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?

18911131429

Comments

  • BadSpockBadSpock Member UncommonPosts: 7,943
    It's because PvP is cheap, easy content.

    It's also potentially never ending content.

    Give players the ability to fight each other, they'll fight over resources, over loot, over pride, over identity... even over nothing at all.

    Creating content takes a ton of people and time. That's why most indy MMOs are sandbox - developers build the tools, players bring the content (themselves.)

    I mean, take a guess how many people it takes Ubisoft to build one of their games with 2-3 "main" storylines + hundreds of side quests and other little pieces of curated content.


    MendelUngoodAlBQuirky
  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 2,305
    Ungood said:
    Ungood said:
    Ungood said:
    Ungood said:
    There are plenty of Perma-Death, Full Loot Open World PvP Survival MMO's out there, like Ark, Rend, Rust, Day Z, etc... some doing quite well.
    Are there actual perms death modes in them? I didn’t know that if true. Not that it matters though the progression is vastly different than an mmorpg which is the main issue I think. 
    I know Day Z is perma death by default.

    Ark has a "Hard Core" mode, which is Perma Death.

    No Clue about the others.. and to be honest, if it does not have Perma Death, than it's simply not a Survival Game in my mind, it's just another pointless PvP MMO.
    Well your mind is wrought with all kinds of crazy so it’s all good. 
    Ponder this.. if you can't really die.. how can you call it a game of survival?
    If you really die, how can you call it a game? YOU seek help.
    I get that you are trying to witty, like this is some kind of jab or what have you, but really, but playing up being deliberately obtuse about the fact that we are talking about games here, just makes you look stupid.

    But keep on keeping on I guess.. 
    No, dipshit, the real problem is when you jump into a thread it goes to shit because you don't stay on topic, you don't have discussions and instead just throw your opinions around like facts. It's obnoxious and pointless to attempt any real discussion with you so I just have fun with it instead.

    But keep on keeping on I guess...
    Let me hold your hand here.. this is a discussion about PvP, and why it is in Games. I am on topic with my points, you on the other hand have added nothing to this discussion because not only do you lack the ability to rationally counter any point I have made, you also you lack the coping skills to handle the truth of what I am saying.

    But kudos to admitting you lack the skills for a discussion and have opted to be nothing but a pissant troll, would explain why you like pointless purposeless PvP games that cater to your mindset.
    Gdemamisquibbly
    Currently Playing Eternal Crusade, because no matter who wins, a bunch of cheaters lost.
  • kitaradkitarad Member EpicPosts: 4,880
    This thread makes me smile because I believe some of you have met your perfect counterparts.
    Amarantharcheyane

  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 2,305
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    This is my point, See in a game of Chess, there is a point to the conflict, to win the game

    In the MMO's you play, there is no point to the PvP, you are simply attacking people to attack them, in an endless cycle of pointless, purposeless violence for the sake of violence.
    It's the exact same point "to win the game."

    The game being the combat between two opponents.

    However, an mmorpg is a bit different than a game of chess. The sole purpose of chess is to beat your opponent. You aren't getting loot, you aren't getting territory control or control of resources.

    Which is, I bet, a part of the conflict in an mmorpg. However, if the game has battlegrounds or some such things then "yes" the purpose is to "win the game."
    Kudos, a thought out response.

    Lets use Chess. Two players sit down to a game of Chess, at some point, one of them will win, one of them will lose, or they will be so evenly matched, they will stalemate.

    A stalemate is where neither player can win the game, at which point, they re-start the game and see if they can win this time.. but the goal here, is to Win.

    Now in a lot of MMO's, you start the game with a Stalemate. You can't win the game and you can't lose either, at best you can just trade pieces on the board, which will get instantly replaced.

    Imagine how boring a game like that would become for the players. imagine sitting at a chess board, stuck in an endless cycle of trading pieces. Sure, I took your pawn, you took my knight, then I took your castle and you took my pawn.. look at us fighting..  at first it might even be fun.. the thrill of the fight.. but that does not change the fact that is is nothing more than a  game of conflict for the sake of conflict, since no one can win and no one can lose, it will go on forever, and ever, and ever... until at least one of the players get bored and leaves. 

    When that happens the remaining player will just cry they have no one to play with.

    Without that Win Mechanic, the PvP is just people killing each other for the sake of killing each other. Conflict for the sake of Conflict.. purposeless pointless violence purely for the sake of violence in and of itself. 


    kitaradGdemamiSteelhelm
    Currently Playing Eternal Crusade, because no matter who wins, a bunch of cheaters lost.
  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,141
    edited February 19
    BadSpock said:
    It's because PvP is cheap, easy content.


    In fact it is much easier to make PvE content. Much easier. Also the PvP is bad for the developer, as he gets paid for the updates and the development. It is much easier to add a new map, with some 3D elements and cool textures. In the PvP you need much more codding for physics, the triggering, the calculations of in general random events and the balance - something most games never make right. If you think PvP is cheap or easy -  you know nothing about the games.
    GdemamiBadSpocksquibbly
  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,141
    Ungood said:

    Lets use Chess. Two players sit down to a game of Chess, at some point, one of them will win, one of them will lose, or they will be so evenly matched, they will stalemate.



    Yeah if you win one chess game you win The Chess game :) Then you can go and kill few people in a cheap PvP MMO. Just hide the bodies, as the police may be concerned.
    squibbly
  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 2,305
    ikcin said:
    Ungood said:

    Lets use Chess. Two players sit down to a game of Chess, at some point, one of them will win, one of them will lose, or they will be so evenly matched, they will stalemate.



    Yeah if you win one chess game you win The Chess game :) Then you can go and kill few people in a cheap PvP MMO. Just hide the bodies, as the police may be concerned.

    You obviously do not play chess, or even understand the nature of the game, and I have neither the patience nor crayons to explain this to you. Leave the higher level discussions to the adults, please, and maybe go entertain yourself with some mindless PvP in Linage 2 or something.. unless you started to suck at that game too.
    Gdemamisquibbly
    Currently Playing Eternal Crusade, because no matter who wins, a bunch of cheaters lost.
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 7,836
    edited February 19
    Thane said:

    fool loot, next thing, a nice in a niche.

    Was that a typo or intentional ? ;)
    Post edited by Jean-Luc_Picard on
    kitaradSteelhelmAlBQuirky
    "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.

  • kitaradkitarad Member EpicPosts: 4,880
    Thane said:

    fool loot, next thing, a nice in a niche.

    What that a typo or intentional ? ;)
    I wondered about that too as it is two letters he misspelled so I guess it was deliberate.
    Jean-Luc_Picard

  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 7,836
    kitarad said:
    Thane said:

    fool loot, next thing, a nice in a niche.

    What that a typo or intentional ? ;)
    I wondered about that too as it is two letters he misspelled so I guess it was deliberate.
    Mine was a typo though (fixed) ;)
    "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.

  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,141
    edited February 19
    Ungood said:
    ikcin said:
    Ungood said:

    Lets use Chess. Two players sit down to a game of Chess, at some point, one of them will win, one of them will lose, or they will be so evenly matched, they will stalemate.



    Yeah if you win one chess game you win The Chess game :) Then you can go and kill few people in a cheap PvP MMO. Just hide the bodies, as the police may be concerned.

    You obviously do not play chess, or even understand the nature of the game, and I have neither the patience nor crayons to explain this to you. Leave the higher level discussions to the adults, please, and maybe go entertain yourself with some mindless PvP in Linage 2 or something.. unless you started to suck at that game too.
    In fact I played professionally chess for a while when I was young. And as there were not MMOs, or even PCs, we played chess for fun, also poker and belote, football, basketball, war games with plastic and wood weapons. We made alternative reality into the reality :) Like most children do. You simply have no idea how much took the computers from the human nature. More than any machine before. Is that bad? I do not know. But our life was more natural maybe, not better, just different.
    Gdemami
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 26,078
    Ungood said:
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    This is my point, See in a game of Chess, there is a point to the conflict, to win the game

    In the MMO's you play, there is no point to the PvP, you are simply attacking people to attack them, in an endless cycle of pointless, purposeless violence for the sake of violence.
    It's the exact same point "to win the game."

    The game being the combat between two opponents.

    However, an mmorpg is a bit different than a game of chess. The sole purpose of chess is to beat your opponent. You aren't getting loot, you aren't getting territory control or control of resources.

    Which is, I bet, a part of the conflict in an mmorpg. However, if the game has battlegrounds or some such things then "yes" the purpose is to "win the game."
    Kudos, a thought out response.

    Lets use Chess. Two players sit down to a game of Chess, at some point, one of them will win, one of them will lose, or they will be so evenly matched, they will stalemate.

    A stalemate is where neither player can win the game, at which point, they re-start the game and see if they can win this time.. but the goal here, is to Win.

    Now in a lot of MMO's, you start the game with a Stalemate. You can't win the game and you can't lose either, at best you can just trade pieces on the board, which will get instantly replaced.

    Imagine how boring a game like that would become for the players. imagine sitting at a chess board, stuck in an endless cycle of trading pieces. Sure, I took your pawn, you took my knight, then I took your castle and you took my pawn.. look at us fighting..  at first it might even be fun.. the thrill of the fight.. but that does not change the fact that is is nothing more than a  game of conflict for the sake of conflict, since no one can win and no one can lose, it will go on forever, and ever, and ever... until at least one of the players get bored and leaves. 

    When that happens the remaining player will just cry they have no one to play with.

    Without that Win Mechanic, the PvP is just people killing each other for the sake of killing each other. Conflict for the sake of Conflict.. purposeless pointless violence purely for the sake of violence in and of itself. 


    There aren't many pvp mmo's that don't have that win state. Whether it's Lineage/Lineage 2/Dark Age of Camleot, Elder Scrolls Online (etc) that allow a win for a castle/keep or a Battleground that allows for a "win" just like in Chess.


    Kyleran



  • ChildoftheShadowsChildoftheShadows Member RarePosts: 902
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    This is my point, See in a game of Chess, there is a point to the conflict, to win the game

    In the MMO's you play, there is no point to the PvP, you are simply attacking people to attack them, in an endless cycle of pointless, purposeless violence for the sake of violence.
    It's the exact same point "to win the game."

    The game being the combat between two opponents.

    However, an mmorpg is a bit different than a game of chess. The sole purpose of chess is to beat your opponent. You aren't getting loot, you aren't getting territory control or control of resources.

    Which is, I bet, a part of the conflict in an mmorpg. However, if the game has battlegrounds or some such things then "yes" the purpose is to "win the game."
    Kudos, a thought out response.

    Lets use Chess. Two players sit down to a game of Chess, at some point, one of them will win, one of them will lose, or they will be so evenly matched, they will stalemate.

    A stalemate is where neither player can win the game, at which point, they re-start the game and see if they can win this time.. but the goal here, is to Win.

    Now in a lot of MMO's, you start the game with a Stalemate. You can't win the game and you can't lose either, at best you can just trade pieces on the board, which will get instantly replaced.

    Imagine how boring a game like that would become for the players. imagine sitting at a chess board, stuck in an endless cycle of trading pieces. Sure, I took your pawn, you took my knight, then I took your castle and you took my pawn.. look at us fighting..  at first it might even be fun.. the thrill of the fight.. but that does not change the fact that is is nothing more than a  game of conflict for the sake of conflict, since no one can win and no one can lose, it will go on forever, and ever, and ever... until at least one of the players get bored and leaves. 

    When that happens the remaining player will just cry they have no one to play with.

    Without that Win Mechanic, the PvP is just people killing each other for the sake of killing each other. Conflict for the sake of Conflict.. purposeless pointless violence purely for the sake of violence in and of itself. 


    There aren't many pvp mmo's that don't have that win state. Whether it's Lineage/Lineage 2/Dark Age of Camleot, Elder Scrolls Online (etc) that allow a win for a castle/keep or a Battleground that allows for a "win" just like in Chess.


    Killing the other person is considered that same win by many, so the entire analogy doesn’t support what he thinks it does anyway. You win the fight, the match, the royale, the siege, the cook-off. It doesn’t matter. That’s all subjective.  
    ScorchienSovrathSteelhelmKyleran
  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member RarePosts: 3,224
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    This is my point, See in a game of Chess, there is a point to the conflict, to win the game

    In the MMO's you play, there is no point to the PvP, you are simply attacking people to attack them, in an endless cycle of pointless, purposeless violence for the sake of violence.
    It's the exact same point "to win the game."

    The game being the combat between two opponents.

    However, an mmorpg is a bit different than a game of chess. The sole purpose of chess is to beat your opponent. You aren't getting loot, you aren't getting territory control or control of resources.

    Which is, I bet, a part of the conflict in an mmorpg. However, if the game has battlegrounds or some such things then "yes" the purpose is to "win the game."
    Kudos, a thought out response.

    Lets use Chess. Two players sit down to a game of Chess, at some point, one of them will win, one of them will lose, or they will be so evenly matched, they will stalemate.

    A stalemate is where neither player can win the game, at which point, they re-start the game and see if they can win this time.. but the goal here, is to Win.

    Now in a lot of MMO's, you start the game with a Stalemate. You can't win the game and you can't lose either, at best you can just trade pieces on the board, which will get instantly replaced.

    Imagine how boring a game like that would become for the players. imagine sitting at a chess board, stuck in an endless cycle of trading pieces. Sure, I took your pawn, you took my knight, then I took your castle and you took my pawn.. look at us fighting..  at first it might even be fun.. the thrill of the fight.. but that does not change the fact that is is nothing more than a  game of conflict for the sake of conflict, since no one can win and no one can lose, it will go on forever, and ever, and ever... until at least one of the players get bored and leaves. 

    When that happens the remaining player will just cry they have no one to play with.

    Without that Win Mechanic, the PvP is just people killing each other for the sake of killing each other. Conflict for the sake of Conflict.. purposeless pointless violence purely for the sake of violence in and of itself. 


    There aren't many pvp mmo's that don't have that win state. Whether it's Lineage/Lineage 2/Dark Age of Camleot, Elder Scrolls Online (etc) that allow a win for a castle/keep or a Battleground that allows for a "win" just like in Chess.


    Killing the other person is considered that same win by many, so the entire analogy doesn’t support what he thinks it does anyway. You win the fight, the match, the royale, the siege, the cook-off. It doesn’t matter. That’s all subjective.  
    That may be true, but in PvP it become PKing, and a one-sided event.
    I played UO for it's first 12 years or so. And in all that time, what I saw from PKers were tactics to insure "victory."
    Anything from killing newbs to all sorts of bushwhacks.
    I do commend them for their strategies, they played smart. Ghost scouts, gating in companions, playing the numbers odds, etc.
    But the fact is that it drove many away from the game, and such game design keeps most PvP focused games from doing well for very long.
    It's a game killer in MMOs.
    Kyleran

    Once upon a time....

  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 2,305
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    This is my point, See in a game of Chess, there is a point to the conflict, to win the game

    In the MMO's you play, there is no point to the PvP, you are simply attacking people to attack them, in an endless cycle of pointless, purposeless violence for the sake of violence.
    It's the exact same point "to win the game."

    The game being the combat between two opponents.

    However, an mmorpg is a bit different than a game of chess. The sole purpose of chess is to beat your opponent. You aren't getting loot, you aren't getting territory control or control of resources.

    Which is, I bet, a part of the conflict in an mmorpg. However, if the game has battlegrounds or some such things then "yes" the purpose is to "win the game."
    Kudos, a thought out response.

    Lets use Chess. Two players sit down to a game of Chess, at some point, one of them will win, one of them will lose, or they will be so evenly matched, they will stalemate.

    A stalemate is where neither player can win the game, at which point, they re-start the game and see if they can win this time.. but the goal here, is to Win.

    Now in a lot of MMO's, you start the game with a Stalemate. You can't win the game and you can't lose either, at best you can just trade pieces on the board, which will get instantly replaced.

    Imagine how boring a game like that would become for the players. imagine sitting at a chess board, stuck in an endless cycle of trading pieces. Sure, I took your pawn, you took my knight, then I took your castle and you took my pawn.. look at us fighting..  at first it might even be fun.. the thrill of the fight.. but that does not change the fact that is is nothing more than a  game of conflict for the sake of conflict, since no one can win and no one can lose, it will go on forever, and ever, and ever... until at least one of the players get bored and leaves. 

    When that happens the remaining player will just cry they have no one to play with.

    Without that Win Mechanic, the PvP is just people killing each other for the sake of killing each other. Conflict for the sake of Conflict.. purposeless pointless violence purely for the sake of violence in and of itself. 


    There aren't many pvp mmo's that don't have that win state. Whether it's Lineage/Lineage 2/Dark Age of Camleot, Elder Scrolls Online (etc) that allow a win for a castle/keep or a Battleground that allows for a "win" just like in Chess.


    Even in those situations, None of that is a Win Mechanic, that is just a grind, you take a keep, you lose the keep, you kill another player, they kill you, it's no different than a generic PvE grind, but you are killing other players purely for the sake of it. They have not lost, you have not Won, you just endlessly fight each other.

    In a game like say, GW2, they have WvW, at the end of the Week, a Team Wins, and it matters who wins and who loses.

    Just like in sPvP in GW2, you have ranks and tiers, your wins matter, just as do your losses. Each match, there is a drive to win, a reason to fight, it is not violence for the sake of it.

    In a game like say Linage 2, players can just kill each other, there is no meaning to that PvP, it is violence for the sake of violence, no other reason. Players killing each other simply because they can.

    Even in DAoC, you could run around and randomly kill people from other fractions with no rhyme or reason, you are killing purely for the sake of killing, and even then you are not winning the fight, as chances are it was not a duel, it was a gank. They are just annoyed, not bested.

    The only way that someone can legibility win in those kinds of games,  is to drive the other player from the game in frustration.. allow that to process... the only way that anyone can legitimately win in those PvP games,  to drive off the games population.

    And that is why PvP MMO's fail.
    Currently Playing Eternal Crusade, because no matter who wins, a bunch of cheaters lost.
  • ikcinikcin Member RarePosts: 2,141
    Ungood said
    Even in those situations, None of that is a Win Mechanic, that is just a grind, you take a keep, you lose the keep, you kill another player, they kill you, it's no different than a generic PvE grind.
    It is very different in fact. You compete with other people. That is why PvP is always better. Because other player can see that you are better, so you will get respect. In the PvE, even if you grind 24/7, you will get just pixels. And that is why even noobs like you play MMOs. The PvE in solo RPG is far superior. But you want attention from people. It is in your gens. It is your biological instinct. You may deny it. But you play MMOs, so you just lie yourself.
    GdemamiSteelhelm
  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 6,399
    Ungood said:
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    This is my point, See in a game of Chess, there is a point to the conflict, to win the game

    In the MMO's you play, there is no point to the PvP, you are simply attacking people to attack them, in an endless cycle of pointless, purposeless violence for the sake of violence.
    It's the exact same point "to win the game."

    The game being the combat between two opponents.

    However, an mmorpg is a bit different than a game of chess. The sole purpose of chess is to beat your opponent. You aren't getting loot, you aren't getting territory control or control of resources.

    Which is, I bet, a part of the conflict in an mmorpg. However, if the game has battlegrounds or some such things then "yes" the purpose is to "win the game."
    Kudos, a thought out response.

    Lets use Chess. Two players sit down to a game of Chess, at some point, one of them will win, one of them will lose, or they will be so evenly matched, they will stalemate.

    A stalemate is where neither player can win the game, at which point, they re-start the game and see if they can win this time.. but the goal here, is to Win.

    Now in a lot of MMO's, you start the game with a Stalemate. You can't win the game and you can't lose either, at best you can just trade pieces on the board, which will get instantly replaced.

    Imagine how boring a game like that would become for the players. imagine sitting at a chess board, stuck in an endless cycle of trading pieces. Sure, I took your pawn, you took my knight, then I took your castle and you took my pawn.. look at us fighting..  at first it might even be fun.. the thrill of the fight.. but that does not change the fact that is is nothing more than a  game of conflict for the sake of conflict, since no one can win and no one can lose, it will go on forever, and ever, and ever... until at least one of the players get bored and leaves. 

    When that happens the remaining player will just cry they have no one to play with.

    Without that Win Mechanic, the PvP is just people killing each other for the sake of killing each other. Conflict for the sake of Conflict.. purposeless pointless violence purely for the sake of violence in and of itself. 


    There aren't many pvp mmo's that don't have that win state. Whether it's Lineage/Lineage 2/Dark Age of Camleot, Elder Scrolls Online (etc) that allow a win for a castle/keep or a Battleground that allows for a "win" just like in Chess.


    Even in those situations, None of that is a Win Mechanic, that is just a grind, you take a keep, you lose the keep, you kill another player, they kill you, it's no different than a generic PvE grind, but you are killing other players purely for the sake of it. They have not lost, you have not Won, you just endlessly fight each other.

    In a game like say, GW2, they have WvW, at the end of the Week, a Team Wins, and it matters who wins and who loses.

    Just like in sPvP in GW2, you have ranks and tiers, your wins matter, just as do your losses. Each match, there is a drive to win, a reason to fight, it is not violence for the sake of it.

    In a game like say Linage 2, players can just kill each other, there is no meaning to that PvP, it is violence for the sake of violence, no other reason. Players killing each other simply because they can.

    Even in DAoC, you could run around and randomly kill people from other fractions with no rhyme or reason, you are killing purely for the sake of killing, and even then you are not winning the fight, as chances are it was not a duel, it was a gank. They are just annoyed, not bested.

    The only way that someone can legibility win in those kinds of games,  is to drive the other player from the game in frustration.. allow that to process... the only way that anyone can legitimately win in those PvP games,  to drive off the games population.

    And that is why PvP MMO's fail.
       Giddy Up

    Image result for horse blinder images

    squibbly
  • PhaserlightPhaserlight Member EpicPosts: 2,766
    Ungood said:
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    This is my point, See in a game of Chess, there is a point to the conflict, to win the game

    In the MMO's you play, there is no point to the PvP, you are simply attacking people to attack them, in an endless cycle of pointless, purposeless violence for the sake of violence.
    It's the exact same point "to win the game."

    The game being the combat between two opponents.

    However, an mmorpg is a bit different than a game of chess. The sole purpose of chess is to beat your opponent. You aren't getting loot, you aren't getting territory control or control of resources.

    Which is, I bet, a part of the conflict in an mmorpg. However, if the game has battlegrounds or some such things then "yes" the purpose is to "win the game."
    Kudos, a thought out response.

    Lets use Chess. Two players sit down to a game of Chess, at some point, one of them will win, one of them will lose, or they will be so evenly matched, they will stalemate.

    A stalemate is where neither player can win the game, at which point, they re-start the game and see if they can win this time.. but the goal here, is to Win.

    Now in a lot of MMO's, you start the game with a Stalemate. You can't win the game and you can't lose either, at best you can just trade pieces on the board, which will get instantly replaced.

    Imagine how boring a game like that would become for the players. imagine sitting at a chess board, stuck in an endless cycle of trading pieces. Sure, I took your pawn, you took my knight, then I took your castle and you took my pawn.. look at us fighting..  at first it might even be fun.. the thrill of the fight.. but that does not change the fact that is is nothing more than a  game of conflict for the sake of conflict, since no one can win and no one can lose, it will go on forever, and ever, and ever... until at least one of the players get bored and leaves. 

    When that happens the remaining player will just cry they have no one to play with.

    Without that Win Mechanic, the PvP is just people killing each other for the sake of killing each other. Conflict for the sake of Conflict.. purposeless pointless violence purely for the sake of violence in and of itself. 


    There is a point with full loot, though.

    In the MMORPG I play, certain items could easily represent a hundred hours of play.  Killing someone and taking their 200 MegaWatt Toroidal Hyper Plasma Reactor has real meaning.
    ScorchienAmarantharSteelhelm

    "The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
    Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online

  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 2,305
    ikcin said:
    Ungood said
    Even in those situations, None of that is a Win Mechanic, that is just a grind, you take a keep, you lose the keep, you kill another player, they kill you, it's no different than a generic PvE grind.
    It is very different in fact. You compete with other people.
    That is the point you don't seem you get, a competition means you can win and in an MMO, they can never lose and you can never win, Your just a bunch of sociopaths locked in an endless cycle of violence for the sake of it, till enough people get bored it, and the game ends.

    Currently Playing Eternal Crusade, because no matter who wins, a bunch of cheaters lost.
  • PhaserlightPhaserlight Member EpicPosts: 2,766
    Ungood said:
    ikcin said:
    Ungood said
    Even in those situations, None of that is a Win Mechanic, that is just a grind, you take a keep, you lose the keep, you kill another player, they kill you, it's no different than a generic PvE grind.
    It is very different in fact. You compete with other people.
    That is the point you don't seem you get, a competition means you can win and in an MMO, they can never lose and you can never win, Your just a bunch of sociopaths locked in an endless cycle of violence for the sake of it, till enough people get bored it, and the game ends.

