Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
PvE games other players do not wait to ambush and gank you after you and the guys you teamed up with completed the Dungeon.
You can't justify it, it is what it is. Bulling and rewarding folks who take things from other players.
Hope you enjoy But, I will not be wasting my time or money on such a game.
One less person in contention for the first 4500 spots then. *Shrug
Have a nice day :)
That's how I'm looking at it too Elth.
People aren't happy with the projected state of things? Fine by me, just one more slot for me when the game goes live.
|
PvE games other players do not wait to ambush and gank you after you and the guys you teamed up with completed the Dungeon.
You can't justify it, it is what it is. Bulling and rewarding folks who take things from other players.
Hope you enjoy But, I will not be wasting my time or money on such a game.
You are stuck in the dungeon model, and that isn't what is going on here.
There will be some dungeons, but often the dungeon will be the fortifications other players have created. There will be some "missions" but they will often by bounties put on other players who have decided to play as the thieves and raiders.
It is an economy game, not a series of raids with random drops. It is PvP in every sense, not just in killing each other.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
PvE games other players do not wait to ambush and gank you after you and the guys you teamed up with completed the Dungeon.
You can't justify it, it is what it is. Bulling and rewarding folks who take things from other players.
Hope you enjoy But, I will not be wasting my time or money on such a game.
Do you complain this much if your GM has creatures ambush you at an inopportune time?
I'm sorry that you don't enjoy open PvP. It's a shame whenever people take such a narrow view of something before any specific details about it have even been released. Hopefully something changes your mind in the future.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Do you complain this much if your GM has creatures ambush you at an inopportune time?I'm sorry that you don't enjoy open PvP. It's a shame whenever people take such a narrow view of something before any specific details about it have even been released. Hopefully something changes your mind in the future.
While I am for the open PVP based on the information that has been provided. I do think people need to stop even considering comparing it to GM vs Player, because it isn't. While a GM will commonly hit you when you are weak, he will generally put something that is considerably weaker then if it was something you prepared for, and try to make it something that you have a high chance of either beating, or escaping if need be, players on the other hand, would be doing everything in their power to minimize if not eliminate your chance of either one. Player vs GM you will expect to win 95% of battles, player vs player, 50/50 at best. That isn't to say both have their roles, but can people please stop trying to call them the same thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do you complain this much if your GM has creatures ambush you at an inopportune time?
I'm sorry that you don't enjoy open PvP. It's a shame whenever people take such a narrow view of something before any specific details about it have even been released. Hopefully something changes your mind in the future.
Anyone who has ever played any player-competitve online game ever knows exactly what PvP will turn into.
It isn't a matter of if the game will turn into a gankfest with griefers it is a matter of when. That's not to say that all it will consist of is ganking and griefing, but it will happen to everybody at some point, and I do not blame anybody who chooses to not deal with it by not participating in the game.
As far as details go, nobody has any real details yet, so the glowingly optimistic side of things is just as potentially silly as the people who are saying right now that they will never play it because they have an overly pessimistic viewpoint at this time.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
As this discussion treats dangerous ground regarding Paizos "Don't be a jerk" rule, I'll just share my opinion regarding the first post:
First off, I have never been in any way interested in PVP in computer games. Like with roleplaying games, I'm playing MMOs to play together with other people, not to compete against them (for competition, there's sports and that's more than enough as far as I'm concerned).
Second, I've made my share of bad experiences with Player Killers in Diablo 2 (where PvP was potentially non-consential) as well as with griefers in WoW and other games. And I tend to agree with Moro: make PF Online a competitive game and it is guaranteed that griefers will become a part of the game reality sooner rather than later.
This said, I'dont mind the general possibility of PVP as long as it is consentual. But should the game force me to fight other players like it or not, I simply won't play it, regardless of how awesome the game should turn out to be.
edit: Ah well, now that I have seen Ryan Dancey's comment quoted in this thread, I already fear that this game won't be for me. Luckily I don't have to decide this now but I guess I'd better not cancel my LOTRO account right now. ^^
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
While I am for the open PVP based on the information that has been provided. I do think people need to stop even considering comparing it to GM vs Player, because it isn't. While a GM will commonly hit you when you are weak, he will generally put something that is considerably weaker then if it was something you prepared for, and try to make it something that you have a high chance of either beating, or escaping if need be, players on the other hand, would be doing everything in their power to minimize if not eliminate your chance of either one. Player vs GM you will expect to win 95% of battles, player vs player, 50/50 at best. That isn't to say both have their roles, but can people please stop trying to call them the same thing.
