Originally posted by Kriminal99 As to your conclusion I can promise you that every person is not completely unique and different from every other. People can have different personalities but they cannot feel pain as pleasure or vice versa. Not that you or anyone else who makes this statement even claims to be able to have any reason behind it. Its just something you say to get warm fuzzies and avoid a fight is it not?
I am guessing you don't spend much time with the BDSM crowd.
~*~ neschria Bludgeoner of Bunnies
... This is where I draw the line: __________________.
Oh sweet mother of god you people are still talking about this. I though you would have all realized that Kriminal is a Complete moron by now. I mean his logical argument makes no sense. His wording is vauge. "Constantly fun".... WTF Kriminal, you really should become a lot more percise with your language. Oh and he has no socail skills to speak of.
Hello I'm Kriminal I'm Mr. Super Smart.
Kriminal what basis do you have to prove you're super smart.
Um because I am super smart.
Kriminal that makes no sense.
Your stupid.
Why am I stupid Kriminal.
Because people are stupid sheep.
Why is that?
Because they won't let me make make game and keep calling me stupid even though I'm super smart.
Oh poor Kriminal.
No I"m not sad, you people are for not being able to realize my super smartness.
Kriminal just wants to feel good about himself by putting everybody down. He's got no tallent for logical aguments. Trying to point out the flaws in his argument is like trying to explain to a five year old that a knight cannot move across the board in chess.
Why can't it move across the board? It makes sense.
No Kriminal it doesn't.
Yes it does cause I'm super smart. Prove to me it can't move across the board.
Um because I'm looking at the rules of chess and they say it can only move in L patterns.
Oh what do they know. People are stupid I'm super smart.
People like Kriminal give Logic a bad name. Just don't talk to the kid. He's is so convinced of his own genius that nobody will ever be able to change his mind.
My reason is i personally don't enjoy a PvP environment. The potential Arguement reason for discrediting your "cost effective" ranting is: If the ratio of people NOT liking PvP vs liking it is in great enough weight on the Non-PvP... there game itself will make much less revenue as players opt not to play it. This is probably why most games try to please both preferences.
Originally posted by AuranAnd you can prove yourself that people don't achieve emotions in different ways? You lack evidence as I do. If you claim my conclusion is false and that I have no basis to my claim, I would at least like to see Valid proof that this is so. Who is to say that NO ONE feels pain as pleasure... Just because it is not the norm doesn't mean it can't be. Even if no one can some may be able to achieve the same emotion as another with a different action. You say that we speak without facts to back them up. I'm yet to see you present a hard fact besides the premises one of which I disproved.
LOL... First of all you didn't disprove anything, saying that you did certainly does not change this. The fact that you did not even attempt to point out how shows that you know you are being rediculous.
Second of all you are arguing against the obvious here...
There is a certain amount of information that is implied simply by the fact that you are talking about a person. If you are trying to claim that we don't know a person wont feel a shock of pain from say being burned just like we don't know for absolute sure that a penny wont fall up when we let go of it, you are wrong. If a something was that completely different then it would no longer be a person.
Psychologists know this for sure (in the case of pain) because they know the chemical reactions that occur for different types of stimuli, and that they tie in to the basic structure of the human body. You know its true for you because although you can ignore it you can not change the pain you get from burning yourself into something else. You know its true for everyone you know because you see it in the way they act everyday. Does your friend get talked about behind their back and then say "oh thats so sweet" I don't have to prove it to you because you see it yourself every damn day...
Another proof based on just common things someone like you would experience is that psychologists can succesfully prescribe drugs which cure psychological problems and effect feelings. If people were all drastically different from each other this would be impossible.
Another obvious proof: Why the hell would it be described in the dictionary as being a consequence of injury if some people felt pleasure as a consequence of injury? Obviously the dicitonary is the consensus of a large number of people...
Pain:
An unpleasant sensation occurring in varying degrees of severity as a consequence of injury, disease, or emotional disorder. - Dictionary.com American Heritage Dictionary of English Language
Any argument requires that you accept the obvious. If you are going to try and argue the possibillity of something counter to what you and everyone else already knows simply out of stubbornness, then arguing with you is a waste of time.
@ Hercules: I hope you are only joking and you know that is rediculous... If people that don't even know me respond to my game poorly then that is new information for me to build from. If people who hate it when anyone ever disagrees with them or has a different idea then what they believe even if it might be right argue with an argument I make that hardly says jack about my argument being right or wrong...
In fact resorting to anger in a argument as most people here have is a sure sign that the person has no idea what they are talking about and is afraid the other person is right...
@ Neschria They feel pleasure after the pain not as it. If you toss them into an acid bath or burning building they aren't going to be having any orgasims
Originally posted by MrVice Oh sweet mother of god you people are still talking about this. I though you would have all realized that Kriminal is a Complete moron by now. I mean his logical argument makes no sense. His wording is vauge. "Constantly fun".... WTF Kriminal, you really should become a lot more percise with your language. Oh and he has no socail skills to speak of. Kriminal just wants to feel good about himself by putting everybody down. He's got no tallent for logical aguments. Trying to point out the flaws in his argument is like trying to explain to a five year old that a knight cannot move across the board in chess. People like Kriminal give Logic a bad name. Just don't talk to the kid. He's is so convinced of his own genius that nobody will ever be able to change his mind.
The argument is still going on because it is probably completely sound. In case you haven't noticed up to this point the world does not revolve around "Mr. Vice" in such a way that just because he doesn't emotionally like an argument it must be wrong. If you really had any thing valid to say against the argument you would be saying it here, not resorting to such childish activity.
I fail to see how anything said by me on these forums would provide insight into my "socail skills" (lol) At what point did I ever say I was super smart? When did I claim to have a "tallent" (hrhr) for logical reasoning? I didn't. Where did that even come from?
I think your projection of this shows a frustration at an inabillity to stay calm long enough to think and come up with a legitimate argument... If anything I just have a lot more experience seperating emotion and bias from logic. Similar to what knowledge said if you would calm yourself for just long enough to think about your position rationally you would either realize you are wrong or be able to come up with an argument that at least made sense...
Your entire post consists of childish insults, projections of ill attitudes that I have in no way demonstrated, a call to others like you to avoid having to reason logically and try and overcome stronger ideas by sheer numbers, trying to reason with metaphors which is basically trying to force someone to believe an inferior idea by getting them to make a connection with something else and then use the feeling of realization to allow pass of the inferior idea, and finally repeating the rediculous idea over and over again as if you are still trying to convince yourself of something you know isn't true.
I pity you.
Originally posted by Entropy My reason is i personally don't enjoy a PvP environment. The potential Arguement reason for discrediting your "cost effective" ranting is: If the ratio of people NOT liking PvP vs liking it is in great enough weight on the Non-PvP... there game itself will make much less revenue as players opt not to play it. This is probably why most games try to please both preferences.
Um the type of pvp my argument nessecitates has not been implemented in any game that I know of to date. Furthermore what you are claiming to dislike when you say you don't like pvp is not pvp simply put. You are referring to whatever pvp you have played before and then attributing it to all forms of pvp (except for pve apparently despite it being a form of pvp making all statements like this self contradictory)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROBABILITY(YOUR STATEMENTS BEING MOTIVATED BY FEAR(I>U)) > .5
Assuming losers quit after a short to a medium time, winners will become losers to match this 20-80 ratio unless new blood enter and can replace the quitters(since the new blood start level 1 it is not easy to do).
Personality is completely ignore, and your first point is not true, only hardwork will bring loyalty, the rest are remedies to win time. Shortcut to save programmers works are not a long term solution, yet focusing where players are motivated in is brilliant. I really dont understand your counterlogic when you say I assume programmers and customers cant interact...they can interact and this interaction is the only thing that make a game continue, PvP can be done in any game, a MMORPG is a new setting and the setting need to be worked, PvP cannot be the center of interest of a serious setting, yet, it can have a place for those that desire it(bigger then in EQ, but nowhere close to enforcing PvP on someone that dont show interest in PvP uberness, PvP can only be enforced to acquire PvP uberness).
Yet, noble try to stand alone and argue with everyone, Napoleon, Hitler, Louis XIV all have merit in focusing, rather well, on something that not should have been a priority, but a welcome secondary aspect, no more. PvP should not be the center of a MMORPG, it can only be a nice secondary aspect of it.
How can someone enjoy Sims online with your logic? Not only it have no PvP, but the level of stress involved in Sims is like nothing compare to the most softcore MMORPG...yet...some players LOVE Sims(not me hehe) and would not think of playing another MMORPG at all, PvP have it logic, which is good for a minority, exactly like any type of activity is, since no single activity will ever rally a majority, now, enforcing every players to play Sims to be able to zone in a PvP zone would be sick dont you think? Tell me how enforcing PvP on someone that just want to solo MOBS endlessly is any better then enforcing Sims online on a PvP player? In fact, studies show clearly that enforcing stress on anyone not actively searching it is a LOT worser then enforcing something easy and boring to do, thereby, enforcing is evil, period, but enforcing anything in that way is PURE evil: PvP (upon any of the following) --- Raiding --- Grouping --- Soloing --- Tradeskilling...enforcing any of the previous on a later activity is purely insane, the other way, from latest to previous is just boring, no more. Thereby enforcing SIMS online on all PvP game is way less bad then enforcing PvP on Sims online. (giving the best rewards of another activity is enforcing the reward giver) (that order dont show any superiority, it show a level of stress with each activity, usually speaking, of course, there can be more complex intertwinned, especially for neighbors activities, stress might be sought for by some player, but it shorten lifespan if ill used...) I never see a PvP player despair because he need to do some grouping or tradeskilling. But even Raiders will go to a desesperate mood if they need to do some PvP, exactly like a tradeskiller that need to raid! This is why the simplest logic that say best tradeskiller is a tradeskiller(can do other stuff, but all tradeskilling real edges where earned in tradeskilling), best soloer is a soloer should be strictly enforced if you want to keep everyone motivated...
You might wield words well(or not), you might even "defeat" anyone, but you ignore the blatant truth, and defending blatant truth is rather hard as did not expect to defend it! PvP is simply not the way for most peoples to make fun, players want to win and progress, and PvP offer this to only 20%, which lead to losing 80%!
Nuff said!
- "Coercing? No no, I assure you, they are willing to bring my bags and pay public transportation just to help me, it is true!''
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Im really sorry but what language are you speaking cause it sure isn't english? Its really difficult to string together 90% of your post...
Somewhere in there I understood a question about the sims, Well first of all this argument does not take into account the social aspect of any game because all games can have it and in games that lose their value as a fun game people do not play they just congregate in a certain area and talk to each other. People hang out in chatrooms, talk on the phone, and hang out with each other in person. This is seperate from the fun of the game aspect of video games.
I think there was an allusion that I was trying to force something on someone that they wouldn't like.. Obviously that is redicuouls because then they wouldn't be having fun, what I am saying is that pvp of a certain type would be fun. For the billionth time the only difference between pvp and pve is that pve is designed to let you win.
Haha well you have an ill attitude despite being unable to form setences, rather than be irritated I'll just thank you for being symbolic of how 80% of the people in this thread have been acting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROBABILITY(YOUR STATEMENTS BEING MOTIVATED BY FEAR(I>U)) > .5
Im really sorry but what language are you speaking cause it sure isn't english? Its really difficult to string together 90% of your post...
Somewhere in there I understood a question about the sims, Well first of all this argument does not take into account the social aspect of any game because all games can have it and in games that lose their value as a fun game people do not play they just congregate in a certain area and talk to each other. People hang out in chatrooms, talk on the phone, and hang out with each other in person. This is seperate from the fun of the game aspect of video games.
I think there was an allusion that I was trying to force something on someone that they wouldn't like.. Obviously that is redicuouls because then they wouldn't be having fun, what I am saying is that pvp of a certain type would be fun. For the billionth time the only difference between pvp and pve is that pve is designed to let you win.
Haha well you have an ill attitude despite being unable to form setences, rather than be irritated I'll just thank you for being symbolic of how 80% of the people in this thread have been acting.
Why do you insult me twice?
That was not my original post, you are just looking for confrontation with folks that dont like confrontation because you fear real PvP player maybe?
You insist on saying a MMORPG need to be PvP to be fun, it dont need to be, it is a welcome part of it, but should not be the ultimate of anything but PvP uberness.
Not all PvE are designed to let you win, old plain EQ pre-Kunark, most folks cant reach level 25 and where sending me tons of praise on my level 50. But PvE is less challenging then PvP, granted, yet, it might suit most players...
That look to me like a 10 years old kids looking for a fight but only with those of 6 and less!
- "Coercing? No no, I assure you, they are willing to bring my bags and pay public transportation just to help me, it is true!''
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Originally posted by Anofalye As for Premise 1, I strongly disagree. Company need to focus their hardwork on the customers they want to reach, but it can never be replaced by anything...all the rest are tricks to gain time, like fast talking. 10 hours for 5 programmers that bring 1 hour of game content for 1 million customer is not a bad deal...50 hours vs 1 million hours...and we suppose none of those customer play more then 1 hour there, I love farming myself and I certainly spend more time in a place like Velketor Labyrinth myself alone then all the programmers staff spend when they design the zone, all together...I love challenge as well, but not all the time, if I play 80 hours a week on a game, I want some smoother curves and some harders. With 300 days played in EQ(24 hours days)...yes, I lack a RL. *shrug*
Well I think you are wrong here. If you think about it, you are basically claiming that the design of the game has no effect on how long it is fun, as long as the company interacts with the customers or provides more content. This excludes the possibility of single player games being fun, much less having any replayability.
Refreshing memory can be good. as well
- "Coercing? No no, I assure you, they are willing to bring my bags and pay public transportation just to help me, it is true!''
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
@ Neschria They feel pleasure after the pain not as it. If you toss them into an acid bath or burning building they aren't going to be having any orgasims
Hey... I was posting a legitimate joke, and this almost sounds like you might have been making a serious reply... But I am one of those people, and it isn't quite like that. (EWWWW! I know, TMI.) But even among people >like me<, there is a wide range of experiences, or at least people describe their experiences in vastly different ways.
But, seriously, if your MMORPG feels like an acid bath, you might want to try a different game. I've felt that way about a couple of games. (LAUGH! LAUGH, I SAY!)
I played EQ from 8/99 to 12/03, and I would probably be playing now instead of posting here if I could swing it. I am willing to accept that the reason I played that long and continue to enjoy it is that I am playing PvP in my own way. I have to admit that I did get a little bit of a thrill from starting over from scratch in 2001 (really and truly from scratch, since I moved all my previous characters to a new server on a server split), passing most of my friends in levels and equipment, and then deleting my level 65 character a couple of weeks before I quit... just because I know they couldn't bring themselves to do that and it wasn't really a big deal to me. I could, after all, have another one in similar equipment again in a couple of months, passing all those people again. And I do see the point that I am playing against them, at least inside my own skull, even as I call them friends. I am not playing against them by killing them, and I am not playing against other players by trying to get to the top end of the game (which never looked like fun to me). I am playing against them in the sense that I do get a sense of achievement out of accomplishing things faster and better than they can while never getting attached to that accomplishment. Easy come, easy go. And their envy is reward enough.
I know that makes me sound awful, but we're all awful people inside sometimes.
~*~ neschria Bludgeoner of Bunnies
... This is where I draw the line: __________________.
Annofyle I'm not really insulting you I'm just telling the truth your grammar is terrible and for the most part I don't have a clue what you are trying to say. English is obviously not your native language correct?
@ Nes lol.. Ive played some games that start out like a nice warm bath and slowly turn into an acid bath those are the ones I hate the most because you stay there paying for it for months before you realize it isn't fun anymore.
Nah that doesn't make you sound awful because its not that they feel bad that makes you feel good, its that they want to do what you can or be you (right?). And there isn't really anything wrong with that. IMO its only bad to rub it in because if they had all the advantages that you had then they probably could have done it too, and them knowing that deep down makes rubbing it in random punishment since it leaves no other explanation then that they deserve it just for being them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROBABILITY(YOUR STATEMENTS BEING MOTIVATED BY FEAR(I>U)) > .5
Kriminal- Let's just assume all your premises and arguments are correct (which 90% aren't) but lets just pretend for a minute they are.
How would you go about explaining ALL the succesful MMOs that are not PvP based. I haven't seen a true PvP game since Meridian 59 or UO. Now its either RvR (Realm vs. Realm) or Guild or Area based. An more recently, in games such as Horizons, PvP is not an option at all.
If your arguement is so sound, why have the game developers strayed from PvP? And you cannot use the arguement that people have just had bad experiences because 90% of the MMORPG market has gone in the direction of consensual PvP or no PvP at all.
As for not proving you wrong you admitted to it, after I made my post you responded:
Originally posted by Kriminal99
Well this argument was regarding something else and has nothing to do with the main argument. But anyways...
kriminal, did you like pre-trammel UO? is that the model that you're working with when you say that a mmorpg has to be pvp-based to be continually fun? now i know you've stretched your definition of pvp to mean pvp AND pve AND whatever, but i'll just concentrate on what most people understand pvp as. ie 2 players engaged in a direct zero-sum game, wherein for one player to win, the other has to lose.
if it is, then the problem i see there is that pre-trammel UO, what you essentially had was a bunch of game styles thrown together at the same time. crafting, exploring, fighting monsters, etc. what unrestricted pvp does, is forces you to change from your game style, to a pvp game style. no other game style does this. if i craft some swords, how does that impinge on your pvp game?
now, a lot of pvp proponents say you must have competition for fun, look at sports, other games, etc. and i'll agree with that, that's true. but if i'm playing CS, then i know what to expect, and then win or lose, well that's just part of the game. if i play baseball, i come to the field ready to play. but i'd be pretty pissed if i'm at home plate, and some linebacker comes out of nowhere and tackles me.
basically kriminal, you've thrown a lot of vague and long-winded arguments about pvp and fun based on psychology and "FACTS". since you want to develop mmorpgs someday, please post an example of how you would implement PVP that would be continually fun, so that we can all understand what it is you're trying to enlighten us with.
Originally posted by Kriminal99 Nah that doesn't make you sound awful because its not that they feel bad that makes you feel good, its that they want to do what you can or be you (right?). And there isn't really anything wrong with that. IMO its only bad to rub it in because if they had all the advantages that you had then they probably could have done it too, and them knowing that deep down makes rubbing it in random punishment since it leaves no other explanation then that they deserve it just for being them.
Yeah, I pretty much keep my gloating entirely on THIS side of the screen. I am only awful on the inside. I have a sweet candy shell on the outside.
~*~ neschria Bludgeoner of Bunnies
... This is where I draw the line: __________________.
Strangely I decided to try the PvP server on DAoC euro last night and had such a laugh.
Made a char and immediately got killed right at the trainer haha.Came back and nuked the guy then got killed ,came back nuked other guy ,then some merc came and killed me .
Logged with a laugh.Total playtime -20 mins.Will I actually come nd make a char and level and build up the char on this server?Certainly not,I have planetside to gank on people when i want and UT2003.
FPS ganking is fun,MMOPRG ganking is dull.Might explain why the server is only 500 people at peak times as against the other euro servers that are 2500.Guess I am not alone in my views.
Ok you wanted me to tear appart your damn post here is goes. Actually I didn't want to waste my time writing this all down, but now you've gone and pissed me off. Lets start with your condition satement shall we.
"To be continually fun a MMORPG must be PVP."
Continually fun... There is no such thing nothing is forever fun. You need to use more spefic word choices. In what way is it fun? FUN for me fun for you, because websters dictionary has the word fun as a subjective term. Meaning it verries from person to person. Also your deffination of PVP is lacking. Player vs Player hell one could successfuly argue that everquest is pvp. However most people who play mmorpgs wouldn't nessarly classify it as a player vs player mmorpg. This whole condition statement needs work.
"Premise 1: Players consume or advance through static precreated game content at an average rate of more than 10 times that which it takes to create it. This means that in order to sustain the fun level of a mmorpg just based on single player type static content you would need more than 10x the man hours than it took to make the game to begin with."
Where is your evidence for this. I don't see any articals or journals to prove your point. THis is a figure you pulled out of your ass. It makes this part of your argument invalid.
"I do not believe this is cost effective, and obviously neither do mmorpg developers as is evidence by their attempted use of tricks to extend game content."
This is an opinion, not a logical arguement. Also I would like you to give 10 examples of "tricks" that mmorpgs use. Your wording here is to vague and you need to give better examples. Oh and by disproving premisis one your whole argument is bunk. But lets cont. shall we.
"Premise 2: Tricks used to slow down players from consuming what content there is or to stretch the content artificially lessen fun to the degree which they are used."
Again we are using non percise words like "tricks", "Content", and "Lessen fun". You need to loose these terms, and what the hell is "lessen fun to the degree they are used to." I mean ok besides it being increddably vague, it verries from person to person. I mean honestly, some people find the grind, which is the only thing I can assume your talking about to be quite fun. I personaly think they're massochrists but hell thats their thing.
"Setting a player back randomly is stressful to the player. this stress can be averted by to the degree that the player expected to be setback for the particular action he was taking. However most of the time the player will avoid situation where he would be setback. But IF there is a possibility of rewards that are worth the risk he will take the action anyways. this is gambling."
I can agree with most of this part of the statement, other than you should remove the "by to the degree" it threw me off for half a minute and doesn't help your arguement any. Also gambling is not certain, some people don't enjoy gambeling of anykind, and are concent taking down easy mobs and stress free quests for their entire character existance. You should change this statement so it refects most people and not all people.
Premise 4: Gambling where ones skills and knowledge is involved is more fun than pure luck gambling.
This is an opinion. You need to remove this statement entierly. If you want me to prove you wrong, then just look at any casino. See the people lined up at the slots. In most cases you'll find more people there than you will at any games that require a degree of skill. Besides as we already discussed fun is a subjective term lets stop using it entirely.
Premise 5: The only entity to date in video games unpredictable enough so that the player will not just assume he can beat it (and therefore dieing to it would be random punsihment) or that he has no chance against it (so he will just avoid it), and can retain this unpredictability through a near infinite amount of interactions, is another player.
In theroy this makes sense, however it doesn't take into effect other stimuli that come into effect in mmorpgs. Forinstance, players tend to avoid combat with characters that are higher level than they are. Players also tend to avoid player vs player combat if the pentaly for death is to high, or the reward is to low. Players tend to avoid combat if the other player in question is tweeked to hell. Forinstance you would probabley be more afraid of a person wearing bad ass end game armour and a glowing sword then a person wearing regualr eq. Finaly your argument doesn't take into consideration balencing issues that that devs might me perpously putting into the game to keep all classes ballenced. (An example of this is the upcomming world of warcraft. Which is implementing a rock, paper, scissors structor for combat. So A warrior will always beat a hunter who will always beat a wizard, who will always beat a warrior. Assuming equil level an baring outside interferance.)
"Also the nature of the pvp can not be to limit the players choice of action to the point where PVP becomes predictable."
This statement seems to be refearing to a perticular type of player vs player. I need you to be more percise. Please explain what type of player vs player are you refearing to here. If you need to give an example from existing game.
"Premise 6: The more the person has a chance of gaining the more fun it is to participate in the gamble, but he must be randomly reinforced by winning sometimes."
I agree with your premise here, but you really need to work on your wording here. Also this seems like kind of a duh statement. The person should win that gambel is kinda unnessary. I mean if he wouldn't randomly win from time to time it wouldn't be much of a gambel would it.
"Premise 7: Since gambling can slow a persons content consumption to any degree without reducing the fun or causing stress signifigantly, it can slow consuption of the games content to the point where Developers could supply more at the rate it is used."
This statement is a red hearing. Nothing in your previous statements lead up to this point. It's just kinda out there. Secondly it doesn't even make sense. The problem is the words "to any degree" which basicly imply that if you have gambeling you can slow down player concuption to a crawl or almost entirely. Well I got news for you, you make the grind to hard and people won't be willing to play it. Thats a fact. Also you really need to clerify the word concuption. Are we talking ecodemy here, quests, points of social interaction, what are we talking about.
"Conclusion: The only possible way to cost-effectively provide a sustained level of fun in an MMORPG is to have a PVP Based MMORPG where players take gambles by choice on their battles between each other."
Ok first of all your statement never goes about proving that this is a cost effective model. Secondly what the hell "sustained level of fun" excusse me, but I've never done anything that fun forever! Once again we have the words PVP baised and again I emplore you, what kinda of player vs player interaction are we talking about. In case you haven't figured it out yet, the reason everybody is getting down on your argument is that your are not being able to convay your ideas to them. Saying pvp in video games terms is the equivalant of saying tree when refuring to a yard.
Seeing as you don't seem to grasp why being persice is important let me give you a demonstration in hopes that you might understand why you need your logical arguments to have some degree of percision. Lets take this statement:
Trees help keep your back yard private.
Well actually thats a true statement, that is if you know anything about landscaping. But the problem is the people I'm trying to communcate with don't understand what hell I'm talking about. Because what I said was to generic.
Now lets try this statement:
A ring of privacey trees around your yard can help keep it private.
Well people begin to understand what I'm talking about, but still they don't seem to get the whole picture. I see the term trees is to general. Well how about this.
Planting Spruce trees around the back yards permiter helps keep your neighbors from watching you. Which gives you a sense of privacy.
See in this statement people know what tree I'm talking about, where I want them placed, and to whom I'm refearing to when I say privacey. I could get even more specific yet, but I'm getting tired. What you need to understand is that these frustrating misconceptions people make about your arguement is because you're not telling them exactly what you're talking about. When people say they don't like pvp, you say you haven't experanced all forms of pvp. It's a cop out man. You need to be more specific.
In addition you need to realize that we are talking about mmorpgs. Do you understand what that acronym stands for. In case you don't I'm going to expalin it to you. It means Massive Multiplayer Online, here's the key right here. Role Playing Game. Yeah thats right. See you tend to think that all people find their satisfaction from creating this player model and acheiving gloary for it. See you are the type of person thats known as the achiever, one who constantly seeks gradification from the game, by improving their charcter. A person like you seeks to be the best at all times, which is why player vs player might seem to be appealing. But for someone like me, that isn't the case. I'm a socailizer. Oh yeah thats right. See I'm that guy who plays on those Role Playing Servers. The guy who makes a character and tries to act like that chracter. I made a palaidn and didn't gain a lvl for 9 days in Everquest. Because I was so busy attempting to convert dark elves to the light side. I mean yeah it's stupid and meta game wouldn't let me do it. But hell I had fun. More fun then I ever had killing a character. In RPGS you are expected to play are role, not get your toon it's next glowie which will proc at lvl 50... *Sigh*
Ok I'm done ranting now... Listen I had more to say and when I read this post later I'm going to be mad that I didn't, but screw it I'm tired. I'll adress you being a dumb ass for discounting peoples experances later. Untill then serriosly listen to what I have to say, you might find it informative.
In your topic statement "Logical argument why to be continually fun a MMORPG must be PVP based - simplified" starts off on a bad note.
Rather than the topic being a statement of fact, it is very much one of your own opinion.
"Continually fun" - What is continually fun for you, may not be fun for someone else. Fun is a feeling of emotion and state of being which can only be measured by the individual experiencing the feeling of fun for themselves.
To be fun an MMORPG must be PVP based is a crock. Again, that is subject to the individual playing the game.
I haven't played Sims Online to know if there is any PvP involved, but it appears to be a game that is immersive in the social aspects rather than "killing your neighbor". There are people playing it to have "fun".
Fun is not a constant. To suggest that PvP would make it so is ridiculous.
Not everyone finds fun in being the "hunter" or the "hunted". MMORPGs that are diverse enough in content to please a variety of play styles is what makes gaming fun.
Your premises, in a nutshell, have no factual support of your topic statement. Furthermore, "simplified" it was not.
Just as a suggestion - It's better to express yourself in a level where the majority of people can understand you. When you know that society as a whole has an average reading level of a 6th grader, it might be a good idea to keep it "simplified". You could spruce it up later for your own purpose, whether it be for school or some psychological work that you're trying to accomplish.
If you're doing this for college credit, I would recommend that you state such in your post. You may have found that people would have been less "defensive" toward what you were attempting to accomplish with this post.
So, to what result do people feel that PVP must be involved for an MMORPG to be "fun"? Let's find out, shall we?
I can't stand reading posts saying that if you PK someone, you RUIN the game for that person. Geez, when I first got PKed while I was mining in UO I was confused. I found out PKing was a part of the game and I didn't whine. Just to clarify things, I never griefed in UO but I did kill players when needed. What's the difference between getting killed by a monster or a player... it's all about being at the wrong place at the wrong moment. Now if you take away free PvP and leave all the PvPers on one server, it turns into a deathmatch game which takes all the fun away for most. PKers are just something you have to deal with, it's a challenge. If most of you are just too lazy to face it then don't play MMORPGs, simply go play NWN on the internet. If you want to play a game where you can camp the same mobs over and over without any interference then the game you wanted is already out and it's EQ. Too many players don't want to die in games and it's just too bad cause death is a big part of MMORPGs. If you crossed a PK you wouldn't automaticly die. There are ways to deal with PKers and removing them from the game is the laziest and the worst solution of them all.
I can already hear the anti-PvP scream at the griefers standing on their corpse. Those players are a ridiculously small minority of the PvPers. There are jerks everywhere. What would you do if a griefer stood on your corpse, if the only things you had on it was a few easy to get items? Best example is UO... when you died you would lose everything you had on yourself so what? There were no sup3r dup3r sword of ub3rness to lose. Everything you lost was easily acquirable so the only thing you really had lost was money. Loot is what kill games. If you play the game because you want to be the best equiped warrior (ie : Furor in EQ is one damn good example) then you're wasting your time. If items is what you want, go play Diablo 2, it's pretty much the only reason to play that game. Then they release expansions with new pwerful loot that you HAVE to buy if you want better items... funny how all the EQ players bought expansions after expansions, yet they do the same thing over and over. So what forces EQ players to buy expansion if they were already having fun in previous ones? Items of course.
If you really want to play a game with a strong community, then the game should not be about items. Don't be hypocrites. I've played UO, EQ, AC, AO, DAoC and beta tested quite a few other games. The strongest community I've ever seen was in UO until they messed it up with patches and new content, geez I still talk with some Brazilians I helped through the game and that was 6 years ago. People bought houses together, financed guild castles, had vendors selling their crafted items, weddings with decorations, furniture and food, events, contests, etc. The interactivity with the world and the players was at its highest point ever in any MMORPG made to this day. Still there were PKers and Griefers around and we still had enormous fun playing the game.
"I am trying to see things from your perspective but I just can't get my head that far up my @$$."
Originally posted by aLeX666 If most of you are just too lazy to face it then don't play MMORPGs, simply go play NWN on the internet. If you want to play a game where you can camp the same mobs over and over without any interference then the game you wanted is already out and it's EQ. Too many players don't want to die in games and it's just too bad cause death is a big part of MMORPGs. If you crossed a PK you wouldn't automaticly die. There are ways to deal with PKers and removing them from the game is the laziest and the worst solution of them all.
HAHAHAHA
Waaa.... If the game isn't the way I like it, it should change. Other people's opinions and desires don't count. i think PvP should be a part of all MMORPG's, so they should all be made that way... Waaaa....
Give me a break... Go find one that has PvP that you like, and the people who don't like PvP can find one that doesn't have it.
Why do most of you guys feel that your way is the only way? And it is mostly the PvP crowd who feel this way.
aLeX666 maybe you should have read this thread before commenting. Nobodies talking about removing pvp, or whining about it. This whole link is based on an argement some DIPSHIT made that says PVP is nessary to have fun in an mmorpg. Which I don't think is true. Hell I've PVPed a hell of a lot in my time and kill or be killed I had a good time, but thats not the point. Don't get you panties in a bunch because some people don't like getting ganked or competing with other people.
I have a friend who will only play the computer in Warcraft Three, does that mean he shouldn't play Warcraft Three. NO!!!! He just doesn't like getting beat by me all the time, so we both have a good time by just playing the comp.
Honestly you need to understand the pvp isn't for everybody. And talk about swithing game, I wish all you bloody twits who don't know how to RP would leave my games. MMORPGS are supposed to be about creating a character and acting as the character. ROLEPLAYING if you will. Now I understnad that some people like just playing the games and thats cool, but you don't see me bitching when someone is complaining about mob at pkb, or when their flm dam ad is gonna proc. Role playing is what these mmorpgs where supposed to be all about, but I understand that times have changed and I dont' bitch at people because they want to play diffrently than I do. You really need to mature buddy and understand where other people are comming from.
I gave up on this topic a long time ago. This guy, Kriminal99 or whatever, refuses to believe that his logic is flawed, no matter what you post. He refuses to acknowledge that carebear MMORPGs are much more popular, something that debunks his logic before he even gets into his premises. He refuses to acknowledge that different people find different things fun. He refuses to acknowledge that his whole logic is based on his personal opinion and therefore might not be logical to other people. He makes wild claims about MMORPG content getting used up 10 time faster than the developers can make it.
It's a pointless argument because as he himself stated "such PvP system doesn't exist." So if it doesn't exist, posting about it is pointless, since the best argument he can bring forth is hypothetical at best.
Well,i luv PvP,but more i luv GvG or RvR.This is how i look at an MMORPG.I think that the killing of monsters (or PvE )Is a way to level up to go on to the real fighting,PvP.I mean,i understand why its also there to explore deeper,and and kill the bigger dragon or monster,but i think of it as leveling up to join a guild,or stand up for yourself.I know that you also get to wear better stuff and all,but i think that lvls are to be more powerful then the 1 before you.Its about representing you dedication and skill and mind power to others of that same world.I personnally like defending the weaker players from bullys,and such.Also,guild wars are a big part for me to show the power and election of the players to join in.Its an honor to be in a strong guild,and 1 that can defeat the other guilds through a nice fair battle.PvP is truley important to me.
**Like to talk about Video Games?Go to Veiwers Pick Forums...
OMG this thread is hilarious. One poster trying to prove "logically" that every MMORPG game should have PVP. Please give it a rest!! Not EVERY MMO game needs to have PvP for it to be successful. Has anyone played ToonTown or The Sims? I'm having a blast playing FFXI and at the moment it doesn't have PvP. So, over 500,000 subscribers who are playing this game and having "logical" fun need to experience PvP? LMAO!! I don't think so!!
Having PvP in a MMO game should NOT be mandatory. It should be optional. Developers know that many people like the experience of PvP and many don't. So you have 3 choices when developing a MMO game. Either make the game completely PvP like Shadowbane or Planetside, make it optional PvP like FFXI and WoW will eventually be or make a game with absolutely NO PvP in it like The Sims.
It has nothing to do with logic, it's all about choice. Yes, people can be force to like something through hypnosis or drugs, but who the hell is going to do the forcing? The person who started this thread?
Comments
HAHA kriminal gonna make a mmorpg someday.
Can you imagine it guys?
player1 -"erm i am going to quit this game .I think it sucks"
player2-"well its ok gonna hang and see how it goes."
appears GMkriminal
GMkriminal-"player1 how dare you say the game sucks.The game is designed to be continually fun.I think it rocks therefore all should think it rocks."
player1-"erm just my view dude.sorry not my style."
GMkriminal-"no its everyone's style.I ban thee!"
player2-"WTF.that was his view he did nothing against CoC!"
GMkriminal-"I ban thee!"
GMkriminal-"I ban everyone since you are all freaks and i am the only normal person here!"
I am guessing you don't spend much time with the BDSM crowd.
~*~
neschria
Bludgeoner of Bunnies
...
This is where I draw the line: __________________.
Hello I'm Kriminal I'm Mr. Super Smart.
Kriminal what basis do you have to prove you're super smart.
Um because I am super smart.
Kriminal that makes no sense.
Your stupid.
Why am I stupid Kriminal.
Because people are stupid sheep.
Why is that?
Because they won't let me make make game and keep calling me stupid even though I'm super smart.
Oh poor Kriminal.
No I"m not sad, you people are for not being able to realize my super smartness.
Why can't it move across the board? It makes sense.
No Kriminal it doesn't.
Yes it does cause I'm super smart. Prove to me it can't move across the board.
Um because I'm looking at the rules of chess and they say it can only move in L patterns.
Oh what do they know. People are stupid I'm super smart.
Um the type of pvp my argument nessecitates has not been implemented in any game that I know of to date. Furthermore what you are claiming to dislike when you say you don't like pvp is not pvp simply put. You are referring to whatever pvp you have played before and then attributing it to all forms of pvp (except for pve apparently despite it being a form of pvp making all statements like this self contradictory)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROBABILITY(YOUR STATEMENTS BEING MOTIVATED BY FEAR(I>U)) > .5
20% winners, 80% losers...
Assuming losers quit after a short to a medium time, winners will become losers to match this 20-80 ratio unless new blood enter and can replace the quitters(since the new blood start level 1 it is not easy to do).
Personality is completely ignore, and your first point is not true, only hardwork will bring loyalty, the rest are remedies to win time. Shortcut to save programmers works are not a long term solution, yet focusing where players are motivated in is brilliant. I really dont understand your counterlogic when you say I assume programmers and customers cant interact...they can interact and this interaction is the only thing that make a game continue, PvP can be done in any game, a MMORPG is a new setting and the setting need to be worked, PvP cannot be the center of interest of a serious setting, yet, it can have a place for those that desire it(bigger then in EQ, but nowhere close to enforcing PvP on someone that dont show interest in PvP uberness, PvP can only be enforced to acquire PvP uberness).
Yet, noble try to stand alone and argue with everyone, Napoleon, Hitler, Louis XIV all have merit in focusing, rather well, on something that not should have been a priority, but a welcome secondary aspect, no more. PvP should not be the center of a MMORPG, it can only be a nice secondary aspect of it.
How can someone enjoy Sims online with your logic? Not only it have no PvP, but the level of stress involved in Sims is like nothing compare to the most softcore MMORPG...yet...some players LOVE Sims(not me hehe) and would not think of playing another MMORPG at all, PvP have it logic, which is good for a minority, exactly like any type of activity is, since no single activity will ever rally a majority, now, enforcing every players to play Sims to be able to zone in a PvP zone would be sick dont you think? Tell me how enforcing PvP on someone that just want to solo MOBS endlessly is any better then enforcing Sims online on a PvP player? In fact, studies show clearly that enforcing stress on anyone not actively searching it is a LOT worser then enforcing something easy and boring to do, thereby, enforcing is evil, period, but enforcing anything in that way is PURE evil: PvP (upon any of the following) --- Raiding --- Grouping --- Soloing --- Tradeskilling...enforcing any of the previous on a later activity is purely insane, the other way, from latest to previous is just boring, no more. Thereby enforcing SIMS online on all PvP game is way less bad then enforcing PvP on Sims online. (giving the best rewards of another activity is enforcing the reward giver) (that order dont show any superiority, it show a level of stress with each activity, usually speaking, of course, there can be more complex intertwinned, especially for neighbors activities, stress might be sought for by some player, but it shorten lifespan if ill used...) I never see a PvP player despair because he need to do some grouping or tradeskilling. But even Raiders will go to a desesperate mood if they need to do some PvP, exactly like a tradeskiller that need to raid! This is why the simplest logic that say best tradeskiller is a tradeskiller(can do other stuff, but all tradeskilling real edges where earned in tradeskilling), best soloer is a soloer should be strictly enforced if you want to keep everyone motivated...
You might wield words well(or not), you might even "defeat" anyone, but you ignore the blatant truth, and defending blatant truth is rather hard as did not expect to defend it! PvP is simply not the way for most peoples to make fun, players want to win and progress, and PvP offer this to only 20%, which lead to losing 80%!
Nuff said!
- "Coercing? No no, I assure you, they are willing to bring my bags and pay public transportation just to help me, it is true!''
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Im really sorry but what language are you speaking cause it sure isn't english? Its really difficult to string together 90% of your post...
Somewhere in there I understood a question about the sims, Well first of all this argument does not take into account the social aspect of any game because all games can have it and in games that lose their value as a fun game people do not play they just congregate in a certain area and talk to each other. People hang out in chatrooms, talk on the phone, and hang out with each other in person. This is seperate from the fun of the game aspect of video games.
I think there was an allusion that I was trying to force something on someone that they wouldn't like.. Obviously that is redicuouls because then they wouldn't be having fun, what I am saying is that pvp of a certain type would be fun. For the billionth time the only difference between pvp and pve is that pve is designed to let you win.
Haha well you have an ill attitude despite being unable to form setences, rather than be irritated I'll just thank you for being symbolic of how 80% of the people in this thread have been acting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROBABILITY(YOUR STATEMENTS BEING MOTIVATED BY FEAR(I>U)) > .5
Im really sorry but what language are you speaking cause it sure isn't english? Its really difficult to string together 90% of your post...
Somewhere in there I understood a question about the sims, Well first of all this argument does not take into account the social aspect of any game because all games can have it and in games that lose their value as a fun game people do not play they just congregate in a certain area and talk to each other. People hang out in chatrooms, talk on the phone, and hang out with each other in person. This is seperate from the fun of the game aspect of video games.
I think there was an allusion that I was trying to force something on someone that they wouldn't like.. Obviously that is redicuouls because then they wouldn't be having fun, what I am saying is that pvp of a certain type would be fun. For the billionth time the only difference between pvp and pve is that pve is designed to let you win.
Haha well you have an ill attitude despite being unable to form setences, rather than be irritated I'll just thank you for being symbolic of how 80% of the people in this thread have been acting.
Why do you insult me twice?
That was not my original post, you are just looking for confrontation with folks that dont like confrontation because you fear real PvP player maybe?
You insist on saying a MMORPG need to be PvP to be fun, it dont need to be, it is a welcome part of it, but should not be the ultimate of anything but PvP uberness.
Not all PvE are designed to let you win, old plain EQ pre-Kunark, most folks cant reach level 25 and where sending me tons of praise on my level 50.
But PvE is less challenging then PvP, granted, yet, it might suit most players...
That look to me like a 10 years old kids looking for a fight but only with those of 6 and less!
- "Coercing? No no, I assure you, they are willing to bring my bags and pay public transportation just to help me, it is true!''
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Well I think you are wrong here. If you think about it, you are basically claiming that the design of the game has no effect on how long it is fun, as long as the company interacts with the customers or provides more content. This excludes the possibility of single player games being fun, much less having any replayability.
Refreshing memory can be good. as well
- "Coercing? No no, I assure you, they are willing to bring my bags and pay public transportation just to help me, it is true!''
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Hey... I was posting a legitimate joke, and this almost sounds like you might have been making a serious reply... But I am one of those people, and it isn't quite like that. (EWWWW! I know, TMI.) But even among people >like me<, there is a wide range of experiences, or at least people describe their experiences in vastly different ways.
But, seriously, if your MMORPG feels like an acid bath, you might want to try a different game. I've felt that way about a couple of games. (LAUGH! LAUGH, I SAY!)
I played EQ from 8/99 to 12/03, and I would probably be playing now instead of posting here if I could swing it. I am willing to accept that the reason I played that long and continue to enjoy it is that I am playing PvP in my own way. I have to admit that I did get a little bit of a thrill from starting over from scratch in 2001 (really and truly from scratch, since I moved all my previous characters to a new server on a server split), passing most of my friends in levels and equipment, and then deleting my level 65 character a couple of weeks before I quit... just because I know they couldn't bring themselves to do that and it wasn't really a big deal to me. I could, after all, have another one in similar equipment again in a couple of months, passing all those people again. And I do see the point that I am playing against them, at least inside my own skull, even as I call them friends. I am not playing against them by killing them, and I am not playing against other players by trying to get to the top end of the game (which never looked like fun to me). I am playing against them in the sense that I do get a sense of achievement out of accomplishing things faster and better than they can while never getting attached to that accomplishment. Easy come, easy go. And their envy is reward enough.
I know that makes me sound awful, but we're all awful people inside sometimes.
~*~
neschria
Bludgeoner of Bunnies
...
This is where I draw the line: __________________.
Annofyle I'm not really insulting you I'm just telling the truth your grammar is terrible and for the most part I don't have a clue what you are trying to say. English is obviously not your native language correct?
@ Nes lol.. Ive played some games that start out like a nice warm bath and slowly turn into an acid bath those are the ones I hate the most because you stay there paying for it for months before you realize it isn't fun anymore.
Nah that doesn't make you sound awful because its not that they feel bad that makes you feel good, its that they want to do what you can or be you (right?). And there isn't really anything wrong with that. IMO its only bad to rub it in because if they had all the advantages that you had then they probably could have done it too, and them knowing that deep down makes rubbing it in random punishment since it leaves no other explanation then that they deserve it just for being them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PROBABILITY(YOUR STATEMENTS BEING MOTIVATED BY FEAR(I>U)) > .5
Edit Spelling*
kriminal, did you like pre-trammel UO? is that the model that you're working with when you say that a mmorpg has to be pvp-based to be continually fun? now i know you've stretched your definition of pvp to mean pvp AND pve AND whatever, but i'll just concentrate on what most people understand pvp as. ie 2 players engaged in a direct zero-sum game, wherein for one player to win, the other has to lose.
if it is, then the problem i see there is that pre-trammel UO, what you essentially had was a bunch of game styles thrown together at the same time. crafting, exploring, fighting monsters, etc. what unrestricted pvp does, is forces you to change from your game style, to a pvp game style. no other game style does this. if i craft some swords, how does that impinge on your pvp game?
now, a lot of pvp proponents say you must have competition for fun, look at sports, other games, etc. and i'll agree with that, that's true. but if i'm playing CS, then i know what to expect, and then win or lose, well that's just part of the game. if i play baseball, i come to the field ready to play. but i'd be pretty pissed if i'm at home plate, and some linebacker comes out of nowhere and tackles me.
basically kriminal, you've thrown a lot of vague and long-winded arguments about pvp and fun based on psychology and "FACTS". since you want to develop mmorpgs someday, please post an example of how you would implement PVP that would be continually fun, so that we can all understand what it is you're trying to enlighten us with.
Yeah, I pretty much keep my gloating entirely on THIS side of the screen. I am only awful on the inside. I have a sweet candy shell on the outside.
~*~
neschria
Bludgeoner of Bunnies
...
This is where I draw the line: __________________.
Strangely I decided to try the PvP server on DAoC euro last night and had such a laugh.
Made a char and immediately got killed right at the trainer haha.Came back and nuked the guy then got killed ,came back nuked other guy ,then some merc came and killed me .
Logged with a laugh.Total playtime -20 mins.Will I actually come nd make a char and level and build up the char on this server?Certainly not,I have planetside to gank on people when i want and UT2003.
FPS ganking is fun,MMOPRG ganking is dull.Might explain why the server is only 500 people at peak times as against the other euro servers that are 2500.Guess I am not alone in my views.
Heh
Ok you wanted me to tear appart your damn post here is goes. Actually I didn't want to waste my time writing this all down, but now you've gone and pissed me off. Lets start with your condition satement shall we.
"To be continually fun a MMORPG must be PVP."
Continually fun... There is no such thing nothing is forever fun. You need to use more spefic word choices. In what way is it fun? FUN for me fun for you, because websters dictionary has the word fun as a subjective term. Meaning it verries from person to person. Also your deffination of PVP is lacking. Player vs Player hell one could successfuly argue that everquest is pvp. However most people who play mmorpgs wouldn't nessarly classify it as a player vs player mmorpg. This whole condition statement needs work.
"Premise 1: Players consume or advance through static precreated game content at an average rate of more than 10 times that which it takes to create it. This means that in order to sustain the fun level of a mmorpg just based on single player type static content you would need more than 10x the man hours than it took to make the game to begin with."
Where is your evidence for this. I don't see any articals or journals to prove your point. THis is a figure you pulled out of your ass. It makes this part of your argument invalid.
"I do not believe this is cost effective, and obviously neither do mmorpg developers as is evidence by their attempted use of tricks to extend game content."
This is an opinion, not a logical arguement. Also I would like you to give 10 examples of "tricks" that mmorpgs use. Your wording here is to vague and you need to give better examples. Oh and by disproving premisis one your whole argument is bunk. But lets cont. shall we.
"Premise 2: Tricks used to slow down players from consuming what content there is or to stretch the content artificially lessen fun to the degree which they are used."
Again we are using non percise words like "tricks", "Content", and "Lessen fun". You need to loose these terms, and what the hell is "lessen fun to the degree they are used to." I mean ok besides it being increddably vague, it verries from person to person. I mean honestly, some people find the grind, which is the only thing I can assume your talking about to be quite fun. I personaly think they're massochrists but hell thats their thing.
"Setting a player back randomly is stressful to the player. this stress can be averted by to the degree that the player expected to be setback for the particular action he was taking. However most of the time the player will avoid situation where he would be setback. But IF there is a possibility of rewards that are worth the risk he will take the action anyways. this is gambling."
I can agree with most of this part of the statement, other than you should remove the "by to the degree" it threw me off for half a minute and doesn't help your arguement any. Also gambling is not certain, some people don't enjoy gambeling of anykind, and are concent taking down easy mobs and stress free quests for their entire character existance. You should change this statement so it refects most people and not all people.
Premise 4: Gambling where ones skills and knowledge is involved is more fun than pure luck gambling.
This is an opinion. You need to remove this statement entierly. If you want me to prove you wrong, then just look at any casino. See the people lined up at the slots. In most cases you'll find more people there than you will at any games that require a degree of skill. Besides as we already discussed fun is a subjective term lets stop using it entirely.
Premise 5: The only entity to date in video games unpredictable enough so that the player will not just assume he can beat it (and therefore dieing to it would be random punsihment) or that he has no chance against it (so he will just avoid it), and can retain this unpredictability through a near infinite amount of interactions, is another player.
In theroy this makes sense, however it doesn't take into effect other stimuli that come into effect in mmorpgs. Forinstance, players tend to avoid combat with characters that are higher level than they are. Players also tend to avoid player vs player combat if the pentaly for death is to high, or the reward is to low. Players tend to avoid combat if the other player in question is tweeked to hell. Forinstance you would probabley be more afraid of a person wearing bad ass end game armour and a glowing sword then a person wearing regualr eq. Finaly your argument doesn't take into consideration balencing issues that that devs might me perpously putting into the game to keep all classes ballenced. (An example of this is the upcomming world of warcraft. Which is implementing a rock, paper, scissors structor for combat. So A warrior will always beat a hunter who will always beat a wizard, who will always beat a warrior. Assuming equil level an baring outside interferance.)
"Also the nature of the pvp can not be to limit the players choice of action to the point where PVP becomes predictable."
This statement seems to be refearing to a perticular type of player vs player. I need you to be more percise. Please explain what type of player vs player are you refearing to here. If you need to give an example from existing game.
"Premise 6: The more the person has a chance of gaining the more fun it is to participate in the gamble, but he must be randomly reinforced by winning sometimes."
I agree with your premise here, but you really need to work on your wording here. Also this seems like kind of a duh statement. The person should win that gambel is kinda unnessary. I mean if he wouldn't randomly win from time to time it wouldn't be much of a gambel would it.
"Premise 7: Since gambling can slow a persons content consumption to any degree without reducing the fun or causing stress signifigantly, it can slow consuption of the games content to the point where Developers could supply more at the rate it is used."
This statement is a red hearing. Nothing in your previous statements lead up to this point. It's just kinda out there. Secondly it doesn't even make sense. The problem is the words "to any degree" which basicly imply that if you have gambeling you can slow down player concuption to a crawl or almost entirely. Well I got news for you, you make the grind to hard and people won't be willing to play it. Thats a fact. Also you really need to clerify the word concuption. Are we talking ecodemy here, quests, points of social interaction, what are we talking about.
"Conclusion: The only possible way to cost-effectively provide a sustained level of fun in an MMORPG is to have a PVP Based MMORPG where players take gambles by choice on their battles between each other."
Ok first of all your statement never goes about proving that this is a cost effective model. Secondly what the hell "sustained level of fun" excusse me, but I've never done anything that fun forever! Once again we have the words PVP baised and again I emplore you, what kinda of player vs player interaction are we talking about. In case you haven't figured it out yet, the reason everybody is getting down on your argument is that your are not being able to convay your ideas to them. Saying pvp in video games terms is the equivalant of saying tree when refuring to a yard.
Seeing as you don't seem to grasp why being persice is important let me give you a demonstration in hopes that you might understand why you need your logical arguments to have some degree of percision. Lets take this statement:
Trees help keep your back yard private.
Well actually thats a true statement, that is if you know anything about landscaping. But the problem is the people I'm trying to communcate with don't understand what hell I'm talking about. Because what I said was to generic.
Now lets try this statement:
A ring of privacey trees around your yard can help keep it private.
Well people begin to understand what I'm talking about, but still they don't seem to get the whole picture. I see the term trees is to general. Well how about this.
Planting Spruce trees around the back yards permiter helps keep your neighbors from watching you. Which gives you a sense of privacy.
See in this statement people know what tree I'm talking about, where I want them placed, and to whom I'm refearing to when I say privacey. I could get even more specific yet, but I'm getting tired. What you need to understand is that these frustrating misconceptions people make about your arguement is because you're not telling them exactly what you're talking about. When people say they don't like pvp, you say you haven't experanced all forms of pvp. It's a cop out man. You need to be more specific.
In addition you need to realize that we are talking about mmorpgs. Do you understand what that acronym stands for. In case you don't I'm going to expalin it to you. It means Massive Multiplayer Online, here's the key right here. Role Playing Game. Yeah thats right. See you tend to think that all people find their satisfaction from creating this player model and acheiving gloary for it. See you are the type of person thats known as the achiever, one who constantly seeks gradification from the game, by improving their charcter. A person like you seeks to be the best at all times, which is why player vs player might seem to be appealing. But for someone like me, that isn't the case. I'm a socailizer. Oh yeah thats right. See I'm that guy who plays on those Role Playing Servers. The guy who makes a character and tries to act like that chracter. I made a palaidn and didn't gain a lvl for 9 days in Everquest. Because I was so busy attempting to convert dark elves to the light side. I mean yeah it's stupid and meta game wouldn't let me do it. But hell I had fun. More fun then I ever had killing a character. In RPGS you are expected to play are role, not get your toon it's next glowie which will proc at lvl 50... *Sigh*
Ok I'm done ranting now... Listen I had more to say and when I read this post later I'm going to be mad that I didn't, but screw it I'm tired. I'll adress you being a dumb ass for discounting peoples experances later. Untill then serriosly listen to what I have to say, you might find it informative.
Mr Vice
PS: The four types of MMORPGers are:
Socailizers
Acheivers
Explorers
and
Killers
Just a little FYI
In your topic statement "Logical argument why to be continually fun a MMORPG must be PVP based - simplified" starts off on a bad note.
Rather than the topic being a statement of fact, it is very much one of your own opinion.
"Continually fun" - What is continually fun for you, may not be fun for someone else. Fun is a feeling of emotion and state of being which can only be measured by the individual experiencing the feeling of fun for themselves.
To be fun an MMORPG must be PVP based is a crock. Again, that is subject to the individual playing the game.
I haven't played Sims Online to know if there is any PvP involved, but it appears to be a game that is immersive in the social aspects rather than "killing your neighbor". There are people playing it to have "fun".
Fun is not a constant. To suggest that PvP would make it so is ridiculous.
Not everyone finds fun in being the "hunter" or the "hunted". MMORPGs that are diverse enough in content to please a variety of play styles is what makes gaming fun.
Your premises, in a nutshell, have no factual support of your topic statement. Furthermore, "simplified" it was not.
Just as a suggestion - It's better to express yourself in a level where the majority of people can understand you. When you know that society as a whole has an average reading level of a 6th grader, it might be a good idea to keep it "simplified". You could spruce it up later for your own purpose, whether it be for school or some psychological work that you're trying to accomplish.
If you're doing this for college credit, I would recommend that you state such in your post. You may have found that people would have been less "defensive" toward what you were attempting to accomplish with this post.
So, to what result do people feel that PVP must be involved for an MMORPG to be "fun"? Let's find out, shall we?
I can't stand reading posts saying that if you PK someone, you RUIN the game for that person. Geez, when I first got PKed while I was mining in UO I was confused. I found out PKing was a part of the game and I didn't whine. Just to clarify things, I never griefed in UO but I did kill players when needed. What's the difference between getting killed by a monster or a player... it's all about being at the wrong place at the wrong moment. Now if you take away free PvP and leave all the PvPers on one server, it turns into a deathmatch game which takes all the fun away for most. PKers are just something you have to deal with, it's a challenge. If most of you are just too lazy to face it then don't play MMORPGs, simply go play NWN on the internet. If you want to play a game where you can camp the same mobs over and over without any interference then the game you wanted is already out and it's EQ. Too many players don't want to die in games and it's just too bad cause death is a big part of MMORPGs. If you crossed a PK you wouldn't automaticly die. There are ways to deal with PKers and removing them from the game is the laziest and the worst solution of them all.
I can already hear the anti-PvP scream at the griefers standing on their corpse. Those players are a ridiculously small minority of the PvPers. There are jerks everywhere. What would you do if a griefer stood on your corpse, if the only things you had on it was a few easy to get items? Best example is UO... when you died you would lose everything you had on yourself so what? There were no sup3r dup3r sword of ub3rness to lose. Everything you lost was easily acquirable so the only thing you really had lost was money. Loot is what kill games. If you play the game because you want to be the best equiped warrior (ie : Furor in EQ is one damn good example) then you're wasting your time. If items is what you want, go play Diablo 2, it's pretty much the only reason to play that game. Then they release expansions with new pwerful loot that you HAVE to buy if you want better items... funny how all the EQ players bought expansions after expansions, yet they do the same thing over and over. So what forces EQ players to buy expansion if they were already having fun in previous ones? Items of course.
If you really want to play a game with a strong community, then the game should not be about items. Don't be hypocrites. I've played UO, EQ, AC, AO, DAoC and beta tested quite a few other games. The strongest community I've ever seen was in UO until they messed it up with patches and new content, geez I still talk with some Brazilians I helped through the game and that was 6 years ago. People bought houses together, financed guild castles, had vendors selling their crafted items, weddings with decorations, furniture and food, events, contests, etc. The interactivity with the world and the players was at its highest point ever in any MMORPG made to this day. Still there were PKers and Griefers around and we still had enormous fun playing the game.
"I am trying to see things from your perspective but I just can't get my head that far up my @$$."
HAHAHAHA
Waaa....
If the game isn't the way I like it, it should change. Other people's opinions and desires don't count. i think PvP should be a part of all MMORPG's, so they should all be made that way... Waaaa.... 
Give me a break... Go find one that has PvP that you like, and the people who don't like PvP can find one that doesn't have it.
Why do most of you guys feel that your way is the only way? And it is mostly the PvP crowd who feel this way.
I gave up on this topic a long time ago. This guy, Kriminal99 or whatever, refuses to believe that his logic is flawed, no matter what you post. He refuses to acknowledge that carebear MMORPGs are much more popular, something that debunks his logic before he even gets into his premises. He refuses to acknowledge that different people find different things fun. He refuses to acknowledge that his whole logic is based on his personal opinion and therefore might not be logical to other people. He makes wild claims about MMORPG content getting used up 10 time faster than the developers can make it.
It's a pointless argument because as he himself stated "such PvP system doesn't exist." So if it doesn't exist, posting about it is pointless, since the best argument he can bring forth is hypothetical at best.
**Like to talk about Video Games?Go to Veiwers Pick Forums...
http://viewerspick.proboards35.com/index.cgi?
*
Outkast Studios
Mystic Online Community Forums
OMG this thread is hilarious. One poster trying to prove "logically" that every MMORPG game should have PVP. Please give it a rest!! Not EVERY MMO game needs to have PvP for it to be successful. Has anyone played ToonTown or The Sims? I'm having a blast playing FFXI and at the moment it doesn't have PvP. So, over 500,000 subscribers who are playing this game and having "logical" fun need to experience PvP? LMAO!!
I don't think so!!
Having PvP in a MMO game should NOT be mandatory. It should be optional. Developers know that many people like the experience of PvP and many don't. So you have 3 choices when developing a MMO game. Either make the game completely PvP like Shadowbane or Planetside, make it optional PvP like FFXI and WoW will eventually be or make a game with absolutely NO PvP in it like The Sims.
It has nothing to do with logic, it's all about choice. Yes, people can be force to like something through hypnosis or drugs, but who the hell is going to do the forcing? The person who started this thread?
Ok. time to close the thread now.
Xander
Xander