This isn't really even worth discussing since there's already a ton of MMO's without PvP. They're successful enough and are still up and running, so the answer is obviously yes.
Personally, I think PvP is only worth exisiting in MMO's if it requires skill or puts players in a situation where they've got something to lose. The current gear-based nothing to lose WoW style PvP is pretty lame and pointless, in my opinion.
Point to to one that is not outdated by 6 or 7 years.
Last one i played was eq2 years ago and last i heard they have now added battle grounds to the pve servers.
Obviously, as indicated by my screen name, I would play a no-pvp game. In games that do have "designated areas" for pvp, I have always stayed away. I always deny sparring requests, and for those games that allow it (like Dungeons & Dragons Online) I set it automatically to deny requests. I'm not into competition at all, and when I am in the mood for casual play (which is all the time) I don't want to be on the defensive because some douchebag player-killer is out to add another notch on their belt.
I seleced No, because while PvE is fun it eventually runs out. I like to have good meaningful PvP in a game, I'am not talking about instanced battle ground arena for the next gear tier or mindless open PvP just for the sake of being a dick. I like to have purpose why I'am fighting the other side, it can be for land a structure or point of interest but just mindless mayhem is really boring.
Yes I would and in a heart beat. PvP what ever form brings out the bad in gamers and I am not advocating all PvP'ers are terrible gamers but I do believe it brings out the bad in someone.
Besides I honestly believe the best form of MMO gaming is found only in PvE elements.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Sure why not there are plenty of PnP RPG rules that don't allow play conflict with deep story. It is all about content anyway and character development not PvP.
As long as PVE content stayed fresh and original (ie. Frequently Updated and New) then yes, otherwise it becomes boring and overdone. I would also like content that is extremely hard, not just a nightmare mode to older content(which could be fun also) I want it to be like in the early days of EQ or Vanilla WoW, where if you saw someone in tier gear or high level gear you knew they had earned it... I love PVE content and even more so story driven content i want to see an MMO with actual consequences to your descions where if you make a certain descion you may be shunned by an entire town or certain quest-lines, unlike SWTOR where regardless of the descsion you make the story progresses and layer those descions so that it would take a conscience effort to duplicate someone else's story.
There are times when one must ask themselves is it my passion that truly frightens you? Or your own?
I played City of Heros and Villains for years without PvP'n.
But after a peroid of time I realized that PvP brings a level of dynamics to my gaming. NPCs are programed, hence they only react in a limited fashion. Human players are unpredictable, hence a bigger challenge.
I think there is a place for both players, there are even some games that manage to please both groups.
Edit: What I find unpleasant is that most often the arguments against either side tend to be opinions and not valid arguments. IE "PvP brings out the worst in people", this is totaly false, I have seen more players exploiting glitches and other players in PVE than in PvP. for the other side:"PvE is boring" There is plenty of content that takes skill and planing.
As a society we too often focus on others and not enough on ourselves. This in and of itself sounds wrong, but let me continue. Too often we want to play that new FFA PvP game because of "X" reason, but don't want to PvP. Seems simple enough that if you don't want PvP you play a different game. Yet more often than not we see calls for a PvE server or safe zones. That same goes for the other side. Have you seen any comments about "Y" PvE game would be better with PvP? I am sure you have. NOw look back at my initial comment, the one about focusing on ourselves and not the others...The point is this, play what you like and stop trying to fashion everything into what you like. Put on your grown-up-pants and go do something by yourself. Make it something YOU like and you will find enjoyment, and you might even have fun.
would depend on the game rule sets. PVE or PVP doesnt effect my gaming choices. its all about the mechanics and enjoyment. so if the game has enjoyable gameplay or mechanics even with it being 100% pve then ill most likely try it, even if its 100% pvp even. lol
Please, someone tell me one good reason to have a PvE based mmo. Unless you are fighting cooperatively with 40+ people, it would be pointless. The entire reason massively multiplayer games exist is because of PvP. What's the point of having thousands of players on a server if all you can do is fight cooperatively with 10-25 people at a time? That's silly. PvE only fans are in the wrong genre, you should be playing co-op games instead. If you want a world more than a game, you have to accept the fact that player vs player interaction is part of life, and is the only real reason to have thousands of players on one server. If all you want is PvE, you should really be playing a coop game with a few buddies. Most new AAA games out that have co-op, have far better gameplay than these WoW-clone PvE centric games.
Originally posted by AvsRock21 Please, someone tell me one good reason to have a PvE based mmo. Unless you are fighting cooperatively with 40+ people, it would be pointless. The entire reason massively multiplayer games exist is because of PvP. What's the point of having thousands of players on a server if all you can do is fight cooperatively with 10-25 people at a time? That's silly. PvE only fans are in the wrong genre, you should be playing co-op games instead. If you want a world more than a game, you have to accept the fact that player vs player interaction is part of life, and is the only real reason to have thousands of players on one server. If all you want is PvE, you should really be playing a coop game with a few buddies. Most new AAA games out that have co-op, have far better gameplay than these WoW-clone PvE centric games.
Look another example.
Here we see attacks agains PvE, yet MMO history shows us PvP was NOT where mmoRPGs started.
I would argue that if PvP is what you want go play lobby based console shooters, not MMOs.
i voted yes asswell.. in the past PvE was all we had and it was fun.
PvP is not a necessity unlike alot of developers think.
Originally posted by Four0Six
Originally posted by AvsRock21 Please, someone tell me one good reason to have a PvE based mmo. Unless you are fighting cooperatively with 40+ people, it would be pointless. The entire reason massively multiplayer games exist is because of PvP. What's the point of having thousands of players on a server if all you can do is fight cooperatively with 10-25 people at a time? That's silly. PvE only fans are in the wrong genre, you should be playing co-op games instead. If you want a world more than a game, you have to accept the fact that player vs player interaction is part of life, and is the only real reason to have thousands of players on one server. If all you want is PvE, you should really be playing a coop game with a few buddies. Most new AAA games out that have co-op, have far better gameplay than these WoW-clone PvE centric games.
Look another example.
Here we see attacks agains PvE, yet MMO history shows us PvP was NOT where mmoRPGs started.
I would argue that if PvP is what you want go play lobby based console shooters, not MMOs.
Having to work with other players and cooperate is what I find most interesting.
This kind of gaming I have mostly found with players who understand group dynamics, where everyone plays their part (or role) as they can and their personal gain equals how well the group works.
PvE attracks most of these players, while PvP often attract the individualists... generally speaking and with exceptions!
Other reasons for PvE only game are, half the efford (budget) that is usually used on PvP can be used to make even better PVE mechanics, no reason to balance a game to dullness because it is ok to have different characters (roles or classes) with different powers (and thereby value) for various situations, no reason to somplify skills/spells/mechanics to have PvE and PvP rules to work persistantly in the same world.
I played EQ2 and LOTRO for years, so I guess I would lol.
"When people don't know much about something, they tend to fill in the blanks the way they want them to be filled in. They are almost always disappointed." - Will Wright
Originally posted by AvsRock21 Please, someone tell me one good reason to have a PvE based mmo. Unless you are fighting cooperatively with 40+ people, it would be pointless. The entire reason massively multiplayer games exist is because of PvP. What's the point of having thousands of players on a server if all you can do is fight cooperatively with 10-25 people at a time? That's silly. PvE only fans are in the wrong genre, you should be playing co-op games instead. If you want a world more than a game, you have to accept the fact that player vs player interaction is part of life, and is the only real reason to have thousands of players on one server. If all you want is PvE, you should really be playing a coop game with a few buddies. Most new AAA games out that have co-op, have far better gameplay than these WoW-clone PvE centric games.
Look another example.
Here we see attacks agains PvE, yet MMO history shows us PvP was NOT where mmoRPGs started.
I would argue that if PvP is what you want go play lobby based console shooters, not MMOs.
Please explain to me how that makes any sense. Also, what are these first mmos that you are talking about? Are you talking about MUDs? Rofl. MUDs weren't massive, you couldn't ever interact with that many people at a time. Despite the large number of people on a server.
So, please tell me why PvP'ers should play a lobby based game. Are you aware that in real mmos you have hundreds of people fighting against eachother on non-instanced maps? How would a lobby based console shooter compare with that? And I ask again, what's the point of having thousands of players on a server if you can only fight cooperatively with 10-25 people?
You make an argument, and provide no reasoning. Is it because there is no reasoning for you faulty argument?
Originally posted by ShakyMo No but I hope one gets made so I can tell all the "sociopath" spouting pop psychologists to go away and play it.
Also mmo history shows mmos were MORE pvp orientated in the past. Uo, daoc, ac darktide etc.. EQ was the only pve heavy old mmo.
Then wow came out and we had 8 years of heavy pve bias with shitty tupperware pvp.
The balance is being redressed lately with planetside 2, gw2, dfuw, TESO etc.. about bloody time.
Well in terms of number of games you would be right.
In population? maybe not. EQ was by far the most populated of those games and when the other games had a pve alternative (e.g. Trammel), the pvp population plummeted.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
I love PvP in my MMO's, but if I went in to the game knowing that there would be no PvP. I would be ok with that. I just dont like being promised bountiful PvP and then being disappointed.
Originally posted by ShakyMo Pveers would be better served by a lobby game, once levelled all they do is sit in cities queueing to go dungeons and raids.
so?
the thing is queuing is a thing wich is farely new. we used to not have queus or portals. we had to run evrywhere to do our thing.
then sitting in a city talking to people. prepping to go somewhere gathering your group made fucking sens.
yes NOW we scratch our asses inside cities because we can qeue up.
So if a oldschool mmo would be brought out without any of the convinenses cities make sense, right now yes you could make a lobby game out of it. but that not what is desired. we want a world for a reason to move in it.
Originally posted by ShakyMo Pveers would be better served by a lobby game, once levelled all they do is sit in cities queueing to go dungeons and raids.
This.
All of the old epic mmorpgs were PvP based games. EQ is the only exception. Games like UO, DAoC, and Asheron's call started the mmorpg revolution.
I think it could work but it would have to a lot of paths and options. Crafting would have to be very in depth and events managed by gms would have to be common.
Comments
Point to to one that is not outdated by 6 or 7 years.
Last one i played was eq2 years ago and last i heard they have now added battle grounds to the pve servers.
Obviously, as indicated by my screen name, I would play a no-pvp game. In games that do have "designated areas" for pvp, I have always stayed away. I always deny sparring requests, and for those games that allow it (like Dungeons & Dragons Online) I set it automatically to deny requests. I'm not into competition at all, and when I am in the mood for casual play (which is all the time) I don't want to be on the defensive because some douchebag player-killer is out to add another notch on their belt.
I'd like some pvp options even it's just 1 zoned area for it exclusively. All Pve would be too much like single player.
Express your opinion
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/371172/Poll-Most-hated-MMORPG.html
No matter how cynical you become, its never enough to keep up - Lily Tomlin
Yes I would and in a heart beat. PvP what ever form brings out the bad in gamers and I am not advocating all PvP'ers are terrible gamers but I do believe it brings out the bad in someone.
Besides I honestly believe the best form of MMO gaming is found only in PvE elements.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
There are times when one must ask themselves is it my passion that truly frightens you? Or your own?
I voted yes.
I played City of Heros and Villains for years without PvP'n.
But after a peroid of time I realized that PvP brings a level of dynamics to my gaming. NPCs are programed, hence they only react in a limited fashion. Human players are unpredictable, hence a bigger challenge.
I think there is a place for both players, there are even some games that manage to please both groups.
Edit: What I find unpleasant is that most often the arguments against either side tend to be opinions and not valid arguments. IE "PvP brings out the worst in people", this is totaly false, I have seen more players exploiting glitches and other players in PVE than in PvP. for the other side:"PvE is boring" There is plenty of content that takes skill and planing.
As a society we too often focus on others and not enough on ourselves. This in and of itself sounds wrong, but let me continue. Too often we want to play that new FFA PvP game because of "X" reason, but don't want to PvP. Seems simple enough that if you don't want PvP you play a different game. Yet more often than not we see calls for a PvE server or safe zones. That same goes for the other side. Have you seen any comments about "Y" PvE game would be better with PvP? I am sure you have. NOw look back at my initial comment, the one about focusing on ourselves and not the others...The point is this, play what you like and stop trying to fashion everything into what you like. Put on your grown-up-pants and go do something by yourself. Make it something YOU like and you will find enjoyment, and you might even have fun.
Look another example.
Here we see attacks agains PvE, yet MMO history shows us PvP was NOT where mmoRPGs started.
I would argue that if PvP is what you want go play lobby based console shooters, not MMOs.
Wow 77% would.
i voted yes asswell.. in the past PvE was all we had and it was fun.
PvP is not a necessity unlike alot of developers think.
Exactly what im saying
Having to work with other players and cooperate is what I find most interesting.
This kind of gaming I have mostly found with players who understand group dynamics, where everyone plays their part (or role) as they can and their personal gain equals how well the group works.
PvE attracks most of these players, while PvP often attract the individualists... generally speaking and with exceptions!
Other reasons for PvE only game are, half the efford (budget) that is usually used on PvP can be used to make even better PVE mechanics, no reason to balance a game to dullness because it is ok to have different characters (roles or classes) with different powers (and thereby value) for various situations, no reason to somplify skills/spells/mechanics to have PvE and PvP rules to work persistantly in the same world.
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
"When people don't know much about something, they tend to fill in the blanks the way they want them to be filled in. They are almost always disappointed." - Will Wright
Also mmo history shows mmos were MORE pvp orientated in the past.
Uo, daoc, ac darktide etc.. EQ was the only pve heavy old mmo.
Then wow came out and we had 8 years of heavy pve bias with shitty tupperware pvp.
The balance is being redressed lately with planetside 2, gw2, dfuw, TESO etc.. about bloody time.
Please explain to me how that makes any sense. Also, what are these first mmos that you are talking about? Are you talking about MUDs? Rofl. MUDs weren't massive, you couldn't ever interact with that many people at a time. Despite the large number of people on a server.
So, please tell me why PvP'ers should play a lobby based game. Are you aware that in real mmos you have hundreds of people fighting against eachother on non-instanced maps? How would a lobby based console shooter compare with that? And I ask again, what's the point of having thousands of players on a server if you can only fight cooperatively with 10-25 people?
You make an argument, and provide no reasoning. Is it because there is no reasoning for you faulty argument?
Well in terms of number of games you would be right.
In population? maybe not. EQ was by far the most populated of those games and when the other games had a pve alternative (e.g. Trammel), the pvp population plummeted.
Don't know about the others but daoc was around 250,000.
Add on eve, planetside, uo etc.. there was probably more players in games with a pvp focus pre wow
so?
the thing is queuing is a thing wich is farely new. we used to not have queus or portals. we had to run evrywhere to do our thing.
then sitting in a city talking to people. prepping to go somewhere gathering your group made fucking sens.
yes NOW we scratch our asses inside cities because we can qeue up.
So if a oldschool mmo would be brought out without any of the convinenses cities make sense, right now yes you could make a lobby game out of it. but that not what is desired. we want a world for a reason to move in it.
This.
All of the old epic mmorpgs were PvP based games. EQ is the only exception. Games like UO, DAoC, and Asheron's call started the mmorpg revolution.