1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
You will always have the problem of PvP and PvE rulesets creating conflicts in the design of the game. What works for PvP balance tends to make PvE problematic, and vice versa.
WoW is a PvE game with PvP bolted on, and it shows, badly, in a lot of ways.
I PvP on occasion, but I'm mostly there for the PvE. So, yes, I'd play a PvE only game. In fact, when I fire up a single player game, that's what I'm doing.
CH, Jedi, Commando, Smuggler, BH, Scout, Doctor, Chef, BE...yeah, lots of SWG time invested.
Although I do find it odd people say pvp is killing the RPG aspect when most of the older mmorpg games had pvp in them in some shape or form. Perhaps it is a case that having to balance pvp classes around instanced arenas is what is causing the problem.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
As the title states. Would you play a purely pve game with maybe 1-2 pvp servers that were a sideshow gimick for the players who wanted it like everquest?
Yes.
I hate PvP in MMORPGs, it's 99% of the time crap and corrupted by levels and gear. I play FPS games for my PvP.
I also hate the angry dickhead culture that often goes hand in hand with it.
The need for PvP in every game comes from 2 places imo; 1. The need for cheap filler content to extend the life of the game at the smallest possible cost, and 2. the mistaken belief that because WoW was successful and had PvP that it was the existance of PvP alone that made it successful (a false reality imo).
Although I do find it odd people say pvp is killing the RPG aspect when most of the older mmorpg games had pvp in them in some shape or form. Perhaps it is a case that having to balance pvp around instanced arenas in pvp games is what is causing the problem.
Well (a) most RPGs didn't have PVP in them, and (b) a lot of progression (ie a lot of RPG) harms PVP integrity (it makes winning PVP about non-skill factors like playtime.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Although I do find it odd people say pvp is killing the RPG aspect when most of the older mmorpg games had pvp in them in some shape or form. Perhaps it is a case that having to balance pvp around instanced arenas in pvp games is what is causing the problem.
Well (a) most RPGs didn't have PVP in them, and (b) a lot of progression (ie a lot of RPG) harms PVP integrity (it makes winning PVP about non-skill factors like playtime.)
Well (a) I gather we are speaking in term of mmorpgs. I don't recall anyone complaining about the lack of rpg in Ultima Online, SWG, EQ and the likes. (b) Balance is far more of an issue in class based games in which players compete in instances looking for a fair fight. It is far less of an issue in skill based (meaning skills not classes as opposed to twitch) open world games. Oddly enough some can get over the fact that there will be some rpg aspects to their pvp in mmorpg games....
People constantly and only looking for completely fair, team based pvp in which all classes are balanced is part of what the whole 'balance issue' is about and is what is fking up the rpg aspect. If people stuck to pvp centric games for their team based instance obsession and left it to open world and open skill/not class systems in mmos and didn't cry every time they got ganked it wouldn't be a problem would it.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
I hearken back to the MUD days, and beyond. A lot of them, even most, were purely PVE. And pretty playable, I logged seven years on one of them.
But given the advent of the Console Gamers, I'm not sure it's profitable to run such a concept any more. A substantial proportion of the current player base grew up playing Shooters; PVP is a natural selling point.
More importantly, you're removing one of the only two possible endgame solutions discovered to date--what to do with capped players to keep them from getting bored and wandering off? Answer: Raid or PVP.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I definitely would. I think many of the sandboxing full-loot PvP types tend to forget that many of us gamers are getting older and now game with our gf's or spouses. And while I don't want to generalize female gamers, I do have to say that most of them don't seem to enjoy open world PvP.
Getting ganked is not so fun, and it can completely shut down a woman's desire to play a game. I usually play with older people (late 20's/30's) which is more and more becoming the average age of gamers and in my experience the gf's and wives have reacted badly to unwanted PvP, and often stay away from it even in BG form.
My own gf broke down crying because she got tricked into getting pvp flagged during a duel and then ganked repeatedly by a 5 man group. She stopped playing for a week before wanting to come back. My old guild leader's gf got ganked somehow one day and she got pissed off and quit for a few days too.
Again, I don't want to say this is how all female gamers are, but in my personal experience, females tend to keep their distance from PvP (esp open world PvP).
And like others have said, PvP balance has really screwed up mmo enjoyment in general. PvPers cry about any perceived advantage someone else might have, and they never stop crying, they just change who they're piling on.
I play different genres other than MMO for PVP. I can't stand gear + levels difference of MMO PVP, and for PVP in a game to be fun to me it needs to be purely player skill-based.
