Trending Games | Black Desert Online | World of Warcraft | Trove | Elder Scrolls Online

    Facebook Twitter YouTube YouTube.Gaming
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:3,302,598 Users Online:0

Show Blog

Link to this blogs RSS feed Staff Blog

The staff of 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: PvE Players and Large Scale PvP

Posted by MikeB Saturday March 10 2012 at 4:30PM
Login or Register to rate this blog post!

In this week's Community Spotlight we're highlighting the thread, "PvE players: large scale PvP more tolerable?" by Mardukk. In the thread, Mardukk wonders if PvE players find large scale PvP more tolerable than instanced or e-Sport PvP:

As a PvE player almost exclusively I was wondering what other PvE players find to be the more tolerable form of PvP.  I definitely feel that PvP with a larger purpose would appeal more to the PvE player rather than arenas and e sport PvP.

If what I suspect is true, why do developers continue to focus so much on E Sport/Arena style PvP when they could possible grab a more significant piece of the pie with more focus on large scale PvP?

  I could even so myself subing to a Shadowbane type game if there was a large common goal to work towards rather than killing each other over and over for nothing.  Do you think GW2 would fill this Shawdowbane type void?

So, what's the verdict? Read on to find out!

Master10K agrees with Mardukk's assertion:

Yeah I do think for PvE players, a lot of them, can only find good large-scale PvP to be tolerable or even actually fun. It reminds me of my guild in Rift. We were pretty much a progression raiding guild and a lot of them never really touched the PvP in that game (even though we were on a PvP server). Then one night our raid was called off and about a dozen of us were just there with nothing to do. So we started doing Raid Rifts, until the enemy faction crashed the party and it escalated into some large-scale, really fun, open world PvP.

Give PvE'ers a way to experience large-scale PvP that requires tactical play, rather than individual player skills and make it accessible. Chances are they will enjoy it, especially if there's something to gain. That is what I see with Guild Wars 2's World v World. Just today I watched TotalBiscuit's Mailbox, which had some WvW in the background, which really shows  how easy it is to get together with some people and the potential of having fun. Also players are "fighting for their server", so I do see some PvE'ers getting stuck in some of that PvP, even if it's just to see what it's like.

acidblood (also a PvE player) prefers large scale PvP due to the 'freedom' of it:

I'm mostly a PvE player, but yes, large scale PvP is definitely more of a draw than Battlegrounds and especially Arenas, mainly because there is a lot more freedom too it... Arenas (in WoWs case at least) are just killing the other team, and in most cases the outcome it decided by gear / classes before the match even begins, and Battlegrounds while fun for a while get increadable repedative, and in most cases the fastest way to win is to avoid PvP... both of these types of PvP are also generally about Points Per Hour, which to me is not fun.

My next MMO is definitely going to be GW2, and one of things I'm most looking forward to is World v World; I doubt I'll even set foot in the Arenas / Battlegrounds.

Arachneus1 asserts that if the OP's suspicions are true, Guild Wars 2 will be able to cater to both types of players:

In reply to a post earlier, Guild Wars 2 will have the best of both worlds.  Competitive e-sport arenas that makes everyone wear the same gear and WvWvW open-world PVP (which is a large scale arena with limited players that can enter) In fact the open-world pvp in guild wars is competitive as well as each server is ranked on a ladder just like teams in the e-sport arena mode.  So even casual players get that competitive edge and wants to help bump their server up the ladder by going for certain objectives.

Also balance is in the open-world to as every level 80 item is the same regardless what difficulty dungeon you get it from or open-world boss that drops.  Gear is cosmetic only at an equal level so skill is the only factor and balancing out skills in a game like this.  Of course it will take some time before everyone is max level to balance the gear out in the server arenas.

I think Guild Wars 2 will make PvP in this genre bearable to everyone and I think more should take note of this especially that they should remove the whole gear factor...this makes it easier to balance the game's class skills if everyone is the same.

I've always enjoyed PvP, so I can't really speak to the OP other than to say I am fine with the idea of both. I do prefer large-scale PvP, simply because I enjoy the idea of being part of some larger effort with potentially meaningful repercussions for our conquests. eSport PvP is about winning to say you're the best -- it has no potential affect on the game world. The same, generally, goes for instanced PvP. They're fun diversions, but MMOs are best suited to large scale PvP. It simply plays to the genre's strengths.

Shana77 writes:

I've always enjoyed large scale pvp much more then small scale skill based team pvp. For me its all about immersion, being part of a massive war but also the more casual nature of large scale pvp. 


I'm amazed that game companies have not offered more to create such options. Look at how fondly people think of DoAC and look at the enthausiasm for WvW in guild wars 2 and then figure out that aside from warhammer which failed for different reasons no other game has offered an attempt at large scale pvp in the 7 years since wow came out. So many missed opportunities. 

Sun Mar 11 2012 6:39AM Report
Terranah writes:

Some people will not like pvp because of the competitive nature, no matter how it is packaged.  Others like to compete but with themselves not others, and again no matter how you package it they will not be interested.  There is also less control in a pvp situation as opposed to pve.


For myself, I tend more toward the pve side of games these days.  I don't like feeling out of control of my character and there is a lot happening in pvp that is out of my control.  First off, I tend to be grouped with peeps in pvp I don't know, and secondly with all the roots and stuns I don't feel like I have the control that I want.


As far as what kind of pvp I prefer when I choose to do it, that depends on the game.  I loved pvp in Precu SWG.  Guild Wars I didn't like the pvp.  WOW was ok but I never got heavily into it.  Warhammer world pvp and instanced pvp were fun.  APB I loved.  So maybe I tend more toward open world pvp when I do it but instanced is fine as well.  

Sun Mar 11 2012 8:02AM Report
uncletoma writes:

The true answer is: we need DAoC2.

It means: like DAoC but without grinding (only quests, like EQ/WOW/LOTRO/etc), only one epic armour, then dungeons for PvE guys and frontiersFTW for PvPer. And Darkness Falls2.0 can be entered by PvPers: no cowards required (lol)

Sun Mar 11 2012 10:05AM Report
Lanfea writes:

i don't like pvp in the most mmorpgs because ...


1)  i do not have the time to 'grind' me a suitable pvp- gear which makes me equal on the battlefields. rift had this problem, sw:tor does it have now that without the time and the patience to do pvp to get the necessary gear to compete with others, youre only a victim. thats no fun.


2) the stealth ability which can be used by some classes leads to less teamplay. the majority of players who choose a class with stealth ability for pvp are only looking on their statistics and archivements. depending on the game you can also say: the more stealth classes are in your team the more likely you will not win the match.


3) its nearly impossible to gurantee a balanced pvp if you use the same abilities and skills a game offers for pve for pvp. all these 'crowd control' spells and self healing abilities are killing the fun.

Sun Mar 11 2012 12:11PM Report
adam_nox writes:

I like large scale because it means sometimes the battles are unfair, and this presents opportunities whether it's unfair for my side or for theirs.  I know that seems strange, but I think that's actually a cool aspect as long as it's not unfair for one side consistently.

Also, large scale allows me more freedom to do what I want instead of being scrutinized by a 'team' of half-wit hardcores.  It allows attention to be off of what I'm doing, which I like to sneak around, pick targets carefully, take my time, maybe watch from the sidelines for a while, that sort of thing.

When WoW first came out, argent dawn, an RP pve server, had probably more world pvp than any mmo server in any game ever.  It was constant day and night every day until BGs came out, then it died.  Southshore, tarren mill, that bordertown on the other continent I forget, the elf city.  Sorry I forget names after all this time, astranaar maybe? 

Always fighting, always starting fights by killing their npcs until half the server was involved.  It was a hell of a time, a drama filled time, but still great.

Sun Mar 11 2012 12:21PM Report
tordurbar writes:

I am a solo pve player but I did enjoy Tarren Mill in vanilla WOW. Yes I would like open world pvp if it was voluntary. However, I don't believe that open world pvp is viable. Most mmos are two faction and one faction ALWAYS has more (and/or better) pvp players. As much as I loved Tarren Mill the Horde eventually won almost every time. The best example why open world pvp will not work is Ilum in SWTOR. Open world pvp is fun until you are getting ganked all the time. Unless you can overcome the balance issues open world pvp then it is a nice idea but not my cup of tea.

Mon Mar 12 2012 6:53AM Report
Angier2758 writes:

I'm pvp player... but my best memory was a massive 3 sided **** storm of a fight in midgard's area....

Somehow hibernia who was the smaller of the 3 sides... won.  I know as soon as someone came after me I ran into enemy ranks and then back out figuring as a celt with all the lag I probably looked like I could be on any of the 3 sides.  Silly or not it worked.


Mon Mar 12 2012 2:44PM Report
Ergload writes:

I like large scale PvP where the PvE people can be meatshields or extra DPS for the core PvPers, especially during faction versus faction raids. I think Achaea has that system down best.

Mon Mar 12 2012 3:52PM Report
darkhalf357x writes:

Im a PVE'er almost exclusively, but would tolerate a large PVP scenario.  It would remind me of my Star Wars Battlefront days which I was addicted to back when it was popular.  Looking forward to see how GW2 implements this model.

Mon Mar 12 2012 7:52PM Report
livewen writes:

as a once timid exclusively pve player. I thought it was

violent and vicious to hunt other "people" as a means of gain to be

very evil and murderous.

Now that i converted to pvp as a function of the game I find it

my duty to train the other side to a non-bot construct  living breathing entity to  do my bit of good and love (be it tough)

after all nobody is getting killed in real life in intention. I love you for

those who attack me and your wise and good counsel

Livewen Hallvean.


P.S. maybe real war can be the same.

Tue Mar 13 2012 10:08PM Report writes:
Login or Register to post a comment

Special Offers