Community Spotlight - PvP in MMOs: What Gamers Want
This week in her MMORPG.com Community Forum Spotlight column, Community Manager Laura Genender discusses user blog involving PvP and what kinds of experiences players are looking for.
High end content in MMOs is basically restricted to one of two paths: raids, which require players to work together against large events or creatures; or PvP, which allows players to generate their own high-end challenges against each other. For our community, at the very least, it is the latter which seems to be catching the most attention.
Perhaps that’s no big surprise; after all, two of the big upcoming giants – Age of Conan and Warhammer Online – are mostly centered around PvP. Current popular games such as World of Warcraft and Guild Wars offer plenty of PvP, too. But for user T0nyd, this isn’t enough.
In a blog entry titled “PVP MMORPGs, are they real?” T0nyd outlines the features he believes are key in any MMO PVP experience:
“For me to call an MMORPG a PVP game,” T0nyd, starts, “I want to be able to level from 1 to max through PvP. I am not saying that I believe no PvE should exist. I am just saying that I believe if I choose I should be able to gain EXP and advance through the killing of other players.” Through T0nyd’s description I can imagine a starting area with multiple starting NPCs, oftering you quests to kill monsters, make armor, or kill other players. While some of us obsessive gamers (like myself) would likely feel compelled to complete all of them, it would allow players to choose – if they desire – how to advance.
The downside is, once the newbie area entered out (as most MMO newbie areas do), would the PvPer be out of luck for finding kills? Game populations fluctuate over time, with more new players coming in near release and expansions. Those in between times are often low on pickings, and any new player would be forced to bypass PvP.
T0nyd’s next idea concerns the PvP quest system. “Why does it always have to be kill (insert number) of pigs/rabbits. Why cant kill (insert number) of orcs mean orc players as well. Why cant there be a quest to take a keep from an opposing faction.” Me, I think this would be pretty fun – it takes an easily made and somewhat monotonous quest style and spices it up with non-artificial intelligence. As with above I see an issue if players have to perform group events, or are assigned to take an unoccupied keep; I think that this would have to be an instanced sort of “match up” system to balance the defenders vs. attackers. But assuming we can solve the issue of low numbers, this seems like an excellent plan.
And of course, where there are quests, there must be rewards! “You should obtain useful equipment doing what it is that you like doing, be that crafting, killing mobs, or killing players,” Asserts T0nyd. And while we’re at it, T0nyd suggests a change in armor as we know it in MMOs. “What happened to the days of armor is armor in rpgs. Yeah, equipment should matter. The question is, how much should it matter?” This reminds me a bit of Guild Wars, where gear is a factor but not the end-all be-all it’s become in several other games. Assuming class and skill balance is done correctly, the player starts to determine the outcome of PvP instead of the character. I’m a big fan of player skill-based systems.
In a slightly more bitter tone, T0nyd continues his discussion with a look at instances and PvP. “Why do games avoid world PvP?” He asks. “Why do games avoid actual objectives in world PvP? Back when WoW was released I loved fighting over South Shore. To bad South Shore wasn't some objective. To bad SS and Tarren Mill couldn't be conquered by either faction. This might actually involve players enjoying themselves so we cant have that. Instead lets make little isolated areas called instances and lets have the players fight there. Also lets not have these little instances matter at all. Great concept, err no.”
While I empathize with T0nyd, I understand why instances are favored in development: it allows players to play out a story so to speak, which is uninterrupted by the outside world that chooses not to participate. Buildings can fall, cities can burn, and it doesn’t actually change the gameplay of anyone else. In fact, almost every player will get to be the hero of Miscellaneous Burning Town.
While we all think “why would they do that?!” there is actually a good number of players who enjoy this style of gameplay. With that being said, I would like to see an MMO with more world-wide events just like T0nyd. In fact, a compromise: like DAoC or CoH/V, I think it’s great to have certain areas which are effected by player ownership status – but not all areas. The game better be balanced though!
Read the rest of T0nyd’s blog entry here.
I've always enjoyed T0nyd's postings, and of course the features by Stradden. I remember reading the blog and thinking:
Warhammer is pretty much aiming to fill all of those PvP needs.
PvP only from level 1 to level 40 - check
Quests designed for PvP - check
Rewards from PvP - check
Gear from PvP - check
Territorial control in PvP - check
but also with a full PvE game included.
While I would love to see a fun PvP game, I am always wary of the lack of good PvE content. It is hard to get the proper mix of both play styles and keep most players happy. I would hope that WAR or Conan will bring a play style that can be a perfect blend of both.
There is nothing that I like more than sticking a caster with an arrow from a hill top or grouping through a good dungeon.
If only more people knew about DAoC. DAoC allows a person to level up from 1-50 in PvP or PvE. I can't think of a better made game than DAoC. Only reason why I don't play it anymore is because of the low population numbers. Which is why I say "If only more people knew about DAoC."
Planetside.
You want PvP 24 x 7? That's all it is. You lvl simply through PvP. I've played many of the MMOs out there and there were none that came close to providing the thrill of the incredible battles in PS. That being said, after all the work of taking over a tower, a base or a planet, going stealth, getting a MAX suit or just sitting back and sniping...it gets old. For this reason you need to have PvE content, to take a break from the same-old-same-old. You need to create value to each of your battles - taking over a base just didn't mean anything after a while in PS because the next day someone else would have it. It's not like there was any tangible benefit to having taken it over, other then whooping the other team - and don't get me wrong - that was a blast. But if that's all there is, it's probably not enough.
When discussing this topic I've always said if they can mix the excitement of PS with a WOW, EQ, etc. then you've got yourself a kick-ass game. Can AOC or War do it? I'm just as eager to find out as everyone else.
Exactly what i planned to write :)
he was spot on about south shore in wow - i loved the pvp there before pvp even gave you any recognition or reward. i thought it was a great bit of the game that overlapped pvp with pve and there really should have been some pvp objectives there to complete (if you wanted). sadly, the implementation of pvp in wow killed the game for me.
as for daoc, when i used to play it you couldn't really do pvp until about level 20 or so, but had a lot of fun when i did get to do pvp. tthey did introduce pure pvp servers at one point, but i don't remember being able to level by doing pvp - it was a matter of doing pve and hoping you didn't get pasted and hope you got invited to one of the larger guilds for protection. eventually thugh i got bored before i managed to max out my character, mainly because i was playing on american servers from the uk.
so thanks to mythic, i am very much looking forward to warhammer online!
i never really understood why pvp wasn't a bigger part of all mmorpgs really - i mean fps games have always been pvp - so why not rpgs?
I think the important thing is making PvP matter in the game world.
The concept of having certain quests open up when a town is taken is good - it gives a reason to fight.
Instanced PvP doesnt give this reason and is only good for casual gamer play.
While I think PvP is popular, it is still not as popular as plain ole PvE. While WoW PvP lost its flavor to me I tried to figure out why. My conclusion is that I don't like competing against humans... in RL as well as games. I love a great discussion with humans though because there are opinions that can't be wrong, therefore no winner or loser, just an exchange of ideas. Opinions in games can only be expressed in a textual form but not a game mechanic, unless you're talking about the expression involved with costuming like CoH/V.
Anarchy Online definitely had a super PvP system that involved a changing world as territories changed sides and Notum posession was the holy grail. But like DaoC it went the way of the dodo because by today's standards they are both graphically inept.
SWG had a great system of player killing that allowed leveling up while hunting players (bounty hunter) and would still be sweet if it wasn't for the "big change" it underwent to accomodate kids and their need for "make me a Jedi or I won't play" attitude.
spot on ... which reminds me of daoc (again) - the faction with the most keeps had access to darkness falls (a dungeon). i don't think it was the sole reason people did pvp but if a faction were close people did tend to pile in and help out and then run like to hell to darkness falls and wipe out the players from other factions who were still inside when access changed.
good times! damn, i'm almost tempted to go and re-roll a shammy...
For thos of us that want their PvP and PvE sepperated ( And i am sure this is the majorrity of all MMO players...weather they realise it or not) ...DAoC was the holy grail. It gave you the feeling of world PvP with good clear objectives. without interfering with PvE
Also it made me realise that by havinf 3 parties or more in a PvP conflict....there is another extra twist, that makes it speciall.
I totally disagree with the FFA PvP ideas implanted in the brains of many people..... the same people that start whining after being ganked in FFA PvP 5 times in an hour.
I believe all MMORPG's fail at pvp combat.
They succeed in griefing and ganking.
PvP means to me a fight between players where the skill of the player (not the arbitrary power of a toon leveled to 50 or whatever) decides the outcome. WW2 Online, Planetside, etc, are examples of this kind of PvP. Everyone has a chance to win for the most part (rifleman vs tiger, not so much, but Tigers are super rare, and rifleman are not). Besting an opponent in this style of combat is a rewarding experience for me.
In MMORPG's however, aside from the somehat balanced small instances in some of them (BG's in WoW etc) typically devolve into one sided gank fests (DAOC, L2, Shadowbane, AO, etc). Without balance, you have grief. Superior numbers and levels wins the day. Every... single.... time........ That would bore the hell out of me, but apparently there are sufficient numbers of sociopaths in the world that it makes game developers think of them first (PotBS, Warhammer, AoC) when designing new games. I find no joy in ganking someone 5 or 6 on 1. That's not fun for me, and I shudder to think of what kind of person it is who does find it enjoyable (Did they boil puppies alive when they were younger? Put firecrackers into frogs?)
And on the opposite side, the person who gets ganked 5-6 on 1 will find it unenjoyable as well. They'll probably cancel the account if it gets bad enough (Shadowbane anyone?) This kind of PvP where levels and items and time played (and numbers) matter far more than skill is self defeating for the developer. Sure, you don't have to provide end game content as these people are more than willing to sit at a spawn point for hours on end waiting for a helpless victim to come along.... but sooner or later, the game runs out of helpless victims and it goes under.
As for why most games aren't Open PvP, I wonder why... its these same sociopaths who'd ruin it for everyone but themselves. Its why we have laws in our societies. We shouldn't NEED them, but there are people, just as in these games, who'd go out of their way to mess with everyone (or worse) if they weren't in place. And sometimes even the laws don't stop them and they have to be jailed or put down (see the colorado religious school shootings just yesterday). Wouldn't suprise me if the idiot who went on the shooting spree was a griefer in some MMORPG.
Nice read but whoever said that AOC was pvp centered or is that just the hype or even wishful thinking for that matter. Yes, AOC will have pvp but a large portion of the game will be centered around character progression and raids as well.
Warhammer goes a different path which is purely pvp centered. If I am going to play Warhamemr it is strictly going to be for pvp purposes. Being able to pvp through the entire game is a huge plus for pvpers.
<p>Originally posted by eric_w66</p><p>I find no joy in ganking someone 5 or 6 on 1. That's not fun for me, and I shudder to think of what kind of person it is who does find it enjoyable (Did they boil puppies alive when they were younger? Put firecrackers into frogs?)