Little forum boys with their polished cyber toys: whine whine, boo-hoo, talk talk.
I play different genres other than MMO for PVP. I can't stand gear + levels difference of MMO PVP, and for PVP in a game to be fun to me it needs to be purely player skill-based.
Yes, that's the other argument that I forgot to mention. For me, the core feature of an MMO is seeing yourself gradually grow much more powerful over time. And that conflicts directly with an expectation that I have of PvP games: contests of skill (and luck) only, with each player or team having the same amount of power.
The reason I ask is because I think pvp is slowly killing off the RPG factor in the MMORPG because every class needs to be built the same and be balanced for pvp. There is very little variation between what one class can do and another cannot.
I agree with you the RPG part but pvp is not the solely to blame for this. In most of the tank-healer-dps games , due to lack of tanks or healers / specific needs of dungeons / to make classes more useful in the parties, developers eventually decides to give most of the classes same type of skills, so every healing class has HoTs, AOE heals, most dps has some type of crowd control etc. So Pve mechanics are also contributes to lack of uniqueness in class design problems. That being said I wouldn't mind playing pve only games, constant nerf/buff cycles for the balance of pvp really sucks .
Whether a game has PvP or not is pretty far down on my priority list. When there's a game with good depth, nice complexity, developed lore, good crafting and skill system I'll probably play it, no matter whether there's PvP or not. (Faction PvP ala DAoC preferred.)
I maintain this List of Sandbox MMORPGs. Please post or send PM for corrections and suggestions.
Absolutely. I never pvp. To me it always seems aimless, like you're never really progressing.
I do think the OP has a valuable point. Almost every MMO has both PvE and PvP and while it's fine to balance the classes for PvP, such balance should not screw over PvE. PvE needs to have very different classes, and developers should not be trying to make them balanced for the PvE part of the game.
The only way I can see this done right is if the PvP version of a class is quite different from the PvE one; having different strengths and maybe even abilities.
Comments
I already do.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Yes i would. Just for the enjoyment of hearing the word "pwned" or 'raped" significantly less.
You will always have the problem of PvP and PvE rulesets creating conflicts in the design of the game. What works for PvP balance tends to make PvE problematic, and vice versa.
WoW is a PvE game with PvP bolted on, and it shows, badly, in a lot of ways.
I PvP on occasion, but I'm mostly there for the PvE. So, yes, I'd play a PvE only game. In fact, when I fire up a single player game, that's what I'm doing.
CH, Jedi, Commando, Smuggler, BH, Scout, Doctor, Chef, BE...yeah, lots of SWG time invested.
Once a denizen of Ahazi
Always.
Nope. But I can see why some would.
Although I do find it odd people say pvp is killing the RPG aspect when most of the older mmorpg games had pvp in them in some shape or form. Perhaps it is a case that having to balance pvp classes around instanced arenas is what is causing the problem.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Yes, please.
Yes.
I hate PvP in MMORPGs, it's 99% of the time crap and corrupted by levels and gear. I play FPS games for my PvP.
I also hate the angry dickhead culture that often goes hand in hand with it.
The need for PvP in every game comes from 2 places imo; 1. The need for cheap filler content to extend the life of the game at the smallest possible cost, and 2. the mistaken belief that because WoW was successful and had PvP that it was the existance of PvP alone that made it successful (a false reality imo).
Well (a) most RPGs didn't have PVP in them, and (b) a lot of progression (ie a lot of RPG) harms PVP integrity (it makes winning PVP about non-skill factors like playtime.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
PvP and PvE design frequently conflict with each other.
So seperating them is probably a good idea, otherwise you have PvE balance suffering when the devs try to balance PvP and vice versa.
I think players really want variety and I think you can create variety with less antagonistic mechanics, like racing or gambling or something.
By having a PvE only game you may even have the opportunity to create better PvE content than you could otherwise have.
All men think they're fascinating. In my case, it's justified
Well (a) I gather we are speaking in term of mmorpgs. I don't recall anyone complaining about the lack of rpg in Ultima Online, SWG, EQ and the likes. (b) Balance is far more of an issue in class based games in which players compete in instances looking for a fair fight. It is far less of an issue in skill based (meaning skills not classes as opposed to twitch) open world games. Oddly enough some can get over the fact that there will be some rpg aspects to their pvp in mmorpg games....
People constantly and only looking for completely fair, team based pvp in which all classes are balanced is part of what the whole 'balance issue' is about and is what is fking up the rpg aspect. If people stuck to pvp centric games for their team based instance obsession and left it to open world and open skill/not class systems in mmos and didn't cry every time they got ganked it wouldn't be a problem would it.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
I hearken back to the MUD days, and beyond. A lot of them, even most, were purely PVE. And pretty playable, I logged seven years on one of them.
But given the advent of the Console Gamers, I'm not sure it's profitable to run such a concept any more. A substantial proportion of the current player base grew up playing Shooters; PVP is a natural selling point.
More importantly, you're removing one of the only two possible endgame solutions discovered to date--what to do with capped players to keep them from getting bored and wandering off? Answer: Raid or PVP.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I definitely would. I think many of the sandboxing full-loot PvP types tend to forget that many of us gamers are getting older and now game with our gf's or spouses. And while I don't want to generalize female gamers, I do have to say that most of them don't seem to enjoy open world PvP.
Getting ganked is not so fun, and it can completely shut down a woman's desire to play a game. I usually play with older people (late 20's/30's) which is more and more becoming the average age of gamers and in my experience the gf's and wives have reacted badly to unwanted PvP, and often stay away from it even in BG form.
My own gf broke down crying because she got tricked into getting pvp flagged during a duel and then ganked repeatedly by a 5 man group. She stopped playing for a week before wanting to come back. My old guild leader's gf got ganked somehow one day and she got pissed off and quit for a few days too.
Again, I don't want to say this is how all female gamers are, but in my personal experience, females tend to keep their distance from PvP (esp open world PvP).
And like others have said, PvP balance has really screwed up mmo enjoyment in general. PvPers cry about any perceived advantage someone else might have, and they never stop crying, they just change who they're piling on.
I play different genres other than MMO for PVP. I can't stand gear + levels difference of MMO PVP, and for PVP in a game to be fun to me it needs to be purely player skill-based.
Little forum boys with their polished cyber toys: whine whine, boo-hoo, talk talk.
I hate PvP so yes, that's all I play, or if the game I play has PvP, I entirely ignore it.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Yes, PVP can take a hike.
I think in the end MMOs hurt themselves more by trying to appeal everybody instead of niching.
If a game is built around PVP, then it is what it is.
If it is not, all PVP does is cause problems.
i ignore pvp
so yes bring on the pve!
Played: MCO - EQ/EQ2 - WoW - VG - WAR - AoC - LoTRO - DDO - GW/GW2 - Eve - Rift - FE - TSW - TSO - WS - ESO - AA - BD
Playing: Sims 3 & 4, Diablo3 and PoE
Waiting on: Lost Ark
Who's going to make a Cyberpunk MMO?
I would and I have: DDO. Nothing wrong with it.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Yes, that's the other argument that I forgot to mention. For me, the core feature of an MMO is seeing yourself gradually grow much more powerful over time. And that conflicts directly with an expectation that I have of PvP games: contests of skill (and luck) only, with each player or team having the same amount of power.
That's pretty much how I play already. PVP doesn't bother me as long as I'm not forced into it.
It's not about fighting, it's about balance. It's not about enlightenment, it's about balance. It's not about balance.
Yes, most definitely. Its one of the reasons I have returned to Middle Earth in LOTRO.
yes
I agree with you the RPG part but pvp is not the solely to blame for this. In most of the tank-healer-dps games , due to lack of tanks or healers / specific needs of dungeons / to make classes more useful in the parties, developers eventually decides to give most of the classes same type of skills, so every healing class has HoTs, AOE heals, most dps has some type of crowd control etc. So Pve mechanics are also contributes to lack of uniqueness in class design problems. That being said I wouldn't mind playing pve only games, constant nerf/buff cycles for the balance of pvp really sucks .
Sure I would play it.
Whether a game has PvP or not is pretty far down on my priority list. When there's a game with good depth, nice complexity, developed lore, good crafting and skill system I'll probably play it, no matter whether there's PvP or not. (Faction PvP ala DAoC preferred.)
I maintain this List of Sandbox MMORPGs. Please post or send PM for corrections and suggestions.
Absolutely. I never pvp. To me it always seems aimless, like you're never really progressing.
I do think the OP has a valuable point. Almost every MMO has both PvE and PvP and while it's fine to balance the classes for PvP, such balance should not screw over PvE. PvE needs to have very different classes, and developers should not be trying to make them balanced for the PvE part of the game.
The only way I can see this done right is if the PvP version of a class is quite different from the PvE one; having different strengths and maybe even abilities.
No..
I really enjoy PvP too much, but i will say, recently released games PvP haven't been too impressive..
Though i am looking forward to Prime ; )