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!

The amount of people who settle for Instanced PvP Trash simply amazes me.

145791018

Comments

  • ForumPvPForumPvP KingstownPosts: 871Member
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Disagree. Mmos trying to cater to everyone end up being a jack of all trades and master of none.

    Give me more games like planetside 2, that know who their audience is and give their audience the best possible experience.

    Infinitely preferable to games just adding a couple of battlegrounds to a raid grinder so the can put a "got pvp" check on the game box.

    We need different games for different players.

    PS2 is a great game.

    But from instanced pvp fighters point of view.

    Imagine warsong gulch on PS2.

    People standing on the starting area,joining instances.

    What eis the next step on this instancing? well next step is instance inside instance which is allready instance.

     

    Let's internet

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,260Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kuppa

    Incredibly ignorant and horribly stated argument. The fact that you don't like it doesn't mean its trash. Some people like a good balanced pvp fight, they don't need rewards just getting in there and pvping on a balanced field.

     

    The same could also be said about OWPVP. There are folks who love it because it has "meaning", they like that constant threat or like to go hunt others. But we could do like you are doing and call it trash because it's basically just a gankfest, right? NO!

     

    Different pvp for different tastes, deal with it.

    Instanced pvp is an immersion break in any mmorpg with factions.

     

    "There is no such thing as a fair fight" We crave Opvp/Wpvp for the realism it adds. Ceremonial fights like WoW Arena have their place, within the pvp ethos.

     

    Battlegrounds all though fun at times make no since what so ever, thus the immersion break.  A game will suffer with only meaningless battle grounds.

  • KeegarKeegar FryslanPosts: 19Member

    Instanced PvP is the best solution in my opinion, for themepark games.

     

    For sandbox games it's terrible of course, and you want open world pvp, BUT with added incentive (full loot i.e.)

  • HefaistosHefaistos BucharestPosts: 186Member

    How to get rid of the zerg:

     

    Huge Open WOrld + Free for All pvp + 100 objectives to defend/conquer/attack/loot + PvE included in the areas = Win

  • GrunchGrunch yuma, AZPosts: 493Member

        I agree with everything the OP said. I think the game that did it best was DAoC. They have (had) end game world pvp that did not suck like STWOR’s. They also have battlegrounds for levels under fifty and they were not trash style pvp instances. These were on going battles over terrain. They also had plenty of PvE areas with no PvP at all. I really liked how DAoC balanced PvE, PvP, and World PvP (RvR). I really wish more games these days would copy something as cool as that instead of the old “copy/paste” of WoW features games that keep popping up.

    I also enjoy watching these games fail and end up FTP. STWOR imo was one of the biggest flops ever. I had a lot of fun up until max level. I remember going to the "RvR, open world PvP" planet Ilum. Let me tell you, I actually spit up my drink when I saw the so called "world pvp" of Ilum. I laughed for hours than cried because I wasted $60.

    "I'm sorry but your mmo has been diagnosed with EA and only has X number of days to live."

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

    The number of people who 'settle' for battleground style PvP should tell you something about what the majority of people actually want. They aren't suffering through the PvP, they're choosing to do it. The only people suffering are the ones who for some reason chose to play a game that has instanced pvp as one of the primary options.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member
    Originally posted by Cepheiden

    Why is this even a discussion?

    A good mmorpg should implement EVERYTHING and give out SUITABLE REWARDS.

    You had me, for half a sentence there.

    Personally, I think players lost when it turned into a "game the system for the most effecient rewards turnover" contest.

    Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

  • botrytisbotrytis In Flux, MIPosts: 2,567Member
    Originally posted by Hefaistos

    How to get rid of the zerg:

     

    Huge Open WOrld + Free for All pvp + 100 objectives to defend/conquer/attack/loot + PvE included in the areas = Win

    Nope - Griefers waiting at spawn areas to kill anything that comes in. There is zerg because you have to respawn and get killed again. Been in games where that happened - the griefers had fun, nobody else did. SO then people left the game and only the griefers where playing, it eventually died.

     

    Sorry - it is not a win, not even close. The reason games like that are not being made is they cater to a small niche of people, not the masses. I know people don't like to hear that on this site, but that is reality. More players, more money = company survives for another day. Game are expensive to develop and code. Servers are expensive and sometimes a pain to maintain.  The basic idea is at the end of the day, a game company is out to make money. If they aren't, they won't survive and get people to put money in. All these Kickstarter games are great but that money raised from that is a small drop in the bucket compared to what really is needed to put out a game.

    image

    "In 50 years, when I talk to my grandchildren about these days, I'll make sure to mention what an accomplished MMO player I was. They are going to be so proud ..."
    by Naqaj - 7/17/2013 MMORPG.com forum

  • ForumPvPForumPvP KingstownPosts: 871Member
    Originally posted by botrytis
    Originally posted by Hefaistos

    How to get rid of the zerg:

     

    Huge Open WOrld + Free for All pvp + 100 objectives to defend/conquer/attack/loot + PvE included in the areas = Win

    Nope - Griefers waiting at spaw areas to kill anything that comes in.

     

    Sorry - it is not a win, not even close. The reason games like that are not being made is they cater to a small niche of people, not the masses. I know people don't like that on this site, but that is reality. More player, more money = company survives for another day.

    Thats insane,somehow you are trying to tell that when its instance then this doesnt happen,i can tell you,every single WSG i have done in WoW,people are trying to get to the opponents spawn point and kill them there when they spawn.

    Griefers waiting at spawn areas to kill anything that comes in.Thats excactly what happens in instanced PvP.

    You should love it because you just want that one area and not world where you could do things differently.

     

    Let's internet

  • FonclFoncl UppsalaPosts: 197Member

    World pvp can be awesome when you are fighting for something that's valuable in the game, like control over resources in EvE for example. For owpvp to be interesting, the game needs to be designed so that the outcome of battles has a potential for big impact on players in the game imo. Owpvp in WoW for example is just a gankfest most of the time which doesn't interest me at all.

     

    The only game I've played where owpvp is meaningful enough to make it really fun and interesting is EvE. A game doesn't have to be in space to have meaningful world pvp though. I hope more devs make MMO's where you fight for resources and control of areas that are truly valuable to players and impactful on the game.

     

    Edit: Warhammer online had decent world pvp but it wasn't impactful enough on the game to be really fun imo. The fact that the game was realeased unfinished didn't help either :/

  • KuppaKuppa Boulder, COPosts: 3,292Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Instanced pvp in mmos sucks gorilla sung balls.

    There are much better ways to get instanced match pvp - e.g. csgo or Tf2

    There are 2 models of pvp in a mmo that work, the eve model and the daoc model, al other mmo pvp is shit.

    Thank god planetside 2 has come along to resurrect the daoc model.

    Nope, spvp works just fine. It's just that you don't like it image

    Yeah, Miley Cyrus is the best artist ever, her music is so creative and layered, there's nothing wrong with it. You just don't like it is all!

     

    Gee... I wonder why people don't like it...

     

    We have in this thread people posting concrete details about why most instanced PvP, defending their answers. Then we have the other half just going "Nah there's nothing wrong with it, you just don't like it is all, silly!"

    If you have been following the thread I already gave my reasons. Either way just saying that its horrible really means you don't like it, not that it's horrible.

    image


    image

  • KuppaKuppa Boulder, COPosts: 3,292Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by bcbully
    Originally posted by Kuppa

    Incredibly ignorant and horribly stated argument. The fact that you don't like it doesn't mean its trash. Some people like a good balanced pvp fight, they don't need rewards just getting in there and pvping on a balanced field.

     

    The same could also be said about OWPVP. There are folks who love it because it has "meaning", they like that constant threat or like to go hunt others. But we could do like you are doing and call it trash because it's basically just a gankfest, right? NO!

     

    Different pvp for different tastes, deal with it.

    Instanced pvp is an immersion break in any mmorpg with factions.

     

    "There is no such thing as a fair fight" We crave Opvp/Wpvp for the realism it adds. Ceremonial fights like WoW Arena have their place, within the pvp ethos.

     

    Battlegrounds all though fun at times make no since what so ever, thus the immersion break.  A game will suffer with only meaningless battle grounds.

    It won't if they are done right. Immersion is not something everyone wants for their pvp. That seems to be what most hardcore mmo players can't get in their head.

    image


    image

  • KuppaKuppa Boulder, COPosts: 3,292Member Uncommon
    It's pretty bizzare the amount of people that just won't accept the FACT that there are many fans out there of spvp on mmo's. This thread has turned into a bashing ground for no reason. Its quite simple, there are people that like different styles of mmo pvp. Why say its trash or garbage? get over the fact that you just don't like it.

    image


    image

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Because with the possible exception of gw1. IT IS TRASH. When compared to csgo, Tf2, lol, dota, sc2 etc..
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by lizardbones

    The number of people who 'settle' for battleground style PvP should tell you something about what the majority of people actually want. They aren't suffering through the PvP, they're choosing to do it. The only people suffering are the ones who for some reason chose to play a game that has instanced pvp as one of the primary options.

    Furthermore, look at the success of LOL, DOTA and WOT. Just instanced pvp, no world, no nothing.

    People don't "settle" for instanced pvp. They prefer it.

  • KuppaKuppa Boulder, COPosts: 3,292Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Because with the possible exception of gw1. IT IS TRASH. When compared to csgo, Tf2, lol, dota, sc2 etc..

    First I agree that I don't like many other's outside of gw1 and 2. But that doesn't mean that it can't be done and it hasn't been done. To generalize is always bad.

    image


    image

  • ForumPvPForumPvP KingstownPosts: 871Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by lizardbones

    The number of people who 'settle' for battleground style PvP should tell you something about what the majority of people actually want. They aren't suffering through the PvP, they're choosing to do it. The only people suffering are the ones who for some reason chose to play a game that has instanced pvp as one of the primary options.

    Furthermore, look at the success of LOL, DOTA and WOT. Just instanced pvp, no world, no nothing.

    People don't "settle" for instanced pvp. They prefer it.

    That is their world ?

    If you want make those instanced,then they allow you to stay on those battles and you teleport to another instance where you do something else but your are not participating on the main thing.

    You would say something like,i dont want to be ganked while gathering resources,i want own instance where other players cant do it.

     

    Let's internet

  • ElikalElikal ValhallaPosts: 8,063Member
    Originally posted by mmoDAD

    When did players start to accept the fact that it's okay for PvP to be completely instanced?

    EverQuest II's 2006 Nagafen Server was a World PvP Server. It worked.

    SWG's PvP was World PvP. It worked.

     

    Ever since WoW, PvP has become pure trash. And to make matters worse, "World PvP" has become such a loose term that anything that isn't completely structured  is considered World PvP, e.g., SWTOR's Ilum - a dedicated area for PvP. This isn't World PvP. It's trash.

     

    Servers should go like this:

    Server #1 PvE (Optional Battlegrounds)

    Server #2 PvP (World PvP)

     

    I'll tell you why people waste time in these redundant battlegrounds. It's because they are so helpless and consumed with the damn carrot dangling in front of their faces. You want that little piece of reward that everyone will eventually have. It's boring. It's an embarrassment to the genre.

    I don't want to see anyone fail. However, it would be a lie to not say I enjoy watching these Instanced PvP games turn into failed FTP games.

    *nods* I entirely agree. Warzones/Battlegrounds were only a substitute, a gap filler. I don't really like them. Alas, really cool open PVP seems to be rare these days. And I don't mean FFA, I mean a vast open zone dedicated for always ongoing PVP with sieges and everything.

    People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert

  • RazperilRazperil Lewiston, MEPosts: 289Member
    Originally posted by mmoDAD

    When did players start to accept the fact that it's okay for PvP to be completely instanced?

    EverQuest II's 2006 Nagafen Server was a World PvP Server. It worked.

    SWG's PvP was World PvP. It worked.

     

    Ever since WoW, PvP has become pure trash. And to make matters worse, "World PvP" has become such a loose term that anything that isn't completely structured  is considered World PvP, e.g., SWTOR's Ilum - a dedicated area for PvP. This isn't World PvP. It's trash.

     

    Servers should go like this:

    Server #1 PvE (Optional Battlegrounds)

    Server #2 PvP (World PvP)

     

    I'll tell you why people waste time in these redundant battlegrounds. It's because they are so helpless and consumed with the damn carrot dangling in front of their faces. You want that little piece of reward that everyone will eventually have. It's boring. It's an embarrassment to the genre.

    I don't want to see anyone fail. However, it would be a lie to not say I enjoy watching these Instanced PvP games turn into failed FTP games.

    I know what you mean. Borecraft killed pvp period. The kids need that carrot to do anything these days, even in pvp. How sad is that? Very! I've gone back to consoles for now due to the lack of immersion in MMO's. Killing someone in games these days gives no reward. Even in Lineage 2; one of the greatest pvp games that was created, does not anymore. (you need like 31 pk's or so to even drop a thing. Yes, my opinion of Lineage 2). People fret on FFA, however, at least that made risk with the reward.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Elikal
     

    *nods* I entirely agree. Warzones/Battlegrounds were only a substitute, a gap filler. I don't really like them. Alas, really cool open PVP seems to be rare these days. And I don't mean FFA, I mean a vast open zone dedicated for always ongoing PVP with sieges and everything.

    Play planetside 2 then ... it is nothing but pvp in a vast zone with territory control.

     

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    See I've gone the other way
    I'm getting my pvp in a mmo - planetside 2
    I'm getting my pve from skyrim, minecraft and farcry 3 which feel more like mmos than actual so called mmos.

    Mmo pve has gotten stale and boring. There's the odd exception like stealth and puzzle quests in tsw. But mmo pve needs a huge reinvention. Sadly gw2 was a brave effort to do something different, but eventually it got as boring as the wow clones. (wvw is fun, but ps2 does the sake thing better)
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    See I've gone the other way
    I'm getting my pvp in a mmo - planetside 2
    I'm getting my pve from skyrim, minecraft and farcry 3 which feel more like mmos than actual so called mmos.

    Mmo pve has gotten stale and boring. There's the odd exception like stealth and puzzle quests in tsw. But mmo pve needs a huge reinvention. Sadly gw2 was a brave effort to do something different, but eventually it got as boring as the wow clones. (wvw is fun, but ps2 does the sake thing better)

    May be MMO is just not that suited to combat-centric progression pve games. A ARPG like D3 or TL2 is better because you don't have to create a world, and can focus on the combat, or story (like KOTOR).

    PvE is more interesting (to me) in small groups anyway. So all you need is online MP .. and you won't really need a world, unlike large pvp battles.

  • Asuran24Asuran24 St. pual, MNPosts: 517Member

    Saddly one of the biggest issues is that opinions, as well as enjpyment are completely personal. Instanced pvp is popular in most accounts to the fact that alot of players prefer, as well ass enjoy that form of pvp, and so trully you could say that since ow-pvp is fading meaning that it is the ow-pvp is trash.  It is just like with how the pace of the game progression (level, questing, and such.) gaining in speed shows that a majority of gamers prefer that style, compared to the older slower pace of the mmos, and so in that regard also those games are trash.. Anything viewed from a baised an personal standing is going to see the oppisite side as an abomination, regardless of what those that enjoy it feel.

     

    ow-pvp like many have said needs to be rewarding, challenging, meaningfull, and yet also dangerous too, or it will fall by the way side. Why go somewhere in the world to pvp that has no impact, when you can que-up into a battle-ground an get a fairer fight (alot of people prefer fair fights, as they are equally fun for both sides.). Yet when you add into the mix zone/area, resource control, as well as content (both pvp, and pve wise) unlocks that allow for ow-pvp to gain more meaning. Yet you also need measures that peniliz, as well as give soe protection for players in pvp, or you will get ganking/griefing that is out of control. Nothign wrong with ganking/griefing when it has a equally high price to be paid by the ganker/griefer for thier activities,

     

    Also the carebare/hardcore bs is realy funny, since just as much when you call someone a carebare as an insult, you can use hardcore as one too. I mean carebares might be wimps or hap-less, but atleast they are not masochistic mad person.

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Or players just didn't have the option.

    From 2004 to 2011 there was just two aaa mmo released with outdoor pvp content - warhammer & aion. The former was rushed, the second was way to grindy.

    It's only this year that non instanced pvp has made a big comeback with gw2 and ps2. Both of which are doing better than the myriad wow clones with their tupperware pvp
  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAPosts: 18,451Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by FrodoFragins
    Originally posted by mmoDAD

    When did players start to accept the fact that it's okay for PvP to be completely instanced?

    EverQuest II's 2006 Nagafen Server was a World PvP Server. It worked.

    SWG's PvP was World PvP. It worked.

    Those games failed.  If all I cared about was world PVP I'd play a genre where it's more enjoyable like an FPS.

     

    World PVP generally means there will be a lot of ganking and rez camping.  It gets old after a while.  Most players prefer to choose when to PVP in a role playing game.  How fun would a role playing game like Skyrim be if people were always ganking you?

     

    World PVP really needs a game dedicated to it that doesn't really care about leveling or getting loot.

    This argument always comes up (ffa, battlegrounds, etc) and it's a ridiculous argument.

    For instance, I've played Lineage 2 for years and I've had some of the best pvp moments in any game while I played. And more meaningful in many cases.

    But, I've also played warhammer and I completely enjoyed the scenarios with my blade master.

    They are two different animals.

    to that point, and to yours, some people truly do hate to be ganked.

    but some people don't. Really, some don't. For the most part I don't. I say that because sometimes I just like to log in and do some pve stuff. And when I'm in that mood I don't log into an ffa pvp server/game.

    ffa pvp games are for those people who have absolutely no problem with the whole gank and be ganked scenario.

    There really is no need for any complaints from people...

    If one doesn't like ffa pvp games then don't play them. Or if there is a pvp server that is a ffa ruleset then don't roll a character there.

    If one doesn't like battleground games then don't play them.

     

145791018
Sign In or Register to comment.