Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
PvP vs PvE poll by age
ethion
Member UncommonPosts: 2,888
Thought this would be an interesting poll.
This is a breakdown of PvP oriented game design vs PvE game design by age group.
So the first set is PvE game design. This means the game skills are designed to support PvE type game play. It might have dueling and some PvP warzone like stuff but the game balance and design is about PvE gameplay.
Or the game is designed around PvP. Classes are designed to be balanced and not have any skills make class balance difficult. The game will have PvE but is focused on PvP.
---
Ethion
Comments
I can see PVP vs PVE, but how does age effect the game/play style?
I have to admit two things here
1. im a bit confuse don what the actual questions is.
2. I like both PvP and PvE it is just certain forms of PvP I dislike.
F2P may be the way of the future, but ya know they dont make them like they used to
Proper Grammer & spelling are extra, corrections will be LOL at.
Ya, poll is a bit limited. I don't stand for "just pvp."
I, for instance, like PvP only if the game is first fun without it. Games like Darkfall have always ended up a bore to me because the game just wasn't fun without pvp. The best PvP games I've ever played were ones sitting on a strong foundation of PvE. Competing over not just territory and resources, but rights to dungeons and world bosses is really a must.
Why is it so hard to balance classes for PVE AND PVP?
Just nerf/enhance over/under-powered abilities when used against players.
The poll is about the game design orientation not if you want to play PvE or PvP. When a game is designed there are numerous limitations that balancing it puts on the design of character classes. So when you design a game you need to make a decision that you are going to design if for PvE balance or PvP balance. PvP balance means that classes have to have equal survivability against each other and certain abilities are either not available or very limited. Where PvE balance you can make characters significantly more unbalanced giving them strength and weaknesses built around grouping and PvE challenges.
Things like a 90 second CC ability mezing or rooting isn't gonna fly in PvP. Having a class that is great a kiting isn't gonna be easy in PvP. Healing vs non healing, etc. There are many more balancing issues and limitation you need to make if want to design the game to be PvP oriented.
So this poll is about which game design style you prefer. PvE oriented design or PvP oriented design.
---
Ethion
Thats what they did in EQ2 i beleive there 2 value for each spell a mob dmg and a pvp dmg.
AO used to do this as well.
hell, they even went with some PvP centric nanos....
Stupid Grid Armor nuke... *shakes fist*
There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"
I voted PvE for my age bracket, because mostly what I play is PvE. If I do play PvP, it tends to be games where the entire focus of the game is PvP, like WoT or TF2. In my MMORPG or multiplayer games, even when PvP is an option, or a major focus of the game, mostly what I'm going is PvE, so I guess I'm mostly a PvE player.
**
I have a feeling this is going to be like one of those charts that purports to show crime statistics or the like, but it's really just a chart of population density. Most of the people here are going to be 21 to 30, so that's where all the votes are going to go. :-)
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I went with PVE as I believe we should focus on playing together, not 1 vs 1 in PVE or PVP. If a particular class/ability is strong vs players, then it can be toned down, but that is a slippery slope. DAoC did a fairly good job of balancing between both, there was a lot of crazy CC and what not, but at the same time, people ran together. If you went out alone, you knew trouble would find you. Similar to EQ, traveling alone wasn't always the best idea (at least early on) with high lvl mobs appearing to say hello. But an easy way is to just decrease the strength of all abilities in PVP and make mobs difficult to begin with.
EQ2 is fairly PvE oriented but even so it isn't as rich for PvP as EQ.
Consider the enchanter who is a light weight caster, with long mezes, AE mez, some roots, and the ability to charm and take control of an enemy to make it fight for him. In the PvE context the class is all about control, bufs, and managing the fight. Solo the enchanter can use the charm ability to control and add dps. Or the enchanter can use a pet and kite mobs.
Now balance that for PvP without totally destroying the class... Shaman has long lasting debufs and a strong long lasting root. Ranger has a run speed buf, roots, ranged attacks, and even a pet.
Many core abilities of these classes are completely unbalanced for PvP. Take these skills and abilities away and you nerf the class completely, try to balance it and you would completely change the flavor of the class.
So you either eliminate these types of classes and make them totally different to balance them or you completely change their skills in PvP making them really nothing like the original class.
---
Ethion
PVP OVER 50! There can be only one.
Age has nothing to do with PvP. You should redo the poll to better reflect what people prefer and why.
You also have to take into consideration mmorpg's are different and many Pkers use hacks, scripts and other forms of cheats to gain advantage and will never admit it. You also have to understand other type of mmorpg's that have cash shops that give players an unfair advantage over others that cannot or will not purchase items from the cash shop, this is the only example of what some people refer to pay -to-win. Pay-to-win is simply that, paying to win against others.
For me PvP is FPS games not in mmorpg's. At least you can quickly identify the cheaters using hacks in those games and they are still killable unlike mmorpg's. If there is dedicated admins monitoring their servers they can kick/ban those players when they are identified as cheaters.
I respect the players that PK honestly even though there's not many of them, they truly have honor.
I like both, give me EQ pve with open world with rules for pvp. Imo there hasnt been a good pve mmo in ages, they are all just boring gear treadmills with gear resets every expansion or raid tier.
Ranked pvp instances are a must for true skill. I never understood why they dont just make abilities have different rulesets from pvp to pve.
"Its better to look ugly and win than pretty and lose"
Actually going by the results age certainly does have a lot to do with it.
People who are in their 20s seem to be fairly evenly split PVE to PVP with 42% choosing PVP.
People in their 30s are more PVE oriented with 31% choosing PVP (under 1/3rd)
People in their 40s are even more PVE oriented with 24% choosing PVP.
The other interesting thing is that people in their 30s are dominating the forum. Maybe it is time that the MMOs start catering to an older audience.
As of 156 votes cast here is what I noticed: The 2 most populous answers, 1 from PvE and 1 from PvP were the 31-40 age crowd.
I voted for PvP, 31-40.
I'd like to see this poll stickied for awhile.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
All this poll shows, is that people in their 30s like spending a time on these forums.
I chose PvP 31-40.
I can definitively say that if a game does have good PvE, I can not stick with it more than a couple months at most.
All the same, if a game doesn't have any PvP, I feel like all my accomplishments are meaningless and I won't stick around either.
So I really wasn't comfortable with any of the choices and just wanted to see the results.
Just to question the philosophy. Army of Socrates.
This is what I want. I would like for PVP to be present as a way to enhance the game. Not where the game devolves into FPS territory control with swords and levelups.