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!

Could you accept player imprisonment in a FFA PvP game?

Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Oxon Hill, MDPosts: 1,147Member Uncommon

In a sandbox game where players police themselves could you accept the risk of imprisonment for breaking laws by stealing, killing or harming another player inside their territory if defeated?

 

I ask this because I know one of the biggest things about FFA PvP is that even when players band together to stop gankers they just return.  Eventually this leads to apathy of stopping the random killer.

 

With rule of law given to the community the ability to lock up player killers up I think you might have a lot less random killings.  This of course does not stop wars and the like but focus on the random killers.

«13456710

Comments

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member

    No. I won't play a game that don't allow me to play. What is the point?

    But i won't play a FFA pvp game in the first place, so i suppose my opinion is moot.

     

  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Oxon Hill, MDPosts: 1,147Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    No. I won't play a game that don't allow me to play. What is the point?

    But i won't play a FFA pvp game in the first place, so i suppose my opinion is moot.

     

     

    No surprise that you wouldn't.

     

    You could still play but you would in in prison.  Not just a cell but a larger area to wander.   I should have gone in further in stating there would be a time limit to how long you could be imprisoned and you have to be defeated.  Its more of a if you come into a town and start killing people there could be consequences.  

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

    No. I won't play a game that don't allow me to play. What is the point?

    But i won't play a FFA pvp game in the first place, so i suppose my opinion is moot.

     

     

    No surprise that you wouldn't.

     

    You could still play but you would in in prison.  Not just a cell but a larger area to wander.   I should have gone in further in stating there would be a time limit to how long you could be imprisoned and you have to be defeated.  Its more of a if you come into a town and start killing people there could be consequences.  

    That does not sound fun.

    It does not matter about the time limit. Even if it is 5 min, i can always find another game that won't give me 5 min of non-fun time.

     

  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Oxon Hill, MDPosts: 1,147Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    No. I won't play a game that don't allow me to play. What is the point?

    But i won't play a FFA pvp game in the first place, so i suppose my opinion is moot.

     

     

    No surprise that you wouldn't.

     

    You could still play but you would in in prison.  Not just a cell but a larger area to wander.   I should have gone in further in stating there would be a time limit to how long you could be imprisoned and you have to be defeated.  Its more of a if you come into a town and start killing people there could be consequences.  

    That does not sound fun.

    It does not matter about the time limit. Even if it is 5 min, i can always find another game that won't give me 5 min of non-fun time.

     

     

    Kind of the point of it though.  Its an anti grief tool in a game where you could be killed.  You would only be subject if you were killing someone for no reason in their area.

  • YalexyYalexy BerlinPosts: 1,053Member Uncommon

    Imprisoning is a good system, but only if you get caught by NPCs.

    Divide the world in guarded and unguarded zones, and if you've got criminal records then the NPC will hunt you down in those guarded areas, whereas you can travel freely in the unguarded zones.
    Oh, and criminal records are only applied when you commit crime in guarded areas too.

    This way the people who want to play it safe can stay in the guraded areas, and those who want to take risks can go to the unguarded areas.

    Look at EvE Online, it works like a charm, allthough there's no prisons.

  • Vynxe_VaingloryVynxe_Vainglory Princeville, HIPosts: 20Member

    If you are roleplaying, being imprisoned for committing crimes is fun.

     

  • XiaokiXiaoki White Pigeon, MIPosts: 2,601Member Uncommon

    People want the freedom to kill whomever they want and take all of their loot but they dont want any consequences for those actions.

  • XssivXssiv Haskell, NJPosts: 359Member
    Age of Wushu
  • czombieczombie Monroe, MIPosts: 82Member
    Originally posted by Vynxe_Vainglory

    If you are roleplaying, being imprisoned for committing crimes is fun.

     

    Your post reminds me of Clark Duke's character in Second Life's prison in "Hot Tub Time Machine."

  • LissylLissyl Peru, INPosts: 271Member Common
    Originally posted by Xiaoki

    People want the freedom to kill whomever they want and take all of their loot but they dont want any consequences for those actions.

