There may be players who do want PvE players as targets, but with in-depth reviews, YouTube videos, Steam Reviews and thousands of games there is no reason to ever be in a game where you don't like the ruleset - if you get lured in that is a you problem, not a developer problem (provided they were honest about the ruleset).
Seems like its both the Devs and Players problem now isnt it. These games getting negative reviews and having no players seems to be a huge problem.
Yeah, I know.
You're trying to pressure game developers to make the game using your preferred ruleset by applying your interpretation of market results. I've seen this for the past 20 years - every time a game fails it is because [insert dead horse here].
The problem you have is that the majority of successful games throughout history have been player vs. player - in fact, before the advent of computers that pretty much describes every game.
The decision to be a PvE player is a relatively new phenomenon.
Now the MMORPG space does offer some challenges and I applaud developers who take on those challenges. I don't think it is a trivial problem (most developers don't even understand it) - but I do resent people who threaten developers with financial ruin for daring to explore the problem.
It doesn't cost you anything if a developer tries out some new solutions for this game design challenge - stop pretending it harms or inconveniences you in some way.
iF yOu dON'T LisTen TO Me yoU wILL eNd Up PoOR
^--- exact same stupid line we get from the PvP folks, by the way. It's like ya'll read off the same script.
All those games have PvP in which no PvE player can be forced into PvP. You can't just waltz into Goldshire and flip it to PvP so you can kill everyone.
There isn't a single video game in existence where a player is forced into PvP. I'm getting tired of the rape analogy being applied to a video game.
You bought the game, you just gave consent.
You logged into the game, you just gave consent.
You enter a PvP zone, you just gave consent.
Imagine this same complaint being applied to a game of chess. I take your pawn and you're like "I didn't consent to that - why you forcing PvP on me?"
You can either play the game by the rules or not play at all. It isn't the PvP players fault if you picked the wrong game. They're not the bad guys in this scenario.
Here is the real question? Why wont they let PVE players have their own server? What is the problem with that? Afraid of the choice they will make?
If you dont want PVE players as targets then what is all the fuss about?
If planets are procedurally generated, then they can conjure up however many they want. I don't think that there is any other way that they reasonably assume that they'll have plenty of planets, as if each planet takes a bunch of custom work to generate it, then they won't be able to keep up unless the game is almost entirely dead.
So long as planets have a robust way to ban PVP that can't be readily circumvented by griefers (admittedly a huge assumption), you could think of every planet as being a separate server--but with unlimited, free server transfers. And if thought of that way, then there could be plenty of PVE servers.
This made me think of the Sentinels in No Man's Sky. They are there to maintain order, and some planets have a few and some have many that are aggressive. They watch everything you do and if you so much as mine one rock aggressive sentinels will attack you.
What if the people on a planet that just wanted PvE could invest in and/or build the equivalent to aggressive sentinels? Anybody trying to attack another person becomes kill-on-sight and the sentinels never give up.
This might even work on a smaller scale, where a bunch of players found a town and then invest in sentinels to protect it. Inside the town, any attempt at PvP will bring unrelenting attacks, while in open zones PvP might be tolerated.
PVE players don't want ways to restrict PVP somewhat so that they get ganked somewhat less often. PVE players want the option to completely shut down PVP and not have to worry about it at all.
Play a game with no PvP in it.
I respect the desire to not want PvP - but I do get tired of people reading about a game and deciding it needs to be a different game. Whether it is PvP vs. PvE or science fiction vs. High Fantasy, going into a game and demanding it be something else is ridiculous.
Freedom of choice begins at time of purchase, but not after the purchase where someone goes in and demands a ton of changes.
Wait, right here, don't you say you want both PvP and PvE players in your PvP game?
For my personal preferences, I won't play
an MMORPG unless it has both PvE and PvP on the same server. I enjoy
both activities, but PvE (by it's nature) eventually either gets
finished or gets boring, so I need the PvP to fill in those gaps.
Not even sure what your point is. If they have PVP both PVE servers
then you can chose the one you want. Nothing is forcing you to play on
a PVE server.
