Correction, I was informed that EVE can actually have "suicide gankers" in High sec who just want to grief noobs. That's certainly an issue, and makes my claim that their system being the best is still not perfect.
Suicide gankers are there (in most cases) not to grief newbs but to make money you don't suicide gank anything that does not cover your ship loss from concord and gives you profits on top Usual targets are mission running ships fitted with extra bling or cargo ships transporting valuables Suicide ganking or even exploiting duels in star systems where new players start can be actually punishable if reported And it IS a good system you are not completely safe anywhere outside the station but if are not stupid you are mostly safe in high sec
Cargo ships choosing to not use tank over cargo space will get ganked since they can be killed and the amount of loot they drop can cover the loss of the suicide gankers. Happened to me and I adapted.
@Charles Ward - I believe the "noobs" in question is more like what we call "carebears". Those are the type of player who refuse or not interest in PvP, going into low and null sec. Suicide gank on carebears miner is quite a nice profit if you pick your target. But to the point, most of gankers don't grief newbies out of blue, unless you wrong them.
I'd like to point out that the potential of suicide gankers is also intended - you're severely punished for it if you do it of course, but its also not completely pointless like in black desert. Its simply to forward the social experiment idea that in all honesty, society is just built upon agreed upon rules of how we conduct ourselves with other people, but in fact these rules are fairly flexible/breakable - and although retribution comes, it doesn't come until after you perform the act. I would also like to mention that in many cases, the sheer possibility of this threat encourages players to meet more like minded individuals, to band together to get things done so they worry less about people bothering them. This interaction greatly contributes to the lifespan of the game, and is a large reason why miners are still mining, almost 15 years after the release of the game.
The main issue is that pvp players often don't know when to stop and don't have respect for the other players fun. When I was playing Aion as an assassin and was killing enemy pve people in the open world, I would kill them once and then leave them be. Even if they come back to the same area I killed them at, I'd greet them with a friendly animation and let them do their pve thing because I know they want to have fun, too. On the other hand, when I needed to pve grind to get some quests done, far too often I had assholes who wouldn't leave me alone even after they killed me 30+ times and after I made it clear that I don't want to pvp right now. Another bad situation was when I spent hours preparing and gathering people for a pve raid, but the entrance to that raid is blocked by a horde of overgeared pvp groups. You essentially have only half of the players having fun playing the game while the other half gets frustrated, having wasted hours preparing for something they now have no access to. And the next time I wanted to do try that pve raid again most people I asked wouldn't want to invest the time anymore just because it was likely we wouldn't even be able to start the raid, again. Also, in my experience many pvp players have a very rude and disrespectful attitude, talking trash and yelling profanities to the other person whom they just ganked, this is not really producing an atmosphere that would be considered fun for most people.
I really enjoy PvP in MMOs, but I don't understand why they can't also have PvE in them. Sometimes it looks like the devs concentrate on PvP so much that they forget about other things. Also I HATE full loot MMOs. I'm not going to grind for hours just to get killed once and lose everything. Fuck that, fuck it long, fuck it hard.
There is one good thing about a full loot MMO. Loot can be everywhere you just keep getting it overload, Loot. But I don't care to much for full loot ether.
I agree, hence why I hate "survival" game cuz its not about being a badass survivor but be the first one to have the best gear to go rampage near a newbie area.
From the producer's marketing perspective - you have to pick one. In many cases, you can't split resources, or you can't split the playerbase - as lacking in either fields can easily cause the whole game to collapse. So rather than "Design the game that targets all audiences," they tend to try to lean towards one niche or the other, so they can attract an appropriate target audience and what not. (Take WAR, the old warhammer game - it had a fantastic PvE and pioneered public events/group events. Huge development went into the PvE sections, but this had the averse effect of subtracting their population actually taking part in the PvP, or later when most of the remaining population was in PvP, it was simply a huge waste of space and development, as comparatively fewer people were using it)
I reckon you can do a system like runescape with the loot, you keep your most valuable item (in rs its usually your weapon) when you die, if you didnt initiate the pvp yourself you keep more items. You can also spec to keep even more items via a skill (prayer) to keep even more items, though this can sometimes be punished to increase risk but that's a rare occurance. Still, either way, you're going to lose a bunch of stuff when you die but not an insurmountable amount, yet still enough loot is dropped on death to make killing other endgame players profitable if you're good at the game.
As a mere "sheep", I can say my main problem with PvP-centric MMOs isn't that PvP is a nuisance or I can't keep up with the skill of others - it's that typically, these games just aren't functionally competitive for newcomers, often down to excessive power gaps between new and established players. The "wolves and sheep" analogy is a massive problem too, as it directly relates to this issue - no player should be mere fodder for another. Had a bunch of friends all try the original Darkfall, and as new players with no power and nothing to our names, we were farmed out of existence by existing players who had insurmountable advantages - better stats, better gear, more utility. Losing in a heart-pounding battle for survival is fun - being farmed by an enemy you have no hope of defeating is not. So all you end up with is your casual players - always the majority of a playerbase - are NOT HAVING FUN, so they'll move on. I'm convinced that the reason your "wolves" can't survive without "sheep" to farm is because a large portion of them don't want risky conflict - they want sweeping domination, to feel like they're powerful. These sorts of players usually can't compete with the truly skilled, competitive PvP players, so I can't imagine they'd be having much fun when the "sheep" have gone, either, and the player base as a whole shrinks. The idea that PvP games require the portion of their playerbase to be brainless, effortless fodder is a huge problem. A player is never going to play a game to be fodder.
" it's that typically, these games just aren't functionally competitive for newcomers, often down to excessive power gaps between new and established players." This is generally why I don't get into multiplayer stuff and prefer PvE. By the time I get around to a game, people have been playing it for possibly years. By the time I finally get to a skill level necessary to compete I'm ready to move on since I don't stick with a single game for a significant period of time. It's no fun bashing my face against the wall that is these players who've been there way longer than me when I know I'll be ready to move on to something else by the time I get skilled enough to actually compete. I'd rather experience and get good at many different games than get really really good at one game just to potentially compete with people who've been at it far longer than me.
I will have one objection, in the 'wolves vs. sheep'... okay, two when describing pve players as sheep. Nobody should be considered 'prey', this isn't about feeling 'butthurt', it's if pvp is fueled by the excitement of risk and competition, then you aren't supposed to act like a predator, you need to act like someone participating in a SPORT. Predators DO look, specifically, for the easiest kill, because they aren't looking for a challenge, they are looking for food. And the less energy they spend getting dinner, the less likely to get injured getting dinner, the better. But this isn't 'Call of the Wild', it's intended to be a GAME. It's a sport, where they separate amateurs and professionals, they have weight classes, they have divisions so that the competitors are evenly matched in order to provide that rush of actual risk, actual accomplishment. So, if players are going to act like predators, not just rules and consequences, but MECHANICS need to be set in place to stop them. The easiest being simply flags set that has pvp'ers only able to attack others who are also interested in pvp, and then level restrictions even then, so you can only attack someone once you, and they, have reached a certain minimum level, and are within a certain level of each other. The second is the idea of those who do pve do so because they are unskilled. Are they unskilled in pvp? If they don't pvp, yeah...but they may have a lot of skill and practice in doing pve in their game of choice. I put in hours of research and work in leveling my stealth dungeon crawler. Picked the race, class, farmed the gear and put in the practice so I now have a character that can enter a group dungeon solo and sneak all the way to the end of the dungeon, past the final boss to pick up a lorebook, just so I can complete that map. Others can solo world bosses. Some teams can do extremely challenging and complicated trials with really weird mechanics. Some have become experts at gathering materials and have max leveled crafters. Sure, I'm not skilled at pvp, but that's because that's not what I DO, not because I'm unable. It isn't skilled vs. unskilled, it's about entirely different skillsets.
"Why do PvP MMOs always seem to fail?" >Calls PvErs sheep and implies that they're gullible and weak. "We need to give systems to HELP the sheep, because they can't do anything by themselves!" >Calls PvErs casual when professional raiding guilds are a thing. >consistently hears how PvPers love to fight other PvPers with consequence, and yet griefing/twinking is an endless thing. >Claims to want permanence and change while ignoring the corpses of all the previous PvP games that became ridiculously one-sided and points this out in a later section. >(again) implying sheep are softcore while ignoring that hard-core raiders say exactly the same about pushing yourself. You answered it yourself. I like PvP. I have fun in PvP. I don't like being called soft-core because I look for/celebrate different types of difficulty than you. You are not inherently a better play than me because of what you find fun.
I stated PVE players are generally sheep. Most PVE players aren't hardcore PVE raid type players not. They are more casual players by nature. Sorry if that offends you for some reason.
So the average player who decides to spend their time crafting or just being social is inherently a weaker player that needs help then? Why do they get to be called weaker players when there're plenty of mid-tier to low-tier PvPers who all think they're the best or, at the very least, above those "casual" PvErs? The mentality itself is stupid. I hate the wolf/sheep analogy because PvPers don't need PvErs to do what they want to do, they just need other players. On paper a PvPer should be perfectly happy with nothing but other PvPers around, and yet twinking/griefing/camping/getting griefing off of being a general asshat is a regular issue we tend to see in a lot of games. PvErs don't need to be culled/thinned out. The only case I could see that being an issue is if they're trying to PvP and being terrible at it. If that's the case, they're being a shitty PvPer, not a PvEr. You even see it in your comments. "I'm a PvPer because you just can't mimic fighting a smart person who thinks back!" I think the notion that we're missing a strong PvP MMO is kind of silly only because the current trend of MMOs coming out/being hyped are sandbox PvP based MMOs (or ones that at the very least strongly encourage it.) For some reason, they tend to garner a lot of hype, are plagued by shady business practices, and the hype train moves on. There're plenty out that could work if they were tweaked ever so slightly or the publisher changed its business decisions, but I wouldn't say that BDO or even BnS are dead. They're just perceived as boring/"broken" now.
Im gonna say the truth here...YOU ARE A SHEEP, you just want to keep eating grass without getting hurt. And yes sheeps (like you) are weaker, because it takes strenght in some form to do what a wolf does, in this case it takes higher lvl gear, or a stronger mentality to not get butthurt when someone kills you, or more skill.
Infuzed: And you are just a vulture who gets pissed off when you can't harvest sheep. Not everyone wants to be the biggest killer in the room. But, go about, believe that because you can team up and gank lowbies that you are the superior entity.
@@Infuzed. You have so much skill right? Beating up low level noobs in unbalanced RPGs dont make you a wolf. Come and team up with me in a few rounds of cs go or pubg,we will see where Mr cocky wolf goes in a fair environment,noob.
Love the new opening. Also, another potential problem with open PVP systems and gankers is that, in many cases, the progression systems in many MMOs makes the problem worse. It is one thing to lose progress or gear because you got out-fought by a superior player. While this can be frustrating, it is something that you can avoid. Meanwhile, having someone who you are completely unable to beat run up to you and instantly kill you is far more frustrating. Especially if you can be substantially set back by this loss that happened simply for being in the same general area as some jerk who outleveled you. The most dangerous part of this (from the perspective of the lifespan of a game) is that this leans specifically against newer players. Not even less skilled players, simply those that are newer to the game, and thus don't have the experience and gear. And, of course, for a game to last, it needs to have enough of an influx of new players to counteract the fact that some people will, inevitably, leave over time. There are probably many ways to reduce this, depending on the sort of game being made. The most obvious is limiting open PVP to players within a certain level range of each other, or giving stat penalties to balance things out while engaging someone weaker than you. Alternatively, the more difficult route would be to try and make a progression system where you cannot gain a definitive advantage over another player, allowing a highly skilled player to defeat someone who is superior to them statistically, but this is both difficult and at odds with the design philosophies of many MMOs.
Ya in a PvP game I totally allow players to max lvl before allowing PvP. They could still choose not to but the option would be there. A gear difference would still likely be there and that would be fine. That something EVE does well with for the most part safe zones you can gear up an learn the game first
I've played on a PvP server on DAoC and got ganked plenty of times by upper levels... I eventually made it to their level and got my payback. It's all about enduring and learning how to adapt and not get butthurt. Game devs can easily put pvp level restrictions though.. say maybe within 5 levels so a level 30 can not attack a level 24.. but once you hit 25 fair game.
I think the biggest problem is that pvp in mmos generally devolve into 1 guy being attacked by 2+ people. In most mmos your level and gear are more important than skill where 1 vs 2 or 3 is not possible where in games like cs:go, dark souls, or more competitive games skill is the defining factor rather than gear which i think the general gaming population prefers.
I would strongly disagree that "skill" is a factor in open-world PvP. I've been playing MMOs for over 20 years, and can count on one hand the amount of "fair" fights I've had. 99% of open world PvP is decided before battle starts by a disparity in number of players, player levels, or gear, and most players won't initiate unless they have clear advantage. This balance issue is inherent to the genre, and is unsolvable. The only people who enjoy it are those who take effort to gain advantage in order to unfairly gank others with little fear of retaliation.
Exactly. Any game with a Gear system really has no reason to ever have PVP. PVP or any competition is supposed to be about two EQUALLY capable decks/teams/characters going against each other. Problem is in a game where you can deal more damage, take less damage, have quicker cooldowns etc you will never have a equal capability. Bottom line is that people dont like unequal competition and thats exactly what you get in MMO/Dungeon Crawler/Looter Shooter PVP.
@@suddenllybah im not saying things have to be a mirror match. But when you have stats and such they can make things lopsided. Better to just skip PVP in stat/gear games as I said.
The problem with PVP games is the PVP community itself. In your comparison of wolves vs sheep, I would liken myself to a sheep dog: I prefer to play with sheep and do sheep things, but when a wolf comes around I kill him. The average PVPer comes to gank the casuals, but as soon as you kill them they ragequit. There are very few 'real' PVP players that just love good competition. Most PVPers are just scared bullies. As long as these candyass 'PVPers' are the majority, PVP games will always fail because the wolves eat the sheep. Sheep leave, wolves then have to fight each other and most PVPers don't actually want to die and lose, they want to gank and bully. So the candyass 'PVPers' leave the game, and the real PVP players get bored because there is no more PVP. This isn't something that will be fixed by any game design, this is a flaw in the entire playerbase.
Agreed with this whole heartedly. This does, however, affect real PvPers. I remember spending time in WoW vanilla as a lvl 30 priest killing a lvl 60 warrior and later a lvl 60 paladin. Gaining the High Warlord title was an incredible accomplishment to me. There was no pay 2 win or anything of the sort in those days. The open world PvP fell apart shortly after AQ and never returned. I've moved across multiple titles seeking wonderous open world PvP. The best one I've found since those days has been Tera, up and until about 2 months post launch. The one thing that I noticed in every game with a good PvP world..... and that is the toxicity of the PvP group of players. The PvP playerbase seem to try and be some sort of elitist group of losers that are willing to nolife to win, and as soon as people catch up, ie. reach end game and beyond.... and they can no longer grief..... they leave the game because they are "bored" when in reality it is as you said. They are typically sore losers that ragequit. This is unlikely to change though.
I disagree. Gankers and trolls have always been a minority in the PvP community. PvP games usually thrive until PvE players who can't handle the competition cry and whine till they get their way, and ruin the experience for PvP players. Pirates of the Burning Sea is a prime example. When I played that game, i played for a nation that had a hard time fielding 16 players to PvP. Constantly being harassed and picked on by bigger nations, so we stepped up our game and eventually became the dominate force in the game, spite the fact being the smallest force the whole time. It is the PvE player that ruins it with their inability to adapt.
@@ironjade8666 WoW is not a PvP game, and those are not PvP players. If you also paid close attention toxic players are always a minority(always the same people), and the elitist aspect is simple. Trying to provoke a challenge. So step your game up, simple as that. No different then top PvE players being toxic or being elitist, cause they have BiS gear.
Accept you very rarely SEE the truly top tier PvE guilds (those that do mythic world first races for example) being toxic. However they have a point, the majority of PvP players ARE vultures, they're not wolves not matter how much you protest. It's the 'no true scotsman' fallacy that you're doing. "Oh most PvPers are gankers and vultures" "Well they're not TRUE PvPers..." yes they are...in fact I'd say that these are the most common type of PvPers.
The fact that PvPers consider themselves "The Wolves" and everyone else "The Sheep" is one of the main problems, there is a very literal god complex going on in a lot of PvPers heads that they will never get over, because they feel themselves to be an objectively superior being because they stack a cookie cutter system to the optimum micromanagement of stats and then it ends up nigh impossible for them to lose a fight. "Most" PvPers do play simply to gank and make people feel bad, despite your own opinion on it. Genuine competitive PvPers are the minority, most PvPers actually moan more than any "sheep" if a patch changes the meta so their max exploit builds no longer work so they might actually need to compete rather than get sure wins, and many devs bend to their cries, especially in P2W where desperate to win PvPers are huge whales.
Better pvp players never moan about changes or nerfs - they embrace them as it is their way to stay atop as they will be the ones who find new meta first and make good use of it before everyone catches up and copy them the ones who complain are wannabe wolves who just left their sheep flock yeah and I surely have fun if I find out that someone gets so triggered and butthurt over being ganked in a computer game that he PMs me with insults and death threats lol
Again with the flattering "wolf" and the insulting "sheep" comparison. Giving yourselfe the name of a great predator while giving those who do not like to play the way you like to play the name of a domestic animal known for being quite stupid and helpless all things considerd, just shows the inherit problem with PvPers: Thinking they are better then others, aka sheer arrogance. They are the grand predators while all others just exist to feed them... yeah no... Most PvPers behave more like vultures, singling out the weak, the lone and the inexperienced. Top that off with being willing to break and abuse the system for any little advantage they can get, playing in a highly unsportly manner most of the time and the comparison to wolfs is starting to fall apart rather quickly. If PvE players are grass eating sheep, PvPers are carrion eaters. Heres another reason a pvp focused mmoRPG will never work: The RPG aspect will allways lend itselfe to tryhard minmaxers who play the rules instead of the game. There is no such thing as a watertight RPG rulesystem that would ever prevent that. Not to mention the PvPers who solely exist to ruin everyone elses fun wich are a huge problem in PvP centric systems. PvP mmoRPGs dont work by nature
I follow most of your videos and admire your research. But ask yourself: How does the thought sit with you to play a game which is mainly created for people that perceive you as sheep? As a PvE centric player myself no amount of awesome sandbox stuff would get me into such a game unless it is HEAVILY policed; and then you would have the wolves that howl endlessly how unfair and PvE centric such game is (i.e. increased PK penalty in Black Dessert; except the one nearly deserted Server without any punishment (!) ). I do like the mental ideal of the noble and strong good-guy PvP player but lets face it: the majority just loves to be jerks and walks on to the next game if they cannot be one anymore for either lack of "sheep" or amount of punishments & restrictions.
Pretty much this, been playing on a private WoW server that's pvp. The same people that foam at the mouth wanting to kill people, cry like little bitches when they get ganked. All you see on both sides are over geared max level players who grief low level players or go into towns killing bankers / AH npc's. The vast majority of PVP is twinks in the 70-79 bracket, no one pvp's in the 80 bracket. None of these people want a fair fight, they want to jump up and down on you rubbing their balls in your face. While the vast majority of the server plays to raid, ignoring the pvp side for the most part.
Being called a sheep because I have better things to do with my life then grind 8-14 hours a day on an MMO has to be one of the most pejorative (and stupid) things I have ever heard from this channel. This is why most people do not play PVP MMO games, as most pvp in any of the MMOs I played were all heavily dependent on grinding bleeding edge gear and running the current meta builds, over skill based game play. I can't say I have met many 'wolves' in my decades of gaming, mostly what I see in MMO games are gankers who don't want a real or fair fight, they want to stomp on someone who can't possibly defend themselves. About the only MMOs I liked PVP in was the realm vs realm fights in Dark Age of Camelot (too bad the grind to get there was horrific), or games like planetside and WW2Online. I would rather play a pvp game like Escape From Tarkov. At least there I have a chance to out tactic/out shoot much more heavily geared opponents and take their crap for myself.
It's funny how he says that there's no evidence that PVP focused MMOs can't succeed, while giving us examples that every single PVP focused MMOs have failed except one. This is evidence. Evidence through historical examples in a majority is evidence. Particularly when someone who is a fairly strong pro-pvp voice is so horribly toxic when discussing it and doesn't even realize that fact. I like PVP and PVE, and will only play MMOs that do both. But... well, I've seen more high-end PVE focused players drop into PVP and dominate than the other way around. Usually high end PVE has a higher skill-cap.
In a Predator and Prey relationship, the predators are there to regulate the prey and keep them from overpopulating a biome and causing an ecological collapse. The relationship is largely self-correcting. According to the Lotka-Volterra equation, in a functioning biome there are always less predators by a large margin. In an MMO, when there are too many wolves (predators) the biome (the game) is in danger of collapse (barring outliers like EVE). PvP players do not contribute to PVE players. In an MMO there can never be too many PVE players. Every single PVE player enriches the experience of other PVE players in some, even if its just by paying the developer more money so the game gets more funding. Another PVE player is always a positive thing. PVP players on the other hand can actively make other players have a worse experience and can potentially cause a PVE player to leave the game permanently. In a focus designed PVP game PVP players are absolutely a good thing and always add more to the game, but that is only because the game is populated mostly by people who are there for the PVP. In a PVE centric game, PVP players are outliers who don't actually contribute to the games growth.
I am not quite sure what you are debating, this seems like a stream of consciousness. Do you honestly not think that PVE players can also contribute to PVE players leaving? Or that, if a PVE player is ganked it means it's consensual (barring bugs or exploits). Non-consensual PVP is a myth because you KNOW you can die in a PVP area if you travel in it.
There are tools to removed another PVE player from your sphere of activity. By blocking, muting, putting them on ignore, leaving etc. PVP by its very nature is designed to inconvenience you and take up your time. Wolves prey on sheep, wolves without sheep starve and die.
But to address your video directly. I do not think there will ever be a pure PVP MMO or a PVP centric MMO will ever be as successful. PVP players are interested in PVP and not in the other trappings of MMOs.
Open world PvP players have a very hard time convincing people to come play the game with them. That's why they fail. If I want to PvP I'll go play battle royale or arena PvP. I rather not go into a game I'm nothing more than "gank squad fodder". And I'm not going to run with a gank squad because shitting on people until they leave the game isn't fun for me.
plenty of competitive games that aren't MMO based have no consequences outside of a loss, but many don't find them to be boring even if some things are repeated a lot.
@@thewandererofconfusion Nothing actually happens to you beyond the loss of time, so no, it isn't like real life. Games have no consequences. Games have no meaning beyond having fun. You aren't actually accomplishing anything. I have had some extremely nasty arguments with PVP cunts over this shit. They're all immature imbeciles that can't understand the simplest of concepts. Like subjectivity. IE, I don't enjoy PVP at all, never have, never will. Nothing about it appeals to me, so being forced into it is a violation. It's actually pretty simple, mobs aren't real. There isn't anyone sitting at a computer playing them. PCs are played by real people. Killing NPCs means nothing, attacking another PC is no different to attacking a real person at a psychological level. Controlled PVP in arenas is like combat sports. There are rules, and everyone who takes part has agreed to do so. Open PVP is like being jumped by thugs while you're walking down the street minding your own business. Unless your real life is actually like that, then no, the game isn't like real life. And it isn't. Ghetto thugs aren't online playing video games. You're a fucking nerd sitting at a computer. I play MMORPGs for the same reasons I play solo RPGs, because I mostly play solo as much as I can. But sometimes I like doing raids, chatting, or doing other team content. PVP cunts can't seem to grasp the idea that not everyone plays games in order to attack other people. That while they may view all the other content of the game as side-content to the PVP. Most people who play MMORPGs consider PVP to be side-content. Open PVP is an excuse for people to behave like little sociopaths. It isn't about consequences. It isn't about competition. It's about dickless little cowards who feel powerless in real life, wanting to be able to feel like they have power over other people. Which is true of most gamers. People play games like these in order to do shit they can't do in real life, the difference is that most of us are happy getting our murderhobo jollies killing mobs. It's only the PVP cunts who are sick enough to need to "hurt" other people in order to get off.
I think there's two issues. First, no one wants to be a sheep. If someone is farming mobs or completing a quest, they don't want to deal with getting ambushed after aggroing a few extra enemies or talking to an NPC. Secondly, MMORPGs, by their very nature, are RPGs first and foremost. With such an emphasis on stats, it actually takes away from the competitive nature of these games. Why, if someone is truly competitive, would they feel like it's good game design that they do more damage than an opponent simply because their gear is better? I hate to generalize, but I think that a lot of the people who enjoy open world PVP do so to make themselves feel better by dominating weaker opponents with their own better gear. If they were truly competitive, they'd be playing something that puts them on an even footing as their opposition - MOBAs, Battle Royale, Counter Strike, Starcraft...there are plenty of competitive games out there that don't rely on one's ability to win mainly being about whose played longer. Since you now have a group of players who are essentially preying on weaker ones, the game now has a population of players that is actively avoiding fair fights, and indeed real competition, in favor of fighting and killing the players who least want it. This is going to create a split in the community and eventually, those sheep leave for greener pastures.
PVP games could be better if they were more about items that are not stat sticks. So like Dota 2 items vs LoL items. Also with real time combat that requires more than button presses. Increase the mechanical scale. Also have a system with actual consequences so if you attack someone in a town or with a certain affiliation you now are going to struggle to deal with those people. Also make it so it isn't easily fixed or maybe even permanent. As funny as it sounds Dungeons and Dragons PVP in the tavern arenas was more fun than almost any other MMO I've played. Way more depth.
Majority of the modern audience (atleast for mmorpgs) would rather opt to have pvp to be an optional side of end game if they wanted to... people play games to be entertained, and usually with pvp based games 1 side will defo lose.. and that losing side might not always have that mindset of "hey I wanna improve on my gameplay" and would most likely rage quit and opt for pve gameplay where things are coop based. In hindsight, if the game has lost its purpose of entertainment, the player will stop playing said games. I myself avoid pvp only focused games in general with the exception of Overwatch and that is mainly because I have friends who wanted to play.
its also a time thing, for a mmo that losing side may be weeks if not months when during a normal game its 15 minutes. I can handle losing for 15 minutes, but logging onto a character I know will get destroyed because it is outnumbered 5-1 would get old fast
S. F. P. Most full loot pvp game are dead or near dead .... full loot creat a mentality of " if I'm not gonna win 100% sure I won't even try " it also make pvper not fight each other but farm easy target ... if that is not the opposite of competitive gameplay I don't know what that is. ( ps i was a player that play a lot of full loot pvp game and it really hard to find a guild that actually what to pvp and not chase easy target )
S.F.P. the problem with adding to big consequence to dying is all that you rally add is a farm time you have to do if you die. Say it takes you 2h of farming to get back to the state befor your death (most games rather 20h). Then if you want casuals to play the game that maby got 10h / week if they die more then 4 times per week they are on constant loss...and if they die 3 times they gotta farm for half the time (while i guess they can be killed aswell). The system works for ppl that don´t mind farming 5h/day forever to simply be able to do some pvp on the evnings.
But there is a problem with the system they had in Wintergrasp/Tol Barad etc in WoW. That being most servers don't have an even population in each faction, or rather they dont have an even population of good/end game players. So one side would get stomped to the point where one faction has access to the zone almost permanently. I remember one of the servers i played on getting to the point where the Alliance would only have Wintergrasp in the early hours of the morning once all the horde players had gone to sleep.
@@qeloqoo Oh, they can exist all they want, they'll just always starve for lack of players. O pen world PvP and MMOs are mechanically, fundamentally, incompatible. MMOs are all about progression, yet that same progression makes it extremely unlikely that any 2 people likely to meet each other in PvP will be on equal footing. PvP between players of unequal capability is not PvP, it's griefing.
@@FNLNFNLN That's sheep's talk. Use maneuvers, tactics. PvP isn't only exchanging damage numbers. It's fighting sentient player, not scripted NPC/mob. Outsmarting him or her. With your attitude you will lose every fight before it started, and ofc pvp would feel like griefing for you. Simply cause you are uncut for it, carebear.
@@qeloqoo 1) And with progression mechanics, sometimes, no matter how much outsmarting you do, the difference in stats, or skill points, or whatever, will dominate. I've played open world PvP games where the other person can 2 shot me, yet if they literally just stood there doing nothing, it would take me minutes to dps them down. There is no "outsmarting" your opponent with that kind of gear difference, beyond not fighting. There's no PvP there, only griefing. 2) Also, for all of your "play smart" shit, PvPtards hate people "playing smart", if it falls outside of what they define as "PvP". I still remember playing Archeage a while back, where I was able to use the game's arena map and mechanics to ambush and win against players far more geared and skilled than I was, and the bitching over that never stopped. Or look at BDO and it's community stigma against using the game's PvP punishment mechanic to force more geared players off grind spots. The second you "play smart" to accomplish your goals against better geared and more skilled players, they'll bitch and moan non-stop because you didn't do it "fairly". 3) And finally, your attitude is why a PvP centered MMO will never be a major hit. "PvP all the time or gtfo". The vast majority of MMO players don't want all PvP all the time. If they did, PvP focused games would be more popular.
@@FNLNFNLN 1) It's bad RPG system design: big disparity in levels (WoW), no skill cap (DFO). Doesn't mean PvP games are all about griefing. 2) There's always gonna be sore losers. I've met people who'd alt+f4 to deny "reward" to you, even if that doesn't cost them anything (no death penalty). Still fighting other player beats hitting rock/clearing same dungeon/raid time after time after time. 3) Well, EvE online is PvP focused game with big "pve" part of playerbase who are required to sustain economy. Yet, "pve" players still participate in player versus player through market and logistics.
If you disagree, please let me know in the comments. Hope you guys like the new art/intro. The next DOAG should also have some unique graphics too :). Sorry for the delays.
Guild Wars 1 did extremely well for a PvP focused game. It was entirely PvP until very late in development, when they decided to add the ability to even do PvP.
Those pie charts are not readable and the blurry background can be painful to look at, with eyes trying to focus on them. Also is "long longevity" a multiplicative or an additive term?
"Will PvP focused MMOs always fail?" Proceeds to spend 20 minutes explaining how they are extremely niche to tryhards and subjectively zero fun. Btw love the content on this channel
The worst enemy of PvP centric games are "hardcore" PvPers... Let me explain to you what "hardcore" pvp usually means: Only showing up when you have more manpower then the enemy Using any class imbalance to your advantage Using any ingame glitches to your advantage Abusing the PvE system to get some easy kills and then mock the PvE players that clearly dont belong to the wolf masterrace because they simply want to enjoy some PvE content, making sure that said "sheep" is going to invest his limited free time somewhere else. All of these things where observable during warhammer onlines les then stellar run. To claim that the PvP was great is a gross misrepresentation.. just like everything else in that game the PvP was broken, rushed and hilariously flawed. Another example? EvE online.. wich has succeeded not because of its PvP systems but DESPITE of it. If hardcore PvPers where mostly in it for the ingame PvP how is it that big battles in EvE are so rare and exceptional that if they happen they make news across the entire internet? What really keeps people interested in eve is backstabbing and political intrigue that cannot be had anywhere else. This doesnt have anything to do with player versus player in a traditional sense and more to do with the meta of EvE.. namingly "everything goes" (again something that cant be had anywhere else currently). People on that game even engage in RL shenanigans to gain advantages over their openents and have plans in the working to take out the competition spanning years in the making. All of this without even touching the ingame PvP systems. Sure smallscale PvP happens but most often its more a case of "spank the n00b" or war deccing on some fresh corp that has absolutely no chance of fighting back, or ganking miners in low sec... you know.. totaly risk free and not hardcore at all? If people where really so interested in "hardcore PvP" dont you think there would be huge battles all over the place and not rare exceptions that happen because some guy fucked up their jump sequence in their titan and was cought with his pants down and no way to retreat? There are few actual wolves in EvE, but a whole lot of vultures
Perfect end line. That's all "hardcore," pvper's are. It's hillarious they choose the term "wolves," like they sound hard. Yes, you are certainly a PACK, of people that only engage and single out weak people to kill, never going after the challenge of killing an alpha without your pack.
That doesn't sound like hardcore PvPers, hardcore PvPers generally don't give 2 shits about ganking low gear players because there's no challenge in it, hardcore PvPers would want to fight other PvPers with good gear and knowledge of their class. What you are describing there are the usual rookie PvPers who can't win against experienced players so they seek satisfaction somewhere else.
If thats the case then the hardcore PvPers are a minority thats hard to come across... or have wandered off to non gear progression focused games like overwatch or pubg
Riptors Of course, hardcore players are the minority in both PvP and PvE, the majority are always average/casual players and a branch of exploiters and scumbags, but they are on both sides as well. Imo, when it comes to PvP vs PvE neither is better or more mature than the other, personally I feel like MMO's should put an equal amount of effort in both PvE and PvP and never force one upon the other, that way we can keep both sides happy.
The difference is that "exploits" in PvP directly affect other players while in PvE they dont really ruin anyone elses fun. In WoW it really doesnt affect me in the least if some hardcore raiding guild abuses a glitch in a boss encounter, however in PvP games thats a huge issue. You are right that neither PvE or PvP is more mature, another reason why this "PvPer are noble wolves and PvEr are stupid sheep" comparison is idiotic. Wich was my main grief about this video
Because if you want to just beat the crap out of each other for bragging rights, you can play a fighter or FPS. MMOs should focus on objective based PvP.
+Lord Crimsiden I think it is due to how combat is designed in most MMOs. It can be fun when you are fighting against a bunch of AI mobs or a tricky raid boss, but just awful feeling when you are playing against humans. Not to mention if you have to deal with gear differences and the like which can suck all the semblance of skill right out of it. Someone in Call of Duty can have the "best" gun in the game but if they can't aim for shit you can just mop the floor with them with your pistol.
RBT Same goes for PvP in mmo's tho, players can have bis gear and get trashed by a player in blues just because that player was much better at PvP than the guy in bis gear.
Well said. We need objectives and rewards for using teamwork. I'm a destroy the enemy on site type of player but, that gets old, it's also very unrewarding if I have the upper hand. edit: "can be" unrewarding lol.
Frankly, the reason given here still doesn't validate that PvP focused MMORPG will ever work I mean when you said that there needs to be more things to do other than PvP... that PRACTICALLY admits that you need PvE to cater the sheep because let's face it... things to do other than PvP is going to end up being PvE one way or another because if there's no actual challenge in the PvE part for the bulk of the players then that's just tedium and ppl will get bored of it. And if you say the PvE MMORPG tend to have much bigger budget and team, well yeah of course they do since PvE NEEDS assets to work... you know ... PvE after all pits players against the environment and NPC that are part of that environment. PvP focused MMORPG are supposed to have the players as the main assets... you build the system around them but part of the assets that form the activity they do are going to be partially coming from the players themselves and by right they should not require as much time and asset as PvE MMORPG. if PvP focused MMORPG needs as much team, budget and asset as PvE MMORPG... then the question is: WHO THE HELL WOULD FINANCE THAT? We already established earlier that you NEED PvE anyway for the PvP focused game to even survive because you do need the sheep so in the end if you need to build PvE anyway which requires time and budget which is going to bloat the development cost for the publishers... then why wouldn't the publisher just put their budget to the PvE part? Financially it makes NO SENSE to fund PvP focused MMORPG, it's just going to end up as a game with PvE that is inferior to PvE focused MMORPG, and PvP that will never have enough budget to achieve what is required to be good PvP focused MMORPG nor enough population to sustain itself and make return of investment. And ultimately... PvP focused MMORPG require a system as you say to manage them but the reason they do is because ultimately there will be sizable number of ppl who ARE JERKS, ppl who ARE @$$hol3s, ppl whose intent is nothing other than to BREAK the system and that's the reality when you take random groups of ppl from internet. No one that's been around long enough is gonna be naive enough to believe that you can possible develop a system to regulate these ppl without immense amount of manpower and budget because that's pretty much the only way you can properly regulate it if PvP is indeed the main focus of your game as PvP focus is going to amplify the issue (ppl care less if they break PvE setting, compared to breaking PvP system). So... if you say they just haven't developed a system good enough for PvP focused MMORPG to work. Then i turn the question back to you, what makes you think they can build a system good enough for PvP focused MMORPG to work? Who is going to fund it? What reason would you give them to fund it? Who is going to manage the PvP population? Who is going to balance it? (which in PvP focus is absolutely critical).
First, they didn't release important new content for a year and a half, then they went free-to-play and for that reset all characters. Yes, hundreds of hours gone (not to mention all the money I paid for the game and DLC). Then it STILL took them over a year to come up with new content. Now they expect me to play through the entire game again to experience new content. When they disrespect customers like this, they can fuck right off.
you totaly forgot the toxicity that usualy comes with PVP, especialy full loot PVP games. Most people think bad of themselfs, especialy when it comes to playing with or against other people. Not many people take the "ok how can I learn this and improve" route when it comes to gaming. Also, who wants to deal with 14 year old toxic ADD "pro gamer" kids all the time? Nobody. It's all too stressful for the majority of MMO interested players. I been a PVPer in many gamesm bt I do like to have options. Even as a dedicated PVPer I do enjoy to lean back and just immerse myself in a good MMORPG world with interesting story and PVE gameplay. Most PVP centric MMO's simply lack content. Once you become "good" in PVP, the game becomes boring, and when there are no other options, you simply move on to another game. There's plenty out there. That's why I love GW2 PVP. I can hop in, play some rounds of PVP, or do some WvW roaming, and when it gets boring or too toxic, I have so many options, so much content... Also, gear and level doesn't matter. That's one game that does it right, in my opinion. I think if you develop an MMO only for PVP and neglect PVE, it is doomed to fail, because nowadays toxic kids simply don't pay the bills long enough to keep it alive. MMO players are getting older, and with age we become more laidback, looking for a more relaxed gaming experience. Actionjunkies have their lobby based games which grant instant action. I could go on, but I think these are some good reasons why PVP centric MMO's always fail. You can't go full niche with your game and expect to survive in nowadays market.
You aren't learning or improving anything, it's a game. Games are for fun, they serve no other purpose. If I'm not having fun, then why the fuck would I keep wasting my time with it?
Know why PVE will always last longer? Becuase quests like the Coldain Ring War from Everquest 1 will never exist in a PVP game. Mmos were created becuase people wanted to play Dungeons and Dragon's with lots of people.
"Mmos were created becuase people wanted to play Dungeons and Dragon's with lots of people." -That's like saying TV was created to educate people. People want different things for different reasons. Anyways, MMOs hardly ever come out these days, the fact that the few that do come out are PvE doesn't inherently mean there isn't a market for PvP MMOs. If there was a recent PvP MMORPG that came out and failed maybe I'd say there wasn't a market. I mean, what's the best we have to go by? Warhammer? As the video stated, that game was a train wreck and felt clunky compared to other games out at the time. Also, how many PvE MMOs have failed? Are we to judge an entire genre based on the success of one game that came out almost 10 years ago? -Given the success of WoW I'd have to guess most developers just want to capitalize on what they think is safest, which is why developers generally don't make any MMOs, period.
Yeah, I agree. I played D&D back in the day and have also been playing MMORPGs for close to 20 years, I never felt like the two were similar. Even if "D&D" simulation was what they intended, it's not what they've evolved into. Like you said, the fun with playing D&D mostly comes from everyone's imagination and roleplaying, with an MMO, I never felt that was the case. You can certainly roleplay in some MMOs but there are so many technical limitations to what you can do that you might as well just cut the game out entirely. -Maybe in the future when virtual reality is a bit more advanced and people can do pretty much anything it will be different but, for now, I really can't see MMORPGs and D&D feeling like similar experiences.
Rotten Cheerio I very much disagree. What was ever challenging about WoW arenas, black dessert open world pvp, GW2 arenas or RvR, ESO pvp? Most of the time, it was just a giant deathball. Arenas? Pick the most OP class (HI season 2 Disc Priest) and go from there. I'm currently playing Warhammer Vermintide 2 and it has to be one of the most difficult games I have played and it's entirely PVE. Maybe I'm just getting old, but the PVP mind set is off putting with this generation of gamers. For the life of me, I cant join a game of overwatch without half the team raging at the start. I have better experiences with PVE and can recall most of my PVE days in EQ1 and Wow but I could never tell you about the time I won an arena match or WvW. There is a market for both, of course, but my market will never be pvp focused moving forward. I can't wait for Pantheon.
@Paul Karyakos #Paul Karyakos I would recommend that you watch Capain shacks video. ruclips.net/video/b5GoHO1KHJc/видео.html he will claim otherwise and as a player of the same kind I agree whit him. the thing whit todays MMO is that its to much DEV driven MMO flurish when the player have control. thats why EVE is so popular if the EVE player wanted they could turn the 4 faction war into a 3 faction war by wiping one of the faction off the map and its not impossible for them to do that (stupidly hard but they can).
As someone who's played MMO's for a little while.... The PVE version is true. Quite frankly every time I've seen a PVP community, it's become a hell of toxicity on top of some outright hellish balance, because of how people will allways yell about the dominant strategy, causing things to degrade over time. It is the same story, and one I'm currently seeing in the Elder Scrolls Online. The 'wolves vs sheep' thing is also a big factor. (Terminology I am still convinced was coined by a sociopath.) The criminal thing isn't even remotely an adequate to compare to, either. Even your mentality as to why the 'wolves' need those consequences, speaks to the fundemental problem of PVP. *Selfishness* It is the selfishness of the system, the setting, the game mode, and the people playing it, that drive all but the most ruthless away. It has been my experience as a 'sheep', that the PVP componant makes the game worse invariably due to the ammount of variables PVP needs to be regulated, which has a negative effect on the rest of the systems. PVP is mutually exclusive with everything else, I'm sorry. You just need to accept that. And no, I dont hate PVP players because I got killed. I hate them because they are some of the most ruuthless toxic bastards I've ever seen. I hate them because seeing people who focus on one person they can get a rise out of and potentially continuing until they kill themselves makes me sick to my stomache. Screw you and the horse you road in on, with that one. I hate the player, because the player dictates how they act. Not the game. PS: Love the new intro even if I disagreed with the video, or it's characterization of me as a 'casual'.
darkspawn senior Yet I see no toxity at all in EVE Online.. Literally everyone who destroyed me either sent me the price of my losses back or gave me advises and tried to help me succeed.
Your comment shows perfectly why modern MMOs are all about socially inept peoples wish fulfillment and for retreat from real life, and in order to have that working any meaningful PvP must be destoryed.
At 8:00 You say that saying PvP focused mmo games are doomed to fail isn't based on facts and is sensationalized, but... The reason this video even exists is because it is based on facts. Historically that's what's happened so I'm not sure what why you even said that. There sort of is a reason PvE players can't co exist with PvP players too (in the same game). PvP players want to kill other players and that's the last thing PvE players want. They want to be left alone, and PvP players are litteraly getting in the way of their fun every chance they get. Thats not even to mention what you said about ballancing for the two types of play is not very combinable because they are so vastly different. Those two types of players fundamentally cannot get along, and the only way to fix the situation that's been found so far (that I know of) is to seperate the players by server, map, etc and keep them apart, but at that point you aren't playing the same game anyway. Sorry for such the long post to anypkne who might be bothering to read it, but another thing to consider is how PvP in a mmo context turns people against each other in games, even more than other competitive games. In mobas and most other competitive games you have yourself, and you get matched against usually around 5 players with teammates, which are all random in most cases. You have (usually) 5 man teams, but that's about as far as it goes. Rivalries vs other players or teams aren't as common, or fierce in those types of games barring pro scenes because you are playing random people so the chance of playing vs someone you dislike many times is pretty low. Compare that to what you have in PvP mmos where you can have huge guilds of players going against others over and over, all the while sometimes literally taking the enemies stuff that they worked hours to get. Give that enough time and people start to turn against each other in ways that the game never intended. They start to dislike others in real life, target other people in game to harass with all their friends, and serious community ripping effects can start to occur given time. This in my opinion is the biggest thing holding back PvP focused mmos as a concept, and just to reiterate all of this is 100% my opinion and I'm not trying to present anything as objective fact.
Also as another thing I was thinking about: You say the wolves need sheep to survive, otherwise they cannibalize themselves. The problem with that is that the sheep don't play PvP very much if at all. This being the case, if a sheep has the choice between an mmo where there are wives that can take its stuff, and one where there aren't any it will always chose the second one. It's just like how given the choice a real sheep will choose to live in a place with no predators given the option. This means that while the wolves need the sheep, the sheep don't want the wolves... And they have the option to ditch them.
"but another thing to consider is how PvP in a mmo context turns people against each other in games, even more than other competitive games." Yeah that's exactly what makes pvp mmos so good overcoming an enemy you have a long history with is much more valuable than winning vs some random dudes or AI scripts and that's completely untrue about dislikes in real life I've been to EvE online fanfests and had a great time hanging out with people who are my enemies ingame If you are not a lunatic you keep ingame stuff ingame
Charles I disagree, The greatness of PvP MMO's is that the world is alive, working with each other matters, from the lowly miner(or rich in EvE's case) to the general leading large army's. The world of a PvP can change, and the stories are real, is why it is alive.
At 8:50 you assume that most of the paying customers will always be PVE-players or casuals (sheep). If that is true, so why should developers focus on the hardcore PvP-players (wolves)? Do the wolves help the game succeed? This is he big question that needs to be answered.
As I said in my comment. Not at all. If there is a chance for a stronger player to prey on the weaker, there is no reason to not do so (even with "PK systems, some people take pride on it). All the times I pvp on a open world pvp, I did because I could make the other party lives as miserable as possible, having them quit or call for help was the ultimage victory.
What I've noticed the difference between vP vs vE is community. PvE focused games have a lot to do with cooperation and collaboration with players. There's usually a lot to do that isn't trying to kill other people. As you pointed out with STO, combat is something that's generally a last resort. Instead, we somehow have combat focus everywhere. Carebears who enjoy exploiting, exploring and expanding. PvP players culturally are focused on exterminating. They want to challenge their mechanical and knowledge skills in combat and contests. The environment grows hostility and handling problems through aggression and combat. This culture is fine, but for fewer people and all about raging. I know this sounds similar to what you said here, I'm trying to focus on the culture and social aspect of playing a game with others. Focus on growing a fun community and culture and you'll attract people who want to join in.
Eve's a very special case as their economic system is so large that it's essentially it's own category. The game can be played without interacting with the PvP elements whatsoever. It's almost impossible to sell a new player on a PvP game with no match making and statistical advantages for established players. Sure the Battle Royale genre gets away with a complete lack of match making but that's through a large number of extremely smart decisions to allow newer players a chance to work their way into it. For example, you get to decide where to drop so a newer player can go to safer places at the start to run into less immediate competition. They reset the gear and offer inequity of gear, so while a new player might not win in an equal fight they can win in an unequal fight. And honestly that's why I think PvP MMOs are never going to be anything more than niche titles, because I don't see how a new player can deal with being less experienced AND mechanically disadvantaged.
When I played eve I ended up manufacturing in demand ships and selling them to the pvp and pve players. Love wars, war means money. Incursions mean even more money. Need a PC again, hopefully this year.
@diana jones I actually think EVE's system is one where PVP actually weaves itself into all aspects of the game. The market mechanism itself is largely treated as a zero-sum game between its participants. Any PVE is done solely for the purposes of engaging in direct or indirect PVP.
PVP is also balanced in EVE because your "gear" isnt really randomly earned. Everything in EVE is either bought or manufactured really. This puts everyone on a semi equal footing, which is what PVP wants.
I always prefer PvE. I also LOVED the scenarios in Rift and Warhammer:AoR (brimstone bauble was a personal favorite). I do believe there's a way to do a PvP-centric MMO that won't chase away Bartle's Achievers, Explorers, and Socializers. It's just that nobody's figured out the math yet. However, as we stand in the ashes of empires, we can find lessons to salvage. Here's some I've seen; -Avoid snowballing victory. The spoils of one victory should not contribute to the next. Things should always get harder the closer you are to winning. Constant conflict means constant gameplay. -Have safe PvE areas. Most people get bored of the same gameplay everyday, however exciting. Sometimes you just want to grind mobs to a podcast. Clans also need a place to farm resources when they get pushed back from the front. War always pays better than hunting, but people still go hunting. -Deal with population imbalance. Be draconian if you have to. If you're doing RvR, make damn sure to balance the aesthetics of each side. When one group can zerg down everyone else, it means they won the war and the game is over. If you know more, post it.
In Albion online, during invasion day, you have the boss team and the zerg. the boss team is doing pve, killing a really tough boss fight to cap an area. The zerg protects the boss team from other zergs and pvps while the team kills the boss. Really fun mix of both types of playstyles, where the two groups work together for a common goal.
The average age of the "pve" mmos you used were much less then the average age of the "pvp" mmos you used. That creates a false differance. The budgets of mmos have risen drastically over time. You're like, "Look how this 20 year old mmo Dark Age of Camelot's budget is lower then SWTOR! That's why pvp mmos aren't succesful!" Sounds like you're just pushing a biased narrative.
Actually it further proves my point. That you can't compare the two without understanding a litany of clear differences. Age, budget, and Dev team size.
Ugh... Except that people been saying the MMO market is changing ... people don't want greedy PvE MMOs where devs just gouge your wallet. MOBAs are more popular. Those are PvP. Hell, even Blizzard cashed in on it twice with HotS and Overwatch.
"The budgets of mmos have risen drastically over time." BDO was made for a mere12 mil $ in 2015 and it is the most beautiful MMO on the market I see it as that PVE games need more extensive content involving 3d modelling, voice acting etc so they have bigger budgets A large part of SWTOR insane budget went on voice acting alone with every small side quest being fully voice acted You do not really need this shit for a good MMO game, it's just a fad
Peter Lopez Your comment speaks of games. It didn't specify MMOs. Though I did comment that there has been a lot of chatter that MMOs in general are possibly a dying breed. Which enter MOBA can pick up and put down and don't have to invest a lot of time to character building.
The fundamental issue in any PvP based game is: "Is it fair?" When you queue up for a game of your favourite non-mmo pvp game, everything gets reset to a fair and even state and you get matched with an even number of players close to your own skill level. An open world factionless PvP MMORPG has no matchmaking, no balancing of numbers and the point at which everything was fair and equal, was the launch of the game or server. If that also gets combined with typical MMO combat, where it is unlikely to get lucky and kill someone clearly stronger, then a large chunk of the player base has a terrible experience in PvP. And adding PvE content to keep more sheep around does not resolve the underlying predatory system that favors the hardcore, which damages the long term mainstream appeal of the game. I don't know if there are any good solutions for resolving these issues without destroying the persistent worlds and "RPG-ness" of the games. How do you stop good players from ruining everyone else's day? There's the obvious permadeath/losing gear option, to reset the playing field somewhat. Perhaps semi-permanent wounds, so your character can't get healed back to full after taking damage, so your unstoppable healer-dps combo can't just rampage through everybody. You could give a temporary stat penalty for getting kills on other players. You could make dying incredibly easy, so even the worst player could get a lucky hit on a hardcore pro and kill them. (Which is how BR games avoid having strict matchmaking.) You could do "seasons" of gameplay, after which whole servers get wiped to an initial clean slate, negating any level/gear advantages long term players have.
While I would consider myself inexperience in MMORPG and I prefer PvE (MOBA is more of my type in PvP), I do notice some interesting perspective in your video that may hinder the enjoyment of the players. 1. Stop the Wolf/Sheep dynamic analogy. If in a PvP focus MMORPG all you can see is players behaving like wolves and sheep, it is Doomed. No people want to be sheep. They may identify themselves as sheep only because you force the narrative on them. If all you want is to illustrate a hunter/prey dynamic, it is Carnviore and Herbivore. There are tonnes of animals such as rhino/elephant/hippo/gazelle that don't hunt other animals, but they are far from helpless against predators. Sheep IRL is fairly replaceable, but PvE players aren't. So you don't need "Sheep" players, you need more "Rhino" players that if attacked, they are encouraged to fight back with significant chance to survive/win (some buff/debuff gaming mechanics?) 2. Fun is anything but natural. Nature highly appreciates zero risk: one-turn kill, preying on the sick and weak, inbalanced raiding party, paralyzing toxins etc. These mechanics are anything but fun for both side (so it is tolerable for PvE, garbage for EvP and PvP). Real life aren't that fun too, that's why people play game where arbitrary rules are made up to create a safe bubble that people can compete in equal footing; that's why people immerse in the virtual game world MMORPG. So stop asking the question "Why something works IRL doesn't work in game?" IT SHOULDN'T BECAUSE IT IS NOT REAL, THAT'S THE POINT. Focus on what makes game special and how it is overall fun for everyone. 3. Yes, screw/discourage vultures/griefers, if you can't negate their negative influence to the herbivore players. You don't deserve their attention.
I am a pve player, I came from a game where pvp was pretty much eliminated and I noticed a change, where there was a lot less players. And it made me sad, it made me sad for the fact that those pvp players lost a game that they loved. And it made me think, if the game I loved so much turned its back on me how would I feel? So I began to respect pvp players, and realized they play for the same reason I play. To have fun.
There's pvp players and then there's pvp players. It's fine to play to have fun, but for some that fun is the sociopathic kind, where they victimize other players for shits and giggles.
guild wars 1 was essentially pvp focus. You pretty much max level in a couple of weeks playing the pve content mainly to unlock skills, mods, gear and prepare for pvp battles later on. Endgame content for PVE was un-noteworthly with only 2 instances and the rest of it was grinding for cosmetics. Its PVP learning curve was steep for many but those that put effort into it was rewarded lavishly, thus off putting to PVE players and eventually the devs realise it was a problem and subsequently its expansions focus more on PVE. Its also note worth saying gw2 pvp is a joke compare to its predecessor
Imo, GW was probably the best and the only good PvP in MMORPGs (even if it was not a real MMORPGs). The whole design from the start encouraged people to participate in them. You could create characters made only for that part of the game without even having to Gear them or leveling them just to enjoy that part of the game. It was also a lot better balanced than others and it was quite alive too. Imo it is an MMORPGs that focused on PvP and didn't failed by doing so.
People that like competition between players will normally go to shooters, while people that like MMORPG like dungeons that require team work. A little fraction of players ends up liking a MMORPG focused on PVP.
Lets clear something up from the beginning: 1. modern games are not designed to be fun. These games are designed to create an addiction so that you can be milked of cash in ever greater quantities for ever greater periods of time. You form an emotional bond with a character that you invest ever more effort, time and money into that you become ever more reluctant to abandon, all the time encouraged and reinforced by peer pressure. The end game being you pay all your money to the company for a mere chance of receiving something others have, rather than face an impossible grind that gets ever more impossible the further you progress and the more addicted you become. MMOs are not designed to provide the players with what all the players know is needed to make a great game. They are designed to keep you there through conditioning as a cash cow through 'hope'. 2. There is no such thing as an MMO. Not any more. The idea of the MMO was to be a community driven game built on the foundations of collaboration (not competition). ALL modern games are single player or small multiplayer groups where everyone's actions are isolated or in direct competition. There is no community collaboration, so there is no true MMO. Ashes of creations node concept is designed to go some way toward addressing this. 3. No game to date takes balance seriously as all games allow you to level up or grow in power with vertical progression. Any new players get further and further outgunned by veterans so balance is never achieved. Where a community game demands all players can play with any player at any time in any place, this mechanic ensures its impossible. The only way to achieve true balance is by starting as a full power hybrid and allowing progress into specialist niches ONLY by sacrificing existing power in opposing areas. Alas many players want single player god mode, and refuse to pay any penalties, preferring to dominate new players, which causes the very PvE vs PvP angst quoted to begin with. An MMO is not a single player title so GOD MODE can not exist. 4. There are two types of PvP players. Communal PvPs that want a fair battle at all costs to test their skill. Solo players that come from single player games that want the God Mode experience they are accustomed to. And PvE centric players that are used to the notion of endlessly incrreasig power with no sacrifice, which the devs allowed and encouraged because increasing power is irrelevant in a PvE world where only NPC cant complain. And who doesnt want to be a god in their own play world ? But an MMO is not a personal play space. It is a communal playspace....until they made it single player or small group whose activity were isolated from each other. Even here the feathers fly when resources are competed for in a communal market as no communal framework exists to allow 'collaboration'. TL;DR. Devs are told what to do by accountants whose motive is profit not fun. An MMO can not be run on the same principles as an isolated single player game. No MMO exists, as there is no framework for community to truly exist and collaborate, only solo and small group. PvP and PvE will remain incompatible until PvP and PvE players are mutually dependant and must collaborate in a communal setting. ie. The PvP and PvE are two arms of a mutual support group rather than antagonist and competitors. Pve player seek mutual creation through collaboration. PvP players seek mutual destruction through competition. They are diametrically opposed play-styles that can only work together if designed to do so.
PVE mmo's have larger Dev Team simply by the fact they need to create more PVE content. PVP driven mmo's "events" are mostly player driven. Hence designing Quests, Dungeons, Raids etc etc is not a priority.
The main problem with an open world pvp oriented games ,in my opinion ,is that numbers decide everything and eventually every locations will be dominated by a guild's zergs and they just won't let any single player to make a single step on it. So if you don't wanna endure hardcore pvp jerks guildmates that harass everyone for a single mistake ,you won't ever achive anything ,above lowest level locations (:
Why do pvp-centric mmos fail? Time. In the beginning everyone is at zero. As time goes on veterans become more and more powerful and it makes it very difficult to attract new players. I will not even bother getting into a pvp title that's a couple of years old, because I'll be so far behind the curve that I'll get my ass handed to me every 2 minutes. That's just not fun.
Completely agree with the Sheep and Wolf system.. I used to play a PvP Mud back in the days where if you get attacked by someone they incur "evil points". If you incur enough evil points, you will ultimately become an outlaw status. As an outlaw you can be attacked by Town Guards and also be attacked on sight by players without penalty to them. If you obtain enough evil points your status goes farther down to the worse which was Fiend and powerful NPC bounty hunters would hunt you. You can also choose to be Lawful where you can't attack anyone but if someone ever attacks you, they will incur double evil points. I think this was a great way to keep wolves at bay where you needed to go to town at times and you couldn't because you were outlawed. This was a complete PvP game where you could attack anyone anywhere but the concept was the best. Also if you died you lose everything and if you died 9 times you get re-rolled as in deleted.. BUT everytime you leveled you gained 5 lives with a max of 9.
I have a strong dislike of any PVP games. Never cared for them and play games to have fun. I don't find it fun when I want to do X but can't because someone thought it would be fun to attack me. Never liked attacking other players because it makes me feel like an asshole.
I played WoW for years specifically for the PvP. In between battlegrounds or arenas I had fond memories of just hanging outside of town dueling ppl, getting ganked by stealth enemies, going over to enemy towns and having sporadic epic battle, hearing the call to battle with the timed world pvp events, etc. I even enjoyed questing near enemies and seeing who was going to attack first when one of our guards dropped and then having that fun gank turn into an epic battle of factions as more and more players jumped in to help. I also really enjoyed optimizing gear and builds trying to get that edge over others but when WoW abandoned PvP gear and PvP vendors for ilvl gear grinded from PvE world daily events I quit and never returned. In other words, I really enjoyed the PvP but had equal fun with the stuff I did in the world during the down time.
Personally where I feel pvp MMORPGs will always fail is because the people who tend to make them are always somewhat lacking in managing and growing a game. I also feel that people who make games in general are touched. :E
As a PVEer playing BDO currently, I have to say open world PVP is a bit of a rush for me. I like that added fear that someone might come after at anytime, and sometimes It can even make boring level grinding more interesting for me. Then again it may just be my nostalgia for 2007 era Runescape
The video was pretty slanted, I would definitely agree that this was more of a pvp apologist video rather than a comparison. Community is usually why PvP FFA games die, as the long-term players tend to make it almost impossible for new players join the game. The community feeds on itself until it dwindles to nothing.
This idea that PvP mmos have a smaller budget and team is the problem is inherently wrong. Why? Because PvP-based MMOs have far less content in them than a PvE game. You don't have to spend art assets on a giant world filled with quests, npcs, monsters, etc if they main purpose is to kill each other. You don't need the writers on staff when there is no story. You don't need quest designers when there aren't any quests. You don't need a dungeon team if there are no dungeons, etc. Take Albion online for example: Dungeons are randomly generated and are incredibly bare bones. This is because the game isn't about them. The environments are all boring and stale because, again, the game isn't about them. The loot is boring because, yet again, it isn't about that. Planetside 2 is another good example of one of the more popular PvP-based mmos. Same thing. The map is boring and uninspired. The cosmetics are mostly dull, there is no loot to speak of, and again, there is no story or quests for you to follow. They don't NEED the budget of one of the big PvE mmos because they don't have to provide anywhere near the content. When a game is designed in this sort of fashion there is very little reason to have the budget or team of a WoW, FFXIV, or ESO that is filled with an ungodly massive amount of content in the form of quests, story, loot, etc. They are inherently different properties. Now if you said you cannot compare them BECAUSE they are inherently designed differently, sure. But their budgets and team size are irrelevant.
Good video as always. I think one of the problems you touched on was the community of pve vs pvp. There has always seemed to be an antagonistic relationship between the two groups. Honestly, this paradigm really ruined my experience with black desert online. The endgame in bdo is obviously pvp, but getting there requires endless amounts of lifeskilling or pve grinding, which is a problem lots of pvp mmos face. I don't do much pvp in that game because its so gear intensive, any fight I get into is inevitably one sided. Theres really no skill involved when it gets like that. I saw people in my own guild act like toxic children when they killed people lower level than them, calling them carebears etc. I would love to see an mmo with great pvp mechanics implemented so I can also experience that unique kind of game. Cheers though, keep up the good work!
Yes, I wish the hardcore and casual groups would stop alienating themselves. Ultimately both groups need each other; without the hardcore there is no foundation to build the community on, and without casuals theres no life to a game. I feel like mmos showcase the problem much more than other games too, because of the amount of player interaction. I'm pretty hardcore with rpgs like Dark Souls, but man, if Fire Emblem didn't have an easy mode, I'm not sure I would have beaten it. I'm just straight garbage at turn based stuff.
GW1 and to a slightly lesser extent, GW2 were both excellent in that regard. Unfortunately the mechanical skill cap in both of those games was a little low.
TheBionicOnion - You will love PVP in Final Fantasy XIV. Duals, which can only take place in the dual area, are gear-centric but that isn't the case with all of the other PVP modes. Square Enix decided to kill the "Arms Race" that eventually ruins PVP in other MMOs. They MOBA-ized PVP giving you a fixed list of abilities based on your Job and standard armor ratings regardless what you have equipped. Everyone is on the same footing regardless of level. This makes PVP purely based on Skill and Team Cooperation rather than an Arms Race of who has the best gear. Since they've made this change PVP has become immensely popular in the game. You can still acquire PVP gear but it is useful only for the Glamour System to customize the look of your character. Oh, and there is a new actual MOBA in the game and its proven popular too.
PvP friendly MMO's see empires rise and fall, cities become glorious metropolis or fade into ruins. I've helped defend the sigils against all 3 of the enemy factions throwing waves of dragons at our ragged line while volunteers ran the gauntlets to bring in supplies, dying in their droves to help us hang on anoher 15, 10 or 2 minutes. if I might steal from Roy Batty in Bladerunner: "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die." PvP is the history of MMOs, the rest is what happens in the background.
Many mmorpg pvp games are doomed to fail because of gear progression. A never ending treadmill of constantly better weapons and armor that requires P2W, Alt2Win, or stupid amounts (years) of grinding just to be competitive. Often times the pvp players shoot themselves in the foot with the pure thought of "Kill Everything!" and only want to work with the other "top" players leaving nothing to feed upon but sheep or those without ability, soon after burning out from boredom (no content, dedgame, gitgud). They don't self regulate, they don't want to lose (ever), they talk all kinds of smack (unprovoked), and more people than you might like to admit enjoy griefing others. This is not true of ALL of them, as I and several i know are gracious victors or losers and don't want to dominate nor get crushed constantly. Games like SWTOR had wonderful pvp arenas so that gear progression didn't matter and it was down to actual skill. It will be the same case for Conan Exiles (perhaps not an mmorpg? but it blurs the lines) where it isn't terribly difficult or expensive to get top weapons/armor, with no p2w elements. Although I foresee the official pvp servers eating themselves and crashing quickly, and the pve ones lasting much longer, it will be the private pvp servers that self regulate and withstand the tests of time.
The goal of any competitive game is make your oponent leave the game, there is no greater satisfaction then seeing your oponent log off or give up on playing because of how much you made thier lives miserable. That by itself is a problem, as it creates a toxic mindset on the community, see any competitive game like LoL, DotA, CSGO, Fortnite, among others. But what these games do is to give incentives for you to get back into the fight, be as how it is quick for you to get back, or how much you want to get a higher elo. Just see the newly released phase 2 of wow for instance, it is a shitshow of people ganking others in the transition phase between flight-points, blocking dungeon routes, and ganking lowbies. I myself only PVP when I can "instagib" the other party, and continue to camp their corpse again and again, but it's clear to see how that is counter productive to the game, as people who can't play tend to quit the game. That is exactly what is happening to classic wow now. For the competitive games crowd, this is the golden age, competitive game became a sport and you have big companies inveting big money on competitive games. People playing on equal footing for fast, adrenaline filled matches. Just pick one of the games I mentioned above and you'll have an amazing experience*. *after you gitgud and/or get used to hear about your teamates romantic escapes with your mother
PVP MMORPGs have one huge problem, people want to jump into the action without a long grind. The one thing MMORPGs just don't do well is remove the grind.
I was turned off by PvP when Blizzard started nerfing class abilities and raid gear based on PvP'ers complaints. Additionally, there is no honour with PvP'ers. 90% of them are there to grief and they will do it no matter what game they're playing or what rules are in place. Lineage 2 had some harsh penalties for dying, considering how hard it was to obtain items. Didn't stop anyone from ganking and griefing 24/7.
i hate open world pvp games why can't they just make arenas for pvp GW2 gets pvp right, their is nothing more frustrating in game when someone blows $5000 real money to buy in game gear to make their characters impossible to beat then they just go to low level zones and constantly kill any new player that comes their way for S$#!'s and giggles i pass on every game i want to play when i hear it has open world pvp
The problem is that Devs honestly can't balance PvE and PvP well at the same time. Look how often an ability in an MMO would get 'nerfed' into uselessness for PvE because of PvP. Hell the reason the WoW devs decided to slow their game down and took out what people were enjoying in legion was because people were complaining about things in PvP (the GCD change was totally a PvP focused move). City of heroes was a prime example of this in its early days. Regen got massively nerfed because it was overperforming in PvP, however it was only 'decent' in PvE, with the changes taking it from decent to bottom of the barrel from which it never recovered. Even the Rogue servers STILL haven't buffed it back up to a level where it can compete with anything else.
Isn't fact that MMO PvP is rather niche pretty much the reson why it will never be a good MMO? Can niche product be a truly massive? I would like to not use Eve online as an example as it's really an exception to the rule and has a few speicifics that other worlds will never have. It feels to me that most succesfful PvP MMOs I know are the ones that are actually PvE with PvP aspect to it. GW2 world vs world. Ultima online. Ragnarok online. Mostly those were/are PvE games where you do your PvE stuff to become stronger in PvP eventually. And another point of view. You say you can't change human nature, which I do agree. The problem is, human nature is much easier to control in smaller environments. Once you go massive, there will be enough idiots that like to pick unfair fights and hunt lower levels for fun. I remember back in the days wow... it's primarily PvE game, but there were many occassions where I was minding my PvE bussiness only to get ganked or simply overpowered by PvPer. I ultimately regretted my choice of server...
Most PvP games boil down to who has the bigger pain train. PvP games also take a lot larger commitment than PvE games. In PvE games you can generally log in and do some dailies, chat a little, and log off. PvP games generally turn into live styles.
Elite Dangerous technically isn't an MMO but PVP is killing the game. Frontier Developments has done little to resolve the problem. Gankers and Trolls feel emboldened, they attack people trying to express how unbalanced the PVE v. PVP is calling them Carebears and otherwise basically shouting them down. This has resulted in a segregation of the player community. Elite Dangerous has Open Play which is where the problem exists. To avoid the Gankers people are flocking to Private Groups like Mobius PVE which has so many members that they're comprised of multiple private groups. Regardless of whether you're in Open Play or a Private Group you still have influence over the overall game and this pisses off the Gankers that people who ran to private groups to avoid being trolled by them can still influence the game. Basically, due to FDEV's negligence, they've allowed an elitist community of toxic players to dictate to other players how the game should be played. The level of incompetence shown by FDEV in how they've failed every time to deal with this issue is breathtaking.
On the other hand, if the PVE-centrists, after banding together, fund their own "police" of PVP fanatics to go after the gankers, the game will be essentially policing itself.
Just food for thought, I imagine all games veer towards PvP at some point, as human nature's primary goal is to conqueror their environment (PvE), but once the environment is conquered, what do we do? Look for bigger challenges, or fight amongst ourselves - the former sometimes reaching for the impossible, while we never seem to grow tired of the latter. In other words, I imagine PvP to be a necessary end game for all MMOs, but the implementation in many cases leaves much to be desired.
I can agree that the systems in place are part of the problem, but I've tried enough MMOs with open world pvp to know that a substantial chunk of pvpers enjoy killing others players for no better reason than they can. I agree 100% that consequences for such behavior is hard to juggle without being too lenient or heavy handed and I think that's why most PvE slanted games have structured and/or instanced pvp rather than open world pvp. I'm of the opinion that this appeals to more players overall and casuals are more apt to actually engage in pvp when it's structured and given the choice to participate. Admittedly I'm not a huge fan of pvp, but I was very active in Dark Age of Camelot, SWG, WoW(When getting the Warlord title was an accomplishment), SWTOR, and have dabbled a bit in FF14. These games didn't force participation, but encouraged it with incentives.
I think people are starting to distance themselves in increasing numbers from any form of fun that involves a high risk of being perpetually dominated by other players more powerful than you. I remember playing Warhammer Online and there was this one PVP map where the forces of Order would almost always dominate to the point of grave camping. It wasn't fun at all, so I didn't want to play that map anymore. In Warhammer's case further, there was major imbalance between the factions with Order usually dominating, which wasn't fun for the other side, so players on the other side either quit or joined the winning side, worsening the situation. People who retort with arguments like "git gud" are probably the people who power game the most overpowered classes, or are on the winning side, and it would be akin to me getting 4 guys to hold you down while I smash your face into a deformed mess with a hammer, which is both not fair, beyond your power to resist and absolutely not fun.
This is why WAR really needed a 3 faction system. Instead of Order vs Chaos, it should have been something like 'Elves, Dwarfs, Humans' 'Chaos, Dark Elves, Greenskins' 'Tomb Kings, Vampire Counts, Skaven'. That way you'd never have one faction stomping the other depending on your server since the two lower population sides could gang up on the bigger faction and push them back (before inevitably turning on each other)
I love that intro. I love the subject of this video. I love your treatment of said subject. Well done! Now, for the nitpicking :p About the budget and team sizes differences: While I think the point is totally valid, it is pertinent to consider that those PVP-focused games are for the most part older than WoW and the PVE games you show. You can see that the more recent one, W:AR, has considerably more budget and employees than the other PVP titles in the list. Let's say the age difference aggravates the comparison. About Crowfall: From what I understand, there will be both GVG and RVR, as the game will be paced around campaigns with different sets of rules (like, one campaign will have faction war, another wills have clans war, another will have FFA... with rotations so you always have 2 or 3 different campaign worlds running). Each campaign having a finite duration, it should prevent the biggest clans/factions to snowball since you start each one anew. About RVR: The balance problem with RVR is that you can't force players into factions and there can be a(n) (dis)advantage due to some faction being underpopulated or one being largely more populated than the other 2. Plus a lot of players have a tendency to join whichever faction is more populated from the get-go to get an advantage.
You mentioned the size of the dev team and the budget, but you didn't mention one thing that is related to that: yes the PvE focused MMORPGs have been more successful throughout the past 20 years, while PvP focused MMORPG's have been unsuccessful...but here's the catch, the PvE MMOs that have been successful are 4 or 5 out of hundreds of PvE MMOs that failed, while PvP MMOs that haven't been sucessful are 4 or 5, which means that yes the top MMORPG's are PvE focused, but how many of PvE MMOs died in the last 20 years? hundreds and hundreds. And how many PvP MMOs died in the last 20 years? probably not even 10....this means the market is flooded with PvE MMOs, and since these are proven to be sucessful, almost no one wants to fund PvP MMOs (and never did in the past). So there's a crazy amount of probability factor here. So in fact there's very few MMOs (PvE or not) who have been sucessful throughout the years. (I know in general you mentioned all of this but I feel like most people don't know about the hundreds of PvE MMOs that failed so I just had to mention and specify).
I'm a sheep, a proud carebear and have no problem with wolves if done properly. My problem however lies with the type of PvPers who PvP to make others feel bad, acting all tough 'gangsta' ,'l33t' and w/e.. insulting me and calling me 'noob', 'scrub' w/e just because I died in PvP and made that player feel superior. I mean Ok - I'm the sheep and accept it, the opposite end must show at least some respect to the weaker players, because even you stated that a game needs the 'casuals' as much , if not even more than the 'hardcore' . PvP players often forget they are dealing with a living, breathing person when they grief that person. I came to play a game, because in a way I was sick and tired of real life rush, real life 'idiots', crimes and violence... I don't want to see the same toxicity, which is often escalated in PvP games - especially MOBAs, shooters and F2P games where people can just buy their power and carry on dominating the others. All in all, PvP focused games have more toxicity, more 'bad boys' type of player , who try very hard to be the alphas and do it in a terrible, sometimes pathetic way. Don't get me wrong, I've met amazing PvP wolves who treat sheep like me with respect and fairplay, sometimes even let us be, because we don't offer them much challenge, some even carried on protecting me or mentoring me, as I grinded or learned the game... but in my experience in online games - these type of PvPers are the minority and less and less rare in a world, where the toxicity in video games is increasing , rather than decreasing. Loud, raging teenagers and kids are freely allowed to play a 16+, 18+ titles, where back in 2000, when i was just 9, I wasn't even allowed a computer of my own until quite some time later. I've noticed a terrible decline in quality of players in recent years, nowadays with all the memes and slangs taking over internet, I see more and more PvP players posting something like ' cry more ' and inserting some meme. P2P PvP MMOs, are definitely better in that regard, but when you put only wolves in these games, sooner or later they will destroy themselves , leading that game to slowly die out, because I've noticed how PvE players like me nowadays rarely join PvP server or PvP games, because most are totally repulsed by the toxicity. In the past, I could get called a lesbian for playing a game, but I found that just immature.. that was the 'best', the toxic people could come up with... Nowadays the insults are out of control, sometimes scary even. Never before I've seen such foul language in a game, like in the recent 5 years or so. The sad part is, that toxicity slowly creeps in PvE as well, where you can get flamed and terribly insulted, for not having the best gear when you go in a dungeon, getting yelled at for dying, for not doing as much dps or not healing 'fast enough' etc etc. I'm sorry for making my post this long, but thinking about it, maybe your next video should be about the terrible online communities we have recently and how toxic and insulting people increase , rather than decrease. No wonder there are guilds and some private servers accepting member who are of age 30 + even for PvE. TLDR: I enjoyed the video overall and as I said, I do not mind being the sheep to a wolf, my pleasure even, if you want to duel or fight me, I'll try, will do it to make you happy and congratulate you when you probably win, then carry on... however I find it intolerable that some wolves forget they need the sheep and show them no respect. I'll never seem to completely ignore toxicity as it always finds a way to make me feel bad and insulted, no matter how hard I try to not pay it attention. Happy gaming ! :)
Guild Wars 1 PvP was my favorite PvP... and my favorite MMO. God I miss running Bunny Thumper R/W or 50hp Monk... Then running through a map to farm mats with my E/Me on the downtime. edit: Please do a video on GW1 specifically. :D
Open-world PvP attracts a toxic personality more interested in winning by beating up on weaker players than they are in perfecting their skill. Such people may be in the minority, but for "outreach" to new players these will be the main ambassadors. Predator vs Prey is an interesting analogy. Real-life predators aren't looking for a fight, but a kill. They go for the old, the sick, and the feeble--those too weak to defend themselves and too slow to run away. Even the boldest of lions isn't looking to tangle with an elephant in its prime. In this vein, being called a "predator" irl is definitely not a compliment. Competitive games in other genres, be it fighting games, RTS, MOBAs or even real-life sports, tend to match players based on skill level and actively discourage predation on lower-skilled players. Progress is more about improvement than winning. So when a game comes out with abundant opportunities for beating up on new players, guess who flocks in...
I know you think what you said was really intelligent but there's so many holes in that I don't know where to start. For starters the predator and analogy actually proves my point so thanks for explaining it. And second MMO's aren't about equal matchmaking, so it's okay if a game isn't fair. But if it's so unfair that players can't get started then that needs to be changed. This elementary logic that everyone who likes to player-versus-player in a video game somehow just wants to take advantage of somebody though is just as silly as assuming the opposite.
@@nerdSlayerstudioss Like I said, it's a minority of players. The serious PvP folks I encountered in my MMO days were generally busy doing high-level PvP against other serious PvP folks. Which means that they weren't in the low-level zones where the griefers set up shop. More on the animal analogy, predation isn't the only kind of violence among animals. Fights for dominance are common (bucks, bulls, etc.), and in a herd might even lead to a graded hierarchy. Others, like ants, seek total annihilation of rival colonies. Organized competitions definitively drift in the dominance direction. Which is the ideal PvP MMO experience?
Sorry but I feel like you are making fun of pve players by calling us sheep or not hard core players. Like we don't play 10 plus hours a day raiding dungeons and what not.
I can't help but feel the ideal system for PVP is effectively instanced mini-games via your avatar. FFXIV and WoW did this mostly, while world PVP's are just too hard to balance as you mentioned. It's also easier to add the monthly pvp flavors, FFXIV did it with their Moba eqv and we could well see a balanced KotH introduced because the experience can be modualy inserted. Unfortunately this method would be against the PVE needs you pointed out. I just don't think the two can be grouped together in a method that isn't "getting" lucky like EVE or SWG did. I do remember PVP in SWG being a big thing, but I could be crazy there.
PvP focused MMO's will always fail and suck due to class imbalances and being unable to play how you want. You will always get pigeonholed into making a cookie-cutter class and needing specific gear just to be competitive. Same with PvE. No matter how you slice it, MMO's are always designed around creating specific classes that have one specific way to play otherwise you will fail. It's always just a numbers game where the devs create all sorts of cool flashy abilities that will cause epilepsy to some people but will just get covered up by hotbars and some form of specific UI that you "must" have in order to stay competitive and in the end, you've covered up your entire screen and can't even see any part of the actual game.
pvp mmos are dogshit because theyre never as good as multiplayer games that are ENTIRELY pvp, stuff like overwatch, league of legends or cs:go. splitting the focus of a game between pvp and pve usually just ends up watering down the experience as a whole.
Is ESO PVP centric? No its not, and he said USUALLY there are exceptions to the rule so that doesnt make him "wrong". Also he is right that having both waters down both. You have 20 Million to spend, you do just one thats full 20 into PVE or PVP. You do both and thats only 10 Million or less into one of them. Bottom line is you cant develop your PVE/PVP to the level of a game that spent 20 million on theirs if you spend 10. To put it another way, you can have a whole pie to yourself or share half with a friend. Yes you still get pie but not as much pie as if you didnt share it.
They should have far larger budgets and dev teams because great pve content is extremely difficult to do do well and requires a lot of work from artists/musicians/writers etc, while pvp is all about balance and repetition - not nearly as expensive
Seeing the average budget and dev size of PvP MMO's really put things into perspective. It kinda makes me worry that we won't have any good ones in the future unless a major publisher funds one.
yes, because nothing is more exciting than doing the same raid for the 40'th time while watching TV and with sound turned off because no1 is on voice comms (why should you if it's so easy and there is no chance of getting jumped on by another group?)
@@Mic_Glow I don't even play MMOs, but why would I bother doing something if some random jackasses can come in and kill me or ks me whenever they feel like it.
Reason is simple. People play for fun. Loosing is not fun. Winning is fun. But there is a limit of how much you can "git gud". If you allow people kill each other, social structure will be established : few top dogs, able to beat the shit of everyone else and getting most fun, slightly bigger group that get beaten by top dogs, but can beat everyone else, even bigger group below them and so on, and so on. Amount of pleasure got from playing wil be in inverted proportion to player group size. And since game needs numbers to sustain itself ... well, that's a problem. It's like in real world really. This is why we went from simple "strong rule weak" to political and social systems full of limitations and handicaps.
The argument in favor of PvP that "winning stuff and losing stuff means something" is also an argument that can be made on the other end, therefore i don't see it as an argument. While i am biased in favor of PvE i can see a benefit for an MMO having both but a there needs to be a consideration about the balance of the game. Personally i think there will never be a time were the PvP will have the depth one can put into PvE/Co-Op. From single player games to MMO's, PvE is immeasurably far more interesting to me, more challenging, more things to learn (and learning is a drug indeed) and the storytelling is also adding to it. Not everyone being a criminal IRL is also because some people have ethical restrictions. So it's not only the restrictions put by society laws. And for e the ethical restrictions are far more important than society laws. Also, i don't exactly understand the terms used here of "wolves and sheep" because in most cases the so called "sheep" are more intelligent than the PvP "wolves". The most intricate and with depth games and challenging games are the of the PvE and Co-Op genre/nature. But i do get it at some level.
I think the reason PvP players (such as myself) dislike PvE players is the lack of competition. We play MMORPGs and grind PvE elements in order to then compete against other players. Sure, you can use the fastest dungeon clear (or other similar aspect) to judge how good you are as a PvE player, but that grows stale for PvP-centric players. Dungeons/bosses are about set mechanics and PvE progression ultimately relies on new content being added. The amount of variation in open world fights is what keeps the content interesting for PvPers. The end-game is about seeing how well you stack up on the battle field against other players.
Paul H If you like competition why are you not playing MOBAs or FPS? They are sport games with set rules. MMORPG competition is determined by gear, RNGs, faction, guilds etc. It is fun to have PVP in MMO but it is not competitive.
bladerun101 MOBAs are too team reliant and FPS games get stale. I hate when people use that argument. At their core, MMOs are way more fun and require much more skill to pull off good combos. The amount of variation you encounter in open world PvP is unmatched. If you played games like Ultima Online, you know what I'm talking about. They also had 1v1 tournaments with set rules and gear restrictions so that it comes down to who the better player is. I still enjoy the PvE elements that a MMO offers because I like to see progression in my character. I just think the idea of grinding PvE content, in order to clear PvE content faster, seems silly. Someone can be regarded as the best party member to have for clearing dungeons, but where's the pride in that? Beating someone in a duel is much more rewarding. End game should be based around (balanced) PvP imo.
I agree with Paul H on pretty everything. As a fellow PvP lover, I've tried all the MOBAs and FPS games but none have satiated my taste for a PvP MMORPG. It's the character permanence and progression that we want. There's also the aspect of notoriety, you become respected within that community and everyone on the server knows you. You form relationships with people that just isn't there with more temporary arena styled games. Do you remember the other 99 players in a battle royale game? Do you remember teammates in LoL that you don't already know? The open world aspect is a requirement for me as well because you never know what's going to happen- each encounter can be completely different. One encounter you get stuck with a bunch of monster aggros against an enemy group double your size, the next fight you're fighting with an allied group taking on 20 players trying to raid your keep. Battle Royal games are somewhat like this but they're lacking the character progression that I love. Maybe sometime in the future they will come out with one with more RPG/MMO elements, I've heard about one coming out within a year or so that promises to be more like an MMO -I guess we'll see where that goes. Also, if you look at games like Shrouded Isles era DaoC, it's not hard to create a game where PvP is not a complete gear check. You simply got to max level (took quite a while), crafted/found your gear and in a few weeks and you could be ready to go. The biggest thing was that there were stat caps in place that made it so you didn't feel obligated do raids and other things you didn't want to do to be competitive. At best, someone that spent an extra year raiding would only have at most a few extra points in their resistances. You didn't need to be in a large guild either, which was an awesome aspect to the game. You could excel as a solo player as much as someone that played in a coordinated guild group. -DaoC deteriorated when they saw the success of WoW and tried to change the focus to be more PvE oriented. Make PvE raids required in a game known for PvP? NEedless to say, the game never recovered.
Planetside 2 managed to combine faction vs faction vs faction with clan vs clan, by introducing a clan arena on a separate launcher. It doesn't have to be a separate launcher though. You could have an in game arena where clans can fight each other, even if they're from the same faction. After all, clan vs clan is all about bragging rights. You can do similar for PvE content in a PvP focused game. Just make PvE arenas private instances. Eve Online does this as well. The problem is that devleopers don't want to make this extra effort.
![[DOKKAN BATTLE] Worldwide Campaign Announcement Video Part 2!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JpT5Voak6WA/mqdefault.jpg)
Correction, I was informed that EVE can actually have "suicide gankers" in High sec who just want to grief noobs. That's certainly an issue, and makes my claim that their system being the best is still not perfect.
Suicide gankers are there (in most cases) not to grief newbs but to make money
you don't suicide gank anything that does not cover your ship loss from concord and gives you profits on top
Usual targets are mission running ships fitted with extra bling or cargo ships transporting valuables
Suicide ganking or even exploiting duels in star systems where new players start can be actually punishable if reported
And it IS a good system
you are not completely safe anywhere outside the station but if are not stupid you are mostly safe in high sec
Cargo ships choosing to not use tank over cargo space will get ganked since they can be killed and the amount of loot they drop can cover the loss of the suicide gankers. Happened to me and I adapted.
Also there are mechanics that the targets of suicide gankers can use to protect themselves. So it keeps things relatively in control.
@Charles Ward - I believe the "noobs" in question is more like what we call "carebears". Those are the type of player who refuse or not interest in PvP, going into low and null sec. Suicide gank on carebears miner is quite a nice profit if you pick your target. But to the point, most of gankers don't grief newbies out of blue, unless you wrong them.
I'd like to point out that the potential of suicide gankers is also intended - you're severely punished for it if you do it of course, but its also not completely pointless like in black desert. Its simply to forward the social experiment idea that in all honesty, society is just built upon agreed upon rules of how we conduct ourselves with other people, but in fact these rules are fairly flexible/breakable - and although retribution comes, it doesn't come until after you perform the act.
I would also like to mention that in many cases, the sheer possibility of this threat encourages players to meet more like minded individuals, to band together to get things done so they worry less about people bothering them. This interaction greatly contributes to the lifespan of the game, and is a large reason why miners are still mining, almost 15 years after the release of the game.
The main issue is that pvp players often don't know when to stop and don't have respect for the other players fun. When I was playing Aion as an assassin and was killing enemy pve people in the open world, I would kill them once and then leave them be. Even if they come back to the same area I killed them at, I'd greet them with a friendly animation and let them do their pve thing because I know they want to have fun, too. On the other hand, when I needed to pve grind to get some quests done, far too often I had assholes who wouldn't leave me alone even after they killed me 30+ times and after I made it clear that I don't want to pvp right now. Another bad situation was when I spent hours preparing and gathering people for a pve raid, but the entrance to that raid is blocked by a horde of overgeared pvp groups. You essentially have only half of the players having fun playing the game while the other half gets frustrated, having wasted hours preparing for something they now have no access to. And the next time I wanted to do try that pve raid again most people I asked wouldn't want to invest the time anymore just because it was likely we wouldn't even be able to start the raid, again.
Also, in my experience many pvp players have a very rude and disrespectful attitude, talking trash and yelling profanities to the other person whom they just ganked, this is not really producing an atmosphere that would be considered fun for most people.
I really enjoy PvP in MMOs, but I don't understand why they can't also have PvE in them. Sometimes it looks like the devs concentrate on PvP so much that they forget about other things. Also I HATE full loot MMOs. I'm not going to grind for hours just to get killed once and lose everything. Fuck that, fuck it long, fuck it hard.
There is one good thing about a full loot MMO. Loot can be everywhere you just keep getting it overload, Loot. But I don't care to much for full loot ether.
Not really, you always have to grind for a while. Also you can't go to PvP with your best gear in fear of loosing it. It's just annoying.
I agree, hence why I hate "survival" game cuz its not about being a badass survivor but be the first one to have the best gear to go rampage near a newbie area.
From the producer's marketing perspective - you have to pick one. In many cases, you can't split resources, or you can't split the playerbase - as lacking in either fields can easily cause the whole game to collapse. So rather than "Design the game that targets all audiences," they tend to try to lean towards one niche or the other, so they can attract an appropriate target audience and what not. (Take WAR, the old warhammer game - it had a fantastic PvE and pioneered public events/group events. Huge development went into the PvE sections, but this had the averse effect of subtracting their population actually taking part in the PvP, or later when most of the remaining population was in PvP, it was simply a huge waste of space and development, as comparatively fewer people were using it)
I reckon you can do a system like runescape with the loot, you keep your most valuable item (in rs its usually your weapon) when you die, if you didnt initiate the pvp yourself you keep more items. You can also spec to keep even more items via a skill (prayer) to keep even more items, though this can sometimes be punished to increase risk but that's a rare occurance. Still, either way, you're going to lose a bunch of stuff when you die but not an insurmountable amount, yet still enough loot is dropped on death to make killing other endgame players profitable if you're good at the game.
As a mere "sheep", I can say my main problem with PvP-centric MMOs isn't that PvP is a nuisance or I can't keep up with the skill of others - it's that typically, these games just aren't functionally competitive for newcomers, often down to excessive power gaps between new and established players. The "wolves and sheep" analogy is a massive problem too, as it directly relates to this issue - no player should be mere fodder for another.
Had a bunch of friends all try the original Darkfall, and as new players with no power and nothing to our names, we were farmed out of existence by existing players who had insurmountable advantages - better stats, better gear, more utility. Losing in a heart-pounding battle for survival is fun - being farmed by an enemy you have no hope of defeating is not. So all you end up with is your casual players - always the majority of a playerbase - are NOT HAVING FUN, so they'll move on. I'm convinced that the reason your "wolves" can't survive without "sheep" to farm is because a large portion of them don't want risky conflict - they want sweeping domination, to feel like they're powerful. These sorts of players usually can't compete with the truly skilled, competitive PvP players, so I can't imagine they'd be having much fun when the "sheep" have gone, either, and the player base as a whole shrinks.
The idea that PvP games require the portion of their playerbase to be brainless, effortless fodder is a huge problem. A player is never going to play a game to be fodder.
" it's that typically, these games just aren't functionally competitive for newcomers, often down to excessive power gaps between new and established players."
This is generally why I don't get into multiplayer stuff and prefer PvE. By the time I get around to a game, people have been playing it for possibly years. By the time I finally get to a skill level necessary to compete I'm ready to move on since I don't stick with a single game for a significant period of time. It's no fun bashing my face against the wall that is these players who've been there way longer than me when I know I'll be ready to move on to something else by the time I get skilled enough to actually compete. I'd rather experience and get good at many different games than get really really good at one game just to potentially compete with people who've been at it far longer than me.
I will have one objection, in the 'wolves vs. sheep'... okay, two when describing pve players as sheep. Nobody should be considered 'prey', this isn't about feeling 'butthurt', it's if pvp is fueled by the excitement of risk and competition, then you aren't supposed to act like a predator, you need to act like someone participating in a SPORT. Predators DO look, specifically, for the easiest kill, because they aren't looking for a challenge, they are looking for food. And the less energy they spend getting dinner, the less likely to get injured getting dinner, the better. But this isn't 'Call of the Wild', it's intended to be a GAME. It's a sport, where they separate amateurs and professionals, they have weight classes, they have divisions so that the competitors are evenly matched in order to provide that rush of actual risk, actual accomplishment.
So, if players are going to act like predators, not just rules and consequences, but MECHANICS need to be set in place to stop them. The easiest being simply flags set that has pvp'ers only able to attack others who are also interested in pvp, and then level restrictions even then, so you can only attack someone once you, and they, have reached a certain minimum level, and are within a certain level of each other.
The second is the idea of those who do pve do so because they are unskilled. Are they unskilled in pvp? If they don't pvp, yeah...but they may have a lot of skill and practice in doing pve in their game of choice. I put in hours of research and work in leveling my stealth dungeon crawler. Picked the race, class, farmed the gear and put in the practice so I now have a character that can enter a group dungeon solo and sneak all the way to the end of the dungeon, past the final boss to pick up a lorebook, just so I can complete that map. Others can solo world bosses. Some teams can do extremely challenging and complicated trials with really weird mechanics. Some have become experts at gathering materials and have max leveled crafters. Sure, I'm not skilled at pvp, but that's because that's not what I DO, not because I'm unable. It isn't skilled vs. unskilled, it's about entirely different skillsets.
You aren't skilled at PvE. The mobs are trash nowadays.
"Why do PvP MMOs always seem to fail?"
>Calls PvErs sheep and implies that they're gullible and weak. "We need to give systems to HELP the sheep, because they can't do anything by themselves!"
>Calls PvErs casual when professional raiding guilds are a thing.
>consistently hears how PvPers love to fight other PvPers with consequence, and yet griefing/twinking is an endless thing.
>Claims to want permanence and change while ignoring the corpses of all the previous PvP games that became ridiculously one-sided and points this out in a later section.
>(again) implying sheep are softcore while ignoring that hard-core raiders say exactly the same about pushing yourself.
You answered it yourself. I like PvP. I have fun in PvP. I don't like being called soft-core because I look for/celebrate different types of difficulty than you. You are not inherently a better play than me because of what you find fun.
I stated PVE players are generally sheep. Most PVE players aren't hardcore PVE raid type players not. They are more casual players by nature. Sorry if that offends you for some reason.
So the average player who decides to spend their time crafting or just being social is inherently a weaker player that needs help then? Why do they get to be called weaker players when there're plenty of mid-tier to low-tier PvPers who all think they're the best or, at the very least, above those "casual" PvErs? The mentality itself is stupid. I hate the wolf/sheep analogy because PvPers don't need PvErs to do what they want to do, they just need other players. On paper a PvPer should be perfectly happy with nothing but other PvPers around, and yet twinking/griefing/camping/getting griefing off of being a general asshat is a regular issue we tend to see in a lot of games. PvErs don't need to be culled/thinned out. The only case I could see that being an issue is if they're trying to PvP and being terrible at it. If that's the case, they're being a shitty PvPer, not a PvEr. You even see it in your comments. "I'm a PvPer because you just can't mimic fighting a smart person who thinks back!"
I think the notion that we're missing a strong PvP MMO is kind of silly only because the current trend of MMOs coming out/being hyped are sandbox PvP based MMOs (or ones that at the very least strongly encourage it.) For some reason, they tend to garner a lot of hype, are plagued by shady business practices, and the hype train moves on. There're plenty out that could work if they were tweaked ever so slightly or the publisher changed its business decisions, but I wouldn't say that BDO or even BnS are dead. They're just perceived as boring/"broken" now.
Im gonna say the truth here...YOU ARE A SHEEP, you just want to keep eating grass without getting hurt.
And yes sheeps (like you) are weaker, because it takes strenght in some form to do what a wolf does, in this case it takes higher lvl gear, or a stronger mentality to not get butthurt when someone kills you, or more skill.
Infuzed: And you are just a vulture who gets pissed off when you can't harvest sheep. Not everyone wants to be the biggest killer in the room.
But, go about, believe that because you can team up and gank lowbies that you are the superior entity.
@@Infuzed. You have so much skill right? Beating up low level noobs in unbalanced RPGs dont make you a wolf. Come and team up with me in a few rounds of cs go or pubg,we will see where Mr cocky wolf goes in a fair environment,noob.
Love the new opening.
Also, another potential problem with open PVP systems and gankers is that, in many cases, the progression systems in many MMOs makes the problem worse. It is one thing to lose progress or gear because you got out-fought by a superior player. While this can be frustrating, it is something that you can avoid. Meanwhile, having someone who you are completely unable to beat run up to you and instantly kill you is far more frustrating. Especially if you can be substantially set back by this loss that happened simply for being in the same general area as some jerk who outleveled you. The most dangerous part of this (from the perspective of the lifespan of a game) is that this leans specifically against newer players. Not even less skilled players, simply those that are newer to the game, and thus don't have the experience and gear. And, of course, for a game to last, it needs to have enough of an influx of new players to counteract the fact that some people will, inevitably, leave over time.
There are probably many ways to reduce this, depending on the sort of game being made. The most obvious is limiting open PVP to players within a certain level range of each other, or giving stat penalties to balance things out while engaging someone weaker than you. Alternatively, the more difficult route would be to try and make a progression system where you cannot gain a definitive advantage over another player, allowing a highly skilled player to defeat someone who is superior to them statistically, but this is both difficult and at odds with the design philosophies of many MMOs.
Ya in a PvP game I totally allow players to max lvl before allowing PvP. They could still choose not to but the option would be there. A gear difference would still likely be there and that would be fine. That something EVE does well with for the most part safe zones you can gear up an learn the game first
I've played on a PvP server on DAoC and got ganked plenty of times by upper levels... I eventually made it to their level and got my payback. It's all about enduring and learning how to adapt and not get butthurt. Game devs can easily put pvp level restrictions though.. say maybe within 5 levels so a level 30 can not attack a level 24.. but once you hit 25 fair game.
@Kent Arnold, there lot of single player games for it.
I think the biggest problem is that pvp in mmos generally devolve into 1 guy being attacked by 2+ people. In most mmos your level and gear are more important than skill where 1 vs 2 or 3 is not possible where in games like cs:go, dark souls, or more competitive games skill is the defining factor rather than gear which i think the general gaming population prefers.
a Dark Souls like MMORPG would be a dream of mine. Stats, equipment and skill matters!
I would strongly disagree that "skill" is a factor in open-world PvP. I've been playing MMOs for over 20 years, and can count on one hand the amount of "fair" fights I've had.
99% of open world PvP is decided before battle starts by a disparity in number of players, player levels, or gear, and most players won't initiate unless they have clear advantage.
This balance issue is inherent to the genre, and is unsolvable. The only people who enjoy it are those who take effort to gain advantage in order to unfairly gank others with little fear of retaliation.
Dave B
Open-World PvP is a lot like nature in that way.
Exactly. Any game with a Gear system really has no reason to ever have PVP. PVP or any competition is supposed to be about two EQUALLY capable decks/teams/characters going against each other. Problem is in a game where you can deal more damage, take less damage, have quicker cooldowns etc you will never have a equal capability. Bottom line is that people dont like unequal competition and thats exactly what you get in MMO/Dungeon Crawler/Looter Shooter PVP.
DAoC a skilled group could own a Zerg and happened often. Best MMO I ever played.
memnarch129
People don't like really lopsided competition.
Mirror Matches can get boring after awhile.
@@suddenllybah im not saying things have to be a mirror match. But when you have stats and such they can make things lopsided. Better to just skip PVP in stat/gear games as I said.
The problem with PVP games is the PVP community itself. In your comparison of wolves vs sheep, I would liken myself to a sheep dog: I prefer to play with sheep and do sheep things, but when a wolf comes around I kill him. The average PVPer comes to gank the casuals, but as soon as you kill them they ragequit. There are very few 'real' PVP players that just love good competition. Most PVPers are just scared bullies.
As long as these candyass 'PVPers' are the majority, PVP games will always fail because the wolves eat the sheep. Sheep leave, wolves then have to fight each other and most PVPers don't actually want to die and lose, they want to gank and bully. So the candyass 'PVPers' leave the game, and the real PVP players get bored because there is no more PVP. This isn't something that will be fixed by any game design, this is a flaw in the entire playerbase.
Wow exactly bro, couldn't have put it better.
Agreed with this whole heartedly. This does, however, affect real PvPers. I remember spending time in WoW vanilla as a lvl 30 priest killing a lvl 60 warrior and later a lvl 60 paladin. Gaining the High Warlord title was an incredible accomplishment to me. There was no pay 2 win or anything of the sort in those days. The open world PvP fell apart shortly after AQ and never returned. I've moved across multiple titles seeking wonderous open world PvP. The best one I've found since those days has been Tera, up and until about 2 months post launch.
The one thing that I noticed in every game with a good PvP world..... and that is the toxicity of the PvP group of players. The PvP playerbase seem to try and be some sort of elitist group of losers that are willing to nolife to win, and as soon as people catch up, ie. reach end game and beyond.... and they can no longer grief..... they leave the game because they are "bored" when in reality it is as you said. They are typically sore losers that ragequit. This is unlikely to change though.
I disagree. Gankers and trolls have always been a minority in the PvP community. PvP games usually thrive until PvE players who can't handle the competition cry and whine till they get their way, and ruin the experience for PvP players. Pirates of the Burning Sea is a prime example. When I played that game, i played for a nation that had a hard time fielding 16 players to PvP. Constantly being harassed and picked on by bigger nations, so we stepped up our game and eventually became the dominate force in the game, spite the fact being the smallest force the whole time.
It is the PvE player that ruins it with their inability to adapt.
@@ironjade8666 WoW is not a PvP game, and those are not PvP players. If you also paid close attention toxic players are always a minority(always the same people), and the elitist aspect is simple. Trying to provoke a challenge. So step your game up, simple as that.
No different then top PvE players being toxic or being elitist, cause they have BiS gear.
Accept you very rarely SEE the truly top tier PvE guilds (those that do mythic world first races for example) being toxic. However they have a point, the majority of PvP players ARE vultures, they're not wolves not matter how much you protest. It's the 'no true scotsman' fallacy that you're doing. "Oh most PvPers are gankers and vultures" "Well they're not TRUE PvPers..." yes they are...in fact I'd say that these are the most common type of PvPers.
The fact that PvPers consider themselves "The Wolves" and everyone else "The Sheep" is one of the main problems, there is a very literal god complex going on in a lot of PvPers heads that they will never get over, because they feel themselves to be an objectively superior being because they stack a cookie cutter system to the optimum micromanagement of stats and then it ends up nigh impossible for them to lose a fight.
"Most" PvPers do play simply to gank and make people feel bad, despite your own opinion on it.
Genuine competitive PvPers are the minority, most PvPers actually moan more than any "sheep" if a patch changes the meta so their max exploit builds no longer work so they might actually need to compete rather than get sure wins, and many devs bend to their cries, especially in P2W where desperate to win PvPers are huge whales.
Better pvp players never moan about changes or nerfs - they embrace them as it is their way to stay atop as they will be the ones who find new meta first and make good use of it before everyone catches up and copy them
the ones who complain are wannabe wolves who just left their sheep flock
yeah and I surely have fun if I find out that someone gets so triggered and butthurt over being ganked in a computer game that he PMs me with insults and death threats lol
Again with the flattering "wolf" and the insulting "sheep" comparison.
Giving yourselfe the name of a great predator while giving those who do not like to play the way you like to play the name of a domestic animal known for being quite stupid and helpless all things considerd, just shows the inherit problem with PvPers:
Thinking they are better then others, aka sheer arrogance. They are the grand predators while all others just exist to feed them... yeah no...
Most PvPers behave more like vultures, singling out the weak, the lone and the inexperienced.
Top that off with being willing to break and abuse the system for any little advantage they can get, playing in a highly unsportly manner most of the time and the comparison to wolfs is starting to fall apart rather quickly.
If PvE players are grass eating sheep, PvPers are carrion eaters.
Heres another reason a pvp focused mmoRPG will never work:
The RPG aspect will allways lend itselfe to tryhard minmaxers who play the rules instead of the game. There is no such thing as a watertight RPG rulesystem that would ever prevent that. Not to mention the PvPers who solely exist to ruin everyone elses fun wich are a huge problem in PvP centric systems.
PvP mmoRPGs dont work by nature
...yeah, honestly, co-op players are more akin to wolves; a species known for its cooperation and friendliness.
You couldn't have said it better. They basically play the system to their advantage in the most obscure ways.
@@riptors9777 That's a minority. Majority of PvP players seek a challenge. It;s all about adapting and evolving. Gankers are their own category.
I follow most of your videos and admire your research. But ask yourself: How does the thought sit with you to play a game which is mainly created for people that perceive you as sheep? As a PvE centric player myself no amount of awesome sandbox stuff would get me into such a game unless it is HEAVILY policed; and then you would have the wolves that howl endlessly how unfair and PvE centric such game is (i.e. increased PK penalty in Black Dessert; except the one nearly deserted Server without any punishment (!) ). I do like the mental ideal of the noble and strong good-guy PvP player but lets face it: the majority just loves to be jerks and walks on to the next game if they cannot be one anymore for either lack of "sheep" or amount of punishments & restrictions.
Pretty much this, been playing on a private WoW server that's pvp. The same people that foam at the mouth wanting to kill people, cry like little bitches when they get ganked. All you see on both sides are over geared max level players who grief low level players or go into towns killing bankers / AH npc's. The vast majority of PVP is twinks in the 70-79 bracket, no one pvp's in the 80 bracket. None of these people want a fair fight, they want to jump up and down on you rubbing their balls in your face.
While the vast majority of the server plays to raid, ignoring the pvp side for the most part.
Wish everyone would stop saying majority, cause that's completely false.
Being called a sheep because I have better things to do with my life then grind 8-14 hours a day on an MMO has to be one of the most pejorative (and stupid) things I have ever heard from this channel. This is why most people do not play PVP MMO games, as most pvp in any of the MMOs I played were all heavily dependent on grinding bleeding edge gear and running the current meta builds, over skill based game play. I can't say I have met many 'wolves' in my decades of gaming, mostly what I see in MMO games are gankers who don't want a real or fair fight, they want to stomp on someone who can't possibly defend themselves. About the only MMOs I liked PVP in was the realm vs realm fights in Dark Age of Camelot (too bad the grind to get there was horrific), or games like planetside and WW2Online.
I would rather play a pvp game like Escape From Tarkov. At least there I have a chance to out tactic/out shoot much more heavily geared opponents and take their crap for myself.
Get good scrub
@@eliaszbojko2559 Its spelled "Git Gud"! Can't you noobs even get this right! ;)
It's funny how he says that there's no evidence that PVP focused MMOs can't succeed, while giving us examples that every single PVP focused MMOs have failed except one. This is evidence. Evidence through historical examples in a majority is evidence. Particularly when someone who is a fairly strong pro-pvp voice is so horribly toxic when discussing it and doesn't even realize that fact. I like PVP and PVE, and will only play MMOs that do both. But... well, I've seen more high-end PVE focused players drop into PVP and dominate than the other way around. Usually high end PVE has a higher skill-cap.
Wrong. He explained the differences between PVP and PVE dev teams. It's not a one for one comparison. Main differences being bugit/team size
@@greanskull7981 Please read before responding to 2 year old posts, thanks.
Rather than "Predator & Prey", I think "Parasite & Host" is a more accurate description of the relationship between PvP and PVE players.
As if PVE players had no agency or that PVP players offered no benefit. That's rich.
In a Predator and Prey relationship, the predators are there to regulate the prey and keep them from overpopulating a biome and causing an ecological collapse. The relationship is largely self-correcting. According to the Lotka-Volterra equation, in a functioning biome there are always less predators by a large margin. In an MMO, when there are too many wolves (predators) the biome (the game) is in danger of collapse (barring outliers like EVE). PvP players do not contribute to PVE players. In an MMO there can never be too many PVE players. Every single PVE player enriches the experience of other PVE players in some, even if its just by paying the developer more money so the game gets more funding. Another PVE player is always a positive thing. PVP players on the other hand can actively make other players have a worse experience and can potentially cause a PVE player to leave the game permanently. In a focus designed PVP game PVP players are absolutely a good thing and always add more to the game, but that is only because the game is populated mostly by people who are there for the PVP. In a PVE centric game, PVP players are outliers who don't actually contribute to the games growth.
I am not quite sure what you are debating, this seems like a stream of consciousness.
Do you honestly not think that PVE players can also contribute to PVE players leaving? Or that, if a PVE player is ganked it means it's consensual (barring bugs or exploits). Non-consensual PVP is a myth because you KNOW you can die in a PVP area if you travel in it.
There are tools to removed another PVE player from your sphere of activity. By blocking, muting, putting them on ignore, leaving etc. PVP by its very nature is designed to inconvenience you and take up your time. Wolves prey on sheep, wolves without sheep starve and die.
But to address your video directly. I do not think there will ever be a pure PVP MMO or a PVP centric MMO will ever be as successful. PVP players are interested in PVP and not in the other trappings of MMOs.
Open world PvP players have a very hard time convincing people to come play the game with them. That's why they fail. If I want to PvP I'll go play battle royale or arena PvP. I rather not go into a game I'm nothing more than "gank squad fodder". And I'm not going to run with a gank squad because shitting on people until they leave the game isn't fun for me.
More consequences = more logging off/running away = less action = boring.
Fewer consequences = more fights but with no meaning = repetitive = boring.
plenty of competitive games that aren't MMO based have no consequences outside of a loss, but many don't find them to be boring even if some things are repeated a lot.
You must be a hoot at parties...
PS- You're actually right I'm just kidding you, PVE is the only way to go.
i like how it only has to be the one extreme or the other, to help justify your bias ;)
is like real life
@@thewandererofconfusion Nothing actually happens to you beyond the loss of time, so no, it isn't like real life. Games have no consequences. Games have no meaning beyond having fun. You aren't actually accomplishing anything.
I have had some extremely nasty arguments with PVP cunts over this shit. They're all immature imbeciles that can't understand the simplest of concepts. Like subjectivity. IE, I don't enjoy PVP at all, never have, never will. Nothing about it appeals to me, so being forced into it is a violation. It's actually pretty simple, mobs aren't real. There isn't anyone sitting at a computer playing them. PCs are played by real people. Killing NPCs means nothing, attacking another PC is no different to attacking a real person at a psychological level.
Controlled PVP in arenas is like combat sports. There are rules, and everyone who takes part has agreed to do so. Open PVP is like being jumped by thugs while you're walking down the street minding your own business. Unless your real life is actually like that, then no, the game isn't like real life. And it isn't. Ghetto thugs aren't online playing video games. You're a fucking nerd sitting at a computer.
I play MMORPGs for the same reasons I play solo RPGs, because I mostly play solo as much as I can. But sometimes I like doing raids, chatting, or doing other team content.
PVP cunts can't seem to grasp the idea that not everyone plays games in order to attack other people. That while they may view all the other content of the game as side-content to the PVP. Most people who play MMORPGs consider PVP to be side-content.
Open PVP is an excuse for people to behave like little sociopaths. It isn't about consequences. It isn't about competition. It's about dickless little cowards who feel powerless in real life, wanting to be able to feel like they have power over other people. Which is true of most gamers. People play games like these in order to do shit they can't do in real life, the difference is that most of us are happy getting our murderhobo jollies killing mobs. It's only the PVP cunts who are sick enough to need to "hurt" other people in order to get off.
I think there's two issues.
First, no one wants to be a sheep. If someone is farming mobs or completing a quest, they don't want to deal with getting ambushed after aggroing a few extra enemies or talking to an NPC.
Secondly, MMORPGs, by their very nature, are RPGs first and foremost. With such an emphasis on stats, it actually takes away from the competitive nature of these games. Why, if someone is truly competitive, would they feel like it's good game design that they do more damage than an opponent simply because their gear is better?
I hate to generalize, but I think that a lot of the people who enjoy open world PVP do so to make themselves feel better by dominating weaker opponents with their own better gear. If they were truly competitive, they'd be playing something that puts them on an even footing as their opposition - MOBAs, Battle Royale, Counter Strike, Starcraft...there are plenty of competitive games out there that don't rely on one's ability to win mainly being about whose played longer. Since you now have a group of players who are essentially preying on weaker ones, the game now has a population of players that is actively avoiding fair fights, and indeed real competition, in favor of fighting and killing the players who least want it. This is going to create a split in the community and eventually, those sheep leave for greener pastures.
PVP games could be better if they were more about items that are not stat sticks. So like Dota 2 items vs LoL items. Also with real time combat that requires more than button presses. Increase the mechanical scale. Also have a system with actual consequences so if you attack someone in a town or with a certain affiliation you now are going to struggle to deal with those people. Also make it so it isn't easily fixed or maybe even permanent. As funny as it sounds Dungeons and Dragons PVP in the tavern arenas was more fun than almost any other MMO I've played. Way more depth.
Majority of the modern audience (atleast for mmorpgs) would rather opt to have pvp to be an optional side of end game if they wanted to... people play games to be entertained, and usually with pvp based games 1 side will defo lose.. and that losing side might not always have that mindset of "hey I wanna improve on my gameplay" and would most likely rage quit and opt for pve gameplay where things are coop based. In hindsight, if the game has lost its purpose of entertainment, the player will stop playing said games. I myself avoid pvp only focused games in general with the exception of Overwatch and that is mainly because I have friends who wanted to play.
its also a time thing, for a mmo that losing side may be weeks if not months when during a normal game its 15 minutes. I can handle losing for 15 minutes, but logging onto a character I know will get destroyed because it is outnumbered 5-1 would get old fast
S. F. P. Most full loot pvp game are dead or near dead .... full loot creat a mentality of " if I'm not gonna win 100% sure I won't even try " it also make pvper not fight each other but farm easy target ... if that is not the opposite of competitive gameplay I don't know what that is. ( ps i was a player that play a lot of full loot pvp game and it really hard to find a guild that actually what to pvp and not chase easy target )
S.F.P. the problem with adding to big consequence to dying is all that you rally add is a farm time you have to do if you die. Say it takes you 2h of farming to get back to the state befor your death (most games rather 20h). Then if you want casuals to play the game that maby got 10h / week if they die more then 4 times per week they are on constant loss...and if they die 3 times they gotta farm for half the time (while i guess they can be killed aswell). The system works for ppl that don´t mind farming 5h/day forever to simply be able to do some pvp on the evnings.
So Just like Bdo. witch i found weird that Nerd did not talk about that one.
But there is a problem with the system they had in Wintergrasp/Tol Barad etc in WoW. That being most servers don't have an even population in each faction, or rather they dont have an even population of good/end game players. So one side would get stomped to the point where one faction has access to the zone almost permanently. I remember one of the servers i played on getting to the point where the Alliance would only have Wintergrasp in the early hours of the morning once all the horde players had gone to sleep.
No one not interested in PvP will want to play a game with PvP content forced upon them.
That doesn't mean games that enforce PvP ruleset shouldn't exist. Contrary to belief of carebears...
@@qeloqoo Oh, they can exist all they want, they'll just always starve for lack of players. O
pen world PvP and MMOs are mechanically, fundamentally, incompatible.
MMOs are all about progression, yet that same progression makes it extremely unlikely that any 2 people likely to meet each other in PvP will be on equal footing. PvP between players of unequal capability is not PvP, it's griefing.
@@FNLNFNLN That's sheep's talk. Use maneuvers, tactics. PvP isn't only exchanging damage numbers. It's fighting sentient player, not scripted NPC/mob. Outsmarting him or her. With your attitude you will lose every fight before it started, and ofc pvp would feel like griefing for you. Simply cause you are uncut for it, carebear.
@@qeloqoo 1) And with progression mechanics, sometimes, no matter how much outsmarting you do, the difference in stats, or skill points, or whatever, will dominate.
I've played open world PvP games where the other person can 2 shot me, yet if they literally just stood there doing nothing, it would take me minutes to dps them down.
There is no "outsmarting" your opponent with that kind of gear difference, beyond not fighting. There's no PvP there, only griefing.
2) Also, for all of your "play smart" shit, PvPtards hate people "playing smart", if it falls outside of what they define as "PvP". I still remember playing Archeage a while back, where I was able to use the game's arena map and mechanics to ambush and win against players far more geared and skilled than I was, and the bitching over that never stopped. Or look at BDO and it's community stigma against using the game's PvP punishment mechanic to force more geared players off grind spots. The second you "play smart" to accomplish your goals against better geared and more skilled players, they'll bitch and moan non-stop because you didn't do it "fairly".
3) And finally, your attitude is why a PvP centered MMO will never be a major hit. "PvP all the time or gtfo". The vast majority of MMO players don't want all PvP all the time. If they did, PvP focused games would be more popular.
@@FNLNFNLN 1) It's bad RPG system design: big disparity in levels (WoW), no skill cap (DFO). Doesn't mean PvP games are all about griefing. 2) There's always gonna be sore losers. I've met people who'd alt+f4 to deny "reward" to you, even if that doesn't cost them anything (no death penalty). Still fighting other player beats hitting rock/clearing same dungeon/raid time after time after time. 3) Well, EvE online is PvP focused game with big "pve" part of playerbase who are required to sustain economy. Yet, "pve" players still participate in player versus player through market and logistics.
If you disagree, please let me know in the comments. Hope you guys like the new art/intro. The next DOAG should also have some unique graphics too :). Sorry for the delays.
nerdSlayer so, what are your thoughts on crowfall overall?
Come on the Tale of toast Discord.....will talk about it then
Guild Wars 1 did extremely well for a PvP focused game. It was entirely PvP until very late in development, when they decided to add the ability to even do PvP.
Nice intro :D Let's watch the video now ^^
Those pie charts are not readable and the blurry background can be painful to look at, with eyes trying to focus on them. Also is "long longevity" a multiplicative or an additive term?
Anyone who can just pvp endlessly has something wrong with them.
My standards are too high to enjoy pvp to no end.
"Will PvP focused MMOs always fail?" Proceeds to spend 20 minutes explaining how they are extremely niche to tryhards and subjectively zero fun.
Btw love the content on this channel
The feeling isn't mutual for this post
@@nerdSlayerstudioss Can't even take a compliment and you wonder why people are so against you on this.
The worst enemy of PvP centric games are "hardcore" PvPers...
Let me explain to you what "hardcore" pvp usually means:
Only showing up when you have more manpower then the enemy
Using any class imbalance to your advantage
Using any ingame glitches to your advantage
Abusing the PvE system to get some easy kills and then mock the PvE players that clearly dont belong to the wolf masterrace because they simply want to enjoy some PvE content, making sure that said "sheep" is going to invest his limited free time somewhere else.
All of these things where observable during warhammer onlines les then stellar run. To claim that the PvP was great is a gross misrepresentation.. just like everything else in that game the PvP was broken, rushed and hilariously flawed.
Another example? EvE online.. wich has succeeded not because of its PvP systems but DESPITE of it.
If hardcore PvPers where mostly in it for the ingame PvP how is it that big battles in EvE are so rare and exceptional that if they happen they make news across the entire internet?
What really keeps people interested in eve is backstabbing and political intrigue that cannot be had anywhere else. This doesnt have anything to do with player versus player in a traditional sense and more to do with the meta of EvE.. namingly "everything goes" (again something that cant be had anywhere else currently).
People on that game even engage in RL shenanigans to gain advantages over their openents and have plans in the working to take out the competition spanning years in the making. All of this without even touching the ingame PvP systems.
Sure smallscale PvP happens but most often its more a case of "spank the n00b" or war deccing on some fresh corp that has absolutely no chance of fighting back, or ganking miners in low sec... you know.. totaly risk free and not hardcore at all? If people where really so interested in "hardcore PvP" dont you think there would be huge battles all over the place and not rare exceptions that happen because some guy fucked up their jump sequence in their titan and was cought with his pants down and no way to retreat?
There are few actual wolves in EvE, but a whole lot of vultures
Perfect end line.
That's all "hardcore," pvper's are. It's hillarious they choose the term "wolves," like they sound hard.
Yes, you are certainly a PACK, of people that only engage and single out weak people to kill, never going after the challenge of killing an alpha without your pack.
That doesn't sound like hardcore PvPers, hardcore PvPers generally don't give 2 shits about ganking low gear players because there's no challenge in it, hardcore PvPers would want to fight other PvPers with good gear and knowledge of their class.
What you are describing there are the usual rookie PvPers who can't win against experienced players so they seek satisfaction somewhere else.
If thats the case then the hardcore PvPers are a minority thats hard to come across... or have wandered off to non gear progression focused games like overwatch or pubg
Riptors Of course, hardcore players are the minority in both PvP and PvE, the majority are always average/casual players and a branch of exploiters and scumbags, but they are on both sides as well.
Imo, when it comes to PvP vs PvE neither is better or more mature than the other, personally I feel like MMO's should put an equal amount of effort in both PvE and PvP and never force one upon the other, that way we can keep both sides happy.
The difference is that "exploits" in PvP directly affect other players while in PvE they dont really ruin anyone elses fun. In WoW it really doesnt affect me in the least if some hardcore raiding guild abuses a glitch in a boss encounter, however in PvP games thats a huge issue.
You are right that neither PvE or PvP is more mature, another reason why this "PvPer are noble wolves and PvEr are stupid sheep" comparison is idiotic. Wich was my main grief about this video
Because if you want to just beat the crap out of each other for bragging rights, you can play a fighter or FPS. MMOs should focus on objective based PvP.
mmoRPG
I honestly agree, arena based pvp in mmos is crazy boring.
+Lord Crimsiden I think it is due to how combat is designed in most MMOs. It can be fun when you are fighting against a bunch of AI mobs or a tricky raid boss, but just awful feeling when you are playing against humans. Not to mention if you have to deal with gear differences and the like which can suck all the semblance of skill right out of it. Someone in Call of Duty can have the "best" gun in the game but if they can't aim for shit you can just mop the floor with them with your pistol.
RBT Same goes for PvP in mmo's tho, players can have bis gear and get trashed by a player in blues just because that player was much better at PvP than the guy in bis gear.
Well said. We need objectives and rewards for using teamwork.
I'm a destroy the enemy on site type of player but, that gets old, it's also very unrewarding if I have the upper hand.
edit: "can be" unrewarding lol.
Frankly, the reason given here still doesn't validate that PvP focused MMORPG will ever work
I mean when you said that there needs to be more things to do other than PvP... that PRACTICALLY admits that you need PvE to cater the sheep because let's face it... things to do other than PvP is going to end up being PvE one way or another because if there's no actual challenge in the PvE part for the bulk of the players then that's just tedium and ppl will get bored of it.
And if you say the PvE MMORPG tend to have much bigger budget and team, well yeah of course they do since PvE NEEDS assets to work... you know ... PvE after all pits players against the environment and NPC that are part of that environment.
PvP focused MMORPG are supposed to have the players as the main assets... you build the system around them but part of the assets that form the activity they do are going to be partially coming from the players themselves and by right they should not require as much time and asset as PvE MMORPG.
if PvP focused MMORPG needs as much team, budget and asset as PvE MMORPG... then the question is:
WHO THE HELL WOULD FINANCE THAT?
We already established earlier that you NEED PvE anyway for the PvP focused game to even survive because you do need the sheep so in the end if you need to build PvE anyway which requires time and budget which is going to bloat the development cost for the publishers... then why wouldn't the publisher just put their budget to the PvE part?
Financially it makes NO SENSE to fund PvP focused MMORPG, it's just going to end up as a game with PvE that is inferior to PvE focused MMORPG, and PvP that will never have enough budget to achieve what is required to be good PvP focused MMORPG nor enough population to sustain itself and make return of investment.
And ultimately... PvP focused MMORPG require a system as you say to manage them but the reason they do is because ultimately there will be sizable number of ppl who ARE JERKS, ppl who ARE @$$hol3s, ppl whose intent is nothing other than to BREAK the system and that's the reality when you take random groups of ppl from internet.
No one that's been around long enough is gonna be naive enough to believe that you can possible develop a system to regulate these ppl without immense amount of manpower and budget because that's pretty much the only way you can properly regulate it if PvP is indeed the main focus of your game as PvP focus is going to amplify the issue (ppl care less if they break PvE setting, compared to breaking PvP system).
So... if you say they just haven't developed a system good enough for PvP focused MMORPG to work.
Then i turn the question back to you, what makes you think they can build a system good enough for PvP focused MMORPG to work?
Who is going to fund it? What reason would you give them to fund it? Who is going to manage the PvP population? Who is going to balance it? (which in PvP focus is absolutely critical).
Ultima Online, nuff said.
2:25 When I hear Secret World music in the background I weep tears of blood. What have they done :(
I hear ya ;(....
FUNCOM'd !! (AoC. Hard core raider. Hate that company now.)
First, they didn't release important new content for a year and a half, then they went free-to-play and for that reset all characters. Yes, hundreds of hours gone (not to mention all the money I paid for the game and DLC). Then it STILL took them over a year to come up with new content. Now they expect me to play through the entire game again to experience new content. When they disrespect customers like this, they can fuck right off.
Well, you can technically still play the old version which is the standard excuse of most sycophants but without new content, why would you want that?
Oh please everyone knew that original Scret World was sunking ship. For exemple AGIS system was completly retarded.
you totaly forgot the toxicity that usualy comes with PVP, especialy full loot PVP games. Most people think bad of themselfs, especialy when it comes to playing with or against other people. Not many people take the "ok how can I learn this and improve" route when it comes to gaming. Also, who wants to deal with 14 year old toxic ADD "pro gamer" kids all the time? Nobody. It's all too stressful for the majority of MMO interested players.
I been a PVPer in many gamesm bt I do like to have options. Even as a dedicated PVPer I do enjoy to lean back and just immerse myself in a good MMORPG world with interesting story and PVE gameplay. Most PVP centric MMO's simply lack content. Once you become "good" in PVP, the game becomes boring, and when there are no other options, you simply move on to another game. There's plenty out there.
That's why I love GW2 PVP. I can hop in, play some rounds of PVP, or do some WvW roaming, and when it gets boring or too toxic, I have so many options, so much content... Also, gear and level doesn't matter. That's one game that does it right, in my opinion.
I think if you develop an MMO only for PVP and neglect PVE, it is doomed to fail, because nowadays toxic kids simply don't pay the bills long enough to keep it alive. MMO players are getting older, and with age we become more laidback, looking for a more relaxed gaming experience. Actionjunkies have their lobby based games which grant instant action.
I could go on, but I think these are some good reasons why PVP centric MMO's always fail. You can't go full niche with your game and expect to survive in nowadays market.
Raffels Videoblog Theres as much if not more toxic players in PVE as well.
Este foi o melhor comentário.
You aren't learning or improving anything, it's a game. Games are for fun, they serve no other purpose. If I'm not having fun, then why the fuck would I keep wasting my time with it?
@@Dark74111 Those are just terrible PvP players camouflaged as PvE players.
Know why PVE will always last longer?
Becuase quests like the Coldain Ring War from Everquest 1 will never exist in a PVP game.
Mmos were created becuase people wanted to play Dungeons and Dragon's with lots of people.
Paul Karyakos ii
"Mmos were created becuase people wanted to play Dungeons and Dragon's with lots of people." -That's like saying TV was created to educate people. People want different things for different reasons.
Anyways, MMOs hardly ever come out these days, the fact that the few that do come out are PvE doesn't inherently mean there isn't a market for PvP MMOs. If there was a recent PvP MMORPG that came out and failed maybe I'd say there wasn't a market. I mean, what's the best we have to go by? Warhammer? As the video stated, that game was a train wreck and felt clunky compared to other games out at the time. Also, how many PvE MMOs have failed? Are we to judge an entire genre based on the success of one game that came out almost 10 years ago? -Given the success of WoW I'd have to guess most developers just want to capitalize on what they think is safest, which is why developers generally don't make any MMOs, period.
Yeah, I agree. I played D&D back in the day and have also been playing MMORPGs for close to 20 years, I never felt like the two were similar. Even if "D&D" simulation was what they intended, it's not what they've evolved into. Like you said, the fun with playing D&D mostly comes from everyone's imagination and roleplaying, with an MMO, I never felt that was the case. You can certainly roleplay in some MMOs but there are so many technical limitations to what you can do that you might as well just cut the game out entirely.
-Maybe in the future when virtual reality is a bit more advanced and people can do pretty much anything it will be different but, for now, I really can't see MMORPGs and D&D feeling like similar experiences.
Rotten Cheerio I very much disagree. What was ever challenging about WoW arenas, black dessert open world pvp, GW2 arenas or RvR, ESO pvp? Most of the time, it was just a giant deathball. Arenas? Pick the most OP class (HI season 2 Disc Priest) and go from there.
I'm currently playing Warhammer Vermintide 2 and it has to be one of the most difficult games I have played and it's entirely PVE.
Maybe I'm just getting old, but the PVP mind set is off putting with this generation of gamers. For the life of me, I cant join a game of overwatch without half the team raging at the start.
I have better experiences with PVE and can recall most of my PVE days in EQ1 and Wow but I could never tell you about the time I won an arena match or WvW.
There is a market for both, of course, but my market will never be pvp focused moving forward.
I can't wait for Pantheon.
@Paul Karyakos #Paul Karyakos I would recommend that you watch Capain shacks video.
ruclips.net/video/b5GoHO1KHJc/видео.html
he will claim otherwise and as a player of the same kind I agree whit him. the thing whit todays MMO is that its to much DEV driven MMO flurish when the player have control. thats why EVE is so popular if the EVE player wanted they could turn the 4 faction war into a 3 faction war by wiping one of the faction off the map and its not impossible for them to do that (stupidly hard but they can).
As someone who's played MMO's for a little while....
The PVE version is true.
Quite frankly every time I've seen a PVP community, it's become a hell of toxicity on top of some outright hellish balance, because of how people will allways yell about the dominant strategy, causing things to degrade over time. It is the same story, and one I'm currently seeing in the Elder Scrolls Online.
The 'wolves vs sheep' thing is also a big factor. (Terminology I am still convinced was coined by a sociopath.) The criminal thing isn't even remotely an adequate to compare to, either. Even your mentality as to why the 'wolves' need those consequences, speaks to the fundemental problem of PVP.
*Selfishness*
It is the selfishness of the system, the setting, the game mode, and the people playing it, that drive all but the most ruthless away.
It has been my experience as a 'sheep', that the PVP componant makes the game worse invariably due to the ammount of variables PVP needs to be regulated, which has a negative effect on the rest of the systems. PVP is mutually exclusive with everything else, I'm sorry. You just need to accept that.
And no, I dont hate PVP players because I got killed. I hate them because they are some of the most ruuthless toxic bastards I've ever seen. I hate them because seeing people who focus on one person they can get a rise out of and potentially continuing until they kill themselves makes me sick to my stomache. Screw you and the horse you road in on, with that one. I hate the player, because the player dictates how they act. Not the game.
PS: Love the new intro even if I disagreed with the video, or it's characterization of me as a 'casual'.
darkspawn senior Yet I see no toxity at all in EVE Online.. Literally everyone who destroyed me either sent me the price of my losses back or gave me advises and tried to help me succeed.
Your comment shows perfectly why modern MMOs are all about socially inept peoples wish fulfillment and for retreat from real life, and in order to have that working any meaningful PvP must be destoryed.
At 8:00 You say that saying PvP focused mmo games are doomed to fail isn't based on facts and is sensationalized, but... The reason this video even exists is because it is based on facts. Historically that's what's happened so I'm not sure what why you even said that.
There sort of is a reason PvE players can't co exist with PvP players too (in the same game). PvP players want to kill other players and that's the last thing PvE players want. They want to be left alone, and PvP players are litteraly getting in the way of their fun every chance they get. Thats not even to mention what you said about ballancing for the two types of play is not very combinable because they are so vastly different. Those two types of players fundamentally cannot get along, and the only way to fix the situation that's been found so far (that I know of) is to seperate the players by server, map, etc and keep them apart, but at that point you aren't playing the same game anyway.
Sorry for such the long post to anypkne who might be bothering to read it, but another thing to consider is how PvP in a mmo context turns people against each other in games, even more than other competitive games. In mobas and most other competitive games you have yourself, and you get matched against usually around 5 players with teammates, which are all random in most cases. You have (usually) 5 man teams, but that's about as far as it goes. Rivalries vs other players or teams aren't as common, or fierce in those types of games barring pro scenes because you are playing random people so the chance of playing vs someone you dislike many times is pretty low. Compare that to what you have in PvP mmos where you can have huge guilds of players going against others over and over, all the while sometimes literally taking the enemies stuff that they worked hours to get. Give that enough time and people start to turn against each other in ways that the game never intended. They start to dislike others in real life, target other people in game to harass with all their friends, and serious community ripping effects can start to occur given time. This in my opinion is the biggest thing holding back PvP focused mmos as a concept, and just to reiterate all of this is 100% my opinion and I'm not trying to present anything as objective fact.
Also as another thing I was thinking about: You say the wolves need sheep to survive, otherwise they cannibalize themselves. The problem with that is that the sheep don't play PvP very much if at all. This being the case, if a sheep has the choice between an mmo where there are wives that can take its stuff, and one where there aren't any it will always chose the second one. It's just like how given the choice a real sheep will choose to live in a place with no predators given the option. This means that while the wolves need the sheep, the sheep don't want the wolves... And they have the option to ditch them.
"but another thing to consider is how PvP in a mmo context turns people against each other in games, even more than other competitive games."
Yeah
that's exactly what makes pvp mmos so good
overcoming an enemy you have a long history with is much more valuable than winning vs some random dudes or AI scripts
and that's completely untrue about dislikes in real life
I've been to EvE online fanfests and had a great time hanging out with people who are my enemies ingame
If you are not a lunatic you keep ingame stuff ingame
Charles I disagree,
The greatness of PvP MMO's is that the world is alive, working with each other matters, from the lowly miner(or rich in EvE's case) to the general leading large army's. The world of a PvP can change, and the stories are real, is why it is alive.
Wow your IQ is pretty low IQwe if that is what you inferred.
At 8:50 you assume that most of the paying customers will always be PVE-players or casuals (sheep). If that is true, so why should developers focus on the hardcore PvP-players (wolves)? Do the wolves help the game succeed? This is he big question that needs to be answered.
As I said in my comment. Not at all. If there is a chance for a stronger player to prey on the weaker, there is no reason to not do so (even with "PK systems, some people take pride on it). All the times I pvp on a open world pvp, I did because I could make the other party lives as miserable as possible, having them quit or call for help was the ultimage victory.
Could you not do your graphs in different shades of the same color please? cough-colorblind-cough
@Maximiliano Fauda Cariddi But changing graph colors are way easier than figuring out videos for blind people.
What I've noticed the difference between vP vs vE is community.
PvE focused games have a lot to do with cooperation and collaboration with players. There's usually a lot to do that isn't trying to kill other people. As you pointed out with STO, combat is something that's generally a last resort. Instead, we somehow have combat focus everywhere. Carebears who enjoy exploiting, exploring and expanding.
PvP players culturally are focused on exterminating. They want to challenge their mechanical and knowledge skills in combat and contests. The environment grows hostility and handling problems through aggression and combat. This culture is fine, but for fewer people and all about raging.
I know this sounds similar to what you said here, I'm trying to focus on the culture and social aspect of playing a game with others. Focus on growing a fun community and culture and you'll attract people who want to join in.
you answered your own question at the beginning with eve, the pvp mmo just has to have enough depth to compete with a lootsentric pve mmo
Eve's a very special case as their economic system is so large that it's essentially it's own category. The game can be played without interacting with the PvP elements whatsoever. It's almost impossible to sell a new player on a PvP game with no match making and statistical advantages for established players. Sure the Battle Royale genre gets away with a complete lack of match making but that's through a large number of extremely smart decisions to allow newer players a chance to work their way into it.
For example, you get to decide where to drop so a newer player can go to safer places at the start to run into less immediate competition. They reset the gear and offer inequity of gear, so while a new player might not win in an equal fight they can win in an unequal fight.
And honestly that's why I think PvP MMOs are never going to be anything more than niche titles, because I don't see how a new player can deal with being less experienced AND mechanically disadvantaged.
When I played eve I ended up manufacturing in demand ships and selling them to the pvp and pve players. Love wars, war means money. Incursions mean even more money. Need a PC again, hopefully this year.
@diana jones I actually think EVE's system is one where PVP actually weaves itself into all aspects of the game. The market mechanism itself is largely treated as a zero-sum game between its participants. Any PVE is done solely for the purposes of engaging in direct or indirect PVP.
PVP is also balanced in EVE because your "gear" isnt really randomly earned. Everything in EVE is either bought or manufactured really. This puts everyone on a semi equal footing, which is what PVP wants.
I always prefer PvE. I also LOVED the scenarios in Rift and Warhammer:AoR (brimstone bauble was a personal favorite). I do believe there's a way to do a PvP-centric MMO that won't chase away Bartle's Achievers, Explorers, and Socializers. It's just that nobody's figured out the math yet. However, as we stand in the ashes of empires, we can find lessons to salvage. Here's some I've seen;
-Avoid snowballing victory. The spoils of one victory should not contribute to the next. Things should always get harder the closer you are to winning. Constant conflict means constant gameplay.
-Have safe PvE areas. Most people get bored of the same gameplay everyday, however exciting. Sometimes you just want to grind mobs to a podcast. Clans also need a place to farm resources when they get pushed back from the front. War always pays better than hunting, but people still go hunting.
-Deal with population imbalance. Be draconian if you have to. If you're doing RvR, make damn sure to balance the aesthetics of each side. When one group can zerg down everyone else, it means they won the war and the game is over.
If you know more, post it.
In Albion online, during invasion day, you have the boss team and the zerg. the boss team is doing pve, killing a really tough boss fight to cap an area. The zerg protects the boss team from other zergs and pvps while the team kills the boss. Really fun mix of both types of playstyles, where the two groups work together for a common goal.
The average age of the "pve" mmos you used were much less then the average age of the "pvp" mmos you used. That creates a false differance.
The budgets of mmos have risen drastically over time.
You're like, "Look how this 20 year old mmo Dark Age of Camelot's budget is lower then SWTOR! That's why pvp mmos aren't succesful!"
Sounds like you're just pushing a biased narrative.
Actually it further proves my point. That you can't compare the two without understanding a litany of clear differences. Age, budget, and Dev team size.
Ugh... Except that people been saying the MMO market is changing ... people don't want greedy PvE MMOs where devs just gouge your wallet. MOBAs are more popular. Those are PvP. Hell, even Blizzard cashed in on it twice with HotS and Overwatch.
"The budgets of mmos have risen drastically over time."
BDO was made for a mere12 mil $ in 2015
and it is the most beautiful MMO on the market
I see it as that PVE games need more extensive content involving 3d modelling, voice acting etc so they have bigger budgets
A large part of SWTOR insane budget went on voice acting alone with every small side quest being fully voice acted
You do not really need this shit for a good MMO game, it's just a fad
Peter Lopez Your comment speaks of games. It didn't specify MMOs. Though I did comment that there has been a lot of chatter that MMOs in general are possibly a dying breed. Which enter MOBA can pick up and put down and don't have to invest a lot of time to character building.
@Charles Ward
12 million vs 3 million which is what the old mmos were made with.
The fundamental issue in any PvP based game is: "Is it fair?"
When you queue up for a game of your favourite non-mmo pvp game, everything gets reset to a fair and even state and you get matched with an even number of players close to your own skill level.
An open world factionless PvP MMORPG has no matchmaking, no balancing of numbers and the point at which everything was fair and equal, was the launch of the game or server. If that also gets combined with typical MMO combat, where it is unlikely to get lucky and kill someone clearly stronger, then a large chunk of the player base has a terrible experience in PvP. And adding PvE content to keep more sheep around does not resolve the underlying predatory system that favors the hardcore, which damages the long term mainstream appeal of the game.
I don't know if there are any good solutions for resolving these issues without destroying the persistent worlds and "RPG-ness" of the games. How do you stop good players from ruining everyone else's day? There's the obvious permadeath/losing gear option, to reset the playing field somewhat. Perhaps semi-permanent wounds, so your character can't get healed back to full after taking damage, so your unstoppable healer-dps combo can't just rampage through everybody. You could give a temporary stat penalty for getting kills on other players. You could make dying incredibly easy, so even the worst player could get a lucky hit on a hardcore pro and kill them. (Which is how BR games avoid having strict matchmaking.) You could do "seasons" of gameplay, after which whole servers get wiped to an initial clean slate, negating any level/gear advantages long term players have.
keep in mind, RF ONLINE is still popular as ever in SEA and Russia with different private servers.
While I would consider myself inexperience in MMORPG and I prefer PvE (MOBA is more of my type in PvP), I do notice some interesting perspective in your video that may hinder the enjoyment of the players.
1. Stop the Wolf/Sheep dynamic analogy. If in a PvP focus MMORPG all you can see is players behaving like wolves and sheep, it is Doomed. No people want to be sheep. They may identify themselves as sheep only because you force the narrative on them. If all you want is to illustrate a hunter/prey dynamic, it is Carnviore and Herbivore. There are tonnes of animals such as rhino/elephant/hippo/gazelle that don't hunt other animals, but they are far from helpless against predators. Sheep IRL is fairly replaceable, but PvE players aren't. So you don't need "Sheep" players, you need more "Rhino" players that if attacked, they are encouraged to fight back with significant chance to survive/win (some buff/debuff gaming mechanics?)
2. Fun is anything but natural. Nature highly appreciates zero risk: one-turn kill, preying on the sick and weak, inbalanced raiding party, paralyzing toxins etc. These mechanics are anything but fun for both side (so it is tolerable for PvE, garbage for EvP and PvP). Real life aren't that fun too, that's why people play game where arbitrary rules are made up to create a safe bubble that people can compete in equal footing; that's why people immerse in the virtual game world MMORPG. So stop asking the question "Why something works IRL doesn't work in game?" IT SHOULDN'T BECAUSE IT IS NOT REAL, THAT'S THE POINT. Focus on what makes game special and how it is overall fun for everyone.
3. Yes, screw/discourage vultures/griefers, if you can't negate their negative influence to the herbivore players. You don't deserve their attention.
I am a pve player, I came from a game where pvp was pretty much eliminated and I noticed a change, where there was a lot less players. And it made me sad, it made me sad for the fact that those pvp players lost a game that they loved. And it made me think, if the game I loved so much turned its back on me how would I feel? So I began to respect pvp players, and realized they play for the same reason I play. To have fun.
There's pvp players and then there's pvp players. It's fine to play to have fun, but for some that fun is the sociopathic kind, where they victimize other players for shits and giggles.
guild wars 1 was essentially pvp focus. You pretty much max level in a couple of weeks playing the pve content mainly to unlock skills, mods, gear and prepare for pvp battles later on. Endgame content for PVE was un-noteworthly with only 2 instances and the rest of it was grinding for cosmetics.
Its PVP learning curve was steep for many but those that put effort into it was rewarded lavishly, thus off putting to PVE players and eventually the devs realise it was a problem and subsequently its expansions focus more on PVE. Its also note worth saying gw2 pvp is a joke compare to its predecessor
I liked GW1's balance though - it didn't abandon PVE in favor of PVP. Yes, the PVE content was finite, but PVE content is finite by definition.
Imo, GW was probably the best and the only good PvP in MMORPGs (even if it was not a real MMORPGs). The whole design from the start encouraged people to participate in them. You could create characters made only for that part of the game without even having to Gear them or leveling them just to enjoy that part of the game. It was also a lot better balanced than others and it was quite alive too. Imo it is an MMORPGs that focused on PvP and didn't failed by doing so.
Guild Wars was NOT PVP focused. Yes it was their and a lot of people played it but that was NOT its focus.
No, they will always be niche though.
People that like competition between players will normally go to shooters, while people that like MMORPG like dungeons that require team work. A little fraction of players ends up liking a MMORPG focused on PVP.
Lets clear something up from the beginning:
1. modern games are not designed to be fun. These games are designed to create an addiction so that you can be milked of cash in ever greater quantities for ever greater periods of time. You form an emotional bond with a character that you invest ever more effort, time and money into that you become ever more reluctant to abandon, all the time encouraged and reinforced by peer pressure. The end game being you pay all your money to the company for a mere chance of receiving something others have, rather than face an impossible grind that gets ever more impossible the further you progress and the more addicted you become. MMOs are not designed to provide the players with what all the players know is needed to make a great game. They are designed to keep you there through conditioning as a cash cow through 'hope'.
2. There is no such thing as an MMO. Not any more. The idea of the MMO was to be a community driven game built on the foundations of collaboration (not competition). ALL modern games are single player or small multiplayer groups where everyone's actions are isolated or in direct competition. There is no community collaboration, so there is no true MMO. Ashes of creations node concept is designed to go some way toward addressing this.
3. No game to date takes balance seriously as all games allow you to level up or grow in power with vertical progression. Any new players get further and further outgunned by veterans so balance is never achieved. Where a community game demands all players can play with any player at any time in any place, this mechanic ensures its impossible. The only way to achieve true balance is by starting as a full power hybrid and allowing progress into specialist niches ONLY by sacrificing existing power in opposing areas. Alas many players want single player god mode, and refuse to pay any penalties, preferring to dominate new players, which causes the very PvE vs PvP angst quoted to begin with. An MMO is not a single player title so GOD MODE can not exist.
4. There are two types of PvP players. Communal PvPs that want a fair battle at all costs to test their skill. Solo players that come from single player games that want the God Mode experience they are accustomed to. And PvE centric players that are used to the notion of endlessly incrreasig power with no sacrifice, which the devs allowed and encouraged because increasing power is irrelevant in a PvE world where only NPC cant complain. And who doesnt want to be a god in their own play world ? But an MMO is not a personal play space. It is a communal playspace....until they made it single player or small group whose activity were isolated from each other. Even here the feathers fly when resources are competed for in a communal market as no communal framework exists to allow 'collaboration'.
TL;DR.
Devs are told what to do by accountants whose motive is profit not fun.
An MMO can not be run on the same principles as an isolated single player game.
No MMO exists, as there is no framework for community to truly exist and collaborate, only solo and small group.
PvP and PvE will remain incompatible until PvP and PvE players are mutually dependant and must collaborate in a communal setting. ie. The PvP and PvE are two arms of a mutual support group rather than antagonist and competitors.
Pve player seek mutual creation through collaboration. PvP players seek mutual destruction through competition. They are diametrically opposed play-styles that can only work together if designed to do so.
PVE mmo's have larger Dev Team simply by the fact they need to create more PVE content. PVP driven mmo's "events" are mostly player driven. Hence designing Quests, Dungeons, Raids etc etc is not a priority.
Bad designs and shit updates ruin pvp games
The main problem with an open world pvp oriented games ,in my opinion ,is that numbers decide everything and eventually every locations will be dominated by a guild's zergs and they just won't let any single player to make a single step on it. So if you don't wanna endure hardcore pvp jerks guildmates that harass everyone for a single mistake ,you won't ever achive anything ,above lowest level locations (:
Why do pvp-centric mmos fail? Time. In the beginning everyone is at zero. As time goes on veterans become more and more powerful and it makes it very difficult to attract new players. I will not even bother getting into a pvp title that's a couple of years old, because I'll be so far behind the curve that I'll get my ass handed to me every 2 minutes. That's just not fun.
Completely agree with the Sheep and Wolf system.. I used to play a PvP Mud back in the days where if you get attacked by someone they incur "evil points". If you incur enough evil points, you will ultimately become an outlaw status. As an outlaw you can be attacked by Town Guards and also be attacked on sight by players without penalty to them. If you obtain enough evil points your status goes farther down to the worse which was Fiend and powerful NPC bounty hunters would hunt you.
You can also choose to be Lawful where you can't attack anyone but if someone ever attacks you, they will incur double evil points. I think this was a great way to keep wolves at bay where you needed to go to town at times and you couldn't because you were outlawed. This was a complete PvP game where you could attack anyone anywhere but the concept was the best. Also if you died you lose everything and if you died 9 times you get re-rolled as in deleted.. BUT everytime you leveled you gained 5 lives with a max of 9.
I have a strong dislike of any PVP games. Never cared for them and play games to have fun. I don't find it fun when I want to do X but can't because someone thought it would be fun to attack me.
Never liked attacking other players because it makes me feel like an asshole.
TechnoGolem So in other words you prefer co-op RPGs where you control everything.
Peter Lopez He said it himself, he only cares about PvE and hates any kind of PvP so he only likes an environment where he can control the fights
@@5H4D3 And? It's a game. What point do you think you're making? Because I don't see one.
You didn't even touch the subject of pay to win in pvp which imo is the BIGGEST reason why pvp mmorpgs fail.
Will PvP focused MMORPGs Always Fail? "Uh...Yes!"
I played WoW for years specifically for the PvP. In between battlegrounds or arenas I had fond memories of just hanging outside of town dueling ppl, getting ganked by stealth enemies, going over to enemy towns and having sporadic epic battle, hearing the call to battle with the timed world pvp events, etc. I even enjoyed questing near enemies and seeing who was going to attack first when one of our guards dropped and then having that fun gank turn into an epic battle of factions as more and more players jumped in to help. I also really enjoyed optimizing gear and builds trying to get that edge over others but when WoW abandoned PvP gear and PvP vendors for ilvl gear grinded from PvE world daily events I quit and never returned. In other words, I really enjoyed the PvP but had equal fun with the stuff I did in the world during the down time.
Personally where I feel pvp MMORPGs will always fail is because the people who tend to make them are always somewhat lacking in managing and growing a game. I also feel that people who make games in general are touched. :E
As a PVEer playing BDO currently, I have to say open world PVP is a bit of a rush for me. I like that added fear that someone might come after at anytime, and sometimes It can even make boring level grinding more interesting for me.
Then again it may just be my nostalgia for 2007 era Runescape
The video was pretty slanted, I would definitely agree that this was more of a pvp apologist video rather than a comparison. Community is usually why PvP FFA games die, as the long-term players tend to make it almost impossible for new players join the game. The community feeds on itself until it dwindles to nothing.
This idea that PvP mmos have a smaller budget and team is the problem is inherently wrong.
Why? Because PvP-based MMOs have far less content in them than a PvE game. You don't have to spend art assets on a giant world filled with quests, npcs, monsters, etc if they main purpose is to kill each other.
You don't need the writers on staff when there is no story. You don't need quest designers when there aren't any quests. You don't need a dungeon team if there are no dungeons, etc.
Take Albion online for example: Dungeons are randomly generated and are incredibly bare bones. This is because the game isn't about them. The environments are all boring and stale because, again, the game isn't about them. The loot is boring because, yet again, it isn't about that.
Planetside 2 is another good example of one of the more popular PvP-based mmos. Same thing. The map is boring and uninspired. The cosmetics are mostly dull, there is no loot to speak of, and again, there is no story or quests for you to follow. They don't NEED the budget of one of the big PvE mmos because they don't have to provide anywhere near the content.
When a game is designed in this sort of fashion there is very little reason to have the budget or team of a WoW, FFXIV, or ESO that is filled with an ungodly massive amount of content in the form of quests, story, loot, etc. They are inherently different properties.
Now if you said you cannot compare them BECAUSE they are inherently designed differently, sure. But their budgets and team size are irrelevant.
Good video as always. I think one of the problems you touched on was the community of pve vs pvp. There has always seemed to be an antagonistic relationship between the two groups. Honestly, this paradigm really ruined my experience with black desert online.
The endgame in bdo is obviously pvp, but getting there requires endless amounts of lifeskilling or pve grinding, which is a problem lots of pvp mmos face. I don't do much pvp in that game because its so gear intensive, any fight I get into is inevitably one sided. Theres really no skill involved when it gets like that. I saw people in my own guild act like toxic children when they killed people lower level than them, calling them carebears etc. I would love to see an mmo with great pvp mechanics implemented so I can also experience that unique kind of game.
Cheers though, keep up the good work!
Yes, I wish the hardcore and casual groups would stop alienating themselves. Ultimately both groups need each other; without the hardcore there is no foundation to build the community on, and without casuals theres no life to a game. I feel like mmos showcase the problem much more than other games too, because of the amount of player interaction.
I'm pretty hardcore with rpgs like Dark Souls, but man, if Fire Emblem didn't have an easy mode, I'm not sure I would have beaten it. I'm just straight garbage at turn based stuff.
GW1 and to a slightly lesser extent, GW2 were both excellent in that regard. Unfortunately the mechanical skill cap in both of those games was a little low.
TheBionicOnion - You will love PVP in Final Fantasy XIV. Duals, which can only take place in the dual area, are gear-centric but that isn't the case with all of the other PVP modes. Square Enix decided to kill the "Arms Race" that eventually ruins PVP in other MMOs. They MOBA-ized PVP giving you a fixed list of abilities based on your Job and standard armor ratings regardless what you have equipped. Everyone is on the same footing regardless of level. This makes PVP purely based on Skill and Team Cooperation rather than an Arms Race of who has the best gear. Since they've made this change PVP has become immensely popular in the game. You can still acquire PVP gear but it is useful only for the Glamour System to customize the look of your character. Oh, and there is a new actual MOBA in the game and its proven popular too.
Meanwhile, we get nothing PSO-related in FFXIV.
Thanks for reminding me to never waste my time playing pvp mmos. I'll stick to shooters.
PvP scene is cancer
PvP friendly MMO's see empires rise and fall, cities become glorious metropolis or fade into ruins. I've helped defend the sigils against all 3 of the enemy factions throwing waves of dragons at our ragged line while volunteers ran the gauntlets to bring in supplies, dying in their droves to help us hang on anoher 15, 10 or 2 minutes. if I might steal from Roy Batty in Bladerunner: "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die." PvP is the history of MMOs, the rest is what happens in the background.
Many mmorpg pvp games are doomed to fail because of gear progression. A never ending treadmill of constantly better weapons and armor that requires P2W, Alt2Win, or stupid amounts (years) of grinding just to be competitive.
Often times the pvp players shoot themselves in the foot with the pure thought of "Kill Everything!" and only want to work with the other "top" players leaving nothing to feed upon but sheep or those without ability, soon after burning out from boredom (no content, dedgame, gitgud). They don't self regulate, they don't want to lose (ever), they talk all kinds of smack (unprovoked), and more people than you might like to admit enjoy griefing others. This is not true of ALL of them, as I and several i know are gracious victors or losers and don't want to dominate nor get crushed constantly.
Games like SWTOR had wonderful pvp arenas so that gear progression didn't matter and it was down to actual skill. It will be the same case for Conan Exiles (perhaps not an mmorpg? but it blurs the lines) where it isn't terribly difficult or expensive to get top weapons/armor, with no p2w elements. Although I foresee the official pvp servers eating themselves and crashing quickly, and the pve ones lasting much longer, it will be the private pvp servers that self regulate and withstand the tests of time.
This isn't just PVP this is PVE as well. WoW will die off eventually.
The goal of any competitive game is make your oponent leave the game, there is no greater satisfaction then seeing your oponent log off or give up on playing because of how much you made thier lives miserable. That by itself is a problem, as it creates a toxic mindset on the community, see any competitive game like LoL, DotA, CSGO, Fortnite, among others. But what these games do is to give incentives for you to get back into the fight, be as how it is quick for you to get back, or how much you want to get a higher elo.
Just see the newly released phase 2 of wow for instance, it is a shitshow of people ganking others in the transition phase between flight-points, blocking dungeon routes, and ganking lowbies. I myself only PVP when I can "instagib" the other party, and continue to camp their corpse again and again, but it's clear to see how that is counter productive to the game, as people who can't play tend to quit the game. That is exactly what is happening to classic wow now.
For the competitive games crowd, this is the golden age, competitive game became a sport and you have big companies inveting big money on competitive games. People playing on equal footing for fast, adrenaline filled matches. Just pick one of the games I mentioned above and you'll have an amazing experience*.
*after you gitgud and/or get used to hear about your teamates romantic escapes with your mother
All the examples you cited are why they fail honestly.
PVP MMORPGs have one huge problem, people want to jump into the action without a long grind. The one thing MMORPGs just don't do well is remove the grind.
Really? Wolves and sheep? Seriously? Half the video....
I was turned off by PvP when Blizzard started nerfing class abilities and raid gear based on PvP'ers complaints. Additionally, there is no honour with PvP'ers. 90% of them are there to grief and they will do it no matter what game they're playing or what rules are in place.
Lineage 2 had some harsh penalties for dying, considering how hard it was to obtain items. Didn't stop anyone from ganking and griefing 24/7.
i hate open world pvp games why can't they just make arenas for pvp GW2 gets pvp right, their is nothing more frustrating in game when someone blows $5000 real money to buy in game gear to make their characters impossible to beat then they just go to low level zones and constantly kill any new player that comes their way for S$#!'s and giggles
i pass on every game i want to play when i hear it has open world pvp
Go ahead, blow $5000 on a titan. And when you'll get it wrecked because you're a shitty pilot we'll all laugh at you like many others before.
The problem is that Devs honestly can't balance PvE and PvP well at the same time. Look how often an ability in an MMO would get 'nerfed' into uselessness for PvE because of PvP. Hell the reason the WoW devs decided to slow their game down and took out what people were enjoying in legion was because people were complaining about things in PvP (the GCD change was totally a PvP focused move).
City of heroes was a prime example of this in its early days. Regen got massively nerfed because it was overperforming in PvP, however it was only 'decent' in PvE, with the changes taking it from decent to bottom of the barrel from which it never recovered. Even the Rogue servers STILL haven't buffed it back up to a level where it can compete with anything else.
Isn't fact that MMO PvP is rather niche pretty much the reson why it will never be a good MMO? Can niche product be a truly massive? I would like to not use Eve online as an example as it's really an exception to the rule and has a few speicifics that other worlds will never have.
It feels to me that most succesfful PvP MMOs I know are the ones that are actually PvE with PvP aspect to it. GW2 world vs world. Ultima online. Ragnarok online. Mostly those were/are PvE games where you do your PvE stuff to become stronger in PvP eventually.
And another point of view. You say you can't change human nature, which I do agree. The problem is, human nature is much easier to control in smaller environments. Once you go massive, there will be enough idiots that like to pick unfair fights and hunt lower levels for fun. I remember back in the days wow... it's primarily PvE game, but there were many occassions where I was minding my PvE bussiness only to get ganked or simply overpowered by PvPer. I ultimately regretted my choice of server...
Most PvP games boil down to who has the bigger pain train.
PvP games also take a lot larger commitment than PvE games. In PvE games you can generally log in and do some dailies, chat a little, and log off. PvP games generally turn into live styles.
Elite Dangerous technically isn't an MMO but PVP is killing the game. Frontier Developments has done little to resolve the problem. Gankers and Trolls feel emboldened, they attack people trying to express how unbalanced the PVE v. PVP is calling them Carebears and otherwise basically shouting them down. This has resulted in a segregation of the player community. Elite Dangerous has Open Play which is where the problem exists. To avoid the Gankers people are flocking to Private Groups like Mobius PVE which has so many members that they're comprised of multiple private groups. Regardless of whether you're in Open Play or a Private Group you still have influence over the overall game and this pisses off the Gankers that people who ran to private groups to avoid being trolled by them can still influence the game. Basically, due to FDEV's negligence, they've allowed an elitist community of toxic players to dictate to other players how the game should be played. The level of incompetence shown by FDEV in how they've failed every time to deal with this issue is breathtaking.
On the other hand, if the PVE-centrists, after banding together, fund their own "police" of PVP fanatics to go after the gankers, the game will be essentially policing itself.
Just food for thought, I imagine all games veer towards PvP at some point, as human nature's primary goal is to conqueror their environment (PvE), but once the environment is conquered, what do we do? Look for bigger challenges, or fight amongst ourselves - the former sometimes reaching for the impossible, while we never seem to grow tired of the latter. In other words, I imagine PvP to be a necessary end game for all MMOs, but the implementation in many cases leaves much to be desired.
@@peterlopez2388 BDO is P2W.
I can agree that the systems in place are part of the problem, but I've tried enough MMOs with open world pvp to know that a substantial chunk of pvpers enjoy killing others players for no better reason than they can. I agree 100% that consequences for such behavior is hard to juggle without being too lenient or heavy handed and I think that's why most PvE slanted games have structured and/or instanced pvp rather than open world pvp. I'm of the opinion that this appeals to more players overall and casuals are more apt to actually engage in pvp when it's structured and given the choice to participate.
Admittedly I'm not a huge fan of pvp, but I was very active in Dark Age of Camelot, SWG, WoW(When getting the Warlord title was an accomplishment), SWTOR, and have dabbled a bit in FF14. These games didn't force participation, but encouraged it with incentives.
I think people are starting to distance themselves in increasing numbers from any form of fun that involves a high risk of being perpetually dominated by other players more powerful than you. I remember playing Warhammer Online and there was this one PVP map where the forces of Order would almost always dominate to the point of grave camping. It wasn't fun at all, so I didn't want to play that map anymore. In Warhammer's case further, there was major imbalance between the factions with Order usually dominating, which wasn't fun for the other side, so players on the other side either quit or joined the winning side, worsening the situation.
People who retort with arguments like "git gud" are probably the people who power game the most overpowered classes, or are on the winning side, and it would be akin to me getting 4 guys to hold you down while I smash your face into a deformed mess with a hammer, which is both not fair, beyond your power to resist and absolutely not fun.
This is why WAR really needed a 3 faction system. Instead of Order vs Chaos, it should have been something like 'Elves, Dwarfs, Humans' 'Chaos, Dark Elves, Greenskins' 'Tomb Kings, Vampire Counts, Skaven'. That way you'd never have one faction stomping the other depending on your server since the two lower population sides could gang up on the bigger faction and push them back (before inevitably turning on each other)
I love that intro. I love the subject of this video. I love your treatment of said subject. Well done!
Now, for the nitpicking :p
About the budget and team sizes differences: While I think the point is totally valid, it is pertinent to consider that those PVP-focused games are for the most part older than WoW and the PVE games you show. You can see that the more recent one, W:AR, has considerably more budget and employees than the other PVP titles in the list. Let's say the age difference aggravates the comparison.
About Crowfall: From what I understand, there will be both GVG and RVR, as the game will be paced around campaigns with different sets of rules (like, one campaign will have faction war, another wills have clans war, another will have FFA... with rotations so you always have 2 or 3 different campaign worlds running). Each campaign having a finite duration, it should prevent the biggest clans/factions to snowball since you start each one anew.
About RVR: The balance problem with RVR is that you can't force players into factions and there can be a(n) (dis)advantage due to some faction being underpopulated or one being largely more populated than the other 2. Plus a lot of players have a tendency to join whichever faction is more populated from the get-go to get an advantage.
You mentioned the size of the dev team and the budget, but you didn't mention one thing that is related to that: yes the PvE focused MMORPGs have been more successful throughout the past 20 years, while PvP focused MMORPG's have been unsuccessful...but here's the catch, the PvE MMOs that have been successful are 4 or 5 out of hundreds of PvE MMOs that failed, while PvP MMOs that haven't been sucessful are 4 or 5, which means that yes the top MMORPG's are PvE focused, but how many of PvE MMOs died in the last 20 years? hundreds and hundreds. And how many PvP MMOs died in the last 20 years? probably not even 10....this means the market is flooded with PvE MMOs, and since these are proven to be sucessful, almost no one wants to fund PvP MMOs (and never did in the past). So there's a crazy amount of probability factor here. So in fact there's very few MMOs (PvE or not) who have been sucessful throughout the years. (I know in general you mentioned all of this but I feel like most people don't know about the hundreds of PvE MMOs that failed so I just had to mention and specify).
Love your video model! IMO the best chanel about mmorpgs.
I'm a sheep, a proud carebear and have no problem with wolves if done properly. My problem however lies with the type of PvPers who PvP to make others feel bad, acting all tough 'gangsta' ,'l33t' and w/e.. insulting me and calling me 'noob', 'scrub' w/e just because I died in PvP and made that player feel superior. I mean Ok - I'm the sheep and accept it, the opposite end must show at least some respect to the weaker players, because even you stated that a game needs the 'casuals' as much , if not even more than the 'hardcore' .
PvP players often forget they are dealing with a living, breathing person when they grief that person. I came to play a game, because in a way I was sick and tired of real life rush, real life 'idiots', crimes and violence... I don't want to see the same toxicity, which is often escalated in PvP games - especially MOBAs, shooters and F2P games where people can just buy their power and carry on dominating the others.
All in all, PvP focused games have more toxicity, more 'bad boys' type of player , who try very hard to be the alphas and do it in a terrible, sometimes pathetic way. Don't get me wrong, I've met amazing PvP wolves who treat sheep like me with respect and fairplay, sometimes even let us be, because we don't offer them much challenge, some even carried on protecting me or mentoring me, as I grinded or learned the game... but in my experience in online games - these type of PvPers are the minority and less and less rare in a world, where the toxicity in video games is increasing , rather than decreasing. Loud, raging teenagers and kids are freely allowed to play a 16+, 18+ titles, where back in 2000, when i was just 9, I wasn't even allowed a computer of my own until quite some time later.
I've noticed a terrible decline in quality of players in recent years, nowadays with all the memes and slangs taking over internet, I see more and more PvP players posting something like ' cry more ' and inserting some meme. P2P PvP MMOs, are definitely better in that regard, but when you put only wolves in these games, sooner or later they will destroy themselves , leading that game to slowly die out, because I've noticed how PvE players like me nowadays rarely join PvP server or PvP games, because most are totally repulsed by the toxicity. In the past, I could get called a lesbian for playing a game, but I found that just immature.. that was the 'best', the toxic people could come up with... Nowadays the insults are out of control, sometimes scary even. Never before I've seen such foul language in a game, like in the recent 5 years or so. The sad part is, that toxicity slowly creeps in PvE as well, where you can get flamed and terribly insulted, for not having the best gear when you go in a dungeon, getting yelled at for dying, for not doing as much dps or not healing 'fast enough' etc etc.
I'm sorry for making my post this long, but thinking about it, maybe your next video should be about the terrible online communities we have recently and how toxic and insulting people increase , rather than decrease. No wonder there are guilds and some private servers accepting member who are of age 30 + even for PvE.
TLDR: I enjoyed the video overall and as I said, I do not mind being the sheep to a wolf, my pleasure even, if you want to duel or fight me, I'll try, will do it to make you happy and congratulate you when you probably win, then carry on... however I find it intolerable that some wolves forget they need the sheep and show them no respect. I'll never seem to completely ignore toxicity as it always finds a way to make me feel bad and insulted, no matter how hard I try to not pay it attention. Happy gaming ! :)
Calling players "wolves" and "sheep" is pretty toxic by itself.
Guild Wars 1 PvP was my favorite PvP... and my favorite MMO. God I miss running Bunny Thumper R/W or 50hp Monk... Then running through a map to farm mats with my E/Me on the downtime.
edit: Please do a video on GW1 specifically. :D
Open-world PvP attracts a toxic personality more interested in winning by beating up on weaker players than they are in perfecting their skill. Such people may be in the minority, but for "outreach" to new players these will be the main ambassadors.
Predator vs Prey is an interesting analogy. Real-life predators aren't looking for a fight, but a kill. They go for the old, the sick, and the feeble--those too weak to defend themselves and too slow to run away. Even the boldest of lions isn't looking to tangle with an elephant in its prime. In this vein, being called a "predator" irl is definitely not a compliment.
Competitive games in other genres, be it fighting games, RTS, MOBAs or even real-life sports, tend to match players based on skill level and actively discourage predation on lower-skilled players. Progress is more about improvement than winning. So when a game comes out with abundant opportunities for beating up on new players, guess who flocks in...
I know you think what you said was really intelligent but there's so many holes in that I don't know where to start. For starters the predator and analogy actually proves my point so thanks for explaining it. And second MMO's aren't about equal matchmaking, so it's okay if a game isn't fair. But if it's so unfair that players can't get started then that needs to be changed.
This elementary logic that everyone who likes to player-versus-player in a video game somehow just wants to take advantage of somebody though is just as silly as assuming the opposite.
@@nerdSlayerstudioss Like I said, it's a minority of players. The serious PvP folks I encountered in my MMO days were generally busy doing high-level PvP against other serious PvP folks. Which means that they weren't in the low-level zones where the griefers set up shop.
More on the animal analogy, predation isn't the only kind of violence among animals. Fights for dominance are common (bucks, bulls, etc.), and in a herd might even lead to a graded hierarchy. Others, like ants, seek total annihilation of rival colonies. Organized competitions definitively drift in the dominance direction.
Which is the ideal PvP MMO experience?
The only time I actually enjoyed PvP was in Warhammer Online.
It was the one and only time it just felt "right" to play PvP , even while questing.
This. Mind you I was playing a Black Orc and everyone knows Orcs fight everything and anything no matter the odds.
Awesome new intro
Sorry but I feel like you are making fun of pve players by calling us sheep or not hard core players. Like we don't play 10 plus hours a day raiding dungeons and what not.
Love the new intro and channel style
Sometimes, some people just want to pick herbs in peace :D
So now you are kind of a MMO detective, huh??? Well, start with EA and check their files... everyone smells fish over there.
I can't help but feel the ideal system for PVP is effectively instanced mini-games via your avatar. FFXIV and WoW did this mostly, while world PVP's are just too hard to balance as you mentioned. It's also easier to add the monthly pvp flavors, FFXIV did it with their Moba eqv and we could well see a balanced KotH introduced because the experience can be modualy inserted. Unfortunately this method would be against the PVE needs you pointed out. I just don't think the two can be grouped together in a method that isn't "getting" lucky like EVE or SWG did. I do remember PVP in SWG being a big thing, but I could be crazy there.
NICE opening man!
PvP focused MMO's will always fail and suck due to class imbalances and being unable to play how you want. You will always get pigeonholed into making a cookie-cutter class and needing specific gear just to be competitive. Same with PvE. No matter how you slice it, MMO's are always designed around creating specific classes that have one specific way to play otherwise you will fail. It's always just a numbers game where the devs create all sorts of cool flashy abilities that will cause epilepsy to some people but will just get covered up by hotbars and some form of specific UI that you "must" have in order to stay competitive and in the end, you've covered up your entire screen and can't even see any part of the actual game.
pvp mmos are dogshit because theyre never as good as multiplayer games that are ENTIRELY pvp, stuff like overwatch, league of legends or cs:go. splitting the focus of a game between pvp and pve usually just ends up watering down the experience as a whole.
Elder scrolls online says youre wronggggg
Is ESO PVP centric? No its not, and he said USUALLY there are exceptions to the rule so that doesnt make him "wrong". Also he is right that having both waters down both. You have 20 Million to spend, you do just one thats full 20 into PVE or PVP. You do both and thats only 10 Million or less into one of them. Bottom line is you cant develop your PVE/PVP to the level of a game that spent 20 million on theirs if you spend 10.
To put it another way, you can have a whole pie to yourself or share half with a friend. Yes you still get pie but not as much pie as if you didnt share it.
They should have far larger budgets and dev teams because great pve content is extremely difficult to do do well and requires a lot of work from artists/musicians/writers etc, while pvp is all about balance and repetition - not nearly as expensive
Love the new look Nerd!
Seeing the average budget and dev size of PvP MMO's really put things into perspective. It kinda makes me worry that we won't have any good ones in the future unless a major publisher funds one.
As someone who hates PvP I'm happy all the major ones are PvE
95keat play eso. The pvp section is the map from oblivion
Servant of Satan I'm aware, still don't like it I'm afraid
95keat its not for all i imagine. I hated it the first time i tried it. But i started eating it up here lately.
yes, because nothing is more exciting than doing the same raid for the 40'th time while watching TV and with sound turned off because no1 is on voice comms (why should you if it's so easy and there is no chance of getting jumped on by another group?)
@@Mic_Glow I don't even play MMOs, but why would I bother doing something if some random jackasses can come in and kill me or ks me whenever they feel like it.
Reason is simple. People play for fun. Loosing is not fun. Winning is fun. But there is a limit of how much you can "git gud". If you allow people kill each other, social structure will be established : few top dogs, able to beat the shit of everyone else and getting most fun, slightly bigger group that get beaten by top dogs, but can beat everyone else, even bigger group below them and so on, and so on. Amount of pleasure got from playing wil be in inverted proportion to player group size. And since game needs numbers to sustain itself ... well, that's a problem. It's like in real world really. This is why we went from simple "strong rule weak" to political and social systems full of limitations and handicaps.
The argument in favor of PvP that "winning stuff and losing stuff means something" is also an argument that can be made on the other end, therefore i don't see it as an argument. While i am biased in favor of PvE i can see a benefit for an MMO having both but a there needs to be a consideration about the balance of the game.
Personally i think there will never be a time were the PvP will have the depth one can put into PvE/Co-Op. From single player games to MMO's, PvE is immeasurably far more interesting to me, more challenging, more things to learn (and learning is a drug indeed) and the storytelling is also adding to it.
Not everyone being a criminal IRL is also because some people have ethical restrictions. So it's not only the restrictions put by society laws. And for e the ethical restrictions are far more important than society laws. Also, i don't exactly understand the terms used here of "wolves and sheep" because in most cases the so called "sheep" are more intelligent than the PvP "wolves". The most intricate and with depth games and challenging games are the of the PvE and Co-Op genre/nature. But i do get it at some level.
I think the reason PvP players (such as myself) dislike PvE players is the lack of competition. We play MMORPGs and grind PvE elements in order to then compete against other players. Sure, you can use the fastest dungeon clear (or other similar aspect) to judge how good you are as a PvE player, but that grows stale for PvP-centric players. Dungeons/bosses are about set mechanics and PvE progression ultimately relies on new content being added. The amount of variation in open world fights is what keeps the content interesting for PvPers. The end-game is about seeing how well you stack up on the battle field against other players.
You should try the eso pvp. Its so good
Paul H
If you like competition why are you not playing MOBAs or FPS? They are sport games with set rules. MMORPG competition is determined by gear, RNGs, faction, guilds etc. It is fun to have PVP in MMO but it is not competitive.
bladerun101
MOBAs are too team reliant and FPS games get stale. I hate when people use that argument. At their core, MMOs are way more fun and require much more skill to pull off good combos. The amount of variation you encounter in open world PvP is unmatched. If you played games like Ultima Online, you know what I'm talking about. They also had 1v1 tournaments with set rules and gear restrictions so that it comes down to who the better player is.
I still enjoy the PvE elements that a MMO offers because I like to see progression in my character. I just think the idea of grinding PvE content, in order to clear PvE content faster, seems silly. Someone can be regarded as the best party member to have for clearing dungeons, but where's the pride in that? Beating someone in a duel is much more rewarding. End game should be based around (balanced) PvP imo.
I agree with Paul H on pretty everything. As a fellow PvP lover, I've tried all the MOBAs and FPS games but none have satiated my taste for a PvP MMORPG. It's the character permanence and progression that we want. There's also the aspect of notoriety, you become respected within that community and everyone on the server knows you. You form relationships with people that just isn't there with more temporary arena styled games. Do you remember the other 99 players in a battle royale game? Do you remember teammates in LoL that you don't already know?
The open world aspect is a requirement for me as well because you never know what's going to happen- each encounter can be completely different. One encounter you get stuck with a bunch of monster aggros against an enemy group double your size, the next fight you're fighting with an allied group taking on 20 players trying to raid your keep. Battle Royal games are somewhat like this but they're lacking the character progression that I love. Maybe sometime in the future they will come out with one with more RPG/MMO elements, I've heard about one coming out within a year or so that promises to be more like an MMO -I guess we'll see where that goes.
Also, if you look at games like Shrouded Isles era DaoC, it's not hard to create a game where PvP is not a complete gear check. You simply got to max level (took quite a while), crafted/found your gear and in a few weeks and you could be ready to go. The biggest thing was that there were stat caps in place that made it so you didn't feel obligated do raids and other things you didn't want to do to be competitive. At best, someone that spent an extra year raiding would only have at most a few extra points in their resistances. You didn't need to be in a large guild either, which was an awesome aspect to the game. You could excel as a solo player as much as someone that played in a coordinated guild group.
-DaoC deteriorated when they saw the success of WoW and tried to change the focus to be more PvE oriented. Make PvE raids required in a game known for PvP? NEedless to say, the game never recovered.
Planetside 2 managed to combine faction vs faction vs faction with clan vs clan, by introducing a clan arena on a separate launcher. It doesn't have to be a separate launcher though. You could have an in game arena where clans can fight each other, even if they're from the same faction. After all, clan vs clan is all about bragging rights. You can do similar for PvE content in a PvP focused game. Just make PvE arenas private instances. Eve Online does this as well.
The problem is that devleopers don't want to make this extra effort.