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 amount of people who settle for Instanced PvP Trash simply amazes me.

1679111218

Comments

  • Adam1902Adam1902 Posts: 520Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by mmoDAD

    When did players start to accept the fact that it's okay for PvP to be completely instanced?

    EverQuest II's 2006 Nagafen Server was a World PvP Server. It worked.

    SWG's PvP was World PvP. It worked.

     

    Ever since WoW, PvP has become pure trash. And to make matters worse, "World PvP" has become such a loose term that anything that isn't completely structured  is considered World PvP, e.g., SWTOR's Ilum - a dedicated area for PvP. This isn't World PvP. It's trash.

     

    Servers should go like this:

    Server #1 PvE (Optional Battlegrounds)

    Server #2 PvP (World PvP)

     

    I'll tell you why people waste time in these redundant battlegrounds. It's because they are so helpless and consumed with the damn carrot dangling in front of their faces. You want that little piece of reward that everyone will eventually have. It's boring. It's an embarrassment to the genre.

    I don't want to see anyone fail. However, it would be a lie to not say I enjoy watching these Instanced PvP games turn into failed FTP games.

    Don't think I could have said it better myself mate.

    I don't understand why people actually like all these meaningless instances in their MMOs. If I wanted "instanced PvP" I'd play an FPS - Where it's a level playing field and it takes more skill to play.

    Darkfall will satisfy both of those needs, for me atleast.

    _________
    Currently in casual mode!
    Playing: Few FPS games.

    Watching: Albion Online: Summer alpha was great, but the game seems to be progressing towards heavy instancing.

    Always hating on instances in MMOs! Open worlds, open PvP, territory control and housing please. More persistence, more fun.

  • Beatnik59Beatnik59 Chicago, ILPosts: 2,224Member Uncommon

    Nobody should be forced to PvP.  Let the gankers gank amongst themselves, just so long as they don't gank us.

    Nobody should be forced to buy crafted goods.  Let the crafters craft amongst themselves, just so long as we can loot our gear.

    Nobody should be forced to RP.  Let the RPers RP amongst themselves, just so long as we don't have to participate.

    Nobody should be forced to type.  Let the typers type to each other, just so long as we can group with voice users.

    Nobody should be forced to travel.  Let the travellers travel the long way, just so long as we can skip the travel and get to the quest.

    Nobody should be forced to accept a person into our guild.  Let them form their own guild, just so long as we don't have to take them.

    Nobody should be forced to team.  Let them team amongst each other, just so long as we can do their content solo.

    Nobody should be forced to grind.  Let the grinders grind, just so long as we can skip the grind (for a fee).

     

    Yeah, I've seen this kind of "nobody should be forced to" argument before.  It starts with the gankers.  It never ends with them.

    Every single one of the arguments used against gankers can be used against whatever you like to do.  And every argument against what you like to do can be justified the same way.

     

     

    __________________________
    "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

  • Asuran24Asuran24 St. pual, MNPosts: 517Member

    Open world pvp can be done in a mmo pve, or otherwise, if you make it that it do not make it largely a annoince, with little to no effect on the world or beneffit to the players engaging in it. Yeah a pvper will jsut pvp in ow-pvp for the hell of it, but people that are not hardcore into pvp will avoid it largely if it has little to no effect on them, and they are merely food/toys for the pvpers to play with. Ow-pvp needs to have a place, meaning, and most of all a reward for the players that engaging in it regardless of what type of player it is. Making ow-pvp only give players pvp rewards (gear, titles, an pvp content.) just makes the pve crowd that also populate the world see it as a worthless feature.

    Both pvp an pve content should feed into each other, making it that doing one, or the other actually effects, and also leads to opening of more content fro the other wise, which makes both sides actually benefit each other without actually having to fully interact in playstyles they do not like. Like opening up a pvp area for the players that like to pvp after the pve players take down a gate, or such, and then those pvping players when they finnally rest control of the new zone to their side it opens more content for the pve players to do (gathering, exploring, instances/raids, quests.), while the pvpers also gain acess to more items for their own style of play (thrru pvp, and pve play based on what you prefer.) while needing to even constantly keep control of a zone that is contested for ownership (never completely owned.).

    Also though i hate the idea of pve/pvp specific gear, oriented stats or such to pve or pvp is one thign, but making specific stats that only effect one side fo the game is wrong. While to me a good game that wants to do both pvp an pve in the open world side by side, needs a dual stat value system in place. The system would have two pairs of stats that influence an abiltie/attack based on if it is used in pvp, or pve, and so then you merely nerf/buff the stat/value of the ability in the apporate pvp/pve value set.  this way no more worrying about a nerf to an abiltiy in pvp, will directly affect that abiltiy in pve content, since the abilty is actually from the base level function on two different values based on the content you are in.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Adam1902
    Don't think I could have said it better myself mate.I don't understand why people actually like all these meaningless instances in their MMOs. If I wanted "instanced PvP" I'd play an FPS - Where it's a level playing field and it takes more skill to play.Darkfall will satisfy both of those needs, for me atleast.

    Why is it so hard to believe that there are people who don't like what you like? There are millions of people who read books that you probably don't like to read, millions of people who like to watch television shows that you don't like to watch...why is it so unbelievable that there are people who don't like the same PvP implementation that you like?

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • JakdstripperJakdstripper logan lake, BCPosts: 2,126Member Uncommon

    personally i like both.

    instanced pvp for when i'm alone and want an even numbered pvp battle with a little strategy thrown in the mix. easy to get into the action and not much lost either way. it's sort of like an arena where you pvp for sport more than anything. a mini game, sort of like a practice. 

     

    world pvp is a completely different beast. it's usually unfair, gank fest, and can be both splendid or horrid depending on an incredibly ammount of different factors. there is usually a lot of time wasted looking for a battle. it's really a crap shoot, but the main trend is that the zerg usually wins. Open world pvp works best with sandboxes where dieing usually costs you your gear.

     

    i agree that games should provide both, pve servers with instanced pvp, and pvp servers wiyhout instanced pvp (because if you have instanced pvp nobody bothers with world pvp).  i whould have multiple characters in each server.

     

     

  • Adam1902Adam1902 Posts: 520Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Beatnik59

    Nobody should be forced to PvP.  Let the gankers gank amongst themselves, just so long as they don't gank us.

    Nobody should be forced to buy crafted goods.  Let the crafters craft amongst themselves, just so long as we can loot our gear.

    Nobody should be forced to RP.  Let the RPers RP amongst themselves, just so long as we don't have to participate.

    Nobody should be forced to type.  Let the typers type to each other, just so long as we can group with voice users.

    Nobody should be forced to travel.  Let the travellers travel the long way, just so long as we can skip the travel and get to the quest.

    Nobody should be forced to accept a person into our guild.  Let them form their own guild, just so long as we don't have to take them.

    Nobody should be forced to team.  Let them team amongst each other, just so long as we can do their content solo.

    Nobody should be forced to grind.  Let the grinders grind, just so long as we can skip the grind (for a fee).

     

    Yeah, I've seen this kind of "nobody should be forced to" argument before.  It starts with the gankers.  It never ends with them.

    Every single one of the arguments used against gankers can be used against whatever you like to do.  And every argument against what you like to do can be justified the same way.

     

     

    People with this mentality just don't understand what an MMORPG is in its traditional sense. It's supposed to be a living, breathing persistant world. People should be able to effect (in a negative, or positive way) one another with their actions.

    These mindsets shouldn't be playing these games, and should instead be on single player or regular multiplayer ones instead of encouraging more lazy developers to limit our worlds to even more linear gameplay. -sigh-

    I have my home in Darkfall. Where people like this spend half their time in-game as a mangled, looted corpse propped up against a tree. -grin-

    _________
    Currently in casual mode!
    Playing: Few FPS games.

    Watching: Albion Online: Summer alpha was great, but the game seems to be progressing towards heavy instancing.

    Always hating on instances in MMOs! Open worlds, open PvP, territory control and housing please. More persistence, more fun.

  • dreamscaperdreamscaper Somewhere, NCPosts: 1,582Member Uncommon

    I imagine it's because the demographic clamoring for instanced PVP where everything is level consists of mainly the teenage crowd - adults realize that not everything in life is fair, nor should it be.

     

    I'm not a large fan of pvp myself, but overall I would say I prefer Aion's model, back before they nerfed the begeezus out of the rifts.

    <3

  • FearumFearum Cinnaminson, NJPosts: 1,166Member Uncommon
    When done right it could be great, no game has been able to do it though. Not everyone wants PvP all the time, if they did Darkfall would have been a success, we will see how long they can hold onto the players after the new game update finally comes out. Until then I have to agree, Ive never been a fan of the e sport type pvp in mmorpg games, but zoned areas like in GW2 are more enjoyable but still wish they were bigger with more stuff to do within them. TESO is what I'am looking forward too with Cyrodiil being a very large area with PvP, PvE and open dungeons all while being an option to join with the PvE only area seperate. But we will see.
  • Laughing-manLaughing-man Dublin, OHPosts: 3,415Member Uncommon

    World PVP = Griefing.  

    Its as simple as that, you can argue the value of it all day long but 90% of the time all you will encounter in a game with open world PVP is griefing. 

     

  • VorthanionVorthanion Laguna Vista, TXPosts: 2,117Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Adam1902
    Originally posted by Beatnik59

    Nobody should be forced to PvP.  Let the gankers gank amongst themselves, just so long as they don't gank us.

    Nobody should be forced to buy crafted goods.  Let the crafters craft amongst themselves, just so long as we can loot our gear.

    Nobody should be forced to RP.  Let the RPers RP amongst themselves, just so long as we don't have to participate.

    Nobody should be forced to type.  Let the typers type to each other, just so long as we can group with voice users.

    Nobody should be forced to travel.  Let the travellers travel the long way, just so long as we can skip the travel and get to the quest.

    Nobody should be forced to accept a person into our guild.  Let them form their own guild, just so long as we don't have to take them.

    Nobody should be forced to team.  Let them team amongst each other, just so long as we can do their content solo.

    Nobody should be forced to grind.  Let the grinders grind, just so long as we can skip the grind (for a fee).

     

    Yeah, I've seen this kind of "nobody should be forced to" argument before.  It starts with the gankers.  It never ends with them.

    Every single one of the arguments used against gankers can be used against whatever you like to do.  And every argument against what you like to do can be justified the same way.

     

     

    People with this mentality just don't understand what an MMORPG is in its traditional sense. It's supposed to be a living, breathing persistant world. People should be able to effect (in a negative, or positive way) one another with their actions.

    These mindsets shouldn't be playing these games, and should instead be on single player or regular multiplayer ones instead of encouraging more lazy developers to limit our worlds to even more linear gameplay. -sigh-

    I have my home in Darkfall. Where people like this spend half their time in-game as a mangled, looted corpse propped up against a tree. -grin-

    Affecting people positively is good for business, it's the negative thing that ruins it for everyone but the griefers.  It's been proven over and over again in past games, which has led the industry to optional PvP and a much greater emphasis on instance PvP.  It has also culminated in the ultimate PvE mechanics such as shared credit for kills, shared resource nodes, phasing for boss mobs and so forth.  You see, the genre has learned its lessons, while people like you willfully ignore them.

    image
  • Asuran24Asuran24 St. pual, MNPosts: 517Member

    Also an mmo is a game, that is played for the enjoyment of the paying customer, and so what it was traditionally does not matter in the least. The devs, company, and shareholders are out to make money, and if they make a great product in the process that is great, but in the end it is a form of entertainement  that is funded by the money of players that enjoy using it. Mmos stopped being about what most people think of as traditional quite some time ago, and started focusing on being games of entertainment, which has worked pretty well. Only a small minority of players in the grand scheme of things are not playing, or finding things they enjoy in the games.

    An  got to say i find people tlaking about being hardcore in pvp, or pve games kinda funny, and yet also really quite sad. They really think it is that hard, or even meaningful to label yourself as "ardcore" For playing in a video game regardless of what style you play. Get over yourself an enjoy your style of play, and learn to be humble in knowing your enjoying yourself, over thinking just because you prefer another form of enterainment to another person it makes you any more or less of anything to them.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Adam1902
     

    People with this mentality just don't understand what an MMORPG is in its traditional sense. It's supposed to be a living, breathing persistant world. People should be able to effect (in a negative, or positive way) one another with their actions.

    Don't confuse understanding with rejecting. There is nothing sacred of what MMO is suppose to be. It is just a trial starting back in 1995. If some ideas (like world pvp) do not resonate with players, why not get rid of them. After all, MMOs are entertainment products.

    In fact, people should not be free to affect others, if that make the experience bad. Case in point, ninjaing. Blizz is now rolling individual loot in LFR .. meaning you cannot affect whether the other person is getting an item. Same system in Diablo 3. You roll your own loot. Thus, there is LESS interaction between players. It is a good thing if it makes everyone's (or just a majority) gameplay experience better.

    These mindsets shouldn't be playing these games, and should instead be on single player or regular multiplayer ones instead of encouraging more lazy developers to limit our worlds to even more linear gameplay. -sigh-

    Shoulnt' be playing these games? That is the height of arrogance. Consumers should be able to play any game they see fit, and vote with their wallet. It is, after all, not a necessity of life. And in fact, it is not that people should not play MMOs with these mindset .. it is the devs WANT to include players with these mindsets.