    Well, you did just strongly imply Chess was a meaningless game, so generalizing MMORPG players as sociopathic is about the same volume.
    Palebane

    "The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
    Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online

  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 2,305
    Ungood said:
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    This is my point, See in a game of Chess, there is a point to the conflict, to win the game

    In the MMO's you play, there is no point to the PvP, you are simply attacking people to attack them, in an endless cycle of pointless, purposeless violence for the sake of violence.
    It's the exact same point "to win the game."

    The game being the combat between two opponents.

    However, an mmorpg is a bit different than a game of chess. The sole purpose of chess is to beat your opponent. You aren't getting loot, you aren't getting territory control or control of resources.

    Which is, I bet, a part of the conflict in an mmorpg. However, if the game has battlegrounds or some such things then "yes" the purpose is to "win the game."
    Kudos, a thought out response.

    Lets use Chess. Two players sit down to a game of Chess, at some point, one of them will win, one of them will lose, or they will be so evenly matched, they will stalemate.

    A stalemate is where neither player can win the game, at which point, they re-start the game and see if they can win this time.. but the goal here, is to Win.

    Now in a lot of MMO's, you start the game with a Stalemate. You can't win the game and you can't lose either, at best you can just trade pieces on the board, which will get instantly replaced.

    Imagine how boring a game like that would become for the players. imagine sitting at a chess board, stuck in an endless cycle of trading pieces. Sure, I took your pawn, you took my knight, then I took your castle and you took my pawn.. look at us fighting..  at first it might even be fun.. the thrill of the fight.. but that does not change the fact that is is nothing more than a  game of conflict for the sake of conflict, since no one can win and no one can lose, it will go on forever, and ever, and ever... until at least one of the players get bored and leaves. 

    When that happens the remaining player will just cry they have no one to play with.

    Without that Win Mechanic, the PvP is just people killing each other for the sake of killing each other. Conflict for the sake of Conflict.. purposeless pointless violence purely for the sake of violence in and of itself. 


    There is a point with full loot, though.

    In the MMORPG I play, certain items could easily represent a hundred hours of play.  Killing someone and taking their 200 MegaWatt Toroidal Hyper Plasma Reactor has real meaning.
    Until someone kills you for it.. and then it still has.. real meaning?

    That's the point, the PvP  has no meaning, you're just attacking people for no other reason than to hurt them, inflicting pain purely to inflict pain, that is in the purest way, violence for the sake of it.

    You don't think that sounds like a Sociopath, to attack someone purely just to hurt them, because it will cause them duress, maybe.. you get the greatest victory of all and drive them from the game?

    You don't see a problem with that set up and design?
    Steelhelm
    Currently Playing Eternal Crusade, because no matter who wins, a bunch of cheaters lost.
  • PhaserlightPhaserlight Member EpicPosts: 2,766
    Ungood said:
    Ungood said:
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    This is my point, See in a game of Chess, there is a point to the conflict, to win the game

    In the MMO's you play, there is no point to the PvP, you are simply attacking people to attack them, in an endless cycle of pointless, purposeless violence for the sake of violence.
    It's the exact same point "to win the game."

    The game being the combat between two opponents.

    However, an mmorpg is a bit different than a game of chess. The sole purpose of chess is to beat your opponent. You aren't getting loot, you aren't getting territory control or control of resources.

    Which is, I bet, a part of the conflict in an mmorpg. However, if the game has battlegrounds or some such things then "yes" the purpose is to "win the game."
    Kudos, a thought out response.

    Lets use Chess. Two players sit down to a game of Chess, at some point, one of them will win, one of them will lose, or they will be so evenly matched, they will stalemate.

    A stalemate is where neither player can win the game, at which point, they re-start the game and see if they can win this time.. but the goal here, is to Win.

    Now in a lot of MMO's, you start the game with a Stalemate. You can't win the game and you can't lose either, at best you can just trade pieces on the board, which will get instantly replaced.

    Imagine how boring a game like that would become for the players. imagine sitting at a chess board, stuck in an endless cycle of trading pieces. Sure, I took your pawn, you took my knight, then I took your castle and you took my pawn.. look at us fighting..  at first it might even be fun.. the thrill of the fight.. but that does not change the fact that is is nothing more than a  game of conflict for the sake of conflict, since no one can win and no one can lose, it will go on forever, and ever, and ever... until at least one of the players get bored and leaves. 

    When that happens the remaining player will just cry they have no one to play with.

    Without that Win Mechanic, the PvP is just people killing each other for the sake of killing each other. Conflict for the sake of Conflict.. purposeless pointless violence purely for the sake of violence in and of itself. 


    There is a point with full loot, though.

    In the MMORPG I play, certain items could easily represent a hundred hours of play.  Killing someone and taking their 200 MegaWatt Toroidal Hyper Plasma Reactor has real meaning.
    Until someone kills you for it.. and then it still has.. real meaning?

    That's the point, the PvP  has no meaning, you're just attacking people for no other reason than to hurt them, inflicting pain purely to inflict pain, that is in the purest way, violence for the sake of it.

    You don't think that sounds like a Sociopath, to attack someone purely just to hurt them, because it will cause them duress, maybe.. you get the greatest victory of all and drive them from the game?

    You don't see a problem with that set up and design?
    I disagree; inflicting pain is rarely the goal of others, and never the goal of mine.

    It could be to assert dominance, to deny resources to an enemy group, or because the item was necessary.

    "The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
    Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online

  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 2,305
    Ungood said:
    Ungood said:
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    This is my point, See in a game of Chess, there is a point to the conflict, to win the game

    In the MMO's you play, there is no point to the PvP, you are simply attacking people to attack them, in an endless cycle of pointless, purposeless violence for the sake of violence.
    It's the exact same point "to win the game."

    The game being the combat between two opponents.

    However, an mmorpg is a bit different than a game of chess. The sole purpose of chess is to beat your opponent. You aren't getting loot, you aren't getting territory control or control of resources.

    Which is, I bet, a part of the conflict in an mmorpg. However, if the game has battlegrounds or some such things then "yes" the purpose is to "win the game."
    Kudos, a thought out response.

    Lets use Chess. Two players sit down to a game of Chess, at some point, one of them will win, one of them will lose, or they will be so evenly matched, they will stalemate.

    A stalemate is where neither player can win the game, at which point, they re-start the game and see if they can win this time.. but the goal here, is to Win.

    Now in a lot of MMO's, you start the game with a Stalemate. You can't win the game and you can't lose either, at best you can just trade pieces on the board, which will get instantly replaced.

    Imagine how boring a game like that would become for the players. imagine sitting at a chess board, stuck in an endless cycle of trading pieces. Sure, I took your pawn, you took my knight, then I took your castle and you took my pawn.. look at us fighting..  at first it might even be fun.. the thrill of the fight.. but that does not change the fact that is is nothing more than a  game of conflict for the sake of conflict, since no one can win and no one can lose, it will go on forever, and ever, and ever... until at least one of the players get bored and leaves. 

    When that happens the remaining player will just cry they have no one to play with.

    Without that Win Mechanic, the PvP is just people killing each other for the sake of killing each other. Conflict for the sake of Conflict.. purposeless pointless violence purely for the sake of violence in and of itself. 


    There is a point with full loot, though.

    In the MMORPG I play, certain items could easily represent a hundred hours of play.  Killing someone and taking their 200 MegaWatt Toroidal Hyper Plasma Reactor has real meaning.
    Until someone kills you for it.. and then it still has.. real meaning?

    That's the point, the PvP  has no meaning, you're just attacking people for no other reason than to hurt them, inflicting pain purely to inflict pain, that is in the purest way, violence for the sake of it.

    You don't think that sounds like a Sociopath, to attack someone purely just to hurt them, because it will cause them duress, maybe.. you get the greatest victory of all and drive them from the game?

    You don't see a problem with that set up and design?
    I disagree; inflicting pain is rarely the goal of others, and never the goal of mine.

    It could be to assert dominance, to deny resources to an enemy group, or because the item was necessary.
    You have piqued my interest.. The item was Necessary for what?
    Currently Playing Eternal Crusade, because no matter who wins, a bunch of cheaters lost.
  • PhaserlightPhaserlight Member EpicPosts: 2,766
    Ungood said:
    Ungood said:
    Ungood said:
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    This is my point, See in a game of Chess, there is a point to the conflict, to win the game

    In the MMO's you play, there is no point to the PvP, you are simply attacking people to attack them, in an endless cycle of pointless, purposeless violence for the sake of violence.
    It's the exact same point "to win the game."

    The game being the combat between two opponents.

    However, an mmorpg is a bit different than a game of chess. The sole purpose of chess is to beat your opponent. You aren't getting loot, you aren't getting territory control or control of resources.

    Which is, I bet, a part of the conflict in an mmorpg. However, if the game has battlegrounds or some such things then "yes" the purpose is to "win the game."
    Kudos, a thought out response.

    Lets use Chess. Two players sit down to a game of Chess, at some point, one of them will win, one of them will lose, or they will be so evenly matched, they will stalemate.

    A stalemate is where neither player can win the game, at which point, they re-start the game and see if they can win this time.. but the goal here, is to Win.

    Now in a lot of MMO's, you start the game with a Stalemate. You can't win the game and you can't lose either, at best you can just trade pieces on the board, which will get instantly replaced.

    Imagine how boring a game like that would become for the players. imagine sitting at a chess board, stuck in an endless cycle of trading pieces. Sure, I took your pawn, you took my knight, then I took your castle and you took my pawn.. look at us fighting..  at first it might even be fun.. the thrill of the fight.. but that does not change the fact that is is nothing more than a  game of conflict for the sake of conflict, since no one can win and no one can lose, it will go on forever, and ever, and ever... until at least one of the players get bored and leaves. 

    When that happens the remaining player will just cry they have no one to play with.

    Without that Win Mechanic, the PvP is just people killing each other for the sake of killing each other. Conflict for the sake of Conflict.. purposeless pointless violence purely for the sake of violence in and of itself. 


    There is a point with full loot, though.

    In the MMORPG I play, certain items could easily represent a hundred hours of play.  Killing someone and taking their 200 MegaWatt Toroidal Hyper Plasma Reactor has real meaning.
    Until someone kills you for it.. and then it still has.. real meaning?

    That's the point, the PvP  has no meaning, you're just attacking people for no other reason than to hurt them, inflicting pain purely to inflict pain, that is in the purest way, violence for the sake of it.

    You don't think that sounds like a Sociopath, to attack someone purely just to hurt them, because it will cause them duress, maybe.. you get the greatest victory of all and drive them from the game?

    You don't see a problem with that set up and design?
    I disagree; inflicting pain is rarely the goal of others, and never the goal of mine.

    It could be to assert dominance, to deny resources to an enemy group, or because the item was necessary.
    You have piqued my interest.. The item was Necessary for what?
    It could be sold to another player for profit, or used in the construction of a military or civil asset.

    "The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
    Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online

  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 26,078
    Ungood said:
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    Sovrath said:
    Ungood said:
    This is my point, See in a game of Chess, there is a point to the conflict, to win the game

    In the MMO's you play, there is no point to the PvP, you are simply attacking people to attack them, in an endless cycle of pointless, purposeless violence for the sake of violence.
    It's the exact same point "to win the game."

    The game being the combat between two opponents.

    However, an mmorpg is a bit different than a game of chess. The sole purpose of chess is to beat your opponent. You aren't getting loot, you aren't getting territory control or control of resources.

    Which is, I bet, a part of the conflict in an mmorpg. However, if the game has battlegrounds or some such things then "yes" the purpose is to "win the game."
    Kudos, a thought out response.

    Lets use Chess. Two players sit down to a game of Chess, at some point, one of them will win, one of them will lose, or they will be so evenly matched, they will stalemate.

    A stalemate is where neither player can win the game, at which point, they re-start the game and see if they can win this time.. but the goal here, is to Win.

    Now in a lot of MMO's, you start the game with a Stalemate. You can't win the game and you can't lose either, at best you can just trade pieces on the board, which will get instantly replaced.

    Imagine how boring a game like that would become for the players. imagine sitting at a chess board, stuck in an endless cycle of trading pieces. Sure, I took your pawn, you took my knight, then I took your castle and you took my pawn.. look at us fighting..  at first it might even be fun.. the thrill of the fight.. but that does not change the fact that is is nothing more than a  game of conflict for the sake of conflict, since no one can win and no one can lose, it will go on forever, and ever, and ever... until at least one of the players get bored and leaves. 

    When that happens the remaining player will just cry they have no one to play with.

    Without that Win Mechanic, the PvP is just people killing each other for the sake of killing each other. Conflict for the sake of Conflict.. purposeless pointless violence purely for the sake of violence in and of itself. 


    There aren't many pvp mmo's that don't have that win state. Whether it's Lineage/Lineage 2/Dark Age of Camleot, Elder Scrolls Online (etc) that allow a win for a castle/keep or a Battleground that allows for a "win" just like in Chess.


    Even in those situations, None of that is a Win Mechanic, that is just a grind, you take a keep, you lose the keep, you kill another player, they kill you, it's no different than a generic PvE grind, but you are killing other players purely for the sake of it. They have not lost, you have not Won, you just endlessly fight each other.

    In a game like say, GW2, they have WvW, at the end of the Week, a Team Wins, and it matters who wins and who loses.

    Just like in sPvP in GW2, you have ranks and tiers, your wins matter, just as do your losses. Each match, there is a drive to win, a reason to fight, it is not violence for the sake of it.

    In a game like say Linage 2, players can just kill each other, there is no meaning to that PvP, it is violence for the sake of violence, no other reason. Players killing each other simply because they can.

    Even in DAoC, you could run around and randomly kill people from other fractions with no rhyme or reason, you are killing purely for the sake of killing, and even then you are not winning the fight, as chances are it was not a duel, it was a gank. They are just annoyed, not bested.

    The only way that someone can legibility win in those kinds of games,  is to drive the other player from the game in frustration.. allow that to process... the only way that anyone can legitimately win in those PvP games,  to drive off the games population.

    And that is why PvP MMO's fail.
    So you are abanoning your Chess analogy?

    'Cause, in chess, I win, you win, I win, you win, a stalemate, you win, I win.

    See a grind.

    Oh wait ... it's the actual game, the actual moves, the actual experience?

    Then the same can be said about a castle siege (which, by the way, in some games actually give the capturing side benefits) or a pvp fight.

    I'm sorry but your last paragraph almost wants me to write "show me where the bad pvp game touched you ..."

    It's cynical and not really fitting except for people who buy into that type of defeatist thinking.
    ScorchienSteelhelm



Sign In or Register to comment.