Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Steam Top 10

New DayZ dawn in the list of the 10 bestselling games on Steam for last week:

  1. DayZ
  2. Starbound
  3. Rust
  4. The Walking Dead: Season Two
  5. BioShock Triple Pack
  6. Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
  7. Batman: Arkham Origins
  8. METAL GEAR RISING: REVENGEANCE
  9. BioShock Infinite
  10. The Stanley Parable

View
80 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >

80. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 25, 2013, 05:40 Jerykk
 
There are two things in life that prevent most humans from killing eachother and taking what they want. Morality and the consequences if caught. In games, these things to out the window. Most people will do whatever they can get away with because of this. I'm sorry this simple concept is lost on you.

It's not lost to me at all. But as I've stated repeatedly, placing arbitrary consequences (like morality points) on specific actions completely goes against what DayZ is trying to do. DayZ is a sandbox survival game. It neither encourages nor discourages any specific actions. Instead, it leaves players to their own devices. These devices usually entail killing other players. Such is life.

As I've also mentioned numerous times before, adding a deeper crafting system to the game would provide players with more incentive to work together because it would provide them a common goal (like building a fort or outpost). The key here is motivation, not punishment. If players want to go around killing other players on sight, the game shouldn't punish them for it.

Imagine if you played an FPS that punished you for shooting. That would be fairly absurd, right? Because the whole point of an FPS is to shoot stuff. Similarly, the whole point of a survival sandbox is freedom. Freedom to help or harm as you see fit. Morality systems and other arbitrary punishments undermine this freedom by encouraging certain playstyles over others. If I told you that shooters would be better if they punished you for shooting and rewarded you for using diplomacy, would you agree? I wouldn't because that would completely change the core appeal of shooters. What you want out of DayZ (an open-world, co-op PvE experience) is not what DayZ is nor is it what people want from the survival sandbox genre.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
79. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 25, 2013, 03:18 Krovven
 
Jerykk, stop trying to tell me what I want.

You don't seem to want to comprehend one message to the next, so I'm not going to bother continuing to repeat myself. You are against a morality system, consequences for player actions and unwilling to listen to anything that involves ideas along those lines, that much is clear. So I'm wasting my time discussing it with you.

There are two things in life that prevent most humans from killing eachother and taking what they want. Morality and the consequences if caught. In games, these things to out the window. Most people will do whatever they can get away with because of this. I'm sorry this simple concept is lost on you.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
78. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 25, 2013, 00:27 Jerykk
 
Krovven wrote on Dec 24, 2013, 06:37:
Jerykk wrote on Dec 24, 2013, 02:52:
So basically, you want an open-world, massively multiplayer co-op zombie survival game with no PvP. That could work, though I have to wonder how much threat zombies would pose in the long run.

Sigh, it's like talking to a brick wall. I've already said several times that I don't want to completely remove PvP from the equation. But the games offered currently have no consequences for just killing random people along with no benefit of random people working together. Therefore I may as well just play any number of shooters if I want to PvP.

I truly do find it amusing, how people are so defensive of their survival game PvP. How precious it seems to be to them that they don't even want to see alternative games and ideas instead of all these copy and paste jobs of DayZ. With all of them, including DayZ, being very amateurish and really none of them being very good or even completed.

The discussion is going on many websites and forums currently, with most defenders of PvP not even being open to other possibilities.
And a whole lot of stories from the PvPers saying "I tried to play nice and work with others, but I was just killed by them." Then they wonder why folks want to see something different.


Except everything you've said so far has been against PvP. You say people should be punished for killing other players. You're only willing to tolerate PvP if it's heavily restricted by either punishing players who do it or limiting where or how they can do it. You keep emphasizing how you want a co-op experience, even though DayZ already offers that. There is a very clear benefit to working with other people in DayZ. When you're in a group, you're far less likely to die. Strength in numbers.

What you really want is a co-op only experience where you don't have to worry about getting shot by other players. That's fine but it goes against what games like DayZ are all about. I think that's what you're failing to understand. If you impose arbitrary punishments or rewards for specific actions (like in the humanity system you suggested earlier), your game becomes less of a survival sandbox (which is what DayZ is) and more of a theme park (like most MMOs are). There is nothing inherently wrong with a theme park but it's a polar opposite to what DayZ is and what it's trying to achieve.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
77. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 24, 2013, 11:33 goatee21
 
I don't see anyone being defensive here, I think everyone has been trying to pin down what it is exactly you want out of a game. You say you want PvP but then make posts in seeming contradiction of that with talk about reason and fairness which can't really be applied to open world survival games with PvP. I'm not married to PvP playmodes, I just don't think these games would be much of anything without them. Like you said many of these games are really amateurish and incomplete, in many cases without the PvP there isn't much of a draw to playing at all. If this group of gamers you talk about is big enough then someone will make a game for them and I will definitely check it out, hopefully it is everything those people want it to be.

To be fair to games like Day Z though, I do see a lot of discussions on other forums where people talk about being griefed, bitch about PvP and when you finally get the real story out of them it essentially boils down to they got killed in some way they didn't like and only want PvP on their terms when its favorable. That sort of bullshit I won't support, no one likes losing but those people can nut up or go play games like Dead Island where its strictly coop.

I had a bit more to say but I have to wrap this up, headed out to family for christmas. Merry Christmas guys, PvP or not!

What redmask said!
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
76. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 24, 2013, 11:31 goatee21
 
Krovven wrote on Dec 24, 2013, 06:37:
Jerykk wrote on Dec 24, 2013, 02:52:
So basically, you want an open-world, massively multiplayer co-op zombie survival game with no PvP. That could work, though I have to wonder how much threat zombies would pose in the long run.

Sigh, it's like talking to a brick wall. I've already said several times that I don't want to completely remove PvP from the equation. But the games offered currently have no consequences for just killing random people along with no benefit of random people working together. Therefore I may as well just play any number of shooters if I want to PvP.

I truly do find it amusing, how people are so defensive of their survival game PvP. How precious it seems to be to them that they don't even want to see alternative games and ideas instead of all these copy and paste jobs of DayZ. With all of them, including DayZ, being very amateurish and really none of them being very good or even completed.

The discussion is going on many websites and forums currently, with most defenders of PvP not even being open to other possibilities.
And a whole lot of stories from the PvPers saying "I tried to play nice and work with others, but I was just killed by them." Then they wonder why folks want to see something different.


I'd LOVE to see something between dayz and dead rising like you mentioned. I don't see why it always has to be zombies though. I didn't like dead rising much, it was a little silly if you ask me. I also found coop in that annoying because if the person you tried to team up with was a higher level they always had awesome stuff and would kill everything before you go to it. It was super annoying, I'd have a pistol they'd have an electroshock jump slam whatever thinger. They were just griefing me all the time ruining my game by not letting me join in the zombie killing.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
75. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 24, 2013, 11:28 goatee21
 
Krovven wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 19:24:
goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 18:34:
By the way, if you want to completely eliminate griefing try playing Rust on a pvp OFF server.

No thanks. Rust looks like absolute crap and zero fun to play.

I'm not interested in doing mundane work tasks in a game. "Somewhere between Dead Island and DayZ", does not equal building shacks in the wilderness with a bunch of naked dudes running around killing chickens with rocks.


My nephew and I have enjoyed it immensely! The crafting tasks don't take long at all. We usually do some mining while running from one base to another. The shacks are a great way to protect yourself from being killed (or griefed if you insist on calling it that) and the tension of being inside one hiding while people are running passed can be pretty intense!
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
74. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 24, 2013, 11:16 goatee21
 
Krovven wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 19:13:
goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 18:26:
I hear it all the time, someone logs in, says they've played for 15 minutes gotten killed twice that that they hate this dumb game and leave. Happened in rust, dayz, etc. People in the forums would say they've been griefed, people would ask how, they would say they were minding their own business and someone killed them. Would you say they've been griefed? I wouldn't.

What was the reason for the other player to kill that person if all they had was a "rock" as you said before? No reason at all, they didn't even have equipment to steal, so yes, I call that griefing. In this type of game, if you are killing another player simply because they are in view on your screen, that equates to griefing.

goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 18:26:
Not sure where you are going with your last sentence. I SEE the cause and effect and am discussing portions of it so???

Schools in... CAUSE - player A gets killed repeatedly by other players while they are trying to explore and fight off zombies. EFFECT - player A learns to shoot other players on sight. Vicious cycle ensues where it's extremely rare for random players to help one another or work together.

Griefing is rampant in most games that players have means to grief. Give someone an environment that has zero repercussion for it and that's what they will do all the time.

Considering this needs to be explained to you speaks volumes. But I'm guessing you are one of the people that shoots other players on sight.

I'm not sure why it's so difficult for some people to comprehend that not everyone wants these kinds of mechanics. And that we'd like to see another game with different mechanics, more focused on coop.


krowen lol i already said I understand that. And I'm actually one of THE most cooperative people. I already gave some examples but here are more. I run passed people all the time that are doing their thing and I saY HELLO in in game voice chat. So I am standing there saying hello to a random survivor stranger without killing them or harassing them. I randomly put things in peoples storage boxes, i give food to people who ask. If a bear is chasing someone I try to kill it. For some of these things I've been rewarded or talked to, in other cases they have turned and killed me on site.
logging into a game like dayz or rust means that people are going to mess with you. It's like walking dead. If you have a stockpile of things, people will want to take it. If you take pvp out of it, why would you even stockpile things? Why would you collect guns ammo and beans? What POINT would there be to either of these survival games without conflict?
Now a game with different mechanics sure! They are poor comparisons but let's take something like minecraft or terraria. Cooperative play, crafting, building etc. PVE.
Give me an example, tell me what you want to do in a survival game that's cooperative maybe that will help. What is it you want to do in this apocalypse world with your friends? What game mechanics would you like to see?
I'd also be interested to see how you'd like to encourage coop. Not being sarcastic or snotty at all I'm completely serious.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
73. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 24, 2013, 10:41 Redmask
 
Krovven wrote on Dec 24, 2013, 01:35:
That's your definition. Wikipedia says "A griefer derives pleasure primarily or exclusively from the act of annoying other users, and as such is a particular nuisance in online gaming communities, since griefers often cannot be deterred by penalties related to in-game goals."

It wasn't my definition, it was the first google result care of Wikipedia. 'Anyone who kills me when I don't want to be killed or for no reason' seems like trying to stretch the definition well beyond it's meaning, loose or otherwise. It's also absurdly hard to implement from a development perspective. PvP is not convenient. You don't walk 10 paces and about face for an honorable duel with pistols at sunset. It is often dirty and sometimes the only solution is to avoid it. Some fights aren't fair or winnable, knowing how to make those choices is part of the learning process. I don't see how you can implement 'fair' PvP in an open world survival game. You can't punish players for killing other players because you can't really define 'reason' in gaming without getting into cheesy WoW style 'I wasnt tagged for PvP!' stuff. All you can do is encourage players to work together to overcome other players who present themselves as an obstacle. We all seem to agree on that much so I'm not sure why this is continuing.

Reputation systems and other forms of punishment for initial aggressors are inherently flawed and players tend to work around them in creative ways. I think like we all agreed, the best thing you can do is give players better tools for grouping and working together, reward that behavior and people will choose it. It won't stop PvP but it will give other players pause before acting out their darker impulses.

I truly do find it amusing, how people are so defensive of their survival game PvP. How precious it seems to be to them that they don't even want to see alternative games and ideas instead of all these copy and paste jobs of DayZ. With all of them, including DayZ, being very amateurish and really none of them being very good or even completed.

I don't see anyone being defensive here, I think everyone has been trying to pin down what it is exactly you want out of a game. You say you want PvP but then make posts in seeming contradiction of that with talk about reason and fairness which can't really be applied to open world survival games with PvP. I'm not married to PvP playmodes, I just don't think these games would be much of anything without them. Like you said many of these games are really amateurish and incomplete, in many cases without the PvP there isn't much of a draw to playing at all. If this group of gamers you talk about is big enough then someone will make a game for them and I will definitely check it out, hopefully it is everything those people want it to be.

To be fair to games like Day Z though, I do see a lot of discussions on other forums where people talk about being griefed, bitch about PvP and when you finally get the real story out of them it essentially boils down to they got killed in some way they didn't like and only want PvP on their terms when its favorable. That sort of bullshit I won't support, no one likes losing but those people can nut up or go play games like Dead Island where its strictly coop.

I had a bit more to say but I have to wrap this up, headed out to family for christmas. Merry Christmas guys, PvP or not!

This comment was edited on Dec 24, 2013, 10:56.
 
Avatar 57682
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
72. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 24, 2013, 06:37 Krovven
 
Jerykk wrote on Dec 24, 2013, 02:52:
So basically, you want an open-world, massively multiplayer co-op zombie survival game with no PvP. That could work, though I have to wonder how much threat zombies would pose in the long run.

Sigh, it's like talking to a brick wall. I've already said several times that I don't want to completely remove PvP from the equation. But the games offered currently have no consequences for just killing random people along with no benefit of random people working together. Therefore I may as well just play any number of shooters if I want to PvP.

I truly do find it amusing, how people are so defensive of their survival game PvP. How precious it seems to be to them that they don't even want to see alternative games and ideas instead of all these copy and paste jobs of DayZ. With all of them, including DayZ, being very amateurish and really none of them being very good or even completed.

