[MUD-Dev] RE: The Permadeath of PvP (was RE: Hiding the Numbers (was Re: [M UD-Dev] Maintaining fiction.)

[Lee Sheldon]

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Rickey
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 1:56 PM
To: mud-dev at kanga.nu
Subject: Re: [MUD-Dev] RE: The Permadeath of PvP (was RE: Hiding the
Numbers (was Re: [M UD-Dev] Maintaining fiction.)

Dave,

Thanks for the thoughtful response!  I'll try to make my way through
it below.

>> If you aren't Ks, Why place as much emphasis, both in the game
>> and in the face you present to the public, on PkP as you do?

> The very first reason is that the "Big Three" represent an
> apparent aberration in online games.  UO ran into some scaling
> problems, that caused PvP issues to be overwhelmingly dominated by
> "Griefer" issues.

<snip>

> That was the background against which the "Big Three" were
> developed or re-developed.  However, before that, most, nearly
> all, online games had been *inherently* PvP.  Not just the earlier
> OLRPG's, which were mostly only incidentally PvP environments, but
> things like Air Warrior, MPBT, NetTrek, the list goes on.  Even
> the "Casual Games" like online backgammon are played against other
> players, and that was always their attraction.

So, the first reason you'd say people concentrate on PkP is that
historically online games have included it?  Can't argue with that.

> So, at one level, you have a general trend with these glaring
> exceptions, all of them stemming from a single causational focus.
> If you can deal with that cause, neutralize it in future designs,
> the trend *should* work for you, as compared to those who are
> bucking the trend.

If griefers can be checked, coralled, isolated, somehow made a
non-issue, the major problem people have with PkP will be solved?  I
see the qualifier *should* there. :)

Okay, I can see where it might make PkP more palatible to a wider
audience, but only of people who simply want PkP that works better.
I'm not sure that addresses my concern about others who might be put
off simply by the fact that PkP (however deftly done) is in a game.
In other posts people have pointed out that while PkP may attract
more accomplished players, it doesn't necessarily seem to attract
better socialized ones.  So, assuming common areas where PkPs and
non-PkPs will interact, we've only protected one group from dying at
the hands of the other.  Even without blatant griefers the odds are
increased that the interactions will be less harmonious than without
PkPs at all.  I've got this image (not my own) of worthy citizens
being jostled and shoved aside by swaggering ruffians.  The jostling
and shoving may be physical, verbal, or spiritual.  It's been
pointed out elsewhere how much role-playing takes a hit in these
situations.

I hope it's clear I'm not suggesting -all- PkPs are griefers.  Of
course not.  But our craft is all about probablities.  And PkP
simply seems to me to increase the odds of, shall we say,
"icompatible" encounters?

> Next, there's the "Elder Game" issue.  Prior to UO, PvP in OLRPG's
> was generally the province of the "maxed out" player, once you had
> exhausted the PvE environment you turned to PvP to keep things
> interesting.

Yes, this has been brought up before, and I agree it has been a
major factor.

> In spite of efficiencies of scale, it has proved impossible to
> keep up with the player's ability to consume PvE content.  The
> very first step towards putting the players to work entertaining
> each other is to integrate PvP.  There's an inherent pointlessness
> to the PvE game, you get stronger to fight stronger NPC's to get
> better loot to get stronger....

Except... except... in EQ where the 20% of PkPs are effectively
isolated from the rest, most on other servers (no common areas for
all that jostling), 80% of the players are still hooked into the
elder game.  The elder game is surpassingly strange of course.
Griefers, or simple bullies have created their own PkP in a non-PkP
world by fighting over spawns, training, and so on.  They take their
PkP to message boards as well.  Yet, a large part of the population
appears suffiently entertained by expansion packs, new loot and so
on.  They're keeping the achievers happy at least, a huge group by
all accounts.

> PvP potentially adds a sense of purpose to the long-time player's
> world.

I would think it would only add that sense of purpose to the people
who need that style of conflict to enjoy themselves.

> And the last is simply a calculated risk: Since we cannot hope to
> match the resources of SOE/EA/MS at generating PvE content
> (regardless of inefficiencies, they can simply outspend us by an
> order of magnitude), our only hope to make a significant inroad
> into their market dominance is to "hit them where they ain't," and
> develop a PvP-integrated environment.  The "calculated" part of
> that risk comes from the first two reasons.

Competing with the big guys is always a daunting prospect.  I've
spent most of my game-design career doing it.  But you do highlight
for me what remains an unfortunate paradigm: the perception of the
extreme difficulty to the point of impossibility of generating
-enough- (whatever enough might be) PvE content, especially with
limited resources.  I realize it's a moot point in DAoC's case.
You've planted your seeds, and you're howing your rows.  But PvE
content can be generated much more simply and swiftly than most
people in our industry seem to be able to imagine.  AC doesn't fall
down in my opinion because of a lack of ongoing story.  It falls
down because of how uninteresting that story is, and how few players
are hooked into it.  Those are crimes of omission, not commission.

But the perception still persists.  As a result the options seem so
limited.  As a result the experiences do too.

I think it's good that some persistent worlds try to go all the way
PkP as DAoC and WWII Online.  If done as well as they hope it will
be... at least demonstrably better than the others who only offer
partial PkP... who know?  Maybe we'll eventually see a major
persistent world with none.

Lee

_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev