| 315 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
9/26/12 1:28:00 PM#301
Originally posted by lizardbones Yeah everyone should look into a game before they play it. And they shouldn't complain about it having OWPVP or not after they know what they go into. I kinda disagree that a game has to focus on either PvP or PvE tho. It just seems to be the trend to create PvE and PvP seperated to please as many customers as possible. Which is fine in itself. But it leaves out a portion of the player base, the players that like OWPvP. You can easily design a game where both PvP and PvE servers can coexist, and nobdy looses. It may not be the easiest or the best way to make money tho. Edit: And to clarify, im not necessarily talking about free for all & full looting when talking about OWPVP.  |
|
|
9/26/12 3:54:52 PM#302
Originally posted by lizardbones If someone lists an explict reason (such as a power disparity reason) then clearly it is not out of reason to suggest that an owpvp system with zero/reduced power disparities might be a better option then simpy suggesting "turn teh pvp off".
I am well aware of different strokes for different folks. |
|
|
9/26/12 4:16:20 PM#303
I like Open World PvP but I prefer Faction Based...rather then FFA format that tends to be the dominant form in most Open World PvP games today. I also think Starter Areas should be off-limits, as you want new players to at least have some opportunity of learning the basic mechanics of playing the game without having that disrupted with hostilities, beyond that I'm pretty much fine with it.
|
|
|
9/26/12 4:30:25 PM#304
It's not just a matter of jerks griefing low level players with 0 chance to fight back and pose a threat to the ganker. People play themeparks in chunks: "I'll do a zone exploration" chunk, "I'll run a dungeon" chunk, "I'll craft" chunk, "I'll chase quests" chunk and yes, even "I'll PVP" chunk.
Each one of those requires a different level of engagement: some can be done while you watch Monday Night Football and others can't be done unless you're at your best. It's just part of the package when you buy a themepark: you get to do a variety of different things whenever YOU feel like it, not when someone else forces it on you.
Other games have been and continue to be developed with the PVP tension a constant factor: any where, any time. When you buy those games you know what you're getting into. But these games are typically developed with good anti-ganking systems and even they usually have some no-PVP or really, really, well-protected-by-NPCs zones where people can craft and/or chill.
There is another model that also works pretty well: the segregated zone system where the amount of real estate devoted to persistent 24/7 PVP is at least equal to if not bigger than the PVE-only zones. DAoC is the best examplke of this type of system working and now GW2 has brought it back.
The OWPVP problems are typically seen in PVE games where the developer just throws a bone at PVPers by designating a server or two as PVP. In other words, it's just a tacked-on afterthought. with little to no mechanics devoted to the PVP aspect except maybe declaring the 1-10 zones as no auto-flag zones. People get pissed because it's just a crappy system that allows griefing of level 11 by level 85 permastealth basement dwellers but also because, quite simply, as PVP goes, it sucks. |
|
|
9/26/12 8:22:07 PM#305
Originally posted by Hycoo I think there does need to be some focus, if a game has OWPvP then that needs to be designed into the game from the ground up. Otherwise you get what most people experience when they try a PvP server on their favourite themepark where a level 80 with all the stats to deal with the level 80 PvE fodder is in a world with Level 10's who he can slaughter without risk or retribution. This is what creates the mindless gankfests which people hate. This is far less common in a game with balance and a decent risk/reward ratio built in from the start. Simply, if you make a game with OWPvP, then make an effort to design it to work, rather than just removing the inability to attack player characters. "i don't waste my time building relationship in games" - nariusseldon |
|
|
9/26/12 8:45:51 PM#306
Originally posted by Madimorga Actually, most games nowadays don't have it in all areas of their game, keep in mind their 1 percent open world area out of the whole game. not to bring up a discussion about swtor, just an example, swtor is 99 percent instanced 1 percent open world. So no not most games. Looking at: The Repopulation |
|
|
9/27/12 12:41:50 PM#307
Originally posted by Hycoo Don't many games already have PvE and PvP servers? |
|
|
9/27/12 12:44:23 PM#308
Originally posted by bunnyhopper And of course a system with no disparities defeat the purpose of a progression RPG. HOwever, if you can find such a person that does not care about progression, and want zero disparaty, you may was well have him play a MMOFPS. Why have a RPG with no progression? |
|
|
9/27/12 1:29:25 PM#309
Originally posted by nariusseldon You can have a massive amount of progression in a game that has little to no actual character combat/item stat progression.
You can have economic progression metrics. You can have social/award progression metrics. You can have skin/vanity progression metrics. You can have guild/clan progression metrics. You can have personal story/title progression metrics. You can have crafting progression metrics. You can have territory/RvR/warfare control progression metrics. You can have rank/ladder/arena progression metrics. You can have the fact that you actually get better at (you know progress) the skills required to be good at combat. You could give everyone the same amount of skill points and let them pick and choose. If they choose non combat stuff that's their choice.
In short you can have a major amount of "progression" and a major amount or RP in a game which limits or gets rid of combat stat/item stat progression.
You may as well play an mmofps if it offers a persistent world replete with crafting, player housing and cities and all the other trappings associated with an mmorpg.
Now I am not saying that everyone should like it, regardless of what is changed, nor am I saying that ffa should be changed to sub grab more potential players. But it is clear you can remove the problem of "level 80 smacking level 10" without suddenly shattering the whole point of RPG. Although that takes a little more thought than just naysaying the entire thing. |
|
|
9/27/12 2:24:16 PM#310
Originally posted by Parasitenoir It sounds great in principle but... 1) It always, and I mean ALWAYS, ends up with lvl 50+ ganking people under lvl 10 2) Risk-free PvP is bland, pointless and simply not worth the effort. If I can't loot you, what use is this carebear-heavy PvP to me? I don't want crappy points or epeen league table - I want your stuff, otherwise why even bother? Eve Online is the only game where PvP means something. I don't even class PvP in games like WoW, etc., as actual PvP. It's like fighting in Tom and Jerry - people pop back from death, seconds later, with no fuss and no muss. What a joke. |
|
|
9/27/12 3:21:29 PM#311
I see so many people arguing with "there is so many people level 50 ganking lowbies" but what about a system like they had it in Lineage II? OWPVP, you can attack anyone anywhere at any time. If you do you become purple (flagged) if you kill your victim without him hitting you back (which -if he did- would turn him purple too) you become red (PK). Depending on your level difference you get Karma. If you level difference is high (such as level 50 killing lvl 10) you will gain a ton of karma. And on top of that you cant reduce your karma by killing monsters that are NOT in your level range. And I think this is important. Because lowbies you will obviously find in lowbie areas with lowbie monsters. If you go to that area to gank lowbies you will not be able to kill of your karma. Or well, it will be very hard to do and way too much of a hassle.
This wont guarantee that no one will gank lowbies ofc. Why should it, isn't that sense of danger at all time fascinating to you? but it will discourage ganking of uber-lowbies hy higher level players....
Seriously that game imo had the ABSOLUTE BEST PVP/PK system ever. Lineage 3 - www.lineage3-online.com |
|
|
9/27/12 4:41:23 PM#312
Originally posted by xDrac IDK if it was the best or not, but at least it was designed with PVP in mind. The problems usually crop up in PVE games when the devs just add some sort of lazy-ass tacked on PVP. Those typically have zero lowbee ganking consequences. |
|
|
VengeSunsoar
 Elite Member
Joined: 3/10/04
GRIND DOES NOT EXIST. IT IS ENTIRELY YOUR PERCEPTION. |
9/27/12 4:44:21 PM#313
I just don't like being zerged/ganked by 50 players at once, or by someone impossibly higher than me. I like PVP, I suck at it, but I still like it, under certain conditions. i.e. a fight more appropriate to my level or the best is when we both see each other, we both hesitate then we both go at it. Win or lose, those are fun. But when I'm crafting and doing my own thing, no thanks. You know, in ancient Egypt. One of the hieroglyphics on the walls of the pyramids actually says 'I am upset as my heir will ruin my kingdom' or something to that affect. This is 5000BC stuff and you know what? Nothing has changed. :P |
|
9/27/12 5:01:09 PM#314
Originally posted by bunnyhopper Yes you can. And in fact, many F2P FPS have a lot of those mechanics. But you should also know that in many RPGs, combat power progression is a focus because people like it. And you are going to lose that.
|
|
|
9/28/12 11:23:30 AM#315
Originally posted by nariusseldon Well, at a certain point the lines between MMORPG and MMOFPS start to blurr. I personaly like FPS and MMOFPS games quite a bit. However if we are being litteral here... MMOFPS implies... First Person perspective... some people may not be interested in that Shooter...... some people may not be interested in a modern or sci-fi genre, which shooter pretty much implies.
MMORPG implies... Role-Playing Game.... some people actualy like Role-Playing, in addition to PvP.
Those are 3 reasons off the top of my head where someone may be interested in MMORPG and not MMOFPS.
|
|
Friends: vgchartz.com
Not a member? You can still subscribe to our newsletters and daily updates here!
May 19, 2013 7:51 PM
- Page Created in 0.406 seconds -
