The latest update for Shroud of the Avatar has information on the new version eight release, and gives detailed instructions on how to install & play.
More information.
Shroud of the Avatar - Release 8 Instructions
- Thread starter Couchpotato
- Start date
Carnifex
SasqWatch
PvP.....after almost 20 yrs of hearing the term, I still don't get it. Might be why I despise games like CoD and such as well, at least the online parts. Single player campaigns, those I can enjoy. Yet some people seem to love the pvp.
Since the most popular games on Steam are DOTA and CS, I would say you're totally wrong, alot of people want PvP. I don't however, and my already small interest in this game is almost completely gone after this update.
blatantninja
Resident Redneck Facist
I think that is just the focus of this release, not of the entire game.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
News of the day:
Some people like PvP and some people don't. We don't know how many there are of each - as there are many kinds of PvP, and there are many ways of integrating it into a game.
I know it's shocking and a massive undertaking to understand that some people like something you don't - but it's actually true.
Some people like PvP and some people don't. We don't know how many there are of each - as there are many kinds of PvP, and there are many ways of integrating it into a game.
I know it's shocking and a massive undertaking to understand that some people like something you don't - but it's actually true.
lostforever
SasqWatch
Apparently League of Legends has 27 million active players each day! So like you say more people want some sort of PvP.
S
Sacred_Path
Guest
Nah, shooting people makes sense. In a shooter. It's kinda meta-gamey and defeating the point of an RPG though. I mean... gee, even if there were clearly defined "villain" roles for human players and they stuck to that script, it would still not be very exciting to me. Because anything that is controlled by a human player somehow stands out in a virtual world like a sore thumb.
blatantninja
Resident Redneck Facist
I think people like PvP because of the challenge. Not me personally, but if you're a good tactician, pretty much no matter the difficulty of the AI, you'll eventually master it and be able to beat any computer controlled enemies. But playing another player? That's a whole different thing.
S
Sacred_Path
Guest
with Diablo II the best PVP builds were figured out pretty quickly and duels often didn't take more than a few seconds.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
S
Sacred_Path
Guest
Diablo 2 is also just about the worst example of PvP out there
And it proves it's not the challenge that attracts people to PVP. Also, this being an online Ultima I simply expect a lot of senseless PK'ing. Like back in UO when my weak ass newbie character was killed right out of the first town at a time when I also routinely got killed by rabbits and stags (but at least those didn't steal my stuff). Ah, the memories.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
Proves?
So, because some people like PvP in Diablo 2 - and you tell yourself there was no challenge involved - ALL people in the entire world who like PvP have no interest in challenge?
I like PvP because of the challenge, the rush, the unpredictability and so on.
For instance, I can't really play strategy games anymore unless they're multiplayer capable - because I find my victory to be inevitable against the AI. So, unless there's some kind of story involved - I just don't play them.
Again, it's key not to box people in and keep an open mind.
Trust me, there are countless gamers in this world who thrive on competition and challenge. Do you think eSports is all about exploits and there's no challenge there, either?
S
Sacred_Path
Guest
doing something for other reasons than challenge != disliking challenge.
I understand the appeal of PVP in other genres such as strategy, and I said so. I also think it's a lot more fun to play a shooter against other human players than against bots. As I said, I think the very presence of a non-computer controlled character is immersion breaking in an RPG, so I like to limit those. But I also think there's a difference between classical roleplaying - other people assuming the roles of companions and adventuring together - and the 4th wall breaking duking it out for little to no ingame reasons.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
Still doesn't change that your claim was ludicrous. As in, not only did you claim to understand every single Diablo 2 player and that "effective builds" were discovered quickly AND that there was basically no skill involved because you were ganked in UO like everyone else who played it - you also said that this, rather questionable perception, was proof that no one PvPs because of challenge.
I mean, really?
There's nothing resembling even a shred of proof in that fantasy.
I would agree there are good and bad things with almost any kind of PvP. But you have to appreciate there are many ways of doing it, and that people aren't all the same when it comes to the reason they enjoy it.
Many MMOs have rules in place for in-game PvP that makes sense. It's just that you might have had a bad experience with it, so you think it's all bad.
I'm afraid that's not the case at all.
Ganking is common, but once you accept that it's part of some MMOs - it can be great fun to PvP, especially if you go against the gankers and murderers. That's what I usually do, and it feels very good to fight the griefers.
The 4th wall is no more broken by fighting people who roleplay murderers and bandits than it is by having magical items rain down from the sky every time you slay some mob with a colored name that has a tiny subset of actions within a rigid and predictable script.
S
Sacred_Path
Guest
Still doesn't change that your claim was ludicrous. As in, not only did you claim to understand every single Diablo 2 player and that "effective builds" were discovered quickly AND that there was basically no skill involved because you were ganked in UO like everyone else who played it - you also said that this, rather questionable perception, was proof that no one PvPs because of challenge.
I mean, really?
There's nothing resembling even a shred of proof in that fantasy.
I was responding to the claim that people generally PVP because they like a challenge, so the hyperbole was appropriate, I think.
I'm not gonna bring up the example of ridiculous character names. I might sound a bit aspy here, but even a name with alternating CaPs can break my immersion. It's that split second where you go "eh, that doesn't belong here" that... not ruins, but diminishes my suspension of disbelief. And it's harder for me to reconcile that strange landmark of another human player with the virtual environment we both share if, instead of cooperative questing (which I would do just the same on my own) the other guy just hangs around waiting for me to enter a PVP zone.
PVP just isn't central to the core gameplay of most RPG's - if you argue for PVPing, you could just as well argue for the inclusion of a strategy type mini game, say some sort of board game. It's a gimmick, and one I don't like. Deal w/ it
D
DArtagnan
Guest
I was responding to the claim that people generally PVP because they like a challenge, so the hyperbole was appropriate, I think.
Makes very little sense to me, but whatever floats your boats
I'm not gonna bring up the example of ridiculous character names. I might sound a bit aspy here, but even a name with alternating CaPs can break my immersion. It's that split second where you go "eh, that doesn't belong here" that… not ruins, but diminishes my suspension of disbelief. And it's harder for me to reconcile that strange landmark of another human player with the virtual environment we both share if, instead of cooperative questing (which I would do just the same on my own) the other guy just hangs around waiting for me to enter a PVP zone.
PVP just isn't central to the core gameplay of most RPG's - if you argue for PVPing, you could just as well argue for the inclusion of a strategy type mini game, say some sort of board game. It's a gimmick, and one I don't like. Deal w/ it
Oh, I'm ok with you not liking PvP and for whatever elusive reason finding it immersion breaking. To me, few things are more central than sharing the RPG experience with other people - and I don't need them to be friendly with me. It's all part of the fun of that imaginary passtime.
I used to have loads of fun coming up with ways to work against my fellow PnP players back in the day, and interacting with other people is the most fun I've ever had in a computer game, both in a cooperative and competitive fashion.
So, to me, if PvP is done right - as it is in a few MMOs, it can be among the most immersive qualities out there. I love it.
That said, I'm not a big fan of the "sports" PvP implementation that many modern MMOs use, like WoW arena and battlegrounds. It can be fun, but I find it counterproductive to the immersion. It's artificial and stupid, frankly.
But games like Eve Online and Darkfall have great PvP that fits perfectly into the design, and those games can be highly immersive in that way. Unfortunately, they take up too much time for me to be able to play them as I'd like - so I just don't.
S
Sacred_Path
Guest
Oh, that can be cool alright, though hard to implement in game with real time combat. I agree it can be cool to roleplay a not super sweet, self-serving character, which could include the option to get rid of your "fellows", but it would also be tedious to always watch your back. It's also hard to bring that character concept across in a vidya game - apart from stealing loot and outright killing other players.