Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Newsletter #38: From the Editor
Stradden
Managing EditorMember CommonPosts: 6,696
This week, I’d like to take a few moments to talk about the idea of PvP players and non-PvP players. In reading through forum after forum, I see that generally, MMORPGers fit themselves into one of these two categories. Either you enjoy PvP or you don’t. What I find interesting about that is the fact that the two sides can’t seem to get along.
It’s gotten to the point where name-calling ( Care Bear, Ganker, etc.) comes up in almost any discussion of the topic. My question is why? What is it about these two groups that makes it so difficult for the vocal supporters of each side to come together without argument.
My question to all of you is this: Is it possible to create a game design that makes both the hardcore PvPers and the hardcore PvEers happy?
Cheers,
Jon Wood
Managing Editor
MMORPG.com
Comments
If you said hardcore PvP to me, I would instantly think UO. UO was built around FFA (free-for-all) PvP, yet there was still meaning in the world. Players still had to face consequences, but if you truly wanted to be that evil PKer who went around killing blues, you could -- but if you killed too many blues you wouldn't be able to go into "good" towns.
Hardcore PvE? Heh, not really something you hear very often. I'm sure when most people hear PvE they instantly think EQ and WoW. But to be honest, most hardcore PvP games have better PvE than these grind fests. PvE doesn't necessarily mean killing monsters, that would be PvM (player vs monster). PvE is the economy, currency, and community. Tradeskills and crafting items goes under PvE. EVE has been the most popular sandbox game for a while, and it is known as being a very hardcore game -- yet you'll never hear someone say how nice the PvE is.
Most PvEers (PvMers in this case) tend to let PvP distract them. They don't understand that most hardcore PvP games have great PvE, because they're so open-ended. Most people tend to think of DF as a hardcore PvP game, and while it does have a very anti-carebear atmosphere, it is still going to offer gameplay for those who do not like PvP combat. Who is going to harvest the resources and craft the weapons? The entire economy is run by the players, just like EVE and oldschool UO.
While this is coming from a very competetive PvPer, I'm sure a lot of you will agree with me. Most PvEers (PvMers) say they dislike PvP games because of the direct competition and how they just like to make friends and battle monsters, yet they're pretty much dissing the entire concept of being a hero and making a name for yourself. You should feel like you're part of something greater than in your real life. Sure, beating Ragnaros for the first time gave you a great feeling, but after the 20th time it just gets old. The players should shape the world, not the development team.
A little bit of background: I am Dutch, and tend to think that the best solution is that one man's pursuit of happyness is allowed as long as it doesn't hinder another's. That being said, I think the WoW PvE server system was great. If you wanted to do PvP, you could flag it on. If you didn't, you could mull about your PvE business without being attacked from behind by another player. The colour of the name-tag clearly revealed if you were open to PvP or not. There was also plenty of PvP action in the instanced battlegrounds, so PvP'ers should be happy. Ideal system IMO.
Guild Wars has the PvP down right by having the arenas.
The devs for Matrix Online thought that having whole servers for PvP or PvE was a good idea, however it failed as there was so much abuse from people who were killed in PvP as a result of mass "ganking" also known as Zerging (after Starcraft), MXO has ridiculous PvP and since the new combat system and it's gotten worse thanks to ability trees that were nerfed for no reason.
Also any game that has more than two sides or factions like MXO, which has three, doesn't work well, as you find that the factions with the lowest player count tend to team up, recently in MXO the Machine and Merovingian factions have been working together against the Zion players.
The best way to solve the whole PvP Vs PvE is to do what Guild Wars did, make them seperate.
I would class as PvPvE as I don't mind PvP when it's done right, but having just left MXO for good due to excessive amount of Zerging and coder camping where pleyers who may be coding are attacked purely bacause unless you get revived you lose all code bits (the crafting materials) they you had in your inventory.
if this doesn't make much sense I appolagise but I'm tired of the attitude that goes into PvP from the idiots that think it's the only thing to live for.
More importantly, WHY do games have to include both? What is wrong with folks who enjoy PvE wanting just a PvE game? It seems like the PvP crowd believes they have to be included in every single game these days, as if leaving out PvP is some personal attack. I have seen game after game be "Balanced" once PvP is introduced, always to the detriment of the PvE game. I guess I'll never understand the PvP folks because when a game is released that advertises as a PvP game, I stay away. Why can't the PvPers do the same for PvE games instead of insisting games be made into something they were never meant to be?
I don't think you can make both hardcore PVP and hardcore PVE players happy in the same game. when a game lacks full autoloot and when players can't be ganked at any given time at any given place, PVP players start complaining its a "carebear game". and when a game does involves ganking with full loot then PVE players will complain they get ganked and lose equipment while doing PVE.
PvE players and PvP players will never get along. Some PvE players may begin to enjoy PvP and vice verse, but the styles have ideals which directly contradict each other.
PvE players are role playing a hero of lore. The hero never gets ganked, never loses a fight (unless it allows him to have a chance at a dramatic revenge). He slays dragons. He saves his people and his praises are sung for ages. Getting ganked while you are farming baby dragons just doesn't fit into that paradigm.
PvP players, on the other hand, love to ambush people. They love to defend themselves against ambushes. They love to hate "XxDarthMaulxX" or whatever other player they have chosen as their nemesis. The PvP player isn't trying to be the famous hero. He is trying to be the infamous brigand or the unwaivering lawman.
I am seriously convinced that if ANY PvE carebear ever defended himself successfully against a 4v1 ambush then he'd be a convert for life. Of course you lose 99 out of 100 of those fights, but if you ever win one OMFGROFLMAO it R0><0R$ D3//D !
FFA PvP offers the most oppurtunities for a seriously player controlled community. Unfortunatley, it is a harsh harsh existance.
Ask any old AC DT player.
I know that there will never be the perfect game that everyone loves and plays. I just hope that games of the future will have one server dedicated for FFA PvP.
Which FF Character Are You?
Yes I believe you can and there once was a game that contained both PvP and PvE in harmony. This game was set in a galaxy far, far away. Screenshots are all over the interent of the huge PvP battles that took place. There are so many games coming out now that are strictly PvP orientated and while that is fine, you exclude those other casual players that dont much care for that style of game play. I think that both can coexist in the same game and then everybody is happy.
All I can say is that for those that want to call the people "carebears," jump into Lineage II and see just how frustrated you get when you get ganked at level 10 by a level 65 player while you are still in the beginner area trying to get your skills up.
I do not really care for PvP but I do play Lineage II (PvP all the time, no option to turn it off) and when I get bored with killing the same mobs over and over again I will jump into a different game so I can craft. The sad thing that I have seen after playing and talking with some of the people in L2 that claim to be hard core PvPers is the fact that the areans for the most part are not used and a lot of high level people have a RED (chaotic) player that is strictly for killing low level people. I dont understand how they can be 1337 as there really isnt much skill involved with killing someone that is so much lower then you are. Like most people since you can have several toons on the same server, after you have one of your new toons get ganked, a lot of people will bring in their main to go back and face the chaotic player only to see that they will Force Log because they simply dont have a clue how to fight someone the same level that they are.
When I played the game with the name I will not mention, as I have said, I never really took place in the PvP aspect of the game much but I did have the option and on occasion would switch my status to take part in some of the battles. Having an option to go on Special Forces to take part in the PvP aspect of the game was a very good idea. I think with that as an option it gives the casual PvEer the choice to try out another aspect of a game on their terms. You never know, some that start out as strictly PvE may end up spending more time in PvP battles. PvP and PvE are choices and most people either love it or hate it but to have a good MMO I think you need the option to satisfy both to draw in more subscribers.
pve'er - someone who has 80 hours a week to spend grinding in raids?
pvp'er - someone who only hangs out in groups and jumps lone strangers?
those are extremes of both. both is how people seem to label the other side. neither is anywhere near accurate (for the majority of people).
anti socials and little kids can be attributed to the people that fill up BOTH those stereotypes.
i don't think i've been part of a guild/clan yet (uo, eq, eq2, wow, eve, sor, gw, et cetera) where everyone didn't enjoy both the pvp and the pve after they'd experienced it with the group.
first week i played uo, i thought there was this red boss that lived JUST outside of brit, cuz everytime i'd get a bit into the woods, the red guy would come kill and loot me. surely that wasn't a player who had nothing better to do than gank OBVIOUS noobs? it was a player. so i just started going out southern brit instead of the GY side.
part of the issue is that people want to solo in MMOs for as long as possible, and don't like grouping because someone else will ALWAYS get the good stuff that drops.
being part of a good clan would eliminate that fear, and honestly, it does fix a lot of the supposed animosity between the "two camps". but those anti socials and the little kids... they won't ever get it, and they'll be very vocal about their not getting it.
take wow for instance. on average, not even 0.1% / one-tenth of one percent of the people raid, and no one that grinds in a bg does it because it's fun and world pvp is a joke. the exceptions are the extreme stereotypes (anti socials and little kids).
bleh, think what you guys will, just my two cents.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
I don't think thats strictly true, I think you hear the sides of the most devout PvPers which can in turn polarize people who are not so keen on PvP to call themselves PvErs. I actually think there are alot of people out there who could potentially enjoy a Pvp game if it is designed right. As evidence of this, I would say there is a large number of people in WoW who do or have done BGs.
So quite rightly the more appropiate question as you posed above is can hardcore PvPers and hardcore PvErs enjoy a game together? To which I think the answer is probably no as by definition both people are looking really for their own game. Hardcore PvPers may PvE to improve their equipment for PvP, but hardcore PvErs don't want anything to do with the pvp side. Again as evidence of this in EQ, there was the option for players to turn PvP on a PvE server, the majority did not and preferred to go on a PvP server if they wanted hardcore PvP.
Often it seems that people who are relating their poor experiences with PvP are focusing on the element of getting PK'ed - player-killed, killed by another player. I personally believe that this is a vital flaw. PvP is never about being killed, it's about being able to kill. Allow me to explain.
To me, this seems a rather obvious conflict - a matter of incompatible goals. On one hand, we have players who prefer not to hunt other players and on the other we have some that do - often to the point of sport. Now if one were the sort of player who prefers PvE and predominantly tries to steer away from PK'ing, for whatever the reason, then naturally, a certain amount of animosity towards any players intent on sabotaging that goal is to be expected.
Ultimately, however, the pivotal element of this conflict seems to be one of mentality. One has to consider that any PvP-game is essentially still a PvE-game, it just happens that the environment has been expanded to include other players as well and that, all things being equal, this addition extends to everyone involved. Of course, what this means is that the concern of whether-to-PK-or-not-to-PK is really just a moral choice and that for someone intent on doing so everything else, level, gear, player-skill etc., becomes merely the means to an end.
Therefore, essentially we come down to this, how ever often someone may get killed by another player that person is still the one in control of how it could happen; by choosing the ability to kill others it goes without saying that others gain the ability to kill you. As such, it is my opinion that whenever someone is deciding whether to play a PvP-game the question they have to ask themselves is this:
For if the answer is, "No" then they have already set themselves at a disadvantage.
People in general like to generalize and categorize EVERYTHING. Do I think that Pvpers and PvEers will ever coexist in one, I most defiantly think that it is possible, but you will not achieve this goal through the players. They will always remain the same, the company or game maker will have to, through great focus groups, beta testing and reading forums to understand what each person wants in a game. I personally have no bad experience playing in a PvP server and doing so as a PvEer.
I am what many people would say is “out of genre”. Why? Because I hate groups and grouping I am a BIG solo player. However I love the MMORPG universe and hope one day it accommodates me and many others like me. After reading the Conan interview for there online game I feel they are on the right track in PvP-PvE and soloing.
