Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

New MMO's with REAL PvP?

17891113

Posts

  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Garthor wrote: »
    I think he's frustrated because they are arguing over game mechanics that he knows nothing about and hasn't seen in action.

    It'd be like someone with a PhD on Benjamin Franklin's life arguing with someone whose only knowledge of Ben came from a wikipedia article. Of course the PhD is gonna expect you to have more than a rudimentary knowledge of the man before you pipe in with your opinion of him.

    I have a PhD in you are a goddamn moron.

    Let me explain again. I'm going to type this slowly for you.

    People are talking about EVE. This implies that they want to start a discussion about EVE. Part of this discussion would be "is EVE good or not?" They are immediately dismissing anybody who doesn't play the game as having a worthless opinion - because they don't play the game. People who play the game will, necessarily, have similar opinions on whether EVE is good or not. Therefore, they are saying, "You are not allowed to disagree with us." This makes them pompous little fuckwits, which fits very nicely with all the other people I've seen advocating that game.

    Also: I've played EVE. It sucked. Somebody is going to say, "Well that's because you lost your ship and can't deal with it you baby." That's why it sucks. Because of people like that.

    You are always so hostile Garthor, I'm sorry that you feel the need to take it out on me. I'm a PvPer, not an anger management counselor.

    I realize that people are talking about EVE. I see that you said that you played EVE, and subsequently did not list how long you played. I'm curious, Garthor, how long did you play before you quit? Also, it's fairly obvious from your preemptive defense that you did quit because your ship got destroyed. Do you also quit whenever you are setback in sports? In football, if your team suddenly fumbles, do you quit, or do you try and regain control to try again?

    It's a valid illustration and a pertinent question Garthor, I'm hoping you won't respond with more cursing and intellect bashing. The angry crafter is suddenly becoming the archetype of people defending your side.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Both positions have some validity, but the only one that matters financially is the initial reaction.

    Casual audiences are where the money is at, Eve doesn't grab them as well as WoW does.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • OboroOboro __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2007
    I played EVE for a few weeks but got frustrated when I learned that no amount of effort on my part could reduce the time it would take to do the things I want to do in the game. I had the ISK and a ship on which I could just barely mount a shitty cloaking unit, but training to Electronics V and subsequently Cloaking I would have taken an additional two weeks.

    All I wanted to do was see what it's like to fly a cloaking clunker. I didn't want to log on and farm ISK, or be a pawn in someone else's planning, or continue to mine/fire rockets at PvE duders. I didn't want to be a tackler, I wanted to do what I wanted to do, and EVE said "wait two weeks, and then log back in."

    So, somewhere in those two weeks I reactivated World of Warcraft and started doing things I liked/working towards things I liked. I never logged back into EVE.

    words
  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Both positions have some validity, but the only one that matters financially is the initial reaction.

    Casual audiences are where the money is at, Eve doesn't grab them as well as WoW does.

    I agree. The initial discussion was someone looking for a game with PvP the way it was meant to be done. I have no delusions about a game with the "real pvp" being described here toppling WoW. Here's the bottom line, some players want PvE with a PvP afterthought, and some people want PvP with a PvE afterthought. I know that PvE will always be the more financially reliable. We're still waiting for a game with PvP at the forefront to come out and capture the roughly 25% of us that are waiting for it.

    You can stay in WoW, and we'll move on to the RP friendly PvP game, everyone wins. It's fun to debate, but we all know the endgame here.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • OboroOboro __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2007
    lol 25%

    Most people don't describe a PvPMMORPG, they want a PvP game more in line with Guild Wars. When they start asking for more than that, they begin pushing it towards a game which is no longer PvP-friendly-- EVE, for what it is, is a minimalistic experience. You are your ship, and your ship is embroiled in an intragalactic war with some other ships. Ultima Online was a different sort of experience, and every new bit of content they added necessarily made it less PvP-friendly because PvP combat in a non-consensual sense would be entirely at odds with any new content a developer can add.

    Unless the PvP is the content, in which case you have PvP Guild Wars.

    words
  • GarthorGarthor Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    It's good to see that even when I flat-out say "somebody's going to say X and it's going to make them a fucking douche to have done so," they still say it. It really ties into the whole "this is the only real MMO and you're a goddamn moron if you disagree" vibe that's been shat all over this goddamn thread since it started.

    I'm hostile because you never fucking read what anybody else says, so it doesn't fucking matter what I say, and yelling at you is considerably more entertaining.

    The people that play EVE just think of it as such a perfect game that they're totally unwilling to accept that somebody quits due to the glaring flaws in the game itself. No, it's because they can't handle the game. They're not cool enough. They're WoWbabies. This rampant goddamn moronic elitism is one reason I quit. The excessive, unnecessary complexity was another. The undocumented features and random crap that, really, made no sense was another. I'm also off-put by games that are inherently shitty but people say, "Oh, you just have to ignore fifty percent of the game, the other half is cool." Why should I take their word for it? The game from where I stood seemed like shit.

    And my opinion is rendered invalid because I didn't spend enough time wading through that shit? Do I have to eat my quota of fucking shit before I'm allowed to say, "okay guys, this shit tastes like shit." Only in the minds of these fucking morons who are looking for any goddamn reason to fucking see themselves as nothing else but true gamers, the hardcores, the pee vee peers who know what a real game is.

    But it doesn't fucking matter what reason I give for why I quit, because it will always be my fault for not enjoying such a flawless game. The fact that I quit is used only as fuel for some infernal goddamn furnace of elitism. "We're so much better because we don't play with the kind of people who don't like this game."

    I mean, I'm sure that, somewhere, there's gotta be somebody who's not a gigantic, stuck-up prick. I just haven't seen them anywhere, which probably isn't much of a surprise. It's not the reasonable people that tend to speak out, those people in the middle of the spectrum. It's the people who say, "No game could possibly have any sort of meaning without PvP and you are all in denial of this fact and also babies" who are apt to say things, because they - for some reason - feel threatened by the existence of games that do not conform to their idea of what a game should be. Heaven forbid that other people have different opinions, that wouldn't fit in with their goddamn objectivist notion that their game is The Best, it's in the One True Style, and that all nonbelievers must be purged from their game.

    Fucking hell. People like you just piss me off.

    Pony_Sig.png
  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Oboro wrote: »
    lol 25%

    Most people don't describe a PvPMMORPG, they want a PvP game more in line with Guild Wars. When they start asking for more than that, they begin pushing it towards a game which is no longer PvP-friendly-- EVE, for what it is, is a minimalistic experience. You are your ship, and your ship is embroiled in an intragalactic war with some other ships. Ultima Online was a different sort of experience, and every new bit of content they added necessarily made it less PvP-friendly because PvP combat in a non-consensual sense would be entirely at odds with any new content a developer can add.

    Unless the PvP is the content, in which case you have PvP Guild Wars.

    Yes, 25%. Add the number of players playing EvE online, UO on free servers, Shadowbane, waiting for darkfall, age of conan, and all the PvP servers and you don't think you'd come up with 25% of eight million (the number of players in WoW)? I think 25% is a conservative estimate. There can and should be a game that unites the people scattered across what they want to be the next big MMOPvP game.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • OboroOboro __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2007
    Except, last I heard, a large amount of the people who are not part of the massive turnover on EVE are not even paying anymore to play, thanks to the ability to buy game-time with ISK. Also, really, the fact that your statistic relies on the fact that people pirating MMOs, waiting for vaporware, and banking on speculated and ostensible features, are going to unite to create a paying player-base to support a game with a stable population one-fourth that of World of Warcraft...

    I mean, it just sort of lols itself.

    words
  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    [QUOTE=Garthor,BASTION OF THE ANTIPVP MOVEMENT;3497817]It's good to see that even when I flat-out say "somebody's going to say X and it's going to make them a fucking douche to have done so," they still say it. It really ties into the whole "this is the only real MMO and you're a goddamn moron if you disagree" vibe that's been shat all over this goddamn thread since it started.

    I'm hostile because you never fucking read what anybody else says, so it doesn't fucking matter what I say, and yelling at you is considerably more entertaining.

    The people that play EVE just think of it as such a perfect game that they're totally unwilling to accept that somebody quits due to the glaring flaws in the game itself. No, it's because they can't handle the game. They're not cool enough. They're WoWbabies. This rampant goddamn moronic elitism is one reason I quit. The excessive, unnecessary complexity was another. The undocumented features and random crap that, really, made no sense was another. I'm also off-put by games that are inherently shitty but people say, "Oh, you just have to ignore fifty percent of the game, the other half is cool." Why should I take their word for it? The game from where I stood seemed like shit.

    And my opinion is rendered invalid because I didn't spend enough time wading through that shit? Do I have to eat my quota of fucking shit before I'm allowed to say, "okay guys, this shit tastes like shit." Only in the minds of these fucking morons who are looking for any goddamn reason to fucking see themselves as nothing else but true gamers, the hardcores, the pee vee peers who know what a real game is.

    But it doesn't fucking matter what reason I give for why I quit, because it will always be my fault for not enjoying such a flawless game. The fact that I quit is used only as fuel for some infernal goddamn furnace of elitism. "We're so much better because we don't play with the kind of people who don't like this game."

    I mean, I'm sure that, somewhere, there's gotta be somebody who's not a gigantic, stuck-up prick. I just haven't seen them anywhere, which probably isn't much of a surprise. It's not the reasonable people that tend to speak out, those people in the middle of the spectrum. It's the people who say, "No game could possibly have any sort of meaning without PvP and you are all in denial of this fact and also babies" who are apt to say things, because they - for some reason - feel threatened by the existence of games that do not conform to their idea of what a game should be. Heaven forbid that other people have different opinions, that wouldn't fit in with their goddamn objectivist notion that their game is The Best, it's in the One True Style, and that all nonbelievers must be purged from their game.

    Fucking hell. People like you just piss me off.[/QUOTE]

    You didn't refute a single point that I made in my last post. Basically, I pointed out that you were mad and why you were mad, and it made you more angry. I've linked this thread on quite a few PvP boards, and I've been getting a ton of PMs everyday about new people who are discovering this thread. As such, for those just arriving, I have chosen to quote your post in it's entirety, and tie your name to the "Anti-PvP" side of this debate, so that the people just joining us can see that the angriest, most embittered person here isn't on the side of those of us wanting more PvP. You just made my job so much easier, and for that, I thank you.

    As for your argument that you begin with, that I'm a prick for pointing out your defense... I have to admit that I laughed. It's like being in a courtroom and saying "And this is the weak point of our case, BUT THE PROSECUTION HAD BETTER NOT ATTACK IT OR THAT WOULD BE LAME AS HELL. HONESTLY, WHAT-THE-FUCK, PROSECUTION?" And you realize that, which is why you started off your post by calling me a douche.

    Again, you didn't even stay long enough to participate in the game. It's like you are reading Moby Dick, got to the first boring factual chapter about the specifics of hunting whales in the open sea, and gave up; "I bet the whole damn book is like that." Obviously, in this situation, no one is going to value your opinion on Moby Dick. Please don't curse at me for that invaluable point, they just leap out at me, and I have to announce them as so.

    And then your last paragraph, really, is just angry bile spewing, so I'll just leave that completely alone and in it's context so as not to ruin the perfect opportunity you have graced me with. Anything else?

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Oboro wrote: »
    Except, last I heard, a large amount of the people who are not part of the massive turnover on EVE are not even paying anymore to play, thanks to the ability to buy game-time with ISK. Also, really, the fact that your statistic relies on the fact that people pirating MMOs, waiting for vaporware, and banking on speculated and ostensible features, are going to unite to create a paying player-base to support a game with a stable population one-fourth that of World of Warcraft...

    I mean, it just sort of lols itself.

    The point is, if people are desperate enough to play free games, play on pirated servers, wait for games that might not even exist, etc, aren't they fervent enough to support the game we are looking for? I stand by the fact that I believe if you combined the player groups I listed, they would come out to 25% of 8 million (2 million), yes.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • OboroOboro __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2007
    Jesus fucking Christ, you just repeated all of the things he called you out for doing. :|

    17 pages, tl;dr-- different people enjoy different things, and should be respected for it.

    words
  • OboroOboro __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2007
    Oboro wrote: »
    Except, last I heard, a large amount of the people who are not part of the massive turnover on EVE are not even paying anymore to play, thanks to the ability to buy game-time with ISK. Also, really, the fact that your statistic relies on the fact that people pirating MMOs, waiting for vaporware, and banking on speculated and ostensible features, are going to unite to create a paying player-base to support a game with a stable population one-fourth that of World of Warcraft...

    I mean, it just sort of lols itself.

