Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Most Frustrating Part of Gaming Community

24

Comments

  • cheyanecheyane Member EpicPosts: 6,043
    Sovrath said:
    Sovrath said:
    My thought in your original example is that to me introducing these choke points at mining camps does not encourage pvp...it encourages griefing.  

    Encouraging pvp against a crafter is about stupid.  I can hear the defense of this now...well the crafter should join a guild and bring a whole bunch of people to defend him.  For what?  So they can stand there and watch him mine?  That's fun.....


    We used to have a lot of fun in lineage 2 defending our clan mates while they are getting rid of "red"

    There was the time, in Cruma where an alliance took over the entire dungeon and wouldn't allow people to get in.

    It took a lot of people to break their way into it and fight that alliance.

    What you don't get, and others who share the same view, is that "open pvp" is exactly about those moments. It's about hunting a red down over the desert or running to the noob area to take out a group of reds who are hunting low level players.

    It IS fun.

    The question is, why do people play these games when the shouldn't be playing these games?
    But have you seen a successful game do that in the past ten years?


    I'm thinking this is as much a consumer tastes shift as anything else.  These days, "reds" don't exist without a full guild of buddies on Discord to back them up should someone give them a bit of resistance.

    Chasing off a red is fun, but when he returns with a group full or more as necessary to ensure they ruin the game for anyone in that zone, it's fun for no one but the group chasing people down they know can't defend themselves against their mini-zerg.


    In the end, wide open PvP is a very basic design philosophy.  No dev has had the creativity and/or guts the implement a law system that appropriately discourages random ganking to the point where PvP is relegated to meaningful encounters within the purview of the game world itself.
    But technically they shouldn't be ruining the game for people because that's the experience they signed up for.

    It's like going to a water park and complaining that you get wet. Guess what? i don't like getting wet and I don't go to water parks. If I was at a water park I'd expect to get wet!

    As far as successful game in the past ten years, no one has made a "good" game that had those features. Probably because it would be very expensive in the post World of Warcraft era with developers/studios desiring World of Warcraft profits.

    Is there an audience for these type of games? Absolutely. Is there a large enough audience for a "good game?" Abstaf**kingtutely. Is there a large enough audience to keep an expensive game afloat?

    No idea. I'm going to say "possibly" but they will need to look toward EVE numbers and not World of Warcraft numbers.
    It is quite different to complain about the whole water park but a complaint against one particular ride is allowed.

    What you're equating is a complaint against the PvP game which isn't what this is about at all. They are complaining about one aspect.

    It is also very disingenuous of companies to try to get players who like to craft and play in their open world games because let's face it they want those players' money by promising robust mechanisms in place while all the while setting up choke points to serve them up on a platter to the PvPers who love to pluck the low hanging fruit.
    PhryparrotpholkaummoidTorval
    image
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 7,873
    Sovrath said:
    Sovrath said:
    My thought in your original example is that to me introducing these choke points at mining camps does not encourage pvp...it encourages griefing.  

    Encouraging pvp against a crafter is about stupid.  I can hear the defense of this now...well the crafter should join a guild and bring a whole bunch of people to defend him.  For what?  So they can stand there and watch him mine?  That's fun.....


    We used to have a lot of fun in lineage 2 defending our clan mates while they are getting rid of "red"

    There was the time, in Cruma where an alliance took over the entire dungeon and wouldn't allow people to get in.

    It took a lot of people to break their way into it and fight that alliance.

    What you don't get, and others who share the same view, is that "open pvp" is exactly about those moments. It's about hunting a red down over the desert or running to the noob area to take out a group of reds who are hunting low level players.

    It IS fun.

    The question is, why do people play these games when the shouldn't be playing these games?
    But have you seen a successful game do that in the past ten years?


    I'm thinking this is as much a consumer tastes shift as anything else.  These days, "reds" don't exist without a full guild of buddies on Discord to back them up should someone give them a bit of resistance.

    Chasing off a red is fun, but when he returns with a group full or more as necessary to ensure they ruin the game for anyone in that zone, it's fun for no one but the group chasing people down they know can't defend themselves against their mini-zerg.


    In the end, wide open PvP is a very basic design philosophy.  No dev has had the creativity and/or guts the implement a law system that appropriately discourages random ganking to the point where PvP is relegated to meaningful encounters within the purview of the game world itself.
    But technically they shouldn't be ruining the game for people because that's the experience they signed up for.

