Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

The worst arguments against FFA PVP

167891012»

Comments

  • bunnyhopperbunnyhopper LondonPosts: 2,751Member
    Originally posted by Ehliya
      Old UO had to create Trammel because the griefers were impacting their business model.
     

    The figures show UO growing continuously throughout the entire pre Tram period.

     

    Actually ignore that, it is so far off topic it doesn't matter :)

     

    "Come and have a look at what you could have won."

  • Beatnik59Beatnik59 Chicago, ILPosts: 2,238Member Uncommon

    I don't consider myself a "ganker," although I do enjoy the occasional PvP scrum once in awhile.

    Nevertheless, I support "world-PvP," "non-consensual" or "flagged eligible" PvP, and--dare I say--"ganks."

    The reason I do is because, even though I--personally--don't play the games to "gank," I realize that this is fun for someone, so who am I to dictate that a person can't enjoy their playstyle?

    See, all the arguments that I've heard against the "ganker" playstyle can--and has--been applied to every other playstyle.  Believe me, because I've been in the trenches of the "great playstyle wars" of the early to middle 2000s, where we pseudo-intellectualized entire playstyles as "wrong" and "irrelevant." 

    See, gankers were the easiest players to dismiss, but they weren't the last players.  And arguments kept on coming out against other playstyles, based on the logic that if a feature isn't something I like, it shouldn't be a feature.

    "Nobody likes being forced to PvP, so make it so nobody is forced to PvP."  Result: you marginalize the ganker's place in the world.

    "Nobody likes being forced to go to the crafter, so make it so nobody is forced to go to the crafter."  Result: you marginalize the crafter's place in the world.

    "Nobody likes being forced to travel, so make it so nobody is forced to travel."  Result: you marginalize the explorer's place in the world.

    "Nobody likes being forced to roleplay, so make it so nobody is forced to roleplay."  Result: you marginalize the roleplayer's place in the world.

    And it goes on and on and on.  But the sum result of all these requests didn't make systems better.  It removed systems altogether.  It removed all the diverse notions of fun that made this genre unique, that made MMORPG players the most cosmopolitan and diverse community that software entertainment had ever known.

    See, I support open-world, non-consensual PvP for the same reasons I support roleplay, crafting, exploration, raids: they all--in their own ways--create a robust and diverse player community.

    So, gankers.  I support your PvP.  I'll subject myself to your ganks from time to time.  But, you ought to promise me something.

    Promise me you'll act in character sometimes to maintain immersion.  Take immersion seriously, and know you have to do your part to maintain it.  Don't go running off to the buffbot or lootbot to twink your toon out.  Become a citizen of the game, not just of your guild.  Support player crafting, decay, and all of the things that are needed for a robust game for your non-combat players.  Don't ask for travel times or downtime to be nerfed, simply because it's more convenient for you.

    We're all in this together.  Because unless we all put up with things we don't necessarily understand or like, we shouldn't be surprised when the developers take away the things we do like.

    __________________________
    "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
    --Arcken

    "...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
    --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.

    "It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
    --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE

  • rungardrungard st. john''s, NFPosts: 1,035Member
    Originally posted by Beatnik59

    I don't consider myself a "ganker," although I do enjoy the occasional PvP scrum once in awhile.

    Nevertheless, I support "world-PvP," "non-consensual" or "flagged eligible" PvP, and--dare I say--"ganks."

    The reason I do is because, even though I--personally--don't play the games to "gank," I realize that this is fun for someone, so who am I to dictate that a person can't enjoy their playstyle?

    See, all the arguments that I've heard against the "ganker" playstyle can--and has--been applied to every other playstyle.  Believe me, because I've been in the trenches of the "great playstyle wars" of the early to middle 2000s, where we pseudo-intellectualized entire playstyles as "wrong" and "irrelevant." 

    See, gankers were the easiest players to dismiss, but they weren't the last players.  And arguments kept on coming out against other playstyles, based on the logic that if a feature isn't something I like, it shouldn't be a feature.

    "Nobody likes being forced to PvP, so make it so nobody is forced to PvP."  Result: you marginalize the ganker's place in the world.

    "Nobody likes being forced to go to the crafter, so make it so nobody is forced to go to the crafter."  Result: you marginalize the crafter's place in the world.

    "Nobody likes being forced to travel, so make it so nobody is forced to travel."  Result: you marginalize the explorer's place in the world.

    "Nobody likes being forced to roleplay, so make it so nobody is forced to roleplay."  Result: you marginalize the roleplayer's place in the world.

    And it goes on and on and on.  But the sum result of all these requests didn't make systems better.  It removed systems altogether.  It removed all the diverse notions of fun that made this genre unique, that made MMORPG players the most cosmopolitan and diverse community that software entertainment had ever known.

    See, I support open-world, non-consensual PvP for the same reasons I support roleplay, crafting, exploration, raids: they all--in their own ways--create a robust and diverse player community.

    So, gankers.  I support your PvP.  I'll subject myself to your ganks from time to time.  But, you ought to promise me something.

    Promise me you'll act in character sometimes to maintain immersion.  Take immersion seriously, and know you have to do your part to maintain it.  Don't go running off to the buffbot or lootbot to twink your toon out.  Become a citizen of the game, not just of your guild.  Support player crafting, decay, and all of the things that are needed for a robust game for your non-combat players.  Don't ask for travel times or downtime to be nerfed, simply because it's more convenient for you.

    We're all in this together.  Because unless we all put up with things we don't necessarily understand or like, we shouldn't be surprised when the developers take away the things we do like.

     I fully agree. You have to have it all. You cant simply dismiss playstyles and segregate them ...you need to find the appropiate rules that will allow everyone to coexist. There are ways to make every playstyle work together, whether its crafting, roleplaying, pvping, pveing, and raiding. This doesnt mean that everyone gets exactly what they want.

    though i wouldnt trust the gankers to do the right thing no more than the raiders, i would ensure that the games ruleset is strong enough to ensure coexistance.

    image

  • snapfusionsnapfusion San, CAPosts: 954Member
    Ive got the best argument there is, I dont like it, and for me thats all that matters.  But nice wall of text just the same.
  • SimphanaticSimphanatic Marion, IAPosts: 92Member

    Characterizing "ganking" as a playstyle is like calling serial murder a career choice.

     

    Many times already, in this thread and others, I've advocated for FFA PvP, and that does include ganking. But I reiterate vehemently that PvP and all its attendant flavors must be integrated into the game world. Those who make a choice to randomly attack others, whether singly or in groups, must suffer consequences for their actions. At the very least, absent player-driven justice systems, bounties should be generated and the random PvP'ers/gankers become the hunted. Without some form of regulation, the game will devolve to a bunch of shitheads roaming about attacking weaker players and the game will ultimately fail.

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Re beatnicks excellent post about playstyles.

    It strikes me the instanced pveers mostly won looking at the big mmos (bar eve and gw2)

    But they ironic thing is they don't actually need a mmo to enjoy their playstyle.

    Imagine a game, its like wow but..
    You don't need to level, you start at max level with green gear.
    Theres no open world at all.
    When you log in, you are put in an instanced city.
    From there you can form groups and what have you to go do dungeons, which you just teleport to.
    There's some sort of leaderboard that shows progress of guilds and what have you.

    As a b2p game, that occasionally released new dungeons and raids, some free, some dlc. Such a game would probably be a big success. For those that like dungeons it would cut out all the "boring" leveling and exploring bits.
  • CalmOceansCalmOceans BergenPosts: 2,273Member

    This is why PVE and PVP are split, no one agrees and the two don't mix.

    People can't agree on a forum, let alone in an actual game.

  • CecropiaCecropia Posts: 3,472Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    This is why PVE and PVP are split, no one agrees and the two don't mix.

    People can't agree on a forum, let alone in an actual game.

    EVE online would like a word with you.

    A symbiotic relationship between PVE and PVP is probably one of the most important aspects that the majority of mmos severely lack.

    "Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb

  • rungardrungard st. john''s, NFPosts: 1,035Member
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    This is why PVE and PVP are split, no one agrees and the two don't mix.

    People can't agree on a forum, let alone in an actual game.

     wrong. Most of us agree that for openworld pvp you need a strong ruleset in place to prevent unwanted activities such as greifing, and most also agree that unwanted activities exist in all playstyles.

    image

  • DuluDulu Orange Park, FLPosts: 57Member
    Originally posted by Beatnik59

    I don't consider myself a "ganker," although I do enjoy the occasional PvP scrum once in awhile.

    Nevertheless, I support "world-PvP," "non-consensual" or "flagged eligible" PvP, and--dare I say--"ganks."

    The reason I do is because, even though I--personally--don't play the games to "gank," I realize that this is fun for someone, so who am I to dictate that a person can't enjoy their playstyle?

    See, all the arguments that I've heard against the "ganker" playstyle can--and has--been applied to every other playstyle.  Believe me, because I've been in the trenches of the "great playstyle wars" of the early to middle 2000s, where we pseudo-intellectualized entire playstyles as "wrong" and "irrelevant." 

    See, gankers were the easiest players to dismiss, but they weren't the last players.  And arguments kept on coming out against other playstyles, based on the logic that if a feature isn't something I like, it shouldn't be a feature.

    "Nobody likes being forced to PvP, so make it so nobody is forced to PvP."  Result: you marginalize the ganker's place in the world.

    "Nobody likes being forced to go to the crafter, so make it so nobody is forced to go to the crafter."  Result: you marginalize the crafter's place in the world.

    "Nobody likes being forced to travel, so make it so nobody is forced to travel."  Result: you marginalize the explorer's place in the world.

    "Nobody likes being forced to roleplay, so make it so nobody is forced to roleplay."  Result: you marginalize the roleplayer's place in the world.

    And it goes on and on and on.  But the sum result of all these requests didn't make systems better.  It removed systems altogether.  It removed all the diverse notions of fun that made this genre unique, that made MMORPG players the most cosmopolitan and diverse community that software entertainment had ever known.

    See, I support open-world, non-consensual PvP for the same reasons I support roleplay, crafting, exploration, raids: they all--in their own ways--create a robust and diverse player community.

    So, gankers.  I support your PvP.  I'll subject myself to your ganks from time to time.  But, you ought to promise me something.

    Promise me you'll act in character sometimes to maintain immersion.  Take immersion seriously, and know you have to do your part to maintain it.  Don't go running off to the buffbot or lootbot to twink your toon out.  Become a citizen of the game, not just of your guild.  Support player crafting, decay, and all of the things that are needed for a robust game for your non-combat players.  Don't ask for travel times or downtime to be nerfed, simply because it's more convenient for you.

    We're all in this together.  Because unless we all put up with things we don't necessarily understand or like, we shouldn't be surprised when the developers take away the things we do like.

     

     

     

    Excellent post. Everyone should read.

167891012»
Sign In or Register to comment.