Howdy, Stranger!

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

The death of FFA PvP

I posted about this in many threads, but never got the replies I was looking for.

Who here thinks that FFA PvP and open loot died as soon as people realized that they could sell in game items for real world money?

I believe this is what killed this genre and turned it into a carebear wasteland of look alike and do alike characters.

So what do you think?

If you have another idea, please post

 

«13456

Comments

  • stephen_sofstephen_sof Member, Newbie CommonPosts: 388

    problem is even the hardcore pvps would be really pissed if they got ganked and would hate the game so thats why its fading away

    "It's the darkness that brings us power"

  • scaramooshscaramoosh Member Posts: 3,424

    I guess developers realised only a handful of people enjoy this!
    Most people are happy with WOW's PVP and it shows with 5 million subs :)

     

     

    Con: more games will copy WOW.

    ---------------------------------------------
    image
    Don't click here...no2

  • MarkuMarku Member Posts: 452

    I'd have to say Loot is the problem, People are afraid of losing what is important to them. What they worked hours to achieve.

    image
    image

  • SheistaSheista Member UncommonPosts: 1,203

    It happened when alternatives were given.

    Look at AC for instance. People -loved- the PvP in AC. It was only a small community, and then there was the large community on the full-PvP server. Then, the developers added PK-lite. PK with no penalties. No looting, no death penalty. Nothing. In fact, as soon as you were buffed you could go right back into the fray because you had no stat penalty for dying. The day that was introduced, red-PKing completely died on the white servers. COMPLETELY. The only reason people went red-PK was for arranged duels with people to make it interesting.

    In EQ, players were reduced to -no looting-. Which really, was just dumb. On Rallos Zek, people played it to have looting. There were droppable items, and there were no-drop items. It worked fine. Things were balanced. You could either be powerful and wear your good things and risk losing one of them because they weren't no-drop, or you could wear something crappy but not risk losing anything. Instead, they cater-ed to the masses and took away looting so that people from white servers would enjoy PvPing more. My opinion is, if you don't want consequences, you shouldn't PvP.

    Instead of the ability to lose an item, developers are just giving faction hits, with no real penalty. Before there became alternatives (PvP without penalty), players loved PvP. There was no reason to hate it, because those who didn't want to lose things simply didn't PvP. They could duel if they wanted... that was enough. They should have left it like that. PvP should have stayed with the looting and such, and they should have kept dueling to where you didn't lose things. It's a simple concept, but no game seems to want to try it like that now.

  • RoinRoin Member RarePosts: 3,378

    I love PvPing, but I see no point in adding looting to it. I don't want your armor, weapons, items, or money. I want your life. I'm not a rogue or a thief. I usually play Warrior or Archer types. If you PvP for the loot. Then you really aren't a pvp'er in my opinion. You are just a step above a PvE'er, in which you are doing the same thing.

    PvP is for the Challenge or Bragging rights.
    PvE is for the collection of Loot and Items.
    Ganking/PKing is for those that lack the balls to be PvPers.

    In War - Victory.
    In Peace - Vigilance.
    In Death - Sacrifice.

  • hadzhadz Member Posts: 712

    You forgot to add a very important option in your poll:

    FFA PvP is a pile of steaming horse manure!  ;)

  • Entreri28Entreri28 Member Posts: 589

    Oh good, someone that doesn't enjoy challenge.  Why do you even care about posting in a pvp thread if you don't like it? 

    Anyway, I think it is because of whiners.  The items being sold on ebay shouldn't matter if the game is made right like UO was because it was personal skill not amount of time character was trained or items gained.  At least there is a few games coming out that promise to fix this(Roma Victor, Darkfall, The Chronicle).

    Your mind is like a parachute, it's only useful when it's open.
    Don't forget, you can use the block function on trolls.

  • hadzhadz Member Posts: 712



    Originally posted by Entreri28

    Oh good, someone that doesn't enjoy challenge.  Why do you even care about posting in a pvp thread if you don't like it? 



    FFA PvP in a MMORPG is NOT a challenge.  It's generally an uneven contest one way or another, and it has the added drawback of encouraging griefing.  It has NO redeeming features...FULL STOP.

    PS.  I thought the thread was about the DEATH of FFA PvP...that's why I'm here...to see, and revel in it!  ;)

  • KaptainZergKaptainZerg Member Posts: 322


    Originally posted by Sheista
    It happened when alternatives were given.the developers added PK-lite. PK with no penalties. No looting, no death penalty. Nothing. In fact, as soon as you were buffed you could go right back into the fray because you had no stat penalty for dying. The day that was introduced, red-PKing completely died on the white servers. COMPLETELY..

    Shiesta is correct. When an alternative was offered the carebear impulse in many players destroyed the warrior spirit inside, and that was it. The game devs reported what had happened to the bookeeper and he smiled and said: this is gonna be almost as good as selling crack!

  • asdarasdar Member UncommonPosts: 662

    I love FFA PVP, but I don't think it had a thing to do with care bears or looting.

    People don't like being ganked by people five levels higher or packs and they hate the trash talking that goes with it. I don't mind the ganking but hate the trash talk myself.

    It's the FFA PvP'ers that did it, the ones who call anyone not for FFA care bear.

    Instead of promoting and defending fair fights, honor and respect they'd rather talk trash and insult people. I love FFA PvP and I get sick of those guys.

    Not enough people even get to the level they can really experience a fair fight.

    If you re-did your poll to give that option I bet a lot would pick it.

    Asdar

  • Jimmy_ScytheJimmy_Scythe Member CommonPosts: 3,586

    FFA PvP in MMORPGs is dead?! THANK THE GODS!!!

    Seriously, If I want to PvP, I'll play Counter-Strike, Planetside, Red Alert 2, or Soul Calibur 3. PvP in MMORPGs is for people that have no skills and are afraid of a fair contest.

  • SpiritofGameSpiritofGame Member UncommonPosts: 1,329

    With Darkfall ramping up its beta (at long last) we will see when and if this game ever opens just what the market demand is for full PK/PvP including full looting and even death by "friendly fire."

    The Devs say there won't be a lot of griefing (wait ... gotta stop laughing before I can type again) because the game penalizes griefing.  Trust me, if it can be done, it WILL be done.

    Now, I admit, don't we all love the idea of finding some guy in the wilderness who has really pissed you off in town and just wasting that sucker and taking all his stuff and laughing when he sends tells cursing you out?  Oh wow, that does sound like fun -- but as any fan of PvP knows what is much more likely to happen is 5, 6, 8 v 1 ganking, looting and spitting on the corpse.

    That "world model" is so freaking criminal, anti-social and sociopathic it even worries me (and I love PvP).

    Why did FFA PvP dwindle?

    Wasn't the Carebears who killed it ... was the Griefers and Gankers who killed it.  Abused the system so badly, created such ill-will, that people closed their accounts and left the game.  Meaning: took the cash right from the hands of the Devs.  Yikes!

    "Holy crap," screamed the Devs, "people are leaving the game just because they 1) get killed a lot while minding their own business 2) lose the stuff they are carrying and wearing 3) lose the stuff in their homes and 4) cannot even seem to leave town without getting ganked by roaming squads of PK'ers!  Oh crap, we thought they would just LOVE the danger and revel in being the hapless sheep continually being fleeced!  Wow, guess we were wrong.  Go figure."

    Well the good news is Darkfall might open and PK'ers may have their glory times again.

    Or not.

    image

  • kilaankilaan Member Posts: 15

    Yeah, definetly the gankers and griefers.

    Everquest example, Druid is kiting a HG, Wizard says heh, watch this.

    Wizard casts root.  Druid is Rooted to the ground and is getting beat on by a HG, Druid dies and loses a weeks worth of exp.  Druid comes back and kills wizard but there is no exp loss for PvP (druid lost exp because while the wizard rooted him he died by PvE) and he doesnt drop any items because he is naked.

    Shadowbane example, in a group minding our own business at level 30.  All of a sudden 2 groups of level 60's come and waste us.  Lose all our unequiped items and our equiped items lose mass durability.  Okay so we go somewhere else and 2 different groups come by(while we are fighting mind you) and waste us.

    Don't get me wrong, I loved Everquest, and once I found the perfect guild I loved Shadowbane(till i got fed up with all it's bugs) 

    You mix anonymity with low self esteem and the chance to make other peoples lives as miserable as yours breeds trouble.

    I am really looking forward to Darkfall and hope it lives up to my expectations.  It mostly likely will not but I can always hope.

  • DamonVileDamonVile Member CommonPosts: 4,818

    The only reason I can think of why people want/need looting is because beating someone isn't enough for you. You need to know you've ruined the other persons day/game. You've done more then win, you've proven you're better, and you've caused them grief.

  • dark-merlindark-merlin Member Posts: 314

    peope usualy dont like FFA PVP because they get ganked, or die alot in general and loose things they work for ingame

    the thing that most have to understand, if you get good enough at a certain game, better than most, and/or have a good PK group to play with, you will not like non FFA games anymore..at least that is usualy the case.

     

    point is, keep working at it, if you fail try again, and again, with time you can be the best, and grow a thicker skin too, dont let the idiots put you down. However it is not easy, never is, just like real life. If you dont want to put in the effort then well...play WOW..no problem with that, but dont bitch about someone who wants a challenge from a game.

     

  • VolkmarVolkmar Member UncommonPosts: 2,501

    I think what caused FFA PvP reduced interests nowadays is the fact that NOBODY likes to be killed in an unfair fight AND lose all my equipment/money on top of it.

    It is so easy to exploit that is not funny, in Ultima online you had squadrons of people clothed just with the death tunic, a crappy halberd, a mask and some reagents going around mass murdering anybody that moved and getting not only their money and precious items, but also the crap things like bandages, tools, ore anything. leaving nothing behind.

    This was done just for runing the other person's game as a pick axe wasn't really valuable.

    No wonder people got FED UP with it. getting ganked is a reality of PvP and we can't really avoid it, but it if at least i am not reduced to be unable to play the game for it, much the better, thank you.

    "If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, if you teach him how to fish, you feed him for a lifetime"



  • hadzhadz Member Posts: 712



    Originally posted by dark-merlin

    if you get good enough at a certain game, better than most, and/or have a good PK group to play with, you will not like non FFA games anymore..at least that is usualy the case.



    So, when your "good enough" lvl 50 hits that level 40 in the back while he's fighting mobs tell me how good that makes you feel, and how much of a challenge it is for you?

    And when your "good PK group" kills that lone or paired PvEer minding their own business tell me how good that makes you feel, and whether it really is a challenge!

    We are talking about MMORPGs here!  They are rarely, if ever, a level playing field and to penalise players who aren't playing the game for the PvP is stupid.  I DON'T WANT to get "GOOD" at PKing, because in nearly every case it means I'm hurting someone else to do it.  The whole PK, griefing, ganking thing is anti-social behaviour and doesn't belong anywhere, let alone in a game.  Just look at the comments that come from so many of the FFA PvP players (even in forums) and you'll see why being good at PKing is NOT a thing that any well-adjusted person would want to be.  (Don't want to generalise too much, as I'm sure some people are doing it as an outlet and not as the anti-social behaviour it seems, but honestly take it to the FPS arena where it will actually mean something in terms of "skill"!)

  • dark-merlindark-merlin Member Posts: 314

    me personally i dont grief or gank, i never have in my whole pk career, however i was one of the best PKs in the FFA server that i played. I know that i am not in the "usual crowd" with PKers, but i am a PKer nonetheless, however i try not to grief anyone, only enemies of my clan or people that have wronged me in the past.

     

    now about the lvl 50 killing the level 40 (lets say that was me) while fighting a mob. Well i would never get too upset because of this, one-it is just a bunch of pixels anyway, two-if i am in a FFA game i will be expecting that, and i would live with the consequences of not being alert and ready to fight at any moment. Simple and to the point i hope

  • hadzhadz Member Posts: 712



    Originally posted by dark-merlin

    me personally i dont grief or gank, i never have in my whole pk career, however i was one of the best PKs in the FFA server that i played. I know that i am not in the "usual crowd" with PKers, but i am a PKer nonetheless, however i try not to grief anyone, only enemies of my clan or people that have wronged me in the past.
    now about the lvl 50 killing the level 40 (lets say that was me) while fighting a mob. Well i would never get too upset because of this, one-it is just a bunch of pixels anyway, two-if i am in a FFA game i will be expecting that, and i would live with the consequences of not being alert and ready to fight at any moment. Simple and to the point i hope



    Fair enough.  You're obviously not the run-of-the-mill PvPer then, and that's good.  (Unfortunately for you I think your game has been ruined by other PvPers attitudes and styles of play)  I still stick by the belief that MMOs really don't lend themselves to PvP because of the myriad of non-skill-based things in them that lead to a seldom level playing field.
  • n2soonersn2sooners Member UncommonPosts: 926

    I think it comes down to most people not wanting to play games with people who run around calling others names (like carebear) and ganking new players (who then quit and never get hooked on the game). In short, the thing that hurts open PvP the most are the players.

    image image

  • krulosdimerakrulosdimera Member Posts: 2

    I read a lot. 'try to keep quiet, since there's usually a lot of animosity floating around, and also because I don't think a large post count really amounts to anything.

    But PVP as a mechanic is very dear to my heart, and so I figure I might as well put my long-winded writing skills to work on its proper preservation.

    FFA PVP died because of the carebears. People--all people--even skilled, uber-pwning PK'gods--hate being griefed. --and by griefed, I don't mean the numerous and inconsistently exclusive clinical ganking definitions. When I say griefed, I mean killed unfairly. Killed while in combat with another player or mob, killed by overwhelming numbers, killed by a player 20-levels higher. The whole schpiel.

    It's just not fun. Of related concern especially to me, is the fact that such a mentality is held by those who consider it a prime practice: It wasn't the widespread concern of other players that a more enjoyable experience would be not only more popular, but more marketable. No, not that: It was the carebears whining. The word carebears is an affront to any concept of respect among gamers, and in any effort to cultivate genuine discussion on the subject of PVP, it should be the first thing to go. People opposed to FFA PVP as defined by the OP, including myself, are not PVP cowards out to ruin anybody's fun. We are not unskilled players who should just stay out of PVP, nor are we anti-MMO or any of the other numerous things people have employed to characterize us.

    That said, the ultimate difficulty with unrestricted murder and looting of other characters from a strictly gaming point of view (I'll get to economics and development later), is the psychological polarization of the game itself. This is true of any singular PVP encounter, regardless of the type: The killing player(s) has fun at the expense of the fun of the dying player(s). There is, almost, a directly inverse relationship in the quality of someone's enjoyment in such an encounter. The sweeter it is for the victor, the more demoralizing it is for the loser. Now, in a low-penalty environment, this dichotomy is lessened, usually, in a type of pendulum system. I'll use DAOC as an example: Group of Mids go out into Thidranki, find a solo Hib and butcher him. Half hour later, more Hibs are on, and the formerly dead person returns to kill Mids, and the net gain in enjoyment is better on both sides.

    In an all-loot situation, this potentiality is almost eliminated outright, as the distance between an initial encounter and the possibility for retribution is at times enormous. By the time the griefed player can reequip himself sufficiently, the point of avenging his death several weeks ago is moot. Thus, there is, at least at a glance, the possibility that altogether it's possible, and in many scenarios very likely, that more people will be griefed and have no fun than people who will grief and have fun. If one of the first objectives of a game is to be fun, then the effort is lost at that point. A level 60 Night Elf rogue camped out in the Barrens can kill a dozen Horde before any response is raised on a good day. 1 person has a great time playing the game. 12 people have a bad time.

    In these incidents, the potential for, or at least the knowledge of, eventual retribution fuels the tolerance of griefing. People will put up with ganking given the possibility that they themselves might become the gankers eventually. In WOW, this sense of entitlement goes basically unmitigated, and so PVP servers flourish.

    In a system wherein there is the possibility that that sense of retribution can be halted by the inability to advance at all due to griefing (no equipment=no leveling, not to mention the possibility of losing experience in the process), and compounded by the frustration of the griefing incident itself, all tolerance is lost, and players will quit.

    At this point, the game has become unenjoyable, and as such, unmarketable. Therein lies why such a game is not traditionally successful, and I imagine the logic behind why no such game is going to be developed except with the explicit intention of being marketed to the most tolerant of individuals.


    Now to the individual mindsets of players: It is peculiar to me that most of the discussion for FFA PVP is not a genuine plea for a challenging test of skill on the parts of players with high consequences for failure. To those in favor of FFA PVP, I ask, seriously, how would you feel about a system where there was free and open PVP, with full looting, but only available to characters (let's employ a WOW model): level 60 and with 20+ hours in MC or better? No one who doesn't meet those requirements can be killed and looted, nor can they kill and loot. Do you think that's fair and enjoyable?

    And more tellingly, if not, why not?

    I venture, albeit perhaps prematurely, that such an environment is specifically not pleasant for those who supposedly favor FFA PVP on the stated basis that it restricts freedom, and because it makes the game easier for those who level to 60 without the threat of being killed.

    To which: Is it in anyway less fair to presume that no players have to risk being ganked, than to presume that all players must risk it? It's as level a playing field, potentially, either way. Or, propose we have a flag system wherein lower level characters who desire a more challenging experience can open themselves up to being ganked on their way to 60, but which is optional, but available for those who desire the risk.


    The answers to these hypotheticals, I believe, are the most revealing source of information concerning the true ends of many "hardcore" PVPers. I don't believe the effort is for a challenging game. In a small way, perhaps it is, but I believe the truer end is predatory in nature. It's a plea by those who, for some pseudo-gnostic self-concept which is beyond my logic, believe that they can evade being ganked on the way up by superior skill, and then become top-tier gankers themselves. They are, in short, willing to put faith in their own ability to mitigate disaster on the way up, in exchange for the possibility of causing disasters for others for their own delight in the end. This is not behavior which is rewarded by gaming companies, not only due to the immarketability, but also, at heart, due to the shaky ethical footing on which it stands.


    At the same time, my effort is not, by any means, to categorize griefers as psychotic anti-social people. That's simply untrue. I love to gank, and I suppose I'm one of few people who're willing to admit that I've come to terms with my own deep-seated sadism. To be frank, there's nothing in the world that would give me more joy right this moment than to log onto my Shaman and head into Alliance central, leaving a trail of stripped naked experience-drained corpses on my way. There is something innately fun in knowing that you've profited, quite a bit, and at the same time completely ruined someone else's day. Preferably someone innocent. If you're lucky, maybe even a child. --and not just ruined their day. ruined their whole six months of toiling game experience; all their carefully planned raids, all their instancing, gone to waste in one carefully placed Shock. Hell, that poor guy might even cancel his subscription immediately. That would be the ultimate reward, wouldn't it?

    Point is, in an MMO, there must come a point of equilibrium, even at the expense of certain liberties, in such a fashion which isn't terribly far from the rule of law, particularly tort. This is where the grand and atrocious carebear front finds its most infuriating last stand. The label is a last ditch ad hominem, because the plain fact is that a modicum of respect must be met when dealing with other players, and an effort of developmental isolationism (I want a game for FFA PVPers, 'cause that's the kinda gamer I am, and if you're not hardcore, don't play it!) is simply unrealistic for anyone who is genuinely in favor of a broad-scale MMO genre. It is much wiser, for anyone who actually invisions to play an appealing game, to seek after compromises, one of which, it has been established, is the attempt to preserve as free as possible PVP, while curtailing the elements which accomplish no more than the frustration of the defeated parties. --that is, griefing. Griefing has to go.


    For those of us who like PVP in most forms, I believe it is far more valuable to simply accept that FFA PVP is, in short, a thing of the past, and work for ways to make PVP challenging and the consequences of it (on both ends) meaningful. Is it so much to ask that you don't get to ruin someone's day? What if we give you exp for PVP, or make characters drop loot based on mob loot tables (yes, I know, exploits galore)? You still have your reward, but they don't have the frustration to deal with. If you want the frustration, then you can just delete your items if you get ganked. Is that any different for those who desire to receive the "challenge"?


    Anyway, I think I'll wrap it up. I know I started rambling a couple paragraphs in anyway. Nevertheless, if you read the whole thing, particularly if you're one of those people who insist that FFA PVP is teh hardcore and everybody else is teh carebears, consider the questions, especially. What is it you really want? I hope my assumptions can be proven wrong.

    Peace and safety.

  • DamonVileDamonVile Member CommonPosts: 4,818

    Wow, I'll give that a 10 for rants...but what alot of writing to make some pretty simple points.

  • asdarasdar Member UncommonPosts: 662

    There have been quite a few pure pvp games. If they had a following every care bear could quit and they'd be successful just with hard core PvP'rs.

    The logic that care bears killed it is like saying that eskimo's killed the swimsuit industry. They're not even a real part of it.

    Get enough PvP'rs and it'll make it. The problem is that more people aren't playing PvP, that's pretty obvious. The reason they're not playing isn't because of care bears, it's because of gankers and  griefers.

    Asdar

  • UmbroodUmbrood Member UncommonPosts: 1,809

    Well this is an easy one to answer.

    The carebears did not kill FFA PvP, the fact that you killed/ganked/griefed all the carebears to extinction did, ( to a point were they just left ).

    The people who scream for FFA PvP, full body loot and perma death, THESE are the ones that killed the features they so want to have.

    It reminds me of that simpson episode when they are in the wild west and all they eat is buffalo, until they are all dead, then by a chance they see like only a couple left Homer shoots them at once.

    Should a game with these features arise again, like old UO, only days will pass until the idiots have shot the game to smithereens.

    These games needs carebears for the gankers to prey upon, because it is rare they prey upon each other cause there is a chance they will die then, if you chaase them away and you wont fight each other then what purpose does the whole thing serve?

    Risk VS reward I often hear, but if there is only risk and no reward, and only reward but no risk? ( As is the facts in most griefs/ganks)..

    End of bloody story.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Originally posted by Jerek_

    I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • pezitpezit Member UncommonPosts: 63

    Edit: Look at the post below for my thoughts in better english :)

Sign In or Register to comment.