Kaines
Potato Supreme
- 19,397
- 55,552
Full loot PVP with territory control MMOs are the Communism of MMOs. Those that support it are too dumb to understand why it doesn't work and unironically claim its never been REALLY tried.
- 2
- 1
- 1
Ashes of Creation
- Thread starter Tearofsoul
- Start date
B_Mizzle
Avatar of War Slayer
- 8,970
- 19,307
Yes for sure. I think AOC could have been successful if they just started with their core ideas, an interactive world where the world responsd to player location and actions, towns were built up based on quests and killing monsters etc, simple but beneficial trade skilling. Stuck with some basic classes, went with a much smaller game world and huge focus on the combat system Instead they got sucked into massive feature creep, then had to change engines midway through, and I think that is what sank the game. To be honest combat never really felt that great or responsive but it had improved.
I may have a different take on sieges and PVP, but I feel like Black Desert has a fair middle ground, sieges are instanced or at least were when I was playing, PVP is technically open but the penalties for ganking are pretty severe, they have instanced arena's and BG type stuff. Which is I think the best way. Open PVP no consequences should be a ruleset for a separate server like how alot of other games do it.
- 1
jayrebb
Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
- 15,917
- 15,921
Pretty much anyone that put a little effort into refunds got them.
Would be surprised if it wasn't just flagged as default to customer by now based on the success rate.
Keep em coming.
- 5,342
- 7,491
I understand where you are coming from since in most cases its implemented like dogshit but this is literally the opposite of true.
Instanced based pve games are the actual communism of MMOs. You use instances to infinitely replicate gear so everyone gets a pony cus you basically star trek away scarcity.
Failed pvp games are the "no true scotsman" "real communism has never been tried" aspect of MMOs. The problem is of course they implement them retardedly on top of pve games and that never works.
But literal full loot pvp with territory control are the only style of pvp games that actually work and they only work when pve is optional and unrelated to the core gameplay.
- 1
Kaines
Potato Supreme
- 19,397
- 55,552
- 3,093
- 5,052
We have one successful PvP MMO still running: EVE Online. I'm counting out UO because of the later Trammel/Felucca split.
All other moderately succesful games like DAoC had a unique spin on PvP, like RvR.
However, the "true scotsman" of PvP MMOs was Shadowbane, and that cratered just as well. Simply put, the market for "Full Loot Always On PvP MMORGP" just isn't there, and the game style just does not promote a sense of community and belonging.
- 2
Flobee
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 3,139
- 3,658
Albion Online is still around and doing fairly well. The key to that style of game really seems to be protecting your sheep at all costs. You absolutely need a core of PVE players to support your PK population. I think the failure of these games is as much attributable to a culture problem than an actual systemic problem.
They worked much better when people were roleplaying and willing to take of anti-PK roles for example.
Tough nut to crack figuring out how to solve that but I do hope someone figures it out some day because I do enjoy these types of games before they devolve into toxic slop.
They worked much better when people were roleplaying and willing to take of anti-PK roles for example.
Tough nut to crack figuring out how to solve that but I do hope someone figures it out some day because I do enjoy these types of games before they devolve into toxic slop.
- 5,342
- 7,491
Yes we had one (debatably more than one, albuon is just a new uo as well as daoc, etc) that one, eve online, had more subs than every other mmo not named world of warcraft. So no, the market is there for sure. And the market for mixed pve/pvp via instanced bgs (wow) is clearly there. The one thing that is up for debate despite this forums thoughts on the matter is the pure pve game. That for sure has never actually proven a market exists, despite it being what most of us forum goers think.
Full loot pvp works only if the game is designed around it and pve is an afterthought added in in later expansion packs.
Its basic human psychology. If you have to put in work grinding exp to gain power then you are gonna be too butthurt to risk losing it. Thats where all these failed pvp games go wrong. They build a pve game then try and slap pvp on top.
- 3,093
- 5,052
A couple of things I thought were VERY obvious: EVE Online is an outlier in every sense of the word. EVE was modeled after Elite, but has no direct ship control like the latter. EVE has a very corporate-y culture, with alliances and politics being front and center. At the same time EVE has a bluebie/carebear side to it in high sec, where you can actually learn the game and build your pilot/character, which - very unusual for a game of this type - is basically timegated without any player interaction. The PvE side of the game flows directly into the territory control and management side, where everything is player farmed and built, and you even have post battle reports on how much a battle has cost each side down to the last ISK.
The key point for EVE online however is the distinction between gear and skills. You need the appropriate skills to use high level ships, and you can totally lose the gear--however you don't lose your skills and are even useful in small and cheap ships. So you never have the feeling of being totally stripped of your agency.
This has never really been replicated by any fantasy sword&sorcery MMO. The nearest thing that would work like that would be somehing like Minecraft with skills instead of pure gear progression.
Another key aspect of EVE Online is the territory control, and the world layout in NullSec. You can basically guard the gates to your empire and have territory control that way. Now think about how you couold transfer a system like that to a fantasy world.
There is absolutely a market for non-competitive social MMO around collecting things. I'd even argue the end game for GW2 (which has no end game gear progression) works that way. It's basically a Pretty Princess Dress Up game, and if you can add that to your MMO you instantly have an additional target audience--as long as you don't force them into competetive things.
It's what kept the lights on at Blizzard for WoW when everyone hated on the BfA to Shadowlands progression, which culminated in the fallout of the player base.
Again, see EVE Online: They actually require a lot of PvE to fuel the PvP. It's just that the progression side is split between gear and skills.
