Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Am I the only one who dislikes separate PvP servers?

1234568»

Comments

  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Member EpicPosts: 3,967
    "Hey guys, I don't like your style of gameplay at all. I'm the perfect person to tell you the alternative way to play your games, even though I'm the one with the issue"

    I mean why is this still continuing even now? How do we make it stop?
    "As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*" 

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Member EpicPosts: 3,967
    Konfess said:
    ...
    It's only PvP trying to get into PvE. 


    Do you understand what an choice is right? Yes?

    Okay. There is an OWPVP game where bad people will bother you. Fill in the blanks for the following statement:

    "I have the ________ to play the game. If I make the proper _________ the bad people can't bother me."

    Good job. Now, there are silly developers who put you and the bad people in the same game. It's not your fault. You didn't know. The bad people still can't bother you if you don't want them to. BUT, If you want to be a bad person too you can join, but then you can turn the bad off. It's called flagging, but lets not get too advanced.

     There's a word we're focusing on today. Fill in the blanks for the following statement.

    "I have the _________ to flag myself. If I make the proper __________ the bad people can't bother me."
    "As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*" 

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 8,164
    edited September 2016
    "Hey guys, I don't like your style of gameplay at all. I'm the perfect person to tell you the alternative way to play your games, even though I'm the one with the issue"

    I mean why is this still continuing even now? How do we make it stop?
    I think you misunderstood the thread. The OP is saying that he disliked that Dark and Light is going to have separate servers. So in essence he is not happy with the separation. What are you going on about people complaining about other people's style of game play when it looks like it is a PvPer complaining about the servers being separated? Think you got your wires crossed mistaking the starter of thread as a PvEer complaining about an open world PvP game. That is not the case.

  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Member EpicPosts: 3,967
    kitarad said:
    "Hey guys, I don't like your style of gameplay at all. I'm the perfect person to tell you the alternative way to play your games, even though I'm the one with the issue"

    I mean why is this still continuing even now? How do we make it stop?
    I think you misunderstood the thread. The OP is saying that he disliked that Dark and Light is going to have separate servers. So in essence he is not happy with the separation. What are you going on about people complaining about other people's style of game play when it looks like it is a PvPer complaining about the servers being separated? Think you got your wires crossed mistaking the starter of thread as a PvEer complaining about an open world PvP game. That is not the case.

    We're on page 8 now. :)
    "As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*" 

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
     Stop forcing people who don't want to PVP into those situations.
    How can players be forced to play any games? They don't have to download and play. A game with a pvp flag is two choices .. play the game or not .. turn the flag on or not.

    I don't see anything wrong if someone wants that, or a dev is willing to provide it.
  • ApexTKMApexTKM Member UncommonPosts: 334
    edited September 2016
    Konfess said:
    ApexTKM said:
    Konfess said:

    There are over 29 solutions listed on this site, if they were Honest about their desire for PvP.  These People are Avoiding PvP at all costs.  And Demanding the right to HUNT PvE players.  Nothing more.
    I'm demanding the right to hunt players that choose to flag themselves.



    So you are Avoiding PvP at all costs?  And Demanding the right to HUNT PvE players?
    What don't you get, seriously. Do you know what the flagging system is?
    Konfess said:

    Thing is, it's not PvE trying to get into PvP.  It's only PvP trying to get into PvE.   There are 29 OWPvP games, being ignored by PvP gamers.  This thread is all about OW PVE HUNTING.  NOT about taking down OWPvP.  PvP players are doing that just fine on their own, by ignoring these games.

    Do you even read the posts in this thread, it has nothing to do with harassing PvE players. It has to do with throwing an alternative idea out there that imo makes more sense than having PvP servers. Ganking is pointless and theres only a small crowd out there probably that are interested in that kind of thing.

    I think its better to not have server types cause all it does is segregate. This doesn't mean I want PvE players to be forced to PvP the only party here that'll hurt are the ganking people. Like what don't you understand lol. Stop trying to start PvP vs PvE drama.
    The acronym MMORPG use to mean Massive Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game.

    But the acronym MMMORPG now currently means Microscopic Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Kappa.
  • cameltosiscameltosis Member LegendaryPosts: 3,832
    Konfess said:

    This can be done with things like a flagging system (swg), dedicated pvp zones (pretty much all mmos) or sticking with instanced pvp. 


    whether you use instanced pvp, flagging, or server .. you are basically make pvp an option. I don't see why one is superior than the other. It is just different implementations that work under different conditions. 
    It not a matter of superior or not.  PvE player don't want to be prey, and PvP player don't want to be prey (because they are cowards) either.  

    If a PvP player can't find a solution, that is because all they really want to do is Hunt PvE players (Ganking).  Nothing more.  Really this thread and all like it, should be closed as TROLL posts, by Gankers.

    Hell, several of these MMOFPS actually have the requirements asked for in their description.  These winning PvPer are avoiding the games made for them.

    BTW, I'm mainly a PvE Healer.  I am Famous in Planetside for Healing and Repairing.  But I have played Each game on the MMOFPS list, except Overwatch for years now.

    Fact, the only group that wants blended servers are PvP gankers.  Honest PvP players don't want blended servers.  PvE players don't want anything to do PvP servers.  That's why Flagging is not a solution for PvP Gankers.
    You missed the point. 

    I don't want separate servers with separate rulesets. I'm an inclusive kinda guy - the best communities in the world are the most diverse, the worst communities in the world those that segregate their population. This applies to MMOs as well - the best communities have always been the most diverse, those that accept all playstyles as equally valid. As Jean-Paul Sartre said, hell is being locked forever in a room with your friends. 


    I'm also of the opinion that people change over time and that it is possible to enjoy both pve and pvp. I'm a PvP player primarily (in mmos anyway) but I always play on PvE servers. They always have more diverse communities (and thus better), there is no ganking in open world (so pvers are happy) and the pvp is still just as active and pvp servers, it is just restricted to certain areas. 


    So, with that in mind, I see absolutely no reason to have separate servers and rulesets. Lets keep everyone together. 

    The only question is implementation. I'm not saying any one implementation is the best or superior, I'm just saying that there are many possible solutions for keeping both pvp and pve players happy on the same server and that keeping players together is better for the long term health of the game. 



    Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman

  • linadragonlinadragon Member RarePosts: 589
    Until we bring back SWG style pvp flagging where anyone that wants to pvp has to flag up no there needs to be a seperate split between the two... When that happens sure merge em. There are pvp'ers then there are pk'ers a pvper shouldn't mind a distinct split between the two into separate rule sets and instanced pvp. A pk'er is probably a person claiming pvp or emergent gameplay that is really just looking for an easy target to gank.
  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    If a game requires separate servers with separate rulesets in order to please the population it just means the game designers have designed a game badly. There is absolutely no reason why pvpers and pvers cant co-exist on the same server without issues. 

    This can be done with things like a flagging system (swg), dedicated pvp zones (pretty much all mmos) or sticking with instanced pvp. 

    The only time pvp and pve players being on the same server is a problem is when the game allows full open world pvp with everyone always flagged AND where pvpers are rewarded for killing anyone. But, that is just bad game design. 

    A more fundamental problem is that core concepts from single player RPGs and table top RPGs (e.g. endless vertical progression) are incompatible with MMO PvP. If your MMO has power gaps (via levels / gear) then it is doomed to a sub-par pvp experience for the majority of players.

    However, it is going to take an exceptionally talented designer to come up with an MMO that proves that vertical progression is no longer needed and is in fact harmful to long term health of the genre. Most of us are too unwilling to leave our level and gear grinds behind. 

    Most P&P games still have a max level or max power you can get. It is true that certain systems like Shadowrun and vampire allow you to be really good at many things but there is still a maximum value for your stats, for your skills and how much damage you can do. There are a few that isn't capped at all (Amber is the only one I can think off right now). But I don't think they are a good example, while D&D and Pathfinder might be made so a lvl 1 can't ever kill a high level character the majority of P&P games actually allow that even if it takes a lot of bad luck. A low grade security guard with a sniperrifle can kill a top notch Shadowrunner and actually have a pretty good chance of doing it if he just can get a shot. The Shadowrunner is far deadlier but he wont have more hitpoints then the guards even if he soaks damage better.

    Heck, a MMO translation of Shadowrun mechanics would offer amazing PvP, a bunch of runner players trying to infiltrate a facility guarded by some players working for ARES security. The progression is just right (even if you would slow down the karma gain for a MMO) to make each fight exciting even if you have the odds against you as a noob.

    But indeed, huge powergaps ldon't make good PvP unless you either have some way to match opponents or if you downlevel them to the zone (something similar to what GW2 does in PvE zones). If you can't accept linear progression you need to use something like that to make things work.

