Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Modern MMO PvP games can't even fill a Call of Duty server.
SkillCosby
Member Posts: 684
MMO: MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER ONLINE
In today's MMOs, why are we being fed this embarrassing 6v6 or 8v8 instanced garbage? What is "massive" about it? You can find more people in a single game of Call of Duty.
The lack of innovation is disturbing. Any game that produces such cheap lack-luster traits should go down, as it's horrid for the genre in whole.
Comments
well by that logic modern Call of Duty Games can't even fill more than 1/4th of the original Call of Duty on PC's games
64 player TDM needs to make a comeback
I used to play Return to Castle Wolfenstein on a custom map (Splash Damage's Market Garden) on the same server night after night, playing with 63 other people; MMO PvP is just a bit sad by comparison.
I miss the days when the game devs would allow and entice users to mod their games.
Battlefield 1942: Fans created some great mods, e.g., Star Wars Galactic Conquest, Desert Combat, etc. 64-man servers. Drool. Some were all space flight servers, too. It was like experienced the Battle of Tanaab or the Deathstar showdown with movie-like speed starships. So fun.
That's why I'm looking forward to Planetside 2 for my PvP fix.
Don't play instanced MMOs, play ones with open world pvp:
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=12137836
Permanent killboards are a plus as well.
BF3 for the PC has 64 player TDM. (dunno if there is an actual TDM but 64 player battles none the less)
But yes i agree with the OP, i play my mmos for the PVE nowa days. If i need my PVP fix i just head over to Counter Strike or Battlefield 3
C
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BF5QmLXp4LE
Unfortunately it has no Lightsabers. I would play that for PvP.
For rather massive PvP (128vs128) one could try MAG, if that's still played by anyone that is.
It's kind of sad that this one hasn't been more successful. What killed it for me were the lack of maps and it being a console shooter. Console shooters just aren't my cup of tea.
Some things work better in smaller numbers. For example, in soccer you've got 11 players on the field per team. This works well if the field is of normal size. You can't put 50 people on the field per team using the same sized field, it just doesn't work.
For game types like capture the flag, you really can't have a ton of people on the field at once. For King of the Hill/Domination type games, you can always grow it as long as the size of the map also grows. What's sorely lacking is attack/defend scenarios, something like Wintergrasp and Alterac Valley in World of Warcraft. World of Warcraft in particular is missing a huge opportunity in having instanced city raids. If you could queue up for a Stormwind attack/defend map for example, they can have special things in it outside of the regular world like cannons taking down the walls, breaking down the city/district gates, setting the ships on the harbor on fire, desecrating the chapel, poisoning the canals, setting the prisoners in the stockades free, yadda yadda yadda that would make attacking/defending more interesting.
It's obvious that world PvP isn't that popular, there's not much of a point to actually raid a city(that could be the entire problem right there). The other issue with city raiding is that the time it takes to form up a large enough group for it is a pain in the rear end if you really want a massive-scale fight. Instancing this eliminates the effort put into forming a group, you get rewards for it, and it's in a controlled environment that makes things fair for both sides.
I would totally PvP my ass off if each of the major factioned cities had their own battleground complete with multiple objectives like the ones mentioned above for Stormwind.
Now Playing: Mission Against Terror, Battlefield 3, Skyrim, Dark Souls, League of Legends, Minecraft, and the piano. =3
Visit my fail Youtube channel(don't leave me nasty messages!): http://www.youtube.com/user/Mirii471
Truly "massive" open world PvP would require significantly less flashy graphics.
All the PvE fans and graphics whores would cry blaphemy in a heart beat if "their game" was "dumbed down" visually in order to facilitate more massive scale open world PvP.
Personally, I'd love to see a game with stylized, "lower end" graphics that still looked "good" that supported truly massive open world PvE and PvP.
This. Modern graphics fuck over content.
The only reason Battlegrounds are popular are because of the reward incentives. If those are removed, their population would GREATLY drop.
World PvP is spat upon, as it requires innovation to make it work right - something that costs money and ideas - a risk that these devs refuse to take.
Massive is not necessarily better. Graphics obviously has an impact on the enjoyment of the game.
To me, a 1000 x 1000 fight in sticky figure in 1995 graphics is way LESS fun than 30 vs 30 fight with modern graphics and gameplay mechanics.
i duno, WoW made Wintergrasp work pretty damn well, and that one had hundres of people fighting in the same spot. sure, Wotlk was crap but, Wintergrasp was friken awesome.
that island in Cata (cant remember the name) never really cought on, but by then (with paid server transfers), server population was insanely lopsided that for the larger faction it was besically impossible to even get in. i actually got so fed up with never getting the que that i faction transfered just to be able to get in. after that que were intant pop. it didn't help that Cata was so bland and boring.
If I was an Indie software developer, I'd take the "stick-man PvP game" idea & run with it, I think it could work.
Wintergrasp was fail, the only reason anyone did it was for easy honor or easy loot. Making "World PvP" a scheduled event and applying a player cap on it is not world PvP. Blizzard is utterly terrible at intentional WPvP design, from LOLSAND, BC/EPL pointless tower capping, and Halaa, it has all been fail.
World PvP should be sporadic and unscheduled.
Porn has voice acting, who doesn't skip it?
Simple graphics, with style, have always been popular. In fact, generally more popular then high-end-hardware-requiring graphics.
There's a place for everything, in my opinion. I enjoy large scale battles quite a bit, but it doesn't mean I can't enjoy the smaller fights found in instanced PvP or spread out in the game world. My hope is that my current MMO of choice (whatever it is) offers both options and that they are equally compelling.
While I agree with you that there is a place for both, most games these days tend to focus on instanced pvp and have a poorly implemented design of the alternative (In my opinion of course). There are other non-mmo RPG games that do this better.
Also, a PvP label on a game server really doesn't mean anything anymore and things such as FFA PvP servers are pretty much overlooked by AAA game developers when the community outcry for such a thing has been going on for years.
Porn has voice acting, who doesn't skip it?
Yeah. Planetside 2 and Guild Wars 2 will hopefully wet my MMO PvP appetite.
So long as incentive doesn't tip the balance, which it normally does in favor of BGs.
I would go so far as to have my avatar reskinned into something very simple and basic, standardized "uniforms" if you will that would be very easy on the graphics processor, at least for the big fights.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Yes, I have found the scenario pvp to be lacking, thats why I prefer open world pvp, but people don't seem to be able to make it worth a damn either, for the most part...Some scenario stuff I have done in the past has been done well, but it usually is about 3 different themes done over and over...
I am hoping that GW2 does it's WvWvW right, and makes it fun.
Thats why I always say, if you want arena stuff, go play a FPS...They do it better.
Edit: Yeah they usually favor scenarios for rewards, and obsolete open world pvp even more than their poor design does...Also open world pvp and a super tight railed game are horrible matches....You have low level rats running through a tight maze, that other people know exactly where they will be all the time....Its like shooting fish in a barrel...Their is no more hunt for the most part.
Wow...I've always had a hard time explaining what is so fun about world pvp and you nailed it with just one word.
Hunt
AAA MMOs these days are missing just this, the hunt, and it's very hard to implement this in an instanced zone with a small player and map size limit.
Porn has voice acting, who doesn't skip it?
nah .. not for me. You need at least good art direction and few indie developers can pay for that.