Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Why PVP scares some people?
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
Maybe i have chosen wrong the term (English is not my native language). When i said "scared", i dint mean something like the "dread" of horror movies, but only the "mistrust" or "dismay" that some people seens to demonstrate and speak when knowing that some game will have no-restricted pvp.
Item 2
Item 1, same as the next post...
I was not wanting to defend gank or even OWPvP, but only try to explain the ultimate or "deep" causes to the aversion of some people to the pvp compared to the pve.
PVE AI characters only stay in their spots waiting to be butchered like livestock in the pasture. I DONT see any "fun" in doing this forever (except in the start, when the game is new and have good fight mechanics). I only butcher the AI controled weak/passive/dumb characters to obtain things to become stronger to the PVP, never by the sake of the pve itself.
I don't think this is an issue with the rules of the games, it's a problem with the community. I've seen this development with my own eyes. Back in the days people had balls and some sportmanship today peoples sole intention is to be assholes, because apparently that's cool.
Take WoW for instance, a real cesspool in that regard. I experience so much shit playing that game something I never encountered in DAoC. Open PvP in WoW and many other games today net you nothing, not a single fucking thing. Whenever I wanted to fight someone in the open I did the following: Wait for the to kill the mob they are fighting, let the regen health and mana and then approach and attack. I have honor, people had honor before, but the don't today.
Try playing a game of Dota/hon/LoL, biggest cesspool in the history of gaming, such an obnoxious and disgusting community. I remember the days when saying "good fight" or "GG" meant something positive, today it's seems to be considered an insult.
So shitty sportsmanship from PvPers is probably the main reason PvE players don't want to partiticipate. And it's not like winning is going to satisfy them either [mod edit]. If I see that someone can't beat me in PvP I'm not going to bother, what's the point when you don't even get a challenge out of it?
You forgot to quote the "in equal conditions", written in the second line of the paragraph.
The mismatch of levels is discussed in item 1. Is a wrong thing, but i think the players wouldn't complain much if a AI controlled stronger monster would wander the land killing people, but would do the logic thing: flee/dodge/avoid the threat, report and ask for help from stronger players.
All the answers fits the itens exposed in the text (i am still in page 5, i will still read the others). A interesting fact about the gank is the difference between WoW (a paradigm of the themepark mmo pve focused) with Lineage 2 (a mmo famous be its free pvp): in WoW, althought half of the server cant kill you, a lv 85 can kill a lv 1 with TOTAL impunity! In L2, is VERY risky a high level PK a player with lower lv because of a karma (bigger in proportion to the lv disparity) that can make him drops his gear that took months to get.
So, paradoxically, WoW is more "gank-friendly" than L2 althougt hasn't FFA pvp.
The example of WoW can "obscure" the mind of most people about ganking, because is RARE a mmo where gank is so unpunished as in WoW.
MMOs that try to simulate a "realistic" political and social enviroment needs open pvp. PVP with predefined factions took from the players the control of who is friend/ally or enemy, which damages the political/social/diplomatic challenge. Sandboxes have much resources in the OW that need to be disputed. They could do a "siege system" to all of them (including a mob spot), but the amount of disputable resources is so huge that is easier let the pvp open and free.
The idea of a character lv decreasing to fits each zone pleases me. A other good idea is creating a system that allows two lv 20 players fight one lv 40 with equal chances. The mmos today has a system where twenty lv 10 cant kill one lv 50, this is illogical and bad.
Unchallenging?? Really??
PVE can be every bit as challenging as PVP can be.. Just like knitting can be challenging.. I dare you to knit a sweater with a 99% accurate WOW logo and tell me it isn't challenging.. It's all about what kind of a challenge you want!!
But what i really got from reading your post is that you are calling PVE'rs lame, docile cattle, who can do nothing except eat whatever is put in front of them.. While the PVP'rs are the real gamers, who got the skills and can make/get their on rewards..
I'm sorry, but this just sounds like another way to boost the PVP epeen to me..
- SvendSvin
PVP in games really cannot be compared to real life, while we are a warlike species with a varnish of civility real life death and murder consequences and issues both moral and psychological no one should even try to call any pvp system in any game realistic.
PVP in most games is not and never can be balanced developers just can not come up with a balanced system because pvpers also fall into different categories like the below example
Honor: those who prefer 1v1, who are all about the challenge and skill of taking down an equal oponent, they would never break into your house or fight you while you sleep/eat/drink/craft, it is all about good fights, hell those kind of pvpers are the ones who will give you advice afterwards on how better to fight them.
Unfortunately as we all know the above type of pvper is in the absolute minority, no pvp game has ever been able to counter the "griefer" the "bully" the "zerg" because it is a way of thinking not something you can put rules in place to stop.
Games have no consquence for killing another player, you don't log of and wonder about his family, you don't wash your hands 50 times to try and remove the itchiness and you damn well don't see that person die every time you close your eyes.
In games it is just a game and that sadly to a lot of people allows them to act as shitty and nasty as possible without ever feeling it, pvp is like the ultimate outlet for people like that and it is why a lot of people avoid pvp games.
Understand though, I am not scared of pvp indifferent to it, I enjoy pvp myself in EVE but I do understand why so many do not enjoy it.
You made a complete mess and mixed things, lets by parts:
Is ilogical a lv 20 can kill a lv 50, but is logical THREE lv 20 kill ONE lv 50. The idea is to allow a "zerg" of low lvs to have good chances againts one or few high lvs. This makes complete sense. The union makes the strenght.
The lv fitting to the zone would only decrease, never increase. A low lv couldn't enter a higher zone and have his lv increased, but a high lv would have his decreased if enters a lower zone. This would keep the progression and need to level characters while avoiding the unfair gank. What a high lv wants to do in a low lv zone?
that's why there are pvp and pve servers.
people join pvp servers tho and then complain about being killed. prob explained. as always: pebiac.
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
Knitting is not challenging, is only toilsome and prolonged. The only challenge is on learning, after this, some people can knit with closed eyes.
In most cases, PVP is harder and challenging than PVE, but not all people wants challenge in a mmo or any game, and i respect that.
But the challenge dont comes only from the pvp fight itself, it also comes from political, social, diplomatic and economic enviromnent that a mmo full of disputable resources allows.
That is other thing that i dont get to understand.
I disagree with # 2
PVP in most MMO's is 70% gear stats 20% player skill, and 10% class. I love PVP but I prefer my PVP in the form of FPS games, where there is real tacticas involved. Which is another beef I have with MMO pvp, its all hotbar spamming. MMO PVP is nothing but 1 big joke.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI
Virtual world will never be like real life, even with permadeath, but i cant see how this prevents ANY type of deterrence to grief.
Is very simple: penaltys should be proportional to the crimes. In real life, a murderer can be killed or jailed to life. In a mmo, a kill make the victim lose xp, itens or time (ie: time), so the penalty is make the killer lose time too (imprisonement, loss of itens or xp).
That is sufficiente to zero the griefs? no, but is sufficient to avoid its ocurrence in a lamount that damages the game. Same in real life penaltys.
In the second line you can read "in equal conditions", and the same applies to PVE, but people dont complain about it.
In equal conditions to the fighters involved (stats provided by lv or gear), pvp is much more harder and complex than PVE.
If mmo pvp is a joke, only with hotbar spamming, what to say about the pve!!!! LOL
full loot pvp is amazing if your the one winning the moment your the one losing it feels sucky
and even more so if your always losing (just like me)you might as well just not play
a example was me in planetside 2 i die 12 times for each kill i get now i just dont play as its just not fun spending almost the whole game running to locations getiing killed the moment i turn up
and if it had full loot i wouldnt have played past 5 mins
the biggest problem with full loot or all games in general is it rewards the good or best players with better equipment when the players who really need help are the ones who die all the time
its just like wow and its tread mill of equipment and the best get the best weapons
a handicap system would encourage people to play
players with a bigger handicap could have braggin rights bigger reputations than players who had better equipment
and if i really thought i was a great pvp then winning with equipment worse than my oponent would give me greater satisfaction than winning knowing that its my super equipment that won it for me and not my skill
Yes I am very well aware that PVE has turned to that aswell in these current MMO's, no arument here, hence I have not bought an MMO in well over 3 years now. And there is never equal conditions in PVP so thats a redundant argument to try and use, and nothing more than a pipe dream. I use reality for my debates, not what ifs.
PVP and PVE do not co-exist well in a game, they water each other down, and take away from each other. In PVP players have to be somewhat balanced. In good challeneging PVE there needs to be a strict defined roles. When you have a mix of pve and pvp you have to take away from the strict roles to make the classes viable for PVP. Its like oil and water they dont dont mix well.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI
What about the people where PvP makes them angry? Shouldn't that be a category as well?
I can't count the times I have been called a jerkoff or an ahole, only out to ruin somebody elses fun on a PvP server merely for catching somebody by surprise. No highlevel vs lowlevel or fighting somebody engaged with a mob, nor exploiting, just straight up pvp
people hate to lose. Since it got mentioned what is so bad about full loot PvP. Yes you lose stuff but on the other hand it is much easier to get stuff. So you have to keep your own item flow right and gain more than you lose. This can be done by trading smart farming or buying.
I don't get this thinking that when i lose something it is bad the only thing it does it makes things more interesting.
Meh.
If you dont want PvP, dont do it ...
Most games allow pure PvE servers, dont they ?