www.Tobold.com
Tobold@GMail.com
A blog with my thoughts regarding games I am playing and other stuff in life. Please read my Terms of Service
RSS Feed
Monday, October 09, 2006
Saylah on LOTRO PvP
Saylah of Mystic Worlds has a short rant with interesting information on the PvP planned for Lord of the Rings Online. Why would PvP in a MMORPG be interesting to anyone? Because in LOTRO you can only play the good guys, so no orc vs. elves PvP possible, and Turbine had to come up with something else.
The solution is allowing players to turn into monsters, and then having Player versus Monster Players combat. Which, unlike Saylah, I think is basically a good idea. Transforming into a monster for some time is going to be popular. I *do* agree with Saylah that making PvMP both consensual *and* restricted to special PvMP zones is a bit silly. I'm no fan of unlimited PvP, but either restricting it to certain zones, or to turning a PvP flag on would suffice, both is overkill.
Unlike "normal" ganking in other PvP games, the monster variant automatically has more limited griefing potential, because it seems your power as a monster is determined by your monster points, not by the power of your character. What happens often in other games is that people play PvE for all its worth, get immensely powerful, then get immensely bored, and start ganking newbies using the powers they accumulated. Hey, even the South Park episode on World of Warcraft was like that. I would imagine that if your monster power is independant of your character level and power, you automatically get less of these bored high-level gankers.
You can often hear me saying that WoW PvP isn't very good. And in fact there are lots of things wrong with the current honor system in WoW. But World of Warcraft got one major thing right: PvP has to be an alternative occupation in a PvE game to be permanently successful. The basic idea of games like Archlord, where your standing in the game is defined by PvP, and PvE is only a means to the end of getting stronger for PvP, is flawed. In a PvE game everybody can win. In a PvP game by definition there have to be losers. And getting people to pay for playing losers is always going to be a hard sell. I think Lord of the Rings Online got this one right as well, but we'll have to see how it actually plays out.
- posted by Tobold @ 4:40 PM Permanent Link
Comments:
<< Home
Newer› ‹Older
Well I checked the link to the official page explaining how it would work, but I must say that I'm not totally convinced that it's both consensual (in the meaning of a "PvP switch" or duel system or something like that) and restricted to zones. Maybe I missed something but this is what I found:
Players, on the other hand, will have optional series of quests that will pit them against monster players, giving them reasons to go out and mix it up. PvMP is optional and consensual – you won't "stumble across" a monster player. PvMP will be allowed in specially delineated areas of the game. Some of these areas will be instanced, others will be accessible only through travel NPCs. Either way, you won't need to worry about an orc running through the Shire smacking Hobbits who are just minding their own business and eating pie.
The way I'm interpreting it this "PvMP" is consensual THROUGH these zones, not in addition to it. Much like Daoc RvR. But then again I might also just not see the whole picture. There could be dev posts here and there clarifying this which I haven't seen.
In any case this actually sounds a bit cool to me. I have no idea how it would be once live, but in theory it really sounds cool.
Players, on the other hand, will have optional series of quests that will pit them against monster players, giving them reasons to go out and mix it up. PvMP is optional and consensual – you won't "stumble across" a monster player. PvMP will be allowed in specially delineated areas of the game. Some of these areas will be instanced, others will be accessible only through travel NPCs. Either way, you won't need to worry about an orc running through the Shire smacking Hobbits who are just minding their own business and eating pie.
The way I'm interpreting it this "PvMP" is consensual THROUGH these zones, not in addition to it. Much like Daoc RvR. But then again I might also just not see the whole picture. There could be dev posts here and there clarifying this which I haven't seen.
In any case this actually sounds a bit cool to me. I have no idea how it would be once live, but in theory it really sounds cool.
# posted by 
: 9/10/06 19:22
: 9/10/06 19:22
Your logic is flawed; in PvP games, there are no defined winners or losers. Sure, someone can kill you and win a particular encounter, but does hat make you "lose" the game? Hell no! People with the PvP mindset will be thinking the whole time, "OhgodohgodImmadiehelp!" same as everyone else but AFTERWARDS they will think about getting to a higher level and ganking the shit out of that guy. At least that's how it worked for me -- some great motivation right there.
Besides, people who play PvP are prepared to die. That's just the way it works. If you're not a PvPer, that's fine, just stay on your carebear server and quit bashing a gameplay preference that doesn't affect PvEers at all.
That's not to say Archlord doesn't suck. It does, but not because it's PvP-focused.
Besides, people who play PvP are prepared to die. That's just the way it works. If you're not a PvPer, that's fine, just stay on your carebear server and quit bashing a gameplay preference that doesn't affect PvEers at all.
That's not to say Archlord doesn't suck. It does, but not because it's PvP-focused.
# posted by : 10/10/06 00:20
: 10/10/06 00:20
in PvP games, there are no defined winners or losers
Not on the single-combat level. I have no problems getting killed 50 times during one evening where I play AV. But that is because at the larger level, at the end of that AV evening I will have gained x Frostwolf reputation, and advanced my character.
Now if my goal was to become High Warlord in WoW, or Archlord in Archlord, I would quickly find out that I couldn't reach that goal, because somebody else is always playing more than me. Somebody else would be the winner, because there can be only one Archlord, and I would be permanently losing.
Imagine PvE worked in a way where every time the guy with the most xp killed an orc and gained 100 xp, the number of xp for everybody else to gain a level would go up by 100 xp. Imagine WoW with a relative PvE ranking system, with only one level 60 allowed, and some pyramid allowing lets say 10 level 59, 20 level 58, etc. Imagine losing levels because you were on holiday for a week and other people went up in level, pushing you down. That is how the current PvP rank in WoW works, and that is how Archlord works, and it sucks.
Not on the single-combat level. I have no problems getting killed 50 times during one evening where I play AV. But that is because at the larger level, at the end of that AV evening I will have gained x Frostwolf reputation, and advanced my character.
Now if my goal was to become High Warlord in WoW, or Archlord in Archlord, I would quickly find out that I couldn't reach that goal, because somebody else is always playing more than me. Somebody else would be the winner, because there can be only one Archlord, and I would be permanently losing.
Imagine PvE worked in a way where every time the guy with the most xp killed an orc and gained 100 xp, the number of xp for everybody else to gain a level would go up by 100 xp. Imagine WoW with a relative PvE ranking system, with only one level 60 allowed, and some pyramid allowing lets say 10 level 59, 20 level 58, etc. Imagine losing levels because you were on holiday for a week and other people went up in level, pushing you down. That is how the current PvP rank in WoW works, and that is how Archlord works, and it sucks.
Old idea, not impressed, and even if Turbine weren't absolutely vile people I'd take this with a grain of salt.
To not only have an opt-in policy for a supposed PVP setup based around players filling in for mob AI, for which Turbine is the textbook model of abject failure - pathetic!
But to *brag* about it! As if they were doing something groundbreaking and revolutionary.
If this didn't rank comically low on the list of compelling reasons to laugh at and scorn these peoeple --
oh wait
it *doesn't*
because modern day MMO players by and large don't believe they're participating in anything important, and it's never crossed their minds to know anything about the history of the form, because hey it's just a passing diversion! (to which they've devoted a thousand or more hours of their lives) ...and so LOTRO will come out, and Turbine will get away with the same disgusting behavior they got away with last time
and their customers will damned will deserve every slap in the face.
To not only have an opt-in policy for a supposed PVP setup based around players filling in for mob AI, for which Turbine is the textbook model of abject failure - pathetic!
But to *brag* about it! As if they were doing something groundbreaking and revolutionary.
If this didn't rank comically low on the list of compelling reasons to laugh at and scorn these peoeple --
oh wait
it *doesn't*
because modern day MMO players by and large don't believe they're participating in anything important, and it's never crossed their minds to know anything about the history of the form, because hey it's just a passing diversion! (to which they've devoted a thousand or more hours of their lives) ...and so LOTRO will come out, and Turbine will get away with the same disgusting behavior they got away with last time
and their customers will damned will deserve every slap in the face.
MMO players by and large don't believe they're participating in anything important
Which just shows that MMORPG players by and large are sensible people. Because the G in the acronym stands for Game, which by definition isn't important. Being able to devote a thousand or more hours of your life to something that isn't important is a luxury of civilization. But just because you spend a thousand hours collecting stamps, building model railroads, playing golf, or killing orcs doesn't make any of these activities important.
Which just shows that MMORPG players by and large are sensible people. Because the G in the acronym stands for Game, which by definition isn't important. Being able to devote a thousand or more hours of your life to something that isn't important is a luxury of civilization. But just because you spend a thousand hours collecting stamps, building model railroads, playing golf, or killing orcs doesn't make any of these activities important.
My understanding is that it's not consentual. But the player playing the mob could hide among 'normal' ai mobs so the PCs would not even know until it's too late. The only certain zones restriction to me sounds like you can only go where those monsters normally spawn - just guessing from the article I read.
It's kind of a fun way to get around the lore problem and also the gear>skill problem. Though it does sound like you just grind on monsters to get to play higher level monsters ... so that's it's own grind in a way.
It would make encounters a lot more interesting - there was a cartoon movie recently where one of the lines was "An intelligent guard? Who've have thunk?"
Post a Comment
It's kind of a fun way to get around the lore problem and also the gear>skill problem. Though it does sound like you just grind on monsters to get to play higher level monsters ... so that's it's own grind in a way.
It would make encounters a lot more interesting - there was a cartoon movie recently where one of the lines was "An intelligent guard? Who've have thunk?"
# posted by : 12/10/06 21:23
: 12/10/06 21:23<< Home
