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!

What is the appeal of Arena PvP. I seriously don't get it.

12346»

Comments

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Pfff
    Have you played any mobas or other arena like games?

    More mature my arse
  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Pfff
    Have you played any mobas or other arena like games?

    More mature my arse

     I mentioned above that I have played LoL off and on. Never had the same childish behaviour that I have seen in open world PvP MMOs (where you get mail wishing that you get ass-cancer because you managed to beat two people that tried to stealth gank you).

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Seriously you think lol players are more mature than eve players!


    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
  • red_cruiserred_cruiser Milwaukee, WIPosts: 472Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DeniZg
    Originally posted by Dauzqul

    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.

    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!

    What people wear in PvP isn't a team uniform- it's just the best gear in the game that they currently have access to; there is not an MMO developer out there that is going to say "We are only releasing one PvP map because we want this to be the competitive standard!" yet every football field is pretty much the same; and anybody who doesn't think there is an element of surprise in sports doesn't watch it.  Every sport has trick plays. 

    Arena PvP is good because it lets people get into the action fast.  It's bad because it lets developers throw a room with a flag in it and a palatte swap of raid gear together and then they call it a day.  The truth is that without arenas and warzones, most games wouldn't really bother with PvP because simply creating a server with a player kill = true setting globally ends up creating two different versions of the game down the road or one ends up suffering at the expense of the other. 

  • FondelFondel HelsinkiPosts: 98Member
    Originally posted by Dauzqul

    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.

    Agreed. PvP has died in MMOs since WoW introduced pvp arenas. Lets hope these sandbox indie companies can resurrect the genre with real MMO pvp, not same old instance shit that we are now days used to.

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Seriously you think lol players are more mature than eve players!


    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

     I never mentioned EVE. I never got that far into it, space really isn't my thing. Although from what I have read the Goonswarm seems anything but mature.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,667Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by evilastro
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Seriously you think lol players are more mature than eve players!


    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

     I never mentioned EVE. I never got that far into it, space really isn't my thing. Although from what I have read the Goonswarm seems anything but mature.

    I'm sure one could say that about one guild in every game, no?

    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

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by evilastro
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Seriously you think lol players are more mature than eve players!


    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

     I never mentioned EVE. I never got that far into it, space really isn't my thing. Although from what I have read the Goonswarm seems anything but mature.

    I'm sure one could say that about one guild in every game, no?

     Probably, but making out that EVE is the epitome of maturity is what I am picking holes in.

  • HatefullHatefull Posts: 773Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Dauzqul

    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.

    Your opinion on this topic varies quite a lot depedning on who you talk to.  For me, I like all forms of PvP.  Speaking to what you bring up is simple.

     

    People like Arena's for exactly the reasons you stated.  There is no ganking, no well if I had this buff, none of that.  It is an even playing field where everyone understands their place and if they all play their position well, they will likely win.  You call it immature, and for the life of me I don't understand that, I call it good healthy competition. 

     

    Also, fighting peopel your level, wearing the same gear with the same bufss takes what a lot of MMO players do nbot have: Real Skill.  All things being even, skill is what carries the day.

     

    Speaking directly tto the immature and laziness bit of your post, how hard is it to gank un-suspecting players?  I argue that it takes far more skill to jump into an arena and stand toe to toe with someoone that is prepared than it is to jump an unsuspecting (and lets be honest, usually lower level than you /wink) person out in the open areas?

     

    Also, I bet it takes for more coding to put that arena system together than it does to let people have at each other in an already realized world.  

     

    On the other hand I do agree with you on the grinding part.  I believe that is someone wants to level by purely doing PvP they should be able to.  The PvP crew should not have to grind PvE content to compete and vice versa.

     

    As far as rewards being removed, I play all manner of "arena" pvp, Triebs ascend, BO2, WoW arena, etc etc, and if you took the rewards away, I would still do it.  why?  Because I love going against a skilled, prepared opponent and coming out on top, or at least learnign something when I lose.

