View Full Version : Hardcore Mode & PKing Poll
This poll is multiple choice because I'm asking two separate questions.
MoUsE_WiZ
29-06-2008, 12:44
The hostile button has been there since D1.
It's been continuously nerfed since.
If anyone dies to a legit PK in it's current implementation, they deserved it. It's to the point that PKing borders on being "consentual" pvp as it is, I'd hate to see them take the very last step and remove it all together, it'd make the game sooo dull =/
With legitimate Pk'ing you mean dueling right?
MoUsE_WiZ
29-06-2008, 16:54
With legitimate Pk'ing you mean dueling right?
No, legit as in not using hacks/exploits. The word would also tend to be associated with dupes, but a legit PK can theoretically have HRs that were self found or cubed, so that part of the definition is a bit irrelevant.
Casting a spell that lasts a couple of seconds, then running to town to lure people there and hostile them is an exploit. Not a game-feature.
Duping is also possible because of the way the game is set up. Doesn't make it "legitimate".
MoUsE_WiZ
29-06-2008, 17:21
Casting a spell that lasts a couple of seconds, then running to town to lure people there and hostile them is an exploit. Not a game-feature.
What you're describing isn't even possible any more. Spells that linger long enough to literally run to town and hostile have all been patched to disappear upon entering town.
If you're actually trying to describe TPPK (eg using a script to fire a projectile such as guided arrow or iceblast, cast&use a portal, then hit the hostile button, far faster than any human could ever hope to) the poster specifically states in the poll he's not talking about that. And nobody called it "not an exploit". Especially since 99.9% of all attempts at it are done while using hacks.
I guess the closest thing would be done with either bears or mercs. But those aren't "spells that last a couple seconds".
Basically I'm concluding you have no idea what you're talking about.
Duping is also possible because of the way the game is set up. Doesn't make it "legitimate".
I didn't say "duping is legitimate".
What I said, apparently not clearly enough for you, was that it doesn't matter in this context if the player is wearing dupes.
If a lightning sorc with an infinity merc kills you, you don't know that his runes aren't either self found or cubed from ists. They probably are dupes, but if they weren't, you would have died equally.
So you could be legitly PK'd by someone with HRs.
So being PK'd by someone with HRs for the purpose of this poll would be considered a legit PK because you are either for having people with HRs being able to PK or against it.
Well, in that case I agree with you. If the 10 second timer before entering a wp is not avoided in any way and you don't kill with say previously placed traps at a WP than all is fair.
It is just an impromptu duel then, as anyone with half a brain just uses a Town portal to get out within the 10 seconds and wait for the PK'er to start boring himself. If you stay, you want to duel so it is consentual.
I think Blizz know that without HC and the chance of being legitimately pk'd a lot of people won't play for very long.
I really hope you can play HC from the start this time instead of having to play SC first.
I didn't like this poll at first but since it is being quoted in other threads i had to vote...
first of all, HC or no? we can't really answer that question without knowing the features. If there's a real penalty for death in SC then I would be fine with that. Speaking purely hypothetically we can only take it in the context of what we know now so given that, i voted yes for HC.
Now for the second question I had to vote no. I don't oppose the idea of PK but if you talk to any PKer they will tell you they always get their character rushed and perfectly geared up. They then go back and pick on people playing in normal games who have nowhere near the stats or skills and can't reasonably hope to fight the PKer. That's technically 'legit' but I can't see it in a good light; it's like playing a game that's rigged or competing against someone on steroids.
A lot of legit PKers like to use the term 'hunt' which i think is an interesting and appropriate word, because you all realize the deer can't fight back right?
psykeman420
30-06-2008, 01:31
yes for pking in hardcore only ;)
Hardcore should be just that, hardcore. (old school UO for example, you kill a person and can loot their body muahaha)
But pking should be limited to Hardcore mode in my opinon. Though that's just my own.
bluemoonreturn
30-06-2008, 02:43
Well the fact that you would refer to it as TPPK means you weren't in on it until around 1.10. TPPK was made by gary.
Originally created by mew i.e. Trigger program. You can believe me when I tell you this bluemoonPK with be making a comeback.
I've missed you all so much :D killing hardcore mode players from early in the morning until I went to sleep.
Can't wait for D3 to be released, but I will guarantee this you guys will be seeing me as much as you did back in the day. You can't say you didn't miss seeing things like XXX was slain by anInnocentChild. Then promptly seeing my callsign middlefinger popup on your screen shortly before you lost connection to the game.
Well the fact that you would refer to it as TPPK means you weren't in on it until around 1.10. TPPK was made by gary.
Actually, TPPK is an acronym that stands for town portal player kill, and it's something that was done long before hacker scum like your friend gary created programs for it (and it can still be done without a program using certain spells). And I've been playing Diablo II since the first week it came out. I also used to PK your 12-year old friends from BMPK, until your clan desolved into nothing (which is inevitable when you have 12-year old assholes leading 12-year old assholes).
Regardless, this poll is for legitimate PKing and not the pussified PKing you engaged in, which wrecked the Diablo community.
bluemoonreturn
30-06-2008, 03:01
was originally called trigger and trust me it never dissolved. Due to the lack of players in hardcore it caused for a split off into multiple servers originally USEast then USWest then off to the euro's. I can guarantee you never killed me buddy. I hope we meet up sometime though because like the first meteor pking I want to play with you some more since if you ever played hardcore mode I can guarantee I had your ear. Either way BMPK will be the only group to have trigger once more, and even i they manage to find a way to stop that they will never stop us since a bypass to warden anti-cheat has been known since a week into WoW's release.
was originally called trigger
TPPK was something done long before "trigger" or "tppk" programs existed. That's my point. All your fruity friend Gary did was simplify the process of shooting spells/arrows/spears, teleporting to town and hostiling.
and trust me it never dissolved.
Yes it did.
I can guarantee you never killed me buddy.
No, I probably did kill you, even though you use chicken hack, auto-aim and TPPK, nub. Players like you don't belong in Hardcore mode.
Either way BMPK will be the only group to have trigger once more
If you think Blizzard is going to allow for TPPK in Diablo III, then you're an idiot.
And all this Warden talk is BS-talk. You don't know what you're talking about, and you're making empty threats for a videogame that hasn't even been released yet. You're a micocosm of how retarded BMPK was.
bluemoonreturn
30-06-2008, 03:18
think what you want and no chicken was a program released later on with keylogger embedded used to take peoples accounts.
fyi gary made the best looking trigger but was also the slowest. The original being the best.
and if you don't know warden is the anti cheat used by blizzard that is their failsafe.
either way will enjoy seeing you around.
Well the fact that you would refer to it as TPPK means you weren't in on it until around 1.10. TPPK was made by gary.
Originally created by mew i.e. Trigger program. You can believe me when I tell you this bluemoonPK with be making a comeback.
I've missed you all so much :D killing hardcore mode players from early in the morning until I went to sleep.
Can't wait for D3 to be released, but I will guarantee this you guys will be seeing me as much as you did back in the day. You can't say you didn't miss seeing things like XXX was slain by anInnocentChild. Then promptly seeing my callsign middlefinger popup on your screen shortly before you lost connection to the game.
think what you want and no chicken was a program released later on with keylogger embedded used to take peoples accounts.
fyi gary made the best looking trigger but was also the slowest. The original being the best.
and if you don't know warden is the anti cheat used by blizzard that is their failsafe.
either way will enjoy seeing you around.
Here's my callsign, it's called the Mod Sword of Banning.
Hasta la bye-bye.
Here's my callsign, it's called the Mod Sword of Banning.
Hasta la bye-bye.
I hope that doesn't have splash damage.
MoUsE_WiZ
30-06-2008, 03:47
Hmm.
I'm aware the hack itself was referred to as triggers back in .09, but I'm fairly sure I recall the act itself still being referred to as TPPK.
As for the acronym existing well before then?
That I don't recall... I always just called those guys hydra pks (or whatever).
Hmm.
I'm aware the hack itself was referred to as triggers back in .09, but I'm fairly sure I recall the act itself still being referred to as TPPK.
As for the acronym existing well before then?
That I don't recall... I always just called those guys hydra pks (or whatever).
TPPK was a term I used before there were programs for it. It's a very general term "Town Portal Player Kill". I mean come on... crediting a hacker for that acronym/term is ridiculous.
Who cares? I mean, really. It's all semantics.
Voted yes for HC and yes for PKing.
None of the bluemooners I met ever dared to stand up to me in a straight fight... :)
Back to the current subject. Yes, HC, yes, PK please. Duelling, yes please.
I won't be PKing, I will be Hardcore playing and I damn sure hope to see them both playing a huge role in D3.
coldsong
30-06-2008, 19:19
the bluemoon kid made me laugh out loud. god, the script kiddies of the latest generation is the most amazing invention of the internet, in my opinion.
I voted yes Hardcore and yes non hack, non script kiddy pking.
I'm also wondering if they're gonna have it where "games" are created or if this an actual world? If its games being created - I'm REALLY hoping for the people to be able to make games where they have the power to kick people out of them.
I'm hoping this will allow a player to get a reputation for holding "safe" games where any known hacker/script kiddy will be immediately kicked and of course and soon as they are discovered.
Yes i know this could leave the potential for people kicking other people out right before a boss drops loot or something. However this game mode would hopefully be optional (you dont have to join this kind of game - but hopefully you'll start seeing people whom you know "host" good games). Just something where people in the game have some power (which could be passed down) to control who is in the game as there seems to be more and more of the younger AND older generation that seem to just want to ruin other people's fun.
I voted yes and yes.
I'm not a hardcore player myself but so many people enjoy that mode of play so I see no reason not to implement it.
PK is fun too - I've enjoyed dueling and also hunting I must admit:) I had great fun with my ama back when poison ruled ... logging on to nightmare games and taking down a party of higher level players. Obviously they weren't normally geared for PK but going up against a party was always a challenge. After I made the kills I always left them so they could continue their game.
Of course I've also had PK characters interrupt my own coop leveling games but it was mostly fun - adds some excitement and danger to your game. Of course it sucks if you have prolonged corpse-camping preventing you from continuing with your game.
I hope there's PKing of some sort, but they do something to discourage the 'unfair' PKing via scripts.
I'm up in the air on the high levels entering low levels and pking there.
I Vote yes for hardcore. That's all I currently play.
I have to vote *no* for PK'ing..If it's like it's currently set up. Dueling is great, no problem there..but I don't see the purpose/fun of a lvl 90 toon coming into a norm game and killing lvl 20's. I suppose it's legit but in my opinion, it's griefing..not pking. Or how about in the middle of tanking the last wave of minions and getting attacked by someone... Where's the sport?
I've seen, over the years, people say..Make private games..... Only play with people you know...ect..ect.. If this is a multiplayer game, I don't like the idea of being forced to cut myself off from the community just to be able to play.
Just my 2 cents
(estimated *real* value is currently 0.0000000000024c)
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=7475464063&sid=1&pageNo=2#24
Uncle_Mike
03-07-2008, 16:13
Quote from the above link in case someone is too lazy to click :yes:
We're - in general - not big fans of griefing for any game. It's really only "fun" for one person, and that definition of fun isn't generally something we're going to want to encourage. It's far more positive to encourage and support meaningful and skillful options and systems within a game, than a mechanic for people to instantly turn against one another for no meaningful gameplay reasons.
I definitely remember running with my friends, and someone toggles it, and bam everyone is dead and your one friend is laughing. Ok, ok, good joke I guess, and then you run back and *bam*, you've toggled it to get them back. After a while everyone usually agrees to a truce because it's just a waste of time. But I also remember running with random players and losing extremely nice items because of it, not cool. I'm sure that it was a feature that was right up some people's alleys, I won't deny there are some that would enjoy nothing more than to see others frustrated, but is that truly something that should be encouraged through design - if not directly opposed?
We have a large focus on cooperative play for Diablo III, and the mechanics and design decisions related to multiplayer are likely going to be based on supporting and encouraging it as much as possible, and not breaking it down.
That doesn't mean that PvP won't have its own focus, but those are details and features we aren't yet discussing.
Thanks for the link Davidus.
Quote from the above link in case someone is too lazy to click :yes:
Thanks for the link Davidus.
It seems like they're eluding to separating PVE from PVP. It feels we might have a Guild Wars on our hands here.
etslayer
03-07-2008, 19:33
I am very dissapointed and I must say, my excitement for the game is quickly fizzling.
It looks like we are going to have a lame, watered down PvP system which is controled by Blizzard rather than the players.
Whatever happened to simply being thrown into the cruel world and having to fend for yourself? If you ask me, that is what made D2 so full of possibilities and its the reason it was so fun.
There is some random thread in the D3 discussion forum which is complete nonsense, but as I recall the guy makes one legitimate point: The creators of D3 spent more time playing WoW, it seems, than D2. The only way to grasp why D2 was so successful, and despite its outdated graphics still argued to be superior to WoW by many, many gamers, is to really get into the game. Not just go out killing monsters with a group but actually experiencing the drive to have the best character, competing with many different people and taking the game BEYOND act 5. I think it is clear from what we have seen that (at least some) of the head devs on D3 havn't experienced this. They even stated that they weren't huge D2 fans growing up. That is why they are missing the mark.
I don't even give a **** about the graphics. As far as I am concerned, you are all fools for making such a huge outcry about the graphics, when it's actually the core gameplay that is being heavily influenced by WoW. If you are incredibly lucky, MAYBE Blizzard will cave in and change the graphics. But if the cave on that, don't expect them to even consider changing anything else.
I for one never went out PKing people in D2, and yes it annoyed me when people would come into my game and hunt me down while I'm trying to do my thing. But I could not imagine this game being nearly as fun as D2 without that factor of suspense and anarchy. It's just like adding unlimited respec's. Sounds nice in theory, but the core elements of the game are watered down.
If there is no PK in HC, HC will suck immensely.
Uncle_Mike
03-07-2008, 19:38
Threads merged, this very issue is being discussed here, even the post you've quoted was here before you posted :)
Do not bypass the wordfilter please.
While you guys might be right, jumping to conclusions seems to be a bit premature, the game isn't even in beta stage. As you can see from the results of the poll the majority actually supports PK so far.
Intolerance
03-07-2008, 19:43
I honestly don't care whether or not PKing exists in D3. The problem with PKing in D2 is the degenerate way it's been done- particularly TPPK.
People who PK generally only do so if they stand no chance to die. I'm all for someone hostiling a party, chasing them down, and taking anyone who wants to fight. I'm against anything that gives the PK no chance to lose (again, tppk) or a HUGE element of surprise (hostiling and immediately going to a wp).
As long as the "prey" stands a fair chance to either fight back or avoid conflict, I say bring it on.
DarkGoat
03-07-2008, 20:14
I think I'm gonna cry..
PKing (nonconsensual PVP) has been a large part of the Diablo franchise for around a decade now, and it undoubtedly added an exciting dimension to the previous games that most games today lack. Some players would argue that it ruined their game experience, but my counter is that PKing is part of the Diablo experience; and despite the feature, Diablo went on to be one of the most successful games ever made. One could even argue that it was the inclusion of this feature (along with everything else) that made Diablo so popular. Let me go back to what I was saying before I digressed: you can set guidelines in the game name and the game's description, but that will not impede the freedom players have to express hostility to who they want, when they want. Consequently, you have to be always mindful of the dangers of both players and NPCs in Diablo and Diablo II to survive, regardless of what kind of game you are in. This is one of the things that made Diablo, Diablo, and what made it so exciting. One spoke of the weel so to speak.
The other argument that I've read is that the allowance of a hostility button is unfair. Usually this argument works under the false premise that all PKing is high level to low level; and not low level to high level, or similar level to similar level. Once you straighten out their premise, the arguer will usually fall back on "Well, I don't like the idea of players being able to join my cooperative games to hostile me and my friends." My response to that is there are already features in place for you to avoid PKers: level restrictions (will keep the high level PKs out) and private games with like-minded players (I see people do this all the time and it works). There's absolutely no need for Blizzard to step in by removing this freedom we have to hostile other players. Such an intervention will only homogenize the game experience, dumb it down, et cetera. It'd be one less thing Diablo has to offer over other games.
The last argument I will address is "Players who enjoy this PK option are in the minority." First of all, that's completely baseless and I'd argue that it's the complete opposite: players who like the PK feature are in the majority. Just take a look at this poll: http://forums.diii.net/showthread.php?t=668197&page=2 Yes, only 71 people participated in it, and you can't really draw any conclusions from it, but if this aforementioned argument were true, wouldn't the numbers surely be reversed? You should at least take the poll into some consideration.
TPPK: I got your attention, didn't I? I just wanted to let you know that this exploit has ruined the Diablo community, and it has soured the Diablo playerbase's idea of what PKing is and their general thoughts of PKing. And it'd be best to just put it out of your mind when thinking about Diablo III. I am completely certain there will be no TPPK in Diablo III; and even if this new Diablo team were to replicate the environment in which TPPK could take place, they'd remove it as soon as possible.
Uncle_Mike
03-07-2008, 21:25
Threads merged again, we really don't need more topics on the subject.
Those are valid points and as you've noticed and noted yourself the majority of those who took part in the poll are for PK.
PKing (nonconsensual PVP)
I take issue with this, outside of tricking people with 'come outside camp for ench' and hacks (no 'pvp' involved there), ever since wp cooldown after hostiling PKing is semiconsensual at the very least. You CANNOT force someone to pvp with you. All you can do is force them to pvp with you OR wait to town OR quit the game. And as it stands, they have plenty of time to decide.
Now factor in it's equally possible to grief players with the same option, killing the boss they're trying to farm first, preventing them completing the current quest, etc, without hostiling them at all - I can't see why anyone would have a reasonable problem whatsoever. Which is pretty much what I said the first time around.
ever since wp cooldown after hostiling PKing is semiconsensual at the very least. You CANNOT force someone to pvp with you.
No one is saying you can force players to engage in PVP with you in Diablo II, which by the way, is a point for people like me. EDIT: Actually, this isn't entirely true in my mind. For instance, you can hostile someone who is in the Bloody Foothills, then teleport up to them and PK them. You wouldn't say that's consensual PVP simply because the guy was too slow-reacting, would you? However, just by playing Diablo II online you're agreeing to the rules in regards to PVP.
What I meant was when I wrote "nonconsesual PVP" was that the hostility button allows you to become red, or hostile to players without their consent. Moreover, PK means player kill, so PKing someone would be to imply that you engaged them in PVP without their consent.
No one is saying you can force players to engage in PVP with you in Diablo II, which by the way, is a point for people like me. EDIT: Actually, this isn't entirely true in my mind. For instance, you can hostile someone who is in the Bloody Foothills, then teleport up to them and PK them. You wouldn't say that's consensual PVP simply because the guy was too slow-reacting, would you?
Sure, I alluded to stuff like this mentioning the ench trick. But honestly not hanging around immediately outside of towns in MP is hardcore 101... really basic stuff. No-one dies that way twice who doesn't deserve it (I've never died that way once personally, or to any legit pk attempt where I wasn't willing to duel), I didn't talk about this because I think it's too minor to really take into consideration - and Blizz must agree, considering their inconsistency with wp taking and town leaving.
What I meant was, the hostility button allows you to become red, or hostile to players without their consent; and that's a rarity in today's games. Moreover, PK means player kill, so PKing someone would be killing them without asking for their consent to engage them in PVP before hand.
Sure, I don't consider my point a semantic one however. You cannot be under threat from another player, above exception and hacks aside, unless you make the decision not to leave the game/go to town. Considering how visible the hostility warning is, this decision is every bit as active as the decision to click or decline an 'accept hostility' button. They have given consent; all you've done is forced them to make that decision within several seconds and provided them with a small (yes, having to restart quest/cancel run, wait the pker out or turn pker off hearing you and say 'ng is 567////765' is certainly small) incentive to choose the 'accept challenge' option.
Sure, I alluded to stuff like this mentioning the ench trick. But honestly not hanging around immediately outside of towns in MP is hardcore 101... really basic stuff. No-one dies that way twice, I didn't talk about this because I think it's too minor to really take into consideration - and Blizz must agree, considering their inconsistency with wp taking and town leaving.
You're not making any point. I don't even understand what you're trying to argue. Do you still think Blizzard didn't intend for PKing in Diablo, or Diablo II? The very existence of the hostility button demonstrates that you're wrong. WP delays were probably created to stop people from being killed instantly upon being hostiled. "Hey do you have Catacombs 2 WP?" "Yeah, sure" *HOSTILE* XXXX was slain by ToiletPaper.
Sure, I don't consider my point a semantic one however. You cannot be under threat from another player, above exception and hacks aside, unless you make the decision not to leave the game/go to town.
What's your point? I don't even think you realize that you're arguing for my side when you say there's no threat from legitimate PKers.
etslayer
03-07-2008, 22:10
For all you people who say that PKing ruined your D2 gaming experience, answer me this:
How often did you actually run into PKers? Of all the thousands of D2 games that you were in, how many actually were destroyed by PKers?
Now consider this: there are proportionally WAY more racist bigots, leechers and people who dont help the group than there are PKers. PKing was a actually a way for players to deal with problem-players.
Getting rid of PKing is NOT a way to achieve cooperative gameplay. Blizzard totally missed the mark on this one. People can find infinite ways to be dickweeds and play uncooperatively. The only way to fully avoid uncooperative players is by making private games, utilizing the restriction options (which most people neglected to use then blamed others for their dissatisfaction with the game), and making friends with cooperative players. This is how it is both in video games and in real life. It's your responsibility to look after yourself in a world full of assholes. Getting rid of PK is an artifical, short-sighted approach to achieve "cooperative play" and does nothing at all to enhance the gameplay.
What's especially annoying about Phool's stance is that for it to even work, one would have to assume that anyone who dies from a legitimate PKer is stupid, or a newb. Even if that were true though, what's his point?
You're not making any point. I don't even understand what you're trying to argue. Do you still think Blizzard didn't intend for PKing in Diablo, or Diablo II? The very existence of the hostility button demonstrates that you're wrong. WP delays were probably created to stop people from being killed instantly upon being hostiled. "Hey do you have Catacombs 2 WP?" "Yeah, sure" *HOSTILE* XXXX was slain by ToiletPaper.
Funnily enough I have no idea what point you're trying to make either.
What's your point? I don't even think you realize that you're arguing for my side when you say there's no threat from legitimate PKers.
I don't think you realise I am on your side, as far as I know?! What gave you the impression otherwise, the fact that I correctly pointed out the obvious in mentioning your poll wasn't representative of the entire Diablo 2 populace, and hypothesised (I guarantee, correctly) that it would be more weighted towards pro PK? I didn't even hypothesise it would swing the other way.
I have been explicit since my first post on the topic.
Yes for PKing (to clarify, I'm talking about legitimate PKing; not TPPKing, town killing, etc.)
5zigen, Ankeli, Arakhine, Azon, Baranor, bluemoonreturn, Burst Cancel, cfeldt, coldsong, ColtFourFive, Cruzn, DarkGoat, Dark_Times, Davidus, etslayer, eyums, Fists of War, Flux, Goddess Belldandy, Hcorp, hehe, Incie, jesterlolz, jokersw1ld, Leoner, Lingon, LiquidClear, maczor, mcgurk, Metalshredderr, Mn_Swe2, mopsi, Morannon, Morsexy, MoUsE_WiZ, Nilaripper, Noodie, onebadfish, phool, Pied, poroboszcz, PoXeR, psykeman420, stanmwilson, Tai., ThulRasha, Uncle_Mike, Verashiden, wizAdept, yalthar, YSM
HC pk and pkk provide possibly the biggest adrenaline rush I've experienced in any game, and that's competing with tense twitch fpss like the original Unreal Tournament. If tppk and any other potential similar exploits can be eliminated unwanted pk attempts should definitely stay. With a decent few seconds between seeing a big warning icon flash on your screen and being in immediate risk and no tppk, pk has no reason at all to prevent playing socially with strangers. Sure being forced to quit by a level 90 when you're about to kill andy in act 1 normal is a pain, but they could force you to change games equally easily by killing andy without hosting you at all, there are lots of ways to grief without actually hostiling - and game creator has level restrictions to avoid the situation. Regardless, if you stay in a game when hosted the choice to risk fighting them is just as much in your hands as if they couldn't host without you accepting it - and as I've said there are other ways they can grief if that was the case.
The risk of lethal tps being set up is far more of a threat to social play than legitimiate, non script kiddy pk. It'd be neat if you could look through tps in d3 incidentally, not that I would want to completely remove the involuntary threat from other players in HC.
All in all I do have major faith in Blizz to hold onto what has made D2 such a great game.
edit:2k posts on this forum and I never bothered setting up an avatar? hmm...
edit: one would have to assume that anyone who dies from a legitimate PKer is stupid, or a newb.
Incorrect. They would have to be a noob, a newb, OR a decent player who either CHOSE to risk fighting the PKer, aka duelling, or CHOSE to take the risk the PKer wouldn't find them in time (I'm putting this last one under stupid and noob tbh if they aren't willing to or able to fight, can't quit since the PKer appears on the minimap, didn't consider the PKer might circle in front of them, and got that guess totally wrong).
Summary. I believe PK should stay in exactly the form it is right now in D2 (I would prefer a ~5 second delay given to quitting a town but not a big deal), given removal of tppk. TPPK does completely ruin HC MP for me, legit PK however adds to it.
Uncle_Mike
03-07-2008, 22:25
All of this is pure speculation, D3 hasn't been released and yet some tend to discuss its features as if they were already out there.
Apparently there needs to be balance between ruining the game for some and having total PK freedom for others and I'm sure this will be addressed.
As of now there is hardly any PvP information out there.
Why are the pro PK people so defensive despite the poll results?
edit: there is nothing wrong with Phool's posts
edit2: PK seems to be a big issue for hardcore mostly, you just die to a PK player and move on in softcore.
Funnily enough I have no idea what point you're trying to make either.
My points are quite obvious, and you're the one who decided to rebut my post with a nonsense reply. You can't even tell me what your main point is.
I don't think you realise I am on your side, as far as I know?!
According to the poll, you are, but I don't understand where you're coming from. Are you trying to make the argument that Blizzard never intended for there to be PKing in Diablo II? That's what it looks like when you say things like "BUT THE WP DELAY!", or when you start arguing with me about sticking nonconsensual next to the term PKing.
What gave you the impression otherwise, the fact that I correctly pointed out the obvious in mentioning your poll wasn't representative of the entire Diablo 2 populace
That never needed to be pointed out (for me anyway).
If you're in agreement with me, then why do you keep attempting to argue with me?
PKing can never be consensual because that would contradict the very term.
Uncle_Mike
03-07-2008, 22:35
If you're in agreeance with me, then why do you keep attempting to argue with me?
You seem to try to argue with everyone as well...so far the poll is for PK, except for 3rd party program issues which should really be left out of the discussion.
I don't play hardcore but I'd assume that death is the ultimate thing there, duh. Having said that, if they do implement hardcore mode, I can't see the developers not including PvP features there, and PK is part of the PvP scene. You can avoid PK in d2 even if one finds it annoying, it should be the same in d3.
You seem to try to argue with everyone as well...so far the poll is for PK, except for 3rd party program issues which should really be left out of the discussion.
I don't go out of my way to argue with people (OK, maybe sometimes I do, but I didn't in this instance). I created a post and Phool "took issue" with the part of my post where I stuck "nonconsensual" next to "PKing", so I defended my reasons for doing so. I find it annoying because I think he's just confusing people. I know he's confusing me.
Dang it!
Missed the poll...
But yes to both. No HC will make me reconsider purchasing the game... No PKing will just make HC a bit easier.
Dang it!
Missed the poll...
But yes to both. No HC will make me reconsider purchasing the game... No PKing will just make HC a bit easier.
Hey Uncle_Mike, is it possible for you to extend the duration of the poll? For some stupid reason I decided to limit it to four days.
Uncle_Mike
03-07-2008, 23:10
Hey Uncle_Mike, is it possible for you to extend the duration of the poll? For some stupid reason I decided to limit it to four days.
1. Call me Mike
2. Thank Dredd for the poll being reopened :whistling:
etslayer
03-07-2008, 23:12
How can you have hardcore multiplayer without PK? It would be the same as playing on single player if you only have to worry about monsters. People who play HC know what makes it fun, and PKing is an essential aspect of it.
As far as SC goes, it's true that PK doesn't really mean anything, so why get rid of it?
Hmmm, I find this poll very interesting. If you read one of the other PKing threads, you would know that I am part of the anti-PKing crowd. Im not gonna bother going into any arguments of whether or not PKing is good or bad for the game or if its part of the Diablo theme/spirit, because that inevitably ends in people simply restating their opinion over and over, and typically resorting to immature personal attacks and name calling.
I do want to address the poll though: obviously there is a majority of support for PKing, which very much surprised me. YSM did his best to make it a very fair poll as well (originally it was put in the general forum and was subsequently moved, differentiated between PKing and PvP, differentiated between legit PKing and TPPK), so I commend him for that. But I just want people to keep in mind they type of sample we're dealing with. Its basically haphazard sampling technique. A) This poll is on a website dedicated to the game so it is typically the more dedicated/less casual gamers who will see this poll; I know from my personal experience, out of the 10 friends who used to play this game, I was the only one visiting gaming websites. B) This game is 8 years old, only the most hardcore of Diablo fans are still playing. Granted, I don't play anymore, but still visit this site and participated in the poll, or others have recently come back because of the D3 announcement, but those who are still playing are the most likely to participate in this poll. Those who are still playing are probably BORED out of their minds doing PvE, so they need extra excitement, which may be why they support PKing. C) Similarly, PKing IS a part of Diablo 2, no one can refute that. That may have also turned away some PvE players, and hence why there is less representation on this site. If they really hated it, they probably wouldnt care about D3 or the forums, and would never show up in a poll such as this.
Even with these considerations, Im not saying that this poll is meaningless. I don't think it represents the population, but the simple fact is there IS a portion of the population that supports PKing, and if this poll is an indication, it may even be a significant portion. I just found this very surprising, as I had always assumed that except a few people, everyone hated PKers :)
Oh, and just to asnwer etslayers question about how many times Ive run into PKers who ruined my game. To be honest, back in the day when I was really into the game (I think I quit playing around when 1.09 was released), PKing was basically a non-issue. I probably ran into less than 20 PKers in the span of 2-3 years. But I recently got back on for a month of so, and was sorely saddened by the players online. In one day, over the span of 2-3 hours, I ran into 4 pkers who ruined public cooperative games. I ended up quiting again after seeing the sad state of affairs bnet had become.
In the end, I really don't care if Blizz puts in PKing again. Like I said, it was basically a non-issue when the game was really popular. I will still buy it regardless, but just on preferences, I would prefer them not to have it in there. And judging from the quote that Davidus provided, I believe Blizzard is catering to player such as myself, who enjoy cooperative and fair competitive play, rather than playing that focuses on ways to ruin another player's enjoyment.
I don't go out of my way to argue with people (OK, maybe sometimes I do, but I didn't in this instance). I created a post and Phool "took issue" with the part of my post where I stuck "nonconsensual" next to "PKing", so I defended my reasons for doing so. I just find it annoying because I think he's just confusing people. I know he's confusing me.
I used your post, specifically 'nonconsensual Pking' as an entrance point for rephrasing the ideas I expressed in another thread (see my self-quote in my first post in this thread). I'll again summarise my views:
I don't believe you should be able to force someone to pvp with you;
no-one is at any risk whatsoever from legitimate PKers (exception unless they actively make the decision not to opt out, and have sufficient time to do so); and
I believe in D3 you should be able to provide as much incentive for other players to pvp with you as is currently the case.
My conclusion was, and continues to be, that the hostile system should remain as it is in D2 1.11c in Diablo 3, and that the complaints of those against PK existing, on the basis that it decreases other player's enjoyment of the game, are insufficient, partially due to players having equal potential to 'grief' competent players without going hostile at all.
If you wish to point out the specific places where I've confused you and explain how they've done so, I would certainly appreciate the opportunity to better my communication skills. I do usually make an effort to avoid ambiguities in my language, sometimes at quite some cost of simplicity.
But I just want people to keep in mind they type of sample we're dealing with. Its basically haphazard sampling technique. A) This poll is on a website dedicated to the game so it is typically the more dedicated/less casual gamers who will see this poll
If you're willing to take the time to register on a Diablo fansite and express your opinion, then your opinion should be heard and considered more strongly than someone who is too lazy to register and/or who is just not interested enough to bother. Those are my thoughts, anyway.
And this poll has been posted on the official Diablo III general forum as well.
I used your post, specifically 'nonconsensual Pking' as an entrance point for rephrasing the ideas I expressed in another thread (see my self-quote in my first post in this thread). I'll again summarise my views:[list]
I don't think you should have because there's no other accurate concise definition that differentiates PKing from dueling, or other forms of PVP other than "nonconsensual PVP." PKing is the act of engaging a player and killing them when they do not want to be engaged, nor killed. And by questioning that definition you're only going to confuse people, and get people to question which side you're on, like I did.
I don't believe you should be able to force someone to pvp with you;
When you hostile someone in Diablo, you give them a ultimatum: you fight, or you run. That's very close to forcing someone to PVP.
no-one is at any risk whatsoever from legitimate PKers
I've already explained to you that this is wrong. You can hostile players who are outside of an Act, then run out engage and kill them (and you conveniently ignore this point and/or you claim that anyone who does get PKed like this is a newb and/or stupid, but that doesn't change the fact that legitimate PKers do pose a threat to some people). And while it is true that there are WP delays now, I suspect those delays were put in place so players would have some kind of chance against PKers. Even a good player could be caught off guard the way WPs worked before; in the past, you could literally hostile someone, then "teleport" next to them and kill them in a second, or less.
EDIT: Sorry for the double-post.
If you're willing to take the time to register on a Diablo fansite and express your opinion, then your opinion should be heard and considered more strongly than someone who is too lazy to register and/or who is just not interested enough to bother. Those are my thoughts, anyway.
And this poll has been posted on the official Diablo III general forum as well.
Ehhhh, firstly, even if blizz does weight "non-casual" gamers more, it would still be pretty stupid to completely ignore the casual gamers. Their goals is get the most money possible. Secondly, Im not talking about just registering to take a poll, Im talking about visiting game sites in general. What if instead of all the time you and I spend talking on a D2 forum, they spend actually playing the game. Does this make them less of a fan or less interested? There are many reasons why someone wouldnt register to a game site, and I don't think that should be used to judge a gamer's involvement or interest. BUT if they do bother to register and post, its probably true that they are alittle more non-casual than the typical player. But my point is that there are probably many more non-casual gamers unaccounted for.
As for the second part, I think you did a great job of trying to get a representative sample, no criticism from me at all. Its just problems with surveys in general, and one must keep in mind the limitations that are inherent in this type of measurement.
Ehhhh, firstly, even if blizz does weight "non-casual" gamers more, it would still be pretty stupid to completely ignore the casual gamers.
If these players who are against PKing can't take the time to voice their opinions on a website, then how can Blizzard know they even exist; or why should they worry about their opinion as much? Obviously, someone who doesn't take the time to express their opinion isn't someone who cares that much either way. And I disagree with your assumption that anyone who is for PKing is "non-casual."
What if instead of all the time you and I spend talking on a D2 forum, they spend actually playing the game. Does this make them less of a fan or less interested?
If they can't be bothered to post their opinion in regards to the highly anticipated game: Diablo III, then one could only assume that they're not that interested.
I don't think you should have because there's no other accurate concise definition that differentiates PKing from dueling, or other forms of PVP other than "nonconsensual PVP." PKing is the act of engaging a player and killing them when they do not want to be engaged, nor killed. And by questioning that definition you're only going to confuse people, and get people to question which side you're on, like I did.
When you hostile someone in Diablo, you give them a ultimatum: you fight, or you run. That's very close to forcing someone to PVP.
Forcing means giving someone no realistic alternative. Attempted pk victims have plenty of choice, and plenty of time to make that choice. So no, not 'very close' by the wildest stretch of imagination. If it's not forced, it can be quite reasonably described as consensual.
Enough semantics.
I've already explained to you that this is wrong. You can hostile players who are outside of an Act, then run out engage and kill them (and you conveniently ignore this point and/or you claim that anyone who does get PKed like this is a newb and/or stupid, but that doesn't change the fact that legitimate PKers do pose a threat to some people).
I've acknowledged that there is no delay between hostiling and leaving town, and that that can be 'abused' to catch unwary victims, and expressed my views on it.
I would prefer a ~5 second delay given to quitting a town but not a big deal
And while it is true that there are WP delays now, I suspect those delays were put in place so players would have some kind of a chance against PKers. Even a good player could be caught off guard the way WPs worked before; in the past, you could literally hostile someone, then "teleport" next to them and kill them in a second, or less.
There wasn't actually a point made here, so I'll reiterate.
I believe PK should stay in exactly the form it is right now in D2 (I would prefer a ~5 second delay given to quitting a town but not a big deal), given removal of tppk.
I'll repeat, hopefully for the last time, I am against forced pvp - which is something that currently does not exist in D2 (hacks/exploits and repeatedly aforementioned and dealt with exception aside). I would like to close that exception, certainly not add another far more serious one.
If you disagree with my vision of how pk should be handled in d3, please explain why.
DarkGoat
04-07-2008, 00:48
I seriously don't get it. PK is what gives longevity to hardcore. Sure, beating hell in hardcore is not child's play, but it will not keep you playing for 3+ years. PK does. I can't imagine anything more fun or more satisfying than collecting lvl 99 ears. There are many ways to remedy the non-existent "fairness" problem. For example, they could make PK possible only above a certain lvl, say 40. But completely removing the feature is the stupidest thing they could possibly do. I actually wouldn't mind if they removed it from softcore, since it isn't a very big part of it, but no PK in hardcore cannot be tolerated.
Attempted pk victims have plenty of choice, and plenty of time to make that choice.
That doesn't mean it's consensual, though. (Time is relative to the situation; if they're right outside town, then obviously they won't have much of it if someone were to hostile them.) Not to be condescending, but I think the problem here stems from the fact that you don't fully understand what the word consensual means. When you hostile a player and attempt to PK him, there are no questions asked and the player certainly didn't ask for it (literally speaking); ergo it's nonconsensual. The fact that the player who was hostiled has the choice to run away has no bearing and it doesn't make it consensual; and by him staying outside doesn't necessarily mean he has given consent to the act, either.
If you disagree with my vision of how pk should be handled in d3, please explain why.
The issue here is your inability to concede to the point that PKing is nonconsensual PVP.
Enough semantics
more semantics
My masochistic tendencies are probably showing, but I'll remind you of the point; whether a legitimate player can, or can not, force people (excepting those few foolish enough to stand immediately outside of a town) to fight you against their will. That when given proper time and notification, an 'opt out' choice is just as valid a choice as an 'opt in' choice.
My masochistic tendencies are probably showing, but I'll remind you of the point; whether a legitimate player can, or can not, force people (excepting those few foolish enough to stand immediately outside of a town) to fight you against their will.
If you're not interested in a debate over semantics, then why did you start one with me?
Just because you noted one of the flaws in your own logic in parenthesis, doesn't mean your argument becomes immune to it. And like I wrote previously, I don't think you understand what the word consensual means. No one is absolutely forced to do anything in Diablo II, but that doesn't mean the act of PKing someone, or hostiling someone is consent for a PVP engagement. Consensual PVP would be agreeing to a fight with another player and picking a place, time and forming rules. Continuing to quest, or kill monsters when someone hostiles you isn't; although, such a decision will most likely lead to one.
See my previous post that you've decided to ignore. I'm not repeating myself anymore.
Phredreeke
04-07-2008, 01:50
I think Hardcore should stay, even though I don't play it I can't see any gain in not having the option.
It is just an impromptu duel then, as anyone with half a brain just uses a Town portal to get out within the 10 seconds and wait for the PK'er to start boring himself. If you stay, you want to duel so it is consentual.
That's one way to look on it, or you can look at it like this, the PKer is forcing the player to either duel or leave/wait out. Should players really have to "wait out until it's safe"?
You sure DO like arguing about everything and anything, huh, haha.
If these players who are against PKing can't take the time to voice their opinions on a website, then how can Blizzard know they even exist; or why should they worry about their opinion as much? Obviously, someone who doesn't take the time to express their opinion isn't someone who cares that much either way. And I disagree with your assumption that anyone who is for PKing is "non-casual."
Like I said, noting your bolded text, even if Blizz gives their opinion more weight, they cant COMPLETELY IGNORE casual gamers. That would be idiotic. Im not saying give the casual gamers more weight, but its important to keep both groups in mind. Just because someone doesn't visit gaming sites doesnt mean they don't play or enjoy the game. Ultimately their opinion counts because they buy the game, and that is Blizzards ultimate goal. And I never said anyone who is for PKing is non-casual, so Im not even gonna argue about that.
If they can't be bothered to post their opinion in regards to the highly anticipated game: Diablo III, then one could only assume that they're not that interested.
Um, no. Some people don't go to game forums. Some casual gamers don't even know Diablo 3 has been announced. Should it be released, they would buy it though. Im not talking about hypothetical people, Im talking about friends. And when you ask me why Im speaking for them, its because they don't bother with posting in forums or looking up games.
You do realize that some people don't track the progress of every game they like right? They may have bought the game back in 2000, played and really enjoyed it, and disliked the PK aspect. And then they got tired of the game and quit after 2-3 years. Should Diablo 3 come out, and they remember the old good memories, they might buy the new installment. Simply put, they have an opinion about PKing, but aren't that dedicated to games in general to track the development of a new game. And when it comes down to it, a casual players $60 is worth just as much as a non-casual players $60, so Blizz has to keep everyone in mind. And you're right though, if they don't explicitly post about it, then Blizz might never know, but Blizz is skilled with developing games and one of their talents has to be their ability to anticipate what the fan base, both casual and non-casual, want. Blizzard does not blindly take suggestions from hardcore fans. Its a good starting point, but ultimately blizzard will make the game, not the fans.
You sure DO like arguing about everything and anything, huh, haha.
It takes two to argue.
Like I said, noting your bolded text, even if Blizz gives their opinion more weight, they cant COMPLETELY IGNORE casual gamers.
So, you've ignore all of my points. Allow me to reiterate a few things:
Do not make the mistake of presuming that casual gamers have something against PKing.
How can Blizzard know that this other side exists if they do not communicate?
And I don't think Blizzard should completely ignore "casual gamers" (a term which might not even apply to this situation).
Just because someone doesn't visit gaming sites doesnt mean they don't play or enjoy the game.
No, it just means they're not as interested, nor passionate about the game.
Should Diablo 3 come out, and they remember the old good memories, they might buy the new installment.
Which would include memories of being PKed, or PKing others...
Simply put, they have an opinion about PKing, but aren't that dedicated to games in general to track the development of a new game.
Well that's their loss. Blizzard isn't psychic. And it's unfortunate Blizzard will have to dumb down everything so the "casual gamer who couldn't be bothered to post their opinion" don't get offended, or put off.
For all you people who say that PKing ruined your D2 gaming experience, answer me this:
How often did you actually run into PKers? Of all the thousands of D2 games that you were in, how many actually were destroyed by PKers?
Now consider this: there are proportionally WAY more racist bigots, leechers and people who dont help the group than there are PKers. PKing was a actually a way for players to deal with problem-players.
Getting rid of PKing is NOT a way to achieve cooperative gameplay. Blizzard totally missed the mark on this one. People can find infinite ways to be dickweeds and play uncooperatively. The only way to fully avoid uncooperative players is by making private games, utilizing the restriction options (which most people neglected to use then blamed others for their dissatisfaction with the game), and making friends with cooperative players. This is how it is both in video games and in real life. It's your responsibility to look after yourself in a world full of assholes. Getting rid of PK is an artifical, short-sighted approach to achieve "cooperative play" and does nothing at all to enhance the gameplay.
Did you see my post at all about giving players the option of having an "admin game" where a person could kick anyone of their choice out - this would of course be an optional game mode - but would allow greater ability for a moderator to kick out annoying / script kiddies out. ALSO - it could still allow for those that want / dont care about taking a chance in a public non moderated game.
Allowing hostiling in HC games I think is the way it was INTENDED by Blizzard makers/non hacking players should stay. Its part of the Hardcore experience - if you dont like it - only play HC in private games - or play softcore. Pretty easy?
It would also be cool if they had a guild system too like in WoW - allowing an easy networking of people to create and play games with.
It takes two to argue.
Ha, good point. Except I dont feel the need to argue with everyone. Ive looked at other threads within PK or at the general D3 forum at Blizz. Seems like you argue with everyone, even the guy thats trying to support you.
So, you've ignore all of my points. Allow me to reiterate a few things:
Do not make the mistake of presuming that casual gamers have something against PKing.
How can Blizzard know that this other side exists if they do not communicate?
I also like how you love to point out something in anothers post and then hypocritically do the same thing. Thanks for ignoring parts of my post. Let me reiterate.
- Do not make the mistake of presuming that casual gamers do not have something against PKing. Im not arguing that the unpolled people would be against PKing. They could very well support PKing. For someone who dislikes others making implications, you sure do make alot. But the simple fact of the matter is that we don't know. Im saying there are limitations to your survey (i.e. casual gamers or long time ago players were probably not included), and it is necessary to think of these when looking at the results.
- Blizzard does not make their games based soley off of fan opinions. They are very capable of making their own games. Fan opinions are used as a part of their decision, it is not based solely on what fans on a game website say they want.
And I don't think Blizzard should completely ignore "casual gamers" (a term which might not even apply to this situation).
No, it just means they're not as interested, nor passionate about the game.
Who cares? As long as they are interested enough to buy that game, thats all that really matters.
Which would include memories of being PKed, or PKing others...
And....this means nothing. Of course they have memories of it...I never said PKing wasnt a part of D2. But these casual players will have an opinion not depicted in this poll.
Well that's their loss. Blizzard isn't psychic. And it's unfortunate Blizzard will have to dumb down everything so the "casual gamer who couldn't be bothered to post their opinion" don't get offended, or put off.
No, blizzard isnt psychic. But they do have developers. If all Blizzard did was compile opinions on the internet, then they wouldnt need any developers, they'd just need programers to make the game from what they compiled from the gaming forums.
Ha, good point. Except I dont feel the need to argue with everyone. Ive looked at other threads within PK or at the general D3 forum at Blizz. Seems like you argue with everyone, even the guy thats trying to support you.
Because the people who try to support me a lot of times hurt the cause more than they help. And some of these people who support me nitpick parts of my posts and make asinine points.
As for the people over at the official forums... holy crap. I barely read what anyone writes because it's always something stupid. About a hour ago some guy tried arguing that the inclusion of PKing doesn't add to Diablo II's difficulty at all, and after I wasted a hour "arguing" with him he writes: "OH I GET IT NOW!"
- Do not make the mistake of presuming that casual gamers do not have something against PKing.
When have I?
Im not arguing that the unpolled people would be against PKing.
You do though, and you've done it again in this very post! I'll highlight it for you.
- Blizzard does not make their games based soley off of fan opinions.
When did I write they did?
But these casual players will have an opinion not depicted in this poll.
Perhaps, perhaps not. And maybe I misunderstand what you wrote here.
Because the people who try to support me a lot of times hurt the cause more than they help. And some of these people who support me nitpick parts of my posts and make asinine points.
As for the people over at the official forums... holy crap. I barely read what anyone writes because it's always something stupid. About a hour ago some guy tried arguing that the inclusion of PKing doesn't add to Diablo II's difficulty at all, and after I wasted a hour "arguing" with him he writes: "OH I GET IT NOW!"
And thats why I stopped debating seriously online, haha. Theres no real point. There is way too much miscommunication. But at least you mad him realize your point....
When have I?
You didn't, but I didnt presume they would be anti-PKing, so I figured I just throw an nonsensical claim right back at ya.
You do though, and you've done it again in this very post! I'll highlight it for you.
Hmmm, unless Im missing something, the only highlighted part that I see is "But these casual players will have an opinion not depicted in this poll". This obviously says nothing about WHAT their opinion is. Simply that they did not participate in the poll, and hence their opinion was not shown. I say nothing of if those players like or dislike PKing.
When did I write they did?
Ah, I suppose I made a jump in your logic. You had said Blizz would not know of the opinions of those who did not post in game forums, so I assumed that you thought Blizz was only going to base the game decisions on the opinions presented in game forums, which would be relying solely on fans' opinions. My bad if this is not what you meant.
Edit: Ah! I think I see where the miscommunication is. When I say "will have an opinion not depicted in this poll" I don't mean they will have an opposite opinion of the poll (i.e. where as the poll says a majority are pro-PK, their opinion would be anti-PK). Rather I am saying their opinion won't be INCLUDED in the poll because they are most likely not taking it. And hence the poll does not necessairly depict the opinions of the casual gamers (whatever that opinion might be). Hopefully this clears it up, sorry.
Uncle_Mike
04-07-2008, 09:27
Let's keep OT to the minimum please :whistling:
Let's keep OT to the minimum please :whistling:
Was the topic - how to argue online? :)
Did you see my post at all about giving players the option of having an "admin game" where a person could kick anyone of their choice out - this would of course be an optional game mode - but would allow greater ability for a moderator to kick out annoying / script kiddies out. ALSO - it could still allow for those that want / dont care about taking a chance in a public non moderated game.
Allowing hostiling in HC games I think is the way it was INTENDED by Blizzard makers/non hacking players should stay. Its part of the Hardcore experience - if you dont like it - only play HC in private games - or play softcore. Pretty easy?
It would also be cool if they had a guild system too like in WoW - allowing an easy networking of people to create and play games with.
Giving choice in making such games will only kill PKing as a form of play. Everybody that just wants to quest will make such games and kick pks out, it's the same thing with the idea of creating games where PVP isn't allowed.
The whole idea of PK is to kill people that don't want to duel/pvp, giving them the ability to play in public without fear of pk goes completely against Diablo and moreso HC spirit.
Oh and on the whole TPPK issue, it was called TPPK even before the hack existed, I was TPPKing in bloody foothills with lvl 33 ama before those BMPK nubs made the trigger.
I also disagree with restricting the hostility button for only those chars higher than level X, it would kill low level pking and dueling. I don't know the exact that of D2 at this time since I quit for some time, but when I was playing making lvl9 assas or lvl 18 or 24 chargers and pking/dueling with them were much more fun than high level pk, at least for me.
Giving choice in making such games will only kill PKing as a form of play. Everybody that just wants to quest will make such games and kick pks out, it's the same thing with the idea of creating games where PVP isn't allowed.
Many people in this thread have stated they like the thrill of being attacked by PK'ers and that is essential to Diablo. You are one of them really. I assume these people will make those PK-allowed games put forward here.
Many people in this thread have stated they like the thrill of being attacked by PK'ers and that is essential to Diablo. You are one of them really. I assume these people will make those PK-allowed games put forward here.
Somebody can make such a game but clearly others won't come and actually play in it. Why would they when they can go to the non-pk game? I might as well make a passworded game and play solo.
I'll be forced to make a non-pk game if I actually want to play with a party, it will end up that the only pk games made will be the dueling games.
No choice is the correct option.
Somebody can make such a game but clearly others won't come and actually play in it. Why would they when they can go to the non-pk game? I might as well make a passworded game and play solo.
I'll be forced to make a non-pk game if I actually want to play with a party, it will end up that the only pk games made will be the dueling games.
No choice is the correct option.
All the people who like pk-ing would come into those games. Judging by the poll it would still be a big community of people who don't mind being pk'ed.
The only thing it would take away from pk'ing is the griefing, as this isn't possible because the people who consider it griefing will be in the non-pk games.
Those who have no qualms with it will be in the PK-allowed games.
Truly this is a simple, and perfect solution.
What you are saying is that you think no-one likes pk-ing except for a select few, if this is the case then yes, the pk-allowed games will not be made much. But this would also prove that it is correct that Blizzard removed it then.
All the people who like pk-ing would come into those games. Judging by the poll it would still be a big community of people who don't mind being pk'ed.
The only thing it would take away from pk'ing is the griefing, as this isn't possible because the people who consider it griefing will be in the non-pk games.
Those who have no qualms with it will be in the PK-allowed games.
Truly this is a simple, and perfect solution.
It isn't simple and it isn't a solution either. I have the feeling you're the type of guy that ended up dead in sewers PKed by lvl9 assa that entered by the second door.
If you don't want to die why not go play softcore? There you don't have such worries as PKs, because regardless of some people seem to think, there is no such thing as softcore PK as far as I'm concerned. As long as you don't die the 'K' in PK isn't happening.
Exping without a rush is hard enough without waving flags and calling every pk on the realm while all the carebears have a whorefest on the non-pk games.
It isn't simple and it isn't a solution either. I have the feeling you're the type of guy that ended up dead in sewers PKed by lvl9 assa that entered by the second door.
If you don't want to die why not go play softcore? There you don't have such worries as PKs, because regardless of some people seem to think, there is no such thing as softcore PK as far as I'm concerned. As long as you don't die the 'K' in PK isn't happening.
Exping without a rush is hard enough without waving flags and calling every pk on the realm while all the carebears have a whorefest on the non-pk games.
The why don't you play Softcore, and why don't you play private games arguments need to be stopped. This decision is not to be made by others but by the people who play the game themselves. My position on playing hardcore is just as valid as someone who isn't opposed to PK'ing, I like hardcore, I just don't like the way co-operation has been done away with by other players.
Also stop with the "carebear" calling, please. It holds about the same value as calling someone a "Noob".
The option seemed to me to be a perfect solution as it would keep in mind both opinions we have seen in this thread.
Uncle_Mike
05-07-2008, 18:03
No more carebears please :whistling:
No more carebears please :whistling:
With this I'm assuming you mean the name-calling, not the people being called that. ;)
The why don't you play Softcore, and why don't you play private games arguments need to be stopped. This decision is not to be made by others but by the people who play the game themselves. My position on playing hardcore is just as valid as someone who isn't opposed to PK'ing, I like hardcore, I just don't like the way co-operation has been done away with by other players.
Also stop with the "carebear" calling, please. It holds about the same value as calling someone a "Noob".
The option seemed to me to be a perfect solution as it would keep in mind both opinions we have seen in this thread.
Clearly as the poll shows a majority is for PK and I'm not sure what you understand from the poll but as far as I'm concerned PK would be killed if a non-pk game mode is implemented. As such I take the results as stateting people are against a choice for non-pk game mod.
What you are saying is you're for PK but only PK for people that want to be PKed, the people that don't should get a free ride and I'm starting to doubt you actually ever played HC for any considerable amount of time.
Clearly as the poll shows a majority is for PK and I'm not sure what you understand from the poll but as far as I'm concerned PK would be killed if a non-pk game mode is implemented. As such I take the results as stateting people are against a choice for non-pk game mod.
What you are saying is you're for PK but only PK for people that want to be PKed, the people that don't should get a free ride and I'm starting to doubt you actually ever played HC for any considerable amount of time.
First: Please, I don't want to make this about me, and am not going to defend my experience or anything.
Just wanted to point out that this idea would be a solution to the people with varying opinions.
As I have stated before, with this option Diablo 3 could be a home for both types of players.
Now you wouldn't play in the non-pk games, but does it really bother you that others would be in those types of games? Why does it bother you?
I wouldn't play in the pk-allowed games. But I wouldn't be bothered by people PK'ing in the Pk-allowed games as well. We can both play the game in a satisfying way.
First: Please, I don't want to make this about me, and am not going to defend my experience or anything.
Just wanted to point out that this idea would be a solution to the people with varying opinions.
As I have stated before, with this option Diablo 3 could be a home for both types of players.
Now you wouldn't play in the non-pk games, but does it really bother you that others would be in those types of games? Why does it bother you?
I wouldn't play in the pk-allowed games. But I wouldn't be bothered by people PK'ing in the Pk-allowed games as well. We can both play the game in a satisfying way.
Of course I'd be bothered if people get to play in non-pk games, how could I not? They get the same thing I am at half the risk, only way I could even see a non-pk game a possibility is if non-pk games get some massive exp and mf penalties which would make at least some of the non-pk people go into a pk game. When I say massive I don't mean 10% exp penalty, more like 50-60% exp and mf penalty if the monsters are hard to kill or even 75% penalty if monsters are easy to kill.
Of course I'd be bothered if people get to play in non-pk games, how could I not? They get the same thing I am at half the risk, only way I could even see a non-pk game a possibility is if non-pk games get some massive exp and mf penalties which would make at least some of the non-pk people go into a pk game. When I say massive I don't mean 10% exp penalty, more like 50-60% exp and mf penalty if the monsters are hard to kill or even 75% penalty if monsters are easy to kill.
Why should there be a reward for allowing PK's? It's just a preference. Why do you bother with what items other people find?
Let me phrase that more generally, why would people mind the amount of xp and items other people get in the other type of game?
Why should there be a reward for allowing PK's? It's just a preference. Why do you bother with what items other people find?
There wouldn't be a reward for allowing PK, it would be a penalty for not allowing it. As for why there would be a penalty for not allowing it? It's the price you pay for playing a non-pk game. Want that feeling for security you have when you know you can't be hostiled? Than expect something in return, if you're lazy and want fast exp go play in the spirit of Diablo and hardcore and risk getting pked.
There wouldn't be a reward for allowing PK, it would be a penalty for not allowing it. As for why there would be a penalty for not allowing it? It's the price you pay for playing a non-pk game. What that feeling for security you have when you know you can't be hostiled? Than expect something in return, if you're lazy and want fast exp go play in the spirit of Diablo and hardcore and risk getting pked.
A penalty for playing without pk = a reward for playing with pk. It is the same thing.
I also think our opinion on the "spirit of diablo" is just different, let's agree to disagree on that.
But still, I don't see a reason why you should be jealous(? is this it?) of people playing a non-pk game, if you are able to play in pk-allowed games yourself(along with others)
Uncle_Mike
05-07-2008, 18:33
With this I'm assuming you mean the name-calling, not the people being called that. ;)
Yes, no more name calling would be nice :)
A penalty for playing without pk = a reward for playing with pk. It is the same thing.
I also think our opinion on the "spirit of diablo" is just different, let's agree to disagree on that.
But still, I don't see a reason why you should be jealous(? is this it?) of people playing a non-pk game, if you are able to play in pk-allowed games yourself(along with others)
Clearly we've played different Diablo games.
The penalty would be for playing against the spirit of the game and for that you'd have to pay a price.
I'm not jealous I'm just against people gaining something for nothing. If they want something let them work for it.
If they want something let them work for it.
A game is leisure time to me. Not work. Here may lie that difference we see in the "spirit of the game". But as I tried before: let's agree to disagree on that count.
A game is leisure time to me. Not work. Here may lie that difference we see in the "spirit of the game". But as I tried before: let's agree to disagree on that count.
The way I see it is you don't want to pe penalized from playing with pks so you want your own game mod, the way I see it is you're trying to buy security. I use the term buy loosely, since what you are actually doing is trying to get it for free.
As far as I'm concerned if you want security you'll have to pay for it. You think the price is to high? Tough. Go back to pk games.
I really don't know what Diablo you played but I had to work for everything I had in D2. Be it exping in public cows/baal runs, mf runs on laggy servers with laggy connections or spending hours on the trade channel waiting for that one trade that would increase my wealth. Diablo has always been survival of the fittest and I find your ideas abhorrent and completely against the game.
The way I see it is you don't want to pe penalized from playing with pks so you want your own game mod, the way I see it is you're trying to buy security. I use the term buy loosely, since what you are actually doing is trying to get it for free.
As far as I'm concerned if you want security you'll have to pay for it. You think the price is to high? Tough. Go back to pk games.
I really don't know what Diablo you played but I had to work for everything I had in D2. Be it exping in public cows/baal runs, mf runs on laggy servers with laggy connections or spending hours on the trade channel waiting for that one trade that would increase my wealth. Diablo has always been survival of the fittest and I find your ideas abhorrent and completely against the game.
Underneath that exping, mf-ing and trading is a game where you have to create one of different characters to slay Diablo, and in the expansion Baal.
Don't get me wrong, I like PVP, mf'ing and trading a lot as well, especially on these forums, but I do have high hopes for the actual game as well.
Underneath that exping, mf-ing and trading is a game where you have to create one of different characters to slay Diablo, and in the expansion Baal.
Why gee thanks I'll remember that next time I'm playing my hardcore char in single player because my internet connection dropped. I might try what you suggest.
You might want to check what Blizzard said "Game experience might change during online gameplay."
I always played to be the best than the rest of the server at pretty much everything I did, the social interactions in D2 were always interesting be them positive or negative.
Wow, seems like everyone but you two has long since moved on from this. I applaud your determination.
I just figured I'd chime in my .02 here in regards to making "PK" and "Non-PK" games.
Player A is looking to PK people with the character he is currently on, so he makes a "PK" game. If the games are on separate lists, he more than likely only has other PKers join, forcing him into a duel game instead of the intended hunt.
Player B wants to play cooperative only, so he clearly creates a "Non-PK" game and in his game there in clearly no PKing.
Player C (Me for example) has nothing against PK, but is not looking to PK on his current character. I am looking to get a decent group going, so I have no other option except to create a "Non-PK" game as if I create a "PK" game I'll get nothing but people specifically looking for that type of game (primarily PKs).
I can't see any other options at the moment (it is 5 am) besides these three and if you notice a trend, in none of the three variants is there an impending threat of being PKed while questing. Thus, from my point of view splitting games up into PK and Non will destroy the spirit of PKing.
Obviously if you can think of any other situations I would love to hear them, but it seems you are arguing from the assumption that "a large portion of people want to have PK as a part of the game, thus they will create PK allowing games" I feel this logic is a bit flawed, as it assumes people will willingly limit their community size in return for an additional challenge.
Also, I feel it should be acknowledged that if a PKer is on the hunt and has a list of say 6 games to choose from, all primarily filled with people looking to either PK themselves or PKK, the legit PK community will strangle because of a lack of targets. Eventually it will reach a point where there are not enough people to hunt and people will stop bothering to PK and we'll have a completely obsolete game setting and the death of legit PK.
You were so kind as to point out that the majority of people voting in this poll want PKing in D2 and and I don't think we should entertain a solution that will destroy PKing if taken to its logical closure point, as doing so completely disregards the votes of the majority in this small sample size.
Cheers
-Tai
HouseSpray
07-07-2008, 18:23
The problem with making games with a pvp option is that it is not fair to pvpers/pkers that want to play in pk games.
We should not have to see PVE games and PVErs should not be able to level up in pve games and then get to come Duel in our games.
If there is a pk / non-pk option it MUST be made on creation of the character. That character is then forced to play in ONLY that mode.
Taking pks from the game ruins the game for PKKS!!!
etslayer
07-07-2008, 19:39
HouseSpray you are right, except that if they are going to separate the community, it should be PvM-only and the rest. Is this what you are saying? Sorry if it's the same.
HouseSpray
07-07-2008, 20:24
HouseSpray you are right, except that if they are going to separate the community, it should be PvM-only and the rest. Is this what you are saying? Sorry if it's the same.
Yeah, pretty much. There would be regular pk/pvp play and then PVE mode, and the 2 modes never have to see eachother nor can they play with eachother.
Check boxes for pve play on game creation = BAD
Check boxes for pve play on Character creation = OK
Doing this would also show pvers how few people there really are that do not want pking in the game.
etslayer
07-07-2008, 21:07
Yeah I think that making people chose between PvP+PK and PvE-only would infuriate a lot of people who are PvP oriented but hate PK. HOWEVER, if this system is put into place, it would completely debunk the whole "majority rules" argument that is used by the anti-PK camp.
Right now, a lot of the outcry against PK comes from the PvE oriented camp. If they have their own realm to play on, 100% of these complaints will be gone. The complaints that remain would come from the players who are PvP oriented but still hate non-consentual hostility. I think that these players would be outnumbered by those who prefer the D2 PvP system (which has non-consentual hostility). Therefore, for all these people who say "majority rules", will be shut up because htey would either a) have their own realm or b) be the minority that still chose to play on the PvP realm even though they don't like the D2 PvP system.
That being said, I think that any character that is in HC in the PvE only realm should not be able to compete on the ladder, because they took the easy road. After all, why should they have a ladder if they are PvE... the ladder is a PvP aspect because it is a competition between players.
Uncle_Mike
07-07-2008, 21:21
Yeah I think that making people chose between PvP+PK and PvE-only would infuriate a lot of people who are PvP oriented but hate PK. HOWEVER, if this system is put into place, it would completely debunk the whole "majority rules" argument that is used by the anti-PK camp.
No it wouldn't, it would totally debunk your concept of PK which seems to be hunting down people who aren't interested in that aspect of the game. If the majority of people decide to play PvE only games it will in fact prove that there is limited need for PK in hardcore. People interested in PvP would most likely decide to go the PvP route and take the risk, yet you want to deny them the right to do so and instead decide that they should be free to fall to PK.
To me ladder has always been about experience gained by characters, and in a PvE oriented game that d2 is (my opinion) it's more about killing monsters than killing other players. I also can't remember any threads about top ladder players being PKed so that the one killing them would move up the ladder.
HouseSpray
07-07-2008, 22:06
Well even if PVE-only players had a mutual agree to duel system and PK-only players had the diablo2 system, Hardcore PVE-only diablo3 would be a ghost town.
I played Hardcore for years and have met about ZERO players that did not like having pks in the game.
Its just fun having a lv 9 hostile you every once in a while. It is fun pretending to suck and putting on bad gear to trick a pk into standing at the edge of town in a cocky way, because he thinks you are all scared. Then out of nowhere you put on your real gear and kill him really fast.
The only way a PVE/dueling server would beat out a PK server in diablo3 hardcore is if blizzard somehow made a really really good dueling system to where no one cares about pking anymore... which I do not see happening.
Softcore might go mostly PVE/dueling though, because most pks of any worth do not pk in softcore... its just lame. Softcore has always been the duel for fun zone.
etslayer
07-07-2008, 22:11
No it wouldn't, it would totally debunk your concept of PK which seems to be hunting down people who aren't interested in that aspect of the game.
I wish you wouldn't say things like this. I have stated many times that I am not specifically supporting people who hunt down questers just to be jerks. I am supporting the current D2 HC PvP system which has non-consentual dueling. There are many types of PK. In fact, 100% of all PvP combat is PK because hostiles are non-consentual.
If the majority of people decide to play PvE only games it will in fact prove that there is limited need for PK in hardcore.
Wrong. I am arguing against the whole notion that "majority rules" is a valid argument. There is a good reason why the D2 devs did not always listen to the majority of players. It's because the majority does not always know what is best for a game. In theory an idea might attract the masses, but if actually implemented could seriously hurt the longevity of the game. I believe this same idea applies to the anti-PK camp. Right now, the anti-PK camp likes to use the majority rules argument to justify the removal of PK, often citing PvM oriented players as a group that is treated unfairly. If HouseSpray's system is put into effect, all of these PvM oriented players would be removed from the argument because they would have their own realm. Therefore what is left on the anti-PK side would be all the PvP players who hate non-consntual hostiles. Therefore your majority-rules argument would actually go against you. Considering how much emphasis the anti-PK camp places on the PvM experience, I would assume that the majority of the anti-PK camp is PvM oriented players. Therefore the players on the PvP realm that hate PK would be the minority. See how the majority rules argument can come back to bite you in the arse?
People interested in PvP would most likely decide to go the PvP route and take the risk, yet you want to deny them the right to do so and instead decide that they should be free to fall to PK.
If you are sticking to you majority rules argument, this wouldn't matter because the players on the PvP realm that hate PK would now be the minority of people on that realm.
To me ladder has always been about experience gained by characters, and in a PvE oriented game that d2 is (my opinion) it's more about killing monsters than killing other players. I also can't remember any threads about top ladder players being PKed so that the one killing them would move up the ladder.
Yes, the ladder is about experience gained. But getting this experience is an obstacle. In HC, PvP is part of the obstacle. That is why it's hardcore. Not only because you have to survive monsters till level 99, but all ladder opponents. And if someone kills a top ladder opponent in order to move up on the ladder, that perfectly legitimate. As stated previously, anyone who dies to a PKer allows themselves to be killed. Unless of course some nasty hacks are involved.
Uncle_Mike
07-07-2008, 22:14
Well even if PVE-only players had a mutual agree to duel system and PK-only players had the diablo2 system, Hardcore PVE-only diablo3 would be a ghost town.
I played Hardcore for years and have met about ZERO players that did not like having pks in the game.
What is the problem then? There is no issue whatsoever if the HC crowd is so fond of PK.
Wrong. I am arguing against the whole notion that "majority rules" is a valid argument. There is a good reason why the D2 devs did not always listen to the majority of players. It's because the majority does not always know what is best for a game. In theory an idea might attract the masses, but if actually implemented could seriously hurt the longevity of the game. I believe this same idea applies to the anti-PK camp. Right now, the anti-PK camp likes to use the majority rules argument to justify the removal of PK, often citing PvM oriented players as a group that is treated unfairly. If HouseSpray's system is put into effect, all of these PvM oriented players would be removed from the argument because they would have their own realm. Therefore what is left on the anti-PK side would be all the PvP players who hate non-consntual hostiles. Therefore your majority-rules argument would actually go against you. Considering how much emphasis the anti-PK camp places on the PvM experience, I would assume that the majority of the anti-PK camp is PvM oriented players. Therefore the players on the PvP realm that hate PK would be the minority. See how the majority rules argument can come back to bite you in the arse?
Unless diablo 3 is pay to play the majority definitely rules since they provide Blizzard with most of the revenue. Sadly it's the 12 year olds that get the game as a birthday gift that matter most, not a bunch of people who wish to keep the game alive for 5+ years.
If you are sticking to you majority rules argument, this wouldn't matter because the players on the PvP realm that hate PK would now be the minority of people on that realm.
and the issue would not exist since you would only get to deal with those interested in both HC and PK.
Yes, the ladder is about experience gained. But getting this experience is an obstacle. In HC, PvP is part of the obstacle. That is why it's hardcore. Not only because you have to survive monsters till level 99, but all ladder opponents. And if someone kills a top ladder opponent in order to move up on the ladder, that perfectly legitimate. As stated previously, anyone who dies to a PKer allows themselves to be killed. Unless of course some nasty hacks are involved.
Any cases of people PKing others so that they advance in the ladder? Or even links to threads where people have PKed someone just because he was advancing in the ladder and it felt cool to PK the PvM nerd and show him/her what HC is all about?
Anything except the hostile button and the pvp penalties that makes Diablo 2 PvP and PK oriented?
HouseSpray
07-07-2008, 22:36
What is the problem then? There is no issue whatsoever if the HC crowd is so fond of PK.
Unless diablo 3 is pay to play the majority definitely rules since they provide Blizzard with most of the revenue. Sadly it's the 12 year olds that get the game as a birthday gift that matter most, not a bunch of people who wish to keep the game alive for 5+ years.
and the issue would not exist since you would only get to deal with those interested in both HC and PK.
Any cases of people PKing others so that they advance in the ladder? Or even links to threads where people have PKed someone just because he was advancing in the ladder and it felt cool to PK the PvM nerd and show him/her what HC is all about?
There is no issue for me if you have to pick your character mode at character creation... that would be fine.
I am only against having a checkbox when you make a game for pvp or pve. Once you pick your mode and rules you should be stuck with them... PVE mode can even have a mutual dueling mode for all I care.
Also... only one of those quotes was from me lol.
Uncle_Mike
07-07-2008, 22:46
Also... only one of those quotes was from me lol.
Damn copy/paste ~_~
Respond accordingly :girly:
etslayer
07-07-2008, 23:19
PVE mode can even have a mutual dueling mode for all I care.
You are getting soft :P
Why give PvE oriented players the option of PvP? That would kind of destroy your entire system wouldn't it? I think every character that wants to participate in HC PvP should play under thenon-concentual dueling system. By providing the PvP option for the PvE realm, you are eliminating PK.
I like your original idea better.
HouseSpray
07-07-2008, 23:49
You are getting soft :P
Why give PvE oriented players the option of PvP? That would kind of destroy your entire system wouldn't it? I think every character that wants to participate in HC PvP should play under thenon-concentual dueling system. By providing the PvP option for the PvE realm, you are eliminating PK.
I like your original idea better.
Well... I think they should leave pking the way it was in diablo2. Pking was not much of a problem for softcore... and is wanted by most in Hardcore... so no real need to do anything.
I was just saying if they do different modes they should be done at character creation and should be stuck in their mode. That is the important part.
I was also saying that if that option existed with dueling even in PVE, PK mode would still win in hardcore... the pve/dueling mode would be a ghost town in Hardcore mode.
EDIT:
Originally Posted by Max Schaefer, Senior Designer of Blizzard North
Diablo II and the expansion are the games that we at Blizzard want to play. That is our formula for success. Companies that design games based on focus groups, marketing opinions, and even fan input do not succeed. Although hearing the opinions of others are valuable to us, every design decision must pass the test of whether or not WE would want it in the game. In many cases, we've changed our minds after hearing compelling arguments. But we've decided that PKing is part of the Diablo universe. We are well aware that this does not please everyone. However, you are right: we are not apologetic about it. Not at all. Sure, we could implement a PK switch. It's a trivial coding task. But we wouldn't be being true to ourselves, and our goals as gamemakers.
Mike, just so you know - this last Ladder Reset, my reset team on its way to the top of East Hardcore had 3 PK attempts when we ventured into public games. People recognized our tag and tried to get me twice, once with manual TPPK and tried to get our barb once.
Also, during the ladder run there were 4 deaths I can recall of people above level 80. These people were all ladder runners near the top at the time who were playing in public games and weren't PKed. Obviously there were more than 4 deaths, but I know of 4 that were PK related and multiple other attempts. This is not a one-time trend, our team ran entirely in private games except for 2 Baal runs me and our barb did to level while the rest were grabbing food (we were a bit behind) in 2 runs we had 3 PK attempts because of our tags.
People who we had never heard of nor seen before were constantly messaging us looking for Baals and things like that and I'd feel very confident saying that at least some of those were people trying to PK us on their way up the ladder.
It's not uncommon. Hardcore is cutthroat and, outside of a few select groups I know of from this forum, most of the serious ladder runners I have encountered are members of sites with reputations for hacks and botting.
etslayer
08-07-2008, 00:55
uncle mike those are all my quotes, but it says originally posted by HouseSpray.
(in your post)
Uncle_Mike
08-07-2008, 06:16
uncle mike those are all my quotes, but it says originally posted by HouseSpray.
(in your post)
All but one, i've edited my post, sorry for the confusion/mistake :)
HouseSpray
08-07-2008, 16:37
Well we already know that pking is an intended part of the diablo universe. So there is no need for people that are pro-pk to argue from a point of weakness. It is people that want to remove pking that should have to give good reasons why the diablo universe should be changed.
Also, I am tired of calling it pking... that is not even the issue... I like the HOSTILE system. This means you can hostile anyone in a game and they can choose to stay in a place of danger or play there and have a chance I will find them and kill them.
If someone is being bothersome I should be able to hostile them and kill them. If someone is trying to screw up a quest I am doing and will not party me(like killing a boss I am working on) I should be able to hostile them.
There is no real pk in diablo2 where you can just be killed out of nowhere(not legit anyways, so that is another issue, 3 sec delay on hostile would work). You just get hostiled and then you choose if you want to let them attack you or not... and you can password games and you can put in level reqs.
People in Hardcore WANT the hostile system in the game... everyone I ever played with in hc, even if they did not pvp, wanted it. To the guy in the other thread that said Hardcore players do not want pks because they never liked him when he tried to pk people, EL OH EL at that faulty logic. OF COURSE they do not like YOU when you are trying to pk them... they then want to kill you... its fun... its part of the game.
That is almost as bad as saying "no one likes it when their character is killed permanently... therefore no one likes Hardcore mode".... LOL.
Pking is part of the Diablo universe and should not be changed... maybe a hostile delay to stop tppk. I belive the majority of the players of diablo like the hostile system. If pvers think they are the majority and were in diablo2... then they have already proven that they can put up with the hostile system... so why should blizzard change it?
You can not be pked in a legit manner in diablo2 unless you allow it to happen.
No Housespray, it is not the same thing. And they most certainly did not want to kill me, or fight me. For me, it might have been fun, bu for them it certainly was not. 95% of the general HC populace would rather see PK-ing gone. We here at dii.net do like it, but we are most certainly not the bnet-majority. Never forget this! And no matter how long we debate, we pk's must realize that we kill someone else his char, whether they like it or not (and they dont), and we thus cause grief.
If it is in, I shall defend the right to kill people untill my last breath. If it is not in, I shall not shed a single tear.
Uncle_Mike
08-07-2008, 16:58
Well we already know that pking is an intended part of the diablo universe. So there is no need for people that are pro-pk to argue from a point of weakness.
Runes were also designed as part of the game, does this mean we cannot criticise dupers and economy flooded with high runes?
Concept is one thing, its implementation is another.
Also, that part about PK being intended is from 2001 - they have a new team of developers now and things might change. I don't think there exist a general agreement about the diablo lore and legacy which says: pk: allowed; colors: gothic and dark etc.
HouseSpray
08-07-2008, 17:01
No Housespray, it is not the same thing. And they most certainly did not want to kill me, or fight me. For me, it might have been fun, bu for them it certainly was not. 95% of the general HC populace would rather see PK-ing gone. We here at dii.net do like it, but we are most certainly not the bnet-majority. Never forget this! And no matter how long we debate, we pk's must realize that we kill someone else his char, whether they like it or not (and they dont), and we thus cause grief.
If it is in, I shall defend the right to kill people untill my last breath. If it is not in, I shall not shed a single tear.
There is NO WAY it is 95% of Hardcore players. Pkers yell at pkers when they join their game as much as anyone else. I have no idea where you get your figures from... but I have my doubts about how honest you are being in anything you say. You sound more like a pver trying to argue against the hostile system in a backwards way to me.
EVERYONE I have ever played with in hardcore liked the hostile system. They also almost always yelled at a pker when they joined their game. It is role play... you are going to yell at a pker and try to kill them. Or just yell at them if your dueling build is not ready yet. That in no way means you do not want this feature in the game.
I base my figures off of the people I played with and talked about it with... which I did quite often... even when I made an account not long ago to use the bnet forums... there was a guy that played hardcore and never pks or pkks... but he said he wants the hostile system in the game.
Like I said... I doubt everything you say, as you sound like a pver pretending to be a pk to try to make a point. Your figures of 95% make it sound like you have NEVER played hardcore mode or pked there.
etslayer
08-07-2008, 17:05
There is far less incentive to get the best gear and have the strongest character if all duels are polite, consentual friendly duels. The creators of D2 wanted people to have every reason to have that drive to have the best char, becasuse that is what the game is all about. Diablo is incredibly PvP oriented, despite what the PvM crowd claims.
All you people who say that "if PKing means so much to you, then you are a freak" or something to that affect, maybe we just like a game where people actually have a logical reason to create the strongest character possible. Just because some people don't want their character to face dangers outside of PvM does not mean that this drive to have the best char should be reduced for everyone. Diablo has never been a game that was meant to appeal to everyone. That is why while the online RPG/MMO market has evolved durastically, D2 still remains a fairly popular game despite its old-school PvP system. People realize that it has something to offer which WoW, GWs and all these other carebear games don't. I commend the D2 team for sticking to their principles rather than caving to the public. They realized how important the PvP system was to the game.
I think that the new D3 dev. team is missing the mark because they are too concerned about pleasing the mainstream crowd which typically cannot fathom how PK helped D2 become such a unique and successful RPG. PvP is played down in WoW because that game has such a huge world and therefore is very PvE oriented. But Blizzard has said that D3 will be roughly the same size as D2 (which is relatively very small in comparison to contemporary online games such as WoW and GWs). Therefore it will naturaly evolve into a competitive, PvP oriented game in which non-consentual PvP has proven to be incredibly popular. Trying to implement a WoW style PvP in a game like diablo just doesn't work because that would be an attempt to implement a popular feature from one game that does not naturally fit into another. So either make D3 a huge world where PvE can be satisfactory even for hardcore gamers, or stick to the D2 PvP system designed for no-holds-bar PvP interaction without rediculous consent rules. Pick one or the other Blizzard, or else your game will be a dud. Sure it will still appeal to the casual gamer, but neither the PvE-crazy crowd nor the PvP-crazy crowd will have much reason to play it.
People who are anti-PK now will not even realize that it's a bad idea until the game has been around for a couple years and players begin to realize that the game is just not all that deep unless there is a truley challenging PvP that has real meaning. One that goes beyond friendly duels.
Uncle_Mike
08-07-2008, 17:08
There is NO WAY it is 95% of Hardcore players.
source?
Like I said... I doubt everything you say, as you sound like a pver pretending to be a pk to try to make a point. Your figures of 95% make it sound like you have NEVER played hardcore mode or pked there.
He's the only PKer known to me on this site (i don't venture into the hardcore forum much), if you check his post history (he's been here since at least 2003) you will see him offering PK advice throughout the years. What except of your own statements do you have to back yourself up?
This is the only PK thread left at the moment, if's up to you guys if it stays open.
HouseSpray
08-07-2008, 17:09
Runes were also designed as part of the game, does this mean we cannot criticise dupers and economy flooded with high runes?
Concept is one thing, its implementation is another.
Also, that part about PK being intended is from 2001 - they have a new team of developers now and things might change. I don't think there exist a general agreement about the diablo lore and legacy which says: pk: allowed; colors: gothic and dark etc.
The problem with that is runes are an item. There is no statement that runes being a part of the diablo universe. Runes were also added in late in the game in diablo2. Also the problem you mentioned has nothing to do with runes... it has to do with dupes and hacks... Which is the only problem I have with pks... hacks. So this point is still in my favor.
It does not matter how old that statement is and of course the game can change... the point is that there is no need for people in favor of pk to argue from a point of weakness... because it is already quoted as being an intended part of the diablo universe.
I in no way was trying to say that people that want it removed have no right to say so... just that because of these facts, pro-pks have a stronger point to argue from... instead of trying to defend the game the way it already existed from a point of weakness.
source?
He's the only PKer known to me on this site (i don't venture into the hardcore forum much), if you check his post history (he's been here since at least 2003) you will see him offering PK advice throughout the years. What except of your own statements do you have to back yourself up?
This is the only PK thread left at the moment, if's up to you guys if it stays open.
I have already said my source is based on EVERYONE I have ever talked to in Hardcore mode.
He would be easy for him to pose as being a pk on forums for years. Even more so since I see no reason why a PK would even post on forums about pking and give advice for years. The fact that he would just grant that people that like pking/hostile system are only