Is PvP the future of MMO?

[GaliemVaelant]

This is my first time starting a thread here, and I know neither the proper customs nor formalities practiced here as far as that goes, so bear with me please.


I have come to the conclusion that the future of MMO's cannot possibly be designed 100% PvE and be successful.

Reason being, when you create an MMO that is PvE, you basically create an entire world that is pitting the players against the developers inherintly. Everyone playing is going after the same mobs, and for the most part have the same goals.

With 100% PvE, players must compete for content constantly, which in itself can bring about problems.

Then there's the issue of whether any system can survive for any considerable duration when thousands of people are battling it. After the 10,000th time uber mob xxx has been killed, it's no longer uber.

This forces the development team to implement new content and new encounter types on a system that does age. We are unarguably seeing this effect first hand in EQ.

Eventually, the content gets old, the world seems less "alive" or "dynamic", and people get bored. The same equation on a thousand games also makes for a very stale market.

The only answer to this problem seems to be PvP. While I wouldn't bet on the marketability of a 100% PvP MMO either, I believe some aspect of it must be present, yet controlled.

I won't go into the various systems that have been tried, such as in DAoC, or those proposed in WoW, because this post is long enough as is.

The point is, though, is the same old player versus AI going to be enough ever again, whether the AI is great or not?

Edit: I am goodest grammar.

[Chaotic]

Just look at eq, its 100% pve, taking into consideration the fact that you're on a blue server.

Is it drawing to a close in regards to how "uber" they can make a mob? Hell no. Something hits for 4k, AE's for 500? Next time around make one that hits for 8k and AE's for 2000. Unfair? Yes. But given how fast the PoP content has been steam rolled through, and considering how incredibly difficult it is comparitive to "old school" read: "pharm status" shit pre PoP. Yet, people owned it all with ease... so i'm sure theres a bunch of room for the developers to make shit harder, and thats only regarding one aspect. If they got creative, im sure they could make it more difficult then simply kill this mob, keep your MT alive, own adds, etc. Stupid little things that require some intelligance. For example, a tile pattern - say 16 tiles, every 30 seconds or so, 4 of them would begin to blink for 10 seconds, then become solid color. If someone doesnt stand on the tile before they become solid, unleashes something nasty, etc. If someone goes down whos supposed to be on tile.... you get the idea. Weak idea im aware, but point is, theres a whole world of shit they can do to make things more difficult/interesting.

PvP is a problem, because alot of people who play it are simply griefers, I learned this on SZ, so many gimpy lvl 35 rangers would come raid the FoB newbie area, why? Thats leet competition? People would wait till after you a kill a mob and oom, or 40% life.. its inherently annoying imo. Although alot of people do enjoy it, but I seriously doubt if it is the future of mmorpg's.

After all, look at all the pvp mmorpg's... and look at eq ;(

[Esmo]

100% PvE can and will continue to be a highly successful genre. PvP has its fans but the numbers will always be lower because of griefing.

The issue with a PvP/PvE combination is balancing mob power with player power. You cannot have balance between in the two in a game like EQ where mob power is exponentially higher than player power - in order for players to combat mobs of such power is to give them abilities which make PvP a series of one or two hit kills.

If any company wants to design a game with successful PvE and PvP elements they are going to have to steer away from the EQ model and drive toward an AC model (as far as relative mob vs player power being relatively even).

I am not a big PvP fan because of griefing - and griefing will never go away so I doubt I will ever be a fan of it.

So to answer your question: no, PvP is not a necessity for future MMOG's. Conversely, I think more MMOG's will steer to either the 100% PvE or 100% PvP design instead of trying to release some bastardized hybrid of each that causes both elements to suffer sever balance issues.


~esmo

[Mkopec1]

Originally posted by GaliemVaelant
Reason being, when you create an MMO that is PvE, you basically create an entire world that is pitting the players against the developers inherintly. Everyone playing is going after the same mobs, and for the most part have the same goals.

