The Glass is Half Empty - A look inside why people are opposed to Open PvP and Full Loot

Discussion in 'PvP Gameplay' started by antalicus, Aug 28, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Sir Tim

    Sir Tim Avatar

    Messages:
    312
    Likes Received:
    181
    Trophy Points:
    43
    On your first stence, I can reverse it and it is still true "Someone stating that they don't want to personally encounter forced concesual PvP does not constitute an unreasonable limit placed on those who do." So I dont know if you are trying to prove my point, but you are.

    Letting people play how they want should be a moral objective. Implying that they are a sociopath cause thats how they want to PLAY a GAME is involves analysis in the other direction.

    HOWEVER, this is a GAME. treating this with the intesity that its Sociopathic to want a feature in a game is like saying its Sociopathic to kill a mosqito, to give you an extreme example to stress the obsurity of implying we are feeding Sociopathic behaviors.

    You killed an NPC in a game! OMG. This game is going to be REALLY boring for anyone with these views. Its not titled "Shroud of the Sitting in Our Rooms Twiddling Our Thumbs"


    That was an interesting forum. I actually JUST(yesterday in fact) wrote a lengthy letter to Starr Long on this very matter. Its good to see others are noticing the same things I am. It wil lhopefully show I'm not the only one that sees these bias.

    But again... its not only a loaded word... its completely incorrectly applied. This is a GAME. A Sociopath may be able to play a game, but killing something in a game doesnt make you a Sociopath. Anyone who have ever played ANY Ultima Online gmae could thne be considered a Sociopath. Its all pixels and data for our entertainment.
     
  2. MagiK

    MagiK Avatar

    Messages:
    624
    Likes Received:
    644
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA, Maryland
    Sir_Tim,

    It is a game, that does not change the underlying psychological motivations that the VERY real people who play the game have.
     
    Phredicon likes this.
  3. FireLotus

    FireLotus Royal Bard & Master Dabbler Dev Emeritus

    Messages:
    964
    Likes Received:
    6,438
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Anchorage
    You are absolutely right CountessCaterina, it isn't doing anyone here, or Shroud of the Avatar, any good what so ever. When I first launched these forums, I made a post to let everyone know what to expect from these forums. It read:

    The way I see it, bickering with each other, slinging insults, stereotypes, and generalizations is not being good stewards to this community nor to New Britannia itself. And I completely understand WHY some people feel the need to go to a third party site to rant about the game and the community, as it is because they KNOW they will not get away with it here. But it is still a pretty cowardly thing to do, IMHO.

    I do not moderate with the heavy hand some would like you to believe I do, nor do I target a certain type of player or play style to moderate, again, despite what some would have you believe. Do certain users lean towards starting trouble and trolling. Oh yes, and they know they do! They are even proud of it. And they are often the first to cry foul if someone calls them on it. But I do not like to censor ideas, and only step in when it is clear in a thread, like this one, that all meaningful discussion has ceased.

    Warnings have been issued privately, but consider this a public warning as well. Be careful what you ask for. I ~CAN~ come in heavy handed and moderate the crap out of you guys, but I don't out of respect for your ideas and the belief that there is a lot we can accomplish together and creativity is squashed whenever censorship is the norm. But I expect you to show the same level of respect to each other, even when you disagree with one another.
     
  4. MagiK

    MagiK Avatar

    Messages:
    624
    Likes Received:
    644
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA, Maryland
    I am a bit confused. Are you saying that it is your expectation that we NOT disagree with each other? that we should all have the same views?
    I understand not to pick on individuals and to be nice to new people (like myself) who re-ask old questions... But The structure of the Forums lead me to believe that differing views were welcome. For my part...if you wish for me to drop the issue of PvP v PvE Im happy to do so. As for disagreeing with a point of view...where does supporting ones view end and bickering begin?

    I know you have not been heavy handed, and I am not trying to "poke the bear" I am just trying to get clarification.

    Thank you for your patients.

    P.S. As a parent I can appreciate that bickering can also be defending ones view point.....any parent knows this :)
     
  5. FireLotus

    FireLotus Royal Bard & Master Dabbler Dev Emeritus

    Messages:
    964
    Likes Received:
    6,438
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Anchorage
    We WELCOME differing ideas. That's where creativty can blossom! But there are constructive ways to disagree and there are also destructive ways to do so. Bickering tends to be unproductive and creates a negative atmosphere.
     
    MagiK and Umbrae like this.
  6. Chripsy

    Chripsy Avatar

    Messages:
    142
    Likes Received:
    187
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Thornton, Illinois
    PVP and open loot would be cool but just like life there should be consecuences.. If you get killed trying to murder me you shouldn't be able to respawn for a whole week. run around as a ghost and contemplate your actions. kind of like in UO where you were considered a criminal and unable to enter a town without gaurds coming down on you. however if you do succeed in killing me then like in life you can steal my loot.
     
  7. Silent Strider

    Silent Strider Avatar

    Messages:
    1,067
    Likes Received:
    1,343
    Trophy Points:
    113

    While killing someone in a game does not make the player a sociopath, murderer, whatever, the behavior in the game is, to a certain extent, a reflection of the player's personality; the fact SotA is a game doesn't completely isolate actions inside the game from the player's personality, a fact RG himself intends to bank on in order to create deeper and more engaging gameplay.

    It's not a direct match, of course, specially because the social consequences of actions in game are far different than for the same actions in the real world; thus, it takes far more than just liking PvP or attacking rich merchants to even get close to the kind of behavior that can label someone a sociopath. On the other hand, if a player effectively plays with the stated intent to ruin the game for other players, chances are good he is a real life sociopath.

    BTW, to the best of my knowledge UO had a real (as in, acknowledged by the devs, though not necessarily serious) problem with sociopath players. To put it simply, the game's PvP mode originally allowed players to hurt and grief other players in a quite effective way, so, besides the usual PvP crowd, the game attracted some players that were only interested in hurting and griefing. I don't think it was widespread, and part of the PvPers even took on themselves to try to keep down that kind of destructive activity and help victims, but pretending the problem doesn't exist doesn't help in tackling it or preventing the bad side-effects from harming the game itself.
     
    MalakBrightpalm likes this.
  8. TemplarAssassin

    TemplarAssassin Avatar

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    456
    Trophy Points:
    75
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    RUSSIA
    Am I the only one who finds this thread and the discussions in here too nerdy even for an RPG game forum?
    God, whats wrong with you guys. Why did you even chose a Richard Garriott online multiplayer RPG if not for the freedom it could provide? There's so many mmos without any pvp at all, why would you ever want to play SotA?
     
    Sir_Tim likes this.
  9. Adiun Tesserande

    Adiun Tesserande Avatar

    Messages:
    577
    Likes Received:
    670
    Trophy Points:
    75
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    College of Arms Building, Kingsport
    Because there don't exist any other games where I can be a beekeeper, a playwright, a farmer, a chef, a carpenter, or any other non-violent vocation without feeling that I'm limited in my ability to advance because I don't also want to be a crusading destroyer of all those who stand in my way.
     
    skinned and Phredicon like this.
  10. TemplarAssassin

    TemplarAssassin Avatar

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    456
    Trophy Points:
    75
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    RUSSIA
    In fact there are such games.
    Minecraft and Heaven&Hearth, and the next game from the creators of H&H, forgot its name.
     
  11. Adiun Tesserande

    Adiun Tesserande Avatar

    Messages:
    577
    Likes Received:
    670
    Trophy Points:
    75
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    College of Arms Building, Kingsport
    The graphics of Minecraft, though. I just can't stand them. As for Heaven&Hearth, I've never heard of it until now, I'm afraid.

    Having checked it out, though, again... the graphics. Sorry. As well as the warnings that PKing is about as vicious as I've ever heard of it having been on UO.

    But ultimately, the reason I want to play this is that not everyone who came to Lord British's games came via UO. I never played it, for example. To me, U6, U7, U7.2, U8, and U9 are the games I know. Those are why I'm coming back.
     
  12. Baene Thorrstad

    Baene Thorrstad Avatar

    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    499
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Providence, RI
    Add in some occasional non-consentual PvP when I choose to, and a whole lot of consentual PvP, and you have the game I want to play.

    *shrugs* UO has been the closest to what I want for years, why should I think SotA would be aything other than a better implementation of that?

    Free-For-All PvP is not what defines a so called "Richard Garriott" game. There is a whole slew of other things that defines that that I throughly enjoy and want.

    Whats so wrong with wanting the best of both worlds? Why cant we have both aspects and let the players choose which they want? Makes perfect sense to me...
     
  13. Lheiah

    Lheiah Avatar

    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Hello everyone! I just backed today and have not followed the discussions on the web site, nor do I have the time to go back and catch up on thousands of posts. I would like to provide somewhat of an introduction to myself and also state my opionion on this whole pvp vs pve topic, since I do not plan to revisit such a debated topic and I'm pretty sure the dev's know more about game design than I do.

    I played UO for about 3 years, pre and post Trammel. I was the guy that always got his ass kicked, tried to avoid pk'ers as much as possible, and spent probably the first 3 months or so being not much more than a beggar picking up items dropped on the ground to get resupplied to go back out into the wilderness if for nothing more than to hand over my new items to another pk'er. I was never even decent at pvp and pretty much hated it at its core. I took a break in gaming, but eventually found my way to WoW. I tried pvp in WoW, but the only thing I ever did was run out into the middle of a battle ground and die. My entire experience with pvp was pretty much, respawn, then run out and die. I died so fast I couldn't even begin to learn how to pvp or what I was doing wrong. I eventually got frustrated enough that I gave up on pvp and did not pvp for quite some time. And for the record, I'm pretty much a solo player and have always been to some extent. Yes, I had my raiding days and many years of progression content over various games.

    WoW really drew me in for awhile, but to be honest, ever since leaving UO I always felt like I was missing something, which came apparent more and more with each passing game. I couldn't put my finger on it and always blamed the devs for lack on inovation and developing the same game as the one I just left except with a different skin attached. Two or three months would pass, the glitter would wear off and I was on to the next game. What I have finally come to realize what I was missing in a game was the struggle to live and persist that UO gave me. I hated pk'ers as much as the next person, and still do, but it was that struggle that made the game.

    What was the turning point for me in pvp? Well for one, I broke down and started asking questions I was embarrassed to ask. How do I keybind? How do I macro? And the most important, over a two month period of time I learned to strafe and go the direction I wanted to go when I strafed. Keybinding, macroing, and straffing taught me a valuable skill; how to fight on the run or at least keep it as mobile as I could if I was playing a caster. I still suck at duels, mainly because I still freeze to some point, but love group combat. I still am not a fan of open world pvp mainly because of the toxic behavior that occurs. People just don't get it or care to one degree or another, when enough is enough, and that their actions have become toxic to the other side.

    So, here's my two cents to help resolve the issue...

    I personally believe it is not death or loss of items that puts such a sour taste in people's mouth toward pvp. It is the toxic behavior of a minority group of players that can't get it through their heads that what they are doing is not fun to the other side. And, if they do get it, then what is going on? They are negative energy feeders(NEF) and get their enjoyment from the "pain" of others. This is the group that needs to be curtailed, that needs rules, and causes a waste of development time that could be used to make even a better game for everyone, including themselves.

    First thing I suggest is the NEF buff, or in another words the "GET OFF OF ME, BRO!" buff. Plain and simple, it is a rage counter that eventually gets to the point that a player "enrages", just like a boss enrage, and they turn around a one shot a pk'er, even if it's a fist stroke. An example, I'm out mining, naked of course just like UO; a pk'er comes by, kills me and takes all my ore. Am I pissed? Yes. Am I enraged? No. But, if my normal play sessions last say 2 to 3 hours, and I have spent 60% of my time corpse walking, 35% of my time mining, and 5% of my time running from a pk'er and giving him my ore. Then yeh, at that point I'm enraged. As this happens day in and day out, week after week...it gets to the point that I say frak this, I'm done, and move on to the next game. Who actually won here, especially in the long run? I sure didn't. Did the pk'er? Did the game company?

    So how do we get to the point that the NEF buff actually engages? I believe everyone you interact with, you get a rep bar with that person that moves up and down over time. It would have to be somewhat complex. It would have to take into account short term kills and long term kills, who is the agressor, etc. It has to be as complex as necessary to ensure, as we as a community deem, toxic behavior in minimized as much as reasonably possible.

    The short fall I see in this idea is that there is a whole lot of data that has to moved back and forth, which will introduce more lag. I am not a programmer, but I have taken some programming courses. My thinking is why does this type of system have to be "instantaneously" upadated, which is where I would see the lag coming into play. Instead of having a hard boundary, why not a soft boundary, so that the system can determine if your in a high packet demand situation and therfore not update, but wait to say your in town, looking at your bank or whatever, then send those packets and get updated with the server. I kind of see this as one day a certain thing might not upset me, but other days, the same situation might get me pissed off to no end. So instead of saying when I hit 100 rage, I get the NEF buff against an individual, but instead, say I get the NEF buff somewhere between 90 and 110. Yeh, it does introduce some RNG into it, but I see it less detrimental to the game and community than allowing toxic behavior to run unchecked.

    What else is wrong with this idea? Well, the big thing I see is that it will suck for those individuals or groups that say want to lay claim to a given area and defend it, especially in a sandbox style game. My answer is similar to the Civilization 5 style hexagonal map with regards to territory control. In this example I'm the pk'er: I lay down claim of a given hex, which would work well with the land plots. So I or my guild want to take control of say, a open world dungeon, because I know everyone is going to want to come to this dungeon. I lay down claim and I automatically get influence in that hex, it's my plot. Inside my influence zone, when I kill somene that invades my territory, I don't get any enrage points toward the NEF buff with that individual. I don't get to lay down claim on the same hex as the entrance to the dungeon, but say the adjacent hex. I can increase my influence and gain more hexes as my influence grows in a hex. So, say, as me a pk'er, I would have to say get 10,000 kills in a month inside that hex that contains the dungeon entrance to maintain enfluence and suspersede NEF buff. If, I want to control a 3rd hex(landplot plue 2 additinal hexes) I would have to get 30k kills to maintain influence on that 3rd hex. And so on with each additional hex influence cost on a hyperbolic function. This would make even extremely large guilds have a hard time of say controlling more than 5 or 6 hexes total. And all could be lost, if the requirements were not met, all the way to the intial land plot which you could never loose as long as the taxes were paid.

    This could become almost a Game of Thrones mini type game, where I, Mr. Land Plot owner could swear fealty to someone else and automatically extend their influence over my hex. But, at the same time, a bunch of land owners could switch their fealty and the initial "governor" would loose influence in that territory and that influence would go to someone else. With the point being, that city-states or even nations could grow and fall.

    Another part of this system that would be beneficial is limited mentorship. In many fantasy settings and stories there is usually some form of master and apprentice. I really think of the Sith in Star Wars. They were much stronger fighting together than when fighting solo. So why not develop a system that rewards players for taking on a apprentice or finding a master. And when they are within close proximity to one another, they get this reward. The premise is that people that are really good at pvp would want to go out and find people that are not good at pvp and help them develop their pvp expertise. The biggest thing I see deters a persons pvp talents is death, the longer one can survive, the better their pvp skills will become. So, make it so that these hardened pvp'er have a reason to go out and want to "show the ropes" to less experienced pvp'ers. After a month or so, the master has to go out and find a new apprentice and the old apprentice can never be that master's apprentice again.

    And last, but not least, the dreaded pvp flag. Why make it a hard on/off toggle switch? Why not make it somewhat of a slider scale? With, say, far left being similar to the pvp flag being off as we are use to. But, instead, everyone will have to do some amount of pvp, but if they chose hard left, then the NEF buff kicks in much sooner. All the way right on the slider would be the same as "pvp flag on" as we are use to it, but instead that person's enrage timer would never count up since they would be saying I'm ok with any form of toxic behavior, it's the game I want to play. But, for those that go full left, they are basically saying, ok I will pvp, but Bro you're not allowed to sit here and kill me my entire gaming session...move the frak on!

    The system needs to encourage proper social behavior even inside a pvp game. Whatever the community or developers deem toxic behavior is, needs to stamped out with a zero tolerance policy. The system should encourage toxic players to quit throwing sand in the sandbox, and to care about the well being of community and growth of the game. If there are more people in the game, then there are more people to pk; but, the enrage points are spread out amongst a large number of people. That means we can still have villians in the game, but there villiany is spread out amongst a larger group so that no one individual experiences moments that are game breaking for them.

    I don't know if my opinions are right or wrong. I do feel that the approriate amount of development time should be put into this delicate subject to solve the issue, if for no other reason than to nail it on the head the first time, so that future development time doesn't have to be wasted on this topic. This topic has been the bane of every online game out there and a solution needs to be found. I loved and hated pre-Trammel UO, but Trammel is what eventually lead me to leave UO, not the pk'ers.

    Thanks for everyone's time that read this wall of text. I hope everyone can find enjoyment and a home in SoTA; the noobs, the pve'ers, the pvp'ers, the pk'ers, the heroes, and the villians.
     
    Lord Ravnos likes this.
  14. MalakBrightpalm

    MalakBrightpalm Avatar

    Messages:
    1,342
    Likes Received:
    1,480
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sol system.
    ...o_O
     
  15. Baene Thorrstad

    Baene Thorrstad Avatar

    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    499
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Providence, RI
    Meaning the ability to choose to engage in what everyone is terming "Open PvP", "Free-For-All", "kill any one anywhere for any reason", etc type of PvP. The selective multiplayer idea that has already been brought up by the devs should allow this, and therefore should allow everyone to get that which they want, regardless of what it is they want, unless what they want is forced PvP on those who do not want it. Other than that, it covers all the bases.
     
  16. MalakBrightpalm

    MalakBrightpalm Avatar

    Messages:
    1,342
    Likes Received:
    1,480
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sol system.
    Ok, that makes more sense.
     
  17. Coren

    Coren Avatar

    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Yeah, I was about to go o_O myself. :)

    What you describe is unequivocally consentual PvP (the keyword here is "choose"), and nobody's against that! I'm probably going to engage it in occasionally, just as I played on Siege Perillous now and then. What many object to in this thread is the "by refusing to be our victim, you deny us our god-given right to be predators" attitude displayed by some of the more... zealous proponents of PvP here.
     
    skinned and Phredicon like this.
  18. Baene Thorrstad

    Baene Thorrstad Avatar

    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    499
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Providence, RI
    Exactly. THAT is what I'm against and what doesnt make sense to me.
     
    Silent Strider and Phredicon like this.
  19. MalakBrightpalm

    MalakBrightpalm Avatar

    Messages:
    1,342
    Likes Received:
    1,480
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sol system.
    I normally ignore your grievous crimes against English. In this case, one of those errors has become the basis of your arguement. "Forced" and "Consensual" are mutually contradictory terms. Anything consensual does not need to be, indeed CANNOT be forced, anything forced is by definition non-consensual.

    So no, you cannot reverse the statement, not if you are actually speaking English. And no, I'm not really proving your point.
     
  20. High Baron Asguard

    High Baron Asguard Avatar

    Messages:
    1,832
    Likes Received:
    1,904
    Trophy Points:
    125

    Lets see, Ultima 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, SI, and even 8 and 9

    Ie the chance to play THOSE games again, the chance for RG to make up for abandoning those fans to go make UO

    If you want UO so much GO PLAY UO, I belive its still running

    Anyway

    This the thread which never ends,
    yes it goes on and on my friend,
    some people started writing it not knowing what it was, and they'll continue writting it for every just because
    this is the thread which never ends
    yes it goes on and on my friend,
    some people started writing it not knowing what it was, and they'll continue writting it for every just because
    this is the thread which never ends
     
    Veskandar, skinned, Phredicon and 3 others like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.