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.

1568101118

Comments

  • Asuran24Asuran24 St. pual, MNPosts: 517Member
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    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

    Than why do you think it took that long for a comback? If there were so many that wanted it, or a large enouph market for it, than it would have made a comeback sooner. The fact is that alot of players do like wow-like games such as rifts, and how they do pvp in a more controled an fair setting. Also like trends pvp has moved from ow-pvp to instanced, and is now moving back towards a more ow-pvp style after the trend of instanced-pvp grew bland to the players as ow-pvp did before it.

  • wulvgarwulvgar atlanta, GAPosts: 27Member

     

     

    Agree....Well Said mmoDAD !!!!

     

    I will notwaist time with instance pvp games.  SWTOR yet another example of DEV's not listening to fans. 

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Because publishers are idiots that know nothing about gaming and just went "make me wow with a gimmick, I want 11 million subs" then got shocked when people who liked wow stayed in wow.
  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Sovrath
    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.

     




    Everyone always thinks of themselves first when coming up with reasons for or against anything, like OWPVP. "I had a great time in OWPVP!" That's not what drives developers to create games though. There's what, twenty or thirty million people playing some type of MMO games in America and Europe. There's a lot less that are playing RPG specific MMO games. What percentage of those people playing MMORPG are playing OWPVP MMORPG? If the answer is less than half of the people, then most people do not play OWPVP games by choice. That's the important bit because that's the bit that developers are going to pay attention to. The millions of people who would rather PvE or PvP in an instanced area with the feeling balance.

    Complaining about it is fine, but any shock or dismay at developers creating instanced pvp or pve centric games is just sticking your head in the sand and ignoring reality.

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

  • Asuran24Asuran24 St. pual, MNPosts: 517Member
    Also even wow clones can thrive like rifts, might not be as high on subs as wow, but still sits with more subs than alot of ow-pvp games. While alot of wow-clones fail not from being a wow-clone rather they fail from well bad choices, management, and just not being diferent enouph. Rifts is a good example of that really they are very wow-like, but have enouph differences, and uniqueness to the game that sets it apart from wow to keep the players, and yet also do not make near the mistakes/issues/choices that plague other games fallowing wow's style.
  • TorikTorik London, ONPosts: 2,343Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Foncl

    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 :/

    The problem is that this is extremely subjective.  I played EVE and I find its OW PVP to be fairly devoid of meaning.  Players fighting other players so they can gain resources necessary for them to fight other players.  So I find EVE OW PvP to be about as 'meaningful' as a raid in WoW. 

  • JonokuJonoku Cool, PAPosts: 645Member
    Originally posted by SirFubar
    Originally posted by Jonoku
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    What I don't understand is why people settle for world PVP trash in which winning is determined almost entirely by level, gear, and how many people your side has in the area, with very little impact from what you actually do in combat.

    Thanks for the laughs, I've seen a small group defeat the odds of numbers. Level or gear? people need to learn to get their gear and max level before participating in endgame content such as OPvP, its a joke to enter at level 5 with level 5 gear, no one does that........

    "Quality Over Quantity."

    All friendly opinions here but I agree with OP, instanced PvP is pure trash.

    And how do you avoid owPvP when you're trying to level and someone higher level than you with better gear comes at you and can just 1 shot (or close) you and camp your corpse if he wants? How can you not enter owPvP when it's everywhere and you don't have the choice to not participate? This doesn't make any sense.

    I've always preferred instanced PvP since it's a lot easier to get a clean and balanced fight. IMO, its usually there that you will find the best players. Sure owPvP can be fun too but just not in a game where gear matters too much. I mean, I don't mind if someone tries to gank me and I know I can do something, but when your gear stop you from doing anything, its just pure trash. I also love it when you can beat twice the numbers of your group, but it kinda get old fast since you're usually against a bunch of uncoordinated noobs. If they could make a game where your level and gear don't matter at all in the fight, sure the owPvP could be the best thing ever, but I've never seen one and I doubt we will. If it happen, I will surely play.

    Try a PvE server, you wouldn't be forced into OPvP, you simply have to toggle yourself to be involved, in swg no such thing as pve server or pvp server, you weren't forced, you had to toggle yourself to get in the action. instanced PvP is carebearish IMO, because you get to hide and run away after the match is over, its cowardly, PvP'ing and dying is part of the fun, I PvP'd for 8 hours with the fight still going, hell of alot of fun. Instanced PvP is full of limitations.

    I don't mind getting ganked and raped, in fact, I'll try to take on 6 people and I'll lose but eventually I 1v6 and win. I love the element of suprise and I love the challenge. Now it seems like, everything is given to you.

    Looking at: The Repopulation
    Preordering: None
    Playing: Random Games

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

    And LOL is doing better than WOW in terms of active players. WOT is also a hit. So you can't say instanced PvP is not popular.

    I think the point is assessibility, not the size. Look at PS2 ... you can jump in any time, and there is instance teleport to any hot spot. So it is less similar to OW pvp where travel can be impeded by pvp. It is more like a large scale instance pvp.

    I don't think OWpvp mix well with a pve game.

  • catlanacatlana Houston, TXPosts: 1,677Member
    Originally posted by Asuran24
    Also even wow clones can thrive like rifts, might not be as high on subs as wow, but still sits with more subs than alot of ow-pvp games. While alot of wow-clones fail not from being a wow-clone rather they fail from well bad choices, management, and just not being diferent enouph. Rifts is a good example of that really they are very wow-like, but have enouph differences, and uniqueness to the game that sets it apart from wow to keep the players, and yet also do not make near the mistakes/issues/choices that plague other games fallowing wow's style.

    The folks at Trion have just done an amzing job on a relatively small budget. Rift is a game that I constantly return to. The new content is always there. Storm Legion was very well done as well.

  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAPosts: 18,461Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones


    Everyone always thinks of themselves first when coming up with reasons for or against anything, like OWPVP. "I had a great time in OWPVP!" That's not what drives developers to create games though. There's what, twenty or thirty million people playing some type of MMO games in America and Europe. There's a lot less that are playing RPG specific MMO games. What percentage of those people playing MMORPG are playing OWPVP MMORPG? If the answer is less than half of the people, then most people do not play OWPVP games by choice. That's the important bit because that's the bit that developers are going to pay attention to. The millions of people who would rather PvE or PvP in an instanced area with the feeling balance.

    Complaining about it is fine, but any shock or dismay at developers creating instanced pvp or pve centric games is just sticking your head in the sand and ignoring reality.

     

    I don't see how that's possible. You always have a choice. either play or don't play.

    One doesn't "have to" play an open pvp mmo.

    My thought is that if I enjoy something then it's more than likely that a few others will enjoy it too.  And to be honest, there are many things I enjoy that are NOT mainstream. That pretty much struggle just to happen. But they do happen and I'm completely cognizant that others don't enjoy them.

    Of course large companies aren't going to back games that have a small demographic. But there are small game companies that are interested and who will make these games.

    It's just up to the players who like these games not to be "too" picky or else they are going to have to resign themselves to doing something else with their time.

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Nari
    You back up my point

    Non mmos do instanced pvp better

    Mmos should play to their strengths rather than trying to compete with instanced pvp games.
  • maccarthur2004maccarthur2004 SPosts: 510Member

    Instanced pvp only makes sense in a themepark mmo, where there is not fight for resources, ownerships, political domains, etc. In these type of mmo, pvp is regarded only as a attraction or pastime, like the fights in colosseuns or arenas.

     

    "What we are aiming in ArcheAge is to let the players feel the true fun of MMORPG by forming a community like real life by interacting with other players, whether it be conflict or cooperation." (Jake Song)

    image
  • SwaneaSwanea Vegas, NVPosts: 2,368Member Uncommon

    I do say, some of the best pvp I had was raids vs raids right in front of the giant raid instances in WoW.  You had to run there (before flying mounts....) So PvP happened.  And when it was 40 vs 40, it was awesome mayhem.

    I remember half our raid used the furbolg wand, so when their raid rolled up, they saw a giant line of furbolgs charging them.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Nari
    You back up my point

    Non mmos do instanced pvp better

    Mmos should play to their strengths rather than trying to compete with instanced pvp games.

    Yes. And remember that LOL and WOT came AFTER MMO arenas, no doubt figuring out that a) instanced pvp is popular, and b) they can do better without the world.

    And if MMOs (particularly the pve centric ones) do not want to compete with MOBAs, they can get rid of PvP all together. Or they can make a total OWpvp game like PS2.

    Personally i don't think putting OWPvP in a PvE MMO will go anywhere.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004

    Instanced pvp only makes sense in a themepark mmo, where there is not fight for resources, ownerships, political domains, etc. In these type of mmo, pvp is regarded only as a attraction or pastime, like the fights in colosseuns or arenas.

     

    No. Instanced pvp also make sense in e-sport MOBAs.

    BTW, MMOs themselves are past-time. The whole thing is an entertainment product. It boils down to what gameplay players like more and want to focus on.

    The unpopularity of OWpvp in PvE MMOs are pretty apparent.

