Has p99 become Socialist? - Page 4

Arvan · #1 05-03-2021, 05:46 PM

Nope hope this helps

Cecily · #2 05-03-2021, 05:52 PM

Egalitarian style gameplay has always been the best experience for me in games. Everyone participating should have an equal shot at all content having putting the necessary "work." My lineage 2 clan was a bunch of commies. We all donated every scrap of material we got from exping and the guild crafter, a guy who's whole job was to make gear and siege engines, would make everyone nice things on a very regular basis. We all benefited and destroyed the competition, which made the game suck for us because we didn't have anyone to kill. Had our competition been on equal footing with us, the game would have remained fun for everyone.

Winning implies someone loses. It sucks to lose and people stop playing. Then you don't have anyone to feel superior over, which really makes you wonder what's the point? Was there ever one?

Pulgasari · #3 05-03-2021, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cecily [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Egalitarian style gameplay has always been the best experience for me in games. Everyone participating should have an equal shot at all content having putting the necessary "work." My lineage 2 clan was a bunch of commies. We all donated every scrap of material we got from exping and the guild crafter, a guy who's whole job was to make gear and siege engines, would make everyone nice things on a very regular basis. We all benefited and destroyed the competition, which made the game suck for us because we didn't have anyone to kill. Had our competition been on equal footing with us, the game would have remained fun for everyone.

Winning implies someone loses. It sucks to lose and people stop playing. Then you don't have anyone to feel superior over, which really makes you wonder what's the point? Was there ever one?

Ya, command economies do run out of bodies to stack [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

unsunghero · #4 05-04-2021, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cecily [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Egalitarian style gameplay has always been the best experience for me in games. Everyone participating should have an equal shot at all content having putting the necessary "work." My lineage 2 clan was a bunch of commies. We all donated every scrap of material we got from exping and the guild crafter, a guy who's whole job was to make gear and siege engines, would make everyone nice things on a very regular basis. We all benefited and destroyed the competition, which made the game suck for us because we didn't have anyone to kill. Had our competition been on equal footing with us, the game would have remained fun for everyone.

Winning implies someone loses. It sucks to lose and people stop playing. Then you don't have anyone to feel superior over, which really makes you wonder what's the point? Was there ever one?

I remember as a kid playing a pvp-centric MMO called Shadowbane. The game had guilds which could then combine into something larger, called “kingdoms” or something like that. Guilds had to build cities in order to have vendors to be able to craft gear for players to use. These cities were pretty important - in order to progress gear, the guild needed to have the highest possible level craftsman. Building and leveling up a city was expensive and a slow process. The game being pvp-oriented had world pvp. This included sieges on cities where siege engines would be used to tear them down

There were multiple servers at the time I was playing. No matter what server, the result was always the same. There was one mega-guild which was an ever growing zerg. Anyone who opposed them wouldn’t have the numbers to defend themselves and thus their city would be destroyed. All of the remaining guilds whether they liked each other or not, were forced to band together into a single opposing kingdom. The opposition, still being outnumbered, eventually lost, and their cities were destroyed. At this point half of the server would quit the game

Seeing the exact same result happen on every server gave me insight into how people behave in MMO’s. I chalked the result up to human nature

myrddraal · #5 05-04-2021, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by unsunghero [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I remember as a kid playing a pvp-centric MMO called Shadowbane. The game had guilds which could then combine into something larger, called “kingdoms” or something like that. Guilds had to build cities in order to have vendors to be able to craft gear for players to use. These cities were pretty important - in order to progress gear, the guild needed to have the highest possible level craftsman. Building and leveling up a city was expensive and a slow process. The game being pvp-oriented had world pvp. This included sieges on cities where siege engines would be used to tear them down

There were multiple servers at the time I was playing. No matter what server, the result was always the same. There was one mega-guild which was an ever growing zerg. Anyone who opposed them wouldn’t have the numbers to defend themselves and thus their city would be destroyed. All of the remaining guilds whether they liked each other or not, were forced to band together into a single opposing kingdom. The opposition, still being outnumbered, eventually lost, and their cities were destroyed. At this point half of the server would quit the game

Seeing the exact same result happen on every server gave me insight into how people behave in MMO’s. I chalked the result up to human nature

Shadowbane’s problem was a lack of stuff to do for casuals. Casuals will make up MOST of your subscription base, and when the neckbeards chase them off the server the client base (and cash coming in) dwindles and new content becomes more and more rare or greatly decreases in quality.