Originally posted by Rammur that i do agree but the gaming companys dont look at it like that when a gaming company makes a game all they see is money signs so they gonna fix the game up so everybodys likes it pvper and non-pvpers included. thats all that matters in mmorpgs now is money. I miss the old muds they was all free so it didnt matter.
I dunno, I mean yes, PvPers are a niche market, but there is a fair amount of them, and alot of them are really hungry for a good PvPing game. SB, well, it was pretty popular from the start, but well, it just didnt have what it took, bad graphics, horrid gameplay mechanics, PvP, well heck, way it came on one server you could hardly PvP because guilds were so big and allied. So imo, if they do a game well, put good PvP mechanics in it, they could definitely gain some cash.
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
The real problem with PvP in a PvE game is the balance issues are VERY rarely handled correctly. Power players that learn how to push the game mechanics to the point of exploitation just to get ahead tend to force changes by the dev's, to the detriment of the rest of the players.
There ARE straight-up, PvP gankfest games, like Quake Tournament, PlanetSide, etc., which players can get their bloodthirsty 'pwnage' tallies filled so easily, but where's the challenge in PKing if there's no risk vs reward value built in?
PvP would be acceptable by most of the gaming community (imo) if the hardcore PK lot wouldn't take it upon themselves to try and grief/gank with no reason or remorse. To simply destroy another character for the sake of blindless destruction is, in my mind, a cheap form of pulling the wings off of flies. More times than not this causes many players to cry out to the dev's for gameplay changes or they simply quit the game in disgust. That leaves the PKer fewer and fewer REAL opportunities to an honest-to-God challenge and ultimately lessens the entertainment value of ANY game involving PvP in a PvE world.
If at first you don't succeed, pay someone who will.
Originally posted by Cruise The real problem with PvP in a PvE game is the balance issues are VERY rarely handled correctly. Power players that learn how to push the game mechanics to the point of exploitation just to get ahead tend to force changes by the dev's, to the detriment of the rest of the players. There ARE straight-up, PvP gankfest games, like Quake Tournament, PlanetSide, etc., which players can get their bloodthirsty 'pwnage' tallies filled so easily, but where's the challenge in PKing if there's no risk vs reward value built in? PvP would be acceptable by most of the gaming community (imo) if the hardcore PK lot wouldn't take it upon themselves to try and grief/gank with no reason or remorse. To simply destroy another character for the sake of blindless destruction is, in my mind, a cheap form of pulling the wings off of flies. More times than not this causes many players to cry out to the dev's for gameplay changes or they simply quit the game in disgust. That leaves the PKer fewer and fewer REAL opportunities to an honest-to-God challenge and ultimately lessens the entertainment value of ANY game involving PvP in a PvE world.
Very well stated, Cruise. There has been a good bit of complaining about how "whiners" (defined as players who can't handle PvP) get too vocal and force changes to the PvP aspect of a game. However, in my experience, a much larger number of forced changes have come from exploiters using game bugs, loopholes, or even legitimate features to skew the game heavily in their favor.
One famous example was when EQ released The Ruins of Kunark and bumped the max level to 60, it was discovered that the level 59 cleric rez spell was bugged in that a body could be rezzed twice. In other words, you die and lose experience, then the cleric rezzes you with a 99% exp recovery followed by a second rez with the same amount of exp recovery...basically doubling your exp gain. Unscrupulous guilds used this to bump all their members to 60 in a matter of hours (run to a high level mob...die...double rez...run to mob...die...double rez...etc.) As a result, the spell was fixed and the entire cleric rez line was nerfed.
I have seen a lot more "watering down" brought about as the result of exploiters abusing the game than as the result of whiny players demanding the game be made easier.
Your last paragraph echoes my sentiments exactly. PvP griefers/gankers don't realize that their actions tend to run off more players than they challenge. Some may see it as a thinning of the herd, i.e. getting rid of weaker players, but it is more likely that they are shrinking the pool of worthy future opponents. Some of these "whiners" may not actually realize at first that they might eventually like PvP. If their first exposure to it is a marathon gankfest, they may likely never grow into that challenging opponent that, as many here have lamented, is sorely lacking in most PvP environs.
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate. (written on the SW:G CD)
Here is another benefit of PvP, balance. PvE has been out of kilter because there really isn't a common standard in witch to judge classes. In EQ they say things like "We think clerics are balance because they are wanted on raids and in groups, maybe they need more utility"
In PvP balance is general considered by (or should be) by every class being able to average out to a 50% win/lose ratio given equal players. This also creates a system of skill/counter skill witch makes combat more than just pushing the "A" key.
While the last paragraph is true, it's allot like saying "Make love, not war". Life would be allot better if people didn't use violence, but they do, so we have accept that and deal with it. As long as people can attack each other people will do it for no other reason than they can. So you need a system to deal with it. I propose only allowing people to have 1 Name inside the game. They can have allot of characters but at least this way your reputation would mean something, sure griefers will happen but you learn them quickly and they can be ostracized. This easy method prevents allot of PvP "watering down".
The Team based PvP helps this some.. but team based pvp has it's own issues.
-=-=-=-=- "The beauty of MMORPGS is the merging of gaming and chatrooms. EQ is really just AOL merged with a fantasy game." - billus8
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% Test learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=- Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
Comments
I dunno, I mean yes, PvPers are a niche market, but there is a fair amount of them, and alot of them are really hungry for a good PvPing game. SB, well, it was pretty popular from the start, but well, it just didnt have what it took, bad graphics, horrid gameplay mechanics, PvP, well heck, way it came on one server you could hardly PvP because guilds were so big and allied. So imo, if they do a game well, put good PvP mechanics in it, they could definitely gain some cash.
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
The real problem with PvP in a PvE game is the balance issues are VERY rarely handled correctly. Power players that learn how to push the game mechanics to the point of exploitation just to get ahead tend to force changes by the dev's, to the detriment of the rest of the players.
There ARE straight-up, PvP gankfest games, like Quake Tournament, PlanetSide, etc., which players can get their bloodthirsty 'pwnage' tallies filled so easily, but where's the challenge in PKing if there's no risk vs reward value built in?
PvP would be acceptable by most of the gaming community (imo) if the hardcore PK lot wouldn't take it upon themselves to try and grief/gank with no reason or remorse. To simply destroy another character for the sake of blindless destruction is, in my mind, a cheap form of pulling the wings off of flies. More times than not this causes many players to cry out to the dev's for gameplay changes or they simply quit the game in disgust. That leaves the PKer fewer and fewer REAL opportunities to an honest-to-God challenge and ultimately lessens the entertainment value of ANY game involving PvP in a PvE world.
If at first you don't succeed, pay someone who will.
Very well stated, Cruise. There has been a good bit of complaining about how "whiners" (defined as players who can't handle PvP) get too vocal and force changes to the PvP aspect of a game. However, in my experience, a much larger number of forced changes have come from exploiters using game bugs, loopholes, or even legitimate features to skew the game heavily in their favor.
One famous example was when EQ released The Ruins of Kunark and bumped the max level to 60, it was discovered that the level 59 cleric rez spell was bugged in that a body could be rezzed twice. In other words, you die and lose experience, then the cleric rezzes you with a 99% exp recovery followed by a second rez with the same amount of exp recovery...basically doubling your exp gain. Unscrupulous guilds used this to bump all their members to 60 in a matter of hours (run to a high level mob...die...double rez...run to mob...die...double rez...etc.) As a result, the spell was fixed and the entire cleric rez line was nerfed.
I have seen a lot more "watering down" brought about as the result of exploiters abusing the game than as the result of whiny players demanding the game be made easier.
Your last paragraph echoes my sentiments exactly. PvP griefers/gankers don't realize that their actions tend to run off more players than they challenge. Some may see it as a thinning of the herd, i.e. getting rid of weaker players, but it is more likely that they are shrinking the pool of worthy future opponents. Some of these "whiners" may not actually realize at first that they might eventually like PvP. If their first exposure to it is a marathon gankfest, they may likely never grow into that challenging opponent that, as many here have lamented, is sorely lacking in most PvP environs.
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate. (written on the SW:G CD)
A: 73% E: 73% S: 40% K: 13%
-----
Old timer.
Here is another benefit of PvP, balance. PvE has been out of kilter because there really isn't a common standard in witch to judge classes. In EQ they say things like "We think clerics are balance because they are wanted on raids and in groups, maybe they need more utility"
In PvP balance is general considered by (or should be) by every class being able to average out to a 50% win/lose ratio given equal players. This also creates a system of skill/counter skill witch makes combat more than just pushing the "A" key.
While the last paragraph is true, it's allot like saying "Make love, not war". Life would be allot better if people didn't use violence, but they do, so we have accept that and deal with it. As long as people can attack each other people will do it for no other reason than they can. So you need a system to deal with it. I propose only allowing people to have 1 Name inside the game. They can have allot of characters but at least this way your reputation would mean something, sure griefers will happen but you learn them quickly and they can be ostracized. This easy method prevents allot of PvP "watering down".
The Team based PvP helps this some.. but team based pvp has it's own issues.
-=-=-=-=-
"The beauty of MMORPGS is the merging of gaming and chatrooms. EQ is really just AOL merged with a fantasy game." - billus8
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% Test learn what it means here.
-=-=-=-=-
Achievers realise that killers as a concept are necessary in order to make achievement meaningful and worthwhile (there being no way to "lose" the game if any fool can "win" just by plodding slowly unchallenged). -bartle
Bartle: A: 93% E: 55% S:3% K: 50% The Test. Learn what it means here.
I am a little late on this thread, but kudos!
Very funny post!