Reading through the original post, I am sorry but I do not agree on anything you have said.
If this game didn't have PvP, a giant portion of the game would quit almost immediately(I would be gone right off the bat).
In a game like Rift for example, I was 50% PvP, 50% PvE. The only reason why my PvE time was 50% was because of the raids. I was in a large, successful end game raiding guild and that's all we did. Raid..and PvP.
Regrettably, the PvE in this game is as easy as my daughters Hello Kitty games.
In my opinion, PvE wise, there is no thing whatsoever keeping non-casual gamers here to play, other then PvP. PvP needs a major overhaul, and most will say it is also easy, but atleast in PvP you can schedule a premade and have an hour long white knuckle fight with another 5 people. A Challenge, that PvE in this game currently doesn't even remotely come close to matching.
I agree with your comparison of a large menu in a restaurant 100%. With that mentality, what I feel they need to do is hire a dedicated Team at Cryptic that does nothing but introduce new PvP content.
As a competitive person, that in itself I feel would make make the company stronger, and the game better. Why? Because you have a Team that makes PvP content, and a Team that makes PvE content working their hardest to make better quality content then the guys across the hall(so to speak) A competition within the work environment of Cryptic Studios, of whose making the more enjoyable content. Competition breeds better quality..period.
What they also need. Is actual Cryptic GMs who moderate Bots, Gold spammers, and find bugs in the LIVE game. I've said it in countless posts, EQ 1 is my best example. GM's would raid with our guild, and test encounters themselves, or watch us test them, pop and repop boss's, or areas, etc to get real time information on current bugs. Things got fixed very quickly. There was no such thing as bugs for months at a time. It didn't exist, because of this.
Bottom line. This is a cash cow game, that is producing less, and less cash, because Cryptic fails to work hard at fixing the problems.
This sums up every issue of the game in 1 post.
U R 2 E Z- SENT IV GWF undefeated 16k GS
FaceRoller- regen recovery TR (put on the shelf for now) 14k GS
Supreme CHAOS - IV GF (put on the shelf for now) 16k GS
White Khalifa- tene/hp/regen CW (retired) 11k GS (tene)
Death From Above- TANK ranger 16kGS
(all halfling everything)
At this point I'm not sure what to do with respect to not being allowed to voice and fight for my opposing opinion.
There is nothing respectful about your opinion when you start with "PvP should be removed because"...
It doesn't matter how well reasoned your argument is. If I enjoy PvP (which I do) I'm not going to consider anything you have to say after reading your opening statement.
Changes to PvP? Sure, I'm all for that. Remove it? Screw that...
Oops, sorry to have misread your post. I thought you were the OP defending his position again.
Some posters have made valid points, some have naught but spoken their minds. I actually did not think that my post would enflame the forums this much; sorry for that.
However, most seem to have a grasp of basic psychology. So I think it would be fun to truly explore gaming from that perspective.
1. The Drive to Game
the 'ol son B.F. Skinner unknowingly laid the base for looking at games through a social scientist perspective. He showed that expectancy of a rewards increased the likelihood of displaying a behaviour. As a rewards, he used food (as far as I know) since it is a universal drive for organizms to eat. Ofcourse, this is not applicable, since we do not game for food. We get other rewards. And while it is true that competition is a part of humanity, what most competitive people seem to misunderstand, is that it is not a universally enjoyed past-time. So while competing and trumphing over other is a reward for some, it is not a reward for all.
Enjoyment of competition is considered by evolutionary psychology to be a evolutionary strong trait. But the emergence of humanity has given rise to a evolutionary trait that, if not overshadows, atleast equals competition. This trait is enjoyment of co-operation. However, these two basic enjoyment-factors are not a dichtomy (just google the word) for two reasons. 1st is that they are not mutually exclusive, and 2nd is that they are not nomothetical (google ). Ofcourse, there is some evidence that they exist in all of us, but are primed by what culture we grow up in. Since these theories have as of yet not been applied to international communities of games, this is all hypothetical.
So F that I guess.
3rd is because they are not the only forms rewards can take in a game. Alot play single, or for story. So to state that one trumphs the other is to base such assumptions on opinion, and that never gets us anywhere.
2. The Drive to Spend Money
As I said in an earlier post, I know people who never PvPed that spent alot of money anyways. But such statements are void since all we would do is argue in a circle. So how do we understand spending money? Well, this one becomes harder, because it is not as easily explained. Some have tried, and built a new theory-base around the concept, called modern-reenchantment (Why Spend Real Money on Virtual Goods? : Placing Microtransactions in the Context of Modern Re-Enchantment, http://urn.nb.no/URN:NBN:no-37748 , 2013) What they find is that micro-transactions is largley based on involvement in the virtual world. In essence, it is part of your life. Now, I am not going to read the entire study, so if someone wants to contend the following, reading the entire study would give you a good base. I stick to the abstract.
So, returning to involvement in the virtual world. Involvement could ofcourse be competetive play, but it could also be cooperative play, or explorative play. So one is not more important than the other in this regard.
3. Community
Many have touched on this, so I thought I had to as well. Someone used the words quality and quantity. I guess it comes down to how you percieve quality. To me it is about enjoyment, to some it is min-maxing. However, none of those areas are exclusive to any version of gaming, the exception perhaps exploratory.
HOWEVER, competition breeds a patrinizing culture. This is not even up for discussion, considering that the Robbers Cove experiments have been repeated over and over again in different cultures, with different populations (social scientific defenition of population). If you want a gaming equivalent, please go to the HotN and LoL forums. If you want a theory in practice, google the Jigzaw-classroom
So if it is about one better than the other, in all domains the two remain equal based on hypothesis derived from theoretical science. Except when it comes to community, where no hypothesis is needed, only how much you value friendliness.
But my original intention was not in any way to state that competetive play is not an important part of games, In fact, I enjoy alot of competetive play myself.
So why then did I make the OP? Simple, it seems that cryptic has a smaller team than most companies, but still try to produce content to fill the game. From this perspective I thought it might be better to limit the scope. Instead of a jack of all trades, be the master of one.
We can all agree that we love the combat-system? I know I do. So I understand why people want to see this game focused more on PvP. But for me, I enjoy cooperation the most, and go to other games for competition when I feel the urge. And I think that NW will become a better game if it stops trying to cater to all versions of gaming. If it became more quality than quantity of experience, I think it would see an increase in expenditure and community growth, no matter what the numbers are now. I do not think it matters which version PW would choose, only that I would like to see it turn to PvE competetive-dungeon-clearing-of-the-week.
Just a final word. On the subject of competition and quality. It is not that simple, and there is no period applied here. In fact, competition often hurt quality as much as improve it, since it breeds stress and easy paths. It shifts the focus of the why of production, and it often breeds a "win at all costs" culture. I am not contradicting you here. Just the "period" part. Please consider what is truth, and your truth. I know mine is that competition often puts me off, but enjoyment of creation and seing people enjoy me creation, gives me a boost that trumphs any competition. This is called "flow" (google: positive psychology AND flow) and "positive feedback".
Sorry about my response. I totally misread your first statement and just jumped into a post. I think we're on the same side here. I enjoy PvP quite a bit, and I find any call to remove it as being disrespectful.
Just a final word. On the subject of competition and quality. It is not that simple, and there is no period applied here. In fact, competition often hurt quality as much as improve it, since it breeds stress and easy paths. It shifts the focus of the why of production, and it often breeds a "win at all costs" culture. I am not contradicting you here. Just the "period" part. Please consider what is truth, and your truth. I know mine is that competition often puts me off, but enjoyment of creation and seing people enjoy me creation, gives me a boost that trumphs any competition. This is called "flow" (google: positive psychology AND flow) and "positive feedback".
I think you are overthinking a very simple, truthful statement.
Some people don't like competition, that's fine. I get it. Some people are put off by competition because they don't want to be put on the spot, or just want to relax, and find competition stressful. Which is all fine and good, whatever a persons reasons for liking, or disliking any form of competition.
But, competition as a whole, is proven time and time again to breed "better", in the sense of the word, in any category that you can possibly "compete" in.
Having "One" is fine. People get used to it, because there is only "one". Monopoly if you will. But bring in 2? Now we have a competition. A consumers choice. A..or B. Which one is "better"? Now, we have a competition. A, and B, are going to be forced to increase "something", lower costs, better customer service, more perks, etc etc etc. Bottom line. Competition just increased the product by way of nature. You cant change it, it just happens.
Sports. Would you watch basketball if it was just 5 guys shooting the ball in the hoop for no reason at all, other then to just put a bouncy ball into a hoop? Some would I spose, moral of the story is no, you wouldn't. Because it would be boring. Now, add 5 other guys into the mix, and give them a goal. Now it becomes interesting, because each team, will naturally want to be the victor.
Hell, Competition has been making "Man" better since Men were first put on this earth. We got better because we, whether we liked, or understood it or not, were competing with each other over everything.
So your truth, my truth, his or her truth it makes no difference. Competition in the very general sense, has always proven to make "better".
Not quite how competition works in nature. It doesn't make either side better, it simply tends to kill the worse one.
And of course in nature the cheetas can't pay to slot tenebs so they can one-shot gazelles... :P
I think my problem with PvP is it encourages a very aggressive mindset, both because it's tougher (human opponents won't sit back and wait for you to recover, so ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK ARGGHRGEBBBLEE) and because the satisfaction of beating a person is much more rewarding on a very basic level, than the satisfaction of beating a programmed bit of code.
Sure, at the very top end things tend to level out as everyone is sorta A) good, and seeing the same faces over and over again, so manners count for more, but on the way up there you encounter an awful, awful lot of truly terrible people. Massively overgeared people who just join to pugstomp and quit as soon as they die (once). Spawncampers. Trash talkers. Bots. Oh so many bots.
I find this aggressive, GRARR ME SO GUD attitude tends to spill over into PvE more than I'd like. Plus of course PvP leads to lots of "balance fixes" which make no sense whatsoever in PvE. Sure, you could argue that PvE is easy enough anyway (well, you could. I couldn't, coz I'm not that awesome) but it still hurts to have a useful skill suddenly become trash just because a whole load of TRs who can't dodge were complaining too much (or similar).
Sorry, I have to answer Munkey81 here. If this is power-posting, I apologize and accept any reprecussions.
Having a simplistic understanding does not make you right.
There is a difference between sports and spectator sports (sports, derived from desporte, old french, meaning relaxation/ enjoyment).
Humanity has not biologically changed much in 18 000 years (upper paleolithic era)
Competition was not the cornerstone of society, cooperation was.
