I'm just wondering if there are no new MMO's being developed which is focused on PvE? Seems to me that all new MMO's, at least the hyped ones, are marketed towards the PvP crowd. Of course they all have some PvE content aswell, but I would really like to play a pure PvE game where classes and skills can be developed without PvP in consideration.
What on earth are you talking about?! What planet are you living on?! Virtually every mmo that comes out these days is based on a PvE concept. Nearly all of them are single player co-operative games with PvP aspects thrown in as an alternative.
So you want a pure PvE game where you can develop your character without being affected by other players? Thats called a single player game my friend. There are LOADS of them and they have been around ever since computers were invented.
Heres a shocking thought for you. How about making an online game where players can effect each other? I know its ground breaking stuff isnt it.......and heres another stunning idea. How about making a game which doesnt tell you a story (as an alternative to reading a book) but actually lets the players make up the story by interacting with and influencing each other? The only games I know of that do that even remotely well are Ultima Online (old and outdated now) and EVE. Apart from thats its all PvE "turn your brain off and follow the yellow brick road" mush.
But nahhhh lets not do that! Lets just keep all mmos as single player, linear, story driven games that have been coming out for ages. Afterall thats what everyone is used to and it would be daft to do something different wouldnt it!
No need to get all hotheaded, I'm not attacking PvPers. I know that the PvP crowd are also looking for a game that has main focus on their playstyle.
The reason I'm looking for a pure PvE game is that I think that the need for PvP balance hinders alot of spells, abilities, gear etc. For example no single attack can be too powerfull, even if it's on a long cooldown, because it could one-shot other players. CC also suffer alot, because everybody hates loosing control of their character.
Almost all mmo forums are filled with flamewars between the PvE and PvP crowds, because even though they play the same game, they want different content and experience. It's great that there are games that try to cater to both, lots of people also like the option to shift around, but I think that pure PvP and PvE games would offer a better experience for those who play exclusively one style.
Oh dont mind me. I get all hotheaded all the time. Its not meant as an attack against you or anything like that. It just struck me as a really odd thing to say when the market seems to be saturated with PvE mmos.
The reason PvP games have had problems before is simply because they were not designed very well. The PvP elements were incorporated into PvE systems. Also all of these games are level based so you always get players winning because they are higher level and have all the uber gear......not because they are actually better at playing the game.
Create a game that is designed for PvP and give players a reason to interact with others properly and it could easily work well. The ideas in Darkfall are spot on........shame it might never get made.
MMO's are moving towards PvP as endgame because it creates content without development. It takes alot less work to plop down an arena and say "ok kill each other" than to create an additional 100 quests and 20 new instances.
Its really sad to think now that content is "quests" (which is just more meaningless tasks of killing random animals and collecting their feet for exp, thats some glorious quest, King Arthur would be proud), and instances, which are the bane of most MMOs.
"Waaah, but he stole my mob. I had to wait to kill this mob!" Good game design can prevent most of the problems people have with dungeons. Vanguard has seamless dungeons and I've never once had to fight with another group over killing a boss, because the world is so massive, respawns are quick, and there are plenty of options for everyone. And besides, why play an MMO if you don't want to deal with people?
MMO's are moving towards PvP as endgame because it creates content without development. It takes alot less work to plop down an arena and say "ok kill each other" than to create an additional 100 quests and 20 new instances.
Its really sad to think now that content is "quests" (which is just more meaningless tasks of killing random animals and collecting their feet for exp, thats some glorious quest, King Arthur would be proud), and instances, which are the bane of most MMOs.
"Waaah, but he stole my mob. I had to wait to kill this mob!" Good game design can prevent most of the problems people have with dungeons. Vanguard has seamless dungeons and I've never once had to fight with another group over killing a boss, because the world is so massive, respawns are quick, and there are plenty of options for everyone. And besides, why play an MMO if you don't want to deal with people?
Well said good sir!
....although personally I would like to see online game design move away from games such as Vanguard. I'm so bored of all of this static gameworld crap where all the creatures just hang around in the same area waiting to be killed by the players. Boss monsters are kind of lame too. It would be great to see a bit of AI being implemented in these games or better still let the players do meaningful stuff to change the world they are in.
Kill too many Goblins in an area and their tribe starts waging war on the nearest human settlements. Kill the Troll King and the trolls leave the cave system they are in which later becomes inhabited by some other creatures. Allow players to ally with certain types of monsters, giving players a reason to conflict with other players.......a group of Orc players might spend their time helping and protecting an Orc tribe from other do-gooder players who keep trying to kill them.
There are loads of interesting things that can be done. Instead we just keep seeing the same old idea appearing over and over again.
......also if a player wants to just level up his character without any interference from other players then why not just play a single player game and have Instant Messenger open while you play. That way you get left alone by people in the game but you still have people to chat to while you play. Thats basicly what most of these mmos are anyway - they're just glorified single player games with a chat window added on. Actually I take that back.......they're not glorified single player games at all. They're simplified single player games that lack the depth and detail that most real single player games have.
I wouldnt reccommend Eve PVE to anyone. For all the comments about Eve being a sandbox game it has the most repetitive PvE content I've encountered thus far.
Vanguard had a very rough start but this is EQ 3.0 - its how EQ should have evolved (no offense to the EQ2 crowd).
its clear that the focus in Vanguard is good quality PvE. It does have that quest system which I find pretty lame; the quest system that tries to drag you along by the nose....but I challenge anyone to find a game today that doesn't use this motif. The difference i find in vanguard is there are a lot of options and I found it fun tossing the body parts of the halfling into the river as a quest
......also if a player wants to just level up his character without any interference from other players then why not just play a single player game and have Instant Messenger open while you play. That way you get left alone by people in the game but you still have people to chat to while you play. Thats basicly what most of these mmos are anyway - they're just glorified single player games with a chat window added on. Actually I take that back.......they're not glorified single player games at all. They're simplified single player games that lack the depth and detail that most real single player games have.
stroke your e-peen much? The thing that always gets me about these type of players is they somehow think they are 'tough' because they pvp.
I would argue the exact opposite in regards to a pvp vs a pve encounter. If I'm playing my mage and fight a rogue.. I can almost exactly guess what he is going to do. Almost every rogue tries the same thing. It doesn't matter that there is a human being controlling it, they all do the same thing. Go on a board and say " I'm a rogue, how do I beat a Shaman" and you'll get 10 replies, all telling you basically the exact same thing. I am very rarely shocked by how a player plays his character.
Now compare that to a good raid boss encounter where you probably have 10 devs spending days scripting the encounter. It takes much longer to figure out how to beat a raid boss then it takes to figure out how to beat your 'generic rogue pvper'.
But the biggest difference between a single player game and a MMORPG is simply the amount of content. It would take a weekend to 'win' Warcraft 3, I've been playing WOW since launch and I never once thought the game was over.
......also if a player wants to just level up his character without any interference from other players then why not just play a single player game and have Instant Messenger open while you play. That way you get left alone by people in the game but you still have people to chat to while you play. Thats basicly what most of these mmos are anyway - they're just glorified single player games with a chat window added on. Actually I take that back.......they're not glorified single player games at all. They're simplified single player games that lack the depth and detail that most real single player games have.
stroke your e-peen much? The thing that always gets me about these type of players is they somehow think they are 'tough' because they pvp.
I would argue the exact opposite in regards to a pvp vs a pve encounter. If I'm playing my mage and fight a rogue.. I can almost exactly guess what he is going to do. Almost every rogue tries the same thing. It doesn't matter that there is a human being controlling it, they all do the same thing. Go on a board and say " I'm a rogue, how do I beat a Shaman" and you'll get 10 replies, all telling you basically the exact same thing. I am very rarely shocked by how a player plays his character.
Now compare that to a good raid boss encounter where you probably have 10 devs spending days scripting the encounter. It takes much longer to figure out how to beat a raid boss then it takes to figure out how to beat your 'generic rogue pvper'.
But the biggest difference between a single player game and a MMORPG is simply the amount of content. It would take a weekend to 'win' Warcraft 3, I've been playing WOW since launch and I never once thought the game was over.
.....and here is yet another gamer who just cannot think outside the box. All the usual lame old reasons for PvP not working coming out of the woodwork. You're using WoW as an example for how PvP doesnt work. Well......duh! Obviously thats one of the best examples you could use to show how PvP has been implemented badly. Of course everyone plays the rogue the same way. The design of the game doesnt allow you to do anything else. Rogues hide, sneak and stab you in the back. Mages are weak at close combat and blast things from a distance. Warriors run up to things and hit them. Blah blah blah. Borrrrriiinnngggg. There is also no reason for PvP in WoW so its a really stupid example to use.
As usual you are one of the many players who thinks that PvP cant work and can never be fun because it didnt work in WoW. There are other ways of making games ya know? Ever considered that basic concept. If you plonk a load of level based cookie cutter characters down and say "go and kill each other" then of course its gonna be crap. Any moron can predict that. The problem is that brainless people thinks that is all there is and then they say "Oh PvP never works. I hate PvP" and after being spoon fed static do-quest-level-up games like WoW for years they then become incapable of seeing the potential of other good ideas. Monkey see monkey do!
So you find it more interesting to fight a scripted monster that behaves the same way every time over an opponent controlled by a player? Yeah that makes loads of sense doesnt it.
Also whats all this bullshit about PvPers thinking they are tough? What a load of dumb crap! In real life I can interact with people around me. They have an effect on my life and I have an effect on theirs. Its one of the reasons I enjoy real life. Whats wrong with wanting this in my games? When I am in a game I will meet people who I will want to ally with for various reasons. I will also meet people who are my enemies. If I cant interact with people in a meaningful way in game then its extremely limited and very daft. Its not that I want more of a challenge by getting a cheap thrill from killing a player.......I just want more interesting situations to be possible.
PvP does not have to mean "Uhhh me go kill players. Huhhh huhhh huhhh me piss them off huhh huhhh huhhh. Oh look I ganked him for no reason huhhh huhhh huhhh. Me feel tough now huhh huhhh huhhhh". A good PvP system (NOT what is in WoW) can allow a whole load of interesting scenarios to unfold that you will NEVER get in a scripted PvE game in which the encounters are always the same. These are always referred to as game WORLDS so let them actually be worlds. Let the players shape what happens in them.
So the biggest difference between an mmo and a single player game is the content? Basicly......its bigger. Thats it! Its bigger! Its not more interesting than a single player game. It doesnt have any more depth. It doesnt allow you to do anything more interesting. Thats the only noticeable difference between an mmo and a single player game you can see. You summed it up perfectly for me. There is just......more of it.......and you like that? You think thats a good thing? So yeah like I said we dont need any more PvE focused games because they already exist in single player games. Its called a multiplayer option.
Of course the level of interaction that I would like to see would be too distracting for you. You will be too focused on going up levels, farming phat loot, beating the big bad boss for the 10th time with your friends and of course stroking your e-peen.
I'm leaving Eve for Vanguard. I wouldnt reccommend Eve PVE to anyone. For all the comments about Eve being a sandbox game it has the most repetitive PvE content I've encountered thus far.
Vanguard had a very rough start but this is EQ 3.0 - its how EQ should have evolved (no offense to the EQ2 crowd).
its clear that the focus in Vanguard is good quality PvE. It does have that quest system which I find pretty lame; the quest system that tries to drag you along by the nose....but I challenge anyone to find a game today that doesn't use this motif. The difference i find in vanguard is there are a lot of options and I found it fun tossing the body parts of the halfling into the river as a quest
EVE is not a PvE game. If you have just been playing it for that and not actually getting involved with the other players then Vanguard is indeed the game for you. Then you can throw the halflings body parts into the river over and over again until you explode with joy! Wow that just sounds amazing! It must have been pretty exciting reading the line of text "You throw the halflings body parts into the river". Things like that must never grow old
there are going to be plenty of pure PvE games out, but AAA MMOs seem to be moving to PvP because its player driven and thus far more dynamic.
I don't know about that. I think we'll see it break down like this from now on:
AAA PvE games which focus primarily on conventional PvE gameplay, questing and instance running, will have parallel PvP gameplay.
A new generation of story-centric MMORPG's will emerge, which may or may not have any major PvP content.
I think that's really the rule. Your world needs to have weight. It needs to vest the player in it somehow. Otherwise the game just starts to feel like a hollow, pointless grind. You can accomplish this in one of two ways, from what I've seen. You can give it weight by adding persistent player conflict, like DAoC, or you can deliver a story in a clever, interesting way, like LotRO.
Whenever I hear the word "story" in a MMORPG or any RPG game, I shudder. "Story" conjures up memories of frustration when I was "forced" to follow some lame plotline and where events unfolded in a specific unavoidable manner within some linear game design.
Now, if you meant "background" or "game world politics", then that is fine. But if you truly mean some linear trek, where players are inside a predetermined story and occasionally allowed to participate, then I'm not with you on that. AOC in the first 20 levels was that design and it was a miserable gaming experience for me.
If I want a "linear" story, I'll watch a movie instead of playing a game. Hollywood writers are better story-tellers than game devs.
A good MMORPG can give players goals without giving them a script. Remember, part of the thrill of MMORPG's, and the fantasy genre in general, is freedom. I toss my sword into the air and the direction it points to when it hits the ground might be the direction I follow that day.
there are going to be plenty of pure PvE games out, but AAA MMOs seem to be moving to PvP because its player driven and thus far more dynamic.
I don't know about that. I think we'll see it break down like this from now on:
AAA PvE games which focus primarily on conventional PvE gameplay, questing and instance running, will have parallel PvP gameplay.
A new generation of story-centric MMORPG's will emerge, which may or may not have any major PvP content.
I think that's really the rule. Your world needs to have weight. It needs to vest the player in it somehow. Otherwise the game just starts to feel like a hollow, pointless grind. You can accomplish this in one of two ways, from what I've seen. You can give it weight by adding persistent player conflict, like DAoC, or you can deliver a story in a clever, interesting way, like LotRO.
Whenever I hear the word "story" in a MMORPG or any RPG game, I shudder. "Story" conjures up memories of frustration when I was "forced" to follow some lame plotline and where events unfolded in a specific unavoidable manner within some linear game design.
Now, if you meant "background" or "game world politics", then that is fine. But if you truly mean some linear trek, where players are inside a predetermined story and occasionally allowed to participate, then I'm not with you on that. AOC in the first 20 levels was that design and it was a miserable gaming experience for me.
If I want a "linear" story, I'll watch a movie instead of playing a game. Hollywood writers are better story-tellers than game devs.
A good MMORPG can give players goals without giving them a script. Remember, part of the thrill of MMORPG's, and the fantasy genre in general, is freedom. I toss my sword into the air and the direction it points to when it hits the ground might be the direction I follow that day.
I totally agree with you. All of these idiots that really seem to think that the best part of a PvE focused mmo is the "great story" it tells have clearly never read a decent book before. If I want something to tell me a story then I can just go and read a very good book that I am into at the moment or like you said I can watch a film. I am guaranteed that even the worst films around will be more entertaining than the brainless drivel that you get in an mmo.
I cant really think of any mmo that I have played that has told a particularly good story. They all seem really stupid and childish to me. Even my 13 year old kid brother thinks they are crap. He was playing EQ2 a while back and he stopped playing it because he hated the dumb quests and all the pointless things the game forced him to do.
I like your last comment about tossing your sword by the way. A truly epic adventurer ye be! But......but......how will you decide what to do? Who is going to tell you where to go? Oh gosh!
I'm just wondering if there are no new MMO's being developed which is focused on PvE? Seems to me that all new MMO's, at least the hyped ones, are marketed towards the PvP crowd. Of course they all have some PvE content aswell, but I would really like to play a pure PvE game where classes and skills can be developed without PvP in consideration.
Pure PvE games are more multiplayer than massive. Without PvP they become boring too fast. Thats why most of games aim at PvP. Also PvP in one game can not mess PvE and consideration about how to build the char it just depend how game is designed. I really hate WoW redesign and time that you have to spend earn money for it. I have to do it every 2 weeks so I can top my arena team while Raiding and minimize the time to earn money for it. In fact WoW is the only game with such problem I have played up to now.
Where themepark games try to hide that they are copying WOW, games like Mortal Online and Darkfall make no attempt to hide their inspiration ______\m/_____ LordOfDarkDesire
I'm leaving Eve for Vanguard. I wouldnt reccommend Eve PVE to anyone. For all the comments about Eve being a sandbox game it has the most repetitive PvE content I've encountered thus far.
Yep Vanguard have great PvE but no PvP, in the same way as EvE have PvP but can say no PvE. Missions are just way to earn resources to participate in PvP if you cannot earn money in PvP.
Where themepark games try to hide that they are copying WOW, games like Mortal Online and Darkfall make no attempt to hide their inspiration ______\m/_____ LordOfDarkDesire
I'm leaving Eve for Vanguard. I wouldnt reccommend Eve PVE to anyone. For all the comments about Eve being a sandbox game it has the most repetitive PvE content I've encountered thus far.
Yep Vanguard have great PvE but no PvP, in the same way as EvE have PvP but can say no PvE. Missions are just way to earn resources to participate in PvP if you cannot earn money in PvP.
This is true, though a lot of people don't want to put their faction fittings on the line in pvp (preferring t2 stuff instead). So those mission runners end up using their faction stuff to simply run more missions more efficiently.
Eve does have a pve game, but after a short time you will have done all of the missions, and then it gets repetitive very quickly. Eve's pvp game, meanwhile, actually means something: territory control, which comes with resource control and the like. Beats the heck out of pvp mini-games, imo.
With WoW being such a huge success, and being almost purely based on PvE, I can't see how there won't be more of these games.
The problem is that the games that are geared towards PVE feel just like WoW.......THere is wayyyyyyyyyyyy too much emphasis on questing and soloing in PVE games anymore....
EVE does have PVE content that is non-repetitive sure. But you have to use your noggin'. If all you wanna do is kill rats or farm missions or Mine then you might want to exit that way <---- to the MMO list.
But if you like trading, crafting, or manufacturing then those activites are of course non-repeitive. That is what EVE is aimed at (they have an economist on staff). I believe Missions was a late addon.....
Now, if you are just a pure adventurer that wants to do Quests and dungeons then maybe Vanguard or something else is a much better fit. Especially if you dont care for PvP. EVE is very PVP centric but its also equally a game for everyone
Also be fair guys EVE has a time based training system. There is no reason to grind for anything. The only thing PVE gives you is ISK. And you can use your imagination to earn ISK like starting an ingame business to make it. What I did was spend bout 5-10 mins trading everyday to earn my ISK.
I could be wrong but I think EVE is a much better PVE game for sandbox people like me. I do bout 90% PVE in this game and I like not being forced to grind mobs or quests for XP. dont get me wrong- grinding can be fun too. But im happy EVE doesnt force me to grind technically
With WoW being such a huge success, and being almost purely based on PvE, I can't see how there won't be more of these games.
WoW have still alot of pvp its not realy pure pve, but pve server you can avoid all pvp yes.
FFXI is 99.99 % pve, they have some silly pvp arena but thats nothing.
Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009..... In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.
Comments
What on earth are you talking about?! What planet are you living on?! Virtually every mmo that comes out these days is based on a PvE concept. Nearly all of them are single player co-operative games with PvP aspects thrown in as an alternative.
So you want a pure PvE game where you can develop your character without being affected by other players? Thats called a single player game my friend. There are LOADS of them and they have been around ever since computers were invented.
Heres a shocking thought for you. How about making an online game where players can effect each other? I know its ground breaking stuff isnt it.......and heres another stunning idea. How about making a game which doesnt tell you a story (as an alternative to reading a book) but actually lets the players make up the story by interacting with and influencing each other? The only games I know of that do that even remotely well are Ultima Online (old and outdated now) and EVE. Apart from thats its all PvE "turn your brain off and follow the yellow brick road" mush.
But nahhhh lets not do that! Lets just keep all mmos as single player, linear, story driven games that have been coming out for ages. Afterall thats what everyone is used to and it would be daft to do something different wouldnt it!
No need to get all hotheaded, I'm not attacking PvPers. I know that the PvP crowd are also looking for a game that has main focus on their playstyle.
The reason I'm looking for a pure PvE game is that I think that the need for PvP balance hinders alot of spells, abilities, gear etc. For example no single attack can be too powerfull, even if it's on a long cooldown, because it could one-shot other players. CC also suffer alot, because everybody hates loosing control of their character.
Almost all mmo forums are filled with flamewars between the PvE and PvP crowds, because even though they play the same game, they want different content and experience. It's great that there are games that try to cater to both, lots of people also like the option to shift around, but I think that pure PvP and PvE games would offer a better experience for those who play exclusively one style.
Oh dont mind me. I get all hotheaded all the time. Its not meant as an attack against you or anything like that. It just struck me as a really odd thing to say when the market seems to be saturated with PvE mmos.
The reason PvP games have had problems before is simply because they were not designed very well. The PvP elements were incorporated into PvE systems. Also all of these games are level based so you always get players winning because they are higher level and have all the uber gear......not because they are actually better at playing the game.
Create a game that is designed for PvP and give players a reason to interact with others properly and it could easily work well. The ideas in Darkfall are spot on........shame it might never get made.
Its really sad to think now that content is "quests" (which is just more meaningless tasks of killing random animals and collecting their feet for exp, thats some glorious quest, King Arthur would be proud), and instances, which are the bane of most MMOs.
"Waaah, but he stole my mob. I had to wait to kill this mob!" Good game design can prevent most of the problems people have with dungeons. Vanguard has seamless dungeons and I've never once had to fight with another group over killing a boss, because the world is so massive, respawns are quick, and there are plenty of options for everyone. And besides, why play an MMO if you don't want to deal with people?
Darkfall Travelogues!
Its really sad to think now that content is "quests" (which is just more meaningless tasks of killing random animals and collecting their feet for exp, thats some glorious quest, King Arthur would be proud), and instances, which are the bane of most MMOs.
"Waaah, but he stole my mob. I had to wait to kill this mob!" Good game design can prevent most of the problems people have with dungeons. Vanguard has seamless dungeons and I've never once had to fight with another group over killing a boss, because the world is so massive, respawns are quick, and there are plenty of options for everyone. And besides, why play an MMO if you don't want to deal with people?
Well said good sir!
....although personally I would like to see online game design move away from games such as Vanguard. I'm so bored of all of this static gameworld crap where all the creatures just hang around in the same area waiting to be killed by the players. Boss monsters are kind of lame too. It would be great to see a bit of AI being implemented in these games or better still let the players do meaningful stuff to change the world they are in.
Kill too many Goblins in an area and their tribe starts waging war on the nearest human settlements. Kill the Troll King and the trolls leave the cave system they are in which later becomes inhabited by some other creatures. Allow players to ally with certain types of monsters, giving players a reason to conflict with other players.......a group of Orc players might spend their time helping and protecting an Orc tribe from other do-gooder players who keep trying to kill them.
There are loads of interesting things that can be done. Instead we just keep seeing the same old idea appearing over and over again.
......also if a player wants to just level up his character without any interference from other players then why not just play a single player game and have Instant Messenger open while you play. That way you get left alone by people in the game but you still have people to chat to while you play. Thats basicly what most of these mmos are anyway - they're just glorified single player games with a chat window added on. Actually I take that back.......they're not glorified single player games at all. They're simplified single player games that lack the depth and detail that most real single player games have.
I'm leaving Eve for Vanguard.
I wouldnt reccommend Eve PVE to anyone. For all the comments about Eve being a sandbox game it has the most repetitive PvE content I've encountered thus far.
Vanguard had a very rough start but this is EQ 3.0 - its how EQ should have evolved (no offense to the EQ2 crowd).
its clear that the focus in Vanguard is good quality PvE. It does have that quest system which I find pretty lame; the quest system that tries to drag you along by the nose....but I challenge anyone to find a game today that doesn't use this motif. The difference i find in vanguard is there are a lot of options and I found it fun tossing the body parts of the halfling into the river as a quest
stroke your e-peen much? The thing that always gets me about these type of players is they somehow think they are 'tough' because they pvp.
I would argue the exact opposite in regards to a pvp vs a pve encounter. If I'm playing my mage and fight a rogue.. I can almost exactly guess what he is going to do. Almost every rogue tries the same thing. It doesn't matter that there is a human being controlling it, they all do the same thing. Go on a board and say " I'm a rogue, how do I beat a Shaman" and you'll get 10 replies, all telling you basically the exact same thing. I am very rarely shocked by how a player plays his character.
Now compare that to a good raid boss encounter where you probably have 10 devs spending days scripting the encounter. It takes much longer to figure out how to beat a raid boss then it takes to figure out how to beat your 'generic rogue pvper'.
But the biggest difference between a single player game and a MMORPG is simply the amount of content. It would take a weekend to 'win' Warcraft 3, I've been playing WOW since launch and I never once thought the game was over.
stroke your e-peen much? The thing that always gets me about these type of players is they somehow think they are 'tough' because they pvp.
I would argue the exact opposite in regards to a pvp vs a pve encounter. If I'm playing my mage and fight a rogue.. I can almost exactly guess what he is going to do. Almost every rogue tries the same thing. It doesn't matter that there is a human being controlling it, they all do the same thing. Go on a board and say " I'm a rogue, how do I beat a Shaman" and you'll get 10 replies, all telling you basically the exact same thing. I am very rarely shocked by how a player plays his character.
Now compare that to a good raid boss encounter where you probably have 10 devs spending days scripting the encounter. It takes much longer to figure out how to beat a raid boss then it takes to figure out how to beat your 'generic rogue pvper'.
But the biggest difference between a single player game and a MMORPG is simply the amount of content. It would take a weekend to 'win' Warcraft 3, I've been playing WOW since launch and I never once thought the game was over.
.....and here is yet another gamer who just cannot think outside the box. All the usual lame old reasons for PvP not working coming out of the woodwork. You're using WoW as an example for how PvP doesnt work. Well......duh! Obviously thats one of the best examples you could use to show how PvP has been implemented badly. Of course everyone plays the rogue the same way. The design of the game doesnt allow you to do anything else. Rogues hide, sneak and stab you in the back. Mages are weak at close combat and blast things from a distance. Warriors run up to things and hit them. Blah blah blah. Borrrrriiinnngggg. There is also no reason for PvP in WoW so its a really stupid example to use.
As usual you are one of the many players who thinks that PvP cant work and can never be fun because it didnt work in WoW. There are other ways of making games ya know? Ever considered that basic concept. If you plonk a load of level based cookie cutter characters down and say "go and kill each other" then of course its gonna be crap. Any moron can predict that. The problem is that brainless people thinks that is all there is and then they say "Oh PvP never works. I hate PvP" and after being spoon fed static do-quest-level-up games like WoW for years they then become incapable of seeing the potential of other good ideas. Monkey see monkey do!
So you find it more interesting to fight a scripted monster that behaves the same way every time over an opponent controlled by a player? Yeah that makes loads of sense doesnt it.
Also whats all this bullshit about PvPers thinking they are tough? What a load of dumb crap! In real life I can interact with people around me. They have an effect on my life and I have an effect on theirs. Its one of the reasons I enjoy real life. Whats wrong with wanting this in my games? When I am in a game I will meet people who I will want to ally with for various reasons. I will also meet people who are my enemies. If I cant interact with people in a meaningful way in game then its extremely limited and very daft. Its not that I want more of a challenge by getting a cheap thrill from killing a player.......I just want more interesting situations to be possible.
PvP does not have to mean "Uhhh me go kill players. Huhhh huhhh huhhh me piss them off huhh huhhh huhhh. Oh look I ganked him for no reason huhhh huhhh huhhh. Me feel tough now huhh huhhh huhhhh". A good PvP system (NOT what is in WoW) can allow a whole load of interesting scenarios to unfold that you will NEVER get in a scripted PvE game in which the encounters are always the same. These are always referred to as game WORLDS so let them actually be worlds. Let the players shape what happens in them.
So the biggest difference between an mmo and a single player game is the content? Basicly......its bigger. Thats it! Its bigger! Its not more interesting than a single player game. It doesnt have any more depth. It doesnt allow you to do anything more interesting. Thats the only noticeable difference between an mmo and a single player game you can see. You summed it up perfectly for me. There is just......more of it.......and you like that? You think thats a good thing? So yeah like I said we dont need any more PvE focused games because they already exist in single player games. Its called a multiplayer option.
Of course the level of interaction that I would like to see would be too distracting for you. You will be too focused on going up levels, farming phat loot, beating the big bad boss for the 10th time with your friends and of course stroking your e-peen.
EVE is not a PvE game. If you have just been playing it for that and not actually getting involved with the other players then Vanguard is indeed the game for you. Then you can throw the halflings body parts into the river over and over again until you explode with joy! Wow that just sounds amazing! It must have been pretty exciting reading the line of text "You throw the halflings body parts into the river". Things like that must never grow old
I don't know about that. I think we'll see it break down like this from now on:
AAA PvE games which focus primarily on conventional PvE gameplay, questing and instance running, will have parallel PvP gameplay.
A new generation of story-centric MMORPG's will emerge, which may or may not have any major PvP content.
I think that's really the rule. Your world needs to have weight. It needs to vest the player in it somehow. Otherwise the game just starts to feel like a hollow, pointless grind. You can accomplish this in one of two ways, from what I've seen. You can give it weight by adding persistent player conflict, like DAoC, or you can deliver a story in a clever, interesting way, like LotRO.
Whenever I hear the word "story" in a MMORPG or any RPG game, I shudder. "Story" conjures up memories of frustration when I was "forced" to follow some lame plotline and where events unfolded in a specific unavoidable manner within some linear game design.
Now, if you meant "background" or "game world politics", then that is fine. But if you truly mean some linear trek, where players are inside a predetermined story and occasionally allowed to participate, then I'm not with you on that. AOC in the first 20 levels was that design and it was a miserable gaming experience for me.
If I want a "linear" story, I'll watch a movie instead of playing a game. Hollywood writers are better story-tellers than game devs.
A good MMORPG can give players goals without giving them a script. Remember, part of the thrill of MMORPG's, and the fantasy genre in general, is freedom. I toss my sword into the air and the direction it points to when it hits the ground might be the direction I follow that day.
I don't know about that. I think we'll see it break down like this from now on:
AAA PvE games which focus primarily on conventional PvE gameplay, questing and instance running, will have parallel PvP gameplay.
A new generation of story-centric MMORPG's will emerge, which may or may not have any major PvP content.
I think that's really the rule. Your world needs to have weight. It needs to vest the player in it somehow. Otherwise the game just starts to feel like a hollow, pointless grind. You can accomplish this in one of two ways, from what I've seen. You can give it weight by adding persistent player conflict, like DAoC, or you can deliver a story in a clever, interesting way, like LotRO.
Whenever I hear the word "story" in a MMORPG or any RPG game, I shudder. "Story" conjures up memories of frustration when I was "forced" to follow some lame plotline and where events unfolded in a specific unavoidable manner within some linear game design.
Now, if you meant "background" or "game world politics", then that is fine. But if you truly mean some linear trek, where players are inside a predetermined story and occasionally allowed to participate, then I'm not with you on that. AOC in the first 20 levels was that design and it was a miserable gaming experience for me.
If I want a "linear" story, I'll watch a movie instead of playing a game. Hollywood writers are better story-tellers than game devs.
A good MMORPG can give players goals without giving them a script. Remember, part of the thrill of MMORPG's, and the fantasy genre in general, is freedom. I toss my sword into the air and the direction it points to when it hits the ground might be the direction I follow that day.
I totally agree with you. All of these idiots that really seem to think that the best part of a PvE focused mmo is the "great story" it tells have clearly never read a decent book before. If I want something to tell me a story then I can just go and read a very good book that I am into at the moment or like you said I can watch a film. I am guaranteed that even the worst films around will be more entertaining than the brainless drivel that you get in an mmo.
I cant really think of any mmo that I have played that has told a particularly good story. They all seem really stupid and childish to me. Even my 13 year old kid brother thinks they are crap. He was playing EQ2 a while back and he stopped playing it because he hated the dumb quests and all the pointless things the game forced him to do.
I like your last comment about tossing your sword by the way. A truly epic adventurer ye be! But......but......how will you decide what to do? Who is going to tell you where to go? Oh gosh!
Pure PvE games are more multiplayer than massive. Without PvP they become boring too fast. Thats why most of games aim at PvP. Also PvP in one game can not mess PvE and consideration about how to build the char it just depend how game is designed. I really hate WoW redesign and time that you have to spend earn money for it. I have to do it every 2 weeks so I can top my arena team while Raiding and minimize the time to earn money for it. In fact WoW is the only game with such problem I have played up to now.
Where themepark games try to hide that they are copying WOW, games like Mortal Online and Darkfall make no attempt to hide their inspiration
______\m/_____
LordOfDarkDesire
Yep Vanguard have great PvE but no PvP, in the same way as EvE have PvP but can say no PvE. Missions are just way to earn resources to participate in PvP if you cannot earn money in PvP.
Where themepark games try to hide that they are copying WOW, games like Mortal Online and Darkfall make no attempt to hide their inspiration
______\m/_____
LordOfDarkDesire
Yep Vanguard have great PvE but no PvP, in the same way as EvE have PvP but can say no PvE. Missions are just way to earn resources to participate in PvP if you cannot earn money in PvP.
This is true, though a lot of people don't want to put their faction fittings on the line in pvp (preferring t2 stuff instead). So those mission runners end up using their faction stuff to simply run more missions more efficiently.
Eve does have a pve game, but after a short time you will have done all of the missions, and then it gets repetitive very quickly. Eve's pvp game, meanwhile, actually means something: territory control, which comes with resource control and the like. Beats the heck out of pvp mini-games, imo.
The problem is that the games that are geared towards PVE feel just like WoW.......THere is wayyyyyyyyyyyy too much emphasis on questing and soloing in PVE games anymore....
EVE does have PVE content that is non-repetitive sure. But you have to use your noggin'. If all you wanna do is kill rats or farm missions or Mine then you might want to exit that way <---- to the MMO list.
But if you like trading, crafting, or manufacturing then those activites are of course non-repeitive. That is what EVE is aimed at (they have an economist on staff). I believe Missions was a late addon.....
Now, if you are just a pure adventurer that wants to do Quests and dungeons then maybe Vanguard or something else is a much better fit. Especially if you dont care for PvP. EVE is very PVP centric but its also equally a game for everyone
Also be fair guys EVE has a time based training system. There is no reason to grind for anything. The only thing PVE gives you is ISK. And you can use your imagination to earn ISK like starting an ingame business to make it. What I did was spend bout 5-10 mins trading everyday to earn my ISK.
I could be wrong but I think EVE is a much better PVE game for sandbox people like me. I do bout 90% PVE in this game and I like not being forced to grind mobs or quests for XP. dont get me wrong- grinding can be fun too. But im happy EVE doesnt force me to grind technically
WoW have still alot of pvp its not realy pure pve, but pve server you can avoid all pvp yes.
FFXI is 99.99 % pve, they have some silly pvp arena but thats nothing.
Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009.....
In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.