NeillMcAttack wrote: »NeillMcAttack wrote: »I haven't played a game where there is a PvP Justice system, but I have played ones where I have taken part in Justice type situations in wPvP enabled systems. Including this in the voting options is an appeal to authority: "You only get your views on the subject taken seriously if you have done it in the past and haven't liked it". No. Just no.
Your response to the person who didn't want to see PvP going on was also lacking. "Come on dude" isn't a reasoned response. It isn't playing devil's advocate. It is dismissing the concern of another player based on your own bias. The same goes for not having heard "a single reason that has convinced" you. There have been plenty of reasons given since launch. I suspect the issue is that you dismiss them based on your desire for this system, rather than that they are actually bad, or even unconvincing, arguments.
And, for the record, the reason I am glad that this isn't being implemented is because I don't want to see it. Ever. This game was launched without wPvP. If they are going to introduce it then they are going to need to make a much stronger argument than anyone has done before I will accept how this will impact on my own play time. The current version of the justice system already does, sometimes when I am in a bank, the entire environment explodes as some hapless idiot takes on the guards in there. You think that contributes to my ability to critically consider what I should/shouldn't keep... or how best to fulfill a crafting order? Do you honestly believe that this will occur less if the PvP part of the justice system is implemented?
Quite simply, unless someone can promise that all Justice flagged players would be phased out of my sight, I am going to be against this... and remain against it.
"Come on dude" is about as justifiable an argument as, "it didn't have it before so I don't want it" or "it might distract me"!
No, it isn't. "Come on dude" is an exclamation that contains no factual content.
"it didn't have it before so I don't want it" is related to the idea that you bought a product with certain expectations based on preview material, interviews, etc. world PvP was not one of those things. I suggested that they would need a better argument, or certain conditions, in place before being happy for them to make yet another fundamental alteration to the game.
"it might distract me" wasn't what I said. I said "the current level of justice content does distract me". This is one the reasons I argued against it when they started talking about it. My view hasn't changed. I asked the OP if he expected the added wPvP elements to decrease that possibility. Still waiting for my answer.
So no, the statements aren't equivalent. One was an exclamation that added nothing to the discussion but the OP's incredulity... the latter two actually contained the basis of an argument. You really still think that they are similarly justifiable? Or do you want to take another run up at that?
K, perhaps what I should have said was, your arguments against, carry about as much weight as "come on dude".
To call it world PvP is basically an over exaggeration first off. You are against a killable player character being able to deal out justice, but not an unkillable NPC. Calling that a "fundamental change to the game" is absurd. I could, with the same logic, argue that I bought the game based on the promise that the enforcer system was being implemented (see how I didn't call it wPvP) and now that it isn't, I require much more justification for the fundamental change to the game I thought ESO was going to be.
Secondly, no the OP can't promise you that, but wasn't that a part of the game you bought, the MMO you purchased. Just like no one can promise you that every single person isn't going to wage all out war on every NPC in the game now that we know there is basically no punishment for leading a life of crime besides a tricky dash to the crafting tables. This argument actually reeks of a sense of entitlement so much that I regret spending a portion of my lunch break having to address it.
"come on dude" isn't an argument and therefore cannot carry weight as one. One thing you may notice is that I included reasons for my views, and even a suggestion that would mean I would support the introduction of the system as described. (Hint: It's the bit where I mention phasing)
Calling it a fundamental change to the game isn't absurd. The introduction of PvP in any form into what are currently purely PvE areas is a fundamental change. That you refuse to see it as such, even going as far as to construct a strawman argument in an attempt to dismiss it, suggests a fair amount about your own bias. Further to this, you couldn't argue the opposite position with the same logic, because to do that you would have to find articles and interviews that specify that the justice system would be implemented in the game with a PvP component at launch. The justice system, if memory serves, started getting reported about in or around October 2014... or about 6 months after release. That would make those promo materials pretty hard to find, don't you think?
Of course the OP can't promise me that the introduction of PvP justice won't contribute to the distractions. That was the point I was originally making. Of course what I do remember is that people said that bringing the first phase of the Justice system into towns wouldn't impinge on the playing activities of anyone who wasn't actively carrying out criminal activities, and that those of us who raised concerns at the time were fear-mongering. Seems rather similar to your argument now.
If you think a rationally worded argument, raising concerns about the way this debate is being framed, is based around a sense of entitlement... while not actually bothering to address the points made... well, then maybe your time really would have been better spent concentrating on your food because you sure-as-heck aren't contributing anything useful here.
anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »If you think a rationally worded argument, raising concerns about the way this debate is being framed, is based around a sense of entitlement... while not actually bothering to address the points made... well, then maybe your time really would have been better spent concentrating on your food because you sure-as-heck aren't contributing anything useful here.
And you sure as heck do not contribute to a polite and constructive exchange of views.
Your basic argumentation looks elaborate but it can be summarized as "I don't want it because I don't like it and therefore don't need it. I will not tolerate it either for the sake of other players who might enjoy it because I don't care about anyone else but myself".
The part where you state that whatever guard/thief fight occurring near you disrupts your bank operations deserves no more than "come on Dude..." but if you really want a detailed explanation, here it is : this is an MMO, which means a shared playground, if you're not ready to endure such basic events like a fight near you, you'd better play a single player game.
As to the argument that "it wasn't advertised as such when I bought the base game", itsounds very opportunistic. With arguments like that, you could put down any innovative step from ZOS that would not have been announced in 2014 already. If it was something you'd actually like, and someone else would come with such an argument, you'd find it just as out of place.
MMO are meant to evolve, else they die. That's their nature. Arguing that they cannot be different from what they were at launch is just nonsensical when it comes to MMOs.
NeillMcAttack wrote: »Calling it a fundamental change is absurd. I guess we will have to disagree on that.
And you're going to have to be clearer, are you saying that the current iteration of the justice system has a negative affect on your enjoyment of the game?
Sallington wrote: »People wanting to ONLY play in their little solo PvE bubble, and actively preventing other styles of play, are ruining what could have been an amazing MMO.
Sevalaricgirl wrote: »ZOS has done the right thing. PvP does not belong in PvE areas. PvP in the justice system means that those who don't want to PvP won't be able to participate in the justice system. We're talking about ZOS. There is no way they can separate a PvP justice system and a PvE justice system.
Sallington wrote: »People wanting to ONLY play in their little solo PvE bubble, and actively preventing other styles of play, are ruining what could have been an amazing MMO.
Don't feed the troll mate.Sallington wrote: »People wanting to ONLY play in their little solo PvE bubble, and actively preventing other styles of play, are ruining what could have been an amazing MMO.
One could argue the same for pvp players wanting to stay in their little bubble. No one group is to blame more than the other, and in the end ZOS is the one making the decisions. I just wish people could accept their favorite style of play isn't the only one that matters.
Don't feed the troll mate.Sallington wrote: »People wanting to ONLY play in their little solo PvE bubble, and actively preventing other styles of play, are ruining what could have been an amazing MMO.
One could argue the same for pvp players wanting to stay in their little bubble. No one group is to blame more than the other, and in the end ZOS is the one making the decisions. I just wish people could accept their favorite style of play isn't the only one that matters.
Really? I thought my post on page 2 where I asked for a more reasoned response from the OP than "come on dude" was actually pretty polite. I do, however, take exception to suggestions of absurdity and entitlement from people who don't both to actually address the original request. Are you saying you wouldn't?
Ask yourself: If ability effects going off near crafting/service areas are such a low level of concern, then why are there still people calling for pets to be unsummoned in banks? Why annoyance with healing spam near crafting tables? I remember both of those getting a fair amount of air-time since launch. It comes down to what different people consider an acceptable level of interference. You wish to change the game to suit your tastes... and everyone else has to tolerate it because you want it? How then is your position not also selfish?
As it is, I have said twice that I will support the introduction of PvP justice into the game if people want it... as long as I don't have to see it. I have referred to phasing. Keep the people who are not flagged for the Justice system in a different phase from those who are... and those people can do whatever the heck they like, as far as I am concerned. I am offering a solution that allows for both styles of play. Can you say the same?
I didn't suggest ESO shouldn't change. I suggested that it should have good reasons for doing so, especially in the case of a fundamental change such as this. Please don't misrepresent my words again.
anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »I am against it because I have 76 million bounty. A bounty I am never going to get rid of. It's almost impossible. Thus I would only vote for a PvP Justice System if it would get resetted at launch.
How do you "live" with that ? You never ever go to town and never use a guild bank (with that character ?). I wonder wonder how it's possible to reach such a high bounty...
anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »If you think a rationally worded argument, raising concerns about the way this debate is being framed, is based around a sense of entitlement... while not actually bothering to address the points made... well, then maybe your time really would have been better spent concentrating on your food because you sure-as-heck aren't contributing anything useful here.
And you sure as heck do not contribute to a polite and constructive exchange of views.
Your basic argumentation looks elaborate but it can be summarized as "I don't want it because I don't like it and therefore don't need it. I will not tolerate it either for the sake of other players who might enjoy it because I don't care about anyone else but myself".
The part where you state that whatever guard/thief fight occurring near you disrupts your bank operations deserves no more than "come on Dude..." but if you really want a detailed explanation, here it is : this is an MMO, which means a shared playground, if you're not ready to endure such basic events like a fight near you, you'd better play a single player game.
As to the argument that "it wasn't advertised as such when I bought the base game", itsounds very opportunistic. With arguments like that, you could put down any innovative step from ZOS that would not have been announced in 2014 already. If it was something you'd actually like, and someone else would come with such an argument, you'd find it just as out of place.
MMO are meant to evolve, else they die. That's their nature. Arguing that they cannot be different from what they were at launch is just nonsensical when it comes to MMOs.
Really? I thought my post on page 2 where I asked for a more reasoned response from the OP than "come on dude" was actually pretty polite. I do, however, take exception to suggestions of absurdity and entitlement from people who don't both to actually address the original request. Are you saying you wouldn't?
Ask yourself: If ability effects going off near crafting/service areas are such a low level of concern, then why are there still people calling for pets to be unsummoned in banks? Why annoyance with healing spam near crafting tables? I remember both of those getting a fair amount of air-time since launch. It comes down to what different people consider an acceptable level of interference. You wish to change the game to suit your tastes... and everyone else has to tolerate it because you want it? How then is your position not also selfish?
As it is, I have said twice that I will support the introduction of PvP justice into the game if people want it... as long as I don't have to see it. I have referred to phasing. Keep the people who are not flagged for the Justice system in a different phase from those who are... and those people can do whatever the heck they like, as far as I am concerned. I am offering a solution that allows for both styles of play. Can you say the same?
I didn't suggest ESO shouldn't change. I suggested that it should have good reasons for doing so, especially in the case of a fundamental change such as this. Please don't misrepresent my words again.NeillMcAttack wrote: »Calling it a fundamental change is absurd. I guess we will have to disagree on that.
And you're going to have to be clearer, are you saying that the current iteration of the justice system has a negative affect on your enjoyment of the game?
We will have to agree to disagree on it.
And yes, I am saying that I originally opposed the current iteration of the justice system. I was primarily concerned about two aspects of it:
1) With the change to containers, getting crafting materials and motifs would be more difficult. It is more difficult but I have been willing to embrace the change for the depth of interaction that it brings to the game.
2) That in-town (and especially in-building) combat would detract from my own enjoyment of these spaces. This, sadly, has remained a problem for me (try as I might). I don't enjoy it and I find it distracting.
I hope that answers your question.