Howdy, Stranger!

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

Most Frustrating Part of Gaming Community

13

Comments

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,347

    I think if you join a PvP game, then you should be okay with whatever happens within allowed rules. EVE is a perfect example in that regard. Also, EVE is a great example where you can control your level of risk. 
    Sometimes the rules as stated allow behavior that is obviously undesirable and the rules should be amended.  It's perfectly reasonable for players to petition game developers for such fixes.

    Several years ago in NCAA football, the clock used to start on a kickoff when it was kicked, not when it was caught.  Then one coach decided to run out the clock before the half by having his players intentionally run way offsides so that the receiving team couldn't return the kickoff.  The first kick took several seconds off the clock.  It was a penalty and a rekick, so they did it again.  And again, until they ran out the clock.  The NCAA quickly changed the rule to prevent that from happening again.

    And that's in a heavily visible, well-studied game worth billions of dollars per year.  Computer games that are making things up as they go are a lot more likely to have rules that lead to unintended and undesirable consequences.
    Kyleran
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,347
    No, but even devs with OWPvP don't encourage griefing.  Things like corpse camping lowbies.  Because they know that it's a death knell to support such behavior, and it doesn't matter if you advertise your game as a literal psycho shit show.

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

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

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

    That seems insane to me.
    Uncharted Waters Online has an enormous amount of progression, as well as open-world PVP for much of the world, and you can loot other players if you board and defeat them that way.  But it still works, even for the PVE crowd.  The key is that all that progression means that a weaker player may not be able to sink his attacker, but he sure can run away if he wants to.  If you add the additional condition that the progression means that a weaker player can't really do anything other than die, then yes, that's a disaster.
    KyleranPhry
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,347
    Sovrath said:
    Ok, I'm at a loss. Name a game that has open pvp that isn't considered a "pvp game."

    Uncharted Waters Online.  Probably less than 10% of the playerbase has attacked another player within the last week.
    SovrathPhry
  • sunandshadowsunandshadow Member RarePosts: 1,985
    For me the most frustrating part about the gaming community is how impossible it is to get a few people to agree about what they'd really like to play.  If indie development effort could be redistributed so there was more fan support and more dev and modder effort for each of a smaller number of projects, everyone would benefit.
    I want to help design and develop a PvE-focused, solo-friendly, sandpark MMO which combines crafting, monster hunting, and story.  So PM me if you are starting one.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited January 2019
    Quizzical said:
    No, but even devs with OWPvP don't encourage griefing.  Things like corpse camping lowbies.  Because they know that it's a death knell to support such behavior, and it doesn't matter if you advertise your game as a literal psycho shit show.

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

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

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

    That seems insane to me.
    Uncharted Waters Online has an enormous amount of progression, as well as open-world PVP for much of the world, and you can loot other players if you board and defeat them that way.  But it still works, even for the PVE crowd.  The key is that all that progression means that a weaker player may not be able to sink his attacker, but he sure can run away if he wants to.  If you add the additional condition that the progression means that a weaker player can't really do anything other than die, then yes, that's a disaster.
    Thought about getting into that one.  Not sure how I'd go about it, these old MMORPGs generally have such an old (in terms of in-game skill/level and items) playerbase.

    EDIT- Eh, reconsidering.  My first outing on the sea, headed to the newbie adventurer quest, and a PvE ship "ambushes" me with something like 7 more men and cannons, and is moving faster than I am.  He proceeds to murder my entire crew then the battle ends and I can't sail anywhere because I have no crew.  No indication that an ambush was waiting (don't even remember the tutorial mentioning ambushes), nor could I do anything to outrun the ship once it ambushed me.  Don't like immediately being put in no-win situations without explanation.  It reminded me of the number one reason I can't play old MMORPGs without UI updates: lack of good feedback to the player on actions taking place in the game.

    image
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,347
    edited January 2019
    Quizzical said:
    No, but even devs with OWPvP don't encourage griefing.  Things like corpse camping lowbies.  Because they know that it's a death knell to support such behavior, and it doesn't matter if you advertise your game as a literal psycho shit show.

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

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

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

    That seems insane to me.
    Uncharted Waters Online has an enormous amount of progression, as well as open-world PVP for much of the world, and you can loot other players if you board and defeat them that way.  But it still works, even for the PVE crowd.  The key is that all that progression means that a weaker player may not be able to sink his attacker, but he sure can run away if he wants to.  If you add the additional condition that the progression means that a weaker player can't really do anything other than die, then yes, that's a disaster.
    Thought about getting into that one.  Not sure how I'd go about it, these old MMORPGs generally have such an old (in terms of in-game skill/level and items) playerbase.

    EDIT- Eh, reconsidering.  My first outing on the sea, headed to the newbie adventurer quest, and a PvE ship "ambushes" me with something like 7 more men and cannons, and is moving faster than I am.  He proceeds to murder my entire crew then the battle ends and I can't sail anywhere because I have no crew.  No indication that an ambush was waiting (don't even remember the tutorial mentioning ambushes), nor could I do anything to outrun the ship once it ambushed me.  Don't like immediately being put in no-win situations without explanation.  It reminded me of the number one reason I can't play old MMORPGs without UI updates: lack of good feedback to the player on actions taking place in the game.
    A battle ends if you sail outside of the combat circle.  It's common to be attacked by fleets that you can't beat, at least if you're not geared for combat.  But it's easy to run away from them.

    Do be warned that there are a ton of ways in which UWO doesn't follow conventions that you're used to.  Sometimes it's going to take 10 minutes of banging your head against a wall to figure out what you're supposed to do.  Or an hour.  But the game doesn't actually push you into impossible situations.
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,347
    Also, you can eventually get some skill that I forget what it is that makes it so that you don't get ambushed anymore.  Until then, expect to get ambushed every few minutes at sea and have to run away.
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,435
    Quizzical said:
    Sovrath said:
    Ok, I'm at a loss. Name a game that has open pvp that isn't considered a "pvp game."

    Uncharted Waters Online.  Probably less than 10% of the playerbase has attacked another player within the last week.
    Heck, Lineage 2 back in the early days. Played for almost 6 months,  was attacked twice by a Red in all that time.



    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

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

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • WargfootYVWargfootYV Member UncommonPosts: 261
    edited January 2019
    Quizzical said:


    How many features are foundational to a game?  If someone gets upset about the single, core, most important feature of a game, then yeah, he's being ridiculous.  But if there are ten things you're looking for in a game, no game has all ten, and a particular game has nine of the ten, you might play it anyway even though that tenth thing on your list is definitely not what you're looking for.
    First, there cannot be 10 foundational things to a game.
    You may be confusing 'features' with 'foundational' (as I use it here).

    Secondly, given that PvE vs. PvP is used to define entire servers - and that for many games that designation shows up on the server selection screen - it seems to me that wouldn't be just a feature but the absolute first consideration any gamer would ponder before entering a world.

    So if you log onto a PvP server and immediately try to circumvent PvP you're doing it wrong.

    It is as idiotic as logging into a PvE server and suggesting the developers allow open world PvP and begin making changes in that direction.
    Gdemami
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,435
    Quizzical said:


    How many features are foundational to a game?  If someone gets upset about the single, core, most important feature of a game, then yeah, he's being ridiculous.  But if there are ten things you're looking for in a game, no game has all ten, and a particular game has nine of the ten, you might play it anyway even though that tenth thing on your list is definitely not what you're looking for.
    First, there cannot be 10 foundational things to a game.
    You may be confusing 'features' with 'foundational' (as I use it here).

    Secondly, given that PvE vs. PvP is used to define entire servers - and that for many games that designation shows up on the server selection screen - it seems to me that wouldn't be just a feature but the absolute first consideration any gamer would ponder before entering a world.

    So if you log onto a PvP server and immediately try to circumvent PvP you're doing it wrong.

    It is as idiotic as logging into a PvE server and suggesting the developers allow open world PvP and begin making changes in that direction.
    If every game offered the choice of separate PVE/PVP only servers then your argument holds some merit.

    I think you will find the trend in recent years has been to provide only a single server type, usually PVP only.

    Besides, many people enjoy PVP and PVP so a  PVE only server isn't desirable. (I played EVE for more than 10 years)

    Still reasonable for them to ask developers to make changes to control bad player behaviors or bad designs which encourage such, at least if the devs would like to continue to get their money.

    Of course devs are free to ignore such, CCP did and lost me and several of my friends as paying customers two years ago.

    As you said, no point to keep playing a game which has disagreeable features that are not likely to change 
    aummoid

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

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

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited January 2019
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    No, but even devs with OWPvP don't encourage griefing.  Things like corpse camping lowbies.  Because they know that it's a death knell to support such behavior, and it doesn't matter if you advertise your game as a literal psycho shit show.

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

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

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

    That seems insane to me.
    Uncharted Waters Online has an enormous amount of progression, as well as open-world PVP for much of the world, and you can loot other players if you board and defeat them that way.  But it still works, even for the PVE crowd.  The key is that all that progression means that a weaker player may not be able to sink his attacker, but he sure can run away if he wants to.  If you add the additional condition that the progression means that a weaker player can't really do anything other than die, then yes, that's a disaster.
    Thought about getting into that one.  Not sure how I'd go about it, these old MMORPGs generally have such an old (in terms of in-game skill/level and items) playerbase.

    EDIT- Eh, reconsidering.  My first outing on the sea, headed to the newbie adventurer quest, and a PvE ship "ambushes" me with something like 7 more men and cannons, and is moving faster than I am.  He proceeds to murder my entire crew then the battle ends and I can't sail anywhere because I have no crew.  No indication that an ambush was waiting (don't even remember the tutorial mentioning ambushes), nor could I do anything to outrun the ship once it ambushed me.  Don't like immediately being put in no-win situations without explanation.  It reminded me of the number one reason I can't play old MMORPGs without UI updates: lack of good feedback to the player on actions taking place in the game.
    A battle ends if you sail outside of the combat circle.  It's common to be attacked by fleets that you can't beat, at least if you're not geared for combat.  But it's easy to run away from them.

    Do be warned that there are a ton of ways in which UWO doesn't follow conventions that you're used to.  Sometimes it's going to take 10 minutes of banging your head against a wall to figure out what you're supposed to do.  Or an hour.  But the game doesn't actually push you into impossible situations.
    The Fallen Mercenary appeared to be faster than I was.  I continued sailing the same line as the battle started, but he appeared to be gaining on me.  At that point I tried adjusting course to attempt to gain speed, but there didn't appear to be a good indicator of my nautical speed anywhere I've been able to find, so I couldn't actually tell if any turns I made were speeding me up or slowing me down unless it was an extreme change.

    He quickly caught up and boarded, at which point I attempted to retreat, which failed and left me stranded.  All within the first few minutes at sea.

    It all happened before I had even gotten a chance to get invested into the game, the world, or my character, so it killed my desire to continue at the time.

    Alas, we're getting off-topic here.

    image
  • WargfootYVWargfootYV Member UncommonPosts: 261
    edited January 2019
    Kyleran said:

    If every game offered the choice of separate PVE/PVP only servers then your argument holds some merit.

    I think you will find the trend in recent years has been to provide only a single server type, usually PVP only.
    Does every PvE game have to provide a Full Loot, Open World, PvP server then?

    And again, all this is beside the point.

    If you don't like a PvP game then why buy one?  Sure, it might be better for the business model, etc - but why buy a game when you don't like a fundamental aspect of the game.

    It isn't frustrating to me that games come and go or have different rulesets.
    It is frustrating that a person would buy a game with a particular ruleset and then immediately attempt to make it exactly the opposite - blaming the developers and people who bought the game because of that ruleset along the way.
    Gdemami
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 31,937
    Kyleran said:
    Quizzical said:


    How many features are foundational to a game?  If someone gets upset about the single, core, most important feature of a game, then yeah, he's being ridiculous.  But if there are ten things you're looking for in a game, no game has all ten, and a particular game has nine of the ten, you might play it anyway even though that tenth thing on your list is definitely not what you're looking for.
    First, there cannot be 10 foundational things to a game.
    You may be confusing 'features' with 'foundational' (as I use it here).

    Secondly, given that PvE vs. PvP is used to define entire servers - and that for many games that designation shows up on the server selection screen - it seems to me that wouldn't be just a feature but the absolute first consideration any gamer would ponder before entering a world.

    So if you log onto a PvP server and immediately try to circumvent PvP you're doing it wrong.

    It is as idiotic as logging into a PvE server and suggesting the developers allow open world PvP and begin making changes in that direction.
    If every game offered the choice of separate PVE/PVP only servers then your argument holds some merit.


    It still holds merit.

    Pve/pvp servers - pve/pvp games.

    Just choose games that have features you want and stay away from games that have features you dislike.

    Maybe that's my frustration of certain members of the community, some think every game needs to be for them.
    WargfootYVGdemami
    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • WargfootYVWargfootYV Member UncommonPosts: 261
    Sovrath said:

    Maybe that's my frustration of certain members of the community, some think every game needs to be for them.
    Exactly.
    Absolutely, Freakin', Exactly.
    Gdemami
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 22,825
    cheyane 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.
    I was killed three times and played about three to four months. There were some places you could go to that were more dangerous though. Not counting guild v guild wars here.
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 22,825
    Sovrath said:
    Kyleran said:
    Quizzical said:


    How many features are foundational to a game?  If someone gets upset about the single, core, most important feature of a game, then yeah, he's being ridiculous.  But if there are ten things you're looking for in a game, no game has all ten, and a particular game has nine of the ten, you might play it anyway even though that tenth thing on your list is definitely not what you're looking for.
    First, there cannot be 10 foundational things to a game.
    You may be confusing 'features' with 'foundational' (as I use it here).

    Secondly, given that PvE vs. PvP is used to define entire servers - and that for many games that designation shows up on the server selection screen - it seems to me that wouldn't be just a feature but the absolute first consideration any gamer would ponder before entering a world.

    So if you log onto a PvP server and immediately try to circumvent PvP you're doing it wrong.

    It is as idiotic as logging into a PvE server and suggesting the developers allow open world PvP and begin making changes in that direction.
    If every game offered the choice of separate PVE/PVP only servers then your argument holds some merit.


    It still holds merit.

    Pve/pvp servers - pve/pvp games.

    Just choose games that have features you want and stay away from games that have features you dislike.

    Maybe that's my frustration of certain members of the community, some think every game needs to be for them.
    Or go realm versus realm, all the fun of PVP and if you don't like it you can ignore it.
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    Sovrath said:
    Maybe that's my frustration of certain members of the community, some think every game needs to be for them.
    ...more like some think there must be a game that caters to them only.
    [Deleted User]
  • aummoidaummoid Member UncommonPosts: 82
    Sovrath said:
    It still holds merit.

    Pve/pvp servers - pve/pvp games.

    Just choose games that have features you want and stay away from games that have features you dislike.

    Maybe that's my frustration of certain members of the community, some think every game needs to be for them.
    Well, game studios seem to love the design principles that you want to play because they keep trying to make and launch those games. And then once the game launches, suddenly the studios keep doing these hard pivots away from those design principles.

    So maybe you should be frustrated with game studios, for wanting to stay in business more than they want to stick to the design principles that you prefer.
    Gdemami
  • Quizar1973Quizar1973 Member UncommonPosts: 251
    edited January 2019
    The thing i hate about the Community is people who think everyone has played for years and there is no such thing as Noobs....Those are the people who dont help Noobies and think everyone new to game should already be a Pro....
    Ungood
    No one shall Rent space in my head!!!!!  B)
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,435
    Scot said:
    Sovrath said:
    Kyleran said:
    Quizzical said:


    How many features are foundational to a game?  If someone gets upset about the single, core, most important feature of a game, then yeah, he's being ridiculous.  But if there are ten things you're looking for in a game, no game has all ten, and a particular game has nine of the ten, you might play it anyway even though that tenth thing on your list is definitely not what you're looking for.
    First, there cannot be 10 foundational things to a game.
    You may be confusing 'features' with 'foundational' (as I use it here).

    Secondly, given that PvE vs. PvP is used to define entire servers - and that for many games that designation shows up on the server selection screen - it seems to me that wouldn't be just a feature but the absolute first consideration any gamer would ponder before entering a world.

    So if you log onto a PvP server and immediately try to circumvent PvP you're doing it wrong.

    It is as idiotic as logging into a PvE server and suggesting the developers allow open world PvP and begin making changes in that direction.
    If every game offered the choice of separate PVE/PVP only servers then your argument holds some merit.


    It still holds merit.

    Pve/pvp servers - pve/pvp games.

    Just choose games that have features you want and stay away from games that have features you dislike.

    Maybe that's my frustration of certain members of the community, some think every game needs to be for them.
    Or go realm versus realm, all the fun of PVP and if you don't like it you can ignore it.
    Funny you should bring that up, Jan 12th the Phoenix rises.

    Just following your sage advice....

    ;)
    Scot

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

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

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,347
    Quizzical said:
    How many features are foundational to a game?  If someone gets upset about the single, core, most important feature of a game, then yeah, he's being ridiculous.  But if there are ten things you're looking for in a game, no game has all ten, and a particular game has nine of the ten, you might play it anyway even though that tenth thing on your list is definitely not what you're looking for.
    First, there cannot be 10 foundational things to a game.
    You may be confusing 'features' with 'foundational' (as I use it here).

    Secondly, given that PvE vs. PvP is used to define entire servers - and that for many games that designation shows up on the server selection screen - it seems to me that wouldn't be just a feature but the absolute first consideration any gamer would ponder before entering a world.

    So if you log onto a PvP server and immediately try to circumvent PvP you're doing it wrong.

    It is as idiotic as logging into a PvE server and suggesting the developers allow open world PvP and begin making changes in that direction.
    You're arguing that PVP (or not PVP) is always foundational to a game, and furthermore, that it always should be.  But there can be many degrees of just how important PVP is to a game, not just all or nothing.

    If a game is designed and advertised as being all about hardcore, non-consensual PVP, then yes, people interested in PVE shouldn't pick up such a game and then complain about getting ganked.

    But if a game has a long list of features, and is presented as if PVP is a relatively small portion of the game, then players can reasonably complain if actually playing the game mostly consists of getting slaughtered by higher levels with no hope of doing anything besides dying a lot.

    By the same token, suppose that a game had many features, with crafting as just one of the features, and not presented as particularly important.  But then when you actually play the game, you discover that all of the gear you need to do anything else at all comes from crafting, and you have to spend the bulk of your time crafting in the game.  People who picked up the game thinking that they were mostly going to go questing or raiding or ganking would have a legitimate beef.  They knew that the game had crafting, but it wasn't presented as being dominated by crafting.
    KyleranUngoodmmolou
  • WargfootYVWargfootYV Member UncommonPosts: 261
    Quizzical said:

    You're arguing that PVP (or not PVP) is always foundational to a game, and furthermore, that it always should be.  
    Absolutely not... I play a game now, and I do so on the PvE server as the PvP doesn't interest me.
    What I don't do is play on the PvP server and then complain about PvP being 'forced' onto me.
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,435
    Quizzical said:

    You're arguing that PVP (or not PVP) is always foundational to a game, and furthermore, that it always should be.  
    Absolutely not... I play a game now, and I do so on the PvE server as the PvP doesn't interest me.
    What I don't do is play on the PvP server and then complain about PvP being 'forced' onto me.
    Fortunately for you the game offers players a choice, not every interesting game does therefore it is normal for those wishing to play it for features they enjoy to ask devs to alter ones the feel are not to their liking.

    It isn't reasonable to ask a PVP centric game like EVE to standup a PVE only server,  but recently CCP decided to address the totally (IMO) borked war dec mechanic after years of player complaints calling for change.

    Truth is they finally caved when their metric gathering grew robust enough to confirm what had long been claimed, customers were clearly leaving the game forever after being relentlessly griefer by those who leveraged the poor designs to maximum advantage.

    It's always surprising to see how many gamers care only about winning big,  regardless of how they win.  



    [Deleted User]

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

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

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,347
    Quizzical said:
    You're arguing that PVP (or not PVP) is always foundational to a game, and furthermore, that it always should be.  
    Absolutely not... I play a game now, and I do so on the PvE server as the PvP doesn't interest me.
    What I don't do is play on the PvP server and then complain about PvP being 'forced' onto me.
    If a game has both PVP and PVE servers, then you can make that argument.  But that doesn't seem to be common anymore.  I can't think of a game that I've played in the last 13 years that did.
  • ConstantineMerusConstantineMerus Member EpicPosts: 3,338
    I need to mention this interesting fact; Upon WoW's launch till the end of WotLK (that's when I quit, so maybe even longer) PvE servers had weak PvE progression and (almost) all top PvE guilds were on PvP servers. I had several accounts and played on US and EU both. This was changed when I got in for Legion. 

    What do you guys think about that?
    Constantine, The Console Poster

    • "One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
Sign In or Register to comment.