Forums » General Pantheon Discussion

Why training and other "bad things" are good for the g

    • 29 posts
    July 17, 2017 2:35 PM PDT

    Roenick said:

    Recently, an online friend and I were discussing how much we miss the fact that we could be trained or griefed in game. We came to the conclusion that part of why MMO's now are so sterile is because they actually don't allow anyone to become a villain anymore.

    IMO, what made the early games so great was the competion and the greifers. It formed alliances, and also rivalaries. All of which helped build the community. Most of today's MMOs want to treat players like suburban parents often treat their children —"everyones a winner."

    I would venture to guess, that when you reflect on those old MMO experiences, the pain of getting loot stolen, or blocked on a mob, or constantly trained at the zone entrance has been replaced by not only nostalgia, but also a loss of part what made communities great back then–rallying against some Dbag.


    So to all the Boofs, Reznors and TreyHarrys of the world, I salute you.

     

    I think training and other negative social aspects should be a part of the game. Negative/Positive social interactions (and actually affecting other people in game), reputations, etc make a game very fun and dynamic. With all the artificial restrictions put into todays MMORPG's (Themeparks), they are dull, dry and boring.  


    This post was edited by Zybane at July 17, 2017 2:36 PM PDT
    • 80 posts
    July 17, 2017 3:31 PM PDT

    Maybe VR could do a automatic wow /train triggered when 1 player has more then xx mob tagged and been running for xx meters  to warn or call for help and make a intended train discovered by other players in the zone ?

    • 32 posts
    July 17, 2017 3:45 PM PDT

    "You have the choice: either as little displeasure as possible, painlessness in brief … or as much displeasure as possible as the price for the growth of an abundance of subtle pleasures and joys that have rarely been relished yet? If you decide for the former and desire to diminish and lower the level of human pain, you also have to diminish and lower the level of their capacity for joy."

    -Friedrich Nietzsche

    • 1537 posts
    July 17, 2017 4:28 PM PDT

    Didn't expect to see Nietzsche.

    I also completely disagree.

    This runs completely contrary to the concept of higher quality of life, modern medicine, etc. It also contradicts mountains of evidence. Would someone seriously try to argue that an increase in pain correlates with an increase in joy?

    Taken out of context, this quote is patently absurd. Sounds like some Mother Theresa garbage.

    • 341 posts
    July 17, 2017 5:08 PM PDT

    I believe Nietzsche was just saying "no pain, no gain".  In any human endeavor you can hang back, avoid effort, exposure, engagement and be a bit happy

    -or-

    plunge in whole heartedly, risk much but with great passion in an attempt to achieve something new, something great, something wonderful and be beyond bliss

     

    [then again, I am a bard, not a philosopher.  Nietzsche also said "Without music, life would be a mistake".  I can agree with that without reservation]

    • 1537 posts
    July 17, 2017 5:29 PM PDT

    I don't like reducing discussions into soundbites, or quotes for that matter.

    The overwhelming majority of people do not take great risks on a whim. Similarly, you hear a lot more about those who succeed than those who fail.

    By definition, most people are average and will live average lives. Those who take risks are outliers, not the norm. Not all risks are created equal, as well.

    If you risk dying in a video game that might cost you an hour of corpse recovery at most, that's a pretty minor risk. Jumping off of a building onto a mattress for the lulz is a far greater risk. The 20 times you succeed do not outweigh the one time you fall to your death or end up permanently disabled.

    The point I'm getting at is that quotes and cutesy common sayings do not serve to create a productive discussion.

    • 329 posts
    July 17, 2017 5:42 PM PDT

    If playing MMO's for over 20 years has taught me anything, it's this:

    Designing Toxicity into your game ensures failure.  I look forward to seeing how this turns out for Visionary Realms, with popcorn if necessary. :)

    • 659 posts
    July 17, 2017 5:50 PM PDT

    vjek said:

    Designing Toxicity into your game ensures failure.  I look forward to seeing how this turns out for Visionary Realms, with popcorn if necessary. :)

    EVE Online would like to have a word with you.

    • 1537 posts
    July 17, 2017 5:54 PM PDT

    Vandraad said:

    vjek said:

    Designing Toxicity into your game ensures failure.  I look forward to seeing how this turns out for Visionary Realms, with popcorn if necessary. :)

    EVE Online would like to have a word with you.

    EVE is a PvP game, competitive by nature. Competition breeds toxicity.