    What clearly isn't working is to just add open world PvP servers to a PvE game. As for flagging, I feel that you need to make it more advanced so you can choose to only be flagged by people around your own powerlevel if you want to use that for fun PvP. People tend to turn off the flags until max level if they constantly get ganked in noob zones by high level characters. But it still isn't my favorite solution.
  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    Until we bring back SWG style pvp flagging where anyone that wants to pvp has to flag up no there needs to be a seperate split between the two... When that happens sure merge em. There are pvp'ers then there are pk'ers a pvper shouldn't mind a distinct split between the two into separate rule sets and instanced pvp. A pk'er is probably a person claiming pvp or emergent gameplay that is really just looking for an easy target to gank.
    Perhaps if it took 24 hours to switch between PVP and PVE mode, people might be more accepting, at least, i can't think of a reason why PVE players would have a problem with it, honestly, i think Konfess has a point, although i wouldn't actually tar all the PVP'ers with the same brush, but when it comes to flagging, the only ones who are likely to complain about a 24 hour wait for changes in stance between PVP and PVE flagging, are likely to be the PVP'ers, as they are the only ones it could possibly affect :o
  • ApexTKMApexTKM Member UncommonPosts: 334
    Phry said:

    Perhaps if it took 24 hours to switch between PVP and PVE mode, people might be more accepting, at least, i can't think of a reason why PVE players would have a problem with it.......
    mine as well bring back perma-death and lootable corpses in PvP. Whats the point of flagging if this is the case and you are right, PvE only players wouldn't have a problem with it but those who do both have the most problem with it out of those playstyle types.

    I disagree people would be more accepting if anything it'll turn people off. Maybe the people who like to gank would be more accepting or the people who like to be flagged 24/7 but what percentage of the PvP population is that.
    The acronym MMORPG use to mean Massive Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game.

    But the acronym MMMORPG now currently means Microscopic Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Kappa.
  • cameltosiscameltosis Member LegendaryPosts: 3,832
    Maybe I've just been playing the "wrong" MMOs, but I've literally never come across ganking in any MMO I've played. Is it really that big a problem, or is it just a perceived problem because it used to happen 15 years ago in the first iteration of MMOs?

    Every MMO I've played has had systems in place specifically to prevent ganking:

    • SWG - Flagging system (pvp = 100% consensual)
    • LotRO - Separate zone for pvp (pvp = 100% consensual)
    • WAR - higher tiered players get turned into chickens + flagging system
    • SW:TOR - Flagging system + no renown for open world kills (pvp = 100% consensual + ganking = useless)
    The other ones I've tried / beta tested over the years all had similar systems in place to allow pvp and pve players to play on the same server without getting in each other's way. It has literally never been a problem in any game I've ever played online. I've never seen anyone complain about it, even on forums. 

    It really does feel like this problem has already been solved for years, the only time the problem reoccurs is when developers design a game badly. 
    Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman

  • DistopiaDistopia Member EpicPosts: 21,183
    Konfess said:
    ApexTKM said:
    Konfess said:

    There are over 29 solutions listed on this site, if they were Honest about their desire for PvP.  These People are Avoiding PvP at all costs.  And Demanding the right to HUNT PvE players.  Nothing more.
    I'm demanding the right to hunt players that choose to flag themselves.



    So you are Avoiding PvP at all costs?  And Demanding the right to HUNT PvE players?
    How are people agreeing with you, that's what I'd like to know, nothing you have said is anything less than completely ridiculous... We want flag systems so we can hunt PVE players LOL? How do you hunt someone who is not attackable? LMAO... 


    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson


  • Vermillion_RaventhalVermillion_Raventhal Member EpicPosts: 4,198
    Maybe I've just been playing the "wrong" MMOs, but I've literally never come across ganking in any MMO I've played. Is it really that big a problem, or is it just a perceived problem because it used to happen 15 years ago in the first iteration of MMOs?

    Every MMO I've played has had systems in place specifically to prevent ganking:

    • SWG - Flagging system (pvp = 100% consensual)
    • LotRO - Separate zone for pvp (pvp = 100% consensual)
    • WAR - higher tiered players get turned into chickens + flagging system
    • SW:TOR - Flagging system + no renown for open world kills (pvp = 100% consensual + ganking = useless)
    The other ones I've tried / beta tested over the years all had similar systems in place to allow pvp and pve players to play on the same server without getting in each other's way. It has literally never been a problem in any game I've ever played online. I've never seen anyone complain about it, even on forums. 

    It really does feel like this problem has already been solved for years, the only time the problem reoccurs is when developers design a game badly. 
    All PvP is consensual because you logged into a game where you can be killed.  You can't  log into Call or Duty and complain you were killed in a deathmatch.  

    To me it's more about the PvP being fair and fun.  
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 18,719
    Distopia said:
    Konfess said:
    ApexTKM said:
    Konfess said:

    There are over 29 solutions listed on this site, if they were Honest about their desire for PvP.  These People are Avoiding PvP at all costs.  And Demanding the right to HUNT PvE players.  Nothing more.
    I'm demanding the right to hunt players that choose to flag themselves.



    So you are Avoiding PvP at all costs?  And Demanding the right to HUNT PvE players?
    How are people agreeing with you, that's what I'd like to know, nothing you have said is anything less than completely ridiculous... We want flag systems so we can hunt PVE players LOL? How do you hunt someone who is not attackable? LMAO... 


    I have to say though, the idea of hunting PVE players has some appeal. Maybe one day per year? We can call it "The Purge" :)
    "Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”

    ― Umberto Eco

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • linadragonlinadragon Member RarePosts: 589
    Maybe I've just been playing the "wrong" MMOs, but I've literally never come across ganking in any MMO I've played. Is it really that big a problem, or is it just a perceived problem because it used to happen 15 years ago in the first iteration of MMOs?

    Every MMO I've played has had systems in place specifically to prevent ganking:

    • SWG - Flagging system (pvp = 100% consensual)
    • LotRO - Separate zone for pvp (pvp = 100% consensual)
    • WAR - higher tiered players get turned into chickens + flagging system
    • SW:TOR - Flagging system + no renown for open world kills (pvp = 100% consensual + ganking = useless)
    The other ones I've tried / beta tested over the years all had similar systems in place to allow pvp and pve players to play on the same server without getting in each other's way. It has literally never been a problem in any game I've ever played online. I've never seen anyone complain about it, even on forums. 

    It really does feel like this problem has already been solved for years, the only time the problem reoccurs is when developers design a game badly. 
    All PvP is consensual because you logged into a game where you can be killed.  You can't  log into Call or Duty and complain you were killed in a deathmatch.  

    To me it's more about the PvP being fair and fun.  
    There is a problem with that theory unless a game is purely PVP oriented. Unless you are going to do away with levels which makes PVE often boring and verticle progression at all you can't mix the two without making sure all pvp is truly consensual. Saying you logged into a pvp game so you consent is not a valid argument at all.  You acknowledge that there is PVP and there is a distinct difference between PVP where two people are fighting and one sided ganking that exists heavily in many open world mmorpgs... And many of those games mentioned were themepark games with seperate server rulesets (SWTOR for instance as well as LOTRO) those are bad examples to use really as there are games now that implement OWPVP and many mmorpgs are now implementing open world pvp which almost always leads to ganking. Most mmorpgs now are already doing a split server rule set (at least 2 of the games there have splits)
  • immodiumimmodium Member RarePosts: 2,610

    Flag systems and security levels seem to be the easiest ways to have inclusive PvP.  A loy of players will PvP but nobody wants to be ganked and hounded with no recourse.  A system needs to give unwarranted PvP accountable.  
    Making unwarranted PvP accountable is still not a good idea for PvE players. They don't want their game time to be interrupted at all.

    Unless the system allows the person who didn't want to PvP the option of loosing nothing, respawning instantly at the place they died with no penalties (death debuffs, xp loss)and can never be attacked by the same person again.

    It's not about punishing the person initiating the PvP, it's about how to keep the person who didn't inconvenienced.

    image
  • cameltosiscameltosis Member LegendaryPosts: 3,832
    Maybe I've just been playing the "wrong" MMOs, but I've literally never come across ganking in any MMO I've played. Is it really that big a problem, or is it just a perceived problem because it used to happen 15 years ago in the first iteration of MMOs?

    Every MMO I've played has had systems in place specifically to prevent ganking:

    • SWG - Flagging system (pvp = 100% consensual)
    • LotRO - Separate zone for pvp (pvp = 100% consensual)
    • WAR - higher tiered players get turned into chickens + flagging system
    • SW:TOR - Flagging system + no renown for open world kills (pvp = 100% consensual + ganking = useless)
    The other ones I've tried / beta tested over the years all had similar systems in place to allow pvp and pve players to play on the same server without getting in each other's way. It has literally never been a problem in any game I've ever played online. I've never seen anyone complain about it, even on forums. 

    It really does feel like this problem has already been solved for years, the only time the problem reoccurs is when developers design a game badly. 
    All PvP is consensual because you logged into a game where you can be killed.  You can't  log into Call or Duty and complain you were killed in a deathmatch.  

    To me it's more about the PvP being fair and fun.  
    That reasoning only works if the game is 100% PvP. 

    If there is anything other than PvP then you can pretty much guarantee that there will be players who want to play your game but who don't want to PvP. Rather than turn away those players, you can either create extra servers with different rulesets or create systems to allow both to play together without pissing each other off. 

    I'm definitely in favour of the second option, keeping everyone on the same server but ensuring they don't piss each other off (so, use flagging system, or specific pvp zones etc). This creates a healthier community and ensures that in the future, those who previously only liked one activity can start participating in the other as their needs change. 

    Of course, the primary focus should be as you say: creating fair and fun pvp. But, regardless of how good your system is, some people will always hate pvp. 
    Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman

  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 9,386
    PvP areas or PvP instances do not make PvP players feel included in fact it makes them feel like pariahs isolated in their corners of the world. If you want to include them only the flagging system works but it has its own issues and many times the PvP players themselves hate this system as it can be exploited leaving many players invulnerable to attack. Making something work is obviously the most difficult part and some developers do not want to use any resources in trying to make these systems work.

    It is obvious if you join an open world PvP game that you know the game has PvP and if you do not like then make sure you do not complain about it. That is pure courtesy to the people playing the game and not the issue in this thread.
    Garrus Signature
  • immodiumimmodium Member RarePosts: 2,610
    cheyane said:
    It is obvious if you join an open world PvP game that you know the game has PvP and if you do not like then make sure you do not complain about it. That is pure courtesy to the people playing the game and not the issue in this thread.
    Yes, that is obvious.

    However the title of this topic is:
    Am I the only one who dislikes separate PvP servers?
    So one would assume OP is talking about a PvE based games as a PvP game wouldn't have separate PvP servers.

    Also in the subject:
    It's that generally PvP servers are poorly done. Just kind of a bone to the hardcore with little to no point but ganking in a PvE game.
    Lends credence to the assumption.

    If not it's just a poor PvP game, regardless of the PvE.

    So:
    cheyane said:

    It is obvious if you join an open world PvE game that you know the game has PvE and if you do not like then make sure you do not complain about it. That is pure courtesy to the people playing the game and not the issue in this thread.


    image
  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Member EpicPosts: 3,967
     Stop forcing people who don't want to PVP into those situations.
    How can players be forced to play any games? They don't have to download and play. A game with a pvp flag is two choices .. play the game or not .. turn the flag on or not.

    I don't see anything wrong if someone wants that, or a dev is willing to provide it.
    Game: Blade & Soul
    Style: Theme Park MMORPG
    Optional PVP: Flagging via bopae/outfit

    How can players be forced into PVP? By gating required content behind PVP walls.

    The "don't download and play" doesn't apply here because it's touted as a PVP optional game. PVE-only players have every right to complain about this scenario.
    "As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*" 

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • GruntyGrunty Member EpicPosts: 8,657
    edited September 2016
    Scorchien said:
    Vesavius said:
    DMKano said:
    If a game has separate PvP and PvE server - one thing is certain

    One of them is going to be much worse than the other.

    Over time one will thrive the other dwindles,  and devs will eventually focus only on the one that thrives 

    Bottom line doing both PvE and PVP means one will fail longterm so it's failure from the start. 

    Has there ever been a game where, with seperate PvP and PvE servers offered, the PvE has been the one to die?

    Honest question, I don't know.
    Well , Darktide (pVP) at one time and may still be the most populated AC server
    The Asheron's Call Darktide server has been all but physically eliminated by Turbine.  The reason?  The PVPer's were using global, local and private chat to organize server crashes so they could duplicate anything and everything.  

    Turbine's solution to this was to shut down all forms of in-game communication on Darktide.  The PVPer's response to this has been to abandon Darktide and invade other shards and continue to cause server crashes so they can continue to duplicate items. Even still the worst insult a PVPer can say to another PVPer is that their equipment is duplicated. 

    And yes, there are some PVE only players that do this too but not to the extent of the DT current/former population.

    TDLR:  DTer's ate their own asshat on Darktide and are now spreading their cancer to other servers.
    Post edited by Grunty on
    "I used to think the worst thing in life was to be all alone.  It's not.  The worst thing in life is to end up with people who make you feel all alone."  Robin Williams
  • nerovergilnerovergil Member UncommonPosts: 680
    no. pve has its own fan. it should be seperated
Sign In or Register to comment.