Don't patronize me with a simplistic version of markets. Monopoly is not mandatory in an area where co-operation trumphs competition. And to sum up economics like you did is in essence a falsehood and in practice a direct lie.
Viewing the world in absolutes is the cornerstone of the sith.
Truth does not exists, only versions of it.
I don't get put off by competition because "it puts me on the spot". I dont LIKE it because it shifts the focus of what I am working on. Some people need competition because they don't care about their activities unless an external gratification can be had. I am encouraged by internal gratification. Competition adds nothing to the quality of my work, it only serves to force a comparison. Which in turn creates a negative and territorial communication between who-ever I am forced to compete with. Instead we could be working together to be more than the sum of our parts.
"So your truth, my truth, his or her truth it makes no difference. Competition in the very general sense, has always proven to make "better".".
- Darth Sidious
Sorry, I have to answer Munkey81 here. If this is power-posting, I apologize and accept any reprecussions.
Having a simplistic understanding does not make you right.
There is a difference between sports and spectator sports (sports, derived from desporte, old french, meaning relaxation/ enjoyment).
Humanity has not biologically changed much in 18 000 years (upper paleolithic era)
Competition was not the cornerstone of society, cooperation was.
Don't patronize me with a simplistic version of markets. Monopoly is not mandatory in an area where co-operation trumphs competition. And to sum up economics like you did is in essence a falsehood and in practice a direct lie.
Viewing the world in absolutes is the cornerstone of the sith.
Truth does not exists, only versions of it.
I don't get put off by competition because "it puts me on the spot". I dont LIKE it because it shifts the focus of what I am working on. Some people need competition because they don't care about their activities unless an external gratification can be had. I am encouraged by internal gratification. Competition adds nothing to the quality of my work, it only serves to force a comparison. Which in turn creates a negative and territorial communication between who-ever I am forced to compete with. Instead we could be working together to be more than the sum of our parts.
"So your truth, my truth, his or her truth it makes no difference. Competition in the very general sense, has always proven to make "better".".
- Darth Sidious
I guess you and I will have to agree to disagree then
I don't feel it as being "simplistic" at all. Some things in life are just way over thought. Some things are just that...simple. We have competition in every single aspect of our current world.
Saying that humanity hasn't changed much since the beginning is...sorta true. But, even at the beginning..there was competition. Tests of will, tests of wit, tests of strength. Who can throw the boulder further kinda stuff.
I used the word "Monopoly" to help describe what I was talking about, not sure what your mean by saying cooperation trumphs competition?
I wasnt talking about you personally either, I was saying "you" in the general sense. That being said however, you mentioned yourself as competition in your personal work environment being counter productive in its value of your work. That, is a personal opinion..I don't even know what you do, but I know that competition is involved You are providing a service if you will, of which so are other people. The end goal, whether its your personal goal or not, is to be better then the latter, as too serve, sell and be more wanted.
Competition is everywhere my friend!
It makes the world better, by providing more options, and "generally" will HELP to increase the value/quality.
Sorry about my response. I totally misread your first statement and just jumped into a post. I think we're on the same side here. I enjoy PvP quite a bit, and I find any call to remove it as being disrespectful.
I would encourage you to change this perspective, not just here, but in life as well. An opinion is not disrespectful simply because it does not fall in line with your own or goes against something you prefer or believe in.
Furthermore, I find that being so dismissive of an opinion, utterly refusing to even entertain their position, or read their opinion on a particular subject to be the true disrespect in a discussion such as this.
There is absolutely nothing disrespectful about stating his opinion the way he did, and I challenge you to keep an open mind and approach things in a more constructive manner in the future.
I hope you take this as constructive criticism and not ill-natured nor disrespectful towards you or your opinion.
Well, we busted 100 post mark. Some good arguments where made. But I think this thread is officially been changhai:ed.
Thanx all for participating
0
twstdechoMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 630Bounty Hunter
edited December 2013
Spellwarden,
I agree with a lot of what you said here, and I can be a highly competitive person.
To me, D&D has always been about cooperation, not competition. Always about working together, as a team, finding your way through a story, a plot-line together, growing as a team and building each other up, not as individuals, but as a group to support and defend one another.
That's not to say other's experiences are all the same as my own, but every PnP gaming group I have ever been a part of shared this sense of cooperation, this sense of camaraderie.
I believe the overall point of "pick what you want to be, focus on, and be great at it" is lost on some, and of course, some simply disagree, but I've often found that focus and that ability to be head and shoulders above the "competition" far more important than having more options but not being as good across the board.
There are plenty of PvP-centric games available that really knock PvP out of the park, and some PvE games that do the same for their respective focus. Given the nature of Neverwinter, and it's roots in D&D, I think it could be an absolutely amazing PvE game if developers had the ability to focus purely on that aspect instead of spreading themselves thin trying to be everything for everyone (so to speak).
Heck, at this point, you wouldn't even have to get rid of PvP, leave it as is with the message from the developers that the focus is PvE, and PvP will not be focused on, nor come into play in terms of balancing etc. This lets the developers focus on making the PvE experience the best possible experience they can, without worrying about how power/feat changes will impact PvP, only PvE.
Certainly this would lead to imbalanced PvP, but if it leads to a better community, a better PvE game in general and improved content, I'd certainly be all for it.
