Howdy, Stranger!

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

Full loot PVP MMOs, why do indi developers keep making them?

1356729

Comments

  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,206

    2. In fact you can. Can US attack and bomb any other country? Yes. Except the countries with nuclear weapons. How Russia is in Syria and Ukraine? The right is always in the hands of the stronger. If you have enough money and power you can do any crime without consequences. This is the harsh reality. The law and the police are pretty much illusion that keeps the society from the step to the anarchy. But that does not mean they can protect you. What keeps you safe is the illusion they create. 

    Back in the medieval times that illusion was more limited. So the games are pretty realistic in that point.

    4. This is your personal delusion. As I played some games with loot - you will not be constantly looted. Most players do not care about you. They want to progress. And the few bullies that are actually bored from the game do not play 24/7 waiting specially for you - we all know there are people - is the worst phrase ever. That phrase gave the power in the hands of NRA, Nazi, communists and etc. The mass delusional threat. 

    In fact the unrestricted PvP works pretty well if the PvE allows it. The problem of the full loot games is the PvE progression.  If full loot means to lose a day or even a week - that is pretty much acceptable. But if you lose months - the risk may not worth it. And we have EVE where the strong bond between the PvE and PvP makes even such a loss acceptable for many of the players.
    Amaranthar
  • rodarinrodarin Member RarePosts: 2,465
    Kyleran said:
    Maurgrim said:
    We have seen so many games coming out during the years that promise great gameplay and full loot PVP.
    Has it ever worked I mean really?

    We can take an example, a classic indi sandbox full loot mantra we have all heard.
    Be a crafter
    Be a villian
    Be a hunter of rare animals
    Be a trader and make your fortune by trade.
    Be a guildleader and stake your claim on a land and prosper to create a kingdom

    Yadda Yadda Yadda

    We have all heard these classic commercial phrases, but really they all have come down to pure pvp nothing about pve just pvp with a very small gaming community that hails it for the win.
    It dosent matter how much pve activity you put into your game the game will die with full loot pvp due to the simple reason the majority don't like full loot pvp and those who enjoys it are the ones who stick around hence the lable MMO full loot pvp arena for a game that suppose to be an adventure with trade, craft, exploration, building ect.

    So sad really that indi developers never can understand the basics that full loot ppv never works no matter how much pve content you provide due to pvper gonna hurt your game and scare away the pve player and you end up with a pvp arena mmo that will burn slowly until the pvper finds another game and do it all over again.
    There is an entire sub genre called "survival games" which seem to challenge some of your assertions.

    Now as to why full loot is acceptable in survival games but not MMORPGs I'm still trying to figure out.



    none of these survival games is an actual MMO and none of them are even very popular unless they have private servers where Rp geeks can get it on. Which basically negates the whole full loot aspect of the game.

    I would also say there arent nay full loot PvP games that have been made that arent basically defunct. Sure a lot are  TRYING to be made but none have been made that are even a blip on a radar.

    Each one of these developers is myopic enough to think they can be THE one to make THE game that is THE full loot PvP game that everyone wants. But no one really wants it. The true psychos all get their sociopathic fix with the plethora of BRs out there. And theyre fast enough and you can die instantly that there is no real sense of loss or worry when you do die, unless its a top 5 situation then some mental break downs can occur. 

    Bottomline is people have to stop wishing and hoping for something that is never ever going to come. This isnt like the NFL in LA (which 99% of the population around the area couldnt care less about) where it wasnt necessarily going to happen unless some 'perfect' scenario took place. Only took 20 years....

    It been about 5 years since the last playable MMO was released (ESO) so there are 15 more I guess if youre holding out hope. But with every release its a swing and a miss.

    ANY but the guys who made it deliver Life is Feudal and it had the most potential. Definitely the best world to play in land manipulation like no other. (at least non pixilated minecraft looking crap). But they refused to listen and also put out a full loot system with major flaws all around and even the niche fanboys abandoned it. Mostly because its a grind.

    But everyone of these so called 'sandbox' games needs developer supported platforms...trading, auction house, banking, caravans/shipping,  some sort of storyline, and maybe even a few quests. All they have done is make a crafting and building system than anyone using unreal engine can implement. Not exactly pushing the envelope.

    Thats why I say stop hoping and just take what they give and if thats not enough there are still a lot of games with modders and basement developers creating content for them. Fall out 4 basically has guys working on it that are better than Bethesda (which isnt saying much right now) obviously not an MMO, but what is these days, at least something not half a decade old at least.
    GdemamiCazriel
  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,206
    rodarin said:
    But everyone of these so called 'sandbox' games needs developer supported platforms...trading, auction house, banking, caravans/shipping,  some sort of storyline, and maybe even a few quests. All they have done is make a crafting and building system than anyone using unreal engine can implement. Not exactly pushing the envelope.
    This is the problem. Like in the PvP arena, the players just create too much random events. And when you make everything players driven the game will become incredibly complicated as a code. It is not impossible, but it is harder. Much easier is to break the game on pieces and to enforce the solo interaction with the AI. So to limit the random events as much as possible. 
    Gdemami
  • JakdstripperJakdstripper Member RarePosts: 2,399
    edited February 16
    full loot mmos are fun, not gonna lie.

    that's why all these BR games are so popular. it's basically a full loot pvp game with no grinding. full loot straight to the action. full loot pvp is super fun when done right. 

    the problem becomes when you try and merge grinding/leveling with full loot ganking. when you force pvp onto people that just want to pve. 


    i agree that EvE online found the best balance to date. can't think of a single game that did it better. Aion came close with their rift system. for the life of me cannot understand why no other mmo developer hasn't gone the way of EvE. it's just so perfect. it allows all types of playstyles to interact, without forcing either pvpers or pvers onto each other. you can literally choose how much risk you want to take, and those players hell bent on doing nothing but ganking are forced to stay far away from pvers. 

    the only issue that EvE has really is the fact that you are always a ship. such a shame that they abandoned walking in space stations. that was truly the next step for that game.  


    SteelhelmAlBQuirkydeniterPalebaneLackingMMOVermillion_RaventhalCayleraKyleran
  • foxgirlfoxgirl Member UncommonPosts: 113
    PVP-focused games get made because I think, the devs want quick cash, or they don't know how to read a crowd. Bunches of games have tried this and only end up being "flash in the pan", one-hit-wonders and such.
    Aion flopped because pvp is forced and the majority of players like pvp on the side.
    Mortal Online, Warhammer Online (the only game I actually liked pvp in), Lineage 2 - probably the only one that was successful for a while, Age of Conan was pve focused, but they tried to make it more about the pvp and it didn't do so well.
    Octagon7711
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,061
    It's simple...
    PvP is the strongest possible interaction between player controller characters.
    The strongest always takes over if not controlled, and severely punished if going overboard.
    So PvP takes over all those poorly designed games.
    Only a few who managed to control PvP, and therefore are well designed, survive and thrive, the greatest example being EvE.
    AlBQuirkySteelhelm
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming - RAM: 16GB Kingston HyperX Savage DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Philips 40PUK6809 4K 3D TV - Second display: Philips 273v 27" gaming monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset and Razer Hydra controllers - Soundcard: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.

  • CicceroCiccero Member UncommonPosts: 171
    Not reading all those pages

    These indie developers grew up with PVP as the theme of most games. They see what the twitch rave is about, the revenue streams, and they band wagon. They eventually realize that there is no balance. You cannot attain a balance that pleases pvp focused, pvp partial, and pve players. So then they reinforce their view, with zeal, while flailing about, disregarding X,Y,Z while chanting money,money,money. it goes from an idea, based on love, to a dash for cash. I've been told it is  happening with new World. The game is being mouthpieced by the hardcore players, about 18% of the active player base, some tentative support, with requests for a few items for balance or that allows a pve play function that is more tolerable, a larger percentage, then the 20-30% who deal with pvp, but what a visually stunning game with serious pve focuses