    The point is, if people are desperate enough to play free games, play on [free] servers, wait for games that might not even exist, etc, aren't they fervent enough to support the game we are looking for?

    I stand by the fact that I believe if you combined the player groups I listed, they would come out to 25% of 8 million (2 million), yes.

    What?

    words
  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Oboro wrote: »
    Oboro wrote: »
    Except, last I heard, a large amount of the people who are not part of the massive turnover on EVE are not even paying anymore to play, thanks to the ability to buy game-time with ISK. Also, really, the fact that your statistic relies on the fact that people pirating MMOs, waiting for vaporware, and banking on speculated and ostensible features, are going to unite to create a paying player-base to support a game with a stable population one-fourth that of World of Warcraft...

    I mean, it just sort of lols itself.

    The point is, if people are desperate enough to play free games, play on pirated servers, wait for games that might not even exist, etc, aren't they fervent enough to support the game we are looking for?

    I stand by the fact that I believe if you combined the player groups I listed, they would come out to 25% of 8 million (2 million), yes.

    What?

    Perhaps I wasn't clear. I'm saying that there are enough disjointed players looking for old-style UO PvP, that they could indubitably support any sort of game that came close to what that (the PvP community) is looking for.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • OboroOboro __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2007
    It's not fucking "indubitable"-- by your logic, all of the teenagers who go around on Halloween just to screw around and get free candy because it's free could prop up the candy industry because they would indubitably and fervently purchase candy, as well.

    I just... you are really, really hurting me here. :|

    EDIT: anyway it's time to go play WoW

    words
  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Oboro wrote: »
    It's not fucking "indubitable"-- by your logic, all of the teenagers who go around on Halloween just to screw around and get free candy because it's free could prop up the candy industry because they would indubitably and fervently purchase candy, as well.

    I just... you are really, really hurting me here. :|

    I'm sorry, the fervent, rabid fans of the MMO that you call vaporware, they have been following a game around for years that probably will not even come out purely on the prospect that it might be real. If you think fanboys this die hard wouldn't pay to support an MMO...

    Likewise you think free servers stay open for free? The popular ones cost thousands of dollars to maintain in infrastructure. The community donates to them, many much more than the typical monthly fee for a pay game, because they supply what they want. These servers have been open for years on the support of the players.

    These are just a couple examples. Is free now a relative term?

    Edit: P.S. Indubitably

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • SabanSaban Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Alright guys, time to make a new thread.


    this ones full up on dumb.

    371839-1.png
  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Saban wrote: »
    Alright guys, time to make a new thread.


    this ones full up on dumb.

    Agreed, I don't know how much longer I can thrive in the hostility here!

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • falsedeffalsedef Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Oboro wrote: »
    lol 25%

    Most people don't describe a PvPMMORPG, they want a PvP game more in line with Guild Wars. When they start asking for more than that, they begin pushing it towards a game which is no longer PvP-friendly-- EVE, for what it is, is a minimalistic experience. You are your ship, and your ship is embroiled in an intragalactic war with some other ships. Ultima Online was a different sort of experience, and every new bit of content they added necessarily made it less PvP-friendly because PvP combat in a non-consensual sense would be entirely at odds with any new content a developer can add.

    Unless the PvP is the content, in which case you have PvP Guild Wars.

    Yes, 25%. Add the number of players playing EvE online, UO on free servers, Shadowbane, waiting for darkfall, age of conan, and all the PvP servers and you don't think you'd come up with 25% of eight million (the number of players in WoW)? I think 25% is a conservative estimate. There can and should be a game that unites the people scattered across what they want to be the next big MMOPvP game.
    Add all those up and you'd barely get a few percent of the total MMORPG share. WoW and Lineage are already over 75%. Disney's Toontown online has as many players as EVE.

  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    falsedef wrote: »
    Oboro wrote: »
    lol 25%

    Most people don't describe a PvPMMORPG, they want a PvP game more in line with Guild Wars. When they start asking for more than that, they begin pushing it towards a game which is no longer PvP-friendly-- EVE, for what it is, is a minimalistic experience. You are your ship, and your ship is embroiled in an intragalactic war with some other ships. Ultima Online was a different sort of experience, and every new bit of content they added necessarily made it less PvP-friendly because PvP combat in a non-consensual sense would be entirely at odds with any new content a developer can add.

