Why do people seek PvP?

Chimborazo

Still for the sake of discussion, and maybe helping me figure out what I should look in a next MMO.
I've seen that PvE mainly and PvE only players are the most common, then there are PvP only players who are not interested in PvE.
They might seek instanced, perfectly balanced PvP to test their skill against other capable players in order to rise to the top, and that I can fully understand.
Then there's the crowd who seek open world open PvP, high risk high reward (full loot?) experience and they despise PvE cause it's easy, boring, predictable ecc. 

In my process of reflecting on the true nature of some aspects of gaming, I have come with yet another question : is it really a matter of people or AI? 

The average PvE themepark is usually more laid back in open content, they don't push you a lot, only raid content that becomes predictable offer some sort of challenge etc. But if you think about it for a moment, this are not features that are intrinsecally tied to a PvE game, it's just the default choice.

The issues I've had with open PvP (and I fear this is tied with most kind of deeply player driven content) is that people are flawed, have their limits as people (can't be connected 24 / 7) and you can also count on drama, griefing etc.

Some would say that if you're playng an MMO you have to do it to play with people, and I agree with that, but maybe we should be more realistic and find a middle ground. 

I'm asking PvP fans who actively seek open world PvP: what if a game put at the core of the game an open PvE system, very little instanced content, good AI with mobs that provide challenge (not in the way big raid bosses have done to this day) dynamic events where the mobs actually seek to destroy you and conquer your territories, while you are also able to conquer their base etc, meaningful death penalty. 

Does this type of game still (which doesn't exist I think) not appeal to you?

Let me know what you think

Aeander

I can only speak as a fan of faction PvP. I like realm loyalty and epic large scale wars. It's not so much that it's PvP, but rather that all of these people are interacting and fighting an unpredictable foe that shares their objectives. And the faction politics are interesting. It gives these games life, and serves as a great pacebreaker when the PvE side grows repetitive. Most importantly, it's an experience that you cannot find in any other genre. You can get better PvE in a single player RPG. You can grief people in a trash survival game. Even dynamic PvE content is becoming a staple of the MMO-lite space. Realm vs. Realm PvP is unique to the MMO.

I'm not a fan of arena PvP (usually), because the objectives don't tend to be compelling like they are for a MOBA.

I'm not a fan of free for all PvP, because non-consensual PvP isn't competitive; it's inconvenient at best and outright harassment at worst.


As for your concept of PvE-only faction wars, I'd certainly enjoy that. It's not an entirely new idea. Just an uncommon one. Firefall tried it (until it changed its mind). 

Xatsh

I feel it really comes down to keeping ppl from getting bored.

PvP adds elements of skill into fights and there is technically not a cap. Every Encounter is different.

PvE no matter how complex it is or how long it takes to learn, once mastered in most PvE games it is easy to replicate, because it is always the same, never changing. While a better AI might work... there is currently nothing developed or technology available that would allow the game to learn and adapt to the situation.

And I will throw this out.. no pve game has released enough content to keep people busy since the 2006/2007ish era in terms of pure pve content. PvE games are so overly focused on casuals... hardcores burn through the content in months if not weeks.

Instanced vs Open World.

In my opinion if a game is going to have PvP, it needs to be tied into the world you are playing in not somewhere outside it. Can have safe areas and such but if a game has pvp it has to be openworld or it becomes a side activity... not a primary point of the game.

In FFXIV PvP is completely pointless in the game honestly. Serves no purpose at all.

Current version of WoW PvP in the open world is more or less for ganking lowbies.

In Both there is no real rewards/not enough rewards for pvp in terms of primary progression. And in MMO's progression is key. No reward = No progression = pointless. Aka why play pvp in a mmo for nothing when you can play a moba which is vastly superior in every way in terms of pure pvp with no lasting rewards.

So I feel to make those who want pvp and mmos happy it has to be incorporated into the world in some way, and having a higher skill has to have some value to it.

Now lies the issue can both PvE and PvP exist equally without becoming completely imbalanced.

In Archeage for example it is a game with alot of pvp and pve. But it gets to a point where if you are geared enough and skilled enough with a group... you can negate others PvE almost completely with PvP. Aka the hardcores literally have the power to ruin the game for the casuals, preventing them from playing the majority of content. one of the major downfalls of the game.

Other PvP centric games have suffered similar fates in the west.

So can it exist evenly and make both pve and pvp happy... I honestly am not sure if it is possible.

As for full loot pvp. I personally like pvp, but I feel that has no place in a mmo at all in my opinion. mmos are about long term progression, losing your gear (progression) goes against that.

Kyleran

Why did Cain kill Abel? Why do hunters shoot animals with high powered riflescat very long range?  Who can explain the sociopaths amongst us?

  

Chimborazo

Aeander said:

I can only speak as a fan of faction PvP. I like realm loyalty and epic large scale wars. It's not so much that it's PvP, but rather that all of these people are interacting and fighting an unpredictable foe that shares their objectives. And the faction politics are interesting. It gives these games life, and serves as a great pacebreaker when the PvE side grows repetitive. Most importantly, it's an experience that you cannot find in any other genre. You can get better PvE in a single player RPG. You can grief people in a trash survival game. Even dynamic PvE content is becoming a staple of the MMO-lite space. Realm vs. Realm PvP is unique to the MMO.

I'm not a fan of arena PvP (usually), because the objectives don't tend to be compelling like they are for a MOBA.

I'm not a fan of free for all PvP, because non-consensual PvP isn't competitive; it's inconvenient at best and outright harassment at worst.

I think you can achieve some of those aspects too: different realms, fighting among them is not allowed (or is just not the focus of the game) and everyone fights against this other big realm of mobs, there's still a feel of belonging to a faction, a little bit of alliance / drama if you want (like Faction A is fighting with the mob faction and ask faction B to help, that might come or refuse etc) and every faction is competing with each other at who beats the AI faction the most, like a sort of cold war: but you still have an infrastructure that is devoted and tuned to give everybody the fun they look for in a game. You can't ofc recreate a deep political system in a scenario like this.

I've had my fair share of open PvP in GW2, that mode is not the core of the game and has its flaws but I've noticed that, even if my side had the right amount and quality of people, the fun would only come if also the other enemy players were in the right situation, in the right numbers moving on the right way etc. This situation hasn't happened to me that often to be honest, I know you could work on the mechanics of the open world PvP itself to improve the situation a bit but in the end you can't control players. 
I think (but I'm far from an expert) it's more reasonable trying to make a PvE open system (heavily cooperative on large scale, that's the part you can't find on RPG) that gets closer to "perfection". 

Jakdstripper

Because in the end those people are looking for a human connection, and no AI can ever give you that. The inteligence behind a human is alive and communicative, an AI is not. People that play exclusively pvp thrive on that adversary type of connection with other human beings.its an antagonistic connection but still a connection. They like to struggle and prevail over other humans. It doesnt matter how intricate or difficult or adaptable an AI is, it will never feel like a human intelligence. 

At the same time, pvp tends to create strong tribal bonds with other like minded pvpers in the struggle to survive and dominate. This is an additional type of connection that pve games very rarely manage to replicate with the same intensity. 

Lastly, variety. No AI will ever create the endless content that a competing human mind will. Its endless, ever changing, hyper competitive entertainment.

Chimborazo

Xatsh said:

I feel it really comes down to keeping ppl from getting bored.

PvP adds elements of skill into fights and there is technically not a cap. Every Encounter is different.

PvE no matter how complex it is or how long it takes to learn, once mastered in most PvE games it is easy to replicate, because it is always the same, never changing. While a better AI might work... there is currently nothing developed or technology available that would allow the game to learn and adapt to the situation.

And I will throw this out.. no pve game has released enough content to keep people busy since the 2006/2007ish era in terms of pure pve content. PvE games are so overly focused on casuals... hardcores burn through the content in months if not weeks.

Instanced vs Open World.

In my opinion if a game is going to have PvP, it needs to be tied into the world you are playing in not somewhere outside it. Can have safe areas and such but if a game has pvp it has to be openworld or it becomes a side activity... not a primary point of the game.

In FFXIV PvP is completely pointless in the game honestly. Serves no purpose at all.

Current version of WoW PvP in the open world is more or less for ganking lowbies.

In Both there is no real rewards/not enough rewards for pvp in terms of primary progression. And in MMO's progression is key. No reward = No progression = pointless. Aka why play pvp in a mmo for nothing when you can play a moba which is vastly superior in every way in terms of pure pvp with no lasting rewards.

So I feel to make those who want pvp and mmos happy it has to be incorporated into the world in some way, and having a higher skill has to have some value to it.

Now lies the issue can both PvE and PvP exist equally without becoming completely imbalanced.

In Archeage for example it is a game with alot of pvp and pve. But it gets to a point where if you are geared enough and skilled enough with a group... you can negate others PvE almost completely with PvP. Aka the hardcores literally have the power to ruin the game for the casuals, preventing them from playing the majority of content. one of the major downfalls of the game.

Other PvP centric games have suffered similar fates in the west.

So can it exist evenly and make both pve and pvp happy... I honestly am not sure if it is possible.

As for full loot pvp. I personally like pvp, but I feel that has no place in a mmo at all in my opinion. mmos are about long term progression, losing your gear (progression) goes against that.

Technology is probably not here yet, but I feel developers purposely tune the level of open PvE toward the easy side. I'm not just talking about the general difficulty of each mob encounter, but the general idea that you as a player decide when, where and how to approach the environment, while the environment never strikes you on its initiative. 

"hard" PvE like it's been done many times is not my cup of tea tbh, it's usually a combination of grind to have the right gear / stars + 10/15 minutes spent around a single raid boss who has many phases and you have to not fail / mess up under pressure. That's the kind of situation you can "master" with time. I don't believe you can make a PvE encounter as good and varied as a PvP one (altho there are lots of bad players and lame unbalanced builds out there) but we can definitely improve from the current situation :

About the "grand scheme" of PvE, the "dynamic event" you probably don't even need an AI, several game master that works behind the scenes and play the game similar to a strategy game against the players seams doable. 

WBadger

Chimborazo said:

Still for the sake of discussion, and maybe helping me figure out what I should look in a next MMO.
I've seen that PvE mainly and PvE only players are the most common, then there are PvP only players who are not interested in PvE.
They might seek instanced, perfectly balanced PvP to test their skill against other capable players in order to rise to the top, and that I can fully understand.
Then there's the crowd who seek open world open PvP, high risk high reward (full loot?) experience and they despise PvE cause it's easy, boring, predictable ecc. 

In my process of reflecting on the true nature of some aspects of gaming, I have come with yet another question : is it really a matter of people or AI? 

The average PvE themepark is usually more laid back in open content, they don't push you a lot, only raid content that becomes predictable offer some sort of challenge etc. But if you think about it for a moment, this are not features that are intrinsecally tied to a PvE game, it's just the default choice.

The issues I've had with open PvP (and I fear this is tied with most kind of deeply player driven content) is that people are flawed, have their limits as people (can't be connected 24 / 7) and you can also count on drama, griefing etc.

Some would say that if you're playng an MMO you have to do it to play with people, and I agree with that, but maybe we should be more realistic and find a middle ground. 

I'm asking PvP fans who actively seek open world PvP: what if a game put at the core of the game an open PvE system, very little instanced content, good AI with mobs that provide challenge (not in the way big raid bosses have done to this day) dynamic events where the mobs actually seek to destroy you and conquer your territories, while you are also able to conquer their base etc, meaningful death penalty. 

Does this type of game still (which doesn't exist I think) not appeal to you?

Let me know what you think

Not particularly.  That genuinely doesn't sound like a middle ground.  It sounds like a safe space MMO that caters to only one playstyle.  PvP is a dirty, toxic, mud slinging cess pool.  And that's the way it should be, because most people inherently want to do dirty, toxic, things.  Keyboard warriors, ones who will always say nasty things to you on the internet certainly wouldn't do the same thing in real life because in real life we live in a civilized society where certain things can be socially punished.  When you remove that outlet by removing a negative player interaction like that for the sake of other people who don't want to partake in it, those people bottle up those negative emotions.  If you don't enjoy pvp, then you don't enjoy pvp.  But presenting this 'tofu-alternative,' to pvp is essentially trying to bait people into being vegans.

CitizenX007

MMO developers have been aggressively pushing the idea of PvP since the beginning...because it saves them from spending 100's of millions of dollars on actual content/AI development. The sociopaths players entertain themselves whilst pouring millions into the cashshop...works out beautifully for the publishers. And, to make sure that the psychos PvPer's have an ample supply of new victims competitors to dominate compete against, they will often lock desirable items behind X number of hours of time spent in PvP, thus forcing people to participate in PvP mode who otherwise wouldn't.

Aeander

I had my own concept for a faction PvPvE type game. In which all factions are hostile to one another (barring player-made alliances). But they would all have a common enemy.

Players who engage in PvP would eventually corrupt their souls to the point of permanent physical transformation into a new race, and they'd all form into one hostile faction in the center of the world that everyone must unite against.

That way, the douchefucks of the world would eventually have free reign to do what they want, but they would be unable to interface with the PvE component of the game at all, they'd lose all ability to interact with other factions non-violently, they'd have to sneak past the other faction's inevitable defensive borders to PK people, and they'd be identified as hostile on sight.

TEKK3N

I tell you what it is.

PvPers (in MMORPGs) seek for the most easy prey, mainly Carebears.
So what they look for is Low Risk, High Reward.

Unfortunately Carebears do not stick around for long as they are the ones subjected to the High Risk, Low Reward law.

AKA, it should be the other way round but it isn’t, for some unknown reason.

Jakdstripper

CitizenX007 said:

MMO developers have been aggressively pushing the idea of PvP since the beginning...because it saves them from spending 100's of millions of dollars on actual content/AI development. The sociopaths players entertain themselves whilst pouring millions into the cashshop...works out beautifully for the publishers. And, to make sure that the psychos PvPer's have an ample supply of new victims competitors to dominate compete against, they will often lock desirable items behind X number of hours of time spent in PvP, thus forcing people to participate in PvP mode who otherwise wouldn't.

The simple fact that you like pvp does not make you a psycopath. If that was the case then anyone that ever competed in any sport or activity should be as well. There is a big distinction between the natural need to compete and dominate (which is a very primal instict dictated by nature and evolution especially in males),  and a complete lack of emphaty, shame, regret, pitty, or general positive feelings of psychopaths. 

Yes, the stress of competition often brings out the worst in people, especially already unhappy or frustrated people, but that doesnt make everyone a pshycopath. In fact most pshycopath are very good at appearing "nice, friendly, caring, charming even charismatic" to the world.
 

iixviiiix

Because You can't expect AI to be dumb .

Human capable to both dumb and smart , unexpected . That's why PVP fun and people seek for it .

Theocritus

Some people like the "only the strong survive" concept. but often the strong are either players with no life (play 24/7) or they spend thousands in the cash shop. I've yet to play a PVP MMORPG that was anywhere near fair or set up well.

Amaranthar

Chimborazo said:

Still for the sake of discussion, and maybe helping me figure out what I should look in a next MMO.
I've seen that PvE mainly and PvE only players are the most common, then there are PvP only players who are not interested in PvE.
They might seek instanced, perfectly balanced PvP to test their skill against other capable players in order to rise to the top, and that I can fully understand.
Then there's the crowd who seek open world open PvP, high risk high reward (full loot?) experience and they despise PvE cause it's easy, boring, predictable ecc. 

In my process of reflecting on the true nature of some aspects of gaming, I have come with yet another question : is it really a matter of people or AI? 

The average PvE themepark is usually more laid back in open content, they don't push you a lot, only raid content that becomes predictable offer some sort of challenge etc. But if you think about it for a moment, this are not features that are intrinsecally tied to a PvE game, it's just the default choice.

The issues I've had with open PvP (and I fear this is tied with most kind of deeply player driven content) is that people are flawed, have their limits as people (can't be connected 24 / 7) and you can also count on drama, griefing etc.

Some would say that if you're playng an MMO you have to do it to play with people, and I agree with that, but maybe we should be more realistic and find a middle ground. 

I'm asking PvP fans who actively seek open world PvP: what if a game put at the core of the game an open PvE system, very little instanced content, good AI with mobs that provide challenge (not in the way big raid bosses have done to this day) dynamic events where the mobs actually seek to destroy you and conquer your territories, while you are also able to conquer their base etc, meaningful death penalty. 

Does this type of game still (which doesn't exist I think) not appeal to you?

Let me know what you think

OP, I think the concept is doable and very exciting. 
I would expect, as you said in a post in the middle of this thread, that GMs would also have an ability to guide the MOB side. To add to the things going on. 
I'd add that the GMs could play, in-game, special Avatars such as Dragons and Demons as the "force behind the events." 

I do love good PvP. But I was never for the way PvP players would roll over the rest of the game. 
I do feel that there's a simple way to do a Justice System that really works. But I never get hardly any support. So screw it, better option is exactly what you are thinking. 

You can still have mutually agreed on Guild Wars, too. 

AAAMEOW

Chimborazo said:

I'm asking PvP fans who actively seek open world PvP: what if a game put at the core of the game an open PvE system, very little instanced content, good AI with mobs that provide challenge (not in the way big raid bosses have done to this day) dynamic events where the mobs actually seek to destroy you and conquer your territories, while you are also able to conquer their base etc, meaningful death penalty. 

Does this type of game still (which doesn't exist I think) not appeal to you?

Let me know what you think

It sound very interesting.  In practice you have games just send monster to attack cities in a timer.

I played GW2 a few years ago.  Silverwaste is kind of like area.

There are also some games(not mmorpg) where you try to gather resource, and on a timer zombie will attack you etc.

I understand you are talking about complicated AI, which is not the easiest thing to do.  Especially on a large scale with many players involve.

Wizardry

Two types of Ai,a simple proximity one or a line of sight and then FFXI that used blood/health and hearing and true sight as well as an ability use aggro system or a magic use aggro system.

Mobs attacking would then dumb the immersion and combat down to a scaling mode which is a mode i cannot stand.Otherwise how would you have the players and mobs interact when using levels?Example you make the mobs level 50 and all the players in a particular area are mostly level 10-20 they would have no chance.

So yet again FFXI had a daily event where mobs would attack enter a city and even try to capture some npc's so you could no longer use those npc's in that city.It only worked because it was geared at level 50-75 players but pretty much everyone knew it was a  level 75 content idea.

We also already have several of these Age of Empire games where the AI is sort of simple and attacks your territories.

So imo these options already exist and are not going to change the mindset of a player looking for pvp.There is imo only one kind of pvp and that is pure vanilla pvp,NOTHING influences the outcome except the player,not gear,not levels,not abilities or spells,just the players.

kitarad

I'm asking PvP fans who actively seek open world PvP: what if a game put at the core of the game an open PvE system, very little instanced content, good AI with mobs that provide challenge (not in the way big raid bosses have done to this day) dynamic events where the mobs actually seek to destroy you and conquer your territories, while you are also able to conquer their base etc, meaningful death penalty. 

Does this type of game still (which doesn't exist I think) not appeal to you?

It will not appeal to most of them because they want the person behind the keyboard to suffer. If you notice the way they hound and kill people in overwhelming numbers or people who cannot fight back, what motivation is there. One only, they want people to quit, they want the person to get so discouraged that they leave. Surely you can actually see what happens when you take all hope away from an outmatched enemy, it isn't nuclear physics, it is obvious people will ultimately stop playing, either to leave the server when given the opportunity to do so or simply abandon that character and restart on another server or worse still just quit the game altogether.

When Flamelash the server that died on WoW classic, when most of the Alliance transferred off it there were threads on the forums about why the Horde in this case (it could just as easily have been Alliance ) did what they did without any mercy or empathy and relentless ganking until people had to leave. Most said they wanted the people to quit. Don't know whether that was said in anger because of what had happened to their server but it had a ring of truth in it.

So you see humans have to be the enemy they quash and step on until they cannot even get up. It's no fun otherwise. So no the answer to your question is no it will not satisfy them at all.


Thanks for tip I requoted.

Amaranthar

kitarad said:

Chimborazo said:

I'm asking PvP fans who actively seek open world PvP: what if a game put at the core of the game an open PvE system, very little instanced content, good AI with mobs that provide challenge (not in the way big raid bosses have done to this day) dynamic events where the mobs actually seek to destroy you and conquer your territories, while you are also able to conquer their base etc, meaningful death penalty. 

Does this type of game still (which doesn't exist I think) not appeal to you?



It will not appeal to most of them because they want the person behind the keyboard to suffer. If you notice the way they hound and kill people in overwhelming numbers or people who cannot fight back, what motivation is there. One only, they want people to quit, they want the person to get so discouraged that they leave. Surely you can actually see what happens when you take all hope away from an outmatched enemy, it isn't nuclear physics, it is obvious people will ultimately stop playing, either to leave the server when given the opportunity to do so or simply abandon that character and restart on another server or worse still just quit the game altogether.

When Flamelash the server that died on WoW classic, when most of the Alliance transferred off it there were threads on the forums about why the Horde in this case (it could just as easily have been Alliance ) did what they did without any mercy or empathy and relentless ganking until people had to leave. Most said they wanted the people to quit. Don't know whether that was said in anger because of what had happened to their server but it had a ring of truth in it.

So you see humans have to be the enemy they quash and step on until they cannot even get up. It's no fun otherwise. So no the answer to your question is no it will not satisfy them at all.

P.S. Hate the way this stupid thing never lets me type properly but it ends up looking like an addendum to your original post.

You have to right click farther down in the box, keep trying until you see the line move in a more forward place. 

Chimborazo

iixviiiix said:

Because You can't expect AI to be dumb .

Human capable to both dumb and smart , unexpected . That's why PVP fun and people seek for it .

Then why is it possible to beat windows at chess with different difficulty levels? 

Chimborazo

AAAMEOW said:

Chimborazo said:

I'm asking PvP fans who actively seek open world PvP: what if a game put at the core of the game an open PvE system, very little instanced content, good AI with mobs that provide challenge (not in the way big raid bosses have done to this day) dynamic events where the mobs actually seek to destroy you and conquer your territories, while you are also able to conquer their base etc, meaningful death penalty. 

Does this type of game still (which doesn't exist I think) not appeal to you?

Let me know what you think

It sound very interesting.  In practice you have games just send monster to attack cities in a timer.

I played GW2 a few years ago.  Silverwaste is kind of like area.

There are also some games(not mmorpg) where you try to gather resource, and on a timer zombie will attack you etc.

I understand you are talking about complicated AI, which is not the easiest thing to do.  Especially on a large scale with many players involve.

I'm glad you brought Silverwaste into this discussion. 

Silverwaste is a kind of PvE content that's neither the instanced raid with big bosses or the generic "easy" open world PvE where you just jump from way point to waypoint, can avoid events and mob and travel mostly freely and decided what and when engage. 

Beside what somebody mentioned in the previous post, I do like PvP and open PvP. Problems I have found in open PvP (again, some of them are tied to the way the open PvP is designed but I think the human nature also contribute to that) is that good experience is usually hanging by a thread.

If people want PvP only and are not interested in PvE because they want to rise at the top, play politics and all the other "meta" aspects that have been mentioned here, ofc the thing I'm suggesting won't be tight. 

But if people are after dinamicity, struggle, feeling under pressure etc than a (big) evolution from a map like Silverwaste might be a great improvement. 

Chimborazo

Wizardry said:

Two types of Ai,a simple proximity one or a line of sight and then FFXI that used blood/health and hearing and true sight as well as an ability use aggro system or a magic use aggro system.

Mobs attacking would then dumb the immersion and combat down to a scaling mode which is a mode i cannot stand.Otherwise how would you have the players and mobs interact when using levels?Example you make the mobs level 50 and all the players in a particular area are mostly level 10-20 they would have no chance.

So yet again FFXI had a daily event where mobs would attack enter a city and even try to capture some npc's so you could no longer use those npc's in that city.It only worked because it was geared at level 50-75 players but pretty much everyone knew it was a  level 75 content idea.

We also already have several of these Age of Empire games where the AI is sort of simple and attacks your territories.

So imo these options already exist and are not going to change the mindset of a player looking for pvp.There is imo only one kind of pvp and that is pure vanilla pvp,NOTHING influences the outcome except the player,not gear,not levels,not abilities or spells,just the players.

Ofc a system like the one we're dusussing would require some other work arounds, like a more player skills based combat with decreased gap between lvls (or removing them altogether?) then ofc you can calibrate the maps a bit: maybe you have a starting area in the middle and you expand outwards, at first you take an area from mobs and start to tame it a bit, then you move to the next area that becomes the "fronteer" while the previous area is at little bit less intense, so new player start from the middle and work their way toward the outer regions 

Adamantine

Well ... why PvP ?

Because its fun.

And because it can another sphere of gaming. Next to PvE / Crafting / Farming / ... whatever other areas you have; for example Vanguard also had Diplomacy.

There was also Fishing though I hated that with a passion because absolutely batshit superboring. Watching paint dry is about the same level of fun. Plus, thanks to my poor ping (having to play from Europe on the last remaining US server) I stood no chance for success anyway.

And theres many variants of PvP. You can have open world PvP, arena/battlegrounds, castle sieges (see Lineage 2), ...

I am not aware theres any PvP only players. In most games you have to level PvE first.

cameltosis

I like PvP. And PvE

First, some terminology so it's clear what I'm speaking about because people have different meanings,

Open PvP, for me, simply means it's open to everyone. That means anyone can join if they choose to, there are no player caps. It doesn't mean its non-consensual, or free-for-all, or full loot, or that it can occur anywhere in the open world. Simply that it is PvP with no player caps.

Open world PvP, for me, means that the PvP occurs in the main game world, i.e. it is not sectioned off or in an instance.

Free-for-all PvP, for me, means that every player is attackable, i.e. it is non-consensual.

Full-loot PvP, for me, means that once an enemy dies, you are able to loot some of their items.

So, why do I PvP?

I play MMORPGs for a variety of reasons. I enjoy the fantasy worlds. I enjoy the combat. I enjoy playing with other people. I enjoy the scale, i.e. massively multiplayer, which is the only unique selling point of the genre.

When it comes to combat, it is all about "flow", or being in the zone. To achieve this state of flow, which is key to happiness, you must be challenged. So, when I start an MMO, I know nothing, so the initial challenge is just learning the controls, learning the systems and learning your first few skills. Once that challenge has been met, you progress, unlock more skills and more power and you must learn all this new stuff and challenge yourself.

Very quickly, learning how to solo in a game becomes easy, not a challenge, and so I cannot achieve a state of flow. You can set yourself your own challenges, like soloing group content, or taking on tough enemies in the open world, but even then it doesn't take long before you've learnt everything you can.

Next step is group content. This adds additional challenge - not only learning a new way to play your character in a group setting, but also the challenge of learning teamwork with others and the challenge of taking on tough group content.

but, eventually I beat that challenge too, and it doesnt take long. Once the challenge is gone, so is the state of flow. It can still be relaxing, it can still be social, but it is no longer fun.

So what's next?

PvP

In PvP, I have the challenge of playing my character to it's best. I have the challenge of working with a team. But now I also have the challenge of fighting real people, who are often better than me to begin with and who can be unpredictable. This keeps the challenge level high for a long time, which means I can be in flow and achieve happiness.

Open PvP is the pinacle of this type of challenge as it has the most variety and unpredictability. Battlegrounds are all well and good, I enjoy them and played them a lot. But the maps become predictable, the tactics predictable and the numbers are balanced so it eventually gets boring.

Open PvP also has the advantage of offering a variety of playstyles. If I'm solo, grouped or in a raid, I can find a challenging fight. I can support the main fights, or go roaming. I can try to cut off reinforcements, or lead the charge into a keep. I can hunt down gankers, or seek out 1v1s.

Finally, PvP is where I have the most fun roleplaying.

This may sound weird, and it's not the stereotypical roleplaying most of us think of. It's not like we speak in character or use lots of emotes to act out stuff. But we play our roles within the PvP community, even if the roleplaying doesn't necessarily fit with the games lore.

For example, when I play an orc in PvP, I deliberately act like an aggressive savage. I charge into the enemy, get stuck in hand to hand and see it through, even if I'm unlikely to win. I regularly come across players who "roleplay" the part of leaders, or sneaky gits, or set themselves up as badguys, or play the heroic good guys. I'll be fighting against someone who teabags my fallen comrades, but an hour later he'll be on an alt on my side and hes the nicest guy, deliberately doing these things to get people worked up. It sounds like trolling, but these people are doing it to provide context to the PvP, to set themselves up as heroes or villains in order to make the PvP more interesting. This sort of roleplaying leads to nights where our raid will be told to kill a specific enemy at all costs, perhaps even charging the whole raid into a keep on a suicide mission just to kill one guy. Or if we hear of a "hated" ganker roaming the map, we might break off our larger fight just to go hunt him down.

the combination of the challenge, the variety, the scale and the roleplaying all makes for a heady mix that is great. its a feeling and a style of gameplay that literally doesn't exist anywhere else in the gaming world. its only possible with persistent worlds and open pvp too, because if its cross-server or always randoms then you never develop those rivalries, you can never develop your knowledge of the other players to help with the psychology of it all.

Are there genuine assholes and trolls in PvP? Yup. Are there genuine gankers? You bet. But in my experience, these people are just a small percentage of the PvP population in MMORPGs.

When it comes to gankers, my experience is these players are not playing for fun, because there is not challenge in ganking. Most gankers I've met are simply gaming the system - they've worked out that it is quicker to rank up by ganking other players than it is in regular PvP. The rest are indeed what you'd expect - petty players who take pleasure in other's suffering. Luckily, these people are very few and far between, and as they're unpleasant people they usually find it difficult to find a group, so they can't gank people often. They usually settle for jumping other solo players, which can still be unfair but 1v1 is not ganking.

Also, I hope you can pick out from the above that i am not a ganker, nor do I enjoy taking on players considerably worse or better than me. When you are playing the game for fun, i.e. playing to challenge yourself, then the goal is to find the most balanced fair fight possible. I want winning to be achievable but only if I'm playing at my best. When I do find these fights, I also couldn't really care less whether I win or lose because the fight itself is what matters, the fight itself provides the fun.

Amathe

To me, occasional PvP breaks up monotony. It's not something I do a lot, but it's fun now and then.

alkarionlog

mostly? challenge, against someone else things get impredictable, unless he do pvp like he do his "raids" following the script and holding the macro button, with mostly are easy to deal with

things with pve is always or is a cheap move or is huge numbers, be hp or number of mobs, pvp at the very least, with orgazined people you need to worry about some random attack