----------------------------------------------------------
Dammit I hate this editor, lol</p><p></p><p></p><p><br>When I played MUD's back in the early 90's they were seperated into PK or non-PK muds. (player killing, not the care-bear term PvP we have nowadays).</p><p><br>People who played and enjoyed PK muds were generally the mentally disturbed or had difficulty in normal social situations. I asked one guy his reasons for playing PK muds. I remember to this day what he said... "there's no greater joy than watching someone work every day to accumulate their equipment and levels, and then taking it all away from them by killing them, and then laughing"</p><p>I just can't be that cold-blooded. And even though much of the face of PKing has changed to be more care-bear (no looting, no xp loss, no eq deterioration), I still do not have a taste for defeating another player.</p>
I don't raid - its boring. I don't PVP - its frustrating since the same guy you popped 15 minutes ago will be back and in your face again with no real penalty for death. Don't get me wrong. I've played PVP - Planetside was a little bit of a thrill ride even though i sucked most heinously 90% of the time - the problem is many fold - preventing 'exploits' can also prevent strategy from being effective and it can come down to who has the best gear which can be ebayed by the impatient or camped for levels and gear by the jobless who actually have time to spend 80 hours a week *just* playing the game.
All i want to do is hang out, kill a few things with my buddies, maybe have a tavern to play cards in or dice or something while we socialize and wait for the rest of the party to show up, do some crafting that isn't as tedious as taking up the profession in real life, nor so easy that its a push the button get 200 bandages or whatever, do some funny stuff, and be able to smack mouthy 'tards up side the head.
PVP *sounds* great, and in theory, i'd be all over it. except it isn't great. Its full of griefers who camp people 20 levels lower than they are because somehow it makes them feel good to kill things that are no challenge and prove their manhood. Corpse camping, zoneline camping, and note above - exploit prevention actually favors the griefers because there is no acutal executable strategy available in most games to sneak past em/outsmart em etc etc.
The effort of learning to survive long enough in a pvp world to enjoy it isn't cost effective in time - i only have so much time to devote to the game per day and trust me, i have more than a lot of people.
I'd like to see a more realistic game world run by players, where animals behaved like animals and deer didnt' turn to attack when you shot them with a bow, bunnies didn't chew your peasant legs off, and a fox could not kill a level one ranger in 2 hits. Where if some player character named KILLYOUALLNOOBS! was being a pain, people could band together and kill him - permanantly.
I just don't think its ever going to happen. Too many people are more interested in exploiting the games than playing within the concept and rules to make that sort of environment work.
That sounds all good but when you really get down to it, Players will always fall back into the pve leveling routine because they know they can level faster that way. I'd level the pvp way because I'm not a player that does the rat race leveling but instead I take my time and enjoy the game in a different way.... So basically for all those people that want to level up pvp'ing then stick with it and don't switch when someone passes you in level.
Actually SWG had an ability that allowed the town militia to make people in their town attackable if they didn't leave within a certain period of time. Unfortunately do to an unfortunate incident involving kicking out a csr from a town and then ganking him, the ability was revoked. Not sure if that was the sole reason the ability was removed, but I remember it made quite a stink at the time. Made for a good screenshot too
>>>Unfortunately do to an unfortunate incident involving kicking out a csr from a town and then ganking him, the ability was revoked. <<<
Omg tragically funny.
Sadly though, that's what happens to *all* strategy in the games - someone figures out how to exploit it and the ability is removed, leaving us with the same homogenized pap that all games start to deteriorate into as time passes and rather than find and aggressively ban people who exploit, they remove the exploitable content.
I understand - its business, and they just can't get rid of everyone who does it without catching some people who are not doing so and they can't just ban everyone or the games would be kinda empty. But trust me. I've complained about some really nasty behavior in game, and i've worked as a helper in a game and found that we're not actually able, in most open-to-the-public games, to do much about it until certain legal lines are crossed.
Leveling to 50 via pvp or pve or both is great till u actully hit max level then what?
Spend countless hours trying to get a group to kill a mob u cant get to because a guild of 100 players is camping the spot ready to gank you when u enter the zone, (daoc pvp server toa entrance spot anyone?)
And since u cant get the gear to compete u think of buying in game money for real money to to find out u need a grand real money to have enough in game money to buy the top tier stuff to compete with due to inflated prices.
So in short i dont mind pvp at all its fun at times but more frustration then fun most of the time.
Pvp rewards the person who plays 80 hours a week. The more ya gank the more your rewarded via Rp's or skill points or what ever the sytem the games chooses to use.
Pvp game with out pvp kill reward system is what im waiting for like when Daoc first came out u got rps but they didnt mean squat, u killed other player for the thrill and sport of killing them. Taking the relics then going back home with it.
18 months later Toa and pvp reward system = 300k casual player base went by,by.
6 years later your left with the Hardcore players all whining there is no one left to kill or i killed a noob 13 times in 25 minutes man it was funny, ROFL!!!!!
PvP rewards=Casual Player Fodder..
"Actually SWG had an ability that allowed the town militia to make people in their town attackable if they didn't leave within a certain period of time. Unfortunately do to an unfortunate incident involving kicking out a csr from a town and then ganking him, the ability was revoked. Not sure if that was the sole reason the ability was removed, but I remember it made quite a stink at the time. Made for a good screenshot too "
-----------------------------
I totally remember that. Classic flashback points for you.
Real PvP was in Neocron till they ruined it :(
What we need is less fantasy mmos getting tired of sword swinging and elf RPer pervs.
For real PvP we need to have Rockstar make a Grand Theft Auto MMO with Gangs, Thugs, Cops, Swat and military all playable with player owned safe houses.
Now thats a game ill play for a long time!
So come on Rockstar make GTA Online!
I think this blog would have been more accurately titled "What SOME Gamers Want". THIS gamer certainly does NOT want PvP in her MMOs. There are all kinds of players out there with all kinds of likes and dislikes; thankfully, there are games to fit most tastes.
That is why I like Guild Wars--it keeps the PvP separate from the PvE. Players can kill each other to their hearts' content, but they don't bother those of us who do not relish getting ganked and griefed.
I couldn't quite understand the assertion that high end content is restricted to raids and PvP--Guild Wars Eye of the North fairly reeks of high end content that majors on PvE. I am sure other games can be cited that exercise similar creativity, although Guild Wars is a real gem.
I realize that I am doing exactly what I tweaked the blogger for doing--touting his own likes. But I am not claiming that all gamers want the same thing I do--it is just my gaming preference.
I prefer PvE. PvP is purely a fantasy, a 'wouldn't it be nice' sort of thing where the 'bad guys' would play to lose or to defend their own turf rather htan gank people.
I am not a competitive gamer - what i want is to go in and fight with, not against, other players to take down opponents. I actually don't *care* if its pvp or pve as long as i am having fun with a group of friends. Until roleplaying games came along, i did not play games. like... at all. having to compete with any friend - poker, chess, atari shoot em ups - whatever - they really lacked appeal.
WITH. not AGAINST!
Always.
I agree with the some of the previous posters about DAoC. The pvp (RvR as they called it) felt more meaningful than other game's attempts. Instanced pvp is fun but has no impact on the game as a whole. Why, steal an enemy realm's relic and you just gave everyone in your realm a buff where ever they are. Their battlegrounds were non-instanced, only 5 levels (1-4, 5-9, etc) and had a keep that could be seiged and seized.
The problem with pvp is that it takes only 1 person to ruin things for a lot of people. Think about real life cops. If just ONE cop is found to be corrupt, it will jade the public into thinking most of the cops are corrupt.. even if they aren't. Same thing in pvp, if one player goes around ganking people.. those people will think that everyone who pvp's ganks.
Unfortunately there are cruel, petty and immature people in the world and many of them play MMO's. The anonymity of the internet only encourages these types of people to ruin people's gameplay. Heck I even knew a guy who said that his main reason of playing WAS to ruin other people's gameplay. My enjoyment from pvp comes from defeating an opponent that was challenging and had a realistic chance of defeating me. One shotting a player 60 levels below me, who I could of went afk and had lunch and still be alive, is not my idea of fun or "1337 gaming skilz".