    This.  And this is why I dislike 'full PVP' so much.

     

    No alts, no extra accounts, and no offline countdown.  Then, and only then, might I consider full open world PVP. 

  • itsTortitsTort San Diego, CAPosts: 128Member
    Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal

    In a sandbox game where players police themselves could you accept the risk of imprisonment for breaking laws by stealing, killing or harming another player inside their territory if defeated?

     

    I ask this because I know one of the biggest things about FFA PvP is that even when players band together to stop gankers they just return.  Eventually this leads to apathy of stopping the random killer.

     

    With rule of law given to the community the ability to lock up player killers up I think you might have a lot less random killings.  This of course does not stop wars and the like but focus on the random killers.

     

     

    I think what really needs to happen; is there needs to be extremely limited safe zones in the world, maybe main cities, and one or two central hubs in the zone itself. 

     

    Players bickering about "anti-grief" really bother me. I grew up playing MMOs, and really enjoying them. There was no "anti-grief" system back then, it was kill, be killed, or relocate areas. I am all for the mass slaughter of pvp on pvp realms, and really dislike too many restrictions, as it takes the immersiveness out of the game. 

     

    For the most part, people roll on a PVP server to, well, you know, pvp. These days though, people cry about getting ganked once, call it griefing, and I just can't figure out why those people ever roll on the PVP servers ;-;

  • tommygunzIItommygunzII Roanoke, VAPosts: 321Member
    Originally posted by Lissyl
    Originally posted by Xiaoki

    People want the freedom to kill whomever they want and take all of their loot but they dont want any consequences for those actions.

    This.  And this is why I dislike 'full PVP' so much.

     

    No alts, no extra accounts, and no offline countdown.  Then, and only then, might I consider full open world PVP. 

    As someone who has no desire to attack an innocent person, I agree. Until they add some consequences into FFA PVP count me out. At least an ability to hide, but I don't see that happening since most MMO's have the players name above their head.

    Don't get me wrong I loved War Z and DayZ, you could be killed at any time for no reason, but at least you could hide if you weren't as well equipped. If those games had my name in big letters above my head for everyone to find me I wouldn't play them either.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,638Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal

    In a sandbox game where players police themselves could you accept the risk of imprisonment for breaking laws by stealing, killing or harming another player inside their territory if defeated?

    An MMO I played a while back called Dransik had that. IIRC, I had to smash boulders and hand in the stones to try to shorten my sentence. Part of the time was also spent avoiding other criminals that wanted to kill me for my stones.

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Boca Raton, FLPosts: 4,491Member Uncommon

    If done correctly I would absolutely play such a game.

     

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

  • rodingorodingo Posts: 2,346Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal

    In a sandbox game where players police themselves could you accept the risk of imprisonment for breaking laws by stealing, killing or harming another player inside their territory if defeated?

    An MMO I played a while back called Dransik had that. IIRC, I had to smash boulders and hand in the stones to try to shorten my sentence. Part of the time was also spent avoiding other criminals that wanted to kill me for my stones.

    At least they weren't trying to toss your salad.

    "If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor

  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Oxon Hill, MDPosts: 1,147Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by itsTort
    Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal

    In a sandbox game where players police themselves could you accept the risk of imprisonment for breaking laws by stealing, killing or harming another player inside their territory if defeated?

     

    I ask this because I know one of the biggest things about FFA PvP is that even when players band together to stop gankers they just return.  Eventually this leads to apathy of stopping the random killer.

     

    With rule of law given to the community the ability to lock up player killers up I think you might have a lot less random killings.  This of course does not stop wars and the like but focus on the random killers.

     

     

    I think what really needs to happen; is there needs to be extremely limited safe zones in the world, maybe main cities, and one or two central hubs in the zone itself. 

     

    Players bickering about "anti-grief" really bother me. I grew up playing MMOs, and really enjoying them. There was no "anti-grief" system back then, it was kill, be killed, or relocate areas. I am all for the mass slaughter of pvp on pvp realms, and really dislike too many restrictions, as it takes the immersiveness out of the game. 