    Survival MMO is niched itself out of existence by the sheer waves of creators, trying to cash in, promises made, cash given, and now in a downward spiral, trying to justify proceeding, to get a paycheck from companies that are even MORE far removed from the "clue" that a simply daily read of a few websites would clear up.
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 8,860
    foxgirl said:
    PVP-focused games get made because I think, the devs want quick cash, or they don't know how to read a crowd. Bunches of games have tried this and only end up being "flash in the pan", one-hit-wonders and such.
    Aion flopped because pvp is forced and the majority of players like pvp on the side.
    Mortal Online, Warhammer Online (the only game I actually liked pvp in), Lineage 2 - probably the only one that was successful for a while, Age of Conan was pve focused, but they tried to make it more about the pvp and it didn't do so well.

    I played Aion for a long time symply because I enjoyed the PvE so much, the zones were interesting, a lot of the quests were well done, and I liked the flying gimmick, so I played it in spite of the PvP.   L2 I loved because I thought it was done fairly.  If you didn't want to PvP just use a blessed escaped scroll and get instantly transported to town when you saw a red name coming at you.  So give me an instant teleport out of combat and I'll probably play any PvP game.  I still play AoC every once in awhile.  

    I once read a Dev wrote he likes making PvP games because they make the players more active.  Or something like that. 

    "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

  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,206
    The main problem of the open world games are the goals. There the players do not have strict solo goals limited of faction, area, quest chain. This is the main reason games like EVE and the old L2 are so good. They give goals for the solo player, for the small group, for the large group. And all that is in the open world, so goals with consequences. In such a game loot works pretty well. In L2 Classic (not the broken US version) I lost few swords and other gear, but that was not a problem. The main issues there were lack of enough raid bosses, lack of fortresses, and lack of rare gear - so lack of goals for a small clan, and kind of pointless crafting. 

    In fact as both games are old, the things could be made much better. But this is a very hard task. It is much easier to make another WoW.
    Cryomatrix
  • k61977k61977 Member RarePosts: 1,245
    It's a proven niche market.  Right now the battle royal which is pretty much a full loot game, not really an MMO though is the king of the hill for pulling in money.  No they will never be the main stream for PVE type players that want to play an MMO. 

    I don't mind PVP myself but I don't play a single full loot game anymore.  I started out my MMO time really with Ultima Online, it is a gamestyle that I would never play again to be honest, because the work and time it took to get great gear got overshadowed by the PK population for a long time.

    Yes PVP centric MMO's don't seem to stand the test of time anymore.  One of the issues I see with these games isn't the PVP itself, it is the lack of things other than just killing each other.  They are the cheapest form of MMO to make because you are not worrying about making new content all the time.  The content is killing each other, which for me get boring really fast.

    My gripe isn't with full loot PVP more so it is with having PVE all the way till the end and all the sudden you must PVP to keep playing.  If it is going to be PVP then make it PVP from day one not a month or two into playing.
  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member RarePosts: 3,513
    edited February 16
    As to the question of why developers keep making those types of games, I don't really know.  I actually think part of it goes back to the beginnings of MMORPGs and the idea of making a virtual world.  If you are trying to make a virtual world it does make sense that players should be able to take any action they choose to take.

    The reasons why it doesn't work out very well have all been pointed out already by other people but I guess I'll rehash it.  It all ties in to the fact that it's not a real world it's a virtual world game.  So even if they trying to make it feel like a world it is still a game and things work differently in a game than they do in the real world.

    So why doesn't it work?

    1.  Power gaps between players.  One guy is much higher level than the other guy or has far better equipment so when they encounter each other there isn't any chance for a fight there is just one guy trying to murder the much weaker guy and the weaker guy can only try to escape.  For some people being the stronger guy in that situation is fun but nobody finds it fun being the weaker guy.  This is the result of it being a game and it's not realistic.  In the real world if you gave two random healthy adults each a sword and forced them to fight there would at least be some chance that the less experienced guy would win.

    2.  Lack of consequences.  In the real world could you hang around a public park ambushing people and killing them at will with no consequences?  No.  But in a game you can.  I don't know of any PvP game that has ever come up with any good solution for this.  I have thought that maybe some type of faction system that really matters would help.  Kill another player and for every faction he has positive standing with you will take a negative hit equal to his positive standing with that faction. 

    But then it would need to be a fairly involved and deep faction system.  It couldn't just be a simple light versus dark, pick one or the other system.  You would need lots of factions so that a player might have positive standing with a multitude of factions that actually matter in a game.  This way, anyone contemplating murder would have to wonder how they are going to screw up their own faction standings if they do it.  For this to work the factions would have to really mean something in the game and not just be something you could shrug off.

    3.  Unacceptable loss.  It's been mentioned before but if you lose many hours worth of progress because some gank squad or higher level guy killed you...it sucks hard.  If it happens repeatedly, well, most people in that situation will just stop playing that game.

    4.  Harassment.  Even if the loss upon death is not so bad it's no fun being killed every time you step out away from the guards or whatever.  And we all know there are people who will hang around just to do that sort of thing.  Hang around an area where they know they can find weaker characters just so they can make the game a miserable experience for them.

    Basically, trying make a MMORPG that strives to be like a virtual world but also has unrestriced PvP just doesn't work and it never will.  The two things just don't fit together.
    Neanderthal, this is exceptional among some exceptional posts in this thread.
    My contention is that a true virtual world MUST have open world PvP and Full Loot.
    The whole point is that:
    1) a few players will always abuse the rules, and players need a means to take action against other if that occurs.
    2) A world does not feel true to simulation with artificial boundaries. And direct PvP restrictions or toggles does not lend to that feel of "realism" that a simulation needs.

    But to get to this virtual world, you also have to have a way of keeping the Wild West (rampant PKing) out of it. It makes no sense that a smaller percentage of players can kill all the time with no consequence, especially that they care about. Most of them accept being killed from time to time, as long as they win most of the time.

    1) A True Justice System, one that affects the PKers to an extent that they actually care to avoide the consequences, is absolutely needed.
    2) Sanctioned Warfare is where they can be set loose for their game thrills.
    BOTH of the above need to be handled with care, and has to somehow be inclusive of the rest of the player population.
    For example, in Sanctioned Warfare, the outcome should affect the rest of the players as in a simulation of a "real" world, i.e. what would it be like in a Fantasy world setting.
    Not 100%, the game has to be interesting and maintain that fun feeling. But something that makes sense.

    I'm am very impressed with you idea of many factions and a deep system.
    I think this has high potential to minimize PKing and Full Looting.
    I've had ideas on this sort of thing to use for Sanctioned Warfare, as a means to drive it in an in-lore way. And maintaining the "worldly" and "virtual world" setting.

    But yes, I think there's a huge potential in controlling PKing too.
    I think that it would have to affect the player also, on top of affecting his faction.
    I'm just toying with the idea at this point, but let me set an example....

    Suppose the game has deities like the Greek (or other wide set) gods. You have gods of:
    War
    Commerce
    Luck
    Love
    Rivers, lakes, and streams
    Woodlands
    Hunting
    Seas
    Storms
    etc.

    Some of these god factions are naturally aligned.
    Such as Woodlands and Hunting.
    So a player PKs a Hunter, and now he has bad Karma with all those who follow Both the Hunting god AND the Woodland god.
    On top of that, said PKer may gain bad Karma with the victim's City Faction.

    The effects of having too much bad Karma with a Faction should affect the player's character.
    And it should be enough to cause said player to think that maybe it's not worth it to PK.
    In this case, each Faction Deity might start giving small penalties to the PK character.
    He/she may start out with:

    1) Hunting God Faction
    -1 to missile weapon hit chances and damage
    -1 to chances or effects pertaining to hunting, such as Tracking, Stealth, etc.

    2) Woodland God Faction
    -1 to Foraging, woodland resource gathering, and the like
    -1 to food and water benefits while in any woodlands setting
    +1 to Compass direction (malfunction), as each time the player turns his/her compass may spin 1 degree extra, the cumulative effects throwing him off and eventually making the compass totally useless. Said PKer would have to then navigate by terrain features only.

    3) City Faction
    -to all selling prices
    + to all buying prices
    (The two above would be done through an invisible  "tax", so that it affects these actions with other player's as well as NPC shops.
    ---whatever else.

    Just an example.
    Now these penalties can increase with repeated actions and increased Faction bad Karma.
    "Kill On Sight" would be the end result of too much bad Faction Karma, together with some added permanent penalties such as skill reduction and loss of HPs.

    From there the game could allow for these penalties to wear off, or have Faction quests to remove a set number of penalty points. These quests would be to benefit the offended Faction in some way (typically financially).
    MaurgrimAlBQuirkyNeanderthal

    Once upon a time....

  • SpottyGekkoSpottyGekko Member EpicPosts: 6,911
    PVP is the most popular form of online play... by far !

    Just not in MMORPG's... :wink:

    Attempts at making virtual worlds always fail, because some players like to control their risk (PVE), which means they'll avoid games where that's not possible (non-consensual PVP).
    squibbly
  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member RarePosts: 3,513
    PVP is the most popular form of online play... by far !

    Just not in MMORPG's... :wink:

    Attempts at making virtual worlds always fail, because some players like to control their risk (PVE), which means they'll avoid games where that's not possible (non-consensual PVP).
    You'll never have a game that makes all players happy.
    AlBQuirky

    Once upon a time....

  • bigmilkbigmilk Member UncommonPosts: 45
    I am still hoping someone can name a single server, PvP, full-loot, perma-death, persistent world, crafting, character building, base building MMO with a justice system and inheritance system.

    You know, a game that the OP says nobody does right. Also a game that has all the things that others say is missing in PvP games.

    I am asking because Haven and Hearth and Salem are the only games that I know that seems to have everything that others say is missing in a properly done PvP game.

    Are there any other games like them? I have developed 30 characters in Salem over the last 5 years. I can play them separately or simultaneously, working together as a group or as individual adventurers, and any of them can join any other players, groups or towns. Some get killed and then their possessions, if any, can be inherited or left to be salvaged by others in the 5 year old single server persistent world.

    So, please, can anyone tell me that there are other games like that?
  • ChildoftheShadowsChildoftheShadows Member RarePosts: 1,157
    bigmilk said:
    I am still hoping someone can name a single server, PvP, full-loot, perma-death, persistent world, crafting, character building, base building MMO with a justice system and inheritance system.

    You know, a game that the OP says nobody does right. Also a game that has all the things that others say is missing in PvP games.

    I am asking because Haven and Hearth and Salem are the only games that I know that seems to have everything that others say is missing in a properly done PvP game.

    Are there any other games like them? I have developed 30 characters in Salem over the last 5 years. I can play them separately or simultaneously, working together as a group or as individual adventurers, and any of them can join any other players, groups or towns. Some get killed and then their possessions, if any, can be inherited or left to be salvaged by others in the 5 year old single server persistent world.

    So, please, can anyone tell me that there are other games like that?
    And everyone still don’t know what your point is. Advertising said games?
    Kyleran
  • CazrielCazriel Member UncommonPosts: 419
    "A true Justice system . . . "

    . . . never works.  Ever.  No Justice system in any game creates any kind of parity between PvE players and PvPers.  Never has, never will. 

    There is never any JUSTICE for the PvE player.  He never gets his stuff back, never gets any satisfaction for having been PK'd, camped, ganked or griefed.  There are only penalties for the PKer, none of which create a deterrent and many of which are actually an encouragement and fervently sought after.

    So long as PvE is used as a lure to create a "target rich environment" for PvPers, who are the real players for whom the game is made, there is never going to be a successful full-loot PvP game.

    There is no solution. 
    ArglebargleGdemamidelete5230RnjypsyMaurgrimAlBQuirkySteelhelmSpottyGekko
  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member RarePosts: 3,513
    edited February 17
    Cazriel said:
    "A true Justice system . . . "

    . . . never works.  Ever.  No Justice system in any game creates any kind of parity between PvE players and PvPers.  Never has, never will. 

    There is never any JUSTICE for the PvE player.  He never gets his stuff back, never gets any satisfaction for having been PK'd, camped, ganked or griefed.  There are only penalties for the PKer, none of which create a deterrent and many of which are actually an encouragement and fervently sought after.

    So long as PvE is used as a lure to create a "target rich environment" for PvPers, who are the real players for whom the game is made, there is never going to be a successful full-loot PvP game.

    There is no solution. 
    No one has ever done a Justice System right. Ever. They always leave "outs" for the PKers.
    The one I love to point at the most is "prison." And it turns out to have "escape", which is just more game play for the PKer and doesn't do a thing as a deterrent.

    I've offered ideas for Justice Systems that truly affect the PKers. I just offered an idea above, in the post you are quoting from I believe, that would definitely affect the PKers. And would cripple their characters if they do it too much. Which would definitely reduce PKing drastically.
    And what do I get? Ignoring the offer and a drive-by "never worked before", even though it's never been done before.

    Once upon a time....

  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 3,944
    PVP is the most popular form of online play... by far !

    Just not in MMORPG's... :wink:

    Attempts at making virtual worlds always fail, because some players like to control their risk (PVE), which means they'll avoid games where that's not possible (non-consensual PVP).
    Just MMORPG players really.  I think the character and time investing also adds to this.  The power gap, powerlessness and general unfairness adds to it as well.
  • ArglebargleArglebargle Member RarePosts: 2,622
    Cazriel said:
    "A true Justice system . . . "

    . . . never works.  Ever.  No Justice system in any game creates any kind of parity between PvE players and PvPers.  Never has, never will. 

    There is never any JUSTICE for the PvE player.  He never gets his stuff back, never gets any satisfaction for having been PK'd, camped, ganked or griefed.  There are only penalties for the PKer, none of which create a deterrent and many of which are actually an encouragement and fervently sought after.

    So long as PvE is used as a lure to create a "target rich environment" for PvPers, who are the real players for whom the game is made, there is never going to be a successful full-loot PvP game.

    There is no solution. 
    No one has ever done a Justice System right. Ever. They always leave "outs" for the PKers.
    The one I love to point at the most is "prison." And it turns out to have "escape", which is just more game play for the PKer and doesn't do a thing as a deterrent.

    I've offered ideas for Justice Systems that truly affect the PKers. I just offered an idea above, in the post you are quoting from I believe, that would definitely affect the PKers. And would cripple their characters if they do it too much. Which would definitely reduce PKing drastically.
    And what do I get? Ignoring the offer and a drive-by "never worked before", even though it's never been done before.
    Justice system that works should culminate with an IP ban for the greifers and gankers.   And more.

    Your contention that your system of justice would work where all else have failed, is the same coda we hear from all of these game devs.   

    My system of justice is to never give these games my money.  Pretty much the same for almost everyone in my gaming circle.
    GdemamiRnjypsysquibbly

    If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member RarePosts: 3,513
    edited February 17
    Cazriel said:
    "A true Justice system . . . "

    . . . never works.  Ever.  No Justice system in any game creates any kind of parity between PvE players and PvPers.  Never has, never will. 

    There is never any JUSTICE for the PvE player.  He never gets his stuff back, never gets any satisfaction for having been PK'd, camped, ganked or griefed.  There are only penalties for the PKer, none of which create a deterrent and many of which are actually an encouragement and fervently sought after.

    So long as PvE is used as a lure to create a "target rich environment" for PvPers, who are the real players for whom the game is made, there is never going to be a successful full-loot PvP game.

    There is no solution. 
    No one has ever done a Justice System right. Ever. They always leave "outs" for the PKers.
    The one I love to point at the most is "prison." And it turns out to have "escape", which is just more game play for the PKer and doesn't do a thing as a deterrent.

    I've offered ideas for Justice Systems that truly affect the PKers. I just offered an idea above, in the post you are quoting from I believe, that would definitely affect the PKers. And would cripple their characters if they do it too much. Which would definitely reduce PKing drastically.
    And what do I get? Ignoring the offer and a drive-by "never worked before", even though it's never been done before.
    Justice system that works should culminate with an IP ban for the greifers and gankers.   And more.

    Your contention that your system of justice would work where all else have failed, is the same coda we hear from all of these game devs.   

    My system of justice is to never give these games my money.  Pretty much the same for almost everyone in my gaming circle.
    That's fine, you don't have to buy anything you don't want to buy.

    But I've shown how my system would work. It basic logic.
    And I've shown why previous efforts, many just to con players in and some with the failed thinking that PKers should not really suffer because of their choices (which drive other players away), failed to stop random Ganking. And again, it's just basic logic.

    It's the logic of human nature, that players won't destroy their own characters,
    ->and game play<-, at work here. And even if they did, it wouldn't last for long before they are ineffective at it. And become the hunted, instead of the hunter.

    Why is it so hard to get people to understand this?

    Once upon a time....

  • bcbullybcbully Member EpicPosts: 9,809
    OP can’t be serious. “All these full loot games”
  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,206
    foxgirl said:
    PVP-focused games get made because I think, the devs want quick cash, or they don't know how to read a crowd. Bunches of games have tried this and only end up being "flash in the pan", one-hit-wonders and such.
    Aion flopped because pvp is forced and the majority of players like pvp on the side.
    Mortal Online, Warhammer Online (the only game I actually liked pvp in), Lineage 2 - probably the only one that was successful for a while, Age of Conan was pve focused, but they tried to make it more about the pvp and it didn't do so well.
    Do you realize LoL, Fortnite and etc. are PvP games? And WoW is a niche game in comparison. Most players do not play multiplayer games to grind solo, they play to compete with other people. This is the crowd. The so called PvE (solo) players are a small minority. It is even ridiculous to claim that every game with weapons and monsters must have Sims mode. 

    The problem of the PvP focused MMORPGs is that many of them do not merge well the PvP and the PvE. The crowd hate the grind, at the same time the solo players hate the constant competition. So often when the developer combines solo grind with competitive gameplay, he gets only hate.

    What made Lineage 2 and EVE better? In both you have goals above the solo story, achievements and progression. In L2 you need a clan to progress. And there are goals for small clans, that benefit every member like raids, fortresses, open world dungeons (all that is missing in the L2 Classic US), there are goals for the big clans like castles and epic raids. And all of that is build on open world competition with FFA PvP. In such a game you can implement even full loot, as the clans policies prevent the chaotic PKs. And there are PK rules that give some protection to the few solo players. EVE is very similar, but the solo players there are more. And the PK protection is zoned. 

    So let take BDO, or L2 Classic US. Two very similar games with the original L2, but also very different. There the PK rules effectively prevent the open world PvP. So the players do not need protection from a clan. The clan goals that benefits every player - like raids and dungeons, do not exist. Instead the open world raids are noncopetitive. The rewards for a group are not enough to stimulate the cooperation. The player does not need a clan or any kind of constant group to progress. In addition the economics of BDO is singleplayer - the PvE is effectively separated from the PvP, but with rules, instead with instances. 

    Above all, the success of one game is based on the implemented goals. This is something many developers do not understand. It is not the immersion, the world, the lore, the combat, but the goals. So how the player wins the game. To make a good open world game, you need open world goals, for the solo player, the small groups, the big groups. When the player have a goal above the solo character progression and gathering of gear, even the full loot will work fine.
    Gdemamibcbully
  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 3,944
    I wonder what makes the western MMORPG market so adverse to pking. It also seems less accepting of pay to win. The eastern market doesn't seem to have the same issues.  Entitlement, fairness, control I guess are at play.  
    AlBQuirkybcbullysquibblyKyleran
  • MaurgrimMaurgrim Member RarePosts: 1,240
    edited February 17
    I wonder what makes the western MMORPG market so adverse to pking. It also seems less accepting of pay to win. The eastern market doesn't seem to have the same issues.  Entitlement, fairness, control I guess are at play.  
    Maybe because eastern games had that from the start so asian players sees that as normal practice, we in the west didn't had that in the golden age of mmorpg.
    AlBQuirkyAmarantharsquibbly
  • rodarinrodarin Member RarePosts: 2,465
    full loot mmos are fun, not gonna lie.

    that's why all these BR games are so popular. it's basically a full loot pvp game with no grinding. full loot straight to the action. full loot pvp is super fun when done right. 

    the problem becomes when you try and merge grinding/leveling with full loot ganking. when you force pvp onto people that just want to pve. 


    i agree that EvE online found the best balance to date. can't think of a single game that did it better. Aion came close with their rift system. for the life of me cannot understand why no other mmo developer hasn't gone the way of EvE. it's just so perfect. it allows all types of playstyles to interact, without forcing either pvpers or pvers onto each other. you can literally choose how much risk you want to take, and those players hell bent on doing nothing but ganking are forced to stay far away from pvers. 

    the only issue that EvE has really is the fact that you are always a ship. such a shame that they abandoned walking in space stations. that was truly the next step for that game.  


    Eve is a complete grindfest and spread sheet game. The number of players in it are also dubious. I have said it a dozen times now the population is probably a fifth of what it looks like, meaning the average number of accounts for each individual is 5. Obviously not everyone has 5 but some guys have 10 or 20.

    Its also plex driven that big surge a few years ago has literally kept the game populated. I dont know how many people are joining or rejoining but the group I played with, maybe 30 people havent been playing in quite awhile. Its that niche game where the hardcores will play it to death and pay with in game currency which if you have the experience is ridiculously easy to make. Even with Plex being outrageous now compared to what they used to be the amount of isk in the game is also equally ridiculous.

    As far as BRs go they feed the trolls. They also feed the ADD insta gratification  mentality everyone wants now. While too many games are grinding and make you feel like its a 'job' many are also making it too easy to 'achieve' things. Everyone talks about 'balance' with MMOs but the real balance issues are class based but how the game is designed and developed between grind and 'easy mode'. BRs despite their huge interest now are a passing fad. Once the next big thing comes along and the streamers and content creators all move on to that these BRs will be nothing. You see it now within the genre. Apex came out and everyone has flocked to it. PuBG used to be king fortnite came out and people went to that game now its APex. no 'brand' loyalty and definitely showing the ADD mentality of the players of these games. None of them are particularly good or even decent. But theyre the flavor of the month and someone that they watch play it tries to explain the tiny things that make one 'better' than the other. Which doesnt mean its good it just does things differently. But in the end theyre all so similar that depending on who is streaming it that will be the one that has the most going on.

    Thats why when theyre new people flock to them because everything IS new and not a grind or easy there is no point of reference until you play awhile. Some are so obviously cut and pastes from other games most people dont need any time ot see their short comings.

    But ANY MMO that wants to come out cant be full anything all the time be it PvE or PvE. With maps getting bigger and bigger there is really no reason not to have the tried and true 'zone' method. Some zones are safe others arent. Its pretty simple. Any MMO that ever had any sort of longer lasting success has employed that system. Even in seemless 'openworld' maps its not hard to do it. Archeage did it fairly well. Only thing issue htere is their zones had chokepoint and entry spots you couldnt just go into a zone anywhere freely. So it was easier to know when you were getting close to a 'bad' area.
    Gdemami
Sign In or Register to comment.