Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Dispelling the myths about full PVP
Bidwood
Member Posts: 554
Dispelling the myths about full PVP
There are inevitable debates that pop up during the development of high-profile, triple-A MMOs.
This purpose of this thread is to dispel the myths about full PVP that grow back like weeds every time you cut them down. Hopefully this thread helps some folks see the point of view of those who are waiting patiently for a triple-A game with full PVP.
So what is “full” PVP? Here are some of the defining characteristics:
- PVP is “on” throughout the entire world. (No place is 100 per cent safe, although there can be some areas with strong protection like hi-sec in EVE.)
- It's integrated with the other mature game systems in a meaningful way -- like the economy -- where everything from crafting to territory control are designed with PVP in mind. (Integration with other well-developed systems is where a lot of the indies fall short and why we need a triple-A title.)
- It involves risk v.s. reward in a big way. Getting the best resources means venturing into unsafe/contested territories.
I may need to expand on the defining characteristics after other folks weigh in.
The myths
1. You just want to grief me.
- This is the self-centered argument of someone who was scarred for life in Ultima Online a decade ago and can’t move on. We actually don’t care if you play the game. In fact, if you dislike full PVP then we hope you don’t play
2. “Why should I be forced to play your way? No one is forcing you to PVE.”
- This makes it sound like you’re already a paying customer for a game and we’re pulling the rug out from under you. If a game is in development and you find out it has full PVP, you aren’t forced to do anything. You can simply play a different game. If you do play and get ganked, then you still made a conscious decision with regard to risk v.s. reward. And you lost. No one forced anything on you.
3. It’s PVP v.s. PVE and people who enjoy PVP are a niche.
- This creates sort of a false dichotomy where you’re looking at a niche of gamers – those who only want to PVP – and ignoring the huge market of folks who want to PVP AND PVE. So the most passionate arguments are usually between those who want ONLY full PVP and those who want ONLY PVE. Both of these are arguably niche, but then again League of Legends is the most played game in the world with only PVP.
4. Okay - but the majority of people want PVP on their terms.
- How many triple-A MMOs with full PVP have they even been able to try in the last 15 years? Who's to say they would find a triple-A game with full PVP distasteful? Games like Darkfall don't count, because they don't have mature systems to integrate with the PVP.
5. The answer is simple: Just let people flag themselves for PVP when they want to engage in it.
- Things go wrong when you take a game designed for full PVP and let people opt in/out whenever they want. Take, for example, the risk v.s. reward characteristic. Human nature compels us to get rewards using the path that involves as little risk as possible. Even people who love risk would be stupid not to turn PVP off because it puts them at a distinct tactical disadvantage. This is like Game Geenie or any number of other hacks and it would break any game designed with full PVP.
6. The answer is simple: Just implement PVP and non-PVP servers.
- You might as well have two different games, because full PVP requires a dedicated dev team to succeed. Remember, it’s not just the ability to attack people. It’s the integration of PVP with other game systems and risk v.s. reward. While a game with dedicated full-service dev teams for each server type would be great for players, it could also hurt publishers’ return on investment.
7. Look around at the limited number of PVP servers on popular games. This is proof that the market for open-world PVP games is niche.
- The only thing this proves is that gamers don’t like a server where a core game mechanic has been merely “turned on” as an afterthought to the game’s design. The PVP is often meaningless in these games because it isn’t “full” PVP and is essentially in its own vaccuum.
Okay, so that’s what I was able to come up with so far. I’ll probably refine this and come up with a “v 2.0” after all of the arguments are made.
Comments
I am not going to go into some long diatribe about why you are wrong because you're probably not interested in reading my rebuttal anyway so all I am going to say is I disagree with every point in your post because I have 14+ years of experience that prove otherwise. So quit trying to pass your preferred and biased playstyle off on someone like me who doesn't want it.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
"TL; DR"? Admit it...
Seriously, that's the best you can do?
Your forum PvP is weak, grasshopper...
an excellent post, something similar to a post i made a looong time ago on ten ton.
/golfclaps
over 20 years of mmorpg's and counting...
Myth # 2. “Why should I be forced to play your way? No one is forcing you to PVE.”
Exactly!!! 110% of the PvP crowd, and I hate to use this term because it makes it sound like there are camps. But the PvP crowd, namely the FFA PvP crowd will never settle, will never compromise and I do not understand how anyone can be so blinded and obtuse to an argument with opinionated fallacy.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
We've gone over most of this in this thread as well: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/5859170/PvP-vs-PvE-Compromise.html#5859170 on the EQN forums.
You don't need to go into any sort of long argument or talk about your years of experience. Your stance is provably illogical as your entire basis for why he is "wrong" is that he is trying to "pass [his] preferred and biased playstyle off on someone" which is not the case.
Anyone who is agreeing with azzamasin on this topic is simply agreeing with someone who did not take the time to understand the points made as he countered an argument that was never made.
I can't say I agree with everything said in the OP fully, but this knee jerk anti-PvP player reaction some seem to have without actually having listened to the OP is saddening to me.
edit: This thread is either being trolled into oblivion, or a lot of people here have quick fingers and slow eyes.
What is there to win? Why would anyone think there is anything to win in a forum?
Furthermore, a post, even a thread opening post, does not need to promote or seek discussion, it can just be informative like the one in this thread.
Ok, we all get it. You're "Pro" PvP. However, your constant attempts to persuade non-PvP players to your point of view are becoming annoying. You, more than any other poster I've seen on these boards of late, have incited more "troll" threads about how wonderful pvp can be and anyone that doesn't agree with your opinion is completely uninformed. Give it a rest will you? I can't wait for the SOE expo to put all this speculation to rest so those who are interested can move forward and those who don't like what they hear can move on. Have a nice day.
(My son speaking to his Japanese Grandmother) " Sorry Obaba, I don't speak Japanese, I only speak human."
Open world "PvP" is not PvP. It's not balanced. It's not skill-based. It's not meaningful, and it's rarely even between two consenting parties. It's for the crowd that wants to kill other players but is not skilled enough to do so against players who are able, ready, and willing to fight back.
If you want your own "PvP" servers, that's well enough - everyone who is on them has made the conscious decision to play in these conditions. If you want an entire FFA "PvP" game, well.... you're at the mercy of the market and game developers, and I can't be inclined to care. One doesn't "consent" to be ganked just because they decide to play a game that only offers "PvP" servers - there's more to a game than its central game type, and being forced to give up mechanics, classes, or an environment that one would enjoy without constantly being ganked by xxNarutoxx the Assassin would leave a bitter taste in a lot of mouths.
sorry i had to come back, but if your playing the age game, i have 20+ years or mmorpg experience, have worked on a successful mmorpg, have friends that are both former and current indie devs, beta tested more than most people and have in my very small way helped define the genre. I dont have thousands of posts on this site, but i have been here from the beginning prettymuch, and have read the going ons of this website since the first day of mmorpg.com.
the OP is right in his opinions, as are you, this is a forum for discussion, and when you break it down, PLAYER VS PLAYER is exactly that. no holds barred competition. It is always highly ironic to me that in the course of the games i have played over the years i see people bragging their pvp prowess, but only on their terms. this is not real pvp, this is called playground pvp.
this is a total nich market, and thats why there is not many games that offer this, UO did, and Jean Luc, i am a UO vet as well, I was there in the crowd when Rainz killed Lord British to boot.. and in the origional UO, people did not accept the ffa PVP model, thus the game was changed.
EVE , and to some extent darkfall(2) have successfully done this model , but few others.
IMHO, PVP and PVE are both sides of a coin, and somewhere in between is the game we all want to play.
cheers.
over 20 years of mmorpg's and counting...
Not to mention his entire 'Myth #2' argument is blatantly flawed. It amounts to saying 'unrestricted PvP games don't force PvP on you, because you might not be paying money yet, and you can always play a different game'. What he doesn't realize is that just re-confirms the Myth he's trying to disprove. Most of us are, in fact, not playing those games because we don't want it forced on us.
It doesn't make any sense, whatsoever.
Most of those points are for a FFA PvP game, but the 'myths' you bring up are usually associated with threads/comments/notions etc. to have a game balanced for PvP and PvE.
LoL isn't an Mmo, no breathing world to play in. It's definitely an e-sport with competition as the driving force behind it.
Still a personal opinion though and not quite debunks the whole 'myth' thing.
They're like Locusts, they go into a game and destroy everything then move on to the next game, there is a reason most companies hardly ever make FFA pvp games, its because they know these people will destroy it.
This ^.
Oh, sweet irony.
Nope, there are some (maybe many?) people who do not want PvP in any form.
Well then go play all the failing games that have no PVP.
Good post OP, but I doubt the closed minded PvE folks will read it. They complain about how "eeevil" and "sociopathic" PvPers are, but I've never seen more self centered uneducated posts than from the "We don't want no stinkin PvP!" crowd.
Yeah, you are right, it is called "General Discussion " XD.
Umm, you say PvE'rs complain and namecall PvP'ers yet in the same statement call PvEr's "Self-centered and uneducated".
Does hypocrisy mean anything to you?
Why do you need PvE players to read it ? You do not want PvE players because they are the ones who ask for separate servers and flags in games. So why would you want them ?
Thanks. The funny part is I'm not asking them to play this game with me or for any of the games they're playing to be transformed into this.. I'm just trying to explain my perspective (and the perspective of others here) and what we want in a future game and it's somehow being perceived as threatening to a lot of people. As if they're going to lose something precious if we finally get a game that satisfies us.
What? No. In this myth I'm talking about games you haven't even played yet that are in development. If it turns out to be full PVP, nobody's forcing you to play it when it comes out. Are you really against there being a triple-A game that isn't your cup of tea?
Thanks - starting to wonder about the "trolled into oblivion" people as many responses have totally missed the point.
Again!?! Did you even read my post???
4. Okay - but the majority of people want PVP on their terms.
While there are a few posts here obviously lacking in insight. I do feel that dimly witted people, people who are aggressively ignorant, and generally mean folks are on all parts of the spectrum. This thread thus far, even though it does seem to indicate your point, should not be taken as any proof that us PVP loving people are of a more enlightened breed.
I do understand where you are coming from, I just feel I should at least try to sway you.