| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (32)

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 1:03PM mode7overworld said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I've always thought people clamoring for PVP in MMOs were a bit goofy. As you said, pure skill-based competition is better left to multiplayer shooters like Counterstrike, or my alltime personal favorite, Quake 3. The gameplay style of RPGs can only be expected to go so far in sustaining conflict between players.

The one argument I can make for PVP is that it can potentially drive home a feeling of freedom for the player. In theory, it can make the world seem more alive and untamed, with less restriction of choice.

In my experience, though, it generally ends up making you feel paranoid and distrusting in a genre that's usually focused on cooperation. Assuming that every player approaching from the horizon is a threat gets kind of exhausting. Not that this is a bad quality on its own, its just really jarring when a good portion of these games require you to cooperate with other people.

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 1:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
PVP is the main problem when you want to balance a MMORPG, but hey, such a great fun to battle other players.
In my opinion, PVE and PVP should be absolutely separated, so you can access both activities, never mixing them. That way you can do a better job with itemization, skill balance, etc. They should improve PVP goals and gameplay, separated from PVE. I would even encourage a developement of different gears for both PVP and PVE, but the way you can't use PVP gear out of PVP activity and same with PVE.

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 1:45PM Daemodand said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It's conventional wisdom that only about 10% of MMO players have PvP as a primary motivation. AoC figured this out, and I hope one day Allods figures it out too as its hardcore gank-style PvP is one of the few things keeping that otherwise fantastic game from becoming a major F2P juggernaut.

And if you want skill-based PvP, it's called Counter-Strike (which I've been playing a lot of recently and loving it). That game really let's you see how absurd MMO PvP is. MMO PvP is basically: whoever spent more time grinding their toon up wins. How is that fun?

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 1:49PM Samael said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Again a great article, and although there are a few things that I did not agree with.

Let me first say that I hate open world PvP in most games. I am waiting on SWTOR to see if I can like it, but in all probability I do not like open world PvP.

But I agree that the people that like that kind of gameplay needs to have a game cater to them. Something like Darkfall maybe? And EvE is the perfect example of good open world PvP. Hence why I could never get into EvE.

Everyone who like this constant state of fear like the idea of real loss and real damage. The thing I say to them is this, I take risks everyday at work where the loss of anything is very very real to me, I play my games to relax and have fun and people will agree that constant state of fear and paranoia is not fun (well maybe for some, but I cannot see how). Why should I let someone else dictate when and how I play a game? If I do not want to PvP, then I should not have to.

I have this irrational theory that almost everyone that wants pure open world PvP are gankers and like preying on the casuals, so that they can thump their chests and think that they are demi-gods. But I know that not everyone is like that.

ok enough of my rant on the open world thing.

But you are right in the fact that if people wanted real skill based PvP RPGs are just not the genre for it. FPSes are, and I love playing PvP FPSes. The best part about most PvP FPS is that you are not ganked usually and with a little bit of skill can take care of yourself, does not matter if you are low level player or a high level player (talking about the ones that have level progression, these days most do). The differences are minimal that it does not affect your gameplay. RPGs are just not like that, and to make them like that you have take away the essence of RPGs. With MMO RPGs there will never be pure skill based combat, or rather I cannot see it in the future at all. Though I would love to hear how people propose this so called skill based PvP be set?



At the very end I would like to ask Massively to please provide us with a forum where we can continue discussions. This commenting system for some reason does not foster proper discussion. Are there any plans for this? Or would that be too difficult?

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 2:00PM Seffrid said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The best way of separating PvE and PvP is by putting them in different games. The problem is that while PvE players happily accept there are some games that are off-limits to them (Darkfall, EVE etc), PvP players constantly whine so much about PvE games excluding them that the developers always relent and add a PvP element but in such a way that nobody is really happy. That happened, for example, with both EQ2 and LoTRO neither of which was designed to have any PvP.

At the moment AoC is a decent game but it needs quite a bit of additional content and if the developers are wise they'll focus on the PvE aspect because that's where the majority demand lies in MMORPGs.

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 2:41PM clik said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
There are games that do it well and there are games that don't. Guild Wars, DAOC, EVE, and I'll even toss WoW out there for example in the games that do PvP well and some of them mix in PvE as well. Sure the PvE market is bigger, but that doesn't exclude the part about AoC being a pretty bad representation of a pvp a game. The majority of the PvP crowd didn't like it at all it seemed. Instead of blaming it on the PvP market being small, I would go as far to say that it's the sandbox niche that is small.

