Well it's a good thing there are a lot of games out there for everyone because I couldn't disagree with you more if I tried.
Oh wait, there aren't many pvp mmos to choose from. I guess new world will be.... Oh wait...
That's the problem. There are plenty of pve focused mmos for all the pve focused players to choose from. Not so much for the rest of us.
The argument can be made both ways.
There are so many great PvE focused games out there that the PvEers joined a PvP focused game in beta, New World, and cried until they made it another PvE game. Maybe people want PvP more than they want to admit.
Err, it was the small percentage of psychopathic players whose only joy was to run around repeatedly killing lowbies for no good purpose which convinced Amazon to change the PVP design, you have only them to blame.
Unless of course, you are them? If so, here's a mirror.
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
Well it's a good thing there are a lot of games out there for everyone because I couldn't disagree with you more if I tried.
Oh wait, there aren't many pvp mmos to choose from. I guess new world will be.... Oh wait...
That's the problem. There are plenty of pve focused mmos for all the pve focused players to choose from. Not so much for the rest of us.
See and I found just the opposite: Almost every single PVE game I tried had PVP in it, which I had no interest in.
Having pvp and basing the game on pvp are two completely different concepts. Most MMOs have pvp, but it's meaningless outside being just a pastime activity if you feel like it. There is a subculture of MMORPG players who want an MMO based on pvp that has meaning and is a major part of the game whether it's forced or not.
There are so many great PvE focused games out there that the PvEers joined a PvP focused game in beta, New World, and cried until they made it another PvE game. Maybe people want PvP more than they want to admit.
Err, it was the small percentage of psychopathic players whose only joy was to run around repeatedly killing lowbies for no good purpose which convinced Amazon to change the PVP design, you have only them to blame.
Unless of course, you are them? If so, here's a mirror.
It only takes one or two a-holes to gank noobs for an hour a day to ruin the experience for a lot of people. For all we know, these a-holes are rabid PvEers that have no interest in a fair fight, which is why they are PvEers, ganking noobs.
And yes, I've admitted that I've ganked noobs in the past for specific reasons, but I've never camped them... and I've never played New World. Must have been rabid PvEers thinking that noob camping was real PvP and ruined the game. PvEers ruin everything.
Well it's a good thing there are a lot of games out there for everyone because I couldn't disagree with you more if I tried.
Oh wait, there aren't many pvp mmos to choose from. I guess new world will be.... Oh wait...
That's the problem. There are plenty of pve focused mmos for all the pve focused players to choose from. Not so much for the rest of us.
See and I found just the opposite: Almost every single PVE game I tried had PVP in it, which I had no interest in.
Having pvp and basing the game on pvp are two completely different concepts. Most MMOs have pvp, but it's meaningless outside being just a pastime activity if you feel like it. There is a subculture of MMORPG players who want an MMO based on pvp that has meaning and is a major part of the game whether it's forced or not.
No.
They want the PvP forced, in fact this little thing with New World where they allow flags, and people ugly cried about it, means they need it to be forced to paclate their desires.
And if we look at why Amazon put the flags in.. because of Asshat Gankers.
We kinda get a picture of the noisemakers that want this kind of game.
But, there enough MMO's out there that provide this, like EvE, Ark, Rust, Mortal, I just learned about Age of Wushu, but.. I notice something, they are not playing those games?
I wonder if it's because these games have been around a bit, and there are too many wolves in the game now, looking to give the fresh blood a beat down, and that is not appealing to all the players that claim they want that kind of PvP MMO.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Well it's a good thing there are a lot of games out there for everyone because I couldn't disagree with you more if I tried.
Oh wait, there aren't many pvp mmos to choose from. I guess new world will be.... Oh wait...
That's the problem. There are plenty of pve focused mmos for all the pve focused players to choose from. Not so much for the rest of us.
See and I found just the opposite: Almost every single PVE game I tried had PVP in it, which I had no interest in.
Having pvp and basing the game on pvp are two completely different concepts. Most MMOs have pvp, but it's meaningless outside being just a pastime activity if you feel like it. There is a subculture of MMORPG players who want an MMO based on pvp that has meaning and is a major part of the game whether it's forced or not.
No.
They want the PvP forced, in fact this little thing with New World where they allow flags, and people ugly cried about it, means they need it to be forced to paclate their desires.
And if we look at why Amazon put the flags in.. because of Asshat Gankers.
We kinda get a picture of the noisemakers that want this kind of game.
But, there enough MMO's out there that provide this, like EvE, Ark, Rust, Mortal, I just learned about Age of Wushu, but.. I notice something, they are not playing those games?
I wonder if it's because these games have been around a bit, and there are too many wolves in the game now, looking to give the fresh blood a beat down, and that is not appealing to all the players that claim they want that kind of PvP MMO.
No.
You are a PVE'r that's for certain. You lack any understanding of what it takes to make a good pvp MMORPG and automatically assume if someone doesn't want flags that they want a gankfest.
You couldn't be more wrong.
Areas need to be policed and there need to be proper penalties for your actions.
And here you go again listing a few games where some are not even MMO s but I'll bite one lady time.
Played Eve for a decade, need something new. Ark is not an MMO, rust is not an MMO, mortal is terribly built. Age of wushu isn't fun.
Tell me, oh knowledgeable one, according to your logic why aren't you PVErs just playing WoW, ESO, FF14, WoW Classic, Aion, BDO, or any of the COUNTLESS pve friendly MMOs instead of flocking to the next PvP focused mmo and crying "REMOVE PVP!" ?
You are a PVE'r that's for certain. You lack any understanding of what it takes to make a good pvp MMORPG and automatically assume if someone doesn't want flags that they want a gankfest.
No, I am a PvPer, I just speak the truth and you don't like it.
Also, I'll bite, how exactly is Ark not an MMO?
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Pirates of the Burning Sea also has an interesting PvP take. Normally, there is no open PvP.
However, you can start piling up points on a port, and it becomes contested. A big red circle shows up around the port, and anybody inside this is subject to PvP. Eventually, a port battle can happen that allows the port to be flipped to the other side.
For crafters and haulers, it becomes pretty intense trying to get in and out of contested ports. If you are sunk, you lose your cargo.
I mean, it's right in the name Player vs Player, not Toon vs Toon.
I'm certainly not a PvP'er, but this right here is why I think MMOs are not what "real PvP'ers" (however that's defined) need. Way too many variables involved for true "player skill vs player skill", in my opinion. Levels is the HUGE de-equalizer, not to mention weapons, armor, and skills. Shooters are the games you need, where everyone is exactly the same and all have access to the exact same weapons and defenses, and player skill is truly the defining factor.
That's just my uninformed opinion, of course
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
In a way, I agree with this. I haven't seen a good combination of PVE and PVP yet, so the GW2 approach was to isolate them. Of course, the OP did ask for combined.
The OP's question is a question but in the context of the thread Ia better question would have been - something like - what were the "good" elements of past games. Especially as many of the games being discussed "evolved".
What if - for example - DAoC launched with the Shrouded Isles expansion included? A lot of people said it "killed" realm combat. If you were in the middle of the - new - mega-dungeon content people no longer got themselves killed so they could go fight the invaders when a message flashed up. Even dividing up the loot took an age. What if DAoC had launched with ToA! would some people still be singing its praises?
DAoC did - clearly - have a significant impact though with its 3 sided Realm based combat.
I think that would be a more meaningful discussion. Things that seem "obvious" now were not necessarily "obvious" at the time. For example should there be "safe zones" or should a world be fully open PvP. Or have semi-safe areas - and in this regard EvE can be discussed a lot.
So in that light what about:
Scorchien said: ESO being instanced should not even be in the discussion
Should ESO be in the discussion?
I actually thing that ESO's main campaign "instances" are a huge step forward. And to be clear about what I - and I assume Scorchien - are talking about the instances are a) large holding c. 6,500 people and b) are timed so they reset - after a week say c) there is a cap on each of the 3 factions population. And - since they draw their population from one of the 6 mega-servers - they are usually full. None of this bemoaning that the entire server is dominated by one side or another, or empty.
If it were possible to identify a) things that should be included and b) key decisions - which could be done one way or another recognising that you will get a type A game or a type B game?
A game I don't think has been mentioned in the thread is Pirates of the Burning Sea. It had loading screen issues and never got any traction but I always thought it did PvE and PvP well.
First it was RvRvRvP. 3 realms - very much like DAoC with all the benefits of that design - plus pure Pirate; people who had defected from a realm and could attack - and be hunted - by all. Is having a 4th FFA faction better that 3 way or not?
Second it provided a link between PvE activity and PvP activity. PvE players doing PvE stuff bolstered that realm's PvP players. It didn't expect PvE players to do PvP, or PvP players to do PvE. There was a very real - and strong - link though when it came to taking over Ports. Which was done via an instanced and timed fight. Is it good to have such a link?
Instanced and timed fights - I think that was introduced with Lineage. Good? Or not?
Which leads you to Darkfall say - with territorial conquest. And, much like ESO, maps that would be reset if one "guild/alliance" had "won". Another decision point.
I mean, it's right in the name Player vs Player, not Toon vs Toon.
I'm certainly not a PvP'er, but this right here is why I think MMOs are not what "real PvP'ers" (however that's defined) need. Way too many variables involved for true "player skill vs player skill", in my opinion. Levels is the HUGE de-equalizer, not to mention weapons, armor, and skills. Shooters are the games you need, where everyone is exactly the same and all have access to the exact same weapons and defenses, and player skill is truly the defining factor.
That's just my uninformed opinion, of course
I think the term "player vs player" is being taken too literally. It doesn't mean 1 player vs 1 player... it just means players can fight other players. Being this is an MMO site, it's safe to say PvP is not meant to be a solo activity.
It would seem the people who want "fair 1 on 1 fights" or even just "fair fights" regardless of the number of people involved, that maybe a shooter is the game for them. MMO PvP is anything but fair and is not something actual MMO PvPers want.
Yes. I thought the SI and ToA expansions were great and I think instanced PvP isn't real PvP. It has to be a perpetual world with rewards and consequences.
You are a PVE'r that's for certain. You lack any understanding of what it takes to make a good pvp MMORPG and automatically assume if someone doesn't want flags that they want a gankfest.
No, I am a PvPer, I just speak the truth and you don't like it.
Also, I'll bite, how exactly is Ark not an MMO?
You speak your opinion coming from an anti-pvp mindset. You have no clue.
As far as I'm aware, it's not Massively Multiplayer. It can only support a small-ish number of players on the same map / server (140 according to google, but that number is from 2017 so i guess it could have been increased) which is well below most people's threshold for what constitutes an MMO
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
You are a PVE'r that's for certain. You lack any understanding of what it takes to make a good pvp MMORPG and automatically assume if someone doesn't want flags that they want a gankfest.
No, I am a PvPer, I just speak the truth and you don't like it.
Also, I'll bite, how exactly is Ark not an MMO?
You speak your opinion coming from an anti-pvp mindset. You have no clue.
the fact that someone thinks Ark is an MMO should tell you enough to end the discussion ..
As far as I'm aware, it's not Massively Multiplayer. It can only support a small-ish number of players on the same map / server (140 according to google, but that number is from 2017 so i guess it could have been increased) which is well below most people's threshold for what constitutes an MMO
Got it, so, it provides everything they say they want, but they don't like it because it's full of all the people that like that kind of game and they can't compete, so they need to find a way to dismiss it.
Got it.
Thank you for heads up.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
You are a PVE'r that's for certain. You lack any understanding of what it takes to make a good pvp MMORPG and automatically assume if someone doesn't want flags that they want a gankfest.
No, I am a PvPer, I just speak the truth and you don't like it.
Also, I'll bite, how exactly is Ark not an MMO?
You speak your opinion coming from an anti-pvp mindset. You have no clue.
the fact that someone thinks Ark is an MMO should tell you enough to end the discussion ..
You are a PVE'r that's for certain. You lack any understanding of what it takes to make a good pvp MMORPG and automatically assume if someone doesn't want flags that they want a gankfest.
No, I am a PvPer, I just speak the truth and you don't like it.
Also, I'll bite, how exactly is Ark not an MMO?
You speak your opinion coming from an anti-pvp mindset. You have no clue.
It's becoming more obvious you don't really play PvP games nor are you really a PvP player, which is why you advocate for games promoting unfair fights and ganking.
We shall simply never agree.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
DAOC wins for me. Aion makes my #2. GW2 and SWTOR were decent. Warhammer Online was a big disappointment. Shadowbane had great ideas, but the server lag and bugs made it virtually unplayable. In terms of pvp teamwork, Tribes is the only thing that ever came close to DAOC for me. Eve is an outlier, I was never able to get into it, it may have ranked highly judging by what others have said over time.
I could see how some might say the PVE in DAOC was meh. I mostly enjoyed it, and the later PVE content was actually pretty fun. If you had a summoner pet with ML9, you could really challenge yourself. Seeing which bosses and raid encounters you could solo, dying hours on end in the process only to finally succeed and get some ridiculous loot. The most fun I've had in PVE in any game by far.
The RVR speaks for itself, and no game has come close to topping it for my taste. I've been waiting for Camelot Unchained, but seems I might be dead before it comes out.
There are so many great PvE focused games out there that the PvEers joined a PvP focused game in beta, New World, and cried until they made it another PvE game. Maybe people want PvP more than they want to admit.
Err, it was the small percentage of psychopathic players whose only joy was to run around repeatedly killing lowbies for no good purpose which convinced Amazon to change the PVP design, you have only them to blame.
Unless of course, you are them? If so, here's a mirror.
It only takes one or two a-holes to gank noobs for an hour a day to ruin the experience for a lot of people. For all we know, these a-holes are rabid PvEers that have no interest in a fair fight, which is why they are PvEers, ganking noobs.
And yes, I've admitted that I've ganked noobs in the past for specific reasons, but I've never camped them... and I've never played New World. Must have been rabid PvEers thinking that noob camping was real PvP and ruined the game. PvEers ruin everything.
Fair enough, I'm used to shouldering the blame, I can handle this too.
BTW, I am firmly a carebear, yet I played EVE for 10 years like you, and no, not all in high sec.
I have no issues with being prey in such a universe, as long as the devs maintain a proper risk balance between the two play styles which is a difficult tightrope to walk I realize.
CCP seems to have forgotten how to do this as of late which is why I left 3 years ago.
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
DAOC wins for me. Aion makes my #2. GW2 and SWTOR were decent. Warhammer Online was a big disappointment. Shadowbane had great ideas, but the server lag and bugs made it virtually unplayable. In terms of pvp teamwork, Tribes is the only thing that ever came close to DAOC for me. Eve is an outlier, I was never able to get into it, it may have ranked highly judging by what others have said over time.
I could see how some might say the PVE in DAOC was meh. I mostly enjoyed it, and the later PVE content was actually pretty fun. If you had a summoner pet with ML9, you could really challenge yourself. Seeing which bosses and raid encounters you could solo, dying hours on end in the process only to finally succeed and get some ridiculous loot. The most fun I've had in PVE in any game by far.
The RVR speaks for itself, and no game has come close to topping it for my taste. I've been waiting for Camelot Unchained, but seems I might be dead before it comes out.
Listen to the newbie (sorry, your title is newbie). He's making sense.
There are so many great PvE focused games out there that the PvEers joined a PvP focused game in beta, New World, and cried until they made it another PvE game. Maybe people want PvP more than they want to admit.
Err, it was the small percentage of psychopathic players whose only joy was to run around repeatedly killing lowbies for no good purpose which convinced Amazon to change the PVP design, you have only them to blame.
Unless of course, you are them? If so, here's a mirror.
It only takes one or two a-holes to gank noobs for an hour a day to ruin the experience for a lot of people. For all we know, these a-holes are rabid PvEers that have no interest in a fair fight, which is why they are PvEers, ganking noobs.
And yes, I've admitted that I've ganked noobs in the past for specific reasons, but I've never camped them... and I've never played New World. Must have been rabid PvEers thinking that noob camping was real PvP and ruined the game. PvEers ruin everything.
Fair enough, I'm used to shouldering the blame, I can handle this too.
BTW, I am firmly a carebear, yet I played EVE for 10 years like you, and no, not all in high sec.
I have no issues with being prey in such a universe, as long as the devs maintain a proper risk balance between the two play styles which is a difficult tightrope to walk I realize.
CCP seems to have forgotten how to do this as of late which is why I left 3 years ago.
I really wanted to like Eve. I've popped in at least a half dozen times for extended periods to try and get into it. It just never happened. But I do get the draw.
And I still have no idea what you meant in the other post about trolls (says the guy with an orange warning bar that has "medium" written in it).
Comments
Unless of course, you are them? If so, here's a mirror.
"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
See and I found just the opposite: Almost every single PVE game I tried had PVP in it, which I had no interest in.
They want the PvP forced, in fact this little thing with New World where they allow flags, and people ugly cried about it, means they need it to be forced to paclate their desires.
And if we look at why Amazon put the flags in.. because of Asshat Gankers.
We kinda get a picture of the noisemakers that want this kind of game.
But, there enough MMO's out there that provide this, like EvE, Ark, Rust, Mortal, I just learned about Age of Wushu, but.. I notice something, they are not playing those games?
I wonder if it's because these games have been around a bit, and there are too many wolves in the game now, looking to give the fresh blood a beat down, and that is not appealing to all the players that claim they want that kind of PvP MMO.
You are a PVE'r that's for certain. You lack any understanding of what it takes to make a good pvp MMORPG and automatically assume if someone doesn't want flags that they want a gankfest.
You couldn't be more wrong.
Areas need to be policed and there need to be proper penalties for your actions.
And here you go again listing a few games where some are not even MMO s but I'll bite one lady time.
Played Eve for a decade, need something new. Ark is not an MMO, rust is not an MMO, mortal is terribly built. Age of wushu isn't fun.
Tell me, oh knowledgeable one, according to your logic why aren't you PVErs just playing WoW, ESO, FF14, WoW Classic, Aion, BDO, or any of the COUNTLESS pve friendly MMOs instead of flocking to the next PvP focused mmo and crying "REMOVE PVP!" ?
Because there is no logic. Just ranting.
Also, I'll bite, how exactly is Ark not an MMO?
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
That's just my uninformed opinion, of course
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
I haven't seen a good combination of PVE and PVP yet, so the GW2 approach was to isolate them. Of course, the OP did ask for combined.
What if - for example - DAoC launched with the Shrouded Isles expansion included? A lot of people said it "killed" realm combat. If you were in the middle of the - new - mega-dungeon content people no longer got themselves killed so they could go fight the invaders when a message flashed up. Even dividing up the loot took an age. What if DAoC had launched with ToA! would some people still be singing its praises?
DAoC did - clearly - have a significant impact though with its 3 sided Realm based combat.
I think that would be a more meaningful discussion. Things that seem "obvious" now were not necessarily "obvious" at the time. For example should there be "safe zones" or should a world be fully open PvP. Or have semi-safe areas - and in this regard EvE can be discussed a lot.
So in that light what about:
Scorchien said: ESO being instanced should not even be in the discussionShould ESO be in the discussion?
I actually thing that ESO's main campaign "instances" are a huge step forward. And to be clear about what I - and I assume Scorchien - are talking about the instances are a) large holding c. 6,500 people and b) are timed so they reset - after a week say c) there is a cap on each of the 3 factions population. And - since they draw their population from one of the 6 mega-servers - they are usually full. None of this bemoaning that the entire server is dominated by one side or another, or empty.
If it were possible to identify a) things that should be included and b) key decisions - which could be done one way or another recognising that you will get a type A game or a type B game?
A game I don't think has been mentioned in the thread is Pirates of the Burning Sea. It had loading screen issues and never got any traction but I always thought it did PvE and PvP well.
First it was RvRvRvP. 3 realms - very much like DAoC with all the benefits of that design - plus pure Pirate; people who had defected from a realm and could attack - and be hunted - by all. Is having a 4th FFA faction better that 3 way or not?
Second it provided a link between PvE activity and PvP activity. PvE players doing PvE stuff bolstered that realm's PvP players. It didn't expect PvE players to do PvP, or PvP players to do PvE. There was a very real - and strong - link though when it came to taking over Ports. Which was done via an instanced and timed fight. Is it good to have such a link?
Instanced and timed fights - I think that was introduced with Lineage. Good? Or not?
Which leads you to Darkfall say - with territorial conquest. And, much like ESO, maps that would be reset if one "guild/alliance" had "won". Another decision point.
I think the term "player vs player" is being taken too literally. It doesn't mean 1 player vs 1 player... it just means players can fight other players. Being this is an MMO site, it's safe to say PvP is not meant to be a solo activity.
the fact that someone thinks Ark is an MMO should tell you enough to end the discussion ..
Got it.
Thank you for heads up.
We shall simply never agree.
BTW, I am firmly a carebear, yet I played EVE for 10 years like you, and no, not all in high sec.
I have no issues with being prey in such a universe, as long as the devs maintain a proper risk balance between the two play styles which is a difficult tightrope to walk I realize.
CCP seems to have forgotten how to do this as of late which is why I left 3 years ago.
"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
I really wanted to like Eve. I've popped in at least a half dozen times for extended periods to try and get into it. It just never happened. But I do get the draw.