Trending Games | Elder Scrolls Online | ArcheAge | WildStar | EverQuest Next

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,857,231 Users Online:0
Games:742  Posts:6,242,619

Show Blog

Link to this blogs RSS feed

MMORPG.com Staff Blog

The staff of MMORPG.com gets together to bring you some behind the scenes insights on stories, the industry and the site itself.

Author: staffblog

Contributors: BillMurphy,MikeB,garrett,SBFord,Grakulen,

Community Spotlight: Would You Play a Fully PvE MMOG?

Posted by MikeB Thursday February 18 2010 at 2:37PM
Login or Register to rate this blog post!

This week’s Community Spotlight focuses on the thread “Would you play a 100% PVE MMO, No PVP at all?” by user Aguitha. In the original post, Aguitha wonders how viable a fully PvE MMOG would be, and polls the community on whether or not they would play a fully PvE MMOG with no PvP offering whatsoever:

“And please give the reasons for your answers. Personally PVP has never been my cup of tea. It's not that i never tried, i just dont feel any sense of accomplishement fighting others peoples for what really ? Bragging rights ? There is already TONS of pvp game out there, mostly shooters, why does every MMO that comes out MUST have some sort of PVP in it ? Do you think we could have a succesful MMO without the PVP aspect ?”

Shamarou says he would definitely play a fully PvE MMOG, adding that while PvP does encourage some positive behavior, it brings out lots of negative behavior as well:

“For sure i would play PvE only. I don't neccessarily like the attitude that is getting round that pvp is be all and end all of an mmo. While it does encourage interaction of players which is great. It also encourages such things as griefing. The problem i see with some of the games today is that they try to do both and dont really succeed at either. If a game came out that was purely PvE but you need the help of others to complete certain tasks such as healing or even trading it would be better than trying to do both and failing at both. Also the probs with pure PvE is the storyline that runs through a game, they would need to get that right to keep interest as well as reasons for going to raid dungeon X.”

Talthanys presents a very principled stance against fully PvE MMOGs:

“No, I wouldn't.

I was, at first, a very PvE person. My first MMORPG was UO, and I shied from PvP and embraced the PvE. As a roleplayer, I mistakenly believed PvP and RP could not exist together. The formation of Trammel seemed to bear this out, but I was wrong. RP is drama, it is conflict, it is overcoming obstacles. So, I've come to believe that you cannot have true, meaningful RP without the possibility to PvP. Especially in mideval settings/games where very often might indeed make right. Essentially, the two playstyles are married as ideals, though we can all admit that there is no existing ideal.

But, RP philosophies aside, not having PvP in any form (open or instanced, FFA or restricted) seems artifical to me. A little bit of the world dies without competition on that level, without that style of freedom and choice and opportunity. I like pitting my ability against another thinking, breathing person as much as I love hoisting a tankard of ale with clanmates in a RP tavern.

Yes, PvP is a playstyle that attracts a certain type of crowd that are there to do nothing other than grief.

They aren't RPing villains or murderers, not really. They are simply there to grief. But the wonderful part is, it attracts other types as well. Honorable and empathic people (at least in-game). Having a game that is completely PvE denies potential nobility among the refuse, it buries that diamond in the rough, and stifles the world in which the game is set. To some, these pros do not outweigh the cons.

To me, they do.”

Greenie offers some insight on the pitfalls of a fully PvE MMO, at least from the perspective of what MMO PvE resembles today:

“I would not enjoy an MMO that was pve only. At least I don't think I would. PvE just does not bring a huge rush of excitement, although for it's social aspects I do love it. After a while though, it becomes very easy to go into "farm" mode.

When it comes to pve and playing with friends, I think I'll have more fun on a console game with a storyline going and me and a friend trying to work our way through the game, similar to when the Playstation first came out and Resident Evil 1 was released.

When it comes to an MMO I want pvp that feels like I am affecting the environment/world if even only temporarily. My love for DaoC's RvR in it's glory days has not been surpassed yet. Currently I am playing EvE but have not ventured into low sec and started pvp'n yet. When I find a good corp then I'll attempt that avenue. Very much looking forward to Earthrise though.

Basically, without pvp I just don't feel like a game can be entertaining long enough that I can justify paying for it. The storyline/movie footage from a console game is much more entertaining and loot grinds do not interest me.”

Greenie’s comments remind me of the many players who figure out WoW’s content and then put it “on farm.” It eventually simply becomes a matter of going through the motions. Does this discount PvE from being able to stand on its own? No. But I would agree that there would definitely need to be some innovations made to make it interesting and compelling longterm if it were the only thing players could participate in. I don’t think the raid to gear, gear to raid cycle would quite cut it.

Of course, how could we have this discussion without mention of FFXI? Bloodaxes showers Square Enix’s MMOG with praises for its PvE offerings:

“Yes I would because I love games were I don't have to see whinings and kids spaming in chats how hardcore or l33t are they.

FFXI was a great example of a pve mmo with a rich storyline were some of the endgame was getting to know some of the lore of the game with cutscenes it was great imo but I know some wouldn't like them because you don't get fat loots..

Hopefully FFXIV will be a better game then XI. “

FFXI does certainly stand out as an MMOG that has pretty much stood on its own with really only PvE on offer, and given the game’s success, I would say many players would definitely play a fully PvE MMOG. In fact, Square Enix is counting on it! With Final Fantasy XIV set to release this year, the developers at Square have not been shy to admit that like FFXI, FFXIV will focus almost if not completely entirely on PvE. So if you fall into this crowd, keep your ears perked for developments on FFXIV!

Personally, I’m not sure I could play a fully PvE MMOG, as I feel I need a purpose for all my progression whether it be skills or gear etc. That purpose, at least for me, is often using it to triumph against other players, so I admit I am a bit of a PvP junkie. I won’t completely dismiss the possibility, however, as I intend to check out Final Fantasy XIV as well.

Could you see yourself playing a fully PvE MMOG? Let us know in the comments below!

Paragus1 writes:

FFXI is probably one of the most understated MMOs around.   It's a game my guild has gone back to time and time again, and in my opinion is the best pure PvE MMO on the market.   It offers the old school group oriented gameplay and is more challenging than a lot of the MMOs out today.   That challenge leads to a higher sense of satisfaction, and a community that is superior to most MMOs. 

Given how long the game has been out, it has an absolutely staggering amount of content.  You'd be hard pressed to find a better PvE game than FFXI especially given how cheap you can find a box collection with all the expansions.

Thu Feb 18 2010 3:14PM Report
Inktomi writes:

 Hell yeah paragus. I just picked up the ultimate collection at Gamestop for $15 bucks! FFXI was my first MMO and I am returning to check out some of the new content and classes.

Yes, I would play a full pve game, as long as its fun. FFXI was good for awhile and it wasn't until I got caught up in the wow hysteria as when I left FFXI. 

So now I have at least 2 hours of installation and updates ahead of me....

Thu Feb 18 2010 3:18PM Report
Evasia writes:

Ive played 3 months FFXI becouse of some friends ask me, man was i mistaken terible game just terible and the fact that it had no pvp.

This was in time when we played on a japanese server years ago pc version that was.

I can't immagine a mmo without pvp so NO is my answer for me its boring when there is no pvp in a mmo.

Thu Feb 18 2010 3:40PM Report
Frobner writes:

I have been waiting very long time for a full PVE only MMO.  A game where the ablites of the characters can be balanced for PVE encounters ONLY - meaning more varieties and some unique abilites. 

What this comuntiy spotlight should really be asking is - WHy is there no PVE only MMO out since the mmo gerne is all about creating "niche" games ?  The answer to that is easy... Its more expensive to create that content than to create a PVP content.  Thats the only reason why we dont have PVE only games.   But those developers to focus on PVE and do it right (WOW - LOTRO) are still the giants of the genre.  

The only thing that destroyed WOW was the Arena system.  Even WOW developers have said that publicly.  It turned the game into endless baltte of balance - instead of creating more and more unique things for the gamers to play with. 

Thu Feb 18 2010 3:40PM Report
Ezhae writes:

The biggest issue i see with pure PvE mmo is how different it would be from singleplayer game with multiplayer co-op mode? Eventually you will reach the cap be it lvl or skill, from there its just farming, for gold, for drops, you log on at evening just to go for a trip into group content or a short RP session (which is rare enough to not consider it viable option for non-pvp mmos). Once you reach the ultimate peak of your character developement the game becomes nothing more than chat room with fancy visuals while you wait for expansion/content patches.

PvP, as much as it brings a lot of moaning, whining and 'QQ' is still something you can usually just jump into whenever you feel like, something to do, that in theroy never will end untill there are other players and each fight can be different (not much different but always).

Thu Feb 18 2010 4:01PM Report
Warhawck writes:

Yes I would play a pve only mmo. As it is most mmo's are 90% pve anyway so to me it would be no loss if there was no pvp.

Thu Feb 18 2010 4:02PM Report
MacAllen writes:

I would absolutely play PvE-only games.  It would be like playing Mass Effect 2 with friends.

This is almost a religious question in how diverse and passionate the playerbase is.  Those who enjoy PvP can't comprehend why anyone would play a game without it.  Those who enjoy PvE see all the negative things that PvP brings.

I will tell you this, MMO's that are 99% PvE (WoW PvE servers, for example) are FAR more successful than games that are 99% PvP (Shadowbane).  The PvP-only market is a small subset of players who very rarely even like each other.  They're the folks who go from FPS to FPS, changing games every 3 months as new ones come out.  They don't build community, they don't socialize outside their clan, they're there to compete, win, and seek a new challenge.

PvP does not build a good MMO, it can't, by definition.  PvP seeks to destroy community.  It makes great games (Love the CoD series, for example), but you don't chat in those games, you shoot people in the face, pwn noobs, teabag.  Competition does not breed community, nor does it breed massive sales.

One of the many reasons Eve doesn't have, nor will it ever have, millions of accounts, not until the % of PvE in the game rises dramatically.  Again, not a bad game, a great game actually...if you enjoy PvP.

Thu Feb 18 2010 4:29PM Report
eric_w66 writes:

EQ1 was PvE only for the most part. AC1 as well. Trammel for UO. PvE only games have been very successful. If you removed PvP servers from WoW, it'd still be nearly as popular (consentual PvP areas and battlegrounds to me do not make a game "PvP").

MMO design went downhill with everyone trying to focus on PvP which is a bizarre thing to do considering how it fails almost every time (even Eve has issues with it, trying to get people to "participate" in it is a driving goal it seems at CCP, yet 70% of the people still resist going anywhere in the danger areas).

Sure, PvP makes for player-created content for the endgame, but its boring endgame content. And MMORPG's do PvP extremely poorly.

Dear MMORPG Designers of the future: Leave PvP to consentual battlegrounds and arenas, do not base the entire game on it (and for heaven's sake, don't nerf PvE stuff to "fix" PvP stuff).

Thu Feb 18 2010 4:37PM Report
compwhiz writes:

No need for a big comment. I would definitely play a PVE only game. I'm tired on all the MMORPGs that try to be 'big' pvp games.

Thu Feb 18 2010 4:51PM Report
Gomezy3k writes:

I have played PVP games and as far as I can see most of those who love PVP are *** holes.  In one game, the PVPers lurked  around waiting for new players so they could get their rocks off killing some newbie who stood no chance.  And then they stood around and trash talked about how bad they were.  If all I wanted was to spend my time in combat I would play Mortal Combat or some other stupid similar game where all there was to do is fight.

When I play, I want to be able to interact with others without having to worry if they are going to attack me every time I turn around.  I want a game as close to the Pen and Paper Role Playing game as possible.  I want a storyline, quests, and a reason to be there other than just fighting some other player.

Thu Feb 18 2010 5:07PM Report
Athcear writes:

I would certainly play such a game... but I'd probably prefer if it had some PvP.  PvP is fun... as long as you don't take it too seriously.  A PvE-centric game with some PvP in it would be just fine.

To simplify, I would play an MMO with just PvE, I wouldn't play an MMO with just PvP.

Thu Feb 18 2010 5:21PM Report
rainmourn writes:

 Every new MMO that comes out, I go first to their PvP page to find out if the PvP system they have is consensual. If it isn't, I don't look any further at that game. My family all play WoW, but on a PVE server, and if other games don't offer a similar choice, I don't even try them out.

Why do I dislike PvP? I don't play MMOs for their social aspect or their dramas of conflict--I play because MMOs are more interesting than single-player games that have linear stories and definitive endings. I love virtual worlds with frequent content updates and evolving lore. I crave new territories to explore, more frill items to collect, better gear for my characters to obtain, and the warm fuzzy of a reliably perpetual world, but I don't want to look over my shoulder while inhabiting it for some rogue in the shadows, just straight ahead at the mobs I choose to battle.

My family plays together and we don't need groups to quest or do instances with since I multi-box. I'm not anti-social, just prefer being independently capable of achieving all our little in-game goals. I do enjoy the background bustle of a populated virtual world, but I don't want PvP in my games any more than I want someone tackling me unexpectedly when I shop for groceries.

I prefer those fleeting moments when I can help other players, so cooperation, not conflict, is the only interaction I would wish to engage in. 

Some achievements in WoW that reward one with fun seasonal titles or mini-pets require participation in PvP and I generally do them but with great loathing and lamenting. I would absolutely play a PvE only game that offered pretty much what WoW does, but player housing and a vanity outfit display option would be welcome differences.

I've no problem being labeled carebear, all four death knights that I play simultaneously are softies who'd rather cuddle ya than kill ya. MMO doesn't have to mean Massive Mauling Online, it can mean Merry Meet Online. =)

Thu Feb 18 2010 5:26PM Report
Dendro writes:

Yes I would play a mmog that was all PvE. Since I tend to be a causal player and also likes to solo. Set in the right theme/ip then I would have a home for my mmo addiction. For me games that focus on PvP and only put a little PvE in them tend to burn out fast, do to what I like to call MMO-ADD. Attention spans are in short supply with gamers now-a-days.

Thu Feb 18 2010 5:38PM Report
wootin writes:

I'd certainly go for a PvE-only game. My primary consideration there is - how smart and tough are the mobs? I am not into grinding, I'm into the proverbial "good fight", plus a lot of enjoyable discovery.

You can do some really intense AI stuff in games nowadays (Enemy Territory-Quake Wars' bots are very, very smart, for instance). But server horsepower is an issue. I really wish they could tie into the clients to borrow CPU cycles when they need to for good AI :(

In addition, unless the game is fully PvP, and by that I mean no PvE content at all, PvP is just lame when mixed with PvE. You either have to nerf the crap out of PvP to let PvE'ers go about the business of playing the game you built,  or you let the PvP griefers dominate and drive out everyone else until the game is a failure.

So imho, there's no middle ground. You either go full PvE with honkin' good AI, or you go full PvP and make it for meaningful objectives.

Thu Feb 18 2010 5:44PM Report
cloverlief writes:

I would definately play pve only games, as a matter of fact I prefer the. FFXI, being one of the biggest, You play together and work together to accomplish goals. I have played many other games and even tried the pvp concept (even with pvp penalties) and it was just stupid, as well as got boring real fast. Although I do not object to special arenas or places not related to the game to try pvp with people when you want to. (Ballasta in ffxi, The Arena in Flyff) open PVP is a major turn off, and I typically leave the game shortly after I reach the PVP levels. Way too much abuse. Several cases where i worked very hard to have nice gear, only to have groups of roving pvper gang up on me to try to get my nice gear to drop to them, or I afk for a quick second only to find I was pvped while I was get water or something. I was so turned off that when I played Aion i loved the game, planned to buy it (preordered it as a matter of fact) during the open beta. I eventually found out the premise of the entire game which was great up until that point was to get in the Abyss and PvP with the other players, no working together to take down the bosses, or anything else, just pvp. At that point i cancelled my preorder and ended my time with Aion. I will not play a PVP primary game, I will almost always gravitate to PVE (if they want to include pvp in areanas like they do in most pve games, by all means I am all for that I actually will participate in them with friends to experiment and try things out to learn a lot about improving the play style of my character.

Thu Feb 18 2010 5:54PM Report
opusaug writes:

The OP seems to assume there is no such thing as a pure-PVE player in the first place. I've always avoided PVP, and take no small delight in denying other players the opportunity to be a bully. As implemented in most games, I find PVP senseless and worthless.

Thu Feb 18 2010 6:29PM Report
gingercakes4 writes:

I avoid the PVP as much as possible, myself, and would really love a game that is PvE.

Thu Feb 18 2010 6:37PM Report
jrworden1976 writes:

As one who has been playing MMO's for many years...starting with the MUD's I can honestly say I hate everything about PvP. Now I do play games with PvP oriented communitys only to talk with friends, rarely... if any do I paricipate in the "ganking", or "grief killing" that goes on due mostly to the fact it is unfair for the people who are trying to level there toons.

Thu Feb 18 2010 6:37PM Report
Heirojero writes:

I would definetly play a fully PVE mmo.  My favorite MMO of all time was FFXI which barely had and PVP content and when it did I avoided it.  Right now I'm playing Atlantica and you can clearly see a difference between PVE and PVP players.  PVP does offer some interaction with other players and most games out today are very soloable, what we need are more games like FFXI where the difficulty requires you to team up with other players to accomplish your goals.

Thu Feb 18 2010 6:48PM Report
Roseblood writes:

I would love to find a game that is pure pve.  The questing and the story is the most important thing to me.  I do adore Atlantica for the ability to ignore the pvp and focus on the questing and the helping other players.  It's a lot of fun to be able to help players by teaching them how to craft and share the monster info with them.

Thu Feb 18 2010 6:59PM Report
DSBHR writes:

I started in gaming in FPS games and moved to MMORPGs for fun and mainly due to cheaters/hackers in FPS games.  That said the PVP in MMOs just never grabbed me.  It seems it is only either ganking, or depends on class, or gear, etc. but not on how well a person actually plays the game...  a scrub who buys gold rules...

Much rather in an MMO have a great PVE experience to include community and exploration with solo and group content.  Crafting and economy are important.  I would also like to see more along the lines of persistant player housing with various items and enhancements than only equipable gear that most MMOs are limited to. 

 

 

Thu Feb 18 2010 7:07PM Report
Catdancer55 writes:

I am not sure a pure PvE game,  lovely as it sounds,would last.   The Environment would have  to offer a challenge, Quests would be creative, linear, and rewarding.  Your Races would have to be alligned no wars no conflict no nothing.  The MOB would not be a close relative of one of the "Peaceful" races. For some this would be a bore.

I hate unregulated PvP.  Battlegrounds and Arenas are ok  and at time rather enjoyable. Its the immature players that,  Without Honor, Kill and guard the body so they can kill and loot  over and over.  PvP should be Volunteery at best.

I will stick with what I know a mix.

Thu Feb 18 2010 7:15PM Report
qwerty60 writes:

Absolutely. As soon as I find out see a game has unconsentual PVP, that game is no longer on my list. SO tired of gankers.

Thu Feb 18 2010 7:22PM Report
oldwarrior writes:

I would love to see a pve game like wow , Enjoy running solo or just a few friends doing  quest .without pvp to worry about if they wont to pvp do it in arenas.

Thu Feb 18 2010 7:33PM Report
japo writes:

You bet I would.  I don't PvP...ever....in any game....so, where do I sign up for this game.

Thu Feb 18 2010 8:10PM Report
Samhael writes:

 I would. I have. I'd do it again. Most MMO's that have PvP favor to the folks that have lots of time to gear up.  I don't have that sort of time.  I'm more than a casual gamer but I can't manage more than 20-25 hours a week gaming at this point in my life (with a full time job, wife, and a kid).  Also, in a huge wide sweeping generalization, it seems like the people who talk the loudest in PvP games are the same ones I want avoid because of their abrasive personalities.

Thu Feb 18 2010 8:26PM Report
reef22 writes:

I would play PVE only mmo.  I don't really care for pvp and if I have to I could try to defend myself but it's over rated.

I recently canceled my subscription for Aion because of the pvp "problem".  I knew about the pvp when I went into it and I was fully prepared myself for the pvp side of the game BUT I don't like getting killed while gathering materials for crafting or simply walking around.  I don't want to constantly watch my back it's just too much. So I stopped playing Aion and I'm waiting for Final Fantasy 14 online now.

Thu Feb 18 2010 8:27PM Report
Dwarvish writes:

 Yup, in a heartbeat...if it was a good game its a good game!.

 If done well a pve encourages community because the griefers are either not playing or have adapted to the social aspect that anyone is a potential friend and allie.

  I play Aion and will PK but as a rule its after being attacked. It would be a better game if pvp were left to the Abyss or regular ares gave a pk/pvp choice. I've seen friends leave because they are tired of being 1 or 2 shotted by someone 10+ levels above them.

The Abyss...thats different. Go at your own risk which can be fun if you are in the mood but as someone alrady mentioned it rots to be out collecting or exploring having to look over your shoulder all the time.  Seldome is pk equal levels or 1 on one.

A good balance ( also mentioned) would be battlegrounds and arenas for pvp. 

Guild Wars had a great system. You could go guild vs guild, smaller groups or soloish ( with henchies). Its would prolly not be popular with griefers because you were fightine people at your level...skill counted !!!!

Thu Feb 18 2010 9:04PM Report
mlauzon writes:

I would play a PvE only game, because I am not a fan of PvP at all.

Thu Feb 18 2010 9:12PM Report
apallllo writes:

is there a such thing as an all PvE game if there is tell me about it i fking hate PvP

Thu Feb 18 2010 9:15PM Report
dhayes68 writes:

I'm not much of a pvp'er, and I find that the pointlessly overly antagonistic attitude of some pvp'ers detracts a lot from the game, nonetheless, I find an mmoRPg full of other people that absolutely precludes the possibility of hostilities between any of the players far too shallow and limiting to be truly enjoyable for my tastes.

But this goes towards a larger attitude I have towards mmos. I support most mmo dynamics that I don't particularly like because the inclusion of players in the game who may like those dynamics provides a far richer mmo game experience for all involved. I don't go in for crafting or playing the economy, but a game with weak or no crafting/economy doesn't appeal to me, because the players who do like crafting and playing the economy are fun to play with. What's disappointing is you see in these forums again and again, people arguing AGAINST the inclusion of game dynamics that would have no impact on them, merely because they don't prefer those dynamics. Its strikes me as self-defeating in that in the end, the narrower the focus the game, the shallower the community and game will be.

Thu Feb 18 2010 9:18PM Report
mszv writes:

I don't do PvP.   However, PvP is fine if I never see it -- perhaps a different server or something. 

I always thought that in GW, PvP pays for the game -- some people buy it because they like the PvP part.  That makes it good, PvP supports the gameplay I like,

So yes - PvP, good in that in increases game sales, as long as it's somewhere I never have to go.  i want a big full wonderful game with places to go, great story, comrades (sometimes) and people  around (sometimes) and no PvP.  I don't like hostility between players at all -- just not me.

Thu Feb 18 2010 9:53PM Report
BowWake writes:

I am quite FOR a PvE only MMO.

I don't like the kind of attitudes PvP beings out in others... and in me. I don't like how the constant quest for PvP balance negatively impacts PvE play.

A large part of why I don't like PvP is that I am generally not "sk1ll3d" enough to "run with the big dogs" which ends up with me being in the crowd who is spending more than half the time running back from respawns. After about an hour of that, PvP ends to become more of a chore than a way to enjoy gamepay.

My favorite game to date is Lod of the Rings Online, which is almost a pure PvE game, and where the PvP is against a "Monster-Player" faction, which is balanced against the PvE skills of characters. This leaves PvE skills unharmed by PvP balance, and means that te whole PvE game ca be played without EVER thinking about PvP (PvMP in LotRo...)

Thu Feb 18 2010 10:07PM Report
maankatje writes:

For me a world without  gankers would be heaven.  I've played  close to 20 MMOs now and the fastest way to get me to cancel an account is to rez me in the face of a ganker. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind instanced PVP where I know what I'm getting into when I walk in the door, but unfortunately PVP seems to bring out a certain type of immature behavior in people.  I pay good money to have fun with intelligent hard gaming  people.  I would happily forgo PVP if it meant that I never had put up with board level 50 slaughtering the noobs again.  A PVE only game that is well crafted can easily support a rich social environment and would suit me just fine.

Thu Feb 18 2010 10:27PM Report
Greyed writes:

Would I pay for a PvE only MMO?  Hell yes!  To me the two don't mix.  And it isn't like I dislike PvP.  When I PvP I play a game that is focused on PvP.  I don't go to a PvP game asking where the PvE content is.  I go to have fun duking it out with my fellow players.

I play PvE games to have fun coordinating with my fellow players.  I don't enter them asking where the PvP content is.

Focus on one thing and do it well.  Most of the MMOs could probably do quite well with PvE alone.  I'm sorry, but when you spend 2-3 real-life weeks levelling up in PvE just to get to "end game PvP!!!!" where the majority of your time you're PvEing to get the items to PvP there's a huge disconnect.  Why?  People who enjoy PvE will enjoy the ride, get to the end, and be pissed off that there's nothing for them.  People who prefer PvP will hate the ride to the end and see it as something to just get past to the real game.

We've had PvP only games.  We've had PvE games with PvP focused.  Please, just give us a PvE game where the live team can focus exclusively on the PvE content.

Thu Feb 18 2010 10:38PM Report
CleverLegion writes:

There is no such thing as "honor" and their is nothing "honorable" about a fair fight.  There is only winning and losing, that is the reality.  

If you don't like griefing, then get help and fight back.   Just like the bully in school, if you pop him back they will most likely find easier prey.  Fairly simple concept, but I guess it is easier to cry about it like an emo bitch.  Stop crying a figure out how to win.  

Thu Feb 18 2010 10:52PM Report
weirdtimes writes:

I would personally play a PVE only game for the basic fact that I enjoy FPS games, I play RPG to see content and Progress my character, whenever I feel like pvping I go play Call of Duty or something , but thats more of a personal thing than anything, im sure some will agree with me though, PVE rpg game would be nice, not have to worry bout your class getting nerfed because a pvper is QQing or vice versa, then the company can focus solely on pve and make it better, and then play RTS or FPS games to get that pvp craving out of the way, thats how I have mostly done it, and atleast keep a dueling system in if you ask me

Fri Feb 19 2010 12:48AM Report
Ayin writes:

  I would absolutely play PvE only games.  I play several right now, and they're great fun.  I have no desire to kill other players.

  The ideal MMORPG environment for me is one where I can go out into a game world and quest, advance my character, craft, or whatever else without having to worry about being killed at any time (that's not exciting, that's frustrating).  When I see another player, they're a potential friend.  The only thoughts that cross my mind are that they'll help me, I'll help them, or we'll ignore each other and go about our own business without worry.

  PvE can be successful.  Final Fantasy XI, Earth Eternal, and even Atlantica Online are some games I currently play and find their PvE to be enjoyable.

  A common complaint against PvE, is that the content will all eventually get used up, and then you've got nothing left to do.  There are several creative ways around that issue that some game makers have already begun to use.

  One obvious way is to release content patches frequently (I'd like to see once a month "episodes"), but that could easily be "consumed" within the first week each time, resulting in the same complaints just as fast.  So there need to be ways for players to influence the game world in meaningful ways.  Player versus Environment requires a dynamic environment to be interacting with.  So far the games I play haven't had this dynamic environment yet... that's the key element that I think will make the next PvE-centric game a success.

  Another issue with many MMO games is that they're grindfests (this is common in both PvE and PvP games).  In order to cover up a lack of content, they drag out every single endeavor in the game into boring, repetitive tasks.  This applies mostly to gaining levels and money.  Some games have taken strides to reduce these problems, but many still see these activities as "content", and players are getting tired of it.  There are better ways to address the issue, and the developers that jump on this will see great results, I believe.

Switching gears a bit, When you try to mix in PvP:

  PvP is only enjoyable by those who BOTH want to engage in the battle at the time the battle takes place.  Some people want battles to randomly happen to them while they're out gathering crafting supplies... I don't.  Someone killing a non-combatant isn't going to find some special challenge just because they're "living breathing targets."  If they don't want to fight, not even being geared to fight in some cases, what's the challenge in that?  That's like a max-level PvE player going into a newbie zone and killing the earliest enemy for a "challenge."

  So, many game makers have said "OK, fine.  No free-for-all, but we'll still have PvP content like Arenas, PvP zones and Duels." ... and I'd be fine with that too, but with conditions.

  Consequences of defeat should never be permanent.  Loss of equipment is never acceptable to me because in MMO games gear often takes a long time to acquire.  Games made specifically for PvP could bypass this by making gear easy to get, or simply make the acquisition of gear (and levels while they're at it) a non-issue.

  At no point should the abilities of characters be changed due to PvP combat balancing, while they're engaging in PvE combat.  Change the balancing for PvP-only scenarios and I don't have to deal with it.  Again, I'm fine with that.

  In the case of PvP zones, great, but don't force me to go into PvP zones for any reason except for PvP.

  I agree with what others have said about the attitudes of the PvP mindset, however.  This is the hardest issue to resolve with adding PvP to an MMORPG.  PvP works well when the only thing that lasts is your rank on a scoreboard and maybe some unlockable costume type content.  I don't think a persistent world based on PvE character advancement and item acquisition blends well with the PvP FPS-born mindset.

  As soon as you make players into enemies of each other, the entire dynamic of a game's playerbase changes.  People form into guilds for protection from other PKers, and many are only friends with guildmates.  An example situation: Need help with <insert anything that needs a group> and ask a random person?  Suddenly, instead of simply examining schedules to see if they have time to help you, some begin to think: "Are you in my guild?  If not, you're an enemy, prepare to die! (or not receive help even if I had the time)"

  The MMO world could use a good PvE game that really focuses on making it "players versus a dynamic environment that they can really have an effect on."  I'd love to see it happen, but I can live with what's available until then.

So,
PvE: Yes, please.
PvP: No, thanks.
PvE mixed with PvP: Not my ideal, but conditionally acceptable.

 

Fri Feb 19 2010 1:12AM Report
Unlight writes:

I've always found it kind of laughable how PvP is so often considered the pinnacle of the gaming experience by it's adherents.  PvP combat is generally over in seconds.  After which you get a little time out, then you pop back up to go at it again in the finest arcade fashion.  Those that are most effective at it are essentially "farming" their opponents since every possible move has already been mapped out with a counter-move, so it's really not all that different than what raiders do in memorizing encounters.

I've yet to see PvP pulled off in such a way as to make it at all engaging and worth the investment of time to excel at.  Some games have come close, but most settle for a never ending carousel pew-pew-pew-die-wait-respawn-pewsomemore.  Until developers start to give some thought to PvP and make it more than a glorified version of the coin-op Street Fighter, my money and time will be going into PvE exclusively.  It may have a finite lifespan, but at least it will likely surprise and amuse me until I've reached the end of it.  In PvP, there's sadly nothing a player can do that would surprise me, and that in itself is reason enough to avoid it.

Fri Feb 19 2010 1:19AM Report
UnsungToo writes:

Yeah, I'd play a PVE only, I usually only play the PVE parts of MMO's anyways.

Fri Feb 19 2010 1:57AM Report
Jdoki writes:

I play most MMO's PvE and prefer it that way.  I always try PvP, but I'm rarely successful - and find it best left to those who want to make a specific PvP build and get their jollies from pwning other players. 

The PvE vs PvP dynamic often leads to a certain amount of balance issues in an MMO, so has to involve extra work for the devs which could be better spent.

Fri Feb 19 2010 2:20AM Report
gkk1212 writes:

hell yes i would play it, although perhaps if they had a small dueling  area for the ones that wish to to try there gear out .

don't get me wrong i was a heavy  DAOC lolalist back in the day, still am but im tired of getting raped... cuzz im always the support healer... class!

Fri Feb 19 2010 7:13AM Report
Strap writes:

 I loathe PvP. Currently playing Earth Eternal which *only* has PvE. The thing is they plan to add PvP so this PvE-only haven is a temporary thing. Unfortunately.

I liked the sparring feature, as well as Monster Play in LOTRO, as a kind of middle ground. Does LOTRO have PvP? Hard to say yes, and hard to say no.

Fri Feb 19 2010 7:14AM Report
Vargur writes:

As a long-time DAoC player, I admit I enjoy PvP, but I believe the game must be balanced for it to be fun.

Unbalanced PvP in poorly designed areas is hell. I recall PvP in EQ where people camped zone lines and killed people before they had finished zoning. That was just awful. PvP in LotRO was added mostly as an afterthought, and suffered from it.

So, would I play a PvE only game? I'd rather play a PvE-only game, than a ill-designed PvP game. One year of AoC was enough for me. For me, the key to a well-designed PvE game would have to experience good fights without questing. In LotRO, I never got the chance to get to know many people because we just teamed up to do one or two quests, which lasted maybe thirty min, before we broke up to do other quests with new people. In DAoC, we grinded for hours with good fights and fun, and got to know other people. It is still my best experience to date.

Fri Feb 19 2010 7:51AM Report
mCalvert writes:

Theres already plenty of PVE only games. Champions online is an example. Sure you can go to an arena, but you can play the entire story, level up, and never have to pvp. Conan and other games have PVE only servers. I would not play games with no forced PVP because they are boring. Sure I play them for a a few weeks, then quit. Its simply not exciting. Id rather play an FPS offline or coop than a PVE only MMO.

Fri Feb 19 2010 7:58AM Report
bmorrison writes:

Another good example on a game that is more PvE focused is City of Heroes/Villains.  The PvP in that is limited to instanced arenas and 4 specific zones.  I also agree with the observation that PVPers tend to have a certain attitude

Fri Feb 19 2010 8:12AM Report
bmorrison writes:

Another good example on a game that is more PvE focused is City of Heroes/Villains.  The PvP in that is limited to instanced arenas and 4 specific zones.  I also agree with the observation that PVPers tend to have a certain attitude

Fri Feb 19 2010 8:12AM Report
capjlp writes:

I would play a pure PVE but then again I am not twelve so maybe my OP don't count

Fri Feb 19 2010 8:36AM Report
aurick writes:

 Honestly, this is a really stupid question because of how many games have come out that are fully PvE or might as well be.

 

  • FFXI has already been mentioned.  
  • CoH was fully PvE for a long time and got successful during that time.  In my opinion, they messed the game up when they added the arena and started rebalancing powers with PvP in mind.
  • EQ2 went years before they added any PvP beyond a separate server for those people who wanted it.  The game was designed for PvE, most of the servers were PvE and there wasn't anything like arenas or battlegrounds.
  • DDO is also what I would call a "pure" PvE game despite the fact that it does have special rooms  in the taverns for PvP.  That activity has no bearing on the game or character progression.  Classes were never designed for PvP and they've done nothing to change spells or abilities for it.
  • LotRO does have a kind of PvP element, but it is extremely marginalized in a single zone that you can't even get to until level 40.  There's never any reason to go there unless you want to PvMP.  On top of that, because it's PvMP they didn't have to do anything to the classes to balance for it.  The monsters were designed with fighting players in mind, but the classes were designed strictly for PvE. 

So there's a long list of games that have no PvP at all or have marginalized it in a way that doesn't affect PvE gameplay in any way.  People do pay for such games, and several of them are thriving.  So as I said in the beginning, the opening premise of this article really seems pointless.

 

Fri Feb 19 2010 8:49AM Report
Dainiux writes:

yes i would play... world with out war? Nice...

Fri Feb 19 2010 8:51AM Report
eddt writes:

Yes I most definitely would play a PVE MMO - I actually prefer it - have never really been a fan of PVP, because I've seen it used in an abusive fashion in far too many games!

Fri Feb 19 2010 9:18AM Report
Martijn28 writes:

Yes I most definetely would play a PvE MMO because being able to avoid PvP is one the criteria a MMO has to meet for me. I did play Aion recently and you can avoid it but not 100% and that was also part of the reason for me to quit, that and the lack of content.

My very first MMO was full PvP meaning that anyone at any time could attack you except for places like churches guild/personal houses and the depot(for obvious reasons) and you lost gear and 5% of your accumalated experience so dying could be very bad there.

Fri Feb 19 2010 9:38AM Report
Lamamoto writes:

Yes, depends on a good plot/story. Questing should offer more than, like kill xx of this , kill  xx of that. In most mmo's it's the lack, that most quest become boring grinding things^^

 

Fri Feb 19 2010 11:58AM Report
GrumpyMel2 writes:

Yes, I'd definately play a PVE only game. It's not that I entirely dislike PvP, it's simply that most MMO's don't do PvP very well at all. The only one that I can think of that does it well is WWII Online....and to me that's more of a semi-persistant FPS then an MMO.

When I want a PvP experience...I'll typicaly play a strategy game PBEM or an online shooter (Like the BattleField series). When I goto an MMORPG it's almost entirely for PvE.

Fri Feb 19 2010 12:05PM Report
rochrist writes:

There is no such thing as "honor" and their is nothing "honorable" about a fair fight. There is only winning and losing, that is the reality.

If you don't like griefing, then get help and fight back. Just like the bully in school, if you pop him back they will most likely find easier prey. Fairly simple concept, but I guess it is easier to cry about it like an emo bitch. Stop crying a figure out how to win.

 

Exhibit A illustrating why I avoid PvPers. Overwhelming percentage of asshats.

Fri Feb 19 2010 12:58PM Report
lynnara writes:

I am always looking for a good PvE game. There are so many ways to compete besides fighting each other. I wish developers of some of these mmos would grow some imagination, instead of basically copping out using PvP for endgame content. I also wish we'd get more stuff to do in mmos besides killing mobs and running lame errands for npcs.

Fri Feb 19 2010 12:58PM Report
ZoeMcCloskey writes:

My shortest possible answer is YES.  I don't mind having a couple games active at a time so I can always get my PvP fix elsewhere in another game :)

Fri Feb 19 2010 2:35PM Report
Dracondis writes:

As much as I despise PvPers (though not PvP itself) I wouldn't find a pure PvE game to be all that entertaining.  While I don't play any of the games that offer it on servers that require me to do it, I like the option to be there.

Mostly, I'd like to see a game actually do PvP right.  This would include properly engineered social and factional penalties added to make griefers lose valuable game elements so as to discourage griefing PvP, but encourage legitimate contextually-appropriate PvP.  Fighting outside your level?  You lose "Honor" for attacking people who don't stand a chance against you.  Killing merchants/quest-givers for other factions?  Heightened durability lose or an inability to heal/be healed.  Stay on target, guys.  Fight people your own level/gear scores, and quit making play suck for those who aren't your level/don't stand a chance against you.  It's a game, not a substitute for touching yourself.

But pure PvE?  No way.  You're missing out on a major competitive aspect of the game.  Choosing not to do it is one thing.  Not being able to do it at all is quite another.  Good against remotes is one thing.  Good against the living?  That's something else.  (points if you get the quote, MORE points if you saw it in theaters when it ORIGINALLY released)  PvE is only as good as the scripting for the Mobs.  It can only be so good until you can't tell the difference between a mob and another player.  If we ever get to that point, then the option between PvE and PvP will become meaningless.  That's the game I really want to play.

Fri Feb 19 2010 3:32PM Report
Lickitung writes:

My answer is YES.   I'd play an all PvE game.  Why does every game need to be PvP?  I'll agree that a overwhelmingly large percentage of PvPer's are asshats.  Every MMO I've played, there's been massive whining and moaning cause there was no PvP in the first few levels of playing.  Or they're whining about someone else cheating cause the other person was better at exploiting a system than they were.  Or the system sucks.  Or worse yet, they get bored of PvP and harrass people just trying to play the game or Role Play.

Yes, I went there and opened that box.  The age old debate of Rpers vs PvPers.  And this is all I'll say on it.  For all the PvPers that say Rpers harass them, going to thier servers, thier hangouts... I've never witnessed it.  But I've DEFINITELY witnessed a huge number of PvPers doing it to RPers.  Destroying the furniture people are sitting on, backflipping non stop or doing loud massive AoE's on people just sitting around and talking in Champions Online.  A team of Level 70's riding into a newbie zone and killing the quest npc's in WoW.  Spamming via broadcast how Rpers suck.  Spamming "World of Warcraft" via broadcast in Allods Online.

Seriously people... grow up.  "Popping the bully a good one" doesn't make him look for easier prey.  It makes him get his friends to gang up on you for revenge cause that's the PvPer mentality.  Practically every game out there has PvP in it.  There's plenty of games that are devoted to PvP.  Let people who just want to socialize or RP have thier own moments.

PS.  FFXI does have PvP in it... it's just not as readily available or done in the same fashion as other games.

Fri Feb 19 2010 3:40PM Report
mukin writes:

I used to not eevn look at a game if it didn't have hard-core PVP.  I liked the dynamic, 'doesn't act the say way twice' part of the game.  But my tastes have evolved.  Today, I'd happily play a game that is PVE-only. In fact, since I consider LOTRO a PVE-mostly game, and it's my current favorite, I'd say I do!  Why?  Story, depth, maturity and stability.  

Fri Feb 19 2010 4:04PM Report
BadSpock writes:

The biggest problems I see in MMO PvP are due to the very nature of the RPG and MMO aspect of the MMORPG genre.

RPG generally means stats, be they classes or skills or levels or the stats of your ship or sword... and as such, you will always have people who have more/better stats, and those with less/inferior stats. This disparity in stat values/averages when mixed with more "open" rule sets (like FFA) generally leads to an exponential increase in social problems like griefing/ganking.

Now on the flip side, more controlled PvP like battlegrounds with these RPG systems leads to the "race to the top and THEN PvP" mentality, where you have to level/skill up to max before you hop into the "real" game.

I've only seen it really work once, and that was in UO because the stats were meaningless. You could 7x GM in a week, and get enough skills at GM (grand master) in a day to be competitive. There were no stats on gear, so PvP became a matter of skill and preperation.

The other aspect of the MMO genre, the Massively Multiplayer part can have just as adverse of effects in an open world environment. No matter how "good" you are, if the other "side" has three times as many players, you'll still lose 99% of the time. It's an issue of numbers, which has always been a huge factor in warfare, and due to the technical limitations of our programming code and the output potential of our computers/consoles, you really can't (yet) have advanced enough physics / collision detection to allow a small band of players who are together and online to stand up to a massive force of other online players.

Alternatively, if you control the number of participants in an engagement, you reduce the over all level of strategy.

If you combine BOTH the negative RPG elements and MMO elements and try to create a PvP system out of them as games like Warcraft do, well.. you know how it is. The same can be said of EVE or any MMO, even UO (you could box in a player and prevent movement by surrounding them).

So all PvE? Perhaps if it was an open world sandbox with copious amounts of procedurally generated content and extremely advanced AI capable of building armies and territorial expansion/conquest etc to give the "illusion" of fighting a living, breathing enemy yet being able to force upon that enemy some rule and regulation to force honor and competition.

Fri Feb 19 2010 5:05PM Report
Gilnidor writes:

I would play a full fledged PvE MMO for sure. But it had to have a very good story and a really intriguing story to tell.

And of course it had to host some really cool features that I would like to explore may it be crafting, housing, guild events, guild accomplishments etc, etc.

That PvE MMO have to hold a very high standard and house some really unique features to keep me playing the MMO. So until that MMO is on the market I will wait and hope that it will be released.

Sat Feb 20 2010 5:37AM Report
gogogogone writes:

Full PvE with no console idiots?  Who can I give my credit card # to today? :)

Sat Feb 20 2010 2:00PM Report
dadown writes:

 Yes. I rarely engage in PvP and hate it when a game forces me into it. Purely optional PvP is ok, but its something I wouldn't miss.

Sun Feb 21 2010 12:57AM Report
quickman007 writes:

ya i would play a PvE only MMORPG.

Sun Feb 21 2010 12:36PM Report
Vemer writes:

Yes. Like many other i don't PvP in MMO game usually.

Sun Feb 21 2010 2:29PM Report
Totemthumper writes:

PVE > PVP

Sun Feb 21 2010 8:59PM Report
Gamefreek67 writes:

I would most definitely play a PVE only game. I have never been into PVP what- so- ever. I feel no satisfaction in killing another player. There is no real reason for PVP except to brag that you are better at it than others. I've tried it in many games and it  just doesn't feel satisfying to me. Most PVP in MMOs you can't loot the players corpse, so all you get is points on a leader board with either a ranking or title to go along with it. I play games, including MMOs for the storylines, quests, exploring and meeting new people who enjoy doing the same things in games that I do. Sign me up for this game because I'm ready to beta test and play it!

Sun Feb 21 2010 11:40PM Report
Thedrizzle writes:

Why not just play a single player game if you don't want real competition?   No I would not play a PvE only game, afteer fighting AI for too long grows stale and tiresome.  I play PC games for the competition MMO, FPS, etc. etc.  There is no ammount of immersion via story or game dynamics that an MMO can offer that a single player game can't.

If its RP, well then no MMO i have seen yet,(except Percival DAOC) has offered good RP potential. CO-OP games like NWN are the only way to go.

Sun Feb 21 2010 11:57PM Report
Hyanmen writes:

Single player games don't offer cooperation. 

Mon Feb 22 2010 5:37AM Report
gooseh writes:

ive always fealt the the pve was just something to keep you entertained and build your character up until you can pvp decently so no i would not play an all pve mmo if i wanted to do that ide go find a decent rpg and play co-op with some mates. But i do think that games shouldn't force you into pvp if you dont want to because it just gives the people who dont enjoy it feeling very sour as you can probably tell from many of the posts above

Mon Feb 22 2010 3:22PM Report
Kells writes:

Yup, I would play a fully PvE game. In fact, Vanguard: Saga of Heros does not have any PvP (if you don't can't consentual dualing).

Tue Feb 23 2010 12:18AM Report
jujdred writes:

 Absolutely!  I think the main reason this is a good idea for a franchise is because developers would be forced to focus on PvE content rather than attempting to implement PvP, PvE, and all the other Pv? combinations alot of current mmo's try to fit into their games to appeal to the 'masses'.  

However there is always a flipside and PvE seems to be pretty popular in the rpg genre market with hits like Mass Effect 2, Dragon Age: Origins, Fallout 3, and a slew of others I can think of that I have personally played myself.  Problem is that the current PvE rpg market is limited to buy, play, throw away/trade in games with not much shelf life.  I see on Steam all the time the resurgence of older titles and it mostly owes tribute to the lack of new meat.  

If I could pay a monthly fee for a decent Pve rpg title I would definatelyl do so just so long as the content was constantly updated and kept fresh without having to fall into the 'battleground/arena/open world ganking' situations I despise so much.

Wed Feb 24 2010 6:55PM Report
gnana58 writes:

Definately. I don't mind pvp and once in a great while will play alittle myself but I want to choose when to play pvp not have it forced on me.  It is those people who grief and camp that ruin the whole aspect of pvp play. In my opinion if it was designed like how GW has theirs sole and seperate from actual gameplay then it is not so bad . All the pvpers then can pvp till their hearts content.  The problem that arises from pvp is the ones who abuse it which then ruins it for anyone who either dont like pvp or are thinking about it. Leave pvp for pvp realms and create pve for those who dont like pvp.

As far as no substance to pve I tend to differ on that. I have pretty much played , WOW, AoC ,Warhammer ,EQ2, LoTR, Aion  and bunch of others with GW being my favorite at this time.  The substance comes from how the game is structured. Well structured game can do very well if pve only as GW has proven. I hope devs see that their is a huge player base out there who does not like pvp .

Wed Feb 24 2010 8:12PM Report
Reeper writes:

  PVE?, wasnt EQ1 98% PVE,  other then Faction in the Cities, Ogre couldnt play in High Elf cities and exc,  but a Rather succesfull MMORPG although limited in compatition, many players i believe are looking for that Again, but one thing I am looking for in a Game in a sence of Adventure, true Adventure, not paranoia, the one effect that a PVP game offers,...

      Vast areas to explore, Insane amounts of Content., pretty much done with the cookie cutter mmorp(gank)'s

Thu Feb 25 2010 7:52PM Report
JuggaloWolf writes:

ive been trying hard to find pve games it seem's to me pvp has tooken over in most online rpgs n' forces it on players i think pve and pvp should both be in a rpg for players that enjoy either one but keep the 2 apart from each other every player has there own taste in game play me im straight pve i enjoy the game itself quest killing monsters getting and upgrading gear and helping other players level or with there quest the way a rpg should be and rpg to me is a adventure game like a fantasy world / why i don't like pvp : it's pointless and takes away from the game n' makes it hard for new players to level or get anywere in the game and your always getting killed by the same person or mobbed by a bunch of pvpers it's stupid and has nothing to do with the game other then killing each other you take everything away from the game n' leave just killing each other n' what do you have ? a fighting game then it's like gta or mortal kombat 

Sun Feb 27 2011 4:00AM Report

MMORPG.com writes:
Login or Register to post a comment