OPINION: New World & The Age-Old Clash Between PvE & PvP - MMORPG.com

System

OPINION: New World & The Age-Old Clash Between PvE & PvP - MMORPG.com

Like many things in the industry (life, really), rampant tribalism emerges between various camps of differing beliefs, play styles, genres, etc. Many times, these divisions erode into truly toxic behavior and detestable language. But other times, these divisions lead to some good-natured poking. We need not look any further than last week’s news regarding New World and their constantly changing stance on PvE and PvP.

Read the full story here

Thane

you either make a pve or a pvp game.
you cannot combine vegan food with meat, well sure... you could, but it wouldn't be vegan anymore

Elvoc

This is the very reason these games make separate servers, one for PVE and one for PVP so people can play whatever style they like. Trying to force PVP or PVE on a player is just bad business and ultimately spell doom for the game..

alkarionlog

Thane said:

you either make a pve or a pvp game.

you cannot combine vegan food with meat, well sure... you could, but it wouldn't be vegan anymore

several games make the mix work well

problem is always, people who don't like fish ask to eat fish, and then force the place to remove the fish from the menu

alkarionlog

also having danger during exploring is imerssion shatering? I really don't think you know what exploring really is

I can undertand the full loot or bag loot rules, these tend to be annoying in a random drops game, but part of exploring is not be ready for dangers? know how and when to run? when to fight. plus you can always go to another place no? yell for your side pvpers to hunt then?

elveone

Immersion shattering? Really? Oh, god, this is getting stupid.

The reason why most PvE players do not want to be forced to PvP is because it is wasting their time. A lot of players have limited time for their entertainment and being forced into an activity they don't enjoy on general or don't want to do at that particular moment is what is the problem.

PvP players, imagine wanting to participate in an interesting PvP battle and being forced instead to do a dungeon run at the whim of a PvE player. That is what not having the PvP toggle does to PvE players. For you the toggle means that you can PvP as much as you want as long as you want it but you cannot drag random people into your activity wasting their time when they don't want to participate.

DemonicToys

Survival games with hardcore rule sets are popular because you put zero effort into your character and if you die, another decent weapon is right around the corner. They are transient worlds where you can start over at the "endgame" anytime. MMORPGs with the same rule sets always fail, or turn into tiny niche games like albion. All of the popular MMORPGs are a mix of pvp and pve and do not feature full loot. When you invest months into developing your character and riding the gear treadmill, most people don't want to lose their stuff. PVP turns into a mass zergfest as it is in Albion. I like survival games, but the things I like about them are the same things that kill a MMORPG.

biaxil

Given the plethora of pve games in existence, I find it selfish when pve only players want to turn the few pvp games in existence into pve-ish games by restricting the scope or penalties of the pvp system in a given game. I was really looking forward to New World, because it would be the only open world, pvp game, with a triple A backing in the market. PVE players already have wow, eso, gw2, ff14, etc. None of them have complete open world pvp. Pvp in those titles are secondary, and instanced which are boring by comparison.

So pvp purists would finally get a game like darkfall, but from a competent studio. But nope, the people that already have tons of games that suit their playstyle have to come to a game that was made with open world pvp in mind and have it turned into something that no one likes. Great job! New World is now a game, where the map will not meet the playstyle, and will be completely exploitable due to being able to get high end resources without the risk of pvp, which completely changes the meta of how the game is played.

Vorthanion

Games like World of Warcraft, Dark Age of Camelot and Warhammer Online are the only ones that I have enjoyed as a primarily PvE gamer and weekend PvPer.

Sovrath

Elvoc said:

This is the very reason these games make separate servers, one for PVE and one for PVP so people can play whatever style they like. Trying to force PVP or PVE on a player is just bad business and ultimately spell doom for the game..

Or ... they just make one type of game.

People seem to want and think "everything" should be for them.

Would it be nice if there were multiple servers to cater to different tastes? Sure! Should developers feel obligated to do this. Absolutely not.

In the case of this game, they came to the decision that they wanted to rethink pvp. Since the game is still in development that's great.

People shouldn't think that everything is written in stone until the game actually launches.

Aeander

Wolves need sheep.

Sheep do not need, nor want wolves.

You cannot make both happy, and rules/punishments/dishonor systems meant to keep PvP down inherently make PvP less fun.

Raquis

ill wait for beta footage on twitch a month before release.

slowz2secret

I'm a pve player, I would not play this game if is full pvp, I like the changes they did

Gutlard

I'm all for options. I primarily PvE, but do get the PvP bug still.

Hopefully, the Dev's will throw enough money / dev time to make both feel equally rewarding.

Gut Out!

cheyane

I watched a video where a chap explained that this game right now has almost no real content for PvE. Most of the content so far has been for PvP. What are they offering the PvE players for them to even consider playing this game?

I have played two games that are PvP . Black desert Online and Archeage, in BDO no one ever killed me and I went off to far off places and traded. In Archeage as long as I avoided the warzones I was fine to deliver and trade. My property in Archeage was in a safe area so was never in any danger. Not once did I write or ask on any board to change the rule set to suit me a PvE player.

Honestly this myth that is being levelled at the PvE players changing developers minds and destroying PvP hopes is utter rubbish. The PvP players themselves manage to poison the games they have and they deserve what becomes of the the games they themselves ruin.

I always play within my comfort zone when I can. I PvP in WoW BGs and I am willing to do so. I never PvPed in Archeage or BDO since I was not content to do so but in both games I had an immersive experience and the PvP did not bother me. The games had good life systems that I thoroughly enjoyed. I ended up leaving them for reasons that had nothing to do with PvP.

bentrim

We see it in every PVP centric game....GANKING. It is the BULK of PVPers playstyle. Lions don't hunt lions...they hunt prey who either don't fight back or are so overwhelmed, they don't stand a chance. This is typically how PVP evolves in MMORPG games. There is NO WAY you can implement PVP and PVE together. Additionally, trying to appeal to a MINORITY, in order to make "everyone happy" is not possible. So it boils down to which market will generate the most revenue, and we all know what side that is....PVE!!

SplitStream13

The PvP crowd is a vocal minority in MMORPG. Always have been. Especially now with the rise of battle royales they go there to get their PvP fix (even I play BRs). Thing is, battle royales are fun for PvE players - too. Because when you lose, nothing of "value" is lost. MMORPGs are different. Been playing them all my life.

On the PvP side, I'll never forget in Lineage 2 when my buddy and I ganked a karma player and he dropped boss jewelry as a result I was the happiest kid on the block. If someone played L2 in C4/C5 days, you KNOW that boss jewelry was exclusive to the biggest clans/alliances and normies like me couldn't obtain one.

That's like once in a lifetime...everything else is pretty unwanted.

alkarionlog

Sovrath said:

Elvoc said:

This is the very reason these games make separate servers, one for PVE and one for PVP so people can play whatever style they like. Trying to force PVP or PVE on a player is just bad business and ultimately spell doom for the game..

Or ... they just make one type of game.

People seem to want and think "everything" should be for them.

Would it be nice if there were multiple servers to cater to different tastes? Sure! Should developers feel obligated to do this. Absolutely not.

In the case of this game, they came to the decision that they wanted to rethink pvp. Since the game is still in development that's great.

People shouldn't think that everything is written in stone until the game actually launches.

what? never belive in the hype? new to the forums?

Haki88

What PvP means, look at Silkroad Online, early days where most of gold you can earn by doing trades, beeing hunter protecting traders and thief. Now for those who didnt played this game early days, imagine, 1 union which means 8 guildsx50 players, that is 400players is preparing for trade, and some guy says in global "trade @ DW", whole freaking server rush to dw, either to protect that trade or thiefs who will try to kill everyone and steal goods, no matter if ppl who try to protect that trade wont get nothing.

You could make that atleast 80% of server PvP in anytime, so much fun.... but sadly in new games everything is broken, like BDO or AA/U, broken by devs or publishers or game is broken itself.

Last 2 games who were amazing where something new and unique was BDO and AA, latest was BDO with release date of 2014, 6 years later we still dont have even announcement of new mmorpg which will offer something new and unique instead we have "new" mmorpgs with basic options, bad graphic, effects and animation.

botrytis

DemonicToys said:

Survival games with hardcore rule sets are popular because you put zero effort into your character and if you die, another decent weapon is right around the corner. They are transient worlds where you can start over at the "endgame" anytime. MMORPGs with the same rule sets always fail, or turn into tiny niche games like albion. All of the popular MMORPGs are a mix of pvp and pve and do not feature full loot. When you invest months into developing your character and riding the gear treadmill, most people don't want to lose their stuff. PVP turns into a mass zergfest as it is in Albion. I like survival games, but the things I like about them are the same things that kill a MMORPG.

Most survival game are niche games, that doesn't mean they are not popular in that niche. That is why WoW is still surviving and flourishing - no forced PvP.

If you like PvP, go at it. But for a majority of players it is an also ran.

Sandmanjw

biaxil said:

Given the plethora of pve games in existence, I find it selfish when pve only players want to turn the few pvp games in existence into pve-ish games by restricting the scope or penalties of the pvp system in a given game. I was really looking forward to New World, because it would be the only open world, pvp game, with a triple A backing in the market. PVE players already have wow, eso, gw2, ff14, etc. None of them have complete open world pvp. Pvp in those titles are secondary, and instanced which are boring by comparison.

So pvp purists would finally get a game like darkfall, but from a competent studio. But nope, the people that already have tons of games that suit their playstyle have to come to a game that was made with open world pvp in mind and have it turned into something that no one likes. Great job! New World is now a game, where the map will not meet the playstyle, and will be completely exploitable due to being able to get high end resources without the risk of pvp, which completely changes the meta of how the game is played.

Like always, blame the players...last i heard the players just play a game...the dev's build the game.

Let me think of the last time i knew of a player writing code to change a pvp game to not be pvp or have reduced pvp..........................................

Utinni

All of the most popular PC games are PvP. They will definitely favor the PvP content over the PvE.

ultimateduck

Am I the only one that finds these developers insane for doing the same thing over and over without looking at the one major success story?

PvP and PvE can exist in the same game... just separate them, and not with instanced BGs that are a waste of time. A perpetual PvE world and a perpetual PvP world. The concept isn't that hard.

olepi

Some games have both. I've had a lot of PvP fun in DAOC, Ryzom, and ESO. But none of those games *force* you to PvP.

Each of those games has zones where PvP is open, and if you go there, you can and probably will be attacked. In Ryzom's case, the best materials for crafting were in a PvP zone.

The fundamental problem is where you are FORCED to do what you don't want to. In ESO, some of the PvP skills have to be earned in PvE. Games with open PvP might allow PvE, but you can be attacked at any time. Few people want this.

Sovrath

olepi said:

Some games have both. I've had a lot of PvP fun in DAOC, Ryzom, and ESO. But none of those games *force* you to PvP.

Each of those games has zones where PvP is open, and if you go there, you can and probably will be attacked. In Ryzom's case, the best materials for crafting were in a PvP zone.

The fundamental problem is where you are FORCED to do what you don't want to. In ESO, some of the PvP skills have to be earned in PvE. Games with open PvP might allow PvE, but you can be attacked at any time. Few people want this.

I'm absolutely sure that no game forces you to buy/download it. Therefore no game is forcing you to play it. PvE or PvP

biaxil

Sandmanjw said:

biaxil said:

Given the plethora of pve games in existence, I find it selfish when pve only players want to turn the few pvp games in existence into pve-ish games by restricting the scope or penalties of the pvp system in a given game. I was really looking forward to New World, because it would be the only open world, pvp game, with a triple A backing in the market. PVE players already have wow, eso, gw2, ff14, etc. None of them have complete open world pvp. Pvp in those titles are secondary, and instanced which are boring by comparison.



So pvp purists would finally get a game like darkfall, but from a competent studio. But nope, the people that already have tons of games that suit their playstyle have to come to a game that was made with open world pvp in mind and have it turned into something that no one likes. Great job! New World is now a game, where the map will not meet the playstyle, and will be completely exploitable due to being able to get high end resources without the risk of pvp, which completely changes the meta of how the game is played.

Like always, blame the players...last i heard the players just play a game...the dev's build the game.

Let me think of the last time i knew of a player writing code to change a pvp game to not be pvp or have reduced pvp..........................................

You can't be serious with this post. Developers don't just randomly completely change their game which was based on their own vision. This was an obvious knee jerk reaction by the developers based on a group of players that likes to scream to get things to be their way and wants to have it that way in every mmo they touch.