Trending Games | WildStar | World of Warcraft | ArcheAge | Elder Scrolls Online

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,736,505 Users Online:0
Games:713  Posts:6,174,631
Rift (Rift)
Trion Worlds | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Final  (rel 03/01/11)  | Pub:Trion Worlds
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download | Retail Price:Free | Pay Type:Free | Monthly Fee:Free
System Req: PC | Out of date info? Let us know!

General Discussion Forum » The Pub at MMORPG.COM » Bringing PvE and PvP together

2 Pages 1 2 » Search
25 posts found
  Quirhid

Advanced Member

Joined: 1/28/05
Posts: 5492

I dare you to pin a label on me.

 
OP  1/30/13 10:54:35 AM#1

Let me say first that I am not an advocate of open world PvP or nonconsensual PvP although one of the reasons why is the topic of this thread.

PvE and PvP metagames are drastically different. One simple example would be tanking. Frontline melee fighters may be called "tanks" in PvP, but they do not tank damage the same way tanks do in PvE.

Trinity combat in PvE is very formulaic: tank keeps aggro, healer heals the tank, damage dealers do damage until the encounter is done. At worst, this is done one monster at a time. Some additional roles have been added to this, but they are, at best, something one of the main roles could do as a secondary function. Even with additional roles, the trinity stays intact. Infact, the whole thing would fall apart without the trinity. The trinity is the core of generic PvE combat.

Because the two metagames are drastically different, the builds made to engage the chosen content are usually very different as well. Often, PvP puts emphasis on utility and self sustainablity whereas PvE builds commonly do just one thing and rely on their group for other functions (excluding solo builds). For example, in PvP every character usually has some form of CC to either use offensively or defensively whereas in PvE, CC may be the sole focus of one role character in the group with little to no CC on other characters.

You could argue that handling aggro is CC; however, it is the one thing that is completely missing from PvP. Taunting is a cheat which fools the AI to think you are a threat. When there is no taunting, you have to be a threat to make the enemy attack you. Taunt is the easy way to keep enemies from getting to your "squishies".

Instead, you could have a whole toolbox of abilities to protect your allies, through varying forms of CC to pro-active defense. Exactly how you'd do it in PvP! In contrast, often the only form of defense in PvE, is to just keeping aggro on tank and healing the tank. PvP should be the model for PvE combat.

If we bring PvP and PvE closer together, it becomes easier to balance both. Ideally, there wouldn't be PvE builds and PvP builds - just builds. No more "wolves hunting the sheep" because the sheep would also have teeth now. PvE would also serve as a teaching platform for PvP and the shock of moving from one to the other wouldn't be so great.

The topic of this discussion is: How do we bring PvP and PvE together? Or do you even agree they should be brought closer together?

I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  NaughtyP

Novice Member

Joined: 12/02/11
Posts: 795

1/30/13 11:16:42 AM#2

When I purchase a game, it is for all the content not a piece of it. I want all pieces of the puzzle working together, not against each other.

For me, it's not even just PvP and PvE. We now have useless crafting systems in many MMOs, we have little to no exploration in many MMOs. A lot of things that are (imo) core MMO mechanics are either mini-games or side-ventures with little depth.

And that for me is the biggest issue with this PvP-only or PvE-only mentality. The developers should cater to "what's best for the game as a whole", not one specific playstyle. Interdependence not independence.

Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.

  PsiKahn

Apprentice Member

Joined: 12/26/12
Posts: 124

1/30/13 11:19:03 AM#3
I think you raise some good points.  I do think that not every mob should necessarily have the "intelligence" of a player, though it can make sense to a certain extent that certain critters' AI can be "tricked" to make managing them easier.  Things like taunts always ring false for me because they have absolutely no relevance to PvP.  If they are going to use them they should literally be just a taunt, a non-damaging, distracting motion that has some effect on low-intelligence creatures.  Directing AI aggro towards damage on the other hand does make a certain amount of sense for many mobs.  I think a bigger problem is that mobs tend not to have any kind of flight reflex.  Most animals would run away from you on the spot.  And most creatures would run from a losing battle before fighting to the death.  A lot of PvE combat is probably just holdover from old RPGs, but it's definitely worth thinking about what combat should work like in an MMO, and I think you're right that the PvE should much more closely base itself off of the desired PvP combat experience, where you would have something like flight in the face of danger.
  Scottgun

Apprentice Member

Joined: 12/05/07
Posts: 340

1/30/13 11:20:50 AM#4
Originally posted by Quirhid

The topic of this discussion is: How do we bring PvP and PvE together? Or do you even agree they should be brought closer together?

