When I engage someone in pvp in a full loot game my adrenaline levels start rising sharply. Nothing can come close to it in other games, absolutely nothing.
If I lose, everything I am carrying is gone. (of course I will have multiple sets of the best I can get stashed away in the bank, or in my house)
If I win, I score big and take back a sizeable chunk of loot and a rush plenty higher than pwning a boss for the 30th time or scoring a flag in warsong gulch.
Those who don't like it either don't understand it, can't pvp well enough and constantly die, or are the ones who opt out of the scarriest rollercoasters or horror movies.
In MMOs, the loss should be based on communcal losses rather than individual. For example, losing a base might cause all guild members to lose some very nice buffs or access to certain shops/recipes/facilities.
You are right about the adrenaline, but that can also be felt on a guild/community level, especially if it affects on a personal level as well.
EVE captures this fairly well, as everyone who knows the system can minimize the personal risk, but they will have to be prepared to defend their territory. This is seldom possible in more traditional avatar-based MMOs. Therefore, the system you describe is mostly about causing grief and based on invidual gains/loses. It is also a system that forces anarchy not order.
It is also not about understanding PvP. PKing is just a small part of it. A good PvP system is about more than just invidual duels or ganking.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
When I engage someone in pvp in a full loot game my adrenaline levels start rising sharply. Nothing can come close to it in other games, absolutely nothing.
If I lose, everything I am carrying is gone. (of course I will have multiple sets of the best I can get stashed away in the bank, or in my house)
If I win, I score big and take back a sizeable chunk of loot and a rush plenty higher than pwning a boss for the 30th time or scoring a flag in warsong gulch.
Those who don't like it either don't understand it, can't pvp well enough and constantly die, or are the ones who opt out of the scarriest rollercoasters or horror movies.
In MMOs, the loss should be based on communcal losses rather than individual. For example, losing a base might cause all guild members to lose some very nice buffs or access to certain shops/recipes/facilities.
You are right about the adrenaline, but that can also be felt on a guild/community level, especially if it affects on a personal level as well.
EVE captures this fairly well, as everyone who knows the system can minimize the personal risk, but they will have to be prepared to defend their territory. This is seldom possible in more traditional avatar-based MMOs. Therefore, the system you describe is mostly about causing grief and based on invidual gains/loses. It is also a system that forces anarchy not order.
It is also not about understanding PvP. PKing is just a small part of it. A good PvP system is about more than just invidual duels or ganking.
I don't agree. Communcal losses? The individual player will not give a shit. They would never make a penalty that bad if it affected everyone, so it would end up pointless. Each player needs to feel the impact of their actions, and what better way to feel it then personal loss. Communcal losses also mean ABSOLUTELY nothing to those who run without Guilds. So they get away scott free?
On the highlighted note? How do you figure? The system you describe with communcal losses would cause more Anarchy as individuals would just go around killing whomever as there is very little PERSONAL risk. In a system where you drop your loot, you will be a bit more cautious about WHO you attack, knowing that there is a chance you could loose and drop all the shit you have looted from others. Trust me, your theory is incorrect and was even back in 2002 when I was playing Shadowbane.
A lot of people play poker for small money. If they they loose they don't loose a lot. They play because of the game but mostly because they want to spend an evening with their friends.
Then you have hardcore players who play for really big money in illegal games of poker. A lot of these players are willing to risk all they have in these games and we are here talking of real money and property not some pixel gear. Real money and property that probably took them years to get. Why? Because of the thrill of it. Because you know you can loose everything in a night.
Full Loot PVP MMORPGS give you a simulation of these thrill. There is no danger you will loose real money and property, but you can still loose several moths of play/work. And if you are well immersed in the game then the thrill is almost the same.
I'm curious as to what makes this appealing to some people.
From my perspective, it sounds like it would be a real pain in the arse. You spend 'X' amount of hours crafting/finding "gear", someone/something kills you, you die, and someone takes all your stuff. Making the time you put into getting your "gear" useless.
Now, I know people say in these types of games to "only use what you can afford to lose." But, what then is the point to get anything better? If there's an "Epic Sword of Uber Doom" or a "Super Ship of Mega Awesomeness", that take days/weeks/months to aqquire, what's the point if you're never going to use it, or risk losing it if you do?
All that said, I could be looking at this all wrong and am just missing the point. But from where I'm standing, it seems like a huge time waster.
Thoughts?
-Z
I dont like it either nor do I like pvp at all I stay avay from games with any kind of pvp focus.
I noticed that a few people made mention of this, but it doesn't really pop out when skimming through the thread, so I'll reiterate it.
The point of a full loot system, and base capture, and ship destruction, and mount killing, and player killing...
... is because it's a more semi-realistic system which captures cause and effects better, thus resulting in a more interesting game.
Imagine if when you played a PvP game, you had an enemy that kept coming back to kill you with the same gear, over and over. There would be no noteworthy cause and effect, regardless of how many times you killed him. He would keep respawning, keep coming at you, and motives would never change.
The point of full-loot and permadeath and resource destruction is to create better stories with better gameplay. Anyone who believes otherwise, or thinks its about psychopathy and antisocial behavior, has completely missed the boat and may be in need of psychiatric attention themselves.
Hording loot to gain power is not a game. It's a comfortable addiction used to replace success in real life.
If people want to do it for realism then the game needs encumberance so they can't take everything or they will be too heavy to move also it will not work in a gearcentric game like WoW. I would still prefer a faction based pvp sort of like DAoC but for people who want to be reds they could stay out in the froniters and kill anyone but they could only sell on black market merchants in the frontier. They could also not trade with other players other than other reds. So free to do what you want but there are consequences for actions. Sort of like society now you can kill who ever you want but there is a penalty assuming you get caught.
The vast majority of the games that have full-loot PvP can't top 20k subs, so...draw your own conclusions.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
The vast majority of the games that have full-loot PvP can't top 20k subs, so...draw your own conclusions.
EVE has way more than 20k subs. I believe the only real competition EVE has for subscribers (real ones) is WoW and perhaps some Asian MMOs. WoW seems to be losing subscribers currently, as well.
The appeal is the illusion of destroying other players and receiving all of their loot. The sad truth is that it rarely ever happens to anyone but the hardcore players.
To the pink poster above, popularity doesn't make quality. Mankind is full of lazy, cowardly sheep. They feel comfort in mimicking what their surrounding does.
Mmhmm. The world's full of niche games with niche ideas. This neither makes the games great nor the players rugged individualists who are just too maverick for popularity.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
its a sense of lose for me and the fact you always have to be on your toes. Death in MMOs today is almost meaningless, but if you have a real chance of losing something, it completely changes the way the game is played.
Risk versus Reward. When I engage someone in pvp in a full loot game my adrenaline levels start rising sharply. Nothing can come close to it in other games, absolutely nothing. If I lose, everything I am carrying is gone. (of course I will have multiple sets of the best I can get stashed away in the bank, or in my house) If I win, I score big and take back a sizeable chunk of loot and a rush plenty higher than pwning a boss for the 30th time or scoring a flag in warsong gulch. Those who don't like it either don't understand it, can't pvp well enough and constantly die, or are the ones who opt out of the scarriest rollercoasters or horror movies.
In MMOs, the loss should be based on communcal losses rather than individual. For example, losing a base might cause all guild members to lose some very nice buffs or access to certain shops/recipes/facilities.
You are right about the adrenaline, but that can also be felt on a guild/community level, especially if it affects on a personal level as well.
EVE captures this fairly well, as everyone who knows the system can minimize the personal risk, but they will have to be prepared to defend their territory. This is seldom possible in more traditional avatar-based MMOs. Therefore, the system you describe is mostly about causing grief and based on invidual gains/loses. It is also a system that forces anarchy not order.
It is also not about understanding PvP. PKing is just a small part of it. A good PvP system is about more than just invidual duels or ganking.
I don't agree. Communcal losses? The individual player will not give a shit. They would never make a penalty that bad if it affected everyone, so it would end up pointless. Each player needs to feel the impact of their actions, and what better way to feel it then personal loss. Communcal losses also mean ABSOLUTELY nothing to those who run without Guilds. So they get away scott free?
On the highlighted note? How do you figure? The system you describe with communcal losses would cause more Anarchy as individuals would just go around killing whomever as there is very little PERSONAL risk. In a system where you drop your loot, you will be a bit more cautious about WHO you attack, knowing that there is a chance you could loose and drop all the shit you have looted from others. Trust me, your theory is incorrect and was even back in 2002 when I was playing Shadowbane.
Just my opinion though.
In DAoC, if your side lost enough frontal keeps, your side lose access to the best dungeon in the game. I think it was called Darkfall, not sure. It works, DAoC works.
I noticed that a few people made mention of this, but it doesn't really pop out when skimming through the thread, so I'll reiterate it. The point of a full loot system, and base capture, and ship destruction, and mount killing, and player killing... ... is because it's a more semi-realistic system which captures cause and effects better, thus resulting in a more interesting game. Imagine if when you played a PvP game, you had an enemy that kept coming back to kill you with the same gear, over and over. There would be no noteworthy cause and effect, regardless of how many times you killed him. He would keep respawning, keep coming at you, and motives would never change. The point of full-loot and permadeath and resource destruction is to create better stories with better gameplay. Anyone who believes otherwise, or thinks its about psychopathy and antisocial behavior, has completely missed the boat and may be in need of psychiatric attention themselves. Hording loot to gain power is not a game. It's a comfortable addiction used to replace success in real life.
If the purpose of PvP is PvPing, that the process of fighting each other is fun, and enjoyable, I do not see any problem of having the losing side coming back for another. In a game of badminton, I do not need to confiscate the racket of the side that lost the last game, I fully enjoy starting another game with him.
If, on the other hand, you feel the need to hurt others after winning a round, you are exhibiting the nature of a griefer, somehow. The argument that a win is worthwhile if you can loot your opponent seems to confirm this suspicion of mine.
As for reproduction of some kind of real rule set of whatever, that is not what I want from a game. I want fun from it. After all, the rules in a badminton game is not life realistic.
The vast majority of the games that have full-loot PvP can't top 20k subs, so...draw your own conclusions.
EVE has way more than 20k subs. I believe the only real competition EVE has for subscribers (real ones) is WoW and perhaps some Asian MMOs. WoW seems to be losing subscribers currently, as well.
Draw your own conclusions.
So you are saying, the best PvP game has like 300k sub while the best PvE game has like 11 million, and you are asking for opinion based on sub.
Frankly, PvP, including a full loot version, could be enjoyable to some, and such enjoyment do not need sub level comparison to confirm. Bringing sub levels into the argument does not seem to make any further contribution.
For those who enjoy full loot, they can enjoy it even if there are no other players than themselves in the game. Same for WoW, we only need 9 more to form a raid. Once we zone in, we never know about the rest of the millions online.
Adrenaline and immersion. It doesn't have to be full loot, any form of harsh death penalty does the trick for me (partial loot, xp loss). It's not that I'm a masochist, I just find that playing a game where there's nothing to loose from dying gets boring fast and it's so unrealistic it totally breaks the immersion. To the pink poster above, popularity doesn't make quality. Mankind is full of lazy, cowardly sheep. They feel comfort in mimicking what their surrounding does.
And you think that you are not masochist yet calling the majority lazy cowardly sheep? Do you need those labels? Do you need sweeping attacks on everyone else?
You need penalty to keep you interested. Period. Noted.
