| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Sunwillow Auryn
   |
Posted - 2008.05.30 18:54:00 -
[241]
In EVE I personally define PvP as Pew vs Pew.
Everything else is a gray area. I don't care about everything else, I'll give it a go. Pew vs Pew? Not for me.
Pew vs Pew is why I don't go into low sec.
Pew vs Pew is why I don't go into nil sec.
Pew vs Pew is why I won't be doing FW.
This is carebear. This is how I play. This is what I enjoy. You don't? Well... I can deal with and even respect your playing preference, deal with and respect mine as well.
However, if you are so short of valid points to post that all you can do is argue the definition of PvP with the OP when it is abuntantly clear to anyone with more brain power than a ****** addict on a 3 day trip what he means... then please go troll elsewhere.
|
Kagura Nikon
Infinity Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.05.30 18:57:00 -
[242]
 Originally by: Sunwillow Auryn
In EVE I personally define PvP as Pew vs Pew.
Everything else is a gray area. I don't care about everything else, I'll give it a go. Pew vs Pew? Not for me.
Pew vs Pew is why I don't go into low sec.
Pew vs Pew is why I don't go into nil sec.
Pew vs Pew is why I won't be doing FW.
This is carebear. This is how I play. This is what I enjoy. You don't? Well... I can deal with and even respect your playing preference, deal with and respect mine as well.
by this same reasoning we can say STOP complainign about the lack of PVE content, Pew pew is how CCP play you don like it, deal with it and respect it.
-------------------------------------------------
If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2008.05.30 21:16:00 -
[243]
ôIts funny, pve in 0.4 and below are to him pvp yet pve in 0.5+ systems are pve untill someone actually engages...ö
Please stop tolling your just trying to cause trouble. ItÆs PvE in 0.4 and below except 99.9999% of the time youÆre engaged in combat by players so it turns to PvP. For all intensive purposeÆs its PvP since you pretty much never managed to do it as PvE.
I explained many times why I class FW as PvP. The so called new PvE means you have to go to war against other players, you have to jump 15jumps or more into enemy player controlled space, you have to compete against those players for victory points to take and control the system. All the time the enemy players are hunting you and trying to stop you getting victory points. A bunch of players shooting each other and trying to get victory points is not PvE.
In short itÆs next to impossible to do the new FW missions and battlegrounds without doing PvP. So I class FW as PvP.
Anyway no matter how you define PvP, itÆs very clear how I define PvP and what my post was talking about. Even with your strange made up definition of PvP it doesnt change my points about zero new content in 0.0 space and 0.5+ space. Zero content in those areas is very bad how ever you look at it. ItÆs also a first for CCP to not add content for them. Define PvP how ever you want, my posts are useing the original meaning of PvP of combat between players. Even if I use your version of PvP the points I am trying to get across dont change. There is no new content in 0.0 or 0.5+ space.
ôIf they have an active market then they have none combat pvp. The OP is just too stupid or pig headed to try and contemplate that you dont need to shoot someone to engage in player verses player.ö
ItÆs not pig headed or stupid according to the definition of PvP you do have to shoot or fight someone in combat. I have been gaming for over 20 years now and PvP has always meant combat between people.
Just because you and nowhere else says otherwise doesnÆt make it true. Some people use the word incorrectly but that doesnÆt mean they are right.
ôPlayer versus player was coined sometime in the late 1980s to refer to the combat between players that resulted in the loser being penalized in some way.ö
ThatÆs the simple truth of the matter. PvP refers to combat and has done for 20+ years. Some people have been using it incorrectly recently but that doesnÆt mean they are right.
Going around saying PvP refers to people trading on the market is almost as bad as going around and saying Carebear means someone how avoids combat to steal goods in online games.
ôPVE is getting added and fixed but because concord wont save his arse it doesnt count. I am willing to bet that pottsey also thinks high sec is 100% safe, low sec has a 10 BS gate camp in every system and they guy who just undercut him on the market is an NPC.ö
You know full well I donÆt think any of that and you know Concord have nothing to do with it.
____
ôToo many times. Too many times have the addictions of man destroyed the progress of ages. History is about to fail us again, and deny us the right to walk among you once more.ö |
Miana Amannar
|
Posted - 2008.05.30 21:18:00 -
[244]
Edited by: Miana Amannar on 30/05/2008 21:21:15
Originally by: Lt Angus
Originally by: Pottsey
Edited by: Pottsey on 30/05/2008 11:51:28
Pretty much every MMO that talks about PvP has it in reference to combat.
http://www.guildwars.com/gameplay/pvp/
http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/pvp/
http://www.jossh.com/join_today/JG_recruit_files/faq.html#5
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm notice how the games without PvP still have mining and crafting.
http://chronicle.ubi.com/What+is+Shadowbane.php Another one that has PvP as combat.
http://forums.hellgatelondon.com/forumdisplay.php?f=222 all to do with combat.
Maybe because none of those games have non combat pvp in them 
He should've looked at Pirates of the burning sea  .
It shares several aspects of EVE (e.g. a player-driven market) - and the DEVs of PotbS clearly state crafting and selling stuff on the market as PVP! In a direct sense (not only because it means Player vs. Player opposed to Player vs. Environment)!!
PVP is (and never was) not only shooty-shooty. But I doubt the OP will ever understand that  .
BTW, this thread fails  . Can't believe I'm actually posting in it. I must be bored
EDIT:
Originally by: Pottsey
I have been gaming for over 20 years now and PvP has always meant combat between people.
He finally understood it
Hint: You can combat on the market, too
|
Feilamya
Pelennor Swarm
Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 10:56:00 -
[245]
Originally by: Pottsey
ôIts funny, pve in 0.4 and below are to him pvp yet pve in 0.5+ systems are pve untill someone actually engages...ö
Please stop tolling your just trying to cause trouble. ItÆs PvE in 0.4 and below except 99.9999% of the time youÆre engaged in combat by players so it turns to PvP.
You just proved the "troll"'s point.
That happens when you hit the "Quote" button before reading the whole post.
|
Daelin Blackleaf
Naqam
Project Alice.
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 11:19:00 -
[246]
Originally by: Miana Amannar
PVP is (and never was) not only shooty-shooty. But I doubt the OP will ever understand that .
While technically true I'm pretty sure any game that touted itself as PvP-centric but contained only races to complete missions faster and market competition would soon find itself considered a PvE game no matter how much they tried to claim the contrary.
It's all about common usage and context.
If market competition and racing to get gear first or that is in limited supply than WoW on a standard server would be considered a PvP-centric game. With the fact that players compete for prestige based on kills, gear, cash, completion times etc, etc you could say almost any game with a community is PvP.
The word chips can refer to small pieces of just about anything, but when I'm in a British chip shop I don't expect them to be slate or wood chips.
----------------------------
Originally by: CCP Subscription
I'm sorry Sir your European I'll have to charge you 58% extra
|
El Yatta
Mercenary Forces
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 11:28:00 -
[247]
Originally by: Pottsey
it doesnt change my points about zero new content in 0.0 space and 0.5+ space. Zero content in those areas is very bad how ever you look at it. ItÆs also a first for CCP to not add content for them.
Ignoring your ludicrous campaign to redefine PVP, which obviously nobody could get through, but fair enough, I disagree on the above statement.
If we're now (because you're basically talking about levels of risk as PVP, not player interaction) discussing why EA is an expansion focussing entirely on low-sec and nothing for high-sec or 0.0, then I think this is a good thing.
Lowsec has been criminally neglected for all playstyles and has been dead for a long time. If this revitalises it, makes piracy and anti-piracy and combat in low-sec more fun, it is an instant success. I dont think neglecting high-sec is "bad whatever way you look at it" because I dont think encouraging more people to live in high-sec is good. I think its awful, promotes risk-free play and thus indirectly encourages non-interaction. Developing low-sec content as a way of bridging risk-averse players into the fun of PVP will indirectly move some of them to 0.0 once they "grow up".
I will stress, I DONT KNOW if this will work. I hope it does, but plenty of people will just go "oh god not risk" and not touch FW. Fair enough, there's room for everyone. But this is the first expansion to try and revitalise low-sec. Moaning that you "cant use the new content" because you wont take risks says you dont deserve new content specifically for you.
_______________________________________________
Mercenary Forces |
Windy Creme
|
Posted - 2008.05.31 11:39:00 -
[248]
Originally by: Pottsey
ItÆs PvE in 0.4 and below except 99.9999% of the time youÆre engaged in combat by players so it turns to PvP.
It is still PvE, but it's your choice if you gonna go to 0.4 and do it or u will stick in hi sec and won't do it, but nomatter how u look at it it's still PvE!
Oh and in 20years of playing games you could start pvping someday now.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |