Originally posted by mennacce There needs to be a balanced death penalty however NOT this kind of crap lots of you are posting about statloss or exp loss or whatever. Exp loss or temp stat loss is not a good option, these are just an annoyance and gain for absolutely nobody. Dropping items on death is the way to go, when you die your gear and items you were carrying are left with your corpse, you can run back and retrieve them, but only if somebody else doesn't beat you to it. Of course you shouldn't be able to just loot everybodies corpse without consequences, it should be a crime unless you were in a guild at war with the person, the only time this would not be a criminal act is when you were attacked first. Dropping your items on death is a penalty good enough for anyone, but theres a key factor that makes this penalty reign supreme over ALL over penalties mentioned, with this penalty, you may be at a loss for losing your equipment, but in the likelyhood that somebody else loots you, that person will be at a gain for aquiring all your stuff, your loss will be equal to his gain. This way, its not just a lose-lose situation for all players when they die and get some crappy stat loss penalty, the player that dies may lose his gear, if he doesn't manage to get it back, its because somebody else has, its perfectly balanced, you feel loss and penalty equal to the gain the person who aquired your gear feels. Full loot is the perfectly balanced yet so simple answer to all our problems, the devs just have to know not to give into the whiners who cry when they die, the devs need to remember, that for every person who whines that they lost their gear, theres another person out there whos feeling rather chuffed about his newly aquired items, yet he doesnt go crying to the devs about it, so his opinion goes unheard. This system with done with the right mechanics will be the new style kind of MMO's when somebody does it right, i am just awaiting the day an MMO of this style emerges. The current crapping penalty systems are hardly even a penalty, and the ones that are a penalty are merely an annoyance, as i said above, stat loss or exp loss is a gain for NOBODY, its just a lose-lose situation for the player and nobody feels good or gets any reward from it. This is the style of MMO where players become bored and end up quitting after they feel they have achieved all the main content and there is nothing left to do.
That's the original Ultima Online design !
You died, your corpse lay there waiting to be looted by you or someone else.
If you were a character of "good notoriety" "blue" anyone else that looted your corpse would temporarily have "negative notoriety" "grey". This gave them a temp flag that made them attackable by all. So if they happened to stumble upon your corpse and looted you someone else that stumbled upon them could kill them and then when you returned they could give your stuff back if they were nice and not just "noto pk'ing". Killing someone because they were grey.
You see the system wasn't perfect because if you were out hunting with a friend and they died you would have to turn grey by looting their corpse so nobody could come steal their stuff. This became the birth of "notoriety killing" /noto pk'ing, killing just because the game mechanics allowed you to kill someone else.
lol it was years before they put in place a system were a guildmate or group member could loot you without negative consequences.
The system kept track of how many times you went grey and if you did bad things too often you were perma grey, permanently attackable by everyone.
Much like how they dealt with pk's. You would become "red" if you killed too much and then you couldn't go into towns and use your bank and also attackable all the time.
The system still had some loopholes that needed sewn up but overall it was one of the best systems that put a consequence for your actions.
The mechanics of this got screwed up when UO started to give into the whines of it being too harsh of a system from the players who wanted to take advantage of the loopholes without consequence.
I would like to state that in no way shape or form that anything I receive from SOE influences my opinion about SWG or their company. Im pretty much a typical average player enjoying the game.
Now mind you, I never got into UO, but that original scheme of a death penalty seems to be to be the ultimate of what i would want in a game. Nowing that they gave in too, garuntees I will never play that game again. Boredom results from their being no detriment to death. People that just want the best stuff to show of to friends or whatnot should stick to single player games and take screen shots.
Generally speaking, I'm in favor of a moderately serious death penalty. True, it's a real disappointment when you do fail & die, and admittedly some are encouraged to just log out when death occurs repeatedly. However, when you DO succeed, and get through the mission/quest without dying...it's a real feeling of encouragement. My most memorable experience from City of Heroes was when my scrapper (read: Fighter) ran through a mission with a fairly serious debuff on her (as part of a mission storyline). It was rough going, especially when I got to the Boss (this was before you could opt not to get Bosses when running solo). When I finished that Boss off with just the barest sliver of Health left to me, it was all I could do not to leap from my chair and cheer.
Hell, to be honest, I'm even in favor of permadeath (*ducks*). I see nothing wrong with honest-to-god killing of a character...so long as death doesn't come easily. If your average sewer rat can come up and nuke you, then maybe permadeath isn't such a good idea. But if the game is balanced in such a way as the PC's are the heavyweights, then actually losing the character when I die seems appropriate. Sad, certainly...but appropriate.
Playing a game where it takes hundreds of hours to build up your character, and you could lose it all in a second is like paying someone to sneak into your house and stab you while you are asleep on some random evening. Sure, it may add axcitement to your life, but you will be damn sorry you did it eventually.
You want a free MMORPG with a harsh as hell death panalty? Try this:
There you go, the harshest death penlty on the market. One death and that's it, your dead. Forever. Loony birds that crave being permanently ass raped every time they screw, up enjoy. I'm going to head back and play my "pansy" games.
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
I can't edit my previous post for some reason. Just to clarify, I intended that post to be a bit tongue in cheek. If you like brutal death penalties, by all means play whatever game has the harshest one you can find. Not my bag, but I respect the right of anyone to pursue whatever floats their boat. More power to you
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
Why dont they have a YIELD button - I GIVE IN! All these PVP games only give you a DIE! or RUN! or WIN! option. If we all had a YIELD button we could press that and avoid dying. The yield would result in possibly a ransom in cash, or xp even, or an item... it would be a negotiated yield and once agreed a flag could be set stopping you from being able to attack each other for a week etc etc....
Or PVP Perma-death, if you want to PVP go for it, but its perma-death... only the serious PVPers would partake, the griefers would be eliminated quickly... or maybe semi-perma death, your character is locked out for a week (go play an alt)... or for $50 you can unlock it... MY GOD, SOE would make a fortune!
There are lots of different options if you think about it, but most companies just dont want to bother. I especially have no idea why they dont have a Yield button, it is even historical.
"Playing a game where it takes hundreds of hours to build up your character, and you could lose it all in a second is like paying someone to sneak into your house and stab you while you are asleep on some random evening. Sure, it may add axcitement to your life, but you will be damn sorry you did it eventually."
I know this. The stabbing hurts more, but I understand what you're saying. And I know this post was tongue in cheeck, as you call it.
But have you noticed the mention of death penalties / permadeath needing to be designed according to the rest of the game? You said it yourself: "Playing a game where it takes hundreds of hours to build up your character..." This is the norm of games today. And frankly: It works poorly.
It is the system from games such as D&D (tabletop) where you don't fight PCs who may choose freely when to attack, and who to target, but instead fight monsters as the DM deems appropriate. You could seek out easier challenges just for the hell of it, but there'd be no motivation but hacktime. The game would usually direct you into even matches, or matches designed so that you stand only a slight chance of winning. (Or relatively easy matches)
In MMORPGs the DM isn't in control. Each "monster" is another player and that player has the option to strike wherever he wants. Artificial limitations such as "cannot attack 10 levels lower" are implemented, but that only proves the game doesn't work, and makes it worse in some aspects. IMHO. IMO, at least. I'll not claim too much humility.
The solution, in my eyes, is to let characters start out a little stronger, advance a little slower, and never get to that amazing point where only those who have lived as long as him can pose a threat. Playing a game where the actual fun starts almost immediately after character creation and you could fall back to the beginning after a single kill, gives you a playfield where top and bottom of the scale are always present and active / effective.
To some of you:
To assume that we "want pain" is just silly. It doesn't hurt. The shovel thing was reasonably funny, but it would not have enhanced our gaming experience.
A dynamic playing field is what we want. I've pointed it out earlier, I point it out again:
Without setbacks everybody will drift to the top, and soon the game won't be worth playing until you make it there.
If you're able to join right back in the battle you just died in there is no way to win the battle by force. All you can do is stay online until the field is yours.
You cannot defeat a player if he cannot die. In some settings this won't matter too much, because the fight and victory might still be entertaining. However, those are not the settings I normally see. (Sample setting: An arena fight where everybody is a gladiator and the goal is to have spectacular fights, not kills. Nobody's willing to deal the finishing blow, and everybody always get to stand up again. However, the top heavy powerscale will still be a problem)
I want that game where you can see all the scale in activity, and it is all worth playing.
The future: Adellion Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants) Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens) Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
A few years back I ran a small corp. For people that are old eve players minerII's had just come out.
Back then mining was the best way to make money, so me and my 5 corp mates mined solid for 7 days to buy enough minerals (zydrine) to trade for the miner II's
On the way to pick them up I was jumped by player pirates, with around 200 hours of combined game time value in my hold - those 5 seconds getting to the gate and secure space were the most intense I have ever had in any game.
Saying that the game is now ruined in too many ways now for me, I stopped playing about 8 months ago, popped back a few times and it felt the same. So Im playing the 360 waiting for that something new game to appear.
A game where everyone was close to to a level playing feild from the get go (or after a very modest grind), one where your avatatar was more a vehicle to role playing than a big sign that says how many hours you've sunk into the game, and skill was more of a determinant of outcomes in encounters than RL spare time...that is one where I think harsh deaeth penalties could be fun. Mybe not permadeath (since a RPing avatar is one that you would tend to become very attached to), but corpse runs, open looting, and all that other jazz I would support.
The fundamental problem that I have with harsh death enalties is that under the current norm for MMORPG game design they could represent hours and hours of work down the crapper. To me that's just not fun. But I agree, if that mechanic were to change more realistic death penalties would be a lot more fun.
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
The death penalty, in my opinion, is so fraught with detractions to its supportability that it seems like a case for it can not be made while still accounting for the player bell curves in play. A LOT of people are not interested in dying, as evidenced from the beginning of this thread and down through the building pages of the discussion. Personally, I crave the absolute death penalty. You get killed, you're gone. All your stuff can be repo'ed right off the body. You start over, and the survivors live on. Your body remains in the game, and after a few hours, the vultures come and start picking away at it.
Any other death penalty, like experience debt or item decay, are such bizarre inventions in terms of immersion. It almost feels like designers are trying to satisfy both camps with these compromise solutions to the death question, in addition to satifying the very real need to bring in subscriber income on a monthly basis.
Whatever side you fall on, the death penalty question is really about immersion. And immersion in this case is only vaild with respect to things worth dying for and things worth killing for. I support the death penalty only in an MMO completely designed around that concept. Such an MMO, for me, would need to have no nametags and no broadcast chat channels. I have always wanted to see an MMO where you have your spatial chat options - whisper, say, and yell - along with places designed to advertise goods (a virtual marquee or billboard), things like cell phones that you can use to coordinate chat with friends and other groups, such as guilds, and ways to take snapshots both mental and physical that can be used to give the "authorities" something to "go on" when acting as a witness to a murder crime.
The combat system needs to also accurately reflect just how hard it can be to kill someone, especially if that someone is fast and is running away from you. Death penalty will never be meaningful in an over-simplified combat system. Damage needs to be allocated to areas of the body, causing penalties to combat performance that uses those areas. Lethal damage needs to be defined specifically (eg., HEADSHOT!). Initiative absolutely needs to be used in the system. A game with death penalty naturally needs to be sophisticated. After all, the only players who really support death penalty in an MMO are almost to a person supporters of a harder-to-learn yet more involved and immersive combat system.
Above all, the game needs to be designed in such a way that killing others entails a massive risk, while gaining the ability to have that luxury at one's fingertips is earned through playing the game and playing it carefully.
Lag-death, though, is the deal-breaker. Until a game is made that has a consistent and infallible way to eliminate lag-death from the equation, almost no argument for the death penalty will hold water.
In truth, as so many people have posted, this argument is kind of a null argument, since the death penalty is inextricably united to the gam design. Perhaps the thread should be steered out of this now meaningless basic argument and into the argument it generates in turn:
What would be the nature of design for a game where a hard death penalty is in play?
I hate greifers and I hate the immature community usually associated with PvP. On the flip side I think there should be a death penalty (here on out DP) serious enough that people will use skill to play rather than run in the open over and over again to get killed.
For example: In DAoC you don't have a harsh DP. if you walk into a BG you will find people soloing when they should be grouping or grouping and running around with no tactics or by themselve (like they were soloing). Just last night I was in a BG and this idiot kept running out in the wide open looking to kill people getting owned by the same 2 enemies over and over again. It's not just him either, it's the majority of the people and groups that play this game. Why you would run around in the open vrs the trees waiting to ambush is beyond me. My theory is that if there was a harsh death penalty people would start to group and use common sense and skill/tactics while in PvP. They would learn from their mistakes and try something different when they fail.
I for one, a person unbiased on pvp really, am looking forward to Darkfall which promises death penalties as well as a system that will cut down on griefers. Finally will I see real skill and thought put into actions.
I really don't care if the game I choose to play has PvP or not. I can have fun with either and find the good in both games, but if your going to have PvP you should have a penalty harsh enough to make people think twice before acting.
Yea it seems that death penalty is a huge divding factor in the community. Developers will choose a large portion of their player base depending on which way they decide to go. Other things which determine which type of game you'll play are skill/leveling system, crafting, territory control and genre.
For me there is no game out there which i am happy enough with to pay my hard earned for. I did like UO though. The only reason i stopped playing it was because of bandaging in combat, the actual combat death didnt bother me. Also people talk about "griefers", but in my 3 months playing i was only grief killed once. People in the community were almost always hospitable and open to meeting new people, they werent suckers though. My guess is that over a period of time people formed their own communities and helped eachother out. Which is why i play an MMOG.
You cant just judge a games death system by itself. It depends on the other types of game dynamics listed in my first paragraph. Here are examples from the 3 mmog's that i have played for a resonable amount of time:
WOW: The death system here is weak. But then it should be because of the amount of playing you have to do. Like alot of people have said, its a singleplayer game. Its a GRIND. So the death system is right for the game environment. But to me the game sucks. It only starts once you hit max level 70 and then its boring, the only thing left to do are raids but with no benefit, only the armor repair cost afterwards.
UO: Strong death penalty. But it doesnt matter so much because you dont lose heaps of gameplay hours. But because of the skill system lower skilled players can kill higher skilled players, even if it is only a small chance. No mega super special items to lose. I dissliked the economy (monsters drop gold coins), and the bandaging system. No crafting.
EVE: Medium. You can avoid skill loss by buying a clone and ship loss by buying insurance. Left this game because of the skill system, almost the same as a leveling system. Time based, very annoying.
I would play any of these game if other parts of the game were more to my liking. I dont choose a game purely on death penalty, though it does have a big impact on the game feel, over all.
My ideal game would have strong death penalty, like UO. No gold dropping from monsters, only if they were humaniod or at least intelligent creatures, no bandaging during combat. Player controled towns with their own laws/taxes/culture. Economy based on crafting/resource collection (not from monsters) The ability for a city to punish other players (get thrown in jail for 3 hours).
[edit] oops just read the above posts. Sorry about repeating. I agree no nametags (well only if a player is on your friends / guild list). Players should have a wide range of ways to look different, if not individually then at least as a player group(at all these levels sub-race/cluture/clan/guild).
Good points Kormac and dubbs. I agree with you both on some points. There needs to be a game out there that caters to this style of play. And that does it well.
Adellion, i remember that game, is it still up and running?
I've played tons of MMORPGs. EQ, AC, AO, AC2, CoH, Horizons, WoW and a bunch of others I have forgotten. Most of my MMORPG years were spent playing AC so a lot of my message will reference that game.
To me the best death penalty of the bunch was AC. EQ way back when (5+ years ago) was too harsh. Lose all your gear?! Yeesh. On the other hand everything back AO was too light and, honestly, CoH and WoW (the latest two I've played) don't have a death penalty. Gaining some XP at half rate (CoH) and a few silver of broken gear along with a 2m run (WoW) is so miniscule they could be removed and noone would change their behavior.
In AC when you died you lost some (but not all) items on your body and you lost some stats until you earned enough XP for that debt to be cleared. It wasn't so harsh that you'd lose everything but by the same token when ya died ya felt it. It was something to be avoided.
Furthermore, and here's something not touched on in the debate, death penalties where items were on the body made for a good reason for multiplayer interaction. Frank touched on ganging up to prevent death but didn't mention that one had to do a corpse recovery in backup gear to a location that killed you in your main gear the best way to do it was often to bring friends!
To me MMORPGs have been on a decline recently. They've been stagnate and boring. Early MMORPGs could be enjoyed for years. Recent MMORPGs get stale after a few months. Often times they are offering the same feature sets with very little improvement over what has gone on previously. Here it is, 2-3 years out of my AC days and I'm still waiting for the next generation MMORPG to emerge. WoW comes close but while it has advanced in some ways (mail system, quest system, instances) it has slipped backwards in others (no global LFG system, very limited guild system, no "ownership" of in game real estate, etc). It's more like generation 1.5 of MMORPGs.
Step one, IMHO, is to stop this trend of ever easing death penalties. That's the first indication that this isn't just another single-player game. Then maybe from there the players will start demanding the better features and items that have shown up here and there in MMORPGs. Like advanced guild structures (Shadowbane's guilds swearing to guilds) and management (AO/Horizons) along with in-game social centers for guilds (AC's mansions). On top of that more complex game play and quests would help greatly. Finally, a reversal of the mindset of "Oh, they'll play it for a few months, that's all we need content for." Any MMORPG released today should look at the history of UO, AC and EQ (the first big 3)... They have been played for *years*. Some fans put 4-5 years into it. The initial design document should start with the question "how can we acoomodate and make the game interesting for even the fastest levelling player for 2 years?" CoH's original level cap was hit un under a month. People if they push hard can hit it in 2-3 weeks. WoW is the same way. AC it took a good 1-2 *years* for the first person to hit the level cap. Even so in my 5 years playing it I never made more than 2/3rds of the way to the cap.
MMORPGs are not a 2-3 month "play and forget" revenue stream when designed and administered properly. They are multi-year cash streams. Time for the game companies to realize that and design accordingly.
EDIT: Forgot to mention that I am talking strictly in the sense of PvE and not PvP. I am of the opinion that PvP and MMORPGs should not mix, period. 99% of the play time in an MMORPG is PvE; I have not ever seen a PvP system in an MMORPG which wasn't broken from the onset or, if it was decent, didn't break PvE play in the process. I played Asheron's Call for 5 years solid and not once... ever... "went red". IMHO Developers of MMORPGs would do far better dropping PvP and devoting the massive amount of development and balance time spent on the 1% of PvP play into enhancing the PvE experience. If I want PvP I'll play CS:S. I play MMORPGs for cooperative play, not competative.
Perhaps when you die you can make yourself logoff and do your homework, call your girlfriend, remind your wife you're alive, go look for a job or simply take a shower.
In RL "Earth MMORPG", If someone shoots my neighbor I don't have the right to run over and steal everything out of his clothes so why do people assume that we should have that right in games.
If you feel you must have pain attached to your ingame death then buy me some beer and I'll be happy to stand behind your chair and hit you with a shovel whenever you die but as for myself, I don't have 8 hours a day to play that way.
Wow what an ass hat. His mom should start teaching him better before he enters the real world.
All I know is this. When I PvP in wow their is no fear nor great thrill. When I PvP in EvE where if I screw up and die I will lose 200mil isk ship and maybe even my pod that contains my body. Loseing you Pod in EvE just suxs ass you wake up in green goo and you end up buying a new clone plus you fell great pain as you realize that your head full of implans is now a frozen corps out in the middle of space. This fear of death cause one of the deepest, edge of your seat, palm sweating, vocaly screaming, PvP thrills you can feel short of a near death experance. And I have had a near death experance was diving in a lake when I went to go up for more air I got hooked on some tangled fishing line. Stopped me about a foot from the surface. I had to accully dive back down to brace my feet to the bottom so I could pull up the weeds the line was tangled in with when I got back up to the surface I gasped so hard that my chest hurt 3 days after wards. I had to go to the ER to get the hook out of my hand. When I come near death in EvE I get the same fellings that I did when I was suddenly stopped a mear foot away for the surface of that lake.
Wow what an ass hat. His mom should start teaching him better before he enters the real world.
Nothing HE/SHE said made HIM/HER an asshat...
It's you name-calling PvPing EVE-lovin' wanabees that generally come off looking the asshats in nearly every thread I read on here.
Oh...and if you're looking for an "adventure-sport" for an MMO...might I suggest you actually attempt to go OUTSIDE and find a real one! (Stick to your diving or parachuting or fire-eating, and let mature people who aren't looking for a thrill-rush...ie. PKing and trash-talk high-penalty-death experiences...play MMOs) Thank you and goodnight.
Originally posted by Phantom999 First, in repsonse to the previous poster about instancing. Your an idiot. The very fact that your going into an instance with other REAL PLAYERS is socializing, compared to going in with NPC characters. Of course this isnt what this debate is about now is it :P As for death penalties, my stance is more towards none. Frankly, I understand alot of peoples idea about how Death Penalties create a more adrenaline pumping pvp type of game. I also understand peoples stance on not wanting to lose hours upon hours of work, because not everyone can spend 24/7 playing a game. Personally, id like to see two types of servers on most MMORPGS. A penalty free, and one with penalties. That way, both types of players can play the game, and enjoy it, without haveing to deal with eachother. I know I wouldnt mind it, hell I might even make a character on both. One to be able to complete the quests, pvp, and just run around with my buddies without worrying about losing hours of work. And then being able to also go on a server where, should I wish it, I could play with the chance of losing exp, money, or items to other players when I get killed, or by monsters when im outnumbered and make a mistake. The fact is, id have that choice, and thats something I think MMORPG's should incorporate. Hate it or love it, right now you get your choice between one or the other, not both. And thats my stance on this subject.
DAoC tried this, and look at where they are now. 90% of their clients are on the Original servers. The two options they had prior to this were, be in a massive guild that can do the ToA quests for that EQ feel or the hardcore pvp servers. In both cases, the small group never benefitted because the larger groups had the better equipment and skills that being in that group gave them. The most "hardcore" pvp games out there are dieing off on the American servers for this reason too. No one wants to spend hours and hours of gaming, which they have to pay 14 or more dollars a month plus retail price to have some group of morons come along with their uber gear that they exploited or duped to get and gank them. Nor do they want to be required to join the 300 person super guilds to actually have to play the game as the designers meant it to be played. The days of people joining super guilds are about over for internet gaming USA. They still occur in places like Korea and Japan because the society there requires that groups be larger due to the fact of overcrowding of land area. We have islands in America too, we just don't cram every American citizen we can onto them.
There lies the biggest problem. If they can create a cheat free environment, it would not be such an issue. Games like CheaterBane and HowManyBuffersCanIRunOnL2Walker are the reason that hardcore pvp will never see the glory days of UO again. Even UltimaHackzorIGEOnline had this problem.
Regarding the editors comment MAORPG? What is antisocial about less "hardcore" rulesets? I can tell you, running around in gank squads, beating on people well below your level range and using exploits and cheats to do it even better is definately antisocial. Anti, meaning not, Social, expected social behavioralisms. Since when has it been accepted as the norm in any society on earth to run around in small hit squads and kill people whenever you like it without any penalty. I think you need to think more about what you are saying and less about how much you want to wtfpwnzor that newbie.
My resume of MMORPGs starts with UO spanning over 10 years of gaming including well known games such as: EQ, EQ2, LINEAGE:TBP, LINEAGE2, RAGNAROK, DARK AGES, DAOC, GUILD WARS, SHATTERED GALAXY, NEXUS:KW, MAPLE STORY, FFXI, ANARCHY ONLINE, EVE ONLINE, AC, AC2, COH, COV, KNIGHT ONLINE, SECOND LIFE, THE MATRIX ONLINE, PLANETSIDE, MU ONLINE, WOW, GATE OF HEAVEN, RAN ONLINE, OZ WORLD, and currently beta testing AUTO ASSAULT (Loving it by the way, suggest it to everyone) PLUS an entire repertoire of games that half of you wouldnt understand the names to...I have been around gaming since I was 9...and yes I used to be a little brat.
The most memorable years of my gaming must have been Lineage The Blood Pledge, during the era where sieging was still a matter of honor and those of us who were princes amongst our fellow players still felt the passion and excitement each siege represented. Lately though, a shift in the market of MMORPGs has caused the gaming companies to sell out to a much broader audience. And I don't blame them, its about the money. But does that mean the quality of the game and its integrity have to fail along the way? Do you have to bend over backwards to every crying 12 year old who just got Pked in Fire Valley? By lowering death penalties you open the games to immature players, who don't, have never and will never understand the true meaning of the MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER online role playing game. Blizzard is the best example of a company selling out and becoming the "bitch" of these petulent children. As the world anticipated World of Warcraft, myself included, we had high hopes for the creators of some of our earlier favorites such as Diablo 2 and Starcraft. However, as I found out quite quickly, I was to be dissapointed beyond reperations...And now you could not pay me enough to play WoW...During the first week of its release, I had, without much effort mind you, made it to lvl 40...The day after I made cap I broke the CDs for WoW and burned them in my fireplace...A while later, when the cap was increased to lvl 60, my hopes were renewed. I had had time to forgive Blizzard a little for bringing this atrocity of a game into existance...But again my hopes were shattered...Not only did they make the game easier still, they had the nerve to allow me the ability to slay the highest lvled mods within 2 more weeks of playing...and by the end of that month I had again reached the cap lvl. This is largly due to just how simple they made it to walk around with no fear of death...A great man once told me, "Those who do not fear death...have nothing to live for..." And that is the perfect example of what low or no death penalties do to MMORPGs...With no fear, where is the point in getting stronger so you no longer have to fear? Instead once you reach the highest lvl and obtain all the best stuff you simply wish to quit. There is no longer any point in continuing within the world...You no longer have any goals to reach. And some might say, "Make a new character, and do it all over again..." To those of you I only have one thing to say..."No..." There isn't a point...Because I know that at the end of my journy there will no longer be a point to the character I have spent so much time on. If I cannot do unto others what others have once done to me then I have no motivation to outdo anyone anymore, therefore no motivation to play. I WANT to make little 12 year olds feel bad about losing their stuff cause they won't show their elders some respect...I WANT to grief and in turn want to BE griefed because then I have something to aim for...I DON'T like emos in real life why would I want them invading my sanctuary which is gaming? The entire point in high death penalty is to keep such riffraff out of games...But alas over time I have come to accept that money is all that matters to these companies, and while we loyal gamers wish to keep these communities from becoming wastelands of "stfu" and "I'm gonna hop on my main and kill you" our requests fall on deaf ears...Anyone who cannot handle the consequences of death and PvP or PK should not be allowed to play battle based games.
In response to the post above me about MAORPG, I do believe what he was talking about was the players who play MMORPGs but expect solo play rules to apply such as low or no death penalties. And on top of that at least while you are ganking and killing people lower level then you, you are socializing with the people you are doing this with instead of being reclusive doing solo quests making you easy targets and thereby fitting the definition of "antisocial." And you also confused his point about running around a killing with no penalties...His entire argument was based around the fact that low penalties, IE "less hardcore" causes more ganking and zerging because no one has any reason not to do it.
The first developer to have a good game with full PvP and permadeath out will NOT get the benefit of WoW's 5 million subscribers (regardless of what truths and deceptions lie behind that number).
What they will get is a playerbase that has absolutely no other game to go to for what they offer. Say 10,000 players who wouldn't leave if you charged 25$ a month? (And another 10,000 who would, but hope you won't)
Wouldn't that be neat?
The future: Adellion Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants) Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens) Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
there is a vein sticking from my forhead that is dedicated to depict annoyance everytime a dominant asumption gets to be completely undoubted by the one making the theory around it, and this vein gets bigger when the arguer doesn't even seem aware of that asumption...
the only one argument for lightwaight death penelty that isn't completely based on the asumption that a game worth is grind-time and leveling gained, is the commercial argument of bringing single game players to the mmo. i think that to bring them in, dev's need to understand that no one grinds in those (pacman and snake, maybe, possibly tetris... but i don't think they do on the RPG ones), and that they are used to have great stories, handcrafted quality. give players in an mmo more deph of action and more derived reasons to play like quality characters of a story (there own), and you create a game that can attract a lot more single players. this comes in the price of risk, but, i think that games with risk and perma death are looking in the wrong direction, they need to gather up the non-mmo player. there are risk takers everywere. bring them closer to the computer. PnP and LARPers are also a smaller but more well known and defined potential buyers.
right now we have 3 games with permadeath in production (and i ask any one who has the slighest feeling that mmorpg's need to be about more then leveling treadmills to give at list one of them a try).
: the chronicle, addelion, and trials of ascension, respectivly on the list, each one taking less risk then the one before it.
i like the one offered on TC, since it is closer to the TOA original idea of increasing chance of PD, since you can permadie at any moment, and the game uses "natural" sceniroes to create a second chance situation if your lucky to not permadie (which is still the most probable result). on the other hand, as much as the system itself is risky, the developers aren't taking a risk themselves. they are offering this as a well rewardered option, and this might create a very odd dynamic within the games playerbase.
addelion developments are kind of more hardcore themselves: it seems they want the player to be suseptible to permadeath for most of there main playing time, while the first couple of "life counters" are based on the developers astimation of "how many times you will die before geting the hang of it and getting to the long and careful life-span which is the main play time.
both of those are also great for the casual players. on the surface, a hursh penelty sounds bad for people without a lot of real life time to play (me included): "cause' it will take me a lot more time to recover the death penelty that i lost", in this case build a new character. but if you open up to the idea, you will understand that the game will play differently then other games, because everyone has the Perma death risk on there head, and most characters are not going to last very long if your going to take to many risks. in other words, you can play the risk-taking heroes as short playing sessions, a month or two per character, where you play out its story. not a lot of people are going to be stronger then you any how, cause they are probebly going to die by then. most games reward you strictly for how much time you invest in the game, while this kind of game rewards you for how well you play.
trials of ascension are doing designing it for long play sessions, potentially a couple of years with a character, by giving you a set numbers to die.
all of those, for the long term survivers, you will be rewarded for either being very smart/lucky in battle, or better: being part of a society, a community of players protecting each other very much like in real life. this is for the true risk takers PvP players who are ok with real looses, and not many griefers will survive this dependency on others, and the greatest bond for the socializers, plus an immersive expirience for role players.
While we are very happy to see so many people feel as adamantly as us about the topic at hand, we do not enjoy seeing the posts descend into a display of name calling and general disrepect for those who would not share our opinions.
We wholeheartly welcome you to join us in this debate. But please keep it respectful, even to those who do not share your view of what makes the games we love great. With such an exciting topic as this, we do not want to see the thread locked due to a select few who cannot control the emotion the topic insights.
That said, keep it coming!
I notice a lot of people drift from the topic of deth penalties specifically into the realm of open pvP vs limited/no PvP. To those who opposed the harsh death penalties, is it the penalty itself, or the penalty at teh hands of a fellow player that make it intolerable?
A stiff DP in PvE play can boost the excitement in that aspect of gameplay just as much, making you think clearly before you act, play a more strategic game, and perhaps bring friends. Otherwise you might have said 'What they heck' and charged on solo, dieing numerous times with no penalty, nd ultimately beating the mission through attrition or just coming back after a few levels and walking right through it? Which sounds more exciting??
Frank 'Spankybus' Mignone www.spankybus.com -3d Artist & Compositor -Writer -Professional Amature
I think it's an interesting discussion, whether death penalties are an enrichment or even neccesity, or wether they are just another timesink.
And I think that both answers are valid. Each just leads to a different game.
One could divide MMO's into two categories based on this subject. Competitive/empowering play- movivated MMO's and linear play- movivated MMO's. With linear play I do not specifically mean a shortage of choice when it comes to when you do what, but try to give a name to games that offer much more guidance and have implemented systems were competition and interaction are intirely opional, rather then a goal in themselves. Goals in these games are given if not definately suggested, and the road to it is mostly set upfront. Your gameplay consists of getting to that goal at your own pace, either solo or as a group, and having fun along the road.
I've played a few MMO's in my time, from early UO via some steps down to my current favourite Eve-Online. I'm sure that makes clear that I'm quite the fan of the competitive/empowering MMO's rather then linearly styled ones.
I also beleive that the two are in fact seperate genres with seperate markets.
Competitive/empowering MMO's like Eve-Online clearly need a death penalty to add credibility and empowerment to their gameplay. Without loss there is indeed no gain, and in a competitive environment gain and loss are required.
But, I think the simple subscription numbers of games tell us enough about their market overlap is it not ? Eve-Online is in my mind clearly superior to for example WoW or other mainly pve based games that feature some pvp without consequence. But that's simply because I am not a person Blizzard aims its product at. The mere fact WoW sports 50 times the subcriber base of Eve Online tells me enough about which is the larger market. And I really don't care as long as people start realising these games cannot be compared in that sense, or at least not as being two products in the same genre.
So while discussion is fun, this one is pointless, as the choice a developer makes when it comes to death penalties is just a small part of the greater choice he makes when asking himself what genre his game should be a part of.
I've been playing SWG for the past 13 months(not that long). I was there for the original faction grind gank fest. It was hard for me to even learn the beauties of faction grinding when i would get ganked by a rebel as soon as i fired my pistol. This frustrated me to no end, I could accomplish nothing with faction grinding. Just the thought of "I have 20 reb NPCs in front of me, that i need to kill to become imp, and one reb player behind me. The only strategy I had was to hit and run to accomplish my goals without taking massive wound damage to all my stats." This prevented me from taking part in a great time until I leveled to max. I like the softer penalties with less griefing and I still joined a large guild where we did large scale PVP attacks. Sometimes just besting an oponent is the best high, with or without the fear of penalties. Matching skill against skill and besting someone you looked up to or someone that has made an online life of hunting your guild. It's call self pride.
Well lets put it here.. Some people don't mind to be slaughter over and over till the sun goes down from point one. Why? Cause they will go ok this guy is going to be out here and kill me and I need a way around him or try to make some friends who can help me.
Others don't like being killed over and over so you like that and losing their stuff.
So there for you have three types of people
One>Likes being killed and losing their stuff cause it makes them regret what they did and make them think Two>Don't like the above Three>Likes a mix of things
I currently only play guildwars cause of my sucky computer (hardrive wise as well as spec wise)
Lets break it down.. You die you get a death pent. You lose health and mana and it keeps going to a point. It still forces you to think instead of just rushing in and trying to "pwn" everything. Cause if you did that you be rezoning into a city alot and wouldn't get nothing done. Though its short based game as of now.. BUT! As the it was stated with guildwars the game is based on your skill not how much you play it. So someone who played mabye three hours a month could totaly own someone who spent a their life on the game. Why? Cause its based on skill and not getting the best weapons and the like.. Unlike other games tended to be.
I actualy like guildwars cause you can put alot of time into it and do all the quests and all that... Or you don't have to put alot of time in it and just play the missions.
So ethier make a game that applys to all three people or just stop debating about death penalty.. Why? Cause there will always be the three types of people out there.
Originally posted by EbonDrake Trials of Ascension. Something more then instanced quests for solo players (dragons), permadeath (100 lives and then restart), full loot drop and open pvp. Nuff said.
Or how about a game that is coming out sometime this decade? Like The Chronicle.
Death penalties are a good thing, but it depends on the style of the game. The MMO has to be designed around the death penalty. It CANNOT be an afterthought.
I've been playing MMOs for about a decade now and have watched them go from a great, immersive experience to a complete and utter cakewalk. Garrett, I know you needed to play sides as far as the debate goes, but the fact that you are defending the lack of death penalties on MMOs makes me sick. You are not helping the situation whatsoever.
bring on The Chronicle! (Or any other MMO with PERMADEATH and twitch-based combat). I've had enough of this sh!t...
Joined 2004 - I can't believe I've been a MMORPG.com member for 20 years! Get off my lawn!
Comments
That's the original Ultima Online design !
You died, your corpse lay there waiting to be looted by you or someone else.
If you were a character of "good notoriety" "blue" anyone else that looted your corpse would temporarily have "negative notoriety" "grey". This gave them a temp flag that made them attackable by all. So if they happened to stumble upon your corpse and looted you someone else that stumbled upon them could kill them and then when you returned they could give your stuff back if they were nice and not just "noto pk'ing". Killing someone because they were grey.
You see the system wasn't perfect because if you were out hunting with a friend and they died you would have to turn grey by looting their corpse so nobody could come steal their stuff. This became the birth of "notoriety killing" /noto pk'ing, killing just because the game mechanics allowed you to kill someone else.
lol it was years before they put in place a system were a guildmate or group member could loot you without negative consequences.
The system kept track of how many times you went grey and if you did bad things too often you were perma grey, permanently attackable by everyone.
Much like how they dealt with pk's. You would become "red" if you killed too much and then you couldn't go into towns and use your bank and also attackable all the time.
The system still had some loopholes that needed sewn up but overall it was one of the best systems that put a consequence for your actions.
The mechanics of this got screwed up when UO started to give into the whines of it being too harsh of a system from the players who wanted to take advantage of the loopholes without consequence.
I would like to state that in no way shape or form that anything I receive from SOE influences my opinion about SWG or their company. Im pretty much a typical average player enjoying the game.
Now mind you, I never got into UO, but that original scheme of a death penalty seems to be to be the ultimate of what i would want in a game. Nowing that they gave in too, garuntees I will never play that game again. Boredom results from their being no detriment to death. People that just want the best stuff to show of to friends or whatnot should stick to single player games and take screen shots.
Generally speaking, I'm in favor of a moderately serious death penalty. True, it's a real disappointment when you do fail & die, and admittedly some are encouraged to just log out when death occurs repeatedly. However, when you DO succeed, and get through the mission/quest without dying...it's a real feeling of encouragement. My most memorable experience from City of Heroes was when my scrapper (read: Fighter) ran through a mission with a fairly serious debuff on her (as part of a mission storyline). It was rough going, especially when I got to the Boss (this was before you could opt not to get Bosses when running solo). When I finished that Boss off with just the barest sliver of Health left to me, it was all I could do not to leap from my chair and cheer.
Hell, to be honest, I'm even in favor of permadeath (*ducks*). I see nothing wrong with honest-to-god killing of a character...so long as death doesn't come easily. If your average sewer rat can come up and nuke you, then maybe permadeath isn't such a good idea. But if the game is balanced in such a way as the PC's are the heavyweights, then actually losing the character when I die seems appropriate. Sad, certainly...but appropriate.
Playing a game where it takes hundreds of hours to build up your character, and you could lose it all in a second is like paying someone to sneak into your house and stab you while you are asleep on some random evening. Sure, it may add axcitement to your life, but you will be damn sorry you did it eventually.
You want a free MMORPG with a harsh as hell death panalty? Try this:
http://www.thangorodrim.net/mangband.html
There you go, the harshest death penlty on the market. One death and that's it, your dead. Forever. Loony birds that crave being permanently ass raped every time they screw, up enjoy. I'm going to head back and play my "pansy" games.
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
I can't edit my previous post for some reason. Just to clarify, I intended that post to be a bit tongue in cheek. If you like brutal death penalties, by all means play whatever game has the harshest one you can find. Not my bag, but I respect the right of anyone to pursue whatever floats their boat. More power to you
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
Why dont they have a YIELD button - I GIVE IN! All these PVP games only give you a DIE! or RUN! or WIN! option. If we all had a YIELD button we could press that and avoid dying. The yield would result in possibly a ransom in cash, or xp even, or an item... it would be a negotiated yield and once agreed a flag could be set stopping you from being able to attack each other for a week etc etc....
Or PVP Perma-death, if you want to PVP go for it, but its perma-death... only the serious PVPers would partake, the griefers would be eliminated quickly... or maybe semi-perma death, your character is locked out for a week (go play an alt)... or for $50 you can unlock it... MY GOD, SOE would make a fortune!
There are lots of different options if you think about it, but most companies just dont want to bother. I especially have no idea why they dont have a Yield button, it is even historical.
"Playing a game where it takes hundreds of hours to build up your character, and you could lose it all in a second is like paying someone to sneak into your house and stab you while you are asleep on some random evening. Sure, it may add axcitement to your life, but you will be damn sorry you did it eventually."
I know this. The stabbing hurts more, but I understand what you're saying. And I know this post was tongue in cheeck, as you call it.
But have you noticed the mention of death penalties / permadeath needing to be designed according to the rest of the game? You said it yourself: "Playing a game where it takes hundreds of hours to build up your character..." This is the norm of games today. And frankly: It works poorly.
It is the system from games such as D&D (tabletop) where you don't fight PCs who may choose freely when to attack, and who to target, but instead fight monsters as the DM deems appropriate. You could seek out easier challenges just for the hell of it, but there'd be no motivation but hacktime. The game would usually direct you into even matches, or matches designed so that you stand only a slight chance of winning. (Or relatively easy matches)
In MMORPGs the DM isn't in control. Each "monster" is another player and that player has the option to strike wherever he wants. Artificial limitations such as "cannot attack 10 levels lower" are implemented, but that only proves the game doesn't work, and makes it worse in some aspects. IMHO. IMO, at least. I'll not claim too much humility.
The solution, in my eyes, is to let characters start out a little stronger, advance a little slower, and never get to that amazing point where only those who have lived as long as him can pose a threat. Playing a game where the actual fun starts almost immediately after character creation and you could fall back to the beginning after a single kill, gives you a playfield where top and bottom of the scale are always present and active / effective.
To some of you:
To assume that we "want pain" is just silly. It doesn't hurt. The shovel thing was reasonably funny, but it would not have enhanced our gaming experience.
A dynamic playing field is what we want. I've pointed it out earlier, I point it out again:
I want that game where you can see all the scale in activity, and it is all worth playing.
The future: Adellion
Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually
Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants)
Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens)
Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
For me Eve's system is the way it should be.
A few years back I ran a small corp. For people that are old eve players minerII's had just come out.
Back then mining was the best way to make money, so me and my 5 corp mates mined solid for 7 days to buy enough minerals (zydrine) to trade for the miner II's
On the way to pick them up I was jumped by player pirates, with around 200 hours of combined game time value in my hold - those 5 seconds getting to the gate and secure space were the most intense I have ever had in any game.
Saying that the game is now ruined in too many ways now for me, I stopped playing about 8 months ago, popped back a few times and it felt the same. So Im playing the 360 waiting for that something new game to appear.
Actuallhy I totally agrre with you Kormack.
A game where everyone was close to to a level playing feild from the get go (or after a very modest grind), one where your avatatar was more a vehicle to role playing than a big sign that says how many hours you've sunk into the game, and skill was more of a determinant of outcomes in encounters than RL spare time...that is one where I think harsh deaeth penalties could be fun. Mybe not permadeath (since a RPing avatar is one that you would tend to become very attached to), but corpse runs, open looting, and all that other jazz I would support.
The fundamental problem that I have with harsh death enalties is that under the current norm for MMORPG game design they could represent hours and hours of work down the crapper. To me that's just not fun. But I agree, if that mechanic were to change more realistic death penalties would be a lot more fun.
I don't want to write this, and you don't want to read it. But now it's too late for both of us.
The death penalty, in my opinion, is so fraught with detractions to its supportability that it seems like a case for it can not be made while still accounting for the player bell curves in play. A LOT of people are not interested in dying, as evidenced from the beginning of this thread and down through the building pages of the discussion. Personally, I crave the absolute death penalty. You get killed, you're gone. All your stuff can be repo'ed right off the body. You start over, and the survivors live on. Your body remains in the game, and after a few hours, the vultures come and start picking away at it.
Any other death penalty, like experience debt or item decay, are such bizarre inventions in terms of immersion. It almost feels like designers are trying to satisfy both camps with these compromise solutions to the death question, in addition to satifying the very real need to bring in subscriber income on a monthly basis.
Whatever side you fall on, the death penalty question is really about immersion. And immersion in this case is only vaild with respect to things worth dying for and things worth killing for. I support the death penalty only in an MMO completely designed around that concept. Such an MMO, for me, would need to have no nametags and no broadcast chat channels. I have always wanted to see an MMO where you have your spatial chat options - whisper, say, and yell - along with places designed to advertise goods (a virtual marquee or billboard), things like cell phones that you can use to coordinate chat with friends and other groups, such as guilds, and ways to take snapshots both mental and physical that can be used to give the "authorities" something to "go on" when acting as a witness to a murder crime.
The combat system needs to also accurately reflect just how hard it can be to kill someone, especially if that someone is fast and is running away from you. Death penalty will never be meaningful in an over-simplified combat system. Damage needs to be allocated to areas of the body, causing penalties to combat performance that uses those areas. Lethal damage needs to be defined specifically (eg., HEADSHOT!). Initiative absolutely needs to be used in the system. A game with death penalty naturally needs to be sophisticated. After all, the only players who really support death penalty in an MMO are almost to a person supporters of a harder-to-learn yet more involved and immersive combat system.
Above all, the game needs to be designed in such a way that killing others entails a massive risk, while gaining the ability to have that luxury at one's fingertips is earned through playing the game and playing it carefully.
Lag-death, though, is the deal-breaker. Until a game is made that has a consistent and infallible way to eliminate lag-death from the equation, almost no argument for the death penalty will hold water.
In truth, as so many people have posted, this argument is kind of a null argument, since the death penalty is inextricably united to the gam design. Perhaps the thread should be steered out of this now meaningless basic argument and into the argument it generates in turn:
What would be the nature of design for a game where a hard death penalty is in play?
In reply to the topic:
I hate greifers and I hate the immature community usually associated with PvP. On the flip side I think there should be a death penalty (here on out DP) serious enough that people will use skill to play rather than run in the open over and over again to get killed.
For example: In DAoC you don't have a harsh DP. if you walk into a BG you will find people soloing when they should be grouping or grouping and running around with no tactics or by themselve (like they were soloing). Just last night I was in a BG and this idiot kept running out in the wide open looking to kill people getting owned by the same 2 enemies over and over again. It's not just him either, it's the majority of the people and groups that play this game. Why you would run around in the open vrs the trees waiting to ambush is beyond me. My theory is that if there was a harsh death penalty people would start to group and use common sense and skill/tactics while in PvP. They would learn from their mistakes and try something different when they fail.
I for one, a person unbiased on pvp really, am looking forward to Darkfall which promises death penalties as well as a system that will cut down on griefers. Finally will I see real skill and thought put into actions.
I really don't care if the game I choose to play has PvP or not. I can have fun with either and find the good in both games, but if your going to have PvP you should have a penalty harsh enough to make people think twice before acting.
Yea it seems that death penalty is a huge divding factor in the community. Developers will choose a large portion of their player base depending on which way they decide to go. Other things which determine which type of game you'll play are skill/leveling system, crafting, territory control and genre.
For me there is no game out there which i am happy enough with to pay my hard earned for. I did like UO though. The only reason i stopped playing it was because of bandaging in combat, the actual combat death didnt bother me. Also people talk about "griefers", but in my 3 months playing i was only grief killed once. People in the community were almost always hospitable and open to meeting new people, they werent suckers though. My guess is that over a period of time people formed their own communities and helped eachother out. Which is why i play an MMOG.
You cant just judge a games death system by itself. It depends on the other types of game dynamics listed in my first paragraph. Here are examples from the 3 mmog's that i have played for a resonable amount of time:
WOW: The death system here is weak. But then it should be because of the amount of playing you have to do. Like alot of people have said, its a singleplayer game. Its a GRIND. So the death system is right for the game environment. But to me the game sucks. It only starts once you hit max level 70 and then its boring, the only thing left to do are raids but with no benefit, only the armor repair cost afterwards.
UO: Strong death penalty. But it doesnt matter so much because you dont lose heaps of gameplay hours. But because of the skill system lower skilled players can kill higher skilled players, even if it is only a small chance. No mega super special items to lose. I dissliked the economy (monsters drop gold coins), and the bandaging system. No crafting.
EVE: Medium. You can avoid skill loss by buying a clone and ship loss by buying insurance. Left this game because of the skill system, almost the same as a leveling system. Time based, very annoying.
I would play any of these game if other parts of the game were more to my liking. I dont choose a game purely on death penalty, though it does have a big impact on the game feel, over all.
My ideal game would have strong death penalty, like UO. No gold dropping from monsters, only if they were humaniod or at least intelligent creatures, no bandaging during combat. Player controled towns with their own laws/taxes/culture. Economy based on crafting/resource collection (not from monsters) The ability for a city to punish other players (get thrown in jail for 3 hours).
[edit] oops just read the above posts
. Sorry about repeating. I agree no nametags (well only if a player is on your friends / guild list). Players should have a wide range of ways to look different, if not individually then at least as a player group(at all these levels sub-race/cluture/clan/guild).
Good points Kormac and dubbs. I agree with you both on some points. There needs to be a game out there that caters to this style of play. And that does it well.
Adellion, i remember that game, is it still up and running?
I've played tons of MMORPGs. EQ, AC, AO, AC2, CoH, Horizons, WoW and a bunch of others I have forgotten. Most of my MMORPG years were spent playing AC so a lot of my message will reference that game.
To me the best death penalty of the bunch was AC. EQ way back when (5+ years ago) was too harsh. Lose all your gear?! Yeesh. On the other hand everything back AO was too light and, honestly, CoH and WoW (the latest two I've played) don't have a death penalty. Gaining some XP at half rate (CoH) and a few silver of broken gear along with a 2m run (WoW) is so miniscule they could be removed and noone would change their behavior.
In AC when you died you lost some (but not all) items on your body and you lost some stats until you earned enough XP for that debt to be cleared. It wasn't so harsh that you'd lose everything but by the same token when ya died ya felt it. It was something to be avoided.
Furthermore, and here's something not touched on in the debate, death penalties where items were on the body made for a good reason for multiplayer interaction. Frank touched on ganging up to prevent death but didn't mention that one had to do a corpse recovery in backup gear to a location that killed you in your main gear the best way to do it was often to bring friends!
To me MMORPGs have been on a decline recently. They've been stagnate and boring. Early MMORPGs could be enjoyed for years. Recent MMORPGs get stale after a few months. Often times they are offering the same feature sets with very little improvement over what has gone on previously. Here it is, 2-3 years out of my AC days and I'm still waiting for the next generation MMORPG to emerge. WoW comes close but while it has advanced in some ways (mail system, quest system, instances) it has slipped backwards in others (no global LFG system, very limited guild system, no "ownership" of in game real estate, etc). It's more like generation 1.5 of MMORPGs.
Step one, IMHO, is to stop this trend of ever easing death penalties. That's the first indication that this isn't just another single-player game. Then maybe from there the players will start demanding the better features and items that have shown up here and there in MMORPGs. Like advanced guild structures (Shadowbane's guilds swearing to guilds) and management (AO/Horizons) along with in-game social centers for guilds (AC's mansions). On top of that more complex game play and quests would help greatly. Finally, a reversal of the mindset of "Oh, they'll play it for a few months, that's all we need content for." Any MMORPG released today should look at the history of UO, AC and EQ (the first big 3)... They have been played for *years*. Some fans put 4-5 years into it. The initial design document should start with the question "how can we acoomodate and make the game interesting for even the fastest levelling player for 2 years?" CoH's original level cap was hit un under a month. People if they push hard can hit it in 2-3 weeks. WoW is the same way. AC it took a good 1-2 *years* for the first person to hit the level cap. Even so in my 5 years playing it I never made more than 2/3rds of the way to the cap.
MMORPGs are not a 2-3 month "play and forget" revenue stream when designed and administered properly. They are multi-year cash streams. Time for the game companies to realize that and design accordingly.
EDIT: Forgot to mention that I am talking strictly in the sense of PvE and not PvP. I am of the opinion that PvP and MMORPGs should not mix, period. 99% of the play time in an MMORPG is PvE; I have not ever seen a PvP system in an MMORPG which wasn't broken from the onset or, if it was decent, didn't break PvE play in the process. I played Asheron's Call for 5 years solid and not once... ever... "went red". IMHO Developers of MMORPGs would do far better dropping PvP and devoting the massive amount of development and balance time spent on the 1% of PvP play into enhancing the PvE experience. If I want PvP I'll play CS:S. I play MMORPGs for cooperative play, not competative.
Not just another pretty color.
Wow what an ass hat. His mom should start teaching him better before he enters the real world.
All I know is this. When I PvP in wow their is no fear nor great thrill. When I PvP in EvE where if I screw up and die I will lose 200mil isk ship and maybe even my pod that contains my body. Loseing you Pod in EvE just suxs ass you wake up in green goo and you end up buying a new clone plus you fell great pain as you realize that your head full of implans is now a frozen corps out in the middle of space. This fear of death cause one of the deepest, edge of your seat, palm sweating, vocaly screaming, PvP thrills you can feel short of a near death experance. And I have had a near death experance was diving in a lake when I went to go up for more air I got hooked on some tangled fishing line. Stopped me about a foot from the surface. I had to accully dive back down to brace my feet to the bottom so I could pull up the weeds the line was tangled in with when I got back up to the surface I gasped so hard that my chest hurt 3 days after wards. I had to go to the ER to get the hook out of my hand. When I come near death in EvE I get the same fellings that I did when I was suddenly stopped a mear foot away for the surface of that lake.
Nothing HE/SHE said made HIM/HER an asshat...
It's you name-calling PvPing EVE-lovin' wanabees that generally come off looking the asshats in nearly every thread I read on here.
Oh...and if you're looking for an "adventure-sport" for an MMO...might I suggest you actually attempt to go OUTSIDE and find a real one! (Stick to your diving or parachuting or fire-eating, and let mature people who aren't looking for a thrill-rush...ie. PKing and trash-talk high-penalty-death experiences...play MMOs) Thank you and goodnight.
DAoC tried this, and look at where they are now. 90% of their clients are on the Original servers. The two options they had prior to this were, be in a massive guild that can do the ToA quests for that EQ feel or the hardcore pvp servers. In both cases, the small group never benefitted because the larger groups had the better equipment and skills that being in that group gave them. The most "hardcore" pvp games out there are dieing off on the American servers for this reason too. No one wants to spend hours and hours of gaming, which they have to pay 14 or more dollars a month plus retail price to have some group of morons come along with their uber gear that they exploited or duped to get and gank them. Nor do they want to be required to join the 300 person super guilds to actually have to play the game as the designers meant it to be played. The days of people joining super guilds are about over for internet gaming USA. They still occur in places like Korea and Japan because the society there requires that groups be larger due to the fact of overcrowding of land area. We have islands in America too, we just don't cram every American citizen we can onto them.
There lies the biggest problem. If they can create a cheat free environment, it would not be such an issue. Games like CheaterBane and HowManyBuffersCanIRunOnL2Walker are the reason that hardcore pvp will never see the glory days of UO again. Even UltimaHackzorIGEOnline had this problem.
Regarding the editors comment MAORPG? What is antisocial about less "hardcore" rulesets? I can tell you, running around in gank squads, beating on people well below your level range and using exploits and cheats to do it even better is definately antisocial. Anti, meaning not, Social, expected social behavioralisms. Since when has it been accepted as the norm in any society on earth to run around in small hit squads and kill people whenever you like it without any penalty. I think you need to think more about what you are saying and less about how much you want to wtfpwnzor that newbie.
My resume of MMORPGs starts with UO spanning over 10 years of gaming including well known games such as: EQ, EQ2, LINEAGE:TBP, LINEAGE2, RAGNAROK, DARK AGES, DAOC, GUILD WARS, SHATTERED GALAXY, NEXUS:KW, MAPLE STORY, FFXI, ANARCHY ONLINE, EVE ONLINE, AC, AC2, COH, COV, KNIGHT ONLINE, SECOND LIFE, THE MATRIX ONLINE, PLANETSIDE, MU ONLINE, WOW, GATE OF HEAVEN, RAN ONLINE, OZ WORLD, and currently beta testing AUTO ASSAULT (Loving it by the way, suggest it to everyone) PLUS an entire repertoire of games that half of you wouldnt understand the names to...I have been around gaming since I was 9...and yes I used to be a little brat.
The most memorable years of my gaming must have been Lineage The Blood Pledge, during the era where sieging was still a matter of honor and those of us who were princes amongst our fellow players still felt the passion and excitement each siege represented. Lately though, a shift in the market of MMORPGs has caused the gaming companies to sell out to a much broader audience. And I don't blame them, its about the money. But does that mean the quality of the game and its integrity have to fail along the way? Do you have to bend over backwards to every crying 12 year old who just got Pked in Fire Valley? By lowering death penalties you open the games to immature players, who don't, have never and will never understand the true meaning of the MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER online role playing game. Blizzard is the best example of a company selling out and becoming the "bitch" of these petulent children. As the world anticipated World of Warcraft, myself included, we had high hopes for the creators of some of our earlier favorites such as Diablo 2 and Starcraft. However, as I found out quite quickly, I was to be dissapointed beyond reperations...And now you could not pay me enough to play WoW...During the first week of its release, I had, without much effort mind you, made it to lvl 40...The day after I made cap I broke the CDs for WoW and burned them in my fireplace...A while later, when the cap was increased to lvl 60, my hopes were renewed. I had had time to forgive Blizzard a little for bringing this atrocity of a game into existance...But again my hopes were shattered...Not only did they make the game easier still, they had the nerve to allow me the ability to slay the highest lvled mods within 2 more weeks of playing...and by the end of that month I had again reached the cap lvl. This is largly due to just how simple they made it to walk around with no fear of death...A great man once told me, "Those who do not fear death...have nothing to live for..." And that is the perfect example of what low or no death penalties do to MMORPGs...With no fear, where is the point in getting stronger so you no longer have to fear? Instead once you reach the highest lvl and obtain all the best stuff you simply wish to quit. There is no longer any point in continuing within the world...You no longer have any goals to reach. And some might say, "Make a new character, and do it all over again..." To those of you I only have one thing to say..."No..." There isn't a point...Because I know that at the end of my journy there will no longer be a point to the character I have spent so much time on. If I cannot do unto others what others have once done to me then I have no motivation to outdo anyone anymore, therefore no motivation to play. I WANT to make little 12 year olds feel bad about losing their stuff cause they won't show their elders some respect...I WANT to grief and in turn want to BE griefed because then I have something to aim for...I DON'T like emos in real life why would I want them invading my sanctuary which is gaming? The entire point in high death penalty is to keep such riffraff out of games...But alas over time I have come to accept that money is all that matters to these companies, and while we loyal gamers wish to keep these communities from becoming wastelands of "stfu" and "I'm gonna hop on my main and kill you" our requests fall on deaf ears...Anyone who cannot handle the consequences of death and PvP or PK should not be allowed to play battle based games.
In response to the post above me about MAORPG, I do believe what he was talking about was the players who play MMORPGs but expect solo play rules to apply such as low or no death penalties. And on top of that at least while you are ganking and killing people lower level then you, you are socializing with the people you are doing this with instead of being reclusive doing solo quests making you easy targets and thereby fitting the definition of "antisocial." And you also confused his point about running around a killing with no penalties...His entire argument was based around the fact that low penalties, IE "less hardcore" causes more ganking and zerging because no one has any reason not to do it.
short and sweet .. anything thats not saved(via inn, log off,etc) should be lost ... no need for permadeath but there is a need for loss...
uh huh
Just a note on the economical side...
The first developer to have a good game with full PvP and permadeath out will NOT get the benefit of WoW's 5 million subscribers (regardless of what truths and deceptions lie behind that number).
What they will get is a playerbase that has absolutely no other game to go to for what they offer. Say 10,000 players who wouldn't leave if you charged 25$ a month? (And another 10,000 who would, but hope you won't)
Wouldn't that be neat?
The future: Adellion
Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually
Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants)
Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens)
Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
there is a vein sticking from my forhead that is dedicated to depict annoyance everytime a dominant asumption gets to be completely undoubted by the one making the theory around it, and this vein gets bigger when the arguer doesn't even seem aware of that asumption...
the only one argument for lightwaight death penelty that isn't completely based on the asumption that a game worth is grind-time and leveling gained, is the commercial argument of bringing single game players to the mmo. i think that to bring them in, dev's need to understand that no one grinds in those (pacman and snake, maybe, possibly tetris... but i don't think they do on the RPG ones), and that they are used to have great stories, handcrafted quality. give players in an mmo more deph of action and more derived reasons to play like quality characters of a story (there own), and you create a game that can attract a lot more single players. this comes in the price of risk, but, i think that games with risk and perma death are looking in the wrong direction, they need to gather up the non-mmo player. there are risk takers everywere. bring them closer to the computer. PnP and LARPers are also a smaller but more well known and defined potential buyers.
right now we have 3 games with permadeath in production (and i ask any one who has the slighest feeling that mmorpg's need to be about more then leveling treadmills to give at list one of them a try).
: the chronicle, addelion, and trials of ascension, respectivly on the list, each one taking less risk then the one before it.
i like the one offered on TC, since it is closer to the TOA original idea of increasing chance of PD, since you can permadie at any moment, and the game uses "natural" sceniroes to create a second chance situation if your lucky to not permadie (which is still the most probable result). on the other hand, as much as the system itself is risky, the developers aren't taking a risk themselves. they are offering this as a well rewardered option, and this might create a very odd dynamic within the games playerbase.
addelion developments are kind of more hardcore themselves: it seems they want the player to be suseptible to permadeath for most of there main playing time, while the first couple of "life counters" are based on the developers astimation of "how many times you will die before geting the hang of it and getting to the long and careful life-span which is the main play time.
both of those are also great for the casual players. on the surface, a hursh penelty sounds bad for people without a lot of real life time to play (me included): "cause' it will take me a lot more time to recover the death penelty that i lost", in this case build a new character. but if you open up to the idea, you will understand that the game will play differently then other games, because everyone has the Perma death risk on there head, and most characters are not going to last very long if your going to take to many risks. in other words, you can play the risk-taking heroes as short playing sessions, a month or two per character, where you play out its story. not a lot of people are going to be stronger then you any how, cause they are probebly going to die by then. most games reward you strictly for how much time you invest in the game, while this kind of game rewards you for how well you play.
trials of ascension are doing designing it for long play sessions, potentially a couple of years with a character, by giving you a set numbers to die.
all of those, for the long term survivers, you will be rewarded for either being very smart/lucky in battle, or better: being part of a society, a community of players protecting each other very much like in real life. this is for the true risk takers PvP players who are ok with real looses, and not many griefers will survive this dependency on others, and the greatest bond for the socializers, plus an immersive expirience for role players.
While we are very happy to see so many people feel as adamantly as us about the topic at hand, we do not enjoy seeing the posts descend into a display of name calling and general disrepect for those who would not share our opinions.
We wholeheartly welcome you to join us in this debate. But please keep it respectful, even to those who do not share your view of what makes the games we love great. With such an exciting topic as this, we do not want to see the thread locked due to a select few who cannot control the emotion the topic insights.
That said, keep it coming!
I notice a lot of people drift from the topic of deth penalties specifically into the realm of open pvP vs limited/no PvP. To those who opposed the harsh death penalties, is it the penalty itself, or the penalty at teh hands of a fellow player that make it intolerable?
A stiff DP in PvE play can boost the excitement in that aspect of gameplay just as much, making you think clearly before you act, play a more strategic game, and perhaps bring friends. Otherwise you might have said 'What they heck' and charged on solo, dieing numerous times with no penalty, nd ultimately beating the mission through attrition or just coming back after a few levels and walking right through it? Which sounds more exciting??
Frank 'Spankybus' Mignone
www.spankybus.com
-3d Artist & Compositor
-Writer
-Professional Amature
I think it's an interesting discussion, whether death penalties are an enrichment or even neccesity, or wether they are just another timesink.
And I think that both answers are valid. Each just leads to a different game.
One could divide MMO's into two categories based on this subject. Competitive/empowering play- movivated MMO's and linear play- movivated MMO's. With linear play I do not specifically mean a shortage of choice when it comes to when you do what, but try to give a name to games that offer much more guidance and have implemented systems were competition and interaction are intirely opional, rather then a goal in themselves. Goals in these games are given if not definately suggested, and the road to it is mostly set upfront. Your gameplay consists of getting to that goal at your own pace, either solo or as a group, and having fun along the road.
I've played a few MMO's in my time, from early UO via some steps down to my current favourite Eve-Online. I'm sure that makes clear that I'm quite the fan of the competitive/empowering MMO's rather then linearly styled ones.
I also beleive that the two are in fact seperate genres with seperate markets.
Competitive/empowering MMO's like Eve-Online clearly need a death penalty to add credibility and empowerment to their gameplay. Without loss there is indeed no gain, and in a competitive environment gain and loss are required.
But, I think the simple subscription numbers of games tell us enough about their market overlap is it not ? Eve-Online is in my mind clearly superior to for example WoW or other mainly pve based games that feature some pvp without consequence. But that's simply because I am not a person Blizzard aims its product at. The mere fact WoW sports 50 times the subcriber base of Eve Online tells me enough about which is the larger market. And I really don't care as long as people start realising these games cannot be compared in that sense, or at least not as being two products in the same genre.
So while discussion is fun, this one is pointless, as the choice a developer makes when it comes to death penalties is just a small part of the greater choice he makes when asking himself what genre his game should be a part of.
Well lets put it here.. Some people don't mind to be slaughter over and over till the sun goes down from point one. Why? Cause they will go ok this guy is going to be out here and kill me and I need a way around him or try to make some friends who can help me.
Others don't like being killed over and over so you like that and losing their stuff.
So there for you have three types of people
One>Likes being killed and losing their stuff cause it makes them regret what they did and make them think
Two>Don't like the above
Three>Likes a mix of things
I currently only play guildwars cause of my sucky computer (hardrive wise as well as spec wise)
Lets break it down.. You die you get a death pent. You lose health and mana and it keeps going to a point. It still forces you to think instead of just rushing in and trying to "pwn" everything. Cause if you did that you be rezoning into a city alot and wouldn't get nothing done. Though its short based game as of now.. BUT! As the it was stated with guildwars the game is based on your skill not how much you play it. So someone who played mabye three hours a month could totaly own someone who spent a their life on the game. Why? Cause its based on skill and not getting the best weapons and the like.. Unlike other games tended to be.
I actualy like guildwars cause you can put alot of time into it and do all the quests and all that... Or you don't have to put alot of time in it and just play the missions.
So ethier make a game that applys to all three people or just stop debating about death penalty.. Why? Cause there will always be the three types of people out there.
Or how about a game that is coming out sometime this decade? Like The Chronicle.
Death penalties are a good thing, but it depends on the style of the game. The MMO has to be designed around the death penalty. It CANNOT be an afterthought.
I've been playing MMOs for about a decade now and have watched them go from a great, immersive experience to a complete and utter cakewalk. Garrett, I know you needed to play sides as far as the debate goes, but the fact that you are defending the lack of death penalties on MMOs makes me sick. You are not helping the situation whatsoever.
bring on The Chronicle! (Or any other MMO with PERMADEATH and twitch-based combat). I've had enough of this sh!t...
Joined 2004 - I can't believe I've been a MMORPG.com member for 20 years! Get off my lawn!