I dont like the idea of mixing pve games with pvp at all whatsoever. They can be the same game on two completely different servers but together the idea is horse poop.
Only the sociopaths want to pve in their pvp, they are 100% just looking for easy targets to bully, nothing more
I would say that I enjoy both pvp and pve together and I only ever pk the "annoying people" or the "pk'ers" and you would be hard pressed to prove I was a sociopath.
I think you are basing your judgment off of stereotypes and essentially the louder, more obnoxious people who typify this behavior.
well i dont think I am taking the full context into account.
I mean what does a non-pve pvp server look like? well now that I think about it I dont think there is one...ever..anywhere..all of them have some element of pve to them, I would think anyway
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Part of the problem with all of the issues in MMOs these days is that the genre has stagnated so long and become so narrow that nobody even thinks beyond the existing scope.
DAoC was one of the worst balanced games I ever played. I had many characters two of which were berserker and shadowblade. Before the left axe (their main weapon skill) nerf, they were both insanely powerful; after the nerf they were completely unplayable. Did any of that even really matter? People still played the game and loved it.
Albion was fundamentally flawed by design in that they had too many classes and the important skill trees were spread too thin across them. I believe it was the most populated realm, certainly it wasn't underpopulated.
As long as you don't balance combat around arenas or duels does it even matter?
Also, if you are a PvE only player and your character gets nerfed because PvP brought an imbalance to light why are you mad about it? The only reason I would be mad is if the nerf broke my character (like the LA nerf). I mean, I actually want characters to be balanced in PvP and PvE.
The problem isn't the balancing; the problem is that players (most often PvE players in my experience) flip out any time their character is nerfed and go on a crusade against whatever they perceive as the cause (usually PvPers). The don't actually care that their character was broken or overpowered before or even if still is, they just care that it's worse than yesterday and it's somebody's fault.
I can't believe that we've reached the point where people actually want mutually exclusive PvE and PvP games just so they don't have to worry about their class getting nerfed. What pray tell are you going to do when your class gets nerfed because some .1% raiding guild does something broken?
Most games already use raiders at the metric for the rest of the gaming population and we non-raiders don't appreciate that either. I think most people who are against mixed PvE / PvP , do so because they don't want the hassle of dealing with each other. It's the nerfs / balancing that is the straw that breaks the camel's back so to speak.
Most games already use raiders at the metric for the rest of the gaming population and we non-raiders don't appreciate that either. I think most people who are against mixed PvE / PvP , do so because they don't want the hassle of dealing with each other. It's the nerfs / balancing that is the straw that breaks the camel's back so to speak.
I need some help.
I know what a PvE only game looks like but i dont think i have ever seen a PvP only game, so what do we mean in that context now that I have had time to think on it
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Mixing PVP and PVE has nothing to do with class balancing...
All the issue with mixing PVP and PVE stem from simple, obvious fact that they are 2 different play styles. This often results in major problem:
One being required in order to perform the other - typically gear or levels being obtainable via PVE so you can do PVP or other opposite PVE tied to PVP active areas.
The other, very closely related, issue are rewards. Both play styles sports very different incentives that are merely mutually exclusive - PVP players want "equal playing ground" but PVE players love the opposite, they love progression and new shiny,inhritedly creating disparity between players. How to create incentives for PVE players without affecting PVP players? That is hard nut to crack.
I would have to disagree about the nothing to do with class balancing part because that is my major grip as well as many people I have played with over the years. We get a class the way we like it get our rotations down and then bam all the sudden they change everything so that the PVP side is more balanced.
I dont like the idea of mixing pve games with pvp at all whatsoever. They can be the same game on two completely different servers but together the idea is horse poop.
Only the sociopaths want to pve in their pvp, they are 100% just looking for easy targets to bully, nothing more
I would say that I enjoy both pvp and pve together and I only ever pk the "annoying people" or the "pk'ers" and you would be hard pressed to prove I was a sociopath.
I think you are basing your judgment off of stereotypes and essentially the louder, more obnoxious people who typify this behavior.
well i dont think I am taking the full context into account.
I mean what does a non-pve pvp server look like? well now that I think about it I dont think there is one...ever..anywhere..all of them have some element of pve to them, I would think anyway
I kind of think you are correct.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Part of the problem with all of the issues in MMOs these days is that the genre has stagnated so long and become so narrow that nobody even thinks beyond the existing scope.
DAoC was one of the worst balanced games I ever played. I had many characters two of which were berserker and shadowblade. Before the left axe (their main weapon skill) nerf, they were both insanely powerful; after the nerf they were completely unplayable. Did any of that even really matter? People still played the game and loved it.
Albion was fundamentally flawed by design in that they had too many classes and the important skill trees were spread too thin across them. I believe it was the most populated realm, certainly it wasn't underpopulated.
As long as you don't balance combat around arenas or duels does it even matter?
Also, if you are a PvE only player and your character gets nerfed because PvP brought an imbalance to light why are you mad about it? The only reason I would be mad is if the nerf broke my character (like the LA nerf). I mean, I actually want characters to be balanced in PvP and PvE.
The problem isn't the balancing; the problem is that players (most often PvE players in my experience) flip out any time their character is nerfed and go on a crusade against whatever they perceive as the cause (usually PvPers). The don't actually care that their character was broken or overpowered before or even if still is, they just care that it's worse than yesterday and it's somebody's fault.
I can't believe that we've reached the point where people actually want mutually exclusive PvE and PvP games just so they don't have to worry about their class getting nerfed. What pray tell are you going to do when your class gets nerfed because some .1% raiding guild does something broken?
A big part of the unbalanced classes is so you can have a straight up support role that does not heal or dps or tank. Now think about that a person that doesn't do dps or heal, you are not going to PVP with that class. In a straight up non pvp game you could have major glass cannons that if caught get one shot, tanks that could take damage all day long but not really do much damage, support classes that do nothing but buff or negate things. Look at early games like EQ for examples of support classes if you want.
I get mad when they make changes to my playstyle because someone else thought that it should be changed for PVP purposes yet. If I am fighting AI mobs why do I need a balanced class. They wouldn't nerf and buff classes the way they do now if there wasn't PVP in a PVE game or vice versa.
Personally I think that PvP is fundamentally flawed in MMORPG's, expecially ones that are class based. Those are the ones that all stem from table top games like D&D which was at it's core a co-op game. Balance is an issue between classes and anyone saying otherwise is deluding themselves.
Levels add to the problem, making things even more unbalanced and then you get gear with rediculous stats thrown into the mix.
You tend to find better PvP in MMO's that are skill based, no levels and don't have drastically vertical gear progression. Yeah, loads of those around, right? About as common as rocking horse shite.
FPS games, on the other hand, are perfect for PvP.
I cut out the rant part but I believe you have hit the nail on the head this is kind of where I am at with my thoughts to. But I did some D&D back in my younger years and there were major imbalances and that was part of what made a class special to me at least.
I would have to disagree about the nothing to do with class balancing part because that is my major grip as well as many people I have played with over the years. We get a class the way we like it get our rotations down and then bam all the sudden they change everything so that the PVP side is more balanced.
I do agree with the second point about the gear.
There would be some merit in there if there was no balancing ever done because of PVE, which is not true.
The point is, balancing is never ending process, does not really matter "why"...
I think what bothers me is that every PVE only game gets pressured to add PVP...There are literally tons of MMOs with PVP in it but very few that are pure PVE
Personally I think that PvP is fundamentally flawed in MMORPG's, expecially ones that are class based. Those are the ones that all stem from table top games like D&D which was at it's core a co-op game. Balance is an issue between classes and anyone saying otherwise is deluding themselves.
Levels add to the problem, making things even more unbalanced and then you get gear with rediculous stats thrown into the mix.
You tend to find better PvP in MMO's that are skill based, no levels and don't have drastically vertical gear progression. Yeah, loads of those around, right? About as common as rocking horse shite.
FPS games, on the other hand, are perfect for PvP.
I cut out the rant part but I believe you have hit the nail on the head this is kind of where I am at with my thoughts to. But I did some D&D back in my younger years and there were major imbalances and that was part of what made a class special to me at least.
Case in point, look at DDO. Classes are not balanced when it comes to duels and whine all you want, they never will be. The devs are quite clear about that. The imbalance in duels is irrelevant because they work in PvE, which is what the game is all about.
I think what bothers me is that every PVE only game gets pressured to add PVP...There are literally tons of MMOs with PVP in it but very few that are pure PVE
As someone mentioned earlier in the thread it's ridiculous to contrast MMORPGs with PVP against MMORPGs that are PVE-only.
The fair comparison would be PVP-only to PVE-only. Are there examples of any of either? Not that I know of, but I'd give better odds to a PVE-only MMORPG existing than a PVP-only one.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I think what bothers me is that every PVE only game gets pressured to add PVP...There are literally tons of MMOs with PVP in it but very few that are pure PVE
As someone mentioned earlier in the thread it's ridiculous to contrast MMORPGs with PVP against MMORPGs that are PVE-only.
The fair comparison would be PVP-only to PVE-only. Are there examples of any of either? Not that I know of, but I'd give better odds to a PVE-only MMORPG existing than a PVP-only one.
People don't really play MMOs to PvP only, unless you are talking about the few people in games like WoW/BDO who arena only. There aren't many of those in my experience though.
Most people who only want to PvP play MOBAs or FPS or the like, they don't play MMOs and only PVP.
I hate to play the 'vocal minority' card here (since it gets played against groups I agree with quite often) but I think the majority of MMOers like some of both and the number of people wanting strictly one or the other is quite small. Either way developers cut out a large portion of their market if they develop strictly one way or the other.
People don't really play MMOs to PvP only, unless you are talking about the few people in games like WoW/BDO who arena only. There aren't many of those in my experience though.
Most people who only want to PvP play MOBAs or FPS or the like, they don't play MMOs and only PVP.
I hate to play the 'vocal minority' card here (since it gets played against groups I agree with quite often) but I think the majority of MMOers like some of both and the number of people wanting strictly one or the other is quite small. Either way developers cut out a large portion of their market if they develop strictly one way or the other.
Sure, and between my two posts those were basically the points I implied. (And I never implied there were a lot of players who only want PVP in MMORPGs. There are a lot more players who only want PVE than only want PVP, and as you point out the majority want some mix of both.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
OP, the future is mmorpgs who blend pvp and pve seemlessly in a virtual world balanced by risk and reward.
Mmorpgs that focus on pve are a thing of the past. It's all been done before for one, and for two it's not cost effect to try and maintain.
Here in the real world, the most successful MMORPGs haven't been games which "blend PVP and PVE seemlessly in a virtual world".
Instead, the most successful MMORPGs have largely focused on PVE, with a casual PVP component.
So going by what has been popular and what is popular, the future you're describing definitely isn't going to come to pass.
Your speaking as if everything has already been figured out. Time to just close the book and call it a wrap.
What's tried and true today doesn't always work tomorrow.
It doesn't matter what kind of industry you're in, every 10 to 20 years some things going to come along that will force you to re-think and re-tool. I'm personally going through for the third time in my industry.
What's tried and true today doesn't always work tomorrow.
yeh .. that is why MMOs are moving away from old ideas like persistent virtual worlds, and down-time.
Virtual worlds
It's been toyed with but hasn't been done yet on a meaningful scale.
One day someone will make a virtual world that will knock your socks off. Like a 1:1 scale gta styled earth. With 100's of thousands or maybe even millions playing at the same time in the same instance.
As I've said on this forum more times than I can count, PvE can work great with PvP. My favorite game of all time was EverQuest on a PvP server. The PvE was the continual source of meaningful conflict that I have found lacking from most PvP titles. In fact, I feel that if a game is not fun without PvP, it won't be fun with it either. Just to note, I feel that way having played every "PvP" title since UO.
Yes OP,you pretty much repeated the same words i have said for a long time,they cannot go together because PVE is forced into a pvp design. Class balancing does nothing for a game's pve nothing at all it only removes several ideas that can make PVE great.Now if yoru developer really doesn't have a clue to what it is doing,it won't matter either way,but at least on paper PVE does not belong with pvp.
I love BOTH PVe and pvp but i do not want them both in my game,i want my game to be the best it can be not half ass at both.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I mean what does a non-pve pvp server look like? well now that I think about it I dont think there is one...ever..anywhere..all of them have some element of pve to them, I would think anyway
Quake III: Arena, Unreal Tournament, etc...
Basically, it wouldn't be a MMORPG but a gigantic, quickly boring gankfest.
The problems I've seen over my long history in MMORGPS (i've been around since Meridian 59) has been in the overall handling of games with both systems in place for the majority of games. Mixing the two systems often leads to shall we say complications in game design. I'll bring up the points though...
The first "complication" we run into when mixing PVP with PVE is the entire balancing act that PVP ends up requiring. There have been games with numerous classes that were good in PVE game play only to be "balanced" (nerfed) for pvp and they became outright useless for PVE based content. The entire design structure of having to basically build around PVP balancing can and does often ruin class experiences in PVE based games and It is majorly sad when a class that is fun to play in PVE outright becomes useless due to trying to mix the two.
The solution to the first problem requires a bit of work to do, but there is little to no reason there cannot be a separate PVP skill set entirely OR no reason a skill cannot have both a pve and a pvp "stat" where it is the same skill, but hits differently, has a diff cd, does diff damage, hell maybe even diff effects...
Onto complication number two. Open World PVP (OWPVP)... Okay first let's get this out of the way OWPVP the way most game developers design it DOES NOT WORK. The simple reason being you cannot rely on the player base to be responsible enough to police itself anymore outside of a small subset of players that have been around long enough to actually want to do it. Games that autoflag you for PVP in any sort of zone where you can be attacked at any time are done badly period end of story unless that zone is particularly a PVP zone.
The best design if you are going to slap an open world PVP like element onto a game is a true flagging system + specific pvp areas. Star Wars Galaxies (which introduced to us the flagging system in the first place) had the design idea done right. You could flag for PVP and you could walk around constantly flagged if you wanted to and were seen as a real badass if you did. That PVP was consensual you made an active choice to toggle that flag out and put up with the fights it caused.
What we end up with in many PVE games that tack OWPVP onto them is a system that outflags you outside town and some arguing "You consent if you bought the game" and while that's a point there is also a point where people do actively seek out targets much weaker than them. Ganking becomes an outright issue in these games and there is often little to no penalty for it. There needs to be a real jail system in these games or systems that actually punish players that partake in non consensual PVP (ganking). Archeage did well with the jail system, but made it far to easily escapable (while you still had the debuff yeah..) you also had the fact that it was player driven being interesting, but not really practical.
I think there are many more issues in mmorpg design, but those are the two largest glaring ones about modern PVP in pve based games...
I mean what does a non-pve pvp server look like? well now that I think about it I dont think there is one...ever..anywhere..all of them have some element of pve to them, I would think anyway
Quake III: Arena, Unreal Tournament, etc...
Basically, it wouldn't be a MMORPG but a gigantic, quickly boring gankfest.
which is a fair answer but on this topic is that what people are really talking about here?
in the context of this conversation when people are refering to no pve in their pvp are they talking about fps games?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Comments
well i dont think I am taking the full context into account.
I mean what does a non-pve pvp server look like? well now that I think about it I dont think there is one...ever..anywhere..all of them have some element of pve to them, I would think anyway
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Most games already use raiders at the metric for the rest of the gaming population and we non-raiders don't appreciate that either. I think most people who are against mixed PvE / PvP , do so because they don't want the hassle of dealing with each other. It's the nerfs / balancing that is the straw that breaks the camel's back so to speak.
I know what a PvE only game looks like but i dont think i have ever seen a PvP only game, so what do we mean in that context now that I have had time to think on it
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
I do agree with the second point about the gear.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
I get mad when they make changes to my playstyle because someone else thought that it should be changed for PVP purposes yet. If I am fighting AI mobs why do I need a balanced class. They wouldn't nerf and buff classes the way they do now if there wasn't PVP in a PVE game or vice versa.