Can't do it. As we established infallibly in this thread , anyone who PVP's at all is a ganker out to ruin everyone else's fun.

How not to sell me on a game: "And most people that make it past the tutorial seem to appreciate [x game's] uniqueness, even if they don't find it fun."

  Quizzical

Guide

Joined: 12/11/08
Posts: 13110

1/30/13 11:34:55 AM#5
If you want to make PVE combat more like PVP, then Trinity combat is entirely the wrong place to start.  Trinity combat relies very heavily on mobs being extraordinarily stupid.  A better place to start is with games that don't use trinity combat, so that you're not locked into mobs needing to be idiots who follow an artificial aggro system.  That way you have more freedom to tinker without worrying that Bob the Really Big Dragon will realize that he can go kill all of the healers in two shots.
  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19117

1/30/13 11:52:50 AM#6
Originally posted by Quirhid

The topic of this discussion is: How do we bring PvP and PvE together? Or do you even agree they should be brought closer together?

My question is WHY do we need to bring them together? Just have different games. Or better yet, have the same classes, and combat mechanics, but separate pve & pvp into different instances. In this case, players who are attached to their toons can use their toons to do both.

I don't see a compelling reason to put both types of game play in the same experience.

  Loktofeit

Elite Member

Joined: 1/13/10
Posts: 11822

Currently playing EVE, SMITE, ESO, and Combat Arms

1/30/13 12:04:20 PM#7
Originally posted by Quirhid


If we bring PvP and PvE closer together, it becomes easier to balance both.

The two were originally together. We've separated them because they are distinctly different. Earlier attempts at separation in UO were in the form of spells and skills affecting players and NPCs differently. Asheron's Call also started creating specialized PVP weapons and armor to address the drastic differences between a player opponent and an NPC opponent. The reason for this is because of AI and mob design. mobs play differently from other players, have different objectives and even have completely different (usually far higher) stats and bonuses.

Since then the separation has continued. AoC and GW2 are examples of MMOs where a separate set of gear is used for PVP than for PVE.

 

To bring them closer one would have to change not only the reason for PvE (levelling, loot acquisition) but also the behaviour and design of the mobs. They would also need to be changed to being a goal unto themselves, not simply a means to another goal - which is what they have been in most dikuMUD influenced MMOs for the past 15 or so years.

 

In a different type of game or a drastically different approach to MMOs it would probably be worth it to bring them back together. For MMOs as presently designed, bringing them back together would just be repeating mistakes of the past.

 

  Xiaoki

Advanced Member

Joined: 3/07/04
Posts: 2422

1/30/13 12:14:46 PM#8

You seem to focus on Tanks in PvP. Your title should have reflected that.


Anyway, there have been MMOs where Tanking abilities were important to PvP.


However, if you want to bring PvE and PvP closer to parity the first step would not be Tanks it would be CC.

  User Deleted
1/30/13 12:18:36 PM#9
Originally posted by Quirhid

 

PvP should be the model for PvE combat.

The topic of this discussion is: How do we bring PvP and PvE together? Or do you even agree they should be brought closer together?

 

Great concept.

 

One of the goals in FPS botmatch was to make AI behavior indistinguishable from human players.  I think the focus on shifting MMORPG PVE towards PVP gameplay would be to rework the AI in a similar manner.

 

On the other side, I like holy-trinity combat.  But in reality I think it's gotten far too formulaic.

 

Brought closer together?  I think a key point in the survival of the MMORPG genre is diversification and variety.  It would be great if a couple games tried reworking combat to change trinity.  I wouldn't want to see the entire genre do it.  That sort of defeats the purpose of innovation.

 

  Loktofeit

Elite Member

Joined: 1/13/10
Posts: 11822

Currently playing EVE, SMITE, ESO, and Combat Arms

1/30/13 12:29:20 PM#10
Originally posted by Xiaoki

You seem to focus on Tanks in PvP. Your title should have reflected that.


Anyway, there have been MMOs where Tanking abilities were important to PvP.