Games like GW, WoW, and even old DAOC (to a certain extent) have session based pvp and it was no flop. GW gvg, factions were huge. WoW BG's, arenas are really big, they even have professional arena teams that compete thousands of dollars in tournaments while streaming it over the internet with rumors of upward to 12,000-20,000 viewers watching it at any given time.

PvPers are very picky and I'd say there are more niche market pvp crowds than PvE. Some like their sandbox, others like to que into it with organized matches, or some just like a little more structure rather than all out FFA.

The whole "go play an FPS if you want skill based pvp" is kind of ignorant. MMOPvP although requiring a different element such as gear holds a lot of skill as well. Such as situational awareness, class knowledge and how to react to them, building characters to fit with your team for synergy, when to go defensive/offensive with your team, how to set up coordinated attacks in unison with the class on your team. There's a lot that goes into competitive pvp.

Besides if you want a real balanced game that requires dexterity and brainpower, go play Starcraft :p

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 4:12PM DrewIW said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I like the changes that 1.05 brought, partly because it it seemed more familiar, and partly because it helped to differentiate characters.

I still have issues with AoC, but I know a lot of people on this site have active accounts, so I was wondering if someone could answer some questions.

1. Is there more variety to end game gear? Everywhere I went, people always looked the same.
2. Do sieges actually work? Does anyone do them?

I loved the combat system, but like so many people the early bugs and lack of content killed it for me. If they had a greater depth of scenario or instance-based PVP, I'd resub in a heartbeat.

Posted: Jun 28th 2010 8:36PM Myria said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
1) In theory, yes, some of the new faction stuff looks fairly different than what you typically see hanging around Tarantia. In practice the grind to get any of it is so severe (for the purple pixels you're literally talking hundreds of godmode runs per piece) that about the only place you'll see any is screenshots on YG or what have you.

2) My understanding is that sieges do work... Kinda. Sorta. As far as I can tell, though, the whole concept is pretty much dead as a doornail, heaped somewhere on a Shrine of Boring.
Reply

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 4:25PM Unverfied B said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Why then is there this vocal group on the official boards that is constantly either a) bemoaning what happened to the original game or b) asking for things like servers that exclude caster classes and other assorted silliness?"

This kind of crap happens in any MMO, there will ALWAYS be a vocal group that will claim that patch/expansion X broke the game, for any value of X, and will rabidly request special servers that are limited to X-1.

Look at UO... according to different vocal groups the game went down the drain atleast 5 times...
UO:R and AOS being the most popular hated expansions, one of them split the world into PVP and PVE zones, the other redid itemization added much higher emphasis on items (oh wait...)
Funny thing - the game is still around, and somewhat kicking. They even gave those guys a different server (Siege Perilous) but it's always empty, because it's either not different enough or too different or whatever...

Then WOW... Dig through any old posts and you'll find (in chronological order):
Adding the honor system killed the game!
Adding the battlegrounds killed the game!
Hybrid buffs killed the game!
Redoing the honor system (re)killed the game!
Burning Crusade killed the game!
Flying killed the game!
10 man raids killed the game!
25 man raids killed the game!
Badge gear killed the game!
Dailies killed the game.
Death knights killed the game!
.....
And now there are already claims on various features, or lack thereof (see path of the titans) of Cataclysm that will kill the game! You are also guaranteed to find requests of pre-whatever servers for any entry in the list above.

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 5:06PM Deadalon said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
You kinda forgot to mention the thing that really killed WOW...

Arenas and PVP balance took away alot of the PVE enjoyment in WOW. It has also turned the classes into many fragments of exactly the same thing. Arenas took it to far and instead of allowing Blizzard to balance content around intresting PVE encounters... they had to tone down the unique features of each class - meaning that in the end - every PVE boss is just tank - dps - and heal... again and again and again... other talents do not matter anymore cause the entire game is balanced on these 3 things.. for a 3 man PVP arena.....

Even Blizzard has adimitted that they took the Arena idea to far and it put to much emphasis on class balance.
Reply

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 5:15PM Brianna Royce said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Let's try this again, replying to bdew this time! Hehe. You're right that "vocal groups" often claim the game died after certain changes. But UO is an odd case. Subscription numbers actually improved after UO:R (Trammel), which for a game several years old (with hefty competition from EQ) suggests that open PvP was the problem all along. By contrast, right after AOS (an overhaul comparable to SWG's NGE) was launched, subscriptions declined dramatically. Sure, AOS didn't kill the game like some people say, but it wounded it heavily. UO is still alive, but it's not thriving.

Interesting that you note Siege Perilous. You're right; SP was intended to be a retro shard. But it's not identical to pre-Trammel UO. The additional restrictions on travel spells and a crippled economy make it more of a hardcore shard than a true old-school shard. It's neither fun nor nostalgic, and that's why it's empty.

Mythic apparently believes that a true retro shard would do well; they've been toying with the idea for the past few months (after years of emphatic not-gonna-happens). Hmm!

-Bree
Reply

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 5:19PM Brianna Royce said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I give up. Comment system!!! *shakes fist*
Reply

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 4:43PM jimr9999us said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
AoC for PvE.

W:AoR for PVP.


Honestly, those are the 2 best AAA sub-based mmog's for their respective gameplay choices. And anyone who says otherwise hasn't played either lately. Great communities, polished gameplay, and most importantly: fun. The only shame is crafting. Someday someone will hit the trifecta. I'm in no hurry...it's a young genre.

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 4:56PM Deadalon said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
I wonder how much Funcom payed the OP for the big letter quote there... AOC is a very poor PVE game based simply on the fact it is unable to maintain content at same rate as other mmos are doing atm. Not to mention the fact that to balance the game around PVE with this many classes... Is a joke !

Now... OP.. be a good pal and tell us how much you were paid for quoting this.

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 5:25PM Jef Reahard said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You got me.

I think (it's hard to count when the stacks of coin are this high) that it's somewhere in the neighborhood of eleventy billion dollars. Also some stock options and a date with the girl who inspired Casilda.

Oh and a Ferrari. Yep. Black. With a wireless connection so I can play AoC on the go.

I'll tally up the totals for you later this week, as the payoff perks are still rolling in.
Reply

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 7:18PM Deadalon said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Well - maybe you can answer how Funcom is going to handle the issues I talked about ? Less content than the rival MMOs cause of small dev crew (seems to be even smaller now after the expansion). Balance and uniqeness of classes ? WOW has 10 classes now and is really strugling to keep them anything else than copycats of each other. AOC is not even trying since the game is built around some crappy shield system that only works for some of the classes anyway.
Reply

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 11:44PM Lateris said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Dead why are you always such a jerk?
Reply

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 5:44PM Seffrid said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Drat, now you've got the Funcom Ferrari, Jef, they can't put it in the cash shop! I was banking on that for my next car upgrade...

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 5:46PM Seffrid said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@jimr9999us: Whilst I agree that AoC is a very good PvE game and among the top few, it isn't by any means the best not least because it has virtually nothing to do outside of combat. The crafting is far too restrictive. LoTRO and EQ2 are much better balanced games overall in my view, as indeed is WoW but AoC does follow them.

Posted: Jun 27th 2010 8:29PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If you're the type of player that insists that well made PvE content will last the playerbase indefinitely or that players themselves in a cooperative based game never wanted to try to kill another player, then there's nothing in this post for you to see, so you're free to move along.
However if you're understanding that even the best PvE content has it's limits and are open to PvP but not sure what role it plays to fill in that gap then maybe you can find some gems of wisdom here.

The truth of the matter is that PvE itself is flawed, from a developer's point of view. It takes an extremely long time to craft beautiful PvE dungeons and intricate questlines, but it only takes a short time for the community to consume said content and thereby development dollars. Now the original way around this is to make the PvE content so insanely difficult that players themselves will either never see it, or will virtually kill themsevles over seeing it. That didn't really bode well for either party. PvP on the other hand is a type of "player created" content in which players battle each other, every single mini-game will play fresh and differently from the next, new strategies are being developed and countered, and it's fairly cheap to maintain compared to PvE content, and lasts much much longer.

Secondly saying that PvP causes people to fight more then in PvE is a gross misconception. In fact the opposite is more true if you think about it. In pure PvE games players have found ways to try to kill each other, either through training mobs through player camps, or pretending to help a player in a dungeon and maliciously abandoning them to die. Like a kettle that has a hole to release the steam before it explodes, organized PvP is a method of allowing players to vent their natural frustrations against other players in a civilized manner without resorting to such childish behavior that ruins players PvE. For those few people complaining about being griefed by other players in a FFA server/game/contested area, did you not read the signs when you entered said place? I really can't help you with that.

For a lump summary, a NEW MMO that focuses EXCLUSIVELY on PvE, is only going to be marginally successful compared to a NEW game that focuses EXCLUSIVELY on PvP.

If you really want to get WoW numbers, you're either gonna have to make crud like Farmville, or actually make a good Triple A title that has both quality PvE and PvP aspects in it.

Breaking News

Breaking News

Massively-that-was


Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW