DDOGamer: Understanding PvP Hate

[Dribble]

Dribble...
The burden of proof on this statement rests with you, not with me.

In that, you are incorrect.

I am unable to counter an argument that rests solely on "I hate XXX". If you hate ice cream, I am very unlikely to change your mind by simply extolling the virtues of ice cream as I see it. Likewise, I unable to effectively argue against suspect and nebulous "I have 10 years experience with people who like pvp and they are all meanies!". The best I can do there is express severe doubt EVERYONE you met fit that category, mock that kind of generalization, point out that previous experience does not dictate future experience, mention the implementation could be WILDLY different than anything you've seen before and suggest you try for a better argument.

That's the reality.

The opposition to improving or adding to the pvp in DDO has never (and I mean never) included a rational supportive argument free from a counter. Not once. It's an indefensible position for the very reason that, at its most basic level, is "Let's improve DDO". When you strip away all the non-arguments, you almost always end up at "Ya well I don't like pvp and I don't want dev time wasted on it". That's flawed in two very specific ways:
1) You have absolutely zero idea how Turbine may go about adding such a feature. Monster Play, Player vs Monster Dungeons, Competetive 2+ team dungeons, etc.
2) You don't walk into a restaurant and demand everything you don't like come off the menu. If DDO attracts more players, it attracts more profit. With more profit, it enjoys a longer life. Cutting off your nose to spite your face is not a rational standpoint.

If I take a moment to read further into your post, you include other non-arguments. You ruminate on what you believe the devs were thinking years ago and speculate on why the current system is left rotting (note: I was actually here back then, you likely were not. And that was not the public conversation that preceded pvp being added). This is not a relevant fact, point or argument.

You can believe, feel and opine on whatever you like. Those are not arguments though. Those are also not productive places from which to publically oppose people who may actually be interested in genuine discussion.

[rdasca]

Started Playing DDO because it was the closet thing out there to Pen and Paper Dungeons and Dragons.

I don't hate PvP, I just have no interest in it. I have tried PvP in other MMOs and did not care for it there either. If I want to play against another human, I would rather play battlefield or team Fortress or something similar.

Amen!!!

[MsEricka]

And threads like this are yet another reason why I hate PvP. People coming in and giving their opinions and statements and others attempting to flame them because of their differing views. I've probably posted 20 or more times as to why PvP in DDO doesn't work, I don't need to say it again as others in this thread have said exactly how I feel about it.

I don't need to defend or explain my opinion in a thread that isn't about that. This thread is about an "article" that was purely placed on the site to generate page views while having no actual content.

DDOGamer: Understanding PvP Hate
Clearly the very idea of PvP stirs up a lot of unpleasant emotions.

DDOGamer talks about why

This isn't a general games website, it's about DDO. So when a site about DDO talks about PvP then it should really give some information about PvP in DDO, not some experiences someone had in another game.

And no where in that "article" was there any information about WHY people actually hate PvP in DDO.

The article was garbage. Pure trash in fact. And as I said already it is simply there to generate page views and make someone feel good that they took thirty seconds to put together some words. I'm quite surprised that page doesn't have about 1800 advertisements on it like other gaming spamvertising sites.

"Articles" like this do nothing to gain an audience. At least next time log onto one of the servers and ask for random opinions so you can quote them and then pretend to discuss it.

[Dribble]

I've probably posted 20 or more times as to why PvP in DDO doesn't work, I don't need to say it again as others in this thread have said exactly how I feel about it.

*cough*

I've seen you pop your head into every pvp thread and have never seen you post anything constructive or thought provoking. I can sum up your contribution with the following:

- /not signed
- remove pvp
- pvpers are griefers!

No one can argue with you, because you provide absolutely zero rationalization. That's precisely why I said your "hate" is not relevant and your position indefensible. Rather than try to be productive, you've opted to aim for disruptive...well, good on you, I guess. Not sure what you add to the community discussion though.

But hey, prove me wrong. Back up the statement you just made. Of the "20 or more times" you've posted on why pvp in DDO won't work, link 1 (just ONE!) with a single coherant and rational argument included. I know you can't, but I'll pretend to wait. Go on...

/waiting

[wax_on_wax_off]

My long standing suggestion for PVP in DDO: https://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=253062

Cooperative? Tick!
Doesn't rely on balancing? Tick!
PvE themed? Tick!
Revenue generating? Tick!
Proven concept? Tick!
Minimal coding through use of existing maps? Tick!
Provides content for people not interested in PVP (as it can be played without an opposing team)? Tick!

I do hope that DDO sticks around and I still think that it needs a better PVP implementation if it's going to stand the test of time because right now it isn't.

[Entelech]

The story so far:

There are no valid reasons for opposing PVP.

Here are five reasons.

Those aren't valid, because I said no valid reasons exist, and I am obviously right.

Prove it.

No, I don't have to, because I am obviously right.

I'm guessing you have never heard of Russel's Teapot.

[Dribble]

The story so far:

You've yet to give a single valid argument. Since I appear to constantly need to help you interpret your own posts, let's review what you consider arguments, one last time:

- Pvp players are jerks. You base this on some personal observation in DDO (note: since DDO isn't a pvp game, these are primarily pve players btw...) and other games. Your argument is vague, illogical and offers nothing substantive in terms of prediction of reaction to a new gameplay element.

- /ignoring people is too hard. Nearly every single player attracted to a new feature, like Monster Play, would be obnoxious and harass you by their very existence. If we accept this as true (putting aside it's ridiculous), then that is immediately solved in two ways: separate instance and/or being not lazy by using /ignore. Improving PVP actually *addresses* your primary "issue". I'll go out on a limb and assume you've met people in DDO you don't like. Sucks...that's the reality of a diverse group.

- DDO is the functional equivalent of Mayberry - we have a very civil playerbase. Well, let's again put aside it's the same playerbase you complain about when you overhear Lobster rants. You may think we don't have players that don't "mock" Turbine staff...I'd suggest that you have myopic view of things and don't get around much. We very much do...we have other boards that practically revel in it.

So did I miss one of your stellar arguments? I managed to get 3...maybe I could have managed 4 but I couldn't bring myself to include your imagining of dev reasoning as a plausible attempt at a logical point.

Seriously, if I missed one, fill me in.

[ZeebaNeighba]

I can kill players. But often they fly into a rage.

I can kill monsters. Then I don't have to put up with a chat box full of profane yellow words.

[Saravis]

PVP is perfectly fine where its at in DDO, a niche mechanic for a niche audience.

[Entelech]

Okay. Clearly there is a failure to communicate going on here... I seem to need to explain the Russel's Teapot thing for those who don't understand.

It's obviously true that "I hate PvP" is not a basis for argument any more than "I love PvP" is. But that's not the point of this discussion. The point of this discussion is whether a significant investment of developer resources into improving PvP would benefit DDO's longevity, revenue stream, and player satisfaction more than investing that same effort in other avenues would. Other avenues such as new content, bug fixes, the enhancement pass, etc...

Now, there is no way to prove this one way or the other, since we cannot do an experiment where we create two or more parallel universes and see how each decision path plays out. In cases such as these, the only reasoning that can be applied is Bayesian, based on evidence of prior probability.

In such a case, the historical success, or lack thereof, of previous historical MMO's and the level of PvP they supported constitutes valid evidence (basically, "It didn't work for DAoC, why should it work here?") of how likely PVP is to be the optimal path. As does the ratio of PVP proponents to PVP opponents in this thread. (roughly 1 to 5?)

Dismissing such Bayesian evidence as "I hate PVP" is probably an example of the strawman fallacy, or possible a fundamental misunderstanding of the question before us. But that's far from the worst rhetorical sin under consideration in this thread.

Stating that "No valid evidence exists...and I decide what is valid" goes above and beyond strawman logic. If we ignore the hypocrisy of such an assertion for a moment, we quickly note that the statement cannot be proven false without the cooperation of the person making it.

That is to say, regardless of how good or bad any proffered evidence may be, "valid" evidence can only be found if the person saying "No evidence exists" contradicts himself.

Thus, my earlier statement that Dribble must provide proof of his assertion since (1) The assertion is non-falsifiable, and (2) Russel's Teapot tells us that non-falsifiable arguments should be logically dismissed unless the person making them can offer compelling proof.

For more information on concepts like Russel's Teapot, the Strawman Fallacy, and Bayesian inference, I suggest Wikipedia as a good place to start.

[Entelech]

If you prefer a less-formal demonstration of why the burden of proof lies with Dribble, consider the following:

(1) I assert something like "Well...there's no valid evidence FOR improving PVP either. All your arguments just boil down to 'I love PvP' too, so there's no reason to go either way."

(2) Since a lack of support for PVP is the status quo, I win by default.

[LOOON375]

Clearly the very idea of PvP stirs up a lot of unpleasant emotions.

DDOGamer talks about why


Not to worry gentle readers, we are almost done with this series. One more tomorrow and then back to our normal (non-PvP related) drivel.

You know, I had to go back and forth and read things a couple of times.

You have a website where you write "articles" and then you come here and link to them as if you were linking to an outside source?

You like PvP and are linking to something you wrote to back up your views to prove a point?

Im not trying to be a smart arse. Im just trying to figure out what the heck it is you are actually trying to do here.

Reading this thread reminds me of talking to someone that can't stop talking about themselves in the 3rd person.

[Singular]

There was nothing in your post that even approached a "relevant defense", nor was it remotely logical. What you provided, since you apparently need some clarity, was a rambling and incoherent string of vitriol intended to baselessly group anyone that happens to enjoy playing against a player, rather than playing against a script/AI, into some insulting and narrow label you've invented.

You are free to take that brush of yours and broadly colour any group of players you like. I really don't care. I can not argue rationally against someone taking the kind of position you have taken. What I CAN do however (and what the article should have done a better job with) is address the actual weak argument:

On Players you don't like:
- You have been provided tools to deal with harassment, the same way you have tools to deal with obnoxious people in PVE/chat.
- Turbine has managed to police the game and forums (overly, imo) since going F2P. They can do so with your imaginary drooling PVP crowd as well.
- Various solutions or suggestions on improving/adding pvp actually include separate instances. So for those xenophobic folks that need to protect their virgin ears from mean pvpers, but can't find the /ignore feature...well, it's actually an **improvement**.

I've yet to encounter a rational argument based on anything close to reality. PvP is a very general term and could be added to DDO in a way that not only profits Turbine, but has zero impact on balance. *gasp* It could even happen in a way that gets Pve'ers and RPers excited....!

But no...let's stifle the discussion with non-arguments and +1 each other

I read your article - if it was yours - about PVP. I think you had good insights. But I really don't see how DDO can be made to have good PVP. DnD is simply not made for PVP. The characters really have no balance - look at all the spells and abilities that have to be turned off to make it "somewhat fair." DnD characters are balanced to finishing quests, attacking monsters, overcoming the environment. Despite what I wrote above, some comments might work:

I wonder if you could have speed challenges between parties of various kinds (single classes, mixed classes, specified classes, etc)?

The suggestion that some PVP only allows the same classes to compete works. There's balance in each class.

I mean, personally, I'd be all for it. I'd love to see sieges with massive numbers of players - maybe you'd get balance through numbers?

[Entelech]

Conspiracy theories aside, Geoffhanna is the guy who wrote the linked article. Dribble is not the same person.

[Dribble]

If you prefer a less-formal demonstration of why the burden of proof lies with Dribble, consider the following:

(1) I assert something like "Well...there's no valid evidence FOR improving PVP either. All your arguments just boil down to 'I love PvP' too, so there's no reason to go either way."

(2) Since a lack of support for PVP is the status quo, I win by default.

No. That's a nonsensical question (and I fully accept you aren't getting it). You should ask "Is there a market for pvp? Can it be monetized? Does Turbine have the experience to do it justice?". Those would be logical and worthwhile questions. If you want to discuss my OPINION, then fine, I want more stuff to do in DDO. I want hobbies. I want monster play. I want a house. I want crafting on the level of SWG. I want PREs finished. I want more stuff to do. I want more players. My wants do NOT = arguments. My wants may not even be remotely logical or possible.

I already told you I want nothing further to do with you. The mod may have deleted your post but that doesn't erase the fact that you failed to be "civil and mature" (to quote you).

I read your article - if it was yours - about PVP.

Wasn't my article, I happen to simply be annoyed by the trend of a vocal minority that storm these pvp threads with nothing but attacks in order to disrupt conversation.

You have one argument in your post (a common one), about how DND was never based on PVP. I'll address that in a few ways (I am sure the article does too):

- DND is most certainly based on PVP. The DM is a person, not a script, that challenges the players. That is the core of pvp. Perhaps what you meant was "classes are not balanced to fight each other fairly in DND"? Well that's a different issue. PVP doesn't need to take that into account (monster play open pvp, monster vs character dungeons, competetive dungeons, etc) OR it can carefully take it into account (class vs class, melee vs melee, etc). The point is, there are options. Endless options.

- DDO is not PNP. It might be based on 3.5 but let's face it, DDO has little resemblance to the actual tabletop game.

[Singular]

Wasn't my article, I happen to simply be annoyed by the trend of a vocal minority that storm these pvp threads with nothing but attacks in order to disrupt conversation.

You have one argument in your post (a common one), about how DND was never based on PVP. I'll address that in a few ways (I am sure the article does too):

- DND is most certainly based on PVP. The DM is a person, not a script, that challenges the players. That is the core of pvp. Perhaps what you meant was "classes are not balanced to fight each other fairly in DND"? Well that's a different issue. PVP doesn't need to take that into account (monster play open pvp, monster vs character dungeons, competetive dungeons, etc) OR it can carefully take it into account (class vs class, melee vs melee, etc). The point is, there are options. Endless options.

- DDO is not PNP. It might be based on 3.5 but let's face it, DDO has little resemblance to the actual tabletop game.

Cheers.

Pretty sure the whole party system in DnD was to promote friendly group oriented quests - mind you, a little infighting always made it more interesting.

- Yeah. DDO is not the PnP version, that's for sure. Yes, you're right, classes aren't balanced to fight each other fairly. They're made for taking down baddies with tens of thousands of hit points. That sort of translates into a lot of instant kills in PVP.

It would be pretty neat to see monster races for PVP only, as per one of the suggestions in that article.

[Entelech]

You should ask "Is there a market for pvp? Can it be monetized? Does Turbine have the experience to do it justice?". Those would be logical and worthwhile questions.

But those questions would be insufficient.

Of course there's a market for PvP. The four people who still play Dark Ages of Camelot are, obviously, a market. The problem is something that economists call "opportunity cost". If the Devs are busy coding the PVP stuff you want, then they are NOT fixing bugs...or implementing player houses...or putting in SWG-like crafting...or finishing PrE's... Would doing PVP be BETTER than doing any of those OTHER things? THAT is the question we need to ask.

If you want to discuss my OPINION...

Nope. I'm not really interested in your opinion, any more than you're interested in mine. If this boils down to "I love PVP" versus "I hate PvP" then I win by default. As I have already pointed out.

You need to present practical arguments sufficient to convince the Devs to drop everything and start upgrading PvP. I just need to present practical arguments to convince them to do what they were going to do anyway.

I already told you I want nothing further to do with you. The mod may have deleted your post but that doesn't erase the fact that you failed to be "civil and mature" (to quote you).

Well, I have no plans to ask the moderator to delete a post of yours. I have no difficulty in refuting your argument point by point, and I feel comfortable letting our relative levels of civility and maturity in these posts make their own arguments to the wider audience.

...some nonsense about Pen and Paper that is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand...

[Entelech]

Singular,

Apropos of nothing, back in my own Pen and Paper days, inter-party conflict was usually a no-no.

In fact I distinctly remember a Kender character (from Dragonlance) who was executed by the party while screaming something to the effect of "Guys...guys...I'm ROLEPLAYING...I'm a Kender for crying out loud."

As I recall they strapped him to a rack and turned him into something that resembled a Solinesti Elf. He'd thought the Fighter's dagger looked "interesting" for a while, then abandoned it in a mud puddle along the side of the road. When they caught him, he had the Cleric's Holy Symbol in his belt pouch, and had left grape jelly stains on the Wizard's spellbook.

Have you had similar experiences?

[wax_on_wax_off]

Conspiracy theory: is it jus me, or does "The Great Tree" challenge look a lot like a one-sided version of DotA and the "Ritual" look a lot like King of the Hill?

Really, if we consider that these challenges are already in the game how much extra work is it to turn them into PvP maps?

[Kawai]

...Really, if we consider that these challenges are already in the game how much extra work is it to turn them into PvP maps?

Well, extra work is... extra work.
Opinion: Use time clocked in to fix whats already broken?
Shocking!
There's an overstated idea. And i for one am all for that!

Don't really care if PvP stay's or goes... there's plenty of that in other games im told.
Primarily, it's a character flaw to have to prove yourself -to yourself? ~As i doubt no one else really truly cares? -although i admit... i do enjoy the occasional pwning of your Monkcher clones.
...they learn the hard way.