With 100% PvE, players must compete for content constantly, which in itself can bring about problems.

Then there's the issue of whether any system can survive for any considerable duration when thousands of people are battling it. After the 10,000th time uber mob xxx has been killed, it's no longer uber.

This forces the development team to implement new content and new encounter types on a system that does age. We are unarguably seeing this effect first hand in EQ.

Eventually, the content gets old, the world seems less "alive" or "dynamic", and people get bored. The same equation on a thousand games also makes for a very stale market.

Only if you think in terms of EQ as being the only model for PvE.

Now lets look at Anarchy Onlines model for PvE. they came up with a static dungeon system which utilizes diffrent "instances" of the same dungeon. So theoretically you and your group can have content which is the same as another groups but the dungeon is all yours and yours alone. This solves all the camping issues and also the problem of competing with others for the same content.

Now lets look at the mission system which, again, Anarchy Online introduced into the genra. This is the best thing ever introdiced to a MMOG IMO. The content is created for you on the fly, yours and your groups own little dungeon to explore. Now granted AO's missions tend to get stale after a while because the variety is just not there. But If other Devs could take this idea and im sure they could expand on it and make it a better system.

And with their latest AO expansion which is due to hit at the end of July they are proposing a new and revolutionary Uber Mob system which is unlike any to date. People were complaining in AO, like they do in EQ, that the end game Uber Mobs with their 7 day spawn cycles and the camping and all the problems associated with it.

So they are proposing a new uber mob spawning system. Basically its a "pocket monster" type of thing.

Players will find diffrent parts of this Uber monster in outdoor areas and missions, and when the guid is ready they will spawn this monster/god/ whatever whenever they want to. It takes certain components, old writings, monsters imbuled to crystals and a certain combination of other crystals and such will spawn this content for the guild.

So think about it, no more scheduling conflicts, no more camping conflicts, all sloved with the "pocket monster" mentality. Cant get your guild together on sunday but Monday? No problem, just spaqwn the baddazz Uber mob on monday when everyone can attend.

[GaliemVaelant]

I appreciate the feedback in this. Was just curious how the general gamer feels on that issue, and y'all have some ideas that are much more creative and probably effective than going to PvP would be.

The concept of MMO design I've been pondering lately is the World Design vs Game Design balance. Leaning toward pure world design, anybody could attack anyone, sure, but it's not about that... It's all pretty much role play. In pure game design (the other end of the spectrum), everyone would start out in their town with the rest of the world blacked out (picture Warcraft 3 before a map is explored), and then set out in teams.

The biggest issue my mind keeps coming across while turning this over is how to get away from the EQ model, and come up with something unique. One such idea was for players to work together for the good of their city or civilization. In other words, Bob couldn't reach level 30 if his city doesn't support it, so he works as part of a team with others to contribute to the city.

Then PvP comes up... Actually, no matter what route my thoughts went, PvP seemed to be the end of the path, so thank you kindly for helping me derail that train of thought, as it seems not to be the best one...

I shouldn't post while letting my mind wander... I get confusing and seem t ojump form subject to subject, but I have one more question:

Outside the general "only in arenas" type PvP, does anyone think it can become an important part of an MMOs mechanics? Even if not centered entirely on PvP, I think it's one tool in a bag of tricks that, if used right, could be very interesting, however difficult to balance.

kk... I am buggering off now before my mind wanders anymore 8)

[Mkopec1]

Well, to date, SB had the best balanced and nob friendly PvP. The way they created their characters was by the "diinishing returns" idea.

It was a point system where you spend your points on diffrent skills and such, but as you level higher, you get less and less points. So it was totally viable for a lv 30ish character to take down a lv 50ish. Because the lv50ish character didnt have that much more points as the lv 30ish.
Hence the "diminishing returns".

and PvP in that game was fun, no one was bitching about character balance or anything, for the first time we had a balanced PvP game!

But the end game consisted of only PvP, which is fun for a while, but in the end it gets boring fast. You are basically relying on players to make content instead of the devs. SB had other problems too, ummm....like stability?

Anyways, I think PvP is great in games, only if balanced right and you still have to have compelling PvE content also. Only the mixture of both will create a good game.

[-[Ao1]-Nemesis]

To me, pure or mostly PvP is not the route MMOG should take.

Unfortunately for the developers, most of the easy ways of creating a PvE environment are all used up. They simply have to get more creative and possibly...listen to player suggestions! *gasp* (Sony says: listen...wtf?) From this forum alone, I have seen excellent ideas in all stages of development.

In my opinion, PvP in its purest form gets old real quick. Between the high level PKers and the cheap people who kill you at 40% health, it's just no fun. Of course, level limits and other precautions can be used to prevent these downfalls. New ways in PvP will keep it interesting. For example, off the top of my head, guild wars. In Everquest, from way back when I did them, they were fun as hell. As long as proper rules were applied of course.

Okay, I'm done *steps off soap box*

[dbsanfte]

Reason being, when you create an MMO that is PvE, you basically create an entire world that is pitting the players against the developers inherintly.

That's also true for PvP games. The players will blame the developers for class-balance problems relating to PvP just as fast as they'll blame them for PvE problems. Instead of "You stupid devs caused us to wipe to Lady Vox", it turns into "You stupid devs caused me to die to that Shadowblade. Fix Theurgists!".

I'm sure if we all thought long and hard, we could figure out a way to remove the developer from blame for in-game situations. But for the life of me, I just don't see one. As long as the players know somebody is responsible for the weaknesses in their class and the bugs/hardships in their game, they will lash out at the source. It's human nature.

It aggrivates the problem when you let players run the show by giving the whiners what they want. All you get is more whining. See the DAoC class balance rants & raves for example.

[Suineg]

PvP only games have never been done and they cannot logically be implemented and work well. Where do you get your equipment from? You have to have some PvE in order to gear up and practice.

AO you levelled up to 100+ on PvE and you got all your gear that way. Once you got to a certain level you were PvP flagged whether you liked it or not. It had it's ups and downs but honestly it could have been tweaked and the game would have been good.

I think PvP right now is mainly a good distraction when you are bored of the PvE or there is nothing up worthwhile to kill.

SWG has a good concept by having the ongoing war. I know DAoC had this same thing but they had force areas you had to start in etc. If SWG developers pull their heads out of their asses and retweak a lot of the game the PvP would be worth playing. You can have your entire character created and 'levelled' up to a good playing level in SWG at a casual place in about a month to two max. During that time you can learn your hybrid with ease and get quite decent gear. After that there is nothing left but to fool around with things like PvP or doing the 'amusement park' zones or crafting. It needs work but I think it is the best PvP concept I have seen.

[Mkopec1]

Originally posted by Beauti

AO you levelled up to 100+ on PvE and you got all your gear that way. Once you got to a certain level you were PvP flagged whether you liked it or not. It had it's ups and downs but honestly it could have been tweaked and the game would have been good.

Come on Beuti, your talkin out your ass because you never played AO given yor statement. In AO you could PvP anytime you wanted, at lv 1 or lv 100. You are not flagged for nothing. You simply enter a zone which is PvP enabled. Its just that PvP is way unbalaced for lvls1-100 because of twinking. You cannot go up against a lv 20 twik which is sporting lv100 implants and lv100 weapon, with twinked armor with your lv20 noob character.

Originally posted by Beauti


SWG has a good concept by having the ongoing war. I know DAoC had this same thing but they had force areas you had to start in etc. If SWG developers pull their heads out of their asses and retweak a lot of the game the PvP would be worth playing. You can have your entire character created and 'levelled' up to a good playing level in SWG at a casual place in about a month to two max. During that time you can learn your hybrid with ease and get quite decent gear. After that there is nothing left but to fool around with things like PvP or doing the 'amusement park' zones or crafting. It needs work but I think it is the best PvP concept I have seen.

SWG has a good premise, but not what they are implementing. The way PvP in SWG goes is meaningless PvP in flagged zones which amounts to nothing. Its a pastime.

Where is the galactic war? It should be evrywhere, not just in flagged zones where you pick a side upon enterring do a little PvP and leave. Thats LAME.

So the dark side and the light side coencide peacefully and hunt together and then wage war in flagged zones? Wow thats the best PvP system evar!

[Suineg]

Come on Beuti, your talkin out your ass because you never played AO given yor statement. In AO you could PvP anytime you wanted, at lv 1 or lv 100.

Yes you COULD PvP anytime but after a certain level you HAD to PvP if you ever wanted to leave a town again. Maybe you never levelled past 100 and didn't know this. I was an ARK on there until patch 12.6 when they nerfed Enforcers and Soldiers hardcore which I played when I wasn't ARKing. Remember my info is a little outdated and has to do with release and the first couple months after they may have changed PvP since then.

Where is the galactic war? It should be evrywhere, not just in flagged zones where you pick a side upon enterring do a little PvP and leave.

Last time I logged onto beta was in the middle of a firefight in Bestine. If you had picked a side you were not safe anywhere. Now they are implementing battlefields which are strategic areas you can build up walls, turrets, minefields etc.. But the galactic war is everywhere. Right now though the PvP is not balanced. You can be a 3rd level Pistol shooter and if you get first shot you will kill a Master Marksman or any other class in about 10 - 20 seconds flat. They are making all the weapon dmg and skills for PvE and forgot to make % changes when you fight PvP.

[Mkopec1]

Originally posted by Beauti
Yes you COULD PvP anytime but after a certain level you HAD to PvP if you ever wanted to leave a town again. Maybe you never levelled past 100 and didn't know this. I was an ARK on there until patch 12.6 when they nerfed Enforcers and Soldiers hardcore which I played when I wasn't ARKing. Remember my info is a little outdated and has to do with release and the first couple months after they may have changed PvP since then.

Nope, PvP was always and will always be consentual in AO.

Like I said, certain zones are flagged for PvP, you were never forced into it. You just had to avoid those zones.

90% of the world in ao has that 75% gas remember?

Sometimes the best rewarding missions were in these PvP zones, they were the best paying ones. But you could always choose to run missions in other zones which were PvP blocked.

[Wrathcaster]

I think the solution to the PVP/PVE dilemma is not to rely on either one too heavily to keep players busy and happy. Pure PVE, as currently implemented and conceived, will get stale due to many different factors such as lack of content. Pure PVP will get stale because relying and trusting a community of gamers to maintain and create their own content consisitently is foolish.

A logical solution, I believe, is to introduce PVE concepts into PVP gameplay, and vice versa, as some companies are beginning to do. Ideas off the top of my head are things such as player owned and created NPC cities, hirelings, and even armies. Introducing PVE encounters into PVP gameplay could allow for diversity in PVP strategy and warfare seen today. Of course such ideas would require careful use, balance, and testing to avoid exploitation and grief play. Whatever ideas are introduced to PVP from PVE gameplay, the general concept is alleviate the responsibility on the player's part to think up and plan their own content. This translates over into storylines and history as well. Giving player's complete freedom never works, but being a dictator over content also kills a sense of being able to change the gameworld, so the solution is to allow for moderation in content control.

I think that making any type of gameplay absolutely necessary to have fun, such as a complete PVP environment, will alienate players and limit their options. While you can introduce PVP elements to PVE gameplay, it isn't always a good idea to force it upon people.

Will post more as I go over and refine my thoughts on this topic.

[Frodlin7th]

The only way I can effectively think of to implement simultaneous PvP and PvE is to have separate PvP skillsets and levelling vs. PvE skillsets/levelling, this way one doesn't take their PvE skills/Spells and apply them to PvP where for instance one player would be nothing but a greenie if he/she were a mob.

[KiL4H]

I am not sure but isnt the "pocket monster" teory exactly as how xanamech is spawned ? I dont see what new concept is implemented there.