    • 46 posts
    July 17, 2017 5:59 PM PDT

    Kilsin said:

    Gamerchick said:

    Roenick said:

    Recently, an online friend and I were discussing how much we miss the fact that we could be trained or griefed in game. We came to the conclusion that part of why MMO's now are so sterile is because they actually don't allow anyone to become a villain anymore.

    IMO, what made the early games so great was the competion and the greifers. It formed alliances, and also rivalaries. All of which helped build the community. Most of today's MMOs want to treat players like suburban parents often treat their children —"everyones a winner."

    I would venture to guess, that when you reflect on those old MMO experiences, the pain of getting loot stolen, or blocked on a mob, or constantly trained at the zone entrance has been replaced by not only nostalgia, but also a loss of part what made communities great back then–rallying against some Dbag.


    So to all the Boofs, Reznors and TreyHarrys of the world, I salute you.

     

     

     

    I'm trying to understand exactly what you mean by this.  If you mean that you wish to keep EQ standards like they were and not change anything I.e. Training and camp stealing are possibilities than fine, you guys are keeping it old school and that's what many of us are here for in the first place.

     

    Here are some things I would consider...Times have changed.  Over the years people have figured out what internet anonymity means and now we have whole guilds packed with people who just don't care about what people think anymore.   Having such a positive attitude about why letting bad things happen is good for a community is somewhat worrying because it sounds like you are saying that a place like Lord of the Flies is ideal in gaming.  I don't nessacarilly disagree that a certain amount of chaos is bad but it's the rose colored glasses that worry me. 

    I would like a better explaination of your statement does this mean that you guys will encourage both good and bad behavior?  Does this mean you think less policing is where you guys are going?  Can you be a little more clear?

    Please keep in mind this was posted by Roenick in April last year before he joined the Visionary Realms team, back when he was a community member posting his thoughts as one of you folks, this is not an official Visionary Realms team view point. ;)

    I think everyone here knows and has seen your thoughts on training, Kilisin. ;)

    All kidding aside, as Kilsin has stated this is an old post before I joined the team. My personal feelings on the topic have not changed, but they don't represent VR or the team. That said, as Gamerchick eluded to, I think we're all here for the same reasons and emergent gameplay is certainly something we're all fond of. Training maybe not so much...

    • 39 posts
    July 17, 2017 6:29 PM PDT

    I agree with the no hand holding, no artificial means of sterilizing the experience.  I have no problem with game mechanics that don't lend themselves to things such as train (i.e., better AI that makes intentional trains more like hearding cats or some such.)

    • 8 posts
    July 17, 2017 6:34 PM PDT

    Without pain and hardship, pleasure and reward cannot even be ascertained, let alone completely enjoyed. Pain and hardship makes pleasure and reward more fulfilling. Again, to me this is just common sense; and I believe it should be kept in mind when developing video games.

    Games where there is no challenge, no heart ache, and no possible way another player can affect your own are boring. And if we lived in such a world then our world would be just as boring. Thankfully, we don’t. In the real world we have free choice with meaningful consequences tied to them. By using free will individual men and women can send out reverberations through the world and into its future, affecting every person in good ways and bad ways. Can the same be said about any MMORPG? Put another way, sticking every player in a bubble with a chat room isn't going to get you very close to the aforementioned.


    This post was edited by manofyesterday at July 17, 2017 6:54 PM PDT
    • 733 posts
    July 17, 2017 7:00 PM PDT

    Agree, disagree, it's sad that so many people can't even acknowledge the OP's points. It indicates a lack of understanding of what made EQ great. And yeah yeah yeah, this isn't EQ. 

    • 733 posts
    July 17, 2017 7:00 PM PDT

    manofyesterday said:

    Without pain and hardship, pleasure and reward cannot even be ascertained, let alone completely enjoyed. Pain and hardship makes pleasure and reward more fulfilling. Again, to me this is just common sense; and I believe it should be kept in mind when developing video games.

    Games where there is no challenge, no heart ache, and no possible way another player can affect your own are boring. And if we lived in such a world then our world would be just as boring. Thankfully, we don’t. In the real world we have free choice with meaningful consequences tied to them. By using free will individual men and women can send out reverberations through the world and into its future, affecting every person in good ways and bad ways. Can the same be said about any MMORPG? Put another way, sticking every player in a bubble with a chat room isn't going to get you very close to the aforementioned.

    Preach!

    • 1537 posts
    July 17, 2017 8:06 PM PDT

    Krixus said:

    Agree, disagree, it's sad that so many people can't even acknowledge the OP's points. It indicates a lack of understanding of what made EQ great. And yeah yeah yeah, this isn't EQ. 

    Disagreeing with OP isn't a lack of acknowledgement.

    Every single person on this forum who has stated that people have a "lack of understanding of what made EQ great" provides a different reason.

    I highly doubt that everyone who likes/liked EQ likes/liked it for the same reasons. I enjoyed EQ but hated corpse runs, and still do. I enjoy PvP, and EQ's PvP was awful to me. EQ's best feature to me was that its unique, relatively exploitable mechanics allowed me to do things I ordinarily wouldn't be able to do in an MMO. There are other things EQ "allowed" me to do that I won't talk about here.

    You don't speak for me as to what made EQ great the same way you don't speak for me as to what food I like to eat.


    This post was edited by Liav at July 17, 2017 8:28 PM PDT
    • 11 posts
    July 17, 2017 8:18 PM PDT

    EQ's PvP was awful

     I'd argue that EQ1 had the best PvP of any MMO ever made, and I've played most of them.  It wasn't designed and overly constrained the way most MMOs do it.  For example, in WoW they increasingly neutered PvP by shoving more and more of it into irrelevant instanced arenas.

     On the subject of trains and such, it's not really an issue on PvP servers, but on PvE servers it seems like a balancing act.  There were times in EQ on PvE servers where you couldn't really do much about someone training you repeatedly, and it was frustrating.  But I think the larger point about all this is that it seems good for players to be able to affect each other, in both negative and positive ways.  If you put every player in a protective bubble so they can't be affected negatively by others, you reduce the dynamic range of possible experience in the game, and you will probably end up with a more sterile game where it's not that meaningful who your friends and enemies are.


    This post was edited by vylo at July 17, 2017 8:18 PM PDT
    • 1537 posts
    July 17, 2017 8:39 PM PDT

    vylo said:

    EQ's PvP was awful

     I'd argue that EQ1 had the best PvP of any MMO ever made, and I've played most of them.  It wasn't designed and overly constrained the way most MMOs do it.  For example, in WoW they increasingly neutered PvP by shoving more and more of it into irrelevant instanced arenas.

    Edited for clarity. It's a matter of taste, not fact, so I'm not really interested. Not in this thread at least.

    vylo said:

    On the subject of trains and such, it's not really an issue on PvP servers, but on PvE servers it seems like a balancing act.  There were times in EQ on PvE servers where you couldn't really do much about someone training you repeatedly, and it was frustrating.  But I think the larger point about all this is that it seems good for players to be able to affect each other, in both negative and positive ways.  If you put every player in a protective bubble so they can't be affected negatively by others, you reduce the dynamic range of possible experience in the game, and you will probably end up with a more sterile game where it's not that meaningful who your friends and enemies are.

    Allowing people to spam racism in general chat channels technically increases the "dynamic range of possible experience", but no one is going to convince me that it would be a good thing to allow to occur. The same goes for cheating (speed hacking, etc.).

    I understand that it is categroically different than something like training, but it still applies. There is a line as to what is allowable in a game. This debate should be centered around where that line is. If someone is going to draw that line in such a way that it allows training, it would probably be prudent to provide arguments in favor of training as a mechanic itself.

    Generalized statements such as "it makes the game sterile" do not provide any merit for specific actions being allowable as opposed to others, as outlined above.


    This post was edited by Liav at July 17, 2017 11:42 PM PDT
    • 1248 posts
    July 17, 2017 8:52 PM PDT

    I agree with the OP.  That said, I also feel it would be great to have a world that allows players to truly carve out roles as "heroes" just like they could "villains."  I have delved into specific ideas on how this can be accomplished on other threads, so I'm not going to derail this one. Most good stories have both good guys and bad guys ... and the majority of my favorite movies all-time featured some sort of tragic loss with at least one of the main characters.  If you want Terminus to feel "worldly" then you need to let people do people things ... and just like in the real world, reward/punish them appropriately.


    This post was edited by oneADseven at July 17, 2017 8:53 PM PDT
    • 39 posts
    July 17, 2017 9:35 PM PDT

    vylo said:

    EQ's PvP was awful

     I'd argue that EQ1 had the best PvP of any MMO ever made, and I've played most of them.  It wasn't designed and overly constrained the way most MMOs do it.  For example, in WoW they increasingly neutered PvP by shoving more and more of it into irrelevant instanced arenas.

     On the subject of trains and such, it's not really an issue on PvP servers, but on PvE servers it seems like a balancing act.  There were times in EQ on PvE servers where you couldn't really do much about someone training you repeatedly, and it was frustrating.  But I think the larger point about all this is that it seems good for players to be able to affect each other, in both negative and positive ways.  If you put every player in a protective bubble so they can't be affected negatively by others, you reduce the dynamic range of possible experience in the game, and you will probably end up with a more sterile game where it's not that meaningful who your friends and enemies are.

    Quoting for agreement on the second paragraph (since I can't just like the post).

    • 80 posts
    July 17, 2017 11:25 PM PDT

    Maybe stickin my head in a hornet's nest here but.....

    What i read is some here whant "mechanics" and allowance to make other players playing harder right? Cus thats life ? In real life we have some things called law enforcment wich is there to govern this behavier i could be possitiv to this if VR could put some mecanich in wich counted your "crimes" and made it hard for us if we get tagged to go into villages and maybe have random patrols in "suburban" areas. I even would suggest a kind of "volantary tax" system with players going to the marshall and give money to enforce law's (tricky balance here with cost) and make our Perception skill matter if someone make's  a decission to make some one else live harder and that player's perception "notice" it as in high enough could help tag the other players villan counter. If this kind of system is active i can agree to all the "this is life" but without law enforcment ingame i cant realy agree to a "this is live" ingame as it real not , and take all this with a grain of salt plz its an ide. In eso when they inplemented thievery and hideouts it got realy funn and dangerous with a working mechanic so it should be possible. If so there could be mechanics for a player to warn npc's of an attack as in players doin story and other such stuff, but sayin trainin is part of game cus life is tuff is like stealing candy from kids as players wich are trained realy dont have a mecanic to deal with it put that in and im fine but then we approach a semi PvP game it gets very tricky.

    Well just some early morning thought while waiting for my morning coffe to kick my damaged brain into gear. And plz read this right i do not whant to stop/flame  your discussion just whant to say if you whant "life is tuff" then there have to be a system for it part from community imo.

    PS

    Sorry if i dont follow OP's point but it has moved  past that imo so i whanted to see if this could lead to someting new in MMO world.

    "Edit" And plz read with my post with tollerance eng is not my language so there is alot of spellin misses and gramas sorry for that


    This post was edited by Stratoz at July 17, 2017 11:28 PM PDT
    • 29 posts
    July 18, 2017 1:24 AM PDT

    vylo said:

     I'd argue that EQ1 had the best PvP of any MMO ever made, and I've played most of them.  It wasn't designed and overly constrained the way most MMOs do it.  For example, in WoW they increasingly neutered PvP by shoving more and more of it into irrelevant instanced arenas

     

    I completely agree. This is from someone who has played about every PvP MMORPG ever made. If someone thinks EQ1 PvP was awful; it was either too hardcore for them, they weren't any good at, or a combination of both. 


    This post was edited by Zybane at July 18, 2017 1:26 AM PDT
    • 8 posts
    July 18, 2017 3:36 AM PDT

    Liav said:

    Allowing people to spam racism in general chat channels technically increases the "dynamic range of possible experience", but no one is going to convince me that it would be a good thing to allow to occur. The same goes for cheating (speed hacking, etc.).

    But nobody here is advocating for cheating and racism. This is a straw man. Instead, some people here are advocating for meaningful and challenging gameplay where players can affect other players in good and bad ways within the game. Of course there are going to boundaries to this, although it would be interesting if in the future a game is developed where players can do absolutely anything they want to each other.

    If someone is going to draw that line in such a way that it allows training, it would probably be prudent to provide arguments in favor of training as a mechanic itself.

    Honestly, it’s something you either get or you don’t. The possibility of another player purposely or accidentally training mobs brings excitement to the game for me. It also more accurately represents the nature of our world. There are no “locked encounters” in reality. And it’s like another poster has already said: the more freedom each player is given, the more interesting the experiences. How much variation is there with locked encounters? Not much. It’s boring by nature. Dangerous and unpredictable are interesting.

    Generalized statements such as "it makes the game sterile" do not provide any merit for specific actions being allowable as opposed to others, as outlined above.


    This is largely a matter of taste. Like I said earlier, some people enjoy castrated gameplay because there’s no chance for them to be frustrated. Others don’t. However, some arguments have been brought forth for training; and the only argument I’ve seen so far against training has been, “It makes me mad.” That’s not a particularly strong argument. What’s interesting though is that it reinforces the pro training arguments. Of course being trained is frustrating, but the threat of it brings excitement. That’s the point. It’s sort of like a person saying, “I don’t like hit points because if an enemy hits me enough, then I’ll die, which will make me angry. Therefore, let’s make all players invulnerable.” But isn’t the threat of dying what makes combat exciting? In other words, death in itself is frustrating and yet it brings excitement to the game. The same holds true for training. The difference between you and me is you seem to have arbitrarily drawn your line a little earlier without providing any good reason except to say, "I can't go any further or I'll get too mad." I could go all the way. I'm ready for a game where players can do whatever they want. How cool would that be? A game where players can do absolutely anything... with swords, magic, elves, and dragons. That'd be amazing. What's interesting about this concept is that it would fix intentional training. How? Because players would band together and kill the guy, laugh at his body, and then take his stuff.


    This post was edited by manofyesterday at July 18, 2017 3:45 AM PDT
    • 429 posts
    July 18, 2017 4:28 AM PDT

    Playing with strangers,their actions have most weight initially.
    You can only see those good and bad actions ,not the person.And it would be a shame if bridges are burned before you actually get the chance to get to know people.
    Those initial actions do not define the person behind it if you think about it.But on first contact with people they often mean make or break for social bonds.
    If you are only able to see the terrible side of someone,that is what they'll show back;their terrible side.
    And do we really want to set the stage for an unpleasant ,toxic community where everyone vents their frustrations on players they don't even know?
    If you want to achieve an embracing community I think that will achieve the opposite.

    There is a difference between friends you bring and total strangers too
    When friends mess around with you,it is not a reason to abandon them,you often think "well,he's just being silly"
    With friends,people don't have the convenience of the internet anonymity cloak in attempts to take your happiness away.
    And those who are out there to take away your happiness to feel better themselves ,get what they want if they are able to get to you.
    If they can't push your buttons ,you are no *fun* to play with to them.
    They might as well go beat a rock that is immune to their attacks


    Yes,most here want emergent gameplay,no easy-mode game.

    chenzeme said:
    I dont think there is any excuse for intentionally setting out to ruin game play for people. I would argue that this kind of behaviour is more in line with PVP based gameplay that should not part of a PVE environment.

    agree

    • 94 posts
    July 18, 2017 4:36 AM PDT

    i agree with manofyesterday and Liav, eventhough they seem to disagree with eachther... strange.

    my opinion on this: i think training and other player behavor (good or bad) makes a more interessteing gameplay and a better comunity. therefore i'm fine if player have the possibility to train others.

    on the other hand such bad behavior must have consequences. i dont want to be helpless in this kind of situation either, which seems often the case on a pve server. reporting a player who kept intentionally training me multiple time/steal my rare, etc doesnt really satisfy my desire for payback. also those reports seems to have no impact most of the time and punishment seems to handholding. i mean a 1-3 day ban 6 months later? cmon...that's no punishment, that's a joke. Getting him kicked out of his guild might be a start (when guilds matter again). ffa pvp seems a good solution to me but i'm searching for a solution for this problem on a pure pve server.

     

    • 429 posts
    July 18, 2017 7:09 AM PDT

    The helplessness in this kind of situation is what often feeds into the frustrations.
    And the problem is that nothing can satisfy the desire for payback here,also because the game mode is intended to be played against environment
    The one you want to get revenge at is often *untouchable*,so you vent it in other ways that often create a very unpleasant,rotten atmosphere while interacting with other people.
    Unable to satisfy the desire for payback.
    Many dwell on the negative and painful experiences in life,even cherish them and seek encouragement from friends "you should know all that I've been through"
    Expecting friends to reply "you poor thing you deserve more and better than that,we'll get the ******* that has done this to you" Things would be easier if people could just let it all go.

    Another interesting bit in the NPC disposition and behavior section is that NPC movement speeds may vary if they feel outmatched or feel that they are lured into a trap.
    Which also takes me back to the initial viewpoint ;they are capable of so much more now,compared to all these years ago .Able to take all of this beyond our wildest dreams

    Also how these invading forces from the zone events will affect this ,has to be seen.


    This post was edited by Fluffy at July 18, 2017 7:18 AM PDT