Make PvP consensual
- Thread starter Kebek
- Start date
- Status
Trolling obviously.
Also i heard a rumor that the game will have third person camera.
Just to throw something in, that it worked for UO although they just created a mirror of the world one pvp one pve, they had to as people just got sick to death of being ganked every 10 mins and subscriptions fell, cash is king. Probably the reason why UO is still running to this day which amazes me as I played it at launch in 1997!
As a pure PVE game, MO is pretty trash, mostly because the game is design with PVP as it's center. The reason it worked for UO was because there were no competitors. It's a also a 23 year old game and it's not a game that new people go to but a game that is still alive due to the type of people who never leave (like us idiots who followed MO since the beginning). The server split was also one of the first nails in UOs coffin.
And sorry to be the party pooper but no one is seriously trying to make it a thing. This thread was obviously posted as a joke.
I think I've just read the worst UO comparison ever made in this forum.
I think I've just read the worst UO comparison ever made in this forum.
Not comparing anything, although MO2 is just a UO ripoff with a shiny 3d engine, although UO had far more depth to it that this.
Making it optional would destroy the experience for most of the players that come to play MO2 that are looking for this kind of game. You don't even need to be hardcore PvP'er to prefer this sort of gameplay. I personally wouldn't consider me a harcore PvP player, but I like the danger and the feeling of beeing vulnerable to other players. Makes the reward of achieving something feel even better.
Also if you make it optional, people would exploit the system. They'd turn it on and off whenever they need it. Want to carry your stuff to another city? Turn PvP off for the time the journey takes. Even the hardcore PvP'ers would do that. This would remove one of the exciting gameplay elements this game has to offer. Games like Mortal Online 2 need wolves and sheep. Nobody wants to play on a server full of wolves. And I enjoy beeing a sheep at times.
I have played Ultima Online since 1997 and initially I supported the move to make PvP optional. But when they introduced Trammel (PvE only) and Felucca (PvP mirror of the world) it completely destroyed the experience on regular servers for many players until Siege Perilous came out. PvP was kind of like the salt in the soup (German saying, not sure if you can say that in English). The game became stale and less exciting. In a healthy community there will always be people who can help you out. There will be PKs and anti PKs who will deal with the bad guys
I understand when people don't want to be pk'ed. But there are so many games where players can opt out of PvP, but there are no other games that offer the same experience as MO2 does. At least there are no other next or current gen MMOs like this. And this is IMHO a chance to establish MO2 as a game for people with this kind of mindset. MO2 needs to fill that niche and I'm sure it can be successful, because there aren't any other games to play for us likeminded players.
That is such a bad misrepresentation, it only ruined it for the PK'er not for the majority of players. Most of the players moved to Trammel where they could play the game the way they wanted and those that wanted to PVP stayed on Feleucca and it became a wastland empty and devoid of large numbers of players. This is what happens to every single full loot no restriction PVP MMO there has every been. UO was a perfect example of why those games don't work in the long term and remain niche.
The reason this happens is because the griefer/Rampant PKer (the wolf in you analogy) doesn't learn that if you eat all the sheep there is no food left and you die of starvation, something real wolves know in the real world.
And that's why I said for "many" players. I wasn't a PK'er and I missed them when they were gone. I agree there were more players who preferred the Trammel live, but believe me there were many who didn't like it in the end.
I never had the feeling there were ever too many PK'ers on the servers I played (Chesapeak and Drachenfels). There were always more anti PK's that would chase the red players.
There are idiots in every game that want to ruin your day. No matter if PvP is possible or not. If they want to annoy you, they will find a way. Be it by ninja looting the monsters you just killed, steal the kills from you, or other things to piss you off. But these are idiots we all have to deal with.
However, my point is, that there are literally no other recent MMOs that offer what MO2 has to offer but so many other games for players who don't like to PvP. Why ask to ruin that sort of gameplay for the people who came here for exactly that reason? They have no other place to go.
I do agree with you here, but to be fair I don't think the current generation of gamers are like we were in UO back in the day, gamers nowadays seem very childish in their behaviour and only PK over and over to cause grief and because in most of these types of games there are no consequences for it. In UO there were real consequences for going Red, not being able to enter towns apart from Buccs den was one which made life difficult for those who made bad choices.
That's why it's important to have the option to turn off PvP.
It is not for multiple reasons, 1 its not the core of the game 2 it would inflate the market with cheap stuff , 3 boring, the game is about danger and u want to take it away ...
Boring in your opinion. The trouble is with you and other so called hardcore PvPers you think your opinion is the only one that matters and fail to listen to other players views. Other people might find a mix of hardcore pvp and the ability to decide I wont take part for a week appealing.
It's pretty much an Alpha and those who are alpha testing can raise these questions and the Devs will decide in that process if they want a very niche game with the limited revenue that brings or a game that will appeal to a slightly larger audience and bigger revenue stream.
What is the playing population of MO1 by the way out of interest?
Last edited:
To add to the existing UO discussion I think it's important to remember when UO came out there were not exactly a lot of options for players in regard to MMORPGs to play, so it was UO or... nothing? Sorry I can't recall what other MMOs existed back then. UO at release was at least the most complex one available at the time.
I believe a full loot PvP focused MMO RPG can be sustainable, but yeah. If you give players an option to avoid PvP they likely will. Just the nature of the beast.
I believe a full loot PvP focused MMO RPG can be sustainable, but yeah. If you give players an option to avoid PvP they likely will. Just the nature of the beast.
What's with the flaming? If you don't like my feedback, please provide a counter-argument or just don't participate in the discussion.
It's obvious quite a few people are onboard already with my suggestion of making PvP a consensual thing.
Do you not understand that will never happen due to the core design principles of the game? There are suggestions to be made within the confines of what the game is designed to be... then there is demanding the game abandon it's core mechanics in favor of what most other games already have. Just go play something else.
Thread has gone too far off topic, and has become unproductive. As such, I am locking it.
- Status