Smuggler Archive
Thread: Why Only Missions for Combat Skills???
Page 2 of 2
AnyaSilverblade
Thu Jul 14, 2005 8:18 am
#14
Yep...You have 3 places you can go in UO...Trammel= No PVP what so ever....Fellucia= Free game..Kill all you want, Die alot.
And now they have Malas...No PvP what so ever there either...And yes Sometimes it was chaos...LOL
Phizuol
Thu Jul 14, 2005 9:41 am
#15
That's what the UO people thought too. But unlike the real-life analogies you use people in games who are killed or arrested are out raising trouble again very quickly.
GanymedePharuu
Thu Jul 14, 2005 9:46 am
#16
Phizuol wrote:
That's what the UO people thought too. But unlike the real-life analogies you use people in games who are killed or arrested are out raising trouble again very quickly.
well why not make it so they can't go out and raise trouble again so quickly?
make prisons, make punishments against "unlawful" behavior. doesn't make sense to take away the freedom of actions in a virtual world when you could very easily allow the Players to put an end to those actions by adding additional freedoms.
Phizuol
Thu Jul 14, 2005 9:53 am
#17
So you will trade the freedom of one player for the freedom of others? But who is right and who is wrong? Both pay the same to play, why should one person be penalized for playing their way while the others are allowed to run free? See, that is the trap these game designers are stuck in.
Their answer was to make separate servers so that you could play unmolested if you chose, or you could subject yourself to PvP if you wanted. This decision was a huge success and for the most part a lot of the big MMOs that followed have adopted some sort of similar approach (ie, voluntary pvp.)
Their answer was to make separate servers so that you could play unmolested if you chose, or you could subject yourself to PvP if you wanted. This decision was a huge success and for the most part a lot of the big MMOs that followed have adopted some sort of similar approach (ie, voluntary pvp.)
GanymedePharuu
Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:04 am
#18
Phizuol wrote:
So you will trade the freedom of one player for the freedom of others? But who is right and who is wrong? Both pay the same to play, why should one person be penalized for playing their way while the others are allowed to run free? See, that is the trap these game designers are stuck in.
Their answer was to make separate servers so that you could play unmolested if you chose, or you could subject yourself to PvP if you wanted. This decision was a huge success and for the most part a lot of the big MMOs that followed have adopted some sort of similar approach (ie, voluntary pvp.)
yeah it's a delicate balance.
but i think the main goal behind all these games is to mimick a reality. so the more realism involved, the better the game. that's why i think game mechanics which prevent certain actions ruin the virtual experience, rather than help it.
i mean we're here to play with and against other players right? we're not here to have imaginary rules set upon us by coded game mechanics.
i dunno that's how i see it. i'm sure others don't mind giving up realism for a more peaceful game experience.
Phizuol
Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:22 am
#19
I think there's a lot of people that feel the same way, including myself. Unfortunately its like Communism, it sounds great but it never works out like the plan. In theory it COULD work, but so far it has not. Shadowbane was a big project set to prove that theory was possible; I have not played it, but I have heard it failed miserably in more ways than one.
All the great theories aside I have run into two truths that seem to thwart them. #1 - Nobody can play 24 hours a day. #2 - Any penalty sufficient to "punish" a fellow player is too harsh a penalty to apply to a paying customer.
If your cyber cops could play 24 hours or be able to respond at a moment's notice then the cyber cops could be a good deterrent to harassment. The truth is that the pvp climate can vary wildly depending on who is logged on at the moment. This makes any sort of communal stability difficult and at times the peaceful folks are very vulnerable.
If agressors are punished too harshly then they will complain that the game is stacked against them (which would be true.) But if the game is balanced, for example if you are killed you are banned from the game for 24 hours, who do you think will suffer more? The peaceful folks or the agressors?
The MMO companies study this stuff VERY closely, they have a lot of money riding on their ideas. There is a good chance that any simple answers have already been examined. I am not saying you don't have ideas that might work, but keep in mind that a lot of other bright minds have been working on this problem too. Humans are hard to predict.
All the great theories aside I have run into two truths that seem to thwart them. #1 - Nobody can play 24 hours a day. #2 - Any penalty sufficient to "punish" a fellow player is too harsh a penalty to apply to a paying customer.
If your cyber cops could play 24 hours or be able to respond at a moment's notice then the cyber cops could be a good deterrent to harassment. The truth is that the pvp climate can vary wildly depending on who is logged on at the moment. This makes any sort of communal stability difficult and at times the peaceful folks are very vulnerable.
If agressors are punished too harshly then they will complain that the game is stacked against them (which would be true.) But if the game is balanced, for example if you are killed you are banned from the game for 24 hours, who do you think will suffer more? The peaceful folks or the agressors?
The MMO companies study this stuff VERY closely, they have a lot of money riding on their ideas. There is a good chance that any simple answers have already been examined. I am not saying you don't have ideas that might work, but keep in mind that a lot of other bright minds have been working on this problem too. Humans are hard to predict.
TatharLB
Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:41 am
#20
I too played UO in the very early years....left it...came back....left it again....came back again. DAMN YOU UO! I cancelled my last account less than 6 months ago. I really loved the game in the early days b/c you always had to look over your shoulder which made the game have a seemly unsafe atmosphere feeling to it. I can't remember all the times I had to run from PKers. LOL What a blast those days were. I even gave the Samurai Empires expansion a shot. I thought it might breath new life into the game. *Sigh* It didn't.
AnyaSilverblade
Mon Jul 18, 2005 11:25 pm
#21
Nope the Samari Expantion for UO just made it more complicated for people who wanted to play murderers...Although now Reds can go into towns and stuff...In Fellucia....But they still cant go to Trammel...
Trammel, Fellucia, and Malas are different lands in the same server...If you want to PvP you take a moongate to Fellucia and if you didnt want to PvP you go to the land of Trammel...I dont know if that makes any sence..LOL..I tried
Glixx Axelgear
Page 2 of 2