The discussion is going on many websites and forums currently, with most defenders of PvP not even being open to other possibilities.
And a whole lot of stories from the PvPers saying "I tried to play nice and work with others, but I was just killed by them." Then they wonder why folks want to see something different.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
71. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 24, 2013, 02:52 Jerykk
 
So basically, you want an open-world, massively multiplayer co-op zombie survival game with no PvP. That could work, though I have to wonder how much threat zombies would pose in the long run.  
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
70. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 24, 2013, 01:35 Krovven
 
Redmask wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 22:51:
What was the reason for the other player to kill that person if all they had was a "rock" as you said before? No reason at all, they didn't even have equipment to steal, so yes, I call that griefing. In this type of game, if you are killing another player simply because they are in view on your screen, that equates to griefing.

You can call it that but that's not griefing. Griefing is intentionally harassing other players using the game mechanics in unintended ways and it doesn't always result in death. Players don't need a reason to kill other players in a game with PvP combat because the game isn't bound by moralistic rules unless expressly written into the game code.

I don't see how a dev can include both PvP and coop while also enforcing some arbitrary set of rules to protect people from perceived unfair deaths in a survival game. The former seems to go against the spirit of the latter. Devs would be better off just making a separate coop survival game to serve that market or have entirely separate game modes. I think that's already happening with games like 7 Days to Die so I think those players will be served anyway.

That's your definition.

Wikipedia says "A griefer derives pleasure primarily or exclusively from the act of annoying other users, and as such is a particular nuisance in online gaming communities, since griefers often cannot be deterred by penalties related to in-game goals."

Urban Dictionary has their own list of definitions. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=griefer

But I don't really care what you want to define it as, because there is no set definition as it's a term created by gamers and doesn't exist in the proper English dictionary. Most of those definitions apply partially or in whole to what I described.

But I'm not really interested in debating semantics. The point is, there are plenty of people that do not want to always play games that way and we'd like to see some alternatives. If I wanted to to play PvP or blatantly kill other players (or be killed) in games for no reason, I've already got dozens and dozens of other games to do that.

This comment was edited on Dec 24, 2013, 01:43.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
69. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 23, 2013, 22:51 Redmask
 
What was the reason for the other player to kill that person if all they had was a "rock" as you said before? No reason at all, they didn't even have equipment to steal, so yes, I call that griefing. In this type of game, if you are killing another player simply because they are in view on your screen, that equates to griefing.

You can call it that but that's not griefing. Griefing is intentionally harassing other players using the game mechanics in unintended ways and it doesn't always result in death. Players don't need a reason to kill other players in a game with PvP combat because the game isn't bound by moralistic rules unless expressly written into the game code.

I don't see how a dev can include both PvP and coop while also enforcing some arbitrary set of rules to protect people from perceived unfair deaths in a survival game. The former seems to go against the spirit of the latter. Devs would be better off just making a separate coop survival game to serve that market or have entirely separate game modes. I think that's already happening with games like 7 Days to Die so I think those players will be served anyway.

This comment was edited on Dec 23, 2013, 23:01.
 
Avatar 57682
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
68. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 23, 2013, 19:24 Krovven
 
goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 18:34:
By the way, if you want to completely eliminate griefing try playing Rust on a pvp OFF server.

No thanks. Rust looks like absolute crap and zero fun to play.

I'm not interested in doing mundane work tasks in a game. "Somewhere between Dead Island and DayZ", does not equal building shacks in the wilderness with a bunch of naked dudes running around killing chickens with rocks.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
67. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 23, 2013, 19:13 Krovven
 
goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 18:26:
I hear it all the time, someone logs in, says they've played for 15 minutes gotten killed twice that that they hate this dumb game and leave. Happened in rust, dayz, etc. People in the forums would say they've been griefed, people would ask how, they would say they were minding their own business and someone killed them. Would you say they've been griefed? I wouldn't.

What was the reason for the other player to kill that person if all they had was a "rock" as you said before? No reason at all, they didn't even have equipment to steal, so yes, I call that griefing. In this type of game, if you are killing another player simply because they are in view on your screen, that equates to griefing.

goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 18:26:
Not sure where you are going with your last sentence. I SEE the cause and effect and am discussing portions of it so???

Schools in... CAUSE - player A gets killed repeatedly by other players while they are trying to explore and fight off zombies. EFFECT - player A learns to shoot other players on sight. Vicious cycle ensues where it's extremely rare for random players to help one another or work together.

Griefing is rampant in most games that players have means to grief. Give someone an environment that has zero repercussion for it and that's what they will do all the time.

Considering this needs to be explained to you speaks volumes. But I'm guessing you are one of the people that shoots other players on sight.

I'm not sure why it's so difficult for some people to comprehend that not everyone wants these kinds of mechanics. And that we'd like to see another game with different mechanics, more focused on coop.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
66. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 23, 2013, 18:34 goatee21
 
By the way, if you want to completely eliminate griefing try playing Rust on a pvp OFF server. You will likely quickly find yourself bored as there isn't enough other stuff to do without the player tension. If you think that is a design flaw then again, I'm not sure this type of game is for you. Rust as it stands right now (alpha) is about collecting things to keep you alive and protect yourself from animals, zombies and others. Zombies can one hit kill you if you aren't equipped, same with bears, you can starve to death in about 30 mins from starting a new guy if you don't find something to eat. Once most players are geared up I've found that they leave noobs alone.
Also play using a fricking MIC. Local area chat can do wonders to keep you alive. If you run into someone in the forest try saying friendly outloud, say hey when you run passed someone, drop some meat, toss out some resources, randomly give a guy a tool.
We had some guys come knocking in our door in rust demanding our blood. I (in my best grandmother voice) told them that we were busy baking cookies and they would have to come back in the morning. We put some blood outside in a bag and hoped that would suffice. It didn't. They gave us time like they said, came back, and blew our base open and took all our stuff.
We were griefed? No we laughed our BUTTS off and it was another awesome pvp moment.

This comment was edited on Dec 23, 2013, 19:02.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
65. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 23, 2013, 18:26 goatee21
 
Krovven wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 18:10:
goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 17:16:
harlock most of the people complaining about being "Griefed" have not actually been griefed, they've just gotten killed, some of them ONE TIME and are cry babies.

You'd do better with your opinions to not claim to know what others have experienced.

goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 17:16:
Also, many of the people who say "hey some dude killed me and all i had was my rock" do the EXACT same dang thing as soon as THEY get a gun.

Gee, I wonder why? Congrats on coming to the same conclusion as the others here, but not being able to see the obvious cause and effect.


I hear it all the time, someone logs in, says they've played for 15 minutes gotten killed twice that that they hate this dumb game and leave. Happened in rust, dayz, etc. People in the forums would say they've been griefed, people would ask how, they would say they were minding their own business and someone killed them. Would you say they've been griefed? I wouldn't.

Not sure where you are going with your last sentence. I SEE the cause and effect and am discussing portions of it so???
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
64. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 23, 2013, 18:10 Krovven
 
goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 17:16:
harlock most of the people complaining about being "Griefed" have not actually been griefed, they've just gotten killed, some of them ONE TIME and are cry babies.

You'd do better with your opinions to not claim to know what others have experienced.

goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 17:16:
Also, many of the people who say "hey some dude killed me and all i had was my rock" do the EXACT same dang thing as soon as THEY get a gun.

Gee, I wonder why? Congrats on coming to the same conclusion as the others here, but not being able to see the obvious cause and effect.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
63. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 23, 2013, 17:16 goatee21
 
harlock wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 14:32:
goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 10:59:
Seriously everyone complaining about griefing, these games are obviously not for you. THE ENTIRE POINT OF THESE GAMES IS PVP.

PVP is not the same as griefing at all... if thats what you think, then i weep for you.. like, woe is you

harlock most of the people complaining about being "Griefed" have not actually been griefed, they've just gotten killed, some of them ONE TIME and are cry babies. PVP and greifing are definitely not the same. These survival games are made for you to be scared and alone. You will not survive unless you take a chance on teaming up with a complete stranger who could kill you at any minute. The tension and the drama CAN be amazing. I'd definitely agree it would be nice if there was a little more incentive to team up somehow because raiding definitely can be more productive than being a nice guy.
Also, many of the people who say "hey some dude killed me and all i had was my rock" do the EXACT same dang thing as soon as THEY get a gun.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
62. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 23, 2013, 14:32 harlock
 
goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 10:59:
Seriously everyone complaining about griefing, these games are obviously not for you. THE ENTIRE POINT OF THESE GAMES IS PVP.

PVP is not the same as griefing at all... if thats what you think, then i weep for you.. like, woe is you
 
Avatar 57944
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
61. Re: Steam Top 10 Dec 23, 2013, 12:51 Creston
 
goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 12:26:
Creston wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 12:20:
goatee21 wrote on Dec 23, 2013, 11:01:
SO....it doesn't attach my comment to who I'm replying obviously lol. Sorry all, I was replying to individual posts while I read them.

It's easiest to just use the Quote feature.



AHA!!!!

Taddaaaaaa! Party
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
80 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo