Originally posted by Phry

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by Phry

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by Aglaranna

Originally posted by deviliscious

Oh no I didn't mean that you get no reward for killing! Of course you should get your loot! What I meant is that isn't the reason why you kill. The reason for killing is the challenge, and yes there should be a reward and risk in that challenge. I was referring to the reason you fight, it isn't for pixel junk, it is for the thrill of the actual fight.

That's an idealistic point of view. Look at any MMO with world PvP that doesn't provide significant rewards for doing so. It's pretty dead, and people do alot of complaining to the devs about the "need" for world pvp objectives. Why? Because no one wants to world PvP since there is no compelling reason or reward for it.

So while it's nice to say "the reason for killing is the challenge" and "the reason you fight, it isn't for pixel junk", based on what I see on Forums nearly every day, I'd have to say you are in the minority of PvPers who feel that way.

 It is not idiealistic at all, it is how it all got started. It seems many MMORPG's these days have forgotten their video game roots.  It started with games like pac man, where the only reward was getting the highest score only to have it reset.

 I do not know many people who play COD or MK for rewards,  they play pvp games for the fun of the fight itself. If the combat mechanics are not fun, if the fight itself is not challenging it does not matter what the rewards are the game will still suck.

Sure rewards are fine , like  sprinkling powdered sugar on top of strawberries. But if  it  turns out the strawberry isn;t a strawberry, instead it is a lump of dog poo, it doesn;t matter what you put on it, I am not going to eat it.

 The majority of PVPer's do not even play MMORPG's atm, and unless pvp improves in MMORPG's I can't see why they would want to. LOL

its not that games have 'forgotten' their video game roots, its that they have evolved.. skill grinding is all very well, but, to prevent toons becoming overpowered caps have to be in place, and limitations, i think Darkfall is a good example of this, and something that they are still working on, maxing out in 'everything' actually invalidates player skill, even the worst possible player will win most of the time if the toons skills are 'maxed' ... in Darkfall it caused a lot of players to use bots to grind their toons skills.. to be honest, i see game mechanics like that as being the excuse of players without real talent, games like Planetside where all toons are the same (but you can get licenced on more weapons) are a more 'challenging' example of pvp, that rely on actual player skill than a game mechanic to make them better at it.  i disagree though that pvp'ers don't play MMO's, its just that you don't know where they are.. there are quite a number of games that specialise in pvp.. but.. choose games where their own skill is not dependent on game mechanics, take DCUO.. an action game that would seem to fulfill most of your requirements, combo's etc that you learn apparently, but its a game thats already in decline,  as for COD, its only played by a small fraction of the online fps crowd, the 'elephant' in that particular room is counterstrike source and to some extent, Teamfortress 2..  for action games like Mortal Kombat..  im not really sure,  but as someone who does play Counterstrike etc.. i would add that i don't look for pvp in MMO's (other than Eve online that is..) as most are level based and that often negates actual player skills.

 I disagree. They evolved until they veered  the direction to graphix over gameplay, and then they sacrificed core content to purchase expensive graphics, and now have to catch back up again to where they were before they had to sacrifice.

I never said PVPer's don;t play MMO's I stated  MOST PVP's do not play MMORPG's. Which is accurate when you view the entire gaming market both console and pc games combined.

Though Guild wars is a class based game, it really does not have to be with the way skills are balanced and limited to what you can put on a skill bar.  It was by far the most balanced class based game I have played, they did well with that.

The problem with Darkfall wasn;t the freedom, it was the emphasis based on grind vs a game like Guild wars where you get very little reward,  no grind requirement, but the PVP was fun instead. PVP in guild wars was based more on real player skill vs  items/ lvls/ Every class could be played well, if you just bothered to learn how to do it right.

Take a system similar to guild wars and give it more freedom, not just 2 class options and it can still do fine because the core design was good to begin with.

Darkfalls problems (which are being addressed) was the grind, but the grind was the result of allowing it to make players overpowered, until everyone had to grind just to stand a chance of surviving an encounter, never mind winning a fight.. 

As for Guild Wars, despite having a certian amount of popularity,  its still a long way from being what i consider to be a good PVP based game, tbh, i mostly see GW1 as just being another asian grinder, i did play it when it first came out, but it wasnt a game i could really get into.. most of the time it was just a single player game with a social hub every now and then.. you could group with other people and do stuff, but.. tbh.. DDO did that kind of thing better.. Guildwars game mechanics imo were boring.. its years since i played and maybe the game improved with each of the expansion packs they brought out.. but what i saw of it was uninspiring. Perhaps as someone who played FPS games like counterstrike etc.. that was inevitable. (at the time i also played EQ1 and i think SWG.. Guildwars has been around for years after all...)

i think that when it comes to what we think of as 'player skill' we have different ideas on what that is.. 

 GW1 an asian grinder? HHAHAHA you don;t have to grind at all. LOL

You can  play the game completely in pvp, start from the beginning with a max character and woop ass with it from the go if you so choose. DId you even play it?

I don;t do pve, so maybe that is why you felt the way you did. Istarted pvp from the go and stayed there. Maybe that is where you went wrong. LOL

I never had a moment where I felt like it was a single player rpg, but i only did pvp, and stayed at arenas.

player skill to me is being able to think fast in combat, quick reflexes,good timing, improvise in combat and take control of the battle by predicting what my opponent will do. I personally prefer to force moves to maintain control of the battle, not sure what your idea of PVP is, but that is what I enjoy about  it.

Take a system similar to guild wars and give it more freedom, not just 2 class options and it can still do fine because the core design was good to begin with. You can actually play all classes in Guild wars on one character once you ascend.. so it isn;t like some games aren;t getting something right.

Though you really shouldn;t have to choose between 2 at a time when it is done right.  I think the overemphasis on  character appearance affecting ability has been overdone to the point of madness, when it wasn;t even necessary in the first place.

In reality,  you don't judge a book by it's cover, why would we want to do so in games? Just look at CHuck Norris for example.. he is not even a big guy - but looks can be deceiving. LOL

Originally posted by romanator0

Originally posted by Phry

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by Phry

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by Aglaranna

Originally posted by deviliscious

Oh no I didn't mean that you get no reward for killing! Of course you should get your loot! What I meant is that isn't the reason why you kill. The reason for killing is the challenge, and yes there should be a reward and risk in that challenge. I was referring to the reason you fight, it isn't for pixel junk, it is for the thrill of the actual fight.

That's an idealistic point of view. Look at any MMO with world PvP that doesn't provide significant rewards for doing so. It's pretty dead, and people do alot of complaining to the devs about the "need" for world pvp objectives. Why? Because no one wants to world PvP since there is no compelling reason or reward for it.

So while it's nice to say "the reason for killing is the challenge" and "the reason you fight, it isn't for pixel junk", based on what I see on Forums nearly every day, I'd have to say you are in the minority of PvPers who feel that way.

 It is not idiealistic at all, it is how it all got started. It seems many MMORPG's these days have forgotten their video game roots.  It started with games like pac man, where the only reward was getting the highest score only to have it reset.

 I do not know many people who play COD or MK for rewards,  they play pvp games for the fun of the fight itself. If the combat mechanics are not fun, if the fight itself is not challenging it does not matter what the rewards are the game will still suck.

Sure rewards are fine , like  sprinkling powdered sugar on top of strawberries. But if  it  turns out the strawberry isn;t a strawberry, instead it is a lump of dog poo, it doesn;t matter what you put on it, I am not going to eat it.

 The majority of PVPer's do not even play MMORPG's atm, and unless pvp improves in MMORPG's I can't see why they would want to. LOL

its not that games have 'forgotten' their video game roots, its that they have evolved.. skill grinding is all very well, but, to prevent toons becoming overpowered caps have to be in place, and limitations, i think Darkfall is a good example of this, and something that they are still working on, maxing out in 'everything' actually invalidates player skill, even the worst possible player will win most of the time if the toons skills are 'maxed' ... in Darkfall it caused a lot of players to use bots to grind their toons skills.. to be honest, i see game mechanics like that as being the excuse of players without real talent, games like Planetside where all toons are the same (but you can get licenced on more weapons) are a more 'challenging' example of pvp, that rely on actual player skill than a game mechanic to make them better at it.  i disagree though that pvp'ers don't play MMO's, its just that you don't know where they are.. there are quite a number of games that specialise in pvp.. but.. choose games where their own skill is not dependent on game mechanics, take DCUO.. an action game that would seem to fulfill most of your requirements, combo's etc that you learn apparently, but its a game thats already in decline,  as for COD, its only played by a small fraction of the online fps crowd, the 'elephant' in that particular room is counterstrike source and to some extent, Teamfortress 2..  for action games like Mortal Kombat..  im not really sure,  but as someone who does play Counterstrike etc.. i would add that i don't look for pvp in MMO's (other than Eve online that is..) as most are level based and that often negates actual player skills.

 I disagree. They evolved until they veered  the direction to graphix over gameplay, and then they sacrificed core content to purchase expensive graphics, and now have to catch back up again to where they were before they had to sacrifice.

I never said PVPer's don;t play MMO's I stated  MOST PVP's do not play MMORPG's. Which is accurate when you view the entire gaming market both console and pc games combined.

Though Guild wars is a class based game, it really does not have to be with the way skills are balanced and limited to what you can put on a skill bar.  It was by far the most balanced class based game I have played, they did well with that.

The problem with Darkfall wasn;t the freedom, it was the emphasis based on grind vs a game like Guild wars where you get very little reward,  no grind requirement, but the PVP was fun instead. PVP in guild wars was based more on real player skill vs  items/ lvls/ Every class could be played well, if you just bothered to learn how to do it right.

Take a system similar to guild wars and give it more freedom, not just 2 class options and it can still do fine because the core design was good to begin with.

Darkfalls problems (which are being addressed) was the grind, but the grind was the result of allowing it to make players overpowered, until everyone had to grind just to stand a chance of surviving an encounter, never mind winning a fight.. 

As for Guild Wars, despite having a certian amount of popularity,  its still a long way from being what i consider to be a good PVP based game, tbh, i mostly see GW1 as just being another asian grinder, i did play it when it first came out, but it wasnt a game i could really get into.. most of the time it was just a single player game with a social hub every now and then.. you could group with other people and do stuff, but.. tbh.. DDO did that kind of thing better.. Guildwars game mechanics imo were boring.. its years since i played and maybe the game improved with each of the expansion packs they brought out.. but what i saw of it was uninspiring. Perhaps as someone who played FPS games like counterstrike etc.. that was inevitable. (at the time i also played EQ1 and i think SWG.. Guildwars has been around for years after all...)

i think that when it comes to what we think of as 'player skill' we have different ideas on what that is.. 

? It was made by ArenaNet in Seattle and you can hit the level cap in a day. I don't see how thats a korean grinder.

at the time thats just what it seemed like.. whether a game was made in the USA or Australia.. it doesnt really make a difference, it was just my perception of the 'game type' 

Wait so you want an mmo in which everyone has the opportunity to max out every skill for use in combat, with said combat being more twitch based and player centric. When people mention DF you are put off by the 'grind'. Are you sure you want to play an mmo at all?

The thing about open skill games is that those who compete at the top of the pile have 'maxed out' all of the skills. The thing about skill based mmos is that they tend to be quite player progression focused, more skills = longer time. You enter the game and grind up broadsword or whatever, the guy you fight whose been there longer has that and uber nukes of doom, you lose. But that's part and parcel of an mmo, the key is actually to add some limitations to the system and by doing so whilst you give the vet more options over all, at any given time after he has made his choice, if it's the wrong one the noob has more of a chance.

The problem is not in the length of the grind per skill per say, it's in the fact that in a truly open system you end up having to grind up everything, which takes forever. AV are starting to get the picture with the armour cap system.

If you want to play a pvp centric mmo with twitch skills and an 'open skill system', it's there on the market now, it's called Darkfall and I highly recommend it.

Having an mmo which has little to no time sink in order to ramp up your skills so you can blast away at your opponents sounds great on paper, in reality it would be shit. For a start why would I pay a sub for a game which is essentially a glorified fps game with a few more buttons to press?

Ultimately the twitch aspect isn't going to appeal to the pve/carebear crowd so the devs are hardly going to waste time putting effort into that side of the game to pad it out. Furthermore what would be the appeal of this lower progression based mmo over dedicated pvp fps games which have far better server tech and more able opponents to fight against?

