It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Modern PvP sucks because it's virtual socialism.
Battlegrounds? There is no element of surprise. The obvious strats are learned by all within a month. Everything becomes a redundant rinse and repeat borefest. It doesn't feel "massively multiplayer" or "heroic". Battlegrounds, Arenas, and Warzones all feel like an extremely sloppy Counter-Strike - small Online games that mean nothing.
I can understand the need for Battlegrounds on PvE Servers, as PvE players should have a choice. The problem comes when they stick that stuff on PvP Servers. Most would not play them if it wasn't for their gear-driven incentive. If the didn't offer rewards for playing Warsong Gulch 10,000 times, people would stop playing them after day 2.
World PvP is the future. However, World PvP has never been done correctly. It has never had proper sanctions to protect lowbies from high-levelers. There has never really been an ultimate goal. All we've been given is the option to attack the opposing faction. It has always been extremely half-assed.
A great deal of "modern" pvp sucks due to two key reasons:
1. It tries to replicate the kind of pvp found in other genres of games, when said pvp is unsuited to the kind of mechanics you typically see in modern mmorpgs. Having highly competitive, e-sport arenas is great, if the game is not built around character progression, if the game has little to no itemization, if the characters are built only on pvp balance within specfic team sizes and if matches are ranked via ladders.
2. It often totally removes/bipasses the game world. Given the game world and the whole "massive" part of mmorpgs is what makes the genre unique, having systems which completely side step that and/or make it redundant is something of a fundamental design flaw.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
yes it sucks. just look at the so called free4all pvp crowd jumping from game to game moaning and complaing about everything. The silly devs listens to that vocal and poor crowd and ruins the game for everyone else.
Go to eve online if you want some freaking awsome pvp mmo. Othervise go and play bf3 32vs32 and get pwned.
Corsair 700D, EVGA X58 3x SLI classified, i7 950@4,2ghz,12gb ram@2ghz, 680@1255mhz/6625mhz, Xonar essence, 2x80gb intel g2, 1x120gb intel g2, 5tb Western Digital black, Seasonic 1k platinum, EK-CoolStream (140), EK-CoolStream (360), EK Waterblocks EVGA X58 Classified Acetal, EK Water Blocks EK-RAM Dominator X6, Aquastream XT ultra,Aquacomputre Aquadrive x4, 3xNexus Real Silent 120mm, SyncMaster 305Tplus
It sucks because it isn't fun. When it devolves to "Who has more people and/or higher levels and/or better gear." it ceases to be about the skill of the player, and more about the "zerg".
People who claim it's all about the tactics are just deluding themselves. Sure, it's a great tactic to outnumber your foe 3:1 and have better equipment in a real war. But in a game you pay to play to have fun in, not so much. But some people are all about the "Win" and fun can go to hell. I pity those who are that shallow.
I agree on the meaningless aspects of separation from the rest of the game.
However, that brings up the problem of "wide open" PvP vs. players who don't want to be ganked all day long. They can't play what they want to play without always playing PvP.
That's why I've been promoting the idea of factions. Lot's of factions. That's basically Guild Warfare, but what it does is add worldly meaning via the factions. I'm a proponent of a deep faction system where players can create their own, based on game world base factions and enmities. Mix and match them to put your guild in the light that you want them to be, against others who choose the opposites. And no requirements for players to join any of them. That pits players against players according to their own made up faction. Deity cults against deity cults, thief cults against collective monetary based guilds, Orcs against Elves, etc.
This opens the game world up to PvP, gives it meaning (especially when you add ownership of related relics, constructions, and territory), yet keeps PvP separate while at the same time mixed within the rest of the game community.
Once upon a time....
I like pvp (as in playing against a player, not the AI), but 'pvp' in mmo's are something else... Pvp for me is board games, strategy games (not the rts crap, real strategy ), fps games (I was deep into CS back in the days, before 1.6), card games, etc.
The mmo version should be called class vs class, or gear vs gear, or something similar. The player factor (your knowledge, skills, wits...) has only smaller effect to the outcome. It's there, no question about that, but not enough to call that 'vs player' (for me at least. Nice illustration pics btw).
As an experiment we did once a spar in LotRO, 2 minis, same level, same gear, same traits, that was fun but I guess that's the maximum you can get as pvp in mmo games. That's why I don't play pvp, and avoid it even in pvp-focused mmo's... but I wouldn't say pvp sucks. If it's not mandatory, or has no effect on pve gameplay (khm, like class/skill changes because of the constant whining of pvp'ers about balance...) I'm fine with it.
PvP sucks in most MMOs because it's a totally disconnected and meaningless sidegame.
If you want to do PvP right, then look at EvE Online. The whole game is built around PvP basically and keeps true to the formula of "risk vs. rewards".
Arenas, battlegrounds or warzones are a waste of time and efforts. You have no risks involved there in most MMOs. No repair-costs, no looting of corpses, no nothing. Just a meaningless gankfest.
Originally posted by Yalexy
PvP sucks in most MMOs because it's a totally disconnected and meaningless sidegame. If you want to do PvP right, then look at EvE Online. The whole game is built around PvP basically and keeps true to the formula of "risk vs. rewards". Arenas, battlegrounds or warzones are a waste of time and efforts. You have no risks involved there in most MMOs. No repair-costs, no looting of corpses, no nothing. Just a meaningless gankfest.
This pretty much says what I wanted to say. The Article was well reasoned and much of it is true.
About the only thing I require from PvP is some ability to choose when it happens. Whether that choice is provided by a pvp flag, a separate pvp zone, or just the ability to run away to a safe area, so long as there is a choice, the rest of it doesn't matter too much to me.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I would like to say a few words in praise of World PvP. I know the very idea makes many of you cringe, but for me, the threat of being killed (or ganked), and the thrill of having to be aware of my surroundings at all times makes these rather boring Themeparks much more fun. I find that questing just to do quests and level up is about as uninspiring as anything can be. Care-free PvE is really just a notch or two above Farmville on the brain activity chart, and it gives no sense of survival or anything else in my opinion. Especially with modern MMOs where the mobs themselves don't offer even the slightest challenge.
I'm not even a hardcore PvP player, really. I find arena battle to be very stale after the first few runs, in the same way dungeons are. Treadmills in general don't appeal to me which is why I like sandbox design. I always join PvP (world) servers though.
It's actually been pretty funny watching *lazy" gamers quest in The Secret World. They expect to kit up, and go out into the world where they will always be handed the next uber-gear they need to survive the area with little thought about respawns. These lazy gamers run into a surprise when they are told they are going to have to fix, or adjust the build they didn't pay attention to that is now getting them regular dirt naps. In fact, many people have come to the boards to post that they quit the game because it is "too hard", which makes me laugh uncontrollably.
Welcome to the brain-dead mouth-breather world, everyone.
A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.
I agree with this 100%. The reason you end up with an immersion-breaking mess in most MMOs is because it isn't designed with PvP in mind from day 1. It's a tacked on feature at best.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
Fighting with ill intentions to kill and pillage vs. Fighting for sport and shaking hands with your opponent after the competition
Loss of life involved with the ancient Colisseum make the battles more meaningful than today's bouts in the octagon? I'd say yes, but in which arena would you rather compete? The majority of the market seems to prefer sport > potential grief.
It depends on what classes you play for the degree of tactics you need. Some classes are pretty much just faceroll with a few IWIN buttons.
Of coarse these are always the more popular PvP classes, because everyone wants to "pwn teh noobs."
PvP, imo, 'sucks' because of 2 things in these games. The first is the usual broken reliance on gear/ class/ levels. The second is the players. Western MMORPGers, ESPECIALLY PVPers, are assholes, and whats more they take pride in being assholes, and because it takes an asshole to enjoy spending their leisure time in the company of other assholes and they have affirmed and re-affirmed the behaviour to one another and developed this culture where the coolest kid is the biggest asshole.
I hope I haven't over used the word asshole here.
PvPrs are some of the best gamers around, they look at the math behind everything to squeeze the most out of a build, they experiment with new builds and gear/skill combinations. They do things that my lazy ass would never attempt. Are they ego driven douchebags yes many of them are, but they also frequently are skilled and raise the average level of play in a match. PVE fotm builds frequently come from PVPrs.
There is however a subclass of lazy PVPrs bent on getting to max everything and then destroying everyone under them, these people are usually not skilled, AFK in warfronts, race to max level and AFK to max gear. Then they destroy everyone. The good thing about GW2 and other games sure to come out is that this is not going to be possible for these people anymore.
Only ways to do PvP "right" in a MMO is either like EvE online or like sPvP in GW2.
1. Open world, cause/effect, consequence heavy
2. Instanced, even, fair, skill based, eSport
DAOC or something like GW2 WvW can certainly work as well, but for every 1 awesome even-balanced totally fun super cool epic battle there are 9 zerg/blitz or zero-contact roams.
I do think the 1 super awesome epic fight is worth the 9 zerg/blitz zero-contact roams however.
And I enjoy eSport like sPvP as it is about skill and build/strategy.
I also think EvE has some really poorly designed systems/mechanics but that they certainly have the intent correct - risk vs. reward.
Always PvP for me. Always more fun fighting a human than A.I. A.I is no way near as challenging as taking on a human brain.
I come from a background in FPS PvP, where pretty much everyone was equal, no stats etc. I know alot of MMORPG PvP is based off of whos got the better gear.
PVP with minimal level disparity is fun for me. PVP where gear isn't an IWIN button is fun for me. PvP where politics and clan/guild resources or territory are at stake is really fun for me. Adam, like you, i enjoy when the PVP is more about a night of combat than about the stats required to enjoy that night of combat. I think that's why i enjoyed Ultima Online's PVP so much.
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
Am I the only one to remember how much fail WAR's rvr was? It's not the first time lately I see it mentioned as a positive example of it done right... But that's kind of not what I remember it being at all, nor what most people used to comment about it way back when. Maybe it changed? I admit I wouldn't know, I never went back for a second look.
Oh, and the article reads like a whiny rant. Pvp in a box is pvp in a box, and it isn't going anywhere but neither is it the cause of the world's problems. Trick is just to limit it's balance affecting pve and the game as a whole. If people want to massacre each other in a pvp box let them, as long as there's other options and other games I don't see the issue really.
If the PvP is not balanced as in esport (gear/levels/zergs/class/skill combinations) it's broken system. If the PvP is inconsequential, it can become repetive (re-rez/spam buttons again).
Esport/team-based and open-sandbox pvp potentially can be the best gameplay in mmorpgs though, if combat is the main emphasis, then playing against a human > AI is more fun. Except if the player is there for other toxic reasons.
Instanced "Warzones" and lack of death penalty, not to mention the invention of "No drop" items, spoiled people and killed PvP . In order to sell a game the Devs have to make sure that the player is assured nothing bad will happen to them out of fear they will have a fit and flock somewhere where they can be assured they won't have a challenge to worry about and can get back to chasing that carrot on a stick.
Originally posted by RohnI agree with a lot of the article.The ONE significant thing that separates the MMORPG from other games is the persistent world filled with a potentially large virtual society.Modern themepark MMOs tear that world apart, and make it a collection of meaningless "games within a game". Immersion-killing? Absolutely. It runs counter to the most basic concept of the MMORPG, yet here we are.I understand completely what Adam is saying when he says current MMOs are overly "gamey". The virtual world is gone, the RPG replaced with an arcade game.Spot-freakin'-on!
Yep. I agree 100% with the article and you.