Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
What is the appeal of Arena PvP. I seriously don't get it.
Dauzqul
Member RarePosts: 1,982
Please help me understand the appeal for such a terrible PvP concept...
#1. Everyone looks the same (Everyone of the same class will ultimately be wearing the same PvP gear).
#2. Redundant Gameplay - In order to obtain PvP gear, you must play the same few instances over and over and over again.
#3. What is "Massively Multiplayer" about 10 vs 10 Team Deathmatch, Domination, or Capture the Flag?
#4. Since there are so few instances, the best and obvious strategies are learned by all within the first month. Thus, gameplay becomes a rinse and repeat process.
#5. There is literally zero element of surprise. Everyone is pre-buffed and expecting combat. Everyone knows where the opposition is coming from. Everyone is ready. There is no such thing as an ambush or grand escape. There is no such thing as infiltration.
#6. Immersion Breaking... especially with concepts such as Huttball. Arena PvP ultimately makes the MMO feel dumbed down for children.
Instanced PvP is simply Developer Laziness. Instead of actually thinking about how to make a worldly and mature PvP system, developers decide that it's cheaper and easier to make these small instanced PvP zones. They know people will play anything for some type of item reward.
I say this with 100% confidence: If rewards were removed from Battlegrounds / Arenas, nobody would play them. Why? Because they are boring.
Comments
its actually very simple in my very own opinion,
its pretty much the only way to keep pvp competive and "fair" since all is on equal ground (when they have geared up) and your 100 % confidence is just pulled outta your a** since games like CoD and all the different mobas don't offer much reward except the joy of outplaying your opponents
if you wan't to stick to MMO's i guess wow high ranking arenas and GW2 battleground or what its called is still thriving despite people being geared already and just playing to show how skilled they are.
It depends on what someone is looking for their competitive gameplay. Why they look for that in MMORPGs, a genre that, by design, goes against everything that is needed for that type of gameplay is the part that I don't get.
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
'Relatively balanced and fair fights' is the attraction.
I say this with 100% confidence: If rewards were removed from Battlegrounds / Arenas, nobody would play them. Why? Because they are boring.
Some people would, because they find it enjoyable. Different people, different tastes etc. In much the same way a PvP purely game with no rewards for PvP would not get much fan service.
As for your questions...
1) Most people in modern MMOs look the same anyway, most people in older MMOs did too. People will gravitate towards the most beneficial armour, if that wasn't the gear you mentioned it would be something else, this has always happened.
2) As opposed to the same areas for open world PvP over and over?
3) Nothing. Just as there is nothing massively about ganking people who aren't expecting it with a few friends. Almost every successful MMO also grinds to an unplayable mess in large scale fights.
4) Same with any form of PvP. Whilst there are a few people who can shine and adapt whilst thinking outside the box, the vast majority perform the same routine, over and over and over. In many cases the unpredictability of other players is 'did they really just use that there? What a waste!'
5) Avoiding ganking or being ganked again is one of the reasons people enjoy this type of PvP, they are on a relatively even playing field rather than that of prey that cannot fight back, or predator that is seeking aforementioned prey.
6) You say dumbed down for children, others would say entertaining for a brief play session. Opinions.
It is true that Arena style PvP is quite probably easier to develop, and direct, than other forms of PvP but equally given the diversity of players in the genre I can guarantee you won't please everyone and what you would enjoy would no doubt frustrate or annoy someone else, as arenas do for you.
Those are all your own personal opinions and I disagree with all of them. I prefer arena, makes me feel like a gladiator or in rocket arena quake. Also fast paced and quicker than chasing someone down all over the world.
What is the point of sports in general. Every team member wears the same outfit, it's always played on the same field and there is no element of surprise?
I say this with 100% confidence: If rewards were removed from PVE questing and dungeons, nobody would play them!
Comments in quotes... now for the main answer:
You don't understand them, because you are an RPer trying to explain away a PvP system. Simply put the two mindsets operate on entirely different sets of rules. Everything you are bashing Arena PvP for, is what makes games like TF2, Counterstrike, Battlefield, League of Legends, Dota, Call of Duty etc. etc. etc. wildly successful. The rewards are definitely icing, but most of those games are fun without the rewards.
Can you honestly say that most people would play PvE in an MMORPG if there were no rewards? Why the double standard?
- The appeal to arena PvP is that it's structured, and generally balanced (or at least is supposed to be). PvPers like games that challenge their skillset, encorperate strategy, and have the winner being achieved by skill / luck, instead of how much time they spent in dungeon X.
Arenas offer this, without forcing players to play a different game to get such an experience. It's an attempt to keep players in your game, because most gamers have varying tastes and like to do a variety of things. Some games take the PvP more seriously, some the PvE, but most games that focus too heavily on one or the other tend to be fairly niche. It might be more immersive, but that doesn't necessarily make it a better game.
I would ask the same thing of fans of DaoC but they actually SAY that they dont like PvP unless a developer creates the situations and the pride for them and in a way that wont confuse them with an enemy that may look like them.
Basically what I am saying is, its not just "arena PvP" its all "carrot on a stick themepark PvP".
If the game doesnt allow PvP anywhere in the world, no I dont mean "FFA" though that is included, just being able to flag and fight anywhere...then its themepark PvP and that is ALWAYS about the shiney, either gear, title, buffs...some kind of reward.
PvP should only be about fun and challenge.
Do you also not understand how games like DOTA, DOTA2, LoL, HoN etc are amongst the most played games at the moment? Or first person shooters like CS, COD, BF etc?
Instanced Arena PVP offers the same thing they all offer (essentially) - quick, repeatable, enjoyable player vs player content that is incredibly easy to get in to requiring minimal effort that can be played at any time. If you ask "well then why not just play one of those games", its because people also enjoy the MMO & RPG aspects that those games dont offer.
You personally may find them boring, and to each his own thats just your opinion. Saying that if the rewards were removed people wouldnt play them is pretty much wrong though, as proven by numerous 'arena-PVP' games mentioned above being some of the most successful games of all time.
Just because someone loves MMO's doesnt mean thats all they love. And just because they love MMO's doesnt mean they necessarily love PVP, and even if they did love both it doesnt necessarily mean they love massive PVP.
Massive, large-scale PVP is honestly a game system that appeals to a niche audience for a number of different reasons (as mentioned above). 'Developer laziness' may play a part in it as they will often be hindered by technical limitations of engines and player's machines as graphics continue to increase, but it is also a design choice that appeals to a larger audience than large-scale PVP would, so unless they wanted to nail down a niche audience its the smart thing for devs to do.
This
Also, IMO instanced PvP arena is the most fun and challenging combat within any combat based game.
Instanced PvP is far from developer laziness because making it good is every bit as hard as making any other style of PvP good. Even more so, competitive PvP crowd is much more critical about depth and balance unlike say those who prefer open world PvP.
The core principle is: make it "easy to learn, hard to master", and above all else, make it fun.
In comparison, instanced PvP offers more fun, more frequently and more consistently. Your time is not wasted by arduous side-activities, preparation, searching the enemy or traversing to the site, your contribution is guaranteed to matter, and you are guaranteed to have a good chance to win. May the best player win.
That's the appeal.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Because very few people actually like mmorpg. So developer have to steal players from other genre.
That is why mmorpg include solo content and esport. Because there are actually many people playing those other genre.
Arena PvP to me is like a Professional boxing match in MSG. 2 sides, evenly matched, very structured where, all things considered the best side/individual should win.
RvR is like your typical war between countries. Usually lots of people vs lots of people with the potential for widely ranging skills and abilities. Sometimes tactics, sometimes numbers sometimes skill wins the day.
OWPvP is like gang warfare or criminal activities. No structure, rarely balanced, the aim is to pick on the weakest opponent for the most gain without real risk.
I guess it depends what type of PvP you want.
I personally prefer structured and balanced because I believe the PvP is more fun and a better test of skill. Random gank squads or high level attacking low level in OWPvP or Zergs and circle keep taking in RvR never really shout out 'skill' or 'fun' as much. Sure you can have fun and be skillful but you can just as easilly have the opposite engagement. But that is just my assessment.
RvR/Faction warfare couldn't be any further removed from typical war between countries.
OWPVP is like ANY warfare.
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
What about those MOBA, epsort games, fps. They are nothing but battlegrounds and arenas. And people do play them.
You may believe whatever you want. But Those genre are actually quite big.
I actually think mmorpg is the unwanted children here. Very few people actually play mmorpg for the mmorpg. That is why there are so many solo and battlegrounds/arenas in mmorpg.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
I call it cage fighting when 1v1 to 5v5... 10v10 plus is just organized scrims. The theory is you are being matched against opponents that actually care about the outcome, not merely points/gear. But the reality is, it's just another way to grind gear in less time.
This indeed is the part that i've pondered every now and then.
We've WoW to blame for introducing such a useless feature into the genre, that is definitely more niche than many other features that gets overlooked, but yet arenas appear.
I agree. There's no rules (not in total war anyway) and nobody could give a shit if the other guy is fighting with just sticks and rocks. The point of warfare is to win by any means necessary.
RvR and such is way more structured than that.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Not at all.
My first experience with "arena" pvp was Warhammer and I have to say, outside fo the sieges in Lineage 2 (the good sieges, not the sieges where you stood around because the enemy signed up to waste your time) it was the most fun I had in ages.
Very concise goals, people were pretty even, it was non-stop action as opposed to standing around or worse, just rolling over your opponent which isn't really fun for me.
hmmm makes me want to go sign up again...
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
hahahahahahaa
Hey, are you the Iraqi information minister? Seriously...what is this magical ability of RvR that makes it the only way to have pride and exclusive rights to tactics and skill that non RvR games just plain simple cannot have just because there are no realms...nevermind, the rose colored glasses make it impossible to answer that in a non-biased way.
Would that be the balance thing that also did not exist before Blizzard and Arenanet came along? Guess Esports had nothing to do with it...
I have to largely agree with Aesperus. There are some things I'd like to add though to some of those main points that I feel have the weight of consideration in this.
[ Note: For clarities sake, I am going to change some colors here and ad in:
A: for response comments made by Aasperus
H: For my own repsonse comments. ]