Ofc it has the possibility of working in a subless game like GW, but again I'd question why people would not rather play a more dedicated pvp game with better twitch mechanics and better servers.

Originally posted by bunnyhopper

Wait so you want an mmo in which everyone has the opportunity to max out every skill for use in combat, with said combat being more twitch based and player centric. When people mention DF you are put off by the 'grind'. Are you sure you want to play an mmo at all?

 

The thing about open skill games is that those who compete at the top of the pile have 'maxed out' all of the skills. The thing about skill based mmos is that they tend to be quite player progression focused, more skills = longer time. You enter the game and grind up broadsword or whatever, the guy you fight whose been there longer has that and uber nukes of doom, you lose. But that's part and parcel of an mmo, the key is actually to add some limitations to the system and by doing so whilst you give the vet more options over all, at any given time after he has made his choice, if it's the wrong one the noob has more of a chance.

 

The problem is not in the length of the grind per skill per say, it's in the fact that in a truly open system you end up having to grind up everything, which takes forever. AV are starting to get the picture with the armour cap system.

 

If you want to play a pvp centric mmo with twitch skills and an 'open skill system', it's there on the market now, it's called Darkfall and I highly recommend it.

 

Having an mmo which has little to no time sink in order to ramp up your skills so you can blast away at your opponents sounds great on paper, in reality it would be shit. For a start why would I pay a sub for a game which is essentially a glorified fps game with a few more buttons to press?

 

Ultimately the twitch aspect isn't going to appeal to the pve/carebear crowd so the devs are hardly going to waste time putting effort into that side of the game to pad it out. Furthermore what would be the appeal of this lower progression based mmo over dedicated pvp fps games which have far better server tech and more able opponents to fight against?

 Guild wars seemed to do it good, though they made you have to ascend to access all in game content from one character, but it still existed in the game. Oh yea- you didn;t have to grind either. very little emphasis in Guild wars was based on items, and you could start out maxed if you chose to do so.  You can have progression without grind, the idea you have to repeat the same thing over and over again to get ahead is boring not challenging. LOL

It can work in sub based games as well, instead of buying a box every few months. payment models can vary, but content is either worth playing or not.

Originally posted by bunnyhopper

Wait so you want an mmo in which everyone has the opportunity to max out every skill for use in combat, with said combat being more twitch based and player centric. When people mention DF you are put off by the 'grind'. Are you sure you want to play an mmo at all?

 

The thing about open skill games is that those who compete at the top of the pile have 'maxed out' all of the skills. The thing about skill based mmos is that they tend to be quite player progression focused, more skills = longer time. You enter the game and grind up broadsword or whatever, the guy you fight whose been there longer has that and uber nukes of doom, you lose. But that's part and parcel of an mmo, the key is actually to add some limitations to the system and by doing so whilst you give the vet more options over all, at any given time after he has made his choice, if it's the wrong one the noob has more of a chance.

 

The problem is not in the length of the grind per skill per say, it's in the fact that in a truly open system you end up having to grind up everything, which takes forever. AV are starting to get the picture with the armour cap system.

 

If you want to play a pvp centric mmo with twitch skills and an 'open skill system', it's there on the market now, it's called Darkfall and I highly recommend it.

 

Having an mmo which has little to no time sink in order to ramp up your skills so you can blast away at your opponents sounds great on paper, in reality it would be shit. For a start why would I pay a sub for a game which is essentially a glorified fps game with a few more buttons to press?

 

Ultimately the twitch aspect isn't going to appeal to the pve/carebear crowd so the devs are hardly going to waste time putting effort into that side of the game to pad it out. Furthermore what would be the appeal of this lower progression based mmo over dedicated pvp fps games which have far better server tech and more able opponents to fight against?

 

Ofc it has the possibility of working in a subless game like GW, but again I'd question why people would not rather play a more dedicated pvp game with better twitch mechanics and better servers.

True.. Darkfall's problems are being worked on..  chances are when its done it will be the fantasy game i use for PVP..

whatever happened to playing  a game because it is fun, and not because it takes forever to level? LOL

I disagree you have to have  to torture your players to get them to keep playing, if done right they will play because they actually enjoy it rather than because they look at is as another job. 

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by bunnyhopper
 

 Guild wars seemed to do it good, though they made you have to ascend to access all in game content from one character, but it still existed in the game. Oh yea- you didn;t have to grind either. very little emphasis in Guild wars was based on items, and you could start out maxed if you chose to do so.  You can have progression without grind, the idea you have to repeat the same thing over and over again to get ahead is boring not challenging. LOL

It can work in sub based games as well, instead of buying a box every few months. payment models can vary, but content is either worth playing or not.

Guilds wars isn't a sub paying game, some would argue whether or not GW is an mmo at all.

You can have progression without grind indeed, you seem to have missed the point though. Progression necesitates a time sink regardless of how it's implemented. More skills equals a greater time sink. Unless you want to cash shop it. LOL.

If you want to give them instant access to all the skills ala or very similar to a GW set up, you are going to end up with a subless GW game. Perhaps the thread should just be "Can I have GW with more skills please"?

Originally posted by deviliscious

whatever happened to playing  a game because it is fun, and not because it takes forever to level? LOL

I disagree you have to have  to torture your players to get them to keep playing, if done right they will play because they actually enjoy it rather than because they look at is as another job. 

another reason why i think that games without levels are better than those that do.. in level based games the emphasis is on levelling up rather than 'playing the game' its artificial content..

As much as it's been said, an fps is the true test of "skill".

Besides that, in many games currently, skill sets/group makeups/"Comps" are the big thing.  But, just because you have those things, you still need skill to use them.

That's great that you personally can beat players in MK on some arcade game.  But when you must combine your abilities with others to beat another group of players?  That's more then just skill involved.  

I agree that "arena" combat doesn't hold a candle to running into other players in an open world, but it still has it's place.

It still takes skill to be at the very top of any ladder. 

There are some games out where you don't know what you are fighting until after it's over.  Sure, that takes the ability to adept and fight back without knowing beforehand.  But you are still stuck with your "skill set".  You have the skills you trained against theirs.  What if they are magic heavy / anti melee, and you are melee heavy / light ranged?

Sorry but why "Girls Perspective"?

Games are made to be liked by either Male or Female. That's not relevant. There will never be Games, especially not MMOs which includes Female only stuff.

So I don't see the Point why your Oppinion (which is nothing to flame/blame/harass at) is threated better/worse because you are Female.

Originally posted by bunnyhopper

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by bunnyhopper
 

 Guild wars seemed to do it good, though they made you have to ascend to access all in game content from one character, but it still existed in the game. Oh yea- you didn;t have to grind either. very little emphasis in Guild wars was based on items, and you could start out maxed if you chose to do so.  You can have progression without grind, the idea you have to repeat the same thing over and over again to get ahead is boring not challenging. LOL

It can work in sub based games as well, instead of buying a box every few months. payment models can vary, but content is either worth playing or not.

Guilds wars isn't a sub paying game, some would argue whether or not GW is an mmo at all.

 

You can have progression without grind indeed, you seem to have missed the point though. Progression necesitates a time sink regardless of how it's implemented. More skills equals a greater time sink. Unless you want to cash shop it. LOL.

 

If you want to give them instant access to all the skills ala or very similar to a GW set up, you are going to end up with a subless GW game. Perhaps the thread should just be "Can I have GW with more skills please"?

 GWS1 wasn;t an mmorpg. it was a cooperative online role playing game. teams were far too small to be an mmorpg.

You do not have to have repetition  or grind to have a " want to play". Most games I play isn;t for grind at all, I only go on for  battles and wars.

You can have all skills and leave it up to players what they choose to do with them. Some people may never choose to do skilling portions while others will.

 Take Guild wars graphix and combat system and then take a variety of other things to do like a game like runescape, ( mini games, combat and noncombat skills, treasure trails, ect) and change it to where the skills are actually fun and not repetitious and  you will have a sub based winner.

 You can have guild wars with more skills and be able to access all content from one character in a persistant world and have the other content as well, why people think you have to take one thing to add another is beyond me.

 Before people rant runescape is a f2p game - the majority of the game is sub based and has been for a very long time. LOL

I dont get this post.. Some people are sugesting pvp games, but the post is about a persons point of view on pvp in games ?

Anyhow..here is my point of view with your point of view-

I dont think having all skills maxed (the same as you opponent) would be any good. You would simply end up with endless fights no ?

Lets take the most common classes used in games:

the dps (mostly hunter/rogue/spell caster type class with high dps and cc of some sort)

the tank (mostly defensive class)

the healer  (we all know what they do :P )

Now.. for a epic battle to take place where two players had all the ability`s from all the above classes it would be a big mess with no advantige for the attacker or the one getting attacked. And the attacker should always have the upper hand (thats how it is in real life). If you attacked, the opponent would be defensive and heal and the other way arround untill one of you gave up.

The "Luck factor" has to be there, if not then you could figure out a way to stay alive longer that your opponent (its simple math).

Having the "luck factor" makes a fight harder to forsee and that way making it a more skill based fight.

What pvp game(s) are you playing atm ? I would like to know, because i cant seem to find any that I find good other than Daoc :(

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by bunnyhopper

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by bunnyhopper
 

 GWS1 wasn;t an mmorpg. it was a cooperative online role playing game. teams were far too small to be an mmorpg.

You do not have to have repetition  or grind to have a " want to play". Most games I play isn;t for grind at all, I only go on for  battles and wars.

You can have all skills and leave it up to players what they choose to do with them. Some people may never choose to do skilling portions while others will.

 Take Guild wars graphix and combat system and then take a variety of other things to do like a game like runescape, ( mini games, combat and noncombat skills, treasure trails, ect) and change it to where the skills are actually fun and not repetitious and  you will have a sub based winner.

 You can have guild wars with more skills and be able to access all content from one character in a persistant world and have the other content as well, why people think you have to take one thing to add another is beyond me.

 

Why exactly do you think GW(1) doesn't have all the trappings of a full mmo? Why do you think GW2 which is meant to be a full mmo with a persistant world is not going with full twitch combat and a massively open skill system?

I would play an mmo with zero progression in an open world setting, I play games to pvp. But the point is it is highly unlikely that I will get to do as such in a system that you seem to be asking for. The reason being the vast majority of mmorpg players are not into twitch combat/hardcore pvp and are more into questing and character progression. And the vast majority of hardcore pvp players are not into mmos, if they are they tend to play ones that also have mmo aspects..like progression...which require a timesink.

What company is going to spend the time, effort and money building a rich and diverse open world in order for it to be populated by the smaller, twitch centric pvp crowd? An indie might do it and you will get the likes of DF, or someone will make it as a subless game and as such you will not get any of the persistant world content you were going on about, but GW.

You mention Runescape, whats the sub cost of that game again?

Originally posted by rottN

I dont get this post.. Some people are sugesting pvp games, but the post is about a persons point of view on pvp in games ?

Anyhow..here is my point of view with your point of view-

I dont think having all skills maxed (the same as you opponent) would be any good. You would simply end up with endless fights no ?

Lets take the most common classes used in games:

the dps (mostly hunter/rogue/spell caster type class with high dps and cc of some sort)

the tank (mostly defensive class)

the healer  (we all know what they do :P )

Now.. for a epic battle to take place where two players had all the ability`s from all the above classes it would be a big mess with no advantige for the attacker or the one getting attacked. And the attacker should always have the upper hand (thats how it is in real life). If you attacked, the opponent would be defensive and heal and the other way arround untill one of you gave up.

The "Luck factor" has to be there, if not then you could figure out a way to stay alive longer that your opponent (its simple math).

Having the "luck factor" makes a fight harder to forsee and that way making it a more skill based fight.

 

What pvp game(s) are you playing atm ? I would like to know, because i cant seem to find any that I find good other than Daoc :(

 With a system like guild wars, you can be all things, but are limited to what you can do at one time. You can change that before and after battle. No mess there, it works great.

Rather than luck factor, have a " chaos " factor, environmental factors that could change the course of battle instead.  Whether it be  other players able to attack you, or a python appears and starts to strangle you.. chaos is more fun than luck. 

Lately all MMORPG games I have been playing ( More thana  few times) are old ones. the new ones just suck too bad to play. LOL other than that I am on consoles, fps..

Originally posted by deviliscious

 

Why would they have to wear the same kind of armor? Now imagine for a second that every item in the game is craftable, tradable, socketable and dropable, and that appearance has nothing to do with ability. SO say they make what looks like range armor and socket and fit it giving it warrior armor stats. You would have no clue what they were capable of. Give players the ability to set their own armor stats wearing anything they like , even a MS Clause outfit if they so choose, and you would still not be able to guess the abilities of such armor based on the appearance of it. It would really open up the possibilities, and remove the predictability from the games.

 

 I'm going to have to disagree that this would make a good MMORPG PVP game.  To me it actually make PVP less interesting not more so.  I think it takes a lot of thinking and tactics out of the game because if you have no clue what another character is nor what he/she could do, you fall back into pretty much always using the same offensive/defensive tactics or you simply guess what tactics would be best.  But if you do have a clue what you are up against, a good PVPer will tailor their tactics for who they are fighting.  What you describe as making things better just simplifies it too much in my opinion and takes most of the thinking/planning out of it and makes it pure reflex instead.  And I get my reflex fix from my FPS games and don't really look for this ultimate balance in my MMORPGs.  And to be honest even FPS games are beginning to differentiate character types and make them recognizable not hidden.

And odd that you would mention your love of the japanese fighting games to start the thread, which tend to be very clear on tactics based on character you choose, and each character has its own moves and counters that need to be understood in order to be effective with and against.

And what was that Professor Farnsworth quote from Futurama episode:  [while in a parallel universe, watching two Leelas fight] "Now, now, perfectly symmetrical violence never solved anything."

Originally posted by bunnyhopper

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by bunnyhopper

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by bunnyhopper
 

 GWS1 wasn;t an mmorpg. it was a cooperative online role playing game. teams were far too small to be an mmorpg.

You do not have to have repetition  or grind to have a " want to play". Most games I play isn;t for grind at all, I only go on for  battles and wars.

You can have all skills and leave it up to players what they choose to do with them. Some people may never choose to do skilling portions while others will.

 Take Guild wars graphix and combat system and then take a variety of other things to do like a game like runescape, ( mini games, combat and noncombat skills, treasure trails, ect) and change it to where the skills are actually fun and not repetitious and  you will have a sub based winner.

 You can have guild wars with more skills and be able to access all content from one character in a persistant world and have the other content as well, why people think you have to take one thing to add another is beyond me.

 

Why exactly do you think GW(1) doesn't have all the trappings of a full mmo? Why do you think GW2 which is meant to be a full mmo with a persistant world is not going with full twitch combat and a massively open skill system?

 

I would play an mmo with zero progression in an open world setting, I play games to pvp. But the point is it is highly unlikely that I will get to do as such in a system that you seem to be asking for. The reason being the vast majority of mmorpg players are not into twitch combat/hardcore pvp and are more into questing and character progression. And the vast majority of hardcore pvp players are not into mmos, if they are they tend to play ones that also have mmo aspects..like progression...which require a timesink.

 

What company is going to spend the time, effort and money building a rich and diverse open world in order for it to be populated by the smaller, twitch centric pvp crowd? An indie might do it and you will get the likes of DF, or someone will make it as a subless game and as such you will not get any of the persistant world content you were going on about, but GW.

 

You mention Runescape, whats the sub cost of that game again?

 

 

 

 Guild wars is not an MMORPG because Arena Net told us it was a CO-RPG.

 It doesn;t allow for massive amounts of players to battle, it does not allow for massive amounts of players to interact in a persistant world.

As for GW2 I think it is going to be great. Never said it wasn;t.

 A game can have both. PVP and PVE and work better than those that specialize. We play mmorps to play with and againt massive amounts of people, and if the game is too specialized, you are not going to have a game that we can play with friends.

Sub on runescape is like $7.95 a month.  Amazing that many people still pay for their poor graphix. LOL

Their graphix are dated, but you can still access all content from one character, change fighting styles in combat, and they still manage to have wars with hundreds of people at same time.

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by rottN

I dont get this post.. Some people are sugesting pvp games, but the post is about a persons point of view on pvp in games ?

Anyhow..here is my point of view with your point of view-

I dont think having all skills maxed (the same as you opponent) would be any good. You would simply end up with endless fights no ?

Lets take the most common classes used in games:

the dps (mostly hunter/rogue/spell caster type class with high dps and cc of some sort)

the tank (mostly defensive class)

the healer  (we all know what they do :P )

Now.. for a epic battle to take place where two players had all the ability`s from all the above classes it would be a big mess with no advantige for the attacker or the one getting attacked. And the attacker should always have the upper hand (thats how it is in real life). If you attacked, the opponent would be defensive and heal and the other way arround untill one of you gave up.

The "Luck factor" has to be there, if not then you could figure out a way to stay alive longer that your opponent (its simple math).

Having the "luck factor" makes a fight harder to forsee and that way making it a more skill based fight.

 

What pvp game(s) are you playing atm ? I would like to know, because i cant seem to find any that I find good other than Daoc :(

 With a system like guild wars, you can be all things, but are limited to what you can do at one time. You can change that before and after battle. No mess there, it works great.

Rather than luck factor, have a " chaos " factor, environmental factors that could change the course of battle instead.  Whether it be  other players able to attack you, or a python appears and starts to strangle you.. chaos is more fun than luck. 

Lately all MMORPG games I have been playing ( More thana  few times) are old ones. the new ones just suck too bad to play. LOL other than that I am on consoles, fps..

I did try GW1 when it was in late beta.. and i dident like it, too much wow-like battlegrounds. I like the open world pvp more.

You`r "chaos" factor actually sounds interresting (not the part with the snake tho) :D

Originally posted by gainesvilleg

Originally posted by deviliscious

 

Why would they have to wear the same kind of armor? Now imagine for a second that every item in the game is craftable, tradable, socketable and dropable, and that appearance has nothing to do with ability. SO say they make what looks like range armor and socket and fit it giving it warrior armor stats. You would have no clue what they were capable of. Give players the ability to set their own armor stats wearing anything they like , even a MS Clause outfit if they so choose, and you would still not be able to guess the abilities of such armor based on the appearance of it. It would really open up the possibilities, and remove the predictability from the games.

 

 I'm going to have to disagree that this would make a good MMORPG PVP game.  To me it actually make PVP less interesting not more so.  I think it takes a lot of thinking and tactics out of the game because if you have no clue what another character is nor what he/she could do, you fall back into pretty much always using the same offensive/defensive tactics or you simply guess what tactics would be best.  But if you do have a clue what you are up against, a good PVPer will tailor their tactics for who they are fighting.  What you describe as making things better just simplifies it too much in my opinion and takes most of the thinking/planning out of it and makes it pure reflex instead.  And I get my reflex fix from my FPS games and don't really look for this ultimate balance in my MMORPGs.  And to be honest even FPS games are beginning to differentiate character types and make them recognizable not hidden.

And odd that you would mention your love of the japanese fighting games to start the thread, which tend to be very clear on tactics based on character you choose, and each character has its own moves and counters that need to be understood in order to be effective with and against.

And what was that Professor Farnsworth quote from Futurama episode:  [while in a parallel universe, watching two Leelas fight] "Now, now, perfectly symmetrical violence never solved anything."

 Maybe I have been playing the same games too long, where you actually get to know your opponents, how they fight what they will do and are capable of. In games where they can and have the ability to do all fighting styles at any given time, you remember the players you fight and  learn their moves. To me that is more of a challenge than just dealing with masses of players who all have same strengths and weaknesses. More like bringin games back to where player lore was more important than " developer prescripted lore".

It put more emphasis on community and getting to know  your actual opponents rather than just the random rogue.

You do not seem to understand me, maybe you should read my "rambelings" again

I have been talking about how immersion and how too much Freedom would destroy that...

DWO has so much freedom with its builds that it destroys immersion.

WoW have less freedom than that and that game goes stronger than ever. Imagine WoW with a Warrior casting Holy Light, summoning Imps and using Frost Nova.

and with class limitations you dont have to make things fair, balancing makes it fair and fairness is unrealistic. While freedom only serves to create setups that has highest possible rate of killing and surival. Your Freedom ends up restricting us more

so then...

How do your idea intent to rapair any immersion problems that happends due to your freeforall combat?

How did you plan on preventing the game of becoming the "this build is the best"?

How will new people ever want to enter the game, when they cant hope to compete with veterans?