Thats right... lets make diablo like every other game out there because you could never handle the heat of PK.
The Diablo PvP system was never broken (before hacking, obviously hacking destroyed a good thing), so why fix it. Oh thats right, because while your saying the people who want to keep PK are crying.. its in fact the crying of people like you over multiple years of getting owned in game that forced Blizzards hand to change a good thing in the first place.
Gogo generic game pvp for the protection of weak players.
It's not about being "weak" or my ability to "handle the heat", it's about whether or not a style of play that is inherently divisive, inappropriate, and inconsiderate of others should be promoted in a game. I wouldn't be surprised if most anti-PK players could rush through a cookie cutter PvP build and handle themselves in PvP. The point is, they don't want to and shouldn't HAVE to just to be able to play the game that Blizzard has provided.
In the other thread, I was told that all my arguments were invalid because of two things. 1) People's fun being ruined is invalid because to remove the PK system would ruin the fun of PKers. 2) PK should be in the game because the removal of PK would necessitate a radical overhaul of the PvP system. Although I have gone over these points before, I will attempt to tackle them again, and hopefully these relevant sentences will be included in any quotes people take from this post.
For number one, PKing is designed to ruin the fun of other players. You may not do it just to ruin their fun or "grief" them, but that is the result. That is what it is designed to do. Having fun by causing others misery is not a constructive style of play to promote. So when you say my argument is invalid because the PKers fun would be ruined if it's removed, that's kind of my point. I am saying that the fun they are having is destructive and harmful to the community, and should not be promoted.
For number two, that is once again my pont. The PvP system NEEDS a radical change to allow players of all types to have fun playing on the realms. There are ways that PKers can still have fun, like the suggestion that many people have come forward with of seperate realms for PvP-enabled and non-PvP. Unless your style of play requires killing people who don't even want to fight back, this should be no problem. As for how it would "split the community", I disagree. There are plenty of people who don't play D2 on the realms or at least in public games because they dislike the PvP system. If a system like this were implemented, these people would all have places to play in public. Thus, while the community would be split, the net size of the comunity would be larger than it would be otherwise, mitigating the effect.
I don't really have high hopes for this post, since most of my posts in the last thread were either ignored completely or selectively quoted to cut out the relevant parts of my post. I tried to keep it a little more brief than my multi-pager last time, so who knows? Oh yeah, and I was wondering if I could request that everyone could keep the insults and personal attacks to a minimum? It's what got the other thread closed, so if you really care about this discussion, it's not a constructive way to proceed. I'm not trying to backseat moderate here, I just feel strongly about this topic and would hate to see this thread end like so many other PK threads: locked.
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.
1
It's not about being "weak" or my ability to "handle the heat", it's about whether or not a style of play that is inherently divisive, inappropriate, and inconsiderate of others should be promoted in a game. I wouldn't be surprised if most anti-PK players could rush through a cookie cutter PvP build and handle themselves in PvP. The point is, they don't want to and shouldn't HAVE to just to be able to play the game that Blizzard has provided.
In the other thread, I was told that all my arguments were invalid because of two things. 1) People's fun being ruined is invalid because to remove the PK system would ruin the fun of PKers. 2) PK should be in the game because the removal of PK would necessitate a radical overhaul of the PvP system. Although I have gone over these points before, I will attempt to tackle them again, and hopefully these relevant sentences will be included in any quotes people take from this post.
For number one, PKing is designed to ruin the fun of other players. You may not do it just to ruin their fun or "grief" them, but that is the result. That is what it is designed to do. Having fun by causing others misery is not a constructive style of play to promote. So when you say my argument is invalid because the PKers fun would be ruined if it's removed, that's kind of my point. I am saying that the fun they are having is destructive and harmful to the community, and should not be promoted.
For number two, that is once again my pont. The PvP system NEEDS a radical change to allow players of all types to have fun playing on the realms. There are ways that PKers can still have fun, like the suggestion that many people have come forward with of seperate realms for PvP-enabled and non-PvP. Unless your style of play requires killing people who don't even want to fight back, this should be no problem. As for how it would "split the community", I disagree. There are plenty of people who don't play D2 on the realms or at least in public games because they dislike the PvP system. If a system like this were implemented, these people would all have places to play in public. Thus, while the community would be split, the net size of the comunity would be larger than it would be otherwise, mitigating the effect.
I don't really have high hopes for this post, since most of my posts in the last thread were either ignored completely or selectively quoted to cut out the relevant parts of my post. I tried to keep it a little more brief than my multi-pager last time, so who knows? Oh yeah, and I was wondering if I could request that everyone could keep the insults and personal attacks to a minimum? It's what got the other thread closed, so if you really care about this discussion, it's not a constructive way to proceed. I'm not trying to backseat moderate here, I just feel strongly about this topic and would hate to see this thread end like so many other PK threads: locked.
1
______________________________________________________________________
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.