player was on the side of the Triumvirate and another player was on a side opposing the Triumvirate, and the Journey System makes them both an instance where they have to do stuff against each faction? For example, both players are dropped in the instance. One player's objective is to spy on the Triumvirate and obtain information for their faction. The other player's duty, however, is to make sure that no spies get in or out, and to stop the spies in any way they can. It's not traditional PvP in the sense of killing each other, but it's still PvP because you are trying to thwart each other, and in the process becoming more of a hero for your faction.
Well, for the record, I wouldn't put the full loot pvp system in the game if I were in charge anyway, for reasons that I have stated already. I'm simply wishing to have a hypothetical discussion with the OP on how such an inherently flawed system could be made better, or more 'heroic'. Basically, I'm wanting to have a conversation with him and not a flamefest, which it was starting to become.
Will HJ have such open pvp/full loot server available? I don't think so, and nor do you Ren. But honestly we don't really know (since Simu seems to want to make a PvP element that will satisfy most everybody). Also, no one from Simu is jumping out and saying 'hell no' either.
True Darq, but it may be a wise idea also to think outside the box when it comes to PvP. If they do something completely different and handle PvP in a way that no one has seen before, even the most hardcore PvPer may like it better.
Just my two cents.
Again mate its not about accomodating "my" playstyle mate, its about the greater good and the longevity of the game. Its not about the actual "loot" either. Its about having a working and simple risk versus reward system. I can see youve pictured some sort of deathmatch server where everyone is jumpin eachother 24/7 but that would be the case under this ruleset. Let me explain.
If youve played Ultima Online you would know that despite its open pvp and loot system, player killers usually wouldnt venture outside their houses in fear of getting ganked. The vast majority of the playerbase were blue players and the game was actually very safe for normal players. Why? Because the penalties of murdering players on a steady basis were severe to say the least. Unconsensual pvp should indeed be punished severely.
But at the same time, consensual pvp needs to have excitement and reward, otherwise it becomes boring and tedious. What im trying to say is that without a risk versus reward system, heros journey will become another world of warcraft or guild wars when it comes to pvp. Mindless deathmatch.
Like ive said before, its not up to the game to decide wether youre a hero or not its up to your fellow players. If you vanquish an infamous murderer at great risk of dying yourself, how do you think youll look in the eyes of his victims and everyone else whom loathe him?
_____________________
I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
If youve played Ultima Online you would know that despite its open pvp and loot system, player killers usually wouldnt venture outside their houses in fear of getting ganked. The vast majority of the playerbase were blue players and the game was actually very safe for normal players. Why? Because the penalties of murdering players on a steady basis were severe to say the least. Unconsensual pvp should indeed be punished severely.
But at the same time, consensual pvp needs to have excitement and reward, otherwise it becomes boring and tedious. What im trying to say is that without a risk versus reward system, heros journey will become another world of warcraft or guild wars when it comes to pvp. Mindless deathmatch.
Like ive said before, its not up to the game to decide wether youre a hero or not its up to your fellow players. If you vanquish an infamous murderer at great risk of dying yourself, how do you think youll look in the eyes of his victims and everyone else whom loathe him?
Well, the reason I refer to it as "your" type of playstyle is that, in all honesty, no matter how for the greater good you think it is, is IS your playstyle, because that's what you like.
Although I never have played UO (I'm new to these games relatively), the picture you paint of it is vastly different from what I've heard most people say about it. I think you're one of the only people I know of that has not described UO's PvP as a chaotic gankfest (not that I say I'm doubting you).
One thing that I find curious is that you say that this type of playstyle would be for the greater good and longevity of the game. In your opinion, if this type of playstyle is so crucial for these games, why has no one really implemented it since UO? The reason this style of game has kind of faded into the background is because the number of people that disliked it outnumbered the people that did. You stated yourself that the number of 'blue' players in UO (I'm assuming that means non-pk) outnumbered the others.
And while I must say that your heroic scenario is a good one (vanquishing the evil pk'er), I think most people into this style of play wouldn't even care. You see, while you may have noble intentions, you are a minority in that regard. This is the MAIN reason why players who prefer PvE have such a negative view of PvP players. Their attitude. Now I am no longer grouping you into this category, as I do not think you are that way, but in my experiences (and many others), PvPers are a rude, obnoxious bunch, who don't really care for fair play much at all. Which brings me to another point--PvP encounters are hardly ever fair. In my PvP experiences, I have never been attacked by someone that I had even a remote chance of defeating. Many PvPers will only enter a confrontation if they KNOW they are going to win. I try to participate in fair PvP with folks around my level, but usually they'll just run (knowing there's a chance they'll lose). Where's the fun, the challenge, in that? You may be the minority, but most players in PvP centered games are cowards and bullies (at least that's how they act).
UO was a gankfest but only for those whom actively engaged in guild wars or factional pvp and again, thats a conscious choice they made and thus arent entitled to complain about getting ganked. The simple reason to why no one has implemented full pvp is due to the developers fears that it will alienate a large portion of their playerbase and scare them away.
I agree that its a bold stance to take, but one that is necessary for the genre to evolve beyond the generic npc-harvest games we see popping up each and every day. While the number of blue people outnumbered the red in UO, that doesnt mean the blue people didnt pvp. On the contrary, 99% of those whom engaged in consensual pvp were blues whom were in warring guilds or factions.
On your point that people whom are into hardcore pvp wouldnt care if a high profile pker was to be killed, you are one hundred percent wrong. Coming from eve online ive seen many players proclaimed hero's by the playerbase when their tormentors were punished in one way or another.
Your last point isnt really something i can argue about suffice to say that most games provide you with the tools to stop grief behaviour and cowardice (in the form of ignore buttons and webs/stuns/roots or what have you) but that has to do with basic game mechanics and would derail the discussion from the topic at hand. Either way, i agree that PvP has its share of rotten apples but that applies to both camps. You see it more in pvpers because PvP brings out more emotions then PvE and at the same time puts a face on your tormentor/victim.
_____________________
I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
Good points, pirrng. I think you may have misunderstood me a bit on one point however. I wasn't stating that the community wouldn't care if a hated ganker were killed--I was stating that I believed that most of the hardcore PvP communtity wouldn't care about being the hero.
I may be wrong about this too, but you must understand that on the whole I have had a very negative PvP experience, where it seems you have had a mostly positive one. When it comes down to it, neither one of us is right, and neither one of us is wrong. Our opinions, as with anything, are shaped by our own personal experiences. Actually, I would very much enjoy the type of PvP environment you describe, if only it could be found.
Ah i see what you mean mate. From my extensive experience of pvp having tried nearly every pvp MMO on the market, i can tell you that you're wrong on that point. There will always be skilled PvPers whom take it upon themselves to stop those whom pray on the meek, myself included. The "hardcore PvPers" will undoubtedly only engage in contested pvp such as faction wars and wars between guilds. This type of playstyle would also be encouraged by severe death penalties for murderers (uncontested pvpers)
I too have had negative pvp experiences, more then a few infact and every time i simply brush it off because in the end its just a game. Ive found that the key to thoroughly enjoy yourself in such an enviorment is to surround yourself with quality people. Joining a nice guild with friendly people is absolutely essential in full pvp games.
_____________________
I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
Not to derail things too much, Pirrg, but the kind of PvP your looking for is a focal point for "The Chronicle".
That said, I'll be playing both.
As a pre-uor Ultima Online player myself, im surprised that you would say something like "not every game needs to be ultima online" when the direct opposite is true. EVERY game should be ultima online, alas not a single game is. Instead, we have npc harvest clones such as eq2/wow/guildwars/tabularasa/d&d online and just about every other MMO on the market or in development today.
Then go play Ultima Online.
The fact that UO had major flaws is undisputable.
Was it enjoyable? Absolutely.
Was it exploitable? Absolutely.
Was it a great system conceptually that turned out to be completely broken? Again, absolutely.
When UO was being designed, the producers figured that the players, given the freedom to govern themselves and their own interactions, would police themselves. As any of us who played the game know, that is not what happened.
Sure, it wasn't the chaotic gankfest that some people seem to remember it as, but it was most certainly a system without proportionate consequences for your (negative) actions.
So, like I said, I'm glad they're steering away from FFA PvP with looting. Slapping that feature on a game like HJ is like putting a jet engine on an '82 Chevette. There just isn't enough of a frame to support it. Ultima suffered from it, and the backlash ruined the game.
Now, it would be cool if there was an arena with FFA PvP and looting. Or at least a controlled environment where entry was consensual.
-----------------------------
Listen Asmodeeus, seven years ago, Ultima Online didn't even have those pathetic "quests" that you refer to or those "professions" of ninja, samurai, necromancer, and paladin. Nor did it have any of the neon crap, or bug mounts. It didn't even have any "combat moves." You turned on attack and jousted with simplistic swings. It was a better game then. if you can't guess why then just uninstall the thing and move along. - Crabby
As a pre-uor Ultima Online player myself, im surprised that you would say something like "not every game needs to be ultima online" when the direct opposite is true. EVERY game should be ultima online, alas not a single game is. Instead, we have npc harvest clones such as eq2/wow/guildwars/tabularasa/d&d online and just about every other MMO on the market or in development today.
Then go play Ultima Online.
The fact that UO had major flaws is undisputable.
Was it enjoyable? Absolutely.
Was it exploitable? Absolutely.
Was it a great system conceptually that turned out to be completely broken? Again, absolutely.
When UO was being designed, the producers figured that the players, given the freedom to govern themselves and their own interactions, would police themselves. As any of us who played the game know, that is not what happened.
Sure, it wasn't the chaotic gankfest that some people seem to remember it as, but it was most certainly a system without proportionate consequences for your (negative) actions.
So, like I said, I'm glad they're steering away from FFA PvP with looting. Slapping that feature on a game like HJ is like putting a jet engine on an '82 Chevette. There just isn't enough of a frame to support it. Ultima suffered from it, and the backlash ruined the game.
Now, it would be cool if there was an arena with FFA PvP and looting. Or at least a controlled environment where entry was consensual.
I admit that pre-t2a/uor UO was a bit extreme for casual gamers. NOTHING was broken with uo's system though. The PvP was FAR from FFA and the players did infact govern themselves. How did ultima suffer from it when its been going strong for 7 years. The open pvp didnt ruin the game, the catering of carebears from OSI did.
I loathe anything even resembling arena pvp though and i truly hope that isnt a route the devs chose to walk down.
_____________________
I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
As a player of the original UO from beta on for a while, and then again as a Counsilor during the same time frame (prior to the counsilor scam/betrayal/uproar) I can tell you from first hand experience, it was a big gankfest.
Now some folks like that, but it made it dire on newbies to go exploring without getting whacked for no reason by a quick Por
Like i said, pre-trammel it was a gankfest, no denying it. Post trammel it became much better, players learned to police themselves and player killers usually only came out when nearly everyone were asleep.
_____________________
I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
Not sure about shadows ... but I saw the first of our body morphing sliders in today. It was groooovy.
BEEEEEEFCAAAAKE ... scrawny ... BEEEEEFCAAAAKE ... scrawny.
Sweet.
--- oops ... I meant to post this in the screenshot folder. Sorry about that.
But can I play a SUMO?
_____________________
I am the flipside of the coin on which the troll and the fanboy are but one side.
Bah! Ignore this...wrong thread
Qoute: "I neva *ucked anybody over in my life, who didn't have it comin' to 'im, you got that? All I have in this world is my balls, and my word, and I don't break 'em for no one, jou understand?" Tony Montana
I think a lot of people have the wrong idea about open PvP because it's generally viewed as nothing but a gank fest. That doesn't have to be the case however. For those of you unfamiliar with Lineage 2, it has open PvP with loot drops on death, but it's not a non-stop gank fest. Why? because just like the UO system, you suffer serious penalties for killing someone who doesn't fight back. Your name turns red and you gain karma, which means it's open season on your @ss and your chances of dropping items if you die is very high. You also become KOS to guards so you can forget about visiting any towns. To work off the karma you either have to die (often multiple times depending on how much karma you have) or kill monsters around your level. Good luck hunting mobs with other players running around while your name is red.
The great thing about that system is players are always on the look out for PK's with red names because they hope for a good drop when they kill them, and your name doesn't turn red if you kill a red player so you basically have nothing to lose and they have everything to lose. So the players do actually police the game.
Why even have such a PvP system in the first place? Well let me ask you this... have you ever been hunting and someone ran up and KS'd or ran you out of a room you were camping by killing all the mobs or did something similar that really pissed you off because it was rude and inconsiderate? I'm sure most of you have had that happen. Well in a non-open PvP game, there's very little you can do except whine about it, but in an open PvP game (like Lineage 2) there is something you can do about it. So it's not about wanting to be a griefer or ganker, it's about empowering the player to stand up for him/her self when need be. And it's especially nice when you run across RMT farmers who are ruining a great game like HJ and you have the power to put a stop to them.