Personally I usually prefer either but not both, because general MMO mechanics dont really work for both.

The PvE trinity system works horrible in PvP while twitched based combat systems lacks something for the PvE.

GW2 is a step in the right direction but we really do need some new mechanics to make both work perfectly.

Originally posted by Vesavius

Role based PvE based play for me in the long run.

I don't need PvP polluting my MMORPG... If I want to enjoy that I go to a FPS game that does it well and is actual fun.

 

Same with me. I'm only for PvE in mmorpgs. For PvP I'll go play LoL or even COD.

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by Kiljaedenas

Not a good one though. Yes, it could be possible to make a purely PvE MMO with a strong economy but to help prevent massive inflation of everything or rampant, uncontrolled creation of "stuff" and money you would need destructable equipment, no NPC vendors to sell stuff to and a fully player-run industry for everything in the game except for the basic tools to at least get started (i.e., Eve's system). I know of ways that this could be done, but PvP or not it would still have to be a much harsher PvE environment than pretty much anything that has been seen in the standard themepark MMOs. Personally I think that could be a very awesome game and I even know some ways how it could be implemented, but good luck finding a game producer that would have the balls to do that.

I'm sorry, but when people talk about PvP, they're not talking about competing with other players economically, they're talking about ganking, backstabbing losers who go around and kill other players for fun.  You can absolutely have a player-driven economy in an entirely PvE game. 

Dude...that's exactly what I was saying. Yes, it is possible to have a player run economy in a purely PvE game, but you would have to have a very different PvE system with DESTRUCTABLE player equipment, otherwise inflation and item creation gets out of control in a real hurry.

Originally posted by Deivos

Originally posted by Kiljaedenas

Not a good one though. Yes, it could be possible to make a purely PvE MMO with a strong economy but to help prevent massive inflation of everything or rampant, uncontrolled creation of "stuff" and money you would need destructable equipment, no NPC vendors to sell stuff to and a fully player-run industry for everything in the game except for the basic tools to at least get started (i.e., Eve's system). I know of ways that this could be done, but PvP or not it would still have to be a much harsher PvE environment than pretty much anything that has been seen in the standard themepark MMOs. Personally I think that could be a very awesome game and I even know some ways how it could be implemented, but good luck finding a game producer that would have the balls to do that.

About the only part I can agree with is the need to balance money sinks and means to move currency around.

That however barely dents longterm inflation, and PvP does not really change much of that because most quotable PvP games actually prevent item degradation from PvP encounters (I think gw2 lets it happen though, but haven't seen the results of using a worn out item).

 

If you want to address economy you need finite resources, which most people will disagree with that being a part of a game on rinciple that unless you start getting socialist, hoarders will screw that up too. Fact is the only way for a digital economy to work is to indeed get a tad socialist and strongarm people into keeping the money/resources moving around.

 

As for the OP. I say both. I value what PvP brings to games at least in theory and I generally have most enjoyable moments from competitive shooters, so I have a fair assumption my preference of play lies in that field. However I am also not what I call a particularly competitive player, I prefer PvP mostly due to shortcomings in PvE challenge.

I do also however love the mechanics that PvE tends to entail and would like to see more game mechanics that ae not directly PvP but influence PvP implemented. Spore-like tools to tailor equipment, building, and vehicles using resources gathered to improve and modify them into custom machines. RTS type elements to give overarching strategy to player actions. Flow of resources for management of territories and support of players. There's many ideas that can be used to feed into one another.

It's a matter of concept and implementation though. I still look forward to a good implementation of such concepts.

As a response to that green part, you obviously missed the line where I said you would need a PvE system with DESTRUCTABLE equipment. For a good, in-depth player run economy where the players make nearly everything you can use, there needs to be a system in place where virtually all of that made stuff can also get destroyed if the player isn't careful, otherwise players would just create, create, create and glut the market with "stuff" that no one will buy. There could be not even the slightest scrap of PvP anywhere in the entire game but you'll still need this system to have a good economy.

A lot of MMO players that prefer PvE over PvP probably wouldn't want to play a pure PvE game that was this harsh, given what I've seen people complain about in this forum. I know EXACTLY how it could be made though, even down to the storyline and details of the item loss. I doubt any game producer other than CCP would be willing to take the chance on making something that different, but I would definitely play it if anyone did. 

I apologise.

The way it was worded seemed to imply that you were saying the only means without PvP would be to have an exceptionally harsh PvE environment ant most devs naturally shy away from, in which case PvP becomes in a sense a necessary evil for the economy.

I would repeat my comment in regards to the solution though.

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by VirusDancer

Originally posted by Cephus404

I hate PvP with a passion, I want nothing whatsoever to do with it, ever.  That said, so long as I can entirely ignore it, I don't care if people want to go do PvP somewhere I don't have to watch the childish dickwaving.

But given a choice, I'll take pure PvE with no PvP whatsoever.

So you're against games with an economy?

You can have an economy without people going out and hitting each other with swords, which is what you know we're talking about.

Try again.

It's Player vs. Player.  People are trying to undercut each other on price - buying up the product that's been placed cheaper so that folks will buy at the higher price - having the surplus bank to undercut the competition so they cannot stay in business - etc, etc, etc - it's PvP.  It's about hitting up the various spawns - whether mobs or nodes before other players can, faster they can, so that you've got the goods.

You said "no PvP whatsoever" - which would mean no economy.

All PvP means is that is a a player (or group of players) in competition against another player (or another group of players).  PvP takes many forms - it's not just about trying to stick each other with pointy objects.

That competition takes many forms in games.  There are many paths where players compete against other players without having to throw a single fireball.  Server firsts, achievement firsts, friendliest guild, largest guild, coolest looking outfit, most vanity pets, etc, etc, etc.

There are people that claim to despise PvP - that spend more hours in a day participating in PvP than the people that they rant and rave against....

Originally posted by Kiljaedenas

Dude...that's exactly what I was saying. Yes, it is possible to have a player run economy in a purely PvE game, but you would have to have a very different PvE system with DESTRUCTABLE player equipment, otherwise inflation and item creation gets out of control in a real hurry.

Sorry, not seeing how that type of economy needs to be any different depending on whether you have a PvP game or a PvE game.  In a PvE game, people are farming equipment from NPC mobs.  In a PvP game, people are farming equipment from other players.  In both cases, the equipment ought to be destructable to keep people from being able to sell it for ridiculous profits.

Originally posted by VirusDancer

It's Player vs. Player.  People are trying to undercut each other on price - buying up the product that's been placed cheaper so that folks will buy at the higher price - having the surplus bank to undercut the competition so they cannot stay in business - etc, etc, etc - it's PvP.  It's about hitting up the various spawns - whether mobs or nodes before other players can, faster they can, so that you've got the goods.

You said "no PvP whatsoever" - which would mean no economy.

All PvP means is that is a a player (or group of players) in competition against another player (or another group of players).  PvP takes many forms - it's not just about trying to stick each other with pointy objects.

That competition takes many forms in games.  There are many paths where players compete against other players without having to throw a single fireball.  Server firsts, achievement firsts, friendliest guild, largest guild, coolest looking outfit, most vanity pets, etc, etc, etc.

There are people that claim to despise PvP - that spend more hours in a day participating in PvP than the people that they rant and rave against....

That's not what anyone is talking about in this thread when someone brings up PvP.  The only thing anyone is talking about is combat-based PvP.

Come on, you ought to know that.

Originally posted by Cephus404

That's not what anyone is talking about in this thread when someone brings up PvP.  The only thing anyone is talking about is combat-based PvP.

Come on, you ought to know that.

That's kind of why that point is important.  A lot of folks will claim they are against combat PvP for reasons that they completely ignore while participating in other forms of PvP.  Folks need to take a honest look at why they do not like/want it, and then provide those honest reasons.  Where's the issue in that?

I see great value in having both PvE and PvP in the same game. It certainly makes for a lively community and gives folks a genuine alternative from whichever one they mostly spend playing. I voted both.

When they introduced PVP elements in Rift beta on PVE servers, people lost it. But I stood by them, if your game promises PVE, you better stick with your promise, some people (me included) do not like PVP in any form.

I completely respect people who like PVP, it's just not my thing you know, when pure PVE players say they don't want PVP, most mean it, which the Rift developers didn't understand at first, no PVP for PVE players means 0 PVP, not 1% PVP lol.

EQ was pure PVE, there were 2 servers of PVP iirc, and like 20 PVE servers, and they were all pure PVE, there was no PVP outside of a tiny arena in the bazaar that people used for fun sometimes. PVE is a style of play that should be respected like PVP, I never tell people who play PVP how they should play, so I don't think PVP players should have any say on a PVE server.

It depends on the game though, I don't go asking for a PVE server on a game that I know has PVP, but if the game has pure PVE servers, when they try to introduce PVP on those servers, it usually doesn't end well.

Originally posted by VirusDancer

That's kind of why that point is important.  A lot of folks will claim they are against combat PvP for reasons that they completely ignore while participating in other forms of PvP.  Folks need to take a honest look at why they do not like/want it, and then provide those honest reasons.  Where's the issue in that?

Clearly, nobody in this thread is talking about economics, only combat.  Derailing the discussion and trying to talk about something entirely different and only tangentially related isn't going to change the fact that most people hate combat PvP.

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by VirusDancer

That's kind of why that point is important.  A lot of folks will claim they are against combat PvP for reasons that they completely ignore while participating in other forms of PvP.  Folks need to take a honest look at why they do not like/want it, and then provide those honest reasons.  Where's the issue in that?

Clearly, nobody in this thread is talking about economics, only combat.  Derailing the discussion and trying to talk about something entirely different and only tangentially related isn't going to change the fact that most people hate combat PvP.

How does getting to the root issue of why they hate it derail the thread when that's what the thread is about?  It can't be because they do not want to compete with other players, because they most likely do compete with other players.

So many of the reasons given are things that happen on both the PvP and PvE side of things - and likely even happen more on the PvE side.

It's like asking a person why they don't like a certain type of food.  They give you all sorts of reasons why they supposedly don't like it - but all of those reasons are nullified by the simple fact that they eat other foods with similar qualities.  It's much simpler if they just give a straight answer.  I don't like peanuts.  I'm allergic.  Nice and simple.

When somebody gives an answer that doesn't make any sense - a dev is going to take that as an answer that doesn't make any sense....

I haven't seen PVP and PVE done both right in a game except for Pirates of the Burning Sea.

Pirates of the Burning sea has open world PvP. There are zones on the map which are designated as PvP area (and pirate PvP area, where only pirates can attack or be attacked). The PvP areas are dynamic, they continuesly change.

It starts by causing 'unrest' near another nation's harbor, by turning your PvP flag on while in the water.  As a counter people cause 'rest' by also going into the water and turning on their PvP flag, and fighting. But, and this is why it is interesting, 'rest' can also be caused by PvE players: They can do special missions, they can attack NPC near the harbor, you can even craft materials for the war effort and give them to the town.

After enough unrest, we get a open PvP zone, where everyone can fight players from other nations. After a while the PvP zone goes away and depending who wins the town changes nations or it stays the same. The player who own the town can set the tax rate on it, so conquests are meaningful. Also the dynamic PvP zones causes dynamics in the market of crafting materials.

Originally posted by VirusDancer

How does getting to the root issue of why they hate it derail the thread when that's what the thread is about?  It can't be because they do not want to compete with other players, because they most likely do compete with other players.

I don't.  I don't compete against anyone, at any time, for any reason.  I'm just not intererested.   That's in combat or economics.   Yet if you read this thread, virtually everyone who argues against PvP has done so specifically on the basis of combat.  I don't recall a single message in this thread where someone has hated PvP because of economics.

In fact, I have so little interest in in-game economies, I almost always sell anything I find to the NPCs, unless I come up with something I know is rare, at which time I'll shout "who wants this?" in guild chat.  I can't recall the last time I used an auction house to sell anything.

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by VirusDancer

How does getting to the root issue of why they hate it derail the thread when that's what the thread is about?  It can't be because they do not want to compete with other players, because they most likely do compete with other players.

I don't.  I don't compete against anyone, at any time, for any reason.  I'm just not intererested.   That's in combat or economics.   Yet if you read this thread, virtually everyone who argues against PvP has done so specifically on the basis of combat.  I don't recall a single message in this thread where someone has hated PvP because of economics.

In fact, I have so little interest in in-game economies, I almost always sell anything I find to the NPCs, unless I come up with something I know is rare, at which time I'll shout "who wants this?" in guild chat.  I can't recall the last time I used an auction house to sell anything.

It's a general discussion that has taken place across many threads.  Some people may feel they have made their point in other threads and have no need to repost in this thread - still, their thoughts on PvP are still out there.

I applaud your direct answer, and I hope that you do not believe that I was calling you out personally in the least - but there is little doubt that one could see where many of the posts against PvP make little sense when viewing them from the general populace.

Even in discussing combat PvP - it still leaves many questions.  In your case, you do not want to compete with other players.  That's not the only reason for folks not wanting to participate though.  Some may want to compete but feel that it's not very competitive in certain games.

Yes, it requires more effort to the discussion that most are willing to give.  I don't play other games though.  I haven't touched a console in almost 9 months, I haven't played a single player PC game in over a year... it's pretty much MMOs and has been for around 15 years.

I suppose the Fall TV schedule hasn't helped...lol...meh.

But given all the various types of PvP out there - are people really drawing the line at PvP in general or are they really just against certain types.  Even with combat PvP, are they against OWPvP - FFAPvP - Arenas - Zones - instanced Battlegrounds - Duels - Factional - Guild - etc, etc, etc.

PvP has been a discussion for well over a decade...