Most Frustrating Part of Gaming Community

WargfootYV · January 2019

For me the most frustrating part of the gaming community, aside from the hackers and griefers, would be people who don't seem to comprehend the marketing materials and game FAQs. I admit there was a time when I suffered from this problem - I'd buy a game, be surprised by the content, and then insist that the developers make changes to the game to meet my requirements.

I honestly feel bad for developers on this point.
They're in a tough spot.

For example, I'm posting on a game forum where people are complaining about 'choke points' in mining. They're upset that players are forced to mine rare ores in well known locations that have limited entrances and exits. They don't like this design because PKs make a nuisance of themselves and mining is difficult. The suggested fix by the playerbase: Spread rare ores out all over the map so that we can avoid PKs. This is in a PvP game, people.

Naturally, there is nothing wrong with making suggestions to the developers on how to improve a game; however, this suggestion seems to fly in the face of an obviously intentional design choice that encourages player conflict. In a PvP game the mechanics are supposed to encourage PvP - not work to avoid it. Again, If you buy a PvP game then understand that it is going to be put together in such a way as to force player conflict.

To me this is almost as ignorant as loading up Camelot Unchained and asking the developers when they'll implement intergalactic travel, trading, and space warfare. Hey developers, thanks for the new chainmail armor, but I'm really wanting to get some cybernetic implants - when does that update drop?

Reflexively I want to blame the developers in that they need to do a better job of communicating; however, for the game I'm talking about (Legends of Aria) the website brags about player vs. player conflict and that the world will be dangerous out in the wilds. If you don't 'get it' after viewing the website then I don't know what the developers could do to make it clear.

aummoid · January 2019

To me, the most frustrating part of the MMORPG community are the ones who act like everyone else in the game exists to be their victims, then act surprised when everyone else in the game either demands changes to the game or stops playing it entirely.

I mean, seriously: if it happened in the last ten games you tanked, what makes you think that the current game will be any different?

WargfootYV · January 2019

aummoid said:

To me, the most frustrating part of the MMORPG community are the ones who act like everyone else in the game exists to be their victims, then act surprised when everyone else in the game either demands changes to the game or stops playing it entirely.

I mean, seriously: if it happened in the last ten games you tanked, what makes you think that the current game will be any different?

I don't know why developers keep trying to mix substantive progression with PvP.
When I see those two features advertised together I give the game a hard pass.

That aside, can you blame the players viewing others as victims when the game advertises that you can be an outcast and prey on the weak? Again, it is an advertised feature of the game that you can make other players your target - so I don't see how players to buy that game for that feature would be irritating to anyone.

Full disclosure: I don't PvP. Period. So my post isn't a veiled attempt to defend ganking.

I'm just puzzled by people who buy a game that advertises feature X and then immediately petition the developers to remove feature X.

It is like buying Madden 2019 and petitioning the developers to stop making the game all about football and to add more car theft and gunplay.

Palebane · January 2019

Makes sense. There is often a fine line between making your vision and making money. They dont always run parallel. I do believe gamers have gotten more fickle and entitled, but I feel that way about modern American society in general.

Kyleran · January 2019

WargfootYV said:

aummoid said:

To me, the most frustrating part of the MMORPG community are the ones who act like everyone else in the game exists to be their victims, then act surprised when everyone else in the game either demands changes to the game or stops playing it entirely.

I mean, seriously: if it happened in the last ten games you tanked, what makes you think that the current game will be any different?

I don't know why developers keep trying to mix substantive progression with PvP.
When I see those two features advertised together I give the game a hard pass.

That aside, can you blame the players viewing others as victims when the game advertises that you can be an outcast and prey on the weak? Again, it is an advertised feature of the game that you can make other players your target - so I don't see how players to buy that game for that feature would be irritating to anyone.

Full disclosure: I don't PvP. Period. So my post isn't a veiled attempt to defend ganking.

I'm just puzzled by people who buy a game that advertises feature X and then immediately petition the developers to remove feature X.

It is like buying Madden 2019 and petitioning the developers to stop making the game all about football and to add more car theft and gunplay.

