14 reasons why PK should stay in D3

etslayer · 04-07-2008, 21:30

EDIT: it's actually 15 reasons.

Sorry for the ultra-long post... I hope at least somebody will read through the whole thing.

OK I have gotten into some pretty heated arguments with people on this forum regarding the PK removal issue. I'm going to try and be more civil in this thread.

If you disagree with me, please specifically point out which reason (listed below) you disagree with. And DO NOT take any of them out of context. If you have an issue with one of my reasons, quote the WHOLE reason. If you are just going to go on a rant about why PK should be eliminated, there are already threads for that. This thread is not for this purpose. All arguments should specifically relate to the points that I am laying down.

Blizzard has clearly stated that their reason for wanting to get rid of PKing is to encourage "cooperative gameplay". This is a flawed theory for many reasons. Frankley, I am surprised that a professional game designer would make such a shortsighted and (dare I say) ignorant comment.

I have made many of these arguments in other threads, but I wanted to put them all into one post.

1) PKers make up a very small minority of so-called "uncooperative players". I know that when I played D2, it was not PKers that ruined my fun, but the constant presence of racist bigots, stupid kids with nothing better to do than insult people, unwelcomed leechers, etc... Getting rid of PKing does not prevent anybody from being uncooperative. There are an infinite number of ways of ruining people's fun. Blizzard, if you want to make the game more cooperative you should do something about the most common forms of anti-social behavior rather than penalizing all the fans of the current D2 PvP system (no PK = entirely revamped PvP system).

2) It is not PKers in particular that ruin people's fun, but all anti-social behavior. There is no reason to single out PKing, because Blizzard provided many options for players to avoid playing with uncooperative players. There were level restrictions, private games, friends list to gather players that share your interests. The whole purpose of a gaming community is to party up with players that you get along with. Every single claim that a "high level PKer ruined your game" could have been easily avoided by utilizing the level restriction option. It is unfair to cater to those that fail to utilize the game's options (i will address low level "tweeked" Pkers as well)

3) In order to remove PK, the entire PvP system must be revamped. The way I see it, the most likely solution will be forcing both players to hit the hostile button before they can engage in combat. This opens up the door for a whole new breed of problem-player: those who run around dueling games pissing people off knowing that nobody can attack them. Actually, this is not a new breed... we see it now with level 1's running around dueling games and getting in the duelers way. So In order to solve these resultant problems, Blizzard will be forced to continue making more PvP restrictions to deal with these people. One restriction would lead to another etc... What we are left with is a watered down, overly-regulated PvP system that completely strays from other diablo games, and is very, very unnapealing in my mind.

4) Removing PK and revamping the PvP system is an artifical and shortsighted way of getting rid of uncooperative gameplay. It's like saying that you can get rid of racism by removing freedom of speech. It's completely obsurd. Getting rid of PK just means the assholes will find different ways of being assholes (a level 95 joins your game. He can't PK you but he CAN go and kill all the bosses before you can get to them. There you go, your fun is ruined and he didn't have to PK you) and those who enjoy the PvP as it is have to be penalized. Assholes are only avoidable if you go out of your way to avoid them. That's how it always has been and always will be. Getting rid of PK would dissapoint all the fans of the current PvP system while really not doing anything accomplishing to abolish anti-social behavior in any way whatsoever. Nothing is gained and many are left dissapointed. That is why it is an artificial solution. It sounds nice in theory, but doesn't accomplish anything.

5) Besides high level PKers, there is also the argument about low level tweeked characters that can slip through the level restrict filter and still PK you. This is not a valid reason to get rid of PK because a) there is a proportionally small number of low level tweeked chars, and if you happen to run into one, you can simply leave the game. Just like you can leave the game because of bigots and other fun-ruiners. Revamping the whole PvP system because of a small minority of **** disturbers would not make any sense. b) you can still avoid them by making private games.

6) PKing in softcore doesn't really mean anything because you just respawn anyway and don't lose anything. In fact, in all my years of SC play (and i played for a solid 7 years on sc), I hardley ever had to deal with PKers. People just don't PK in softcore very often. So why is it even an issue? Nevertheless, if PKing is removed, it means that all softcore players have to deal with an entirely new, frustratingly regulated PvP system even though SCPK has never even been much of an issue in the first place.

7) the real contraversy regarding PK has to do with HC. This is where the idea of getting rid of PK begins to take on some validity, because it can actually have devistating affects. However hardcore is called hardcore for a reason. What is the point of having a hardcore mode online if you are immune to all player attacks. That is the opposite of hardcore isn't it? If players only want to be vulnerable to monsters, they can either play in private games with friends (which I think is the perfect solution to this whole contraversy) or play single player. I have played HC and I remember losing my level 80 necro to a TPPKer. Yes I was pissed, but I also acknowledged that I should have been more careful. Carelessness and hardcore just don't mix. If you can't be careful, dont play hardcore.

8) As in SC, the removal of HC PK would mean a much more regulated PvP system. Once again. This is so not hardcore. Why should Blizzard change the HC PvP system just because some people don't have the guts to join a dueling game with the actual risk of getting killed without necessarely EXPECTING it? People in HC dueling games are cunning, and everybody is on the same page. Everybody knows that by stepping into blood moor, they risk losing their character. Take this suspense away from HC, and you take away the life-blood of multiplayer hardcore gameplay. As stated above, there are plenty of options for those who are only interested in PvM (see reason #2)

9) If you look at it another way, PK can actually encourage cooperative play. Say a tweeked level 30 comes into your game with the intention of PKing you. You can gather with your party and team up on him, just as if he were a monster.

10) Another way that PK encourages cooperative gameplay is in HC. HC is an environment much like in real life. You only have 1 shot, so don't screw it up. Knowing this, people are less likely to be assholes in general. In softcore everyone is free to say and do whatever they want because they know nobody can do anything to them. Even PKing doesn't do anything because they will still have their character and their big motuh. In HC it's much different. People are less likely to be uncooperative because they know that if they are anti-social, they face a greater risk of getting killed by another player. This is why HC games are generally so much more cooperative. Because of PK. Ironic eh?

11) TPPK hacks are not a valid argument for removing PK. Blizzard has to deal with these hacks, not remove a huge aspect of the game because of the possibility of hackers. That's not the correct approach to take in making a video game.

12) Legit TPPK (no hacks) can also be removed without affecting any other PvP aspects of the game. Blizzard can simply make it so that all spells cast before the hostile is made have no affect on other players. I am surprised Blizzard never implimented this simple solution to TPPK.

13) What ever happened to good ol' fashioned realism? The life-blood of the previous diablo games, the thing that made them so addictive. The game designers went out of their way to make the world as realistic as possible in terms of multiplayer interaction, and now they are going out of their way to get rid of it. Getting rid of PK, making more restrictions on PvP, making HC so much easier... this strays from the realism formula that made D2 one of the biggest and greatest games of all time.

14) You can also argue that TPPK should stay because of all the reasons listed in (12). I never cared for TPPK though.

15) Saying that "PKers ruined my fun" is not a valid argument. I could say that Duriel being so hard ruined my fun. So what? You have to give reasons why your fun was unfairly ruined. If you can come up with a way that PK illegitimately ruined your fun which I have not addressed in this post, please do so.

Crudesash68 · 04-07-2008, 22:53

The problem with many of your arguments is that they are subjective, and you assume that your opinion is a centered one that is logcally correct for everyone; that said, it is a well-written, passionate post.

Despite your demand, I will see your words in any context I choose. You are writing from a subjective viewpoint, and therefore cannot expect everyone else to see your words the way you do; you are not saying that water is wet, but that it tastes bad. Subjective.

If there is a majority of people who enjoy open, public games, without being PK'ed, and here I will make an uneducated assumption that this is true, many of your points simply lose their value.

Someone who PK's, in my opinion, is akin to the kid you knew who would destroy a project you and some other kids were working on, and laugh about it.

The argument about locking games is like saying it is OK to steal something if someone doesn't lock it up. I am not saying it is not stupid to take the risk, but it is still wrong to steal, whether or not the item is easily taken. A similar analogy is that a rape victim was "asking for it" by wearing sexy clothing.

Leaving a game when someone enters...OK, let's assume you are at a mall, and an annoucement comes over the loudspeaker "Murderer now in the building". Would you leave? Sure. Would you go back? No. If Blizzard does not make their realms enjoyable and fun for the people who play, they just won't, plain and simple. Going to another mall does not remove the problem.

Why do you assume that just because it is SC it is OK? It is still a pain in the you-know-what, still wastes time, and is still annoying! Not the same as HC, of course, but still annoying. Plus if you lose an Elite or Set item because of it, grr...(actually, I don't remember if you lose items in your inventory on death, so that may not be a consideration)

Here is a simple solution, and the game will be proof of it; make a section of the server open to PvP, and a section not open to PvP. Just like on WoW servers. Now, if there is a large group of people who enjoy HC games AND the added thrill of possibly getting killed by another player at almost max level before the final boss fight, why, the HC-PvP server will be bursting with people for you to fight. If they create this, and you are still upset about not being able to join games where people don't want you, you need to look in the mirror, because you are a miserable cretin.

I agree with some of what you said as well; PvP is not bad because of hacks, that makes everything bad, and if Blizz does not protect the servers the way they do with WoW, I will stick to SP like I did with D2.

Hopefully they work it out to make as many people happy as they can; I for one would like to try the B-Net side of things, but if the same system is in, I don't see how I would.

SirMoogie · 04-07-2008, 22:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by etslayer

EDIT: it's actually 15 reasons.
1) PKers make up a very small minority of so-called "uncooperative players". I know that when I played D2, it was not PKers that ruined my fun, but the constant presence of racist bigots, stupid kids with nothing better to do than insult people, unwelcomed leechers, etc... Getting rid of PKing does not prevent anybody from being uncooperative. There are an infinite number of ways of ruining people's fun. Blizzard, if you want to make the game more cooperative you should do something about the most common forms of anti-social behavior rather than penalizing all the fans of the current D2 PvP system (no PK = entirely revamped PvP system).

Invalid. Fallacy: Red herring and/or false dichotomy. I agree with your claim that racism, and other insults are detrimental to cooperation. However, the fact that these other types of activities are also disruptive is neither here nor there. PKing is still disruptive to cooperative play, and Blizzard can eliminate it AND these other problems that you mention. There is no reason to suspect that Blizzard is in a situation where they must choose between removing rampant insulting or removing PKing.

Quote:

2) It is not PKers in particular that ruin people's fun, but all anti-social behavior. There is no reason to single out PKing, because Blizzard provided many options for players to avoid playing with uncooperative players. There were level restrictions, private games, friends list to gather players that share your interests. The whole purpose of a gaming community is to party up with players that you get along with. Every single claim that a "high level PKer ruined your game" could have been easily avoided by utilizing the level restriction option. It is unfair to cater to those that fail to utilize the game's options (i will address low level "tweeked" Pkers as well)

Unsound argument based on false premises. There is no evidence that PKing must accompany other antisocial behaviors in order to ruin cooperative play. Counter example: An individual that joins a game, even at the same level as the others playing, and waits for an opportune moment to 'defect', such as when the players are fighting a boss, can ruin the game play experience without incorporating other antisocial behaviors, such as racist language.

Quote:

3) In order to remove PK, the entire PvP system must be revamped. The way I see it, the most likely solution will be forcing both players to hit the hostile button before they can engage in combat. This opens up the door for a whole new breed of problem-player: those who run around dueling games pissing people off knowing that nobody can attack them. Actually, this is not a new breed... we see it now with level 1's running around dueling games and getting in the duelers way. So In order to solve these resultant problems, Blizzard will be forced to continue making more PvP restrictions to deal with these people. One restriction would lead to another etc... What we are left with is a watered down, overly-regulated PvP system that completely strays from other diablo games, and is very, very unnapealing in my mind.

Invalid. Fallacy: Argument from ignorance,argument from dire consequences, red herring and potentially a false dichotomy. Just because you can't imagine a concise solution to dueling without incorporating PKing doesn't mean one doesn't exist, and that Blizzard hasn't thought of it already. In fact, they have. Look at WoW where there is dueling between members of the same faction, and yet, no PKing between them. Furthermore, just because something might be difficult to implement, doesn't mean it shouldn't be implemented for the good of the game.

As for your second issue, it is another red herring. If level 1's get in the way, this is another type of anti-cooperative behavior that can be dealt with independently of the PK problem. There is no reason to think this is a dichotomy of choices.

Quote:

4) Removing PK and revamping the PvP system is an artifical and shortsighted way of getting rid of uncooperative gameplay. It's like saying that you can get rid of racism by removing freedom of speech. It's completely obsurd. Getting rid of PK just means the assholes will find different ways of being assholes (a level 95 joins your game. He can't PK you but he CAN go and kill all the bosses before you can get to them. There you go, your fun is ruined and he didn't have to PK you) and those who enjoy the PvP as it is have to be penalized. Assholes are only avoidable if you go out of your way to avoid them. That's how it always has been and always will be. Getting rid of PK would dissapoint all the fans of the current PvP system while really not doing anything accomplishing to abolish anti-social behavior in any way whatsoever. Nothing is gained and many are left dissapointed. That is why it is an artificial solution. It sounds nice in theory, but doesn't accomplish anything.

Much of what was said in the rebuttal for the first point applies here. Blizzard can (attempt) to deal with all of these issues AND the PKing problem. There is a very effective way of dealing with the PK one, get rid of it. However, I couldn't resist adding another fallacy. Fallacy: Bad analogy. Removing the ability to speak, while an effective way of eliminating hate speech, it also removes a number of useful benefits for speech, such as cooperation. Removing PKing from Diablo only gets rid of the anti-cooperation aspects of PvP (and potentially some "fun" for the deviant), whilst sparing the cooperative game play.

Quote:

5) Besides high level PKers, there is also the argument about low level tweeked characters that can slip through the level restrict filter and still PK you. This is not a valid reason to get rid of PK because a) there is a proportionally small number of low level tweeked chars, and if you happen to run into one, you can simply leave the game. Just like you can leave the game because of bigots and other fun-ruiners. Revamping the whole PvP system because of a small minority of **** disturbers would not make any sense. b) you can still avoid them by making private games.

Fallacy: Strawman. No one is arguing that PKing should be removed because the current system can't be utilized to filter out potential PKers well enough. Blizzard is arguing against all forms of PKing in Diablo III, a cooperative game, no matter how you choose to frame it.

Ok, that's enough for the time being. I'll get to the others some other time. Or maybe someone else can? =D

LucianDK · 04-07-2008, 22:58

Involuntary PKing have no place in online games. Unless you willingly had entered a server with such rules, or enabled it in the game you made. Elsewhise it does not belong there under no circumstances. I do not want to have my time wasted by a snotty 12 year old.

etslayer · 04-07-2008, 23:27

What I am trying to say is that all of the frustration that derives from negative, uncooperative players is all being displaced onto PKers simply because it is much simpler for the devs to get rid of PK than other types of uncooperative play. In other words, PKers are being used as scapegoats to blame for all of D2's cooperation problems, thereby artifically bloating the actual affect that they have on gameplay, which is relatively insignificant. I know that this alone is not an argument to keep PK, but I am establishing that PKers' affect on the game is greatly exadurated.

I am not saying that change is bad. What I am saying is that many of these changes will have to be made not because there is anything wrong with the current dueling system (referring specifically to PvP, not PK), but because a change in PK will impose itself onto dueling. There is no way around it. Blizzard will have to change the PvP to accomodate the change in PK, regardless of whether the PvP actually needs a change in the first place. Whether it does or not is a completely different discussion.

The level 1 example was just an example of why changing PK would cause a whole chain of changes, and that it couldn't just stop at changing PK alone. It is just an example as to why the anti-PK camp is asking for more changes than they necessarely realise they are.

And you are assuming that PK is a problem. I am trying to argue that it is NOT a problem. Therefore your rebuttal in this case is invalid.

My entire point is that eliminating PK does not make the game cooperative. That was literally the entire point of my rant in the first place. If Blizzard wants to make the game cooperative, eliminating PK will not even slightly do anything at all to help.

Oh and about the private game argument... you say that people shouldn't have to be obligated to make private games just to avoid PKers? Well I am saying that the reason there are passwords and level restrictions is because Blizzard wanted to give people the option of making their own rules for their own games. How can you say that just because you don't want to utilize these options, other people should change their playing styles? Before you answer this, keep in mind that PKing is not inherently "bad". You can't use the assumption that it is a bad thing when arguing my points. You have to explain WHY it is bad, which is something that you have not done.

Nimbostratus · 04-07-2008, 23:33

(note: adding titles to the points so it's easier to follow along without having to scroll back up)

1. Uncooperative players.
It's been a while since I played on Bnet, but I only encountered one or two major racists my whole time playing. Of the people I saw otherwise insulting each other, it was almost always confined to trading or dueling. Even if there are more insults being tossed around nowadays, I wouldn't say it ruins your fun. Just squelch them and move on. Leechers can be a little more annoying if your party is having trouble, but for the most part you can just reparty and leave them out of it. Jerks and leechers can be overcome in the same game. PKers force you to make a new game or start a "who can bring in the highest level" fight. While I agree that something should be done about racists, jerks, and leechers, PKing is the one that can most easily "ruin" a game.

2. Singling out PKing/level restrictions
Again, the non-PKing uncooperative players can be overcome with simple means. PKers require you to get something to fight back, or to start a new game and lose progress. As for level restrictions, they're usually left out in case somebody wants to bring in their higher level characters to help out. If they can get the focus away from "rush all the way to the endgame," then I could see people actually using this for once.

3. Unhostiled characters in dueling games
I don't have any experience in dueling, but I would judge this as more an annoyance than a major problem. If it is major, then they can just add in "PVP only" as a game choice and make everyone auto-hostile or something.

4. PKers -> quest ruiners
What proof do you have that former PKers will switch to just going around and killing bosses to ruin games? What proof do you have that any change to the current PVP system will make it frustratingly annoying?

5. same/lower level PKers
As I said earlier, you can squelch the people throwing insults, and you can re-party if a leecher is really getting to you. "Just leave the game" really isn't a good solution, as you have to re-make any progress you lost. And what's the point of Bnet if everyone is supposed to just play in private games with only people they know?

6. softcore PK/PVP
You still lose progress, exp, and gold. Not much compared to hardcore, but that doesn't mean it isn't frustrating to get killed by another player out of nowhere. And again, limits on PVP don't automatically make it frustrating.

7. What's the point of Hardcore without PK?
What's the point of making players go into private games with only people they know? And contrary to popular belief, there ARE some players who would enjoy Hardcore PVM without having to worry about any and every other player wanting to kill them.

8. Hardcore PVP
Limiting PKing doesn't automatically have to make regular PVP hard to do.

9. PKing encouraging cooperative play
The problem is that people don't usually wanna risk it. If things were more balanced so that a PKer of roughly the same level couldn't kill you in under 5 hits, then I'd be all for this. I'd love to see some sort of "rescue" system where you get some sort of bonus (even if it's just a "bragging rights only" stat) for defeating a PKer.

10. PKing making people more cooperative in HC
For the people that don't PK, yes, it makes them more cooperative. But think of how rampant PKing is in HC mode. That's not exactly cooperation there. Besides, at least part of the extra cooperation in normal players comes from not wanting to get killed by curse/extra strong/extra fast frenzytaurs and the like. Other players aren't the only threat, ya know. Heck, they could make monsters more dangerous than usual in HC if necessary.

11. -

12. -

13. Realism in PKing
I doubt that the ability to be killed by other players while doing PVM was such a major selling point. Besides, killing somebody just for the sake of killing them isn't really "realistic."

14. -

15. Ruined fun not being a valid argument
In the example you gave, the player knows they're going to face an act boss, and thus it doesn't come as a complete surprise if he gets his *** handed to him. In all games after that, he knows what he's up against and can plan accordingly. You can plan for nearly anything in PVM. Not the case with PKers.

SirMoogie · 04-07-2008, 23:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by etslayer

What I am trying to say is that all of the frustration that derives from negative, uncooperative players is all being displaced onto PKers simply because it is much simpler for the devs to get rid of PK than other types of uncooperative play.
In other words, PKers are being used as scapegoats to blame for all of D2's cooperation problems, thereby artifically bloating the actual affect that they have on gameplay, which is relatively insignificant. I know that this alone is not an argument to keep PK, but I am establishing that PKers' affect on the game is greatly exadurated.

You don't have any evidence for this, and there has been counter evidence provided that Blizzard has focused on countering the other anti-cooperative behaviors, such as racism through squelching and reporting. You're now beating a dead horse.

Quote:

I am not saying that change is bad. What I am saying is that many of these changes will have to be made not because there is anything wrong with the current dueling system (referring specifically to PvP, not PK), but because a change in PK will impose itself onto dueling. There is no way around it. Blizzard will have to change the PvP to accomodate the change in PK, regardless of whether the PvP actually needs a change in the first place. Whether it does or not is a completely different discussion.

Stick to the issues. PKing. Dueling is not on the table, and Blizzard has said nothing about removing consensual dueling. This nonsense about this actually being a burden to implement has also been refuted. Blizzard has made successful PvP games that don't allow PKing (See WoW and inter-faction cooperation w/o PKing).

Quote:

The level 1 example was just an example of why changing PK would cause a whole chain of changes, and that it couldn't just stop at changing PK alone. It is just an example as to why the anti-PK camp is asking for more changes than they necessarely realise they are.

You have no evidence to support this claim. A system without PKing is just that, a system without PKing. Getting rid of it in its entirety removes even a "twinked" level 1 character from ruining the cooperative gameplay. There is no chain of changes required. PKing is gone. Good riddance, I say. =D

Quote:

And you are assuming that PK is a problem. I am trying to argue that it is NOT a problem. Therefore your rebuttal in this case is invalid.

You haven't argued that it isn't a problem, though. The argument goes that PKing is antithetical to cooperative gameplay, Diablo III is aiming to be a cooperative gameplay, therefore PKing should be removed. This is a valid argument, though it might not be sound. However, the only premise that could possibly be questioned is*: "PKing is antithetical to cooperative gameplay". This seems self-evident, can you explain how PKing makes for cooperative gameplay? I thought the whole idea was to interfere with one or more other player's progress in a game?

* - Unless you believe Blizzard is lying about their goals with Diablo III.

Quote:

My entire point is that eliminating PK does not make the game cooperative. That was literally the entire point of my rant in the first place. If Blizzard wants to make the game cooperative, eliminating PK will not even slightly do anything at all to help.

This is agree with, only because if the only action by Blizzard was to remove PKing, this wouldn't ensure the game is cooperative. However, Blizzard has said they are working on making the gameplay encourage cooperation. If they succeed, then PKing acts as an antithesis to those goals and should be removed.

etslayer · 05-07-2008, 01:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirMoogie

You have no evidence to support this claim. A system without PKing is just that, a system without PKing. Getting rid of it in its entirety removes even a "twinked" level 1 character from ruining the cooperative gameplay. There is no chain of changes required. PKing is gone. Good riddance, I say. =D

In the context of Diablo, there is absolutely no way to get rid of PK without affecting general PvP. They would have to make it so that both characters agree to duel, and that is a huge change from what it is right now. And are you saying you want a WoW style pvp? That is completely different from what we have now, so obviously tons of changes would have to be made to PvP if PK is removed.

And the only way PKing could be a legitimate flaw in the game is if there were no way to avoid it. But there is. I have repeated this over and over. Blizzard specifically implemented features which allow the players to have the sort of game they want. People who want PK in their games get to have it if they don't use these options. Simple.

And do you really want Blizzard to try and remove every single annoying thing that people can do? You have to have the freedom to be annoying, or the game would have no freedoms at all. Have fun playing that kiddy load of ****.

SirMoogie · 05-07-2008, 01:28

If your arguments have devolved into catch phrases like, "Have fun playing that kiddy load of ****", I think we're done here. The quest for a sound argument for including PK in Diablo III, a game with the stated goal of encouraging cooperation, continues.

etslayer · 05-07-2008, 01:41

Quote: