# Factions in MMORPG



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 13, 2009)

I still think it's retarded that races are restricted via factions. It's pretty much a problem I see in old-age literature that somehow never leaves, even today.

Not everyone from a race would have one line of thinking. Some would break free and form their own ideas and such. You could argue that they could be a small number, but what's the point of making a race if they're small in numbers?

I'd rather have it that the player chooses his own race, own class, and own faction. None of that pre-set bullcrap. And no, don't mention about plot - most likely the plot itself would be crappy anyway.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Oct 13, 2009)

I agree it would be more fun to create your own race and class. I don't know a lot about factions to say anything


----------



## Dass (Oct 13, 2009)

Here's my answer; I DON'T WANT NO GNOMES IN MY HORDE!


----------



## Duality Jack (Oct 13, 2009)

lol MMOROGS XD


----------



## Sparticle (Oct 13, 2009)

The Drunken Ace said:


> lol MMOROGS XD



This.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Oct 13, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> I still think it's retarded that races are restricted via factions. It's pretty much a problem I see in old-age literature that somehow never leaves, even today.
> 
> Not everyone from a race would have one line of thinking. Some would break free and form their own ideas and such. You could argue that they could be a small number, but what's the point of making a race if they're small in numbers?
> 
> I'd rather have it that the player chooses his own race, own class, and own faction. None of that pre-set bullcrap. And no, don't mention about plot - most likely the plot itself would be crappy anyway.



So since you are too lazy to actually read the actual lore/plot under the pretense that you prejudge them as probably being crappy...factions are not justified. Lol you.

Also:

*FOR THE HORDE*, I WANT NO HOOYMANS IN MY FACTIONS. NO GNOMES EITHER. OR DWARVES.


----------



## Dass (Oct 13, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> So since you are too lazy to actually read the actual lore/plot under the pretense that you prejudge them as probably being crappy...factions are not justified. Lol you.
> 
> Also:
> 
> *FOR THE HORDE*, I WANT TO HOOYMANS IN MY FACTIONS. NO GNOMES EITHER. OR DWARVES.



Yes, glory to the Horde! Death to the Alliance! Until I can make a Worgen!


----------



## Ridge (Oct 13, 2009)

Final Fantasy XI did this.  You could pick any race and then you could pick any nation.  Granted the city states weren't exactly at war with one another.  

Making factions based on race is lore intensive typically.  Sure you're going to have the misfit who doesn't agree and leaves but chances are they wouldn't be accepted by the other side simply on the basis of prejudice.  

Replay value in MMORPGs are a thought and if you have two factions it makes the player hopefully play the game again from the other side, thus creating more time spent in the game and thus they spend more money.


----------



## Ozriel (Oct 13, 2009)

Dass said:


> Yes, glory to the Horde! Death to the Alliance! Until I can make a Worgen!




Lok'Tar!

And I see that white text, you Benidict Arnold!!
But I am probably going to do the same thing just to grief the furries on the Alliance side.



Ridge said:


> Final Fantasy XI did this.  You could pick any race and then you could pick any nation.  Granted the city states weren't exactly at war with one another.
> 
> Making factions based on race is lore intensive typically.  Sure you're going to have the misfit who doesn't agree and leaves but chances are they wouldn't be accepted by the other side simply on the basis of prejudice.
> 
> Replay value in MMORPGs are a thought and if you have two factions it makes the player hopefully play the game again from the other side, thus creating more time spent in the game and thus they spend more money.




True.

Even if the nation does not agree with the policies of their neighbor, they'll still be allies to combat the threat of the other faction and their nations that make up the faction.

And factions based on two major factions with a split off with warring nations is fun.


----------



## Sinjo (Oct 13, 2009)

How about you play City of heroes or Champions on line; there's no class or race  specifics. I'm a fan of racial classes, gives the game more depth, great for pvp. Try WAR, each race has four specific classes, and only certain genders can be certain classes.


----------



## Morroke (Oct 13, 2009)

No Gnomes allo-...Dass beat me to it.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 13, 2009)

Guild Wars will probably do this when all the melees are norns, all the rangers are Sylvari, and all the spellcasters are Asura in Guild Wars 2 while everyone asks "WHERE IN THE HELL ARE THE TENGU?!" 

There was only one time when you had to pick a faction and even then, you didn't have any races to choose from other than human. And even then....it's not like it restricts you that much since you can make another character decide "Screw you SUXONS, I'm going KURZICK!" or "Screw you TURDZICKS, I'm going LUXON!"


----------



## Skittle (Oct 13, 2009)

Play Fallen Earth. No classes, no races. As for Factions, you get to pick or stay neutral.

Fuck Horde vs Alliance. We got 6 different factions! Booyah.


----------



## Rai Toku (Oct 13, 2009)

skittle said:


> Play Fallen Earth. No classes, no races. As for Factions, you get to pick or stay neutral.
> 
> Fuck Horde vs Alliance. We got 6 different factions! Booyah.



You can even change factions, if that's your thing. ^^ Never played the game, but it interested me for a time... until I found its minimum requirements are higher than what my comp has, mostly.


----------



## Skittle (Oct 14, 2009)

Rai Toku said:


> You can even change factions, if that's your thing. ^^ Never played the game, but it interested me for a time... until I found its minimum requirements are higher than what my comp has, mostly.


The problem with faction hopping though is the main reason people do it is for mutations. Certain factions give easier access to certain mutations and thus, faction hopping is born.


----------



## Attaman (Oct 14, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Not everyone from a race would have one line of thinking.


Depends on the fictional realm.  Aren't many benevolent Orcs (so much a rarity that there are novels / short stories completely dedicated to the few good ones) in Forgotten Realms, Lord of the Rings, Warhammer, etc.



> I'd rather have it that the player chooses his own race, own class, and own faction. None of that pre-set bullcrap. And no, don't mention about plot - most likely the plot itself would be crappy anyway.


  I can take pre-set factions well enough, what I dislike is pre-set classes.  Understandable if they're race-specific (only [x] has the access to certain magical field, for instance), but when it's something like "You can be a swordsman.  But not you," it leaves me wondering how that faction fought before mastering magic / psionics / whatever they do.


----------



## Nezumi7 (Oct 14, 2009)

That's one of things I actually enjoyed about EQ2 (Fail as it might be).

You can 'change sides' with any character. Which was interesting.

And the only way I got my Iksar Monk to really 'exist' again. ^^


----------



## Jelly (Oct 14, 2009)

It keeps things cut and dry in regards to PvP and PvE. I'd rather enjoyable gameplay mechanisms than cultural relativism.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 14, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> So since you are too lazy to actually read the actual lore/plot under the pretense that you prejudge them as probably being crappy...factions are not justified. Lol you.
> 
> Also:
> 
> *FOR THE HORDE*, I WANT TO HOOYMANS IN MY FACTIONS. NO GNOMES EITHER. OR DWARVES.



*points at my rant regarding WoW lore and how they ruined said lore*

a.k.a. LotR for dummies by dummies



Attaman said:


> Depends on the fictional realm.  Aren't many benevolent Orcs (so much a rarity that there are novels / short stories completely dedicated to the few good ones) in Forgotten Realms, Lord of the Rings, Warhammer, etc.
> 
> I can take pre-set factions well enough, what I dislike is pre-set classes.  Understandable if they're race-specific (only [x] has the access to certain magical field, for instance), but when it's something like "You can be a swordsman.  But not you," it leaves me wondering how that faction fought before mastering magic / psionics / whatever they do.



And again, we've moved forward since the Tolkeinian stuff. Even DnD likes to push away those things.


----------



## Duality Jack (Oct 14, 2009)

I rather just get some PCP and read Lord of the rings with a bunch of other guys and girls for 5 minutes and fuck using computers see elves for real(not real but hey its cool) Once one friend of mine confused a small autistic child as a garden gnome that was awesome.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Oct 14, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> *points at my rant regarding WoW lore and how they ruined said lore*
> 
> a.k.a. LotR for dummies by dummies
> 
> ...



Even if they did bastardize the lore, the lore is there. The original lore it was based on was prettat my good. It wasn't craptastic at least.

So factions in something like WoW makes sense. I enjoy having a faction to stick with. It's fun. But I can understand if people would rather not be forced into a faction by what race they choose. That's all fine and dandy. Choose an MMORPG that does allow that. No need to crap on other MMORPG's just because they don't allow faction and race choice.


----------



## MBlueWolf (Oct 14, 2009)

The Drunken Ace said:


> I rather just get some PCP and read Lord of the rings with a bunch of other guys and girls for 5 minutes and fuck using computers see elves for real(not real but hey its cool) Once one friend of mine confused a small autistic child as a garden gnome that was awesome.



I want to ask questions about this, but at the same time, I wonder if I shouldn't and just enjoy the story.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 14, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> Even if they did bastardize the lore, the lore is there. The original lore it was based on was prettat my good. It wasn't craptastic at least.



Usually people refer to WC lore, which was built up to WC3 FT, but WoW ruined it by making nearly everything pointless.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 14, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> So factions in something like WoW makes sense. I enjoy having a faction to stick with. It's fun. But I can understand if people would rather not be forced into a faction by what race they choose. That's all fine and dandy. Choose an MMORPG that does allow that. No need to crap on other MMORPG's just because they don't allow faction and race choice.



This is Okami you're talking to...he's not going to listen so long as he hates it and there are people to troll.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Oct 14, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Usually people refer to WC lore, which was built up to WC3 FT, but WoW ruined it by making nearly everything pointless.



Ahem, techinically it was players who ruined it by making everything pointless. Bawing about wanting this and that, and demanding things changed because it's not "easy enough!".

WoW was ruined by idiotic gamers wanting stuff but never thinking of the long term consequences more than any thing else. Honestly you get this everywhere.

Take for example the Hero class, the Death Knight. Started out as it was supposed to be, an overpowered hero class. But you could only get one per every level 55 character you leveled up. Then players bawwed. They didn't want to have to level a character up to 55 every time they want another DK.

