| 111 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
Zorgo
Hard Core Member
Joined: 12/05/05
Who did wrong? The advertiser hired to sell the game or the consumer who put faith in advertising? |
11/10/08 9:49:32 PM#81
Originally posted by metalhead980
Hey man, Not all ffa pvp fans are assholes and gankers. Some players just enjoy pvp that isnt a FPS/mmo respawn fest. Try not to be such a prick. And some players do.
Unless you think that the term 'carebear' doesn't come with a truckload of insulting conotations. In which case, I'd ask, how many people would proudly call themselves a 'carebear' as opposed to 'hardcore'? The point was of my post was not to be a prick, but rather use satire and irony to illustrate how we all have different opinions. Written respectfully I would not have responded to this at all. Instead I emmulated his tone to illustrate the hypocracy.
|
|
originalegg
Novice Member
Joined: 10/09/06
Darkfall Releases - February 25th!!! Vaporware trolls = scum |
11/10/08 10:01:39 PM#82
Originally posted by WSIMike Here's my personal attitude toward death penalties.... If I'm rewarded for my successes, then it seems only fair to be equally penalized for my failures. I gain xp for defeating a mob. I lose xp for being defeated by one. Tit for Tat. Yin and Yang. For those who say "I don't want to be penalized by losing hours of my life having to get back xp or gear"... Well, here's how I and, perhaps others who are more pro-penalty, would see that... The knowledge that you have that time or xp at risk makes the challenge all the more exciting and makes careful planning and execution all the more important. Which, in turn, makes success all the sweeter... especially in situations that look really grim, but the group pulls together and somehow survives. In FFXI you can lose xp and/or levels. I don't know the exact ratio, but compared to the cumulative amount of xp and levels I've gained in my time playing, the amount of xp and levels lost to dying is a drop in a bucket. It's negligible. By comparison, I've died far more in WoW, for example, due to careless or reckless party members who would do stupid things 'cause they didn't care if they, or anyone else for that matter, died. So... we can discuss philosophical differences in penalty versus no penalty all day long. It boils down to the same thing regardless... That's why nothing is for everyone.
Wow well said. This is exactly the way I and many other pro-penalty people feel. I have never taken the time to write it out like you did, and mainly just tried to explain that it adds to immersion and the excitement factor of having something to lose. the tit for tat explanation is a really good one btw. but especially the one about how people would approach situations with more thought and not just blindlessly run into fights because if they die, who cares? It cheapens the gaming experience and if that wasnt that case then the kiddies and add guys would be weeded out fast. Im not saying if you dont like penalties then you are a kiddie, im simply saying those gamers who we have all experienced wouldnt be able to handle it. The ones that go "lol guys cmon dont be nub just charge lolz cmon noobs". It definitely makes things more challenging, and without the mechanics in place to actually penalize me for my mistakes while rewarding my accomplishments, then i feel like im just wasting my time in a pointless chat room than actually playing a game. ---sig---
|
|
Nifa
Apprentice Member
Joined: 11/07/08
You can get more with a kind word & a 2x4 than you can with just a kind word |
11/10/08 11:39:25 PM#83
Reading this argument - again (9 pages? Really?) - kind of reminds me of watching children in the schoolyard arguing, then being interrupted by a teacher or two: Kid #1: I like my PvP this way! This game sucks because the PvP isn't the way I like it!" Kid #2: "Well, I like my PvP this way! If you don't like it, you suck!" Teacher: "Who cares? Games should be fun. If the game isn't fun, go play another one that is fun." Let's try another argument, equally as ridiculous. I like the color red. Anyone who doesn't like the color red obviously needs insulted in some manner...oh, just for fun, we'll say that people who don't like the color red all need to grow up and get a life - especially the people who like the color blue. Can't stand those freaks. Those damn people who like the color blue only like it because it's so easy to find and there's no work involved in looking up at the sky. Bums!
"You are obviously confusing a mature rating with actual maturity." -Asherman Maybe MMO is not your genre, go play Modern Warfare...or something you can be all twitchy...and rank up all night. This is seriously getting tired. -Ranyr |
|
11/10/08 11:50:25 PM#84
You guys sound real knowledgeable but you are all really full of it to some degree. The PvP in this game is pretty horrible. Penalties won't work in making that any different though. If you played the games you say you have played, such as EVE and UO, then you know just how many kids dominate that game. We aren't talking about harmless WoW kiddies who go spamming how great something is. No. We are talking about that one guy who thinks he is uber just because he has 12 hours out of his day to spend standing outside of a IDOC. We are talking about the people who use their moms credit card to buy gold so they can avoid the penalties that you say are so fantastic. Then when they are bored they just sit there with nothing better to do but sit at brit or moonglow bank and leetspeak to all the noobs, talking about their meaningless lives in front of everyone, as if they were so spectacular and everyone else was a slab of turd patty.
I really doubt if any of you even played any of these games you say you have. Even if you did why are you HERE? I am here because I just cancelled my account and wanted to read someone else ***** about how they don't like the game because it would make me feel better about not playing it. Why are YOU here? If you are so elite and uber; WHY ARE YOU HERE? There isn't 1 true vet in the world who would waste his time either here on this forum or playing this game.
The problem with this game is what was stated by most true vets at the very beginning; WoW Sucks, and so do you.
ggkthxbye |
|
|
11/11/08 12:13:46 AM#85
When I quit a game I don't come to a forum to read similar posts to feel better about my decision. If I thought I didn't feel better quitting.. I would still be playing. At least for me personally I come to forums to see different perspectives... As long as someone is presenting a personal point of view.. its nice because I get to see something from another perspective. When people present a point of view as fact.. not so much. DAoC wasn't exactly heavy on a death penalty either. I personally didn't like the EQ1/FFXI penalty. Mostly because part of the game was you found a nice drop. Died and it doesn't matter how .. losing a level. If you lose a level what do you put back into the game? Time. And beyond it may stretch out your sub how does this help? Now in Ultima Online.. risk vs. reward. I kill a guy in pvp I loot his stuff. He kills me he loots my stuff. No uber loot .. well ok some people were dumb enough to pay for weapons "of vanquishing" that didn't really do anything more than a crafted weapon would have. The penalty? You lost your stuff. What did it put back into the game? You had to go buy new gear from a crafter. Oddly enough in that game gear was sold cheap.. I know because I ran a crafter for 4 years. That type of death penalty was great as it put back into the player based economy... Most death systems don't do that at all. Which is why I don't agree with them. I wouldn't use the term carebear.. but dying in WAR certainly didn't feel all that negative. |
|
|
11/11/08 3:01:37 AM#86
Originally posted by markoraos AFK leeching is an excellent example of how harmful this can be - players who find, whatsoever slight advantage to them individually will gimp their whole team because of it. If their reward/benefit was tied EXCLUSIVELY to group performance I'd say we'd have no AFK leechers at all.Originally posted by WSIMike
The basic flaw with this thinking is as follows: THIS IS A GROUP GAME. WHY ARE YOU SHOUTING? I CAN 'HEAR' YOU JUST FINE. I would hope you have at least one other team member helping you protect that objective as best they can. If not, and you're a lone wolf out there, your team isn't working very much like a team at all, in my opinion. The very best group games, both physical sports and computer games have no personal penalties whatsoever included - and for a very good reason. If you induce excessive individual rewards or penalties you are going against the group goals - you are giving players a very unwelcome dilemma "should I be playing for myself or the group?". That's very simple. I'm not arguing for "no risk" play where "everyone is a winner." Far from it. There should be clear winners and clear loosers with substantial rewards (and some penalties) for it. However, group rewards should be CLEARLY superior to individual ones - players who were exploiting heal reward mechanics in WAR scenarios are a clear example how harmful to group play this division of loyalties can be. ... Hey! Where ya goin? I'm over here... When did I mention anything about group rewards or penalties versus individual rewards or penalties in my previous post? If you'd like to respond to my posts and have a conversation, I'm all for it.. but can we please at least have the same discussion?
|
|
|
11/11/08 3:58:10 AM#87
Originally posted by originalegg
|
|
|
11/11/08 5:57:37 AM#88
Losing all your phat loots, your gold, or getting set back to level 1. Sorry, those days are long gone. MMOs are no longer niche games. Their expenisve to make and maintain. They need a happy playerbase to survive and p1ssing them off will see your game die quicker than you can say "hardcore pro-pvp penalty". Yeah, WAR is funny, you can basically "death teleport" back to the nearest village/town, which can be handy when you need to hand in a bunch of quests. But all this really does is save time. The penalty for dieing should NOT be "lose xxx gold" because thats just meaningless and arbitrary. The penalty should NOT be "I gotta run all the way back to the battle, zzzzzzzzzzzzz" The penalty should be "oh craps, I gotta run all the way back to the battle, I hope we dont lose the objective before I get there and then it gets locked out for 24 hours!". That is no longer a meaningless mechanic or timewaster. You dont want to die, and its not some stupid "lose all your phat loots" penalty. |
|
|
Stellos
Novice Member
Joined: 9/15/06
If you're going to stick it out there, don't be afraid if you get it cut off. |
11/11/08 7:49:01 AM#89
Originally posted by Lizard_SF Pretty much what I was thinking. I mean come on....you know what this is a level-based RvR game. Do you honestly think PvP is going to be hardcore like Ultima Online use to be or something? It is what it is. I'm enjoying the game though regardless of the carebear feel. I enjoy the guys who play it like it is hardcore PvP though :) they make me laugh and keep it fun for someone like me who desires hardcore PvP. It's a light-hearted, fun game that has a very in-depth RvR system. If you like teamwork in your MMORPGs this is a great game to get involved with. |
|
Zorgo
Hard Core Member
Joined: 12/05/05
Who did wrong? The advertiser hired to sell the game or the consumer who put faith in advertising? |
11/11/08 8:06:33 AM#90
Originally posted by Onine
Wow, you really said it. You have a lot of nerve talking about other's foolishness. Coming to a forum to get validation from strangers is a whole lot more pathetic imo than what you are discribing. |
|
11/11/08 8:08:37 AM#91
As a long time (3 years) Eve-Online player I must admit I am loving the pvp on this game. Its fast. its fun..I can work with my friends and smack down greenskins for a few hours and not worry about what happens when I die. 2 rl friends of mine are now enjoying the pvp aspects greatly..and these are die hard anti pvpers until this and one is considering moving into pvp on eve where he also plays as a industrialist/miner only.
If it takes a softcore pvp game to get more people into pvp..LONG LIVE WARHAMMER.
Its not for everyone. Neither is Eve. But I am glad to see the variety of options out there.
And no you can't have my stuff.
|
|
|
Zorgo
Hard Core Member
Joined: 12/05/05
Who did wrong? The advertiser hired to sell the game or the consumer who put faith in advertising? |
11/11/08 8:47:48 AM#92
Originally posted by daquack
I think this illustrates a different point of view in regards to pvp. Although I agree that penalties in pvp CAN add an element of risk to the game, if the game was designed around a pvp penalty system. WAR is not that game. If you added penalties to WAR pvp, then you would get an entirely different atmosphere. They designed the game so that the action would be fast and furious. They didn't want two armies staring at each other methodically plotting how they could achieve success without death. They wanted 'people running around like lunatics smashing each other to pieces' (maybe not the exact quote, but close). Which is precisely what sets this games pvp apart from EVE's pvp design choice. Second, they were completely upfront about this through the entire development process. If you didn't want fast-paced pvp without penalties, why pick this game up? And think of the alternative. What if they had talked up fast-paced pvp with no penalties and then released a game with slow methodic pvp with penalties. This forum would have started smoking from the 'broken promises' post count. Lastly, and I've said this before. Judge the game on how well they executed their design, on how much fun it is. The pvp in EVE is good because the design was well executed, not because they chose the 'right' pvp philosophy. Compare to EQ1 pvp. They chose the 'right' pvp philosophy, but it was horribly executed. It encouraged griefing and ganking and frustration for losing that item you camped 12 hours for. Both games have 'penalty' based pvp, one is good - one is bad. So I believe a more acurate critique of WAR's pvp would be to ask the question, was the non-penalty pvp design choice well executed? Did it achieve people running around like lunatics? Did it eliminate staring contests between two armies? Or beyond that, I see that this design choice added a whole new demension to strategies we hadn't seen before. Now you can have 'sacrifice' groups to draw people out, knowing full well they were toast, to open an opportunity to a sneaky group. Think about Phoenix Gate, T2 scenario, group 1 will rush the bridge, heading full force to the flag. Folly right? Except they rush up and then start to pull back, usually dying one by one. The other side follows, gets cocky, thinks 'what a bunch of newbs'. All the while, group 2 is sneaking around back, waiting for them to be drawn out, rushes in and grabs the flag. Bingo. A new strategy which NEVER would have happened in a game where there were serious consequences to dying. And just to be clear. There are death penalties in WAR. You get stacking 'battle fatigue' which by lowering 'wounds' makes you very vulnerable. It is remedied with paying a nominal fee to a healer, which is similar to other games 'item repair' penalty. It is certainly not punitive, but it is certainly a penalty. But a greater penalty is the respawn time and run time lost to your Warband. If all healers are targeted and taken out, the the rest of the warband will be dead before they return. So it gives healers incentive not to die, it gives players incentive to protect their healers and so on. In fact, I guess you could say that WAR is carebear pvp, if you don't consider winning the battle to be important. But I ask , why did you pick the game up if you didn't want to win battles? If you are unhappy with WAR's pvp; if you bought the game expecting harsh penalties for dying; if you expected people to be wary going into pvp battle. If that type of pvp is what gets your blood boiling, then I say the only fault lies with your own purchase decision. By complaining that the developers did something wrong is bullocks. They told you what the pvp would be like, they told you. And you bought the game. It is your fault, not theirs. It would be one thing if i saw posts saying things like: "I haven't tried WAR because I don't get a thrill from that type of pvp" -or- "I thought I would give WAR's pvp a try, to see if I could like non-penalty pvp, but I guess it really doesn't work for me" -or- "I didn't know what to expect from WAR because I didn't keep up with development, so I was disappointed in the type of pvp they used" -or- "Their pvp system works well, however, I have found that WAR is not everywhere. When pvp happens, it happens as designed, the problem is I thought it would happen a lot more often". -------------------------------------------------------------- Those statements are constructive critique. "WAR has carebear pvp" is not. A statement like that says a lot more about the poster than the game.
|
|
11/11/08 10:54:44 AM#93
Originally posted by Zorgo I think this illustrates a different point of view in regards to pvp. Although I agree that penalties in pvp CAN add an element of risk to the game, if the game was designed around a pvp penalty system. WAR is not that game. If you added penalties to WAR pvp, then you would get an entirely different atmosphere. They designed the game so that the action would be fast and furious. They didn't want two armies staring at each other methodically plotting how they could achieve success without death. They wanted 'people running around like lunatics smashing each other to pieces' (maybe not the exact quote, but close). Which is precisely what sets this games pvp apart from EVE's pvp design choice. Second, they were completely upfront about this through the entire development process. If you didn't want fast-paced pvp without penalties, why pick this game up? And think of the alternative. What if they had talked up fast-paced pvp with no penalties and then released a game with slow methodic pvp with penalties. This forum would have started smoking from the 'broken promises' post count. Lastly, and I've said this before. Judge the game on how well they executed their design, on how much fun it is. The pvp in EVE is good because the design was well executed, not because they chose the 'right' pvp philosophy. Compare to EQ1 pvp. They chose the 'right' pvp philosophy, but it was horribly executed. It encouraged griefing and ganking and frustration for losing that item you camped 12 hours for. Both games have 'penalty' based pvp, one is good - one is bad. So I believe a more acurate critique of WAR's pvp would be to ask the question, was the non-penalty pvp design choice well executed? Did it achieve people running around like lunatics? Did it eliminate staring contests between two armies? Or beyond that, I see that this design choice added a whole new demension to strategies we hadn't seen before. Now you can have 'sacrifice' groups to draw people out, knowing full well they were toast, to open an opportunity to a sneaky group. Think about Phoenix Gate, T2 scenario, group 1 will rush the bridge, heading full force to the flag. Folly right? Except they rush up and then start to pull back, usually dying one by one. The other side follows, gets cocky, thinks 'what a bunch of newbs'. All the while, group 2 is sneaking around back, waiting for them to be drawn out, rushes in and grabs the flag. Bingo. A new strategy which NEVER would have happened in a game where there were serious consequences to dying. And just to be clear. There are death penalties in WAR. You get stacking 'battle fatigue' which by lowering 'wounds' makes you very vulnerable. It is remedied with paying a nominal fee to a healer, which is similar to other games 'item repair' penalty. It is certainly not punitive, but it is certainly a penalty. But a greater penalty is the respawn time and run time lost to your Warband. If all healers are targeted and taken out, the the rest of the warband will be dead before they return. So it gives healers incentive not to die, it gives players incentive to protect their healers and so on. In fact, I guess you could say that WAR is carebear pvp, if you don't consider winning the battle to be important. But I ask , why did you pick the game up if you didn't want to win battles? If you are unhappy with WAR's pvp; if you bought the game expecting harsh penalties for dying; if you expected people to be wary going into pvp battle. If that type of pvp is what gets your blood boiling, then I say the only fault lies with your own purchase decision. By complaining that the developers did something wrong is bullocks. They told you what the pvp would be like, they told you. And you bought the game. It is your fault, not theirs. It would be one thing if i saw posts saying things like: "I haven't tried WAR because I don't get a thrill from that type of pvp" -or- "I thought I would give WAR's pvp a try, to see if I could like non-penalty pvp, but I guess it really doesn't work for me" -or- "I didn't know what to expect from WAR because I didn't keep up with development, so I was disappointed in the type of pvp they used" -or- "Their pvp system works well, however, I have found that WAR is not everywhere. When pvp happens, it happens as designed, the problem is I thought it would happen a lot more often". -------------------------------------------------------------- Those statements are constructive critique. "WAR has carebear pvp" is not. A statement like that says a lot more about the poster than the game. Excellent post, very well said indeed! If you can't "Have your cake & eat it too", then how can "The proof of the pudding be in the eating"? |
|
|
11/11/08 12:14:52 PM#94
Great post Zorgo and some very well said points. I don't agree that people should be blamed for not knowing every aspect of a game before release and then understanding how it actually plays out in the game. Even though I disagree with what most of the harsh death penalty players are saying, I think there is some validity to their views. Not to the extremes some are posting and bashing, but just underneath all that hardcore/carebear talk is some very interesting points.
|
|
|
11/11/08 12:19:33 PM#95
Yep Warhammer pvp is meaningless, and thats why so many people get bored with it after a bit. |
|
|
11/11/08 1:18:40 PM#96
Originally posted by lorndarken
Why you play this useless carebear pvp then this was already known before launch lol. If you want real pvp just wait for Darkfall:) |
|
|
11/11/08 3:07:05 PM#97
Its kinda sad to see threads like this ... people who claim to be such old schoolers and loving FFA pvp but they show their utter lack of understanding to game design by hating on games like WAR or WoW for not having a harsh enough death penalty. FFA Games with harsh death penalties have their place in the world and its never been a large one which is why smaller game companies like the guys makign Darkfall tend to make those games. They're also fundamentally different in what the game is designed to promote. Games like Eve and Darkfall are not designed around mass combat and constant killing people (though it does happen of course) while its expected to happen on occasion the games are designed as 'worlds' that you populate and take on a roll in as a crafter or a diplomate or a murderer. In order for people to feel they are impacted by the world and impacting the world there needs to be consequences. Hence the death penalties and the right to kill a person for being a jerk right where they stand or just because you feel like it. Games like WAR are designed around "mass' combat and constant fighting. Its also designed around the idea that people choose a side not just a guild and thats the side they fight for not against. If everyone could kill everyone there would be no point to the central core of the game which is to take out the otherside and capture their city. People wont' flock into PvP constantly on a daily basis if they lose xp, gear, loads of cash, and there's little to no idea of whos' against you or with you. Warhammer PvP is not 'carebear' its designed to promote constant warfare. The word carebear is being tossed around way to much these days and by people who have little idea about design. Carebear is PvP like WoW has where there's no goal to the PvP at all no purpose other than 'mini games.' While its not happened yet due to some design choices the WAR devs made the PvP does have a purpose and it has a goal. While I dont think I could ever call every single FFA PvPEr a jerk I do tend to notice that a lot more of them are the PKing jerks that turned alot of people off to the idea to FFA PvP in the beginning. The PK jerks ruined FFA PvP ... if you really love FFA PvP so much you should take your anger out on the Lawless fun killers who basically chased away potential converts to the FFA way of gaming. They ruined it not the people who flock to games with preset rules. |
|
|
11/11/08 3:47:00 PM#98
Originally posted by strongaxe Yeah, meaningless and fun. Last night on Ironforge we had several warbands on each side going at it in tier 3, and it was insanely fun. More fun in one night than I've had in a year of WoW. |
|
|
11/11/08 3:52:20 PM#99
Lets just call it weak pvp.
Can anyone tell me what game has strong pvp? |
|
|
11/11/08 5:10:55 PM#100
Originally posted by daquack
|
|