Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by Banaghran

I miss active GMs and jailing for disruptive behavior :)

Flame on!

:)

Honestly, how can you do that?  Here's another AO example.  There are places in Shadowlands where groups camp for hours and hours on end, once all of those spots are taken, what are other groups that come along to do?  Groups there will scream if you even walk near their camped spots and they don't leave until they have wrung every bit of XP out of it they can.

So now what?

How can i do what? Prefer that players willing to verbally harass other people are in jail instead of going unchecked in their own instance? Call it schadenfreude if you like.

As for you example

a) let them scream?

b) go to another server?

c) go grind somewhere else?

d) enlarge the area?

e) make the area less of a must to go there?

for starters.

Flame on!

:)

---

Originally posted by Rasputin

---

Originally posted by lizardbones  

---

Originally posted by SpectralHunter

---

Originally posted by Cephus404

---

Originally posted by Magiknight The problems with an open world, ie kill stealing and ninjaing loot, can we dealt with other ways besides instancing. Instancing is for people who want a small game.

---

How do you propose to stop it entirely then?  How can it be dealt with so that those who don't want to be around it are never bothered by it again?

---

Developers should understand they can never meet the expectations of every player.  It's impossible.  If you try to please everyone, you'll end up pleasing no one.  At best, you can implement mechanisms to deter it but ksing and ninjaing will be around just like there's stealing in real life.   The best that developers can do is to create a game that caters to the type of player they are trying to attract.  For instance, I don't like FFA PvP and wouldn't play a game that has it.  But I wouldn't discourage companies to make them if there's a player base for it.  I most certainly wouldn't demand the company to change it for me.

---

Kill stealing can be dealt with by giving any player who hits a mob credit for the kill and making sure that mobs scale with the power of the player so that no player can one shot mobs. Loot stealing can be dealt with by giving each player a separate pile of loot. A player cannot steal another player's loot because they cannot touch or see the other player's loot.  

---

Making arbitrarities like that will fragment the world and reality almost as bad as instancing. What is what? What you see is NOT what you get. Reality will be twisted and warped, making a common frame of reference impossible.

It is a terrible solution. Instead take inspiration from the real world and make consequences for bad actions. Make it possible for bad players to be punished, either by the other players or by the system. Or both. Stuffing new fragmentations of reality on top is a poor solution.

---

Who says, that spawning needs to be at fixed points? Who says that mobs should be incredibly stupid and only walk 10 meters away from their spawn point? What if they spawned randomly and could wander as they liked?

Whoops, suddenly you don't have groups camping spawn points and therefore no killstealers camping the same groups.

You will have an open game, and if any killstealing takes place, it will be completely by chance, because two groups happen upon the same mob at the same time. And it will probably be a rare occasion.

Don't be so locked in how you think about MMO's. Noone says they have to be like the EQ-line of clones.

Originally posted by lizardbones

 

---

Originally posted by Rasputin

---

Originally posted by lizardbones  

---

Originally posted by SpectralHunter

---

Originally posted by Cephus404

---

Originally posted by Magiknight The problems with an open world, ie kill stealing and ninjaing loot, can we dealt with other ways besides instancing. Instancing is for people who want a small game.

---

How do you propose to stop it entirely then?  How can it be dealt with so that those who don't want to be around it are never bothered by it again?

---

Developers should understand they can never meet the expectations of every player.  It's impossible.  If you try to please everyone, you'll end up pleasing no one.  At best, you can implement mechanisms to deter it but ksing and ninjaing will be around just like there's stealing in real life.   The best that developers can do is to create a game that caters to the type of player they are trying to attract.  For instance, I don't like FFA PvP and wouldn't play a game that has it.  But I wouldn't discourage companies to make them if there's a player base for it.  I most certainly wouldn't demand the company to change it for me.

---

Kill stealing can be dealt with by giving any player who hits a mob credit for the kill and making sure that mobs scale with the power of the player so that no player can one shot mobs. Loot stealing can be dealt with by giving each player a separate pile of loot. A player cannot steal another player's loot because they cannot touch or see the other player's loot.  

---

Making arbitrarities like that will fragment the world and reality almost as bad as instancing. What is what? What you see is NOT what you get. Reality will be twisted and warped, making a common frame of reference impossible.

 

It is a terrible solution. Instead take inspiration from the real world and make consequences for bad actions. Make it possible for bad players to be punished, either by the other players or by the system. Or both. Stuffing new fragmentations of reality on top is a poor solution.

---

If the real world was such a great place, then people wouldn't be trying to get out of the real world and into virtual ones. If having consequences for "bad" actions was such a great solution in the real world, it would, you know, stop people from engaging in that "bad" behavior. If virtual worlds were real worlds, they wouldn't be called virtual worlds.

The goal is to stop a certain behavior, not mimic the real world. If you want to stop a particular behavior in a virtual world, you make it impossible.

 

Tricky, there was a time when everyone kinda expected that this

http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Quick_Chat

will replace ingame chat.

Moreover you have to keep immersion and the "virtual reality" part in mind, handholding and  "no no no, bad boy, you cant do that" that appears in 1+ games tends to be offputting.

Flame on!

:)

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by Magiknight

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by Magiknight

The problems with an open world, ie kill stealing and ninjaing loot, can we dealt with other ways besides instancing.

Instancing is for people who want a small game.

How do you propose to stop it entirely then?  How can it be dealt with so that those who don't want to be around it are never bothered by it again?

 

You can make it so that only the people in the party who claimed the monster can get its loot.

You can make it so that each member of the party who would like to fight the monster has to have an item that is very hard to get.

You can add critera for being able to obtain loot, ie having a specific job and / or level.

You can make zones where the monsters are located very difficult to get into in the first place. That way few people are there anyways.

There are a bazillion ways.

All of which essentially turns it into an instance.  People who want no instances want no obstacles to people running in and doing things at any time.  It will turn into another case of what happens every day on Anarchy Online at the Temple of the Three Winds, where you have a room-full of people camping all of the bosses, waiting for them to respawn.  When it does, everyone opens up, kills it in about 3 second without the slightest amount of risk, the fastest group grabs the loot.  Lather, rinse, repeat.

I don't want to play a game like that.

No it doesnt turn it into a instance, he didnt specify what "claiming the monster" really means, quest items to fight something and quests determining the reward are a common thing.

Moreover people who want no instances are more often than not willing to compromise, it is you who wants do to things when you want, i am able not to play during peak hours so that i can get a good spot later with less searching.

Maybe you just dont want to play Anarchy Online, have you considered that?

How about joining the fastest group/clan/whatever? How about starting a good group that will be fast enough? Oh, i see, contact with other people, nvm...

Flame on!

:)

---

Originally posted by Banaghran

---

Originally posted by lizardbones  

---

Originally posted by Rasputin

---

Originally posted by lizardbones  

---

Originally posted by SpectralHunter

---

Originally posted by Cephus404

---

Originally posted by Magiknight The problems with an open world, ie kill stealing and ninjaing loot, can we dealt with other ways besides instancing. Instancing is for people who want a small game.

---

How do you propose to stop it entirely then?  How can it be dealt with so that those who don't want to be around it are never bothered by it again?

---

Developers should understand they can never meet the expectations of every player.  It's impossible.  If you try to please everyone, you'll end up pleasing no one.  At best, you can implement mechanisms to deter it but ksing and ninjaing will be around just like there's stealing in real life.   The best that developers can do is to create a game that caters to the type of player they are trying to attract.  For instance, I don't like FFA PvP and wouldn't play a game that has it.  But I wouldn't discourage companies to make them if there's a player base for it.  I most certainly wouldn't demand the company to change it for me.

---

Kill stealing can be dealt with by giving any player who hits a mob credit for the kill and making sure that mobs scale with the power of the player so that no player can one shot mobs. Loot stealing can be dealt with by giving each player a separate pile of loot. A player cannot steal another player's loot because they cannot touch or see the other player's loot.  

---

Making arbitrarities like that will fragment the world and reality almost as bad as instancing. What is what? What you see is NOT what you get. Reality will be twisted and warped, making a common frame of reference impossible.   It is a terrible solution. Instead take inspiration from the real world and make consequences for bad actions. Make it possible for bad players to be punished, either by the other players or by the system. Or both. Stuffing new fragmentations of reality on top is a poor solution.

---

If the real world was such a great place, then people wouldn't be trying to get out of the real world and into virtual ones. If having consequences for "bad" actions was such a great solution in the real world, it would, you know, stop people from engaging in that "bad" behavior. If virtual worlds were real worlds, they wouldn't be called virtual worlds. The goal is to stop a certain behavior, not mimic the real world. If you want to stop a particular behavior in a virtual world, you make it impossible.  

---

Tricky, there was a time when everyone kinda expected that this

http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Quick_Chat

will replace ingame chat.

Moreover you have to keep immersion and the "virtual reality" part in mind, handholding and  "no no no, bad boy, you cant do that" that appears in 1+ games tends to be offputting.

Flame on!

:)

---

Originally posted by Banaghran

How can i do what? Prefer that players willing to verbally harass other people are in jail instead of going unchecked in their own instance? Call it schadenfreude if you like.

As for you example

a) let them scream?

b) go to another server?

c) go grind somewhere else?

d) enlarge the area?

e) make the area less of a must to go there?

for starters.

Flame on!

:)

 

a)  It's fine if they scream, but if GMs are willing to kick you out because you're infringing on other people's camp site, what are you going to do?

b)  Only works if you have characters on other servers, I personally wish all games let you log into any server and use all of your characters there.  Plus the fact, it makes no difference because all of those camp spots are taken on all of the servers.

c)  So I ought to be denied content in a game I'm paying for?  Seriously?

d)  Try convincing the developers to do that.  Go ahead, try.

e)  So make the game worse?

How about just making the game available for anyone to play the way they want to play at any time?  Or is that too hard for you to get through your head?

Originally posted by Banaghran

No it doesnt turn it into a instance, he didnt specify what "claiming the monster" really means, quest items to fight something and quests determining the reward are a common thing.

Moreover people who want no instances are more often than not willing to compromise, it is you who wants do to things when you want, i am able not to play during peak hours so that i can get a good spot later with less searching.

Maybe you just dont want to play Anarchy Online, have you considered that?

How about joining the fastest group/clan/whatever? How about starting a good group that will be fast enough? Oh, i see, contact with other people, nvm...

Flame on!

:)

Essentially it does, most people who want totally open, non-instanced games want anyone to be able to wander in or out of any battle at will.  All of the suggestions offered take that away.

Logic.  You're doing it wrong.

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by Banaghran

I miss active GMs and jailing for disruptive behavior :)

Flame on!

:)

Honestly, how can you do that?  Here's another AO example.  There are places in Shadowlands where groups camp for hours and hours on end, once all of those spots are taken, what are other groups that come along to do?  Groups there will scream if you even walk near their camped spots and they don't leave until they have wrung every bit of XP out of it they can.

So now what?

You obviously ban the campers for disruptive bahaviour.  Mobs belong to all the players and those feeling they have special rights to them just because they were there first are antisocial jerks.

Originally posted by Torik

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by Banaghran

I miss active GMs and jailing for disruptive behavior :)

Flame on!

:)

Honestly, how can you do that?  Here's another AO example.  There are places in Shadowlands where groups camp for hours and hours on end, once all of those spots are taken, what are other groups that come along to do?  Groups there will scream if you even walk near their camped spots and they don't leave until they have wrung every bit of XP out of it they can.

So now what?

You obviously ban the campers for disruptive bahaviour.  Mobs belong to all the players and those feeling they have special rights to them just because they were there first are antisocial jerks.

Diminishing the return players get from remaining in a certain location or increasing the return for travelling about could work toward that end without having to resort to banning. I think DAoC had code like that, and GW2 introduced something similar, as well.

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by Banaghran

How can i do what? Prefer that players willing to verbally harass other people are in jail instead of going unchecked in their own instance? Call it schadenfreude if you like.

As for you example

a) let them scream?

b) go to another server?

c) go grind somewhere else?

d) enlarge the area?

e) make the area less of a must to go there?

for starters.

Flame on!

:)

 

a)  It's fine if they scream, but if GMs are willing to kick you out because you're infringing on other people's camp site, what are you going to do?

b)  Only works if you have characters on other servers, I personally wish all games let you log into any server and use all of your characters there.  Plus the fact, it makes no difference because all of those camp spots are taken on all of the servers.

c)  So I ought to be denied content in a game I'm paying for?  Seriously?

d)  Try convincing the developers to do that.  Go ahead, try.

e)  So make the game worse?

How about just making the game available for anyone to play the way they want to play at any time?  Or is that too hard for you to get through your head?

a) why would they?

b) log in any server - bingo! , no difference - see e)

c) you are not entitled anything. seriously. will you demand the ability to drive a car at 200mph and not crash from the car salesman just because you bought that car?

d) happens all the time in rs, new areas with old mosters based on different prerequisites to enter as a convenience are added 

e) how?

Flame on!

:)

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by Banaghran

No it doesnt turn it into a instance, he didnt specify what "claiming the monster" really means, quest items to fight something and quests determining the reward are a common thing.

Moreover people who want no instances are more often than not willing to compromise, it is you who wants do to things when you want, i am able not to play during peak hours so that i can get a good spot later with less searching.

Maybe you just dont want to play Anarchy Online, have you considered that?

How about joining the fastest group/clan/whatever? How about starting a good group that will be fast enough? Oh, i see, contact with other people, nvm...

Flame on!

:)

Essentially it does, most people who want totally open, non-instanced games want anyone to be able to wander in or out of any battle at will.  All of the suggestions offered take that away.

Logic.  You're doing it wrong.

The greatest problem in these discussions are the wild assumptions on what the other side wants.

Especially if it can be used as a literary device of the "fallacy" kind.

Flame on!

:)

Originally posted by lizardbones

 

---

Originally posted by Banaghran

---

Originally posted by lizardbones  

---

Originally posted by Rasputin

---

Originally posted by lizardbones  

---

Originally posted by SpectralHunter

---

Originally posted by Cephus404

---

Originally posted by Magiknight The problems with an open world, ie kill stealing and ninjaing loot, can we dealt with other ways besides instancing. Instancing is for people who want a small game.

---

How do you propose to stop it entirely then?  How can it be dealt with so that those who don't want to be around it are never bothered by it again?

---

Developers should understand they can never meet the expectations of every player.  It's impossible.  If you try to please everyone, you'll end up pleasing no one.  At best, you can implement mechanisms to deter it but ksing and ninjaing will be around just like there's stealing in real life.   The best that developers can do is to create a game that caters to the type of player they are trying to attract.  For instance, I don't like FFA PvP and wouldn't play a game that has it.  But I wouldn't discourage companies to make them if there's a player base for it.  I most certainly wouldn't demand the company to change it for me.

---

Kill stealing can be dealt with by giving any player who hits a mob credit for the kill and making sure that mobs scale with the power of the player so that no player can one shot mobs. Loot stealing can be dealt with by giving each player a separate pile of loot. A player cannot steal another player's loot because they cannot touch or see the other player's loot.  

---

Making arbitrarities like that will fragment the world and reality almost as bad as instancing. What is what? What you see is NOT what you get. Reality will be twisted and warped, making a common frame of reference impossible.   It is a terrible solution. Instead take inspiration from the real world and make consequences for bad actions. Make it possible for bad players to be punished, either by the other players or by the system. Or both. Stuffing new fragmentations of reality on top is a poor solution.

---

If the real world was such a great place, then people wouldn't be trying to get out of the real world and into virtual ones. If having consequences for "bad" actions was such a great solution in the real world, it would, you know, stop people from engaging in that "bad" behavior. If virtual worlds were real worlds, they wouldn't be called virtual worlds. The goal is to stop a certain behavior, not mimic the real world. If you want to stop a particular behavior in a virtual world, you make it impossible.  

---

Tricky, there was a time when everyone kinda expected that this

 

http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Quick_Chat

will replace ingame chat.

Moreover you have to keep immersion and the "virtual reality" part in mind, handholding and  "no no no, bad boy, you cant do that" that appears in 1+ games tends to be offputting.

Flame on!

:)

---

GW2 is having plenty of success keeping people from harassing, kill stealing and taking loot. So is D3. I haven't heard anyone complaining about not being able to take another player's loot in either game. Neither game has anything close to 'realistic' rules in place.

Besides, immersion doesn't mean make a game like the real world, immersion means the player ignores everything outside of the game while they're playing it*. Tetris can be immersive. If being like the real world was a requirement, then no games would be immersive, because none of them would be realistic.

In a virtual world, if the goal is to stop a behavior, then you make it impossible. If you don't want people killing certain monsters, they are untouchable. If you don't want people to kill another player and take their gear, other players do not drop their gear when they are killed in PvP. If you don't want kill stealing and loot stealing, then you make it impossible to do so.

Whether the things made impossible makes a player feel more or less immersed in the game world depends on whether the player expects to be able to do these things in the game or not. If the player doesn't expect to be able to take another player's loot, when the player can't take another player's loot, they won't think it's odd and they'll continue on their way. If the player doesn't expect to be able to 'tag' a mob before another player can 'tag' the mob, then it won't seem odd that many players can hit and get credit for a mob kill. The players will continue on their merry way.

* Technically, it means providing information for a variety of senses at the same time. Having the viewer ignore sensory input outside of the entertainment medium doesn't seem to be part of the definition. This seems weird to me, but it's the result of something being immersive, not what immersive means.

 

Speaking of literary devices of the "fallacy" kind, how did we suddenly arrive at ffa pvp looting?

Im just saying, that sometimes you just cannot go too far.

D3 is a good example, do you think the players are overall happyer that they get heaps of useless loot because looting is private and 4 persons get 4x the loot from  a single mob and drops are too common overall ?

Flame on!

:)

Originally posted by Torik

You obviously ban the campers for disruptive bahaviour.  Mobs belong to all the players and those feeling they have special rights to them just because they were there first are antisocial jerks.

But camping isn't against the rules, it never has been and never will be.  The issue here is fair access to content.  If there are only 10 slots available to do that content and 11 people want to do it, there is unfair access to the content because someone has to do without, whether anyone is camping or not.

Make it instanced and it doesn't matter if 1 person, 10 people or 100 people want to do it at once, anyone can.  They also don't have to deal with people coming by and telling at them to hurry up, kill-stealing or anything else.  Everyone can take the time they want to take and no one will be inconvenienced by that.

There just are no rational reasons why these shouldn't be instances.

Been in EVE systems with 2000+ siding off.

It aint all that and a bag of chips. Lagg, gank, Lagg. And for the guy about to point out Ti-Di? Don't. Just don't.

Originally posted by free2play

Been in EVE systems with 2000+ siding off.

It aint all that and a bag of chips. Lagg, gank, Lagg. And for the guy about to point out Ti-Di? Don't. Just don't.

I don't think anyone is asking for 2,000 people to regularly be on the screen at once. Is that where you were going with that or did you accidently post to the wrong thread? Looking for the relevance here.

Originally posted by Rasputin

Who says, that spawning needs to be at fixed points? Who says that mobs should be incredibly stupid and only walk 10 meters away from their spawn point? What if they spawned randomly and could wander as they liked?

Whoops, suddenly you don't have groups camping spawn points and therefore no killstealers camping the same groups.

You will have an open game, and if any killstealing takes place, it will be completely by chance, because two groups happen upon the same mob at the same time. And it will probably be a rare occasion.

 

Don't be so locked in how you think about MMO's. Noone says they have to be like the EQ-line of clones.

Not a single one replied to what I quote. Why not? It is an obvious solution. Yes, it is not the EQ-formula, but that is not necessarily what we are discussing, is it?

So instead of a solution, people want levels and levels of skizofrenic systems, warping reality, so they can save their very narrow type of gameplay? Which is artificial and boring in the first place, and so incredibly outdated and outdone.

Look forward guys.

---

Originally posted by Rasputin

---

Originally posted by Rasputin Who says, that spawning needs to be at fixed points? Who says that mobs should be incredibly stupid and only walk 10 meters away from their spawn point? What if they spawned randomly and could wander as they liked? Whoops, suddenly you don't have groups camping spawn points and therefore no killstealers camping the same groups. You will have an open game, and if any killstealing takes place, it will be completely by chance, because two groups happen upon the same mob at the same time. And it will probably be a rare occasion.   Don't be so locked in how you think about MMO's. Noone says they have to be like the EQ-line of clones.

---

Not a single one replied to what I quote. Why not? It is an obvious solution. Yes, it is not the EQ-formula, but that is not necessarily what we are discussing, is it?

So instead of a solution, people want levels and levels of skizofrenic systems, warping reality, so they can save their very narrow type of gameplay? Which is artificial and boring in the first place, and so incredibly outdated and outdone.

Look forward guys.

---