Do you complain this much if your GM has creatures ambush you at an inopportune time?I'm sorry that you don't enjoy open PvP. It's a shame whenever people take such a narrow view of something before any specific details about it have even been released. Hopefully something changes your mind in the future.
That wasn't me saying they're the same thing. It was more a jerkish comment that probably shouldn't have been made in regards to the specific post. But honestly, there's so many MMOs out there that have the kid gloves firmly in place. It annoys me to no end hearing that people want that yet again.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Do you complain this much if your GM has creatures ambush you at an inopportune time?
I'm sorry that you don't enjoy open PvP. It's a shame whenever people take such a narrow view of something before any specific details about it have even been released. Hopefully something changes your mind in the future.
Anyone who has ever played any player-competitve online game ever knows exactly what PvP will turn into.
It isn't a matter of if the game will turn into a gankfest with griefers it is a matter of when. That's not to say that all it will consist of is ganking and griefing, but it will happen to everybody at some point, and I do not blame anybody who chooses to not deal with it by not participating in the game.
As far as details go, nobody has any real details yet, so the glowingly optimistic side of things is just as potentially silly as the people who are saying right now that they will never play it because they have an overly pessimistic viewpoint at this time.
The only glowing optimistic hope I currently have is that there's open PvP. Which has been firmly stated as in. So there's no silliness going on. Just going by what has already been stated.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But honestly, there's so many MMOs out there that have the kid gloves firmly in place. It annoys me to no end hearing that people want that yet again.
The thing is that there's not a single MMO playing on Golarion so far. So maybe those people (and I'm one of them) just have other preferences.
I'm playing MMOs not because I want to compete with other players but because it gives me the opportunity to explore a game world I love. So those "kid gloves" help me to play the game the way I like instead of having to bother with a game style I don#t.
Unluckily this doesn't seem to be the case with Pathfinder Online.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But honestly, there's so many MMOs out there that have the kid gloves firmly in place. It annoys me to no end hearing that people want that yet again.The thing is that there's not a single MMO playing on Golarion so far. So maybe those people (and I'm one of them) just have other preferences.
I'm playing MMOs not because I want to compete with other players but because it gives me the opportunity to explore a game world I love. So those "kid gloves" help me to play the game the way I like instead of having to bother with a game style I don#t.
Unluckily this doesn't seem to be the case with Pathfinder Online.
I can respect that. But people seem to think that they'll log in for the first time and get ganked. Immediately. That's not the case. It's already been said that you can play through the game in safety. You just won't get the same reward as someone who actually puts themselves at risk. Maybe I'm just jaded by the fact that the first MMO I ever stepped into was a high risk game.
And Gorb, I agree and disagree with you. I think they're aiming for a niche crowd in the MMO market. Not the masses. If they wanted the basic MMO fan of today PFO would end up following along with SW:TOR and WoW. But I can agree with the fact that the average tabletop player might not be the target market either.
The Brutal Truth(tm) might be that Pathfinder Online's primary target demographic are MMO fans, with diehard Golarion pen-n-paper players being the secondary one.
Which would make a lot of sense, in the grand scheme of things.
Someone actually explained the source of all the caustic remarks there.
But what about the people that are both fans of P&P AND MMORPGs ?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ryan has made it clear that if you do not engage in PVP, you will get very little out of the game. I asked him directly how important PVP would be and if I could play without it, and he said I would get the lowest possible reward out of the game if I did that.
You asked wether you can play without engaging in PvP.
This itself is an inaccurate question but I think (and RD probably thought so too) that you mean without the RISK for PvP.
So he answered that when playing in the save zones without any Risk for PvP your rewards will be the lowest possible FOR YOUR TIME.
However when you do not engage actively in PvP but actually are ok with the RISK of PvP you can fully participate in the game. You may need some precautionary measures to minimize the risks of being attacked, such as grouping, avoiding main spots, playing during non peak times, but will most likely be able to enjoy the game without ever actively engaging in PvP.
In EvE there are many people who do not actively engage in PvP but like to just gather resources and trade them. In PFO there will be people who mainly craft.
I posted that in other threads that used the quote to show that there is a BIG difference between never even risking PvP at all (which would probably mean PFO will not be a game for you) and never actively engaging in PvP.
....But honestly, there's so many MMOs out there that have the kid gloves firmly in place. It annoys me to no end hearing that people want that yet again.
Exactly. Why do they need yet another one?
The Brutal Truth(tm) might be that Pathfinder Online's primary target demographic are MMO fans, with diehard Golarion pen-n-paper players being the secondary one.
Which would make a lot of sense, in the grand scheme of things.
I am fearing this also.
And no...it doesn't make sense for me...
But what about the people that are both fans of P&P AND MMORPGs ?
Thoose people are first fans of MMO's and second fans of P&P.
....OR they think as soon as you turn something into a computer game it HAS to be a shooter....but while doing P&P its totally ok to play it all "the boring way".
But what about the people that are both fans of P&P AND MMORPGs ?Those people are first fans of MMO's and second fans of P&P.
....OR they think as soon as you turn something into a computer game it HAS to be a shooter....but while doing P&P its totally ok to play it all "the boring way".
Thanks, I really needed to be compared to people who play games as dull as Call of Duty or Modern Warfare. I've been a P&P fan first and a MMO fan second ever since I quit WoW after the nerfing of the Cataclysm raids. But hey, at least now you know better :D
|
The Brutal Truth(tm) might be that Pathfinder Online's primary target demographic are MMO fans, with diehard Golarion pen-n-paper players being the secondary one.
Which would make a lot of sense, in the grand scheme of things.
I am fearing this also.
And no...it doesn't make sense for me...
It makes sense, because it's supposed to earn money and draw new demographic to Pathfinder. Neither would be really achievable if the game was some kind of virtual tabletop.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If some arrogant tyrant decided that all who weren't allied with him would be killed on sight, his kingdom should dry up within a fraction of the time it took to build their empire. If you try to build a kingdom and ignore the River Freedoms, then the will of the people of the River Kingdoms should be enforced and punish that kingdom.
You shouldn't be rewarded for that level of paranoia or punished for not having it.
And they likely will. If you build an area no one is willing to travel to for trade because of the dangers of travelling to your area, you probably will have major issues.
Some players will want to bring order to the chaos. Some players will want to bring chaos to order.
This is the internal conflict of the game.
The WoW analogy is for the people who don't seem to understand that the game isn't going to be an instance based dungeon delve. It will be a sandbox economic game me that has dungeons.
First person civilization.
That may work if the game is significantly dependent on trade and the NPC kingdoms react to a player kingdom (and their trade allies) killing any non-ally that enters their territory. Or some other element by which NPCs react to the way your kingdom is managed in the wild wilderness. But it was said that there shouldn't be game enforced punishment for committing an act out in the wilderness.
Some mechanic within the game that punishes you for managing your kingdom like a jerk. The NPC kingdoms (and by extension, the game itself) should punish kingdoms who are out of line even if they are committing these acts in the player's own kingdom. This punishment doesn't need to mean sending out an army to destroy them, but it should do things within it's power to show that that actions of the kingdom, it's soldiers, and it's allies are not ignored once they are out of view.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Skipping 171 posts, and thus running the danger of re-hashing something that may have already been said, I think that the split model works best. Servers that accomodate both types of player, those who are pro-PvP and those who are anti-PvP.
However, I do have one thing to ask of Goblinworks/Paizo and that is to enforce roleplaying on your servers when they are up and running.
I don't want to become marginalized as so often happens in MMO's these days. We want the roleplaying and please consider employing teams of people who run impromptu events!
Regards,
John
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lads, lads, no need to get angry at each other. We all have opinions and they are all equally valid, and for each point in favour we can probably find another against. So keep it cool; no one's life is on the line here (unless we start proposing real-life PvP here with full loot).
Just remember that what might seem painfully obvious to you, could seem completely illogical to someone else. Debate, don't fight, and we might come to some very interesting conclusions.
I removed a post and the replies to it. Flag it an move on, folks.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
However, I do have one thing to ask of Goblinworks/Paizo and that is to enforce roleplaying on your servers when they are up and running.
Let's please not do this. Enforcing roleplaying is not a good idea, for two reasons:
1) No one actually agrees on what roleplaying is and isn't.
2) A lot of people aren't going to want to do anything resembling what you're referring to as "roleplaying."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
However, I do have one thing to ask of Goblinworks/Paizo and that is to enforce roleplaying on your servers when they are up and running.Let's please not do this. Enforcing roleplaying is not a good idea, for two reasons:
1) No one actually agrees on what roleplaying is and isn't.
2) A lot of people aren't going to want to do anything resembling what you're referring to as "roleplaying."
Agreeing with Scott here. As much as I plan on roleplaying, and believe it adds a significant amount of "content" to a MMO I do not believe in making it mandatory. As Scott said there is no way to define what is RPing and different people will have different interpretations, and that ends up becoming too much of a slippery slope.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
interesting thoughts, Terquem, so here's my answer:
I totally agree with your points 1,2 and 4 but I cannot agree that intentful impeding other players' enjoyment of the game can or should be tolerated. There's a reason why there's a "Don't be a jerk"-rule implemented on these boards and the same rule is (or should be) implemented in MMOs. Now one of my main gripes with Blizzard has been that they not only do nothing against this kind of behavior but that they actively encourage it via their game design and the way they moderate their games. I am aware that you can only do so much against those players but I would never ever take part in any game again where jerks are officially allowed.
er players.
1)In your refereed based gaming system do you set in place specific consequences for the behavior of “Characters” that are counter intuitive to the accepted social behavior of “Non-Player Characters” that co-inhabit the game world – that is, do you often allow the player’s to get away with “Murder” (read – anything that your game world societies would considered a heinous...
My players may do what they want, but they will have to live with the consequences which basically means they won't get away with murder. Which is basically a non-problem in my games as I won't allow evil characters.
2) In your refereed based gaming system do you set in place, consciously or subconsciously, barriers to play based upon a player’s behavior – that is to say do you selective exclude players who do not approach the game for the same reasons that you do, and consequently set up obstacles, house rules or playing style paradigms that send clear messages to the kinds of players you don’t want in your game to “stay away”.
No. I try to be as clear and concise about possible about my and my players expectations before the game starts. so at least theoretically, they and I know what all particiapants want to get out of the game beforehand. Should someone's behaviour prove as game-disrupting, I'll try to talk to him and find a solution anyone can agree with. If this is not possible, someone may have to leave the game table at least for the specific game.
But I won't use the game to send messages.
and as far as 3) is concerned: my players' characters naturally have an important role to play in the respective adventure/campaign, but they normally aren't the movers and shakers of the game setting. So if the characters show anti-social behavior they will soon learn, that the society won#t accept that behavior and (most of the time) has the means to punish this behavior
Now the thing is, as GM, I run the game engine and play the part of the NPCs, so I have a lot of control about the game flow. In an MMO a part of this lies in the hands of other players which means that I'm at least partially depending on the good-will of other people with more "power" than they would have in the typical referee based game. And in my experience this kind of power is highly attractive for a certain kind of player tending to abuse it because their fun lies in disrupting other peoples' enjoyment of the game. We'll see how this will play out.
I removed a post and the replies to it. Flag it an move on, folks.
I removed a couple I missed the first time.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Funny. I leave the forums for a few days, the game is no more or less detailed or developed and yet your all trying to bludgeon each other wielding your opinions in one hand and your anxieties in the other.
The game could be about flower picking. Saying you can't play a strictly PvP game or you can't play a strictly PvE game is an argument you can have with yourself. It has got nothing to do with Pathfinder Online nor are they trying to develop this game with you specifically in mind.
Wait for more details. Make a decision. Try or do not try the game.
Funny. I leave the forums for a few days, the game is no more or less detailed or developed and yet your all trying to bludgeon each other wielding your opinions in one hand and your anxieties in the other.
The game could be about flower picking. Saying you can't play a strictly PvP game or you can't play a strictly PvE game is an argument you can have with yourself. It has got nothing to do with Pathfinder Online nor are they trying to develop this game with you specifically in mind.
Wait for more details. Make a decision. Try or do not try the game.
The only hole in your argument is that Ryan Dancey's statements have indicated that this will be a primarily PvP-motivated game. His posts elsewhere have indicated that PvP is the risk you need to face to reap any reward.*
So, unless they drastically change the lead developer's intentions for the game, we DO know what we're getting on that front.
*Let the pedantry begin.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The only hole in your argument is that Ryan Dancey's statements have indicated that this will be a primarily PvP-motivated game. His posts elsewhere have indicated that PvP is the risk you need to face to reap any reward.*
So, unless they drastically change the lead developer's intentions for the game, we DO know what we're getting on that front.
*Let the pedantry begin.
Indeed, but people do greatly need to comprehend the difference between it being the risk and being the means for rewards, as well as estimate the frequency etc... We know to gain the best things, you need to travel into areas where PVP is a threat of occurring. That does not mean with absolute certainty that PVP is occurring 24/7 in all areas, that there aren't ways to avoid it etc... Having to keep an eye over your shoulder and being in a fight the second you leave the safeish area, are not the same thing. Now could it mean it, absolutely. We are still working with scraps of details on an unfinalized concept for a game that hasn't even begun developing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The only hole in your argument is that Ryan Dancey's statements have indicated that this will be a primarily PvP-motivated game. His posts elsewhere have indicated that PvP is the risk you need to face to reap any reward.*
So, unless they drastically change the lead developer's intentions for the game, we DO know what we're getting on that front.
*Let the pedantry begin.
That is not the case though. I have played MMORPGs, including sandbox MMORPGs, for many years and I'm not undermining any who have or haven't, but when he says that the greatest rewards are reaped in dangerous areas, that is not to be taken at all how it sounds.
Eve Online and Ultima Online were & are games in which rewards are best gained in dangerous places. Even today in Ultima Online this is the case. I guarantee you that Ultima Online's population is a minority of PvPers.
Resources to craft a MIGHTY BLADE OF RARE ORENESS might only be available should one obtain the RARE ORE from the MOUNTAIN OF DANGER. In UO currently, the scrolls to raise your skill cap are only obtainable from felucca (dangeorus land), yet they are readily available to non-pvp players.
You do not have to go to the mountain of danger. Safe lands could and should be full of things to keep none PvPers busy. The game will no doubt feature a rich market which shall service people everything they need; specifically resources and items which have been extracted from the dangerous lands.
Ryan does not mean that if you want the best items, you need to go to danger land to go get them. He does mean however, if you want to OBTAIN it yourself, that's where you must go. Otherwise put the effort in elsewhere to earn the cash and buy it on the market.
This is a sandbox. It will offer you the means to play the game how you want. PvE players will be viable and have access to all resources, but just different means of acquiring it. Saying that you need to PvP or risk PvP to gain any reward is the typical doomsdaying which has gripped some members of this forum. It is a ridiculous statement. They're largely taking Eve Online into account in the building of this game (by the looks of it). Eve Online and Ultima can both be played happily from within a condom.
In summation. Lets say I have 3 friends. They all own castles, land, magical weapons and armour and a wealth unmatched. One did so through launching wars across the kingdom and conquering his enemies and amassing wealth. The other did so through delving into the deepest darkest dungeons to slay the mightiest dragons. The other owned a shop and made furniture.
How do I know all this? I don't. But every single one of my experiences and what I have learnt from sandbox MMORPG is that how I play dictates my safety. How and where I conduct myself and how I want to achieve what I want to achieve. It's how they work and it's how they should be (and I hope how PFO is) designed.
Oh and for the record I don't plan on PvPing what so ever. I play for social roles and RP; I don't even PvE.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In summation. Lets say I have 3 friends. They all own castles, land, magical weapons and armour and a wealth unmatched. One did so through launching wars across the kingdom and conquering his enemies and amassing wealth. The other did so through delving into the deepest darkest dungeons to slay the mightiest dragons. The other owned a shop and made furniture.
"And you, Lord Jhest of Droors, how did you come to rule a kingdom?"
"You'd be surprised at how much glory there is to be had in proper end table construction."
something about kid gloves
That is clearly not what is being said.
The issue is causal gamers being jumped by online thugs. In short the issue is not PvP, but nonconsentual PvP.Maybe if you jump a PvE'er they should have the right to turn off your ability to PvP for a certain amount of time*, but that is wrong because they are forceing you to not be allowed to play as you like. Well by jumping a nonPVP'er the same thing is taking place.
*Maybe that can be an option if they happen to kill you. I think 100 game hours might work.
It's already been said that you can play through the game in safety. You just won't get the same reward as someone who actually puts themselves at risk.
This I can agree with. I just can't find the source of the info. By all the aruging I guess a lot of other people can't either. I think a source should be noted.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Sorry, I might be thick... aren't they trying to make a *different* sort of game here? Am I the only person who has considered that with player organizations running the world that some enterprising PvP enthusiast will likely create a guild(called the P.F. Marshalls or something) devoted to hunting down griefers and all of the poor lowbies or carebears or w/e will have an advocate.
Unless there's incentive in it, I really don't see this being prevalent.
What I can see happening is player "governments" that include loosely organized militia who enforce a no-PvP policy within their territory in order to encourage player traffic in the area. Whether this turns out to be a truly enforceable policy will depend on how PvP is handled.