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
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Are powerful guilds a problem for PvP?
This blog has been a place in which the conflict between the hardcore and the casual gamers in games like World of Warcraft has been extensively discussed. But most of the real casual players in WoW aren't really bothered. The conflict is purely one of jealousy, fighting about abstract things like the attention of developers. It is fought on message boards, while being nearly invisible in the game itself. The casual player with his dozens of low level alts doesn't care that there are hardcore raiders loaded with epics, and the raider doesn't mind the casual much either. As long as they are all doing PvE, they barely notice each other.
The only place where things get a bit more annoying for the casual players in WoW is the small battleground PvP. A guild team from a powerful guild, well organized, having played together before, and being equipped with advanced technologies like voice chat is totally stomping a team of casual strangers into the ground. But in WoW that doesn't matter much, because you don't lose anything by losing in PvP, you actually get a prize for losing. And PvP isn't really the central point of World of Warcraft anyway.
But I'm wondering what will happen in all those new games now postponed into 2008 which proudly proclaim being more about PvP. The one thing that will undoubtedly be the same as with WoW is that a well-organized hardcore PvP guild will easily beat up any opposition made up from unorganized casual players. Only that in a more PvP centric game that might matter a lot more. There might be actual losses involved when losing in PvP, loss of xp or items (or ships in EVE-like games). And even if losing in PvP doesn't cost you xp or gold, at the very least you didn't achieve your PvP objective.
I am very much afraid that a handful of powerful guilds will dominate the battles in realm vs. realm types of PvP. The casual players will at best just be extras on the battlefield, at worst they'll be the eternal victims. And there is a certain logic to it, a well-organized guild *should* be much better in PvP than a bunch of casuals. Only that while the hardcore are more visible, and online a lot more than the casuals, the casual players are actually more numerous when you count subscriptions. In a PvE-centric game the silent majority of casual players isn't bothered by the hardcore minority, as the casuals can still advance at their own pace, killing computer controlled monsters that don't mind getting slaughtered. In a PvP-centric game you can't win without somebody else losing. And paying a monthly fee for losing all the time isn't very attractive. Casual players with no desire to raise their effort to that of the hardcore will quickly find themselves stuck, not able to achieve anything in PvP, and getting their butts handed to them when getting anywhere near it.
What is missing in all forms of PvP I've seen up to now is some sort of fair pairing system, which makes the best PvP players fight against each other, and has the less good PvPers battle against equally bad opponents. Just like in the real world the little league teams don't play against the Red Sox, in a MMORPG the PvP should be more league structured and not a free-for-all. You need to get every player into a situation where he wins sometimes and loses sometimes, not having the best win all the time and the least good never win. Because if the least good lose all they time, sooner or later they will quit, at which point another group is going to be the least good, and the player base will erode from below. And even for the powerful guilds it is probably more fun to battle somebody who is actually putting up a fight. But besides the WoW arenas I don't see any game even trying something in that direction. Which makes me doubt that the PvP games of 2008 are going to be a huge commercial success.
- posted by Tobold @ 3:30 PM Permanent Link
Comments:
<< Home
Newer› ‹Older
Aren't we all 'casual' gamers? Because imho 'not-casual' means 'professional'...and barely anybody plays a game for money (ok granted, there may be some in the far east... :)
# posted by 
: 30/10/07 16:28
: 30/10/07 16:28
I think Guild wars pretty much covers your requirements for a multi-level PVP game. There really is something for every level of ability - including random arenas (join a random group of other players) team arenas (go in with your own team), organised tournaments and ranking ladders (both individual and guild). You can see the variety of pvp competitions available here: Guild Wars Wiki
there definitely needs to be a way to even things up between groups..but for the moment i'm content, as long as i'm getting my one token per game ;)
# posted by : 30/10/07 17:00
: 30/10/07 17:00
Between the two big pvp games coming out I see a big difference. AoC is basically all about big guilds fighting each other. I really don't see any fun in being in a small guild with friends in that game. With the city to city fighting it just seems more about controlling your city and I can imagine a powerful guild dominating that style of play.
With WAR it seems that with faction controlled cities instead of player run, that yes a powerful guild would help but it will need more than just it's own guild to take other cities. So maybe you are correct that you would be an extra but as long as I am helping in the battle and feel like I contribute than it won't matter to me.
Maybe I will be wrong but that's what I am hoping.
With WAR it seems that with faction controlled cities instead of player run, that yes a powerful guild would help but it will need more than just it's own guild to take other cities. So maybe you are correct that you would be an extra but as long as I am helping in the battle and feel like I contribute than it won't matter to me.
Maybe I will be wrong but that's what I am hoping.
# posted by : 30/10/07 17:04
: 30/10/07 17:04
Well, WoW has this hugely announced matchmaking system. The reason why you don't hear or notice it anymore is because it's set so loosely that it barely has any influence on who's getting paired up with whom in the first place. Considering there's always 20 BGs running in parallel I have no doubts that it'd only increase waiting times by like 5 minutes, on top of the 30 there are already (in some battlegroups, for alliance, yadda yadda), to make for a much fairer PvP system.
I guess the main reason for them not tweaking it too much though is money: People who play a lot of PvP partially do so because they like pwning noobs. Pair them up only with equally geared players, no pwning noobs anymore, so they stop playing altogether. That's only speculation of course.
I'm looking forward to other games who do this better. Games where skill plays a larger part in PvP battles certainly seem to be the key there, as the Battlefield series shows - you only marginally gear up, yet the gain in skill makes more than up for that; a new player with all the unlocks available wouldn't stand a chance against a pro with just the stock equipment. Compare this situation to WoW, where you can totally suck in Tier whatever-the-newest-one-is and beat a green-geared PvP pro without even trying.
I guess the main reason for them not tweaking it too much though is money: People who play a lot of PvP partially do so because they like pwning noobs. Pair them up only with equally geared players, no pwning noobs anymore, so they stop playing altogether. That's only speculation of course.
I'm looking forward to other games who do this better. Games where skill plays a larger part in PvP battles certainly seem to be the key there, as the Battlefield series shows - you only marginally gear up, yet the gain in skill makes more than up for that; a new player with all the unlocks available wouldn't stand a chance against a pro with just the stock equipment. Compare this situation to WoW, where you can totally suck in Tier whatever-the-newest-one-is and beat a green-geared PvP pro without even trying.
Not sure I agree with your point of view. Having just played a MMORPG where PvP was barely a factor, I think what gamers are looking for is more depth to the games other than just grinding out quest. If the PvP system is built correctly then I don't think only the power full guilds will be the ones having all the fun.
# posted by : 30/10/07 19:25
: 30/10/07 19:25
Or set your system up like EVE, where even the 'carebear' players can be part of an Alliance that is PvP focused, and still contribute to the war effort in a very meaningful way.
I think WAR is safe from the uber-guild issue because it is RvR and not group vs group. No idea about AoC.
I think WAR is safe from the uber-guild issue because it is RvR and not group vs group. No idea about AoC.
# posted by : 30/10/07 20:19
: 30/10/07 20:19
Now I can't get this image out of my head of the Red Sox winning against a little league team 103-0, and the kids sitting around crying and Josh Becket yells "QQ more newb! learn to play!" and kicks dirt in a kids face, and the whole team laughs at the kids and their parents.
# posted by : 30/10/07 20:40
: 30/10/07 20:40
Even though the game itself never quite reached the levels it should have, Planetside was probably the most fun PVP you could have being truly casual even though there were repeated examples of how deadly a good group working together could be. Ultimately I got to know many people who really didn't enjoy grouping and yet were amazing at the game and could actually make a difference single-handedly. The groups who worked together could turn a base battle no problem, but they were few and far between. Most people just logged on to kill an hour.
Games where skill plays a larger part in PvP battles certainly seem to be the key there, as the Battlefield series shows - you only marginally gear up, yet the gain in skill makes more than up for that; a new player with all the unlocks available wouldn't stand a chance against a pro with just the stock equipment. Compare this situation to WoW, where you can totally suck in Tier whatever-the-newest-one-is and beat a green-geared PvP pro without even trying.
Yes I've been saying that too for a long time. WoW has HUGE upgrades in gear and it's just way, way, way too much to fit into a system where PvP is supposed to be taken at least somewhat seriously. Upgrades sure, but they should damn well only be slight upgrades.
About the pairing system mentioned in Tobold's post, I read about Fury boasting about a very fair pairing system. I don't know how that worked but I tried the game briefly and it didn't seem very fun so I gave it up.
Yes I've been saying that too for a long time. WoW has HUGE upgrades in gear and it's just way, way, way too much to fit into a system where PvP is supposed to be taken at least somewhat seriously. Upgrades sure, but they should damn well only be slight upgrades.
About the pairing system mentioned in Tobold's post, I read about Fury boasting about a very fair pairing system. I don't know how that worked but I tried the game briefly and it didn't seem very fun so I gave it up.
# posted by : 30/10/07 23:09
: 30/10/07 23:09
The affect that an organized guild has on PvP combat is proportional to the scale of the battle. WoW is very vulnerable to 'gank squads' and epic-ed out guild groups running rampant because the scale is so small. 10-15 people per side is ripe for exploitation. The larger the scale of the battle, the harder it is for a single well equipped guild to dominate it. Dark Age of Camelot had very large scale battles and no single guild was able to dominate play. Considering WAR is being developed by the same people, I would hope for the same.
Shadowbane (*shudder*) was free-for-all pvp unless you joined a guild, at which point it became guild-vs-guild. Even then, the super equipped guilds usually couldn't wipe out the weaker guilds by themselves, it took alliances, i.e. superior numbers.
In short, the issue is actually a flaw with the way WoW designed PvP, rather than a general issue with PvP itself. I have high hopes for the games that are being designed with PvP in mind, rather than PvP as an afterthought.
Shadowbane (*shudder*) was free-for-all pvp unless you joined a guild, at which point it became guild-vs-guild. Even then, the super equipped guilds usually couldn't wipe out the weaker guilds by themselves, it took alliances, i.e. superior numbers.
In short, the issue is actually a flaw with the way WoW designed PvP, rather than a general issue with PvP itself. I have high hopes for the games that are being designed with PvP in mind, rather than PvP as an afterthought.
# posted by : 30/10/07 23:33
: 30/10/07 23:33
The larger the scale of the battle, the harder it is for a single well equipped guild to dominate it. Dark Age of Camelot had very large scale battles and no single guild was able to dominate play. Considering WAR is being developed by the same people, I would hope for the same.
Actually, Daoc turned into a game where you ran with a "FG" (Full Group) through the frontiers looking for other FGs or less to fight. If you joined a battle where two FGs fought you were called a zerger by both fighting parties, even if you were alone. This is at least on the EU servers.
So basically you had to be part of a guild that ran a FG in the frontiers very regularly or spend your time in the frontiers solo (getting ganked by any FG) or join one of the few PuG FGs (getting ganked by guild FGs).
Of course during RRs (Relic Raids) that didn't apply, but then almost everyone was too lagged to make a difference anyway. :)
I often praise Daoc as the near perfect PvP game for me, but this was one of it's drawbacks.
Powerful guilds will use any excuse available to dominate that they are able to I'm sad to say.
Actually, Daoc turned into a game where you ran with a "FG" (Full Group) through the frontiers looking for other FGs or less to fight. If you joined a battle where two FGs fought you were called a zerger by both fighting parties, even if you were alone. This is at least on the EU servers.
So basically you had to be part of a guild that ran a FG in the frontiers very regularly or spend your time in the frontiers solo (getting ganked by any FG) or join one of the few PuG FGs (getting ganked by guild FGs).
Of course during RRs (Relic Raids) that didn't apply, but then almost everyone was too lagged to make a difference anyway. :)
I often praise Daoc as the near perfect PvP game for me, but this was one of it's drawbacks.
Powerful guilds will use any excuse available to dominate that they are able to I'm sad to say.