    It's like going to a water park and complaining that you get wet. Guess what? i don't like getting wet and I don't go to water parks. If I was at a water park I'd expect to get wet!

    As far as successful game in the past ten years, no one has made a "good" game that had those features. Probably because it would be very expensive in the post World of Warcraft era with developers/studios desiring World of Warcraft profits.

    Is there an audience for these type of games? Absolutely. Is there a large enough audience for a "good game?" Abstaf**kingtutely. Is there a large enough audience to keep an expensive game afloat?

    No idea. I'm going to say "possibly" but they will need to look toward EVE numbers and not World of Warcraft numbers.
    It's more like going to a water park that doesn't have a rules of conduct and getting upset when another kid tries to drown yours.

    Devs that leave griefing opportunities wide open rarely succeed, and the ones that have generally appear to have succeeded by providing options to avoid it completely (private servers) or by being old enough to have diehard fanbases.

    image
  • parrotpholkparrotpholk Member EpicPosts: 4,312
    Sovrath said:


    Is there an audience for these type of games? Absolutely. Is there a large enough audience for a "good game?" Abstaf**kingtutely. Is there a large enough audience to keep an expensive game afloat?

    No idea. I'm going to say "possibly" but they will need to look toward EVE numbers and not World of Warcraft numbers.
    Here is the thing I notice about the pvp crowd.

    NOTHING makes them happy.  Look at the plethora of pvp games which have come out in the last 10 years that the crowd jumped on and said how awesome it was only to be a ghost town.

    For that matter a good amount never even had the sales to match the hype.  If you have to pve then they are unhappy, if you have to craft they are unhappy, if you have to do anything except mindlessly kill everyone in your path for no reason they are not happy.  And especially when there are no easy target sheep to kill they are unhappy.  When it comes down to those left who just want the pvp aspect the game then promptly dies.

    A law system needs put in place for it to work.  Most pve players do not mind the random pvp encounter.  But lets not kid ourselves into thinking that is what happens.  No they are camped and bothered until they log out and do not log in anymore.  A good system for that has not been done but pvp players have had plenty to choose from, they just do not like the options and population is one of the constant complaints.

    They would rather play Fortnite at this point and maybe that is what they need.  They have constant pvp 24/7.
    Octagon7711Rnjypsy
  • WenchesnmeadWenchesnmead Member UncommonPosts: 22
    Sovrath said:

    The question is, why do people play these games when the shouldn't be playing these games?
    You effing nailed it. 

    Whats funny to me as well is how people who fall into the category of playing a game when they shouldn't be are usually in my experience you find these same guys complaining they are getting ganked always tend to say "the devs need to do something about this" or "someone should form a guild to deal with this!".

    But these are exactly the people who are the issue. They want everyone else to deal with their issues proactively. They will never try to create a solution in game as you described.

    They will just go on a forum and whine to no end how the game is shit or whine that players dont get the game or understand how it was meant to be played when its themselves who dont fucking understand what the game is about.

    The annoying part for me (which is a topic we could make an unending debate thread about) that really pisses me off in the open world pvp games is the people who complain about being ganked and how that something needs to be changed typically tend to be the same people who when someone complains that a game(especially ARIA) that it sucks and has no depth of content beyond crafting, gathering and pvp.

    That same guy will tell that player he needs to go back to WOW or FF since you want a game on rails when clearly so does he. He doesnt want to play the game as intended and live for the moments exactly as Sovrath describes that make super memorable moments in games like UO and Lineage 2.

    They dont even see how bass ackwards they are and never will.
    parrotpholkGdemami
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 25,918
    edited January 8
    Sovrath said:
    My thought in your original example is that to me introducing these choke points at mining camps does not encourage pvp...it encourages griefing.  

    Encouraging pvp against a crafter is about stupid.  I can hear the defense of this now...well the crafter should join a guild and bring a whole bunch of people to defend him.  For what?  So they can stand there and watch him mine?  That's fun.....




    The question is, why do people play these games when the shouldn't be playing these games?
    On the other hand I would ask...why bother killing these people at all.  There is no challenge to it but my thought is that is exactly why they do it.  If you need to play whack a mole with targets that provide no challenge then the game has bigger problems.  


    In EVE if you came to my alliances home in 0,0 then you would be killed.  I never particularly found it interesting to go to high sec and kill someone in a mining barge.  Woohoo I just killed someone doing the most mind numbing thing the game has to offer!!!!!!  I am AWESOME!!!!!!


    My alliance drew a ton of hate and we were not always well behaved but I never saw the point or use of mindless killing of people who could not fight back.  I could find pvp where I wanted and did not need to incite it by killing miners and hoping they call in the calvary.


    Well, there are two answers there.

    One, it does stoke the fires of animosity/claims resources.

    Two, there are people who have issues.

    I should add that in Lineage 2 I got pretty high for the time and I never pk'ed people who didn't deserve it. But that still doesn't mean I complained if someone offed me.
    Gdemami



  • parrotpholkparrotpholk Member EpicPosts: 4,312
    edited January 8
    Sovrath said:

    Well, there are two answers there.

    One, it does stoke the fires of animosity/claims resources.

    Two, there are people who have issues.

    I should add that in Lineage 2 I got pretty high for the time and I never pk'ed people who didn't deserve it. But that still doesn't mean I complained if someone offed me.
    That last note I completely understand and agree.  I have lost so many expensive ships over the years I lost count in the thousands a long time ago when I was in EVE.  Never did it bother me due to fact I lived in 0,0.

    I am not sure anyone complains about getting killed once or twice.  I believe the loudest people are the ones getting constantly ganked by people who get their low self esteem rocks off by doing it.  I can completely get that because no one plays a game to play dead for a majority of their playtime.  

    To me most of these games are being advertised as a place for anyone.  Yes they have open pvp but that is a component of the game and not the whole game.  Archeage is a good example of that type of game where they wanted all types to play.  It had other issues which run people off but it marketed itself towards everyone and most of these games are doing that.  Darkfall was one exception where they were pretty much giving the finger to pve players.
    MadFrenchie
  • WargfootYVWargfootYV Member UncommonPosts: 261
    edited January 8

    It's more like going to a water park that doesn't have a rules of conduct and getting upset when another kid tries to drown yours.

    Devs that leave griefing opportunities wide open rarely succeed, and the ones that have generally appear to have succeeded by providing options to avoid it completely (private servers) or by being old enough to have diehard fanbases.
    No, it isn't like that at all.

    First, the game does have a ruleset.  The ruleset includes (and you are warned numerous times) that if you step outside of guard protection you may get ganked.  That isn't 'griefing', that is PvP in an open world PvP game.

    Second, in the game I mentioned private servers are available and yet people still complain.

    To define a choke point as 'griefing' -  a choke point (I presume) was designed to encourage PvP, in a PvP game, is silly.

    And again, I'm not trying to justify the behavior of mental midgets who think 6v1 against someone who cannot defend themselves is 'fun'.   I am only expressing exasperation at people who refuse to read the box and then complain when they get burned.
    Gdemami
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 7,873

    It's more like going to a water park that doesn't have a rules of conduct and getting upset when another kid tries to drown yours.

    Devs that leave griefing opportunities wide open rarely succeed, and the ones that have generally appear to have succeeded by providing options to avoid it completely (private servers) or by being old enough to have diehard fanbases.
    No, it isn't like that at all.

    First, the game does have a ruleset.  The ruleset includes (and you are warned numerous times) that if you step outside of guard protection you may get ganked.  That isn't 'griefing', that is PvP in an open world PvP game.

    Second, in the game I mentioned private servers are available and yet people still complain.

    To define a choke point as 'griefing' -  a choke point (I presume) was designed to encourage PvP, in a PvP game, is silly.
    No, but even devs with OWPvP don't encourage griefing.  Things like corpse camping lowbies.  Because they know that it's a death knell to support such behavior, and it doesn't matter if you advertise your game as a literal psycho shit show.

    Encouraging PvP and enabling and encouraging griefing are two different things, something those who try to defend and puff up OWPvP refuse to acknowledge.
    parrotpholk

    image
  • WargfootYVWargfootYV Member UncommonPosts: 261

    I am not sure anyone complains about getting killed once or twice.  I believe the loudest people are the ones getting constantly ganked by people who get their low self esteem rocks off by doing it.  I can completely get that because no one plays a game to play dead for a majority of their playtime.  
    I don't think it is fair to attribute low self esteem to people who are just playing the game per the rules.

    It would be just as fair to claim that people who spend most of their time dead are masochists.

    Let's leave the mind-reading to the pros.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 7,873
    To go back to the water park example: ALL water parks would laugh at you for complaining about getting wet.  They would kick out a kid who repeatedly tried to drown others in said water.
    QuizzicalPhry

    image
  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member EpicPosts: 2,282
    I have to agree with Sovrath but make a detailed distinction. 

    I think if you join a PvP game, then you should be okay with whatever happens within allowed rules. EVE is a perfect example in that regard. Also, EVE is a great example where you can control your level of risk. 

    What I don't like, is getting PK'd due to cheats (a.l.a Diablo 2 and their cheats to go to town, hostile, while having arrows in the air) or games that are poorly designed as not to allow newbies to get a foothold in the game. 

    To further Sovrath. 

    If i'm in EVE and I get ganked. It's like being in the ocean, if a shark attacks you, dont' blame the shark, that is what it does. Every one plays a role in a role playing game. Some play the A-hole role, which is fine. (I do have a problem with people scamming, lying, and cheating though)

    I actually like to gank people in PvP games more to my level or those that are higher level than me. I wouldn't gank noobs mercilessly in a noob zone.

    I just don't play full loot PvP games because what I detest is losing gear as acquiring good gear is the main reason I play, so losing it, deters me. But if there was a good game with PvP that I didn't lose my gear, then yes, I'd gank. Perhaps, you lose your inventory (like project entropia), but not your gear. 

    I once lost $50 in inventory in Project Entropia when i went to a PvP zone by accident lol. Too bad in Entropia, the only people that really PvP are so much higher level than me that i'd get owned hardcore. 

    Cryomatrix
    Gdemami
  • WargfootYVWargfootYV Member UncommonPosts: 261

    No, but even devs with OWPvP don't encourage griefing.  Things like corpse camping lowbies.  Because they know that it's a death knell to support such behavior, and it doesn't matter if you advertise your game as a literal psycho shit show.

    Encouraging PvP and enabling and encouraging griefing are two different things, something those who try to defend and puff up OWPvP refuse to acknowledge.
    IMHO, substantial progression in an open world PVP (full loot, no less) is a recipe for disaster.
    There is no debate on that point - it has been proven many times.

    However, this thread isn't about that since it has been beaten to death about 1,000 times in this forum.

    The thread is about players who hate [insert feature] buying a game that advertises itself as [insert feature] and then demanding that the game be changed to no longer support [insert feature].

    That seems insane to me.
    MadFrenchieGdemami
  • parrotpholkparrotpholk Member EpicPosts: 4,312
    edited January 8

    I am not sure anyone complains about getting killed once or twice.  I believe the loudest people are the ones getting constantly ganked by people who get their low self esteem rocks off by doing it.  I can completely get that because no one plays a game to play dead for a majority of their playtime.  
    I don't think it is fair to attribute low self esteem to people who are just playing the game per the rules.

    It would be just as fair to claim that people who spend most of their time dead are masochists.

    Let's leave the mind-reading to the pros.
    I think you are lumping the entire pvp community into one messy steaming pile when there are 2 very different groups.

    There is a reason pvp games become a wasteland and it is not because they are all horrible games.  

    EVE very much got this right and all play types can play and have an enjoyable time.  I get the game itself is not for everyone however if I was a pve player or high sec trader I could have a very lucrative and more or less good gaming experience.  I could also be a pirate, worm hole explorer or myriad of other things.  Yes there was some high sec griefers but ultimately they died horrible deaths.

    When you advertise your sandbox saying it has all these amazing features then you must have balance.  Balance makes the game better for everyone.  Do not advertise deep crafting and pve experiences and not expect to draw that crowd.  It boggles the mind why people do not see that.  If it was only the hardest core pvp crowd in the game then it would be a very lonely game long term

    Most reds or griefers I have run across are very much the I was beat up in the boys bathroom in high school and now look at me picking on pixels people.  I hold to what I said and was not even trying to be insulting actually.
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 25,918
    To go back to the water park example: ALL water parks would laugh at you for complaining about getting wet.  They would kick out a kid who repeatedly tried to drown others in said water.
    truuuuueee ...

    On the drowning thing  that is ... But that equates to something different for this example. That's causing someone direct harm.

    So if a person were playing an online game and were trying to cause a player direct harm then they would also be arrested.

    But in a video game that touts open pvp?

    In any case, players need to know what they are getting into. It's true that developers want everyone to buy but, and I've said this before, players need to know what they are buying.
    WargfootYVMadFrenchie



  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 6,346

    I am not sure anyone complains about getting killed once or twice.  I believe the loudest people are the ones getting constantly ganked by people who get their low self esteem rocks off by doing it.  I can completely get that because no one plays a game to play dead for a majority of their playtime.  
    I don't think it is fair to attribute low self esteem to people who are just playing the game per the rules.

    It would be just as fair to claim that people who spend most of their time dead are masochists.

    Let's leave the mind-reading to the pros.
    I think you are lumping the entire pvp community into one messy steaming pile when there are 2 very different groups.

    There is a reason pvp games become a wasteland and it is not because they are all horrible games.  

    EVE very much got this right and all play types can play and have an enjoyable time.  I get the game itself is not for everyone however if I was a pve player or high sec trader I could have a very lucrative and more or less good gaming experience.  I could also be a pirate, worm hole explorer or myriad of other things.  Yes there was some high sec griefers but ultimately they died horrible deaths.

    When you advertise your sandbox saying it has all these amazing features then you must have balance.  Balance makes the game better for everyone.  Do not advertise deep crafting and pve experiences and not expect to draw that crowd.  It boggles the mind why people do not see that.  If it was only the hardest core pvp crowd in the game then it would be a very lonely game long term

    Most reds or griefers I have run across are very much the I was beat up in the boys bathroom in high school and now look at me picking on pixels people.  I hold to what I said and was not even trying to be insulting actually.
              We cant assume that that devs are always seprating this ..

    Whos to say that the Crafting And PVE are not there for the PVPers .. they can do all 3 .. Its the person that just wants to craft or just  PVE that is sticking there toes in water they dont belong in some cases..  PvPers enjoy and will participate in all 3 aspects of a PVP sandbox , the problem is players who only want to participate in PVE/Crafting... They are in the wrong sandbox

      If a gamer wants just PVE and or crafting experience there is an endless list for that to participate in .. SO if a game includes PVP you are not the target audience and should expect the rest of the coomunity to cater to there casual desires..

       
    WargfootYV
  • parrotpholkparrotpholk Member EpicPosts: 4,312
    Sovrath said:
    To go back to the water park example: ALL water parks would laugh at you for complaining about getting wet.  They would kick out a kid who repeatedly tried to drown others in said water.


    In any case, players need to know what they are getting into. It's true that developers want everyone to buy but, and I've said this before, players need to know what they are buying.
    Unfortunately a great example to prove they do not is Atlas.

    Most people see the marketing and unlike most of us here do not do their homework before jumping in.
    WargfootYV
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 7,873
    Sovrath said:
    To go back to the water park example: ALL water parks would laugh at you for complaining about getting wet.  They would kick out a kid who repeatedly tried to drown others in said water.
    truuuuueee ...

    On the drowning thing  that is ... But that equates to something different for this example. That's causing someone direct harm.

    So if a person were playing an online game and were trying to cause a player direct harm then they would also be arrested.

    But in a video game that touts open pvp?

    In any case, players need to know what they are getting into. It's true that developers want everyone to buy but, and I've said this before, players need to know what they are buying.
    Doesn't have to be drowning.  You think they wouldn't take issue with a kid following another kid around throwing buckets of water into his face over and over?


    In essence what it boils down to is this: if you're causing a disruption to the point it's evident and interfering with others' experience in a way they can't reasonably engage with the product or avoid, you will be removed because you're bad for business.
    QuizzicalTorval

    image
  • WargfootYVWargfootYV Member UncommonPosts: 261

    Most reds or griefers I have run across are very much the I was beat up in the boys bathroom in high school and now look at me picking on pixels people.  I hold to what I said and was not even trying to be insulting actually.
    So you have extended conversations with these people?
    Enough to know about their childhood experiences?

    I think not.

    I'm sorry, but the mind reading into other people's motivations crosses a line.
    It isn't fair.
  • parrotpholkparrotpholk Member EpicPosts: 4,312

    Most reds or griefers I have run across are very much the I was beat up in the boys bathroom in high school and now look at me picking on pixels people.  I hold to what I said and was not even trying to be insulting actually.
    So you have extended conversations with these people?
    Enough to know about their childhood experiences?

    I think not.

    I'm sorry, but the mind reading into other people's motivations crosses a line.
    It isn't fair.
    Yes, my EVE alliance was full of them actually and had extensive conversations with them.  Not my corp specifically but the overall alliance was littered with them.  It gave them a boost to see their names on other websites being cursed and people whining everytime they wrecked Jita.  

    You could almost hear the pud pounding in the background over voice.

    But I can completely see why you say it is unfair and will leave it at this last post on the topic.  
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 25,918
    Sovrath said:


    Is there an audience for these type of games? Absolutely. Is there a large enough audience for a "good game?" Abstaf**kingtutely. Is there a large enough audience to keep an expensive game afloat?

    No idea. I'm going to say "possibly" but they will need to look toward EVE numbers and not World of Warcraft numbers.
    Here is the thing I notice about the pvp crowd.

    NOTHING makes them happy.  Look at the plethora of pvp games which have come out in the last 10 years that the crowd jumped on and said how awesome it was only to be a ghost town.

    For that matter a good amount never even had the sales to match the hype.  If you have to pve then they are unhappy, if you have to craft they are unhappy, if you have to do anything except mindlessly kill everyone in your path for no reason they are not happy.  And especially when there are no easy target sheep to kill they are unhappy.  When it comes down to those left who just want the pvp aspect the game then promptly dies.

    A law system needs put in place for it to work.  Most pve players do not mind the random pvp encounter.  But lets not kid ourselves into thinking that is what happens.  No they are camped and bothered until they log out and do not log in anymore.  A good system for that has not been done but pvp players have had plenty to choose from, they just do not like the options and population is one of the constant complaints.

    They would rather play Fortnite at this point and maybe that is what they need.  They have constant pvp 24/7.
    Maybe Fortnite is the answer. But for my taste, there really haven't been many great pvp games in the last 10 years.

    I loved Tera pvp but that was more of a proof of concept game than an actual game.
    parrotpholk



  • ShaighShaigh Member RarePosts: 1,910
    MUD was generally heavy when it came to PvE grind and had some PK rules. Most of them never were PvP games. The same can be said about UO and its clones.

    UO suffered a lot due to PK, it stopped new players joining the game and as much as people hated the change that happened to the game the player base increased due to them catering to PvE players.

    20+ years later and developers forgot the lesson.
    Gdemami
    The cynic knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
  • cheyanecheyane Member EpicPosts: 6,043
    edited January 8
    The problem isn't always that cut and dry as people not reading and understanding the type of game they are buying and playing. The developers themselves make concessions like offering immunity items in their cash shop that will make players immune or allow areas in the game to be PvP safe zones. They want the very players you keep saying shouldn't be playing these games. Why are they marketing to them if they don't? So now people are crying foul when the players are complaining about things they are unhappy with but shouldn't you been angry with the developers who wanted these players to play their games in the first place. Why are you blaming the player who wanted to play in an open world with a side dish of PvP?

    Don't hold out that your game can be played by a PvE player or a player who is interested in PvP but not when they are unable to fight back. See making sure you create situations that are unbalanced that places the character engaging in an activity you encouraged and then artificially placing them in jeopardy seems to be a cruel somehow to me. It is perfectly natural for players to feel put upon and their complaints seems a natural consequence.

    From your point of view you say the player should never have tried to play this game. Then does not it also follow that game developers should not be trying to get these players to play their game. It's a double edged sword you want more players but on the other hand you don't want to deal with the complaints and the baggage they bring.

    The best part is when the developer caves in and tries to placate the people complaining and pisses off both sides with half baked solutions that ultimately make the game unpalatable to both sides.
    MadFrenchie
    image
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 7,873
    edited January 8
    I agree with what @cheyane is saying here.

    The sad reality is the low-budget attempts at open world PvP has so stigmatized the label that devs can't lean fully into that feature and expect anything less than total irrelevance.  

    It's gonna take some rehabbing of the feature for devs to lean into that as a marquis feature without also making concessions to less hardcore features that are more widely popular.
    parrotpholkcheyaneWargfootYVQuizzical

    image
  • WizardryWizardry Member EpicPosts: 15,572
    edited January 8
    Well op your statements held a lot of water back a few years ago but now,all the developers are claiming EARLY ACCESS.

    They are saying we are helping them build the game,being early means lots more to come right?
    So under the current pretense i would say it is perfectly fine to ask devs to design something,they say they listen well then let's prove it.
    Now of course if we are seeing a finished product then you shouldn't expect a certain design decision to change but still no harm in asking.Some game design ideas can't be foreseen in the early or even testing stages so we and the developers need to keep an open mind several days...weeks into a game.

    On the subject of "player conflict",we should remember these games and their designs are NOT meant to be played 100% of time player killing.Think of the extreme,a clan of 20 players just stood at your home doorway 24/7 and kept you from ever eating,is that be design MEANT to happen?Obviously no because the game and the developer would lose players.
    There NEEDS to be a rule set,a sort of law within any pk game otherwise it turns out a mess because unlike real life,there are no phones to call 911 or the cops or the sheriff or Dudley Doright and the mounties to come and save the day.

    Now there is a different way,allow players or groups of to make claims,if you are trying to harvest/mine inside their claim,then yeah open season.Then if you want "incentive"by design,i have a very good solution.Normal harvesting rares is maybe 0.5-1%,well if you harvest inside an enemy claim make that % maybe 5-10% or even 20%.The problem with getting too carried away is then large clans will always go to YOUR claim to harvest for the higher% so you need a few tweaks to the rule set.Idk w/o a lot of thought perhaps +1% for each more people than those harvesting.So if a single player harvesting in a zone versus 10 foes then the % is maybe higher like 20% more rares.
    cheyane

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 7,873
    edited January 8
    Sovrath said:
    Sovrath said:


    Is there an audience for these type of games? Absolutely. Is there a large enough audience for a "good game?" Abstaf**kingtutely. Is there a large enough audience to keep an expensive game afloat?

    No idea. I'm going to say "possibly" but they will need to look toward EVE numbers and not World of Warcraft numbers.
    Here is the thing I notice about the pvp crowd.

    NOTHING makes them happy.  Look at the plethora of pvp games which have come out in the last 10 years that the crowd jumped on and said how awesome it was only to be a ghost town.

    For that matter a good amount never even had the sales to match the hype.  If you have to pve then they are unhappy, if you have to craft they are unhappy, if you have to do anything except mindlessly kill everyone in your path for no reason they are not happy.  And especially when there are no easy target sheep to kill they are unhappy.  When it comes down to those left who just want the pvp aspect the game then promptly dies.

    A law system needs put in place for it to work.  Most pve players do not mind the random pvp encounter.  But lets not kid ourselves into thinking that is what happens.  No they are camped and bothered until they log out and do not log in anymore.  A good system for that has not been done but pvp players have had plenty to choose from, they just do not like the options and population is one of the constant complaints.

    They would rather play Fortnite at this point and maybe that is what they need.  They have constant pvp 24/7.
    Maybe Fortnite is the answer. But for my taste, there really haven't been many great pvp games in the last 10 years.

    I loved Tera pvp but that was more of a proof of concept game than an actual game.
    I think there's a distinct difference between what I would consider Fortnite's "massive" PvP and an MMORPG's.

    I feel devs are too hastily dropping any hint of the RPG when they start talking PvP systems.  That's a mistake.  You won't compete with Fortnite in an arena battle.  Stop trying.  You're running on an engine not built to support that twitch-based, ultra-fast gameplay style (talking the pure MMORPG genre here).  Stop trying to retrofit that shit.

    Make a PvP system that includes objectives, environments, and tactical features that pull from RPG systems so you don't need to try and rewrite reality by trying to create a workable system where folks can PvE level like it's an RPG and then jump into a battle of hundreds of people like they're playing one big CoD match.  Those two game types are not compatible in a purely online game.

    Create environments players won't encounter elsewhere; why the hell can't giants or dragons show up sometimes in a PvP/RvR lake to attempt to lay waste to both armies while they're weakened fighting one another?  You won't find that in Fortnite.

    Create objectives that make sense.  Get rid of this capture the flag, team deathmatch, or point control bullshit we see in every competitive online game ever.  Capture a relic that can be used by the owner to channel magic into a powerful one-time use weapon that can lay waste to a battlefield.  Hell, at this point, I'd take a damn ring that turns the wearer invisible but has a chance to draw out a band of orcs and a small group of wraiths attempting to recover the ring for their dark master.  :|
    Gdemami

    image
Sign In or Register to comment.