However, if you want to bring PvE and PvP closer to parity the first step would not be Tanks it would be CC.

The first steps are to bring the purpose of the two encounters together and to bring the behavior of the two opponents together. Without changing those, all other changes would just shift the problem to a different set of mechanics.

  DrunkWolf

Hard Core Member

Joined: 5/07/09
Posts: 1049

1/30/13 12:35:56 PM#11
Originally posted by Loktofeit
Originally posted by Xiaoki

You seem to focus on Tanks in PvP. Your title should have reflected that.


Anyway, there have been MMOs where Tanking abilities were important to PvP.


However, if you want to bring PvE and PvP closer to parity the first step would not be Tanks it would be CC.

The first steps are to bring the purpose of the two encounters together and to bring the behavior of the two opponents together. Without changing those, all other changes would just shift the problem to a different set of mechanics.

 I agree with the purpose of the two together. to many times i see in open pvp games no point to actually pvp other than to just kill the guy because he is there.

back in the days of AC we would fight over dungeons or towns to sell your crap. nowhere was safe when you went out to pve you would have to fight for the right to pve in that place if others were there trying to do the same thing.

early days of AOC was the same thing, we fought over hunting spots, it was at max level when the pvp became really stupid. you stand around dueling or just gank each other over and over for NO reason at all. your max level so no need to fight over hunting spots, and if you wanted the gear you go into a safe instance to raid. lame

  Quirhid

Advanced Member

Joined: 1/28/05
Posts: 5492

I dare you to pin a label on me.

 
OP  1/30/13 1:09:10 PM#12
Originally posted by Loktofeit
Originally posted by Xiaoki

You seem to focus on Tanks in PvP. Your title should have reflected that.


Anyway, there have been MMOs where Tanking abilities were important to PvP.


However, if you want to bring PvE and PvP closer to parity the first step would not be Tanks it would be CC.

The first steps are to bring the purpose of the two encounters together and to bring the behavior of the two opponents together. Without changing those, all other changes would just shift the problem to a different set of mechanics.

Lokto replied first.

Yeah, tanking is a good example how the two metagames differ. I know WAR made an effort to bring tanking into PvP, but it felt they were trying to fit a round peg into a square hole - didn't really work all that well.

I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  Quirhid

Advanced Member

Joined: 1/28/05
Posts: 5492

I dare you to pin a label on me.

 
OP  1/30/13 1:22:53 PM#13
Originally posted by Loktofeit
Originally posted by Quirhid


If we bring PvP and PvE closer together, it becomes easier to balance both.

The two were originally together. We've separated them because they are distinctly different. Earlier attempts at separation in UO were in the form of spells and skills affecting players and NPCs differently. Asheron's Call also started creating specialized PVP weapons and armor to address the drastic differences between a player opponent and an NPC opponent. The reason for this is because of AI and mob design. mobs play differently from other players, have different objectives and even have completely different (usually far higher) stats and bonuses.

Since then the separation has continued. AoC and GW2 are examples of MMOs where a separate set of gear is used for PVP than for PVE.

 

To bring them closer one would have to change not only the reason for PvE (levelling, loot acquisition) but also the behaviour and design of the mobs. They would also need to be changed to being a goal unto themselves, not simply a means to another goal - which is what they have been in most dikuMUD influenced MMOs for the past 15 or so years.

 

In a different type of game or a drastically different approach to MMOs it would probably be worth it to bring them back together. For MMOs as presently designed, bringing them back together would just be repeating mistakes of the past.

No, I don't think they've never been together, since mobs have never acted like players. The metagames have always been different, and there has been distinct PvP builds and PvE builds. Take AoC's Demonologist, for example (only class I played for any significant amount), it had essentially one build for PvE and one build for PvP with minor variations. If you didn't roll out either one, you'd be gimping yourself. So basically every Demonologist was exactly the same depending whether you saw them in PvP or in PvE.

I'm sure you see this is not very good game design. And if you ever want to mix the two (PvP and PvE), you wouldn't want that.

I am suggesting drastic changes into MMO design. A completely new way to design encounters and implement combat. Mobs need to have better AI, and difficulty scaling should be done by other means than just beefing up HP.  You are right: these changes would not work or would change very little in a traditional MMO. There's nothing holy for me in the traditional MMO design. Rip it all out if it is not good enough!

