But there are many that fail. Ultima Online was losing players fast because of the PvPers, it recovered once they implemented a PVE area (like EVE) but it got old and outdated (but still alive today). Dark and Light crashed and burned. Archeage crashed and burned.
Black Desert Online did okay until it went pay to win and bots took over, but it offers tons of PvP and before the cash shop and all the bots took over...it had a ton of players and most just wanted to PvE. There was a substantial amount of posts even for a PVE only server.
Dark Fall Online was incredibly niche, why? Because very limited PvE content.
I'm going to say no.
Can't speak to Ultima Online but Dark and Light did not crash and burn because of pvp. Archeage did not crash and burn period.
Black Desert is my main game and it doesn't feel at all like bots took over at this point. Dark Fall did have limited content, true but have you actually played it? Issues, the company supporting it wasn't great.
I would say that UO celebrating itts 19th anniversary today , speaks for itself
Bluehound17 said: that guy who sang the song hit the spot hard!
The spot was to make yourself look like a fool? o.O
seems to me you were born after 2000+ a kid lel, don't be mad you are one of em embrace it millennial
were you offended because the lyrics described you? you should be fool O.o
thats why kids these days think they are "entitled" to anything and everything, nah son you gotta work you way to the top , as we apply that to playing MMORPG's noone deserves to be on the top of wether it be PvE or PvP ladders without working for it, climb up, don't be mad that some of us like me can easily climb the top in every game we play, if you suck then suck it up (just like the song said "Just because they got a trophy for "participating" once they think they are equal to the ones that actually made an effort LOL)
I make it look really easy without putting any efforts in becoming one of the servers/games best top tier player in all the games I've played, but that doesnt mean i didnt work for it its just raw talent :pleased:
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
But there are many that fail. Ultima Online was losing players fast because of the PvPers, it recovered once they implemented a PVE area (like EVE) but it got old and outdated (but still alive today). Dark and Light crashed and burned. Archeage crashed and burned.
Black Desert Online did okay until it went pay to win and bots took over, but it offers tons of PvP and before the cash shop and all the bots took over...it had a ton of players and most just wanted to PvE. There was a substantial amount of posts even for a PVE only server.
Dark Fall Online was incredibly niche, why? Because very limited PvE content.
I'm going to say no.
Can't speak to Ultima Online but Dark and Light did not crash and burn because of pvp. Archeage did not crash and burn period.
Black Desert is my main game and it doesn't feel at all like bots took over at this point. Dark Fall did have limited content, true but have you actually played it? Issues, the company supporting it wasn't great.
I would say that UO celebrating itts 19th anniversary today , speaks for itself
Again, not a good example, it had to create a PVE friendly server to survive and it can hardly be described as thriving for over a decade.
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
But there are many that fail. Ultima Online was losing players fast because of the PvPers, it recovered once they implemented a PVE area (like EVE) but it got old and outdated (but still alive today). Dark and Light crashed and burned. Archeage crashed and burned.
Black Desert Online did okay until it went pay to win and bots took over, but it offers tons of PvP and before the cash shop and all the bots took over...it had a ton of players and most just wanted to PvE. There was a substantial amount of posts even for a PVE only server.
Dark Fall Online was incredibly niche, why? Because very limited PvE content.
I'm going to say no.
Can't speak to Ultima Online but Dark and Light did not crash and burn because of pvp. Archeage did not crash and burn period.
Black Desert is my main game and it doesn't feel at all like bots took over at this point. Dark Fall did have limited content, true but have you actually played it? Issues, the company supporting it wasn't great.
I would say that UO celebrating itts 19th anniversary today , speaks for itself
Again, not a good example, it had to create a PVE friendly server to survive and it can hardly be described as thriving for over a decade.
UO , PvP , Faction vs Faction, Felucca and Siege Perilous have been active for 19 years , Thats a sucess unlike any other game , The game still pull s in money for EA , And there are NO PVE friendly servers in UO ,each server has Trammel /Felucca(same server) , and each area has benefits , one is a safe zone much like nearly all other PvP mmos offer, with many benefits offered to entice players to Felucca much like any other PvP MMO , Except for Siege Perilous which is entirely old school rule set ....
Bluehound17 said: that guy who sang the song hit the spot hard!
The spot was to make yourself look like a fool? o.O
seems to me you were born after 2000+ a kid lel, don't be mad you are one of em embrace it millennial
Actually a millennial is a person who reaches early adulthood around the year 2000. So typically people born in the early 80s are classed as millennials. You'd have to be in your late 30s to be classed as Generation X.
But there are many that fail. Ultima Online was losing players fast because of the PvPers, it recovered once they implemented a PVE area (like EVE) but it got old and outdated (but still alive today). Dark and Light crashed and burned. Archeage crashed and burned.
Black Desert Online did okay until it went pay to win and bots took over, but it offers tons of PvP and before the cash shop and all the bots took over...it had a ton of players and most just wanted to PvE. There was a substantial amount of posts even for a PVE only server.
Dark Fall Online was incredibly niche, why? Because very limited PvE content.
I'm going to say no.
Can't speak to Ultima Online but Dark and Light did not crash and burn because of pvp. Archeage did not crash and burn period.
Black Desert is my main game and it doesn't feel at all like bots took over at this point. Dark Fall did have limited content, true but have you actually played it? Issues, the company supporting it wasn't great.
I would say that UO celebrating itts 19th anniversary today , speaks for itself
Again, not a good example, it had to create a PVE friendly server to survive and it can hardly be described as thriving for over a decade.
UO , PvP , Faction vs Faction, Felucca and Siege Perilous have been active for 19 years , Thats a sucess unlike any other game , The game still pull s in money for EA , And there are NO PVE friendly servers in UO ,each server has Trammel /Felucca(same server) , and each area has benefits , one is a safe zone much like nearly all other PvP mmos offer, with many benefits offered to entice players to Felucca much like any other PvP MMO , Except for Siege Perilous which is entirely old school rule set ....
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
Bluehound17 said: that guy who sang the song hit the spot hard!
The spot was to make yourself look like a fool? o.O
seems to me you were born after 2000+ a kid lel, don't be mad you are one of em embrace it millennial
were you offended because the lyrics described you? you should be fool O.o
thats why kids these days think they are "entitled" to anything and everything, nah son you gotta work you way to the top , as we apply that to playing MMORPG's noone deserves to be on the top of wether it be PvE or PvP ladders without working for it, climb up, don't be mad that some of us like me can easily climb the top in every game we play, if you suck then suck it up (just like the song said "Just because they got a trophy for "participating" once they think they are equal to the ones that actually made an effort LOL)
I make it look really easy without putting any efforts in becoming one of the servers/games best top tier player in all the games I've played, but that doesnt mean i didnt work for it its just raw talent :pleased:
Yeah because killing 20 wolves and collecting 5 paws is real work. I have been playing MMORPG since the beginning and thought the grinding was dumb from the beginning.
So many things that can be done with this genre and people want to spend most of their time chasing the next level or gear in the most basic boring way.
But there are many that fail. Ultima Online was losing players fast because of the PvPers, it recovered once they implemented a PVE area (like EVE) but it got old and outdated (but still alive today). Dark and Light crashed and burned. Archeage crashed and burned.
Black Desert Online did okay until it went pay to win and bots took over, but it offers tons of PvP and before the cash shop and all the bots took over...it had a ton of players and most just wanted to PvE. There was a substantial amount of posts even for a PVE only server.
Dark Fall Online was incredibly niche, why? Because very limited PvE content.
I'm going to say no.
Can't speak to Ultima Online but Dark and Light did not crash and burn because of pvp. Archeage did not crash and burn period.
Black Desert is my main game and it doesn't feel at all like bots took over at this point. Dark Fall did have limited content, true but have you actually played it? Issues, the company supporting it wasn't great.
I would say that UO celebrating itts 19th anniversary today , speaks for itself
Again, not a good example, it had to create a PVE friendly server to survive and it can hardly be described as thriving for over a decade.
UO , PvP , Faction vs Faction, Felucca and Siege Perilous have been active for 19 years , Thats a sucess unlike any other game , The game still pull s in money for EA , And there are NO PVE friendly servers in UO ,each server has Trammel /Felucca(same server) , and each area has benefits , one is a safe zone much like nearly all other PvP mmos offer, with many benefits offered to entice players to Felucca much like any other PvP MMO , Except for Siege Perilous which is entirely old school rule set ....
Concurrent users online is?
Dont Know, Dont Care its enough and a great community ...
Do you realize that "MMORPG" without grind is just an "MMO"(Planetside)...?
Grind is not a requirement of being an RPG. RPG can stand on its narrative and gameplay as many have no place to grind. In fact, I would say reward > narrative is anti-RPG.
Grind for reward is simply a cheap timesink that removes the need to have on going engaging content or dabble in the social experience between players. Instead people will pay you money to push a button for a treat like a hamster.
"people will pay you money to push a button for a treat like a hamster. "
Yup, thanks to dopamine. That's why little games like Stardew Valley are so compelling, they feed the need and make you feel good.
PVP games are so bad that emotional baggage carriers can't stop complaining about them... EVER.
"OMG MMORPGs with OWPVP are so bad. Amirite?" "Yeah they totally die, and are dead." "Take that griefers who killed me in Aion in 2009" "Yeah *snort snort* SO NOT popular." "Can't wait for artificial intelligence to improve so we can complain about it being too human like"
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
I’ve spent way too much time on figuring out how I could interest
PvPers in Golemizer and I’ve lost focus. I’ve coded a lot of gimmicks
that were badly planned and I’ve even convinced myself that it NEEDED
that. I developed too many mechanics in some ridiculous time that it was
doomed right from the start.
And don’t get me started on community management … The most
time-consuming concerns I had were related to PvP and community
management related to it. Drama … Banning … Abusing … Hate mails …
Threats … It was just way more than I could handle and it wasn’t even
what I wanted to start with. At some point I was desperate to get more
players and I tried way too many things which lead to more troubles.
And another shocking fact … PvPers don’t spend much money on the game.
Dedicated crafters were always the most important supporters of
Golemizer while PvP mostly only brought people who were requiring me to
spend a lot of time for little money. So the most time I’ve spent on
Golemizer was for people who didn’t help me to get any profits out of
Golemizer … bringing me further from my goal of making a living out of
games. That was my mistake. I shouldn’t have let PvPers take so much
place in Golemizer as I know for sure that I’ve lost some of the people I
wanted to play Golemizer in the process.
So yes, PvPer has been one of the nails in the coffin for some games. PvPer sky rockets your expenses: customer support, game mechanics, art asset requirements, player churn/acquisition and similar.
To make it worse most of the games that make PvPer games, allot expenses for their product as if they're making a PvE game. They use servers that would work fine in a PvE game, deaths + time loss from server lagging. They design their avatars+animations as if they're a PvE game and don't account for all the effects that players can do to each other(causing animations to feel even floatier, especially since players are moving far more dynamically than AI which gets amplified when it's player on player). Mechanics need to be far tighter than they are for a PvE game, in a PvPer game anything that is cheesy/buggy will be abused(while in a PvE game it stands a good chance of being ignored if it's more annoying or time consuming than playing normally). To make things worse in a PvPer game everything needs to be "fair", in a PvE game you don't need to care about "fair" just "works".
EDIT: I don't think it needs to be said that most companies that make PvPer games, are treating it as a magic content bullet because they don't have the budget to make PvE content. Which usually works as well as No Man's Sky using procedural generation as a magic content bullet.
Practice doesn't make perfect, practice makes permanent.
"At one point technology meant making tech that could get to the moon, now it means making tech that could get you a taxi."
PvP is not itself the fault that leads to a game's demise. Even OWPvP can work. We've seen reasonable examples of it in the likes of Lineage and EVE. More so we can look to the implementation and often faulty rules to be the issue.
The reason those kinds of titles work is because of rules. PvP that exists in a complete FFA is subject to the whim of others that would abuse the system. When you're talking about a system that's supposed to be for entertainment being the platform for interpersonal virtual abuse, then you have a problem because it means many people aren't being entertained and will not stick around to give you money.
Games like EVE and Lineage which do manage to possess stability as a PvP heavy (or even PvP focused) game experience manage to work because of things that can manage player states, scale the difficulty of getting to players that don't want to participate in such activity, scales the risk associated with such behavior, and uses cooldown and penalty mechanics to make sure players can't readily abuse the system and dodge repercussion.
It means that it is a much more stable and successful game because it mitigates the threat of player abuse. Many PvP focused games fail because they do not have a good enough game or supporting system to reach this standard, but it is something achievable.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
I also don't find it funny that people compare MOBA's to the MMO genre as proof that PvP is enjoyable. MOBA games are in no way, shape or form even similar to PvP MMO's.
Why not?
How about 3rd person shooter PvP? How about fps pvp?
Are you saying only MMO pvp is inferior? In that case, may be they should be more like MOBA.
Or do you forget about World of Tank? A very popular pvp game, classified as a MMO by this site.
PVP fantasy MMO's, by that I mean non shooters, and only PVP MMO,s that are 100% PVP are doomed to fail as the crowds they draw in chew themselves up until there is only a husk left and move along, this behavior is in all MMO,s but never to the extent of sheer locust mentality that is PVP MMO's.
The paradox of PVP games are the thing that draws the player is the thing that will repel them.
I also don't find it funny that people compare MOBA's to the MMO genre as proof that PvP is enjoyable. MOBA games are in no way, shape or form even similar to PvP MMO's.
Why not?
How about 3rd person shooter PvP? How about fps pvp?
Are you saying only MMO pvp is inferior? In that case, may be they should be more like MOBA.
Or do you forget about World of Tank? A very popular pvp game, classified as a MMO by this site.
I think you missed the part in the thread title that says mmoRPG. WoT is not an RPG. So point is moot.
PvP in some of those older games was not hard but it was very much a game of chess. Some people just will never be capable of playing anything but checkers so they leave.
PvP focused MMOs don't fail because they are PvP focused.....they fail due to bad design.
The problem with PvP MMOs is that the context surrounding PvP usually isn't well developed. Mostly, we're either given the option to pvp and left to our own devices, resulting in farming pvp ranks in whatever way is most efficient (zergs or ganking usually) or we're given weak objectives to fight over, like keeps, resulting in repetitive gameplay fighting over the same stuff day in, day out.
This is all usually rounded off with standard single-player mechanics, like levels and gear, which result in power gaps that reduce the fun of pvp. In this way, pvp becomes somewhat fun if you are at the top of the power curve but rubbish for everyone else.
However, the pvp itself is not why it fails. The massive popularity of online shooters and mobas proves that there is a very large desire for online pvp, it is just that designers have yet to come up with a system to make it enjoyable within an MMO for the masses.
There are some crucial things I feel need to change to make MMO PvP popular:
1) Reduce / eliminate power gaps
This could mean removing progression altogether, or going for horizontal progression, or simply making the power curve extremely shallow (max 50% between newbie and vet). This would allow everyone to feel valuable and be able to contribute straight away. Essentially, increasing accessibility.
2) Self-balancing mechanisms
This is harder to achieve, but numbers imbalance will always be a problem in open world pvp. DAoC went the 3-faction route which helped. Other MMOs go the NPC route, giving the undermanned faction somewhere to retreat to where they can have a more balanced fight as NPCs are on their side. Others still offer incentives for the over-populated side to go elsewhere (e.g. lotro's delving of fror, the winning side would open up access to this dungeon which contained worthwhile loot, so many players would disappear to go farm, swinging the balance) and other still would go with some sort of global buff to the losing side.
3) Proper Context
Give people reasons to fight. It might be to unlock new areas to get the best stuff (Darkness Falls?), or to progress the campaign to a new area (WAR), but by providing context you will convince the majority of your players to fight "properly" rather than simply looking for the quickest way to farm pvp ranks. I've personally never met a person who enjoys ganking, despite doing a lot of pvp. I have met a lot of players who solo-roam and jump other people (1v1, or 1v2) but I wouldn't classify this as ganking as they would be equal level and the "ganker" would always be solo.
4) Make it consensual
It may not make sense from a lore point of view, but outside of dedicated pvp zones all pvp should be consensual. It just eliminates a lot of stress and gives your game broader appeal.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
@cameltosis: Yeah, I think that is why PvP MMOs tend to fail.
The devs seems to think that you can just take a PvE game but change the focus which isn't good enough. The reason LOL is larger then all MMOs put together is that it makes PvP fun while MMOs make it into a competition who have best gear and highest level instead of skill and small group tactics.
A few MMOs have better mechanics but still fall short, GW2s WvW do handle the powergap which makes things more fun but it have another problem instead: Zerging. Joining a zerg will give you about 5 times the loot and XP of running a small group with far less risk but it isn't fun when 2 or more zergs just run though the map like locusts.
PvP MMOs also need to learn to get the risk Vs reward right. Killing 100 really weak opponents so beyond you that they hardly can win (which in itself is bad game design) shouldn't really be awarded much but taking out someone far better then you should be worth a lot.
And running in a safe zerg should not give you 5 times the rewards as a small group, you need to make it the opposite.
PvP in some of those older games was not hard but it was very much a game of chess. Some people just will never be capable of playing anything but checkers so they leave.
Just if you were the same level. Otherwise chess would sound like this: "My pawn is lvl 60 with legendary gear so he will gank your entire board without breaking a sweat". Certain games did have better PvP then current games, like DaoC and Lineage but even those games could have been far better in the PvP department. PvP did feel far more meaningful in them though and while that isn't the same as really fun it still is important.
Another quick win for MMO PvP I forgot to mention:
Increased Time-To-Kill
This is something many MMOs get wrong but is part of the appeal of mobas. you die in a moba, you respawn pretty damn quickly and are usually back in the fight within 30s-1min. In an MMO, you die in open world pvp and it could be 5-10minutes before you're back in the proper action.
Even in instanced MMO pvp, the power gaps often mean that a fight will only last 10-15s. For example, in SW:TOR when I played, my jedi shadow could 2- or 3-shot fresh lvl 50s in 4s. There is literally no opportunity for fun for the loser and even worse, there is no opportunity for them to learn!
So, increase the TTK, make standard 1v1s last a minimum of 30s for unbalanced fights, but more like 1-2mins for balanced fights. This ensures that both combatants have the time to enjoy themselves, to execute strategies and learn from the encounter, even if the actual outcome is already pretty much guarunteed due to stats.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Comments
People need to understand that a game is not a failure because you do not play it.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
were you offended because the lyrics described you? you should be fool O.o
thats why kids these days think they are "entitled" to anything and everything, nah son you gotta work you way to the top , as we apply that to playing MMORPG's noone deserves to be on the top of wether it be PvE or PvP ladders without working for it, climb up, don't be mad that some of us like me can easily climb the top in every game we play, if you suck then suck it up (just like the song said "Just because they got a trophy for "participating" once they think they are equal to the ones that actually made an effort LOL)
I make it look really easy without putting any efforts in becoming one of the servers/games best top tier player in all the games I've played, but that doesnt mean i didnt work for it its just raw talent :pleased:
"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
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
"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
Millennial doesn't mean born after 2000.
"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
So many things that can be done with this genre and people want to spend most of their time chasing the next level or gear in the most basic boring way.
Are PvP focused MMORPGs the reason they die?
Yes.
Yup, thanks to dopamine. That's why little games like Stardew Valley are so compelling, they feed the need and make you feel good.
Here's just one of many articles about it:
http://www.bigfishgames.com/blog/how-the-best-video-games-make-us-feel-all-the-things/
"OMG MMORPGs with OWPVP are so bad. Amirite?"
"Yeah they totally die, and are dead."
"Take that griefers who killed me in Aion in 2009"
"Yeah *snort snort* SO NOT popular."
"Can't wait for artificial intelligence to improve so we can complain about it being too human like"
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I’ve spent way too much time on figuring out how I could interest PvPers in Golemizer and I’ve lost focus. I’ve coded a lot of gimmicks that were badly planned and I’ve even convinced myself that it NEEDED that. I developed too many mechanics in some ridiculous time that it was doomed right from the start.
And don’t get me started on community management … The most time-consuming concerns I had were related to PvP and community management related to it. Drama … Banning … Abusing … Hate mails … Threats … It was just way more than I could handle and it wasn’t even what I wanted to start with. At some point I was desperate to get more players and I tried way too many things which lead to more troubles.
And another shocking fact … PvPers don’t spend much money on the game. Dedicated crafters were always the most important supporters of Golemizer while PvP mostly only brought people who were requiring me to spend a lot of time for little money. So the most time I’ve spent on Golemizer was for people who didn’t help me to get any profits out of Golemizer … bringing me further from my goal of making a living out of games. That was my mistake. I shouldn’t have let PvPers take so much place in Golemizer as I know for sure that I’ve lost some of the people I wanted to play Golemizer in the process.- http://www.over00.com/index.php/archives/1119
To make it worse most of the games that make PvPer games, allot expenses for their product as if they're making a PvE game. They use servers that would work fine in a PvE game, deaths + time loss from server lagging. They design their avatars+animations as if they're a PvE game and don't account for all the effects that players can do to each other(causing animations to feel even floatier, especially since players are moving far more dynamically than AI which gets amplified when it's player on player). Mechanics need to be far tighter than they are for a PvE game, in a PvPer game anything that is cheesy/buggy will be abused(while in a PvE game it stands a good chance of being ignored if it's more annoying or time consuming than playing normally). To make things worse in a PvPer game everything needs to be "fair", in a PvE game you don't need to care about "fair" just "works".
EDIT: I don't think it needs to be said that most companies that make PvPer games, are treating it as a magic content bullet because they don't have the budget to make PvE content. Which usually works as well as No Man's Sky using procedural generation as a magic content bullet.
Practice doesn't make perfect, practice makes permanent.
"At one point technology meant making tech that could get to the moon, now it means making tech that could get you a taxi."
The reason those kinds of titles work is because of rules. PvP that exists in a complete FFA is subject to the whim of others that would abuse the system. When you're talking about a system that's supposed to be for entertainment being the platform for interpersonal virtual abuse, then you have a problem because it means many people aren't being entertained and will not stick around to give you money.
Games like EVE and Lineage which do manage to possess stability as a PvP heavy (or even PvP focused) game experience manage to work because of things that can manage player states, scale the difficulty of getting to players that don't want to participate in such activity, scales the risk associated with such behavior, and uses cooldown and penalty mechanics to make sure players can't readily abuse the system and dodge repercussion.
It means that it is a much more stable and successful game because it mitigates the threat of player abuse. Many PvP focused games fail because they do not have a good enough game or supporting system to reach this standard, but it is something achievable.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
How about 3rd person shooter PvP? How about fps pvp?
Are you saying only MMO pvp is inferior? In that case, may be they should be more like MOBA.
Or do you forget about World of Tank? A very popular pvp game, classified as a MMO by this site.
The paradox of PVP games are the thing that draws the player is the thing that will repel them.
PvP in some of those older games was not hard but it was very much a game of chess. Some people just will never be capable of playing anything but checkers so they leave.
Telling me a game has PvP never influenced me. I expect it. Telling me a game has FFA PvP is like a huge flag, screaming griefer paradise.
The problem with PvP MMOs is that the context surrounding PvP usually isn't well developed. Mostly, we're either given the option to pvp and left to our own devices, resulting in farming pvp ranks in whatever way is most efficient (zergs or ganking usually) or we're given weak objectives to fight over, like keeps, resulting in repetitive gameplay fighting over the same stuff day in, day out.
This is all usually rounded off with standard single-player mechanics, like levels and gear, which result in power gaps that reduce the fun of pvp. In this way, pvp becomes somewhat fun if you are at the top of the power curve but rubbish for everyone else.
However, the pvp itself is not why it fails. The massive popularity of online shooters and mobas proves that there is a very large desire for online pvp, it is just that designers have yet to come up with a system to make it enjoyable within an MMO for the masses.
There are some crucial things I feel need to change to make MMO PvP popular:
1) Reduce / eliminate power gaps
This could mean removing progression altogether, or going for horizontal progression, or simply making the power curve extremely shallow (max 50% between newbie and vet). This would allow everyone to feel valuable and be able to contribute straight away. Essentially, increasing accessibility.
2) Self-balancing mechanisms
This is harder to achieve, but numbers imbalance will always be a problem in open world pvp. DAoC went the 3-faction route which helped. Other MMOs go the NPC route, giving the undermanned faction somewhere to retreat to where they can have a more balanced fight as NPCs are on their side. Others still offer incentives for the over-populated side to go elsewhere (e.g. lotro's delving of fror, the winning side would open up access to this dungeon which contained worthwhile loot, so many players would disappear to go farm, swinging the balance) and other still would go with some sort of global buff to the losing side.
3) Proper Context
Give people reasons to fight. It might be to unlock new areas to get the best stuff (Darkness Falls?), or to progress the campaign to a new area (WAR), but by providing context you will convince the majority of your players to fight "properly" rather than simply looking for the quickest way to farm pvp ranks. I've personally never met a person who enjoys ganking, despite doing a lot of pvp. I have met a lot of players who solo-roam and jump other people (1v1, or 1v2) but I wouldn't classify this as ganking as they would be equal level and the "ganker" would always be solo.
4) Make it consensual
It may not make sense from a lore point of view, but outside of dedicated pvp zones all pvp should be consensual. It just eliminates a lot of stress and gives your game broader appeal.
The devs seems to think that you can just take a PvE game but change the focus which isn't good enough. The reason LOL is larger then all MMOs put together is that it makes PvP fun while MMOs make it into a competition who have best gear and highest level instead of skill and small group tactics.
A few MMOs have better mechanics but still fall short, GW2s WvW do handle the powergap which makes things more fun but it have another problem instead: Zerging. Joining a zerg will give you about 5 times the loot and XP of running a small group with far less risk but it isn't fun when 2 or more zergs just run though the map like locusts.
PvP MMOs also need to learn to get the risk Vs reward right. Killing 100 really weak opponents so beyond you that they hardly can win (which in itself is bad game design) shouldn't really be awarded much but taking out someone far better then you should be worth a lot.
And running in a safe zerg should not give you 5 times the rewards as a small group, you need to make it the opposite.
Just if you were the same level. Otherwise chess would sound like this: "My pawn is lvl 60 with legendary gear so he will gank your entire board without breaking a sweat".
Certain games did have better PvP then current games, like DaoC and Lineage but even those games could have been far better in the PvP department. PvP did feel far more meaningful in them though and while that isn't the same as really fun it still is important.
Increased Time-To-Kill
This is something many MMOs get wrong but is part of the appeal of mobas. you die in a moba, you respawn pretty damn quickly and are usually back in the fight within 30s-1min. In an MMO, you die in open world pvp and it could be 5-10minutes before you're back in the proper action.
Even in instanced MMO pvp, the power gaps often mean that a fight will only last 10-15s. For example, in SW:TOR when I played, my jedi shadow could 2- or 3-shot fresh lvl 50s in 4s. There is literally no opportunity for fun for the loser and even worse, there is no opportunity for them to learn!
So, increase the TTK, make standard 1v1s last a minimum of 30s for unbalanced fights, but more like 1-2mins for balanced fights. This ensures that both combatants have the time to enjoy themselves, to execute strategies and learn from the encounter, even if the actual outcome is already pretty much guarunteed due to stats.