     

    At the end of the day, to each their own I get a lot of people that enjoy ganking, and griefing lower level players hate arena because they really can't do well at it.  They have never really had to hone thier skills to be good, just good enough.  Not to say I have never ganked a lowbie, but I much prefer fighting people I know have thew ability to beat me.

    If you want a new idea, go read an old book.

  • sketocafesketocafe StoupaPosts: 801Member Uncommon
    I always play on PvP servers and much prefer to look for fights out in the world rather than participate in instanced pvp. What I really dislike is the WoW approach of neutering your character in the name of balance. My characters carry free action potions. My engineers have all the fun gadgets. My leatherworkers have (had) drums of panic. My paladin knows lay on hands. Nope, not in arenas. It just feels to me like i'm not actually playing my character, but instead playing a generic template of my class.
  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by evilastro
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Pfff
    Have you played any mobas or other arena like games?

    More mature my arse

     I mentioned above that I have played LoL off and on. Never had the same childish behaviour that I have seen in open world PvP MMOs (where you get mail wishing that you get ass-cancer because you managed to beat two people that tried to stealth gank you).

    LoL's community is quite unique (thank goodness). By no means does it represent "arena games" in any way.

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    OK then
    A closer comparison
    Planetside 2 community vs cod community.

    Both fps, one is open world, the other is little box matches.

    Although personally I feel how important gear is is a bigger factor in how bad a community is than the pvp model.

    E.g. wow compared to coh
    Aion compared to daoc
    Modern EQ compared to vanilla EQ
  • DKLondDKLond AlbertslundPosts: 579Member Uncommon

    The appeal naturally depends on the person experiencing it.

    I know people who play MMOs PRIMARILY because they want a sports-like environment to compete on fair and even terms with other players.

    I understand those players - and I can easily recognise why it's fun FOR THEM.

    Personally, I came into MMOs because I'm looking for a "virtual world" in which to immerse myself and live out some fantasies that can't happen in actual life.

    So, when MMOs started introducing arenas and battlegrounds - I was very much against the idea, because I feel it's completely counter to immersion and only serves to create a "mini-game" within my virtual fantasy.

    However, I've come to accept that other players aren't necessarily like me, and indeed - it seems the vast majority are nothing like me at all.

    They play MMOs for completely different reasons - and I have to accept that.

    PvP, to me, is only really interesting when there's something at stake - and I'm not just talking about winning or losing. I want to fear death - and I want to make a name for myself in battle, not in some instanced area as some kind of anonymous player that might as well be a really good AI.

    As for balance, I don't think it's possible to ever balance PvP in a non-structured environment. So, the key for the developers is to create a ruleset that discourages exploitation and meaningless ganking.

    I've yet to see a game that seriously tries to "measure" the odds of any given battle - and reward players accordingly. I've yet to see a game that's smart about how to let players who're NOT into open world PvP avoid it without negative consequence.

    Most games that have full loot PvP lack the world immersion part of the equation. They fail to create a content-rich world with strong stories. Mostly because they're plagued by low budgets and small developer teams.

    I'm waiting for a game that has both - and something like ArcheAge might be the ticket. We'll see when it gets released in NA/EU.

  • HatefullHatefull Posts: 773Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DKLond

    The appeal naturally depends on the person experiencing it.

    I know people who play MMOs PRIMARILY because they want a sports-like environment to compete on fair and even terms with other players.

    I understand those players - and I can easily recognise why it's fun FOR THEM.

    Personally, I came into MMOs because I'm looking for a "virtual world" in which to immerse myself and live out some fantasies that can't happen in actual life.

    So, when MMOs started introducing arenas and battlegrounds - I was very much against the idea, because I feel it's completely counter to immersion and only serves to create a "mini-game" within my virtual fantasy.

    However, I've come to accept that other players aren't necessarily like me, and indeed - it seems the vast majority are nothing like me at all.

    They play MMOs for completely different reasons - and I have to accept that.

    PvP, to me, is only really interesting when there's something at stake - and I'm not just talking about winning or losing. I want to fear death - and I want to make a name for myself in battle, not in some instanced area as some kind of anonymous player that might as well be a really good AI.

    As for balance, I don't think it's possible to ever balance PvP in a non-structured environment. So, the key for the developers is to create a ruleset that discourages exploitation and meaningless ganking.

    I've yet to see a game that seriously tries to "measure" the odds of any given battle - and reward players accordingly. I've yet to see a game that's smart about how to let players who're NOT into open world PvP avoid it without negative consequence.

    Most games that have full loot PvP lack the world immersion part of the equation. They fail to create a content-rich world with strong stories. Mostly because they're plagued by low budgets and small developer teams.

    I'm waiting for a game that has both - and something like ArcheAge might be the ticket. We'll see when it gets released in NA/EU.

    I like the way you expressed yourself here.  Though we disagree, your post was a good read and I appreciate the thought you put in to it.

     

    I am one of those guys you mentioned, well some times I am anyway. I have days when I just want to quest and be left a lone and others where I would like to kill a big boss.  

     

    I am also looking forward to Arch Age, but not just for the PvP.  If AA delivers half the freedom it is advertising, I will be hooked on that game for years to come.

    If you want a new idea, go read an old book.

  • DauzqulDauzqul Detroit, MIPosts: 1,405Member Uncommon

    I play on PvP Servers. The problem is that Battlegrounds are still forced on PvP Server through iten-reward incentive.

     

    I understand the need for Instanced PvP on a PvE Server. However, a PvP Server, if it must still have it, should be without reward.

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

     

    It's not something what I look for in mmorpg's though.  It's odd for me. It's like putting hardcore turn-based strategy in middle of action packed fast First Person Shooter.   

    That is innovation .. providing something new.

    Though not all new ideas are good .. without trying, you never know. Look at Borderlands .. .putting RPG into FPS .. works perfectly. MMORPGs can use a lot of ideas from other genre.

    3rd Person Arena / BG only specialized games will pull more and more players playing mostly for istanced PVP from mmorpg's anyway.   By specializing they'll be able to offer better experience, sooner or later.  Faster developer cycles and not being hold back by PVE mechanics will have it effect. It's only matter of time.       

    Not that i disagree. Certainly for players who only want to do arena, a arena/BG only game is probably better. But what about those who want instanced dungeons AND arenas? There are those who like both PvE & PvP. And they may not want to level up another toon in another game.

    Having both in the same MMo is a compromise. Do you want to play the same toon for different gameplay? Or do you want to do that in different games? Different people answer those questions differently.

  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAPosts: 18,455Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by evilastro
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Originally posted by Horusra
    open world pvp in the current form fails in mainstream because 70% is ganking.

    More like 90%, but yeah.

    The main thing that irks me about open world PvP is the lack of any real point, other than being a douche. Most battlegrounds or arenas have objectives or reasoning behind the conflict, wheras open world PvP is just 'hey look at that noob over there, lets kill it'.

    Why would that be the natural response to meeting someone new? Totally immersion breaking. In a game with harsh PK rules it might work, with the odd assassin or law breaker, but if everyone is just a murderous ahole... whats the point?   

    Well that would depend on the game.

    I would agree that a good amount of open world pvp can be just "ganking" for the sake of it (which I find so deadly dull).

    A lineage 2 example would be closing down a tower or hunting space so that only one clan or set of clans can use it.

    Attacking a raid boss and yet taking out an enemy's attempt at stopping you by either killing them when they get to the area or killing them as they leave town.

    Being attacked by one particular person in a clan and then endlessly "getting revenge" until they beg you to stop or pay to have you stop.

    At one point, players would demand a toll and if you didn't pay it they would kill you.

    Going to a noob area and killing your enemy's lower level members/alts in order to hamper them.

    etc.

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Sulaa

    Not that i disagree. Certainly for players who only want to do arena, a arena/BG only game is probably better. But what about those who want instanced dungeons AND arenas? There are those who like both PvE & PvP. And they may not want to level up another toon in another game.

    Having both in the same MMo is a compromise. Do you want to play the same toon for different gameplay? Or do you want to do that in different games? Different people answer those questions differently.

    Its not too much of a compromise imo. Instanced PvP and co-op PvE work fairly well within the same game although the game should be balanced with PvP in mind. PvP is more vulnerable of the two  when these things are considered.

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

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

    Its not too much of a compromise imo. Instanced PvP and co-op PvE work fairly well within the same game although the game should be balanced with PvP in mind. PvP is more vulnerable of the two  when these things are considered.

    True. That is why WOW is popular .. with decent pve & pvp in the same game. There is some compromise, but it is good enough.

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Decent dungeons
    Wow pvp sucks
  • SulaaSulaa nPosts: 1,151Member Common
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Sulaa
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by Sulaa

     

    It's not something what I look for in mmorpg's though.  It's odd for me. It's like putting hardcore turn-based strategy in middle of action packed fast First Person Shooter.   

    That is innovation .. providing something new.

    Though not all new ideas are good .. without trying, you never know. Look at Borderlands .. .putting RPG into FPS .. works perfectly. MMORPGs can use a lot of ideas from other genre.

    3rd Person Arena / BG only specialized games will pull more and more players playing mostly for istanced PVP from mmorpg's anyway.   By specializing they'll be able to offer better experience, sooner or later.  Faster developer cycles and not being hold back by PVE mechanics will have it effect. It's only matter of time.       

    Not that i disagree. Certainly for players who only want to do arena, a arena/BG only game is probably better. But what about those who want instanced dungeons AND arenas? There are those who like both PvE & PvP. And they may not want to level up another toon in another game.

    Having both in the same MMo is a compromise. Do you want to play the same toon for different gameplay? Or do you want to do that in different games? Different people answer those questions differently.

    Yet. Purely PVP games like LoL, Dota 2 and WoT are ones that get most success vs. mmorpg's that had both PVE and PVP arenas and released in same time.  Dwarfs them in success also those that were f2p.

     

    I am not saying that there won't be games that merge instanced PVE and instanced PVP in future - certainly there will be, but from how market is developing it seems that they'll be in miniority / niche.  Especially that players are getting used to superior instanced PVP and will be propably less willing to accept compromises.   For now - mmorpg's still have competetive advantage of having 3rd person perspective - something that many players love.  Most popular lobby PVP games don't have it and are either FPP or isometric.  Of course there are exceptions like Smite or Forge or Panzar, but they're recent games and aside of Smite they are indie developemnt and marketting wise.  So I wonder what happen when that competetive advantage Arena / BG PvP in mmorpg's have will disappear?

    Besides you said that you play multiple mmos and online games.  It seems like you don't have problem with levelling multiple character.  Additionally many PVP lobby games do not require any levelling.  Example - Dota 2.

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

    Yet. Purely PVP games like LoL, Dota 2 and WoT are ones that get most success vs. mmorpg's that had both PVE and PVP arenas and released in same time.  Dwarfs them in success also those that were f2p.

     

    I am not saying that there won't be games that merge instanced PVE and instanced PVP in future - certainly there will be, but from how market is developing it seems that they'll be in miniority / niche.  Especially that players are getting used to superior instanced PVP and will be propably less willing to accept compromises.   For now - mmorpg's still have competetive advantage of having 3rd person perspective - something that many players love.  Most popular lobby PVP games don't have it and are either FPP or isometric.  Of course there are exceptions like Smite or Forge or Panzar, but they're recent games and aside of Smite they are indie developemnt and marketting wise.  So I wonder what happen when that competetive advantage Arena / BG PvP in mmorpg's have will disappear?

    Besides you said that you play multiple mmos and online games.  It seems like you don't have problem with levelling multiple character.  Additionally many PVP lobby games do not require any levelling.  Example - Dota 2.

    can't really argue with this.

    True .. LOL, DOTA2 & WoT are MORE successful than 99% of the MMO out there, except WOW and GW2.

    True .. there is less leveling in some pvp lobby game (though the biggest one LOL has leveling).

     

     

     

12346»
Sign In or Register to comment.