IMHO Alianse Battles in GW:Factions is way to go. Your opposite is same level as you and battle result depends of fight skills and tactic (except if there is afkers or leavers). Also this is fight for territory and towns. But this is only basic for good pvp and need to be improved.
I like the Lineage 2 PvP system, i will point out the things i like in PvP.
The PvP system should have features like:
1. Why should you want to kill a player ?:
- take his (or his guild's) castle or zone control, wars between guilds,
- kill him for PvP Rank (will increase damage with any weapon, become more strong),
- take his items (if or when he drops them),
- penalty system (become hated and hunted).
2. When you get killed:
- decrease your experience (delevel),
- if you are hunted, drop items off your char or from your inventory.
I've never seen an online game deal with ganking in a realistic way. Think about it in RL. If I were to mug and stab someone coming out a vendor, I'd immediately be wanted by the law. This means that everywhere I went, I'd have to be very careful not to get recognized. If I did this serially, ganking several people over time, I'd become more and more wanted by the law. Furthermore, due to the violence of my "muggings", the law would probably be just as likely to kill me as arrest me.
This is the kind of realism I'd like to see added to PvP in games. You want to be a robber and mugger? Go ahead, but expect realistic consequences.
ever consider some people just dont like PVP for one reason or another?
some for moral reasons disslike killing/slaughtering and killing a charactor run by another player is beyond what they are willing to do,,
others comes down to effectivly unfair fights pure PVPers vs casual/part time PVPers sort of like a navy seal vs bill the construction worker its usually worse because games dont allow for gurilla tactics or effective ambushes .
I generally dont like dieing in a game and especially dont like dieing when Im so outclassed out matched im not having any fun.
Im playing EVE right now and it has free for all PVP and its crippling EVE only 200k accounts
and people are so crouded into the "noob" areas its overloading the server as of last report 78% of the players were in high security space and only 22% were out in low security.
for ma as a casual player "carebear" to want to get involved in PVP several things are required
1. there must be some relativly safe areas where i can play unharassed
2. there must be half way areas where you can fight but not get killed, so that casual players can practice without the unacceptably high risk of getting killed,, bloody and wounded yes.. this would allow players to test themselves and to practice tor more hostile locations.
3. there must be some way that as a casual player that I can last long enough in a fight to feel that i wasnt just meat for someone elses grinder and that I feel that my fighting/death was valuable to my side in short if im gonna risk getting killed I want a very good reason just because its PVP is NOT a good enough reason for me,, just because there is a fort to fight over is pointless to me,, what does the fort posession offer? there is no starvation in games so its not about capturing more farmland or supplies politicol might be another reason if players gave a crap about who is their king.
You don't remember being able to PvP in the 15-19 BG's? Well, no matter, because about 2 years ago they introduced BG's for 1-5, 6-10, and 11-14 in addition to the other ones. Plus, they created a 1-5 & 6-10 mini DF type dungeons in additions to the new BG's. Plus, every level can enter New Frontiers and PvP. I remember going to New Frontiers with my guild in my teens and gaining all kinds of levels. The enemy doesn't know what level you are, so you are helping by making your realm seem like it has more power than it really does. So you've always been able to PvP from lvl 1-50, you just chose not to for one reason or another.
PLANETSIDE got all weard and dimentional whic makes it TOTALLY suck
they should have went the way of starship troopers with dropships and zero g space stations
it would have attracted alot more people.
I played PS for a while but the endless back and forth battles became prety pointless without other content
it was better once they made bases more secure by putng doors in.
to me a good game would also include functioning fortifications and defences balisti cantipults oil cauldrons gates and drawbridges and differing races would have different equipment and tactics like battle elephants or attack wolves
I think the key to success with PVP MMO's is for devs to realise instanced play whilst popular when we all sit round talking about it - isn't people's favoured route in practise.
Look at Blizzard and what they did... brought out the battleground instances to kill open world PvP. The BG's were really enjoyable but the absence of world pvp focus alienated people and left them with only a soft PvE focus. So prior to and after the Burning Crusade expansion they shifted their focus back. (a little too late for some).
Look at Lord of the Rings Online. The monster play whilst separate from the PVE game isn't number balanced. At any time you can enter and the odds can be for you or against you. But search the forums - you will not find a single post by any player asking for numbers to be balanced like the WoW BG's were.
DAoC is probably the best and most successful RvR game currently at retail. Are the numbers balanced?
People like freedom to be able to come and go as they please. People like risk and adversity. People like open world PvP.
And I agree with the OP that the first MMO to come along and offer a route to the level cap entirely through PvP will gain a lot of support. Warhammer Online is shaping up nicely for that so keep an eye on it.
I totally agree its these low life jerks that cause many to quit or leave in SWG people would camp the hospital and if someone did actually kill the guy,, he would respawn at the clone center 100 ft away
another time these guys droped an enemy base at minimum range outside the major rebel town and bases were basicly invulnerable and had a bug so you could shoot from inside, and they had poison makers that were effectivly weapons of mass destruction. when it came down to it the rebels actually had to stop assaulting the base and attack the developers with mass petitions and mass forum spams for them to get off their ass and do something. i wonder what it was like for them to get several hundred petitions all on the same thing or to have every forum held hostage.
in eve ive had so many unarmed haulers and miners destroyed by gankers that I left eve
PVPers are basicly cowards and want easy cheap kills i call em puppy killers because their idea of enjoyment is by harassint the weak and defenceless and game mechanics promote this type of harassment, because developers dont play their own games makes you want to find a dev and ambush him with a 2x4 in the face.
heres a hint, make your CSR/DEV avatars either invulnerable or badasses. theres allways gonns be someone that wants to take on a dev/god.
I love RVR. It gives real purpose and meaning to pvp.I look forward to Guild Wars 2 and the promise of some intelligence and understanding of how to construct and managie an rvr oriented game.
Isnt there enough fantasy style MMOs? come on the developers for MMOs need to look into something new!
click on game list and sort by genre.
NEED NEW IDEAS! not same old games with minor differences
cant wait for Huxley omg something different oO
If its sword swinging arrow shooting you want go for it but my god, we need a change of pace!
Need more PvP based games with balance get tired of the games that you need to quest by collecting (insert body part) and turning it into (random name thats barely pronounceable) or "grinding" a bajillion mobs. i see these types of games and keep moving.
I kinda feel PvP is an essential part of MMOs, because at least for me I enjoy that element of uncertainty. Also I like PvE as much as the next guy, but when you or your leaders can go online and get the easiest way to kill some raid boss it seems to lack some fun.
What I look for in an MMO besides fun is can I PvP when I feel like it and can I PvE without having to worry about that one guy who like to kill people when they are PvEing. Personally I'm not a huge fan of a
a set number vs. a set number I like my PvP with a little unevenness sometimes. I think the unevenness helps to control people who feel the need to "twink" characters. That and the set numbers are usually fairly low like a max of 15 or so, not saying all are, but most. And who doesn't love huge armies clashing with at least 50 people in each all trying to take/defend some base. DAOC's RvR is most likely gonna be the end all be all of my favorite "PvP".
DAOC (best PvP I've ever seen), if they do Warhammer in the same style I just might have to pick it up.
Full Control of you char and the fight.. which means NO Click to walk with the mouse.
Eve Online has the best PvP system I have ever seen. For PvP to be good there has to be sever consequences for loosing and rewards for winning. I will never enjoy a faction-based PvP system again after playing Eve. Free-for-all is where it is at! Yes it is a pain for the developers to balance and get right but if they do they will pull every PvP fan to their game.
If you haven't PvP'd in Eve Online I suggest you do. There is a very steep learning curve but you can PvP effectively in just a few days. For fun I rolled a pirate alt and after 3 days of training I was able to school a 23-day old character. I have never had a such a rush from a game before. Come on... did your heart rate ever double while grinding in WSG?
Eve Online gives you this adrenaline rush because one false move can set you back weeks of ISK (game money). In Eve, death hurts, and that is why it is so much fun. To put it in WoW terms it would be like loosing your Tier 3 armor set when you die. Some of it would be damaged beyond repair but some of it would lie there on the ground for anyone to pick up. Sounds harsh but space is a harsh place...
If you do try it out, read a lot and join a training corporation like Eve University on day one.
I think pvp needs one thing, risk, that's it, politics are the best part about eves pvp.
Realm vs Realm....Faction vs Faction is with out a doubt the greatest pvp for me.Game companys need to understand players want to actively participate in the fun...sooner rather than later. Asian companys to date have not shown this understanding.Mythic has shown they understand this but they make poor reckless,class design decisions..and constantly make class changes which drives many players away(myself included).
Quote:
"While I empathize with T0nyd, I understand why instances are favored in development: it allows players to play out a story so to speak, which is uninterrupted by the outside world that chooses not to participate. Buildings can fall, cities can burn, and it doesn’t actually change the gameplay of anyone else. In fact, almost every player will get to be the hero of Miscellaneous Burning Town."
which mean it's pointless and that is the problem with the pvp in most MMORPG's but I do like you chiming in because it shows just how out of touch you are with those of us that pvp
The best games overall in the future will be games that have pve servers and pvp servers and design content for both playstyles. The carebears can still pose in a city square somewhere with the lastest gear, waiting for the next expansion. Those of us that prefer the challenge that only another human being can offer can enjoy the playstyle we prefer.
Combining the two different playstyles on one server will always lose. The carebears will cry they got ganked (even if it was only one person that killed them which(always cracks me up) and the people that pvp will get tired of hearing how the person they killed are now going to petition them.
It will never work and has never worked. Think somebody would learn by now.
I disagree, the best game will have servers where PvE and PvP happens in the same world.. just in different zones.....and if you PvE in PvP zones , which is still possible, you'll get double XP. Next to that the majorrity want clear goals when playing a game, this goes for both the PvE and the PvP part.... most people just don't like runnibng around and killing things at random anymore.
The big bad future MMO hit will incorporate both their PvP and PvE in storylines. All big bad PvP centered MMO's have failed misserably in the past (Goes for europe and US) While atleast some PvE only games have florished. The onl;y PvP game that did very good was DAoC....and thats because they had the PvP somewhat like i discribed above.
Back then almost all hardcore PvP players joined DAoC... adn stayed there for a long time, when they finally released PvP servers in the US they failed misserably because even most die hard PvP ers actually turned out loving the orriginall system better theb an FFA gankfest...
I really enjoyed the article, and it is one of the better ones I have read. I tend to comment on articles that I really like or really dislike.
ENG-GAME OPTIONS
1. Raiding
The developers have to avoid the binary options in terms of end-game: 1) Raid or 2) PvP. The community hates, and in many respects always hated, raiding (please see my post discussing the shortcoming of raiding www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/160036).
2. PvP
I am not a big fan of PvP, and I think it should be an element in MMORPGs. Nevertheless, similar to raiding, I think people want 1) world immersion, 2) character customization, 3) Deep Questing, and 4) group-cooperative gameplay. PvP is a poor replacement for raiding for end-game content. I might write something with a poll similar to the one on raiding linked above.
3. Many and Varied Options
The "end-game" should be a litany of activities players can choose from, including but not limited to developing and defending a player-owned castle (PvP) to deep Questing that requires solo, group, and perhaps even raid elements. The enjoyment of group-cooperative gameplay in PvE dungeons at the end-game should remain. Developers are forcing us to either raid or PvP (or grind faction). Players want more opportunities for world immersion, character customization, deep Questing, and varied content options from solo, group, and even raiding.