     

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,616Member Uncommon

    I dislike instanced scenario PVP intensely also...but I dislike ffa pvp with no consequences for ganking low level players just as much.

     

    Open world PVP has to have well-designed and programmed mechanics to prevent or srongly discourage someone trivialy destroying 5 players 40 "levels" (or the equivalent in games without levels) below them. There's no two ways about it, that's just griefing and it's not fun.

     

    I also dislike artificial no-pvp "safe zones." Outlaw status and bounty mechanics with harsh consequences (i.e. all NPCs will attack you and won't deal with you, etc.) is the best I can come-up with.

  • maccarthur2004maccarthur2004 SPosts: 510Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Personally i don't think putting OWPvP in a PvE MMO will go anywhere.

     

    I agree. OWPvP in a typical themepark mmo focused in PVE will add nothing, will only be regarded as a annoyance, time loss or slip stone by many players, since the OWPvP dont fits these types of mmo. A mmo to have OWPvP need to be planned from the start to this.

     

     

    "What we are aiming in ArcheAge is to let the players feel the true fun of MMORPG by forming a community like real life by interacting with other players, whether it be conflict or cooperation." (Jake Song)

    image
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Personally i don't think putting OWPvP in a PvE MMO will go anywhere.

     

    I agree. OWPvP in a typical themepark mmo focused in PVE will add nothing, will only be regarded as a annoyance, time loss or slip stone by many players, since the OWPvP dont fits these types of mmo. A mmo to have OWPvP need to be planned from the start to this.

     

     

    The best example is PS2. Good game. Designed only as a pvp game from teh start. And you can do it anywhere the second you log into the game.

     

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

    I dislike instanced scenario PVP intensely also...but I dislike ffa pvp with no consequences for ganking low level players just as much.

     

    Open world PVP has to have well-designed and programmed mechanics to prevent or srongly discourage someone trivialy destroying 5 players 40 "levels" (or the equivalent in games without levels) below them. There's no two ways about it, that's just griefing and it's not fun.

    The concept of travelling around for adventure (presumbly pve) just don't mesh well with pvp. The only way i have seen done well, is to do away with pve, like PS2.

    If it is a war, and all you do is to kill the other side, and you do it in masses, then there is no problem.

    In PS2, you *can* kill a newbie easy (you will have much stronger armor, for example, when you level up) but you still die because there will be hundreds on the other side.

    The same concept probably will still work in a pvp centric fantasy setting melee type big battle (with supporting artillary) like those in LOTR movies.

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    But planetside is basicly daoc pvp system in fps form.
  • SunshineeSunshinee Tempe, AZPosts: 12Member

    These threads are just stupid, and baiting. YOU DONT LIKE WHAT I LIKE SO IT"S TRASH QQ.

    Personally I've done WoW in Vanilla where I'd be in tarren mill pvping and I'd take my rogue in Black rock mountain and world pvp the helpless people running to their dungeons. I had a lot of fun, but I can safely say that for me the PvP experience has been amazing for me personally since BC.

    I am a huge fan of Arenas and to the day only subbed because of it. I like small scale pvp thats even, that rates you among your peers and actually rewards you for being better than everyone else. As a Former Gladiator myself.

    I personally cant stand zergs, or unfair fights that leave me out of my control of being able to defend myself when I know i'm probably better than those people who just zerged me 5 to 1. Honestly though it's personal preference and there is games out there to cater to your playstyle. Play those games and stop crying.

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member
    Originally posted by maccarthur2004
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Personally i don't think putting OWPvP in a PvE MMO will go anywhere.

     

    I agree. OWPvP in a typical themepark mmo focused in PVE will add nothing, will only be regarded as a annoyance, time loss or slip stone by many players, since the OWPvP dont fits these types of mmo. A mmo to have OWPvP need to be planned from the start to this.

     

     

     

    I totally agree with this. OWPvP in themepark MMOs is just a haven for griefers and gankers, with no consequence for their actions (which is entirely unrealistic in any society).

    Sandboxes have the tools available to make meaningful open world PvP, with bounties, territories to fight over and real punishments for criminal behaviour.

    Saying that instanced PvP doesn't have a place in the genre is simply incorrect though. It works perfectly for themepark MMOs. And the two examples the OP gave were terrible examples of open world PvP. If the OP had said DAOC they might have had a point.

    But sandboxes already focus on OWPvP, and themeparks already focus on sPvP... so I am not sure what the point of this thread was other than saying the OP prefers the former.

    My suggestion to the OP would be to sign up to a sandbox. Luckily for the OP, DF:UW is just on the horizon and will cater to what they are looking for. So there is no need to go around bashing what other people like.  

  • Vunak23Vunak23 In your house eatin'' your cookies, FLPosts: 635Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    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

    And LOL is doing better than WOW in terms of active players. WOT is also a hit. So you can't say instanced PvP is not popular.

    I think the point is assessibility, not the size. Look at PS2 ... you can jump in any time, and there is instance teleport to any hot spot. So it is less similar to OW pvp where travel can be impeded by pvp. It is more like a large scale instance pvp.

    I don't think OWpvp mix well with a pve game.

    LoL =/= MMORPG. Last I checked this was about OW PvP in an MMORPG. You don't compare CoD to Mortal Online because they share the FPS style gameplay, they offer completely different experiences.  

     

    You don't think OWPvP mixes well with PvE?... Glad you aren't a developer and people like Jake Song are. Lineage II successfully mixed both PvE and PvP and augmented both with each other. Fights over RAID bosses, were PvP hotspots. UO, same certain mob spawns were PvP hotspots.  Even the Nagafen server for EQII was a success with its OWPvP. 

    That last statement at least lets me know you are newer to this genre and don't have much experience.  

     

    And for the guy above you...GW2 and PS2 are NOT good examples of OWPvP... just saying. 

    "In the immediate future, we have this one, and then we’ve got another one that is actually going to be – so we’re going to have, what we want to do, is in January, what we’re targeting to do, this may or may not happen, so you can’t hold me to it. But what we’re targeting to do, is have a fun anniversary to the Ilum shenanigans that happened. An alien race might invade, and they might crash into Ilum and there might be some new activities that happen on the planet." ~Gabe Amatangelo

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,616Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Iselin

    I dislike instanced scenario PVP intensely also...but I dislike ffa pvp with no consequences for ganking low level players just as much.

     

    Open world PVP has to have well-designed and programmed mechanics to prevent or srongly discourage someone trivialy destroying 5 players 40 "levels" (or the equivalent in games without levels) below them. There's no two ways about it, that's just griefing and it's not fun.

    The concept of travelling around for adventure (presumbly pve) just don't mesh well with pvp. The only way i have seen done well, is to do away with pve, like PS2.

    If it is a war, and all you do is to kill the other side, and you do it in masses, then there is no problem.

    In PS2, you *can* kill a newbie easy (you will have much stronger armor, for example, when you level up) but you still die because there will be hundreds on the other side.

    The same concept probably will still work in a pvp centric fantasy setting melee type big battle (with supporting artillary) like those in LOTR movies.

    It has worked relatively well in the type of segregated zones DAOC, GW2 and WAR had, although WAR was all messed up with the way they attempted to have PVP "lakes" for different level zones.

     

    But even DAOC had a mxture: there was a small amount of PVE in the borderland PVP areas and in the Darkness Falls PVP Dungeon as well. Many sandbox games have also mixed them with some success. I haven't looked at PS2 too much but I find it way too much like an FPS for my taste. And I do prefer fantasy settings over SciFi ones... but that's just me.

     

    Someone will figure it out sooner or later :)

     

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Sovrath
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Everyone always thinks of themselves first when coming up with reasons for or against anything, like OWPVP. "I had a great time in OWPVP!" That's not what drives developers to create games though. There's what, twenty or thirty million people playing some type of MMO games in America and Europe. There's a lot less that are playing RPG specific MMO games. What percentage of those people playing MMORPG are playing OWPVP MMORPG? If the answer is less than half of the people, then most people do not play OWPVP games by choice. That's the important bit because that's the bit that developers are going to pay attention to. The millions of people who would rather PvE or PvP in an instanced area with the feeling balance. Complaining about it is fine, but any shock or dismay at developers creating instanced pvp or pve centric games is just sticking your head in the sand and ignoring reality.  
    I don't see how that's possible. You always have a choice. either play or don't play.

    One doesn't "have to" play an open pvp mmo.

    My thought is that if I enjoy something then it's more than likely that a few others will enjoy it too.  And to be honest, there are many things I enjoy that are NOT mainstream. That pretty much struggle just to happen. But they do happen and I'm completely cognizant that others don't enjoy them.

    Of course large companies aren't going to back games that have a small demographic. But there are small game companies that are interested and who will make these games.

    It's just up to the players who like these games not to be "too" picky or else they are going to have to resign themselves to doing something else with their time.




    You've misread what I said. I'm not saying people are being forced to play OWPvP games. I'm saying people are opting to play instanced PvP games and opting to not play OWPvP games. Well, there are more people opting to play instanced PvP games that who opt to play non-instanced PvP games.

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

1568101118
Sign In or Register to comment.