[MUD-Dev] RE: Value of PvP avatars (was: To Kill an Avatar)

[Ron Gabbard]

From: "Castronova, Edward" <ecastronova at Exchange.FULLERTON.EDU>

> The best evidence that PvP is a less fun way to play, for the
> average player, is not in the price of PvP avatars but in the fact
> that PvP servers seem to have low populations relative to non-PvP
> servers in the same game. If Lineage offered Blue servers, I
> wonder how many people would play the game Red?

Basing the popularity of a product feature on customer use (or
non-use in this case) works if you have an efficient market.
However, one of the components of having an efficient market is that
the customer has all the information they need from which to make an
informed decision as to their own best self-interest.  This isn't
the case regarding PvP as many people have had one bad experience
and erroneously attributed to the PvP attribute or played PvP in a
game that wasn't designed for it.  Additionally, there are other
factors that influence the PvP experience that are a by-product, but
not a direct attribute, of PvP play, such as a typically younger
customer base and more "IPWNZU" characters and fewer "Frodos" than
their PvE counterparts.  There are so many different factors that go
into customer acceptance of PvPcentric games and servers that
attributing it all to the PvP+ or PvP- factor assumes too much
causality.

Designers haven't helped much in framing customer perception of PvP+
either.  In EQ, you turn in your book and go the route of "chaos"
and your name turns red.  In AC1, you pray at the altar of some
evil-looking god and (if I remember correctly) your dot on the radar
turns red.  The PvP server in AC1 is "DARKTIDE" whereas the other
servers have benign names like "Harvestgain".  Going PvP+ is
presented as some sort of evil choice for those "leet" players that
are antisocial player killers... not necessarily the best way to
market a product feature to a customer base for maximum acceptance.

It's a shame that Shadowbane didn't have a smoother launch.  The
city sieges, detection and elimination of enemy thieves, and PA
self-governance with regards to the ganking of non-affiliated new
players and RPKing seems like a pretty good model that was
working... minus the technical issues and some overall
balancing/game mechanics issues.  It could go a long way towards
giving players a fun FFA PvP+ experience that would break down the
stereotypes associated with PvP.  Hopefully, they'll get the kinks
worked out as it really is a fun game.

Cheers,

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