pvp vs pvp
-
@RedRocket said in pvp vs pvp:
Most of the people who are adamantly against PVP are also people who ran from any game where they thought it might happen before ever giving that game a chance.
If you like PVP - more power to you. I don’t have any problem with people playing/running games that do not align with my personal tastes.
But many of us in this thread are speaking of actual things that have happened. We gave the games (plural) chances (plural) and we didn’t have fun. Your characterization of the anti-PVP conclusion is very dismissive.
It’s highly unlikely staff are going to make you fight to the death over some random encounter with zero IC motivation.
I have literally had this occur on a PVP game before, and know of others who also have.
I also know the only games that I remember 30 years later are the games that there was danger of dying on. What do I remember about the “safe” games where everything is negotiated ahead of time and there are never any surprises because everything had to be approved by a +job first? Not much.
Okay? I have plenty of fun, detailed memories from the “safe” games and mostly unpleasant ones from the PVP/permadeath games. All that means is that we like different things. That doesn’t make what you like superior to what I like (or vice-versa).
-
Running from a game that involves some kind of play you have tried before and don’t enjoy is a rational thing to do.
-
You know, I kinda don’t care if anyone leaves a PvP game without giving it a chance. At least they know what they want out of their RP experience and are mature enough to recognise it. A PvP game absolutely won’t benefit from a population of players who don’t like PvP and hope desperately it’ll never become a factor.
I like competitive gameplay and all, but I wanna be playing with people who also want that. Let’s allow people to curate their own experience and move on if it isn’t their thing.
-
@Juniper
Right, I’m not sure why self-selecting out of an experience you don’t want is a problem. I don’t think my posts are particularly anti-PvP but I also don’t get much of it and don’t find it worth the aggravation.FWIW I’ve been on PvP games. I’ve been on games that said they were primarily PvE but ‘allowed’ PvP (probably more common in the MUSH sphere), inevitably with very unclear rules and wildly variable types of players who approached the game real, real differently. The first is fine but not for me, the second is a mess that pleases no one.
-
@Third-Eye
I just think that on a game where a core theme of the setting is conflict between factions, making that conflict between players meaningless or even impossible for no IC logical reason makes the game setting just as pointless and boring.It’s like making a game set in the marvel cinematic universe but no one is allowed to play as the heroes or villains, they can only play normal people doing normal things. What’s the point of having a setting with extraordinary things if you are going to ignore them because it might involve conflict?
If you want a safe, casual, roleplay experience, don’t set your game in a world were killing the other guy is the main objective in the theme. It’s lame. Also, it’s false advertising.
MUSHes promise a world of darkness but deliver a world of boredom. They promised us a game of heroes fighting villains and delivered heroes trolling for sex scenes. That’s why the medium died. People will only put up with being disappointed so many times before they just stop trying.
-
@RedRocket said in pvp vs pvp:
If you want a safe, casual, roleplay experience, don’t set your game in a world were killing the other guy is the main objective in the theme. It’s lame. Also, it’s false advertising.
I now fully believe that you regularly kill the other party members in traditional high fantasy adventuring parties because the monsters aren’t enough challenge.
-
@RedRocket said in pvp vs pvp:
MUSHes promise a world of darkness but deliver a world of boredom.
Well, this also explains a lot of your thinking.
MUSH (a code base for online text-based roleplaying) does not equal World of Darkness (a popular TTRPG & LARP setting involving creatures of supernatural origin in varying levels of conflict with each other.)
Plenty of MUSHes are set in settings that aren’t Dark or Grim or anything like that. Hell, one of the most popular MUSHes I can think of in recent years is Arx, and as far as I can tell (Arx players help me if I’m getting it wrong) it’s a Lords & Ladies game that was set in a high fantasy world, and while there was some darkness and nasty bits, they weren’t the regular thing in the game.
-
-
@RedRocket said in pvp vs pvp:
It’s like making a game set in the marvel cinematic universe but no one is allowed to play as the heroes or villains, they can only play normal people doing normal things. What’s the point of having a setting with extraordinary things if you are going to ignore them because it might involve conflict?
Why are you assuming that a lack of PVP means a game with no conflict? There have been plenty of MUs where PCs are only one faction and the antagonists are all NPCs. There can still be tense battles, epic betrayals, Big Darn Hero moments.
I’ll reiterate: it’s fine to enjoy PVP. But this stubborn insistence that it’s the only way to have fun is baffling. Especially when there are plenty of people here explaining why they enjoy a different thing. I may not personally like PVP, and as a game-runner I think it has more cons than pros, but I’m not baffled by why people like it. You do you. Just don’t WrongFun others who disagree.
-
Lame is not a slur when it is used to describe a thing, only when it is used to describe a person.
It’s a synonym for disappointing, weak or unsatisfying that has been used for most of human history dating back to the early Germanic tribes that first used it to describe an animal with a non-functional of overly weak leg. You would put down your horse because it had a lame leg and couldn’t plow a field anymore.
It’s only considered a slur if you say a person is lame because you are advocating for them to be killed.
I’m very clearly not advocating for the murder of the people who run boring games.
-
-
@RedRocket said in pvp vs pvp:
Lame is not a slur when it is used to describe a thing, only when it is used to describe a person.
It’s a synonym for disappointing, weak or unsatisfying that has been used for most of human history dating back to the early Germanic tribes that first used it to describe an animal with a non-functional of overly weak leg. You would put down your horse because it had a lame leg and couldn’t plow a field anymore.
It’s only considered a slur if you say a person is lame because you are advocating for them to be killed.