    So MMOs are transformed to accomodate these mindset. Let me put it this way ... i will only play a game on my terms. If a MMO devs want me to play his game, it better make a good experience for me, and my mindset. And i highly doubt you decide what mindset of players MMO devs should go after.

    I have my home in Darkfall. Where people like this spend half their time in-game as a mangled, looted corpse propped up against a tree. -grin-

    See . you have your game, and play by your own mind set. I will do the same. By the description, Darkfall is a game i won't enjoy, and i will play those games (D3, MH, PS2, DCUO ..) that i will enjoy.

     

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Nari
    I see you like planetside 2.

    Now, imagine if when they first made wow, they had azeroth and kalimdor as is but also had a 3rd continent that played like ps2.

    Wouldn't that have been so much bloody better than pretending to be playing a round of quake in warsong gulch.
  • TorikTorik London, ONPosts: 2,343Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Nari
    I see you like planetside 2.

    Now, imagine if when they first made wow, they had azeroth and kalimdor as is but also had a 3rd continent that played like ps2.

    Wouldn't that have been so much bloody better than pretending to be playing a round of quake in warsong gulch.

    Isn't Planetside just a scaled up version of a battleground?

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    No
    It's fully persistent, zero instancing.

    If you think daoc without the pve and with fps mechanics. The rules are very simmilar to rvr, except no relics or darkness falls.
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Nari
    I see you like planetside 2.

    Now, imagine if when they first made wow, they had azeroth and kalimdor as is but also had a 3rd continent that played like ps2.

    Wouldn't that have been so much bloody better than pretending to be playing a round of quake in warsong gulch.

    And they tried to do that with WG, with great success.

    At the same time, LOL is also a great success .. so you can't say a round of quake in warsong gulch is not a good thing.

    Now i would not oppose to a whole continent of PS2 style warfare in WOW or any other game but it has to be well done. PS2 is fun, not just because it is open zone large warfare, but also combat design, vehicle comabt, and a thousand other things. In fact, my take is that PS2, at least to me, will be same kind of fun, as long as it is big, even if it is instanced.

    The fact that it is one same world is not that important to me. The key ingrediants are a) combat, and b) large scale.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Torik
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Nari
    I see you like planetside 2.

    Now, imagine if when they first made wow, they had azeroth and kalimdor as is but also had a 3rd continent that played like ps2.

    Wouldn't that have been so much bloody better than pretending to be playing a round of quake in warsong gulch.

    Isn't Planetside just a scaled up version of a battleground?

    Depends on your definition of a BG. It is ongoing ... and never reset. So that may be a difference. But other than that, it is pretty much a huge battleground, and you can port to several point instantly.

    It does have a building/area capture mechanic, but it is not much different than the standard BG capture in WOW.

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    No but they didn't do it with lake wintergrasp, because

    A) blizzard are absolutely bloody obsessed with shoving everything on a bloody timer,making it in effect a battleground in disguise rather than a rvr area.
    B) they couldn't make the rewards too good or all the raiders would beef.
    C) its tiny in comparison to a planetside continent or daoc frontiers or heck even WvW.
  • ZigZagsZigZags Modesto, CAPosts: 328Member
    Originally posted by Purutzil

    feel instanced PvP is a great thing. Open World PvP is just a gank fest and lets face it, something that is just about taking advantage of another player often times who stands no chance. Its a far less 'fair' match which Instanced PvP is able to deliver.

    Instanced PvP is not a gank fest to you?

     

    In arena style pvp you're more likely to rack up dozens of deaths in 15 minutes than you are in an open world environment.

     

    MMO's to me are supposed to be WORLDS! and in the world sometimes you're out numbered, so you are required to improvise, adapt and conquer.

     

    MMOs should not be arcade games which is what instance PVP is. An arcade game.

    Now: Skyrim
    Later: ?
    Played: M59, UO, EQ, Runescape, DAOC, SB, EQ2, WoW, EVE, Darkfall, AoC, FFXI, FFXIV, WAR, SWTOR
    BOYCOTTING: EA/BioWare/Origin/SOE

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    No but they didn't do it with lake wintergrasp, because A) blizzard are absolutely bloody obsessed with shoving everything on a bloody timer,making it in effect a battleground in disguise rather than a rvr area.B) they couldn't make the rewards too good or all the raiders would beef.C) its tiny in comparison to a planetside continent or daoc frontiers or heck even WvW.

    Look at the target audience. They could could certainly create an entire continent dedicated to PS style game play, but they couldn't fill it with people.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • Asuran24Asuran24 St. pual, MNPosts: 517Member

    First instanced pvp really cann't be a gank, since you know what is coming, even if you are fighting another player when a rogue pops out. You went into teh bg to pvp alone, no pve'ing really, where as in the open world you could be doing anythgin other than pvping, and then get jumped/ganked by a pvper without any desire/want to pvp at the time.  Alot of the time i see bgs as grudgefests, since i see so many players tunnel-vision after someone that killed them like they had a grudge against them or their class.

    Also a great way of looking at instanced pvp in mmos is as fallows. It is like when some people go into a resturant order a steak, mash patatos, and some veggies, but ask that the mashed patatos be placed on another plate, or even that the steake be placed oon a seperate plate. It is not like they hate steak or patatos, but more that they might not want the juice from the steak ruining there mash patatos, or veggies flavor. Yet also they do not want to have to sit thru three seatings to enjoy all three things, instead they place them on their own plate to allow them to enjoy each in it's own time, while also being able to transverse between each if they desire to.  In this way you can say that to them instanced pvp preserves the flavor of pvp and the rest of the game for them, while open world pvp allows the rest of the game to sour the flavor of pvp an pvp sour the rest of the game's content too.

    Also it is not so much that blizzard has a thing for timers, but that the wow crowd/playerbase like to know where they shoudl be, and how long till they can partake in the content again. Yet they do not want to feel liek they have to forego one set of content always to do the other content. Knowing that in 30 mins (for example) the zone become contested, and that your raid comes off cool down in 25 mins, allows the player to make the choice prior to an isue happening, While also allowing them to not have to treat a game as a job, but as a game for entertainment they can just enter into when their entertain is availible, and then leave when it goes away.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    No but they didn't do it with lake wintergrasp, because

    A) blizzard are absolutely bloody obsessed with shoving everything on a bloody timer,making it in effect a battleground in disguise rather than a rvr area.
    B) they couldn't make the rewards too good or all the raiders would beef.
    C) its tiny in comparison to a planetside continent or daoc frontiers or heck even WvW.

    a) true. WG does reset.

    b) the size of reward is moot. PS2 does not have good rewards. Early certs can be quite slow. But that is not the point of the game. The point (for me) is to headshot someone else when they are not suspecting it.

    c) It is large enough to have a taste although of course it is no where close to the size of PS2.

    On the other hand, they do have vehicle combat and structure control. Those two ideas are not new to PS2.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Asuran24

    Also it is not so much that blizzard has a thing for timers, but that the wow crowd/playerbase like to know where they shoudl be, and how long till they can partake in the content again. Yet they do not want to feel liek they have to forego one set of content always to do the other content. Knowing that in 30 mins (for example) the zone become contested, and that your raid comes off cool down in 25 mins, allows the player to make the choice prior to an isue happening, While also allowing them to not have to treat a game as a job, but as a game for entertainment they can just enter into when their entertain is availible, and then leave when it goes away.

    I suppose the point is the PS2 has nothing but pvp .. so a timer is not needed, while WOW player can and often do other stuff too. So a timer is more useful.

  • Asuran24Asuran24 St. pual, MNPosts: 517Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Asuran24

    Also it is not so much that blizzard has a thing for timers, but that the wow crowd/playerbase like to know where they shoudl be, and how long till they can partake in the content again. Yet they do not want to feel liek they have to forego one set of content always to do the other content. Knowing that in 30 mins (for example) the zone become contested, and that your raid comes off cool down in 25 mins, allows the player to make the choice prior to an isue happening, While also allowing them to not have to treat a game as a job, but as a game for entertainment they can just enter into when their entertain is availible, and then leave when it goes away.

    I suppose the point is the PS2 has nothing but pvp .. so a timer is not needed, while WOW player can and often do other stuff too. So a timer is more useful.

     Yea so really the time would be redundent in ps. Too many players make ot seem like hat devs/companies seem to make changes, or choices in the game design in a vaccum, when many times the choices (weither you like them, or not.) made are actually coming from feed-back, and trends in the game at large.

  • maplestonemaplestone Ottawa, ONPosts: 3,099Member

    As a non-PvPer, the one thing that I enjoyed in Eve was the news.  The slowly-shifting strategic balance between various player factions and empires gave the game a texture, gave the economy moods and a added a sense of purpose to all the grinds.  That slow mutation of the large-scale state of the game is something that battlegrounds don't give, 

    (That said, I'm not currently playing Eve - as much as I liked the news and shifting obstacles/opportunities, I'm not interesting in being live target practice)

Sign In or Register to comment.