How selfish, just because you want to PVP you feel like you need to force everyone into your playstyle?
I cannot imagine what he said that would cause you to run off on this ridiculous tirade.
He's
made it clear he wants both on the same server, as many people do,
myself included. It is one of the things I look for in a game - a nice
justice system is a beautiful thing.
Nobody here is interested in forcing you (or anyone else) to play PvP.
Again, since your reading comprehension is poor: NOBODY HERE WANTS TO FORCE YOU TO PVP OR TO FORCE ANYONE ELSE TO PVP.
Read
the box carefully and you'll never have to endure someone touching your
goodies again. Get over it already, seek help, see a therapist.
So do you want PvE players in your game or not? PvE players, in this context, are those who don't want to PvP. People who want to deal with PvP players are themselves PvP players.
Maybe there is a miscommunication between what we're both thinking of as PvP and PvE demographics, but to me it sounds like you want PvE people who don't want PvP.
Besides this non-existent hypothetical we're arguing over where PvP and PvE coexist well, that isn't what Raph is describing at all. In fact, he seemed surprised that the focus is on PvP, as if it were some non-factor in the design equation, which is why I feel his messaging has been less than forthcoming.
WoW has PvP
LotRO has PvP
SWTOR has PvP
FFXIV has PvP
GW2 has PvP
ESO has PvP
I can't think of a single successful MMORPG that doesn't include PvP. Yet all those games do just fine including both PvP and PvE on the same servers.
So, why are people making such an issue of it in this thread?
All those games, as far as I can recollect, either have whole pvp servers or pvp arena like areas. The issue is having areas that are pvp but pve players have to go there. The issue is having pve areas that can suddenly turn into pvp areas.
And the issue of course is have ffa pvp in games that pve players want to play. Shouldn't be an issue but it is.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Here is the real question? Why wont they let PVE players have their own server? What is the problem with that? Afraid of the choice they will make?
If you dont want PVE players as targets then what is all the fuss about?
If planets are procedurally generated, then they can conjure up however many they want. I don't think that there is any other way that they reasonably assume that they'll have plenty of planets, as if each planet takes a bunch of custom work to generate it, then they won't be able to keep up unless the game is almost entirely dead.
So long as planets have a robust way to ban PVP that can't be readily circumvented by griefers (admittedly a huge assumption), you could think of every planet as being a separate server--but with unlimited, free server transfers. And if thought of that way, then there could be plenty of PVE servers.
This made me think of the Sentinels in No Man's Sky. They are there to maintain order, and some planets have a few and some have many that are aggressive. They watch everything you do and if you so much as mine one rock aggressive sentinels will attack you.
What if the people on a planet that just wanted PvE could invest in and/or build the equivalent to aggressive sentinels? Anybody trying to attack another person becomes kill-on-sight and the sentinels never give up.
This might even work on a smaller scale, where a bunch of players found a town and then invest in sentinels to protect it. Inside the town, any attempt at PvP will bring unrelenting attacks, while in open zones PvP might be tolerated.
PVE players don't want ways to restrict PVP somewhat so that they get ganked somewhat less often. PVE players want the option to completely shut down PVP and not have to worry about it at all.
Play a game with no PvP in it.
I respect the desire to not want PvP - but I do get tired of people reading about a game and deciding it needs to be a different game. Whether it is PvP vs. PvE or science fiction vs. High Fantasy, going into a game and demanding it be something else is ridiculous.
Freedom of choice begins at time of purchase, but not after the purchase where someone goes in and demands a ton of changes.
Wait, right here, don't you say you want both PvP and PvE players in your PvP game?
For my personal preferences, I won't play
an MMORPG unless it has both PvE and PvP on the same server. I enjoy
both activities, but PvE (by it's nature) eventually either gets
finished or gets boring, so I need the PvP to fill in those gaps.
Not even sure what your point is. If they have PVP both PVE servers
then you can chose the one you want. Nothing is forcing you to play on
a PVE server.
How selfish, just because you want to PVP you feel like you need to force everyone into your playstyle?
I cannot imagine what he said that would cause you to run off on this ridiculous tirade.
He's
made it clear he wants both on the same server, as many people do,
myself included. It is one of the things I look for in a game - a nice
justice system is a beautiful thing.
Nobody here is interested in forcing you (or anyone else) to play PvP.
Again, since your reading comprehension is poor: NOBODY HERE WANTS TO FORCE YOU TO PVP OR TO FORCE ANYONE ELSE TO PVP.
Read
the box carefully and you'll never have to endure someone touching your
goodies again. Get over it already, seek help, see a therapist.
So do you want PvE players in your game or not? PvE players, in this context, are those who don't want to PvP. People who want to deal with PvP players are themselves PvP players.
Maybe there is a miscommunication between what we're both thinking of as PvP and PvE demographics, but to me it sounds like you want PvE people who don't want PvP.
Besides this non-existent hypothetical we're arguing over where PvP and PvE coexist well, that isn't what Raph is describing at all. In fact, he seemed surprised that the focus is on PvP, as if it were some non-factor in the design equation, which is why I feel his messaging has been less than forthcoming.
WoW has PvP
LotRO has PvP
SWTOR has PvP
FFXIV has PvP
GW2 has PvP
ESO has PvP
I can't think of a single successful MMORPG that doesn't include PvP. Yet all those games do just fine including both PvP and PvE on the same servers.
So, why are people making such an issue of it in this thread?
LotRO is one of the games that I think about first and foremost when I write these things. A primarily PvE game that has been polluted by PvP. I say that having had a lot of fun in the Moors on both Freep or Creep (mostly Creep).
For over 15 years PvE players have lamented, complained, and pushed against the changes that very contained PvP has had upon the rest of the PvE game. It has affected, classes and their designs, skills, gear, and loot. That one little neglected PvP area has held back LotRO from cutting loose and building classes that don't have to be "balanced" and neutered for PvP.
Go find a PvE Game. Stop playing PvP Games. PvP is a relationship between PvP players and PvE players. If you don't want to be in a relationship, leave the PvP Game/Player. It's ok if you want to break up. PvP doesn't mind. PvP likes long journeys through frontiers, casual conversations around portals, long adrenalin filled fights, great debates, conflict, yelling, and respecing there characters which makes them moody because they change their persona and playstyle. They are a hard bunch of people to be with, but if you can tame the beast within them, or enjoy the learning curve to be like them, you will enjoy a rich rewarding relationship. You will be so productive; you won't want to live without the PvP player. They really will bring out the best in you. PvP can even make your in-game business the most successful business for PvP players. Get to know the PvP player and forgive their grievances. Try to manifest your own grievances towards PvP so it bothers who it is. PvP enjoys a good fight. Always try to bother PvP as much as PvP bothers you. PvP enjoys being mad at you to. It's the perfect relationship between players. Go forth PvE, and figure out ways to force PvE grievances upon your first love, PvP. They will never ever want to be without you, and they will never leave you.
Sincerely, Fear No Seer
This user is a registered flex offender. Someone who is registered as being a flex offender is a person who feels the need to flex about everything they say. Always be the guy that paints the house in the dark. Lucidity can be forged with enough liquidity and pharmed for decades with enough compound interest that a reachable profit would never end.
PvP isn't a problem in this game, and I've said as much. What I'm saying is PvE players should avoid this dumpster fire like the plague it will be (if it ever even launches).
Raph isn't being honest. There are posters here in this thread who aren't being honest when they say they "want both in game", but they don't want PvE players to complain about how PvP will pollute the experience.
PvE players should avoid this at all costs.
I think you are really jumping the gun, but as you know the way I game fits what you suggest. I virtually never buy before the reviews and a couple months in, by that time PvE players will know if the game is for them. As always, lets wait and see.
You mentioned Lotro, I won't disagree that PvP did effect PvE enemy classes, can you in turn accept that PvE classes effected the PvP ones, this is a two way street. Going back to my ideal solution for a MMO, just like Monster player classes were designed specially for the PvP arena, I would have preferred Fellowship player classes to be specially designed for that and have no effect on what those classes do in PvE. To keep it cheap use the same toons, animations etc but the abilities and powers would be designed from the ground up for PvP.
Also guys I don't think Brainy is being daft at all when he talks about MMOs luring PvE players in only to find it is not to their liking. This results from them making press releases which make the MMO sound like the "MMO for everyone". To a certain extent nearly every new MMO does that. But once again that is just a good reason to "wait and see".
I can't think of a single successful MMORPG that doesn't include PvP. Yet all those games do just fine including both PvP and PvE on the same servers.
So, why are people making such an issue of it in this thread?
All those games, as far as I can recollect, either have whole pvp servers or pvp arena like areas. The issue is having areas that are pvp but pve players have to go there. The issue is having pve areas that can suddenly turn into pvp areas.
And the issue of course is have ffa pvp in games that pve players want to play. Shouldn't be an issue but it is.
Better examples would be New World, PVP players turned its alpha into such a shit show AWS completely walked back on its FFA design but far too late and the game suffered greatly for it.
ArcheAge was another game which forced PVP on its PVE player base and is pretty much dead at this point.
EVE Online and Albion Online have enjoyed lasting but moderate success with their blend of PVPvE but my guess is Raph has promised his investors much greater levels of success than either of those two titles.
Some may not remember that when WOW released it had both PVP and PVE only servers and the PVP ones were actually more numerous and popular, but times (and the player base) have changed, perhaps not for the better.
DAOC also had red ( FFA PVP) servers which actually were my favorite for "reasons" but they were not popular with the average player and died a fairly quick death in the game's life cycle.
Who can forget Shadowbane? Well, practically everyone it seems.
The landscape is littered with failed attempts to get PVE and PVP players to coexist together in one world....Worlds Adrift, Fractured Online and many more.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
While I am not trying to villainize developers (secretly might be), many are greedy shits who do not want to give up the PvE portion of the pie. They want them but they also know if they are totally honest about their game the PvE portion of that pie will flee to the hills and beyond never to be seen again.
So they cannot afford that so they are deliberately vague and encouraging the PvE players all will be well. Notice they never actually have to lure the PvP players because hell yes they are on board from day one.... give me players to kill and I'm there.
This is not the way.
You know what happens when you tell a PvE player they will be safe and their options will be protected when in reality that is never going to happen unless cows jump over the moon. They walk away but not quietly mind you... they will bring the game down out of anger and revenge.
So when people like @Wargfoot talk about how these disgruntled players brought a game down he is talking about this very thing. Now ask yourself whose fault is this?
While I am not trying to villainize developers (secretly might be), many are greedy shits who do not want to give up the PvE portion of the pie. They want them but they also know if they are totally honest about their game the PvE portion of that pie will flee to the hills and beyond never to be seen again.
So they cannot afford that so they are deliberately vague and encouraging the PvE players all will be well. Notice they never actually have to lure the PvP players because hell yes they are on board from day one.... give me players to kill and I'm there.
This is not the way.
You know what happens when you tell a PvE player they will be safe and their options will be protected when in reality that is never going to happen unless cows jump over the moon. They walk away but not quietly mind you... they will bring the game down out of anger and revenge.
So when people like @Wargfoot talk about how these disgruntled players brought a game down he is talking about this very thing. Now ask yourself whose fault is this?
The concept that developers owe PvE players a "piece of the pie" is ridiculous. A game developer doesn't owe any type of player anything whatsoever. The game is the game, love it or leave it.
If you're talking about developers who are dishonest - then we're on the same page. I hope developers that are vague and deceitful are run out of town on a rail. But let's be clear - it is the deceit that kills a game.
Deceit that kills games runs both ways. If the game is advertised as a safe haven for PvE players and it isn't exactly that, people who buy the game will be upset and the players who want the PvP won't even try it. A mismatch between what the game is and is not brings in the wrong crowd and the right crowd doesn't even give it a second thought.
This is true for every feature - if you advertise a complex crafting system and it is simplistic and dull, you'll have angry crafters whereas people who like a simple crafting system won't even try your title.
Let's not grant the PvE/PvP feature some hallowed status - deceit on any feature will kill a game.
I advocate clear communication of the ruleset and even a quiz on the ruleset before the player enters the game - so that there is NO POSSIBLE MISUNDERSTANDING.
It's not that they owe PvE players but rather that they don't want to lose those players and are dishonest about their game. Any form of omission while extolling the benefits of a game that will affect the safety of a PvE player which they are fully aware will affect their decision to play is a lie.
There are all types of lies but lies like this are often carried out with impunity. Raph did it right here where he had the gall to claim he was surprised about the PvP discussion. Like he really didn't think this was an issue? He is really saying that with a straight face after UO?
It's not that they owe PvE players but rather that they don't want to lose those players and are dishonest about their game. Any form of omission while extolling the benefits of a game that will affect the safety of a PvE player which they are fully aware will affect their decision to play is a lie.
There are all types of lies but lies like this are often carried out with impunity. Raph did it right here where he had the gall to claim he was surprised about the PvP discussion. Like he really didn't think this was an issue? He is really saying that with a straight face after UO?
I've already agreed that the dishonesty is unacceptable.
I cannot speak for Raph, but I personally find some of the discussion surprising in that there are segments of the population that don't just have a preference, they don't want the style of play they dislike happening anywhere in their world at all.
I've run into PvP players who have a weird mental tick about PvE happening in places they cannot reach with murder and mayhem. They want the PvE players punished in some manner. Likewise, there are PvE players to bristle at the very idea of PvP happening somewhere in the game world, even if not impactful of them. I find that surprising.
I can't think of a single successful MMORPG that doesn't include PvP. Yet all those games do just fine including both PvP and PvE on the same servers.
So, why are people making such an issue of it in this thread?
LotRO is one of the games that I think about first and foremost when I write these things. A primarily PvE game that has been polluted by PvP. I say that having had a lot of fun in the Moors on both Freep or Creep (mostly Creep).
For over 15 years PvE players have lamented, complained, and pushed against the changes that very contained PvP has had upon the rest of the PvE game. It has affected, classes and their designs, skills, gear, and loot. That one little neglected PvP area has held back LotRO from cutting loose and building classes that don't have to be "balanced" and neutered for PvP.
RIP Loremaster CC.
So, I played LotRO from release until Isenguard (roughly 5 years).
In that time, 99% of patches were purely for the PvE players, and 1% were due to PvP. But when Turbine and Codemasters used to release numbers, roughly 20% of the playerbase engaged in PvP regularly.
The PvE players ofc complained when PvP players got something from the devs, as they always do. The PvP players rarely complained when the PvE got patches for them, even though it often affected PvP.
I'm sorry to hear that things got worse later on. But you know what? You can't blame that on PvP. ALL MMOs get worse over time. Everything unique and interesting gets nerfed in the name of streamlining and simlification. It's inevitable. Blaming it on PvP is absurd.
I will also go back to one of my earliest comments:
A diverse community is a stronger community.
Leaving out PvP would result in a weaker community, lower retention, and therefore less money over time. And given that Raph is trying to build a game that is all about virtual societies and community, he would be shooting himself in the foot if he left out PvP.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
It's not that they owe PvE players but rather that they don't want to lose those players and are dishonest about their game. Any form of omission while extolling the benefits of a game that will affect the safety of a PvE player which they are fully aware will affect their decision to play is a lie.
There are all types of lies but lies like this are often carried out with impunity. Raph did it right here where he had the gall to claim he was surprised about the PvP discussion. Like he really didn't think this was an issue? He is really saying that with a straight face after UO?
I've already agreed that the dishonesty is unacceptable.
I cannot speak for Raph, but I personally find some of the discussion surprising in that there are segments of the population that don't just have a preference, they don't want the style of play they dislike happening anywhere in their world at all.
I've run into PvP players who have a weird mental tick about PvE happening in places they cannot reach with murder and mayhem. They want the PvE players punished in some manner. Likewise, there are PvE players to bristle at the very idea of PvP happening somewhere in the game world, even if not impactful of them. I find that surprising.
In how many MMOS is the PVE not impacted by PVP in some manner?
@ValdemarJ pointed out PVP designs impacted PVE and vice versa.
In ESO there is a significant number of sky shards which can only be obtained by extensively roaming Cyrodil, the PVP region.
I think Blizzard created a special PVP only gear attribute which had no impact on PVE after several years but I haven't played since 2010 so no clue what the game is like today.
New World was pretty good when I played a few years ago in terms of gear design, but which clan controlled which cities (or in some servers like mine, all cities) they could tax the heck out of everyone else's sales so definitely an impact on PVEers.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
In how many MMOS is the PVE not impacted by PVP in some manner?
@ValdemarJ pointed out PVP designs impacted PVE and vice versa.
In ESO there is a significant number of sky shards which can only be obtained by extensively roaming Cyrodil, the PVP region.
I think Blizzard created a special PVP only gear attribute which had no impact on PVE after several years but I haven't played since 2010 so no clue what the game is like today.
New World was pretty good when I played a few years ago in terms of gear design, but which clan controlled which cities (or in some servers like mine, all cities) they could tax the heck out of everyone else's sales so definitely an impact on PVEers.
I think the effect PvP and PvE have on each other varies a lot depending on the game and it is a two way street. Players do seem to have a quite fixed mindset on this topic or might I say fixated? Past in-balancing does not mean it always has to be that way, but I will accept the track record has been patchy.
What we don't see is players who know how hard it is to get the balance between crafting, drops and quest rewards right deciding to give up on a MMO because it has crafting. They know it's an issue but crack on with the game. The mention of PvP seems to send up a balloon and take players of to the stratosphere. Quite like the mention of grouping as we have just seen.
Call me an optimist, I think with the right safeguards the two playstyles sit well together and make for a far better game.
I am not the type of person to go on campaigns to change things. Heaven forbid I can find another game to play. I'm just saying I will simply walk away but it is not right to claim the players buy games knowing full well what type of interactions will be unacceptable to them. You cannot foresee every negative impact and I also agree that developers also cannot predict all the player behaviour that can lead to problems.
However if it is not too much to ask I hope this game will not hold out unrealistic expectations to the PvE player who is averse to PvP in the hope of drawing more players.
You're an optimist @Scot , that only works with players who can accept some form of PvP. No amount of safeguards unless it is flagging is safe enough for one who has no wish to engage in any type of PvP. In the case of @Brainy only a separate server might satisfy him. For me flagging is enough. Flagging gives me a lot of control.
So, I played LotRO from release until Isenguard (roughly 5 years).
In that time, 99% of patches were purely for the PvE players, and 1% were due to PvP. But when Turbine and Codemasters used to release numbers, roughly 20% of the playerbase engaged in PvP regularly.
Sapience flat out admitted that PvP was a whole 7% of the playerbase at it's peak. Really chuffed the PvMP players. Not quite as bad as the raiders who found out they were less than 10% of the playerbase while thinking they were special. So may want to revise that 20%.
So, I played LotRO from release until Isenguard (roughly 5 years).
In that time, 99% of patches were purely for the PvE players, and 1% were due to PvP. But when Turbine and Codemasters used to release numbers, roughly 20% of the playerbase engaged in PvP regularly.
Sapience flat out admitted that PvP was a whole 7% of the playerbase at it's peak, So may want to revise that 20%.
Given the way it was neglected, it is a testament to the excellence of the idea that it got 7%.
So, I played LotRO from release until Isenguard (roughly 5 years).
In that time, 99% of patches were purely for the PvE players, and 1% were due to PvP. But when Turbine and Codemasters used to release numbers, roughly 20% of the playerbase engaged in PvP regularly.
Sapience flat out admitted that PvP was a whole 7% of the playerbase at it's peak, So may want to revise that 20%.
Given the way it was neglected, it is a testament to the excellence of the idea that it got 7%.
It was never intended. It was made last minute to satisfy all the "BuT wE nEeD pVp!!" on the forums before the game launched. Most of whom never intended to play the game in the first place, as usual, but could not stomach a pure PvE game existing. As Orion has stated multiple times on the forums and in interviews, it was never, and never will be, the focus. Which is why it pisses the PvE players off when mechanics have been nerfed/removed because of it.
You're an optimist @Scot , that only works with players who can accept some form of PvP. No amount of safeguards unless it is flagging is safe enough for one who has no wish to engage in any type of PvP. In the case of @Brainy only a separate server might satisfy him. For me flagging is enough. Flagging gives me a lot of control.
Thus the adage: Not every game SHOULD be made for every player. If your condition to play a game is based around setting up a parallel universe for your particular playstyle, it's probably a strong sign that you are trying to push a square peg into a round hole.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Comments
You're trying to pressure game developers to make the game using your preferred ruleset by applying your interpretation of market results. I've seen this for the past 20 years - every time a game fails it is because [insert dead horse here].
The problem you have is that the majority of successful games throughout history have been player vs. player - in fact, before the advent of computers that pretty much describes every game.
The decision to be a PvE player is a relatively new phenomenon.
Now the MMORPG space does offer some challenges and I applaud developers who take on those challenges. I don't think it is a trivial problem (most developers don't even understand it) - but I do resent people who threaten developers with financial ruin for daring to explore the problem.
It doesn't cost you anything if a developer tries out some new solutions for this game design challenge - stop pretending it harms or inconveniences you in some way.
iF yOu dON'T LisTen TO Me yoU wILL eNd Up PoOR
^--- exact same stupid line we get from the PvP folks, by the way. It's like ya'll read off the same script.
I'm getting tired of the rape analogy being applied to a video game.
- You bought the game, you just gave consent.
- You logged into the game, you just gave consent.
- You enter a PvP zone, you just gave consent.
Imagine this same complaint being applied to a game of chess.I take your pawn and you're like "I didn't consent to that - why you forcing PvP on me?"
You can either play the game by the rules or not play at all.
It isn't the PvP players fault if you picked the wrong game.
They're not the bad guys in this scenario.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Go find a PvE Game. Stop playing PvP Games. PvP is a relationship between PvP players and PvE players. If you don't want to be in a relationship, leave the PvP Game/Player. It's ok if you want to break up. PvP doesn't mind. PvP likes long journeys through frontiers, casual conversations around portals, long adrenalin filled fights, great debates, conflict, yelling, and respecing there characters which makes them moody because they change their persona and playstyle. They are a hard bunch of people to be with, but if you can tame the beast within them, or enjoy the learning curve to be like them, you will enjoy a rich rewarding relationship. You will be so productive; you won't want to live without the PvP player. They really will bring out the best in you. PvP can even make your in-game business the most successful business for PvP players. Get to know the PvP player and forgive their grievances. Try to manifest your own grievances towards PvP so it bothers who it is. PvP enjoys a good fight. Always try to bother PvP as much as PvP bothers you. PvP enjoys being mad at you to. It's the perfect relationship between players. Go forth PvE, and figure out ways to force PvE grievances upon your first love, PvP. They will never ever want to be without you, and they will never leave you.
Sincerely,
Fear No Seer
Someone who is registered as being a flex offender is a person who feels the need to flex about everything they say.
Always be the guy that paints the house in the dark.
Lucidity can be forged with enough liquidity and pharmed for decades with enough compound interest that a reachable profit would never end.
You mentioned Lotro, I won't disagree that PvP did effect PvE enemy classes, can you in turn accept that PvE classes effected the PvP ones, this is a two way street. Going back to my ideal solution for a MMO, just like Monster player classes were designed specially for the PvP arena, I would have preferred Fellowship player classes to be specially designed for that and have no effect on what those classes do in PvE. To keep it cheap use the same toons, animations etc but the abilities and powers would be designed from the ground up for PvP.
Also guys I don't think Brainy is being daft at all when he talks about MMOs luring PvE players in only to find it is not to their liking. This results from them making press releases which make the MMO sound like the "MMO for everyone". To a certain extent nearly every new MMO does that. But once again that is just a good reason to "wait and see".
ArcheAge was another game which forced PVP on its PVE player base and is pretty much dead at this point.
EVE Online and Albion Online have enjoyed lasting but moderate success with their blend of PVPvE but my guess is Raph has promised his investors much greater levels of success than either of those two titles.
Some may not remember that when WOW released it had both PVP and PVE only servers and the PVP ones were actually more numerous and popular, but times (and the player base) have changed, perhaps not for the better.
DAOC also had red ( FFA PVP) servers which actually were my favorite for "reasons" but they were not popular with the average player and died a fairly quick death in the game's life cycle.
Who can forget Shadowbane? Well, practically everyone it seems.
The landscape is littered with failed attempts to get PVE and PVP players to coexist together in one world....Worlds Adrift, Fractured Online and many more.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Such that one could be tweaked with 0 impact on the other.
So they cannot afford that so they are deliberately vague and encouraging the PvE players all will be well. Notice they never actually have to lure the PvP players because hell yes they are on board from day one.... give me players to kill and I'm there.
This is not the way.
You know what happens when you tell a PvE player they will be safe and their options will be protected when in reality that is never going to happen unless cows jump over the moon. They walk away but not quietly mind you... they will bring the game down out of anger and revenge.
So when people like @Wargfoot talk about how these disgruntled players brought a game down he is talking about this very thing. Now ask yourself whose fault is this?
If you're talking about developers who are dishonest - then we're on the same page. I hope developers that are vague and deceitful are run out of town on a rail. But let's be clear - it is the deceit that kills a game.
Deceit that kills games runs both ways. If the game is advertised as a safe haven for PvE players and it isn't exactly that, people who buy the game will be upset and the players who want the PvP won't even try it. A mismatch between what the game is and is not brings in the wrong crowd and the right crowd doesn't even give it a second thought.
This is true for every feature - if you advertise a complex crafting system and it is simplistic and dull, you'll have angry crafters whereas people who like a simple crafting system won't even try your title.
Let's not grant the PvE/PvP feature some hallowed status - deceit on any feature will kill a game.
I advocate clear communication of the ruleset and even a quiz on the ruleset before the player enters the game - so that there is NO POSSIBLE MISUNDERSTANDING.
There are all types of lies but lies like this are often carried out with impunity. Raph did it right here where he had the gall to claim he was surprised about the PvP discussion. Like he really didn't think this was an issue? He is really saying that with a straight face after UO?
I cannot speak for Raph, but I personally find some of the discussion surprising in that there are segments of the population that don't just have a preference, they don't want the style of play they dislike happening anywhere in their world at all.
I've run into PvP players who have a weird mental tick about PvE happening in places they cannot reach with murder and mayhem. They want the PvE players punished in some manner. Likewise, there are PvE players to bristle at the very idea of PvP happening somewhere in the game world, even if not impactful of them.
I find that surprising.
@ValdemarJ pointed out PVP designs impacted PVE and vice versa.
In ESO there is a significant number of sky shards which can only be obtained by extensively roaming Cyrodil, the PVP region.
I think Blizzard created a special PVP only gear attribute which had no impact on PVE after several years but I haven't played since 2010 so no clue what the game is like today.
New World was pretty good when I played a few years ago in terms of gear design, but which clan controlled which cities (or in some servers like mine, all cities) they could tax the heck out of everyone else's sales so definitely an impact on PVEers.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
What we don't see is players who know how hard it is to get the balance between crafting, drops and quest rewards right deciding to give up on a MMO because it has crafting. They know it's an issue but crack on with the game. The mention of PvP seems to send up a balloon and take players of to the stratosphere. Quite like the mention of grouping as we have just seen.
Call me an optimist, I think with the right safeguards the two playstyles sit well together and make for a far better game.
However if it is not too much to ask I hope this game will not hold out unrealistic expectations to the PvE player who is averse to PvP in the hope of drawing more players.
You're an optimist @Scot , that only works with players who can accept some form of PvP. No amount of safeguards unless it is flagging is safe enough for one who has no wish to engage in any type of PvP. In the case of @Brainy only a separate server might satisfy him. For me flagging is enough. Flagging gives me a lot of control.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
This is why Brainy hasn't responded to this thread in a minute.
He's developing nicely.
Nope, in fact I designed the TEF system in Galaxies personally.