Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Are PvPers easier to please than PvEers?
Zindaihas
Member UncommonPosts: 3,662
I thought about this today when I was talking to a co-worker who is an online gamer. Although he is not really excited by any games on the market at the moment he seems to be able to find something to keep him interested. He is also a big time PvPer. Right now he's playing WoW on a PvP server. But that's just to keep him busy until WAR is released. That's the game he's really jacked about. And it seems to me that as long as the PvP aspect of WAR is to his liking, he will pretty much love the game regardless of what else it may do wrong (I'm not saying it will do anything wrong, just speculating).
I on the other hand prefer to play PvE and am not currently interested in anything that is in release. I plan to try AoC just because it's been a while since I've played an MMO and am looking for one again. If that is not to my liking, then I will probably wait for WAR and give that one a try. But I'm not really all that excited about either one right now. That's probably a good thing so it won't be so much of a let down if I don't like them.
But that made me wonder if we PvEers are just more picky about what we play since we're not going around beating up on other players. I'm really big into things like lore and exploring and the other aspects of the game. My co-worker, just stick a sword in his hand, point him in the direction of another player and away he goes. I'm not saying the other things aren't important to him, but they seem to be secondary. Thus, the reason for my question. I'm going to add two polls to this thread so maybe we can get a picture.
Comments
Satisfaction level
I'm of the same opinion as your friend. Being primarily a PvPer I don't ask for much more than a game that provides me with an interesting and challenging way to kill other people and you can find that in most MMO's these days, with varying degrees of success.
Consider, a PvPers content is other people who are by nature diverse and unpredictable, whereas a PvEer will gradually get bored with the predictability of the scripted PvE content and look for something fresh and new to hold their interest.
By that measure, I would say yes. PvPers are easier to please than PvErs.
Unless of course the game's PvP is wildly unbalanced in favour of particular "classes" (as most seem to be).
That's when the PvPers turn rabid.
More or less what Rotskab said. The innate randomness of actual living players is, for me, a lot more stimulating then the scripted fights in instanced dungeons. This is perhaps the reason why I don't partake in the raid instances more then once even if that much. I don't get a surge of adrenaline when I go and fight a boss in a dungeon as I get when I'm out and about and someone attacks me out of nowhere. This forces me to think fast, stay on my toes and the element of human error is a lot more important and prominent.
The other thing that turned me off of instance raiding was more or less WoW with it's overzealous leaders what would take it to the point where it ruined my fun. For them it seemed like a life or death situation that if someone stepped in the wrong place all hell broke loose. That's just not my idea of fun. There also seems to be only one way to do things in said situation. I can think of multiple ways to kill other players by feeling the situation out as it unfolds. The fact that they can make their own mistakes and I can take advantage of that is even better.
Don't get me wrong though, I'm not all about the PvP. I still like to go out and get lost in the world of the game where I can feel like I'm out in the remote sections where few have gone and I'm possibly the first person to see it and experience whatever it might have to offer. I guess I could classify myself as an explorer as well as a PvP'er. This tends to go well with a few of my friends who share the same views as I and we usually duo or trio out in the wilderness together.
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-
I like to PvP however I am not your average PvP'er.
Normal PvP'er, give them a card board box that they can gank people in and they are happy.
My self, give me a game where strategy matters, one shot one kill (no 88888888 hits to the face to kill the guy), a reason to stay alive (in other words no spawn die spawn die games), No stiff penalties like player looting and I am happy.
As for PvE it needs to be more than just a means to an end in a PvE/PvP game. It needs to cater to ALL not just one or the other and sadly most games get this wrong wrong wrong.
If a game is strictly PvP make it like WWII online for christ sake, log in, spawn in and fight. No levels, no gear nothing.
I would say that PVPers are probably easier to please, but that would be because they have fewer options. There have been very few games developed with the die hard PVPer in mind so i think they tend to take what they can get.
PVEers (like myself) have lots of games to choose from so we can be more picky.
Sadly i think both of the groups are getting shafted right now.
PVP is often a thrown in joke, and PVE has turned into a follow the quest to max level experience.
The current batch of MMOs all pretty much suck in my opinion. But then that is just my opinion.
In a sense. I'd say PvPers are harder to please, but easier to keep pleased.
Getting PvP done right is not easy, especially when developers choose to spend a larger portion of their limited resources getting PvE set up first.
If you do manage to do PvP right from the start, then it's a lot more low maintenance than PvE. PvP players become their own content, while you have to constantly create new PvE content to move the game along.
I am picky when it comes to both. I want PvP with meaning and which helps to shape and mold the world around you in game. The same goes with PvE, I want it to have meaning, depth and the ability to alter the game world in meaningful ways. As for a the whole
"I am a PvPer" and "I am a PvE'er" statement well I am both and I want crave quality in both areas.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Game(s) I Am Currently Playing:
GW2 (+LoL and BF3)
I'm going to go with PvPers being harder to please out of the two. The reason is simple: balance. How many times have we had to deal with "OMG <insert class here> is too powerful!" or "<insert class here> is too weak!" posts?
Read any PvP forum on any game's website. There are always people whining about classes, weapons, spells, skills, etc. This leads to class nerfs that not only effect PvP but PvE also.
PvEers, on the other hand, seem easier to please. Give them a way to aquire new items and go to new dungeons and experience new quests and they are happy.
The hardest group to please though are RPers. They want a game to resemble real life as close as possible, which is not an easy task for developers to accomplish.
Then again, I'm primary a PvPer, so I may be wrong, though I do enjoy some PvE from time time.
I'm a pvp'er, but I do like some dungeon runs. The thing is...I like being able to do what I want. I generally dislike games that force me to be a gank-ee from the word go because I spend my entire game time losing everything I've earned due entirely to the fact that higher level players get off on doing it.
So FFA PVP is a dead NO for me. I think its intrusive, and completely destructive to getting new players and building a strong community. FFA PVP can never work because we don't punish criminal in game like we would in real life. They get to run free and rob every last thing and the world ignores them.
To comment on how "easy" it is to please us....consider that WoW pleases several PvP'ers with little more than baubles and toys in lieu of actual PvP. I'd say thats evidence that we are VERY easy to please.
No, the constant balance bitching combined with people's penchant for blaming their own shortcoming on other things means PvP stuff is always in a foment.
PvE has BS drama especially with Raid guild crap, but the PvP side of things (MMO or just normal online) is a whole other kettle of fish.
If you read WoW official forums, you'll notice that most of the whining and drama posts have something to do with PvP. I would not call that easy to please.
While it may be easy to satisfy a PvPer by giving him a way to face off against another player, the balancing that usually follows PvP related whining, which in some cases ruins PvE, cannot be ignored.
If you read WoW official forums, you'll notice that most of the whining and drama posts have something to do with PvP. I would not call that easy to please.
While it may be easy to satisfy a PvPer by giving him a way to face off against another player, the balancing that usually follows PvP related whining, which in some cases ruins PvE, cannot be ignored.
Balancing is an issue if some method, some skill, some moves or some statistics are available only to certain players. Let me elaborate.If fear, chain fearing or mezzing is only available to say warlocks of WoW, this clearly COULD be an issue of balancing. Likewise the age old argument about stealth ambushing.
If levels are very hard to get or max, and levels dictate PVP outcome, sure its imbalanced.
If a godly sword of pking wins everything and it take a year of camping to get one, sure its imbalanced.
If there are only 2 chain combat skills that rules and other skills does not matter, yes.
That is why games with level based, class exclusion in access to game breaking skills, gear based ... you know what I mean.
GW at start fixed this somewhat, everyone can start out maxed level for PVP, even if you grind, max level is easy. Imagine a game with little grinding for max cap, alternate sets of gear all substituatable (trade off in terms of stats, say). Imagine common dabbing of skills, aka everyone can respec, everyone has limited access to all skills, huge pool of skills ... I do not pretend I have the answers, but I can still dream.
Yes its imagine, but its not totally impossible. PVP can be made fun and balancing not the critical issue. Lets hope some developer work out some form of implementation that gives us good PVP. RVR from DAoC was the best one I experienced and they did not address many of the issues I mentioned above. There are hopes that a similar or enhanced form be found by another developer someday soon.
So basically if a game requires skill its instantly imbalanced?!?!??!
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
What do you mean by skill?
I did mean something above. If only Warlocks can chain stun or chain mezz or chain fear, and that stun, mezz and fear means life or death in a duel, than its not a balanced game. A warlock will win if he got to start chaining his moves. If a rogue can kill anyone from a stealthed position, and that he can walk around fast while stealthed, yes its not balanced. Any other class unable to outpace the rogue nor see him coming will almost automatically lose once the rogue comes in range. That is what I want to say about skill and balancing. Is that what you mean and want to talk about?
This whole balancing issue that has (as it always does) reared it's head is exactly why class-based games don't do too well in PVP. For example, if I'm in a battleground in WoW and I see a plate-wearer with a mana bar, I know instantly that he is a paladin. I know all his abilities, I know all his weaknesses, and odds are that I have a reasonable idea of what combination of skills I should use to kill him, or if I should just not bother trying and run away.
That's not skill; there are only 9 classes after all.
By contrast in games like UO and EVE, you never know the abilities of your opponent, so you can't always be ready for everything that he does. That alone brings a lot more randomness and unpredictability into a fight.
Once again, I'm going to have to agree with Rotskab. Sure there are going to be balance issues but half the time when you read the boards and see the whining and complaining is it actually valid. There are certain people out there that play the games we play and hate to loose to the point where they would rather have their opponent nerfed or have their class enhanced in some way simply because they made a bad call in picking their fights.
Sometimes however there are things that need to be done. I for one think there should be something done about the way Fear works in WoW but I won't be playing it much longer to really care anymore. As well, back when I played DAoC I always felt that there should be something done about the Theurgist class where they had the longest spell range and could summon pets over and over again that would run at you and begin to beat on you and they could summon quite a number of them. Most would spam out their entire mana bar and you'd have about 10 of these beating on you. Depending on which element they chose, they'd either nuke you with ice spells, stun you over and over again, and the caster would be way out of harms way across the field or could come a bit closer within their regular spell range and nuke you some more along with the pets if they chose to or still had mana to spare.
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-
Well.. it really depends.. i am a pvp player and in all honestly i dont see one game for pvpers avaiable.
Shadowbane? 6 years old, and bugridden from the very beginning, with an awful graphic and controlls.
Ultima Online? 10 years old, turned into a pve game.
EvE? 5 years old, with good tactics and economic depth, but no action at all.. i really wished it would have the controlls and battles like Wing Commander.. not to talk about the lack of an avatar at all.
Any more pvp games? No.. nothing.
Sorry, but WoW PvP is not really pvp, it is a arena/battleground put into a pve game, and it is almost the same with every other game outside. I really prefer any multiplayer FPS/RTS over such dumbed down pvp with grinding requirements, not to talk about zero features more than the simple multiplayer games.
Why we have a persistent world, and it is called massive mutliplayer, when you get packed into a instance of 16-64 players as in any normal multiplayer game? Why we have no world pvp challenges, why we cant shape the economy, politics and the world generally through pvp.. as long all this is not available, is not possible, it is just a dumbed down pvp more similar to multiplayer games and thrown into a pve game.
Talking about WAR.. well, it is PvP, but it is light-weight pvp for casual mmorpg player.. it is not really a pvp game, it is a game for allround players, as much as WoW was for allround players just more straightened to casual pve.
With other words, there are some casual pve and pvp player, which are maybe easier to please, and some players which are generally easier to please, and on the other hand there a player which demand a lot more, be it PvE or PvP.
Are those pvp player not so vocal, or just a minority? Well, of course, if you got no game at all over all this long time, you would also let mmos alone, and instead play your share of available multiplayer games be it FPS or RTS.. so they are of course not as vocal.. are they the minority? Really look at all fps and rts multiplayer games, and the amount of players there, and you will know how much of a minority they are.
What do you mean by skill?
I did mean something above. If only Warlocks can chain stun or chain mezz or chain fear, and that stun, mezz and fear means life or death in a duel, than its not a balanced game. A warlock will win if he got to start chaining his moves. If a rogue can kill anyone from a stealthed position, and that he can walk around fast while stealthed, yes its not balanced. Any other class unable to outpace the rogue nor see him coming will almost automatically lose once the rogue comes in range. That is what I want to say about skill and balancing. Is that what you mean and want to talk about?
I'm talking about skill as in knowing how to play the game, not what level, stats, or items they have.
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
PvEers on the other hand seem easier to please as you give them a way to obtain new bling or do new quests or create a new dungeon for them to visit and they are happy.
No.
Peoples who get unfair edges in a foreign gameplay will be naturally less pissed then peoples unable to play their gameplay the way they want.
Forcing peoples into your gameplay? Will definitely please a minority of PvPers.
PvE players just want to play...in PvE. Now, if you put rewards in PvP zones, don't wonder why the PvErs are not happy, you FORCE them to play a foreign gameplay.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
PVPers suck because of their need for balanced classes. Hey guys, ever hear of support classes? Go play some TF 2 for awhile.
PVEers suck because of their need to sanitized and make every aspect of a game casual. Look, nobody told you to get married a produce three ungrateful kids. Don't come ruin my game because of your need for convenience.
There, got that off my chest.
Currently playing: No MMOs. They all suck.
I would say PvPers are much harder to satisfy than PvEers. This is because PvP must be balanced. Most PvP players function with this mentality: "I'm rock. Nerf paper, leave scissors as it is." Once they get their favored class up to max levels and outfitted and they don't own someone 100% of the time they will head to the forums and agitate for a buff. This happens all the time in DAoC and as a result there's a lot of flavor of the month type play where one class is godly for a while because mythic buffs them and then they have to rebalance. This constant rebalancing is very difficult to fine tune and in many cases is endless.
Personally I think neither side is easy to please....infact I'd rank them as both equally hard to please.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
What do you mean by skill?
I did mean something above. If only Warlocks can chain stun or chain mezz or chain fear, and that stun, mezz and fear means life or death in a duel, than its not a balanced game. A warlock will win if he got to start chaining his moves. If a rogue can kill anyone from a stealthed position, and that he can walk around fast while stealthed, yes its not balanced. Any other class unable to outpace the rogue nor see him coming will almost automatically lose once the rogue comes in range. That is what I want to say about skill and balancing. Is that what you mean and want to talk about?
I'm talking about skill as in knowing how to play the game, not what level, stats, or items they have.
Ok let me try to answer you, I hope I understand you correctly.If you refer to games in which skill plays a major factor (say a FPS) and gear are pretty much common to all sides (you can get the same gun), then there is no balancing. Its just like basketball real life. Its a contest of skill, the better guy will win in the long run. You cannot beat Magic Johnson 1on1 if you play against him over a year.
In that case, there is no point in balancing. Unless we do it like horse racing, the better horse has to carry more weight. Maybe we can implement a different point rewarding, like the old tourney ladder, you will lose more points than you will gain if you fight someone lower than you in the ladder ranking.
I love my guild (blodsregn, hehe advertising here). I go PVE with them, craft with them, collect mats for them ... I built a shaman and a healer as support class for these people. I PVE. I also PVP solo and zerg, I made a warrior just to ambush the stealth ambusher (wear a small shield and mace and walk around like a healer/shaman). I do not feel like being forced to do anything. I will do both, and I will pick the toon I feel like at the moment. Rewards in PVP or PVE are just one of the things that attracts me. The game, the community, my guild, these also counts.