Now, certainly, someone could bring up the flip side to that argument and point out that if they ignored PvE and focused purely on PvP, they could make a fantastic PvP experience. While that also holds true, I point back to the origins, to the root of the D&D experience, and suggest that a PvP-centric game would be better served with different course material.
I would encourage you to change this perspective, not just here, but in life as well. An opinion is not disrespectful simply because it does not fall in line with your own or goes against something you prefer or believe in.
Furthermore, I find that being so dismissive of an opinion, utterly refusing to even entertain their position, or read their opinion on a particular subject to be the true disrespect in a discussion such as this.
There is absolutely nothing disrespectful about stating his opinion the way he did, and I challenge you to keep an open mind and approach things in a more constructive manner in the future.
I hope you take this as constructive criticism and not ill-natured nor disrespectful towards you or your opinion.
Be well.
Normally I would agree with you, but when one side of the argument is calling for such an extreme measure, why would you compromise if you're on the other side of the argument? If you enjoy PvP in this game, why would you agree with someone who only plays PvE and has no stake in the matter? It seems rather ridiculous to me that the OP would think that those who enjoy PvP would consider an argument that begins with "PvP should be removed from this game". That's going to be fighting words to anyone who enjoys PvP.
But that is beside the point. I am not saying that everyone is polarized in the slightest. I am just saying that you can play more than 1 game. If you got two games that provide a more fun experience respectivley in their own domain, would you not play both?
This is the sort of response that ticks me off, especially given the OP's "Keep an open mind, just hear me out" routine.
So you're saying that if I like PvP, I should just go play some other game? Don't you think that's a bit dismissive? I've been playing THIS game for about 7 months. I've put quite a bit time and effort into gearing my character. But yeah, I should quit because you think PvP is taking away from your experience so I should just go play another game...
How in anyway does this resemble a reasonable argument that should be considered by those who enjoy PvP in THIS game?
To answer Ikeepit3hunna: I don't have any statistics on what player-base buys the most zen, or even why they buy the zen. Unless you have such sources, and can link them. Your statement is a fable. And as such you might as well say: Because Unicorns would stop to exists, and therefore neverwinter would not recive enough FBI funding.
Anecdotal statements should be presented as arguments, and not as facts. Sorry, you failed.
While I agree that the population is not very large, and as such, this is actually more anecdotal. I would still point you in the direction of this poll
71%? your counting with lvl 1-60's then i guess....
Anyways in the pve guild im in noone has bought anything except character slots.
In the pvp guild im in 100% have spent ****loads of money on the game.
Their main income is from PVP, once you PVE your not really as dependent on gear as you are in PVP.
Besides that, its easy too gain cash running fast runs thro CN, which means you dont need too buy any ZEN.
I do agree that there should be higher level dungeon, but honestly if I wouldnt be both in a pve and pvp guild I would QUIT the game for sure.
The only sad thing is there is really not any challanging dungeons out there which means I easily get bored of it, its not like when ur wiping on the same boss for a week before you get it down.
On the pvp state Id really wish there where some other options in order too pvp on a higher lvl so you don't need too meet people whining about others pvping or others beeing "too geared" "p2w".
Ive never heard anyone complain about that in CN or Mala.
Ontopic: I agree with implanting more dungeons, but not at the cost of removing pvp.
I am for improving pvp before adding more dungeons(even doh there is a new one already tomorrow) as they still havent improved pvp since alpha.
I like PvE, aswell as PvP. PvP could use some love - patches, though.
(game modes such as: 1on1, duelling etc. But please, nothing related to ganking aka. 5on5, etc. anymore.)
0
twstdechoMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 630Bounty Hunter
Normally I would agree with you, but when one side of the argument is calling for such an extreme measure, why would you compromise if you're on the other side of the argument? If you enjoy PvP in this game, why would you agree with someone who only plays PvE and has no stake in the matter? It seems rather ridiculous to me that the OP would think that those who enjoy PvP would consider an argument that begins with "PvP should be removed from this game". That's going to be fighting words to anyone who enjoys PvP.
And no disrespect taken. :cool:
There's a difference between compromise and respecting someone's opinion. I didn't suggest you should compromise or that you should agree with him in any way, only that you be respectful and keep an open mind, and at least be willing to read his opinion if you want to join in on the conversation. ;-)
0
twstdechoMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 630Bounty Hunter
This is the sort of response that ticks me off, especially given the OP's "Keep an open mind, just hear me out" routine.
So you're saying that if I like PvP, I should just go play some other game? Don't you think that's a bit dismissive? I've been playing THIS game for about 7 months. I've put quite a bit time and effort into gearing my character. But yeah, I should quit because you think PvP is taking away from your experience so I should just go play another game...
How in anyway does this resemble a reasonable argument that should be considered by those who enjoy PvP in THIS game?
No, what he is saying is that, given the limited resources of a development team, playing one game that focused on PvP and another game that focused on PvE might end up being a better experience overall than one game trying to do both at once. The theory being that each development team could deliver more focus and a better game centered around one particular type of play, and neither would suffer from the presence of the other. Easier to develop a deeper PvE experience when you don't have to take PvP into account and the same rings true in reverse as well.
He isn't saying "if you don't like it, you should leave", there's nothing personal in the argument at all, you just choose to apply the argument that way without looking at the merits of the points he brings to the table.
0
josiahiyonMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 396Arc User
edited December 2013
Agreed that Competition and Cooperation are both drivers to spend and play.
That's why PVP is interesting -- it's competitive play that requires a high degree of coordinated cooperation and strategy modification.
The split between PVE and PVP is not as distinct as some think. PVP is functionally just a challenging version of PVE. You work together with a team to defeat enemies and get some reward.
I would say resources and time spent in this game would be as follows:
30% - Cosmetic items (mounts/companions etc)
55% - PVE content
5% - CTA events/skirmishes
9% - Seasonal Events
1% - PVP "balances" and hot-fixing things like spawn killing.
So your proposing moving that 1% to the 55% and some how thats gona give 20 new dungeons? Hmmm....
Maybe we should take some of that 30% and some of that 55% and allocate a total of 10% to PVP, then maybe well have more than 2 pvp maps in the game and MAYBE just MAYBE a new gametype...
0
twstdechoMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 630Bounty Hunter
Well I would say that classes go through addition 600% testing because they need to be balanced for two game types. Rebalancing with the eb and flow of "flavor of the month" builds add another 200% spacebucks to game creation.
But worst of all is that 5 unicorns is spent on moderating defensive PvP-players. And 6 boxes of oreos goes towards removing frustration from "YOU GUYS SUCK" posts because of CC in PvP.
I know for a fact! that I have talked to people in Zone-chat, and 76.34% of those agree 110% with me. the remainder 4% still agree to 72% with me. But then again, if they have had their coffy, that would add another 16% BEFORE tax.
I know, I know. I used % first. But I feel this is really getting out of hand here.
a very small amount of time is spent on anything (even thoughts) regarding pvp. So taking pvp out doesnt honestly change a thing about the game except for less content and a loss of player base.
I know for a fact! that I have talked to people in Zone-chat, and 76.34% of those agree 110% with me. the remainder 4% still agree to 72% with me. But then again, if they have had their coffy, that would add another 16% BEFORE tax.
I know, I know. I used % first. But I feel this is really getting out of hand here.
So your statistic comes from zone chat with pugs?
great that must mean it means the whole community and not the random pugs (who cry cause they don't have the gear or experience too do anything else) agree with you.
0
twstdechoMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 630Bounty Hunter
a very small amount of time is spent on anything (even thoughts) regarding pvp. So taking pvp out doesnt honestly change a thing about the game except for less content and a loss of player base.
I would disagree with this, and I would suggest to you that every single change around character powers, feats etc. takes a considerable amount of time regarding PvP "balance" into account.
End result is you get powers/feats that try to target both PvE and PvP without making either seem over powered. That very balancing act is the point. If it didn't exist, they could focus on PvE without regarding PvP at all.
A page or two ago, I pointed out that you wouldn't even have to get rid of PvP, just stop worrying about PvP balance at all, and focus on PvE completely. Both from a power/feat perspective, and dungeons in general, to create the best PvE environment you can.
In that case, your "PvP" balance becomes: "All characters are available to all players, if you think one particular class is overpowered, play that class". Not ideal by any means, but it gives them a chance to get back to what, I feel, is the base of this game, co-op D&D dungeon fun.
0
jksgsakfsodshgMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited December 2013
PvP kills should grant 10 points to your team, then its not just a booring "capture the point" thing but some actual PvP fight purpose !
srsly Slezki? You realize that I poked fun at made-up anecdotal use of the % sign right? I used it first (or thereabouts) linking to a poll. But then people started flooding with made up numbers that in their heads sounded legit because it had a % sign attached.
besides, 4% added to 76.4% leaves another 19.6% unaccounted for. But I cannot be more than 110% certain of this, since 96% certain that you cannot be more than 100% certain, unless you occupy atleast 5% of L-space within a period of 5 zaphodillions of a second....
Wait a second... 76,4+4-19,6*e^-3. Remove any 5's since it is a pointless number anyways. Divide by 42, because life and such. Take away all numbers except one 1, two 3s, and one 7. and you have 1337!
Comments
This sums up every issue of the game in 1 post.
FaceRoller- regen recovery TR (put on the shelf for now) 14k GS
Supreme CHAOS - IV GF (put on the shelf for now) 16k GS
White Khalifa- tene/hp/regen CW (retired) 11k GS (tene)
Death From Above- TANK ranger 16kGS
(all halfling everything)
Proud rank 6 of: <Enemy Team>
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
There is nothing respectful about your opinion when you start with "PvP should be removed because"...
It doesn't matter how well reasoned your argument is. If I enjoy PvP (which I do) I'm not going to consider anything you have to say after reading your opening statement.
Changes to PvP? Sure, I'm all for that. Remove it? Screw that...
Oops, sorry to have misread your post. I thought you were the OP defending his position again.
However, most seem to have a grasp of basic psychology. So I think it would be fun to truly explore gaming from that perspective.
1. The Drive to Game
the 'ol son B.F. Skinner unknowingly laid the base for looking at games through a social scientist perspective. He showed that expectancy of a rewards increased the likelihood of displaying a behaviour. As a rewards, he used food (as far as I know) since it is a universal drive for organizms to eat. Ofcourse, this is not applicable, since we do not game for food. We get other rewards. And while it is true that competition is a part of humanity, what most competitive people seem to misunderstand, is that it is not a universally enjoyed past-time. So while competing and trumphing over other is a reward for some, it is not a reward for all.
Enjoyment of competition is considered by evolutionary psychology to be a evolutionary strong trait. But the emergence of humanity has given rise to a evolutionary trait that, if not overshadows, atleast equals competition. This trait is enjoyment of co-operation. However, these two basic enjoyment-factors are not a dichtomy (just google the word) for two reasons. 1st is that they are not mutually exclusive, and 2nd is that they are not nomothetical (google
So F that I guess.
3rd is because they are not the only forms rewards can take in a game. Alot play single, or for story. So to state that one trumphs the other is to base such assumptions on opinion, and that never gets us anywhere.
2. The Drive to Spend Money
As I said in an earlier post, I know people who never PvPed that spent alot of money anyways. But such statements are void since all we would do is argue in a circle. So how do we understand spending money? Well, this one becomes harder, because it is not as easily explained. Some have tried, and built a new theory-base around the concept, called modern-reenchantment (Why Spend Real Money on Virtual Goods? : Placing Microtransactions in the Context of Modern Re-Enchantment, http://urn.nb.no/URN:NBN:no-37748 , 2013) What they find is that micro-transactions is largley based on involvement in the virtual world. In essence, it is part of your life. Now, I am not going to read the entire study, so if someone wants to contend the following, reading the entire study would give you a good base. I stick to the abstract.
So, returning to involvement in the virtual world. Involvement could ofcourse be competetive play, but it could also be cooperative play, or explorative play. So one is not more important than the other in this regard.
3. Community
Many have touched on this, so I thought I had to as well. Someone used the words quality and quantity. I guess it comes down to how you percieve quality. To me it is about enjoyment, to some it is min-maxing. However, none of those areas are exclusive to any version of gaming, the exception perhaps exploratory.
HOWEVER, competition breeds a patrinizing culture. This is not even up for discussion, considering that the Robbers Cove experiments have been repeated over and over again in different cultures, with different populations (social scientific defenition of population). If you want a gaming equivalent, please go to the HotN and LoL forums. If you want a theory in practice, google the Jigzaw-classroom
So if it is about one better than the other, in all domains the two remain equal based on hypothesis derived from theoretical science. Except when it comes to community, where no hypothesis is needed, only how much you value friendliness.
But my original intention was not in any way to state that competetive play is not an important part of games, In fact, I enjoy alot of competetive play myself.
So why then did I make the OP? Simple, it seems that cryptic has a smaller team than most companies, but still try to produce content to fill the game. From this perspective I thought it might be better to limit the scope. Instead of a jack of all trades, be the master of one.
We can all agree that we love the combat-system? I know I do. So I understand why people want to see this game focused more on PvP. But for me, I enjoy cooperation the most, and go to other games for competition when I feel the urge. And I think that NW will become a better game if it stops trying to cater to all versions of gaming. If it became more quality than quantity of experience, I think it would see an increase in expenditure and community growth, no matter what the numbers are now. I do not think it matters which version PW would choose, only that I would like to see it turn to PvE competetive-dungeon-clearing-of-the-week.
Just a final word. On the subject of competition and quality. It is not that simple, and there is no period applied here. In fact, competition often hurt quality as much as improve it, since it breeds stress and easy paths. It shifts the focus of the why of production, and it often breeds a "win at all costs" culture. I am not contradicting you here. Just the "period" part. Please consider what is truth, and your truth. I know mine is that competition often puts me off, but enjoyment of creation and seing people enjoy me creation, gives me a boost that trumphs any competition. This is called "flow" (google: positive psychology AND flow) and "positive feedback".
Sorry about my response. I totally misread your first statement and just jumped into a post. I think we're on the same side here. I enjoy PvP quite a bit, and I find any call to remove it as being disrespectful.
I think you are overthinking a very simple, truthful statement.
Some people don't like competition, that's fine. I get it. Some people are put off by competition because they don't want to be put on the spot, or just want to relax, and find competition stressful. Which is all fine and good, whatever a persons reasons for liking, or disliking any form of competition.
But, competition as a whole, is proven time and time again to breed "better", in the sense of the word, in any category that you can possibly "compete" in.
Having "One" is fine. People get used to it, because there is only "one". Monopoly if you will. But bring in 2? Now we have a competition. A consumers choice. A..or B. Which one is "better"? Now, we have a competition. A, and B, are going to be forced to increase "something", lower costs, better customer service, more perks, etc etc etc. Bottom line. Competition just increased the product by way of nature. You cant change it, it just happens.
Sports. Would you watch basketball if it was just 5 guys shooting the ball in the hoop for no reason at all, other then to just put a bouncy ball into a hoop? Some would I spose, moral of the story is no, you wouldn't. Because it would be boring. Now, add 5 other guys into the mix, and give them a goal. Now it becomes interesting, because each team, will naturally want to be the victor.
Hell, Competition has been making "Man" better since Men were first put on this earth. We got better because we, whether we liked, or understood it or not, were competing with each other over everything.
So your truth, my truth, his or her truth it makes no difference. Competition in the very general sense, has always proven to make "better".
Totally off topic here btw =/
And of course in nature the cheetas can't pay to slot tenebs so they can one-shot gazelles... :P
I think my problem with PvP is it encourages a very aggressive mindset, both because it's tougher (human opponents won't sit back and wait for you to recover, so ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK ARGGHRGEBBBLEE) and because the satisfaction of beating a person is much more rewarding on a very basic level, than the satisfaction of beating a programmed bit of code.
Sure, at the very top end things tend to level out as everyone is sorta A) good, and
I find this aggressive, GRARR ME SO GUD attitude tends to spill over into PvE more than I'd like. Plus of course PvP leads to lots of "balance fixes" which make no sense whatsoever in PvE. Sure, you could argue that PvE is easy enough anyway (well, you could. I couldn't, coz I'm not that awesome) but it still hurts to have a useful skill suddenly become trash just because a whole load of TRs who can't dodge were complaining too much (or similar).
Having a simplistic understanding does not make you right.
There is a difference between sports and spectator sports (sports, derived from desporte, old french, meaning relaxation/ enjoyment).
Humanity has not biologically changed much in 18 000 years (upper paleolithic era)
Competition was not the cornerstone of society, cooperation was.
Don't patronize me with a simplistic version of markets. Monopoly is not mandatory in an area where co-operation trumphs competition. And to sum up economics like you did is in essence a falsehood and in practice a direct lie.
Viewing the world in absolutes is the cornerstone of the sith.
Truth does not exists, only versions of it.
I don't get put off by competition because "it puts me on the spot". I dont LIKE it because it shifts the focus of what I am working on. Some people need competition because they don't care about their activities unless an external gratification can be had. I am encouraged by internal gratification. Competition adds nothing to the quality of my work, it only serves to force a comparison. Which in turn creates a negative and territorial communication between who-ever I am forced to compete with. Instead we could be working together to be more than the sum of our parts.
"So your truth, my truth, his or her truth it makes no difference. Competition in the very general sense, has always proven to make "better".".
- Darth Sidious
I guess you and I will have to agree to disagree then
I don't feel it as being "simplistic" at all. Some things in life are just way over thought. Some things are just that...simple. We have competition in every single aspect of our current world.
Saying that humanity hasn't changed much since the beginning is...sorta true. But, even at the beginning..there was competition. Tests of will, tests of wit, tests of strength. Who can throw the boulder further kinda stuff.
I used the word "Monopoly" to help describe what I was talking about, not sure what your mean by saying cooperation trumphs competition?
I wasnt talking about you personally either, I was saying "you" in the general sense. That being said however, you mentioned yourself as competition in your personal work environment being counter productive in its value of your work. That, is a personal opinion..I don't even know what you do, but I know that competition is involved
Competition is everywhere my friend!
It makes the world better, by providing more options, and "generally" will HELP to increase the value/quality.
Edit:
Signed: Sith Alysin Chains =P
But that leaves me with nothing to say. *pout*
I would encourage you to change this perspective, not just here, but in life as well. An opinion is not disrespectful simply because it does not fall in line with your own or goes against something you prefer or believe in.
Furthermore, I find that being so dismissive of an opinion, utterly refusing to even entertain their position, or read their opinion on a particular subject to be the true disrespect in a discussion such as this.
There is absolutely nothing disrespectful about stating his opinion the way he did, and I challenge you to keep an open mind and approach things in a more constructive manner in the future.
I hope you take this as constructive criticism and not ill-natured nor disrespectful towards you or your opinion.
Be well.
Thanx all for participating
I agree with a lot of what you said here, and I can be a highly competitive person.
To me, D&D has always been about cooperation, not competition. Always about working together, as a team, finding your way through a story, a plot-line together, growing as a team and building each other up, not as individuals, but as a group to support and defend one another.
That's not to say other's experiences are all the same as my own, but every PnP gaming group I have ever been a part of shared this sense of cooperation, this sense of camaraderie.
I believe the overall point of "pick what you want to be, focus on, and be great at it" is lost on some, and of course, some simply disagree, but I've often found that focus and that ability to be head and shoulders above the "competition" far more important than having more options but not being as good across the board.
There are plenty of PvP-centric games available that really knock PvP out of the park, and some PvE games that do the same for their respective focus. Given the nature of Neverwinter, and it's roots in D&D, I think it could be an absolutely amazing PvE game if developers had the ability to focus purely on that aspect instead of spreading themselves thin trying to be everything for everyone (so to speak).
Heck, at this point, you wouldn't even have to get rid of PvP, leave it as is with the message from the developers that the focus is PvE, and PvP will not be focused on, nor come into play in terms of balancing etc. This lets the developers focus on making the PvE experience the best possible experience they can, without worrying about how power/feat changes will impact PvP, only PvE.
Certainly this would lead to imbalanced PvP, but if it leads to a better community, a better PvE game in general and improved content, I'd certainly be all for it.
Now, certainly, someone could bring up the flip side to that argument and point out that if they ignored PvE and focused purely on PvP, they could make a fantastic PvP experience. While that also holds true, I point back to the origins, to the root of the D&D experience, and suggest that a PvP-centric game would be better served with different course material.
Normally I would agree with you, but when one side of the argument is calling for such an extreme measure, why would you compromise if you're on the other side of the argument? If you enjoy PvP in this game, why would you agree with someone who only plays PvE and has no stake in the matter? It seems rather ridiculous to me that the OP would think that those who enjoy PvP would consider an argument that begins with "PvP should be removed from this game". That's going to be fighting words to anyone who enjoys PvP.
And no disrespect taken. :cool:
This is the sort of response that ticks me off, especially given the OP's "Keep an open mind, just hear me out" routine.
So you're saying that if I like PvP, I should just go play some other game? Don't you think that's a bit dismissive? I've been playing THIS game for about 7 months. I've put quite a bit time and effort into gearing my character. But yeah, I should quit because you think PvP is taking away from your experience so I should just go play another game...
How in anyway does this resemble a reasonable argument that should be considered by those who enjoy PvP in THIS game?
71%? your counting with lvl 1-60's then i guess....
Anyways in the pve guild im in noone has bought anything except character slots.
In the pvp guild im in 100% have spent ****loads of money on the game.
Their main income is from PVP, once you PVE your not really as dependent on gear as you are in PVP.
Besides that, its easy too gain cash running fast runs thro CN, which means you dont need too buy any ZEN.
I do agree that there should be higher level dungeon, but honestly if I wouldnt be both in a pve and pvp guild I would QUIT the game for sure.
The only sad thing is there is really not any challanging dungeons out there which means I easily get bored of it, its not like when ur wiping on the same boss for a week before you get it down.
On the pvp state Id really wish there where some other options in order too pvp on a higher lvl so you don't need too meet people whining about others pvping or others beeing "too geared" "p2w".
Ive never heard anyone complain about that in CN or Mala.
Ontopic: I agree with implanting more dungeons, but not at the cost of removing pvp.
I am for improving pvp before adding more dungeons(even doh there is a new one already tomorrow) as they still havent improved pvp since alpha.
(game modes such as: 1on1, duelling etc. But please, nothing related to ganking aka. 5on5, etc. anymore.)
There's a difference between compromise and respecting someone's opinion. I didn't suggest you should compromise or that you should agree with him in any way, only that you be respectful and keep an open mind, and at least be willing to read his opinion if you want to join in on the conversation. ;-)
No, what he is saying is that, given the limited resources of a development team, playing one game that focused on PvP and another game that focused on PvE might end up being a better experience overall than one game trying to do both at once. The theory being that each development team could deliver more focus and a better game centered around one particular type of play, and neither would suffer from the presence of the other. Easier to develop a deeper PvE experience when you don't have to take PvP into account and the same rings true in reverse as well.
He isn't saying "if you don't like it, you should leave", there's nothing personal in the argument at all, you just choose to apply the argument that way without looking at the merits of the points he brings to the table.
That's why PVP is interesting -- it's competitive play that requires a high degree of coordinated cooperation and strategy modification.
The split between PVE and PVP is not as distinct as some think. PVP is functionally just a challenging version of PVE. You work together with a team to defeat enemies and get some reward.
Iyon the Dark
30% - Cosmetic items (mounts/companions etc)
55% - PVE content
5% - CTA events/skirmishes
9% - Seasonal Events
1% - PVP "balances" and hot-fixing things like spawn killing.
So your proposing moving that 1% to the 55% and some how thats gona give 20 new dungeons? Hmmm....
Maybe we should take some of that 30% and some of that 55% and allocate a total of 10% to PVP, then maybe well have more than 2 pvp maps in the game and MAYBE just MAYBE a new gametype...
Which means its greater than 50%. So were in the good.
Fox Stevenson - Sandblast
Oh Wonder - Without You
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
- Dylan Thomas
But worst of all is that 5 unicorns is spent on moderating defensive PvP-players. And 6 boxes of oreos goes towards removing frustration from "YOU GUYS SUCK" posts because of CC in PvP.
I know for a fact! that I have talked to people in Zone-chat, and 76.34% of those agree 110% with me. the remainder 4% still agree to 72% with me. But then again, if they have had their coffy, that would add another 16% BEFORE tax.
I know, I know. I used % first. But I feel this is really getting out of hand here.
Fox Stevenson - Sandblast
Oh Wonder - Without You
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
- Dylan Thomas
a very small amount of time is spent on anything (even thoughts) regarding pvp. So taking pvp out doesnt honestly change a thing about the game except for less content and a loss of player base.
So your statistic comes from zone chat with pugs?
great that must mean it means the whole community and not the random pugs (who cry cause they don't have the gear or experience too do anything else) agree with you.
I would disagree with this, and I would suggest to you that every single change around character powers, feats etc. takes a considerable amount of time regarding PvP "balance" into account.
End result is you get powers/feats that try to target both PvE and PvP without making either seem over powered. That very balancing act is the point. If it didn't exist, they could focus on PvE without regarding PvP at all.
A page or two ago, I pointed out that you wouldn't even have to get rid of PvP, just stop worrying about PvP balance at all, and focus on PvE completely. Both from a power/feat perspective, and dungeons in general, to create the best PvE environment you can.
In that case, your "PvP" balance becomes: "All characters are available to all players, if you think one particular class is overpowered, play that class". Not ideal by any means, but it gives them a chance to get back to what, I feel, is the base of this game, co-op D&D dungeon fun.
besides, 4% added to 76.4% leaves another 19.6% unaccounted for. But I cannot be more than 110% certain of this, since 96% certain that you cannot be more than 100% certain, unless you occupy atleast 5% of L-space within a period of 5 zaphodillions of a second....
Wait a second... 76,4+4-19,6*e^-3. Remove any 5's since it is a pointless number anyways. Divide by 42, because life and such. Take away all numbers except one 1, two 3s, and one 7. and you have 1337!
MY GOD, I proved diddly squat!
Just kidding man