Well it would be helpful if developers quit designing their games with activites such as mining which clearly (but not exclusively) appeal to the more PVE minded player (aka as "prey" or "sheep") in order to "encourage" player conflict.

It's a terrible mechanic which has oft been repeated and failed in far too many games especially when the victim has no chance to fight or flee.

I am "Prey" (might make that the name of my next alt) and I will play in PVP centric games as long as there is a way for me to control my level of risk and strong mechanics to avoid being caught.

EVE does this very well, providing several warning mechanisms such a local, ship scanning, and player corps often set up Intel networks to track enemy ship movements.

PVPers often complain it's too difficult to catch PVERs unaware but I just view that as crocodile tears considering I'm normally the only one who loses much of anything in such encounters.

cheyane · January 2019

I agree with @Kyleran on this. I see game developers wanting to provide targets for PvP players that are not just there and who want a fair fight. Players who play the game because they want to PvP are well prepared for encounters and do not mind them. The developers however create content and even actively encourage PvE players who enjoy PvP too but who are more orientated towards crafting or doing other things that involve building, gathering, exploring and creating things in the game. These players may want to PvP sometimes but they don't want to be placed deliberately in places with little defence as they might be wearing mining or other clothing and carrying equipment that makes them ill suited to fight and then are forced to fight as a result of where the PvP players go to catch these easy targets.

This is not a good design for the prey. They become unhappy. The fault here is not with the player who indulges in these activities knowing they will become targets and it is not that they are stupid and should not play but the design of the game is specifically creating prey and it is done in a way that will make the player who is the victim upset and feeling used by the game developers. The game developers seem to think that this is providing content for the PvP players when in fact what you're doing oft times is pissing off the players who are placed in disadvantages positions and quit in disgust.

I really cannot understand how game developers think players like to be cornered , overwhelmed and constantly outmatched because of the circumstances the game has placed them in as a result of its design. They should make these encounters fun for both sides.

Before you say they should bring guards and mercenaries, may be the dwindling population and the loss of these players should at some point light a light bulb above some game developer's head that there is a flaw in this design and it has nothing to do with paid protection.

It is also a very lazy design. Take for instance a village crafter who makes swords. He isn't going to go out and look for the metals for his craft. He will probably have it brought in and it might be the responsibility of the person transporting it to hire the guards to bring it safely to the village . In a game however the weaponsmith will be going to a mine and looking for the materials to make the weapons he wishes to craft and in the process get ambushed, killed and robbed. It does not work unless you make sure the design is such that the weaponsmith is not only going in one direction or to one place but can be unpredictable in his search and have a sporting chance for this to work.

Octagon7711 · January 2019

There have always been complaints about a game in it's forums ever since the first MMO rolled out. No matter what they do there will always be players who don't like it to various degrees.

I finally understand why Devs like PvP, the general answer is that it encourages player interaction. Sometimes I question the quality of the type of interaction they're going for but if I don't like it I simply won't play that game. The hardest to play would be game that have say 60% content I like and the rest I don't. I may play the game but will be complaining about stuff a lot. But again I understand their point.

WargfootYV · January 2019

Kyleran said:

Well it would be helpful if developers quit designing their games with activites such as mining which clearly (but not exclusively) appeal to the more PVE minded player (aka as "prey" or "sheep") in order to "encourage" player conflict.

It's a terrible mechanic which has oft been repeated and failed in far too many games especially when the victim has no chance to fight or flee.

I think it is fair to question why someone would build a game like in the first place; however, this thread is more along the lines of "Why would someone buy a game a major element of which they detest?"

I don't really want this thread to be about ganking because I think we all agree that is unappealing.

What is frustrating is when a game runs an ad like this:

GAME: Medieval Village
ADVERTISEMENT: Play this game to enjoy a really detailed and accurate roleplay of what like would be like to live, prosper, and die in a 1400 A.D. medieval village.

Next day on Medieval Village Forums: This game needs more mech warriors. The developers need to do this NOW or the game will die. What noobs built this game leaving out people who like to drive mech warriors? Are you all racists or what?

So then someone points out the name of the game is "Medieval Village" and how the ads made it clear what the game was about and the response is "Oh, so we have to play the game your way do we?" About 500 people who shouldn't even be in the game chime in with "BUT WE PAID GOOD MONEY FOR THIS GAME" and somehow it is a civil rights violation to not take their criticism seriously.

At some point I think it is fair to say: You are an idiot for not understanding that feature X means that feature X will be in the game. If you don't like feature X (when foundational to the game) then GTFO.

alkarionlog · January 2019

WargfootYV said:

For me the most frustrating part of the gaming community, aside from the hackers and griefers, would be people who don't seem to comprehend the marketing materials and game FAQs. I admit there was a time when I suffered from this problem - I'd buy a game, be surprised by the content, and then insist that the developers make changes to the game to meet my requirements.

I honestly feel bad for developers on this point.
They're in a tough spot.

For example, I'm posting on a game forum where people are complaining about 'choke points' in mining. They're upset that players are forced to mine rare ores in well known locations that have limited entrances and exits. They don't like this design because PKs make a nuisance of themselves and mining is difficult. The suggested fix by the playerbase: Spread rare ores out all over the map so that we can avoid PKs. This is in a PvP game, people.

Naturally, there is nothing wrong with making suggestions to the developers on how to improve a game; however, this suggestion seems to fly in the face of an obviously intentional design choice that encourages player conflict. In a PvP game the mechanics are supposed to encourage PvP - not work to avoid it. Again, If you buy a PvP game then understand that it is going to be put together in such a way as to force player conflict.

To me this is almost as ignorant as loading up Camelot Unchained and asking the developers when they'll implement intergalactic travel, trading, and space warfare. Hey developers, thanks for the new chainmail armor, but I'm really wanting to get some cybernetic implants - when does that update drop?

Reflexively I want to blame the developers in that they need to do a better job of communicating; however, for the game I'm talking about (Legends of Aria) the website brags about player vs. player conflict and that the world will be dangerous out in the wilds. If you don't 'get it' after viewing the website then I don't know what the developers could do to make it clear.

and who would know you didn't change anything

WargfootYV · January 2019

Octagon7711 said:

There have always been complaints about a game in it's forums ever since the first MMO rolled out. No matter what they do there will always be players who don't like it to various degrees.

The forums are there so people can give feedback.
People giving feedback isn't really what I find frustrating.

What I find frustrating is when the central theme/selling point of the game is portrayed as being entirely wrong. In the case of Legends of Aria one of the game's marketing points is open world full loot PvP. That is spelled out very clearly on their website.

That isn't just a PvP balance tweek or a "gosh, goblins hit hard" concern - that is a "go back to the drawing board and rewrite the entire game to make it entirely something different" sort of complaint.

^--- That is the frustrating part. Missing the proverbial elephant in the room.

Minecraft Forums: Hi, I don't like mining stuff or building anything and there is nothing to do in the game. Can you please add an online Scrabble feature so I can play Scrabble with my friends or are you the kind of developers who hate the player base?

If you join a PvP game and have a fundamental objection to PVP you're in the wrong game.

WargfootYV · January 2019

alkarionlog said:

and who would know you didn't change anything

I don't understand the question.

Kyleran · January 2019

WargfootYV said:

Kyleran said:

Well it would be helpful if developers quit designing their games with activites such as mining which clearly (but not exclusively) appeal to the more PVE minded player (aka as "prey" or "sheep") in order to "encourage" player conflict.

It's a terrible mechanic which has oft been repeated and failed in far too many games especially when the victim has no chance to fight or flee.

I think it is fair to question why someone would build a game like in the first place; however, this thread is more along the lines of "Why would someone buy a game a major element of which they detest?"

I don't really want this thread to be about ganking because I think we all agree that is unappealing.

What is frustrating is when a game runs an ad like this:

GAME: Medieval Village
ADVERTISEMENT: Play this game to enjoy a really detailed and accurate roleplay of what like would be like to live, prosper, and die in a 1400 A.D. medieval village.

Next day on Medieval Village Forums: This game needs more mech warriors. The developers need to do this NOW or the game will die. What noobs built this game leaving out people who like to drive mech warriors? Are you all racists or what?

So then someone points out the name of the game is "Medieval Village" and how the ads made it clear what the game was about and the response is "Oh, so we have to play the game your way do we?" About 500 people who shouldn't even be in the game chime in with "BUT WE PAID GOOD MONEY FOR THIS GAME" and somehow it is a civil rights violation to not take their criticism seriously.

At some point I think it is fair to say: You are an idiot for not understanding that feature X means that feature X will be in the game. If you don't like feature X (when foundational to the game) then GTFO.

OK, that's a considerably different example, context is everything of course.

I have to ask, have you really seen a lot of gamers asking for something totally unreasonable and outside of the lore?

Sovrath · January 2019

Kyleran said:

WargfootYV said:

Kyleran said:

Well it would be helpful if developers quit designing their games with activites such as mining which clearly (but not exclusively) appeal to the more PVE minded player (aka as "prey" or "sheep") in order to "encourage" player conflict.

It's a terrible mechanic which has oft been repeated and failed in far too many games especially when the victim has no chance to fight or flee.

I think it is fair to question why someone would build a game like in the first place; however, this thread is more along the lines of "Why would someone buy a game a major element of which they detest?"

I don't really want this thread to be about ganking because I think we all agree that is unappealing.

What is frustrating is when a game runs an ad like this:

GAME: Medieval Village
ADVERTISEMENT: Play this game to enjoy a really detailed and accurate roleplay of what like would be like to live, prosper, and die in a 1400 A.D. medieval village.

Next day on Medieval Village Forums: This game needs more mech warriors. The developers need to do this NOW or the game will die. What noobs built this game leaving out people who like to drive mech warriors? Are you all racists or what?

So then someone points out the name of the game is "Medieval Village" and how the ads made it clear what the game was about and the response is "Oh, so we have to play the game your way do we?" About 500 people who shouldn't even be in the game chime in with "BUT WE PAID GOOD MONEY FOR THIS GAME" and somehow it is a civil rights violation to not take their criticism seriously.

At some point I think it is fair to say: You are an idiot for not understanding that feature X means that feature X will be in the game. If you don't like feature X (when foundational to the game) then GTFO.

OK, that's a considerably different example, context is everything of course.

I have to ask, have you really seen a lot of gamers asking for something totally unreasonable and outside of the lore?

I think it was the wrong example.

People will, however, ask for things that bend the lore such as Rune Keepers in Lord of the Rings Online.

In his example no one would ask for mech warriors. They might ask for fast travel or not having to deal with hunder/cleanliness or some such thing.

Scorchien · January 2019

2 things .. People who buy EA games .. then piss and moan about performance/ content/bugs/rollbacks etc.... it may be as stupid as a person can achieve

2nd .. People who join PVP games but dont want PVP ..

WargfootYV · January 2019

Kyleran said:

OK, that's a considerably different example, context is everything of course.

I have to ask, have you really seen a lot of gamers asking for something totally unreasonable and outside of the lore?

Good question.

In my initial example it isn't a lore question but certainly a fundamental premise of the game.

As an example: In Legends of Aria some players are complaining that the high tier ore is located in areas that have choke points (limited entrances/exits) such that it makes it very easy for PKs to find them, kill them, and loot them. The players are claiming is a design flaw that could be fixed by placing nodes all over the map.

They act as if they've identified a bug or game condition that didn't occur to the developers.

They could be right; however, if the game is a PvP game and the wilds are supposed to be dangerous then choke points would encourage PvP - and make it easier to defend miners when a guild is working anti-PK - and those are advertised features of the game. So if the design goal in a PvP game is PvP then a design that encourages PvP would be "working as intended".

And it isn't the PvP I'm defending (or ganking) - I didn't buy the game because I don't like that sort of thing - but rather, I'm ranting about gamers that are so oblivious to the intent of a game as to not understand when it is working as advertised. The inability to recognize the intent of what they encounter and then suggesting design changes that counter the features of the game is ridiculous.

It makes sense to complain about bugs or broken features in a game.
It doesn't make sense to complain about the underlying premise of the game.

And people always take that as insulting and I don't mean it that way. I played these games for many years before I took the helm of my own experience and decided that I needed to do a better job of picking where I'll spend my time and money.

I'm not saying "LOL NOOB, L2P OR QUIT" - I am saying "Jeez man, find something you enjoy and have at it - don't wait around for a development team to rewrite a title you don't enjoy".

Albatroes · January 2019

Honestly, what really hamstrings developers is publishers (assuming they are separate). Developing a game that 'people' want doesn't really work in today's market because of heavy competition. If someone doesn't like an element of a game to the point it will make them quit, they will more-often-than-not quit for something else instead of getting on a forum and making a thread about it. Even if they do like most of the stuff about a game, it wont stop them for trying something else and might end up liking it better. Publishers (or whatever marketing department if its an all-in-one team) want to make a product that makes money and keeps people around long enough to pull in more people for new pockets. Many developers do want to make something that isn't so formulaic because many of them are actually gamers first. As with many things in lie, something you pursue seems one way until you get there and it turns out being something else. Game development is no different. Imo, the only way to fix this is just to limit options, since options create too much competition and increased competition leads to a cheapened product, not more quality product.

WargfootYV · January 2019

Albatroes said:

Honestly, what really hamstrings developers is publishers (assuming they are separate). Developing a game that 'people' want doesn't really work in today's market because of heavy competition. If someone doesn't like an element of a game to the point it will make them quit, they will more-often-than-not quit for something else instead of getting on a forum and making a thread about it. Even if they do like most of the stuff about a game, it wont stop them for trying something else and might end up liking it better. Publishers (or whatever marketing department if its an all-in-one team) want to make a product that makes money and keeps people around long enough to pull in more people for new pockets. Many developers do want to make something that isn't so formulaic because many of them are actually gamers first. As with many things in lie, something you pursue seems one way until you get there and it turns out being something else. Game development is no different. Imo, the only way to fix this is just to limit options, since options create too much competition and increased competition leads to a cheapened product, not more quality product.

I'd agree, but consider that I'm not talking about a minor quibble here.
The underlying premise of the game is what is being debated.

It would be like me going to a BBQ join and insisting that they switch over to vegan when there are dozens of vegan options across the street. I find it frustrating that person would be in such pain when joy can be attained by leaving the BBQ join and crossing the street.

At what point is the customer just flat out wrong?

cheyane · January 2019

I think you're wrong if I am reading your example in your first post right. If a player joins a game having no problem with the PvP but see that the developer is using a mining point as the means to provide PvP players fodder or easy targets than the player should complain. It is not about joining a game that has PvP and complaining about the PvP at all. These are completely different things.

Sovrath · January 2019

parrotpholk 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?

MadFrenchie · January 2019

Sovrath said:

parrotpholk 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.

Octagon7711 · January 2019

Scorchien said:


   2 things .. People who buy EA games .. then piss and moan about performance/ content/bugs/rollbacks etc....   it may be as stupid as a person can achieve


2nd .. People who join PVP games but dont want PVP ..

I've been guilty of the second one. I've played open world PvP games that had IMO, excellently done PvE content. But I usually don't complain because clearly the game stated it was open PvP.

Sovrath · January 2019

MadFrenchie said:

Sovrath said:

parrotpholk 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.

cheyane · January 2019

Octagon7711 said:

Scorchien said:


   2 things .. People who buy EA games .. then piss and moan about performance/ content/bugs/rollbacks etc....   it may be as stupid as a person can achieve


2nd .. People who join PVP games but dont want PVP ..

I've been guilty of the second one. I've played open world PvP games that had IMO, excellently done PvE content. But I usually don't complain because clearly the game stated it was open PvP.

Me too I played BDO and never once complained about the PvP. Well no one ever tried to kill me....there is that.

cheyane · January 2019

Sovrath said:

MadFrenchie said:

Sovrath said:

parrotpholk 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.

MadFrenchie · January 2019

Sovrath said:

MadFrenchie said:

Sovrath said:

parrotpholk 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.

Wenchesnmead · January 2019

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.

Howdy, Stranger!

Most Frustrating Part of Gaming Community

Comments

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Most Frustrating Part of Gaming Community

Comments

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey