Trending Games | Secret World Legends | Ragnarok Online | Final Fantasy XIV | Diablo 3

    Facebook Twitter YouTube YouTube.Gaming Discord
Username:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:3,549,379 Users Online:0

Show Blog

Link to this blogs RSS feed

Casual Thoughts from a Semi-Retired Philosopher

I play MMOs as an alternative to TV. Sometimes it even turns into quality time with the wife and daughter. Most of the time it's a distraction from doing something productive or meaningful.

Author: Hluill

A Good, PvP-Centered MMO?

Posted by Hluill Thursday March 15 2012 at 9:29AM
Login or Register to rate this blog post!


There's a debate raging on the forums about a need for a "Good PvP-centered Game".  Why do I hang out on a PvP forum?  I do have masocistic tendancies, but I would love to see a good PvP game as well.  I just don't they can exist, considering developers, marketers and fans.


I deleted my response as it started to get really long.


 I cannot believe that I read all seventeen pages...  I feel a little less intelligent now.  Heck, I don't even know what the debates are about anymore.


I thought I understood the question, to which I answered no, by the way.  I answered no because there are enough PvP-centered games out there, cool ones, too.   I realize that they are not MMOrPGs.  I realize that the top sellers are not PvP centered.  In PvP-centered games, people seem centered on PvPing, surprisingly enough.  Stuff like crafting, house decorating, exploring and the other stuff for the RPG part of MMORPG, all fall by the wayside.  If somebody whines because they got ganked while decorating their house, they're dismissed for being a Carebear.  I think Mortal Online is a great example of an MMO trying to have a cool world system, but if you don't like PvP, it sucks to play (unless you like killing weasels, chopping wood and getting mugged).


The other problem with PvP is combat mechanics.  Since the early D&D days, they've sucked.  They're written by geeks who intellectualize mortal struggles but probably don't even know how to make a fist.  At some point in most rule systems, more advanced characters are immune to their lessers' attacks.  Sure, a full suit of chainmail (the uber gear a millenium ago) greatly reduced one's chances of dying in combat, but, number one: it did not reduce them to zero, and two: it didn't mean one didn't get knocked unconscious and held hostage or killed later.  Point is: that lowbie wood cutter?  Yeah, he should have a chance of taking you and all your uberness down. 


Another factor is that ganking is called a well-coordinated attack in the real world.  Sometimes it's an ambush, or raid or a deliberate attack.  It's about killing the enemy while he's still sleeping, surprised or distracted.  If I don't have an unreasonable advantage, then I ain't fighting.  And even with that unreasonable advantage, I still know I could lose.  But where's the fun in playing a game where one has to be in sneaky-sneaky, stalky-stalky mode all the time?  Maybe that's the thrill die-hard PvPers crave.  I have a hard time believe that it's that popular.


So, for anybody unfamiliar with my blogs, I am going to make this point absolutely clear, again: The first rule of combat is that anybody can kill anybody.  If the game does not allow for Uber-elite guy in top-teir gear to be owned by lowbie in rags with a rock, then your combat-system is for sissies.  Go back to sucking your thumb.  History is filled with examples of the top guys getting owned.  Sometimes it's a fluke, sometimes it's a well executed ambush.  Sometimes the top guy just spends too much time reading his own PR and believing it.  Yeah, boom, you're dead. writes:
Login or Register to post a comment