PK and PVP are NOT the same. -- (Dev) Replied

@Redfish:

There is a slider as mentioned in multiple threads. That said, I don't think turning it off should be as simple as clicking a button. That opens a whole new host of possible exploits.

@lordrex:

Yeah dude, you might want to edit the "********" label because some people actually take offense to that. I know that sounds outlandish and childish and it IS, but I guess you can't use that word on the forums. I'm going to try not to, but it's pretty much built into my vernacular.

 

@sirinan:
is "********" a negative word? i thought it just meant people who didn't like PK to be part of the game. i wasn't trying to insult with that... I just thought it was the appropriate word to use. im not being sarcastic here... it's just that with the introduction of everquest that was what people called it. what word should i use then? some people take offense to "newbie" too, but well... sometimes people are new. i don't want to be insulting though so please tell me what the proper term is.

I also do not see the bias i had. I am pointing out my observations, but basically it comes down to collaboration vs. competition, and that in the gaming industry a minority of vocal complainers create skewed bias towards what the game developers think the users want. I built a game with millions players as an architect and that was my experience. I dont like to brag about my real life background and this is about a game series that i love. i dont see where i am being biased towards others to the extent of insulation.

 

@redfish: you have a point in theory, but in practice i dont see how that could be. there were literally 100 blues for every red in the game when the penalties came in. we were constantly using hit and run tactics because we were severely and consistently outnumbered. true, you couldnt get through a day without running into a PK, but for the most part we caused people to socialize more, group more, and plan more. that is what started guilds. no game had guilds until AFTER the players made their own unofficial guilds, and then the devs made it official by putting a guild system in so people could partner up and adventure together automatically. you would log in, be a member of a guild with 50 players, some would be around at all times of the day... bam. there you go. more friends, more collaboration, more fun. heck they even incorporated it into the game website and had stats and stuff. then guild ward started for the first time in any games because then could declare war on eachother. it didnt make it so people had to play a certain way... it just enhanced the game mechanics and the system balanced itself.

 

@rschultzy80: actually, come to think of it i bet i could dig up many many examples of game devs using the term ********... oh well. i grew up in the 1980's when the care bears was my favorite cartoon. I still have a copy of the movie under my TV. weird. What about rainbow bright and my little pony? He-Man? She-Ra?

I'm gonna call them thundercats from now on. hows that?

 

@lordrex - yes, ******** is absolutely a derogatory term. It implies that particular playstyle is tame/lame in comparison to your own in an elitist 'I am superior' way. As for your bias, from your OP:

<blockquote>They have ego issues that run so deep that they get angry or mad if someone else is better than them. sure, the pks and pvpers have ego issues too, but they can handle competition. carebears cannot.</blockquote>

<blockquote>PVP is like the ******** version of player interaction. it has alliance vs horde, order vs. chaos, guild vs. guild. Lots of rules. If this is not good enough for you, then you shouldn?t play an MMO at all.</blockquote>

<blockquote>If you do not want PVP and PK, you are antisocial.</blockquote>

<blockquote>because it hurts your feelings to know someone is better than you. in my opinion, you should go play a single player game, or get your own ******** server.</blockquote>

<blockquote>******** SHOULD BE THE EXCEPTION, NOT THE NORM.</blockquote>

Every one of those is a putdown to the PvE crowd. You clearly do not understand the motivations of PvE, and you just as clearly see PvP as superior to any playstyle of anyone else, and are intolerant of alternative playstyles.

As a PvE player, I didn't even try to see the points you were attempting to make, because of the way that you were presenting it. It seems apparent to me though that you weren't seeking discussion so much as soliciting for support of PvP in opposition to PvE.

 

@Lordrex "@rschultzy80: actually, come to think of it i bet i could dig up many many examples of game devs using the term ********? oh well. "

I know and agree. Unfortunately, we can't define what's offensive to others. ^^ @Sirinan may be somewhat correct in his evaluation of your post as well though lol

 

@Sirinan: Thank you for your response, i really appreciate it. I guess i am starting to see it from your point of view, although i'm not sure that I agree. let me elaborate:

"They have ego issues that run so deep that they get angry or mad if someone else is better than them. sure, the pks and pvpers have ego issues too, but they can handle competition. carebears cannot."

-- I do not see how this is negative or derogatory, but i do see how it could be inflammatory now that you put it in context. I could have chosen better words, but I stand by what I said. I have studied this in depth. the PVE-only crowd is opposed to competition and those who i call "carebears" would see to it that in a role playing game, people cannot truly play an evil role because it bothers them. this is nerfing the game, and for what? how is it different if i kill you or if a monster does? im a red player with bad karma just like the monsters in the game. it comes down to ego and competition. i am just stating things the way they are. words like ego and insecurity bother people, and take away from what i am trying to accomplish. I should use better language. Unlike a previous rude poster, you turned me on to this. thank you.

"PVP is like the ******** version of player interaction. it has alliance vs horde, order vs. chaos, guild vs. guild. Lots of rules. If this is not good enough for you, then you shouldn?t play an MMO at all." and "If you do not want PVP and PK, you are antisocial."

-- i stand by this. it is antisocial to alienate half of all the possible alignments in an RPG and disable those roles in the game. it is elitist and childish. I want to play too. I shouldn't have to change my playstyle because of some elitist PVE point of view. we should all accommodate each other. If you dont like combat with players why play a game with other players? the only reason UO became what it became, the only reason why LB's kickstarter was so profound is because of the free and open dynamic of UO. nothing has come close to it since.

"because it hurts your feelings to know someone is better than you. in my opinion, you should go play a single player game, or get your own ******** server." and "******** SHOULD BE THE EXCEPTION, NOT THE NORM."

-- i put "in my opinion" there for a reason. I think that would be a good solution. it wasn't absolute. i think that carebears are the minority, but they tend to complain a lot more because they are really bothered by the whole PK thing. Why not give them their own servers so they can be happy? with UO they did the opposite, and that was a very bad decision in my opinion. My opinion comes with gaming industry experience as well by the way, so my statistics are not bad.

...................

all of that said, why is it that we cannot even talk about this without inflammation? how is it that i was trying to have an open and friendly discussion and some flaming happened? it is because i am being associated with "haha i killed you, you suck. pwnt. noob!" and so all i have to do is say "********" and someone will get upset. in psychology, this is called projection. projection is a product of insecurity, and insecurity is a product of the ego. I am just calling it the way it is. I am not a griefer, and i am not trying to grief anybody.

 

It's always fun to read PvE (carebears) write about PvP.

It's like a flutist who plays Rock, it sounds good but it's still a little strange.

 

@lordrex - Generalizations are bad.

<blockquote>the PVE-only crowd is opposed to competition and those who i call ?carebears? would see to it that in a role playing game, people cannot truly play an evil role because it bothers them.</blockquote>
I've roleplayed evil characters in single player games. It can be fun. I'm not interested in PvP though. It seems I don't fit your profile of PvE player.
<blockquote> i am just stating things the way they are.</blockquote>
No, you are stating things as you see them, and in an inflammatory fashion.
<blockquote> it is antisocial to alienate half of all the possible alignments in an RPG and disable those roles in the game.</blockquote>
How is it antisocial to want to roleplay in an online game with other players, where the only thing you're not interested in is fighting other players? Just because you want to fight other people doesn't mean that the rest of the world should be interested in being your opponent. Fighting other people is *one* dynamic of an online game. It's not the only one. In short, there's nothing antisocial about not wanting to fight against other players, any more than a PvP player not wanting to mine or craft is antisocial. it's simply a playstyle preference.
<blockquote>?because it hurts your feelings to know someone is better than you. in my opinion, you should go play a single player game, or get your own ******** server.? and ?******** SHOULD BE THE EXCEPTION, NOT THE NORM.?

? i put ?in my opinion? there for a reason. </blockquote>
Yeah, right. PvE players are in the majority, so how about *you* PvP players go and find yourself an alternate server. We have a right to be here, you don't, in my opinion.

Note: The above opinion is fictitious. I do not have that opinion. I believe that all of us have a right to be here. We have been promised a game which will cater to each of our playstyles, so there should be no need for any of us to go anywhere else. Saying anything else is inflammatory, as I hope you now realize.

As for your last paragraph, I think I made it clear in my first post. If you're seeking a discussion, you need to avoid the inflammatory language, or people *will* pick you up on it, and then your nice discussion thread turns into a flamewar. If your opinions of PvE players (note: NOT carebears) are as bad as they seem, keep them to yourself (although personally, I think you need reeducation. )

 

@Sirinan:

Sirinan is convinced that him and Rune are the "majority" of players. I am interested in knowing where he is getting his figures from. I hope it wouldn't be too much of a leap of faith to just assume he's pulling them out of thin air. No, your "type" (as we were referred to in a previous post) wouldn't complete a logical fallacy as bad as that one. Would they?

I think the game should be PVP and open and players should expect this game to be PVP as RG has also posted previously. The main quest arch/storyline will primarily PVE and players will be safe while completing those quests. There will be quests which require you to travel into hazardous areas (heaven forbid). The PVE players also will not have as much access to content as PVP players, this is natural. PVP players are choosing to play the entire game; rather than relying on the game developers to encircle them within a sphere of invulnerability.

Sirinan, you are either a child or just attempting to troll the forums to make players angry. I am so sick of your personal attacks on other players, it isn't even funny. After reading the last part of your post I don't care anymore. "...Although personally, I think you need reeducation." I tried to respect you as long as I could, I can no longer tolerate the personal attacks. You told a previous member to shut the **** up, 1 person that they are a "waste of space." I am sick of it. That was just inappropriate and rude, quite frankly I am fed up with it.

 

@Sirinan: first let me address one thing you said: "How is it antisocial to want to roleplay in an online game with other players, where the only thing you?re not interested in is fighting other players?"

-- because that ONE thing alienates HALF of all possible ROLES in a ROLE PLAYING game. that means you are not allowing half of the possible roles to participate in the society. that is antisocial. if you take games like WOW or Guildwars, youll see that the majority of players play both pvp and pve. very few only play pve. that makes the pve-only crowd a minority, but on the world server their ruleset is the norm. this boggles my mind. thats why i cannot play it. i dont want violence on tap arena. i dont want to role play a gladiator. if i wanted match up's i would play an RTS or an FPS.

that said, u know what? maybe i am blind-sighted here... I would really like to know why it is bothersome to have competition and you only like collaboration.

I guess my blind sightedness is in that i am assuming that the only difference between a monster and another player is the ego part. why does the whole win/loose thing ruin the game? would the game be fun if you never died (obviously not)? why would it be fun if you never died to a person?

I want to venture to guess that the griefing and taunting that sometimes occurs is traumatic (not literally, but in the context of a video game) enough to make you loose interest in the game? is there any way we can mold the game to have no griefing and then would you guys like PVP and PK's? is that it?

 

@Ultima Aficionado: I still think @Sirinan is at least trying to participate and debate in this thread (haven't read his other stuff, don't care that much). People are pissed on both sides. I also know that people are of all ages and backgrounds and everything. Frustrated and civil is ok, even maybe a hint of rudeness. So far in my thread he isn't trolling like @rune_74... I think maybe we can get some insight here.

I just want to play a game that I love as much as UO man. hehe.

 

@lordrex:

I agree, he just isn't going about it the right way. I guess at least he is still remaining civil, although he does seem to attack people; but I'll assume that's how he deals with his frustration.

Yeah, me too.

 

@Sirinan: i really want your perspective here, hope you come back. bring your friends, lets keep it civil.

 

It's hard to track what I post where because every thread under PvP seems to boil down to the definition of consensual PvP. There are a lot of people out there who don't like getting ganked PvEing. It's a case where what makes the game fun and exciting to one, ruins the game for another.

No one knows what the final result of this project will be but RG and the team knows where UO failed in terms of PvP (which I maintain was more of open world issues where people had no direction from the game and never advanced beyond being "a newbie player"), they know what was great about the game, and they will do their best here to employ mechanics that satisfies both parties.

A valid point, even though at times I dislike admitting this, is a lot of these PvE people love Ultima and didn't play UO. Who am I to say their love of RG creations is any less than mine?

RG knows his devout UO followers want a no restrictions world. RG knows he has a group of gamers who don't want to be griefed. I believe he cares more about his legacy as a game developer than he does appealing to the largest demographic. It that weren't true he wouldn't have left the UO project while it was still making money. One of the few out there that believes creating a quality product the gamers enjoy is more important than the bottom line (within reason, it's still a business after all).

If he fails to satisfy both sides of the spectrum the game will fail and we all lose.

That being said, let's stay on topic so they devs can read ideas not pages nonsense. Whether or not people agree, I want our ideas heard so we all get a better game. 10 years or more waiting for a game, it's just been too damn long since this man has started a project like this for us, we should be working just as hard as the dev team to make it work.

 

@lordrex
Well your first post was pretty obviously structured to be a digital middle finger to PVE players lol. All of your points were centered around the PVE play style being inferior and explaining why it should not exist, all the while calling them antisocial and telling them they don't like something because they are not good at it.

The thing here is PVE players accept that PVP is a legitimate way to play and they want it to exist, they just don't want to take part in it. A small subset of PVP players, of which you're apparently one, think PVE is not a valid play style and even though the game as explained by the Devs supports both it should only have PVP. You're asking for the the PVE players to be forced to play your way or leave. Do you see why you're being painted as the bad guy here? The people you're rallying against are fighting for everyone to get what they want including PVP for you, and you're fighting against them selfishly to get only what you want at their expense. Its as hurtful to them as it would be to you if they said "No PVP at all, this game should be 100% PVE only" And I have yet to see a single person say that.

I think you will find PVE players is they are very social people, they still want to meet new people, they still want to join guilds, hunt monsters, do quests together, craft things... They just do not want to take part in stabbing random people, and they don't want to be stabbed. If anything they see the small subset of PVPer's that PK as the antisocial people.

Personally I am on the fence between being a PVP and PVE player, I love me some organized group PVP, but I have never found PVP to be as challenging as a properly balanced hard PVE raid. Does everyone feel the same way? Nope, and that's OK. What's fun to me isn't fun to everyone and I wouldn't want to exclude others from having fun too.

As for UO having the best PVP I personally found other MMO's to have had more enjoyable &amp; more punishing PVP. Heck Neocron felt more brutal then UO without full loot, I vividly remember the GM's getting annoyed at players staying in safe zones and not PVPing. Their answer... turn into irradiated roaches and start killing players until it was safer to be in the PVP zones than the Safe zones UO was certainly a pioneer with PVP, but I personally enjoyed PVP in DAoC / Warhammer / Neocron far more than in launch UO, and while I like PVP and loved UO I am in no hurry to go back to the way it was.

 

@lordrex: Although I don't entirely agree with your aggressive attitude, I agree with most of what you are saying in regards to PVP vs PK vs PVE.
I played as a PK in a guild on Europa; I would always role-play when out 'murdering innocents'.
We would PVP versus the other PK guilds, or sometimes team up with them against the faction guys.

This OPEN play style is what makes an MMO an MMORPG. (in my honest opinion).

Please, at least, let us have an option to 'turn on' this kind of play style - I'm sure a lot of people will.

 

@Elsad:

I have heard the argument that the PVP community is the minority. I do not think that is the case in a game created by the founder of Ultima and Ultima Online. I think a large part of the fan base for SoTA will inevitably be those people. Thus, without a metric of some data you managed to find I will assume you are speaking nonsense as far as your first point is concerned. We honestly don't know whether the majority of players HERE are PVPers or PVEers.

The PVE players are requesting the game shroud them in an invisible barrier. Thus, this diminished the PVP aspect of the game. They are essentially asking for the same thing except for implementation by the developers rather than the relying on freedom and an open world to construct their own barriers. Nobody is asking for this game to be 100% PVP actually, in Rex's first post I saw examples of places where PVP CLEARLY would not occur.

I think UO had the best PVP in any game to date, but that is my personal opinion. I think that if you had stuck around you would have felt the same way. It doesn't have to be the way it was in 1997, there should be consequences for the murderers. They should just not be restricted from a large percentage of the game. You did bring up some excellent points though.

 

@UA - <blockquote>Sirinan is convinced that him and Rune are the ?majority? of players.</blockquote>
I'm convinced of nothing of the sort. I've made no such claims.
<blockquote>Sirinan, you are either a child or just attempting to troll the forums to make players angry. I am so sick of your personal attacks on other players, it isn?t even funny.</blockquote>
I went overboard once, when Ara was trolling me. I regret that. I have not personally attacked anyone else.
<blockquote>After reading the last part of your post I don?t care anymore. ??Although personally, I think you need reeducation.?</blockquote>
The smiley on the end was deliberate. Did you see the smiley?
<blockquote>You told a previous member to shut the **** up</blockquote>
That was part of the aforementioned Ara incident, and I apologized. Moreover, that post was deleted by Firelotus as part of cleaning that thread, as it should have been. You, however, despite all this, continue to rave on about it. Who's trolling who now?
<blockquote> 1 person that they are a ?waste of space.?</blockquote>
No, I did not.

I have done nothing wrong except lose my cool for a few posts responding to Ara, which were provoked by the attitude and responses in that thread. I have done nothing wrong since, and I challenge you to prove otherwise.

@lordrex - "because that ONE thing alienates HALF of all possible ROLES in a ROLE PLAYING game."

I beg to differ. Co-op play is as much a part of MMOs as PvP play. There's also the roles that keep the economy going in games like UO, such as crafting and mining. It's all roleplaying, and it's all got just as much of a right to exist as PvP play.

As for why I *personally* am not interested in PvP? Partially it just doesn't interest me. I feel no need to prove myself in battle with other people. I've also seen what *some* PvP players do, in terms of their behaviour, when they beat someone, and find it pretty repulsive. I'm not interested in being teabagged by an eight year old who happens to have better reflexes than me.

My personal reason will not be the only one. There are likely as many reasons as there are PvE players. Some of them may fit the stereotype you painted, but it is only some of them.

 

@Ultima Aficionado

I made no mention of there being more PVE players or PVP players anywhere in my post, so I am not sure where you got that from. I did say a small subset of PVP players didn't think PVE was a valid game play style, is that what you're referring to? That is not saying PVPers are a small subset of players.

I see what you're saying about the "invisible barrier" but I disagree it harms PVP for anyone but the PKs who I honestly don't mind not catering to. As even RG has said PVE players if forced into PVP will simply quit and not play at all, which reduces the funding for the game and hurts everyone. Taking that into account, what I fail to see is how it hurts you? Either its forced PVP so they quit and you don't see them, or they get to play in a PVE play style without PVP and you don't see them. Either way you will never see them, so why does a solution that allows them to play and support Portalarium with their money upset you?

As for me sticking around I played UO for 7 years from beta onwards, both on Lake Superior and Siege Perilous. So I saw all UO had to offer, when I say I think other MMO's have done PVP better I mean it from personal experience