My biggest observation in all the MMORPGs I have played is lack of accountability. You can’t play an MMO like you play an offline game, You should be accountable for your actions. Even if it IS a game people don’t act like it and not only that, you have 100 of thousand of players playing and people online in general act more rudely and aggressively because there is no accountability. Online and online games embolden people to do and say things that they would not normally do and say. Should ganking be permitted? NO. Imagine in real life someone ganking, are going to your job and harassing you, because in no unfair terms that’s what ganking is, the online term for Harassing which in many countries carries heavy penalties in life. A game - no penalties. Introduce penalties then you have something. Oblivion the offline game has law enforcements for harassing NPC’s so you need the same for online games. People will play differently and not only that it would add to the realism, cut down on unnecessary calls and Emails to Customer Service as well.
Consent is always necessary for everything, contracts are always signed and rules made, in UFC, Boxing or any other contact sport. Even for sex you need consent. So in games why shouldn’t there be consent? That question is aimed at PvPers. Because it takes away realism? Watch the online news there are countries were 1000s of people die daily due to PvP (not player versus player but Person versus Person). I bet you wouldn’t jump the next plane to have that realistic raw experience. Yea but this is a game. You may say, that’s true it is a game being played buy 1000s of people many wanting to have there freedom to do what they want as they want. If that involves exploring, diplomacy are grinding, raiding let them without thinking you have to kill them.
Now for PvErs, most of these games are taken from variations of earths history, which means this, in times passed seemed to have, ruled areas that was under the law of a king and then savage lands are neutral zones or in the very least less unprotected areas. So anyone should expect wondering to far in perhaps the savage land or enemy territory that you will be attacked. You have to INCLUDE that in your roleplaying experience, in truth, it is in a sense, PvE, because that area is designed for such things, even when a large group of Horde or Alliance decide to “raid” your city. It doesn’t happen enough to say it’s unfair.
Jack Nicholson said in Mars Attack, Can't we all just (long pause) Get along
There that’s my two cents.
------------------------------------------------------
Do I ever sleep?
The non PvP crowd likes their challenges to be balanced. We like to be in a controlled enviroment. No one would attack a mob that is 15 levels higher than you. You would also not attack a mob 15 levels lower than you, excluding EQ where mobs always drop cash and items. The mob wouldn't give you any rewards. We don't understand the mentality of someone wanting to kill someone 10-50 levels lower. Also, you have to deal with raid equipped characters which throws the balance off even more.
I am aware of no game that punishes people for being mass murderers. Again, I think most non PvP people feel like that is antisocial behavior is points to the individuals mentality. DAoC is unique, because it is controlled PvP, there is no overpowering raid items, its war so we aren't sociopaths.
In my eyes a lot of people who enjoy PvP master the gank by brute force. IE, levels, gear, numbers. I can't fathom how that is fun. People apparently like it. They don't understand the RPG part. I think non PvP people feel that killing someone without cause should be punishable.
Where is the thrill in killing someone that has 10% life left from a former encounter? Where is the thrill in one shotting the level 15? Where is the thrill in 4 people ganking 1?
These are issues I think that divide us. Its not pvp vs. non pvp, because I think many of us would play a pvp game if it was implemented, so that being a sociopath wasn't rewarding.
Originally posted by Stradden
This week, Id like to take a few moments to talk about the idea of PvP players and non-PvP players. In reading through forum after forum, I see that generally, MMORPGers fit themselves into one of these two categories. Either you enjoy PvP or you dont. What I find interesting about that is the fact that the two sides cant seem to get along.
Its gotten to the point where name-calling ( Care Bear, Ganker, etc.) comes up in almost any discussion of the topic. My question is why? What is it about these two groups that makes it so difficult for the vocal supporters of each side to come together without argument.
My question to all of you is this: Is it possible to create a game design that makes both the hardcore PvPers and the hardcore PvEers happy?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apparently you have two questions.
"What is it about these two groups that makes it so difficult for the vocal supporters of each side to come together without argument?"
Probably the same reasons why people on opposite sides of polarizing arguements in real life fail to meet eye to eye. Passive vs. Aggressive, Right vs. Left, Chicago Deep Dish vs. New York Thin Crust.
"Is it possible to create a game design that makes both the hardcore PvPers and the hardcore PvEers happy?"
An entirely voluntary, yet rewarding and immersive PvP and PvE experience all around.
