I don't think mmorpg PvP has really transcended the PvP paradigm.
Huh?
What I mean is, mmorpg pvp has an opportunity to play out massive battles with legions of players (just like in the fancy cinematic trailers for the games), but that requires proper objectives and good organization. Currently, 50 people run into a battle ground and they play it like an fps, largely alone, without direction and quickly respawn if they die. As mentioned, DAoC has probably come closest to transcending this solo player FPS pvp paradigm when going and attacking various relic keeps (or the towers that protect them, at least).
There is a limiting factor to this: Today's technology. Gather alot of players in one place and you'll get lag. I'm talking about even slow-traffic stuff like player hubs / cities. But imagine the amount of stuff going on if combat is involved.
It'd be nice to be able to see large groups fighting, but a battle would bring the game (and I'd imagine even today's computers) to its knees.
Lineage 2 and EVE Online can easily handle several hundred in a battle at once without crippling your broadband connection or client.
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 mmorpg PvP has really transcended the PvP paradigm.
Huh?
What I mean is, mmorpg pvp has an opportunity to play out massive battles with legions of players (just like in the fancy cinematic trailers for the games), but that requires proper objectives and good organization. Currently, 50 people run into a battle ground and they play it like an fps, largely alone, without direction and quickly respawn if they die. As mentioned, DAoC has probably come closest to transcending this solo player FPS pvp paradigm when going and attacking various relic keeps (or the towers that protect them, at least).
There is a limiting factor to this: Today's technology. Gather alot of players in one place and you'll get lag. I'm talking about even slow-traffic stuff like player hubs / cities. But imagine the amount of stuff going on if combat is involved.
It'd be nice to be able to see large groups fighting, but a battle would bring the game (and I'd imagine even today's computers) to its knees.
Lineage 2 and EVE Online can easily handle several hundred in a battle at once without crippling your broadband connection or client.
also.. Planetside.. that really old FPS MMO... could handle 400 or so players fighting in the same area.. todays PC hardware isnt the issue.. though.. i would imagine it would affect console ports as they do have hardware issues in that respect (why you won't see any fights involving decent number of players on a console game) i think the problem is more to do with the game engine that the games run on.. its a software limitation.. probably imposed to reduce server costs or something..
I am a huge PvP fan myself but lately I am less and less interested in PvP in MMORPG´s mainly because of the balancing problems so I was wondering what kind of PvP do you prefer ? and why ?
Interesting you say about balancing problems in mmo's pvp, because fps games like Battlefield, Call of Duty can be equally unbalanced, the reason is because the higher level you are, the better weapons, better attachments, better armor, better drones are available to you. The match making service isn't exactly the best in those games either, take Call of Duty for example, my first online experience and I get grouped withed a rank33 Colonel (or whatever rank title it is) and numerous rank 10+ people, now being a rank 1 noob I got killed more then anyone else, but on a positive side of things I did get a few kills If match making works properly in fps then fps pvp wins over mmo pvp in my opinion.
I don't think mmorpg PvP has really transcended the PvP paradigm.
Huh?
What I mean is, mmorpg pvp has an opportunity to play out massive battles with legions of players (just like in the fancy cinematic trailers for the games), but that requires proper objectives and good organization. Currently, 50 people run into a battle ground and they play it like an fps, largely alone, without direction and quickly respawn if they die. As mentioned, DAoC has probably come closest to transcending this solo player FPS pvp paradigm when going and attacking various relic keeps (or the towers that protect them, at least).
There is a limiting factor to this: Today's technology. Gather alot of players in one place and you'll get lag. I'm talking about even slow-traffic stuff like player hubs / cities. But imagine the amount of stuff going on if combat is involved.
It'd be nice to be able to see large groups fighting, but a battle would bring the game (and I'd imagine even today's computers) to its knees.
Lineage 2 and EVE Online can easily handle several hundred in a battle at once without crippling your broadband connection or client.
also.. Planetside.. that really old FPS MMO... could handle 400 or so players fighting in the same area.. todays PC hardware isnt the issue.. though.. i would imagine it would affect console ports as they do have hardware issues in that respect (why you won't see any fights involving decent number of players on a console game) i think the problem is more to do with the game engine that the games run on.. its a software limitation.. probably imposed to reduce server costs or something..
I stand corrected then guys. It's just most of what I've tried would come to a slideshow with lots of combatants.
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
I don't think mmorpg PvP has really transcended the PvP paradigm.
Huh?
What I mean is, mmorpg pvp has an opportunity to play out massive battles with legions of players (just like in the fancy cinematic trailers for the games), but that requires proper objectives and good organization. Currently, 50 people run into a battle ground and they play it like an fps, largely alone, without direction and quickly respawn if they die. As mentioned, DAoC has probably come closest to transcending this solo player FPS pvp paradigm when going and attacking various relic keeps (or the towers that protect them, at least).
There is a limiting factor to this: Today's technology. Gather alot of players in one place and you'll get lag. I'm talking about even slow-traffic stuff like player hubs / cities. But imagine the amount of stuff going on if combat is involved.
It'd be nice to be able to see large groups fighting, but a battle would bring the game (and I'd imagine even today's computers) to its knees.
Lineage 2 and EVE Online can easily handle several hundred in a battle at once without crippling your broadband connection or client.
also.. Planetside.. that really old FPS MMO... could handle 400 or so players fighting in the same area.. todays PC hardware isnt the issue.. though.. i would imagine it would affect console ports as they do have hardware issues in that respect (why you won't see any fights involving decent number of players on a console game) i think the problem is more to do with the game engine that the games run on.. its a software limitation.. probably imposed to reduce server costs or something..
I stand corrected then guys. It's just most of what I've tried would come to a slideshow with lots of combatants.
I think technology, or the perception that technology is a limiting factor still holds true as Warmaker pointed out though. Eve is a very niche game, planetside is an older fps, and Lineage is a Korean grinder. Ultimately, there is a design problem on the side of the game makers. If they intended to create real scenarios that leveraged true cooperation in battle, may be they would overcome some of the (perceived) technological hurdles. But, instead we get the same old.
These are the best videos I could find for pvp in each game.
Disclaimer: Honestly test these games out and watch the videos to see which you prefer more because in the end honestly. It's different for each person.
When did you start playing "old school" MMO's. World Of Warcraft?
2 different pairs of shoes. IF im in mode for fps "pvp" im playing fps and if i want real open world mmorpg pvp i play mmorpgs. Gear will always be a factor in mmorpgs deal with it.
Real talk the real deal will be always fighters 1vs1 on stage no bullshit perks just your skill fuck fps.
Anyone who thinks gear is the reason others win in MMO PvP (even in a gear based game, such as WoW) is quite naive at how much they must suck at PvP or gaming in general, lol...
This has to be the dumbest remark I have read here in a long time.
Gear has always mattered, and mattered a lot, in fantasy roleplaying games.
Comments
Lineage 2 and EVE Online can easily handle several hundred in a battle at once without crippling your broadband connection or client.
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
also.. Planetside.. that really old FPS MMO... could handle 400 or so players fighting in the same area.. todays PC hardware isnt the issue.. though.. i would imagine it would affect console ports as they do have hardware issues in that respect (why you won't see any fights involving decent number of players on a console game) i think the problem is more to do with the game engine that the games run on.. its a software limitation.. probably imposed to reduce server costs or something..
Interesting you say about balancing problems in mmo's pvp, because fps games like Battlefield, Call of Duty can be equally unbalanced, the reason is because the higher level you are, the better weapons, better attachments, better armor, better drones are available to you. The match making service isn't exactly the best in those games either, take Call of Duty for example, my first online experience and I get grouped withed a rank33 Colonel (or whatever rank title it is) and numerous rank 10+ people, now being a rank 1 noob I got killed more then anyone else, but on a positive side of things I did get a few kills
If match making works properly in fps then fps pvp wins over mmo pvp in my opinion.
I stand corrected then guys. It's just most of what I've tried would come to a slideshow with lots of combatants.
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
I think technology, or the perception that technology is a limiting factor still holds true as Warmaker pointed out though. Eve is a very niche game, planetside is an older fps, and Lineage is a Korean grinder. Ultimately, there is a design problem on the side of the game makers. If they intended to create real scenarios that leveraged true cooperation in battle, may be they would overcome some of the (perceived) technological hurdles. But, instead we get the same old.
MMORPG's are never going to be as good as FPS. Deal with it.
FPS:
Quake 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSe6jNBGDMM
Unreal Tournament
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I62HRtxYHyM
Counter-Strike: Source
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ymkr3mNX7c&feature=related
Doom Online(Even a 90's game has better pvp than MMO's)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I38eoAh1nYc&feature=related
Pirates, Vikings and Knights(Again a non mmo pvp that runs and players BETTER)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs6ojuWOn9Y
MMO (WARNING MMO VIDEOS HAVE SHITTY MUSIC):
Darkfail Online
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aG3CUzLh5Yc
Mortal Online
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se9wWu7-gCE&feature=related
Aion(Sorry to say, but the pvp looks better than the first two steaming piles of crap)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0yCOZPY9ss
WoW(Again better pvp, man why do these casual MMO's games look more fun with the pvp? Aren't they for carebears? Lol)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyqrzvUjtBE
Star Wars Galaxies(Another OVERUSED and crappy song)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0InqMQrPgsg&feature=related
These are the best videos I could find for pvp in each game.
Disclaimer: Honestly test these games out and watch the videos to see which you prefer more because in the end honestly. It's different for each person.
When did you start playing "old school" MMO's. World Of Warcraft?
2 different pairs of shoes. IF im in mode for fps "pvp" im playing fps and if i want real open world mmorpg pvp i play mmorpgs. Gear will always be a factor in mmorpgs deal with it.
Real talk the real deal will be always fighters 1vs1 on stage no bullshit perks just your skill fuck fps.
This has to be the dumbest remark I have read here in a long time.
Gear has always mattered, and mattered a lot, in fantasy roleplaying games.