Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Can PvE and PvP co-exist?
Maelwydd
Member Posts: 1,123
I have always had a problem with how PvE and PvP are combined in the MMO's I have played so far. Essentially the problem I have is that PvP is better when you have a FFA environment but that impacts greatly on those that want to just PvE. Usually the way to sort it out is to go the route of full blown FFA PvP, have a PvE game with instanced PvP or to simply have a full PvE game without PvP. I am not aware of any game that can combine them well with the exception perhaps of EVE but I still think that is a game many people who just do not like PvP will not play even if they can minimise the risk.
So my question is can a game have both at the same time so that both groups can enjoy the game at the same time?
I have been thinking it over and the closest I can come to with a system is to have a PvE game but where players can choose to enter into the PvP world. If you do not want to PvP you simply choose a role in the world that is effectively civilian and the PvP'ers cannot touch you (I know it will make the PvP'ers angry but stay with me a moment). Now the PvE'ers can have options available through PvE that might be riskier but could provide a greater profit, something like having normal caravans shipping trade goods between town where the PvP option is faster and more profitable but open to attack from PvP'ers. The player does not personally have to engage in any PvP but they can hire PvP'ers to provide escort to the caravan.
Further down the line, a player can choose to transition into a role that opens them up to PvP by becoming a criminal or the 'police'. Doing so would open the player up fully to the PvP part of the game of course but it is a choice they would have to make willingly.
There are also other aspects I think would work such as allowing people to set up their own governing laws (which allow for jails and further protection and punishment) and providing their own level of security. PvP'ers should fully accept the risk vs. reward dilemma but too often games provide the rewards without any real risk.
The problems I think would take place in such a scenario are the usual comments such as being annoyed they cannot kill non PvP'ers or not being fully FFA (it is but only against other likeminded PvP'ers but I can see that argument being used) or that players shouldn't get punished for PvP'ing etc. I have a system design I think covers a lot of these problems (doing a course in game design so this is part of my coursework) but wondered what peoples thoughts were about the main problems having a game with PvE (and PvP elements if they so wish) and FFA PvP (amongst PvP'ers)?
Having recently given AOW a look and seeing some of their ideas such as jail time, PvP'ers offline acting as NPC police etc...Has given me a lot of hope that eventually a system will be put together (hopefully mine:) ) that will allow for a more cohesive structure for a game.
Thoughts, ideas, problems?
Comments
Eve would be another.
Other games its pve first, pvp second like wow, swtor, rift, tsw
Or pvp first, pve second like planetside, war and darkfall
Full loot pvp will never coexist well with pve. People simply will not stand for losing all their items to griefers. The problem with full free for all pvp is that there is no harsh penalties for people who want to do nothing but grief other people. Even EVE online has a crappy penalty for griefing. Sure they come and blow up your ship, but with insurance and whatnot, the griefers lose very little to nothing at all. The devs have got to put in huge penalties for killing players. They have to make it really worth the risk or you will just have griefing running rampant. You really have to think about this. what does a level 50 get out of killing a level 10 person? Nothing at all. But thats what you get when you allow ffa pvp, griefer central.
I provided an example of this so called boundry, a choice the player makes to transition from being a normal civillian (PvE) into non civillian (PvP). Not sure why you think such a system wouldn't give the PvE'ers the exploration.story/character etc.. and the PvP'ers the competition but I am curious wht you think would actually stop it?
I am reluctant to give away specifics (as it is going to be my main submission to publishers) but the system doesn't include instances as all. It does include specific player controlled land area's (which are fully controllable by players so tehy determine how lawful/unlawful an area is) and it also includes PvE towns that will work sort of like starter zones in the fact that they are locked down in what can or cannot be done. Essentially PvP'ers choose to 'opt in' to PvP (I guess the best comparrison would be like how it was done in SWG) but doing so has it's own dangers, none more so then being open to certain system mechanics (for both good and bad types) to allow PvP into certain area's. But if someone is not 'opted in' then they are unable to get involved in the PvP.
I personally think I have a good system in place that gives both parties what they want, including some of the things you categorised, but also without having the systems in place that can frustrate me in other games.
The main problem I am trying to overcome is the idea that some PvP'ers seem to have that they should be allowed to force their PvP onto others. IMO that is a selfish opinion as I think with a system in place to allow PvP'ers and PvE'ers to exist side by side, sharing the same world but with limited ability to affect others, a good balance can be had.
And if you want to define people, I am what you might call a nerd-jock, both in the real world and in the gaming world. I certainly did find it hard to combine my love of roleplaying and computers with playing Rugby for the town, I just made sure I mixed with care. I don't see why the same cannot apply in a game. Of course, there are those hardnosed types that will refuse to play because the game is not too hardcore but I am thinking about the other 95% of PvP'ers here.
I guess the main problem i have is, as in most new games, getting people to remove their blinkers and actually sit back and think about things for a bit. Everyone seems to give kneejerk reactions without actually thinking about what is actually being presented or asked.
More opinions welcome though.
Bullshit to your whole post, I like a mix of both. Your need to break down people into classes leads me to think your a middle school kid.
To OP:
If a game can supply both and do them both well it will last me longer than a game with just one. DAoC did this great, I'am looking forward to TESO, as they are doing it in a way that appeals to both. There are games that focus on just one, but I would much rather have a the choice to do both. I really don't count 3v3 5v5 small instance battlegrounds as PvP they are more like duels and would much rather see it on a large scale. GW2 did it but failed to hold me because it was extremely boring fighting mirrors of myself while zerging around mirrored borderlands.
Well, an option for PvP is that there are actually 2 levels to it. There is the general PvP side of things, and while not instanced PvP the idea and way it works is similar. For example, a group of bad guys can, in the right situation, be challenged to a fight by a group of good guys. Both have chosen to advance into the PvP aspect of the game so and are available to be engaged in PvP anywhere except certain limited zones (some dependednt on player activities.
There is also an additional level where the really hardcore PvP can find a home. Call it an advanced class if you will. IF chosen certain options open up, one being full loot, the other being, in certain situations, the option to actually fight to permadeath. It isn't an option immediately available and requires both parties to reach a certain status.
All the time this side of PvP is taking place, the PvE'er is essentially a fly on the wall. They can be affected by what the PvP'ers do to some extent but the effects are PvE based. Without revealing too much, an example would be, a PvP'er might steal items from a PvE location that can affect the PvE'er but the PvE'er can set-up PvE defences to cmbat this happenning ranging from PvE to PvE options.
As for penalties, including what is mentioned above about what can happen to PvP'ers who fight, PvE'ers can affect the gameplay of a PvP'er as much as the PvP'er can in reverse. Think the system in AOW where they have introduced jail time and prison and offline guards...it can be done and that is what has prompted me to post really.
Knowing waht people think will be the obsticles is the first step to finding a middle point where things can be designed to balance things.
Yes. The way to do it is to target your audience and not create false expectations.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I have to disagree. The orignal question was can they co-exist. To me that means pvp and pve in the same areas, no restrictions and no instances of any type. In that context, they will never co-exist because of griefers. You have them in every single pvp game out there. They live to do nothing more then to ruin your gaming fun and try to make you quit. The only possible way that the 2 sides can ever co-exist is they system can not allow griefing, period. There has to be huge penalties that would stop this right up front. PVP shouldn't (in my opinion) be about who has a better ping or better macro. PVP should be there for those rare times that you feel its worth the price to kill the person for them being an ass. We are not talking fps games here, we are talking about MMO's. Player killing should be a rare thing, not a sport. Now it is somewhat different when you are talking faction vs faction or RvRvR or stuff like that, because those usually have dedicated grounds for fighting. But in a regular MMO world, PVP can only exist when the penalties are extremely harsh enough to make player killings rare. To many PVP'rs mindsets are on nothing more then either killing a lowbie for fun, or to just grief people into quitting. Every open world pvp game that I have played, this has been the case. Sure you do have those that are "honerable" but they aer completely outnumbered by the jerk pvp'rs. They simply can not co-exist as mmo standards are today.
Well that is a given (for me at least) but have you experiences of things that didn't work for you?
An example I have is a game like Mortal Online where there was just no downside to going red in PvP. There was not balance at all. The PvP option was to fight back, but if you were just a PvE'er (or at least wanted to be) then you really didn't have anything to use to defend yourself. Sure some might say surround yourself with PvP'ers but that isn't really balanced. PvP as the only option and there has to be other options.
Some games used no PvP zones (which I dislike for the most part but they do serve a purpose), some put in level restrictions (I happen to have a leveless system) some have deterents. EVE has security levels for each area that the PvE side of the game provides which is close but I think it can be brought closer.
Yeah the grieing thing is my biggest headache really. Unfortunately I don't think you can have open FFA and expect people to respect it as a game (i.e. try and play to the point of the game rather then just playing the game if you get that) so you would have to resourt to punishments. And when i have discussed that type of thing in the past I always got frustrated because on one side you have the "I want total freedom to do waht I want, kill another player if I want" but when you offer "ok so I should ahve total freedom to lock you up for your crimes" the PvP side always said they had a problem with it.
The biggest problem I see is the mentality of some that do not want a consequence for their actions "because it is just a game. Personally, with my design I am saying "you have an option, if you want to PvP you accept the rewards AND the risks. get caught, pay the penalty. You want really hardcore PvP then here is full loot and permadeath(for some) but the people you will be pitted against are also people who want full loot and permadeath. If you can't handle the risk then don't take that last step or at the very least this isn't your game".
Bed now, will pick up again tomorrow.
And that is why it can never co-exist. The pvp'rs will not accept harsh punishments for doing what they feel they should be able to do at no consequences to them. Its one of the reason I don't play full loot pvp type games. Lots of people talk about how great eves system is and I hate to tell you, its not that great. The punishment never fits the crime. When they kill someone in high sec space, they get their ships blown up by the cops and they go to the insurance company and say, oh look, my ship was destroyed, please hand me a check. Now that is some punishment right there for ya. How about instead, you attacked another player in protected space, you lose your ship, you lose your insurance, and you have to stay podded for 48 hours. Now, is it worth it? maybe if they are going after something worth a billion+ in isk. But if it does get destroyed, now they are out for 2 days and didnt get squat for it. That is the kind of punishment that we are talking about to make pvp viable in a pve game. There has to be a dang good reason to do what you do instead of, because I want to! There are plenty of FPS games for that crap.
I'm interested in your thoughts on how you would improve EVE's system. To be clear, I'm not asking for the sake of trying to prove you wrong or to say EVE's system (or any system, for that matter) is perfect, rather I'm genuinely interested in what changes you would make and how you feel those changes would not only impact gameplay but also impact the economic system of the game.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I don't think it needs to be that doom and gloom but I do agree with you about punishments in games and your example of EVE is exactly the kind of thing I hope to resolve. Now I would say that in low sec space you could get away with anything but in high sec the punishments should be greater as you say. I see it as having layers to the PvP and each person chooses the layer they want. Want no PvP at all - stay a civillian. Want a little PvP - choose a class (think job) that gives you oppertunities when you want. Want FFA PvP but without full loot - choose one of these dangerous career paths. Want to become famous - choose to be this class and risk losing it all.
I think the point I am trying to make is that I think the problem I see is the games with PvE and PvP have just thrown it all in the pot and hoped for the best. I think that you should have them all in the game but make it so there are defined ways to play the game you want with area's of cross over. Have all the PvE'ers who dislike PvP do their thing and they interact with those that enjoy a little PvP through the game system, not by actually participating in PvP. And keep doing that right up to the FFA full loot permadeath level. Allow players to choose how much PvP they want and allow the PvE side of things to affect the PvP as much as it does in reverse.
I mentioned AOW previously because I think it is a step in the right direction. For example the kidnap system allows the PvP'er to do their thing to a PvE'er but the PvE'er has a PvE system to engage in to provide a deterent. I also think it will be quite refreshing, in an MMO, to put all the 'wolves' into the same arena and so they don't have any 'sheep' to pick on, if they want to fight let them fight other people who want to fight.
But this really is the biggest challenge, how to design a system that gives everyone freedom to play the game they want without that same system preventing someone else playing the game they want.
Not sure I know EVE's system well enough but in essence how I understand it there are different security levels and the higher the security level the move PvE influence you have to protect people. It is a good system but open to abuse. As someone mentioned above, in high sec the deternent isn't really a deterent. Why whould an insurance company pay you if you break the law? I would change it so that in High sec you do not get insurance if you are the aggressor and you are not podded back to the nearest place but to a regional detention centre where you are locked up for a bit. Jail time in an MMO make sense so i think complaints about it stopping people doing waht they want is redundent. If you don't want to lose your ship, get no insurance and do jail time don't attack people in high sec space.
At least that is how I would hve things in EVE. As for how it would impact the games ecconomy I don't know the system well enough. In essence though I am sure it would have an effect but the thing that is changing is the desireability to attack people in high sec space without fear of any real punishment. If there was a good punishment (and remember low sec space is still brutal) in high sec then only people that really have a good reason to do so will attack there and PvP will move more to low sec space, where it should be. I would expect resources to low sec space area's to become more valuable and resources in high sec to lose value. But again, that is what I would expect anyway. The value of an item is more directly related to demand and availablilty then simply who has the cheepest price.
Without really looking in detail at how EVE works though it would be hard to gauge but the basis for any system starts in the real world so your best model for such a system is what would happen here.
Well the people are your audience so making the basis of your design the fact people are the problem is not a good business plan. You really are not providing anything to this discussion.
Of course people might cheat, you put in systems to prevent it, check your code, do regular checks on data from the game. Of course some people might want to ruin the experience of others, you put in robust systems without any (hopefully) loopholes and if any are found yo patch them out.
Of course one way to handel things is to seperate both parties and build a big wall between them. I think though that that is part of the reason we have such a problem, there has been no bridge built between both sides to get them to a common ground. I think I have a system that can provide such a bridge. Perfect? Not at all. But it is IMO a step in the right direction.
CONCORD currently does not pay insurance for people who suicide gank in High Sec. I agree, it would seem odd that an insurance and policing bureau would pay to replace your ship that they just blew up because you were breaking the law.
Jail seems to be a road some MMOs are now travelling. Ashen Empires/Dransik had it ages ago but no one else really seemed to pick up on it unitl recently. Wizardry Online, ArcheAge and Age of Wushu are three titles that include it.
I'm eager to see what lessons are learned or changes are made as a result of the various jail systems.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
didnt daoc have a whole seperate zone just for rvr?
only accassable via gothies every 15 mins (port)?
not talking about pvp servers here. that was just a feature added later actually ^^
so, they actually DID seperate em both, no? :>
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
Hard borders is what we saw from this years releases, swtor, tsw, & gw2. Let's be honest here, these three games have had very poor retintion.