Bro, do you even Role Play???

I'm willing to bet lots of money that Rune never said that. Anywhere. Now *I* have probably said something like that somewhere. I want to be able to take all the things but I would enjoy a system where you were encouraged not to (encumbrance, curse or it just clashes with your outfit.)

 

Hold up now...Tetris has significant real-world applicability. If you've ever had to pack the back of a minivan or crossover in advance of a week-long family road trip, you'll use quite a lot of the skills that Tetris furnishes you with.

 

The question then is, which bits of realism should be kept and which should be discarded?

I'm of the opinion that every bit of realism added to a game should ideally enhance engagement and fun for the players, and at the very least not reduce any of those. Realism that makes the game more frustrating for the player, without adding a corresponding amount of enjoyable engagement, should never be introduced in the first place.

The issue is that different players have different reactions to different aspects of realism. For example, I'm a hobby crafter, and an engineer, in real life; the kind of item customization and crafting complexity I would prefer would likely prevent most players from ever engaging in crafting (think a crafting system that requires the player to understand real world metallurgy in order to make an usable sword). At the same time I really abhor wasting time in travel, so a game without some kind of fast travel is a game I would most likely never play.

When it comes to roleplaying there are similar issues. While I've been roleplaying (in pen and paper RPGs) for decades, I flat out refuse to roleplay anything unless I'm completely sure the players of every affected character are fine with the result; this means that I will never, ever, initiate non-consensual PvP. I'm also not comfortable with all kinds of roleplay; in particular, I'm not going to ever roleplay anything that involves stealing from, or looting, a player character, because when the target is a player character I can't fully separate the roleplayed action from the real world.

I'm not playing any game mode where there is even a shade of a chance of a player looting me simply because it's just not worth it. Even the mere menace of being looted is enough to completely prevent me from ever enjoying the game, so I would be better not even trying to play rather than risking player looting in any shape or way.

This will basically influence whether I will ever give PvP a try or not. If there is some PvP mode that does not allow any kind of player looting (no ransom, no item looting, and no trophies), then I'm likely to play it quite a bit; if not, I will just never engage in PvP in this game.

Different players have different preferences. For you, player looting enhances the game; for me, it makes the game utterly worthless, merely frustrating without any chance of being fun.

Funny thing, Watch Dogs tried to copy Dark Souls' non-consensual PvP with consequences for defeat. Players hated it so much, with so many players just closing the game without saving if they were ever invaded, that Ubisoft changed the invasion missions to never have a negative consequence for the invaded player, allowing players to just ignore when they are invaded.

BTW, if you don't consider the PvP aspect of Dark Souls, you can't compare it with a PvP heavy game. At all. PvP and PvE feel completely different. I love Dark Souls (though I use tricks to block players from invading my game), but I will never engage in non-consensual PvP.

You should be aware that, for many players, being attacked by another player and being attacked by a NPC have nothing, at all, in common. Wanting to avoid PvP does not mean that the player wants to avoid PvE combat. It's quite the opposite in my case; I'm never, ever, going to accept non-consensual PvP, but I want the hardest and most challenging PvE content that the game can throw at me.

 

I don't think I was responding to Rune....

Either way I agree that encumbrance and space in your pack should definitely limit looting.

My only problem with this whole argument is the demand for realism while at the same time demanding that it be suspended when it's in one party's favor.

Realistically the best bet would be for the entire inventory to be displayed (visually only, no tool tips or descriptions) and the looter can take, say three items of their choice. Only three and any three. Then they can offer them for a ransom if they want.

Full looting really makes no sense.

 

That's an interesting point of view..

 

Yes, I agree with this, but the devs probably want to go easy on players on this front also. IT would make sense also if the effects of encumbrance were more graduated instead of just at a discrete point, so if you loaded your character with all sorts of junk you're penalizing him. A thief would probably only want to steal very little so he could get away with it.

Short of that kind of balance, okay I understand why the devs want a loot system. I don't think full looting in every situation is realistic either. I found it a little ridiculous in UO that some looters would take my full armor and weapons just so they could get a tiny amount of gold back in town. One would also expect my gear to have been damaged in battle, to make it worth less to take. Who really wants to repair a badly damaged hauberk just to sell it?

But I still think it should be designed with the least game-y feel as possible, because it takes out of the depth of the encounters. The devs should be keeping that in mind.

And I really don't understand why. I think its perfect that people save their special gear for special occasions, while otherwise only wearing gear that's good enough to deal with attacks that may come their way. Its not really necessary for everyone walking around fully decked with magic all the time. But there would still be occasions where players would still want to go to their bank and withdraw their good gear.

 

Realism is not in the mind of the beholder. Either something is or it isn't.

 

hmmm so I point out "not everyone" likes to be attacked without provocation and get a ton of "Well UO and other games do just fine" Well uh.. completely irrelevant to my comments guys. Some people don't like being attacked without provocation. That other games allow it doesn't change the fact.

 

Some people just love being freely attacked without provocation.
So is this your way of saying to those guys "Get out of our game, you are not welcome here" ?

 

No it's my way of saying you guys spend too much time over reacting to what isn't actually said.

 

Whats all this realism? >=-O
I dont like realism if it's going to prevent me from dragging and dropping full shiny magic plate, a powerful halberd, 2 big heavy two handed swords, and a fat stack of gold ALL into my magical backpack of unlimited space.
Let me loot! Freely!
And this has nothing to do with PvP... If your going to take away this amazingly euphoric act of looting gobs and gobs of treasure out of a chest I just picked or blew up with a powder keg, or the corpse of that NPC healer or that lich lord I slayed then im gonna be mad!
See my face!: >=-( see how mad it looks??
How am I going to tree an entire town? How am I going to go from drawer, to chest, to basket in every shop, home, inn, castle and pick everything clean thats not bolted down. A pack horse? I got to keep my pack horse parked somewhere away so as to not attract any attention from some do-gooder. And i need to carry big loads of booty back to my mule at a good rate so that my trade will be profitable.


Theres nothing more amazing than the old drag and drop and that sound effect you hear with each drag (sounds kinda like *wwwwwhhhhaaaaa*) and the sound effect you hear when you let go of your left click to drop it in your backpack (sounds kinda like *flipity flipityyyyyy*) and then hearing it over and over again with each drag and drop. Halberds, platemail arms, iron ingots, stacks of gold, regs! All into one bag. Then if your doing it somewhere you can be caught the rate of drag and drop is much quicker, especially since you cant hide while looting. And ill be standing there in my underwear with my invisible magic backpack and loading up all the loot. Soon as I see some blue do-gooder stop by and say "corp por!" i should be able to run at FULL SPEED so long as I dont exceed "x" amount of stones.


Dont take this away from me! =( Give me freedom of loot! The world is magical! Lets just say the backpacks are magical anti gravity backpacks with unlimited volume, so you can pack a ton into them.

 

I feel like in this comment you have no sense of the word compromise, lol. But, if you want to play like that play in FPO or SPOffline. . . Your wish has been granted for no pvp and only pve. Now help figure out how to please pvpers the same way, cause this I only want pve wish was granted when they said they'd have SPOffline and FPO. <];D

 

It's Portalarium's job to come up with the plan, we do not get to compromise. We make suggestions and either accept their choice or we don't.

They have their plans, they are building them. When they see suggestions they like they incorporate them.

Telling someone to go play SPO/FPO is no different than saying go play a different game.

Disclaimer: this is an ambiguous statement

 

If you're interested in the other perspective.... for a lot of role-players, including myself, part of the fun of role-playing in the first place is living out another life in another reality. For things to feel real is essential to the fun of the game to begin with; its not something that helps the game -- its central to it.

Does this mean I think that things in the game should work exactly the same as in reality? No. Its a game, it has to be playable. A feeling of realism is just a target. But there are two things that I believe need to be kept in mind. First, I think, if you need to simplify, you should try not to make it feel arbitrary and game-y. You want to keep a suspension of disbelief as much as possible. Often, not including an element of gameplay at all may be better than including it but making it feel like a game. Second, in many cases, there's such a thing as realism done well, and realism done poorly. In many cases, a game designer will try to make things realistic, but it will end up being even more unrealistic; because its unbalanced, because a computer screen doesn't work like in real life, because you're expecting the player to have the skills of his character. Whatever reason there is.

At anyway, I want to poke at some of the examples you gave to make my point.

* Fast travel. I have nothing against a dual-sale map that speeds things up, its just a form of abstraction, and I don't find it goes against the principle I'm talking about. But I do find the idea of "wasting time" in a role-playing game to be funny. You're making it sound like a job, where you have a certain number of tasks to complete, want to go through those tasks, and never want to stop and smell the roses. Of course, in many games, travel feels pointless, because there's very little to do while travelling and its made just a matter of slowing the player down from point A to point B. If travel really is pointless, there's no reason not to have fast travel. But if travel is actually pointless, why even have it in the game to begin with? -- why not just make all travel fast travel? Just remove travel altogether.

* Crafting. I have nothing against simplifying crafting; since you can't expect the player to have the skills of the character. Its not going to be able to work like in real life. I think there's something in between making it exactly like real life and just making it a matter of input and output, though. I've seen players say they want crafting as quick and easy as possible, so its just a matter of quickly generating in-game gold. This also makes it sound like a job, and not a game. If crafting is just about getting gold, why even have it in the game to begin with? That type of crafting is boring. Just remove crafting. Let people buy everything they need from NPCs.

* Evil deeds. I have nothing against creating boundaries on player actions where they're necessary, and I think PvP was out of hand in UO, but creating boundaries just so people can't do bad things I also find funny, because unless you have the option to role-play a bad character, you can't really role-play a good character, either. Lets face it: the single-player Ultimas were always limited as role-playing games. You were told who you were: a goody two-shoes Avatar. Many people will continue to like PvP, even without others being able to do bad things. They might like combat gaming and treat it that way. I don't entirely dislike it... I enjoy card games, and board games. I've also enjoyed a lot of single player and light RPGs. But I also find it infinitely less interesting from a role-playing perspective.

* * *

Back to the topic. Even if you can't separate players from characters, for a lot of people the ability to do that is part of the fun of role-playing. They may never want to be a thief in real life, but they want to be one in a game. They enjoy the threat of getting caught and killed because they weren't good enough as a thief; its not just about griefing other players.

I'm keeping in mind people will continue to disagree on this... but the heart of Owain's complaint is that a lot of people who enjoy role-playing agree with that perspective. Its not just about PKers and griefers wanting targets... though there are those people, too.

 

I followed a guy home on Friday night because he didn't let me merge so I could take the highway exit to get home. I killed that s.o.b. in front of his wife and kids. Dropped him right there in his own driveway. His buddy next door tried to return the favor but I pwned him too. No one bothered calling the police because we were outside city limits. I didn't care if I left forensic evidence because it didn't matter. In fact, I taunted the family and neighbors who were witnesses. They said something about me being KOS which is the worst they can do to me. Not like I had to worry about the death penalty(expulsion from the game), life sentence (character is locked in a digital cell until they pull the plug on the servers), or even a prison sentence (very lengthy suspension from game). They MAY be able to throw in jail for a bit (some gimmicky justice system where risk is in no way commensurate with the reward of assaulting other characters).

On Saturday, I killed a gal picking blueberries up on Murphy Dome and looted a pound of blueberries because it is was Full Loot. Her clothes won't fit but I disrobed her (she will get a Death Robe when she is revived) and cut them up with the scissors in my backpack. That will teach them blueberry pickers a lesson.

All this talk about realism as if PvP is anywhere remotely realistic in the first place. As a professional combatant whose livelihood was to engage in real life mortal PvP (not just carry an issued firearm to protect myself and others but "Locate, Close With, and Destroy the Enemy by Fire and Manuever"), suggesting that digital PvP is any less realistic because of Loot Rules is ridiculous. Some people around here are fooling themselves... call it what it is. You want non-consensual PvP and Full Loot rights.

 

A prime example of comparing RL Earth to realism within a game world. Modern day Earth is not medieval New Britannia. What is realistic for one is not necessarily realistic for the other.

 

Yes the first time the citizens saw someone who had died come back to life they would quickly change the sentence from hanging to being bricked up in a cell forever more (see Torchwood children of earth where jack is buried in concrete). Not going to be anymore fun staring at a stone wall forever more

BTW the whole "oh but we are immortal so death sentences are not realistic" is bull. RG wrote us being immortal to give a story reason for people coming back from the dead. You have the whole premise backwards

 

I'm not even sure what to say to this comment....not your game not your choice, thanks.

Bowen, they can't just pick and chose the arguement for realism that supports their playstyle, they should expect the other realisms to be brought up. Yes, it's not modern days where you don't get hung for murder without even a trial...


This is still just the gateway to the arguement to make loot simple enough to be looted and that you don't care if you lose it.

 

At what point did I bring up anything to do with a justice system in this thread? I only made the point that you can't argue for or against realism by comparing two completely different settings. What's realistic for one world is not always the same for the other. Medieval New Britannia isn't the same as modern day Earth. How do you go from that to immortality and the justice system?

 

Ideally, I'd want that, and strict carry limits, and a heavy sting to dying (at least), and heavy consequences to being a murderer, and everything else you're pointing out doesn't exist in the game :/ I'd want the whole thing. :/

But the thread is only about a single issue, since we're already ruling out non-consensual PvP.