Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

From your experience, does pvp ruin communities? (Poll)

FredomSekerZFredomSekerZ Long Beach, CAPosts: 1,156Member

WAIT: i'm NOT  talking about open world pvp without safe areas, rule system or any kind of mechanics to keep it under control.

I myself like owpvp, but hate lowbie gankers, which are usually the biggets problem. I believe rules and structure are necessary, but that's another topic.

From your experince with mmorpg pvp, DAOC, SWG, Lineage 2, EVE, FE, GW, WOW, WAR, AOC, AION, anything, do you feel the pvp community is far too harsh and immature, or do you find them respectfull enough?

Let's be realistic here- PVP is competetion, which brings out that competative drive and desire to win in all of us. That much is obvious and, to a certain extent, necessary.

However, there is a clear difference between being an a-hole whole as too much of an elitist, and being a "leader", expecting it's team to do well, follow guild plans, etc. It is a battle after all. A good player will teach and be patient with others. (This also translates into pve even)

There's also something intereting IMHO. Arena/BG style is more of a sports type duel which can bring the drive out alot more, while a more "community-driven" pvp with territory control adn large scale can lead to nice teamwork.

And finally, when i say "PVP community" i'm not trying to say that's all players do, like myself.

Many variables exist, but still, do you feel the overall pvp community is good or bad, or in between?

«1

Comments

  • jmcdermottukjmcdermottuk LiverpoolPosts: 976Member Uncommon

    It's for too complicated a question to answer with a general yes/no answer so I had to pick a mix of good and bad. If you take the RvR from DAoC and compare it to Mortal Online, for instance. One game had structure and safeguards in place allowing PvP in certain areas and provided large areas where players could avoid PvP, the other has the FFA PvP with Full Loot system that can be and often is abused.

     

    The answer will vary depending on which game you look at.

  • FredomSekerZFredomSekerZ Long Beach, CAPosts: 1,156Member
    Originally posted by jmcdermottuk

    It's for too complicated a question to answer with a general yes/no answer so I had to pick a mix of good and bad. If you take the RvR from DAoC and compare it to Mortal Online, for instance. One game had structure and safeguards in place allowing PvP in certain areas and provided large areas where players could avoid PvP, the other has the FFA PvP with Full Loot system that can be and often is abused.

     

    The answer will vary depending on which game you look at.

    I completly agree. But that«s why in my OP, i put owpvp without rules out right there. It leads to out of control ganking and griefing. I understand different experiences exist, but that's why i was acording to those same experiences.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,675Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jmcdermottuk

    It's for too complicated a question to answer with a general yes/no answer so I had to pick a mix of good and bad. If you take the RvR from DAoC and compare it to Mortal Online, for instance. One game had structure and safeguards in place allowing PvP in certain areas and provided large areas where players could avoid PvP, the other has the FFA PvP with Full Loot system that can be and often is abused.

     

    The answer will vary depending on which game you look at.

    Exactly. The question is far too broad, and the choices are preferences not reasons.

    Rules, penalties, power disparity, diveristy, rewards, social tools.... it's the mechanics and features of PVP implementation that make or break the community aspect of it, not the style of the PVP. If you look at PVP MMOs that had solid communities that extended beyond the guild unit, you have all types of PVP represented. Examples: UO and EVE (FFA, RvR, GvG),  DAoC (RvR), L2/GW (GvG in both matches and largescale)

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • antshock35antshock35 cumming, GAPosts: 114Member
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by jmcdermottuk

    It's for too complicated a question to answer with a general yes/no answer so I had to pick a mix of good and bad. If you take the RvR from DAoC and compare it to Mortal Online, for instance. One game had structure and safeguards in place allowing PvP in certain areas and provided large areas where players could avoid PvP, the other has the FFA PvP with Full Loot system that can be and often is abused.

     

    The answer will vary depending on which game you look at.

    Exactly. The question is far too broad, and the choices are preferences not reasons.

    Rules, penalties, power disparity, diveristy, rewards, social tools.... it's the mechanics and features of PVP implementation that make or break the community aspect of it, not the style of the PVP. If you look at PVP MMOs that had solid communities that extended beyond the guild unit, you have all types of PVP represented. Examples: UO and EVE (FFA, RvR, GvG),  DAoC (RvR), L2/GW (GvG in both matches and largescale)

     To be honest I think theres 2 main type of players rpers and pvpers .....The thing I hate is that now every mmo has to incluude both when one or the other could be itself a game. I personally hate pvp but I have friends who swear about it . I don't get why all mmos cant simply be one or the other with maybe a arena or world events to give some feel of the other...b

    Spending resource in the dev3eloping the game  to improve say a rpers experience might be better then say spending half the resource trying to satisfy both and this could go vice verse......

     

    I know ppl will rip this post but pvp in most cases is who has the best macros built in and best armor in the game ..usually pvp is unbalanced at best and never really adds anything but more gear to carry in the game and a inter war between rpers and pvpers .....

    That above agrument could be reveresed as I think pvpers might feel the same....

    To me pvp adds nothing but a occasional distraction from exploring and grouping

  • FredomSekerZFredomSekerZ Long Beach, CAPosts: 1,156Member
    Originally posted by antshock35
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by jmcdermottuk

    It's for too complicated a question to answer with a general yes/no answer so I had to pick a mix of good and bad. If you take the RvR from DAoC and compare it to Mortal Online, for instance. One game had structure and safeguards in place allowing PvP in certain areas and provided large areas where players could avoid PvP, the other has the FFA PvP with Full Loot system that can be and often is abused.

     

    The answer will vary depending on which game you look at.

    Exactly. The question is far too broad, and the choices are preferences not reasons.

    Rules, penalties, power disparity, diveristy, rewards, social tools.... it's the mechanics and features of PVP implementation that make or break the community aspect of it, not the style of the PVP. If you look at PVP MMOs that had solid communities that extended beyond the guild unit, you have all types of PVP represented. Examples: UO and EVE (FFA, RvR, GvG),  DAoC (RvR), L2/GW (GvG in both matches and largescale)

     To be honest I think theres 2 main type of players rpers and pvpers .....The thing I hate is that now every mmo has to incluude both when one or the other could be itself a game. I personally hate pvp but I have friends who swear about it . I don't get why all mmos cant simply be one or the other with maybe a arena or world events to give some feel of the other...b

    Spending resource in the dev3eloping the game  to improve say a rpers experience might be better then say spending half the resource trying to satisfy both and this could go vice verse......

     

    Snip

     

    I disagree. I rp to immerse myself into teh world, but will also pvp in character (will go OOC if the gameplay demands it).

    I fact, i wonder if the  problem is teh clash between the competative, "fair and balanced" players who seem to want arena esports and the ones who want woulds to immerse oneself and fight over territory and gain resources, etc.

  • LarsaLarsa NurembergPosts: 990Member

    Didn't vote.

    One point though, I practically only play sandboxes (not the combat centric Darkfall/MO variety though) and don't mind PvP servers. But I have one quarrel with the PvP-minded population: it's the number of people that cheat or "bend the rules" or use every means they have to become "better", be it by running alts, by dual-boxing the game, by using the cash shop, whatever.

    Looks to me like a PvP game always draws in a good number of competitive players, some of them don't even like the game, but they're playing it because they can "win" - no matter how.

    I maintain this List of Sandbox MMORPGs. Please post or send PM for corrections and suggestions.

  • maplestonemaplestone Ottawa, ONPosts: 3,099Member

    Cultural diversity is always a mixed bag of stresses and strengths.  PvP-vs-PvE is probably the most extreme example, but something similar occurs with every division between playstyles. 

    I keep waffling back and forth over whether or not they can really coexist.  When I'm doing my solo thing and sitting sort of aloof from the community, I like the background drama that PvP adds to the world.  When I'm actually engaged and interacting with other players, I find the competitive side of PvP culture very quickly rubs me the wrong way.

  • dllddlld GöteborgPosts: 542Member Uncommon

    Pvp = competition, the worst form of it too so yeah it's generally going to be quite bad/hostile, doesn't mean every pvper is a antisocial douche but not everyone smoking gets lung cancer but the chances to get it increases by unimaginable levels.

  • McGamerMcGamer Fairfield Bay, ARPosts: 1,012Member

    Open pvp currently is not good in any mmo because too large of a majority of gamers have no self-control or the ability to understand how to create a balanced community. Pure anarchy where everyone kills anything that moves for no reason has proved never to work. 

    Like I said, the majority of pvp gamers don't understand that, so unless devs were able to put tools in place to reign in the anarchists, pvp is best left out of a game.

  • VesaviusVesavius BristolPosts: 7,645Member Uncommon

    I personally think, yes, the shift in PvP as cheap filler content in these games changed the general community for the worse. especially with solo non dependant gameplay.

     

    Base your games on the hostile suppression of others with no social control and this is what you get.

     

    In my experience PvE games, and servers where both are offered, have far better general communities then PvP ones.

     

    PvP culture is goddam awful, to be frank, and I don't see how anyone over the age of 18 enjoys it.

     

  • BadSpockBadSpock Somewhere, MIPosts: 7,974Member

    It's all about implementation and rules.

    No rules / fairly open ? For every one "nice" player who isn't an asshat you'll have 10 PK/griefer/ganker

    Game becomes dog eat dog (or more like wolf eat sheep) and the community will be filled with the worst kind of trash (epic EvE online "let's make a guy commit suicide IRL" kind of people.)

     

    Seperate PvE and PvP and actually give PvP objective (UO post Trammel, SWG, DAOC) - some of the best community.

     

  • Ashen_XAshen_X PLEASANT HILL, CAPosts: 363Member
    Originally posted by BadSpock

    It's all about implementation and rules.

    give PvP objective (UO post Trammel, SWG, DAOC) - some of the best community.

     

    Agreed. Objective and team oriented PvP produce better communities (IMO) than individual generic kill a guy PvP.

     

     

    Originally posted by dlld

    Pvp = competition, the worst form of it too so yeah it's generally going to be quite bad/hostile, doesn't mean every pvper is a antisocial douche but not everyone smoking gets lung cancer but the chances to get it increases by unimaginable levels.

     

     

    Hmm, I am primarily a PvE player and consistently find more antisocial, rude, hostile behavior in PvE than PvP.

    When all has been said and done, more will have been said than done.

  • GTwanderGTwander San Diego, CAPosts: 6,035Member

    It's a mix, because in one hand you get tight-knit smaller groups, that when added together, create a seething conglomerate of human filth.

    Writer / Musician / Game Designer

    Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
    Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture

  • MrlogicMrlogic Posts: 178Member

    Pvp never ruined a community to my knowledge.. elitist asshats ruin communities ^^

  • WarmakerWarmaker San Diego, CAPosts: 2,231Member
    Originally posted by jmcdermottuk

    It's for too complicated a question to answer with a general yes/no answer so I had to pick a mix of good and bad. If you take the RvR from DAoC and compare it to Mortal Online, for instance. One game had structure and safeguards in place allowing PvP in certain areas and provided large areas where players could avoid PvP, the other has the FFA PvP with Full Loot system that can be and often is abused.

     

    The answer will vary depending on which game you look at.

    I agree.  There's so many different PVP / world rulesets, and the communities can vary wildly.

    On a side-note, I do recall something funny.  In PVP, we talked smack a bit, but it was all in good fun.  PVE'ers seem to think we're all griefers.  You do some epic instance / quest / raid and make a mistake, then you generate all kinds of freaking hate.  Insults flying, people leaving the event in disgust, people stamping their feet.  It's all really funny, IMO, becaus they say us PVPers aren't gentlemen and stuff image

    "I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)

  • spades07spades07 YesPosts: 847Member

    It's true it does bring out the bad side in people who are frustrated. Ironically you play a game of hearts online, you'll get the exact same community.
    But where there's pvp you also increase the depth of gameplay. I mean you can play versus the computer at a football game once, you can play versus friends and other people hundreds of times.

  • spikers14spikers14 las vegas, NVPosts: 362Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by GTwander

    It's a mix, because in one hand you get tight-knit smaller groups, that when added together, create a seething conglomerate of human filth.

    +1 on mixed community. Though this translates to me as being more "colorful". I don't mind the lowbie gankers or corpse campers so much. It usually results in some interesting dialogue, assuming the opposing player does it with some style.

     

    Also, I enjoy the polarization of the community, particularly when large scale impromtu battles are waged. 

  • IrusIrus Wichita, KSPosts: 774Member

    I believe PvP does generate a lot of negativity in some players. My main issue with PvP is the thrash talking, mostly when it occurs on your own team, or on message boards discussing PvP. Towards newbies, towards people who play differently, towards people who ask questions or put up ideas on strategies, etc. A lot of it comes from hubris of thinking you're good while losing a lot (frustration), and some comes from just being a jackass.

    Smaller teams (such as SCII's 2v2, LoL's 5v5, and GW2's 5v5) are worse here because it's easier to point to a specific player and say "oh you suck". In larger teams, such as RvR, WvW, or general open world, that's harder, so there's less in-team jackassery. Games that are 1v1 have far less issues. I do not associate most of SCII with a bad community at all.

    I have not found any way to avoid negative sentiments within a PvP community besides very harsh moderation on PvP forums and having your own in-house team when doing PvP. There are too many ultra-competitive types who think their thrash talking is worth anything, as well as people who's brain is permanently stuck in a box so if they see anything other than AD + Support bot their head explodes.

    Originally posted by Czanrei

    Open pvp currently is not good in any mmo because too large of a majority of gamers have no self-control or the ability to understand how to create a balanced community. Pure anarchy where everyone kills anything that moves for no reason has proved never to work. 

    Pretty much this. Open PvP in an MMO is like a country without a government.

    EVE players have all the power to make it a very different environment than it is, but they don't want to. So we have like 2-3 decent major corporations and everyone else is just a bunch of disorganized assholes who think blowing up miners is fun.

     

  • FadedbombFadedbomb Aiken, SCPosts: 2,081Member

    Open World PVP with full loot always brings in the horrible communities. The trolls, and the scum of society with horrible lives thereby making them want to act-out their frustrations & lack of power on others by ruining their day. This gives them a sense of accomplishment in a virtual space that makes them feel better about themselves overall.

     

    Remember, I'm not talking about ALL OpenWorld Pvpers as I've enjoyed my take or two on that forefront. However, there are a much greater precentage of immaturity than others.

     

     

    Arena Based PVP also tends to spawn this sort of mentality that "I'm better than this scrub, and he shouldn't even be in front of me" from people. I can't tell you the amount of times my team has gotten racerolled and we had nothing but crap-talk going on to us from the other team.

     

    I've always, ALWAYS found that the larger scale pvp communities (ala: Shadowbane, DAOC, SWG, etc) with sides that mattered to the player to be the best communities overall for pvp to exist.

     

     

    Just remember, there are always exceptions to the rule as humans are the ones behind the keyboard.

    The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
    Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.

  • dave6660dave6660 New York, NYPosts: 2,543Member Uncommon

    I've never found them to be any better or worse then a PvE game.

    In a FFA full loot game, like Eve, the low sec and null corps have a great sense of camaraderie.  You enemies are going to talk shit, you expect it.  But your corp mates always got your back.  It creates the conflict the game needs to thrive.

    I'll take that deal any day over the mind numbing solo PvE game where the other players are just disposable useful idiots for your gear grinding 5 man instances.  All the while you get to watch your chat box fill with Chuck Norris jokes and links to porn sites.

    “There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.”
    -- Herman Melville

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Houston, TXPosts: 5,348Member

    on a whole.

     

    yes

     

    and intrestingly the science backs me up on this. Competitive communties are far less efficient then collaborating communities, which speaks volumes about our business world

    Correlation does not imply causation

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Houston, TXPosts: 5,348Member
    Originally posted by dave6660

    I've never found them to be any better or worse then a PvE game.

    In a FFA full loot game, like Eve, the low sec and null corps have a great sense of camaraderie.  You enemies are going to talk shit, you expect it.  But your corp mates always got your back.  It creates the conflict the game needs to thrive.

    I'll take that deal any day over the mind numbing solo PvE game where the other players are just disposable useful idiots for your gear grinding 5 man instances.  All the while you get to watch your chat box fill with Chuck Norris jokes and links to porn sites.

    the thing is PVE games socially are radically different from PVP games. For example one could say in non-pvp games you have less competition which is totally true. but in PVE it goes even further. not only do you not have compeition you have explict collaboration which takes it even further then just a community without competition.

    Correlation does not imply causation

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon

    I think some PvP actually promotes a better community.. if' it's a large scale battle like WoW's Wintergrasp or AV..  Maybe even wtih  RvRvR type of PvP..  For me the true destroyer of communities is the Esport mentalities..  So many of the games today place player against each other for gear or status.. This isn't PvP either, this is PvE esporting of my raid gear is better then your raid gear you noob..  Players have to FIGHT to get raid slots that arent' taken.. Which brings up the "gear score" crap most of us dealt with..  It wasnt' just raids, but hard/heroic group things too..   Are you geared? Are you speced?   These Esport tools is what is destroying the MMO communities..  Instead of devs finding way to BRING players together, they find ways to exclude people from groups and raids...... Social?  I think not

  • freegamesfreegames san gabriel, CAPosts: 158Member

    Clicked show me results as depending on the type of game the community could be rubbish or great.

     

    Prefer PVE communities though often nicer and less ganky.

  • spector_0_0spector_0_0 Bar Harbor, MEPosts: 28Member

    Honestly, the same ignorant people that exist in PvE are likely the same ones in PvP; it is just that PvP allows their asshattery to shine more obviously.  This is very much a social issue, as bad seeds exist in both communities.  Some of the most awesome players (regardless of PvE and PvP settings) where from DAoC.  In this case, realm pride and being actively involved in protecting your community in a PvP setting worked very well; in general, there weren't too many bad seeds as they often became pariahs of their realm.  The elitism a-holes start to emerge once you employ arenas and open PvP, where there is generally no sense of community and the only goal is to stroke your e-peen.  I find no joy in lowbie killing, ganking others while engaged in PvE, and unbalanced fights, and open PvP seems to cater to those who like those activities.  To answer the OP's question, it very much depends on the setting in which PvP is placed in (and, yes, what rules are enforced).

«1
Sign In or Register to comment.