Something that really burns my butt

Actually that's a very good analogy. Only you're taking it to an extreme that is not going to happen since we have (and always will have) a 100% consensual pvp environment.

Will there be laughter in the movie? Maybe even talking? Yes.
Will some other theater goers be too tall for you to see over? Yes.
Will some people go to the bathroom and interrupt your experience as they move about? Yes.

All of this happens in a MULTIPLAYER environment, and yes it can impact the level of fun you have. You also have the option to stay at home and watch the movie when it comes out on DVD (single player online mode) where you will see the same exact movie that everyone else did without the chance of being mildly interrupted in the public version of said movie. There is no PVP involved here, only people being people, and you being annoyed by it. Now what movie theaters could do is they could make individual sound proof seating for everyone in the theater so that the experience was much more like it would be at home, but then all the people that showed up to the movie theater for the COLLECTIVE experience of watching the movie on a big screen together would be short changed sitting in their little sound proof boxes that turned what used to be a grand event into a sterilized overpriced individual viewing just because SOME people couldn't handle the reality of people being people.

 

Im glad this is in general chat...


Based on your own observations, SPO is available and enables anyone who wants full access to resources to collect to their hearts desire. Since you can freely transition between the two online modes, your argument of limited resources doesnt hold weight from a big picture perspective because they could gather just as many resources in SPO as they could with instanced nodes.

SPO resources are immediately transferable to MPO.

Im just not seeing a downside.

 

Actually, I believe the intention of the developers is to make it so resources are competed against between SPO and Multiplayer. I don't know exactly how or when they plan to do this, but I know it is supposed to work something like that - the concept being that everyone is in the same economy even if they're not competing directly for the same resources (by being in the exact same scene). I can't answer for what the devs haven't explained though, I don't know how that's supposed to work. I only know that resources are not supposed to be gathered endlessly in the same scenes.

You're failing to see the downside because you don't recognize the loss of player interaction as a downside. I can't help you with that. I can only say that my playingstyle which does recognize it should not be dismissed for the sake of your playing style.

 

You go to a theater for the big screen and big sound experience. Unless you're a social masochist, you don't go for talking people and small bladder interuptions.

 

I haven't heard anything about competing resources in SPO vs MPO being the intent, that 'could' be a game changer, but it sure seems counterintuitive to the whole reason for having SPO.

If that is in fact true then instanced nodes wouldn't make sense, but we will have to agree to disagree on the other 8 reasons we've cycled through in this thread.

 

Well sure you don't...

But you don't go there thinking that won't happen either. You go there knowing that people are people and the collective experience of watching the movie together is part of the event. Otherwise you'd just not go. There's no one going to a public movie theater that says "If only I could watch this at home on a giant screen with big surround sound". That's just not happening. The other people, being AWAY from your house is part of the draw to public theaters. Yes, some bad things happen there from time to time. But overall it's better than being in a little closet where nothing goes wrong. That's why people pay so much money to go there.

It's the same thing with watching a sporting event in a stadium rather than watching it at home. I took my family to a Browns game this year and it cost me like 2k! Why didn't I just watch it at home for free? No weather, no travel, no dealing with drunk guys, no dealing with stupid opposing fans, no crowds, no waiting to use the rest room, no bad seats or angles, no trying to figure out what happened on the last play. The answer is, my family and I had an event that couldn't be reproduced at our home. We'll remember that for the rest of our lives because of all the things that happened that couldn't have happened if we just sat there watching it on TV.

Multiplayer is SUPPOSED to have an unsanitized experience. That's what makes it fun.

 

You might be right on the first incident, I wasn't paying much attention to the young fellow. But the second time the guy (I assume male) saw me start chopping, waited for the wolf to attack and then swarmed in.

 

Im very much a proponent for social interaction when it's respectful and positive, but im also the 6'2 240 guy that will tell a yappy teen to shut his mouth in a full theater if he is disturbing everyone in it. I didn't pay to listen to him.

You're right that it's part of RL social events, but it's still a negative interaction that doesnt need to be present for me to enjoy myself and thus, I prefer it be controlled in a game environment where it's fully controllable.

I get you Drocis, I really do. You want the game to feel authenticly real and you want to feel the shockwave of every players actions on their environment and be able to visibly see its effect on everything it touches around it.

That's called real life homeboy. I'm here to play a stress free game.

 

That is, in fact, the entire premise and goal of Pathfinder Online, in it's current version.
I know, insane, right? But that's literally their ace-in-the-hole for that entire game. Resource scarcity drives conflict, because "no-one else is doing it".

 

I don't want Darkfall Online. I don't want Life if Feudal.

But I would like some challenge and interaction that I don't have control over. There's a balance to be found here, and too often our community seeks to put a stack of lead weights on the side of the scales that represents convenience and "stress free". It's something that I hope the developers are conscious to. For my part, I'm trying to recreate that balance in Rats Nest, but I don't yet have the tools to do so. Right now I have just a check box that says "pvp" and essentially allows for pure chaos without reasonable controls. I really wish the devs would put some tools in place that would ramp that down a bit. But even more so I'd like the devs to maintain a balance in the rest of the world despite the constant calls to remove all risk of negative interaction from even being a possibility.

 

I feel you, there is a balance and I won't pretend that I know where the line should be, I dont. All I know is that things like instanced resources became a reality to elminate negative confrontation and maximize fun for the greatest majority.

One size never fits all.

 

Having instanced resources in MPO with per player individual respawns (like in Guild Wars 2) would increase the number of players in MPO at any given time because more players wouldn't feel it necessary to log into SPO in order to gather resources.
This increases social interaction which is positive in the eyes of many.
There would be no need to rush to a resource and more time to calmly say hello to others etc.

 

Actually I could see them tying virtue to loot stealing. Of course they'd have to make the act of "I'm going to chop that tree" some kind of actionable event where the player claimed it first. Then to be fair so some one couldn't just claim a tree for their own (as a bot) and constantly camp it, there would haven't to be some kind of way to challenge a player for the right to have that tree (PVP sounds reasonable) but I doubt that would be supported by some players.

That's the type of interaction I think makes sense though. You want the tree? Fine. You want to steal the tree? Fine. There are acts of virtue tied to that. Is it virtuous to steal the tree? No. Is is virtuous to camp the tree? No. Is it virtuous to fight over the tree? No. Problem solved, right?

 

I am all for positive interactions... I just fear for the flood of resources on the market that will remove any possibility for being a crafter to be profitable. When a single node, guarded by two or three enemies, can be harvested by all players in an area until the enemies respawn, you get a glut of resources. When a single wolf killed by one person can be harvested by anyone that happens across it until the time it takes for the corpse to despawn (which is a very long time), you get a glut of resources. Soon resources become so inexpensive that there is no demand for resources because every individual person can get them cheap enough to level up crafting themselves and make their own gear. Then the only way to make money in the game will be by adventuring.. By killing mobs for money. FPO is easy enough if you want to gather resources.. no need to make the game easy mode.

#1node1loot

 

Oh man, this is exactly the sort of thing I would do to people if I were allowed to roleplay a different person in this game lol.

 

Would you apply this argument to global chat. If not, why not?

 

it would be nice to be able to go chase him down and pk him but that isnt allowed. kinda sucks

 

That's a fair question. The answer is that I would apply the same logic to global chat, although I fully support giving players the ability to /ignore that chat. Just as we have 100% consensual PVP, we also have the ability to chat and /ignore people that say things we don't like.

However the economic competition between players is not impacted by chat nor PVP (in an environment where all pvp is consensual). Again, there's a scale to balance here, and if I'm balancing the scale based on my preferences I would nudge PVP into more people's lives while still keeping the game 100% consensual pvp. Essentially though, what I'm saying is that the idea of simply removing the possibility of competing resources is something that tips the scales almost full to the side of having no meaningful interaction in the game at all.

If you're not competing for resources, what part of multiplayer do you have to pay attention to other players? The answer is, you don't. There's nothing left in the game to make Multiplayer mode anything less than a private chat room where you can talk and see only the people you want to interact with (so long as they agree). I understand that selective multiplayer is geared towards this type of interaction, but we're supposed to have regional economies and I personally would think that means seeing pepole regionally and at the very least competing for the same regional resources.

 

Don't talk for other players, please. Just speak for yourself. You don't know what "most" players want anymore than I do.

I will say this however, one of the M's in MMO stands for multiplayer, and if we're creating a game where multiple players can't interact with each other...that's not really a multiplayer game. It's something else that I don't really wish to play.

 

It may be for the person who "stole" the resource!