I don't like FFA loot been there and done that in UO. I hate pvp just for the sake of pvp which is all ffa is. I want reasoning and a purpose.
That depends on game design. 3 way RvR is one. StarWars, with it rich lore, provides another reason for PvPing, if you are into RPing the StarWars.
Unfortunately, after those 2 games, the implementation of PvP has been plagued by very poor implementation (like Shadowbane) or meaning grinds (like Darkfall). On the other hand, we have a few very clean implementation of PvEs. That is why many people are playing PvEs, usually with limited concensual PvPs.
Games are shallow without it, you need a sense of danger in the world or its just boring to hell.
True. But on the other side of the coin, there is frustration
Thats the thing with people who love pvp, they get super furious and yell when they lose, but get super happy and yell when they win. Either way, they get off on the adrenaline rush, they lose too much though, they become grumpy all the time.
Thats all the appeal is though, extra risk = more of an adrenaline rush because theres something at stake. I think if a game had open world pvp there should be something to counter random ganking. I have something in mind, but I decided not to share it. But theres things I've seen done in MMOs like a jail system, which gankers seem to laugh at any way because they become too powerful. But anyway, having all your loot taken just sucks. I think only hardcore pvp people would touch something like that though, or people with friends in the game. Idk
This is a reply directed towards the entire perma-death conversation as a whole:
EVE does infact contain both of your definitions of perma-death. If you forget to clone yourself in EVE, say goodbye to years worth of skills if you get pod-killed. Your character will be completely reset like a day 1 character, and you're fucked.
Guess you haven't been podded yet in Eve-Online, yes you will get set back in skillpoints but not by the way you describe. You will lose excactly one level of a trained skill. If it is for instance carrier 5 then yes you lost one month of time in skilltraining. If you lost however only small artelery 5 then it equals to just a week. But nowhere you lose all the time you put in, just look it as an xp penalty on death. Nowhere close to permadeath.
Wrong again, from the wiki:
If you are pod killed while possessing more skill points than your clone is rated for, your highest ranked, highest level skill will lose training points. The amount lost depends on the difference between the maximum skill points of the clone and the number of skill points possessed by the pilot. The maximum amount of skill points that can be lost is 2,048,000.
Still that's a lot of points but it's not the worst thing ever :P
--
This thread is far too focused on soloing (in an M-M-O!) the game shouldn't be balanced for people that don't want to play the game properly in a group or corporation. You can very much more easily mitigate risk when you're out in a fleet
--
I feel sorry for the folks that don't enjoy EVE but want something like it, cause there really isn't anything as good out there in the fantasy realm. The economny and crafting being tied so well to the losses of assets, logistics being important, these are the building blocks of a great pvp game.
People were mentioning that serial killers would have consequences, and in EVE if you kill enough in empire you will be unable to enter without being hunted by police, until you bring your security rating up (a harsh grind) - this could easily be applied to other games, and i'm sure similar systems have been used, i forget the game but there was one where you would become KOS to everyone if you killed.
And I speak out of experience here, try it get podded with a standard clone, you'll notice you only lose maximum of one level of the highest ranked skill. If you don't trust that you can create an alt train that up a few skills so he is over the standard clone and has to lose 2 skilllevels of the highest ranked skill to make even.
Also Eve-online lost a lot of its nice pvp-system when they implemented super capitals. Everyone expects them to be powerfull and rightly so. But also they may not have major weaknesses or they won't ever get used, and that makes them hard to balance. All a pvp fights end in these days in Eve is just who can bring the bigger blob, small scale warfare is hard to find, and you got more risk to stumble upon a blob and get killed. The game lost its pvp magic if you ask me.
So full loot PvP is nice, but it isn't all that makes the game, in the end people will gather up to kill others. As it is always safer and more chance on killing something if you just bring the most people with good fits.
"If all magic fails, rely on three feet of steel and a strong arm"
I like the idea of permadeath (with faster progression, or other forms of permanent progression in addition to it) but I am not a fan of FFA PvP with full loot.
I am no carebear, and had my fair share of Ultima Online and Darkfall-- both of which I liked. FFA PvP is even a fun concept, which I like a lot.
Full loot, however, is where I have a problem. This concept completely destroys itemization, makes players greedy, adds more jerk behavior to a game mechanic already full of griefers (FFA PvP), but most of all just plain sucks. Dying alone sucks. Losing 2 hours of PvE grinding because someone attacked you while fighting a tough monster? That sucks.
Crafting your own gear for hours with a great cost, only to go out and lose it in minutes? Stupid.
A game mechanic which encourages Veterans always have the one-up on new players. Veterans have an infinite supply of equipment, and can lose it every death (and they die lose, losing less items). A newbie not only has no items, but dies MORE often, losing more items. So those who have, lose little. Those who have not, lose the most. PvE is a joke in a FFA PvP game due to griefers and unfair gameplay.
I have never been a gear person, except in games like Everquest where gear actually matters (and im talking old EQ, not new EQ). Although I loved collecting powerful weapons in UO, I could never use them. (ex. Valorite Plate Syndrome).
FFA PvP? Sure, if done right.
Full Loot? No. No thanks. I don't want your loot, because I already have my own. So the only appeal to me is losing my loot, without any positive gains. Nothing positive about being able to take that which you dont want, at the expense of potential loss of what is inevitably worthless items and naked dancing.
Depends on the type of game...Ultima Online had you potentially losing everything on your body, but most people have a house & bank and easy way to replace most of the stuff you carry.
Eve Online, you could lose your ship and everything in it, but most people have many ships and can afford to lose what they are flying occassionally to PVP.
Everquest on the other hand wasn't designed for FULL LOOTING system, and losing all your stuff would totally suck, because most characters are wearing their best stuff, and most people have alot invested in their equipment and losing it would really suck.
So if we are going to talk about FULL LOOT PVP, we need to make sure we are comparing the appropriate games. compare apples to apples, and not apples to oranges. You have one person talking about full loot sucking, and another saying its great, but they are probably thinking about 2 different games, even if they don't mention it.
========================== The game is dead not, this game is good we make it and Romania Tv give it 5 goat heads, this is good rating for game.
Full Loot? No. No thanks. I don't want your loot, because I already have my own. So the only appeal to me is losing my loot, without any positive gains. Nothing positive about being able to take that which you dont want, at the expense of potential loss of what is inevitably worthless items and naked dancing.
What if something of mine is better than yours? What if nothing of mine is better than your but you can sell it for enough to buy something better than you have? What if I have isn't something that you personally want, but it is something that you know one of your comrades could really use?
Also: why are you assuming that you will routinely have "the best" gear? Why are you assuming that the people you will fight will have equipped "worthless" stuff? Most of the PvPers I know go for the stuff with the best price/performance point - not the cheapest, but the most effective compared to price (incidentally this is the stuff that you can resell to other players very easily). People who load up with the highest tier stuff are usually assumed to be the kind that visit gold-sellers.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Comments
In MMOs, the loss should be based on communcal losses rather than individual. For example, losing a base might cause all guild members to lose some very nice buffs or access to certain shops/recipes/facilities.
You are right about the adrenaline, but that can also be felt on a guild/community level, especially if it affects on a personal level as well.
EVE captures this fairly well, as everyone who knows the system can minimize the personal risk, but they will have to be prepared to defend their territory. This is seldom possible in more traditional avatar-based MMOs. Therefore, the system you describe is mostly about causing grief and based on invidual gains/loses. It is also a system that forces anarchy not order.
It is also not about understanding PvP. PKing is just a small part of it. A good PvP system is about more than just invidual duels or ganking.
"The person who experiences greatness must have a feeling for the myth he is in."