I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  Quirhid

Advanced Member

Joined: 1/28/05
Posts: 5492

I dare you to pin a label on me.

 
OP  1/30/13 1:25:20 PM#14
Originally posted by Scottgun
Originally posted by Quirhid

The topic of this discussion is: How do we bring PvP and PvE together? Or do you even agree they should be brought closer together?

Can't do it. As we established infallibly in this thread , anyone who PVP's at all is a ganker out to ruin everyone else's fun.

You can't make a cripple to dance. What I'm proposing is an new approach to encounter design and combat.

I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  Quirhid

Advanced Member

Joined: 1/28/05
Posts: 5492

I dare you to pin a label on me.

 
OP  1/30/13 1:27:52 PM#15
Originally posted by Quizzical
If you want to make PVE combat more like PVP, then Trinity combat is entirely the wrong place to start.  Trinity combat relies very heavily on mobs being extraordinarily stupid.  A better place to start is with games that don't use trinity combat, so that you're not locked into mobs needing to be idiots who follow an artificial aggro system.  That way you have more freedom to tinker without worrying that Bob the Really Big Dragon will realize that he can go kill all of the healers in two shots.

If I didn't make it clear enough in the OP, I'll make it clear now: Abolish the trinity combat! Break it by removing the tank.

I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  User Deleted
1/30/13 1:33:32 PM#16
Originally posted by Quirhid
 

If I didn't make it clear enough in the OP, I'll make it clear now: Abolish the trinity combat! Break it by removing the tank.

 

Isn't that pretty much the GW2 approach?  No aggro management in the pure sense, but aggro control via CC and evasion done by all classes.

 

  maplestone

Novice Member

Joined: 12/10/08
Posts: 3109

1/30/13 1:43:22 PM#17

Ultimately, the metagame is determined by AI.  The mechanics are simply a refections of this, evolving to make the most fun possible out of the situation.  Tanks don't exist because early developers chose to make a trinity, tanks exist because players learned that finding out how to focus the AI's attention on the person who could absorb/evade the most damage was the best strategy.  Constantly tweaking and retweaking the AI to avoid these degenerate strategies was a bottomless pit of coding and recoding.

  Quirhid

Advanced Member

Joined: 1/28/05
Posts: 5492

I dare you to pin a label on me.

 
OP  1/30/13 1:45:53 PM#18
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by Quirhid

The topic of this discussion is: How do we bring PvP and PvE together? Or do you even agree they should be brought closer together?

My question is WHY do we need to bring them together? Just have different games. Or better yet, have the same classes, and combat mechanics, but separate pve & pvp into different instances. In this case, players who are attached to their toons can use their toons to do both.

I don't see a compelling reason to put both types of game play in the same experience.

I'm not proposing to put "same types of gameplay in the same experience". I'm proposing to have only one type of gameplay.

  • First, I see it would be very important if open world PvP was implemented. Like I said, no more wolves (PvP builds) hunting the sheep (PvE builds).
  • Second, to try and sue the assets and content much more efficiently. It is less than ideal to have different classes, builds and skills versions for every type of gameplay.
  • Third, I really don't care for trinity combat. I feel its been done to death and I've never been a fan of it.

I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  Trudge34

Hard Core Member

Joined: 8/08/12
Posts: 388

1/30/13 1:56:05 PM#19
I don't really think you can bring the two close together without watering down the classes a bit for the sake of balance, that so far has reduced the range of encounters you will be able to create from them. To bring them closer, the players will have to accept some form of imbalance between classes IMO. There's a reason that PvP MMOs can typically be counted on one hand, although I'm sure there is a constant balance struggle between all the classes in those games too.

Played: EQ1 (10 Years), Guild Wars, Rift, TERA
Tried: EQ2, Vanguard, Lord of the Rings Online, Dungeons and Dragons Online, Runes of Magic and countless others...
Currently Playing: GW2

Nytlok Sylas
80 Sylvari Ranger

  dave6660

Hard Core Member

Joined: 9/26/08
Posts: 2320

"Next time I see you, remind me not to talk to you."

1/30/13 2:09:53 PM#20

I'd prefer they head in the opposite direction and try to separate the two more.  My favorite mmorpg's are the ones where the game focuses on one or the other.  When they try to make hybrids both aspects suffer.

"Why so serious?"
-- The Joker

2 Pages 1 2 » Search