    Unless the PvP is the content, in which case you have PvP Guild Wars.

    Yes, 25%. Add the number of players playing EvE online, UO on free servers, Shadowbane, waiting for darkfall, age of conan, and all the PvP servers and you don't think you'd come up with 25% of eight million (the number of players in WoW)? I think 25% is a conservative estimate. There can and should be a game that unites the people scattered across what they want to be the next big MMOPvP game.
    Add all those up and you'd barely get a few percent of the total MMORPG share. WoW and Lineage are already over 75%. Disney's Toontown online has as many players as EVE.

    I included the PvP servers in WoW as part of my estimate. I know a lot of the PvP crowd, including my friends, are spending their time on PvP servers until a real PvP game comes out. Edit: And even a few percent of this market paying 10.99 a month is much much more than enough to support a profitable mmo.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited November 2007
    You are confusing "cheap bastards" for "PVP fanatics."

    And it is terribly funny.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Oboro wrote: »
    Except, last I heard, a large amount of the people who are not part of the massive turnover on EVE are not even paying anymore to play, thanks to the ability to buy game-time with ISK.

    You don't buy gametime with ISK. You buy gametime from other people who have paid money to the company for ISK.

    Every subscriber represents one subscription fee, regardless how they are individually paying for it.

    The Company: The CYOA game that anybody can join at any time - running now!
  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    You are confusing "cheap bastards" for "PVP fanatics."

    And it is terribly funny.

    I'm assuming you made this post before reading mine about how "free" servers aren't free.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited November 2007
    I'm assuming you made this post before reading mine about how "free" servers aren't free.

    I'm assuming you missed the part about the people who aren't paying any money and likely have no intention to ever do so which is counterproductive to WoW-monies, which are what most companies want.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    I'm assuming you made this post before reading mine about how "free" servers aren't free.

    I'm assuming you missed the part about the people who aren't paying any money and likely have no intention to ever do so which is counterproductive to WoW-monies, which are what most companies want.

    What? When did I miss that? Are you just copying my post to be funny? What part of my post even insinuates that the aforementioned group wouldn't pay?

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • GarthorGarthor Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    I have chosen to quote your post in it's entirety, and tie your name to the "Anti-PvP" side of this debate

    See, what we have here is a failure to communicate. I, for example, think that PvP means "Player versus Player." As in, some sort of conflict between players. You, on the other hand, seem to think it means, "I can kill people at any time at will with no consequences for myself but HELLSA consequences for them and so help me God this is the only fucking way a game can be a real game."

    Really, just a problem of definitions.

    [edit]Also, I find it funny that my post is being read by a bunch of borderline-literate Neanderthals in some thread which is, essentially, a big ol' elitist circle-jerk. The irony is palpable.

    Pony_Sig.png
  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Garthor wrote: »
    I have chosen to quote your post in it's entirety, and tie your name to the "Anti-PvP" side of this debate

    See, what we have here is a failure to communicate. I, for example, think that PvP means "Player versus Player." As in, some sort of conflict between players. You, on the other hand, seem to think it means, "I can kill people at any time at will with no consequences for myself but HELLSA consequences for them and so help me God this is the only fucking way a game can be a real game."

    Really, just a problem of definitions.

    Indeed, it must be a failure to communicate. Only a few pages back I said that I believed staunch penalties, like stat-loss (remember? the analogy about dropping from 70-40) were in order for PKs who killed without regard or reason. Shall I link the post? I said it in more than one, shouldn't be too hard to find. I can link several posts where you insinuate that you are against PvP as defined in this thread, can you produce a post where I said anything like
    "I can kill people at any time at will with no consequences for myself but HELLSA consequences for them and so help me God this is the only fucking way a game can be a real game."

    or is the absence of such a post part of our communicative failure?

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Garthor wrote: »
    I have chosen to quote your post in it's entirety, and tie your name to the "Anti-PvP" side of this debate

    See, what we have here is a failure to communicate. I, for example, think that PvP means "Player versus Player." As in, some sort of conflict between players. You, on the other hand, seem to think it means, "I can kill people at any time at will with no consequences for myself but HELLSA consequences for them and so help me God this is the only fucking way a game can be a real game."

    Really, just a problem of definitions.
    I think you're entirely content to project a combination of high school issues and general fuckmuppetry found in ANY online game onto just about anyone arguing for a nice concept of a PvP MMO i.e. stop strawmanning.

    The Company: The CYOA game that anybody can join at any time - running now!
  • GarthorGarthor Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    can you produce a post where I said anything like
    "I can kill people at any time at will with no consequences for myself but HELLSA consequences for them and so help me God this is the only fucking way a game can be a real game."
    or is the absence of such a post part of our communicative failure?
    I included the PvP servers in WoW as part of my estimate. I know a lot of the PvP crowd, including my friends, are spending their time on PvP servers until a real PvP game comes out.

    Pony_Sig.png
  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Garthor wrote: »
    can you produce a post where I said anything like
    "I can kill people at any time at will with no consequences for myself but HELLSA consequences for them and so help me God this is the only fucking way a game can be a real game."
    or is the absence of such a post part of our communicative failure?
    I included the PvP servers in WoW as part of my estimate. I know a lot of the PvP crowd, including my friends, are spending their time on PvP servers until a real PvP game comes out.

    Really? That's the post you chose? You don't think that is stretching it?
    Garthor wrote:
    [edit]Also, I find it funny that my post is being read by a bunch of borderline-literate Neanderthals in some thread which is, essentially, a big ol' elitist circle-jerk. The irony is palpable.

    Sorry, had to bring that edit to light as well, you're really just throwing dry kindling on my arguments flames. And stop trying to troll the PvPers reading this thread, they aren't going to be pulled in to name-calling with you, and that strengthens my case further.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited November 2007
    People don't want to be ganked the first time, it doesn't matter if ganking causes you to instantly get raped to death by dinosaurs.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • GarthorGarthor Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Garthor wrote: »
    can you produce a post where I said anything like
    "I can kill people at any time at will with no consequences for myself but HELLSA consequences for them and so help me God this is the only fucking way a game can be a real game."
    or is the absence of such a post part of our communicative failure?
    I included the PvP servers in WoW as part of my estimate. I know a lot of the PvP crowd, including my friends, are spending their time on PvP servers until a real PvP game comes out.

    Really? That's the post you chose? You don't think that is stretching it?

    How would it be stretching it? World of Warcraft has everything you could want for PvP, except for the ability to inflict harsh penalties on those you kill. And yet, it's not real PvP, according to you.

    Pony_Sig.png
  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Garthor wrote: »
    Garthor wrote: »
    can you produce a post where I said anything like
    "I can kill people at any time at will with no consequences for myself but HELLSA consequences for them and so help me God this is the only fucking way a game can be a real game."
    or is the absence of such a post part of our communicative failure?
    I included the PvP servers in WoW as part of my estimate. I know a lot of the PvP crowd, including my friends, are spending their time on PvP servers until a real PvP game comes out.

    Really? That's the post you chose? You don't think that is stretching it?

    How would it be stretching it? World of Warcraft has everything you could want for PvP, except for the ability to inflict harsh penalties on those you kill. And yet, it's not real PvP, according to you.

    You misread friend, reread the context of that post. I was including WoWers on PvP servers as people who would want to play our game... I didn't even come close to describing WoW PvP as what you allege. I'll stick around this thread for a while, see if you can come up with another one, I'm all about second chances.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • GarthorGarthor Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Garthor wrote: »
    Garthor wrote: »
    can you produce a post where I said anything like
    "I can kill people at any time at will with no consequences for myself but HELLSA consequences for them and so help me God this is the only fucking way a game can be a real game."
    or is the absence of such a post part of our communicative failure?
    I included the PvP servers in WoW as part of my estimate. I know a lot of the PvP crowd, including my friends, are spending their time on PvP servers until a real PvP game comes out.

    Really? That's the post you chose? You don't think that is stretching it?

    How would it be stretching it? World of Warcraft has everything you could want for PvP, except for the ability to inflict harsh penalties on those you kill. And yet, it's not real PvP, according to you.

    You misread friend, reread the context of that post. I was including WoWers on PvP servers as people who would want to play our game... I didn't even come close to describing WoW PvP as what you allege. I'll stick around this thread for a while, see if you can come up with another one, I'm all about second chances.

    Okay, let me try again:
    I included the PvP servers in WoW as part of my estimate. I know a lot of the PvP crowd, including my friends, are spending their time on PvP servers until a real PvP game comes out.

    Nope. Still reading, "World of Warcraft does not have 'real' PvP."

    Pony_Sig.png
  • Little JimLittle Jim __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2007
    PvP in WoW is an afterthought. No matter how you break down the pvp in wow, it always comes down to gear

    certainly dudes that are really good will beat other dudes with better gear, but it is a huge factor in the game

    trying to get into a 2K team right now, or getting a team to 2K, without a boatload of resilience is pretty much out of the question

    th_crabz.png
  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Little Jim wrote: »
    PvP in WoW is an afterthought. No matter how you break down the pvp in wow, it always comes down to gear

    certainly dudes that are really good will beat other dudes with better gear, but it is a huge factor in the game

    trying to get into a 2K team right now, or getting a team to 2K, without a boatload of resilience is pretty much out of the question

    This in regards to your rebuttal post, Garthor. Also, as I said before, I have defined PvP as a consensus of the attitudes here, that we need open-ended PvP but with staunch penalties for murders, no where in most post did I refer to WoW as "fucking" anything, or any of the other negative bile that you so eloquently put in my mouth.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • GarthorGarthor Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    So you want:

    Characters are unimportant / disposable, lest we have gear escalation or something similar
    Open-ended PvP where you can do whatever you want, including randomly ganking people...
    Except wait, no, I don't want random ganking. Punish characters who do that.
    Oh wait, we can't do that, because they can just create a new character and bypass the penalty.
    Uh...




    Oh, and Little Jim: why do you want a 2000 arena rating? What possible benefit would you receive from accomplishing that goal?

    Pony_Sig.png
  • VicVic Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Garthor wrote: »

    Oh, and Little Jim: why do you want a 2000 arena rating? What possible benefit would you receive from accomplishing that goal?

    Uh, he never said he did. You totally missed the point of his post, he merely said that gear playes a huge role in pvp in world of warcraft. As in, a really skilled player in blues will not kill a decent player in purples.

  • Grandaddy DeliciousGrandaddy Delicious Registered User
    edited November 2007
    Garthor wrote: »
    So you want:

    Characters are unimportant / disposable, lest we have gear escalation or something similar
    Open-ended PvP where you can do whatever you want, including randomly ganking people...
    Except wait, no, I don't want random ganking. Punish characters who do that.
    Oh wait, we can't do that, because they can just create a new character and bypass the penalty.
    Uh...

    Seriously, what the hell, yes, other characters can go to town if your character is red, but if you kill the muderer they drop from level seventy to level forty. How can they bypass that with another character? Every time I bring this up you ignore it and then a page later ask "But there aren't any penalties!" Yes there are, it is right here, they drop from level 70 to 40, I'll bold it so you don't forget next page.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • OboroOboro __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2007
    Hokay.

    Find me someone who's willing to go from level 70 to 40 and not eBay the account, using the World of Warcraft analogy you've made.

    Stat loss in Ultima Online meant waiting for your powerhour and grinding out that powerhour, which was aptly-named, and took about an hour. After that was removed, it meant AFKing and macroing your skills up while on a boat; nothing even close to 100 hours to get back to your previous level.

    lulz

    words
  • GarthorGarthor Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Garthor wrote: »
    So you want:

    Characters are unimportant / disposable, lest we have gear escalation or something similar
    Open-ended PvP where you can do whatever you want, including randomly ganking people...
    Except wait, no, I don't want random ganking. Punish characters who do that.
    Oh wait, we can't do that, because they can just create a new character and bypass the penalty.
    Uh...

    Seriously, what the hell, yes, other characters can go to town if your character is red, but if you kill the muderer they drop from level seventy to level forty. How can they bypass that with another character? Every time I bring this up you ignore it and then a page later ask "But there aren't any penalties!" Yes there are, it is right here, they drop from level 70 to 40, I'll bold it so you don't forget next page.

    You keep on fucking saying that but it's not true. I haven't played UO in forever, but I'm fairly sure the difference is infinitely closer to 70-69. If even that.

    Besides, all character advancement was just macroing anyway. Loss of stats and skills was literally nothing more than a loss of time you wouldn't be spending playing the game anyway. UO may have gotten some things right, but other things were oh so very wrong.

    And my point wasn't a jab at UO. It was a jab at your inherently contradictory concept of a "real" MMO.

    Pony_Sig.png
This discussion has been closed.