Girls don't hate PvP, they hate the stereotypical PvP'er.
Exactly.
I've never been one for PvP in the past due to horrid experiences in EverQuest, but these days, I enjoy the occasional night spent in the PvP instances in WoW. I'm not the best player by any means, but I like the Battlegrounds because they're a different challenge that allow me to test my skills against a much smarter foe that actually fights back. That's fun. And I've learned a lot about the classes I'm playing that way.
The Arena and the PvP zones in CoH/CoV are fun for a similar reason. I can get together with guildmates and spar with them, or we can go into a zone together, either to do missions, or to try and achieve some sort of goal.
In both cases, the PvP is consensual, since I'm going in by choice, and I know the risks.
What I've never liked about PvP in the past are the idiot griefers and gankers that do things like spawn/corpse camp, train mobs over people, or otherwise act like jackasses. That's why open PvP, like on an FFA server, has never appealed to me. I like going into a reasonably fair fight, where I know what the risks are, and what I'm in for. Some loser 10+ levels higher than me killing me, then camping my spawn point over and over and over because he can? Uh, no. That's just lame.
Lastonedizzy wins a prize (especially for the DFO mention)
Sadly, most people aware of the MMO genre are either conditioned or are too fresh to grasp many of the underlying concepts and grand perceptions behind this baby genre and PvP itself. A few people in this thread thus far have got it right, some even just recently grasped some of the concepts that can shatter those narrow perceptions we repeatedly see in this thread and in the common viewpoint of PvP - Thanks to the (very) few who have given sensible input.
I wish luck to the inquisitive ones, and implore you to continue learning.
The genre has been conditioned and cloned to death, with little to no innovation or thinking outside the box - A trend we see in the industry as a whole. Too bad! In time, a break in the mold will come but until then the meme will continue to stagnate.
In the majority of today's MMOs, PvP is utterly pointless.
On the one side, we have closed, structured PvP. It does nothing to change the game outside of its little isolated environment, affects my character only marginally, and ends up being a moronic dick-waving contest. After a one-on-one fight, I typically get one of two responses from the other player: "i pwn u nub u suk" or "u cheated u suk." It's annoying and pointless.
On the other side, we have open PvP. Again, it does nothign toc hange the game or the characters involved. Some clownhole 25 levels above my character can come along, gank me, and get his jollies by inconveniencing me. Instead of continuing to do what it is I wanted to do, I have to do a corpse run, or go to town for repairs, or whatever teh game requires as a death penalty. There's supposed to be some sort of compensation in that I can also inconvenience other players by ganking their lower-level characters. Again, it's annoying and pointless.
I don't feel the need to compete with other players in MMORPGs. If I want to compete with other players, there are games which do it much better. In most MMORPGs, PvP seems like a dumb little addon, slapped into the game for people who would really rather be playing a first-person shooter.
The main problem is that people throw around the word "PvP" when the really mean different things altogether, reflecting dfferent playstyles.
The first is "FFA PvP", which basically means anyone can attack anyone else virtually anywhere, and upon death you lose items, experience and the like. It's the hardcore system, and for the most part it appeals to PK-type players. In fact, most PK type players don't see any system other than FFA PvP as being real PvP, so it's what they mean when they say PvP.
The second is "limited PvP" -- there are varying ways this can be implemented, either through level bands (ie, can't attack/be attacked by someone outside of a certain +/- of your level), or larger safe areas, or realm v realm type systems like DAOC and WAR. These systems offer players who want to PvP the experience they want without making everyone PvP.
There are far more people who will play in games that feature the second kind of PvP than the first. The first kind of PvP is a very limited market, as any game that features it demonstrates: UO had it, and when the non-FFA-PvP world was introduced, there was a stampede of players over to that world to avoid the FFA PvP; EVE has FFA PvP, and most of the players spend their time in "safe" space to avoid the FFA PvPing. FFA PvP isn't a popular gamestyle, plain and simple -- not massively popular. There is a hardcore PK market out there, but it's small compared to the overall gamer population. Why is that? It's because in an FFA environment, everyone is forced to play the PK playstyle -- the PKers force it on everyone else, and it all drops down to the least common denominator of PK or get PK'd. Many people play these games for relaxation, for a pasttime, and do not want to be looking over their shoulder their entire time in the game, tense, coiled, ready to pounce, etc. -- they want to play a bit, chat with their friends a bit, go AFK for a sandwich etc., and the PK-dominated world doesn't allow that --> you need to be fully on, fully focused, and fully charged to PK the other guy before he PKs you, and to be honest, most people just aren't up for that as the entire gameplay, which is what it becomes when you have FFA PvP.
The problem with the second type of game (limited PvP) is that often it is implemented badly, as a sidelight ot "tacked-on" feature to what is essentially a PvE game, and that's where you end up with things being nadly done. It's very, very hard to balance a game well for both PvE and PvP, you almost have to pick one as the main balance point. And to be honest most of the limited PvP games (with exceptions ... DAOC is one of them) are balanced around PvE and therefore the PvP systems are poor, and people don't like them. DAoC was made with the idea of RvR PvP being the central concept in the game, the same way that WAR is being developed, and that's why IMO these games have taken the proper approach to a true "limited PvP" type game, rather than designing a PvE game and tacking BGs or whatever onto it, or even worse, just opening the game up to FFA PvP servers with level bands like EQ2 did.
It's possible to balance but people are choosing the wrong approach.
Lets recap the three essential aspects of rewarding PvP:
- PvP actually changes something in the gameworld
- PvP is consensual (at least going in a PvP area or something alike)
- PvP is balanced classwise
So, the rough idea would be, you have PvP areas in the zones that can be conquered and defended with effect on the whole zone or eventually the whole gameworld (that could range from taxes to buffs or vendors, whatever).
To balance classes you would just have to introduce PvP only skills and PvE only skills. The main problem with class balance nowadays is that the styles are either PvE fit or PvP fit. PvP builds are mainly "stun stun stun as much as you can" while PvE builds are "buff and fulfill your role"... A balanced set of PvP styles reduces the amount of stun and increases the amount of "tactical", like "blind parry", "evade", defense/offense/balance battle stances... I guess you get the point. Something thats more like a fight and less like a stun/slow battle...
with that said, you might want to consider that the real problem with FFA/pvp is in the actual game model that is implemented and wont dissapear anytime soon...as far as competitive play i can only recall one of the few games that ever impressed me although has no real association with MMo's, would be Ninja gaiden/tournament play, where there were no lvl/gear/weps gaps between players but just the skill to hit or not be hited
would be fun if they could implement a system something like that or at least advances in movement/character control
with that said, you might want to consider that the real problem with FFA/pvp is in the actual game model that is implemented and wont dissapear anytime soon...as far as competitive play i can only recall one of the few games that ever impressed me although has no real association with MMo's, would be Ninja gaiden/tournament play, where there were no lvl/gear/weps gaps between players but just the skill to hit or not be hited would be fun if they could implement a system something like that or at least advances in movement/character control
Well, but that's not an RPG anymore, it is more like an FPS when your own RL twitch"skills" are what determine the outcome (basically reflexes and fine muscle motor memory). An RPG needs the character to be different from the player, not the alter-ego of the player. There are plenty of games that are not RPGs that allow you to basically play your alter-ego.
It's possible to balance but people are choosing the wrong approach.
Lets recap the three essential aspects of rewarding PvP:
- PvP actually changes something in the gameworld
- PvP is consensual (at least going in a PvP area or something alike)
- PvP is balanced classwise
So, the rough idea would be, you have PvP areas in the zones that can be conquered and defended with effect on the whole zone or eventually the whole gameworld (that could range from taxes to buffs or vendors, whatever).
To balance classes you would just have to introduce PvP only skills and PvE only skills. The main problem with class balance nowadays is that the styles are either PvE fit or PvP fit. PvP builds are mainly "stun stun stun as much as you can" while PvE builds are "buff and fulfill your role"... A balanced set of PvP styles reduces the amount of stun and increases the amount of "tactical", like "blind parry", "evade", defense/offense/balance battle stances... I guess you get the point. Something thats more like a fight and less like a stun/slow battle...
Meridion
True enough, but my point is that what people find "rewarding PvP" itself is different. The PK crowd in no way accepts anything that is not full on PK anyone anywhere as being "rewarding PvP", and reject the entire concept of "consensual PvP" as being not PvP at all. I agree that they are outnumbered vastly by others, but many of the PvP enthusiasts you find posting a site such as this one definitely take this approach.
I have also often thought that there should be two styles -- one for PvP and one for PvE -- two skillsets for each character type. But developers seem very reluctant to do this, generally, probably because it will create twice the work for balancing.
I'm having probelems understanding why some people don't like pvp?
Because no one has successfully pulled it off
No there is A game i know that has pulled it off. The thing is, the people who wouldnt mind pvp play games thats not designed for pvp. eg, WoW. Its a multiplayer game thats built around pve with a pvp option. To have a pvp game it cant be an option, it cant just be about killing someone. Everything needs to be pvp. And only one game comes to mind
PKers are few and I guess they can just be ignored therefore, minorities are ignored all the time while planning big projects...
Edit: Oh Dude, and EvE is a sandbox game, dyou think it would be half as successful with only PvP in it? Theres so much more to this game. Plus, as you can see by its subscriber numbers, its not the uber-successful game. It does things different and a good bunch of people like that. Period. But to make a grand game with a lot of different people in it, it takes a lot more than EvEs system. EvE is nice, but EvE is the Smallville of MMORPG. Everyone respects them, theyre nice guys, they act mature and play a thoroughly thought out game... But thats it... Even more, the devs are icelandic... The GAME is icelandic, its there, its nice, its fine spot with some people, but its not one of the "players"... I hope you get the point... The grand PvP revolution thats hopefully coming up needs more than being just "there"...
SWGLover: No its not, ganking occurs, at some lowsec gate, but everybody knows... You can very well stay in highsec or travel guarded paths and manage to survive a pretty long time. Or equip your ship with only escape and speed mods... If you do it right youre not fit to fight but you can evade whatever might come up in lowsec... hell, there are even stealth-devices...
The thing abut EVE's PvP combat, of course, is that most of the player avoid it -- yet again underlining that even in a clearly PvP-oriented game like EVE, most of the people still avoid FFA PvP.
EVE's popularity is largely sustained by the fact that (1) it is the only really viable sandbox game currently and (2) it is the only space MMO period. It's a very well done game, but because it was cheap to make compared to a 3d land-bound game, it can't really be used as an example for anything. And if there were a non-PvP game that offered the same kind of space captain theme, it would probably be more popular than EVE because as it stands now most of EVE's players do not participate in the combat PvP aspects of EVE as it is.
It's possible to balance but people are choosing the wrong approach.
Lets recap the three essential aspects of rewarding PvP:
- PvP actually changes something in the gameworld
- PvP is consensual (at least going in a PvP area or something alike)
- PvP is balanced classwise
So, the rough idea would be, you have PvP areas in the zones that can be conquered and defended with effect on the whole zone or eventually the whole gameworld (that could range from taxes to buffs or vendors, whatever).
To balance classes you would just have to introduce PvP only skills and PvE only skills. The main problem with class balance nowadays is that the styles are either PvE fit or PvP fit. PvP builds are mainly "stun stun stun as much as you can" while PvE builds are "buff and fulfill your role"... A balanced set of PvP styles reduces the amount of stun and increases the amount of "tactical", like "blind parry", "evade", defense/offense/balance battle stances... I guess you get the point. Something thats more like a fight and less like a stun/slow battle...
Meridion
One problem with consensual PvP that has the ability to impact the whole game world is that it opens up the possibility of an imbalance of numbers. Say a world has two factions each with 1000 players, if only 30% of players on one faction participate in the PvP while 60% of the other faction PvP now you will have one faction dominating the other. Like a basketball game where half of one team is standing around not playing.
An MMO with consensual PvP will always be a compromise. It will not really satisfy either PvP or PvE purists, only those who like a blended experience. There is nothing wrong with that but it is not a solve-all solution.
Well for me PVP doesnt make the game, its the people you meet and friends you make that make the game. I could care less if I am uber or can beat anyone in pvp. I do like the battlegrounds in WoW but as far as world pvp..no thanks.
I enjoy the world I am in and I prefer to explore. I will go after the better gear here and there but it is more for those mobs that are harder to beat solo and the better gear always helps. I just have fun with the guild and do other things, yes we run dungeons but I am also a Tailor, Enchanter, Cook, Fisher, Leatherworker, Jewelcrafter and just about any other extra profession I find fun.
So while you may be out pvp'ing I am out gathering resources I need to make equiptment to sell on the auction house for those who need it to lvl or improve their character.
Out of every 100 men, 10 should not be there, 80 are nothing but targets, 9 are the real fighters. Ah, but one, ONE of them is a warrior, and he will bring the others home. -Heraclitus 500BC
I like pre-trammel UO PvP...PvP that actually made sense with the world. All this grinding for PvP points in capture the flag instances like what WoW introduced...sick, I have better things to do than play Alterac Valley for the 15 millionth time.
I'm having probelems understanding why some people don't like pvp?
Because no one has successfully pulled it off
I want to post Enigma's comment again because it says so much in so few words.
So many people take their position on PvP based on their particular experiences in their particular games. IMO they should be saying something more like 'I don't like PvP if it is done in the way that game x does it' instead of the generic PvP is for immature players only.
A palatable open PvP MMO is feasible if:
- Character progression is relaxed - no lvl 50 vs lvl 1 situations
- Gear is relaxed - no 3 month questing for uber gear
- There is a fair win-lose reward and penalty system. No huge setbacks on death
- There are clear goals and objectives - not random unfocused player killing
- Most of all, the game is properly marketed as a PvP game so that the correct players subscribe
Unfortunately people have come to expect that an MMO means rolling an elf and building that character up to level 100 and questing for that unsurpassed bow of rat slaying; for some reason studios assume that people won't play if there is inadequate grind. Studios have to let go of that stereotype if they are going to make a persistent open PvP MMO. There can be no special or uber characters in that kind of game. Each player is just another cog in the machine and they have to be comfortable knowing that.
EDIT:
I really see PvE and PvP minded players as different types of people. Some people only like to go to the movies, some people only like to play sports, and some people like to do both. There is no point in forcing the first type to play sports and there is no point forcing the second type to go to the movies. Only the third type of person will be somewhat receptive; even, then they may not want a blended experience.
One player type bagging on the other is really just prejudice rearing its ugly head. Accept the existence of each other and maybe the industry will make better products for each demographic.
The thing abut EVE's PvP combat, of course, is that most of the player avoid it -- yet again underlining that even in a clearly PvP-oriented game like EVE, most of the people still avoid FFA PvP.
EVE's popularity is largely sustained by the fact that (1) it is the only really viable sandbox game currently and (2) it is the only space MMO period. It's a very well done game, but because it was cheap to make compared to a 3d land-bound game, it can't really be used as an example for anything. And if there were a non-PvP game that offered the same kind of space captain theme, it would probably be more popular than EVE because as it stands now most of EVE's players do not participate in the combat PvP aspects of EVE as it is.
That is because the risks for losing are too high and, as far as I am aware, there is little in the way of overall goals for winning. Large space ships require so many resources to build that few people want to risk losing them even more so when there is little to gain if they do win. I don't see EVE as a CLEARLY PvP-oriented game; I see it more of a spaceship tycoon game with PvP enabled areas.
Consequently I don't think this is really a valid anti-PvP argument. While EVE is MORE PvP oriented than many other MMO's I do not think that it is a good example. Leading once again to PvP not being properly done.
The main problem is that people throw around the word "PvP" when the really mean different things altogether, reflecting dfferent playstyles.
The first is "FFA PvP", which basically means anyone can attack anyone else virtually anywhere, and upon death you lose items, experience and the like. It's the hardcore system, and for the most part it appeals to PK-type players. In fact, most PK type players don't see any system other than FFA PvP as being real PvP, so it's what they mean when they say PvP.
The second is "limited PvP" -- there are varying ways this can be implemented, either through level bands (ie, can't attack/be attacked by someone outside of a certain +/- of your level), or larger safe areas, or realm v realm type systems like DAOC and WAR. These systems offer players who want to PvP the experience they want without making everyone PvP.
There are far more people who will play in games that feature the second kind of PvP than the first. The first kind of PvP is a very limited market, as any game that features it demonstrates: UO had it, and when the non-FFA-PvP world was introduced, there was a stampede of players over to that world to avoid the FFA PvP; EVE has FFA PvP, and most of the players spend their time in "safe" space to avoid the FFA PvPing. FFA PvP isn't a popular gamestyle, plain and simple -- not massively popular. There is a hardcore PK market out there, but it's small compared to the overall gamer population. Why is that? It's because in an FFA environment, everyone is forced to play the PK playstyle -- the PKers force it on everyone else, and it all drops down to the least common denominator of PK or get PK'd. Many people play these games for relaxation, for a pasttime, and do not want to be looking over their shoulder their entire time in the game, tense, coiled, ready to pounce, etc. -- they want to play a bit, chat with their friends a bit, go AFK for a sandwich etc., and the PK-dominated world doesn't allow that --> you need to be fully on, fully focused, and fully charged to PK the other guy before he PKs you, and to be honest, most people just aren't up for that as the entire gameplay, which is what it becomes when you have FFA PvP.
The problem with the second type of game (limited PvP) is that often it is implemented badly, as a sidelight ot "tacked-on" feature to what is essentially a PvE game, and that's where you end up with things being nadly done. It's very, very hard to balance a game well for both PvE and PvP, you almost have to pick one as the main balance point. And to be honest most of the limited PvP games (with exceptions ... DAOC is one of them) are balanced around PvE and therefore the PvP systems are poor, and people don't like them. DAoC was made with the idea of RvR PvP being the central concept in the game, the same way that WAR is being developed, and that's why IMO these games have taken the proper approach to a true "limited PvP" type game, rather than designing a PvE game and tacking BGs or whatever onto it, or even worse, just opening the game up to FFA PvP servers with level bands like EQ2 did.
Thats right on the money really, and i agree with that. Also should take into consideration that the Western FFA PvP is ALOT different than Korean FFA PvP aswell.
Probably why FFA PvP gets such a bad reputation, and even PvP in general. Lets face it, Western games almost always fail at providing a compelling, meaningfull and balanced PvP system, FFA based or not, they just don't do a very good job of it most of the time. Yet Americans are very impatient aswell, so i highly doubt any of the people bashing FFA PvP had the patients to play a Korean MMO long enough to actually see it done correctly. (and yes, im an American aswell, so keep your "anti-american commie" comments to yourself).
EVE is a good example of this; At times the PvP can be really good, but they have a very poor balance between risk/reward, and the penalties for dying can be overly strict, forcing alot of people to avoid PvP altogether. If players are actually scared to venture outside of safe zones because they are risking that much just by being there, something is really wrong with it.
Korean FFA PvP games tend to use rules and systems that protect players from being ganked for no reason, but don't prevent players who want to fight each other from enjoying good PvP. I only wish they would cut down the grind a bit, so everyone could enjoy true FFA PvP when its done correctly. This whole idea of FFA PvP being a huge warzone with lowbies sticking to safe areas only applies to Western style FFA PvP, but very few people are willing to grind it out in a game like lineage 2 to actually see how FFA PvP works when done right.
What i would really like to see is a Western made MMO that uses an FFA PvP system based on what the Koreans use. Then maybe we could actually see an FFA PvP game that everyone can enjoy, without the fallbacks of the Korean games like really bad grinds and poor administration. FFA PvP should never keep players from going out and exploring and playing the game. As things are going now though, i doubt we ever will. I honestly don't blame people for disliking FFA PvP though, because western games always screw it up, theres never a balance between risk/rewards, and they do turn into random slaughter fests. At the same time, Asians are arrogant, they will never change their games to better suit other cultures either, so for the true FFA PvP fans, you better be willing to deal with a nasty grind and poor administration, else your out of luck. And PvE games with tacked on PvP like WoW have horrible PvP all around.
Korean FFA PvP games tend to use rules and systems that protect players from being ganked for no reason, but don't prevent players who want to fight each other from enjoying good PvP.
Clearly you do not know what FFA means. FFA = FREE FOR ALL.
"...systems that protect players..." = NOT a FFA PvP
Koreans need to learn how to make PvP games. All they know how to do is make a fucking grind fest, which you rightly pointed out.
Once again:
Asian mmorpgs = grind fest
NA mmorpgs = ....ah never mind, its just different smell, though occasionally we get a nice attempt at FFA PvP which is more than I can say for Korean(asian in general) MMO developers
Korean FFA PvP games tend to use rules and systems that protect players from being ganked for no reason, but don't prevent players who want to fight each other from enjoying good PvP.
Clearly you do not know what FFA means. FFA = FREE FOR ALL.
"...systems that protect players..." = NOT a FFA PvP
Koreans need to learn how to make PvP games. All they know how to do is make a fucking grind fest, which you rightly pointed out.
Once again:
Asian mmorpgs = grind fest
NA mmorpgs = ....ah never mind, its just different smell, though occasionally we get a nice attempt at FFA PvP which is more than I can say for Korean(asian in general) MMO developers
And this post highlights the problem, I think, that the PvP culture here seems to be different than in Asia. A good portion of the PvP culture here in the West is more based on experiences in FPS games played in multiplayer mode, and this is what the FFA "lobby" wants to see in an MMO: Basically like a CS MMO. That "CS culture" is not nearly as strong in Asia, but it is a huge part of PvP gamer culture in the West, which is one of the main reasons I think we have these wierd dichotomies in Western PvP designs and so much dysfunctionality in general in the PvP aspects of our games.
Yeap. NA players love their PvP thats different from Asian players.
I dont mind people having different choices, but I do mind when people start to WHINE and try to change the game. With the kind of PvP system I love, developers would probably think myself and people who like same system as I do, a minority of PvP. I hate when what looks like a promising game with PvP comes out and then you start to get the posts about people whining from ganking, consensual pvp, and blah blah blah. Quake Wars is less than 2 months away now weeeeeeeeeeeee.
On a side note, why cant developers make more server choices for the players? Like have pvp AND ffa pvp servers? Sigh. Guess they do not want to appeal to broader player base and do not want to collect higher dough?
Yeap. NA players love their PvP thats different from Asian players.
I dont mind people having different choices, but I do mind when people start to WHINE and try to change the game. With the kind of PvP system I love, developers would probably think myself and people who like same system as I do, a minority of PvP. I hate when what looks like a promising game with PvP comes out and then you start to get the posts about people whining from ganking, consensual pvp, and blah blah blah. Quake Wars is less than 2 months away now weeeeeeeeeeeee.
On a side note, why cant developers make more server choices for the players? Like have pvp AND ffa pvp servers? Sigh. Guess they do not want to appeal to broader player base and do not want to collect higher dough?
I think it has to do with all the balancing issues. If you just tack on additional ruleset servers in a game that is otherwise balanced for PvE/consensual PvP it can be disastrous because certain classes are not balanced for the FFA environment, the environment itself is not designed for FFA PvP (placement of towns, guards, bottlenecks and the like). It sounds like an easy solution to add different ruleset servers, but I think it's harder to implement well than we would like to think.
Well said, but our opinions dont matter because where carebears right? But I also love to unite with others and take on a challenging task thats why I play mmorpgs.
And people wonder why society is so messed up and why we have corrupt governments and tirents who want to control us and take our money, oh the irony.
Comments
I've never been one for PvP in the past due to horrid experiences in EverQuest, but these days, I enjoy the occasional night spent in the PvP instances in WoW. I'm not the best player by any means, but I like the Battlegrounds because they're a different challenge that allow me to test my skills against a much smarter foe that actually fights back. That's fun. And I've learned a lot about the classes I'm playing that way.
The Arena and the PvP zones in CoH/CoV are fun for a similar reason. I can get together with guildmates and spar with them, or we can go into a zone together, either to do missions, or to try and achieve some sort of goal.
In both cases, the PvP is consensual, since I'm going in by choice, and I know the risks.
What I've never liked about PvP in the past are the idiot griefers and gankers that do things like spawn/corpse camp, train mobs over people, or otherwise act like jackasses. That's why open PvP, like on an FFA server, has never appealed to me. I like going into a reasonably fair fight, where I know what the risks are, and what I'm in for. Some loser 10+ levels higher than me killing me, then camping my spawn point over and over and over because he can? Uh, no. That's just lame.
Sadly, most people aware of the MMO genre are either conditioned or are too fresh to grasp many of the underlying concepts and grand perceptions behind this baby genre and PvP itself. A few people in this thread thus far have got it right, some even just recently grasped some of the concepts that can shatter those narrow perceptions we repeatedly see in this thread and in the common viewpoint of PvP - Thanks to the (very) few who have given sensible input.
I wish luck to the inquisitive ones, and implore you to continue learning.
The genre has been conditioned and cloned to death, with little to no innovation or thinking outside the box - A trend we see in the industry as a whole. Too bad! In time, a break in the mold will come but until then the meme will continue to stagnate.
On the one side, we have closed, structured PvP. It does nothing to change the game outside of its little isolated environment, affects my character only marginally, and ends up being a moronic dick-waving contest. After a one-on-one fight, I typically get one of two responses from the other player: "i pwn u nub u suk" or "u cheated u suk." It's annoying and pointless.
On the other side, we have open PvP. Again, it does nothign toc hange the game or the characters involved. Some clownhole 25 levels above my character can come along, gank me, and get his jollies by inconveniencing me. Instead of continuing to do what it is I wanted to do, I have to do a corpse run, or go to town for repairs, or whatever teh game requires as a death penalty. There's supposed to be some sort of compensation in that I can also inconvenience other players by ganking their lower-level characters. Again, it's annoying and pointless.
I don't feel the need to compete with other players in MMORPGs. If I want to compete with other players, there are games which do it much better. In most MMORPGs, PvP seems like a dumb little addon, slapped into the game for people who would really rather be playing a first-person shooter.
The first is "FFA PvP", which basically means anyone can attack anyone else virtually anywhere, and upon death you lose items, experience and the like. It's the hardcore system, and for the most part it appeals to PK-type players. In fact, most PK type players don't see any system other than FFA PvP as being real PvP, so it's what they mean when they say PvP.
The second is "limited PvP" -- there are varying ways this can be implemented, either through level bands (ie, can't attack/be attacked by someone outside of a certain +/- of your level), or larger safe areas, or realm v realm type systems like DAOC and WAR. These systems offer players who want to PvP the experience they want without making everyone PvP.
There are far more people who will play in games that feature the second kind of PvP than the first. The first kind of PvP is a very limited market, as any game that features it demonstrates: UO had it, and when the non-FFA-PvP world was introduced, there was a stampede of players over to that world to avoid the FFA PvP; EVE has FFA PvP, and most of the players spend their time in "safe" space to avoid the FFA PvPing. FFA PvP isn't a popular gamestyle, plain and simple -- not massively popular. There is a hardcore PK market out there, but it's small compared to the overall gamer population. Why is that? It's because in an FFA environment, everyone is forced to play the PK playstyle -- the PKers force it on everyone else, and it all drops down to the least common denominator of PK or get PK'd. Many people play these games for relaxation, for a pasttime, and do not want to be looking over their shoulder their entire time in the game, tense, coiled, ready to pounce, etc. -- they want to play a bit, chat with their friends a bit, go AFK for a sandwich etc., and the PK-dominated world doesn't allow that --> you need to be fully on, fully focused, and fully charged to PK the other guy before he PKs you, and to be honest, most people just aren't up for that as the entire gameplay, which is what it becomes when you have FFA PvP.
The problem with the second type of game (limited PvP) is that often it is implemented badly, as a sidelight ot "tacked-on" feature to what is essentially a PvE game, and that's where you end up with things being nadly done. It's very, very hard to balance a game well for both PvE and PvP, you almost have to pick one as the main balance point. And to be honest most of the limited PvP games (with exceptions ... DAOC is one of them) are balanced around PvE and therefore the PvP systems are poor, and people don't like them. DAoC was made with the idea of RvR PvP being the central concept in the game, the same way that WAR is being developed, and that's why IMO these games have taken the proper approach to a true "limited PvP" type game, rather than designing a PvE game and tacking BGs or whatever onto it, or even worse, just opening the game up to FFA PvP servers with level bands like EQ2 did.
Lets recap the three essential aspects of rewarding PvP:
- PvP actually changes something in the gameworld
- PvP is consensual (at least going in a PvP area or something alike)
- PvP is balanced classwise
So, the rough idea would be, you have PvP areas in the zones that can be conquered and defended with effect on the whole zone or eventually the whole gameworld (that could range from taxes to buffs or vendors, whatever).
To balance classes you would just have to introduce PvP only skills and PvE only skills. The main problem with class balance nowadays is that the styles are either PvE fit or PvP fit. PvP builds are mainly "stun stun stun as much as you can" while PvE builds are "buff and fulfill your role"... A balanced set of PvP styles reduces the amount of stun and increases the amount of "tactical", like "blind parry", "evade", defense/offense/balance battle stances... I guess you get the point. Something thats more like a fight and less like a stun/slow battle...
Meridion
with that said, you might want to consider that the real problem with FFA/pvp is in the actual game model that is implemented and wont dissapear anytime soon...as far as competitive play i can only recall one of the few games that ever impressed me although has no real association with MMo's, would be Ninja gaiden/tournament play, where there were no lvl/gear/weps gaps between players but just the skill to hit or not be hited
would be fun if they could implement a system something like that or at least advances in movement/character control
I have also often thought that there should be two styles -- one for PvP and one for PvE -- two skillsets for each character type. But developers seem very reluctant to do this, generally, probably because it will create twice the work for balancing.
No there is A game i know that has pulled it off. The thing is, the people who wouldnt mind pvp play games thats not designed for pvp. eg, WoW. Its a multiplayer game thats built around pve with a pvp option. To have a pvp game it cant be an option, it cant just be about killing someone. Everything needs to be pvp. And only one game comes to mind
EVE-ONLINE.
Edit: Oh Dude, and EvE is a sandbox game, dyou think it would be half as successful with only PvP in it? Theres so much more to this game. Plus, as you can see by its subscriber numbers, its not the uber-successful game. It does things different and a good bunch of people like that. Period. But to make a grand game with a lot of different people in it, it takes a lot more than EvEs system. EvE is nice, but EvE is the Smallville of MMORPG. Everyone respects them, theyre nice guys, they act mature and play a thoroughly thought out game... But thats it... Even more, the devs are icelandic... The GAME is icelandic, its there, its nice, its fine spot with some people, but its not one of the "players"... I hope you get the point... The grand PvP revolution thats hopefully coming up needs more than being just "there"...
Meridion
EvE online has *not* "pulled off" pvp. It's a gank-fest where noobs are gate ganked by forces 10x their size. That's the most common pvp by far.
Almost all pvp in EvE is a small force ( or single guy ) being ambushed by a stronger large force. Yeah, how skillfull.
And the large battles that oh so rarely occur grind most players computers to a halt. Great fun.
Oh yeah, I forgot...the game is boring, also.
EVE's popularity is largely sustained by the fact that (1) it is the only really viable sandbox game currently and (2) it is the only space MMO period. It's a very well done game, but because it was cheap to make compared to a 3d land-bound game, it can't really be used as an example for anything. And if there were a non-PvP game that offered the same kind of space captain theme, it would probably be more popular than EVE because as it stands now most of EVE's players do not participate in the combat PvP aspects of EVE as it is.
An MMO with consensual PvP will always be a compromise. It will not really satisfy either PvP or PvE purists, only those who like a blended experience. There is nothing wrong with that but it is not a solve-all solution.
Well for me PVP doesnt make the game, its the people you meet and friends you make that make the game. I could care less if I am uber or can beat anyone in pvp. I do like the battlegrounds in WoW but as far as world pvp..no thanks.
I enjoy the world I am in and I prefer to explore. I will go after the better gear here and there but it is more for those mobs that are harder to beat solo and the better gear always helps. I just have fun with the guild and do other things, yes we run dungeons but I am also a Tailor, Enchanter, Cook, Fisher, Leatherworker, Jewelcrafter and just about any other extra profession I find fun.
So while you may be out pvp'ing I am out gathering resources I need to make equiptment to sell on the auction house for those who need it to lvl or improve their character.
Out of every 100 men, 10 should not be there,
80 are nothing but targets, 9 are the real fighters.
Ah, but one, ONE of them is a warrior,
and he will bring the others home.
-Heraclitus 500BC
----------
Life sucks, buy a helmet.
I want to post Enigma's comment again because it says so much in so few words.
So many people take their position on PvP based on their particular experiences in their particular games. IMO they should be saying something more like 'I don't like PvP if it is done in the way that game x does it' instead of the generic PvP is for immature players only.
A palatable open PvP MMO is feasible if:
- Character progression is relaxed - no lvl 50 vs lvl 1 situations
- Gear is relaxed - no 3 month questing for uber gear
- There is a fair win-lose reward and penalty system. No huge setbacks on death
- There are clear goals and objectives - not random unfocused player killing
- Most of all, the game is properly marketed as a PvP game so that the correct players subscribe
Unfortunately people have come to expect that an MMO means rolling an elf and building that character up to level 100 and questing for that unsurpassed bow of rat slaying; for some reason studios assume that people won't play if there is inadequate grind. Studios have to let go of that stereotype if they are going to make a persistent open PvP MMO. There can be no special or uber characters in that kind of game. Each player is just another cog in the machine and they have to be comfortable knowing that.
EDIT:
I really see PvE and PvP minded players as different types of people. Some people only like to go to the movies, some people only like to play sports, and some people like to do both. There is no point in forcing the first type to play sports and there is no point forcing the second type to go to the movies. Only the third type of person will be somewhat receptive; even, then they may not want a blended experience.
One player type bagging on the other is really just prejudice rearing its ugly head. Accept the existence of each other and maybe the industry will make better products for each demographic.
Consequently I don't think this is really a valid anti-PvP argument. While EVE is MORE PvP oriented than many other MMO's I do not think that it is a good example. Leading once again to PvP not being properly done.
Probably why FFA PvP gets such a bad reputation, and even PvP in general. Lets face it, Western games almost always fail at providing a compelling, meaningfull and balanced PvP system, FFA based or not, they just don't do a very good job of it most of the time. Yet Americans are very impatient aswell, so i highly doubt any of the people bashing FFA PvP had the patients to play a Korean MMO long enough to actually see it done correctly. (and yes, im an American aswell, so keep your "anti-american commie" comments to yourself).
EVE is a good example of this; At times the PvP can be really good, but they have a very poor balance between risk/reward, and the penalties for dying can be overly strict, forcing alot of people to avoid PvP altogether. If players are actually scared to venture outside of safe zones because they are risking that much just by being there, something is really wrong with it.
Korean FFA PvP games tend to use rules and systems that protect players from being ganked for no reason, but don't prevent players who want to fight each other from enjoying good PvP. I only wish they would cut down the grind a bit, so everyone could enjoy true FFA PvP when its done correctly. This whole idea of FFA PvP being a huge warzone with lowbies sticking to safe areas only applies to Western style FFA PvP, but very few people are willing to grind it out in a game like lineage 2 to actually see how FFA PvP works when done right.
What i would really like to see is a Western made MMO that uses an FFA PvP system based on what the Koreans use. Then maybe we could actually see an FFA PvP game that everyone can enjoy, without the fallbacks of the Korean games like really bad grinds and poor administration. FFA PvP should never keep players from going out and exploring and playing the game. As things are going now though, i doubt we ever will. I honestly don't blame people for disliking FFA PvP though, because western games always screw it up, theres never a balance between risk/rewards, and they do turn into random slaughter fests. At the same time, Asians are arrogant, they will never change their games to better suit other cultures either, so for the true FFA PvP fans, you better be willing to deal with a nasty grind and poor administration, else your out of luck. And PvE games with tacked on PvP like WoW have horrible PvP all around.
"...systems that protect players..." = NOT a FFA PvP
Koreans need to learn how to make PvP games. All they know how to do is make a fucking grind fest, which you rightly pointed out.
Once again:
Asian mmorpgs = grind fest
NA mmorpgs = ....ah never mind, its just different smell, though occasionally we get a nice attempt at FFA PvP which is more than I can say for Korean(asian in general) MMO developers
WTB Shadowbane 2
"...systems that protect players..." = NOT a FFA PvP
Koreans need to learn how to make PvP games. All they know how to do is make a fucking grind fest, which you rightly pointed out.
Once again:
Asian mmorpgs = grind fest
NA mmorpgs = ....ah never mind, its just different smell, though occasionally we get a nice attempt at FFA PvP which is more than I can say for Korean(asian in general) MMO developers
And this post highlights the problem, I think, that the PvP culture here seems to be different than in Asia. A good portion of the PvP culture here in the West is more based on experiences in FPS games played in multiplayer mode, and this is what the FFA "lobby" wants to see in an MMO: Basically like a CS MMO. That "CS culture" is not nearly as strong in Asia, but it is a huge part of PvP gamer culture in the West, which is one of the main reasons I think we have these wierd dichotomies in Western PvP designs and so much dysfunctionality in general in the PvP aspects of our games.
Yeap. NA players love their PvP thats different from Asian players.
I dont mind people having different choices, but I do mind when people start to WHINE and try to change the game. With the kind of PvP system I love, developers would probably think myself and people who like same system as I do, a minority of PvP. I hate when what looks like a promising game with PvP comes out and then you start to get the posts about people whining from ganking, consensual pvp, and blah blah blah. Quake Wars is less than 2 months away now weeeeeeeeeeeee.
On a side note, why cant developers make more server choices for the players? Like have pvp AND ffa pvp servers? Sigh. Guess they do not want to appeal to broader player base and do not want to collect higher dough?
WTB Shadowbane 2
Well said, but our opinions dont matter because where carebears right? But I also love to unite with others and take on a challenging task thats why I play mmorpgs.
And people wonder why society is so messed up and why we have corrupt governments and tirents who want to control us and take our money, oh the irony.