Automoderated users, Autopatrolled users, Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, Confirmed users, Moderators, Rollbackers, Administrators
213,805
edits
The Great Player-Versus-Player Debate: Difference between revisions
The Great Player-Versus-Player Debate (view source)
Revision as of 12:52, 8 October 2020
, 3 years agono edit summary
Looney Toons (talk | contribs) (trope->useful notes) |
No edit summary |
||
Line 1:
{{Useful Notes}}
Different [[Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game|MMORPG]]s have different systems for player-versus-player (PVP) combat. In some games, players may attack each other at any time, anywhere, while in other games players may only attack each other if both consent or they are both in special zones (if at all), and other games are somewhere in the middle. Which system is best is fiercely debated by gamers, and there is a derogatory nickname for the Pro-UPVP and Anti-UPVP sides, "Gankers" and "Carebears" respectively.
Arguments for unrestricted PVP systems (UPVP) include:
Line 24:
* Dynamic competition between massive guild alliances is unquestionably an excellent idea. However, every single example that the UPVP entry notes can be accomplished ''without UPVP''. Players having the ability to kill any other player at any time is simply not in any way, shape, or form a requirement for this.
In order to preserve some of the benefits and new possibilities inherent in PVP while avoiding many of the frustrations, most modern [[Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game|MMORPG]]s include a PVP system that is somewhere between "consensual only" and "completely unrestricted". Common features include:
* Giving players under a certain level protection from PVP, thus enabling new players to learn the game without risk.
| |||