Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by Hrimnir

When Verant was making EverQuest 1 they specifically took PVP out of their game because they went and played UO and realized it wasn't the type of attitude, atmosphere, or player experience that they wanted.

Yeah, D&D and by extension RPGs for the most part have always been about banding together with allies and defeating evils.

They say competition brings out both the best and worst in people.

I'd venture to say cooperation and collaberation bring out the best in people.

Whenever people on this site talk about "the best community ever" most of the time they bring up EQ, SWG, and FFXI.

Wierd how that works...

cant speak for the other 2, never played them

but EQ had the single worst community of any mmo i ever played, ever, even worse than WOW, full of elitist jerks.

now there are PVE games where ive had good community - coh, lotro (although i found the game itself a lazy wow clone with lotro)

but the best game i played for community was DAOC and thats a pvp orientated game.

Originally posted by Theocritus

     Really what I like to see is one well made MMO with several different server options:

1. PVE for those that just want PVE

2. PVP/PVE combo for those that like both

3. FFA PVP open world

 

THis way people can play what they want and everyone is happy.....What I dont like is when a game only offers one server type.....When that is the case then one of the other 3 types complain because the game isnt the way they want it....Ive really only played 3 FFA PVP games.....The first was a very well known game and I hated it...You couldn't even leave town without a group of very high levels just single shotting everyone....The second had a huge world where you could hide apart from most of the playerbase so it wasnt too bad.....The third had maybe 10 players on at any time and you could easily hide if you had no chance. In my opinion its just a bad format that really only appeals to the hardcore gamer.

The Repopulation (if they live up to their own hype) sounds alot like this...that's why Im following it.  I'd like to see all worlds and styles mixed together

Originally posted by GeezerGamer

Originally posted by Biskop

 

If we are talking about a sandbox game, how is FFA PVP fair for the non-combat oreinetd character? The only FFA PVP game I really ever tried on any level was Perpetuum Online for a few months when it released. Most people back then recommended 2 accounts. One for crafting and one for combat. Being a non combat oriented player was just not a good idea and yet, that was a role in the game. THis is my issue with FFA PVP.

you can PVE without ever getting attacked in perpetuum.  It doesnt have a sliding security scale like eve.  It has 100% pve areas, 100% pvp areas, like in a rvr game only its a sandbox.

which suggest you never played it.

Originally posted by Biskop

"People who play FFA PVP games are sociopaths"

Obviously not true. This doesn't even need to be responded to, it is so lunatic of an assumption.

"People who play FFA PVP games are cowards"

People who play PvE games are also cowards. There's also brave people in both of these types of games as well. Go figure. Any blanket accusation that sweeps "All People" under one (mostly dirty) rug is just a bunch of children being butt hurt, unable to come up with any real argument against their opponent. "You're a coward. Oh yea? Well...you're a dummy poop head!! =P" Childish comment.

"FFA PVP games are nothing but gankfests"

 What opponents of FFA PvP do NOT tell you is that all PvP games are gankfests. Guild Wars 2 PvP is probably the worst gankfest I've ever experienced. A single additional player vs another is going to cause a win. Numbers are EVERYTHING in that game, big a much larger power tip than other games. In a game like DAoC, numbers mattered a lot BUT a good mez could completely change that, allowing for a full group to 1v3 groups. The gankfest is true though: the blues gank the reds who try to PK people. Not always successfully mind you, but they do.

I hate gankfests in any genre. At least in MOBA or RTS there is no such thing as a gank fest, because it's 1v1 to 5v5- always even and always such a small number of players that there is no gankfesting- only teamwork. No zergs allowed, only a single full group combining efforts.

WoW, GW2, any zergy MMO, these are all gankfests. MMORPG's are almost designed around Numbers being the #1 most important thing. (Not true in WoW, as I know I can 1v10 if I'm a twink and they're newbs, but in GW2 even a pro will lose to two mediocre non-retarded players.)

"FFA PVP is a griefer's paradise"

This actually IS true. You know what's also true? Some MMORPG's are a griefer's paradise. It really depends on the GAME. For example, in UO you can definitely grief by spawn camping someone. You can also do this in WoW, GW2, or any battleground. In DAoC, you couldn't really unless you were a stealther, and even then it was a big battleground so it was harder to grief.

The important thing to remember though is that ANY game with a spawn, can be griefed through spawn camping. Dur. Most MMORPG battlegrounds are designed to ALLOW griefing, not to avoid it.

"FFA PVP games are not commercially successful, which means they are bad"

Probably the worst argument ever.

"This game would be great if it had a PVE server"

This argument is entirely valid and is merely an opinion. This cannot be wrong, as it could most certainly be true. And why not? Why not have a FFA PvP game where 90% of the servers are FFA PvP, but there's one or two PvE-Only servers? Every PvE game allows for a handful of PvP servers in comparison, so why NOT? People deserve to play as they want to play, and not to be forced to play.

"The devs will want to make money, so why don't they just remove the FFA PVP and attract more players?"

Quoted for the TRUTH!

This line of reasoning is usually accompanied by some hobby economics bullshit, and just goes to show that sadly, many people believe money is the ultimate be-all end-all and that anyone not pursuing ultimate profit rates is out of his mind. These people can not understand that some devs primarily want to make a good game, a game they want to play, not make shitloads of money.

Originally posted by Disatisfied9

Originally posted by Biskop

"People who play FFA PVP games are sociopaths"

Obviously not true. This doesn't even need to be responded to, it is so lunatic of an assumption.

"People who play FFA PVP games are cowards"

People who play PvE games are also cowards. There's also brave people in both of these types of games as well. Go figure. Any blanket accusation that sweeps "All People" under one (mostly dirty) rug is just a bunch of children being butt hurt, unable to come up with any real argument against their opponent. "You're a coward. Oh yea? Well...you're a dummy poop head!! =P" Childish comment.

"FFA PVP games are nothing but gankfests"

 What opponents of FFA PvP do NOT tell you is that all PvP games are gankfests. Guild Wars 2 PvP is probably the worst gankfest I've ever experienced. A single additional player vs another is going to cause a win. Numbers are EVERYTHING in that game, big a much larger power tip than other games. In a game like DAoC, numbers mattered a lot BUT a good mez could completely change that, allowing for a full group to 1v3 groups. The gankfest is true though: the blues gank the reds who try to PK people. Not always successfully mind you, but they do.

I hate gankfests in any genre. At least in MOBA or RTS there is no such thing as a gank fest, because it's 1v1 to 5v5- always even and always such a small number of players that there is no gankfesting- only teamwork. No zergs allowed, only a single full group combining efforts.

WoW, GW2, any zergy MMO, these are all gankfests. MMORPG's are almost designed around Numbers being the #1 most important thing. (Not true in WoW, as I know I can 1v10 if I'm a twink and they're newbs, but in GW2 even a pro will lose to two mediocre non-retarded players.)

"FFA PVP is a griefer's paradise"

This actually IS true. You know what's also true? Some MMORPG's are a griefer's paradise. It really depends on the GAME. For example, in UO you can definitely grief by spawn camping someone. You can also do this in WoW, GW2, or any battleground. In DAoC, you couldn't really unless you were a stealther, and even then it was a big battleground so it was harder to grief.

The important thing to remember though is that ANY game with a spawn, can be griefed through spawn camping. Dur. Most MMORPG battlegrounds are designed to ALLOW griefing, not to avoid it.

"FFA PVP games are not commercially successful, which means they are bad"

Probably the worst argument ever.

"This game would be great if it had a PVE server"

This argument is entirely valid and is merely an opinion. This cannot be wrong, as it could most certainly be true. And why not? Why not have a FFA PvP game where 90% of the servers are FFA PvP, but there's one or two PvE-Only servers? Every PvE game allows for a handful of PvP servers in comparison, so why NOT? People deserve to play as they want to play, and not to be forced to play.

"The devs will want to make money, so why don't they just remove the FFA PVP and attract more players?"

Quoted for the TRUTH!

This line of reasoning is usually accompanied by some hobby economics bullshit, and just goes to show that sadly, many people believe money is the ultimate be-all end-all and that anyone not pursuing ultimate profit rates is out of his mind. These people can not understand that some devs primarily want to make a good game, a game they want to play, not make shitloads of money.

 

Wait, which part is yours? the red or the green?

@ShakyMo & Apraxis,

There is a difference between competition and harrassment. In football hits are part of the game. Even though they can hurt physicaly, you accept it because it's part of the sport and the intent of the hit is not to hurt the other player, either, physicaly or emotionaly, it's just to help your team put more points on the board then the other team. Heck alot of times games even do involve unequal matchups (player size, skill, experience, etc).

One thing that does happen though, is after a hard hit you expect to see the player who just nailed you extending a hand to help you up. At the very least, they are going to be shaking your hand at the end of the game, no matter who won.

There is a world of difference between that and the guy who puts a late hit on you well after the play is over and then dances around taunting you about it aftewards. That sort of behavior has no place in a game....so much so that the referee's will generaly eject such a player for the game. It's not about whether the hit hurts more or less then the legitmate one...it's about not wanting to play a game with the type of punk that engages in such behavior.

Same holds true for the MMO. No one really cares that much about getting thier character killed....but having to play a game with a bunch of punks takes all the enjoyment out of it....and for some reason FFA PvP games (so far) seem to have attracted a very large proportion of punks. It's as simple as that.

You can argue back and forth all you want, at the end of the day PVE players don't need PVP.

PVP is dying out, and the reason is your community, the reason is not because of PVE players who don't want to play PVP.

The reason PVP is dying stems from PVP players leaving your own ranks and going to PVE. A PVE player has their mind set up, they don't do PVP, but a PVP player that you grief and abuse enough, will eventually go to PVE where they can play without constant harrasment.

Instead of trying to convince PVE players to play PVP, something they will never do, you should make your PVP community more friendly than it is now, because PVP is dying from people jumping to PVE, because you have 0 respect and complete disregard for the emotions and feelings of your fellow players.

Harrasment, abuse, and a complete disregard for the emotions of your fellow players is the number 1 reason PVP is dying.

Originally posted by Biskop

"People who play FFA PVP games are cowards"

This argument is related the preceeding one, but while the sociopath angle comes from hobby psychologists spouting armchair diagnoses, this one is the result of a more moralist view. Some people seem to be under the illusion that PVP should be somehow "fair" and "balanced", and that anyone who has learned to use tactics, terrain, numbers, abilities, experience or anything else to their advantage, is a coward who are afraid of a "fair" fight.

In short, this is scrub reasoning. The bottom line here is that PVP is about winning the fight, not roleplaying a knight in shining armor. Bringing some friends, knowing the terrain, getting the jump on people, etc, is all part of the game.

Those who use the "coward" argument should just stick to their MOBAS, BGs or WOW duelling.

I just have to comment on this specifically.

There are morals and rules in warfare. Yes, it handicaps you a bit - makes it harder to win - but it also makes you the good guys.

It has nothing to do with tactics and intelligence gathering and strategy.

There is a reason 1st world countries don't seed terrain with thousands of land mines anymore, use biological and chemical weapons, or just nuke our enemies.

It'd sure be easier, faster, more efficient, and be a sure fire way to win the fight - probably without a loss of life on "our" side.

But we roleplay the knight in shining armor, and our people sometimes (sadly often) pay the ultimate price.

And our use of force is always measured against the will of our people and the power of popular opinion - unpopular wars lose elections.

I am an atheist, but I still would say that this difference is part of what makes our enemies souless cowards.

Now I know ya'll are going to say "it's just a game" and you are right - but this completely objectivist attitude towards PvP in MMOs is just as pathetic.

The people may be virtual in the game, but behind they keyboard they are still people.

Sure, it may be irrational to get totally bent out of shape is someone kills your character in a video game, but no wise man ever acused people of being entirely rational.

I've always been much, much more inclined to choose the virtueous path if given a choice in a video game (Elder Scrolls series, Mass Effect, etc.)

I really do think there is something psychologically wrong with people who only ever choose the path of the sadist and enjoy it so immensly, especially in a multiplayer environment where you KNOW your victims are a real, living, breathing person on the other side.

Either the sadist or the objectivist, there is something wrong with you to be so void of compassion and conscience in a multiplayer environment.

Originally posted by BadSpock

Originally posted by ShakyMo

Originally posted by Apraxis

What i do not understand. What is so hard, or painful, or even worth mentioning, when your Character dies? Will you not be killed from time to time from NPCs? What is the difference, that another player kills your Avatar?

I never got that. To get killed may have bound with some emotions. Like..

And of course.. if someone is really that "sensitive" (i dont know how to call it else), he should seriously dont play any game where something that "terrible" can even happen. I seriously dont want to ruin another players day. But i think, that it is much more the players problem, who was killed, as of the player, who actually killed him. Because, if he was able to do so, it was most probably a way to play this game.

this

who has the most mental issues, the PVP "sociopaths" or the people that get that attached to a bunch of pixels.

This "A versus B" doesn't end well... FYI

No type is better or worse, and you can't tell me you've never gotten frustrated/upset after dying in a video game, MMO or otherwise, or been upset after a loss/defeat in something IRL.

Just because you don't care when you get PK'd doing some PvE or crafting etc. doesn't mean someone else won't care either.

I am really not here for the "A versus B" thing.. i dont care enough about it.

And yes, i get upset and frustrated, but i get upset and frustrated about me. If i play like shit, or if i missed a window of opportunity and lose because of that, i usually get upset and even frustrated, but not over the other guy.

And i get upset/frustrated in games, where luck is a huge part of the outcome(like poker when you lose your preflop chance of 80%), but then again.. i am upset because of my bad luck and not really about the other player. But well, in poker you find a lot of players, which tend to blame the other player much more than there bad luck or bad play. So i guess, it is some kind of usual human behaviour.

So well.. maybe it is really true.. but then again, they should really not try to play such kind of game.

Originally posted by TangentPoint

 

Well, let me tell you. You've never seen someone be reduced from chest-pounding, self-described "elite PvP'er" down to sniveling cry-baby faster than when one of those people get a dose of their own medicine. I've been reported to GMs for "harassing" someone and "preventing them from playing the game" after I dropped them *once* - and this is after seeing them drop a couple dozen newbies/lowbies over the course of about 10 minutes, telling them to "cry more" when they protested. The worst PvE'er complaints I've ever seen don't hold a candle to the typical ganker/griefer who's had their ass handed to them for once.

 

 

hahah  yah.   when i heard him use the word 'butthurt' (a classic "FFA-PVP-type" stereotype, like MOST of what he had to say) i was thinking it was quite ironic.  cuz not only is he expressing a lot of 'butthurt' towards people's WORDS/IDEAS directed towards him, it's %90 likely that in-game he would be the same kind of 'butthurt' that you are describing here...... whenever somebody gives him what he likes to dish out.

Originally posted by Lissyl

Originally posted by Apraxis

Originally posted by Lissyl

In reality, it always devolves into the same cesspool of muck, defended with the tired "Oh, well, see...it just wasn't done -right-, that's all!".  Say what you will about harming computer-controlled goblins, you're not going to equate going out of your way to ruin a PERSON's day and mindlessly killing some mobiles.  One is psychopathic behaviour, the other is not.  As such, PVP tends to be the thing that ruins games for many players.  Aion is a perfect example in my case -- I loved that game...until I had to go to a zone where there was a lot of PVP.  Ruined in under a day, never logged in again despite my winning several of my battles (so please, spare me, and us, the 'hurrdurr not good at pvp' comments).

What i do not understand. What is so hard, or painful, or even worth mentioning, when your Character dies? Will you not be killed from time to time from NPCs? What is the difference, that another player kills your Avatar?

I never got that. To get killed may have bound with some emotions. Like..

- meh, another respawn..

- wow.. nice fight.. i really want to know how he did that

- damn.. steamrolled.. ok, another try

to whatever, it is just a game after all, isnt it?

And about psychopathic behaviour.. almost all (let say 99% of all multiplayer games, not MMOs) are pvp games, and usually you just kill other players all the time, and in FPS 5 within a minute. And seriously a lot of players play them.. and i really cant get it how that is psychopathic behaviour. IT IS A GAME. And i cant get it how to get your pixeled Avatar get killed will ruin anyones day.

And of course.. if someone is really that "sensitive" (i dont know how to call it else), he should seriously dont play any game where something that "terrible" can even happen. I seriously dont want to ruin another players day. But i think, that it is much more the players problem, who was killed, as of the player, who actually killed him. Because, if he was able to do so, it was most probably a way to play this game.

Well, from my perspective I can try to answer you.  In a reasonably 'fair' pvp fight (which is not to say exact level vs level or gear vs gear, but within a range where it is actually a competition and not one-shot-dead-because-I'm-50-levels-higher), I usually take one of the latter views (wow nice fight, or darn steamrolled, or even 'thatll teach ya!' when I win).  But several/many/most pvp'ers don't -want- that kind of fight.  They flee from them, or won't engage in them.  They wait until the odds are stacked so incredibly in their favor as to make victory assured (usually either by level, or by having 7,000 friends in the area) and then go out of their way to 'trash-talk' and intentionally try to ruin the other PERSON's day.  That's going beyond the realm of a game every bit as much as punching the person you're playing chess against every time you take one of their pieces.  I've said before on other forums one way to tell if someone is a player who players for the challenge of pvp or if they're just ganking scum is to float the idea of friendly fire in groups.  It's anathema to gankers.

As for the other point, you're right that there are many multiplayer/competitive games out there and they don't often attract quite the same stigma.  Part of this is because outside the MMO genre, gamers are usually in the 'reasonably fair' category I mentioned above.  Different weapons, different tactics, but fundamentally identical.  Yet even then there are games where the community is known to be among the lowest of the low (COD and LoL come to mind) because of the way they act.  Say what you will about PVE'ers, you won't hear the kind of talk you get in CoD coming from people playing Mabinogi.  Not to say PVE'ers are perfectly innocent of course -- there are griefers -everywhere- -- but there tends to be mass conglomerations of them in the PVP environment.

*Disclaimer -- Please do note that I often use words like 'generally' and 'tends to' and others to show that I am speaking in terms of trends and tendencies.  I am not calling out any particular person or specific playstyle unless mentioned directly by name/description.

Hmm.. ok, there is more often trash talk, then in more pve oriented games. But well.. i dont let ruin my game experience because of a view asshats.. Ignore them and good. And at least i cant remember a lot of situations where i get ganked a lot, or repeatedly. But yeap.. i can at least some situations, where another player ticked out somehow and screamed at me for a half hour. I had even to put him on ignore list.. and i dont do that often.. because a few insults dont harm me, or disturb me enough to put them on ingore list.

Originally posted by lizardbones

 

---

Originally posted by Apraxis

---

Originally posted by Lissyl In reality, it always devolves into the same cesspool of muck, defended with the tired "Oh, well, see...it just wasn't done -right-, that's all!".  Say what you will about harming computer-controlled goblins, you're not going to equate going out of your way to ruin a PERSON's day and mindlessly killing some mobiles.  One is psychopathic behaviour, the other is not.  As such, PVP tends to be the thing that ruins games for many players.  Aion is a perfect example in my case -- I loved that game...until I had to go to a zone where there was a lot of PVP.  Ruined in under a day, never logged in again despite my winning several of my battles (so please, spare me, and us, the 'hurrdurr not good at pvp' comments).

---

What i do not understand. What is so hard, or painful, or even worth mentioning, when your Character dies? Will you not be killed from time to time from NPCs? What is the difference, that another player kills your Avatar?

 

I never got that. To get killed may have bound with some emotions. Like..

- meh, another respawn..

- wow.. nice fight.. i really want to know how he did that

- damn.. steamrolled.. ok, another try

to whatever, it is just a game after all, isnt it?

And about psychopathic behaviour.. almost all (let say 99% of all multiplayer games, not MMOs) are pvp games, and usually you just kill other players all the time, and in FPS 5 within a minute. And seriously a lot of players play them.. and i really cant get it how that is psychopathic behaviour. IT IS A GAME. And i cant get it how to get your pixeled Avatar get killed will ruin anyones day.

And of course.. if someone is really that "sensitive" (i dont know how to call it else), he should seriously dont play any game where something that "terrible" can even happen. I seriously dont want to ruin another players day. But i think, that it is much more the players problem, who was killed, as of the player, who actually killed him. Because, if he was able to do so, it was most probably a way to play this game.

---

It's the difference between what the developer says a game is, and how the game actually plays.

The developer says, "Come play with zombies! Test your survival skills against zombies!", while what happens is, "You got killed by a sniper!", and, "You got killed again by a sniper!"

It's the difference between a game being advertised as a virtual world, when the game is about killing and being killed by other players. If FFA PvP games were advertised first and foremost as kill or be killed PvP games, you wouldn't have people wondering if there should be a PvE version of the game. Nobody wonders about a PvE version of Mortal Online, because it's advertised as a kill or be killed game. This isn't the case for other FFA PvP games.

Players aren't lamenting the loss of their pixels, they are lamenting the loss of the game play that they thought they were going to get.

 

Ok, thats an arguement. Even if i usually inform me about a game before i buy it.. at least most of the time. But wrong perception is an understandable arguement.

I don't think many here are complaing that FFA PvP games do exist or that those games should try to change thier design focus. We are just trying to explain why FFA PvP games tend to be pretty unpopular, even with many players who enjoy other types of PvP.

Note, I don't think it's technicaly impossible to design a FFA PvP game that is popular or works well. Heck, I'm following PFO with alot of interest right now and that would probably qualify as technicaly FFA PvP.....but as far as existing games...yeah there IS a reason why they tend not to have very large player bases.

What the OP's title implies but doesn't address is that there must be some good arguments against FFA PvP. What are they?

As far as I'm concerned there is one good one:  In a persistant online RPG the concept of consequence and context free killing over and over is completely counter to the point of the genre. Unless the lore supports people killing each other for no reason and with no response from the local authorities or the populace, it just doesn't fit. Putting multiplayer deathmatch style play in an RPG makes no sense. 

Originally posted by GrumpyMel2

I don't think many here are complaing that FFA PvP games do exist or that those games should try to change thier design focus. We are just trying to explain why FFA PvP games tend to be pretty unpopular, even with many players who enjoy other types of PvP.

 

While I don't care for PVP, I'll give people one simple reason out of the hundreds there are why PVP is unpopular.

They call every PVE player a carebear as a derogatory term. People are not welcomed in PVP communities, they are put down, in PVE communities they are welcomed with open arms.

Originally posted by ShakyMo
Grumpymel

I've found that sort of thing much more prevalent in raid grinders with flick a switch pvp servers as a half arsed attempt at checking a "got pvp" box, e.g. wow.

I have encountered it in ffa sandboxes, but to a lesser extent.

I have never encountered it in rvr games.

I tend to agree with you about RvR games...it's actualy my prefered style of PvP implimentation.

Originally posted by Waterlily

You can argue back and forth all you want, at the end of the day PVE players don't need PVP.

PVP is dying out, and the reason is your community, the reason is not because of PVE players who don't want to play PVP.

The reason PVP is dying stems from PVP players leaving your own ranks and going to PVE. A PVE player has their mind set up, they don't do PVP, but a PVP player that you grief and abuse enough, will eventually go to PVE where they can play without constant harrasment.

Instead of trying to convince PVE players to play PVP, something they will never do, you should make your PVP community more friendly than it is now, because PVP is dying from people jumping to PVE, because you have 0 respect and complete disregard for the emotions and feelings of your fellow players.

Harrasment, abuse, and a complete disregard for the emotions of your fellow players is the number 1 reason PVP is dying.

So much hate and anger.

But no worries, pvp games do healthy and well. 99% of all multiplayer games are pvp, and a lot of MMOs, too. Ok there was no decent FFA pvp for a while, but the reason for this is, that you have to do it right. If you set up a world and just put FFA pvp within it will not work and will not be fun. But as i see it, Arche Age could be quite nice, and overall at least if it comes down to MMOs, European and Asian users and developers alike are not that afraid from those kind of games. And there are a few in development. And that is another interesting fact. Maybe in US the players are really that terrible in griefing like all of you describe. I am from europe, and play in most cases in eurpean servers. And i cant recall that much angry and hate against pvp players there, or that much insulting on different layers. And i guess from both sides, because such reaction have to have some causes.

I think that some of the claims against FFA PVP are true. I mean, come on: in 99% of all open world pvp encounters, the attacker has won before the fight started. Not because he has better skill, but simply because the fact that in most MMORPGs, level and equipment decide much more than the skill who wins. And it's very very unlikely, that two players with the same equipment level and character level meet. So 99% of the time, it's just ganking, nothing else. It's about attacking where you know that you can't lose, and being attacked, when you know you can't win. People who want fair PvP get it in actual PvP games, such as TF2, or in arenas / Battlegrounds, where roughly everyone has the same level.