D3 scrapped plans for pvp, precisely because it is a bad idea to mix the two.
pvp only games work wonder for world of tank and the likes. Even Blizz, is making a pvp-focus shooter (although you can play against bots).
P.S.
Re the rant; probably for the best
The fair comparison would be PVP-only to PVE-only. Are there examples of any of either? Not that I know of, but I'd give better odds to a PVE-only MMORPG existing than a PVP-only one.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Most people who only want to PvP play MOBAs or FPS or the like, they don't play MMOs and only PVP.
I hate to play the 'vocal minority' card here (since it gets played against groups I agree with quite often) but I think the majority of MMOers like some of both and the number of people wanting strictly one or the other is quite small. Either way developers cut out a large portion of their market if they develop strictly one way or the other.
Mmorpgs that focus on pve are a thing of the past. It's all been done before for one, and for two it's not cost effect to try and maintain.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Instead, the most successful MMORPGs have largely focused on PVE, with a casual PVP component.
So going by what has been popular and what is popular, the future you're describing definitely isn't going to come to pass.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
What's tried and true today doesn't always work tomorrow.
It doesn't matter what kind of industry you're in, every 10 to 20 years some things going to come along that will force you to re-think and re-tool. I'm personally going through for the third time in my industry.
Times change, Tastes change, Technologies change
That's the real world
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
It's been toyed with but hasn't been done yet on a meaningful scale.
One day someone will make a virtual world that will knock your socks off. Like a 1:1 scale gta styled earth. With 100's of thousands or maybe even millions playing at the same time in the same instance.
It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Class balancing does nothing for a game's pve nothing at all it only removes several ideas that can make PVE great.Now if yoru developer really doesn't have a clue to what it is doing,it won't matter either way,but at least on paper PVE does not belong with pvp.
I love BOTH PVe and pvp but i do not want them both in my game,i want my game to be the best it can be not half ass at both.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
There's Planetside ... That's PvP only. MMOFPS
The first "complication" we run into when mixing PVP with PVE is the entire balancing act that PVP ends up requiring. There have been games with numerous classes that were good in PVE game play only to be "balanced" (nerfed) for pvp and they became outright useless for PVE based content. The entire design structure of having to basically build around PVP balancing can and does often ruin class experiences in PVE based games and It is majorly sad when a class that is fun to play in PVE outright becomes useless due to trying to mix the two.
The solution to the first problem requires a bit of work to do, but there is little to no reason there cannot be a separate PVP skill set entirely OR no reason a skill cannot have both a pve and a pvp "stat" where it is the same skill, but hits differently, has a diff cd, does diff damage, hell maybe even diff effects...
Onto complication number two. Open World PVP (OWPVP)... Okay first let's get this out of the way OWPVP the way most game developers design it DOES NOT WORK. The simple reason being you cannot rely on the player base to be responsible enough to police itself anymore outside of a small subset of players that have been around long enough to actually want to do it. Games that autoflag you for PVP in any sort of zone where you can be attacked at any time are done badly period end of story unless that zone is particularly a PVP zone.
The best design if you are going to slap an open world PVP like element onto a game is a true flagging system + specific pvp areas. Star Wars Galaxies (which introduced to us the flagging system in the first place) had the design idea done right. You could flag for PVP and you could walk around constantly flagged if you wanted to and were seen as a real badass if you did. That PVP was consensual you made an active choice to toggle that flag out and put up with the fights it caused.
What we end up with in many PVE games that tack OWPVP onto them is a system that outflags you outside town and some arguing "You consent if you bought the game" and while that's a point there is also a point where people do actively seek out targets much weaker than them. Ganking becomes an outright issue in these games and there is often little to no penalty for it. There needs to be a real jail system in these games or systems that actually punish players that partake in non consensual PVP (ganking). Archeage did well with the jail system, but made it far to easily escapable (while you still had the debuff yeah..) you also had the fact that it was player driven being interesting, but not really practical.
I think there are many more issues in mmorpg design, but those are the two largest glaring ones about modern PVP in pve based games...
in the context of this conversation when people are refering to no pve in their pvp are they talking about fps games?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me