It seems to me that you are the one that has the ridiculous reasoning bunnyhopper. Killing a virtual animal is nothing like beating on someone who has no chance or defending himself and them stealing everything he own. Some immature players may feel that is appropriate, but that doesn't stop the more mature ones from refusing to do it AND personally I applaud BioWare for having the guts to go this route.
I have already stated that BW are right not to have ffa/open/full loot pvp in TOR. I have already stated my surprise at people expecting anything like that to be added to the game. I have also mentioned that those people crying about not being able to gank players should go play the dedicated ffa full loot games. I guess you missed all that.
The wolf analogy worked perfectly well in highlighting the sheer insanity of trying to apply a real life model of moralistic reasoning to an online game domain. I am sorry but someone mugging or killing someone in real life is in no way, shape, or form anything like killing and looting a player who has actively chosen to play a game with that ruleset, more than likely with the intention of doing it him/herself.
Tell me, without resorting to hyperbole, why exactly are players who are so utterly against the idea of being killed by anyone at any time, choosing to play a game with that very mechanic in place when there are countless alternatives out there with safe zones and no looting on death? Other posters in this thread seem to think it is because the players are some how retarded and don't understand that the ffa full loot rules can also apply to them, as such they are victims. What is your view?
If someone is constantly singling out a person to harass them and ruin their game time then that has nothing to do with the system and everything to do with the person being a jerk. Funnily enough not everyone who has ever killed a new player falls into that catagory. I've killed a newb, and then afterwards given him plenty of items and chatted to them. In turn I have had vets whale on me only to give me advice and then give me far more gear and gold then I could have hoped to have made in a week. The fact is everyone should be aware of the ruleset of the game they are playing. If it is a ffa pvp game that you have actively decided to play, to then go crying about getting killed in it smacks of being rather daft.
Actually, I did catch that you were all for BioWares approach. I just disagree with that part about killing a virtual animal . It is not morally wrong since there is nothing suffering for it, while bullying other people with "new" toons is immoral because there is another person on the other end. As I said, a mature player will not attack someone that is so much weaker than themselves that they have no chance at defending themselves. While far to many immature players will camp places that lower level characters HAVE to visit and just to grief them. Equating a virtual animal to a real person is the problem I had with your argument.
Two people of roughly equal abilities going at it in PvP is awesome and should be encouraged though, and that means that one or the other will often die, but at least either one has a chance.
As I said I, like you, applaud Bioware for the approach they are taking. I do hope that they actually go farther though and make it so that players bullying people not only get no reward for it, but are in fact penalized for it. That kind of a built in "Policing" system would at least actually deter the immature players.
"If half of what you tell me is a lie, how can I believe any of it?"
There are people who don't know what to expect because of how the games are marketed and advertised. Those are new players. It doesn't matter if a game is FFA PvP or not. If you don't give those new players a happy experience, or at least an experience that is similar to what you've advertised to them, you're going to lose those new players. Expecting players to know how a game really works, regardless of how it's advertised is very short sighted, and will not lead to having more players.
I do, however, agree with a lot of what you're saying. If you don't want to get killed or participate in a game where you're going to get killed, then FFA PvP games probably aren't for you. Don't whine about it and don't call people jerks for doing it; just don't play the games. The same applies for the FFA PvP crowd and games like SW:ToR. If you don't like games where you can't run around killing anyone you see, then you probably shouldn't play games like that. Don't whine about it, or call people carebears for not wanting FFA PvP; just don't play the games.
Not sure about the first part. I for one try to fully understand a product before buying into it and take a great deal of the advertising spiel to be exactly that, spiel. I would like to give the majority of other players the benefit of the doubt and think that they to made informed choices.
Of course if someone is buying into a product that was mis-sold, or that they othewise didn't realise what they happened to be getting themselves into then I can fully understand them being furstrated and giving up when they have been ganked with no chance of fighting back.
As to your second part, yep I fully agree. And I certainly do not advocate people bemoaning the fact games like TOR, or any other game for that matter with a non ffa specific rule set, do not cater to them being able to gank anyone and everyone. I personally love ffa, full loot pvp, but it has a time and a place and it belongs in specific games. But I also look forward to the likes of GW2 which will certainly not cater to the ffa pvp crowd and I just cannot understand why people fail to accept that there should be options open to each playstyle.
In all honesty I am amazed it has really caused a debate (well i'm not amazed people have jumped on an anti ffa rant) given that surely everyone could see that a game like TOR is simply not suited to truly open kill everyone, everywhere ffa pvp.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
only complete newbs feel the need to gank players signifigantly below there level.. They do this for 1 simple reason, they can not win a fight vs someone there own level so they pick on the weaker players to feel like a "winner".. Its been this way for a long time and I prsonaly have np not allowing high lvls to go to low lvl areas although I hope high lvl imperial can go to low lvl imperial areas not to gank there own fation obviously but to come see / help friends or new chars. When I get a friend IRL to try a game that I am high level in I always liek to come see that person hook them up with gold and kill any low lvl difficult quests they may have etc..
Hopefully they dont make the world itself limited by levels but restricted by faction + levels
Right oh. So by that token when you kill those 10 wolves you are in effect a psychopathic animal abuser? When you take part in RVR or a battle field and kill another player, you are a sociopathic murder?
Those people that you have looted have actively chosen to pay for and play that game with that exact mechanic in it you realise ofc? Probably with the intention of taking advantage of it themselves at some point...
People seem to completely miss the fact that everyone in the game has willing signed up to play it, complete with all it's mechanics.
Perhaps if someone had payed £10 to walk down a dodgy ally with the express knowledge that his payment had bought him the chance to get mugged you would have a point, as it stands you don't.
No one willingly signed up to be harrassed and bullied. People sign up to play the game and are not reponsible for other players action who choose to abuse the mechanics. That is why devs step in to make sure it doesn't happen.
By killing wolves well.....you are just killing wolves and not dealing with a real person behind the screen. in RVR you are killing someone who is willingly entered RVR area for a fight. it is not same as harassing or bullying a low level players who have no intention to fight or engage in PVP. Sorry but your examples made no sense at all.
They made perfect sense, some are just unwilling to accept the fact that by proactively choosing to pay for and play a game with ffa full loot in it, people are not bullied victims akin to the poor sods who get mugged on the street.
There is also MASSIVE difference between killing a character in the hope of getting loot or killing someone and then moving on and the act of harassment by repeatedly killing the same person over and over again just to piss them off.
If people are totally and utterly against the notion of completely open pvp and looting, why in the name of God are they actively buying a game with exactly those mechanics in them? Surely they should look for a game which removes the fear of getting killed as a starting character? The mechanics are there with the express reason to mean that anyone at any time can be killed.
Are people saying here that every game should have exactly the same pvp rule set? That no games should cater to complete open pvp just incase someone who has to actively pay and chose to play said games might feel victimised? If people are syaing that then lol, just lol.
If though people are not saying that, and that there should be games catering to all styles, well, then wtf are people crying about 'victims' for when the players have had to go out of their way to pick to a ffa pvp mmo in a market saturated with non ffa games?
We are talking about the consequence and effects of your action in video game. By killing wolves you are not effecting a person but by harassing a low level player you are. So the excuse 'it is just a game' doesn't fly anymore. That is what was being discussed. So no your examples don't make any sense. On one side a person is entering RVR zone willingly on other hand a low level is being ganked and camped against his wishes by a higher rank player. Two different scenarios.
Even FFA PVP games need some rule sets. One shouldn't just gank and harrass a player because he can. There needs to be strict punishment or consequences for such actions. Otherwise in such a situation only one person is having fun and i don't need to tell you who.
Right oh. So by that token when you kill those 10 wolves you are in effect a psychopathic animal abuser? When you take part in RVR or a battle field and kill another player, you are a sociopathic murder?
Those people that you have looted have actively chosen to pay for and play that game with that exact mechanic in it you realise ofc? Probably with the intention of taking advantage of it themselves at some point...
People seem to completely miss the fact that everyone in the game has willing signed up to play it, complete with all it's mechanics.
Perhaps if someone had payed £10 to walk down a dodgy ally with the express knowledge that his payment had bought him the chance to get mugged you would have a point, as it stands you don't.
No one willingly signed up to be harrassed and bullied. People sign up to play the game and are not reponsible for other players action who choose to abuse the mechanics. That is why devs step in to make sure it doesn't happen.
By killing wolves well.....you are just killing wolves and not dealing with a real person behind the screen. in RVR you are killing someone who is willingly entered RVR area for a fight. it is not same as harassing or bullying a low level players who have no intention to fight or engage in PVP. Sorry but your examples made no sense at all.
They made perfect sense, some are just unwilling to accept the fact that by proactively choosing to pay for and play a game with ffa full loot in it, people are not bullied victims akin to the poor sods who get mugged on the street.
There is also MASSIVE difference between killing a character in the hope of getting loot or killing someone and then moving on and the act of harassment by repeatedly killing the same person over and over again just to piss them off.
If people are totally and utterly against the notion of completely open pvp and looting, why in the name of God are they actively buying a game with exactly those mechanics in them? Surely they should look for a game which removes the fear of getting killed as a starting character? The mechanics are there with the express reason to mean that anyone at any time can be killed.
Are people saying here that every game should have exactly the same pvp rule set? That no games should cater to complete open pvp just incase someone who has to actively pay and chose to play said games might feel victimised? If people are syaing that then lol, just lol.
If though people are not saying that, and that there should be games catering to all styles, well, then wtf are people crying about 'victims' for when the players have had to go out of their way to pick to a ffa pvp mmo in a market saturated with non ffa games?
We are talking about the consequence and effects of your action in video game. By killing wolves you are not effecting a person but by harassing a low level player you are. So the excuse 'it is just a game' doesn't fly anymore. That is what was being discussed. So no your examples don't make any sense. On one side a person is entering RVR zone willingly on other hand a low level is being ganked and camped against his wishes by a higher rank player. Two different scenarios.
Even FFA PVP games need some rule sets. One shouldn't just gank and harrass a player because he can. There needs to be strict punishment or consequences for such actions. Otherwise in such a situation only one person is having fun and i don't need to tell you who.
Let them.
That is the reason FFA MMOs will never be popular. The wolves chase off the proverbial sheep, and are left with a barren server.
Without safe zones, and the ability to trade in game currency for game time, EVE would be right there with Darkfall for thinly populated game IMO. FFA doesnt work for a mainstream title as far as I can see.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
If a high level Imperial somehow manages to sneak his way onto the Trooper starting world, I'll just throw a couple /raspberry and /moon emotes at him, knowing I'm safe. However, it sounds like enemy players won't be able to set foot on the starter worlds at all. If that's the case, I'll /raspberry and /moon the first Imperial I see in the Warzones.
We are talking about the consequence and effects of your action in video game. By killing wolves you are not effecting a person but by harassing a low level player you are. So the excuse 'it is just a game' doesn't fly anymore. That is what was being discussed. So no your examples don't make any sense. On one side a person is entering RVR zone willingly on other hand a low level is being ganked and camped against his wishes by a higher rank player. Two different scenarios.
Even FFA PVP games need some rule sets. One shouldn't just gank and harrass a player because he can. There needs to be strict punishment or consequences for such actions. Otherwise in such a situation only one person is having fun and i don't need to tell you who.
For a start I have explained the point of the wolf analogy about nineteen times now. If you want to see further debate on the matter look up over a few more posts than the one you just quoted. TLDR of it: Those people have ACTIVELY chosen to play FFA games. They have ACTIVELY WANTED to play games with such rulesets so they can take advantage of them as well.
Secondly, there is a world of diference between killing a newb and harassing someone. Repeatedly ganking the same person over and over again to get on his tits is of course a bad thing and I would never condone it. But killing a random newb in a game with FFA rules and no safe zones which he/she has ACTIVELY chosen to play out of the vast array of non-ffa pvp game is quite simply not harassment and he is not a victim to be cuddled and hugged whilst getting the pitchforks out for the person who happened to kill his character.
Oh and yes, a player choosing an ffa pvp game is very much like a player choosing to walk into an rvr zone. Did the people in the store force the guy against his will to choose a game with ffa rules or something?
As to the latter part, FFA pvp games do have rules... And again there is a clear difference between ganking and harassing.
A very simple question and if you are going to respond to this post please answer it: Why are people who are so worried/upset about getting killed as a new character, going out of their way to buy one of the few games that actually have the mechanics in place to allow him to be killed?
@Moaky07, two things occur: First of all so what if they are niche, does that somehow invalidate them as games and the players who enjoy them? Secondly pointing to DF and it's poulation when trying to somehow show how poorly demanded ffa pvp is is not the wisest of ideas, given anyone who has ever looked at or played the game realises it is the tedious grind/lack of skill cap and lack of non bugged content that is really hampering it.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Does SWTOR offer FFA ? If it does not why are we even arguing about it ? What does it matter what other games offer and what a player chooses in those games SWTOR is not thsoe games. So how does making a choice in another game have any relevance in SWtOR ?
Does SWTOR offer FFA ? If it does not why are we even arguing about it ? What does it matter what other games offer and what a player chooses in those games SWTOR is not thsoe games. So how does making a choice in another game have any relevance in SWtOR ?
Because people wish that the system that they prefer would be in every single game so that no one else has an option as to what kind of game they can play. People also love to rush out the white knight "save the victim" card quite alot on forums as well which means that any thread mentioning ffa pvp gets over 9000 haters in it.
Which in turn leads to people defending it and so the circle is complete lol.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
I tend to agree with Spock. Picture a Star Wars fan/complete MMO newb trying to make a youtube preview of the game...
"Hey guys, this is my youtube video of the Jedi Knight class in SWTOR. While it loads, take time to sub to my channel, as I will be previewing all classes in the near future."
*Game loads, his character was killed while loading.*
"Umm. I don't know what's going on here guys. Hmm. Oh, I think my character is dead. It's odd that characters start off dead in this game. Hmm. Where do I go now?"
His first time in game, he does not know where to go or how to resurrect his character. Newbish, but it will be common for many SW fans in this game.
*30 mins later*
"OK guys, I think this is where I go to resurrect my character"
*Resurrects, is instantly blasted by a level 50 Sith and dies.*
"OH, I guess some Sith killed me? I don't even know how to play this game yet and people are killing me."
*Pokes around for another 30 mins, then quits permanently and posts several negative reviews of the game.*
Error: 37. Signature not found. Please connect to my server for signature access.
And as a rule using you past experinece with personal butt hurt on another game to turn the mmo you are working on into a pvp police state, never works out well.
What constitutes a newbie? I've seen max-level players with less talent and grace than a beginning player. Low-level players will still get one-shotted. Bad players will still get embarassed. It's great they aren't allowing newly created characters to be slaughtered as they log in for the first time, but don't pretend that the ocean of tears from players getting beat will not be present.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
The game is PvE for most , this post/ Topic is pretty much irrelevant.
what are you, the god of relevance? lol. There are a ton of people who will be playing this game for its PVP as evidence of the feedback from PAX and Gamescom, so not sure what game you've been following.
The game is PvE for most , this post/ Topic is pretty much irrelevant.
what are you, the god of relevance? lol. There are a ton of people who will be playing this game for its PVP as evidence of the feedback from PAX and Gamescom, so not sure what game you've been following.
Yes, like every game out there that offers either both kinds of servers or both kinds of content, most gamers play on the PvE servers and the PvE content. It's a proven fact. Doesn't make PvP irrelevent, but it sure doesn't make it the priority in most games that offer both. Even in that game called SWG pre-NGE, only a small fraction participated in the GCW, while the majority spent their time playing the PvE game.
The game is PvE for most , this post/ Topic is pretty much irrelevant.
what are you, the god of relevance? lol. There are a ton of people who will be playing this game for its PVP as evidence of the feedback from PAX and Gamescom, so not sure what game you've been following.
Yes, like every game out there that offers either both kinds of servers or both kinds of content, most gamers play on the PvE servers and the PvE content. It's a proven fact. Doesn't make PvP irrelevent, but it sure doesn't make it the priority in most games that offer both. Even in that game called SWG pre-NGE, only a small fraction participated in the GCW, while the majority spent their time playing the PvE game.
I never understand why players will steadfastly argue that games obviously centered around PvE are going to be great PvP games just because they have some minute PvP minigames added on. Every MMO I've played that wasn't designed from the ground up for PvP has sucked for PvP. I think some will have a very rude awakening once this game is released.
But my main point is I consider griefing in a game wrong. Is it immoral? Is it wrong? How is it any different than bullying a smaller child when you were in school. Oh yea...its just a game. So I'll address that now.
If Im playing a game, and I give someone a thousand gold as a generous gift does it not matter? Is it less valid or less generous than giving someone ten bucks in real life? How so? The act is the same. The feeling of the person you've affected is the same. They are just as grateful either way, and it holds just as much value.
So if I gank a person in UO for instance or EvE, and take all their belongings? Im stealing. But its just a game? No difference. The act was still commited. There are people who would much rather me steal 50 bucks from their wallet than trash their ship in EvE and take all the goodies off it. Its stealing. It holds just as much weight, game or not, and the victim affected feels it all the same.
So for those of you who think griefing is fun? You're bullying. You're aggravating another person for your personal pleasure. Game or not. The action is still there. A living breathing person was affected. If you loot items off a player corpse or steal from the guild bank? You've stolen. Game or not. The action is still exactly the same and the victims are equally affected. If you lie, steal, hurt, annoy, give a gift, help someone in need? These actions are just as valid in a game as they are in real life. You are affecting a real breathing person by your actions.
Its only a game? No. Thats only a REAL person you are messing with in some way. The only difference is if you did it out on the street a cop would likely tackle you to the ground. Only difference. Morally, you are still responsible. This is how it is when dealing with real people. Game or not.
Umm why is this thread still going with the above poster WON THE INTERNET with this amazing post.
+1289731687131
He's exactly right but only in a certain light.
If you take players who want to play a game where they can steal from each other, who don't care about being griefed or ganked and players who are looking for a game in a cut throat world then it it's a moot point.
And that's the whole problem with this thread. or any thread like it.
People who don't like ganking, griefing stealing in game aren't the correct players for a game that has these things built in as game play.
If a game were to be built up as a cut throat, dog eat dog world and the players that subscribe to it want this type of game then there is no issue.
the issue comes when you have the wrong type of player in the wrong type of game. On either side.
So sure, it's wrong to steal, bully and whatever else that brings but in a game where all the players WANT to be wrong and wronged, want it to be cut throat and merciless then the actions in game might be "wrong" but the players condone it and uphold this "type" of game play to be right.
Same with a game that doesn't have pvp. If the game is made so that there is no ganking, stealing, griefing then "that's ok".
What we have here are people who desire different things calling each other "wrong" when the only "wrong" thing here is that they can't recognize that the opposing viewpoint is right in what it wants for itself.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Funny, I always thought top level players who need devs to allow them to gank level ones to be carebears.
And as a rule using you past experinece with personal butt hurt on another game to turn the mmo you are working on into a pvp police state, never works out well.
Over dramatize much? You can't gank and grief newbies on the starter worlds. You'll have to wait until they've left the starter world which is about level 15.After that, gank and grief to your heart's content. So sorry that you can't grief level ones who are just learning to play the game. You'll just have to deal with EVERYONE else in game who does know how to actually play the game. If you can't handle a level 15 player with your level 30 then you stink and need to learn to how to play your class. But don't expect Bioware to cater to a group of players who only care about griefing, because when you cut through all the B.S, that is all your side is really fighting for.
for real now, how low you gotta be to kill lowbies
all we get from killing lows is them switching to their mains, killing the low that killed their lows. been there, done that. and it's sickening.
topic closed! happy argueing
Lol, this topic wil never die. Geeze, I have to wait till they are all of level 15 or so before I fight other players. This is a non topic. I have played in a lot of MMO pvp games (see sig). New characters are almost always protected for a little while.
Comments
Actually, I did catch that you were all for BioWares approach. I just disagree with that part about killing a virtual animal . It is not morally wrong since there is nothing suffering for it, while bullying other people with "new" toons is immoral because there is another person on the other end. As I said, a mature player will not attack someone that is so much weaker than themselves that they have no chance at defending themselves. While far to many immature players will camp places that lower level characters HAVE to visit and just to grief them. Equating a virtual animal to a real person is the problem I had with your argument.
Two people of roughly equal abilities going at it in PvP is awesome and should be encouraged though, and that means that one or the other will often die, but at least either one has a chance.
As I said I, like you, applaud Bioware for the approach they are taking. I do hope that they actually go farther though and make it so that players bullying people not only get no reward for it, but are in fact penalized for it. That kind of a built in "Policing" system would at least actually deter the immature players.
"If half of what you tell me is a lie, how can I believe any of it?"
Not sure about the first part. I for one try to fully understand a product before buying into it and take a great deal of the advertising spiel to be exactly that, spiel. I would like to give the majority of other players the benefit of the doubt and think that they to made informed choices.
Of course if someone is buying into a product that was mis-sold, or that they othewise didn't realise what they happened to be getting themselves into then I can fully understand them being furstrated and giving up when they have been ganked with no chance of fighting back.
As to your second part, yep I fully agree. And I certainly do not advocate people bemoaning the fact games like TOR, or any other game for that matter with a non ffa specific rule set, do not cater to them being able to gank anyone and everyone. I personally love ffa, full loot pvp, but it has a time and a place and it belongs in specific games. But I also look forward to the likes of GW2 which will certainly not cater to the ffa pvp crowd and I just cannot understand why people fail to accept that there should be options open to each playstyle.
In all honesty I am amazed it has really caused a debate (well i'm not amazed people have jumped on an anti ffa rant) given that surely everyone could see that a game like TOR is simply not suited to truly open kill everyone, everywhere ffa pvp.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
only complete newbs feel the need to gank players signifigantly below there level.. They do this for 1 simple reason, they can not win a fight vs someone there own level so they pick on the weaker players to feel like a "winner".. Its been this way for a long time and I prsonaly have np not allowing high lvls to go to low lvl areas although I hope high lvl imperial can go to low lvl imperial areas not to gank there own fation obviously but to come see / help friends or new chars. When I get a friend IRL to try a game that I am high level in I always liek to come see that person hook them up with gold and kill any low lvl difficult quests they may have etc..
Hopefully they dont make the world itself limited by levels but restricted by faction + levels
We are talking about the consequence and effects of your action in video game. By killing wolves you are not effecting a person but by harassing a low level player you are. So the excuse 'it is just a game' doesn't fly anymore. That is what was being discussed. So no your examples don't make any sense. On one side a person is entering RVR zone willingly on other hand a low level is being ganked and camped against his wishes by a higher rank player. Two different scenarios.
Even FFA PVP games need some rule sets. One shouldn't just gank and harrass a player because he can. There needs to be strict punishment or consequences for such actions. Otherwise in such a situation only one person is having fun and i don't need to tell you who.
Let them.
That is the reason FFA MMOs will never be popular. The wolves chase off the proverbial sheep, and are left with a barren server.
Without safe zones, and the ability to trade in game currency for game time, EVE would be right there with Darkfall for thinly populated game IMO. FFA doesnt work for a mainstream title as far as I can see.
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
If a high level Imperial somehow manages to sneak his way onto the Trooper starting world, I'll just throw a couple /raspberry and /moon emotes at him, knowing I'm safe. However, it sounds like enemy players won't be able to set foot on the starter worlds at all. If that's the case, I'll /raspberry and /moon the first Imperial I see in the Warzones.
For a start I have explained the point of the wolf analogy about nineteen times now. If you want to see further debate on the matter look up over a few more posts than the one you just quoted. TLDR of it: Those people have ACTIVELY chosen to play FFA games. They have ACTIVELY WANTED to play games with such rulesets so they can take advantage of them as well.
Secondly, there is a world of diference between killing a newb and harassing someone. Repeatedly ganking the same person over and over again to get on his tits is of course a bad thing and I would never condone it. But killing a random newb in a game with FFA rules and no safe zones which he/she has ACTIVELY chosen to play out of the vast array of non-ffa pvp game is quite simply not harassment and he is not a victim to be cuddled and hugged whilst getting the pitchforks out for the person who happened to kill his character.
Oh and yes, a player choosing an ffa pvp game is very much like a player choosing to walk into an rvr zone. Did the people in the store force the guy against his will to choose a game with ffa rules or something?
As to the latter part, FFA pvp games do have rules... And again there is a clear difference between ganking and harassing.
A very simple question and if you are going to respond to this post please answer it: Why are people who are so worried/upset about getting killed as a new character, going out of their way to buy one of the few games that actually have the mechanics in place to allow him to be killed?
@Moaky07, two things occur: First of all so what if they are niche, does that somehow invalidate them as games and the players who enjoy them? Secondly pointing to DF and it's poulation when trying to somehow show how poorly demanded ffa pvp is is not the wisest of ideas, given anyone who has ever looked at or played the game realises it is the tedious grind/lack of skill cap and lack of non bugged content that is really hampering it.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Does SWTOR offer FFA ? If it does not why are we even arguing about it ? What does it matter what other games offer and what a player chooses in those games SWTOR is not thsoe games. So how does making a choice in another game have any relevance in SWtOR ?
chripes, this topic is still going?
for real now, how low you gotta be to kill lowbies
all we get from killing lows is them switching to their mains, killing the low that killed their lows. been there, done that. and it's sickening.
topic closed! happy argueing
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
Because people wish that the system that they prefer would be in every single game so that no one else has an option as to what kind of game they can play. People also love to rush out the white knight "save the victim" card quite alot on forums as well which means that any thread mentioning ffa pvp gets over 9000 haters in it.
Which in turn leads to people defending it and so the circle is complete lol.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Ahh I see it just damned confused me to see all these posts and I wondering what the devil was going on.Thanks for the clarification.
This is not the game you're looking for.
I'm a dude. I do stuff.
I tend to agree with Spock. Picture a Star Wars fan/complete MMO newb trying to make a youtube preview of the game...
"Hey guys, this is my youtube video of the Jedi Knight class in SWTOR. While it loads, take time to sub to my channel, as I will be previewing all classes in the near future."
*Game loads, his character was killed while loading.*
"Umm. I don't know what's going on here guys. Hmm. Oh, I think my character is dead. It's odd that characters start off dead in this game. Hmm. Where do I go now?"
His first time in game, he does not know where to go or how to resurrect his character. Newbish, but it will be common for many SW fans in this game.
*30 mins later*
"OK guys, I think this is where I go to resurrect my character"
*Resurrects, is instantly blasted by a level 50 Sith and dies.*
"OH, I guess some Sith killed me? I don't even know how to play this game yet and people are killing me."
*Pokes around for another 30 mins, then quits permanently and posts several negative reviews of the game.*
Error: 37. Signature not found. Please connect to my server for signature access.
I think I can sum this all up in a picture.
http://itthing.com/wp-content/uploads/Care-Bears.jpg
And as a rule using you past experinece with personal butt hurt on another game to turn the mmo you are working on into a pvp police state, never works out well.
What constitutes a newbie? I've seen max-level players with less talent and grace than a beginning player. Low-level players will still get one-shotted. Bad players will still get embarassed. It's great they aren't allowing newly created characters to be slaughtered as they log in for the first time, but don't pretend that the ocean of tears from players getting beat will not be present.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
The game is PvE for most , this post/ Topic is pretty much irrelevant.
________________________________________________________
Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
what are you, the god of relevance? lol. There are a ton of people who will be playing this game for its PVP as evidence of the feedback from PAX and Gamescom, so not sure what game you've been following.
There Is Always Hope!
Yes, like every game out there that offers either both kinds of servers or both kinds of content, most gamers play on the PvE servers and the PvE content. It's a proven fact. Doesn't make PvP irrelevent, but it sure doesn't make it the priority in most games that offer both. Even in that game called SWG pre-NGE, only a small fraction participated in the GCW, while the majority spent their time playing the PvE game.
I never understand why players will steadfastly argue that games obviously centered around PvE are going to be great PvP games just because they have some minute PvP minigames added on. Every MMO I've played that wasn't designed from the ground up for PvP has sucked for PvP. I think some will have a very rude awakening once this game is released.
He's exactly right but only in a certain light.
If you take players who want to play a game where they can steal from each other, who don't care about being griefed or ganked and players who are looking for a game in a cut throat world then it it's a moot point.
And that's the whole problem with this thread. or any thread like it.
People who don't like ganking, griefing stealing in game aren't the correct players for a game that has these things built in as game play.
If a game were to be built up as a cut throat, dog eat dog world and the players that subscribe to it want this type of game then there is no issue.
the issue comes when you have the wrong type of player in the wrong type of game. On either side.
So sure, it's wrong to steal, bully and whatever else that brings but in a game where all the players WANT to be wrong and wronged, want it to be cut throat and merciless then the actions in game might be "wrong" but the players condone it and uphold this "type" of game play to be right.
Same with a game that doesn't have pvp. If the game is made so that there is no ganking, stealing, griefing then "that's ok".
What we have here are people who desire different things calling each other "wrong" when the only "wrong" thing here is that they can't recognize that the opposing viewpoint is right in what it wants for itself.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Over dramatize much? You can't gank and grief newbies on the starter worlds. You'll have to wait until they've left the starter world which is about level 15.After that, gank and grief to your heart's content. So sorry that you can't grief level ones who are just learning to play the game. You'll just have to deal with EVERYONE else in game who does know how to actually play the game. If you can't handle a level 15 player with your level 30 then you stink and need to learn to how to play your class. But don't expect Bioware to cater to a group of players who only care about griefing, because when you cut through all the B.S, that is all your side is really fighting for.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
Lol, this topic wil never die. Geeze, I have to wait till they are all of level 15 or so before I fight other players. This is a non topic. I have played in a lot of MMO pvp games (see sig). New characters are almost always protected for a little while.