Originally posted by ikcin AA has not a good pvp system. There is too many save zones. Not to mention factions and lack of drop. The pvp is a little bit pointless there.
Not a clue of what hes talking about...
AA has NO SAFE ZONES, I saw many times people being killed in cities, in the face of guards being controlled or aggroed for tanks helping the PK. You can PK EVERYWHERE. Also in lvl1 zones and "safe" cities if you manage to avoid guards range and/or aggro.
You DROP packs that costs money, time and labor and the PKer can loot it for himself, not talking that your merchant ship with 10 trade packs can be completely aborded, looted and destroyed...
You obviously, didnt play the game to 50 where the game shines, the leveling its just a glorified tutorial to try skills, keybinds and so.
Thats something new to me in AA. Allready try with friends and we cant attack anyone unless oposite faction when we are in inicial territorys of our continent, like "Sollsreed Peninsula" or "two crows" for example (we are Nui).
Can you plz explain how that works and how is possible?
Originally posted by ikcin AA has not a good pvp system. There is too many save zones. Not to mention factions and lack of drop. The pvp is a little bit pointless there.
AA have what OP wants in a general way, if hes going to like it or not the details of the game and the ruleset implemented is something he needs to try and see if meets hes requirements imo.
Maybe it will help him get his fix until games like Albion Online and Life is Feudal come out. Both MMOs have the full corpse looting and ganking if I'm not mistaken.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
Originally posted by ikcin AA has not a good pvp system. There is too many save zones. Not to mention factions and lack of drop. The pvp is a little bit pointless there.
Opinions vary.
Best PvP systems are like one in AA - DAoC had a very similar system (faction based)
once you introduce gear drops in PvP - you alienate 80% of your "moderate PvP" playerbase which is what AA and DAoC and many other games are.
Also Auroria - no safe zones - open water - no safe zones.
Most of playable areas in AA are not safe
You may call it pointless (it is not) - but it keeps PvP busy - introduce gear drops and the game would be a ghost town.
"best" is subjective. Most players either only want optional moderate pvp, or no pvp at all. Or "fair" pvp games like MOBAs. I think forced open world pvp in mmos is really so niche that there probably won't be any more support from AAA games.
Let's be honest here for a moment for all the non-honest players out there in the world. Majority of PvPers are cheating in some regard whether from scripting to other type of hacks. Most people who are pro-pvp are in this category, argue it all you like it's a fact.
When Destiny released there were already people cheating in the crucible only a few in the beginning, now that number has increased dramatically.
Whenever you have an online game that is competitive you are going to have the dishonest players show up in droves. This is a main reason why most honest people do not want nor like PvP. If everyone was forced to play honestly without using their hack of choice then it would be different but that is never going to happen.
This in short is the only acceptable answer to your question that you have posed.
And anyone here who knows what Lineage 2 used to be like (and apparently you don't) will have no problem recognizing what I'm talking about.
Perma reds, perm red clans, people camping talking island because it was out of the way and took a while to get there because you had to get there by boat or pay a lot to get there.
And now in Lineage 2 every race doesn't have it's own starting area.
GoD is not L2. And I never saw the red clans. You know, when you was red in L2, you was in danger to lose your items and gear, NPCs did not talk with you, and everyone wanted to kill your character. Red characters were out of Olympiad too. I think you mistake L2 with Tera I specially like the part with "people camping talking island because it was out of the way and took a while to get there because you had to get there by boat or pay a lot to get there" Seriously? People in L2 just used summon and teleports. Not to mention mobs in TA were low levels, so there was no way to clean the karma. In fact camping in TA with red character was maybe the most stupid thing you can do. Not to mention the chaotic PK was totally pointless. You earned nothing, only penalties.
I never said "GoD was L2". (see "prelude" above) I suspect I have more "actual L2 experience" than you do.
Secondly, Regardless of you not seeing red clans or perma reds they were there. EvilSeed? The red who had so many kills he found a bug where he turned "white" at a certain number. Though I liked EvilSeed, at least he was a good player and not an ass.
and yes, at the start of L2 Talking island was a pain to get there. Money was hard to come by so people took the boat. Remember the boat? no you don't because you never played L2 at its earliest most savage days.
Quite frankly, you are trying to talk about L2 that you never experienced. What about the people who would try to walk to the mainland because you couldn't die from drowning but didn't want to take the boat because they would get pk'ed waiting for it?
IN any case "that's my whole point": The reds on Talking Island didn't care about cleaning Karma.
The red system didn't dissuade players from camping Talking Island, or even taking over Dion. Or taking over Cruma for that matter as one of the clans took it over for a bit so that their players could level.
then again, I was on Himdemith so maybe you are forgiven for not seeing these things as they didn't happen on "your" server. Though again, I really doubt you played the game in its heyday but seem to think that your experience "is L2".
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Whenever you have an online game that is competitive you are going to have the dishonest players show up in droves. This is a main reason why most honest people do not want nor like PvP. If everyone was forced to play honestly without using their hack of choice then it would be different but that is never going to happen.
Whenever you have an online game that is competitive you are going to have the dishonest players show up in droves. This is a main reason why most honest people do not want nor like PvP. If everyone was forced to play honestly without using their hack of choice then it would be different but that is never going to happen.
that is why i play mostly pve games.
Dishonest people exist whether a game is PvE or PvP based. PvP games aren't special in this regard. It's just that people care less about cheaters in PvE than they do in PvP.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Let's be honest here for a moment for all the non-honest players out there in the world. Majority of PvPers are cheating in some regard whether from scripting to other type of hacks. Most people who are pro-pvp are in this category, argue it all you like it's a fact.
When Destiny released there were already people cheating in the crucible only a few in the beginning, now that number has increased dramatically.
Whenever you have an online game that is competitive you are going to have the dishonest players show up in droves. This is a main reason why most honest people do not want nor like PvP. If everyone was forced to play honestly without using their hack of choice then it would be different but that is never going to happen.
This in short is the only acceptable answer to your question that you have posed.
I'm not sure if a lot more people would PvP just because there was no cheating. I'm sure SOME would, who normally wouldn't, but whether or not a LOT would is more... unsure.
In regards to a different reply, it's my own experience that competitive games (not just PvP. Competition in general) invite more cheats, although you'll find a little cheating even in non-competitive games a lot of the time if the companies are lax. PvP games (perhaps because they are the most competitive of all, obviously) seem to invite the most if the company isn't actively guarding against it from what I can tell, though.
But yea, the major difference is that in non competitive games, people don't really care that much about others cheating (that much) nor should they, for reasons that I hope is obvious.
Developers have learned that PvP kills games. Not really PvP, but the players who like PvP. The downward spiral of ganking goes as such:
1. High level players run around killing all the lower levels.
2. After awhile the lower level player just gives up and goes to play something else.
3. High level playrs have nothing to kill easily.
4. High level players leave to go grief somewhere else.
Such is the life cycle of ALL modern PvP games. It was fine back in the 90s and even the early 2000s, because you had people that would actually police the griefers, but most of those people have moved on and the majority of people in PvP games are griefers.
I can remember playing a game in the 90s called Dransik, and if you killed someone unfairly, you could expect a guild of 20+ people to come hunt you down and take the stolen loot back. There were consequences for your actions back then. In today's MMOs, there are little to none. Take AA, some guy was on trial for 28 murders and a bunch of theft. You know what he got as punishment? 28 minutes in jail....
Whenever you have an online game that is competitive you are going to have the dishonest players show up in droves. This is a main reason why most honest people do not want nor like PvP. If everyone was forced to play honestly without using their hack of choice then it would be different but that is never going to happen.
that is why i play mostly pve games.
Dishonest people exist whether a game is PvE or PvP based. PvP games aren't special in this regard. It's just that people care less about cheaters in PvE than they do in PvP.
Heh well duh..
That's the point. In PVE they are not bothering the other players. Well, not nearly as much. May have some botters, but you do not have to worry about them following you around and killing your character all the time.
Which in the end is the number one reason why most folks do not like open world PVP..they want to be left alone till they decide they want to try PVP.
It is disrupting the way they wish to play a game. Why play a game if you can not play the way they want to? That question has been answered quite definitely by the PVE players..they will not play it ....period.
I can't believe someone brought up CoD, MOBA's and Battlefield to defend PVP in mmorpgs...that cracks me up.
I don't know if Im the majority or the minority, but when I first started gaming, I played RPG's. I got to experience a cool story, build my character up the way I wanted and enjoy defeating the last boss. The entire time I never had to PVP. I never wanted to PVP. I wanted to relax and enjoy an awesome video game. If I wanted to do something competitive I'd setup a tackle football game with the local kids and we'd go at it.
Once MMORPG's came out, it was even better because there would be updates, there was no real end and you had (in some cases) more options to build your toon the way you wanted. Yet, there was still no desire to PVP...in Anarchy Online, there was no PVP at first anyway....when there was, it became a twinking duel fest where someone would find a way to put better gear on to win...
PVP is in MMORPG's to attract more than just RPG players, but the main focus should always be on the RPG players. Have consenting pvp on the side and/or make a PVP server to go with the PVE servers.
If devs dont want to do that, or want a PVP centric game, then just don't call it an MMORPG because Ive never known an RPG where the main reason to play is to battle other players.
Call it Call of Duty: Ancient Roman edition or something....
I can't believe someone brought up CoD, MOBA's and Battlefield to defend PVP in mmorpgs...that cracks me up.
I don't know if Im the majority or the minority, but when I first started gaming, I played RPG's. I got to experience a cool story, build my character up the way I wanted and enjoy defeating the last boss. The entire time I never had to PVP. I never wanted to PVP. I wanted to relax and enjoy an awesome video game. If I wanted to do something competitive I'd setup a tackle football game with the local kids and we'd go at it.
Once MMORPG's came out, it was even better because there would be updates, there was no real end and you had (in some cases) more options to build your toon the way you wanted. Yet, there was still no desire to PVP...in Anarchy Online, there was no PVP at first anyway....when there was, it became a twinking duel fest where someone would find a way to put better gear on to win...
PVP is in MMORPG's to attract more than just RPG players, but the main focus should always be on the RPG players. Have consenting pvp on the side and/or make a PVP server to go with the PVE servers.
If devs dont want to do that, or want a PVP centric game, then just don't call it an MMORPG because Ive never known an RPG where the main reason to play is to battle other players.
Call it Call of Duty: Ancient Roman edition or something....
You have the right to your opinion and i have the right not agree:
Theres nothing wrong with PvP in MMORPG, no need to name change.
Just because you insert pvp in a rpg online game, the game are still a rpg game. You create a char, that char have a history made by game or made by you, you role play with him, its still a rpg.
I can't believe someone brought up CoD, MOBA's and Battlefield to defend PVP in mmorpgs...that cracks me up.
I don't know if Im the majority or the minority, but when I first started gaming, I played RPG's. I got to experience a cool story, build my character up the way I wanted and enjoy defeating the last boss. The entire time I never had to PVP. I never wanted to PVP. I wanted to relax and enjoy an awesome video game. If I wanted to do something competitive I'd setup a tackle football game with the local kids and we'd go at it.
Once MMORPG's came out, it was even better because there would be updates, there was no real end and you had (in some cases) more options to build your toon the way you wanted. Yet, there was still no desire to PVP...in Anarchy Online, there was no PVP at first anyway....when there was, it became a twinking duel fest where someone would find a way to put better gear on to win...
PVP is in MMORPG's to attract more than just RPG players, but the main focus should always be on the RPG players. Have consenting pvp on the side and/or make a PVP server to go with the PVE servers.
If devs dont want to do that, or want a PVP centric game, then just don't call it an MMORPG because Ive never known an RPG where the main reason to play is to battle other players.
Call it Call of Duty: Ancient Roman edition or something....
You have the right to your opinion and i have the right not agree:
Theres nothing wrong with PvP in MMORPG, no need to name change.
Just because you insert pvp in a rpg online game, the game are still a rpg game. You create a char, that char have a history made by game or made by you, you role play with him, its still a rpg.
Or maybe i dont know what rpg means.
It's simple, name an RPG thats main purpose is PVP? I didnt say PVP can't be in it...I said the premise of any RPG, massively multi or not will never be PVP. In that regard, don't call a game of that nature an MMORPG
PvP in a LEVEL BASED mmo is just makes no sense. Killing someone 10 levels lower then me that can not put up an EQUAL fight is just something that is way out of balance. Add to that the fact that most mmo's just do not have proper mechanics to make it fun. Even though I have played many an mmo that had some form of pvp, I have not found one that I have ever enjoyed or thought was well thought out.
I can't believe someone brought up CoD, MOBA's and Battlefield to defend PVP in mmorpgs...that cracks me up.
I don't know if Im the majority or the minority, but when I first started gaming, I played RPG's. I got to experience a cool story, build my character up the way I wanted and enjoy defeating the last boss. The entire time I never had to PVP. I never wanted to PVP. I wanted to relax and enjoy an awesome video game. If I wanted to do something competitive I'd setup a tackle football game with the local kids and we'd go at it.
Once MMORPG's came out, it was even better because there would be updates, there was no real end and you had (in some cases) more options to build your toon the way you wanted. Yet, there was still no desire to PVP...in Anarchy Online, there was no PVP at first anyway....when there was, it became a twinking duel fest where someone would find a way to put better gear on to win...
PVP is in MMORPG's to attract more than just RPG players, but the main focus should always be on the RPG players. Have consenting pvp on the side and/or make a PVP server to go with the PVE servers.
If devs dont want to do that, or want a PVP centric game, then just don't call it an MMORPG because Ive never known an RPG where the main reason to play is to battle other players.
Call it Call of Duty: Ancient Roman edition or something....
You have the right to your opinion and i have the right not agree:
Theres nothing wrong with PvP in MMORPG, no need to name change.
Just because you insert pvp in a rpg online game, the game are still a rpg game. You create a char, that char have a history made by game or made by you, you role play with him, its still a rpg.
Or maybe i dont know what rpg means.
It's simple, name an RPG thats main purpose is PVP? I didnt say PVP can't be in it...I said the premise of any RPG, massively multi or not will never be PVP. In that regard, don't call a game of that nature an MMORPG
Things change. When RPGs first existed, the idea of writing an RPG with the addition or including PvP didn't make sense because the Internet didn't exist, and when it did, it wasn't pervasive. Now, writing an RPG without considering the existence of a ubiquitous network between players doesn't make sense. This doesn't mean that MMORPGs must be about PvP or that they even need to include PvP at all, but it does mean the PvP as a game mechanic is something that someone developing an MMORPG needs to consider, and including PvP or basing a game around PvP does not mean the game is not an MMORPG. If that were true, then UO, the game for which the term MMORPG was coined isn't an MMORPG.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I can't believe someone brought up CoD, MOBA's and Battlefield to defend PVP in mmorpgs...that cracks me up.
I don't know if Im the majority or the minority, but when I first started gaming, I played RPG's. I got to experience a cool story, build my character up the way I wanted and enjoy defeating the last boss. The entire time I never had to PVP. I never wanted to PVP. I wanted to relax and enjoy an awesome video game. If I wanted to do something competitive I'd setup a tackle football game with the local kids and we'd go at it.
Once MMORPG's came out, it was even better because there would be updates, there was no real end and you had (in some cases) more options to build your toon the way you wanted. Yet, there was still no desire to PVP...in Anarchy Online, there was no PVP at first anyway....when there was, it became a twinking duel fest where someone would find a way to put better gear on to win...
PVP is in MMORPG's to attract more than just RPG players, but the main focus should always be on the RPG players. Have consenting pvp on the side and/or make a PVP server to go with the PVE servers.
If devs dont want to do that, or want a PVP centric game, then just don't call it an MMORPG because Ive never known an RPG where the main reason to play is to battle other players.
Call it Call of Duty: Ancient Roman edition or something....
You have the right to your opinion and i have the right not agree:
Theres nothing wrong with PvP in MMORPG, no need to name change.
Just because you insert pvp in a rpg online game, the game are still a rpg game. You create a char, that char have a history made by game or made by you, you role play with him, its still a rpg.
Or maybe i dont know what rpg means.
It's simple, name an RPG thats main purpose is PVP? I didnt say PVP can't be in it...I said the premise of any RPG, massively multi or not will never be PVP. In that regard, don't call a game of that nature an MMORPG
Things change. When RPGs first existed, the idea of writing an RPG with the addition or including PvP didn't make sense because the Internet didn't exist, and when it did, it wasn't pervasive. Now, writing an RPG without considering the existence of a ubiquitous network between players doesn't make sense. This doesn't mean that MMORPGs must be about PvP or that they even need to include PvP at all, but it does mean the PvP as a game mechanic is something that someone developing an MMORPG needs to consider, and including PvP or basing a game around PvP does not mean the game is not an MMORPG. If that were true, then UO, the game for which the term MMORPG was coined isn't an MMORPG.
Is that why every new RPG that has come out has PVP in it? oh wait...they dont....
PvP in a LEVEL BASED mmo is just makes no sense. Killing someone 10 levels lower then me that can not put up an EQUAL fight is just something that is way out of balance. Add to that the fact that most mmo's just do not have proper mechanics to make it fun. Even though I have played many an mmo that had some form of pvp, I have not found one that I have ever enjoyed or thought was well thought out.
It really all depends on the game and how one sees the game's objectives.
In truth, you never want "a fair fight" in the context of winning because there is supposedly "stuff at stake".
In any war, no commander ever said "damn, we could set up a sneak attack and then overwhelm them with our forces but that just wouldn't be fair".
If a game/game world is about winning and territory control, and control of resources then in no way do you want "a fair fight" but you want to use your tactics and ability to win.
Where the "fair" part comes in is that every player/guild should be able to rise above their station and have the ability to better themselves and their position. Otherwie no one will want to play once the mega-guild gets to power. Their needs to be some balance to allow the little guy, if they are smart, to overcome.
Because, in the end, you are never going to get "a fair fight". even if there wasn't any leveling or "better weapons/protections" someone is going to be better than you. They just are.
Technically, one could look at leveling and getting better weapons as a way to shore up weaknesses and give one a fighting chance. Of course, that's never the case and there are people who are just going to be good AND have better weapons and better protections.
If one needs to win the logically you are going to set yourself up to win. I think the challenge for developers is the balance of allowing players to fight with not only their brawn (gear, weapons, levels) but also with tactics and strategy.
And that seems to be where most games "fall down".
Additionally, I imagine there aren't many players who can compete on all levels and game developers aren't going to make games that cost a LOT of money just for a few players who can compete. So one of the reasons for gear and levels and "random numbers".
As one forum poster put it in some thread "I'm not the one who is fighting it's my character who is fighting and their levels and gear are what I'm working on being the best".
And that goes back to the whole "role play game" aspect.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Some of you love it. A lot of you hate it. But let's be honest Pkers adds a thrilling element to any game. It also makes room for anti-pking, and the battle rages on.
I've been playing Path Of Exile recently. Although it's very much a copy / paste of diablo 2, it's excellent and extremely addicting. And extremely fun. But where is the hostile button when we level up and get bored? Even Diablo 2 had that.
It's really not so much about griefing other people, although I understand it is for many. It's the atmosphere that's created. It's hostile, unpredictable, and imho fun.
But more and more I'm seeing games are chopping the balls off of PvP. IT should be an essential in any RPG as much as grouping up.
Grinding mobs, getting awesome loot are two fun things. But eventually your character hits endgame, and without PvP, well, it's over with.....
What do you guys think? Also, anyone know of a good game with the pvp I seek?
you managed to push my buttons with this one. The atmosphere is NOT fun and exciting, that is purely your opinion. Usually the atmosphere created is one of infantile crudity, extreme vileness and utter disrespect for anything good or productive, and honestly I think that it reflects a mentally disturbed person's inability to successfully integrate with society in real life. I would like to see all PVP in all games banned forever. It serves no purpose, and with the proper time and investment any pve game can be made more difficult, more unpredictable, and more challenging than anything a human player can do.
Keep in mind you asked for opinions. And there is nothing wrong for a game to have an endpoint and you stop playing. If you want to socialize, GO OUTSIDE! go SOCIALIZE with your fellow human beings! Games should only be a distraction and fun way to escape reality, not a place where you leave reality never to return.
I can't believe someone brought up CoD, MOBA's and Battlefield to defend PVP in mmorpgs...that cracks me up.
I don't know if Im the majority or the minority, but when I first started gaming, I played RPG's. I got to experience a cool story, build my character up the way I wanted and enjoy defeating the last boss. The entire time I never had to PVP. I never wanted to PVP. I wanted to relax and enjoy an awesome video game. If I wanted to do something competitive I'd setup a tackle football game with the local kids and we'd go at it.
Once MMORPG's came out, it was even better because there would be updates, there was no real end and you had (in some cases) more options to build your toon the way you wanted. Yet, there was still no desire to PVP...in Anarchy Online, there was no PVP at first anyway....when there was, it became a twinking duel fest where someone would find a way to put better gear on to win...
PVP is in MMORPG's to attract more than just RPG players, but the main focus should always be on the RPG players. Have consenting pvp on the side and/or make a PVP server to go with the PVE servers.
If devs dont want to do that, or want a PVP centric game, then just don't call it an MMORPG because Ive never known an RPG where the main reason to play is to battle other players.
Call it Call of Duty: Ancient Roman edition or something....
You have the right to your opinion and i have the right not agree:
Theres nothing wrong with PvP in MMORPG, no need to name change.
Just because you insert pvp in a rpg online game, the game are still a rpg game. You create a char, that char have a history made by game or made by you, you role play with him, its still a rpg.
Or maybe i dont know what rpg means.
It's simple, name an RPG thats main purpose is PVP? I didnt say PVP can't be in it...I said the premise of any RPG, massively multi or not will never be PVP. In that regard, don't call a game of that nature an MMORPG
Things change. When RPGs first existed, the idea of writing an RPG with the addition or including PvP didn't make sense because the Internet didn't exist, and when it did, it wasn't pervasive. Now, writing an RPG without considering the existence of a ubiquitous network between players doesn't make sense. This doesn't mean that MMORPGs must be about PvP or that they even need to include PvP at all, but it does mean the PvP as a game mechanic is something that someone developing an MMORPG needs to consider, and including PvP or basing a game around PvP does not mean the game is not an MMORPG. If that were true, then UO, the game for which the term MMORPG was coined isn't an MMORPG.
Is that why every new RPG that has come out has PVP in it? oh wait...they dont....
They must consider the existence of the internet when writing their games. This isn't exclusive to RPGs, this is just something that people need to consider when writing their game. If they are going to consider the internet and players interacting with each other in their games, then they need to consider aspects of PvP. One of the possible choices is to not include it at all. Ditto for letting people play together. It's not a requirement, but it is a consideration.
MMORPGs are RPGs where "playing together" is a given. In that environment, PvP must be considered, even if the decision is to not include it. Including PvP does not make an MMORPG something other than an MMORPG. Including PvP in an RPG would not turn that RPG into something other than an RPG.
Ultima Online was the first game where the term "MMORPG" was used. Ultima Online is the original template for MMORPGs. Ultima Online included PvP as a major game play mechanic when released. PvP as a game play mechanic is a common or core mechanic to consider when writing an MMORPG.
Computer RPGs were written from or even copied from PnP RPGs. PnP RPGs included PvP as a game mechanic, and if they didn't, players certainly introduced it. PvP has been a part of RPGs longer than computer RPGs have existed. Where it's possible for players to interact with each other in-game, PvP is something is considered, even if the choice is to make it impossible.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
They must consider the existence of the internet when writing their games. This isn't exclusive to RPGs, this is just something that people need to consider when writing their game. If they are going to consider the internet and players interacting with each other in their games, then they need to consider aspects of PvP. One of the possible choices is to not include it at all. Ditto for letting people play together. It's not a requirement, but it is a consideration.
MMORPGs are RPGs where "playing together" is a given. In that environment, PvP must be considered, even if the decision is to not include it. Including PvP does not make an MMORPG something other than an MMORPG. Including PvP in an RPG would not turn that RPG into something other than an RPG.
Ultima Online was the first game where the term "MMORPG" was used. Ultima Online is the original template for MMORPGs. Ultima Online included PvP as a major game play mechanic when released. PvP as a game play mechanic is a common or core mechanic to consider when writing an MMORPG.
Computer RPGs were written from or even copied from PnP RPGs. PnP RPGs included PvP as a game mechanic, and if they didn't, players certainly introduced it. PvP has been a part of RPGs longer than computer RPGs have existed. Where it's possible for players to interact with each other in-game, PvP is something is considered, even if the choice is to make it impossible.
Again, I didnt say it has no place or cannot be included, but to call a game predicated on PVP an RPG/MMORPG is not even close to accurate. PnP is a VERY different beast than computer gaming. When computer RPGs and Console RPGs came out there was no PVP...to this day there still isnt, EVEN with co-op modes. Why do you think that is? Could it be that makers of these games know who their audience is?
MMO PvP only really appeals to people who want an unfair advantage
Quoting this because it's true. People don't want to admit it though.
Thats a b1tchslap of truth right there. The discussions here are so full of logical fallacies that I cant even take this seriously anymore. I am glad im done with MMO's and now only read up on them for entertainment. Personally I hope that the pvpers kill the MMORPG scene entirely, or they get sick of it and leave so that quality MMO's can be made again for those that are left.
Now that I think about it, your phrasing in your title reveals exactly where you stand on Pvp. You use the term"Pking' and not Pvp. I have found that the people who default to the term of 'Pvp" are the ones that tend to mostly play fair, and are out for a good time. They dont tend to grief or harass other players or enjoy inflicting displeasure on others. Conversely the term "PKin" I have found that the people who default to this term are the ones who want nothing more than to kill other players for the purpose of angering them, use unfair tactics or advantages to inflict displeasure on others so that you can get some sort of twisted enjoyment out of it. Makes me sad that such individuals cant get entertainment in any other way.
They must consider the existence of the internet when writing their games. This isn't exclusive to RPGs, this is just something that people need to consider when writing their game. If they are going to consider the internet and players interacting with each other in their games, then they need to consider aspects of PvP. One of the possible choices is to not include it at all. Ditto for letting people play together. It's not a requirement, but it is a consideration.
MMORPGs are RPGs where "playing together" is a given. In that environment, PvP must be considered, even if the decision is to not include it. Including PvP does not make an MMORPG something other than an MMORPG. Including PvP in an RPG would not turn that RPG into something other than an RPG.
Ultima Online was the first game where the term "MMORPG" was used. Ultima Online is the original template for MMORPGs. Ultima Online included PvP as a major game play mechanic when released. PvP as a game play mechanic is a common or core mechanic to consider when writing an MMORPG.
Computer RPGs were written from or even copied from PnP RPGs. PnP RPGs included PvP as a game mechanic, and if they didn't, players certainly introduced it. PvP has been a part of RPGs longer than computer RPGs have existed. Where it's possible for players to interact with each other in-game, PvP is something is considered, even if the choice is to make it impossible.
Again, I didnt say it has no place or cannot be included, but to call a game predicated on PVP an RPG/MMORPG is not even close to accurate. PnP is a VERY different beast than computer gaming. When computer RPGs and Console RPGs came out there was no PVP...to this day there still isnt, EVEN with co-op modes. Why do you think that is? Could it be that makers of these games know who their audience is?
That's silly. Console RPGs didn't have PvP because it was impossible or because there were so few people who networked their systems together, it wasn't feasible to program that stuff in there. As soon as it was possible to network that stuff together, PvP became an option.
MMORPGs literally came into existence with PvP baked in.
PvP has always been a consideration of games and video games. RPGs are no exception to this.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Comments
Thats something new to me in AA. Allready try with friends and we cant attack anyone unless oposite faction when we are in inicial territorys of our continent, like "Sollsreed Peninsula" or "two crows" for example (we are Nui).
Can you plz explain how that works and how is possible?
Maybe it will help him get his fix until games like Albion Online and Life is Feudal come out. Both MMOs have the full corpse looting and ganking if I'm not mistaken.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
you might like mortal online
The game apparently runs like @ss, but it is very dedicated to being a PvP centric sandbox with player factions and the like.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
"best" is subjective. Most players either only want optional moderate pvp, or no pvp at all. Or "fair" pvp games like MOBAs. I think forced open world pvp in mmos is really so niche that there probably won't be any more support from AAA games.
To OP,
Let's be honest here for a moment for all the non-honest players out there in the world. Majority of PvPers are cheating in some regard whether from scripting to other type of hacks. Most people who are pro-pvp are in this category, argue it all you like it's a fact.
When Destiny released there were already people cheating in the crucible only a few in the beginning, now that number has increased dramatically.
Whenever you have an online game that is competitive you are going to have the dishonest players show up in droves. This is a main reason why most honest people do not want nor like PvP. If everyone was forced to play honestly without using their hack of choice then it would be different but that is never going to happen.
This in short is the only acceptable answer to your question that you have posed.
I never said "GoD was L2". (see "prelude" above) I suspect I have more "actual L2 experience" than you do.
Secondly, Regardless of you not seeing red clans or perma reds they were there. EvilSeed? The red who had so many kills he found a bug where he turned "white" at a certain number. Though I liked EvilSeed, at least he was a good player and not an ass.
and yes, at the start of L2 Talking island was a pain to get there. Money was hard to come by so people took the boat. Remember the boat? no you don't because you never played L2 at its earliest most savage days.
Quite frankly, you are trying to talk about L2 that you never experienced. What about the people who would try to walk to the mainland because you couldn't die from drowning but didn't want to take the boat because they would get pk'ed waiting for it?
IN any case "that's my whole point": The reds on Talking Island didn't care about cleaning Karma.
The red system didn't dissuade players from camping Talking Island, or even taking over Dion. Or taking over Cruma for that matter as one of the clans took it over for a bit so that their players could level.
then again, I was on Himdemith so maybe you are forgiven for not seeing these things as they didn't happen on "your" server. Though again, I really doubt you played the game in its heyday but seem to think that your experience "is L2".
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
that is why i play mostly pve games.
Dishonest people exist whether a game is PvE or PvP based. PvP games aren't special in this regard. It's just that people care less about cheaters in PvE than they do in PvP.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I'm not sure if a lot more people would PvP just because there was no cheating. I'm sure SOME would, who normally wouldn't, but whether or not a LOT would is more... unsure.
In regards to a different reply, it's my own experience that competitive games (not just PvP. Competition in general) invite more cheats, although you'll find a little cheating even in non-competitive games a lot of the time if the companies are lax. PvP games (perhaps because they are the most competitive of all, obviously) seem to invite the most if the company isn't actively guarding against it from what I can tell, though.
But yea, the major difference is that in non competitive games, people don't really care that much about others cheating (that much) nor should they, for reasons that I hope is obvious.
Developers have learned that PvP kills games. Not really PvP, but the players who like PvP. The downward spiral of ganking goes as such:
1. High level players run around killing all the lower levels.
2. After awhile the lower level player just gives up and goes to play something else.
3. High level playrs have nothing to kill easily.
4. High level players leave to go grief somewhere else.
Such is the life cycle of ALL modern PvP games. It was fine back in the 90s and even the early 2000s, because you had people that would actually police the griefers, but most of those people have moved on and the majority of people in PvP games are griefers.
I can remember playing a game in the 90s called Dransik, and if you killed someone unfairly, you could expect a guild of 20+ people to come hunt you down and take the stolen loot back. There were consequences for your actions back then. In today's MMOs, there are little to none. Take AA, some guy was on trial for 28 murders and a bunch of theft. You know what he got as punishment? 28 minutes in jail....
Heh well duh..
That's the point. In PVE they are not bothering the other players. Well, not nearly as much. May have some botters, but you do not have to worry about them following you around and killing your character all the time.
Which in the end is the number one reason why most folks do not like open world PVP..they want to be left alone till they decide they want to try PVP.
It is disrupting the way they wish to play a game. Why play a game if you can not play the way they want to? That question has been answered quite definitely by the PVE players..they will not play it ....period.
I can't believe someone brought up CoD, MOBA's and Battlefield to defend PVP in mmorpgs...that cracks me up.
I don't know if Im the majority or the minority, but when I first started gaming, I played RPG's. I got to experience a cool story, build my character up the way I wanted and enjoy defeating the last boss. The entire time I never had to PVP. I never wanted to PVP. I wanted to relax and enjoy an awesome video game. If I wanted to do something competitive I'd setup a tackle football game with the local kids and we'd go at it.
Once MMORPG's came out, it was even better because there would be updates, there was no real end and you had (in some cases) more options to build your toon the way you wanted. Yet, there was still no desire to PVP...in Anarchy Online, there was no PVP at first anyway....when there was, it became a twinking duel fest where someone would find a way to put better gear on to win...
PVP is in MMORPG's to attract more than just RPG players, but the main focus should always be on the RPG players. Have consenting pvp on the side and/or make a PVP server to go with the PVE servers.
If devs dont want to do that, or want a PVP centric game, then just don't call it an MMORPG because Ive never known an RPG where the main reason to play is to battle other players.
Call it Call of Duty: Ancient Roman edition or something....
You have the right to your opinion and i have the right not agree:
Theres nothing wrong with PvP in MMORPG, no need to name change.
Just because you insert pvp in a rpg online game, the game are still a rpg game. You create a char, that char have a history made by game or made by you, you role play with him, its still a rpg.
Or maybe i dont know what rpg means.
It's simple, name an RPG thats main purpose is PVP? I didnt say PVP can't be in it...I said the premise of any RPG, massively multi or not will never be PVP. In that regard, don't call a game of that nature an MMORPG
PvP in a LEVEL BASED mmo is just makes no sense. Killing someone 10 levels lower then me that can not put up an EQUAL fight is just something that is way out of balance. Add to that the fact that most mmo's just do not have proper mechanics to make it fun. Even though I have played many an mmo that had some form of pvp, I have not found one that I have ever enjoyed or thought was well thought out.
Let's party like it is 1863!
Things change. When RPGs first existed, the idea of writing an RPG with the addition or including PvP didn't make sense because the Internet didn't exist, and when it did, it wasn't pervasive. Now, writing an RPG without considering the existence of a ubiquitous network between players doesn't make sense. This doesn't mean that MMORPGs must be about PvP or that they even need to include PvP at all, but it does mean the PvP as a game mechanic is something that someone developing an MMORPG needs to consider, and including PvP or basing a game around PvP does not mean the game is not an MMORPG. If that were true, then UO, the game for which the term MMORPG was coined isn't an MMORPG.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Is that why every new RPG that has come out has PVP in it? oh wait...they dont....
It really all depends on the game and how one sees the game's objectives.
In truth, you never want "a fair fight" in the context of winning because there is supposedly "stuff at stake".
In any war, no commander ever said "damn, we could set up a sneak attack and then overwhelm them with our forces but that just wouldn't be fair".
If a game/game world is about winning and territory control, and control of resources then in no way do you want "a fair fight" but you want to use your tactics and ability to win.
Where the "fair" part comes in is that every player/guild should be able to rise above their station and have the ability to better themselves and their position. Otherwie no one will want to play once the mega-guild gets to power. Their needs to be some balance to allow the little guy, if they are smart, to overcome.
Because, in the end, you are never going to get "a fair fight". even if there wasn't any leveling or "better weapons/protections" someone is going to be better than you. They just are.
Technically, one could look at leveling and getting better weapons as a way to shore up weaknesses and give one a fighting chance. Of course, that's never the case and there are people who are just going to be good AND have better weapons and better protections.
If one needs to win the logically you are going to set yourself up to win. I think the challenge for developers is the balance of allowing players to fight with not only their brawn (gear, weapons, levels) but also with tactics and strategy.
And that seems to be where most games "fall down".
Additionally, I imagine there aren't many players who can compete on all levels and game developers aren't going to make games that cost a LOT of money just for a few players who can compete. So one of the reasons for gear and levels and "random numbers".
As one forum poster put it in some thread "I'm not the one who is fighting it's my character who is fighting and their levels and gear are what I'm working on being the best".
And that goes back to the whole "role play game" aspect.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
you managed to push my buttons with this one. The atmosphere is NOT fun and exciting, that is purely your opinion. Usually the atmosphere created is one of infantile crudity, extreme vileness and utter disrespect for anything good or productive, and honestly I think that it reflects a mentally disturbed person's inability to successfully integrate with society in real life. I would like to see all PVP in all games banned forever. It serves no purpose, and with the proper time and investment any pve game can be made more difficult, more unpredictable, and more challenging than anything a human player can do.
Keep in mind you asked for opinions. And there is nothing wrong for a game to have an endpoint and you stop playing. If you want to socialize, GO OUTSIDE! go SOCIALIZE with your fellow human beings! Games should only be a distraction and fun way to escape reality, not a place where you leave reality never to return.
They must consider the existence of the internet when writing their games. This isn't exclusive to RPGs, this is just something that people need to consider when writing their game. If they are going to consider the internet and players interacting with each other in their games, then they need to consider aspects of PvP. One of the possible choices is to not include it at all. Ditto for letting people play together. It's not a requirement, but it is a consideration.
MMORPGs are RPGs where "playing together" is a given. In that environment, PvP must be considered, even if the decision is to not include it. Including PvP does not make an MMORPG something other than an MMORPG. Including PvP in an RPG would not turn that RPG into something other than an RPG.
Ultima Online was the first game where the term "MMORPG" was used. Ultima Online is the original template for MMORPGs. Ultima Online included PvP as a major game play mechanic when released. PvP as a game play mechanic is a common or core mechanic to consider when writing an MMORPG.
Computer RPGs were written from or even copied from PnP RPGs. PnP RPGs included PvP as a game mechanic, and if they didn't, players certainly introduced it. PvP has been a part of RPGs longer than computer RPGs have existed. Where it's possible for players to interact with each other in-game, PvP is something is considered, even if the choice is to make it impossible.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Again, I didnt say it has no place or cannot be included, but to call a game predicated on PVP an RPG/MMORPG is not even close to accurate. PnP is a VERY different beast than computer gaming. When computer RPGs and Console RPGs came out there was no PVP...to this day there still isnt, EVEN with co-op modes. Why do you think that is? Could it be that makers of these games know who their audience is?
Thats a b1tchslap of truth right there. The discussions here are so full of logical fallacies that I cant even take this seriously anymore. I am glad im done with MMO's and now only read up on them for entertainment. Personally I hope that the pvpers kill the MMORPG scene entirely, or they get sick of it and leave so that quality MMO's can be made again for those that are left.
Now that I think about it, your phrasing in your title reveals exactly where you stand on Pvp. You use the term"Pking' and not Pvp. I have found that the people who default to the term of 'Pvp" are the ones that tend to mostly play fair, and are out for a good time. They dont tend to grief or harass other players or enjoy inflicting displeasure on others. Conversely the term "PKin" I have found that the people who default to this term are the ones who want nothing more than to kill other players for the purpose of angering them, use unfair tactics or advantages to inflict displeasure on others so that you can get some sort of twisted enjoyment out of it. Makes me sad that such individuals cant get entertainment in any other way.
That's silly. Console RPGs didn't have PvP because it was impossible or because there were so few people who networked their systems together, it wasn't feasible to program that stuff in there. As soon as it was possible to network that stuff together, PvP became an option.
MMORPGs literally came into existence with PvP baked in.
PvP has always been a consideration of games and video games. RPGs are no exception to this.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.