- 1
- 5,342
- 7,491
I think we are using terms differently. What you call pve is really just crafting/tradeskills and NOT what im referring to when it comes to bootstrapping pvp on top of pve games.
The closest thing eve has to pve (or did, I've been out of the loop for over a decade) is ratting which is similar to camping mobs ala eq and mission running which is very rudimentary quest system where you clear mobs. Neither of these activities relate to pvp at all, generate advancement, skill, or gear (well somewhat). You do those activities as a last resort to generate isk to buy things. That's what I mean, there is no pve grinding to generate character advancement, there are no artificial delineators such as levels, which produces a sunk cost fallacy and increases pvp risk aversion.
Eve works because advancement is completely removed from any sort of pve, its solely based on time based skill unlocks which is a universal equalizer, similar to any fps where everyone fels like they are on an even playing field. There is no thought that "he was able to gank me because hes a no life that plays 20 hours a day and thus hes got 30 levels on me" there is also no real gear advantage. Not that officer/ded site gear doesn't exist (equivalent to dungeon/raid "loot"), but because it is full loot/destruction ffa pvp thus nobody in their right mind ever really risks it (and the advantage of that gear is extremely minimal thus not worth the chance at loss).
Again full loot pvp territory control works fine every time its implemented correctly. What you can't do is tack it on on top of a pve based game where you gotta grind 100 hours to hit level cap and spend a month dungeoning for gear before you can raid 6 hours a week to get full bis on top of farming 10k pig dicks a week to maintain a town or taxes or whatever shit they are putting in these things. That combo never fucking works.
- 1
Kaines
Potato Supreme
- 19,397
- 55,552
- 1
Mahes
Silver Baronet of the Realm
- 6,795
- 10,825
Dark Ages of Camelot is as close as you get to the EVE model used.
You had a no-PvP area that allowed a person to learn their character and advance in levels. You also got gear in those areas. You had keeps and towers with relic control providing a boost to characters as long as you maintained control in the PvP/RvR zones. The PvP was not harsh in penalty. You never lost levels or gear for dying. You lost control. You also gained a kind of AA level the more you killed, that also boosted your character. As you progressed you gained new abilities and title.
Given its time, the Keep system was pretty good. You had 5 stages of advancement that increased the strength of the keeps/towers. Each stage added to defense, making it take longer for players trying to over run them.
The RvR was fun. You had Zerg wars between the realms where you could have fights of 60+ verse 60+ players. You also could form up into 8 man groups that could piece apart zergs or look for isolated players/groups. You could also form bomber groups which consisted of a healer and 7 AoE Damage/Crowd Control classes that would drop off castle walls right into a large group of players trying to get into the keep. The strategy also worked well for defense as there were times the AoE could go through walls/floors. Then you had one of my favorite types of RvR, Stealth Wars. Get a group of 8 Stealthers and look for other stealth players or take towers and bring players to you.
To this day, DAoC is the only game I have truly enjoyed fighting other players in.
You had a no-PvP area that allowed a person to learn their character and advance in levels. You also got gear in those areas. You had keeps and towers with relic control providing a boost to characters as long as you maintained control in the PvP/RvR zones. The PvP was not harsh in penalty. You never lost levels or gear for dying. You lost control. You also gained a kind of AA level the more you killed, that also boosted your character. As you progressed you gained new abilities and title.
Given its time, the Keep system was pretty good. You had 5 stages of advancement that increased the strength of the keeps/towers. Each stage added to defense, making it take longer for players trying to over run them.
The RvR was fun. You had Zerg wars between the realms where you could have fights of 60+ verse 60+ players. You also could form up into 8 man groups that could piece apart zergs or look for isolated players/groups. You could also form bomber groups which consisted of a healer and 7 AoE Damage/Crowd Control classes that would drop off castle walls right into a large group of players trying to get into the keep. The strategy also worked well for defense as there were times the AoE could go through walls/floors. Then you had one of my favorite types of RvR, Stealth Wars. Get a group of 8 Stealthers and look for other stealth players or take towers and bring players to you.
To this day, DAoC is the only game I have truly enjoyed fighting other players in.
- 2
- 3,093
- 5,052
You have it backwards, Mining and Crafting are totally PvE: You have to have a reason for territory control, or it's going to be a pointless dick comparison. That goal in EVE is resource control. Without that and crafting you can't have successful PvP, because basically the whole economy in EVE is player-driven.
- 5,342
- 7,491
No I don't have it backyards, you are just using an improper definition of pve. Player vs environment has always meant player vs npc mobs, grinding xp, earning coins, advancing their levels, slaying the dragon. That really doesn't exist in eve except for killing mobs to gather shekels so you can buy things off the player market. Tradeskills is an integral part of any player run player generated economy/market/territory game . I guarantee you the market in eve is 100% a pvp experience.
- 1
Kaines
Potato Supreme
- 19,397
- 55,552
- 3,093
- 5,052
No. I also find it funny that you try to narrow down the definition of "environment" specifically to suit your argument, when I already said that territory control should have an ulterior motive, and in EVE it is control over resources. Which, ironically, are part of the environment.
Yeah, I hear you saying "but mining is part of the economy/tradeskills and therefore not environment." ... so you can now mine things ex vacuo? That would be a very sorry game, and that's not how it works in EVE.
- 1
- 1
Byr
Potato del Grande
- 4,479
- 6,001
Saying that Shadowbane cratered is a little re-writting of history. The game had a long lifespan and was successful enough to see 2 expansions made for it. It was more successful than 99% of MMOs made.
Last edited: