Howdy, Stranger!

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

Care Bears Can Kill (If PVP was Fair and Competitive)

1235

Comments

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member EpicPosts: 6,600
    edited April 2017
    Everything you described except remaining neutral between to warring kingdoms can be done in a pve game and many have been done. Horizons now istaria when the AI used to attack cities you had to do all that stuff. Fix walls, reinforce walls, stockpile supplies.

    Diplomacy and trade deals can also be done and have been done through guilds and even individual Crafters in many games, without the need for an actual diplomatic UI.


    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited April 2017






    Everything you described except remaining neutral between to warring kingdoms can be done in a pve game and many have been done. Horizons now istaria when the AI used to attack cities you had to do all that stuff. Fix walls, reinforce walls, stockpile supplies.

    Diplomacy and trade deals can also be done and have been done through guilds and even individual Crafters in many games.








    Sure, it's possible to do certain things with AI mobs and scripted events, but it's not the same.  To me, playing card games, chess, Monopoly, Life, Risk, Axis & Allies, or Samurai Swords (aka Shogun) is always more fun to play with people than to play against the computer.  Even in pencil-and-paper rpgs, there is a human element controlling the monsters and npcs.  They are called the Dungeon or Game Master. 

    As I've said before in another thread, I'm fairly confident that humans will always make more intelligent, challenging, interesting, creative, and imaginative opponents than AI.  Also, there's not so much need to constantly create new content if the players themselves are creating the majority of the content for each other.

    But you don't have to agree or ever play such a game.  No one will force you to play a game you don't want to play.  I hope.


  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member EpicPosts: 6,600
    I don't mean to sound like a dick. I do mean to drive home that point though that you are going to have to expand on that if you want to get the pve people in whatever game that has pvp.

    Many games have also instituted player made content, usually in ways that involve dungeon making, or making quests. Heck even without the formal ability I've seen people just shout out, "X reward for first person that accomplishes this feat..."

    All forms of player made content. 

    Your right that humans are often more interesting, also more irritating. 
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited April 2017










    I don't mean to sound like a dick. I do mean to drive home that point though that you are going to have to expand on that if you want to get the pve people in whatever game that has pvp.

    Many games have also instituted player made content, usually in ways that involve dungeon making, or making quests. Heck even without the formal ability I've seen people just shout out, "X reward for first person that accomplishes this feat..."

    All forms of player made content. 

    Your right that humans are often more interesting, also more irritating. 










    Have you read all of my posts in this thread? 

    And, yes, I agree that people can be irritating at times, but we often have to take the good with the bad in life.  Just the way it goes.

    But there are some people that simply never want to compete with another human being for anything.  Obviously, a game that involves PvP would not be for such people.  Cooperation is better than competition, but the ability to choose to cooperate is not quite so meaningful if we can't also choose to compete.

    EDIT:  Human history has been an endless cycle of moments and situations where people have chosen to either cooperate or compete with each other.  And the cycle continues to the present day, even up until this very minute.  Do I try to help someone, hurt them, or ignore them?  Do I build people up, tear them down, or leave them alone?  Do I speak to someone kindly, harshly, or with indifference?  Do I love a person, hate a person, or not care either way about a person?  All these options we have in life, our ability to weigh the potential consequences or rewards of our choices, and our potential decisions at any given time are what make life interesting and meaningful.  Our choices may result in benefits and/or drawbacks, advantages and/or disadvantages, positives and/or negatives.  We have the ability to effect or change some person or some part of the world every day, every hour, every moment.

    Life wouldn't be worth living if everything I did everyday was scripted.  Nor do I believe that playing a game where everything is scripted is worth my time.
  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member EpicPosts: 6,600
    edited April 2017
    I've skimmed through the whole thread and kept tabs on it as I was participating earlier as well. I've read many of your posts. No I didn't read every single post. Perhaps I missed something. 

    There are also other forms of competition that do not involve killing the other player or being killed by them. Crafting comes to mind quite well for that. As does some form of merchant (yourself, npc, auction house whatever it is).

    The person that doesn't want to touch pvp at all, there is no hope of attracting them. I'm thinking more of people like me. That only occasionally pvp, we hate being ganked because it interrupts whatever goal we are trying to do, would not gank the person that was just sitting there fishing. Factions seem interesting and add a touch of excitement but the previous sentence still applies. What is the draw for me that I can't either already get in some pve game or in a theoretical future well made pve game. 

    - edit. Just went through your posts on this thread. 
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • ZionBaneZionBane Member UncommonPosts: 328


    @ZionBane - FREEDOM!  More fun, more challenge, opportunities for true role-playing, the ability to effect and change the world with words and deeds.  No need to repeat the same actions over and over while waiting for new content to be released.  The players will create most of the game's content themselves.  You will most likely never play the same game twice.


    @cantankerousmage

    Ok, how would the PvP allow me to change the world/game, overall, in a manner that say, PvE, does not also allow. Would I be able to say, lead a or participate in charge that destroys a starting city, raze it to the ground?

    Now if you say yes, now my next question is, what would inspire me, as a player, to play a game where I could watch all the money, and time of my life, I have invested into a game, get utterly destroyed?

    I understand there is a select group of people that would like that, but, what attraction to me, as a carebear, (or a mostly solo player due to time/obligations limitations) would there be to play a game where I sincerely risk loosing everything after perhaps years and maybe thousands of real life dollars have been invested into the game, simply because, lets say, some member of large clan took a dislike to me? 

    What would be the attraction to the game where I would legitimately want to invest myself into it? 

    As it stands, if I just want to kill, I can play MOBA's, if I want to world build, there are plenty of games that allow user content, if I want to do realms vs realms or World vs World, there are many PvX games out there that provide that.

    In short, what would be there in this PvP game, that would entice me to buy it?

  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited April 2017




    I've skimmed through the whole thread and kept tabs on it as I was participating earlier as well. I've read many of your posts. No I didn't read every single post. Perhaps I missed something. 

    There are also other forms of competition that do not involve killing the other player or being killed by them. Crafting comes to mind quite well for that. As does some form of merchant (yourself, npc, auction house whatever it is).

    The person that doesn't want to touch pvp at all, there is no hope of attracting them. I'm thinking more of people like me. That only occasionally pvp, we hate being ganked because it interrupts whatever goal we are trying to do, would not gank the person that was just sitting there fishing. Factions seem interesting and add a touch of excitement but the previous sentence still applies. What is the draw for me that I can't either already get in some pve game or in a theoretical future well made pve game. 

    - edit. Just went through your posts on this thread. 




    What if a war that eventually shook the foundations of your game world and dramatically changed the course of future events was started because someone robbed you or killed you while you were fishing?

    Wherever humans or creatures based humans exist, they will fight each other at some point in time.  People do not always get along.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited April 2017


    ZionBane said:








    @ZionBane - FREEDOM!  More fun, more challenge, opportunities for true role-playing, the ability to effect and change the world with words and deeds.  No need to repeat the same actions over and over while waiting for new content to be released.  The players will create most of the game's content themselves.  You will most likely never play the same game twice.






    @cantankerousmage

    Ok, how would the PvP allow me to change the world/game, overall, in a manner that say, PvE, does not also allow. Would I be able to say, lead a or participate in charge that destroys a starting city, raze it to the ground?

    Now if you say yes, now my next question is, what would inspire me, as a player, to play a game where I could watch all the money, and time of my life, I have invested into a game, get utterly destroyed?

    I understand there is a select group of people that would like that, but, what attraction to me, as a carebear, (or a mostly solo player due to time/obligations limitations) would there be to play a game where I sincerely risk loosing everything after perhaps years and maybe thousands of real life dollars have been invested into the game, simply because, lets say, some member of large clan took a dislike to me? 

    What would be the attraction to the game where I would legitimately want to invest myself into it? 

    As it stands, if I just want to kill, I can play MOBA's, if I want to world build, there are plenty of games that allow user content, if I want to do realms vs realms or World vs World, there are many PvX games out there that provide that.

    In short, what would be there in this PvP game, that would entice me to buy it?






    PvP is the only hope of creating a true role-playing game online without the need for incredibly advanced AI and/or VR.

    If we want a good MMORPG PvP game, we need to get rid of level and gear progression.  It's not realistic anyway.  Stats should only represent skills and abilities, and they should have limits to how much they can be trained.  No one should be able to be a god in a PvP game.  Unless everyone is a god in the game from the beginning.  No one should be able to master every skill or ability.  Geniuses are rare in real life. 

    What if progression is tied to the advancement of one's family/community/tribe/clan/nation and the perpetuation of a family line, just like in real life.  Fable II allows you to have children.  Why can't we have children and play one of them after our original character dies?  If our character dies without an heir, we can start over with another character in the same community.  I've played a my share of mmorpgs, and I would rather do that in such a game than climb another hamster wheel treadmill grind ladder in some WoW clone or imitator with different bells and whistles.

    Wealth, property, possessions, and titles can be passed down in the same family line, just like in the real world.  There's a reason the desire to reproduce is so strong in humans.  It is built into our DNA.



  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member EpicPosts: 6,600
    edited April 2017
















    I've skimmed through the whole thread and kept tabs on it as I was participating earlier as well. I've read many of your posts. No I didn't read every single post. Perhaps I missed something. 

    There are also other forms of competition that do not involve killing the other player or being killed by them. Crafting comes to mind quite well for that. As does some form of merchant (yourself, npc, auction house whatever it is).

    The person that doesn't want to touch pvp at all, there is no hope of attracting them. I'm thinking more of people like me. That only occasionally pvp, we hate being ganked because it interrupts whatever goal we are trying to do, would not gank the person that was just sitting there fishing. Factions seem interesting and add a touch of excitement but the previous sentence still applies. What is the draw for me that I can't either already get in some pve game or in a theoretical future well made pve game. 

    - edit. Just went through your posts on this thread. 










    What if a war that eventually shook the foundations of your game world and dramatically changed the course of future events was started because someone robbed you or killed you while you were fishing?

    Wherever humans or creatures based humans exist, they will fight each other at some point in time.  People do not always get along.






    That could be very interesting. One way I would expand on that would be say artifacts. The explorers could find them, crafters could build them and they would help dramatically in the supply, stock, upkeep, defense... whatever. They can also be captured.

    edit - I disagree with your true role playing. We'll just leave it at that. That's been discussed to death, the horse was dust years ago.
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 14,204








    I've skimmed through the whole thread and kept tabs on it as I was participating earlier as well. I've read many of your posts. No I didn't read every single post. Perhaps I missed something. 

    There are also other forms of competition that do not involve killing the other player or being killed by them. Crafting comes to mind quite well for that. As does some form of merchant (yourself, npc, auction house whatever it is).

    The person that doesn't want to touch pvp at all, there is no hope of attracting them. I'm thinking more of people like me. That only occasionally pvp, we hate being ganked because it interrupts whatever goal we are trying to do, would not gank the person that was just sitting there fishing. Factions seem interesting and add a touch of excitement but the previous sentence still applies. What is the draw for me that I can't either already get in some pve game or in a theoretical future well made pve game. 

    - edit. Just went through your posts on this thread. 






    What if a war that eventually shook the foundations of your game world and dramatically changed the course of future events was started because someone robbed you or killed you while you were fishing?

    Wherever humans or creatures based humans exist, they will fight each other at some point in time.  People do not always get along.


    http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/archduke-ferdinand-assassinated

    All time classic  MY NEW FAVORITE POST!

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

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member EpicPosts: 6,600
    edited April 2017
    Many historians say Ferdinands death was a scapegoat and propose that events would have started anyway mere weeks later. 
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited April 2017




























    I've skimmed through the whole thread and kept tabs on it as I was participating earlier as well. I've read many of your posts. No I didn't read every single post. Perhaps I missed something. 

    There are also other forms of competition that do not involve killing the other player or being killed by them. Crafting comes to mind quite well for that. As does some form of merchant (yourself, npc, auction house whatever it is).

    The person that doesn't want to touch pvp at all, there is no hope of attracting them. I'm thinking more of people like me. That only occasionally pvp, we hate being ganked because it interrupts whatever goal we are trying to do, would not gank the person that was just sitting there fishing. Factions seem interesting and add a touch of excitement but the previous sentence still applies. What is the draw for me that I can't either already get in some pve game or in a theoretical future well made pve game. 

    - edit. Just went through your posts on this thread. 














    What if a war that eventually shook the foundations of your game world and dramatically changed the course of future events was started because someone robbed you or killed you while you were fishing?

    Wherever humans or creatures based humans exist, they will fight each other at some point in time.  People do not always get along.










    That could be very interesting. One way I would expand on that would be say artifacts. The explorers could find them, crafters could build them and they would help dramatically in the supply, stock, upkeep, defense... whatever. They can also be captured.

    edit - I disagree with your true role playing. We'll just leave it at that. That's been discussed to death, the horse was dust years ago.




    Yes, explorers and crafters (or even inventors) or other non-military personnel have been known to effect or change the world in many different ways.  Even the way a mother raises a child can alter the course of human history. 

    Btw, as to your point about being killed while you're fishing, it wasn't usually a good idea to go out into the wilderness by yourself before the invention of gunpowder.  There are lions, and tigers, and bears out there.  Even wolves.

    It's fine if you disagree with me about true role-playing.  But I played a lot of single-player rpg games when I was kid.  I also messed around with Dungeons & Dragons from junior high onward, read rule books of several different pencil-and-paper role-playing games, then eventually Dungeon Mastered a few games after high school.  I believe I have a good understanding of what true role-playing is.  I even played with other kids while I was growing up and role-played being knights and stuff like that.  Never touched an MMORPG until I was in my early thirties.  Not that it is totally relevant, but I've read a lot of books, articles, and other printed materials about many different topics.  Even explored some of the darkest and most mysterious corners of the internet.  I've also had a plethora of different life experiences and talked with people from all walks of life.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992


    Many historians say Ferdinands death was a scapegoat and propose that events would have started anyway mere weeks later. 


    That may be true, but it was still used as an excuse to start World War I.  The War to End All Wars that also led to World War II.
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited April 2017
    @ZionBane - People like you are why I advocate for different levels of danger in different areas of them. 

    Let me me know what you think of this scenario.

    There are different levels of danger in different areas of the game.

    There are large areas of the game non-consensual PvP is not practical and NPC paladins would utterly destroy anyone who attacks you and then revive you. In other words 0% chance of losing your gear through things like suicide ganks. The only kind of PvP available would be tournament style PvP you willingly subject yourself to. (LAWFUL GOOD AREAS)

    Other areas you will only be subjected to non-consensual PvP within certain limitations. For instance if you are a spy trying to sabotage the an opposing party, and you get caught in the act of sabotage you will be open to attack. But they could never just walk up to you and run you through without provocation. (CHAOTIC GOOD AREAS)

    In other areas certain fights are sanctioned. The ruling party is largely determined through the spilling of blood and if you have pledged your blade in service of your faction you will be involved with bitter blood feuds with opposing factions. You aren't just going to be randomly ganked by people for no reason but you are under constant threat by your declared enemies. Commoners who have not declared their support for a faction are pretty safe so long as they obey the laws.(LAWFUL EVIL AREAS)

    Finally there are sections of the game you can be killed by anyone, anywhere, for any reason without major consequences for them doing so. (CHAOTIC EVIL AREAS)

    Finally there are areas that mix and match some of the elements of these areas for their own unique cultural feel (NEUTRAL GOOD, LAWFUL NEUTRAL, TRUE NEUTRAL, CHAOTIC NEUTRAL, NEUTRAL EVIL)

    Now suppose I tell you those lawful good areas have ways for you to contribute the the sandbox elements and story narrative of the game without ever having to participate in combat against other players.

    Assuming the other qualities of the game were at least satisfactory to you (Graphics, combat system etc.) how interested would you be in the game on a scale of 1-10?
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited April 2017


    Eldurian said:


    @ZionBane - People like you are why I advocate for different levels of danger in different areas of them. 

    Let me me know what you think of this scenario.

    There are different levels of danger in different areas of the game.

    There are large areas of the game non-consensual PvP is not practical and NPC paladins would utterly destroy anyone who attacks you and then revive you. In other words 0% chance of losing your gear through things like suicide ganks. The only kind of PvP available would be tournament style PvP you willingly subject yourself to. (LAWFUL GOOD AREAS)

    Other areas you will only be subjected to non-consensual PvP within certain limitations. For instance if you are a spy trying to sabotage the an opposing party, and you get caught in the act of sabotage you will be open to attack. But they could never just walk up to you and run you through without provocation. (CHAOTIC GOOD AREAS)

    In other areas certain fights are sanctioned. The ruling party is largely determined through the spilling of blood and if you have pledged your blade in service of your faction you will be involved with bitter blood feuds with opposing factions. You aren't just going to be randomly ganked by people for no reason but you are under constant threat by your declared enemies. Commoners who have not declared their support for a faction are pretty safe so long as they obey the laws.(LAWFUL EVIL AREAS)

    Finally there are sections of the game you can be killed by anyone, anywhere, for any reason without major consequences for them doing so. (CHAOTIC EVIL AREAS)

    Finally there are areas that mix and match some of the elements of these areas for their own unique cultural feel (NEUTRAL GOOD, LAWFUL NEUTRAL, TRUE NEUTRAL, CHAOTIC NEUTRAL, NEUTRAL EVIL)

    Now suppose I tell you those lawful good areas have ways for you to contribute the the sandbox elements and story narrative of the game without ever having to participate in combat against other players.

    Assuming the other qualities of the game were at least satisfactory to you (Graphics, combat system etc.) how interested would you be in the game on a scale of 1-10?




    I like these ideas.  I'm interested in making MMORPGs more logical and realistic, more reflective or the real world and actual, recorded and observable human behavior.  If there weren't relatively safe and peaceful areas and times throughout human history, our species may not have survived long.  Not sure I like the idea of any area being 100% safe, but sometimes we have to accomplish things one step at time.  If we have to give some people absolutely safe zones in order for them to at least investigate and experience what a good open pvp world is like (that is fair and competitive), then I wouldn't mind.



  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member RarePosts: 1,482

    Eldurian said:

    I think there is an interesting paradox in the PvP community as a whole. Let's call it "The Trammel Paradox."

    The Trammel Paradox is this:

    Many PvPers: "UO was ruined when they split it into a PvP and a PvE server."

    Same PvPers: "If people can't tolerate consistent abuse I don't want them in my PvP game! We can't let the carebears dumb this game down!"

    In simple the idea of the Trammel Paradox is the idea that you want everyone who plays the game to be subjected to whatever forms of abuse you wish to inflict on them, and that you despise carebears. But on the same hand you feel something was lost from UO when the community was separated.

    In 2017 there are many MMOs. Most of them are catered primarily to PvEers. So if you believe that Trammel was a mistake and there shouldn't be separation it is logically inconsistent to despise carebears and want them driven from your games. They will simply say "**** this ****!" and return to carebear games continuing the divide between between PvErs and PvPers personified by the Trammel split.

    So which is it:

    A. Did the Trammel split not harm the PvP community and was it in-fact a good move?

    B. Did we lose something when we lost the carebears/crafters/PvErs?

    I am a firm believer in B. If you also believe in B, then this a situation we need solutions to. We need to find ways to curb the behaviors that drive them away and allow them to comfortably exist in our community, and we need to give actual draws to our games most PvE games can't offer.



    I read many of your post.  You seemed to want all type of gamers to play your ideal of games.  But you forget if people don't like ffa pvp, people simply don't play it.

    Obviously many wolf felt something is lost when the sheeps no longer want to play with them.  But that's what the carebears want.  Which is not to play on the same servers with these wolf.

    Many people out of their twisted mind felt UO shouldn't have the split because apparently they want to play with carebears who don't even want to play with them.

    Obviously your idea could work if someone create a ffa pvp games with pve elements so great it can lure the pve crowd.  But that is too far fetched it'll ever happen.
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited May 2017
    I think that's something that would be discovered. People would get into the Lawful Good areas and then decide to try areas with a bit more relaxed PvP rulesets and actually enjoy it. And someday they might even find themselves venturing into the chaotic evil areas but doing so on their terms. Not feeling forced into unwanted situations where PvP is thrusted upon them.

    That being said I think any game that's trying to bring the PvP and PvE community together under one title on the same server needs to accept that both groups of players have distinct wants and needs that don't always line up perfectly. 

    Bringing them back together requires both sides seeing the value of coexisting with the other community in the same world, and it also requires both sides seeing the game is trying to take care of their needs and not just ignore them while focusing on the other.

    Fully safe areas (Not just as starter zones but a place you can enjoy a satisfying game experience at any level of play) is an essential olive branch to the PvE community that I think many of them need to see before they will even be interested in hearing the rest of why they should consider playing such a game.

    If implemented well I can't see any downsides to the PvP community that outweigh the benefit to the PvE community.
  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member RarePosts: 1,482

    Eldurian said:

    I think that's something that would be discovered. People would get into the Lawful Good areas and then decide to try areas with a bit more relaxed PvP rulesets and actually enjoy it. And someday they might even find themselves venturing into the chaotic evil areas but doing so on their terms. Not feeling forced into unwanted situations where PvP is thrusted upon them.

    That being said I think any game that's trying to bring the PvP and PvE community together under one title on the same server needs to accept that both groups of players have distinct wants and needs that don't always line up perfectly. 

    Bringing them back together requires both sides seeing the value of coexisting with the other community in the same world, and it also requires both sides seeing the game is trying to take care of their needs and not just ignore them while focusing on the other.

    Fully safe areas (Not just as starter zones but a place you can enjoy a satisfying game experience at any level of play) is an essential olive branch to the PvE community that I think many of them need to see before they will even be interested in hearing the rest of why they should consider playing such a game.

    If implemented well I can't see any downsides to the PvP community that outweigh the benefit to the PvE community.


    If I don't like open pvp why would I play a game with open pvp in the first place.

    Unless you are telling me some open pvp games makes their pve so great that can lure me in.  But sounds pretty much far fetch isn't it.  I could just play games specialize in pve which most likely is much better.
  • TheocritusTheocritus Member LegendaryPosts: 8,732
    I just never found a good PVP game where I felt I could compete, so most of the time I just stood there and waited to die....Most of the griefers were greatly overpowered so I was just a couple hits and I was dead most of the time....
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited May 2017
    @AAAMEOW - I posted this link in my last post before that.

    It's link to notes I've created on how I would go about building my ideal MMO. 

    These notes are titled: Why Play an Open World PvP Sandbox For Crafting and PvE?

    The essential gist of is that the sandbox envisioned has a heavy focus on creating a realistic feeling world you can immerse yourself in. The focus on immersion is not limited to the PvP areas of the game. There are some pretty important features to make the world feel more immersive than any other game on the market appealing to people who will love the feeling of the rich authentic world, even if they don't love PvP aspects of them.

    In short, the game described in my notes is less a "PvP Game" and more a "Empire Building Simulator" with immersive ways to take an active hand in the primary content of empire building for both PvP and PvE focused players. 

    Another huge thing I haven't detailed too much in my posts is this game would have mechanics designed to incentivise ruling factions of regions to want casuals to live and play in their lands. Living in a nation in this game wouldn't be the kind of heavy handed experience that being a part of an EVE alliance would, nor would the game be designed in a way as to cause the majority of groups to dislike when neutrals come into their territory and use their lands.

    Land taxes and auction house fees* don't go to magical gold collection gnomes but the ruling parties of the region to use in the administration costs of running their kingdom. So they want that "filthy carebear casual!" living in their lands and paying their taxes. They have legit incentive to look after your interests.

    So if you are into authentic feeling worlds, sandbox content, and roleplay then there are things this game would offer you can't find in most (if any) other MMOs.

    *Auction houses would be localized in this game. Further incentivizing people to want foreign traders in their lands.
    Post edited by Eldurian on
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited May 2017
    @Eldurian - I totally agree.  PvP is necessary to make a game world realistic.  I don't want PvP just because I want to kill other people's characters.  I wouldn't even want to kill another person's character unless there was a reason and purpose behind it.  PvP would only be the main focus of such a game for those who chose to make it their main focus.  Killing and looting AI mobs would not be the only other thing you would have to focus on either.  Many other paths of progression would and should be possible.
  • ZionBaneZionBane Member UncommonPosts: 328
    @cantankerousmage 

    Here is my question, "How does PvP Improve Roleplay?"

    The main objection I see to Open-World-PvP is that people can and will kill you without any reason provided.

    So what I would like, is for you, is imagine I am looking at the webpage, you are trying to sell me on your game. Inspire me, sell me on this idea, and explain to me, why I would ever want to subjugate myself to open-PvP?
  • ZionBaneZionBane Member UncommonPosts: 328
    @Eldurian

    That sounds like a grand idea, I have seen other games do this, like DAoC, which had "Safe Zone" or more Home city areas, and then they had battle arena's, and they had open PvE/PvP Zones, and then they had shared dungeons.

    The main thing in my mind, is in Most MMO's, there is not an option to Opt-out of PvP if PvP is a central part of the game. While I am fine with people who enjoy those games, I openly admit, I play an MOBA from time to time, so it's not like, I am scared of PvP, I just want it to be on my terms.

    Often times, with an MMO is all about Open-World PvP, there are always issues, like, getting ganked wile crafting, or in the middle of a quest, or having to deal with people in a big guild with an ego problem, and I get that I am a Carebear for saying this, but that is not something I would find myself logging into an MMO to deal with, much less paying for that privilege. 

    How would you address these kinds of issues?
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited May 2017



    ZionBane said:



    @cantankerousmage 

    Here is my question, "How does PvP Improve Roleplay?"

    The main objection I see to Open-World-PvP is that people can and will kill you without any reason provided.

    So what I would like, is for you, is imagine I am looking at the webpage, you are trying to sell me on your game. Inspire me, sell me on this idea, and explain to me, why I would ever want to subjugate myself to open-PvP?







    EDIT #3:  My goal with this thread is exploring the possibilities of how an mmorpg could be made into a true role-playing game similar to pencil-and-paper rpgs, without the need for incredibly advanced artificial intelligence or virtual reality.  I believe open world PvP is an essential element in doing so.  Realm vs Realm as opposed to a free-for-all (though the community a player belongs to doesn't necessarily need to be a kingdom, there can be smaller and larger units), but people could choose to leave their community as well.  There are more details and ideas in my other posts. And in the posts of others. - added to my original post a couple days ago.

    Do you walk down the street without a loaded gun, even though there is a possibility that any random stranger might knife you or shoot you?

    Do you drive your car on the freeway or down the street even though another car or semi-truck might collide you at any given moment?

    Do you opt for surgery even though medical error might potentially kill you?

    Do you hike on a forest trail in the mountains without a loaded gun even though you might come across a man-eating bear?

    I don't know if you do any of these things, but a lot of people do.  Living in the real world is not safe.  Why do we want to play children's games that let us pretend us as if life can be safe?

    Also, there are areas or nations on earth to which you might not want to travel.  Even soldiers often don't want to go to those areas, but sometimes they get ordered to and deployed.

    There are basically places on earth with different general moral alignments (as in D&D) and political/social/religious/cultural structures.  Some places are more or less safe than others.  Some places or more or less free than others.  Some places are more lawful, some places are more chaotic.

    Why can't we make a game world to mimic these conditions we find in real life?

  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited May 2017





    ZionBane said:





    @Eldurian

    That sounds like a grand idea, I have seen other games do this, like DAoC, which had "Safe Zone" or more Home city areas, and then they had battle arena's, and they had open PvE/PvP Zones, and then they had shared dungeons.

    The main thing in my mind, is in Most MMO's, there is not an option to Opt-out of PvP if PvP is a central part of the game. While I am fine with people who enjoy those games, I openly admit, I play an MOBA from time to time, so it's not like, I am scared of PvP, I just want it to be on my terms.

    Often times, with an MMO is all about Open-World PvP, there are always issues, like, getting ganked wile crafting, or in the middle of a quest, or having to deal with people in a big guild with an ego problem, and I get that I am a Carebear for saying this, but that is not something I would find myself logging into an MMO to deal with, much less paying for that privilege. 

    How would you address these kinds of issues?










    Well, for one thing, wandering out into the wilderness by yourself was generally not a good idea in the past.  It's not even really a good idea now, even though there are less wild animals than there used to be.  Still, sometimes you may find yourself needing or wanting a large knife, spear, or loaded gun if you're out in the wilderness by yourself or even with some other people.  You might even come across some wandering psychopath in the wilderness (or on a city street for that matter).  Maybe not that likely, but not as if it isn't possible.

    I wouldn't have quest givers, though maybe there are some player-characters or npcs that occasionally ask you to do things for them, but it wouldn't be part of any particular general questline/closed narrative in the game. 

    And guilds are only for tradesmen/craftsmen.  Though there may be a thieves guild or an assassins guild in a large city.  Your loyalty would be to your family, community/realm, and possibly church (or temple/shaman/witch doctor/coven/cult).

    Community/realms can take many different forms in the game.  Villages, towns, cities, nomadic encampments, baronies, kingdoms, empires are a few examples.  Maybe even a bandit gang or a pirate crew.  Though you could also try to survive on your own as a hermit or something.  Surviving on your own without belonging to any particular faction would be the ultimate challenge.
    Post edited by cantankerousmage on
Sign In or Register to comment.