# posted by : 31/10/07 07:11
: 31/10/07 07:11
Like others have said, World of Warcraft has both a matchmaking system for battlegrounds and arenas. However, it is trying to accomplish two conflicting goals: Match players with appropiate opponents and reduce queue times. Reducing queue times requires the server to match you with any other players who are available, but matching according to gear/skill/rating might require you to wait until an appropiate opponent is available. Currently, it tries to do both and accomplishes only the latter. If you queue up for an Arena match and only that voice-chat-using, sponsor-supported 2.8k+ rating team is in the queue with you.. that's who you'll fight.
While increasing the player pool (merging battlegroups) might alleviate the problem somewhat, it doesn't eliminate the original problem. If you want gear/skill/rating matching, you have to be willing to wait until an appropiate opponent is available.
While increasing the player pool (merging battlegroups) might alleviate the problem somewhat, it doesn't eliminate the original problem. If you want gear/skill/rating matching, you have to be willing to wait until an appropiate opponent is available.
Everybody can get an own PvP gear in nearly no time.
Start with the pvp rewards and get over weeks some of the gladiator sets to raise the equip.
You dont need to raid pvp 24/7 to be the "owner" you just need the interest of l2p your own character.
I've seen random groups, low equipped , owning much better equipped one.
Just my two cents.
Start with the pvp rewards and get over weeks some of the gladiator sets to raise the equip.
You dont need to raid pvp 24/7 to be the "owner" you just need the interest of l2p your own character.
I've seen random groups, low equipped , owning much better equipped one.
Just my two cents.
# posted by : 31/10/07 09:49
: 31/10/07 09:49
Ymir is right on the money. Anybody moaning about PVE gear making the difference in PVP hasn't been playing WoW lately or hasn't been playing intelligently. I have Black Temple and Mt. Hyjal gear and I wear none of it when I PVP. I wear the gear I earned with honor and arena points.
Resilience and stamina make all the difference in PVP now. Even the PVE weapons you can earn aren't better than what you can earn in the arena with a little bit of time. People complaining about PVE gear being a difference in battlegrounds are making an argument that's been irrelevant for 9 months or so.
Resilience and stamina make all the difference in PVP now. Even the PVE weapons you can earn aren't better than what you can earn in the arena with a little bit of time. People complaining about PVE gear being a difference in battlegrounds are making an argument that's been irrelevant for 9 months or so.
@ Albatross:
I think you're right, and you're wrong. Blizzard finally got the gear correct to split the PvE from the PvP game, outside of the weapons. Resilience, stamina, etc. stacked on PvP gear - spell damage, less stamina in favor or intellect, mp5, etc. for PvE gear.
What is still fubar is no matter that I have over 320 resilience (a low number anymore, I admit, but I had that amount of resilience prior to season 2 gear), my team has never broken a 1500 point rating. Why? Because I choose to play my druid with a feral spec with my wife and good friend, a shadow priest and a paladin. It's not an optimized group matrix for higher tier arena - far too susceptible to spell interrupts, etc. But I want to play with my friends, and that is where Blizzard is FUNDAMENTALLY screwing the pooch.
They need to look at WoW, identify any barrier that exists between friends/spouses/whatever playing together, and lower (or remove completely), those barriers. WoW's meteoric rise to fame was primarily fueled by friends telling one another about the game and sucking them in. Once my friends started playing WoW, the different amounts of time we had to commit to the game only widened the gap in levels, forcing us to either reroll, or stop characters so the other(s) could catch up.
Same in PvP, the game is said to be balanced around group play, but that's patently misleading. WoW is balanced around particular group play. It is the case that different classes can fill different roles, but that wasn't the case until TBC was released.
I'm just waiting for Blizz to figure out how to fix the "I want to play with my friends" issue across the board.
I think you're right, and you're wrong. Blizzard finally got the gear correct to split the PvE from the PvP game, outside of the weapons. Resilience, stamina, etc. stacked on PvP gear - spell damage, less stamina in favor or intellect, mp5, etc. for PvE gear.
What is still fubar is no matter that I have over 320 resilience (a low number anymore, I admit, but I had that amount of resilience prior to season 2 gear), my team has never broken a 1500 point rating. Why? Because I choose to play my druid with a feral spec with my wife and good friend, a shadow priest and a paladin. It's not an optimized group matrix for higher tier arena - far too susceptible to spell interrupts, etc. But I want to play with my friends, and that is where Blizzard is FUNDAMENTALLY screwing the pooch.
They need to look at WoW, identify any barrier that exists between friends/spouses/whatever playing together, and lower (or remove completely), those barriers. WoW's meteoric rise to fame was primarily fueled by friends telling one another about the game and sucking them in. Once my friends started playing WoW, the different amounts of time we had to commit to the game only widened the gap in levels, forcing us to either reroll, or stop characters so the other(s) could catch up.
Same in PvP, the game is said to be balanced around group play, but that's patently misleading. WoW is balanced around particular group play. It is the case that different classes can fill different roles, but that wasn't the case until TBC was released.
I'm just waiting for Blizz to figure out how to fix the "I want to play with my friends" issue across the board.
Re: Albatross and Ymir:
Yes that's the usual response, basically "l2p and gear up n00b!!".
Why? Why is the system at all built around gear dependancy? And in such enormous amounts on top of that? When you get to the cap and think you can enjoy PvP, then no, you have to start leveling again, and this time level the gear.
As long as you know how to play your character decently you should be able to enter play and enjoy it to some extent. That doesn't happen when you have to level your gear before being able to enjoy it.
Oh, and before you repeat your "l2p" mantra, I do. I could go on about that but that wouldn't matter, you would still keep repeating it.
Yes that's the usual response, basically "l2p and gear up n00b!!".
Why? Why is the system at all built around gear dependancy? And in such enormous amounts on top of that? When you get to the cap and think you can enjoy PvP, then no, you have to start leveling again, and this time level the gear.
As long as you know how to play your character decently you should be able to enter play and enjoy it to some extent. That doesn't happen when you have to level your gear before being able to enjoy it.
Oh, and before you repeat your "l2p" mantra, I do. I could go on about that but that wouldn't matter, you would still keep repeating it.
# posted by : 31/10/07 17:49
: 31/10/07 17:49
@magrothj:
I actually posted a reasonable explanation that had nothing to do with l2p. The fact that you could only read it as such seems to indicate a problem that you specifically have, and has nothing to do with what I posted.
Why should you have to earn gear to better handle PVP? Why should you have to run 5 mans to get gear to better handle Karazhan? Why do you have to run Karazhan to get better gear for SSC? It's a game. It's a hamster wheel. This is not a new concept. They have to keep moving the carrot (new honor/arena point rewards) in order to keep people interested.
I play WoW about 15 hours each week. Not a lot by any stretch of the imagination. In that small period of time I raid high level instances and also find a little bit of time to PVP. In EVERY battleground that I enter I have more PVP gear than 95% of the people I'm there with. I'm willing to bet that most of the people who have worse PVP gear than me play more than I do each month.
Most people don't want to exert the effort to improve. That's fine, as long as they're having fun doing that. Moaning and blowing off legitimate points because the game isn't tailor made for the microscopic viewpoint you have of the game is pointless. Warcraft was built so that PVE upgrades were necessary in order to complete the next PVE dungeon. Those PVE piece of gear distorted PVP horribly, made it a joke. Warcraft found a reasonable solution which ANYBODY who bothers playing for 2 hours a week can utilize, and yet you still moan.
@blisster:
That's a very solid point. My PVP teams have been a hodge-podge of classes and we almost never come close to what you'd think of us an ideal group composition. Most of my games are spent in 2v2 with a friend and neither of us are PVP spec and we certainly aren't classes that should reasonably be playing together. I'll keep my team, and have fun with my friends and not worry about weapons or shoulders due to point requirement. Luckily, that's easy for me to say as I have the opportunity to upgrade through PVE which others aren't so lucky to have.
I actually posted a reasonable explanation that had nothing to do with l2p. The fact that you could only read it as such seems to indicate a problem that you specifically have, and has nothing to do with what I posted.
Why should you have to earn gear to better handle PVP? Why should you have to run 5 mans to get gear to better handle Karazhan? Why do you have to run Karazhan to get better gear for SSC? It's a game. It's a hamster wheel. This is not a new concept. They have to keep moving the carrot (new honor/arena point rewards) in order to keep people interested.
I play WoW about 15 hours each week. Not a lot by any stretch of the imagination. In that small period of time I raid high level instances and also find a little bit of time to PVP. In EVERY battleground that I enter I have more PVP gear than 95% of the people I'm there with. I'm willing to bet that most of the people who have worse PVP gear than me play more than I do each month.
Most people don't want to exert the effort to improve. That's fine, as long as they're having fun doing that. Moaning and blowing off legitimate points because the game isn't tailor made for the microscopic viewpoint you have of the game is pointless. Warcraft was built so that PVE upgrades were necessary in order to complete the next PVE dungeon. Those PVE piece of gear distorted PVP horribly, made it a joke. Warcraft found a reasonable solution which ANYBODY who bothers playing for 2 hours a week can utilize, and yet you still moan.
@blisster:
That's a very solid point. My PVP teams have been a hodge-podge of classes and we almost never come close to what you'd think of us an ideal group composition. Most of my games are spent in 2v2 with a friend and neither of us are PVP spec and we certainly aren't classes that should reasonably be playing together. I'll keep my team, and have fun with my friends and not worry about weapons or shoulders due to point requirement. Luckily, that's easy for me to say as I have the opportunity to upgrade through PVE which others aren't so lucky to have.
My WoW paladin can beat people with scarlet monastery gear in BG's. Some classes are very gear dpendant tho...
One of the ironic gameplay issues I remember from playing WoW BG's would be going againsts classes that were only/mostly effect with cheap tactics (lvl 19 rogues/hunters ie). I would play my paladin decked out with stam and str gear and stack up potions to counter the gank strategies and thoroughly enjoyed breaking their strategy into a never ending kiting battle, often with my team pulling tide and winning.
This works in the 19 bg's for defensive classes and healer classes. Hunters could spam only soo many stings on my while I simply cleansed them away at next to no cost to myself, once their mp was gone they often would get killed so theyr spawn up a new mana bar...
It is all good fun when tere is smart competition, but honestly I felt it was a waste to be enjoying BG's when WoW has soo much other content to try out... BC, caused some ofthe worst guild drama many ppl's friends left/quit and WoW took is last payment from myself for now..
My best suggestion for Wow would be to release a BG-only version of the game called WOW-lite or something and make it mod-able just as warcraft 3, and starcraft maps were. This would definatly revitalized the part of WoW I enjoyed, id pay monthly for it as well.
One of the ironic gameplay issues I remember from playing WoW BG's would be going againsts classes that were only/mostly effect with cheap tactics (lvl 19 rogues/hunters ie). I would play my paladin decked out with stam and str gear and stack up potions to counter the gank strategies and thoroughly enjoyed breaking their strategy into a never ending kiting battle, often with my team pulling tide and winning.
This works in the 19 bg's for defensive classes and healer classes. Hunters could spam only soo many stings on my while I simply cleansed them away at next to no cost to myself, once their mp was gone they often would get killed so theyr spawn up a new mana bar...
It is all good fun when tere is smart competition, but honestly I felt it was a waste to be enjoying BG's when WoW has soo much other content to try out... BC, caused some ofthe worst guild drama many ppl's friends left/quit and WoW took is last payment from myself for now..
My best suggestion for Wow would be to release a BG-only version of the game called WOW-lite or something and make it mod-able just as warcraft 3, and starcraft maps were. This would definatly revitalized the part of WoW I enjoyed, id pay monthly for it as well.
For some reason while reading this I thought mostly of DAOC. Where one side having the good guild on their team can really influence that side's chances of winning. I have also played a fair amount of CS in my day. I think it would be quite interesting to see some sort of CAL type league system implemented in games with PvP. Though such a thing would probably go against the lore in most games.
And paying a monthly fee for losing all the time isn't very attractive.
I hate to sound mean, but don't play the game if it's not attractive to you. Ever since Ultima Online MMOs have become more and more stale on the PvP side of things. I'm tired of this fair and balanced crap, it's suppose to be a war-like environment, not a sporting event!
What I don't understand is why the PvE crowd doesn't just find a game that already caters to their needs instead of diluting the PvP in a game that's centered around PvP?
I think I'm going to start playing LOTR and complain on the forums that it should be a FFA PvP game! Wait, maybe if I just found a FFA PvP game instead that would be a better idea!
Before you think I'm some wolf that enjoys week noobs as prey, you're wrong. I'm a mediocre PvP'er at best, and I personally enjoy the challenge of facing groups with superior numbers & skills. The thing that draws me to PvP is the unknown; the heart pounding action of not knowing who is, or how many, are around the next corner.
I canceled WoW because I always knew it was 10 vs. 10, or 15 vs. 15 on a small map where every corner is known. I yearn for the days of Ultima Online when I had no idea who was my friend, and who was my enemy, and I could be killed at any time. That was excitement worth paying for! I'm glad some of the upcoming MMOs are designing their game with PvP in mind, and I hope those more interested in PvE will just find another game and not moan about a game not made for their playstyle.
/rant off
I hate to sound mean, but don't play the game if it's not attractive to you. Ever since Ultima Online MMOs have become more and more stale on the PvP side of things. I'm tired of this fair and balanced crap, it's suppose to be a war-like environment, not a sporting event!
What I don't understand is why the PvE crowd doesn't just find a game that already caters to their needs instead of diluting the PvP in a game that's centered around PvP?
I think I'm going to start playing LOTR and complain on the forums that it should be a FFA PvP game! Wait, maybe if I just found a FFA PvP game instead that would be a better idea!
Before you think I'm some wolf that enjoys week noobs as prey, you're wrong. I'm a mediocre PvP'er at best, and I personally enjoy the challenge of facing groups with superior numbers & skills. The thing that draws me to PvP is the unknown; the heart pounding action of not knowing who is, or how many, are around the next corner.
I canceled WoW because I always knew it was 10 vs. 10, or 15 vs. 15 on a small map where every corner is known. I yearn for the days of Ultima Online when I had no idea who was my friend, and who was my enemy, and I could be killed at any time. That was excitement worth paying for! I'm glad some of the upcoming MMOs are designing their game with PvP in mind, and I hope those more interested in PvE will just find another game and not moan about a game not made for their playstyle.
/rant off
# posted by : 1/11/07 22:01
: 1/11/07 22:01
I yearn for the days of Ultima Online when I had no idea who was my friend, and who was my enemy, and I could be killed at any time. That was excitement worth paying for! I'm glad some of the upcoming MMOs are designing their game with PvP in mind, and I hope those more interested in PvE will just find another game and not moan about a game not made for their playstyle.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the pre-Trammel UO PvP style is deader than dead and has absolutely zero chance of survival. There is a handful of fans of this sort of PvP talking about the good ol' days, but in reality the times were never that good. They were only good for the handful of people who liked killing and being killed, but the majority of players didn't. Trammel was introduced to save UO from all the players running away from that PvP. And post-Trammel a full 90% of the UO player base was playing on the PvP-free side of the world.
For you pre-Trammel UO might have been great. But for the rest of the world it was the proof that unlimited PvP didn't work. All the games coming out with marketing telling you they are about PvP will have a very much sanitized form of PvP, where players can always opt out of doing PvP and the consequences of being killed in PvP are minor. Pre-Trammel UO or anything like it will never be back.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the pre-Trammel UO PvP style is deader than dead and has absolutely zero chance of survival. There is a handful of fans of this sort of PvP talking about the good ol' days, but in reality the times were never that good. They were only good for the handful of people who liked killing and being killed, but the majority of players didn't. Trammel was introduced to save UO from all the players running away from that PvP. And post-Trammel a full 90% of the UO player base was playing on the PvP-free side of the world.
For you pre-Trammel UO might have been great. But for the rest of the world it was the proof that unlimited PvP didn't work. All the games coming out with marketing telling you they are about PvP will have a very much sanitized form of PvP, where players can always opt out of doing PvP and the consequences of being killed in PvP are minor. Pre-Trammel UO or anything like it will never be back.
Some games do the pve part by just instancing, and when you have had enough of mobslaying, you can join the permanent side of the gameworld.
What I dislike is games that offer no open ended gameplahy.
Post a Comment
What I dislike is games that offer no open ended gameplahy.
<< Home