So they got what they wanted. Then the battle grounds and raids became overwhelmed and overpopulated by a Hero Class. It was too much. The regular classes could not really do much anymore. It wasn't fair. So they bawwed. Now they want the DK down-graded. They want it less powerful.

Now the people while like playing DK are bawwing because their Hero Class is no longer a Hero Class.

If you actually took the time to think about these things instead of going on half ass rants, something like WoW's main problem has nothing to with Factions or even the bastardization of lore. The problem stems from short sighted players pissed off, and rather than learn to play their character, they'd rather take every easy route, and if they cannot overcome something they want it changed, and then go beserk when it happens to them.

How do you think I felt as a Druid player, having my defense nuked? Having my best things down-graded? Because squishy's who made the choice to be squishy's are tired of not being able to to take on Druids. Meanwhile the Druids are now being slammed by the squishies and even harder by the things with higher armor class...just because of a collective of whiny babies who don't want to deal with the consequences of the class they chose.

Nearly every problem related to WoW stems from stupid players and Blizzard giving them what they want. Not enough people think about the long term consequences of what they ask for. In any case, unless you find the energy within yourself to look into what you are going to bash, so that you can form legitimate issues, I suggest you just keep your trap shut. Really, it's not helping your case here Mr "the lore is probably crappy anyway" but you won't read it, and you just take word of mouth from your gamer friends.

Also, I fucking love the factions in WoW. I love the fact that when I join a group and the raid is successful, it was not because we just overwhelmed the other side with numbers, but we used actual strategy and won. That's the nice thing about being Horde, if you win in something like BG, or Raid's, it has nothing to do with overwhelming the other side with sheer numbers, as the Alliance tends to. Also we do get a decent different in maturity between Alliance and Horde. The kids tend to gravitate towards the Alliance side because they want to play Hero. Factions can make things more interesting.



Digitalpotato said:


> This is Okami you're talking to...he's not going to listen so long as he hates it and there are people to troll.


Yeah yeah...I know. I'm bored though.


----------



## Sinjo (Oct 14, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> Ahem, techinically it was players who ruined it by making everything pointless. Bawing about wanting this and that, and demanding things changed because it's not "easy enough!".
> 
> WoW was ruined by idiotic gamers wanting stuff but never thinking of the long term consequences more than any thing else. Honestly you get this everywhere.
> 
> ...


All MMOs are doomed to have the same problem in the longterm. WoW has outlived itself, now it's just running on the fumes. Blizzard has realised this and that's why they're making a new one. I honestly think they should just stick to what they know. Diablo, SC and WC RTS.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Oct 14, 2009)

Sinjo said:


> All MMOs are doomed to have the same problem in the longterm. WoW has outlived itself, now it's just running on the fumes. Blizzard has realised this and that's why they're making a new one. I honestly think they should just stick to what they know. Diablo, SC and WC RTS.



This is why I like to still have my console games. It is also why it is good to invest in non multi-player games. Eventually all games get ruined in mass multi-player mode by players.

Really though Blizzard's WoW would have been saved if they stopped caving in every time a collective of lazy butt-hurt players ask for something inane.

Anyway, when you want a break from people it's nice to have something fun to fall back on. That's just Miss "Thinks people should stop being stupid individual console or PC fan-boys because you miss part of the experience by following stupid loyalty trends".


----------



## Duality Jack (Oct 14, 2009)

MBlueWolf said:


> I want to ask questions about this, but at the same time, I wonder if I shouldn't and just enjoy the story.



Good times where had.


----------



## Ridge (Oct 14, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> Ahem, techinically it was players who ruined it by making everything pointless. Bawing about wanting this and that, and demanding things changed because it's not "easy enough!".
> 
> WoW was ruined by idiotic gamers wanting stuff but never thinking of the long term consequences more than any thing else. Honestly you get this everywhere.
> 
> ...



I couldn't agree with you more.  I remember when I got WoW when it launched and visiting the forums and saw that Blizzard employees actually posted, and responded, to rants, raves, and cries of the player base.  

I knew this was flawed the moment I saw it.  I was used to games where the developers were very much isolated and they stuck to game mechanics, but some genius in Blizzard felt that direct communication with the players was a good idea.  I felt that if Blizzard silently monitored the forums instead of responding it would have been better, but when Blizzard has responded to player demands openly it creates the mentality that a game is developed and modified by democratic means.  

There's always to side to my argument, one could argue that developer isolation would create insular ideas to the effect that they wouldn't address player concerns quickly, or if at all.  The problem with Blizzard was they responded TOO quickly to certain things and ignoring others, and it always ALWAYS takes them a long time to make any change.  

Final Fantasy XI, if there were problems, the game was down until Square-Enix fixed it, they didn't push problems like abilities doing too much damage by mistake or mobs being able to be exploited until a future patch.  Blizzard's mentality of taking forever to make something "just right" has led to problems in the past.  

Blizzard touching their main characters from WC III and FT are just terrible as well.  Killing main characters?  Really?  I'm sorry but when they made Illidan and Kel'thas bad guys I was done with that.  I felt like Blizzard had run out of original content and bastardized what they had in order to explain the events of Outland.  Blizzard even admitted that the whole existence of the Draenei was an "Oops, we got the lore wrong but OH WELL" thing on their part. 

Sorry, ranting about Blizzard. Anyway, I agree!


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 14, 2009)

^ When did they flat out say that Kael'Thalas, Illidan and the like are "Dead" lorewise? For all we know, they're just "Killable" because players saw this and thought "OMG I WANNA SQUARE OFF AGAINST ILLIDAN AND LOOT THE TWIN BLADES OF DRAMANOTH"? If they *DIDN'T* use them people would get angry *because* they just came up with a bunch of original characters to simply replace them. Would that mean since all the leaders&Jaina are easily killable that they're "dead"?  For all we know, Illidan's gonna say "i'm not dead! I feel fine! i think I can go for a walk now!". 

Would you prefer the alternative where they don't even bother trying to fix it and then left the druids to be the fubar gear-dependent mess that they were? Don't complain about druids being worthless unless you played in 2005 when they really *WERE* worthless and only had one ability that set them apart from everybody else and that was Innervate. You could run without Gift of the Wild.


And if anything, Gaming and games are being ruined by one thing.

Other people.


Not *JUST* "Casuals", but also Graphics Whores, Elitists, Perfectionists, Nostaigla-blinded freaks who expect stuff to have the same impact on them 20 years ago as it did when they were twelve, flamers who "Can't see why other people like stuff they don't", Double and Triple Standarders ("This franchise/genre is allowed to repeat everything but THIS franchise/genre has to do something new every two minutes or else I'll declare it a boring grind!") willfully blind, cock-measurers, and most importantly, The King Customers.


----------



## Internet Police Chief (Oct 14, 2009)

I like PvP, so, factions = good.


----------



## Dass (Oct 14, 2009)

Digitalpotato said:


> ^ When did they flat out say that Kael'Thalas, Illidan and the like are "Dead" lorewise? For all we know, they're just "Killable" because players saw this and thought "OMG I WANNA SQUARE OFF AGAINST ILLIDAN AND LOOT THE TWIN BLADES OF DRAMANOTH"? If they *DIDN'T* use them people would get angry *because* they just came up with a bunch of original characters to simply replace them. Would that mean since all the leaders&Jaina are easily killable that they're "dead"?  For all we know, Illidan's gonna say "i'm not dead! I feel fine! i think I can go for a walk now!".
> 
> Would you prefer the alternative where they don't even bother trying to fix it and then left the druids to be the fubar gear-dependent mess that they were? Don't complain about druids being worthless unless you played in 2005 when they really *WERE* worthless and only had one ability that set them apart from everybody else and that was Innervate. You could run without Gift of the Wild.
> 
> ...



Providing by casuals, you mean noobs who complain about the difficulty level all the time and do laughably poor, thus screwing the entire raid (I had a warlock doing 172 DPS in Naxx [WOTLK] once), I agree wholeheartedly.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Oct 14, 2009)

Digitalpotato said:


> ^ When did they flat out say that Kael'Thalas, Illidan and the like are "Dead" lorewise? For all we know, they're just "Killable" because players saw this and thought "OMG I WANNA SQUARE OFF AGAINST ILLIDAN AND LOOT THE TWIN BLADES OF DRAMANOTH"? If they *DIDN'T* use them people would get angry *because* they just came up with a bunch of original characters to simply replace them. Would that mean since all the leaders&Jaina are easily killable that they're "dead"?  For all we know, Illidan's gonna say "i'm not dead! I feel fine! i think I can go for a walk now!".
> 
> Would you prefer the alternative where they don't even bother trying to fix it and then left the druids to be the fubar gear-dependent mess that they were? Don't complain about druids being worthless unless you played in 2005 when they really *WERE* worthless and only had one ability that set them apart from everybody else and that was Innervate. You could run without Gift of the Wild.
> 
> ...



I hope you are not directing any of this towards me. I never said Druids were "worthless".


----------



## Trpdwarf (Oct 14, 2009)

Ridge said:


> I couldn't agree with you more.  I remember when I got WoW when it launched and visiting the forums and saw that Blizzard employees actually posted, and responded, to rants, raves, and cries of the player base.
> 
> I knew this was flawed the moment I saw it.  I was used to games where the developers were very much isolated and they stuck to game mechanics, but some genius in Blizzard felt that direct communication with the players was a good idea.  I felt that if Blizzard silently monitored the forums instead of responding it would have been better, but when Blizzard has responded to player demands openly it creates the mentality that a game is developed and modified by democratic means.
> 
> ...



There is no wrong in listening to what players say but you are right. That is where it should end like you said. Listen, and then think about the long term consequences of giving players what they ask for. Weight the pro's and cons, and act accordingly so that instead of each patch down-grading the entire experience, it upgrades it.

I'm not getting into a Lore debate. I don't know everything about the lore. I do understand why Blizzard has many flaws in game mechanics and such. They listen too much to their players. If they didn't the game would be more bearable even with it's loss of real original content.


----------



## Ridge (Oct 14, 2009)

Digitalpotato said:


> ^ When did they flat out say that Kael'Thalas, Illidan and the like are "Dead" lorewise? For all we know, they're just "Killable" because players saw this and thought "OMG I WANNA SQUARE OFF AGAINST ILLIDAN AND LOOT THE TWIN BLADES OF DRAMANOTH"? If they *DIDN'T* use them people would get angry *because* they just came up with a bunch of original characters to simply replace them. Would that mean since all the leaders&Jaina are easily killable that they're "dead"?  For all we know, Illidan's gonna say "i'm not dead! I feel fine! i think I can go for a walk now!".
> 
> Would you prefer the alternative where they don't even bother trying to fix it and then left the druids to be the fubar gear-dependent mess that they were? Don't complain about druids being worthless unless you played in 2005 when they really *WERE* worthless and only had one ability that set them apart from everybody else and that was Innervate. You could run without Gift of the Wild.
> 
> ...




I have played WoW since launch but I'm not going to display my gaming experience here.  I am going to say that I personally find it in bad taste to go toe to toe with some of the pivotal characters that really fleshed the series out.  

When you can fight, and yes kill (note how none of them give up), you remove the awe around that character.  You remove the dynamic that made them up if a group of 25 people can beat them.  How does that really add up in comparison to what went on during WC III?  

I do think listening and planning is what a game company needs to do.  I always felt Blizzard never looked into the future and their choices were always on tomorrow or the next day.  It's just a feeling I've gotten after playing the product and reading the forums for awhile.  I'm not an authority on the matter but at the same time my opinions do matter if a lot of the player base is realizing Blizzard doesn't seem to plan ahead.

Yes, Blizzard makes new content but at the slow speed and not a lot of content in comparison for its development time.  Things are half finished, never touched, ignored, etc.  It just feels very sloppy and that the half finished product makes retail speaks even worse for the company.  

I'm sorry if I personally upset you, Trpddwarf.  That's never my intention to anger someone. =)


ANYWAY!!

We were discussing factions in game, right?  Lets keep the ball rollin'!


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 14, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> I hope you are not directing any of this towards me. I never said Druids were "worthless".



Oh no. But really...that's one of the cases in which if they didn't listen to the playerbase, then nobody would have ever played a Druid. (There was a reason you saw maybe 4 or 5 druids per endgame guild.)


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 15, 2009)

But in the end, I don't want all Hyumens to be in a faction that is usually considered WE'RE GOOD GAIS HERE!


----------



## Attaman (Oct 15, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> But in the end, I don't want all Hyumens to be in a faction that is usually considered WE'RE GOOD GAIS HERE!


Play a Furry MMO then:  You'll be lucky to even have humans as an option for the "evil" faction.

I haven't had a chance to give D&DOnline a try yet, do they keep the Alignment System?  If so, there's a good spot to watch some evil humans.  Warhammer Online has an evil human faction, but considering most of them are mutated monstrosities of mustache-twirling evilness, I assume that's the other side of the coin you hate (Where there _are_ evil humans, but they're radically different from the good ones).


----------



## Takun (Oct 15, 2009)

I really don't see the problem in main factions.  The majority wouldn't trust you since you _look_ like another faction.  However, sub-factions are much more diverse.  IE: Cenarion Expedition in WoW.


----------



## lilEmber (Oct 15, 2009)

Ever notice all the bad carebare kids that are non-pvp go horde? 

But on a more serious note: The "Hero Class" isn't actually suppose to be stronger. It's suppose to be balanced. The special part about it is you start at 55.

If you say it's a DK, and because DK's are super-strong then I can say the same about pallys. I mean, the ashbringer was owned and used by a pally.

It's not weak, in fact the DK is easily the strongest class (equal gear, same skill) with pally's coming right behind.

People who baww about DK getting nerfed are mostly the ones who can't play at all. And I mean at all. Those with no, or low arena rating and those that can no longer take on somebody that's better than they are. I got a DK and nobody my level can scratch me in the slightest.


But anyway, I liked how Age of Conan did "factions". Kill everybody.
I also hate not being able to customize your characters build a little.


----------



## Ridge (Oct 15, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> But in the end, I don't want all Hyumens to be in a faction that is usually considered WE'RE GOOD GAIS HERE!



I think this decision is more marketing than anything else.  Think about it this way, an MMORPG is a way to personify a person's character into a video game, and what do a lot of people relate to? Being human.  A lot of people also see themselves as good, regardless of their social standing and actual decisions throughout the day.  

So, when Average Man comes to play a new MMO he's going to pick something, typically, that he can most relate to.  A typical human on the side of good. 

I do agree that the idea is skewed in a lot of ways in that people assume humans = good.  Some games subtly undo this with the lore, but the average player who doesn't read the lore wouldn't care two flips about it anyhow.  

Just the way a company works, I suppose.  That's why I liked Final Fantasy XI.  No Race was perfectly good and honest, they all had those dark clouds that hovered over them.  Square-Enix developed the game in such a way that showed a nation, while trying to be good, can have some dark spots on their record.  

Other games with factions that have an emphasis on PvP can't typically do this since interaction with the other race is typically murdering them.  You have to cater to the idea that there is, on the surface, a bad race and a good race.

An example would be Aion, the Elyos and Asmodians who are mostly similar but the Elyos are bright, normal skinned looking humans with white angelic wings.  The Admodae are more demonic with clawed feet and longer, pointed fingers, red eyes in combat and dark feathered wings.  Symbolically, the Elyos are on the top of the planet and the Asmodians are on the bottom (Reference to heaven and hell here), but if you read the lore, it was the Elyos who pretty much ripped the planet apart.  

Anyway, I hope this helps a little bit!


----------



## Ozriel (Oct 15, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Ever notice all the bad carebare kids that are non-pvp go horde?
> 
> But on a more serious note: The "Hero Class" isn't actually suppose to be stronger. It's suppose to be balanced. The special part about it is you start at 55.
> 
> ...



Thank you.

And it Also depends on the gear. 
I play a DPS DK and they are fun when you get the right gear to play with, and the right enchantments.


On another note, I hate dealing with the players who think just because they sacrificed their lives to the game they have the right to be arrogant and think they are superior to anyone else.


----------



## Ozriel (Oct 15, 2009)

Ridge said:


> I think this decision is more marketing than anything else.  Think about it this way, an MMORPG is a way to personify a person's character into a video game, and what do a lot of people relate to? Being human.  A lot of people also see themselves as good, regardless of their social standing and actual decisions throughout the day.
> 
> So, when Average Man comes to play a new MMO he's going to pick something, typically, that he can most relate to.  A typical human on the side of good.
> 
> ...




Most of the "Pretty races" are on the side of good.

Granted, I like playing with BElves, but my first love will always be the orcs.


----------



## Ridge (Oct 15, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Most of the "Pretty races" are on the side of good.
> 
> Granted, I like playing with BElves, but my first love will always be the orcs.



Right!  Because people relate more to themselves and personify them that way.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 16, 2009)

Fuck relatability. What's the point of relatability if in the end it doesn't fit.

Case in point - realism in superhero comics.


----------



## Ozriel (Oct 16, 2009)

Ridge said:


> Right!  Because people relate more to themselves and personify them that way.



That and people choose the "Good" side because it personifies themselves as super heroes, esspecially on RP based servers.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 16, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> But in the end, I don't want all Hyumens to be in a faction that is usually considered WE'RE GOOD GAIS HERE!



And yet despite this, there exist bad people on both sides.


----------



## Ridge (Oct 16, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Fuck relatability. What's the point of relatability if in the end it doesn't fit.
> 
> Case in point - realism in superhero comics.



Self delusion.  A lot of us think we're good people and if we do bad things we can think of a multitude of reasons to justify it.  It's psychology, plain and simple.  

But I do agree with you!  I would like to see a game mix it up completely, or do away with human-esque races all together.  I'm not asking for a furry MMORPG (would be nice!) but it would be a wonderful change from the status-quo.


----------



## lilEmber (Oct 16, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> That and people choose the "Good" side because it personifies themselves as super heroes, esspecially on RP based servers.



But people think everybody does this and go to the "evil" side to be different. Hence why almost every sever has -far- more horde than alliance, mine for instance is a 60-40 ratio, and others I know of even have 80-20. I've seen wintergrasp with alliance having tenacity 20. That means for every ONE alliance there is in the fight there's 20 horde.


----------



## Ozriel (Oct 16, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> But people think everybody does this and go to the "evil" side to be different. Hence why almost every sever has -far- more horde than alliance, mine for instance is a 60-40 ratio, and others I know of even have 80-20. I've seen wintergrasp with alliance having tenacity 20. That means for every ONE alliance there is in the fight there's 20 horde.



It depends on the server.
Farstriders was outnumbered bu Alliance players until the faction change had come about. In raids, horde was always outnumbered 2-1.

Wyrmrest Accord is more balanced with the numbers than Blackwater raiders. BWR's Alliance cities are always under constant Horde attacks at bi-hourly intervals.

Bloodhoof has a large number of Hordies due to the "Furry Pestilence" on that server, but no one does anything to stop it. 

Dalaran server has a bit more Alliance than horde. Moon Guard has morre horde than Alliance due to he rampant amount of BElves running around in Cybermoon.

There is no telling of the numbers of Alliance vs Horde census because it fluxes on a daily basis. On one day, there could be more Alliance than horde, and fluxes to more Horde than Alliance.

But the reason why most play horde is not because of the stereotypical "Evil", but for the fact that it's more relaxed and a little bit more mature than the Alliance side, which has a good dose of teenage and Tween players with a handful of adults.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 16, 2009)

Which is why good vs evil mmorpgs tend to be retarded.

I propose something like two rival companies beating the shit each other in say... the greatest treasure ever in the whole world, and recruiting adventurers of all races of all classes.


----------



## Ozriel (Oct 16, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Which is why good vs evil mmorpgs tend to be retarded.
> 
> I propose something like two rival companies beating the shit each other in say... the greatest treasure ever in the whole world, and recruiting adventurers of all races of all classes.



At the end of the day, the whole "Good" and "evil" concept is pretty suggestive in it's own right. But sometimes with the "LOLore", they may put the idea into your head of the side filled with Light-Wielding Holy Knights that use religion and force to gain what they want, Naive $cientologist Space goats, Purple Republican hippies, Midgets with beards, Pedobait in denile, and furfags are the "good guys"; while the other side filled with Barbaric cannibalistic pig people, Jamacian and Cajun black people in denile, Furfags in denile, the "Goff" race, Sparkle Faggots, and something that looks like it'll eat your babies are "Evil baddies".

 Obvious run-on.


----------



## Ridge (Oct 16, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Which is why good vs evil mmorpgs tend to be retarded.
> 
> I propose something like two rival companies beating the shit each other in say... the greatest treasure ever in the whole world, and recruiting adventurers of all races of all classes.



You have to answer the call of players who like PvP elements.  You need to do it right, as FF XI did and made it games between nations.  I thought FF XI did the best in terms of 'factions'.


----------



## Attaman (Oct 16, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> But people think everybody does this and go to the "evil" side to be different. Hence why almost every sever has -far- more horde than alliance, mine for instance is a 60-40 ratio, and others I know of even have 80-20. I've seen wintergrasp with alliance having tenacity 20. That means for every ONE alliance there is in the fight there's 20 horde.


 For another example:  Warhammer Online was _broken_ because servers were horribly mis-matched in sides.  So much so that offering bonus' to those playing on the order side still wasn't enough to balance things out, and caused massive server shut-down.

Personally, I blame this on the fact that evil is (usually) cool in MMO's.  They get the best geographies (Eldritch Horror Architecture is almost exclusively an evil-faction thing), get the best looking races / classes / abilities, have backstories that usually are better than the good side's if only because it's one sentence longer in a three-sentence background set.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 17, 2009)

Ridge said:


> You have to answer the call of players who like PvP elements.  You need to do it right, as FF XI did and made it games between nations.  I thought FF XI did the best in terms of 'factions'.



Hence why I said rival companies. Meaning they can beat the shit out of each other.


----------



## lupinealchemist (Oct 17, 2009)

First thing that went through my mind when I heard of WoW's Worgen race is: They're in the Alliance!? 

Although this does not bother me, it was a surprise.


----------



## Ridge (Oct 17, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Hence why I said rival companies. Meaning they can beat the shit out of each other.



What would you have the races be?


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 17, 2009)

Companies aren't picky whether it's a hooman, an elf, a wuff, or even a midget.


----------



## Bobmuffins (Oct 17, 2009)

In my eyes, the whole faction/class idea in MMORPGs is just terrible.

Seriously. Why do I say that?

Say you spend two or three months playing a game, get to a fairly high level, and go try out PvP. You then discover your class/faction is the weakest in the game. Time to restart and pick a new class/faction, and lose two or three months in the process.


----------



## Ridge (Oct 17, 2009)

Bobmuffins said:


> In my eyes, the whole faction/class idea in MMORPGs is just terrible.
> 
> Seriously. Why do I say that?
> 
> Say you spend two or three months playing a game, get to a fairly high level, and go try out PvP. You then discover your class/faction is the weakest in the game. Time to restart and pick a new class/faction, and lose two or three months in the process.



And thus the developer wins and you spend more time in the game replaying it. =P


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 18, 2009)

That's called horrible programming.


----------



## Mel-the-Hybrid (Oct 18, 2009)

Alliance can keep their Worgen, I'm content with being a cow.


----------



## Duality Jack (Oct 18, 2009)

My honest Opinion: Don't play MMORPGS, they take your money and are an escape from reality.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 18, 2009)

lrn2playfreeMMORPGs that are actually well-done.

Usually, people who bash free MMORPGs are just trying to feel good that the money they wasted on paid subscriptions are worth it.


----------



## Dark_Black_Wolf (Oct 18, 2009)

If you don't want factions based on race, but want different races, try Earth Eternal(I'm not sure if it's out of closed beta yet, though).


----------



## Duality Jack (Oct 18, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> lrn2playfreeMMORPGs that are actually well-done.
> 
> Usually, people who bash free MMORPGs are just trying to feel good that the money they wasted on paid subscriptions are worth it.


 I just find MMORRGS remarkably time consuming and unsatisfying.


----------



## Ridge (Oct 18, 2009)

The Drunken Ace said:


> I just find MMORRGS remarkably time consuming and unsatisfying.



An MMORPG is fine in moderation, just like anything else recreational in life.  I could play a console game and the effect is still the same; not really being productive but playing a video game.

The biggest argument is these games can be addicting and that's very true.  However, as long as someone has the ability to step back and go outside, have a job, go to class and excel in a social life then there's no need to avoid an MMORPG. 

Sometimes I'll play for a few hours and some days I won't even turn a game on.  I'll read, go to a movie with friends, etc.  It's all how we spend our free time. =)


----------



## Notebookpanda (Oct 18, 2009)

It seems to be one of those systems that were added to video games and somehow because a baseline for many. Sorta like... the MP system. Or that the healer in most RPG's tends to be a rather young female that's entirely too soft spoken for her own good.

In Aion for example, there's the Elyos and the Asmodians. It creates the field for the PvP between two different sides. There are other games that have more than two factions though. Factions lead to differences between groups, thus it is easier to justify the PvP content through lore. Maybe. 

Also, faction specific languages. They make me a sad panda. =(


----------



## Jelly (Oct 18, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Usually, people who bash free MMORPGs are just trying to feel good that the money they wasted on paid subscriptions are worth it.



Hey man.
My art doesn't suck.
Its called style, you're just jealous.

(Stop plugging that fucking fetish MMO from Malaysia, shit is awful.)


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 18, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> That's called horrible programming.



And yet it works. :B MMOGs are full of people saying "This game sucks/*insert game here* is so much better, yet I still log on to play/pay the monthly fee". Apparently they're still doing something right.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 19, 2009)

jellyhurwit said:


> Hey man.
> My art doesn't suck.
> Its called style, you're just jealous.
> 
> (Stop plugging that fucking fetish MMO from Malaysia, shit is awful.)



lolwut

Also while I do enjoy Perfect World, I still hate it's stupidity regarding character design and such. Hell, I like NeoSteam more than that.

And PW is Chinese. :/


----------



## Ozriel (Oct 19, 2009)

lupinealchemist said:


> First thing that went through my mind when I heard of WoW's Worgen race is: They're in the Alliance!?
> 
> Although this does not bother me, it was a surprise.



Blizz's excuse was that they needed a Monster race for the Alliance, while the Horde has one "Pretty" race.


----------



## Dass (Oct 19, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Blizz's excuse was that they needed a Monster race for the Alliance, while the Horde has one "Pretty" race.



yeah, well... existing lore reasons point to that outcome anyway.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 19, 2009)

lolwowlore


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 19, 2009)

Say, you know what else makes no sense? 

Alignment based class restrictions. 

I should be able to make a jerk ass chaotic evil Paladin if I want and a suck-up Warlock. I should be able to be a serial killing Favoured Soul or a fundamentalist Wu Jen because I want to. Sure it's taking a diarrhea dump all over the rules and the lore but why should I also have class restrictions in a pen-and-paper rule? It's retarded that I have to follow rules or not take a shit all over other peoples rules and mock them and everyone who likes them? And why should I have to use bahamut to be a dragonborn? I should be able to have a dragonborn who follows Tiamat. And why do I have to have this stupid Feats bullshit? I should be able to equip my Wu Jen with exotic plate armour, a nice heavy shield, and spears and my tanking warrior with silk robes and tiny little daggers that'll do no damage? Fuck rules! I SHOULD BE ABLE TO CREATE MY OWN STUFF! RULES ARE RETARDED!

If you can't tell...this is sarcasm.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 20, 2009)

Aren't Paladins automatically considered blind hypocrites?


----------



## Ridge (Oct 20, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Aren't Paladins automatically considered blind hypocrites?



Depends on the game and the lore of course. =P The WoW Blood Elves are, but I wouldn't say the Paladin from FF XI are hypocrites.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 20, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Aren't Paladins automatically considered blind hypocrites?



Not when you can do whatever you want with their characters!  I can make a Paladin in a video game be a borderline serial killer who is just using the light for their own purposes.


----------



## Ozriel (Oct 20, 2009)

Digitalpotato said:


> Not when you can do whatever you want with their characters!  I can make a Paladin in a video game be a borderline serial killer who is just using the light for their own purposes.



.....
That would be Medieval Europe all over again.


----------



## Ozriel (Oct 20, 2009)

Dass said:


> yeah, well... existing lore reasons point to that outcome anyway.



It was bound to happen even though the default king of Gilneas believed that the Alliance was faulty to begin with and had the resources to fend off the horde themselves before the plauge of the Scourge.




WolfoxOkamichan said:


> lolwowlore



Exactly.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 20, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> .....
> That would be Medieval Europe all over again.



Yep, it's *ONLY* the most cliche setting next to World War 2!  I guess that's *why* Guild Wars sets 95% of the game in places outside of Europe, Morrowind's setting is the way it is, and why WoW also has a lot of different real-world inspirations for their races. 

In case you couldn't tell I was being sarcastic.


----------



## Ozriel (Oct 20, 2009)

Digitalpotato said:


> Yep, it's *ONLY* the most cliche setting next to World War 2!  I guess that's *why* Guild Wars sets 95% of the game in places outside of Europe, Morrowind's setting is the way it is, and why WoW also has a lot of different real-world inspirations for their races.
> 
> In case you couldn't tell I was being sarcastic.



I know.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 21, 2009)

Which is why I love PW and Neo Steam. One's in China and the other's in some steampunk world, and both have musclebound furries and naked elves.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 21, 2009)

Like that affects anything. :B


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 21, 2009)

YES IT DOES. NONE OF THAT BULLCRAP WE'RE IN MIDDLEEARTH ONLY EXTREME RAWR

lol


----------



## Digitalpotato (Oct 22, 2009)

Because it's catering to your fetishes.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Oct 22, 2009)

But I also play female elves. :O


----------