     

    For the most part, people roll on a PVP server to, well, you know, pvp. These days though, people cry about getting ganked once, call it griefing, and I just can't figure out why those people ever roll on the PVP servers ;-;

     

    It's a reality of the genre.  I player killed someone as my first action in UO 2nd phase of beta testing.  I'm not against PvP.  But random killers need to be a uncommon like they are in real life or you have a lords of the flies game.

     

    I want the freedom to kill anyone but the consequences need to be their as the balance.  

  • ShadanwolfShadanwolf Posts: 2,114Member Uncommon

    I cannot accept FFA PVP as a game choice I would ever make.

    Faction vs faction conflict is my passion.

  • BidwoodBidwood Toronto, ONPosts: 554Member

    Hmmm..  Age of Wushu has the prison system right? And people can break you out?

     

    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal

    In a sandbox game where players police themselves could you accept the risk of imprisonment for breaking laws by stealing, killing or harming another player inside their territory if defeated?

    An MMO I played a while back called Dransik had that. IIRC, I had to smash boulders and hand in the stones to try to shorten my sentence. Part of the time was also spent avoiding other criminals that wanted to kill me for my stones.

    LOL that sounds hilarious!!

  • AldersAlders Jack Burton'sPosts: 1,857Member Uncommon
    Isn't this already in ArcheAge, complete with trials?
  • TheRealBanangoTheRealBanango Fairfax, VAPosts: 75Member

    If the imprisonment system was fun, then why not? How you make prison fun in a game is another thing.

    I think the idea shouldn't be to punish people for killing innocent players if that is fun for them, but instead to have consequences for dying so that players will think twice before considering if killing a player is worth the risk.

    image
  • maplestonemaplestone Ottawa, ONPosts: 3,099Member
    Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal
    But random killers need to be a uncommon like they are in real life or you have a lords of the flies game.

    Beyond a certain point, the rarity just magnifies the impact when it happens.  

    To me, PKing is either a part of your game or it's not.  There can be a price, but if you are punishing people for playing a role the game deliberately provides for them to play, you've done something wrong.

  • GravargGravarg Harker Heights, TXPosts: 3,332Member Uncommon

    I liked how the reputation and jail system in Ashen Empires works.  If you killed another player or town guard or something, you became criminal, and lowered your reputation.  You would have to stay out of town until criminal status would wear off, and if you got your reputation low enough guards will KoS you.  If you died, you were captured and sent to jail.  In jail you could wait your time out, but you could also move big rocks into a crusher to reduce your sentence.  The more times you went jail the longer your sentence would be.  It worked great.

     

    Edit: also while criminal, you could be looted without the looter becoming a criminal or effecting his reputation :)

  • jesadjesad Posts: 753Member Uncommon
    Word of advice, google the idea before you make a string.  That is unless this is a sideways advertisement for Age of Wushu which already features player imprisonment.

    image
  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Oxon Hill, MDPosts: 1,147Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jesad
    Word of advice, google the idea before you make a string.  That is unless this is a sideways advertisement for Age of Wushu which already features player imprisonment.

     

    So all these threads about other style games are also advertisements or is it a discussion about mmorpg design? 

  • coretex666coretex666 PraguePosts: 1,934Member Uncommon

    I personally think there are more effective and less fun breaking regulatory mechanisms which can be implemented.

    Imprisonment is nice, but is it strong enough to make it effective as a regulatory mechanism? In other words, do players fear being imprisoned?

    If it was supposed to be effective, it would have to be strong, so that players take it as a serious punishment. In such case, the imprisonment would have to last quite long which may ruin the game experience.

    Those are my main concerns with imprisonment.

    I still consider L2's PK system to be better. You kill player who is not and does not want to be involved in combat. You become PK, so others can kill you without becoming PK themselves and you have increased chance of dropping gear you are wearing. I do not think I have seen better PVP regulatory mechanism than this yet.

    Waiting for L2 EU Classic

«13456710
Sign In or Register to comment.