I’m very clearly not advocating for the murder of the people who run boring games.
The people who have willingly engaged in extended discourse with you should get a medal.
-
-
@Faraday said in pvp vs pvp:
There have been plenty of MUs where PCs are only one faction and the antagonists are all NPCs.
And how’s that working out for you? The games are empty, the players who do still log in mostly sit and idle until one of their click logs in and only then does any rp actually happen.
My original statement still holds true, your way is always going to lead to a game withering away. Putting everyone on the same team means staff takes on the burden of being everyone else in the world. It consolidates the responsibility of creating the content most games are designed around (fighting) to a few already overwhelmed staff members.
From superhero games to world of darkness, the whole hobby spiraled into decline when people started banning conflict and putting safety rails on the content to protect the whiners who complained they got murdered just because they did stuff ICly that should get them murdered.
When the games started being about protecting the feelings of bad actors who instigated trouble then ran to staff for protection it all went to shit.
Staff got tired of it so they just banned anyone from playing anything that could cause even the slightest bit of controversy and the games got more shittified every year.
Look at what is happening with the “collective shout” nonsense on steam and itch.io. This is the same thing played out over a longer timeline. Once you start capitulating to people who make it their life goal to ruin things for everyone they don’t stop. They get off on the second-hand power they are handed. They are never going to be satisfied, you can’t ever appease them enough.
It doesn’t matter what kind of game you are on or even what industry you are looking at, you can still see it happening every year. The slow creep of content getting more bland and restricted to protect the feelings of the professionally fragile.
If someone is facing actual injustice, then I will 100% stand with them, but as long as you try and cater to the people who whine about everything just to create drama, no matter what kind of project you are running, it is doomed to collapse.
If staff had learned to say, “That sounds like a you problem.” The text gaming community might not be a ghost town today.
-
@RedRocket said in pvp vs pvp:
My original statement still holds true, your way is always going to lead to a game withering away. Putting everyone on the same team means staff takes on the burden of being everyone else in the world. It consolidates the responsibility of creating the content most games are designed around (fighting) to a few already overwhelmed staff members.
That sounds like a you problem.
-
@RedRocket said in pvp vs pvp:
Lame is not a slur when it is used to describe a thing, only when it is used to describe a person.
It’s a synonym for disappointing, weak or unsatisfying that has been used for most of human history dating back to the early Germanic tribes that first used it to describe an animal with a non-functional of overly weak leg. You would put down your horse because it had a lame leg and couldn’t plow a field anymore.
It’s only considered a slur if you say a person is lame because you are advocating for them to be killed.
I’m very clearly not advocating for the murder of the people who run boring games.
Absolutely wild and inappropriate when someone says “please don’t use a slur” to go on a weird tirade.
All the red flags (no surprise, given your “GAMES ARE DYING BC THEY DON’T PLAY THE WAY I WANT THEM TO” attitude tho).
-
@NotSanni
I’m not saying that games are dying because they aren’t being run the way I want them to be played. I’m saying that they are dying because they are being run the way a small hand full of whiny forever-victims who instigate the problems they then complain about want.The more generic and baby proofed the games became the more the player base dwindled away. What is happening now isn’t working. What people did then was working. Back in the day there were hundreds of active players on at a time. Now you’re lucky to see five.
Maybe, just maybe, you might want to think about why it worked back then instead of just dismissing the only time the medium was actually successful at retaining a large player base because it hurt the feelings of a few bad actors who just want to stir up shit and make drama.
Every year your player bases shrinks because people don’t find the games engaging and every year you double down on doing the same things that don’t work.
How many times are you going to make the same mistakes? Creating a new game with a different setting that is basically the same thing as the last game that collapsed with a slightly different coat of paint on it is never going to work in the long run.
You need to do something that works and the only thing with a proven track record of working is letting people play what they want to play. It’s probably too late now anyway. Even if you did stop trying to shoehorn everyone into the same bland box I doubt you will be able to entice enough players to try the text only format.
The whiny bitches won. They got what they wanted. The games are exactly the way they wanted them - and that’s why no one is playing them any more.
-
@RedRocket said in pvp vs pvp:
And how’s that working out for you? The games are empty, the players who do still log in mostly sit and idle until one of their click logs in and only then does any rp actually happen.
Worked out awesome for me actually. Many happy players having fun. Thousands of RP logs. Great stories being told. To each their own.
-
-
@RedRocket said in pvp vs pvp:
I’m saying that they are dying because they are being run the way a small hand full of whiny forever-victims who instigate the problems they then complain about want.
The more generic and baby proofed the games became the more the player base dwindled away. What is happening now isn’t working. What people did then was working. Back in the day there were hundreds of active players on at a time. Now you’re lucky to see five.
Maybe, just maybe, you might want to think about why it worked back then instead of just dismissing the only time the medium was actually successful at retaining a large player base because it hurt the feelings of a few bad actors who just want to stir up shit and make drama.
Text-based games are dying because gaming mediums are changing. People who want their dopamine fix have tens of thousands of choices, very few of which need telnet to access. This is no longer the Wild Wild Web 1.0 of unbridled creativity spawned by techological limitations.
Young people getting started go to Discord because that’s where all the RP is now. Thousands upon thousands of servers joinable at a click. Infinite accessibility. MUSHing is kept alive because of a dedicated and committed group and the average age of people in that group is rapidly ticking upwards.
It’s pretty clear now you’re arguing in bad faith. Everyone has their personal preferences, but I don’t see anyone else in this thread so virulently lambasting others for having preferences different from their own.
