If it meant that I could actually enjoy the game and its features without having to worry about a major shift or elimination of game mechanics in the name of "balance" for PvP, then I say this wholeheartedly;

YES!

PvE is the patty to the burger as PvP is the cheese.

You don't need cheese to make a burger.

But I love cheese on my burgers. :P

But yes I'd play a game with no PvP.

Originally posted by Ikinari

PvE is the patty to the burger as PvP is the cheese.

You don't need cheese to make a burger.

But I love cheese on my burgers. :P

 

But yes I'd play a game with no PvP.

Originally posted by RefMinor

Originally posted by Ikinari

PvE is the patty to the burger as PvP is the cheese.

You don't need cheese to make a burger.

But I love cheese on my burgers. :P

 

But yes I'd play a game with no PvP.

 

However, you don't need a patty to have a cheese toastie where crafting is a tomato, where are we going with this?

You were going to make me some lunch.

P.S.  I like dill pickle chips with my cheese toasties.

No. I wouldnt waste my time on an mmo that limits how the users can enjoy the game. Make pvp servers, and non pvp servers with different rulesets and let us enjoy.

"Would" ?

I am doing that right now.

Mostly because there is no PvP game that gets close to what Vanguard has to offer.

I would have no problem to envision a game thats as awesome as Vanguard and also has PvP, but there is nothing like that on the market.

I actually am playing 100% PvE MMO atm - Vanguard: Saga of Heroes. And I consider myself PvP player. Its just that good

I haven't touched PvP in any of those in a year or two and I find each one really enjoyable to play.

Originally posted by Romulan78

No. I wouldnt waste my time on an mmo that limits how the users can enjoy the game. Make pvp servers, and non pvp servers with different rulesets and let us enjoy.

That actually is a good idea. Is their a MMO that does this? I would be interested in it because of the fact that it would show that the developer really cares about all play-styles. Very Sandboxy it would be.

A good game without PvP, hell yes I'd play. i don't need to gank fellow players to feel heroic and really PvP in most games is there as a lazy route so the Devs don't need as much content or good IA to make the game seem full.

so you`re saying twitch is the only legitimate skill to master in MMO`s then?

And anything else is pure luck/lame tactics etc etc?

I could never relate to this PvP where everything is fair and balanced and only twitch decides the outcome . I find it a horribly booring waste of time , i`m not too good at it, true , because it never got me interested enough to actualy practice it too much

For me , pvp in rpg`s and mmorpgs should be EXACTLY about trying to make a fight as one-sided as it gets (ofcourse , presuming we have full loot too , so thwew is something at stake

I want games representing wars not sports

If i want fair balanced skill based games,  i can allways go outside and play some sport , when i go gaming i dont care about that mindset

tl;dr : PvP shoud be about wars , about killing and surviving , not about gear grinds and balanced sports

I mostly do PvE. However, occasionally i would like to pvp a bit. So, a game focusing on PvE but with *some* instanced pvp would be ideal.

Originally posted by Romulan78

No. I wouldnt waste my time on an mmo that limits how the users can enjoy the game. Make pvp servers, and non pvp servers with different rulesets and let us enjoy.

That would not work unless the non-pvp allowed server is 100% (not 99.999999999999%) like the pvp only, but only with pvp.

If the non-pvp server was not 100% similar the pvp one, many non-pvp players would complain about their server saying they dont have something the pvp server has or that they have some unwanted thing that the pvp server dont have.

In fact even if both server were equal, many non pvp players would complain how this would split the userbase into 2.

would never never ever play it.

pve is just too broing.

PVE is boring these days but if you get a good PVE game that doesent pander to the PVP babys then it is far better MMO than any PVP MMO. Actually in most MMO it is PVP that spoiles PVE games because they try to even the classes so nobody has a advantage agaisnt each other and also most of the reason peeps race to top lvl is so they can own others in pvp.

I answered NO because, though I might play a game without PvP for a while, I would not likely stick with it. I am primarily a PvEer (perhaps 80% PvE/20% PvP) who enjoys the change of pace that a good PvP match can provide. I quit LOTRO for this reason primarily.

Originally posted by Romulan78

No. I wouldnt waste my time on an mmo that limits how the users can enjoy the game. Make pvp servers, and non pvp servers with different rulesets and let us enjoy.

Depends on the game and how it was designed. GW2 is an example - PvP only cannot be done - A.Net said the game was not designed that way - sorry.

If you want PvP only ask for a game designed for that.

Often times, PvE and PvP do not mix and balance well.

Sure why not. I could always get pvp from other games if I wanted to.

I voted yes. RPGs shouldn't revolve around PVP, that includes MMO-RPGs. I prefer the team accomplishment in achieving a game goal, finishing a tough storyline, a near-impossible raid/dungeon, than fighting other players.

I only "PVP" in a well structured format, mainly found in FPS/RTS games, where everyone has an equal chance, non-dependant on items, numbers or levels, an unfair advantage. I only like "fair" PVP, as a contest of real skill among the participants. I can do that in FPS/RTS so I have no need to do it in an MMO.