Originally posted by ApraxisWell.. not a lot of answers to your question. Some tried to explain, but did not really a good job with it.So i will give it a try to explain you what i think is the answer to your question. .... Long and (in my eyes at least) idealised view of the game EVE ..... If you take out any meaning from pvp it becomes rather dull for a lot of players.I hope you understand it now.PS: And not everyone have to take part in pvp fights in such a world, but everyone is part of equation. Like some crafter or trader may never leave the safe zone, but hire people, which take part in it, and do jobs for them.
As said elsewhere the EV E card has been played over and over again. What is left out is the large number of MMORPG players who have tried EVE and did not like it because of the FFA PvP and the even larger number of players that did not try it at all for a variety of reasons. The thing about EVE is that there is only one server so the option of having two rule sets disappears it was also designed from the ground up to be a PvP game. It suceeds in this well (perhaps even very well). But the option still exists for games with multiple servers to have multiple rule sets. While Apraxis does not state that he is opposed to have multiple servers with different rule sets many have using much the same examples that he does.
I do not dispute that providing a place for people to go who do not want to PvP in any way shape or form may make PvP dull for a lot of players, but not providing this option alienates another large group of players.
In addition creating ghetto zones for people who do not want to PvP is not a good solution socially, it discriminates against those players and encourages PvP players to start using terms like NOOB and Carebear. As to having to wait for a group of PvP players to "escort" me anywhere that is just contemptible.
If you want an OW FFA Pvp game they are out there: Darkfall:UW, EVE, Defiance, the upcoming Camelot Unchained. Even Archage looks to be largely OW FFA PvP. But to provide options for those that do not want OW FFA PvP other games need to be released that do encourage a PvE only play style. Hopefully Everquest Next will be one of these.
I don't have any qualitative arguments with Eve, I think they've got their system setup well, and it works. Better than most FFA, Always On PvP systems I can think of.
The only thing I would say is that the effects of PvP in Eve can be done with PvE, without using the PvP mechanic. To me, that means the reasons listed for requiring PvP for all players* are not good ones. They are good reasons for a Risk vs Reward system, and for having both high and low sec space, but not for PvP to be the particular solution. It's not a reason against PvP as the solution in the Risk vs Reward system either.
* Eve does allow PvP everywhere, but the split between high and low sec space gives players a nearly 100% chance of avoiding PvP if they want to avoid it. Even in low sec space, with a little forethought players can avoid PvP there too, but with a lower chance of success.
Most probably yes. And most probably you could even mix it. But the game have to be build up accordingly. And there is not one game, which did it successfully or even tried it. As i said already, even in a FFA PvP environment we more or less only got EvE for that kind of experience.
But yes, i absolutely agree, the key is risk vs. reward, and not so much pvp or no pvp.
PS: Because UO changed a lot, and can not be counted towards it, and was nevertheless the first try to do something like that. And Darkfall lacks a lot of important features, like regional markets and things like that. It is much more just a big battleground with a few sandbox tools. So it is everything but perfect.
Originally posted by GroovyFlower Originally posted by lizardbonesOriginally posted by GroovyFlowerAsheron's call 2 had different pvp zones and one main pvp zone but most where always abandon.Pve mixed with free for all zones don't work at all.I realy don't see why its a problem when a game have pve servers and a free for all full loot server?Why would someone play a game where free for all are rule set and then start whining about ?
I'm not really looking at people who are for or against FFA or Always On PvP. We know there are people who like it and people who don't, with reasons for their points of view. Another example of what I'm talking about. There are periodically calls for Darkfall to have a PvE server, with a PvE rule set and where the PvP would optional. There are people who like the mob AI and the sandbox style world, but who just don't want to deal with the PvP aspect of the game. There are people who are categorically against having a PvE server for Darkfall, on what seems to be ascetic reasons. It would just be "wrong". However, there was actually a legitimate reason to not do this, other than just not liking it. It would dilute developer resources because they would have to focus on making the PvE game a good game without the PvP aspects at the same time they were working on the PvP side of the game which included the PvE aspects. Too many spices in the soup kind of thing. You've raised another good point I think with Asheron's Call. If you have safe zones and unsafe zones, unless there's a good reason for people to head into the unsafe zones, it's likely they won't travel to those zones. Eve is an example of this too. A very large portion of Eve's population don't go into the low sec space. They have everything they want or need in high sec space. Asheron's call 1&2 it worked perfectly you had many pve servers few Kingdom vs Kingdom servers and one free for all pvp server called Darktide.
Im possitive developers can easly release game that have pve servers and FFA PVP servers.
I would tend to agree with you. However, that doesn't make for a very lively discussion.
Short of sending a message to the people I saw in the EQN threads espousing "nothing but PvP is the only way to do things", I don't know that I'm going to get a very good, general answer. I know why Darkfall doesn't have a PvE server, but with larger scale games like EQN, development shouldn't be hampered by having two server types. It seemed to work OK with UO, and nearly half of WoW's servers are PvP servers, so it is certainly possible.
Any Eve players want to chime in on why the solution to the Risk vs Reward system in Eve must be PvP? Keep in mind, I'm not saying it shouldn't. As I've said I think CCP did their job and did it well, but it seems like it would be possible to do nearly the same thing, but with PvE instead of PvP.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
About WoW and PvP servers.. it never really worked out. Open World pvp got never a lot of purpose or meaning.. so it was reduced to battlegrounds and arenas. And in that regard any simple multiplayer game is usually a lot better.
The same is true to UO.. they didn't solve the PvP - PvE problem. They switched more to pve, and added faction and guild wars, similar to DAoC into the game. But a lot of playstyles left out after the introduction of Trammel.
There is not a easy solution.. but that does not mean that there is no solution at all.
Originally posted by DavisFlight Originally posted by DMKanoOriginally posted by DavisFlightWith just PvPers in a PvP zone... its wolves vs wolves and everything is always the same. aka, boring and unrealistic.
Its players who want to PvP, how is that boring? Its a win-win.Boring is a player who wants to PvE in peace being forced to PvP, its one sided and lame, wif he wanted to pvp in peace he wouldnt be in a ffa pvp game
There do exist people who try new games every day, without a full understanding of what they are getting into. That's why you get people who try Darkfall, and then ask about PvE servers. Darkfall might be their first MMO, or their first FFA PvP MMO, and they find that the sandbox aspects of the game are phenomenal, if only other players didn't stab them in the back while they were working on the mob with the cool AI.
Dismissing those players only works if there are a very small number of them. CCP had the same take on it as Adventurine, but they realized that they had a large audience of people who weren't that interested in PvP, and in order to keep the game from imploding on itself they implemented high sec space. Or they changed the rules for high sec space or something like that. I don't really remember. The point is, when you're talking about player preferences, it's the number of players that matter. The more players you have with a particular preference, the less dismissive you can be about that preference.
I'm not sure any of this is relevant to the topic at hand. It doesn't explain why some people hold the view that if there's going to be PvP in a game, it needs to be global, and always on. Is it just a preference, or is there some supporting logic that makes it a logical response to MMORPGs.
I'm going to assume this is a correct perception on my part, because nobody has said I'm wrong. These forums don't usually skip on pointing out how people have perceived things wrong. :-)
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by bcbully FFA world with a PVE area full of quests and instances. This will give the devs a lot of freedom to design something else.
FFA world separate from PVE on a different server. This will give the devs even more freedom to design something else.
About WoW and PvP servers.. it never really worked out. Open World pvp got never a lot of purpose or meaning.. so it was reduced to battlegrounds and arenas. And in that regard any simple multiplayer game is usually a lot better.
The same is true to UO.. they didn't solve the PvP - PvE problem. They switched more to pve, and added faction and guild wars, similar to DAoC into the game. But a lot of playstyles left out after the introduction of Trammel.
There is not a easy solution.. but that does not mean that there is no solution at all.
The solution is not to have global FFA open world pvp.
If there is not enough players who want it, there is really nothing you can do.
Originally posted by nerovipus32 SWG had the best pvp system, simply join a faction and flag your self as overt. if you don't want to be involved in pvp then just stay neutral.
everyone bitches about how that system doesn't work, but it does as a game mechanic. afterall these are games not real life.
the typical complaint is that unflagged gamers can, (heavens forbid!), spy on them ... because we all know that there are never spies in the real world and that most spies in the real world never get caught. no, because that wouldn't allow them the wolf on sheep metaphor so wisely used earlier in this thread.
i am all for pvp, i play the hell outa some pvp games. but i would never even consider forcing someone to do something they don't want to do. and again our wolf and sheep analogy comes back, because in the end, these people do feel this way. they like to inflict at the minimum annoyance or at best emotional harm on other players they deem as sheep. other players are there for their enjoyment, non-pvp'rs are prey, they are npc's with slightly better AI.
its fascinating, because they often cry out that people be 'open minded', but most of them would never hear of actually respecting the wishes of others in a game.
(please keep in mind i am not referring to people who like to pvp, but rather those who want to see it forced on the overall gaming community.)
"There are at least two kinds of games. One could be called finite, the other infinite. A finite game is played for the purpose of winning, an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play." Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
This is something I've wondered about, but not really understood the logic of. It has definitely gotten a lot more attention recently with the pending release of EQN information.
I understand that PvP is more exciting, can add something akin to a political element to a game, and can even make items in the economy more valuable, but I've never understood the insistence that if there is FFA PvP in a game everyone must participate.
For example, if there are safe areas and unsafe areas, the unsafe areas must contain more valuable items. Why? To me this seems like a mechanic that arbitrarily limits the people who would want to play a game. It seems like the people who would want to PvP would hang out in the unsafe areas and the people who don't like PvP would hang out in the safe areas.
I've also gotten the impression, possibly wrongly, that people who like FFA, Always On PvP are against the idea of having two different server types, one with the PvP rule set and one with the PvP rule set. Why? It seems like a good idea for people who like PvP to be on one server and people who don't want PvP on all the time on another server.
So, what are your thoughts on this? Why must FFA or Always On PvP be universal or all encompassing?
Well.. not a lot of answers to your question. Some tried to explain, but did not really a good job withit.
So i will give it a try to explain you what i think is the answer to your question.
First of all it is not about FFA PvP alone, or PvP in that sense especially not PvP a lot of players think of. PvP in the sense of one player is attacking another player.
It is gameplay offered in EvE or was partially offered in old UO, and with that i will take those two to explain it.
One gameplay option, one role so to say in such a game is that of a trader, or transporter or gatherer. Lets take at first the transporter.
In EvE you transport goods from A to B. You either get paid for the transportation itself, or you make profit because goods you buy in A you can sell to with a much higher price in B. The reason why it is like that may be because in A is a rare resource near by and in B is a weapon factory in need of that rare resource. A is in null sec and b is in high sec or safe zone so to say.
For traveling you have to travel through null sec. And withit comes the danger and the challenge. You may have some escorts to look ahead the traveling route to check out if any pirates or enemy players are around, which may attack you. So it is about planning, it is about finding a secure route and it is about defending your goods, if you get actually attacked.
And it is a lot of fun to play.. at least for some. And you play pvp but without incentive to actually fight.. well you even try to avoid any fight.
Similar scenarios will apply to traders, to gatherer, to salvager... all of them don't look for a pvp fight, but the gameplay is depending on it.
And exactly the same is true for their counterparts, pirates, highwaymen(in a fantasy setting), bandits, with the difference that those guys look for a fight, but even more look for the profit to make with that fight.
So what happens to those gameplay style when you mix pve safe zones with the exact same resources into a game. And this applied to UO as the introduced trammel. They copied 1:1 felucca with pvp deaktivated, with all resources exactly the same.
Rather simple.. those gameplay options die out. Of course now you gather resources from the safe spot, because there is no risk involved. Transportation is not requested, because everyone can do it, because no danger no risk is involved. And as another result prices for high value resources go down dramatically, because it is a lot easier and not dangerous to get those resources.. and after some time, realizing you don't have any fun with resource gathering, transportation you quit the game.(because it became a grind and not an adventure it was originally) Exactly that happened to me in UO after the introduction of Trammel. Not even neccessary to talk about the inflation of the economy because of abuntant supply.
To compare it in PvE language. Think about a world boss, instance or raid. You have two versions of them.. they are exactly the same, with the difference one drops a lot of loot and the other one nothing. Which one will be farmed? Or which instance will be used? And which one will be rather abandoned?
Or a better comparsion. You have a rather easy world boss and a extremely difficult world boss. But both drop the exact same stuff. Which one will be farmed?
With other words you have destroyed different kinds of playstyles by introducing a pve zone with the exact same resources.
But that is it not alone. The same is true for the conquering game. Why you should take the trouble, the resources, the investment to conquer a territory, when there is a safe territory with the exact same resources and rewards? As often said, in such a game it is not only about the fight, it is about risk vs. reward, it is about meaning of pvp engangement.
If you take out any meaning from pvp it becomes rather dull for a lot of players.
But does that mean you can't have any safe/pve zones in such a world? No. You just have to balance it, you have to have those different playstyle in mind. As it is in EvE they do it with resource distribution.. the more valuable resources are in null sec. and therefore all those playstyles stay intact, and the same is for the conquer game or territory control. Balance of risk vs. reward.
You could add the exact same valuable resources in a pve zone, too. But then it have to be balanced difficult to get those resources, to not interfere or destroy those playstyles. Point is, not one game did it up to now in a satisfied way. Hell.. even in a ffa environment there is more or less just EvE, which get those economic playstyles right. Because it is not just ffa pvp, you need a lot of other mechanics, too, to support that kind of gameplay. (which is also often refered as part of the sandbox experience, although it alone does not define a sandbox)
In the end, it is not because of the pvp fight. The fight alone could be done in a lot of ways without the need of a world, without the need of persistence, massivness, economy and all those things found in MMORPGs or EvE. If it would only be about the pvp fight alone we could easily play Battlefield, DoTA or any similar game.
I hope you understand it now.
PS: And not everyone have to take part in pvp fights in such a world, but everyone is part of equation. Like some crafter or trader may never leave the safe zone, but hire people, which take part in it, and do jobs for them.
Edit/PPS:
Some games try to mimic the transporter/trader vs. pirates relation like Arche Age. There you craft/buy transportation goods you can sell at liberty island with a high reward. The way in between is pvp, and pirates or any enemy player can attack you and take the goods from you to sell it themselves.
I think you are bang on the money: Smedley is a big fan of eve. He'll ensure the pvp'ers have to do the fighting in these areas for stuff for other players to craft for pve content. Everyone can find content they want from carebears to gankers to rp'ers.
I think you are bang on the money: Smedley is a big fan of eve. He'll ensure the pvp'ers have to do the fighting in these areas for stuff for other players to craft for pve content. Everyone can find content they want from carebears to gankers to rp'ers.
these are horrid comparisons. once again an ffa pvp'r sees gamers as not wanting to work for things, as not wanting their games to be hard.
well a game can be quite difficultwithout pvp of any kind. he mentions world bosses, but then goes on to imply that these aren't the real challenge, the real challenge of course is his way of playing, of ffa pvp.
he then goes on to add that it is only reasonable that crafters be dependent for their only source for high level goods from the ffa pvp zone and the ffa pvp'rs.
huh.
what continues to disturb me the most is the complete blindness these people have to what gamers other than themselves actually want from a game, even a difficult game.
and why in the world should top world raiding guilds not get the same benefits that ffa pvp'rs get in resources or gear? why should someone who has poured hundreds of hours into harvesting and crafting not be equally rewarded for their hard work, just as an ffa pvp'r is?
i have always been sympathetic to ffa pvp'rs. they do deserve at least one game that is built to their general satisfaction. but this continued insistence that somehow the rest of the gaming community is not actually playing the way 'they should', or that the rest of the gaming community should somehow be dependent upon them for higher end rewards is ludicrous at best and ego-maniacal at worst.
quit being a game fascist. quit insisting that your way of playing should be the high end of gaming, that we should all be dependent upon you and the great rewards you earn for your playstyle.
because in the end, that's all this is: a playstyle. its not better. its not worse. its just a playstyle.
"There are at least two kinds of games. One could be called finite, the other infinite. A finite game is played for the purpose of winning, an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play." Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
I think you are bang on the money: Smedley is a big fan of eve. He'll ensure the pvp'ers have to do the fighting in these areas for stuff for other players to craft for pve content. Everyone can find content they want from carebears to gankers to rp'ers.
these are horrid comparisons. once again an ffa pvp'r sees gamers as not wanting to work for things, as not wanting their games to be hard.
I nowhere said anything about a game beeing hard or easy or anything. And how did you assume that i am a ffa pvper? I described the op how some mechanics work in EvE, which is actually a ffa pvp game, and what effect different mechanics may have when mixing them
well a game can be quite difficultwithout pvp of any kind. he mentions world bosses, but then goes on to imply that these aren't the real challenge, the real challenge of course is his way of playing, of ffa pvp.
The mention of world bosses was not to compare anything between pvp or pve... it was as a example for 2 pve methods, one with loot and the other without, that a lot of players would take on with the one with loot. Just read again.. Or actually just read it once. I never ever said anything about difficulty at all.
he then goes on to add that it is only reasonable that crafters be dependent for their only source for high level goods from the ffa pvp zone and the ffa pvp'rs.
As it is in EvE.. as i said
huh.
Yeap. Huh.. how about actually reading it?
what continues to disturb me the most is the complete blindness these people have to what gamers other than themselves actually want from a game, even a difficult game.
I tried to answer the question of the op. And he asked about a ffa pvp game. I did not make any comparsion, or any judging wether the one nor the other.
and why in the world should top world raiding guilds not get the same benefits that ffa pvp'rs get in resources or gear? why should someone who has poured hundreds of hours into harvesting and crafting not be equally rewarded for their hard work, just as an ffa pvp'r is?
I even suggested, that EVE gameplay mechanics could also work in a world with PVE and balanced challenges like PVE. I never proclaimed that EvE is the only valuable playstyle.
i have always been sympathetic to ffa pvp'rs. they do deserve at least one game that is built to their general satisfaction. but this continued insistence that somehow the rest of the gaming community is not actually playing the way 'they should', or that the rest of the gaming community should somehow be dependent upon them for higher end rewards is ludicrous at best and ego-maniacal at worst.
Yeah. Of course.
quit being a game fascist. quit insisting that your way of playing should be the high end of gaming, that we should all be dependent upon you and the great rewards you earn for your playstyle.
So you are not? But so abusive against me, where i never ever said anything against your or anyone else playstyle? Nor did i even had any judging in it.. just describing the Opening Poster how it is in EvE as he asked?
because in the end, that's all this is: a playstyle. its not better. its not worse. its just a playstyle.
So.. and i claimed anything else?
And not even quoting the post you are refering.. just the response to it? Yeah..
I think you are bang on the money: Smedley is a big fan of eve. He'll ensure the pvp'ers have to do the fighting in these areas for stuff for other players to craft for pve content. Everyone can find content they want from carebears to gankers to rp'ers.
these are horrid comparisons. once again an ffa pvp'r sees gamers as not wanting to work for things, as not wanting their games to be hard.
I nowhere said anything about a game beeing hard or easy or anything. And how did you assume that i am a ffa pvper? I described the op how some mechanics work in EvE, which is actually a ffa pvp game, and what effect different mechanics may have when mixing them
well a game can be quite difficultwithout pvp of any kind. he mentions world bosses, but then goes on to imply that these aren't the real challenge, the real challenge of course is his way of playing, of ffa pvp.
The mention of world bosses was not to compare anything between pvp or pve... it was as a example for 2 pve methods, one with loot and the other without, that a lot of players would take on with the one with loot. Just read again.. Or actually just read it once. I never ever said anything about difficulty at all.
he then goes on to add that it is only reasonable that crafters be dependent for their only source for high level goods from the ffa pvp zone and the ffa pvp'rs.
As it is in EvE.. as i said
huh.
Yeap. Huh.. how about actually reading it?
what continues to disturb me the most is the complete blindness these people have to what gamers other than themselves actually want from a game, even a difficult game.
I tried to answer the question of the op. And he asked about a ffa pvp game. I did not make any comparsion, or any judging wether the one nor the other.
and why in the world should top world raiding guilds not get the same benefits that ffa pvp'rs get in resources or gear? why should someone who has poured hundreds of hours into harvesting and crafting not be equally rewarded for their hard work, just as an ffa pvp'r is?
I even suggested, that EVE gameplay mechanics could also work in a world with PVE and balanced challenges like PVE. I never proclaimed that EvE is the only valuable playstyle.
i have always been sympathetic to ffa pvp'rs. they do deserve at least one game that is built to their general satisfaction. but this continued insistence that somehow the rest of the gaming community is not actually playing the way 'they should', or that the rest of the gaming community should somehow be dependent upon them for higher end rewards is ludicrous at best and ego-maniacal at worst.
Yeah. Of course.
quit being a game fascist. quit insisting that your way of playing should be the high end of gaming, that we should all be dependent upon you and the great rewards you earn for your playstyle.
So you are not? But so abusive against me, where i never ever said anything against your or anyone else playstyle? Nor did i even had any judging in it.. just describing the Opening Poster how it is in EvE as he asked?
because in the end, that's all this is: a playstyle. its not better. its not worse. its just a playstyle.
So.. and i claimed anything else?
And not even quoting the post you are refering.. just a response to it? Yeah..
You obviously didn't read my post, right?
i never read other people's posts.
seriously, if i have misread or misinterpreted you, then i apologize. but really the impression i got was exactly what i responded to.
and as for being sympathetic to ffa pvp'rs check my posts on this site.
"There are at least two kinds of games. One could be called finite, the other infinite. A finite game is played for the purpose of winning, an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play." Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
I don't think the problem is that people who don't like World FFA PvP don't like it because it is forced, necessarily. I think the issue is that it is too easy to be forced into a situation you have absolutely no way of winning. You don't even have a chance.
Ganking. Ganking occurs in two ways: either you are totally outnumbered or you are totally outleveled.
1. To me, this is the fundamental problem with World FFA PvP. And it has to do with the Themepark nature of the game. The areas are built around a specific array of levels. But nothing stops higher level players from entering these areas and rolling face. And given Themepark use of gear-based stats... the fact that they are higher level and would be more powerful anyway, the fact that their gear makes them a god in comparison to a low level player, no amount of zone-level comradery will matter. In other words, a gank squad of level 10's of any amount will never bring down a single level 50 with tricked out gear.
There are ways around this issue, but it would require a totally different design than what we are used to seeing. I won't go too deep into it, but basically, you have to design the game for lateral progression instead of vertical progression. But we will never see this, so it's a moot point.
2. Then there is the matter of a single 10th lvl guy being ganked by 15 10th level guys. Again, the lone guy doesn't have a chance. If this were a FPS like Call of Duty or something, this sort of thing happens all the time. One guy could potentially take out the entire opposite team. I've seen it happen before - a lot. Hell, I've DONE it before. But that was years ago when I was younger. And besides that, it takes a player who really knows how to play the game well to pull off on a consistent basis. And moreover, this is not something that a game should bank on happening by the bulk of its players in the first place.
The thing is, the sort of game where these things happen revolves entirely on player skill. MMO's do not revolve around player skill in any shape or form. They revolve around statistics. One lone player, even totally min-maxed, will never take out an entire team of equal level players, unless their class is OP (which is often the case), and even then... it won't happen. The numbers will not support it. They'll be dead before they take out one of the gankers.
Add to all of this that it is very easy for these gankers to completely lock down an entire area to the point that many players can absolutely not do a single thing in the game until the gankers move on... It's very easy to see how this can be frustrating. I love open world FFA PvP, and even I can see this sucks.
<snip for brevity>
I thought this post way back on Page 3 pretty accurately described the feelings of many PvE-type players. I will offer two more options, however.
3. The player is engaged in a fight versus a mob (or mobs) and someone comes along and kills them while they are occupied. The mob does most of the work for the PvP player, and the player fighting the mobs might not even notice they have been ganked. They PvE player's attention is on another fight, starts at a severely depleted state (health or mana or whatever) and have little or no chance against 2 opponents (the mob and the player).
4. The PvE player is resting/recovering from another fight, or is occupied with crafting or another non-combat proposition. They may not have their weapons out, and may have a different set of gear (with bonuses for crafting, for instance). The PvE player is a lesser combat threat because of their operations.
I could believe that most every low level player in an OW PvP suspects that someone is out there waiting or attempting to employ case #2 on them. And if this proves remotely true, these players' desire to play the game (i.e. pay money to play the game) could be severely lessened. So, how is OW PvP (either FFA or not) conducive to a company? It only enables a segment of in-game players to drive business away. The Open World aspect is the problem, not the PvP.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
well a game can be quite difficultwithout pvp of any kind. he mentions world bosses, but then goes on to imply that these aren't the real challenge, the real challenge of course is his way of playing, of ffa pvp.
100% agreed. Hard mode raid is as difficult as any pvp. In fact, pvp is difficult only up to the skill of your opponent. In a pve setting, difficulty can be ratcheted up infinitely, from merely difficult to impossible.
i have always been sympathetic to ffa pvp'rs. they do deserve at least one game that is built to their general satisfaction. but this continued insistence that somehow the rest of the gaming community is not actually playing the way 'they should', or that the rest of the gaming community should somehow be dependent upon them for higher end rewards is ludicrous at best and ego-maniacal at worst.
Well, no one deserve anything in a free market. Devs are free to produce anything and consumers are free to choose whether to play. No one owes anyone a game.
because in the end, that's all this is: a playstyle. its not better. its not worse. its just a playstyle.
I don't think the problem is that people who don't like World FFA PvP don't like it because it is forced, necessarily. I think the issue is that it is too easy to be forced into a situation you have absolutely no way of winning. You don't even have a chance.
Ganking. Ganking occurs in two ways: either you are totally outnumbered or you are totally outleveled.
1. To me, this is the fundamental problem with World FFA PvP. And it has to do with the Themepark nature of the game. The areas are built around a specific array of levels. But nothing stops higher level players from entering these areas and rolling face. And given Themepark use of gear-based stats... the fact that they are higher level and would be more powerful anyway, the fact that their gear makes them a god in comparison to a low level player, no amount of zone-level comradery will matter. In other words, a gank squad of level 10's of any amount will never bring down a single level 50 with tricked out gear.
There are ways around this issue, but it would require a totally different design than what we are used to seeing. I won't go too deep into it, but basically, you have to design the game for lateral progression instead of vertical progression. But we will never see this, so it's a moot point.
2. Then there is the matter of a single 10th lvl guy being ganked by 15 10th level guys. Again, the lone guy doesn't have a chance. If this were a FPS like Call of Duty or something, this sort of thing happens all the time. One guy could potentially take out the entire opposite team. I've seen it happen before - a lot. Hell, I've DONE it before. But that was years ago when I was younger. And besides that, it takes a player who really knows how to play the game well to pull off on a consistent basis. And moreover, this is not something that a game should bank on happening by the bulk of its players in the first place.
The thing is, the sort of game where these things happen revolves entirely on player skill. MMO's do not revolve around player skill in any shape or form. They revolve around statistics. One lone player, even totally min-maxed, will never take out an entire team of equal level players, unless their class is OP (which is often the case), and even then... it won't happen. The numbers will not support it. They'll be dead before they take out one of the gankers.
Add to all of this that it is very easy for these gankers to completely lock down an entire area to the point that many players can absolutely not do a single thing in the game until the gankers move on... It's very easy to see how this can be frustrating. I love open world FFA PvP, and even I can see this sucks.
I thought this post way back on Page 3 pretty accurately described the feelings of many PvE-type players. I will offer two more options, however.
3. The player is engaged in a fight versus a mob (or mobs) and someone comes along and kills them while they are occupied. The mob does most of the work for the PvP player, and the player fighting the mobs might not even notice they have been ganked. They PvE player's attention is on another fight, starts at a severely depleted state (health or mana or whatever) and have little or no chance against 2 opponents (the mob and the player).
4. The PvE player is resting/recovering from another fight, or is occupied with crafting or another non-combat proposition. They may not have their weapons out, and may have a different set of gear (with bonuses for crafting, for instance). The PvE player is a lesser combat threat because of their operations.
I could believe that most every low level player in an OW PvP suspects that someone is out there waiting or attempting to employ case #2 on them. And if this proves remotely true, these players' desire to play the game (i.e. pay money to play the game) could be severely lessened. So, how is OW PvP (either FFA or not) conducive to a company? It only enables a segment of in-game players to drive business away. The Open World aspect is the problem, not the PvP.
Good points.
As to why OW PvP is conducive to the company? This is a good question that I think merits an explanation that has thus far been entirely avoided in this discussion.
Not every game needs OW PvP in the first place. As I've said, I don't expect anyone coming into an OW PvP game asking for rules that allow for no OW PvP. And the same is true the other way around.
The problem with OW PvP is not really that these instances of ganking exist. The problem is that there isn't an active community participating in the OW PvP to begin with so that these issues of ganking do not go unpunished or are few and far between when compared against the bigger picture. I'll give you an example, again with SWTOR.
I was excited to play on the PvP-RP server because again, I enjoy both OW PvP and PvE. But I was especially excited about the OW PvP experience. I mean, for one... it's Star Wars. It only makes sense to have it. But I was sorely disappointed with the OW PvP experience at the end of the day. Why?
Because I was taking my memories from SWG into account when I created my expectations for SWTOR's OW PvP mechanic. SWG gave the player a legitimate reason to participate in OW PvP. SWTOR had absolutely no reason.
I remember it like it was yesterday - In SWG... people HATED the opposing faction. I'm not even kidding. The amount of trash talk that went on in that game on every single server every single day... it would make the kids of today commit suicide. They wouldn't have been able to handle it, I kid you not.
People had a reason to fight. They had to protect their homes. They had to protect their resources. They had to protect their own built bases. They had to win the war effort so that they could use the Spaceports in towns without mowing through a million NPC troops. People who didn't like to PvP still had an avenue in which they could contribute. They could harvest resources for the crafters who built the stuff that needed protecting. The OW PvP element in SWG was serious business, and it was the very heart of what made the game work. We didn't need quests - we had war. It's just a shame all of it was half-assed and broken.
The point is, OW PvP can create avenues for very exciting gameplay. It doesn't have to be a deterrent, and it doesn't have to be a gank fest.
This is something I've wondered about, but not really understood the logic of. It has definitely gotten a lot more attention recently with the pending release of EQN information.
I understand that PvP is more exciting, can add something akin to a political element to a game, and can even make items in the economy more valuable, but I've never understood the insistence that if there is FFA PvP in a game everyone must participate.
For example, if there are safe areas and unsafe areas, the unsafe areas must contain more valuable items. Why? To me this seems like a mechanic that arbitrarily limits the people who would want to play a game. It seems like the people who would want to PvP would hang out in the unsafe areas and the people who don't like PvP would hang out in the safe areas.
I've also gotten the impression, possibly wrongly, that people who like FFA, Always On PvP are against the idea of having two different server types, one with the PvP rule set and one with the PvP rule set. Why? It seems like a good idea for people who like PvP to be on one server and people who don't want PvP on all the time on another server.
So, what are your thoughts on this? Why must FFA or Always On PvP be universal or all encompassing?
Lazy Devs.
Flagged global worked in SWG. They didn't use it as a way to remove peoples houses from the map. They didn't use PvP to clean up their own lack of forward thinking. Later they added a pack up feature that did remove houses that weren't being used by active players but they never confused true PvP with garbage removal in their sandbox.
Because I was taking my memories from SWG into account when I created my expectations for SWTOR's OW PvP mechanic. SWG gave the player a legitimate reason to participate in OW PvP. SWTOR had absolutely no reason.
I remember it like it was yesterday - In SWG... people HATED the opposing faction. I'm not even kidding. The amount of trash talk that went on in that game on every single server every single day... it would make the kids of today commit suicide. They wouldn't have been able to handle it, I kid you not.
People had a reason to fight. They had to protect their homes. They had to protect their resources. They had to protect their own built bases. They had to win the war effort so that they could use the Spaceports in towns without mowing through a million NPC troops. People who didn't like to PvP still had an avenue in which they could contribute. They could harvest resources for the crafters who built the stuff that needed protecting. The OW PvP element in SWG was serious business, and it was the very heart of what made the game work. We didn't need quests - we had war. It's just a shame all of it was half-assed and broken.
The point is, OW PvP can create avenues for very exciting gameplay. It doesn't have to be a deterrent, and it doesn't have to be a gank fest.
Funny enough, my experience from SWG was completely different. PVP and the factions did not really exist for me and my guild. We never flagged so for us the outcome of PvP never mattered. We moved around freely and were enjoying the PvE content. It's just a shame all of it was half-assed and broken.
Because I was taking my memories from SWG into account when I created my expectations for SWTOR's OW PvP mechanic. SWG gave the player a legitimate reason to participate in OW PvP. SWTOR had absolutely no reason.
I remember it like it was yesterday - In SWG... people HATED the opposing faction. I'm not even kidding. The amount of trash talk that went on in that game on every single server every single day... it would make the kids of today commit suicide. They wouldn't have been able to handle it, I kid you not.
People had a reason to fight. They had to protect their homes. They had to protect their resources. They had to protect their own built bases. They had to win the war effort so that they could use the Spaceports in towns without mowing through a million NPC troops. People who didn't like to PvP still had an avenue in which they could contribute. They could harvest resources for the crafters who built the stuff that needed protecting. The OW PvP element in SWG was serious business, and it was the very heart of what made the game work. We didn't need quests - we had war. It's just a shame all of it was half-assed and broken.
The point is, OW PvP can create avenues for very exciting gameplay. It doesn't have to be a deterrent, and it doesn't have to be a gank fest.
Funny enough, my experience from SWG was completely different. PVP and the factions did not really exist for me and my guild. We never flagged so for us the outcome of PvP never mattered. We moved around freely and were enjoying the PvE content. It's just a shame all of it was half-assed and broken.
Well... I suppose it would require further investigation. To be fair... SWG had 2 completely different game paradigms. There was pre NGE and post NGE.
NGE was all about giving players this Themepark experience. PvP worked a little bit differently in this time. You had to make yourself Overt, which meant you were OW PvP flagged.
I'm talking about way back from the beginning before NGE was ever a thought in someone's mind. Back then... we didn't really have PvE content. I mean, sure there were quests here and there, but nothing like what the NGE offered, and certainly nothing like what we experience in MMO's today. There were a few Themeparks, but again, they were nothing like what we see today. They were very short, and relatively easy depending on your character's build. They mostly focussed around specific Iconic characters, Han Solo, Luke, the Emporer, 3P0. They were not intended to carry you through levels from beginning to end.
Anyway, during this time, flagging happened a bit differently. You couldn't really avoid being flagged for PvP unless you completely avoided everything that had anything to do with a faction. And back then, there were factions for everything, and their level of interest and hate was tracked in your datapad.
Basically, if you attacked an Imperial Trooper or a Revel Trooper of any kind... you were flagged for OW PvP. It was pretty much that simple. Anyone of the opposing faction could attack you when you were flagged. They did not have to be flagged. And you could not attack them until they became flagged. Which meant either they had to go find an opposing NPC and attack it, or they had to attack you. Basically, that meant they got the first blow no matter what.
Because there was this overwhelming sense of a lack of PvE content (of course there were always missions for randomly generated mobs), PvP was the more dominant feature. Add to this the Holocron craze (before the Aurillian Village) - only the highest lvl Imperial Troopers and Rebel Troopers dropped them... you could see how OW PvP was a huge part of the game.
But the fact still remains, as we both have said... it's a shame all of it was half-assed and broken lol.
Funny enough, my experience from SWG was completely different. PVP and the factions did not really exist for me and my guild. We never flagged so for us the outcome of PvP never mattered. We moved around freely and were enjoying the PvE content. It's just a shame all of it was half-assed and broken.
Well... I suppose it would require further investigation. To be fair... SWG had 2 completely different game paradigms. There was pre NGE and post NGE.
NGE was all about giving players this Themepark experience. PvP worked a little bit differently in this time. You had to make yourself Overt, which meant you were OW PvP flagged.
I'm talking about way back from the beginning before NGE was ever a thought in someone's mind. Back then... we didn't really have PvE content. I mean, sure there were quests here and there, but nothing like what the NGE offered, and certainly nothing like what we experience in MMO's today. There were a few Themeparks, but again, they were nothing like what we see today. They were very short, and relatively easy depending on your character's build. They mostly focussed around specific Iconic characters, Han Solo, Luke, the Emporer, 3P0. They were not intended to carry you through levels from beginning to end.
Anyway, during this time, flagging happened a bit differently. You couldn't really avoid being flagged for PvP unless you completely avoided everything that had anything to do with a faction. And back then, there were factions for everything, and their level of interest and hate was tracked in your datapad.
Basically, if you attacked an Imperial Trooper or a Revel Trooper of any kind... you were flagged for OW PvP. It was pretty much that simple. Anyone of the opposing faction could attack you when you were flagged. They did not have to be flagged. And you could not attack them until they became flagged. Which meant either they had to go find an opposing NPC and attack it, or they had to attack you. Basically, that meant they got the first blow no matter what.
Because there was this overwhelming sense of a lack of PvE content (of course there were always missions for randomly generated mobs), PvP was the more dominant feature. Add to this the Holocron craze (before the Aurillian Village) - only the highest lvl Imperial Troopers and Rebel Troopers dropped them... you could see how OW PvP was a huge part of the game.
But the fact still remains, as we both have said... it's a shame all of it was half-assed and broken lol.
Not even close
I never played the NGE SWG. I left the game shortly before the Combat upgrade so the NGE was still about a year away. I started playing shortly after bikes were introduced.
I did try out Jabba's Palace themepark but it was too buggy and the NPC interactions were a mess. They tried for some early instancing-like system and failed.
My guild was technically Rebel faction but it never seemed to be relevant. We did not bother with faction bases. City building, crafting and mission running was faction neutral. The group content like Geocian Caves was also faction neutral AFAIK. There just did not seem to be any reason to flag overt or even to attack faction NPCs.
PvP in pre-NGE SWG seemed just like something extra to do like decorating a house. I am sure people did it but it was trivial to avoid and the people I played with rarely bothered. The capital city on Tatooine supposedly was a major PvP battleground but It was not really noticable to people just passing through.
None of us bothered with the Hologrind so the Jedi vs BH PvP did not affect us. Toward the end of my time in SWG I tried the Jedi village missions whihc supposedly flagged you for PvP but I was never attacked by another player so it seemed like a moot point.
Maybe PvP was a major part of your playstyle in SWG but for my play group it was a trivial feature we did not bother with.
As to why OW PvP is conducive to the company? This is a good question that I think merits an explanation that has thus far been entirely avoided in this discussion.
Not every game needs OW PvP in the first place. As I've said, I don't expect anyone coming into an OW PvP game asking for rules that allow for no OW PvP. And the same is true the other way around.
<snip>.
In my opinion, OW PvP is never conducive to a company's best interests. The open world aspect invites the various ganking situations listed above. Ultimately, without restrictions on where the PvP activities can occur, this is tantamount to inviting people to stand around with pointy sticks and drive other customers away. Lost customers = lost revenue potential, no matter what the business model. So, the openness, the ability to engage in PvP anywhere without restriction, can never really be in a game's best interest unless the game is targeted for the niche hardcore PvP market.
I simply cannot see SOE restricting itself to such a limited potential market. They want to make obscene amounts of money with EQ Next. (It would not surprise me if SOE has already scheduled weekly meetings for its executives to roll in the previous week's profits; they do love their money.) I don't know that any premiere game company with an eye to fiscal responsibility could afford to cater to such a small portion of the gaming market. So, I'd suggest that small manufacturers are going to be the only providers for this niche segment for the foreseeable future.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
please please one of you FFA PVPers answer this ...
why does your fun take precedent over mine? who are you and why are you so special?
if i want to just explore, gather, build or just kill mobs why do you think you should have the right to kill me? what makes you so special that you can interrupt and downright ruin the fun that i was having?
Considering the size and diversity of todays MMO market it's completely unreasonable of anyone to insist that every game should have FFA PvP, or any PvP, or no PvP.
There are supporters for each of these, the full on open world, always on PvP crowd, the ones who want consensual PvP, and the crowd who want PvE only. Anyone who thinks all games have to conform to their ideal type is being selfish and small minded. These are the ones who post stuff like "If xyz game has no PvP I won't play it". Fine, don't play it, there's other games out there to suit you. Same applies to the people saying they won't play a game if it's FFA PvP.
There's plenty of scope for games to support each and every style and still maintain a healthy player base. These arguments are beyond rediculous and just sound like kids in the playground screaming me me me. If a game doesn't include a feature you insist on, then don't play it. It's really that simple.
So, what are your thoughts on this? Why must FFA or Always On PvP be universal or all encompassing?
Who says it has to be? One or 2 opinionated trolls here? Take a look around and see how many MMOs adopt the FFA in the whole world PvP model. Then look at how many don't. Which do you think is more popular?
You hang around here too long and you start to get a warped sense of what features MMO gamers really want. The short answer is that what is desired most around here is what doesn't exist and what's popular is what hasn't been released...even better if the pre-release is kept secret.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
There's plenty of scope for games to support each and every style and still maintain a healthy player base. These arguments are beyond rediculous and just sound like kids in the playground screaming me me me. If a game doesn't include a feature you insist on, then don't play it. It's really that simple.
I doubt that. Some style is so niche that you will never see any AAA development on it. FFA PvP is one of those.
Comments
Most probably yes. And most probably you could even mix it. But the game have to be build up accordingly. And there is not one game, which did it successfully or even tried it. As i said already, even in a FFA PvP environment we more or less only got EvE for that kind of experience.
But yes, i absolutely agree, the key is risk vs. reward, and not so much pvp or no pvp.
PS: Because UO changed a lot, and can not be counted towards it, and was nevertheless the first try to do something like that. And Darkfall lacks a lot of important features, like regional markets and things like that. It is much more just a big battleground with a few sandbox tools. So it is everything but perfect.
Asheron's call 1&2 it worked perfectly you had many pve servers few Kingdom vs Kingdom servers and one free for all pvp server called Darktide.
Im possitive developers can easly release game that have pve servers and FFA PVP servers.
I would tend to agree with you. However, that doesn't make for a very lively discussion.
Short of sending a message to the people I saw in the EQN threads espousing "nothing but PvP is the only way to do things", I don't know that I'm going to get a very good, general answer. I know why Darkfall doesn't have a PvE server, but with larger scale games like EQN, development shouldn't be hampered by having two server types. It seemed to work OK with UO, and nearly half of WoW's servers are PvP servers, so it is certainly possible.
Any Eve players want to chime in on why the solution to the Risk vs Reward system in Eve must be PvP? Keep in mind, I'm not saying it shouldn't. As I've said I think CCP did their job and did it well, but it seems like it would be possible to do nearly the same thing, but with PvE instead of PvP.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
About WoW and PvP servers.. it never really worked out. Open World pvp got never a lot of purpose or meaning.. so it was reduced to battlegrounds and arenas. And in that regard any simple multiplayer game is usually a lot better.
The same is true to UO.. they didn't solve the PvP - PvE problem. They switched more to pve, and added faction and guild wars, similar to DAoC into the game. But a lot of playstyles left out after the introduction of Trammel.
There is not a easy solution.. but that does not mean that there is no solution at all.
if he wanted to pvp in peace he wouldnt be in a ffa pvp game
There do exist people who try new games every day, without a full understanding of what they are getting into. That's why you get people who try Darkfall, and then ask about PvE servers. Darkfall might be their first MMO, or their first FFA PvP MMO, and they find that the sandbox aspects of the game are phenomenal, if only other players didn't stab them in the back while they were working on the mob with the cool AI.
Dismissing those players only works if there are a very small number of them. CCP had the same take on it as Adventurine, but they realized that they had a large audience of people who weren't that interested in PvP, and in order to keep the game from imploding on itself they implemented high sec space. Or they changed the rules for high sec space or something like that. I don't really remember. The point is, when you're talking about player preferences, it's the number of players that matter. The more players you have with a particular preference, the less dismissive you can be about that preference.
I'm not sure any of this is relevant to the topic at hand. It doesn't explain why some people hold the view that if there's going to be PvP in a game, it needs to be global, and always on. Is it just a preference, or is there some supporting logic that makes it a logical response to MMORPGs.
I'm going to assume this is a correct perception on my part, because nobody has said I'm wrong. These forums don't usually skip on pointing out how people have perceived things wrong. :-)
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
FFA world separate from PVE on a different server. This will give the devs even more freedom to design something else.
The solution is not to have global FFA open world pvp.
If there is not enough players who want it, there is really nothing you can do.
everyone bitches about how that system doesn't work, but it does as a game mechanic. afterall these are games not real life.
the typical complaint is that unflagged gamers can, (heavens forbid!), spy on them ... because we all know that there are never spies in the real world and that most spies in the real world never get caught. no, because that wouldn't allow them the wolf on sheep metaphor so wisely used earlier in this thread.
i am all for pvp, i play the hell outa some pvp games. but i would never even consider forcing someone to do something they don't want to do. and again our wolf and sheep analogy comes back, because in the end, these people do feel this way. they like to inflict at the minimum annoyance or at best emotional harm on other players they deem as sheep. other players are there for their enjoyment, non-pvp'rs are prey, they are npc's with slightly better AI.
its fascinating, because they often cry out that people be 'open minded', but most of them would never hear of actually respecting the wishes of others in a game.
(please keep in mind i am not referring to people who like to pvp, but rather those who want to see it forced on the overall gaming community.)
"There are at least two kinds of games.
One could be called finite, the other infinite.
A finite game is played for the purpose of winning,
an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play."
Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
I think you are bang on the money: Smedley is a big fan of eve. He'll ensure the pvp'ers have to do the fighting in these areas for stuff for other players to craft for pve content. Everyone can find content they want from carebears to gankers to rp'ers.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
these are horrid comparisons. once again an ffa pvp'r sees gamers as not wanting to work for things, as not wanting their games to be hard.
well a game can be quite difficult without pvp of any kind. he mentions world bosses, but then goes on to imply that these aren't the real challenge, the real challenge of course is his way of playing, of ffa pvp.
he then goes on to add that it is only reasonable that crafters be dependent for their only source for high level goods from the ffa pvp zone and the ffa pvp'rs.
huh.
what continues to disturb me the most is the complete blindness these people have to what gamers other than themselves actually want from a game, even a difficult game.
and why in the world should top world raiding guilds not get the same benefits that ffa pvp'rs get in resources or gear? why should someone who has poured hundreds of hours into harvesting and crafting not be equally rewarded for their hard work, just as an ffa pvp'r is?
i have always been sympathetic to ffa pvp'rs. they do deserve at least one game that is built to their general satisfaction. but this continued insistence that somehow the rest of the gaming community is not actually playing the way 'they should', or that the rest of the gaming community should somehow be dependent upon them for higher end rewards is ludicrous at best and ego-maniacal at worst.
quit being a game fascist. quit insisting that your way of playing should be the high end of gaming, that we should all be dependent upon you and the great rewards you earn for your playstyle.
because in the end, that's all this is: a playstyle. its not better. its not worse. its just a playstyle.
"There are at least two kinds of games.
One could be called finite, the other infinite.
A finite game is played for the purpose of winning,
an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play."
Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
You obviously didn't read my post, right?
i never read other people's posts.
seriously, if i have misread or misinterpreted you, then i apologize. but really the impression i got was exactly what i responded to.
and as for being sympathetic to ffa pvp'rs check my posts on this site.
"There are at least two kinds of games.
One could be called finite, the other infinite.
A finite game is played for the purpose of winning,
an infinite game for the purpose of continuing play."
Finite and Infinite Games, James Carse
I thought this post way back on Page 3 pretty accurately described the feelings of many PvE-type players. I will offer two more options, however.
3. The player is engaged in a fight versus a mob (or mobs) and someone comes along and kills them while they are occupied. The mob does most of the work for the PvP player, and the player fighting the mobs might not even notice they have been ganked. They PvE player's attention is on another fight, starts at a severely depleted state (health or mana or whatever) and have little or no chance against 2 opponents (the mob and the player).
4. The PvE player is resting/recovering from another fight, or is occupied with crafting or another non-combat proposition. They may not have their weapons out, and may have a different set of gear (with bonuses for crafting, for instance). The PvE player is a lesser combat threat because of their operations.
I could believe that most every low level player in an OW PvP suspects that someone is out there waiting or attempting to employ case #2 on them. And if this proves remotely true, these players' desire to play the game (i.e. pay money to play the game) could be severely lessened. So, how is OW PvP (either FFA or not) conducive to a company? It only enables a segment of in-game players to drive business away. The Open World aspect is the problem, not the PvP.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Good points.
As to why OW PvP is conducive to the company? This is a good question that I think merits an explanation that has thus far been entirely avoided in this discussion.
Not every game needs OW PvP in the first place. As I've said, I don't expect anyone coming into an OW PvP game asking for rules that allow for no OW PvP. And the same is true the other way around.
The problem with OW PvP is not really that these instances of ganking exist. The problem is that there isn't an active community participating in the OW PvP to begin with so that these issues of ganking do not go unpunished or are few and far between when compared against the bigger picture. I'll give you an example, again with SWTOR.
I was excited to play on the PvP-RP server because again, I enjoy both OW PvP and PvE. But I was especially excited about the OW PvP experience. I mean, for one... it's Star Wars. It only makes sense to have it. But I was sorely disappointed with the OW PvP experience at the end of the day. Why?
Because I was taking my memories from SWG into account when I created my expectations for SWTOR's OW PvP mechanic. SWG gave the player a legitimate reason to participate in OW PvP. SWTOR had absolutely no reason.
I remember it like it was yesterday - In SWG... people HATED the opposing faction. I'm not even kidding. The amount of trash talk that went on in that game on every single server every single day... it would make the kids of today commit suicide. They wouldn't have been able to handle it, I kid you not.
People had a reason to fight. They had to protect their homes. They had to protect their resources. They had to protect their own built bases. They had to win the war effort so that they could use the Spaceports in towns without mowing through a million NPC troops. People who didn't like to PvP still had an avenue in which they could contribute. They could harvest resources for the crafters who built the stuff that needed protecting. The OW PvP element in SWG was serious business, and it was the very heart of what made the game work. We didn't need quests - we had war. It's just a shame all of it was half-assed and broken.
The point is, OW PvP can create avenues for very exciting gameplay. It doesn't have to be a deterrent, and it doesn't have to be a gank fest.
Lazy Devs.
Flagged global worked in SWG. They didn't use it as a way to remove peoples houses from the map. They didn't use PvP to clean up their own lack of forward thinking. Later they added a pack up feature that did remove houses that weren't being used by active players but they never confused true PvP with garbage removal in their sandbox.
Funny enough, my experience from SWG was completely different. PVP and the factions did not really exist for me and my guild. We never flagged so for us the outcome of PvP never mattered. We moved around freely and were enjoying the PvE content. It's just a shame all of it was half-assed and broken.
Well... I suppose it would require further investigation. To be fair... SWG had 2 completely different game paradigms. There was pre NGE and post NGE.
NGE was all about giving players this Themepark experience. PvP worked a little bit differently in this time. You had to make yourself Overt, which meant you were OW PvP flagged.
I'm talking about way back from the beginning before NGE was ever a thought in someone's mind. Back then... we didn't really have PvE content. I mean, sure there were quests here and there, but nothing like what the NGE offered, and certainly nothing like what we experience in MMO's today. There were a few Themeparks, but again, they were nothing like what we see today. They were very short, and relatively easy depending on your character's build. They mostly focussed around specific Iconic characters, Han Solo, Luke, the Emporer, 3P0. They were not intended to carry you through levels from beginning to end.
Anyway, during this time, flagging happened a bit differently. You couldn't really avoid being flagged for PvP unless you completely avoided everything that had anything to do with a faction. And back then, there were factions for everything, and their level of interest and hate was tracked in your datapad.
Basically, if you attacked an Imperial Trooper or a Revel Trooper of any kind... you were flagged for OW PvP. It was pretty much that simple. Anyone of the opposing faction could attack you when you were flagged. They did not have to be flagged. And you could not attack them until they became flagged. Which meant either they had to go find an opposing NPC and attack it, or they had to attack you. Basically, that meant they got the first blow no matter what.
Because there was this overwhelming sense of a lack of PvE content (of course there were always missions for randomly generated mobs), PvP was the more dominant feature. Add to this the Holocron craze (before the Aurillian Village) - only the highest lvl Imperial Troopers and Rebel Troopers dropped them... you could see how OW PvP was a huge part of the game.
But the fact still remains, as we both have said... it's a shame all of it was half-assed and broken lol.
Not even close
I never played the NGE SWG. I left the game shortly before the Combat upgrade so the NGE was still about a year away. I started playing shortly after bikes were introduced.
I did try out Jabba's Palace themepark but it was too buggy and the NPC interactions were a mess. They tried for some early instancing-like system and failed.
My guild was technically Rebel faction but it never seemed to be relevant. We did not bother with faction bases. City building, crafting and mission running was faction neutral. The group content like Geocian Caves was also faction neutral AFAIK. There just did not seem to be any reason to flag overt or even to attack faction NPCs.
PvP in pre-NGE SWG seemed just like something extra to do like decorating a house. I am sure people did it but it was trivial to avoid and the people I played with rarely bothered. The capital city on Tatooine supposedly was a major PvP battleground but It was not really noticable to people just passing through.
None of us bothered with the Hologrind so the Jedi vs BH PvP did not affect us. Toward the end of my time in SWG I tried the Jedi village missions whihc supposedly flagged you for PvP but I was never attacked by another player so it seemed like a moot point.
Maybe PvP was a major part of your playstyle in SWG but for my play group it was a trivial feature we did not bother with.
In my opinion, OW PvP is never conducive to a company's best interests. The open world aspect invites the various ganking situations listed above. Ultimately, without restrictions on where the PvP activities can occur, this is tantamount to inviting people to stand around with pointy sticks and drive other customers away. Lost customers = lost revenue potential, no matter what the business model. So, the openness, the ability to engage in PvP anywhere without restriction, can never really be in a game's best interest unless the game is targeted for the niche hardcore PvP market.
I simply cannot see SOE restricting itself to such a limited potential market. They want to make obscene amounts of money with EQ Next. (It would not surprise me if SOE has already scheduled weekly meetings for its executives to roll in the previous week's profits; they do love their money.) I don't know that any premiere game company with an eye to fiscal responsibility could afford to cater to such a small portion of the gaming market. So, I'd suggest that small manufacturers are going to be the only providers for this niche segment for the foreseeable future.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
please please one of you FFA PVPers answer this ...
why does your fun take precedent over mine? who are you and why are you so special?
if i want to just explore, gather, build or just kill mobs why do you think you should have the right to kill me? what makes you so special that you can interrupt and downright ruin the fun that i was having?
Considering the size and diversity of todays MMO market it's completely unreasonable of anyone to insist that every game should have FFA PvP, or any PvP, or no PvP.
There are supporters for each of these, the full on open world, always on PvP crowd, the ones who want consensual PvP, and the crowd who want PvE only. Anyone who thinks all games have to conform to their ideal type is being selfish and small minded. These are the ones who post stuff like "If xyz game has no PvP I won't play it". Fine, don't play it, there's other games out there to suit you. Same applies to the people saying they won't play a game if it's FFA PvP.
There's plenty of scope for games to support each and every style and still maintain a healthy player base. These arguments are beyond rediculous and just sound like kids in the playground screaming me me me. If a game doesn't include a feature you insist on, then don't play it. It's really that simple.
To answer the OP's question:
It doesn't.
Who says it has to be? One or 2 opinionated trolls here? Take a look around and see how many MMOs adopt the FFA in the whole world PvP model. Then look at how many don't. Which do you think is more popular?
You hang around here too long and you start to get a warped sense of what features MMO gamers really want. The short answer is that what is desired most around here is what doesn't exist and what's popular is what hasn't been released...even better if the pre-release is kept secret.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
My contribution to threads like this:
To PVPers:
- Darkfall Unholly Wars
- Mortal Online
- Age of Wushu
- Lineage 2
- EVE
- Archeage (to be released)
- UO Forever
To PVEers:
- WoW
- SWTOR
- GW2
- Tera (PVE servers)
- TES Online (to be released)
- Rift
Have fun and be happy.
I doubt that. Some style is so niche that you will never see any AAA development on it. FFA PvP is one of those.