PvP should be completely voluntary. Yet there should be incentives for choosing to participate in meaningful PvP. PvP battles that actually affect the course of events.
PvP should also not focus primarily on those with the best class/gear/item combination. The lowly privates serve purposes just like the high generals.
The rules should be clear, and fine tuned to avoid griefing.
Yet there should also be benefits for not engaging in PvP to offer some balance. Like no mandatory duty, or fines, or loss of rank or territory. Free will as opposed to being In Service.
It's all very complicated and hard to generalize. Hope some of this made sense...
Is it possible to make a system where PVE and PVP are both happy, yes I think so and this is how I would do it:
1) PVP is always on all the time.
2) When you die in PVP matchups every single item in your inventory is lootable.
3) Insurance Vs PVP losses is available.
4) In Game authorities whether it be Horde/Alliance police in WoW or Rebel/Imperial Troopers in SWG exist. Every time you kill a player lower level than you and it is witnessed by any other player or NPC they can report it to the "authorities". If authorities are informed of a legitimate "gank" they will hunt and permanently kill the player.
5) Executions of the PVP "gankers" are public and well advertised.
PVP hardcore players will love the challenge of picking off loner players, the amount of loot from the kill and the challenge of evading authorities.
PVE players will be able to live with it if they keep insured, travel in groups to have one "survivor" get to the authorities. They will also love going to the public execution of the "ganker" that got them.
Legitimate rewards for PVPers, legitmate risks. PVE players can enjoy this format I think I know I would and I dabble in both worlds although I tend to be more of a PVE enthusiast.
This could be made more fun by having areas where authorities don't search as often or "non extradition countries/planets/zones" where you could exile yourself to if you know you are hunted. I think the ability to make it fun and workable is there it just requires good game design.
And as a side point I hate the idea of forced grouping to safely travel anywhere, I like grouping with friends and strangers but I don't like being forced to wait around doing nothing so I can get a group to do something fun.
And as a side point I hate the idea of forced grouping to safely travel anywhere, I like grouping with friends and strangers but I don't like being forced to wait around doing nothing so I can get a group to do something fun.
I respectfully diagree. I think that if the PVP people worked their butts off to get their characters leveled up only to permanently loose them to authority death, you'd see a marked reduction in "gank" style deaths.
As I said I am mainly a PVE player and this certainly works for me. I think it mirrors RL enough that it could be easily workable.
And as a side point I hate the idea of forced grouping to safely travel anywhere, I like grouping with friends and strangers but I don't like being forced to wait around doing nothing so I can get a group to do something fun.
I respectfully diagree. I think that if the PVP people worked their butts off to get their characters leveled up only to permanently loose them to authority death, you'd see a marked reduction in "gank" style deaths.
As I said I am mainly a PVE player and this certainly works for me. I think it mirrors RL enough that it could be easily workable.
What is the upside to the PVE player over a non-pvp pve environemnt?
I don't think it is even desirable to try. Why should a game try to appeal to opposing player styles? Why not make games that do whatever they do better?
I don't mind PvP, even FFA PvP. I don't think PKers are evil gankers who exist to only ruin my gameplay. But, at the same time, I generally don't feel the need to react violently (not even in a game) when someone merely annoys me, and I don't think I could bring myself to attack a stranger randomly, even if they were "on the other side" in a conflict. I am just not comfortable being unkind to people that way. I've done a fair amount of PvP, but it was almost all self-defense. I think I am fairly balanced on this, but I have talked to people who have no desire whatsoever to ever attack anyone and who have even less desire to have to defend themselves.
I think there needs to be a little more respect and understanding about people who derive their fun from different aspects of games, not only with regard to PvP vs PvE, but also with regard to hardcore vs. casual, soloing vs. grouping, raiding or non-raiding endgames, etc. For some people, fighting other players is the challenge and the fun. For others, that's just a source of discomfort because they don't enjoy conflict with other people. For some people, coordinating with other people to kill a tough boss mob is the challenge and the fun. There's no way to make people like something that just doesn't have any appeal to them.
...
This is where I draw the line: __________________.