| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (115)

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 9:35AM Ably said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@fallwind I don't see how anything of this was forced. Neither were you forced to attack me nor were I forced to die. I could've anticipated you ,defended myself, etc..
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 11:00AM fallwind said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Ably well, I guess you aren't forced to stop your cooking quest, but eventually the game is going to register that you have 0hp and send you to the graveyard.

Or I guess you could take my ability to stab you in the spleen into account and take measures to stop that... in which case I am equally able to force you to take actions you wouldn't if I were not able to do such a thing to you.

My ability to kill you either forces you to go to the GY, or forces you to protect yourself against me. The fact that there is a choice does not make the question any less forced. Pick A or B, no, you can not choose C or "none of the above"... just A or B.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 12:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Ably You are the EXACT kind of person that makes people around here hate free-for-all PVP.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 4:32PM Equillian said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)
Amen brother!
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 8:34AM Yellowdancer said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Ultima Online scarred me for life. I do not like PvP. I can't get into the ganking of newbs. I have flashbacks of running away from grey robed skull masked gankers.

And the Anti-PK's were worse than the PK's.

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 8:34AM avidlurker said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
For me it's a matter of theory vs. practice.

In theory it's nice to know you are walking dangerous territory and that something bad might happen.

In practice it can quickly turn into the ultra-agressive ruining the game for all others.

If the relative number of "predators" vs. "pray" climbs too high, there is a real risk of "there is a chance I might get ganked and lose everything or a significant amount of what I have worked towards will be lost" changing to "it's pretty likely" or even "I'll be lucky if I don't lose everything".

The aggressive also seem to tend to band together, ignoring each other, to instead go after less aggressive players. They don't want to lose out either.
At least a significant amount are like that. I have known eve-online players that did go in risking all their own, but there were also tons of gank-bears.
I belive this at least partial hypocrisy amongst the aggressive players is a reason free-for-all games have hard times.
Also the fact that often it is possible to be aggressive on one account/character and use that one for nothing else but being aggressive, while bank rolling it with a character/account that does not have the bad reputation, making self-balancing and player policing difficult.

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 8:40AM Ably said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@avidlurker
> If the relative number of "predators" vs. "pray" climbs too high, there is a > real risk of "there is a chance I might get ganked and lose everything or a > significant amount of what I have worked towards will be lost" changing > to "it's pretty likely" or even "I'll be lucky if I don't lose everything".

survival of the fittest. freedom implies power wins the day. start ganking yourself.

> The aggressive also seem to tend to band together,

standard human behavior. band together yourself and topple them. don't be so afraid, it's just a game you don't really lose anything.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 8:48AM avidlurker said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Ably

True I guess, but that survival of the fittest often leads to declining populations as the losers at some point accept their loss and move on.

A MMO is supposed to be a long ongoing game. If the aggressive players are too successful it leads to a tournament sort of knock-out process.

In my time in eve-online the golden age of low sec space was long over, low sec largely being a barren desert. I roamed that desert for a while and it was fun for a time. But ultimately the aggressive players were too successful there imho.

I'm not at all opposed to free-for-all on principle, just in practice it's very difficult to make work properly imho.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 8:56AM avidlurker said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Ably

Oh and another thing:
I hate NAP-fests.
Banding together is obviously a part of the reason we play MMOs.

But I hate with a passion the guys that band together to take on the world, except for all those other aggressive players that litter their blue lists and are either formally or informally allied or non-aggressed.

Oh and the "supply us with carebears to gank" mentality quite a few of them have.

Living dangerously has to cut both ways, otherwise it doesn't work in a game.
There were far too few groups of players like Agony Unleashed or the odd Nullsec corp holding it's own without extensive NAPs and far too many with the mentality: free-for-all means we should get to do the killing and you are to do the dieing.

Basic human nature is exactly what makes this type of game difficult to construct fully successfully.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 9:39AM Ably said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@avidlurker if that was true, eve online would've seen steadily declining subs and not rising. if that was true, the nazis wouldn't have been defeated in WW2. if that was true, america would never have declared their indipendence.

SOME people move on. others thrive in situations like this.


0.0. isn't barren. there are problems with 0.0 but non of them have to do with over-aggressive players removing all the competition. that's what you *expect* when you come to 0.0 and for that reason there will always be competition.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 9:44AM Ably said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@avidlurker well, logic predicts that people who band together solely to pwn weaker targets won't be banded together for too long. it's just like real life, really. saw the right seeds and you'll harvest victory. eventually. the system is very much self-governed, as is real life.
now that is not to say that artifical boundaries set up by the game designers (for example having to wait for 1 year straight because you can blow someone up) can scew the system in one or another direction.

in the end it boils down how much you are willing to accept the current distribution of power and how much you want to manipulate it in your favor. like real life. only that in eve-online, you cannot really lose (unless you RMT)
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 8:36AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Open world PVP for everyone? Yeah, I'll pass on a game like that. I like to PVP when I'm in the mood and open world PVP is too much for my tastes. I won't begrudge a game for being designed that way though. Why get all huffy about it, you know? It just means they won't get my money is all, they don't need to cater to me.

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 8:36AM Fabius Bile said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
non-FFA PvP is the dealbreaker for me...When i get a PvP game its to PvP, not to hold people's hands and sing Kumbayah

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 8:47AM Beau Hindman said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Deal breaker? Nah, not really...but close. It's not that FFA is scary, it's just silly. It's more akin to allowing players to trip each other, over and over. Now, if some of the games would also attempt a realistic death or a realistic law enforcement, then sure it would feel better.

As it is now, in all the games that feature it, it just feels goofy to be killed and then magically you wake up a few seconds later like you're in a FPS.

Beau

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 8:48AM chuckasucka said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I really like it, but it always seemed to make me more compelled to grind away in order to be better off in the world; safer, more apt to escape a bad situation, and also better to win of course. I don't like anything in a game that pressures me to play more and more and more. I want to set my own play frequency and still be somewhat competitive. That might be too much to ask though.

Overall, love FFAPVP. I think I just have yet to see it done well. Last one I played was in VG and that was just an awful mess. :(

Anyone got any good suggestions for a FFAPVP game (besides EVE)? I tried Conan, WAR, .... and perhaps some others I'm not remembering.

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 8:54AM Aganazer said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I like FFA PvP as long as there are so many restrictions put on it that no sane person would destroy their character's life by committing non-consensual murder. You know... like real life.

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 9:00AM Sente said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It could be a dealbreaker, but would depend on mechanics and features to set consequences for your actions.

A game where for the most part people would not smash each other head in just because they could, but could potentially face some considerable consequences for it would be ok I think.
The wild west era is probably fairly close to this, as an example.

But a game set up with limited/minimal consequences and most people have to watch out all the time, then no thank you.
Some recent civil wars with warlords fighting each other and abusing the civilian population would perhaps be an analogy for that - and I do not want to play in that type of game.

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 9:03AM FrostPaw said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I don't like having PvP forced upon me by someone else.

I PvP when I am prepared to fight, then its a match, then its a competition.

PvP anywhere anytime often involves being outnumbered, outleveled or simply attacked when you are unprepared. To me, that is not a contest worth having.

Is it a deal breaker on it's own? no, what really counts is how the mechanics around it are handled.

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 9:06AM Ehra said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
To me it depends on it's implemented. There needs to be something to punish "grey killing," and main towns/cities should be safe. But assuming there aren't ridiculous features like corpse looting then I could deal with FFA PvP if it were the right game. I can't deny that there haven't been times where I wish I could just kill another player because they're being a jerk in one way or another

Posted: Jun 3rd 2011 9:11AM Alluvian EstEndrati said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
For me FFA PvP is definitely a deal-breaker. While I do despise those MMOs who just have two factions to pick between for PvP, I do actually prefer PvP to be a bit more organized. I like my PvP to have a point or a purpose, such as in RvR style games that groups against one another for a "good" reason.

I wish there were more games like that.... that had more than two playable factions.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW