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.
(I copied that from the diii.net forums.) Max Schaefer left Blizzard and formed Flagship Studios. He was one of the original creators of D2.
In this post I attempt to convince people why the ability to PK should remain in D3. I ask that before you begin your anger-filled response (which you are probably already started doing), you hear me out.
My goal in this post was to acknowledge every popular anti-PK argument that I have seen, and then debunk them. I am aware that I ramble at many points, but the text in this forum is too small and it hurts my eyes to proof read.
Before I begin I want to make one thing clear which relates to the rest of this post. When Blizzard implies that there will be no more PK in D3, I assume that means we will see a PvP system in which there are no non-consentual hostiles. Both players would have to hit the hostile button in order to be able to duel. In other words, it will be a polite, consentual PvP system which is seperate from the rest of the gameplay. So... why I think this is bad:
Anti-PK camp: “Consentual-only dueling worked for WoW, and WoW was a huge success, so there is no reason why D3 would’nt benefit from this rule!” Wrong. - WoW is a completely different game with a different aim. The world in WoW is enormous and the game is more geared towards PvE play. There is enough content to keep even hardcore gamers entertained just doing PvE. The PvP is played down because it is naturally not such a huge part of the game. That is why it has a non-competitive, consent-only PvP system. However, D2 has a very small world relative to WoW, and naturally evolved into a very competative PvP oriented game. The developers of D2 realized the PvP orientation of this style of game which is why they ignored countless pleas to remove PK throughout all the years of patchwork that the game saw (See Schaefer's quote at the top). - Blizzard has stated that D3 will be roughly the same size as D2. Therefore, like D2, it will naturally evolve into a highly competative PvP oriented game once a lot of people have played through the game. Despite what the PvE crowd claims, D2 has always been more oriented toward endgame PvP. Anyone who has played D2, especially in it's prime, would have seen the popularity of the endgame. - The success of D2 proves that such a PvP oriented game benefits from a no-holds-bar non-consentual dueling system which goes out of it's way to play up the PvP aspect of the game. - Blizzard should either make D3 much bigger so that PvP can be played down and not require the hardcore, no-mercy style of PvP in D2, or keep the same PvP system as D2 with minor adjustment. - All in all, trying to take a popular element from a totally different style game and un-naturally insert it into a game like D3 can do nothing but hurt the game. It is a way of catering to popular demand instead of making a game with an objective purpose. What we will be left with is a game that is not vast enough to appeal to the PvE-crazed fanbase of WoW, and is not PvP-oriented enough to please the PvP-crazed fanbase. The game will mainly appeal tocasual gamers. That's not what Blizzard should be going for though. - What's left is a diluted, happy-go-lucky consent-only PvP system without the huge PvE element to keep it a PvE oriented game in the long run.
Anti-PK camp: "whoah.. who is to say that the PvP-crazed fanbase necessarely wants a D2 style PvP system with PK?" - In a game like D2 which is oriented toward PvP and item-hunting, a no-mercy PvP system (something that you would find in ANY PvP oriented game be it first person shooter or real-time strategy [both of which usually offer much PvE content]) is the only way to go. You will never find a PvP game which discourages PK. Diablo is no different. It is a PvP oriented game, like it or not. - And the desire to item-hunt is greatly fueled by the fact that you are competing with other people. If you are immune to all other players, you are not truley competing, hence, less incentive to item hunt. This is especially true for HC. - Blizzard says they want a cooperative game so they are getting rid of PK. But there is nothing wrong with having a bit of animosity in a game... that is what makes a game fun and competative. Let's say you get NK'd in D2. You probably get pissed at the player. This adds incentive for you to upgrade your character, and really take the game to the limit so that one day you could show that asshole who is boss. Even if you don't realize it when you are playing, a lot of the incentive to make a good character is to compete with others.
Anti-PK camp: "nobody likes to get PK'd especially on HC!" - This is not a valid argument. Obviously nobody likes to be on the recieving end of any punishment. Be it another player or a monster. Nobody likes to die in any game. However this is a challenge that is a part of the game. I personally would have very little fun playing HC if I knew that I was invulnerable to all player attacks. HC would lose all of it's suspense. When you make a character on HC, you automatically agree to the rules of HC which include an imposed PvP system which is an intended part of the challenge. If you are only interested in testing your character against monsters, either play in private games or play in single player. Otherwise it is your responsibility to avoid PvP interaction. - Getting PK'd is avoidable. On HC, there is a ten second wp and tp delay whenever you hostile someone. So everyone has a head start to run away. There are also level restrictions and a friends list to gather players of similar playing style.
Anti-PK camp: "what about town killing???!!?!?" - that is only a real issue in dueling games, so it should be viewed in the context of dueling games which are intended to see someone die. Since it is HC, people should be allowed to use whatever strategy they want to kill their opponents, who by joining a dueling game are pretty much saying "come get me, bitch".
Anti-PK camp: "But why would you say that PvP is an intended and inherent challenge in HC? HC is about leveling your character, not getting PK'd!" Wrong. Here's why: - Since you are competing with other players on the ladder, the entire process of ladder play is PvP. Therefore PvP is an inherent part of the game and players should be able to knock other players off the ladder. It's not fair to say that nobody has the right to kill you in a public game while you are at the same time competing with them on the ladder, even if you are PvE oriented. - The makers of D2 realized that in HC, the only way to encourage PvP and actually make it a real challenge is to make everyone potentially vulnerable to each other.
Anti-PK camp: "Who is to say that all die-hard HC fans enjoyed the non-consentual PvP system in D2?" - Nobody is saying this, but it is irrelevant for several reasons. Firstly, there would not be very many PvP fans, or (D2 fans for that matter) in the first place had the game chosen the non-PK route. Even though everybody hates getting PK'd, without this challenge in HC a lot less people would have found it interesing. Many people don't even realize what the game would have actually been like without the ability to PK. You might think you hate it and its horrible for the game, but without it there would have been a huge deal lacking from core gaming experience. - Naturally, many HC PvE oriented players had no interest in PvP so they hated PK... but if you are only PvE oriented on HC, it is your own responsibility to avoid player interaction because PvP is just as big a part of HC as PvE is.
Anti-PK camp: "Everyone can easily get the most out of the game without PK existing" Wrong. - Knowing that they are vulnerable to everyone is what gives HC players so much incentive to make the best characters possible. I would never have had the drive to make the strongest character if it weren't for the no-mercy PvP system. I knew that the only way to survive on HC is to force myself to make the best character that I could. This is the entire point of endgame.
Anti-PK camp: "The majority of players hate that PK exists so it should be removed due to popular demand!" Wrong. So wrong. - This "majority" statistic is pulled out of thin air. I have seen polls where it is just the opposite. - This "majority" also includes many online RPG/MMO consumers who are mainly only familiar with contemporary MMO's like WoW and GW's. (See my earlier points regarding WoW) - The majority is usually wrong about most things in general. Be it about video games, politics, you name it. That is why our world is so fucked up.
Anti-PK camp: "other players should not be allowed to impose their playing style on me if I don't want to fight them!" Wrong. - nobody has the right to play the way they want in a multiplayer game. Everybody has equal opportunity to play within the rules proposed by the game. Only on single player or in private games do people have the right to make their own rules. Therefore PKers are not infringing on anybody's rights as long as they are not hacking. So if PKing is an imposition, telling people they have no right to PK you is also an imposition. - your character has no rights. Your character is the property of Blizzard, not you.
Anti PK camp: "Well if that's the case, PK should be removed because it is a flawed rule" - See all my previous arguments. It is not a flawed rule. D2 never would have experienced the same success had their been no PK.
Anti-PK camp: "Blizzard should give players the option of disallowing PK when they create a game. That way everyone can make a game that is suited to their prefered playing style." Absolutely not. This is an incredibly flawed argument. I will discuss HC in this situation. - Allowing people to avoid non-consentual HC duels in public games by restricting it, is pretty much a way for Blizzard to eliminating PK without actually admitting that they are eliminating it. I am a big fan of the current HC PvP system, but if I am playing HC and I see an option that allows me to be invulnerable to PK, obviously I am going to chose it. - My point is that i dont want to have this option. If I can choose whether or not I can be killed by another player, it completely removes all the suspense and challenge that PK brings to the HC experience. I don't see why my fun should be compromised because many people want an easier game. HC is meant to be very difficult. - The same goes for dueling games. If there is an option to make your dueling game a consent-only dueling game, then obviously all HC players would take the easy road, only participating in polite, consented duels. Talk about a snoozefest.
Well I'm done... If you managed to get through the whole post, congrats.
I couldn't read BIG big post, but I'm sure the arguments must be solid, specially for PK lovers; that said, I still think PK is not good, simply becuase it's essence is one person having fun at the cost of other person's fun, and that's morally condemnable in my opinion.
Personally, I don't like PvP, but the essence of this combat mod is that both players involved want to fight, so go on ahead as they're both having fun in using their play killing each other and risking to drop their equipment.
As to PK, it may stay in the game and all, but I hope it's not encouraged or improved to MMORPG levels; anyone who want to spend hours being a morally condemnable dick head should play those kind of games when they want that, not Diablo - save it for when you're not on a killing spree ^^
holy shit. i read to last paragraph and i kinda got the point.
anyway. HERES A QUESTION. Why did "Max Schaefer left Blizzard and formed Flagship Studios. He was one of the original creators of D2.".happen? like why'd he leave? What is the guy trying to say and what does that have to do with him leaving blizzard?
Agreed, its part of the environmental hostility which exhibits in Diablo series. To remove it would demystify a crucial aspect of the game, trust. I've played Diablo since D1 was released. I don't believe I could play D3 for its potential without falling flat from boredom. IE it would be not necessary to make the best possible character because I have nothing to worry about.
You have not addressed the largest and most concrete justification for the removal of PK (assumedly) in D3:
The dev. team has specifically stated and re-stated the D3 is first an foremost a co-operative game. This statement alone clearly reveals (as does the cited post) Blizzard's stance on PK'ing in D3.
PK is not intended to be an existent, much less substantial factor of play in D3.
Why is this the only defense that's needed? Because it's Blizzard's game, and if they don't desire for PK to be a factor in D3, then it won't, and it shouldn't. If PK is that important to a player, he / she won't buy the game. Obviously there aren't enough of those kinds of players to dictate D3 including PK.
I appreciate the passion and thought included in the OP, but it's time to face it. No matter how much you love to PK, Blizz doesn't want that to be a part of the D3 universe.
You have not addressed the largest and most concrete justification for the removal of PK (assumedly) in D3:
The dev. team has specifically stated and re-stated the D3 is first an foremost a co-operative game. This statement alone clearly reveals (as does the cited post) Blizzard's stance on PK'ing in D3.
PK is not intended to be an existent, much less substantial factor of play in D3.
Why is this the only defense that's needed? Because it's Blizzard's game, and if they don't desire for PK to be a factor in D3, then it won't, and it shouldn't. If PK is that important to a player, he / she won't buy the game. Obviously there aren't enough of those kinds of players to dictate D3 including PK.
I appreciate the passion and thought included in the OP, but it's time to face it. No matter how much you love to PK, Blizz doesn't want that to be a part of the D3 universe.
Case closed. Thanks.
that statement alone says nothing. cooperation can still exist with a pk mode on. and unless u have an official dev team quote of, "there is no more pk," then u are absolutely foolish to say cased closed.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Remember the String of Ears
"to the worm in horseradish, the world is horseradish."
that statement alone says nothing. cooperation can still exist with a pk mode on. and unless u have an official dev team quote of, "there is no more pk," then u are absolutely foolish to say cased closed.
This is an exact, verbatim quote from a Blizzard rep. (Bashiok) on the Battle.Net forums regarding, specifically, PKing in D3:
* * *
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.
* * *
If you can't interpret that to understand that they are either removing or severely limiting PK options in D3, you need to take some remedial English classes and work on your comprehension skills. :rolleyes:
Diablo 2 and Diablo 3 are different games with different play styles that are from different generations. To say what works in one game would work in another game is nothing but fool hearty.
That being said, PK is probably the worst idea I have ever heard of. You get 500 people out of 5,000 going from game to game killing everyone and having a good time, while the other 4,500 people are getting upset and pissed off. You remove PK and of course those 500 people are going to be upset. But the 4,500 people will enjoy the game far more.
(Mind you, once you get T6 gear or S3 gear in WoW, it's all about PvP. Just an fyi...)
oh boy very ad hominem. hows your English, mon ami? there isnt anything in that quote that sounds remotely like no pk, but it does seem they are leaning in the no pk direction. wait and see then.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Remember the String of Ears
"to the worm in horseradish, the world is horseradish."
Diablo 2 and Diablo 3 are different games with different play styles that are from different generations. To say what works in one game would work in another game is nothing but fool hearty.
That being said, PK is probably the worst idea I have ever heard of. You get 500 people out of 5,000 going from game to game killing everyone and having a good time, while the other 4,500 people are getting upset and pissed off. You remove PK and of course those 500 people are going to be upset. But the 4,500 people will enjoy the game far more.
(Mind you, once you get T6 gear or S3 gear in WoW, it's all about PvP. Just an fyi...)
Exactly PvP is fine, and I think PKing should stay in hardcore, but besides that there is NO need for it other than to laugh at killing a lower level. If you want to battle someone your own level and they want to battle then there will be some form of PvP surely.
This "it's not Diabloish to take out/add <insert random thing here>" is getting kind of old, it's been 8 years things have changed greatly in the gaming industry.
Exactly PvP is fine, and I think PKing should stay in hardcore, but besides that there is NO need for it other than to laugh at killing a lower level. If you want to battle someone your own level and they want to battle then there will be some form of PvP surely.
PvP is freaking fun as hell. I had a PvE frozen orb sorceress and I would go to PvP games and beat the shit out of PvP players. But it was always in dual games that things were fun. Other games you would be doing a baal run or a mf run and then Jackass2145 joins the game and pk's everyone. Oh yea, real fun. *Eye roll.*
Quote from "Daemaro" »
This "it's not Diabloish to take out/add <insert random thing here>" is getting kind of old, it's been 8 years things have changed greatly in the gaming industry.
Plus Blizzard has learned about it's mistakes from the past. Plus you could say it's a whole new company making the game...
PvP is freaking fun as hell. I had a PvE frozen orb sorceress and I would go to PvP games and beat the shit out of PvP players. But it was always in dual games that things were fun. Other games you would be doing a baal run or a mf run and then Jackass2145 joins the game and pk's everyone. Oh yea, real fun. *Eye roll.*
Plus Blizzard has learned about it's mistakes from the past. Plus you could say it's a whole new company making the game...
Yeah I enjoyed PvP just not PKing, there was no real point.
True it's a whole new company, and with that fact in mind they're doing pretty good to keep some old stuff but incorporate a lot of newer features also.
"....that doesn't mean PvP wont have it's own focus."
This quote makes it clear that PvP is in. How can PvP have it's own focus if it's not even there.
Just wanted to clear that up, because some people are begining to think all forms of PvP are going to be removed. Actually random PK (player kill) will be removed. Competitive play will remain, but will be seperate from the Co-op play.
I am glad that my post was taken so well. I really though I would be facing a full scale attack from the anti-PK crowd.
There are a couple things I should add.
For those who say that it is unfair that high levels can PK low levels just to be assholes, keep in mind that there is a level restrict option in D2 that people are generally just too lazy to utilize.
For the guy saying that D3 is a new game for a new generation... you are right, but what I am arguing is that although it's a new game, it retains the same accessibility and reasonably limited PvE gameplay from D2 which is what provided D2 with such a PvP oriented atmosphere. Taking away non-consentual hostiles makes it boring for people who want a reason to build their character after they beat PvE. Most of this drive to make the best character (especially on HC) is knowing that there will be people that attack you and you have to defend yourself.
Quote from "sammyly02" »
holy shit. i read to last paragraph and i kinda got the point.
anyway. HERES A QUESTION. Why did "Max Schaefer left Blizzard and formed Flagship Studios. He was one of the original creators of D2.".happen? like why'd he leave? What is the guy trying to say and what does that have to do with him leaving blizzard?
I don't know why he left Blizzard but it is not necessarely related to the quote. I was just introducing Max Schaefer to those who don't know who he his.
I think Blizzard should consider his words seeing as he completely hit the nail on the head with the D2 PvP system, making it one of the most successful multiplayer games ever. I truley believe that the new D3 team is not as smart as he is when it comes to designing an RPG. Their specialty is MMO's and RTS. Not that I'm calling Blizzard stupid, because they're geniuses, but as far as diablo goes, the old team had the right idea.
Oh and to Palisade... although Blizzard thinks they are encouraging cooperative gameplay by getting rid of PK, what they are actually doing is hurting the game. It's a very simplistic, shortsighted and half-assed soluition a to assume that removing PK will encourages cooperative play (I'm talking about Blizzard here, not you so dont take offense to that) and I am surprised that Blizzard came to this conclusion. What it does do is completely remove the competative aspect of PvP (there is nothing competative about chosing who may or may not fight you) while the people who are only interested in being "uncooperative" group members can find an infinite number of ways of being uncooperative other than PK. Therefore the amount of uncooperative play would not deminish, but an essential element of PvP would be gone. I know that I would no longer have any competative spirit on HC if I were imune to all player attacks.
If Blizzard wants cooperative group play, they should come up with new ways of encouraging cooperative play... maybe have certain items or quests which are only attainable with very strategically planned group play... something that D2 didn't have. But completely carebear-izing the PvP system? Rediculous.
Sup etslayer, too bad your thread on diii.net got closed. I'm going to repost one of my responses from that thread that you never answered and see if maybe you will answer it here.
______________________________________________________________________
Hmm, a lot's happened since I last posted. Let's see if I can cover everything I want to.
let me start with this
Quote from etslayer »
In HC mode, every single aspect of the game is taken to the hardest possible degree. Therefor to abandon the maximum PvP challenge is to not actually be hardcore.
This is just not true. I believe that you play your hardcore characters a certain way, but there is no reason to think that that is part of being hardcore. The one and only thing that changes when you check the hardcore box is that when you die, you do not respawn. That's it. It doesn't "take every single aspect of the game to the hardest possible degree". It just makes you not respawn. If I check hardcore will every unique monster have a devastating combo of attributes? Way more Multishot Lightning Enchanted than normally? More mobs of monsters that are harder than other potential spawns? Will my act 3 be as sprawling and maze-like as possible?
The answer to all those questions is "maybe, but it's no more likely than if you were softcore". So please, don't tell me that hardcore implicitly means you wouldn't mind getting PKed, because the box could be labeled "No Respawn" and it would do and mean exactly the same thing.
-=[]=-
It seems like not many people who are posting in this discussion followed the link I posted to an old but well detailed argument against PK, so I'll just repeat a lot of it here. (the link I posted was to http://sirian.warpcore.org/diablo2/protest.html if anyone here is interested) The fundamental problem people have with understanding why I and many others dislike PK so much is that they think "If the PK doesn't kill anyone, the PvM players have 'won' and his impact is trivial and meaningless." This is wrong. If I am playing a PvM game with people and a PKer joins and hostiles everyone in the game, he has ALREADY WON.
Now my options are:
1) continue play as normal and get killed by the PKer
2) run back to town and hope he leaves
3) join a different game
In any of these situations, my gameplay has been disrupted in a way that I never wanted to have happen to me. The PK may not have killed anyone, but he ruined our game, which was his goal. That is why I say that he has already won, so don't tell me that PKing is trivial because it's so easy to avoid death.
So what it basically boils down to is that the PK's dollar is worth more to the company than my own. We both bought Diablo 2 to play the game we wanted to play. I wanted to play the game advertised on the back of the box, and he wanted to play a game involving killing people who played the game on the back of the box. Apparently, his game is more important than mine. I understand people are saying "PvP is a critical and intrinsic part of playing on Battle.net", but I would disagree with that as well. The box for Diablo 2 didn't say anything about having every B.net game requiring PvP, or really anything about PvP at all. PKing was certainly not one of the main selling points of the game. Maybe a lot of people bought the game for PvP, but it was not touted as a reason why one should buy the game by Blizzard North.
So when I install this game with supposedly co-op multiplayer with a wide audience of people to meet and play with only to have my party get destroyed by some random person who wanted to ruin our day, what am I supposed to think? It's no coincidence that I stopped playing on B.net less than a month after I bought D2.
_________________________________________________________________________
By the way, I find it more than a little entertaining that you're still waving that quote I posted around like it justifies PKing in the game. Just because it was intended to be in the game does not mean it SHOULD be in the game. Not to mention, that when he said that he was not in any way speaking for the company, which if any of the pro-PK people had followed the link I posted initially, you would know. I only posted it anyway to correct someone who said PKing was an unintended side effect of the PvP system.
And here's my final statement from the last topic, right before it got closed:
A type of gameplay that requires conflict with UNWILLING PARTICIPANTS is a divisive, anti-social, hurtful style of play with no regard for others' feelings or wishes. It should not be in the game.
I am glad that my post was taken so well. I really though I would be facing a full scale attack from the anti-PK crowd.
There are a couple things I should add.
For those who say that it is unfair that high levels can PK low levels just to be assholes, keep in mind that there is a level restrict option in D2 that people are generally just too lazy to utilize.
So that your level 52 buddy can't come in and rush you through normal? Yup, real helpfull.
Quote from "etslayer" »
For the guy saying that D3 is a new game for a new generation...
Name's LinkX. Nice to meet you too.
Quote from "etslayer" »
you are right, but what I am arguing is that although it's a new game, it retains the same accessibility and reasonably limited PvE gameplay from D2 which is what provided D2 with such a PvP oriented atmosphere. Taking away non-consentual hostiles makes it boring for people who want a reason to build their character after they beat PvE. Most of this drive to make the best character (especially on HC) is knowing that there will be people that attack you and you have to defend yourself.
It retains nothing. A new game is a new game is a ne game. The drive to make the best character is about A) Pride PvP and C) Knowing your the best.
As for the "Once they finish PvE then there's only PvP. It's only like this in this kind of game!" argument is foolish. Every game (Except little maggot crap like maple Story) has a level cap where you have nothing to do but PvP. The difference is that other games do it without pissing half the people off. Diablo 2's PK system fails at that. And it fails misserably. Misserably indeed.
Quote from "etslayer" »
I don't know why he left Blizzard but it is not necessarely related to the quote. I was just introducing Max Schaefer to those who don't know who he his.
I think Blizzard should consider his words seeing as he completely hit the nail on the head with the D2 PvP system, making it one of the most successful multiplayer games ever. I truley believe that the new D2 team is not as smart as he is when it comes to designing an RPG. Their specialty is MMO's and RTS.
Except there the RPG team, the remenants of Blizzard North. See, there's an MMO team, an RTS team, and an RPG team. The MMO team is working on WotLK, the RTS team is working on SC2, and the RPG team is working on D3. Thus there specialty is not MMO's, but rather RPG's.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
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.
(I copied that from the diii.net forums.)
Max Schaefer left Blizzard and formed Flagship Studios. He was one of the original creators of D2.
In this post I attempt to convince people why the ability to PK should remain in D3. I ask that before you begin your anger-filled response (which you are probably already started doing), you hear me out.
My goal in this post was to acknowledge every popular anti-PK argument that I have seen, and then debunk them. I am aware that I ramble at many points, but the text in this forum is too small and it hurts my eyes to proof read.
Before I begin I want to make one thing clear which relates to the rest of this post. When Blizzard implies that there will be no more PK in D3, I assume that means we will see a PvP system in which there are no non-consentual hostiles. Both players would have to hit the hostile button in order to be able to duel. In other words, it will be a polite, consentual PvP system which is seperate from the rest of the gameplay. So... why I think this is bad:
Anti-PK camp: “Consentual-only dueling worked for WoW, and WoW was a huge success, so there is no reason why D3 would’nt benefit from this rule!”
Wrong.
- WoW is a completely different game with a different aim. The world in WoW is enormous and the game is more geared towards PvE play. There is enough content to keep even hardcore gamers entertained just doing PvE. The PvP is played down because it is naturally not such a huge part of the game. That is why it has a non-competitive, consent-only PvP system. However, D2 has a very small world relative to WoW, and naturally evolved into a very competative PvP oriented game. The developers of D2 realized the PvP orientation of this style of game which is why they ignored countless pleas to remove PK throughout all the years of patchwork that the game saw (See Schaefer's quote at the top).
- Blizzard has stated that D3 will be roughly the same size as D2. Therefore, like D2, it will naturally evolve into a highly competative PvP oriented game once a lot of people have played through the game. Despite what the PvE crowd claims, D2 has always been more oriented toward endgame PvP. Anyone who has played D2, especially in it's prime, would have seen the popularity of the endgame.
- The success of D2 proves that such a PvP oriented game benefits from a no-holds-bar non-consentual dueling system which goes out of it's way to play up the PvP aspect of the game.
- Blizzard should either make D3 much bigger so that PvP can be played down and not require the hardcore, no-mercy style of PvP in D2, or keep the same PvP system as D2 with minor adjustment.
- All in all, trying to take a popular element from a totally different style game and un-naturally insert it into a game like D3 can do nothing but hurt the game. It is a way of catering to popular demand instead of making a game with an objective purpose. What we will be left with is a game that is not vast enough to appeal to the PvE-crazed fanbase of WoW, and is not PvP-oriented enough to please the PvP-crazed fanbase. The game will mainly appeal tocasual gamers. That's not what Blizzard should be going for though.
- What's left is a diluted, happy-go-lucky consent-only PvP system without the huge PvE element to keep it a PvE oriented game in the long run.
Anti-PK camp: "whoah.. who is to say that the PvP-crazed fanbase necessarely wants a D2 style PvP system with PK?"
- In a game like D2 which is oriented toward PvP and item-hunting, a no-mercy PvP system (something that you would find in ANY PvP oriented game be it first person shooter or real-time strategy [both of which usually offer much PvE content]) is the only way to go. You will never find a PvP game which discourages PK. Diablo is no different. It is a PvP oriented game, like it or not.
- And the desire to item-hunt is greatly fueled by the fact that you are competing with other people. If you are immune to all other players, you are not truley competing, hence, less incentive to item hunt. This is especially true for HC.
- Blizzard says they want a cooperative game so they are getting rid of PK. But there is nothing wrong with having a bit of animosity in a game... that is what makes a game fun and competative. Let's say you get NK'd in D2. You probably get pissed at the player. This adds incentive for you to upgrade your character, and really take the game to the limit so that one day you could show that asshole who is boss. Even if you don't realize it when you are playing, a lot of the incentive to make a good character is to compete with others.
Anti-PK camp: "nobody likes to get PK'd especially on HC!"
- This is not a valid argument. Obviously nobody likes to be on the recieving end of any punishment. Be it another player or a monster. Nobody likes to die in any game. However this is a challenge that is a part of the game. I personally would have very little fun playing HC if I knew that I was invulnerable to all player attacks. HC would lose all of it's suspense. When you make a character on HC, you automatically agree to the rules of HC which include an imposed PvP system which is an intended part of the challenge. If you are only interested in testing your character against monsters, either play in private games or play in single player. Otherwise it is your responsibility to avoid PvP interaction.
- Getting PK'd is avoidable. On HC, there is a ten second wp and tp delay whenever you hostile someone. So everyone has a head start to run away. There are also level restrictions and a friends list to gather players of similar playing style.
Anti-PK camp: "what about town killing???!!?!?"
- that is only a real issue in dueling games, so it should be viewed in the context of dueling games which are intended to see someone die. Since it is HC, people should be allowed to use whatever strategy they want to kill their opponents, who by joining a dueling game are pretty much saying "come get me, bitch".
Anti-PK camp: "But why would you say that PvP is an intended and inherent challenge in HC? HC is about leveling your character, not getting PK'd!"
Wrong. Here's why:
- Since you are competing with other players on the ladder, the entire process of ladder play is PvP. Therefore PvP is an inherent part of the game and players should be able to knock other players off the ladder. It's not fair to say that nobody has the right to kill you in a public game while you are at the same time competing with them on the ladder, even if you are PvE oriented.
- The makers of D2 realized that in HC, the only way to encourage PvP and actually make it a real challenge is to make everyone potentially vulnerable to each other.
Anti-PK camp: "Who is to say that all die-hard HC fans enjoyed the non-consentual PvP system in D2?"
- Nobody is saying this, but it is irrelevant for several reasons. Firstly, there would not be very many PvP fans, or (D2 fans for that matter) in the first place had the game chosen the non-PK route. Even though everybody hates getting PK'd, without this challenge in HC a lot less people would have found it interesing. Many people don't even realize what the game would have actually been like without the ability to PK. You might think you hate it and its horrible for the game, but without it there would have been a huge deal lacking from core gaming experience.
- Naturally, many HC PvE oriented players had no interest in PvP so they hated PK... but if you are only PvE oriented on HC, it is your own responsibility to avoid player interaction because PvP is just as big a part of HC as PvE is.
Anti-PK camp: "Everyone can easily get the most out of the game without PK existing"
Wrong.
- Knowing that they are vulnerable to everyone is what gives HC players so much incentive to make the best characters possible. I would never have had the drive to make the strongest character if it weren't for the no-mercy PvP system. I knew that the only way to survive on HC is to force myself to make the best character that I could. This is the entire point of endgame.
Anti-PK camp: "The majority of players hate that PK exists so it should be removed due to popular demand!"
Wrong. So wrong.
- This "majority" statistic is pulled out of thin air. I have seen polls where it is just the opposite.
- This "majority" also includes many online RPG/MMO consumers who are mainly only familiar with contemporary MMO's like WoW and GW's. (See my earlier points regarding WoW)
- The majority is usually wrong about most things in general. Be it about video games, politics, you name it. That is why our world is so fucked up.
Anti-PK camp: "other players should not be allowed to impose their playing style on me if I don't want to fight them!"
Wrong.
- nobody has the right to play the way they want in a multiplayer game. Everybody has equal opportunity to play within the rules proposed by the game. Only on single player or in private games do people have the right to make their own rules. Therefore PKers are not infringing on anybody's rights as long as they are not hacking. So if PKing is an imposition, telling people they have no right to PK you is also an imposition.
- your character has no rights. Your character is the property of Blizzard, not you.
Anti PK camp: "Well if that's the case, PK should be removed because it is a flawed rule"
- See all my previous arguments. It is not a flawed rule. D2 never would have experienced the same success had their been no PK.
Anti-PK camp: "Blizzard should give players the option of disallowing PK when they create a game. That way everyone can make a game that is suited to their prefered playing style."
Absolutely not. This is an incredibly flawed argument. I will discuss HC in this situation.
- Allowing people to avoid non-consentual HC duels in public games by restricting it, is pretty much a way for Blizzard to eliminating PK without actually admitting that they are eliminating it. I am a big fan of the current HC PvP system, but if I am playing HC and I see an option that allows me to be invulnerable to PK, obviously I am going to chose it.
- My point is that i dont want to have this option. If I can choose whether or not I can be killed by another player, it completely removes all the suspense and challenge that PK brings to the HC experience. I don't see why my fun should be compromised because many people want an easier game. HC is meant to be very difficult.
- The same goes for dueling games. If there is an option to make your dueling game a consent-only dueling game, then obviously all HC players would take the easy road, only participating in polite, consented duels. Talk about a snoozefest.
Well I'm done... If you managed to get through the whole post, congrats.
"to the worm in horseradish, the world is horseradish."
Personally, I don't like PvP, but the essence of this combat mod is that both players involved want to fight, so go on ahead as they're both having fun in using their play killing each other and risking to drop their equipment.
As to PK, it may stay in the game and all, but I hope it's not encouraged or improved to MMORPG levels; anyone who want to spend hours being a morally condemnable dick head should play those kind of games when they want that, not Diablo - save it for when you're not on a killing spree ^^
anyway. HERES A QUESTION. Why did "Max Schaefer left Blizzard and formed Flagship Studios. He was one of the original creators of D2.".happen? like why'd he leave? What is the guy trying to say and what does that have to do with him leaving blizzard?
The dev. team has specifically stated and re-stated the D3 is first an foremost a co-operative game. This statement alone clearly reveals (as does the cited post) Blizzard's stance on PK'ing in D3.
PK is not intended to be an existent, much less substantial factor of play in D3.
Why is this the only defense that's needed? Because it's Blizzard's game, and if they don't desire for PK to be a factor in D3, then it won't, and it shouldn't. If PK is that important to a player, he / she won't buy the game. Obviously there aren't enough of those kinds of players to dictate D3 including PK.
I appreciate the passion and thought included in the OP, but it's time to face it. No matter how much you love to PK, Blizz doesn't want that to be a part of the D3 universe.
Case closed. Thanks.
that statement alone says nothing. cooperation can still exist with a pk mode on. and unless u have an official dev team quote of, "there is no more pk," then u are absolutely foolish to say cased closed.
"to the worm in horseradish, the world is horseradish."
This is an exact, verbatim quote from a Blizzard rep. (Bashiok) on the Battle.Net forums regarding, specifically, PKing in D3:
* * *
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.
* * *
If you can't interpret that to understand that they are either removing or severely limiting PK options in D3, you need to take some remedial English classes and work on your comprehension skills. :rolleyes:
- Its Blizzards game, they can do what they want.
- If you really want these things, then you can always play D2, it wont be changed at all.
- Kiserai has a point and i agree.
That being said, PK is probably the worst idea I have ever heard of. You get 500 people out of 5,000 going from game to game killing everyone and having a good time, while the other 4,500 people are getting upset and pissed off. You remove PK and of course those 500 people are going to be upset. But the 4,500 people will enjoy the game far more.
(Mind you, once you get T6 gear or S3 gear in WoW, it's all about PvP. Just an fyi...)
"to the worm in horseradish, the world is horseradish."
Exactly PvP is fine, and I think PKing should stay in hardcore, but besides that there is NO need for it other than to laugh at killing a lower level. If you want to battle someone your own level and they want to battle then there will be some form of PvP surely.
This "it's not Diabloish to take out/add <insert random thing here>" is getting kind of old, it's been 8 years things have changed greatly in the gaming industry.
PvP is freaking fun as hell. I had a PvE frozen orb sorceress and I would go to PvP games and beat the shit out of PvP players. But it was always in dual games that things were fun. Other games you would be doing a baal run or a mf run and then Jackass2145 joins the game and pk's everyone. Oh yea, real fun. *Eye roll.*
Plus Blizzard has learned about it's mistakes from the past. Plus you could say it's a whole new company making the game...
Yeah I enjoyed PvP just not PKing, there was no real point.
True it's a whole new company, and with that fact in mind they're doing pretty good to keep some old stuff but incorporate a lot of newer features also.
This quote makes it clear that PvP is in. How can PvP have it's own focus if it's not even there.
Just wanted to clear that up, because some people are begining to think all forms of PvP are going to be removed. Actually random PK (player kill) will be removed. Competitive play will remain, but will be seperate from the Co-op play.
There are a couple things I should add.
For those who say that it is unfair that high levels can PK low levels just to be assholes, keep in mind that there is a level restrict option in D2 that people are generally just too lazy to utilize.
For the guy saying that D3 is a new game for a new generation... you are right, but what I am arguing is that although it's a new game, it retains the same accessibility and reasonably limited PvE gameplay from D2 which is what provided D2 with such a PvP oriented atmosphere. Taking away non-consentual hostiles makes it boring for people who want a reason to build their character after they beat PvE. Most of this drive to make the best character (especially on HC) is knowing that there will be people that attack you and you have to defend yourself.
I don't know why he left Blizzard but it is not necessarely related to the quote. I was just introducing Max Schaefer to those who don't know who he his.
I think Blizzard should consider his words seeing as he completely hit the nail on the head with the D2 PvP system, making it one of the most successful multiplayer games ever. I truley believe that the new D3 team is not as smart as he is when it comes to designing an RPG. Their specialty is MMO's and RTS. Not that I'm calling Blizzard stupid, because they're geniuses, but as far as diablo goes, the old team had the right idea.
Oh and to Palisade... although Blizzard thinks they are encouraging cooperative gameplay by getting rid of PK, what they are actually doing is hurting the game. It's a very simplistic, shortsighted and half-assed soluition a to assume that removing PK will encourages cooperative play (I'm talking about Blizzard here, not you so dont take offense to that) and I am surprised that Blizzard came to this conclusion. What it does do is completely remove the competative aspect of PvP (there is nothing competative about chosing who may or may not fight you) while the people who are only interested in being "uncooperative" group members can find an infinite number of ways of being uncooperative other than PK. Therefore the amount of uncooperative play would not deminish, but an essential element of PvP would be gone. I know that I would no longer have any competative spirit on HC if I were imune to all player attacks.
If Blizzard wants cooperative group play, they should come up with new ways of encouraging cooperative play... maybe have certain items or quests which are only attainable with very strategically planned group play... something that D2 didn't have. But completely carebear-izing the PvP system? Rediculous.
______________________________________________________________________
Hmm, a lot's happened since I last posted. Let's see if I can cover everything I want to.
let me start with this
This is just not true. I believe that you play your hardcore characters a certain way, but there is no reason to think that that is part of being hardcore. The one and only thing that changes when you check the hardcore box is that when you die, you do not respawn. That's it. It doesn't "take every single aspect of the game to the hardest possible degree". It just makes you not respawn. If I check hardcore will every unique monster have a devastating combo of attributes? Way more Multishot Lightning Enchanted than normally? More mobs of monsters that are harder than other potential spawns? Will my act 3 be as sprawling and maze-like as possible?
The answer to all those questions is "maybe, but it's no more likely than if you were softcore". So please, don't tell me that hardcore implicitly means you wouldn't mind getting PKed, because the box could be labeled "No Respawn" and it would do and mean exactly the same thing.
-=[]=-
It seems like not many people who are posting in this discussion followed the link I posted to an old but well detailed argument against PK, so I'll just repeat a lot of it here. (the link I posted was to http://sirian.warpcore.org/diablo2/protest.html if anyone here is interested) The fundamental problem people have with understanding why I and many others dislike PK so much is that they think "If the PK doesn't kill anyone, the PvM players have 'won' and his impact is trivial and meaningless." This is wrong. If I am playing a PvM game with people and a PKer joins and hostiles everyone in the game, he has ALREADY WON.
Now my options are:
1) continue play as normal and get killed by the PKer
2) run back to town and hope he leaves
3) join a different game
In any of these situations, my gameplay has been disrupted in a way that I never wanted to have happen to me. The PK may not have killed anyone, but he ruined our game, which was his goal. That is why I say that he has already won, so don't tell me that PKing is trivial because it's so easy to avoid death.
So what it basically boils down to is that the PK's dollar is worth more to the company than my own. We both bought Diablo 2 to play the game we wanted to play. I wanted to play the game advertised on the back of the box, and he wanted to play a game involving killing people who played the game on the back of the box. Apparently, his game is more important than mine. I understand people are saying "PvP is a critical and intrinsic part of playing on Battle.net", but I would disagree with that as well. The box for Diablo 2 didn't say anything about having every B.net game requiring PvP, or really anything about PvP at all. PKing was certainly not one of the main selling points of the game. Maybe a lot of people bought the game for PvP, but it was not touted as a reason why one should buy the game by Blizzard North.
So when I install this game with supposedly co-op multiplayer with a wide audience of people to meet and play with only to have my party get destroyed by some random person who wanted to ruin our day, what am I supposed to think? It's no coincidence that I stopped playing on B.net less than a month after I bought D2.
_________________________________________________________________________
By the way, I find it more than a little entertaining that you're still waving that quote I posted around like it justifies PKing in the game. Just because it was intended to be in the game does not mean it SHOULD be in the game. Not to mention, that when he said that he was not in any way speaking for the company, which if any of the pro-PK people had followed the link I posted initially, you would know. I only posted it anyway to correct someone who said PKing was an unintended side effect of the PvP system.
And here's my final statement from the last topic, right before it got closed:
A type of gameplay that requires conflict with UNWILLING PARTICIPANTS is a divisive, anti-social, hurtful style of play with no regard for others' feelings or wishes. It should not be in the game.
So that your level 52 buddy can't come in and rush you through normal? Yup, real helpfull.
Name's LinkX. Nice to meet you too.
It retains nothing. A new game is a new game is a ne game. The drive to make the best character is about A) Pride PvP and C) Knowing your the best.
As for the "Once they finish PvE then there's only PvP. It's only like this in this kind of game!" argument is foolish. Every game (Except little maggot crap like maple Story) has a level cap where you have nothing to do but PvP. The difference is that other games do it without pissing half the people off. Diablo 2's PK system fails at that. And it fails misserably. Misserably indeed.
Except there the RPG team, the remenants of Blizzard North. See, there's an MMO team, an RTS team, and an RPG team. The MMO team is working on WotLK, the RTS team is working on SC2, and the RPG team is working on D3. Thus there specialty is not MMO's, but rather RPG's.