Originally posted by LynxJSAOriginally posted by Mrbloodworth
My stance, and the correct one, is that your going to have to shatter many, MANY standard , and expected (by mainstream players) conventions of MMO's before you even get to the creamy center of making Full looting Mainstream. No rule set is going to instianly change this.
So then I don't know why you are arguing this with me when you just reiterated exactly what I said in my first post.
I wasn't arguing. You were simply assuming to many things. I was commenting on your "Insta-acceptance rule set" you posted first.
That wont work. Its more than just rule sets.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
My apologies for the miscommunication then. I don't remember mentioning a ruleset like that but with a half dozen posts so far in this thread alone this afternoon I may very well have babbled something that could have been construed as such.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Only one thing you said I disagree with, EVE is not full loot as half or more of your "loot" is destroyed when ship goes poof, but yeah i know what you mean im just being picky.
As far as the victim is concerned, it's the equivalent of full loot. People who dislike full loot PvP have pretty much stated that their concern isn't the other person getting items but the total loss of theirs.
And its been shown that more people consistently play in EVE's 'safe space' than in the low sec or 0.0 regions.
Games need safe zones to thrive, simple as that. MO's downfall will be the total lack of safe spots.
Who the hell are you, and why should I care? Congrats! You are a victim of Trollstar!
Only one thing you said I disagree with, EVE is not full loot as half or more of your "loot" is destroyed when ship goes poof, but yeah i know what you mean im just being picky.
As far as the victim is concerned, it's the equivalent of full loot. People who dislike full loot PvP have pretty much stated that their concern isn't the other person getting items but the total loss of theirs.
And its been shown that more people consistently play in EVE's 'safe space' than in the low sec or 0.0 regions.
Games need safe zones to thrive, simple as that. MO's downfall will be the total lack of safe spots.
Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. UO, EVE, Darkfall, Shadowbane... there's plenty of games for current devs to learn from. Plenty of implementations, both successful and disastrous, that if a new dev wants to make a game with complete disregard for history, more power to them.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
My apologies for the miscommunication then. I don't remember mentioning a ruleset like that but with a half dozen posts so far in this thread alone this afternoon I may very well have babbled something that could have been construed as such.
It was your first post, that was using examples of where it worked. When, in the full scope of things, you were talking about systems that are 1/100 of the whole game.
Mainstream Full loot, would be the second feature under PvP.
also, people, UO did not work. Trammel. While it was somthing to curb PvP, yes, part of the subreasion PvP needed to be slightly blunted, was new uers and full looting.
No PvP game is fun after all the wolves eat the sheep. Ever. Infact, a good PvP system would be swapping out the wolves and the sheep in each situation, NOT letting the wolves get stronger, and keeping the sheep, sheeper (?).
Play to c rush is allways another way of saying "I don't wan't my game profitable, or fair". *Waves to darkfall and Shadowbane*
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
Gear is to important and valuable in current mmos.
The average mmo player doesn't like being stolen from or taken advantage of.
Plus the people that enjoy killing and stealing from others are unwilling to accept harsh punishments for their actions. This is IMHO what brought about trammel and now the standard pve servers. There was no consequences to being a murder oh now I can't go into town, I can be attack by anyone. Murders didn't need to go into town and the only time a murder would log on and leave the safety of their house is when they were hunting other players. Little risk high reward led to people abusing the power of freedom.
My apologies for the miscommunication then. I don't remember mentioning a ruleset like that but with a half dozen posts so far in this thread alone this afternoon I may very well have babbled something that could have been construed as such.
It was your first post, that was using examples of where it worked. When, in the full scope of things, you were talking about systems that are 1/100 of the whole game.
But that was the OP's question: Will this ever work within a mainstream MMO? He did not say it had to be core gameplay or even a majority of the game.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
My apologies for the miscommunication then. I don't remember mentioning a ruleset like that but with a half dozen posts so far in this thread alone this afternoon I may very well have babbled something that could have been construed as such.
It was your first post, that was using examples of where it worked. When, in the full scope of things, you were talking about systems that are 1/100 of the whole game.
But that was the OP's question: Will this ever work within a mainstream MMO? He did not say it had to be core gameplay or even a majority of the game.
For it to be mainstream, it would have to be core. Or, we are right back to where were are at now.
PvE games with PvP after thoughts, and some extream examples or Full looting that sucks and kills games dead.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
For it to be mainstream, it would have to be core. Or, we are right back to where were are at now.
But the OP never said anything about it being a PvP game at its core, just whether or not full loot FFA PvP could work within a mainstream MMO.
The answer to that was a universal no.
For it to BEmainstream, it would have to be core.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
Does anyone remember when Street Fighter 2 came out in the arcades. That was an example of a FFA-PvP game. You put your quarter into the game and you fought against another kid who put their quarter in. When you die, you lose your quarter and you have to pony up another quarter. If you were playing the game against the machine and you were almost to the end, and some kid came along and put their quarter in and killed you, you lost all your progress. Remember how popular that was? Because it was fun and competetive.
I know it wasn't an MMO, but my point is, that was the most popular arcarde game even though some stranger can come along and destroy all your progress. It was more popular than the single player or co-op arcade games because it was competitive as well as fun.
If an MMO came out with a FFA-PvP ruleset that was totally fun, people will play it.
If someone had came up to me in 1980 when I was on my Atari 2600 and said we will be playing games with thousands of people at the same time.I guess my response would have been,"but I only have 2 joysticks"
My apologies for the miscommunication then. I don't remember mentioning a ruleset like that but with a half dozen posts so far in this thread alone this afternoon I may very well have babbled something that could have been construed as such.
It was your first post, that was using examples of where it worked. When, in the full scope of things, you were talking about systems that are 1/100 of the whole game.
Mainstream Full loot, would be the second feature under PvP.
also, people, UO did not work. Trammel. While it was somthing to curb PvP, yes, part of the subreasion PvP needed to be slightly blunted, was new uers and full looting.
No PvP game is fun after all the wolves eat the sheep. Ever. Infact, a good PvP system would be swapping out the wolves and the sheep in each situation, NOT letting the wolves get stronger, and keeping the sheep, sheeper (?).
Play to c rush is allways another way of saying "I don't wan't my game profitable, or fair". *Waves to darkfall and Shadowbane*
Shadowbane waves back. It isn't full loot. Currently the consequences to dying in SB are actually less than in WoW. The Play to Crush part of Shadowbane doesn't apply to this conversation at all.
Houses and city's are not loot...hummm....
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
No it never will work. Most people who play mainstream games are quite casual in their play (maybe an hour every few nights or so). Most of them never see helf fo the games features or content but they still have fun. Those people work hard for their loot and it takes them time due to their limited playtime and the result of FFA full loot pvp would be disaterous to them.
Sure loosing your crap at any time with few defences (EVE) is fun for some of us, it's not fun for the guy who spent 2 weeks doing that quest chain for his pretty +1 sword that he just lost to a guy who ganked him while he was fighting a demon.
In short: No it will never work in a mainstream MMO unless there is some form of defences against it (Insurance...ect)
MMO wish list:
-Changeable worlds -Solid non level based game -Sharks with lasers attached to their heads
I know it wasn't an MMO, but my point is, that was the most popular arcarde game even though some stranger can come along and destroy all your progress. It was more popular than the single player or co-op arcade games because it was competitive as well as fun.
Street Fighter is still popular. However, it's not an MMO. There is no gear or money to lose in Street Fighter when you lose to someone else except whatever you paid to play the game in the first place.
This is why FPS games like Halo and TF2 and fighting games like Street Fighter are so popular. If you die or lose, big deal. Just log in again and pick right up where you left off, learn from your mistakes, and move on. However, if someone randomly came over and killed you after you'd just spent 80+ hours in a game world working to attain certain weapons, gear, or money, I can't think of many people who wouldn't be pissed about that. It's not just about the gear or weapons, but the time lost.
For an FFA PvP game to succeed, it can't just be lawless anarchy where anyone can gang rape anyone else just because they're there. There has to be a rhyme and reason to it, and there has to be a way for combat to be optional in some areas, just to give players something to do away from the monotony of just killing others for their loot.
They talk on how a ffapvp full loot system could never work,as I said earlier when the idea of a mmo was even floated alot of ppl were like "wait a sec I have to play with other ppl" or "this will never work playing together"
Now look at where we are.
Maybe some players have to take a step back and say to themselves"well ok lets not dissmiss it right away"
unforunatly thats what they do,thank god we didnt listen to these ppl years ago,if we did then games and even forums like these would not excist.
If someone had came up to me in 1980 when I was on my Atari 2600 and said we will be playing games with thousands of people at the same time.I guess my response would have been,"but I only have 2 joysticks"
Maybe something like a 5% chance an item will be unlocked to become lootable.. The more you carry the greater the chance.. so if your bags are packed you are in more danger of losing something..
But full-loot will never be taken with shiny in the mainstream.
I know it wasn't an MMO, but my point is, that was the most popular arcarde game even though some stranger can come along and destroy all your progress. It was more popular than the single player or co-op arcade games because it was competitive as well as fun.
Street Fighter is still popular. However, it's not an MMO. There is no gear or money to lose in Street Fighter when you lose to someone else except whatever you paid to play the game in the first place.
This is why FPS games like Halo and TF2 and fighting games like Street Fighter are so popular. If you die or lose, big deal. Just log in again and pick right up where you left off, learn from your mistakes, and move on. However, if someone randomly came over and killed you after you'd just spent 80+ hours in a game world working to attain certain weapons, gear, or money, I can't think of many people who wouldn't be pissed about that. It's not just about the gear or weapons, but the time lost.
For an FFA PvP game to succeed, it can't just be lawless anarchy where anyone can gang rape anyone else just because they're there. There has to be a rhyme and reason to it, and there has to be a way for combat to be optional in some areas, just to give players something to do away from the monotony of just killing others for their loot.
I have a feeling we are actually making the same point. There needs to be other things to do to make the game fun rather than just lawless killing.
My only point in bringing up those arcade games was that if the game is made in such a way as to be truly fun, it can still be popular. Remember, before Street Fighter 2, the single player or co-op arcade games were the only ones around.
The short sighted in this thread really amaze me. They talk on how a ffapvp full loot system could never work,as I said earlier when the idea of a mmo was even floated alot of ppl were like "wait a sec I have to play with other ppl" or "this will never work playing together" Now look at where we are. Maybe some players have to take a step back and say to themselves"well ok lets not dissmiss it right away" unforunatly thats what they do,thank god we didnt listen to these ppl years ago,if we did then games and even forums like these would not excist.
You're just as short sighted. Anyone can say anything is possible, it has to be done to matter. You don't even give an example of a system that would work and is acceptable to mainstream players. On the other hand I am reading lots of reasons why it wouldn't work.
As for the topic people need to stop arguing semantics. Sure you can have FFA loot pvp in a mainstream mmo, but it isn't going to the main focus and if it is just a subset of the real game, sowho cares. I assumed the topic was whether ffa loot pvp could be the main focus of a mainstream mmo, but maybe that is just me.
With current systems I don't think it works. In the future who knows.
The short sighted in this thread really amaze me. They talk on how a ffapvp full loot system could never work,as I said earlier when the idea of a mmo was even floated alot of ppl were like "wait a sec I have to play with other ppl" or "this will never work playing together" Now look at where we are. Maybe some players have to take a step back and say to themselves"well ok lets not dissmiss it right away" unforunatly thats what they do,thank god we didnt listen to these ppl years ago,if we did then games and even forums like these would not excist.
You're just as short sighted. Anyone can say anything is possible, it has to be done to matter. You don't even give an example of a system that would work and is acceptable to mainstream players. On the other hand I am reading lots of reasons why it wouldn't work.
As for the topic people need to stop arguing semantics. Sure you can have FFA loot pvp in a mainstream mmo, but it isn't going to the main focus and if it is just a subset of the real game, sowho cares. I assumed the topic was whether ffa loot pvp could be the main focus of a mainstream mmo, but maybe that is just me.
With current systems I don't think it works. In the future who knows.
Maybe read the thread before you say I havent given an example......
If someone had came up to me in 1980 when I was on my Atari 2600 and said we will be playing games with thousands of people at the same time.I guess my response would have been,"but I only have 2 joysticks"
I'm sure that somebody will come up with a recipe that makes PvP looting work for a mainstream title. But it won't be anything like a game that anyone plays today. It might be something that involves your character equipping from your realm's stocks of equipment, then losing that equipment if your character is killed in battle. The other side can't actually use the gear, but can melt it down or take it apart to use it as raw materials for their equipment. And when you kill the enemy and loot them, you take their equipment and do the same thing. If different realms have different amounts of different materials, then it may only be by looting enemy dead that reasonable supplies of important materials can be obtained. Players could still customize the appearance of their gear, and that would be lost in combat. But the loss would be minor enough to still appeal to mainstream PvP players. As I said, it wouldn't be anything like current games.
Best post I've read in this thread so far. wish we had more folks around here that know how to apply their imaginations and thought processes like this
It really depends on what you mean by "work". In my personal oppinion I don't think it ever will and I think darkfall is proof of that. The legion of naked people running around with no armor and starter weapons because they don't want to loose their stuff I think is proof.
The real question is; HOW would a FFA Full-Loot PvP game appeal to mainstream?
Alot of people just don't like the idea of giving another player the option of causing them frustration. Some people just don't like losing to another human being. Some people (more than enough to be called a "majority") would never play a PvP game (server) ever.
Comments
So then I don't know why you are arguing this with me when you just reiterated exactly what I said in my first post.
I wasn't arguing. You were simply assuming to many things. I was commenting on your "Insta-acceptance rule set" you posted first.
That wont work. Its more than just rule sets.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
My apologies for the miscommunication then. I don't remember mentioning a ruleset like that but with a half dozen posts so far in this thread alone this afternoon I may very well have babbled something that could have been construed as such.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
As far as the victim is concerned, it's the equivalent of full loot. People who dislike full loot PvP have pretty much stated that their concern isn't the other person getting items but the total loss of theirs.
And its been shown that more people consistently play in EVE's 'safe space' than in the low sec or 0.0 regions.
Games need safe zones to thrive, simple as that. MO's downfall will be the total lack of safe spots.
Who the hell are you, and why should I care?
Congrats! You are a victim of Trollstar!
As far as the victim is concerned, it's the equivalent of full loot. People who dislike full loot PvP have pretty much stated that their concern isn't the other person getting items but the total loss of theirs.
And its been shown that more people consistently play in EVE's 'safe space' than in the low sec or 0.0 regions.
Games need safe zones to thrive, simple as that. MO's downfall will be the total lack of safe spots.
Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. UO, EVE, Darkfall, Shadowbane... there's plenty of games for current devs to learn from. Plenty of implementations, both successful and disastrous, that if a new dev wants to make a game with complete disregard for history, more power to them.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
It was your first post, that was using examples of where it worked. When, in the full scope of things, you were talking about systems that are 1/100 of the whole game.
Mainstream Full loot, would be the second feature under PvP.
also, people, UO did not work. Trammel. While it was somthing to curb PvP, yes, part of the subreasion PvP needed to be slightly blunted, was new uers and full looting.
No PvP game is fun after all the wolves eat the sheep. Ever. Infact, a good PvP system would be swapping out the wolves and the sheep in each situation, NOT letting the wolves get stronger, and keeping the sheep, sheeper (?).
Play to c rush is allways another way of saying "I don't wan't my game profitable, or fair". *Waves to darkfall and Shadowbane*
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
The only place in high sec to be safe is in a npc corp, even then your not 100% safe if they want to kill you.
No because of several reasons.
Gear is to important and valuable in current mmos.
The average mmo player doesn't like being stolen from or taken advantage of.
Plus the people that enjoy killing and stealing from others are unwilling to accept harsh punishments for their actions. This is IMHO what brought about trammel and now the standard pve servers. There was no consequences to being a murder oh now I can't go into town, I can be attack by anyone. Murders didn't need to go into town and the only time a murder would log on and leave the safety of their house is when they were hunting other players. Little risk high reward led to people abusing the power of freedom.
It was your first post, that was using examples of where it worked. When, in the full scope of things, you were talking about systems that are 1/100 of the whole game.
But that was the OP's question: Will this ever work within a mainstream MMO? He did not say it had to be core gameplay or even a majority of the game.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
It was your first post, that was using examples of where it worked. When, in the full scope of things, you were talking about systems that are 1/100 of the whole game.
But that was the OP's question: Will this ever work within a mainstream MMO? He did not say it had to be core gameplay or even a majority of the game.
For it to be mainstream, it would have to be core. Or, we are right back to where were are at now.
PvE games with PvP after thoughts, and some extream examples or Full looting that sucks and kills games dead.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
But the OP never said anything about it being a PvP game at its core, just whether or not full loot FFA PvP could work within a mainstream MMO.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
But the OP never said anything about it being a PvP game at its core, just whether or not full loot FFA PvP could work within a mainstream MMO.
The answer to that was a universal no.
For it to BE mainstream, it would have to be core.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
Never will be in our life time.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
Does anyone remember when Street Fighter 2 came out in the arcades. That was an example of a FFA-PvP game. You put your quarter into the game and you fought against another kid who put their quarter in. When you die, you lose your quarter and you have to pony up another quarter. If you were playing the game against the machine and you were almost to the end, and some kid came along and put their quarter in and killed you, you lost all your progress. Remember how popular that was? Because it was fun and competetive.
I know it wasn't an MMO, but my point is, that was the most popular arcarde game even though some stranger can come along and destroy all your progress. It was more popular than the single player or co-op arcade games because it was competitive as well as fun.
If an MMO came out with a FFA-PvP ruleset that was totally fun, people will play it.
I direct you to my last post on this topic.
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/235780/page/8
If someone had came up to me in 1980 when I was on my Atari 2600 and said we will be playing games with thousands of people at the same time.I guess my response would have been,"but I only have 2 joysticks"
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/235780/page/8
It was your first post, that was using examples of where it worked. When, in the full scope of things, you were talking about systems that are 1/100 of the whole game.
Mainstream Full loot, would be the second feature under PvP.
also, people, UO did not work. Trammel. While it was somthing to curb PvP, yes, part of the subreasion PvP needed to be slightly blunted, was new uers and full looting.
No PvP game is fun after all the wolves eat the sheep. Ever. Infact, a good PvP system would be swapping out the wolves and the sheep in each situation, NOT letting the wolves get stronger, and keeping the sheep, sheeper (?).
Play to c rush is allways another way of saying "I don't wan't my game profitable, or fair". *Waves to darkfall and Shadowbane*
Shadowbane waves back. It isn't full loot. Currently the consequences to dying in SB are actually less than in WoW. The Play to Crush part of Shadowbane doesn't apply to this conversation at all.
Houses and city's are not loot...hummm....
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
No it never will work. Most people who play mainstream games are quite casual in their play (maybe an hour every few nights or so). Most of them never see helf fo the games features or content but they still have fun. Those people work hard for their loot and it takes them time due to their limited playtime and the result of FFA full loot pvp would be disaterous to them.
Sure loosing your crap at any time with few defences (EVE) is fun for some of us, it's not fun for the guy who spent 2 weeks doing that quest chain for his pretty +1 sword that he just lost to a guy who ganked him while he was fighting a demon.
In short: No it will never work in a mainstream MMO unless there is some form of defences against it (Insurance...ect)
MMO wish list:
-Changeable worlds
-Solid non level based game
-Sharks with lasers attached to their heads
Street Fighter is still popular. However, it's not an MMO. There is no gear or money to lose in Street Fighter when you lose to someone else except whatever you paid to play the game in the first place.
This is why FPS games like Halo and TF2 and fighting games like Street Fighter are so popular. If you die or lose, big deal. Just log in again and pick right up where you left off, learn from your mistakes, and move on. However, if someone randomly came over and killed you after you'd just spent 80+ hours in a game world working to attain certain weapons, gear, or money, I can't think of many people who wouldn't be pissed about that. It's not just about the gear or weapons, but the time lost.
For an FFA PvP game to succeed, it can't just be lawless anarchy where anyone can gang rape anyone else just because they're there. There has to be a rhyme and reason to it, and there has to be a way for combat to be optional in some areas, just to give players something to do away from the monotony of just killing others for their loot.
The short sighted in this thread really amaze me.
They talk on how a ffapvp full loot system could never work,as I said earlier when the idea of a mmo was even floated alot of ppl were like "wait a sec I have to play with other ppl" or "this will never work playing together"
Now look at where we are.
Maybe some players have to take a step back and say to themselves"well ok lets not dissmiss it right away"
unforunatly thats what they do,thank god we didnt listen to these ppl years ago,if we did then games and even forums like these would not excist.
If someone had came up to me in 1980 when I was on my Atari 2600 and said we will be playing games with thousands of people at the same time.I guess my response would have been,"but I only have 2 joysticks"
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/235780/page/8
There is no way full looting will be allowed...
Maybe something like a 5% chance an item will be unlocked to become lootable.. The more you carry the greater the chance.. so if your bags are packed you are in more danger of losing something..
But full-loot will never be taken with shiny in the mainstream.
Street Fighter is still popular. However, it's not an MMO. There is no gear or money to lose in Street Fighter when you lose to someone else except whatever you paid to play the game in the first place.
This is why FPS games like Halo and TF2 and fighting games like Street Fighter are so popular. If you die or lose, big deal. Just log in again and pick right up where you left off, learn from your mistakes, and move on. However, if someone randomly came over and killed you after you'd just spent 80+ hours in a game world working to attain certain weapons, gear, or money, I can't think of many people who wouldn't be pissed about that. It's not just about the gear or weapons, but the time lost.
For an FFA PvP game to succeed, it can't just be lawless anarchy where anyone can gang rape anyone else just because they're there. There has to be a rhyme and reason to it, and there has to be a way for combat to be optional in some areas, just to give players something to do away from the monotony of just killing others for their loot.
I have a feeling we are actually making the same point. There needs to be other things to do to make the game fun rather than just lawless killing.
My only point in bringing up those arcade games was that if the game is made in such a way as to be truly fun, it can still be popular. Remember, before Street Fighter 2, the single player or co-op arcade games were the only ones around.
You're just as short sighted. Anyone can say anything is possible, it has to be done to matter. You don't even give an example of a system that would work and is acceptable to mainstream players. On the other hand I am reading lots of reasons why it wouldn't work.
As for the topic people need to stop arguing semantics. Sure you can have FFA loot pvp in a mainstream mmo, but it isn't going to the main focus and if it is just a subset of the real game, sowho cares. I assumed the topic was whether ffa loot pvp could be the main focus of a mainstream mmo, but maybe that is just me.
With current systems I don't think it works. In the future who knows.
You're just as short sighted. Anyone can say anything is possible, it has to be done to matter. You don't even give an example of a system that would work and is acceptable to mainstream players. On the other hand I am reading lots of reasons why it wouldn't work.
As for the topic people need to stop arguing semantics. Sure you can have FFA loot pvp in a mainstream mmo, but it isn't going to the main focus and if it is just a subset of the real game, sowho cares. I assumed the topic was whether ffa loot pvp could be the main focus of a mainstream mmo, but maybe that is just me.
With current systems I don't think it works. In the future who knows.
Maybe read the thread before you say I havent given an example......
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/235780/page/5
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/235780/page/7
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/235780/page/8
Here you go just incase you missed them
If someone had came up to me in 1980 when I was on my Atari 2600 and said we will be playing games with thousands of people at the same time.I guess my response would have been,"but I only have 2 joysticks"
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/235780/page/8
Best post I've read in this thread so far. wish we had more folks around here that know how to apply their imaginations and thought processes like this
It really depends on what you mean by "work". In my personal oppinion I don't think it ever will and I think darkfall is proof of that. The legion of naked people running around with no armor and starter weapons because they don't want to loose their stuff I think is proof.
-Currently looking forward to FFXIV
-Currently playing EvE and Global Agenda
The real question is; HOW would a FFA Full-Loot PvP game appeal to mainstream?
Alot of people just don't like the idea of giving another player the option of causing them frustration. Some people just don't like losing to another human being. Some people (more than enough to be called a "majority") would never play a PvP game (server) ever.