Originally posted by neonwire

 

Just because a game has PvP it doesnt mean thats the ONLY thing that will be happening in it. Players will still be free to go and do whatever they like.

Just because a game has the client crash every half hour doesn't mean that's the only thing that will be happening in it.  If it interferes with what you're trying to do, it can still be a nuisance, even to the point of being game-breaking.  PvP doesn't automatically interfere with what you're doing, but getting jumped by a high level every 10 minutes or so sure does.

What I want to know is how the OP went up against Supes and beat him... with a killerclown no less.

More details on how that battle went would be nice. I mean, is it possible in this system to make a character that can go toe to toe versus the Big Guy? If not, how do you work out that you can escape him with the cargo in tow? Spare Kryptonite ring lying around... or did you have to beat Bats for his in the mission before it?

Bringing in big names into quests makes it interesting but there should be a level of believability to the encounter.

Originally posted by Alverant

Originally posted by Nadia

there will be both PVE and PVP servers

dcuosource.com/index.php/topic,29.15.html

My impression of the article is that they're going to focus a lot more on PvP with PvE being thrown in as an afterthought so they can say "PvP or PvE action" on the box. It's only going to get worse with micropayments. Mark my words, those of us who don't like being ganked by teenagers with Daddy's credit card are going to get the short end of the stick.

This is exactly what Warhammer Online intended.  It failed.  Lets see how well Sony does with it.  They have such a good reputation of making hits...

The lack of PVE content is going to disappoint a lot of people.  If they haven't made PVE as exciting and fun as the PVP aspects, they will fail utterly.  If PVP is not completely consensual, they will fail utterly.  I know a lot of chickens on this site cluck about pvp vs pve being a 50 vs 50 thing.  AoC and WAR have both shown that is NOT TRUE in the slightest.  PVE FAR OUTSCALES the number of people interested in playing PVP oriented games.  I hope the development team appreciates this and doesn't listen to the loudmouthed minority like the morons before them.

Originally posted by dsebutchr

Originally posted by Alverant

Originally posted by Nadia

there will be both PVE and PVP servers

dcuosource.com/index.php/topic,29.15.html

My impression of the article is that they're going to focus a lot more on PvP with PvE being thrown in as an afterthought so they can say "PvP or PvE action" on the box. It's only going to get worse with micropayments. Mark my words, those of us who don't like being ganked by teenagers with Daddy's credit card are going to get the short end of the stick.

 

This is exactly what Warhammer Online intended.  It failed.  Lets see how well Sony does with it.  They have such a good reputation of making hits...

The lack of PVE content is going to disappoint a lot of people.  If they haven't made PVE as exciting and fun as the PVP aspects, they will fail utterly.  If PVP is not completely consensual, they will fail utterly.  I know a lot of chickens on this site cluck about pvp vs pve being a 50 vs 50 thing.  AoC and WAR have both shown that is NOT TRUE in the slightest.  PVE FAR OUTSCALES the number of people interested in playing PVP oriented games.  I hope the development team appreciates this and doesn't listen to the loudmouthed minority like the morons before them.

Yeah I agree. I played WAR a while, and first it was exciting, but it was exactly WAR which made me doubtful about PVP centered games. Maybe some folks enjoys it, but for me the ever same PVP-run became boring fast, and when WAR-PVE was clearly a lackluster afterthought WAR became boring fast to me. I really hope DCU does not copy that PVP-PVE concept from WAR. See where that led them to. PVE just has to be good, deep and complex. By nature all PVP is essentially simplistic. I mean, how many ways to conquer a castle/keep over and over again can you do before it gets boring? Sorry if that hurts some PVP-geeks feelings, but I found all PVP ever quite same-ish in the long run. I mean, comparing it to the PVE-hog EQ2 I got entertained for years with PVE and I just cant imagine a vast number of people enjoyes the ever same PVP run a similar time. They just shoot themselves in the knee making DCU a PVP centered game imo. But let's wait and see. Maybe its just some bad PR mistake and they emphazised it wrong. I will definitely try it out either way and then see.

I think the thing we all seem to be forgetting is that this game is being made with a Console focus.

What do you do with online Console games? Almost ALL of them are PvP of one sort or another. So for a Console targeted game PvP focus makes perfect sense. As does the twitch gaming.

I have a funny feeling many of us are just the wrong target market. If you like playing FPS or RTS games on your console online, then this game is targeted at you.

However if you like to play online PC games more then online console games... Your not the target demographic.

This is not to say you wont like it, just they are not aiming at you.

Im not a big PvP person but that is PvP that makes sense, especially in the context of the DC comic universe.

Heroes will help Superman defeat Lex Luthor and villains will help Luthor defeat Superman.

MAKES SENSE.

Im guessing a lot of people here that are complaining about the "focus on PvP" are being ignorant on purpose of PvE servers and PvE goals because thisis shaping up to be a great game. A great game by SOE. They just cant accept that.

Also, to all the people complaining that this will also be on PS3 - Champions Online was designed from the ground up to be played on the Xbox 360.

Xia did you read the article or are you being purposely obtuse?  I'm going to assume you did NOT read the article because the alternative is that you are an idiot and I'd like to assume otherwise.

The articles stated quite clearly that the PVE aspects of the game are secondary at best.  This means that all the people who have zero interest in PVP can move on to another game if we take that statement literally.

This is the part I commented on with reference to WAR.  This is the part the discussion continued on for the several posts before yours.

Now again are you simply a troll making yourself look like a tard or did you not read the article and all of our posts before commenting?  I know which I think, but wanted to confirm with you before continuing.

Originally posted by Vinterkrig

What bothers me about all these conversations is, that people want the realisim that goes along with the storyline or quest. Yet they want those situations to be controlled. 

ie.

Yay, I'm  a super hero, I'm gonna go do a quest about saving a bank from being robbed. .....

Wow, that was easy.

 

Instead of, my quest is to stop ... (some rl player, playing a villian) from stealing from the bank.

>insert some sorta epic battle<

wow that was an amazing fight, what a great quest

 

obviously, not actuality of pvp, but you get the picture

why do you want some pos AI always fighting against you, makes no sense... games are supposed to be "real" war envoirnments, yet people always want them with training wheels attached, .. its beyond me

Its nice to see someone using logic and common sense in these forums. Its a rare thing here. Most people are so close minded they dont want any level of freedom in their games. All they want is for games to tell them a linear story and line up loads of dumb computer controlled opponents for them to knock down in sequence. The moment a game moves away from this incredibly restricted type of game design and dares to introduce a level of realism and variety in which people can actually play against each other as well as the computer then we start hearing cries of "Oh no! PvP! You mean real people will get to be my opponents?! This game is doomed! waaaggghh".

Its fucking retarded.

Originally posted by Quizzical

Originally posted by neonwire

 

I totally understand your concerns but thats rather a lot of nay saying. Of course I wouldnt enjoy a game where PvP was implemented badly either (PvP in all the other PvE centric games has nearly always been pretty crap).......but then I dont like bad game design full stop. Simply removing all forms of PvP from online games is not the way to move forwards in my opinion. Online games should give players the freedom to play their characters properly so if a superhero sees a supervillain they should be able to engage them in combat. Enemies should not be able to simply wave at each other and then fight against the computer alongside each other while being seperated by an invisible barrier simply because game designers cant figure out how to develop a decent competitive system. Thats just shitty game design.

There are currently virtually no games in existence that successfully implement PvP (no WAR is crap sorry). I dont mind playing against the computer but its pretty ridiculous that we dont even have the option of being able to choose a good PvP mmo. That needs to change. What we currently have are little more than single player games ported onto the internet in multiplayer mode. Its rather lame.

 

Saying that something is a red flag doesn't mean that I automatically won't play it.  Rather, it means that if I'm looking at playing a game, I'd better look into that particular thing pretty carefully to make sure it isn't game-breaking.

I'd like to play a game that does pvp well.  Infantry did, but that game is all but dead now.  Guild Wars did all right with pvp, I guess.  A game that simply has players running around and says, oh by the way, you can attack each other, is all but guaranteed to do pvp badly.  It might well be possible to balance open world pvp, but it's really, really hard to do, which is why no one has come remotely close to doing so yet.  At a minimum, such a game would have to have quite a few things in place for the express purpose of balancing pvp in order to have a chance at being good.  The odds that a company would go to the work to put such things in place but not then loudly trumpet them as "this is what makes our game better than the competition" are pretty slim.

I generally agree with what you are saying. Being cautious about a game is fine but you are not one of the game designers so its not your job to "look into that thing pretty carefully to make sure it isnt game breaking". Thats what the game developers are doing. All we can do is keep our fingers crossed that they dont cock it up.

Like I said before if a game is well designed then the problems caused by PvP in the recent past dont need to repeat themselves. Obviously if all the players are dumped into a big open battlefield and left to their own devices then it will be crap. Thats just basic common sense.

Originally posted by dsebutchr

Xia did you read the article or are you being purposely obtuse?  I'm going to assume you did NOT read the article because the alternative is that you are an idiot and I'd like to assume otherwise.

The articles stated quite clearly that the PVE aspects of the game are secondary at best.  This means that all the people who have zero interest in PVP can move on to another game if we take that statement literally.

This is the part I commented on with reference to WAR.  This is the part the discussion continued on for the several posts before yours.

Now again are you simply a troll making yourself look like a tard or did you not read the article and all of our posts before commenting?  I know which I think, but wanted to confirm with you before continuing.

Yes, I read the article and what I read are the opinions of some nobody that played a PvP focused demo for a few hours.

Chris Cao, Studio Creative Director - "PvP will always be consensual. You'll either choose to play on a PvP server, opt-in to a PvP zone, or take egregious actions that will flag you for PvP"

http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=170495422&blogID=444821377

That was from 3 months ago so I doubt very much it has changed since.

Quite frankly I'll take the word of the head developer over some nobody.

Also, I fail to see how PvE is a "necessary evil" or an "afterthought" when there is PvE quests, PvE instanmces and PvE raids. When on the PvP side you have PvP aspects to certain quests, arenas and Battlegrounds.

Sounds like the PvP in DCU Online is about as prevalent as the PvP in WoW.

I like how the PvP is incorparated in DCU but just because someone says its the focus of the entire game does not make it a fact.

Originally posted by Slackerboy

Originally posted by Elikal

Originally posted by Slackerboy

The more I see of this game the more sure I will at the least be waiting until it has been out for several months before buying it.

The problems I see are...

1. It is a SOE game.  SWG anyone?

2. It seems to be PvP centric.

3. PvE is a afterthought

4. Made for consoles and PC = Overly simple play for people used to PC games.

5. Console gamers tend to be MUCH ruder then PC gamers. Granted PvP PC gamers do try to give the console gamers a run for their money.

6. RMT

7. Twitch gaming more important then tactics.

 

The only good things I see are.

1. It's a super hero game.

2. It looks pretty

 

If you like PvP and like to play on a console. I can see why you would be looking forward to the game. But for the rest of us... We just have to hope Champions is going to be good.

 

Hey welcome new guy. (No teasing intended here, really. ^^)

I am kinda split over these. It MIGHT be that bad, but most of those points are quite uncertain.

1. SOE made also good games. Like EQ2. And SWG had a long good time also, so I dont see that the chances with SOE are worse than with any other MMO company. Not really.

2 & 3. Yeah the apparent PVP focus sucks. I hope with PVE servers it means there is a lot of PVE content as well. I really wish they would go a bit to the "story" focus as SWTOR and in part LOTRO already did. But we have to see. Maybe its just overly emphazised with PVP and the real game isnt such PVE-light.

4. Simple for PC games? Didnt you mean simple for console gamers???

5. I never met console gamers in a MMO. Are they really??

6. RMT as it is atm with SOE is just neglectable. Did they really finally decide about DCU and RMT? I would guess the final form is yet to manifest.

7. Yeah I see that too, but in DCU and Champions. Not to my liking either, but again, it remains to be seen how it will be implemented.

I guess as DC fan I am biased, or its wishful thinking. Somehow I hope at least ONE of two superhero MMos will be good, but as luck is, maybe both will suck. :/ Lets hope not.

Also what ArcAngel3 said was right. Its SOE! They are known for not too hardcorish games, aiming for the all average joe (or all average Superman in this case). I just cant imagine a SOE game will be so totally out of the line of what they did before, not having quests and all being PVP/PK zerg. 

 

1. I never cared for EQ2, but EQ2 isnt where I developed my problem with SOE it was SWG. I beta tested SWG and it was the WORST beta I have ever been in much more like a alpha, no quest givers, no loot crashed all the time. It was a sick joke. Then they release the game a week after turning up the quest givers and turning on looting.

The release was almost up to most games Beta quality. And it really took almost a year to make it up to the level most games release at. This proved to me that SOE could care less about the quality of a game no matter what the IP.

4. No I meant overly simple for someone used to PC games. The controls on a Console game are very weak. Just a hand full of buttons and a sluggish controler. Compare this to the massive numbers of controls and high response of a PC mouse keyboard setup. Ever wonder why the console version of Halo and the PC version do not play against eachother online?

5. I can't say I have met any console MMO gamers. All I have to go on is console multiplayer gamers, and trust me you do not want to have to listen to them. They are revolting. But thats what happens when 12 year old kids get overly excited.

6. The final form of the RMT will not show its head until LONG after release. SOE will tweak it to find maximum profit. That is the way of any company, but SOE has shown itself to care far more about profit then long term health of a product. There is a reason the new Star Wars game is not a SOE product.

 

All I see in your posts is, I hate consoles.  Cool, don't play on them.
 

My girls kid is 12; I'll leave here in a few minutes and go hang out with him.  We'll play some CoD: World at War (I won't let him play 4, don't want my K to D ratio going down).  I even give him the mic.  He never says anything.  I have to take it back because the lack of smack talk gets dull, but then I'm a beast on my pathetic console shooters and I like talking junk;  just like most everyone else I know my age that likes to be competetive in games. 

I'm 32 and I talk more crap then the 12 year old. 
And most of the people I hear being annoying are well over the age of 12.

And you don't have to listen to anyone when you're playing on a console.  Turn voice off.  It's that easy.

Who are you kidding anyways?  Been playing MMO's for years and I've played with just as many kids in MMO's as I have in shooters on a console. 

There is no dif. between people on a console and people on the PC, except maybe this over inflated ego that some insist on pumping themselves up with because they seem to think that thier PC and the games on them are so much more leet then consoles and those games.  Maybe you should go take a look at video game sales, maybe do a little comparison.  The last time I was in gamestop it wasn't stocked with 99% of PC games, Best Buys PC games section wasn't 5x as large as the console section.

Console games outsell PC games by leaps and bounds buddy.  Stop strocking your epeen, playing on a PC doesn't make you any more sophisticated or uber then a console gamer.

I'll be buying a PS3 when this game releases.  It'll be the only game I play on it.

PS:  You've just met someone that playes MMO's on a console.  FF XI.  There's an insane number of servers to choose from and the one I created on is packed with people.

Originally posted by dsebutchr

Originally posted by Alverant

Originally posted by Nadia

there will be both PVE and PVP servers

dcuosource.com/index.php/topic,29.15.html

My impression of the article is that they're going to focus a lot more on PvP with PvE being thrown in as an afterthought so they can say "PvP or PvE action" on the box. It's only going to get worse with micropayments. Mark my words, those of us who don't like being ganked by teenagers with Daddy's credit card are going to get the short end of the stick.

 

This is exactly what Warhammer Online intended.  It failed.  Lets see how well Sony does with it.  They have such a good reputation of making hits...

Of course it failed. It was based on WoWs game design which is a PvE game. WAR simply made a number of open PvP playpens for players to fight meaningless battles that have no connection or relevance to anything. WAR isnt a PvP game. Its a PvE game with optional PvP that can actually be completely ignored if the player chooses.......so it was bound to fail

The lack of PVE content is going to disappoint a lot of people.  If they haven't made PVE as exciting and fun as the PVP aspects, they will fail utterly. 

True.

If PVP is not completely consensual, they will fail utterly.

False. What an incredibly stupid thing to say! If PvP is COMPLETELY consensual then it will have absolutely no meaning whatsoever.

"Excuse me Mr Villain do you mind if I attack you?"

"Actually yes I do. I'm trying to complete this quest to poison all of these innocents and if you attack me then it will thwart my plans"

"But I'm a superhero and its my job to protect those innocents. I'm supposed to thwart your plans"

"Ah well thats tough luck I'm afraid. You're gonna have to stand by and watch all of them die at my hands while I cackle with glee." 

I know a lot of chickens on this site cluck about pvp vs pve being a 50 vs 50 thing.  AoC and WAR have both shown that is NOT TRUE in the slightest.  PVE FAR OUTSCALES the number of people interested in playing PVP oriented games.  I hope the development team appreciates this and doesn't listen to the loudmouthed minority like the morons before them.

Again you are talking complete crap. AoC and WAR are both PvE games with badly implemented PvP added as an afterthought.

Newsflash! We dont have ANY decent PvP games at all except for EVE and even thats not particularly brilliant. How can you say that most people prefer PvE games to PvP games when PvE games are the ONLY things we have to choose from? Oh thats right your making a giant assumption based completely non existant logic.

If you offer people cheese sandwiches and extremely mouldy ham sandwiches then obviously everyone is going to eat the cheese sandwiches. It doesnt mean that everyone likes cheese. It means that cheese is the only thing on offer.

Use your brain before you type.

Originally posted by neonwire

Originally posted by Vinterkrig

What bothers me about all these conversations is, that people want the realisim that goes along with the storyline or quest. Yet they want those situations to be controlled. 

ie.

Yay, I'm  a super hero, I'm gonna go do a quest about saving a bank from being robbed. .....

Wow, that was easy.

 

Instead of, my quest is to stop ... (some rl player, playing a villian) from stealing from the bank.

>insert some sorta epic battle<

wow that was an amazing fight, what a great quest

 

obviously, not actuality of pvp, but you get the picture

why do you want some pos AI always fighting against you, makes no sense... games are supposed to be "real" war envoirnments, yet people always want them with training wheels attached, .. its beyond me

 

Its nice to see someone using logic and common sense in these forums. Its a rare thing here. Most people are so close minded they dont want any level of freedom in their games. All they want is for games to tell them a linear story and line up loads of dumb computer controlled opponents for them to knock down in sequence. The moment a game moves away from this incredibly restricted type of game design and dares to introduce a level of realism and variety in which people can actually play against each other as well as the computer then we start hearing cries of "Oh no! PvP! You mean real people will get to be my opponents?! This game is doomed! waaaggghh".

Its fucking retarded.

same with you bro, the darkfall threads are worse then this, far worse lol

Originally posted by neonwire

Newsflash! We dont have ANY decent PvP games at all except for EVE and even thats not particularly brilliant. How can you say that most people prefer PvE games to PvP games when PvE games are the ONLY things we have to choose from? Oh thats right your making a giant assumption based completely non existant logic.

If you offer people cheese sandwiches and extremely mouldy ham sandwiches then obviously everyone is going to eat the cheese sandwiches. It doesnt mean that everyone likes cheese. It means that cheese is the only thing on offer.

 

 

I will assume by the tone of your last few paragraphs that your part of the loudmouthed minority I mentioned earlier.

I agree with you that we do not have decent PVP in any games that exist currently.  Frankly I am looking forward to Jumpgate Evolution which I think will take PVP where it should be in the first place.  Twitch based faction based combat on a massive scale.  They get that right and PVP will be revolutionized by what they have.  

I don't even consider EvE to be pvp, that's point and click garbage.  I've said this before, been flamed plenty for it.  I have my opinion they have their's and they are simply wrong...moving on

My point was that with the games we see right now, it's obvious that the population prefers the PVE aspects of gameplay.  Purely consensual pvp is very possible through pve and pvp servers.  Grant the carebears the use of a server where the PVP works exactly as you stated so viciously and the problem is solved for everyone.  Carebears are happy if the PVE doesn't suck, and PVPer's are happy with their gank-fests.

The alternative is to "fix" pvp so that gankfests CAN NOT HAPPEN.  They do not intend on doing this.  They intend on implementing "eventually...what a joke this word makes the whole concept" the use of anti-griefing code that will make high level NPC's protect you from griefers.  We all know what this means...you still get griefed by the toon that doesn't give 2 shits about the high level NPC coming to stop them while they continue to grief you.  It wont cost them anything because making it cost too much breaks realism and makes it not fun for so many people....ie the griefers.

This is what all the other games have done.  I expect it to be the same for anything SOE touches.

what i think could be a cool system is

now keep in mind, I'm 100% for FFA PVP

but as an alternative that could possibly work....

the villain causes trouble, hero doesn't do crap about it

well, obviously who cares about the hero, if he'll let me destroy he isn't much of a hero

i continue my evil deeds, this ruins the hero's w/e certain aspect of the game (questing i guess?)

he has no choice, but to sit around twiddling his thumbs, getting bored or attack me

he doesn't attack me, city? goes into a panic, game becomes a free for all, sorry hero, you are vulnerable now

the evil side gets a buff of some sorts ... lets call it dominance as an example

now the heros strugle to win (whatever the 'endgame' is)

this can all be avoided by putting up a fight (activating a pvp flag)

obviously a rough idea, but i'm sure you get what i'm saying

honestly, i'd rather it just be open to attack whom ever

hero vs villain

villain vs villain

Originally posted by dsebutchr

Originally posted by neonwire

Newsflash! We dont have ANY decent PvP games at all except for EVE and even thats not particularly brilliant. How can you say that most people prefer PvE games to PvP games when PvE games are the ONLY things we have to choose from? Oh thats right your making a giant assumption based completely non existant logic.

If you offer people cheese sandwiches and extremely mouldy ham sandwiches then obviously everyone is going to eat the cheese sandwiches. It doesnt mean that everyone likes cheese. It means that cheese is the only thing on offer.

 

 

 

I will assume by the tone of your last few paragraphs that your part of the loudmouthed minority I mentioned earlier.

I agree with you that we do not have decent PVP in any games that exist currently.  Frankly I am looking forward to Jumpgate Evolution which I think will take PVP where it should be in the first place.  Twitch based faction based combat on a massive scale.  They get that right and PVP will be revolutionized by what they have.  

I don't even consider EvE to be pvp, that's point and click garbage.  I've said this before, been flamed plenty for it.  I have my opinion they have their's and they are simply wrong...moving on

My point was that with the games we see right now, it's obvious that the population prefers the PVE aspects of gameplay.  Purely consensual pvp is very possible through pve and pvp servers.  Grant the carebears the use of a server where the PVP works exactly as you stated so viciously and the problem is solved for everyone.  Carebears are happy if the PVE doesn't suck, and PVPer's are happy with their gank-fests.

The alternative is to "fix" pvp so that gankfests CAN NOT HAPPEN.  They do not intend on doing this.  They intend on implementing "eventually...what a joke this word makes the whole concept" the use of anti-griefing code that will make high level NPC's protect you from griefers.  We all know what this means...you still get griefed by the toon that doesn't give 2 shits about the high level NPC coming to stop them while they continue to grief you.  It wont cost them anything because making it cost too much breaks realism and makes it not fun for so many people....ie the griefers.

This is what all the other games have done.  I expect it to be the same for anything SOE touches.

I will tell you 100% why this never works (pve/pvp server)

it fails every time, because to balance the classes out for pve/pvp is near impossible ... its gotta lean towards one or the other, no matter what (and they aren't going to do two patches (1 for each server) its not worth their time and effort

so you are either going to have OP pvp skills, or OP pve skills.... or just uneven in the way where people are unhappy with the results

Originally posted by Vinterkrig

 I will tell you 100% why this never works (pve/pvp server)

it fails every time, because to balance the classes out for pve/pvp is near impossible ... its gotta lean towards one or the other, no matter what (and they aren't going to do two patches (1 for each server) its not worth their time and effort

so you are either going to have OP pvp skills, or OP pve skills.... or just uneven in the way where people are unhappy with the results

Then you try to make the most people happy that you can, and my original point in my first post was that the PVE players outnumber the PVP players.  Clucking is much louder by the PVP players so they tend to get more attention.  Most carebears simply wont play past the first free month if the game sucks and the developers wont discover this until they put out a worthless piece of garbage and fail miserably. 

I'm just explaining the situation before that happens because I'm tired of games sucking and wasting money on them. 

From what I've heard about this game, unless they do a 180 turn around I have no interest in their POS pvp centric console game for pc.  

Originally posted by Elikal

Originally posted by dsebutchr

Originally posted by Alverant

Originally posted by Nadia

there will be both PVE and PVP servers

dcuosource.com/index.php/topic,29.15.html

My impression of the article is that they're going to focus a lot more on PvP with PvE being thrown in as an afterthought so they can say "PvP or PvE action" on the box. It's only going to get worse with micropayments. Mark my words, those of us who don't like being ganked by teenagers with Daddy's credit card are going to get the short end of the stick.

 

This is exactly what Warhammer Online intended.  It failed.  Lets see how well Sony does with it.  They have such a good reputation of making hits...

The lack of PVE content is going to disappoint a lot of people.  If they haven't made PVE as exciting and fun as the PVP aspects, they will fail utterly.  If PVP is not completely consensual, they will fail utterly.  I know a lot of chickens on this site cluck about pvp vs pve being a 50 vs 50 thing.  AoC and WAR have both shown that is NOT TRUE in the slightest.  PVE FAR OUTSCALES the number of people interested in playing PVP oriented games.  I hope the development team appreciates this and doesn't listen to the loudmouthed minority like the morons before them.

 

Yeah I agree. I played WAR a while, and first it was exciting, but it was exactly WAR which made me doubtful about PVP centered games. Maybe some folks enjoys it, but for me the ever same PVP-run became boring fast, and when WAR-PVE was clearly a lackluster afterthought WAR became boring fast to me. I really hope DCU does not copy that PVP-PVE concept from WAR. See where that led them to.

WAR is not a PvP centred game. Its a PvE game that has been falsely sold to the public as a PvP product. If PvP is the centre of the game then why is it optional?

Yeah WAR failed in the PvP department because there was little meaning to it. Kill player, kill player, ding go up level, kill player, take control of keep, kill player, lose control of keep, ding go up level.......why am I playing this again?

WARs PvE was also boring......but actually it wasnt all that different to the lifeless PvE you find in any other mmo really......but was it an afterthought? Or was the PvP an afterthought? The entire game seemed like an afterthought to me lol

PVE just has to be good, deep and complex.

So does PvP. The entire game needs to be good......that applies to both PvE AND PvP.

By nature all PVP is essentially simplistic. I mean, how many ways to conquer a castle/keep over and over again can you do before it gets boring? Sorry if that hurts some PVP-geeks feelings, but I found all PVP ever quite same-ish in the long run. I mean, comparing it to the PVE-hog EQ2 I got entertained for years with PVE and I just cant imagine a vast number of people enjoyes the ever same PVP run a similar time. They just shoot themselves in the knee making DCU a PVP centered game imo. But let's wait and see. Maybe its just some bad PR mistake and they emphazised it wrong. I will definitely try it out either way and then see.

What a stupidly ridiculous statement to make. Your saying that a human opponent is more simplistic than a computer controlled one? Yeah.....ummm.....dumb arse statement of the year or what! LMAO!

Other human beings provide vastly more different and varied situations to deal with than any computer opponent could ever provide. Why is that? Because people are not SCRIPTED thats why. They are capable of independant thought.

The PvE content in mmos is all the bloody same. You wander into an area and see loads of mobs standing around in the open waiting for you to kill them. They wont attack you until you walk within range of them and when they do you can beat all of them with the same combination of key presses. Yeah thats wildly exciting. You found this entertaining for years? Well its nice to know you are so incredibly easy to please. I personally want more variety in my games. I want my opponents to have brains and be capable of making decisions. I dont want my opponents to just sit there oblivious to my existence simply because I'm not stood within a few metres of them.

By nature all PvE is simplistic because it all follows a routine script programmed by the developers. It will never surprise you. It will never go on the offensive and get you when you least expect it. It will however fill you with the warm cozy feeling of false achievement that can only be gained by defeating an opponent that has less intelligence than yourself.

Just face it. You like pure PvE games because you dont like playing games that challenge you or force you to think. You like to know exactly how things are going to unfold. Throw a human opponent into the PvE equation and suddenly you have variety.

You dont like variety.

I do

Originally posted by dsebutchr

Originally posted by Vinterkrig

 I will tell you 100% why this never works (pve/pvp server)

it fails every time, because to balance the classes out for pve/pvp is near impossible ... its gotta lean towards one or the other, no matter what (and they aren't going to do two patches (1 for each server) its not worth their time and effort

so you are either going to have OP pvp skills, or OP pve skills.... or just uneven in the way where people are unhappy with the results

 

Then you try to make the most people happy that you can, and my original point in my first post was that the PVE players outnumber the PVP players.  Clucking is much louder by the PVP players so they tend to get more attention.  Most carebears simply wont play past the first free month if the game sucks and the developers wont discover this until they put out a worthless piece of garbage and fail miserably. 

I'm just explaining the situation before that happens because I'm tired of games sucking and wasting money on them. 

From what I've heard about this game, unless they do a 180 turn around I have no interest in their POS pvp centric console game for pc.  

Then you should move on

What entitles you to decide who they are going to make the game for? Honestly, please explain it to me.

I'm missing something, and I'd like to be knowledged on the situation.

Why do we not deserve what they are saying they are going to create without your interference. Are you better then us because you like pve? Do you really care about the company's bottom line, do you work for the company? Let this be their pvp game break threw, or flop.

I'm so sick of everyone thinking they are entitled... you aren't

there is about as much integrity in posting these crap posts about how pvp games (pretty much wanted completely gone) by 'carebears' are bad ideas, and should be an afterthought and possibly elimited... its like telling people of color to sit in the back of the bus, obviously not on such an ourrageous level, but similar ...

I'm out right sick of it, and I honestly wish I could program games, because I would make a pvp game in a second, and I bet that it'd be successful

Originally posted by dsebutchr

Originally posted by neonwire

Newsflash! We dont have ANY decent PvP games at all except for EVE and even thats not particularly brilliant. How can you say that most people prefer PvE games to PvP games when PvE games are the ONLY things we have to choose from? Oh thats right your making a giant assumption based completely non existant logic.

If you offer people cheese sandwiches and extremely mouldy ham sandwiches then obviously everyone is going to eat the cheese sandwiches. It doesnt mean that everyone likes cheese. It means that cheese is the only thing on offer.

 

 

 

I will assume by the tone of your last few paragraphs that your part of the loudmouthed minority I mentioned earlier.

Your assumption is wrong but thats ok because its just an assumption......pretty much in the same way that you "assume" that I am part of some minority even though you dont know what everyone on the planet thinks. You assume quite a lot of things dont you. But obviously I am "loudmouthed" because I disagree with you. Of course if I agreed with everything you say then I would not be lumped in this "small group of loudmouths" that you have conjured up in your mind.

I agree with you that we do not have decent PVP in any games that exist currently. Frankly I am looking forward to Jumpgate Evolution which I think will take PVP where it should be in the first place. Twitch based faction based combat on a massive scale. They get that right and PVP will be revolutionized by what they have.

Ok you're talking sense now.....

I don't even consider EvE to be pvp, that's point and click garbage. I've said this before, been flamed plenty for it. I have my opinion they have their's and they are simply wrong...moving on

Hmm ok I can see that. Still talking sense. Things a looking good.....

My point was that with the games we see right now, it's obvious that the population prefers the PVE aspects of gameplay.

Oh dear we've lost him again. Now he's back on the slippery slope of nonsense once again. So you're saying "We only have PvE games at the moment and from that we can see that people prefer PvE gameplay". Read what you just typed. Does that seriously make any sense to you. Do I need to start talking to you again about cheese and ham sandwiches?

I know I'll try something else. Maybe this will get through to you.

I offer you a winegum. You take it and try it. Hmm its not bad.

Now I offer you a 10 year old biscuit. Yuck! That tastes disgusting!

Your logic says = Everyone prefers winegums to biscuits.

My logic says = Everyone prefers winegums to MOULDY biscuits.

Your logic says = People should only make winegums because thats what everyone wants. No-one wants biscuits.

My logic says = People should make good winegums AND good biscuits because no-one knows what good biscuits taste like. They have only sampled mouldy ones.

Purely consensual pvp is very possible through pve and pvp servers. Grant the carebears the use of a server where the PVP works exactly as you stated so viciously and the problem is solved for everyone. Carebears are happy if the PVE doesn't suck, and PVPer's are happy with their gank-fests.

No. You are talking from a completely jaded viewpoint. You used the word "gankfest" which is typical of someone who has had their perspective clouded by the fact that so far PvP has mostly failed in mmos. You are dividing people into two distinct groups which is a mistake. I actually like "good" PvE elements in games but I also want "good" PvP elements too. I dont want gankfests because that is what happens in a BADLY DESIGNED game (mouldy biscuits).

The alternative is to "fix" pvp so that gankfests CAN NOT HAPPEN. They do not intend on doing this. They intend on implementing "eventually...what a joke this word makes the whole concept" the use of anti-griefing code that will make high level NPC's protect you from griefers. We all know what this means...you still get griefed by the toon that doesn't give 2 shits about the high level NPC coming to stop them while they continue to grief you. It wont cost them anything because making it cost too much breaks realism and makes it not fun for so many people....ie the griefers.

This is what all the other games have done. I expect it to be the same for anything SOE touches.
 

Now your back to talking some sense again. Nice to have you back. Yes I am dubious about their method of combating griefing too but we will have to see how that works out. I think these problems can be easily solved by steering away from levels as a means of character development but it seems that many games developers just havent caught onto this idea yet. If levels simply provided additional skills and abilities then maybe the advantage of a more "powerful" character would not be so extreme but usually a single level bestows a gigantic health boost along with various other bonuses. This has always worked ok for single player games but not for multiplayer games.