I don't agree. Communcal losses? The individual player will not give a shit. They would never make a penalty that bad if it affected everyone, so it would end up pointless. Each player needs to feel the impact of their actions, and what better way to feel it then personal loss. Communcal losses also mean ABSOLUTELY nothing to those who run without Guilds. So they get away scott free?
On the highlighted note? How do you figure? The system you describe with communcal losses would cause more Anarchy as individuals would just go around killing whomever as there is very little PERSONAL risk. In a system where you drop your loot, you will be a bit more cautious about WHO you attack, knowing that there is a chance you could loose and drop all the shit you have looted from others. Trust me, your theory is incorrect and was even back in 2002 when I was playing Shadowbane.
Just my opinion though.
It's like playing poker.
A lot of people play poker for small money. If they they loose they don't loose a lot. They play because of the game but mostly because they want to spend an evening with their friends.
Then you have hardcore players who play for really big money in illegal games of poker. A lot of these players are willing to risk all they have in these games and we are here talking of real money and property not some pixel gear. Real money and property that probably took them years to get. Why? Because of the thrill of it. Because you know you can loose everything in a night.
Full Loot PVP MMORPGS give you a simulation of these thrill. There is no danger you will loose real money and property, but you can still loose several moths of play/work. And if you are well immersed in the game then the thrill is almost the same.
I dont like it either nor do I like pvp at all I stay avay from games with any kind of pvp focus.
I noticed that a few people made mention of this, but it doesn't really pop out when skimming through the thread, so I'll reiterate it.
The point of a full loot system, and base capture, and ship destruction, and mount killing, and player killing...
... is because it's a more semi-realistic system which captures cause and effects better, thus resulting in a more interesting game.
Imagine if when you played a PvP game, you had an enemy that kept coming back to kill you with the same gear, over and over. There would be no noteworthy cause and effect, regardless of how many times you killed him. He would keep respawning, keep coming at you, and motives would never change.
The point of full-loot and permadeath and resource destruction is to create better stories with better gameplay. Anyone who believes otherwise, or thinks its about psychopathy and antisocial behavior, has completely missed the boat and may be in need of psychiatric attention themselves.
Hording loot to gain power is not a game. It's a comfortable addiction used to replace success in real life.
If people want to do it for realism then the game needs encumberance so they can't take everything or they will be too heavy to move also it will not work in a gearcentric game like WoW. I would still prefer a faction based pvp sort of like DAoC but for people who want to be reds they could stay out in the froniters and kill anyone but they could only sell on black market merchants in the frontier. They could also not trade with other players other than other reds. So free to do what you want but there are consequences for actions. Sort of like society now you can kill who ever you want but there is a penalty assuming you get caught.
The vast majority of the games that have full-loot PvP can't top 20k subs, so...draw your own conclusions.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
EVE has way more than 20k subs. I believe the only real competition EVE has for subscribers (real ones) is WoW and perhaps some Asian MMOs. WoW seems to be losing subscribers currently, as well.
Draw your own conclusions.
The appeal is the illusion of destroying other players and receiving all of their loot. The sad truth is that it rarely ever happens to anyone but the hardcore players.
Mmhmm. The world's full of niche games with niche ideas. This neither makes the games great nor the players rugged individualists who are just too maverick for popularity.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I don't like FFA loot been there and done that in UO. I hate pvp just for the sake of pvp which is all ffa is. I want reasoning and a purpose.
its a sense of lose for me and the fact you always have to be on your toes. Death in MMOs today is almost meaningless, but if you have a real chance of losing something, it completely changes the way the game is played.
In MMOs, the loss should be based on communcal losses rather than individual. For example, losing a base might cause all guild members to lose some very nice buffs or access to certain shops/recipes/facilities.
You are right about the adrenaline, but that can also be felt on a guild/community level, especially if it affects on a personal level as well.
EVE captures this fairly well, as everyone who knows the system can minimize the personal risk, but they will have to be prepared to defend their territory. This is seldom possible in more traditional avatar-based MMOs. Therefore, the system you describe is mostly about causing grief and based on invidual gains/loses. It is also a system that forces anarchy not order.
It is also not about understanding PvP. PKing is just a small part of it. A good PvP system is about more than just invidual duels or ganking.
I don't agree. Communcal losses? The individual player will not give a shit. They would never make a penalty that bad if it affected everyone, so it would end up pointless. Each player needs to feel the impact of their actions, and what better way to feel it then personal loss. Communcal losses also mean ABSOLUTELY nothing to those who run without Guilds. So they get away scott free?
On the highlighted note? How do you figure? The system you describe with communcal losses would cause more Anarchy as individuals would just go around killing whomever as there is very little PERSONAL risk. In a system where you drop your loot, you will be a bit more cautious about WHO you attack, knowing that there is a chance you could loose and drop all the shit you have looted from others. Trust me, your theory is incorrect and was even back in 2002 when I was playing Shadowbane.
Just my opinion though.
In DAoC, if your side lost enough frontal keeps, your side lose access to the best dungeon in the game. I think it was called Darkfall, not sure. It works, DAoC works.
If the purpose of PvP is PvPing, that the process of fighting each other is fun, and enjoyable, I do not see any problem of having the losing side coming back for another. In a game of badminton, I do not need to confiscate the racket of the side that lost the last game, I fully enjoy starting another game with him.If, on the other hand, you feel the need to hurt others after winning a round, you are exhibiting the nature of a griefer, somehow. The argument that a win is worthwhile if you can loot your opponent seems to confirm this suspicion of mine.
As for reproduction of some kind of real rule set of whatever, that is not what I want from a game. I want fun from it. After all, the rules in a badminton game is not life realistic.
EVE has way more than 20k subs. I believe the only real competition EVE has for subscribers (real ones) is WoW and perhaps some Asian MMOs. WoW seems to be losing subscribers currently, as well.
Draw your own conclusions.
So you are saying, the best PvP game has like 300k sub while the best PvE game has like 11 million, and you are asking for opinion based on sub.Frankly, PvP, including a full loot version, could be enjoyable to some, and such enjoyment do not need sub level comparison to confirm. Bringing sub levels into the argument does not seem to make any further contribution.
For those who enjoy full loot, they can enjoy it even if there are no other players than themselves in the game. Same for WoW, we only need 9 more to form a raid. Once we zone in, we never know about the rest of the millions online.
And you think that you are not masochist yet calling the majority lazy cowardly sheep? Do you need those labels? Do you need sweeping attacks on everyone else?You need penalty to keep you interested. Period. Noted.
That depends on game design. 3 way RvR is one. StarWars, with it rich lore, provides another reason for PvPing, if you are into RPing the StarWars.Unfortunately, after those 2 games, the implementation of PvP has been plagued by very poor implementation (like Shadowbane) or meaning grinds (like Darkfall). On the other hand, we have a few very clean implementation of PvEs. That is why many people are playing PvEs, usually with limited concensual PvPs.
Thats the thing with people who love pvp, they get super furious and yell when they lose, but get super happy and yell when they win. Either way, they get off on the adrenaline rush, they lose too much though, they become grumpy all the time.
Thats all the appeal is though, extra risk = more of an adrenaline rush because theres something at stake. I think if a game had open world pvp there should be something to counter random ganking. I have something in mind, but I decided not to share it. But theres things I've seen done in MMOs like a jail system, which gankers seem to laugh at any way because they become too powerful. But anyway, having all your loot taken just sucks. I think only hardcore pvp people would touch something like that though, or people with friends in the game. Idk
And I speak out of experience here, try it get podded with a standard clone, you'll notice you only lose maximum of one level of the highest ranked skill. If you don't trust that you can create an alt train that up a few skills so he is over the standard clone and has to lose 2 skilllevels of the highest ranked skill to make even.
Also Eve-online lost a lot of its nice pvp-system when they implemented super capitals. Everyone expects them to be powerfull and rightly so. But also they may not have major weaknesses or they won't ever get used, and that makes them hard to balance. All a pvp fights end in these days in Eve is just who can bring the bigger blob, small scale warfare is hard to find, and you got more risk to stumble upon a blob and get killed. The game lost its pvp magic if you ask me.
So full loot PvP is nice, but it isn't all that makes the game, in the end people will gather up to kill others. As it is always safer and more chance on killing something if you just bring the most people with good fits.
"If all magic fails, rely on three feet of steel and a strong arm"
I like the idea of permadeath (with faster progression, or other forms of permanent progression in addition to it) but I am not a fan of FFA PvP with full loot.
I am no carebear, and had my fair share of Ultima Online and Darkfall-- both of which I liked. FFA PvP is even a fun concept, which I like a lot.
Full loot, however, is where I have a problem. This concept completely destroys itemization, makes players greedy, adds more jerk behavior to a game mechanic already full of griefers (FFA PvP), but most of all just plain sucks. Dying alone sucks. Losing 2 hours of PvE grinding because someone attacked you while fighting a tough monster? That sucks.
Crafting your own gear for hours with a great cost, only to go out and lose it in minutes? Stupid.
A game mechanic which encourages Veterans always have the one-up on new players. Veterans have an infinite supply of equipment, and can lose it every death (and they die lose, losing less items). A newbie not only has no items, but dies MORE often, losing more items. So those who have, lose little. Those who have not, lose the most. PvE is a joke in a FFA PvP game due to griefers and unfair gameplay.
I have never been a gear person, except in games like Everquest where gear actually matters (and im talking old EQ, not new EQ). Although I loved collecting powerful weapons in UO, I could never use them. (ex. Valorite Plate Syndrome).
FFA PvP? Sure, if done right.
Full Loot? No. No thanks. I don't want your loot, because I already have my own. So the only appeal to me is losing my loot, without any positive gains. Nothing positive about being able to take that which you dont want, at the expense of potential loss of what is inevitably worthless items and naked dancing.
It's very noticeable that almost all of the people who are speaking against FFA are pretty much wholly focused on how much they hate to lose.
Give me liberty or give me lasers
Depends on the type of game...Ultima Online had you potentially losing everything on your body, but most people have a house & bank and easy way to replace most of the stuff you carry.
Eve Online, you could lose your ship and everything in it, but most people have many ships and can afford to lose what they are flying occassionally to PVP.
Everquest on the other hand wasn't designed for FULL LOOTING system, and losing all your stuff would totally suck, because most characters are wearing their best stuff, and most people have alot invested in their equipment and losing it would really suck.
So if we are going to talk about FULL LOOT PVP, we need to make sure we are comparing the appropriate games. compare apples to apples, and not apples to oranges. You have one person talking about full loot sucking, and another saying its great, but they are probably thinking about 2 different games, even if they don't mention it.
==========================
The game is dead not, this game is good we make it and Romania Tv give it 5 goat heads, this is good rating for game.
What if something of mine is better than yours? What if nothing of mine is better than your but you can sell it for enough to buy something better than you have? What if I have isn't something that you personally want, but it is something that you know one of your comrades could really use?
Also: why are you assuming that you will routinely have "the best" gear? Why are you assuming that the people you will fight will have equipped "worthless" stuff? Most of the PvPers I know go for the stuff with the best price/performance point - not the cheapest, but the most effective compared to price (incidentally this is the stuff that you can resell to other players very easily). People who load up with the highest tier stuff are usually assumed to be the kind that visit gold-sellers.
Give me liberty or give me lasers
full loot pvp means lots of naked fighting...
... naked is good, right?
Play something other than Darkfall.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre