Bounty Hunter Archive

Well then maybe you shouldnt comment on things that you dont have a good understanding of, such as jedi origionally being a pvp profession and even getting an email saying there would be pvp.

Message Edited by ChefRubio on 11-08-2005 04:17 AM

---

ChefRubio wrote:

Well then maybe you shouldnt comment on things that you dont have a good understanding of, such as jedi origionally being a pvp profession and even getting an email saying there would be pvp.

Message Edited by ChefRubio on 11-08-2005 04:17 AM

---

Because, again, you pvp'ers believe that pvp should be imposed on anyone even if they don't want it. Don't make excuses due to the nature of game mechanics... there are a lot of things that you can get away with in this world that aren't technically illegal but that may be nonetheless totally wrong to do to other people.

It seems, sadly enough, that the pvp'ers motto is, "You HAVE to like PVP because I like it... and you must PVP with me because I say so!"

---

pussycat wrote:

Because, again, you pvp'ers believe that pvp should be imposed on anyone even if they don't want it. Don't make excuses due to the nature of game mechanics... there are a lot of things that you can get away with in this world that aren't technically illegal but that may be nonetheless totally wrong to do to other people.

It seems, sadly enough, that the pvp'ers motto is, "You HAVE to like PVP because I like it... and you must PVP with me because I say so!"

---

---

ChefRubio wrote:

Right, and the fact that jedi got an email saying that PVP would definately be involved made a lot of people want to grind the profession. Just because you personally didnt want it and are too arrogant to admit that there ever was an email, even though pre-9 jedi like myself have confirmed it to you, despite not having been unlocked then yourself.

Jedi was origionally a class designed around pvp and had pvp consequenses. I am a pvper and i think you are very ignorant to say that pvpers think that all people have to like jedi.

I have been a part of every jedi nerf except one, I have been an active member of the jedi community since then as well. No breaks. I've seen it all happen. I've seen the profession gradually slip from being somewhat close to what it should be in terms of strength and being a beakon for all to follow to now being a dimly lit candle amonst 1000 other candles.

If you want to make generalizations about who says what, the carebears say "I hate pvp, so I want to take it away from everybody so I can have fun, even if it means completely changing the basis of a profession."

You can't argue with that. You can't argue that jedi was origionally a pvp class. If you do, you're just plain stupid. It DID send emails out saying PVP would be involved and that it would be difficult and sometimes too difficult for some to complete. Thats what many loved about the profession, and now thanks to the louded voices on the forums being heard, it has done a complete 180 from that.

---

You do not know what I did or did not want or why I may or may not have wanted it, please do now assume that you know things about which you are completely ignorant. You conveniently continue to ignore the basic point that I have been trying to make. Please tell me one good reason why pvp should be imposed on players who do not want it. Please tell me one reason why certain content of the game should be inaccessible to people who do not like pvp. I don't think you can do that, because there isn't a good reason.

Those of us who do not enjoy pvp have never said anything even remotely closely to what you just suggested... never wanted to take it away from everybody... just wanted to have a game that ALL PLAYERS could enjoy equally, whether one chose to concentrate on pve, pvp, or both. It's very simply, really -- let every player enjoy the game as they may best want. And it's too bad that it took over two years for the gaming company to realize that, yes, really, it is a lot easier when you let ALL PLAYERS enjoy the game style that they may prefer, being after all that everybody plays the same monthly fees.

This is what you do not understand, are uncapable of understanding, or simply refuse to understand. My position is one of basic fairness to all -- let every player determine the game style they prefer, and let everybody have equal access to the content in the game regardless of their game style preferrence. Why do you not want to accept this basic concept, even know that it is being adopted as an integral part of the new SWG?

That is all I would really like to know... to be perfectly honest, I'm sure everyone who has flamed me here is a nice person deep inside, but something about simply challenging the reasoning behind the previous status quo -- the status quo that will expire on Nov. 15th -- makes everybody turn into mean-spirited and name-calling people. Why? It's not like anything that is said on these boards is really likely to make the devs or their employers change their mind about it.

I challenge the reasoning behind the former status quo simply because of its inherent unfairness -- if you like pvp you get "X" content, but if you prefer not to pvp you get "Y" content, unless of course you subject yourself to forced pvp, in which case you can enjoy "X" content.

Nobody ever asked pvp'ers to change their gaming preferrence into one which was largely the opposite of their preferred game style. But the devs and pvp'ers DID expect that non-pvp'ers change their gaming preferrence if they were to enjoy certain content in the game. Not only that, but the mere fact that a player should express dislike of pvp is enough for the pvp'ers to engage in immediate name-calling -- "carebear", and worse.

And I am still wondering why. Why you felt it was soooo important to your gaming enjoyment that others accept your preferred game style.

---

jalexu wrote:

---

pussycat wrote:

Because, again, you pvp'ers believe that pvp should be imposed on anyone even if they don't want it. Don't make excuses due to the nature of game mechanics... there are a lot of things that you can get away with in this world that aren't technically illegal but that may be nonetheless totally wrong to do to other people.

It seems, sadly enough, that the pvp'ers motto is, "You HAVE to like PVP because I like it... and you must PVP with me because I say so!"

---

You just posted earlier that comparing the game with RL experiences is inappropriate. I still cannot understand for the life of me how some people take offense so easily over events that happen in a game, with no real consequences, but then again, I'm not one to dismiss it if I don't understand it. Game mechanics are not an excuse for one's demeanor. They are the rules that define the virtual environment we're playing in, and they're given as is. You are assuming that all pvp'ers are imposing on you (and more, they're all griefers, but that's just speculation on my part) because they use mechanics within the same environment as you.

It was an interesting experiment that SOE did, giving players 30+ options to play, one of them with extreme benefits, but severe drawbacks at the same time. Unfortunately for some, it failed. You seem to advocate the universal truth that "forced pvp is bad", when, besides the logic fallacy in that, the very premise of it is false. It was not forced in the first place as you consciously picked up the only profession in game that had an innate pvp aspect in it. It's true, there wasn't any developer coming to the boards saying "Jedi is a pvp profession", but that doesn't constitue an argument that it wasn't, it's actually another logic fallacy to assume something's false because it's not widely known to be true. You had all the hints: saber TEF, extreme penalty for death but largely above any other combat profession (during perma-death time), the only profession to be hunted by BH etc. It's all there if you don't refuse to see it.

I'm not gonna insist on it any further, because as others said before me, it's over now. I just wanted to say that you give the impression of desperately trying to get your point across. Maybe that's why some of your arguments contain contradictions and other argumentation flaws, and all serve to the same conclusion that you are doing the very same thing you advocate against, that is, imposing on others.

---

I believe there is a difference between comparing Jedi missions with actual law-enforcement actions, and with simply saying that there's a lot of things in life (and playing a video game is one of the things that we do in life) where you can get away with doing things to others that are unwelcome, and yet know that you will be able to get away with it. I do not see a contradiction there, I am not making a direct analogy or parallel to the game mechanic of Jedi missions and a *specific* action IRL, much less one involving actual law-enforcement. (And even that argument is flawed on other levels, as it would imply comparing acts that take place in what is still, ostenensibly, a democracy, and those that took place in a time and place governed by "an evil galactic Empire").

There is no assumption in saying that many BH's imposed on others in ways that were simply unwelcome, it's pretty much a fact, and I know plenty of Jedi who could easily defeat almost any BH in a clean fight, who nonetheless had enough of it after a while to simply get cloak. Do you understand that a lot of people were simply fed up? That they had had enough of this game mechanic? And that a game mechanic does not have any effect on players unless the players themselves decide, of their own free will, to use said game mechanic?

The point of fact is that there was content in the game that clearly and obviously favored (or had greater appeal) to players with a certain gaming preferrence. There was really no reason why game mechanics could not have been designed that made it equally challenging to level as a Jedi, but without the pvp. As a BH, I made a conscious decision never to take a Jedi mission, not because I was not up to the task, but simply because I felt that it was wrong to do something in the game that might result in ruining the game session of another player.

You can argue all you want that there were warnings, etc., but the one point that you cannot or will not try to explain is: why? Why was it so important to try to make some of the most appealing in the game (at least for a good number of players) into something that would not be equally enjoyable to players who do not like to pvp? I still have not heard of a good reason why you think this was ever a good idea. But, worry not, I honestly do not expect that neither you nor anybody else could provide a good reason. If there really was a good reason for it, player bounties would not have been eliminated.

Oh and one more thing. Tell me why the simple act of expressing an honest and vocal opinion -- and staying within the rules of the boards -- is something that you believe constitutes "imposing on others", yet hunting down and interrupting the game play of a fellow player, who may not want to engage in pvp, does not.

Message Edited by pussycat on 11-08-2005 02:41 AM

The real question is this: If you do not like PvP games then why are you playing this game in the first place? Maybe this is better suited for you.

---

NewEye wrote:

The real question is this: If you do not like PvP games then why are you playing this game in the first place? Maybe this is better suited for you.

Care Bears Game

Calling All Care Bears

---

This game was marketed extensively, though not exclusively, to Star Wars fans. And frankly, the game will be better suited for me after Nov. 15th, because there will no longer be any forced pvp.

---

DTQ wrote:

I dont like Fighting, so I chose a fighting profession in a game with "Wars" in the title, based on a film all about a Galaxy wide civil war.

I just wanted to wave a brightly coloured stick at some bbq fodder.

Now this is an option Im going to shout about it to every one everywhere.

---

Are you trying to be "friendly, curteous, and supportive"? If you are not, then you may be in violation of the forum guidelines.

Were you trying to be so yourself saying I need validation as a human being, and by coming here telling everyone they've lost their content?

---

DTQ wrote:
Were you trying to be so yourself saying I need validation as a human being, and by coming here telling everyone they've lost their content?

---

The content to which you refer was not a part of the game when the game launched. You knew when you signed up for the game that the game experience was subject to change... if you want to pvp, you can still pvp -- only you'll be doing it without forcing it on anybody.

---

pussycat wrote:

You can argue all you want that there were warnings, etc., but the one point that you cannot or will not try to explain is: why? Why was it so important to try to make some of the most appealing in the game (at least for a good number of players) into something that would not be equally enjoyable to players who do not like to pvp? I still have not heard of a good reason why you think this was ever a good idea. But, worry not, I honestly do not expect that neither you nor anybody else could provide a good reason. If there really was a good reason for it, player bounties would not have been eliminated.

Oh and one more thing. Tell me why the simple act of expressing an honest and vocal opinion -- and staying within the rules of the boards -- is something that you believe constitutes "imposing on others", yet hunting down and interrupting the game play of a fellow player, who may not want to engage in pvp, does not.

---

Well, these areall assumptions on my part, but there it goes. In the beginning, devs wanted to implement jedi as a powerful profession and keep it rare at the same time. As we all know, they succeeded for a short time.It was undoubtedly a mistake on their part to think that players will keep away from the ultimate prize that wasjedi simply withthe warning that they'll be hunted and forced to stay hidden. I don't know if you're aware of this, but initially they made good efforts to keep the game according to its timeline. The turning point was when they opened jedi as a profession for players. They knew most people would go for it, so they implemented the harsh penalties during perma-death times, in an attempt to preserve continuity. But then the whining began, and we all know the rest. There's the reason in response to your first paragraph.A little cynic on their part todo that to "the most appealing thingin the game" as you put it ? Yes / maybe, itdoes look and feel like an experiment to me now, as I said.

Now for the 2nd paragraph: I never said pvp against people who don't like it doesn't constitute imposing Actually I agree with you, the BH system was a form of legalised griefing. Legalised, as in implemented and supported by SOE (until now). There are bounty hunters who took advantage of it simply for RP reasons, even if they didn't realize it. Fighting brainless NPCs simply doesn't cut it for some, that was the thrill of hunting someone, a "virtual" someone, but with a human mind behind it. There are of course those with a genuine agression towards the profession, but we have to agree here that people with sociopathic tendencies shouldn't dictate the fate of an entire profession. I'm sure you know jedi who are an insult to what jedi are supposed to be. I can understand the reasons why you support the end of player bounties. Really, I do. But again, they could've found middle-ground, like an opt-in system,not completely remove it and at the same time, remove the appeal for a lot of players, including BH *and* jedi.