i would argue that they have more understanding of the game than casual players. sure, they might not enjoy the story, or the setting, that type of thing, but as far as game mechanics go, they sure do know a lot
And that illustrates the first problem I have with these players. They tend to make blanket statements about anyone else to the tune of describing them as "casual." As if nobody could possibly delve into the mechanics of the game significantly without having the undying urge to utilize that knowledge in order to gain more pvp prowess. In point of fact, there are quite amazing players who don't pvp and are not casual in the least. However, they don't even get a chance to speak without being label'd a casual and shouted down for want of an arena rank, killboard stats, ladder rank, etc.
Admittedly, some games are based around pvp and those stats actually matter, but Diablo games aren't so one-sided.
all because someone doesnt play for the story/lore doesnt make them immature and looking to increase e-peen or w/e the fck it is. some people are just idiots, others look to have fun by building good characters or learning new skills.
I don't factor in the study of lore either. I see that as an entertainment apart from the gameplay that's mostly followed through literature. I would take issue with someone claiming their knoweldge of lore, to the detriment of game mechanics, meant they were a great player. That said, this is another instance where a lot of non-pvp-centric players get a label that doesn't fit. Someone likes pve? Well they must be a lorefag, right?
from the outside looking in, its hard to understand the appeal. i always questioned why someone can only make 1 character or play 1 class and become the best at it; i always grow bored and need to try something else.
I feel the same way, and while I always want to learn more about my "favorite," class that class will shift as I complete my knoweldge of each. Ultimately i'd like to know about every class in detail.
Ultimately, I think a competitive gamer doesn't have to pvp, nor do I feel pvp is a path to enlightenment. Gamers who are serious about their hobby will invariably know more about their game than others and there's absolutely no reason to intentionally slight an entire substrata of players based on which mode of play provides them more enjoyment, be that pvp or pve. As we have seen on these very forums, many pvp'ers feel it to be their perrogative to inform others that they are inherently better in some respects and this is what annoys me the most about the concept of acceping competitive pvp.
I am pretty much what the OP described. I am usually not interested in a game if the game does not allow me to PVP.
I don't think its about e-peen and "winning", however. Its just that PVE has always bored me incredibly fast. PVE is always so... static. I mean, once you did the campaign once, what is there left to do? You either make an alt (and do the same campaign all over again) or go gear hunting (and then farm the same area again and again). PVE is (by nature) very repetitive. PVP, on the other hand, is always new and fresh. Each fight is different. You could PVP for years and still manage to learn new strategies and builds! Also, in a balanced game, the metagame is always shifting, and you have to adapt to stay on top.
It saddens me that blizzard is doing everything possible to destroy competitive PVP in D3.
Hmm.. you guys shouldn't always think of like Casual vs Competitive Gamers, because I think you can be both.
Being a competitive gamer just means you really enjoy playing against other players and have the desire to win. Where as, casual gamers are just people who like to play games at their own pace.
I consider myself as both a casual and competitive gamer. Like with CS and TF2, which are the only games I play a few times a week and really enjoy "pwn'ing" people at (when I can). I don't really think that is such a bad thing. I don't make an ass of myself by trash talking and insulting people, but it is a natural to feel good about yourself when you are winning.
Now, the problem isn't really with competitive gamers per say, the problem is just "those" people in general. It shouldn't be a surprise that the internet is filled with immature a-holes.
Actually the Diablo 2 PVP was amazing and thats why its been going so long. Like I said a million times if Diablo 3 atleast is on par with D2 PVP wise than it will be just fine.
2 and 3 might not be winners to you, but if they're smart enough, they won't give a shit what you think and go play pve!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
i would argue that they have more understanding of the game than casual players. sure, they might not enjoy the story, or the setting, that type of thing, but as far as game mechanics go, they sure do know a lot
And that illustrates the first problem I have with these players. They tend to make blanket statements about anyone else to the tune of describing them as "casual." As if nobody could possibly delve into the mechanics of the game significantly without having the undying urge to utilize that knowledge in order to gain more pvp prowess. In point of fact, there are quite amazing players who don't pvp and are not casual in the least. However, they don't even get a chance to speak without being label'd a casual and shouted down for want of an arena rank, killboard stats, ladder rank, etc.
so i guess you think a casual player is a negative label? im a casual AoE player
if a pve player understands all the mechanics and such, they arnt exactly casual either. maybe i missed some new fancy-pantsy internet term, but a casual player shouldnt know most intricacies of any game imo.
a huge problem with playing against the computer is that the difficulty is just retarded. im no longer speaking about diablo or wow or sc, but most games in general. instead of making the AI smarter in any way, they always seem to make you weaker or the cpu stronger. which is BS. thats why playing against a human player can be so satisfying, you get a challenge thats otherwise not there.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Remember the String of Ears
"to the worm in horseradish, the world is horseradish."
so i guess you think a casual player is a negative label? im a casual AoE player
Not a negative label necessarily, but it's got a connotation that the player doesn't funny understand the game or play it often. I consider myself a casual EVE player, but i'm heavily involved in a lot of metagames there, and as a six year vet i'd like to think I am more competent than a "casual," label would suggest. My raw time input over say, a week, isn't huge and that's where most people make the hardcore distinction.
if a pve player understands all the mechanics and such, they arnt exactly casual either. maybe i missed some new fancy-pantsy internet term, but a casual player shouldnt know most intricacies of any game imo.
Right, that's what i'm getting at. Casual doesn't apply to all pve players.
a huge problem with playing against the computer is that the difficulty is just retarded. im no longer speaking about diablo or wow or sc, but most games in general. instead of making the AI smarter in any way, they always seem to make you weaker or the cpu stronger. which is BS. thats why playing against a human player can be so satisfying, you get a challenge thats otherwise not there.
I agree, AI is problematic in a lot of games, but in a good game you'll still have a variety of challenges to overcome against a cpu opponent. You might also (take example of the Auction House or Ladder) find latent competition among the pve audience where a commanding knowledge of game mechanics and an ability to both execute and lead others to execute competently is key.
Playing against another player is all well and good. I don't disdain pvp. I simply look for my pvp in games where pvp is the prime mover in design and balance. What really screws up game design (in my opinion) is designers attempting to duck-walk an absurd balance of pvp and pve balance. This tends to fall flat in all cases, even in mmo's where they have all kinds of income to throw at the problem on a regular basis with patch iteration and re-design.
As such, I think competitive pvp in D3 is a non-starter at the seriously competitive level. It's going to be competitive alright, and i'm sure leagues will develope to catur to that audience with blizzard throwing more pvp support their way piece-meal. But, when it comes down to demanding blizzard create the "balance," they are so famous for (honestly I will say they do a better job than most, despite the fact i'm horrified at how SC2 turned out) D3 just cannot deliver without diverting a lot of pve resources or simply skewing pve balance, be it short or longterm.
PvE is like a long tutorial that you can repeat over and over again to get the mechanics versus the AI.
PvP is like multiplayer chess in real time versus others made of flesh and blood.
PvP is about skill, PvE is about fun. For a balanced game that is.
Except what tends to happen is, pve is fun and pvp is imbalanced. Forums go into an uproar, things are patched several times, and eventually pvp is still imbalanced, but pve also gets turned on it's head in the process. I could use a lot of mmo's as an example here, but yeah, the devs are right to stick to one side or the other. Pandering to both audiences is just going to frustrate everyone.
a huge problem with playing against the computer is that the difficulty is just retarded. im no longer speaking about diablo or wow or sc, but most games in general. instead of making the AI smarter in any way, they always seem to make you weaker or the cpu stronger. which is BS. thats why playing against a human player can be so satisfying, you get a challenge thats otherwise not there.
GOD YES.
Games have horrible AI in general. The pinnacle of AI in games was around UT2004 and F.E.A.R..
The thing is they never push for it. They just assume everybody wants to play multiplayer so if you're going to do bots, might as well just have a multiplayer game. Which is really sad.
I don't understand why they insist on making the AI "read" and "react instantly" either. Is it THAT hard to add delay? To make the AI remember more than just 1 variable?
Even things like in Unreal 1, where the monster can actually decide what to do depending on how equipped you are and what weapons you are using, is the kind of thing you NEVER see anywhere. Not to mention that this game had a lot of versatility and had very engaging battles. Thats 1998. But even now, its still "read everything you do, be perfect at predicting, and in a lot of games, just plain cheat".
If I had the basic natural talents for this, I'd be making AI for games. Logic dictates there is so much more that can be done with them.
Except what tends to happen is, pve is fun and pvp is imbalanced. Forums go into an uproar, things are patched several times, and eventually pvp is still imbalanced, but pve also gets turned on it's head in the process. I could use a lot of mmo's as an example here, but yeah, the devs are right to stick to one side or the other. Pandering to both audiences is just going to frustrate everyone.
In D3 theres a system in place to prevent that. Skills can be tweaked to affect only pve or pvp. For example there could be a skill that deal 100 dmg and stun for 1 second, but against players it would only do 700 and stun for ,5. And this system is ALREADY DONE. Its in the game.
I dont get the "fear" of PVP unbalancing PVE. they arent linked.
In D3 theres a system in place to prevent that. Skills can be tweaked to affect only pve or pvp. For example there could be a skill that deal 100 dmg and stun for 1 second, but against players it would only do 700 and stun for ,5. And this system is ALREADY DONE. Its in the game.
I dont get the "fear" of PVP unbalancing PVE. they arent linked.
Yeah, except you can't garuntee that's how they'll always do it. Example: Deathknights in WoW. They had some skills that simply couldn't be tweaked just for pvp, they had to be entirely re-designed because of pvp. Also factor in the amount of developer time that is going to be pumped into pvp balance. Unless pvp'ers are feeding them RMAH fees like mad, I don't see blizzard thinking that pvp is where their money should be spent.
I disagree. I believe Blizzard knows very well that Diablo is at least million times better game for Arena PvP then WoW. If you've played the first WoW(lvl 60) you'll know what I'm talking about. The game have never been made for this kind of competitive gaming. It's for Battle Grounds with 10+ players. Diablo on the other hand is made exactly for the small group(arena) type PvP.
There is no way you're seriously implying Diablo3 is more of a pvp game than WoW...
Not exactly but I'll put it this way:
Diablo 3 will be more of a PvP game then the original WoW(lvl60) have ever been.
That's not really a fair compairson given the orignial WoW is more like Diablo, whereas D3 is a third iteration more like Wrath where pvp had been extensively developed.
Not really Proletaria. D3 isn't like wrath in that sense at all. Diablo3 is from scratch. Sure they had D2 pvp as an example, but it wasn't built around D2 pvp at all. It's a completely new game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Not really Proletaria. D3 isn't like wrath in that sense at all. Diablo3 is from scratch. Sure they had D2 pvp as an example, but it wasn't built around D2 pvp at all. It's a completely new game.
I agree, it's a totally new game, but in terms of how pvp has developed I don't think it's fair to say WoW had more or less emphasis on pvp than D3 will. Besides the fact it's apples and oranges (mmo and arpg), D2 pvp was largely player driven whereas WoW pvp became a major part of the game. Hence i'm incredulous that anyone would argue Diablo is more of a pvp title.
This thinking is a bit foreign to me. Where does items fit in here? The building of a character with all it entitles? If you want the player challenge so much isn't there better games out there that provides this and this only? I mean why the fuss of leveling a character, artisans, getting gear if you dislike that part of the game so much? (maybe I missinterpreted your aversion of playing versus AI?)
Exactly. Why bother to play this game if all you care about is competition? This game and the developers deserve more than that. But hey, just my opinion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
If I didn't want competition, I'd go read a book. It's offline single player, and there's book clubs for when I want to multiplayer that provides a friendly competition-free environment and has zero balancing issues.
...
I love leveling my chars and gearing them. I also like pvp. Insinuating that pvpers don't enjoy other aspects of the d3 experience is ludicrous. And if you dont understand why people enjoy competition, you don't understand human nature and the nature of life itself.
edit: ok that last sentence may have been an over exaggeration, but you get my point.
Why don't you go re read my OP before you rage quit. I never said...ugh...Nevermind.
Yes, I think everyone who enjoys pvp should be burned at the steak because of their wasting time on anything but pve.
You heard it, if you like pvp, I hate you. <_<
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
I don't hate people just because I disagree with them on forums, that's what trolls do. I was merely trying to get my point across, albeit rather bluntly.
And I did read your OP, and your opinions are clear but have little merit. Probably because you've had a few too many bad experiences with people who really are pricks irl and on the internet(and really, who hasn't had a bad experience with one?) and lump all pvpers into this category.
@Simpy7: You'll also find that some people are surprisingly predictable in pvp too. i.e. tunnel vision zerg teams etc
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
And that illustrates the first problem I have with these players. They tend to make blanket statements about anyone else to the tune of describing them as "casual." As if nobody could possibly delve into the mechanics of the game significantly without having the undying urge to utilize that knowledge in order to gain more pvp prowess. In point of fact, there are quite amazing players who don't pvp and are not casual in the least. However, they don't even get a chance to speak without being label'd a casual and shouted down for want of an arena rank, killboard stats, ladder rank, etc.
Admittedly, some games are based around pvp and those stats actually matter, but Diablo games aren't so one-sided.
I don't factor in the study of lore either. I see that as an entertainment apart from the gameplay that's mostly followed through literature. I would take issue with someone claiming their knoweldge of lore, to the detriment of game mechanics, meant they were a great player. That said, this is another instance where a lot of non-pvp-centric players get a label that doesn't fit. Someone likes pve? Well they must be a lorefag, right?
I feel the same way, and while I always want to learn more about my "favorite," class that class will shift as I complete my knoweldge of each. Ultimately i'd like to know about every class in detail.
Ultimately, I think a competitive gamer doesn't have to pvp, nor do I feel pvp is a path to enlightenment. Gamers who are serious about their hobby will invariably know more about their game than others and there's absolutely no reason to intentionally slight an entire substrata of players based on which mode of play provides them more enjoyment, be that pvp or pve. As we have seen on these very forums, many pvp'ers feel it to be their perrogative to inform others that they are inherently better in some respects and this is what annoys me the most about the concept of acceping competitive pvp.
I don't think its about e-peen and "winning", however. Its just that PVE has always bored me incredibly fast. PVE is always so... static. I mean, once you did the campaign once, what is there left to do? You either make an alt (and do the same campaign all over again) or go gear hunting (and then farm the same area again and again). PVE is (by nature) very repetitive. PVP, on the other hand, is always new and fresh. Each fight is different. You could PVP for years and still manage to learn new strategies and builds! Also, in a balanced game, the metagame is always shifting, and you have to adapt to stay on top.
It saddens me that blizzard is doing everything possible to destroy competitive PVP in D3.
Being a competitive gamer just means you really enjoy playing against other players and have the desire to win. Where as, casual gamers are just people who like to play games at their own pace.
I consider myself as both a casual and competitive gamer. Like with CS and TF2, which are the only games I play a few times a week and really enjoy "pwn'ing" people at (when I can). I don't really think that is such a bad thing. I don't make an ass of myself by trash talking and insulting people, but it is a natural to feel good about yourself when you are winning.
Now, the problem isn't really with competitive gamers per say, the problem is just "those" people in general. It shouldn't be a surprise that the internet is filled with immature a-holes.
Oh and remember kids...
2 is not a winner and 3 nobody remembers...
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
I disagree, everyone should strive to be a pro gamer.
I honestly can't think of a better way to ruin a great hobby.
if a pve player understands all the mechanics and such, they arnt exactly casual either. maybe i missed some new fancy-pantsy internet term, but a casual player shouldnt know most intricacies of any game imo.
a huge problem with playing against the computer is that the difficulty is just retarded. im no longer speaking about diablo or wow or sc, but most games in general. instead of making the AI smarter in any way, they always seem to make you weaker or the cpu stronger. which is BS. thats why playing against a human player can be so satisfying, you get a challenge thats otherwise not there.
"to the worm in horseradish, the world is horseradish."
Not a negative label necessarily, but it's got a connotation that the player doesn't funny understand the game or play it often. I consider myself a casual EVE player, but i'm heavily involved in a lot of metagames there, and as a six year vet i'd like to think I am more competent than a "casual," label would suggest. My raw time input over say, a week, isn't huge and that's where most people make the hardcore distinction.
Right, that's what i'm getting at. Casual doesn't apply to all pve players.
I agree, AI is problematic in a lot of games, but in a good game you'll still have a variety of challenges to overcome against a cpu opponent. You might also (take example of the Auction House or Ladder) find latent competition among the pve audience where a commanding knowledge of game mechanics and an ability to both execute and lead others to execute competently is key.
Playing against another player is all well and good. I don't disdain pvp. I simply look for my pvp in games where pvp is the prime mover in design and balance. What really screws up game design (in my opinion) is designers attempting to duck-walk an absurd balance of pvp and pve balance. This tends to fall flat in all cases, even in mmo's where they have all kinds of income to throw at the problem on a regular basis with patch iteration and re-design.
As such, I think competitive pvp in D3 is a non-starter at the seriously competitive level. It's going to be competitive alright, and i'm sure leagues will develope to catur to that audience with blizzard throwing more pvp support their way piece-meal. But, when it comes down to demanding blizzard create the "balance," they are so famous for (honestly I will say they do a better job than most, despite the fact i'm horrified at how SC2 turned out) D3 just cannot deliver without diverting a lot of pve resources or simply skewing pve balance, be it short or longterm.
Except what tends to happen is, pve is fun and pvp is imbalanced. Forums go into an uproar, things are patched several times, and eventually pvp is still imbalanced, but pve also gets turned on it's head in the process. I could use a lot of mmo's as an example here, but yeah, the devs are right to stick to one side or the other. Pandering to both audiences is just going to frustrate everyone.
Games have horrible AI in general. The pinnacle of AI in games was around UT2004 and F.E.A.R..
The thing is they never push for it. They just assume everybody wants to play multiplayer so if you're going to do bots, might as well just have a multiplayer game. Which is really sad.
I don't understand why they insist on making the AI "read" and "react instantly" either. Is it THAT hard to add delay? To make the AI remember more than just 1 variable?
Even things like in Unreal 1, where the monster can actually decide what to do depending on how equipped you are and what weapons you are using, is the kind of thing you NEVER see anywhere. Not to mention that this game had a lot of versatility and had very engaging battles. Thats 1998. But even now, its still "read everything you do, be perfect at predicting, and in a lot of games, just plain cheat".
If I had the basic natural talents for this, I'd be making AI for games. Logic dictates there is so much more that can be done with them.
Sorry for developing on something off topic.
In D3 theres a system in place to prevent that. Skills can be tweaked to affect only pve or pvp. For example there could be a skill that deal 100 dmg and stun for 1 second, but against players it would only do 700 and stun for ,5. And this system is ALREADY DONE. Its in the game.
I dont get the "fear" of PVP unbalancing PVE. they arent linked.
Yeah, except you can't garuntee that's how they'll always do it. Example: Deathknights in WoW. They had some skills that simply couldn't be tweaked just for pvp, they had to be entirely re-designed because of pvp. Also factor in the amount of developer time that is going to be pumped into pvp balance. Unless pvp'ers are feeding them RMAH fees like mad, I don't see blizzard thinking that pvp is where their money should be spent.
There is no way you're seriously implying Diablo3 is more of a pvp game than WoW...
That's not really a fair compairson given the orignial WoW is more like Diablo, whereas D3 is a third iteration more like Wrath where pvp had been extensively developed.
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
I agree, it's a totally new game, but in terms of how pvp has developed I don't think it's fair to say WoW had more or less emphasis on pvp than D3 will. Besides the fact it's apples and oranges (mmo and arpg), D2 pvp was largely player driven whereas WoW pvp became a major part of the game. Hence i'm incredulous that anyone would argue Diablo is more of a pvp title.
Exactly. Why bother to play this game if all you care about is competition? This game and the developers deserve more than that. But hey, just my opinion.
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
...
I love leveling my chars and gearing them. I also like pvp. Insinuating that pvpers don't enjoy other aspects of the d3 experience is ludicrous. And if you dont understand why people enjoy competition, you don't understand human nature and the nature of life itself.
edit: ok that last sentence may have been an over exaggeration, but you get my point.
Yes, I think everyone who enjoys pvp should be burned at the steak because of their wasting time on anything but pve.
You heard it, if you like pvp, I hate you. <_<
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
I think you got trolled.
(I'm basing this solely on his account name)
And I did read your OP, and your opinions are clear but have little merit. Probably because you've had a few too many bad experiences with people who really are pricks irl and on the internet(and really, who hasn't had a bad experience with one?) and lump all pvpers into this category.
@Simpy7: You'll also find that some people are surprisingly predictable in pvp too. i.e. tunnel vision zerg teams etc