Quote:
|
Originally Posted by vtrajan
What's so bad about PvP? This is a competitive online rpg, and they've made great efforts to accomodate people for other content and types of play.
|
This is not now, nor has it ever shown signs of being, an RPG. One who plays a role has a dynamic character development where obstacles cause internal psychological changes to the environment. A good example is the movie
Braveheart whom peole often think is about Mel Gibson's character William Wallace. Wallace is a static persona, flat and undeveloping in all attributes. The real hero of the story is not Wallace, but the narator Sir Robert the Bruce who changes from a son obedient and manipulative without conscience for his clan to a believer in things greater than himself willing to sacrifice and fight for those ideals. A role played character can also devolve into something unholy and vile. It is the response choices and changes of the character that create a played role. This, and most other so-called on-line RPGs fail to have any kind of charcter molding. They are merely MMOGs.
What is bad about PvP is the fraud and malice that have come to be synonomous with it.
1) PvP was advertised as an option one could do, not a requirement one must do - Fraud.
2) A minority of PvP elite players control access to PvE content areas from casual and other players who will never be able to put in the time to become PvP elite. This uses the force of PvP elite/professional players to deny playability to those who paid for it - Theft by Force.
3) The lack of chivalry and requirement for chivalry in PvP supports the worst human traits of boastfulness, unsportsman like conduct, immaturity, and chauvanistic opposition (meaning regional Chauvinism).
a) No team should be permitted to engage in combat who has not greeted and soluted each other.
b) No team should be permitted to leave the match before they have saluted and congratulated their opponents for their efforts.
c) No player should be permitted to denigrate the efforts at using the skills of fellow players without being banned.
Quote:
|
Can't you appreciate the work they've done, or go to another PvE specific game?
|
Why should we have to go to another game when they have thru negligence of telling the truth sold us a product they knew we would not like? The outcry thus far is about things done TO us by ANet which they knew would be unappreciated by their clientelle. They did not provide things based on inspiration. From a quote above it appears they wanted to capture a segment of the market that has sophisticated tastes and then dumb them down to the desired company standard of fellow player bashing (PvP). They are still trying to force onto the public a product the majority are disgruntled with or detest for exceptionally good reasons. The game they are trying to force us to play is not the game we bought as Prophecies. They have altered the game we bought as Prophecies. A continued move in this direction will minimize their fan base.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Eudas
They should've rethought that as soon as they realized they were asking the general public to work for something.
|
So you feel that someone spending 8-10 hours a day pouring hot alluminum into molds while someone yells over their shoulder to move faster, get that, grab this, etc. is supposed to come home to some kid screaming over the IM Faster, faster, faster!, Go, go, go!, Do this, block that, kill him, etc. as a form of
casual relaxation. Or are you one of these that thinks anyone over 18 should just be a dead non-person lobotomized into accepting a dull, labor intensive, existence without any relief other than a 4-6 hour nap?
Quote:
I think that you should know that this is, ultimately, what is limiting you from obtaining access to these area -- your unwillingness to join a larger guild or guild alliance, even for a short time.
It's not that you're being limited so much as it is that you're limiting yourself.
|
If I join a larger guild then I can benefit from their larger numbers able to gain more faction. I must also sacrifice my personal expression. I have become quite aware that many people here do not wish to be more than drones for someone else's ideas and ideals. I am not one of those persons. Nor should any American be such. My coat of arms on my cape holds specific meanings for me, as do the symbols used by many in the game. I have one friend who changes her colors with the seasons because it brings into their recreation things this friend believes in. In their case they are a small guild - who is no more likely to ever have access than a one person guild. I want to quote you something to think about
:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley to ANet
When I began discussing the Guild vs Guild system and how it excluded many last November-December, I promted the idea of how neat it would be if Guilds could make alliances with each other and individuals that would allow more inclusive cooperative play. I may not have been the first to think of alliances but I was the first I saw discuss it.
In such a manner, a host could be the guild scheduling an event and their friends who like having their own personal expression in the form of their own coats of arms and colors would join them. As the combattants on a field have their cloaks colored red or blue it would not matter if another persons symbolism was similar or the same as one on the other team. This would be inclusive of all players and personality types.
Instead the game has been set up with exclusionary power aimed at detroying peoples self-value and expression. One must now submit to membership in the largest guild possible in order to have access to advanced areas and game play. Any individualist, introvert, some I know how are disabled and treated poorly by your other customers, etc. must destroy their coat of arms/colors and guild to play.
This is not inclusive. It is exclusive of others. If all you want is meat on a hook without a brain, the local butcher shop can still supply it.
|
Fitz Rinley
