Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

why a game needs some pvp

I actually don't care for forced pvp, and I think LoTRO has it ALMOST right on they money as a game, but there is a part of mmo's that keep people trying to get the slightes upgrades, and being willing to work for it, and that is to be the best.  Unfortunatly, with no direct pvp other than duels and monster play (which I really like, but it doesn't satisfy the drive for "leetness" like real pvp does) I think this effect allows players to see the high end gear and say "meh" since the advantages of that gear won't make any difference in the course of a raid or a mission.

For some reason, I just don't think people care to chase down a warg for 15 mins when the warg has no death penalty, and playing the monsters are fun because I like the change of reference from hero to villain, but there is just no attachment to my character, and I feel like a kamikazee in order to deny an order player resources or cause him to have to spend money on repairs... neither is actually very rewarding in the long term.

I'm not saying this game should make some ad-hoc pvp to appeal to more players, but I do wish that it could get that appeal somehow.  I don't know how this game could swing it since that isn't my job, but it would be nice if it existed.

I know this game doesn't have a lot of options for pvp since the IP never had much in the way of elf v elf or whatnot, but I think it is one of the factors that keeps and otherwise A+ game out of the mainstream.

Elite poster by 82

Comments

  • zeowyrmzeowyrm Member Posts: 746

    Originally posted by smitty0356

    I actually don't care for forced pvp, and I think LoTRO has it ALMOST right on they money as a game, but there is a part of mmo's that keep people trying to get the slightes upgrades, and being willing to work for it, and that is to be the best.  Unfortunatly, with no direct pvp other than duels and monster play (which I really like, but it doesn't satisfy the drive for "leetness" like real pvp does) I think this effect allows players to see the high end gear and say "meh" since the advantages of that gear won't make any difference in the course of a raid or a mission.

    For some reason, I just don't think people care to chase down a warg for 15 mins when the warg has no death penalty, and playing the monsters are fun because I like the change of reference from hero to villain, but there is just no attachment to my character, and I feel like a kamikazee in order to deny an order player resources or cause him to have to spend money on repairs... neither is actually very rewarding in the long term.

    I'm not saying this game should make some ad-hoc pvp to appeal to more players, but I do wish that it could get that appeal somehow.  I don't know how this game could swing it since that isn't my job, but it would be nice if it existed.

    I know this game doesn't have a lot of options for pvp since the IP never had much in the way of elf v elf or whatnot, but I think it is one of the factors that keeps and otherwise A+ game out of the mainstream.

    I don't ever see this being remedied, especially since PvMP hasn't been updated in about a year and a half, not counting the level upgrades for creeps.  And, unless I'm mistaken, the rewards haven't been upgraded since before Moria, making the gear good for lvl 50, but not so much in a world of 65s.  I could be mistaken on the last.  Ultimately, their core audience seems content with PvMP being the way that it is. 

    Besides, where'd you get the impression the game was out of the mainstream?  Last I knew, it was considered a success and was holding it own in the market.   I mean, yeah, it doesn't have the WoW subs, but WoW is a bit of a silly benchmark at this point.

  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004

    It doesnt have pvp in that sense because its not meant to have it, its not the focus of the game, which is more cooperative pve/storyline - if your really into pvp that badly then you'll probably have to look elsewhere, as its not what LOTRO is really about.

  • brutalGOREbrutalGORE Member Posts: 21

    Originally posted by Phry

    It doesnt have pvp in that sense because its not meant to have it, its not the focus of the game, which is more cooperative pve/storyline - if your really into pvp that badly then you'll probably have to look elsewhere, as its not what LOTRO is really about.

    Thank you...I'm sorry pvp is great for those who like it, but lets face it pvp is not for everyone and i would hate to see lotro ruined by adding pvp to get more people in it.

  • kaiser3282kaiser3282 Member UncommonPosts: 2,759

    I agree, it is the one thing that was lacking from LOTRO, and if they had some good pvp going on it would be about the only game i play for awhile now. I think one possibility would be to come out with a seperate expansion/game similar to what they did with City of Heroes / City of Villians, and allow us to play the other (evil) side of the lore and incorporate pvp into the game, even if just limited to certain zones.

  • ShadewalkerShadewalker Member Posts: 299

    There are so many MMO's in the market now that it doesn't really matter if one is centred on PvE and another on PvP. You simply choose the type that is suited to you.  LoTRO simply isn't suitable lore-wise for conventional PvP and why some can't accept that is  a mystery to me. The concept of hobbits killing each other in Rivendell is wholly absurd.

    It won't change, as Turbine know only too well that if they ever changed tack on PvP in LoTRO it would cost them many times more players than it would gain them.

    I've no idea whether PvMP is any good or not, I've no inclination to try it, but I do know that there are plenty of very good PvP MMO's out there and that's fine, there's no need for every game to incorporate it.

    Besides which,Turbine also know that  introducing full-blown PvP wouldn't end the complaints in LoTRO by PvP'ers, it would just be the start given that PvP always generates much more in the way of heated complaints about class balancing and gear etc. the outcome of which is invariably detrimental to PvE which is, and always will remain, the very essence of LoTR.

  • DameonkDameonk Member UncommonPosts: 1,914

    Originally posted by zeowyrm

    Ultimately, their core audience seems content with PvMP being the way that it is. 

     

    This is actually not true.  There are a few big complaints from the players currently and PvMP is in the top 5 for a lot players and probalby number 1 for the people that actually enjoy that part of the game.

    The Ettenmoors are all but desterted and have been for the last few months.  The PvMP gameplay has been reduced to packs of creeps taking out 1 or 2 lone freeps.

    Sure every once and a while someone will get a group or a raid together and fight the creeps.  This happens rarely these days and a lot of people I know that used to play only PvMP don't even bother logging into the game any more.

    Personally I would have been happier if they hadn't wasted development time on the PvMP gameplay and focused more on the PvE, maybe waiting until they actually had a good system in place for the PvMP instead of what we have right now which is one of the worst PvP systems in any MMO game.

    "There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."

  • NeblessNebless Member RarePosts: 1,752

    Originally posted by Shadewalker

    There are so many MMO's in the market now that it doesn't really matter if one is centred on PvE and another on PvP. You simply choose the type that is suited to you.  LoTRO simply isn't suitable lore-wise for conventional PvP and why some can't accept that is  a mystery to me. The concept of hobbits killing each other in Rivendell is wholly absurd.

     While this statement is very true, the LotR lore would easily support a faction based Pvp.  You already have good & bad humans and dwarves, not to mention all the monsters.   Then you have the game-lore itself sending you to various outlaying trouble spots, which are generally border type zones (North Downs is a great example). 

    The real reason no one will ever see Pvp in LotRO is Tolkein Ent. didn't want it, probably for the highlited reason, so it just won't happen.  But even as a non-Pvp'er I can see a faction based, border zone Pvp system would have added to the game.

    SWG (pre-cu) - AoC (pre-f2p) - PotBS (pre-boarder) - DDO - LotRO (pre-f2p) - STO (pre-f2p) - GnH (beta tester) - SWTOR - Neverwinter

  • smitty0356smitty0356 Member Posts: 368

    is it impossible to have great pve and pvp?  Because you are making it sound like that is impossible...  and I think LoTRO is capable of doing both.

    forced pvp... no

    unrestricted pvp... no

    hobbits killing hobbits... (technically I have seen that hundreds of times in duels) but on a battlefield, no

    I think they could do it easily by making small contested areas in each zone where a person could roll a creep and level him up at a rapid pace to potentially participate in some sort of lore-relevant pvp experience.  If incorporated with the story line, and making it objective based, it could be a very fun addition to pvMP.

    Elite poster by 82

  • NeblessNebless Member RarePosts: 1,752

    Originally posted by smitty0356

    I think they could do it easily by making small contested areas in each zone where a person could roll a creep and level him up at a rapid pace to potentially participate in some sort of lore-relevant pvp experience.  If incorporated with the story line, and making it objective based, it could be a very fun addition to pvMP.

     What if for certain quests; like the one where the ranger up near Weathertop sends you to gather Orc orders, you have two choices of playing it?  The first would be the normal PvE version vs all NPC's like you do now and the second would be vs a mix of NPC's and CREEPS?  You'd never know if there were CREEPS playing in the quest or not.  If not it would be a different mindset, sneaking around to collect the orders and if so then it would be a Pvp fight to collect the orders.

    By showing both options on the 'I accept' button, the player would decide how he wanted to play so there'd be no forced Pvp.

    SWG (pre-cu) - AoC (pre-f2p) - PotBS (pre-boarder) - DDO - LotRO (pre-f2p) - STO (pre-f2p) - GnH (beta tester) - SWTOR - Neverwinter

  • SwampRobSwampRob Member UncommonPosts: 1,003

    Originally posted by brutalGORE

    Originally posted by Phry

    It doesnt have pvp in that sense because its not meant to have it, its not the focus of the game, which is more cooperative pve/storyline - if your really into pvp that badly then you'll probably have to look elsewhere, as its not what LOTRO is really about.

    Thank you...I'm sorry pvp is great for those who like it, but lets face it pvp is not for everyone and i would hate to see lotro ruined by adding pvp to get more people in it.

     This.   No matter how you design pvp, I have no desire to participate.   You might make it so it's the best thing since sliced bread and I still won't even try it once.    I have no desire to compete in a video game in any way.

  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 30,966

    I think it's sort of a silly assumption that a game "needs" pvp.

    It's like saying that a neighborhood has to have a roller disco.

    In the end, if you don't like or desire pvp you just won't care.

    what is essentially being said here is that players who want pvp want pvp.

    Well, that's a given.

    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • gurthgorgurthgor Member Posts: 279

    Just pve can be ok meanwhile they give new content for high end ppl frequently, but if you add pvp is even much more fun. I think lotro is very good game, but if there were the option to take an evil char then would be the best mmo atm. I think that is basic if want to reflect truly the world of middle earth, a world dynamic, not static, where players could take cities, and change the story of the book even, that would be fun, would be like being writting the book and seeing what happens.

    Blade with whom i have lived, blade with whom I now die. Serve right and justice one last time. Seek one last heart of evil. Still one last life of pain. Cut well old friend. Then farewell!

  • sylum69sylum69 Member UncommonPosts: 100

    You can forget about this game ever having PvP.

    A while back there was an interesting thread about a similar topic on the LOTRO forums where a dev came in and basically said the decision to not have PvP was entirely Tolkein Enterprises and it was not negotiable. Turbine had to twist their arm to allow Monster play in the game but even Monster Play was initially frowned upon.

    On a plus side, Tolkein Enterprises are apparently very happy with this game and in the direction it's headed.

    I love PvP and I hope that things could change in the future but for now just accept LOTRO for what it is, a very enjoyable PvE game...and there's nothing wrong with that.

  • smitty0356smitty0356 Member Posts: 368

    Originally posted by Sovrath

    I think it's sort of a silly assumption that a game "needs" pvp.

    It's like saying that a neighborhood has to have a roller disco.

    In the end, if you don't like or desire pvp you just won't care.

    what is essentially being said here is that players who want pvp want pvp.

    Well, that's a given.

     It's more like saying a house doesn't NEED a bathroom, you may not even really like using the bathroom, but it is very nice to have around if company comes over.  PVP is one half of a social game like an mmo.  If you elect to not have pvp, then you are cutting the player experience in half.  It's the cheapest and most successful end game content and player motivator with the possible exception of the loot tredmill that WOW uses.

    Bottom line is I don't NEED pvp to enjoy a game, but I enjoy pvp, and I find games that have it in some fashion tend to keep my interest longer. 

    I think people get very afraid that a game with pvp is somehow less pve oriented, or that if you don't like pvp, you can't play a game because it has it in the content.  This is just plain wrong.  SOME games have bad pvp with ganking, imbalance, and a system which requires you to partake in that terrible system. (see mxo for gank, and WAR for terrible system and forced pvp)

    so long as a game keeps a players options in mind, pvp can be great.   And if you don't like it at all, then that's a little part of the world you don't have to visit, but it just might get your future wife to give the game a try in the first place.

    Elite poster by 82

  • zeowyrmzeowyrm Member Posts: 746

    Originally posted by smitty0356

    Originally posted by Sovrath

    I think it's sort of a silly assumption that a game "needs" pvp.

    It's like saying that a neighborhood has to have a roller disco.

    In the end, if you don't like or desire pvp you just won't care.

    what is essentially being said here is that players who want pvp want pvp.

    Well, that's a given.

     It's more like saying a house doesn't NEED a bathroom, you may not even really like using the bathroom, but it is very nice to have around if company comes over.  PVP is one half of a social game like an mmo.  If you elect to not have pvp, then you are cutting the player experience in half.  It's the cheapest and most successful end game content and player motivator with the possible exception of the loot tredmill that WOW uses.

    Bottom line is I don't NEED pvp to enjoy a game, but I enjoy pvp, and I find games that have it in some fashion tend to keep my interest longer. 

    I think people get very afraid that a game with pvp is somehow less pve oriented, or that if you don't like pvp, you can't play a game because it has it in the content.  This is just plain wrong.  SOME games have bad pvp with ganking, imbalance, and a system which requires you to partake in that terrible system. (see mxo for gank, and WAR for terrible system and forced pvp)

    so long as a game keeps a players options in mind, pvp can be great.   And if you don't like it at all, then that's a little part of the world you don't have to visit, but it just might get your future wife to give the game a try in the first place.

    My biggest issue with PvP in games actually comes down to balance.  It seems difficult enough for devs to balance around PvE content, but when you add in PvP, suddenly you have two entirely different scenarios that you need to balance for.  Which is, of course, where the imbalances come from.  In LOTRO, every class is completely viable in PvE, and they all add something useful to the plate to the degree where there really isn't a lack of any one class. 

    I recall there being a HUGE argument about skills getting nerfed in PvMP which then greatly affected how certain classes worked in PvE.  As a burglar at the time, the changes to CC and the CD on stealth were the biggest issues I recall.  This was about 2 years ago, give or take, but the devs took notice.   I suspect there is a correlation there with how long its been since there was a meaningful PvMP update.

  • gurthgorgurthgor Member Posts: 279

    Problem of pvp is that devs use to try to put ppl into classes instead letting them choose what to train, also use to focus tanks just as meat to get the hits and in pvp use to suck, then in the end everybody just chooses the best pvp classes cause devs made unbalance in pvp intentionally to keep the classic roles that i think copy from EQ. Ppl even asume that warriors should be weaker than mages classes, so in the end there wouldnt be any point to take a tank in a pvp world.

    Blade with whom i have lived, blade with whom I now die. Serve right and justice one last time. Seek one last heart of evil. Still one last life of pain. Cut well old friend. Then farewell!

  • smitty0356smitty0356 Member Posts: 368

    I'll agree that pvp balance is a notorious problem in mmo's. The same basic guy has to be viable in pve where many people fight one ai boss, yet still be good enough to play against zerg/zerg gameplay... 

    However I think PvMP could easily overcome this by controlling the monster play experience so it fits in the confines of pve, but there again, I'm not making the kind of money to make those decisions.

    I still hold true that they should just not attempt to balance any skills with pvp in mind.  If the pvp is super imbalanced, but the pve is solid, then that should be good enough for this ip.  The way the system is right now, if you aren't a class with cc, you are a champ/tank, you have no purpose in the ettenmoors, which is fine with everyone EXCEPT tanks/champs/captains who really want to pvp.

    Bottom line is, even pvMP IS pvp, so this game has it, and if you remember back to COH prior to the arena, people were definately missing the drive to participate in end-game content, and people just became alt-aholics until they quit, because the tredmill gets a little rediculous when you are no longer getting new skills.

    that is what pvp brings, it's that challenge that makes people play for hours for seemingly no reward, and it's a good system when it doesn't break up your core gameplay.

    Elite poster by 82

  • oakthornnoakthornn Member UncommonPosts: 863

    Most gamers who cry for pvp in mmorpg's are fans of the FPS genre. My wish would be for all the FPS freaks out there plagueing and ruining our fantasy MMORPG's to just straight up quit MMO's and never come back.. You are the reason why mmorpg's have failed the last 6 years!

    Rallithon Oakthornn
    (Retired Heirophant of the 60th season)

  • SwampRobSwampRob Member UncommonPosts: 1,003

    Originally posted by smitty0356

    Originally posted by Sovrath

    I think it's sort of a silly assumption that a game "needs" pvp.

    It's like saying that a neighborhood has to have a roller disco.

    In the end, if you don't like or desire pvp you just won't care.

    what is essentially being said here is that players who want pvp want pvp.

    Well, that's a given.

     It's more like saying a house doesn't NEED a bathroom, you may not even really like using the bathroom, but it is very nice to have around if company comes over.  PVP is one half of a social game like an mmo.  If you elect to not have pvp, then you are cutting the player experience in half.  It's the cheapest and most successful end game content and player motivator with the possible exception of the loot tredmill that WOW uses.

    Bottom line is I don't NEED pvp to enjoy a game, but I enjoy pvp, and I find games that have it in some fashion tend to keep my interest longer. 

    I think people get very afraid that a game with pvp is somehow less pve oriented, or that if you don't like pvp, you can't play a game because it has it in the content.  This is just plain wrong.  SOME games have bad pvp with ganking, imbalance, and a system which requires you to partake in that terrible system. (see mxo for gank, and WAR for terrible system and forced pvp)

    so long as a game keeps a players options in mind, pvp can be great.   And if you don't like it at all, then that's a little part of the world you don't have to visit, but it just might get your future wife to give the game a try in the first place.

     No.   Everyone needs a bathroom once in a while.   It's more like saying a house doesn't need a hottub, and it doesn't.   It's a nice feature if you like hottubs, but it's far from required to make a game complete.

    There are lots and lots of people who play MMOs and never PvP, but I know of no one who never uses a bathroom.

  • EthianEthian Member Posts: 1,216

    Originally posted by smitty0356

    I actually don't care for forced pvp, and I think LoTRO has it ALMOST right on they money as a game, but there is a part of mmo's that keep people trying to get the slightes upgrades, and being willing to work for it, and that is to be the best.  Unfortunatly, with no direct pvp other than duels and monster play (which I really like, but it doesn't satisfy the drive for "leetness" like real pvp does) I think this effect allows players to see the high end gear and say "meh" since the advantages of that gear won't make any difference in the course of a raid or a mission.

    For some reason, I just don't think people care to chase down a warg for 15 mins when the warg has no death penalty, and playing the monsters are fun because I like the change of reference from hero to villain, but there is just no attachment to my character, and I feel like a kamikazee in order to deny an order player resources or cause him to have to spend money on repairs... neither is actually very rewarding in the long term.

    I'm not saying this game should make some ad-hoc pvp to appeal to more players, but I do wish that it could get that appeal somehow.  I don't know how this game could swing it since that isn't my job, but it would be nice if it existed.

    I know this game doesn't have a lot of options for pvp since the IP never had much in the way of elf v elf or whatnot, but I think it is one of the factors that keeps and otherwise A+ game out of the mainstream.

     Totally agree. LOTRO could have been so much more. I played for alittle over a year, realized that Turbine wasn't going to do much with pvmp and quickly /quit. Nothing to do but quests quickly get boring for me.

    If you've ever played Darkfall online is exactly the way LOTRO should have been created imo. I get more of a feeling of Middle Earth from the world of Darkfall then I ever did from LOTRO. Its a shame really, I'd love to see another company give Middle Earth a shot but unfortionately Turbine has it now so we'll likey never see another Middle Earth MMO   :-/

    "I play Tera for the gameplay"

  • EthianEthian Member Posts: 1,216

    Originally posted by oakthornn

    Most gamers who cry for pvp in mmorpg's are fans of the FPS genre. My wish would be for all the FPS freaks out there plagueing and ruining our fantasy MMORPG's to just straight up quit MMO's and never come back.. You are the reason why mmorpg's have failed the last 6 years!

     Haha, i rofl'd lol

     

    IMO a MMO is boring without good pvp. So there you have it :-)

    "I play Tera for the gameplay"

  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 30,966

    Originally posted by smitty0356

    Originally posted by Sovrath

    I think it's sort of a silly assumption that a game "needs" pvp.

    It's like saying that a neighborhood has to have a roller disco.

    In the end, if you don't like or desire pvp you just won't care.

    what is essentially being said here is that players who want pvp want pvp.

    Well, that's a given.

     It's more like saying a house doesn't NEED a bathroom, you may not even really like using the bathroom, but it is very nice to have around if company comes over.  PVP is one half of a social game like an mmo.  If you elect to not have pvp, then you are cutting the player experience in half.  It's the cheapest and most successful end game content and player motivator with the possible exception of the loot tredmill that WOW uses.

    Bottom line is I don't NEED pvp to enjoy a game, but I enjoy pvp, and I find games that have it in some fashion tend to keep my interest longer. 

    I think people get very afraid that a game with pvp is somehow less pve oriented, or that if you don't like pvp, you can't play a game because it has it in the content.  This is just plain wrong.  SOME games have bad pvp with ganking, imbalance, and a system which requires you to partake in that terrible system. (see mxo for gank, and WAR for terrible system and forced pvp)

    so long as a game keeps a players options in mind, pvp can be great.   And if you don't like it at all, then that's a little part of the world you don't have to visit, but it just might get your future wife to give the game a try in the first place.

    Not even close. You are trying to equate pvp as a general necessity. But it's not proven that it is a necessity. Just to the people who think it is. Now, I realize that there are players who require pvp as a necessity. But there are players who would never even consider it. If it was abolished from their game they wouldn't notice it. And therefore it is not a necessity to them and not a necessity to "all" games.

    To that end, I know of players in Lineage 2 who hated the pve portion of the game. I imagine they wouldn't agree that a game "needs pve".

    to say that pvp is a necessity means that if a game doesn't have it the game suffers and therefor all players would suffer. So how can players who can't stand it and don't care suffer if it is removed. Especially as some of them dislike the type of community that it can foster? (small amount but still there are people who claim that it ruins communities).

    My thought is that it's a sliding scale. There are those who hate it, thouse who have to have it because they love it and everything in between.

    for a pvp game it is what it is and if players are going to play it then they will have to deal with it.  But that's the thing, not every game allows for players to pick and choose whether they take part in pvp. Lineage 2 certainly didn't and I heard complaints for the first year and a half from players who wanted it to be optoinal. Aion is less so as there are some areas that don't have it but otherwise you have to be on your toes in order to avoid it.

    I'm all for choices. Always have been. But players need to know what type of game they are getting themselves into. And developers need to be focused. If they are going to offer pvp then it has to be well thought out. In the case of LOTRO it has to be a choice as well.

    I'm also for not ruining a pvp game either. Either add pve servers or keep it a pvp game. Or of course, work it into the game where it's all good and players have choice. But hard core pvp'ers tend not to like that kind of thing. But to blanket say that "a game needs pvp" is just going to fall on deaf ears for those who could't care less.

    I"m not convinced it's a general necessity "to a game". Just a necessity to a certain segment of players.

    for the record I prefer that my games have some sort of pvp as well. But I still don't think it's a blanket necessity for all games.

    Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb." 

    Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w


    Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547

    Try the "Special Edition." 'Cause it's "Special." https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/64878/?tab=description

    Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo 
  • kingtommyboykingtommyboy Member Posts: 543

    Originally posted by smitty0356

    I actually don't care for forced pvp, and I think LoTRO has it ALMOST right on they money as a game, but there is a part of mmo's that keep people trying to get the slightes upgrades, and being willing to work for it, and that is to be the best.  Unfortunatly, with no direct pvp other than duels and monster play (which I really like, but it doesn't satisfy the drive for "leetness" like real pvp does) I think this effect allows players to see the high end gear and say "meh" since the advantages of that gear won't make any difference in the course of a raid or a mission.

    For some reason, I just don't think people care to chase down a warg for 15 mins when the warg has no death penalty, and playing the monsters are fun because I like the change of reference from hero to villain, but there is just no attachment to my character, and I feel like a kamikazee in order to deny an order player resources or cause him to have to spend money on repairs... neither is actually very rewarding in the long term.

    I'm not saying this game should make some ad-hoc pvp to appeal to more players, but I do wish that it could get that appeal somehow.  I don't know how this game could swing it since that isn't my job, but it would be nice if it existed.

    I know this game doesn't have a lot of options for pvp since the IP never had much in the way of elf v elf or whatnot, but I think it is one of the factors that keeps and otherwise A+ game out of the mainstream.

     

    Lotro is a pve focused game. I wouldn't even care if this game didn't had anny pvp. The monster play is fun, but the devs put this in the game just because they had to. Most mmo's these day's have some pvp features.  I would still have bought it even without these monster play and duel things in it. If your looking for a pvp mmo, then Lotro is not for you.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------
    waiting for ... nothing..

Sign In or Register to comment.