Do you prefer PvE or PvP or Both, and what draws you to that style over the other?
Disclaimer: We have already stated that we will be PvE based and PvP servers will be separate and have no effect on PvE. :)
Clearly PvE!
"Sometimes" its fun, to have a 'Mission', to do some PvP, but i dont really enjoy it. Imo PvP should be optional on a PvE Server and a (or more) PvP Server(s), for PvP Fans (like EQ was). Maybe also a RP Server, with special rules would be nice :D.
Definitely PvE. I do not enjoy PvP unless the game itself is presented as a PvP focussed game, and really only then when it is RvR or something big like that. I unfortunatly see too often the unpleasant side of players when PvP is allowed, and although I know there are a majority of good PvP players, it's the constant jerkiness of the few that totally turns me off of PvP. Yes I agree there are lots of jerks in PvE games too, but they can just go be a jerk on their own, and not realy impact me or my gameplay.
Pretty heavy PvE so far across all platforms, which I expected but I am reading some great answers and combos of both styles plus including RP which is great to see :)
Disclaimer: We have already stated that we will be PvE based and PvP servers will be separate and have no effect on PvE. :)
I like PvE and PvP, but the problem is I've never seen a PvP game that ends up being even. In every game I've played that is heavy PvP, what ends up happening is once one side becomes dominant over the others, the hard core PvP people transfer, reroll characters, or whatever and join the dominant side, making it even more dominant. So in the long term I've never found a PvP game that stays balanced. I'm currently playing a PvP game, but when Pantheon comes out I will strictly play PvE to get back to the just good old fun of MMOs.
Riply said: PvE for the most part, but I do really enjoy mechanics such as duel, arena and GM event based PvP. I wouldn't even be opposed to a anything goes PvP zone(s). But the zone shouldn't have anything that forces people who don't enjoy PvP, to have to go into it. Guess what I'm saying, is any content should be alternative content.
I agree. I dont mind the prospect of contested zones, where PvP is a factor. But if that's so, there should be a reason, and there should be ramifications to those who participate to offset any gains they might make there. It shouldnt just be a flag that says PvP and it's a free for all. There should be a decision by the player for why they are participating, for who, and for what.
I like both PVE and PVP, but these days I prefer them in separate games. I've seen too many PVE character classes watered down for the sake of PVP balance. In some games, I've even seen fun aspects of PVP impacted by PVE changes to character skills or abilities. I'm looking forward to PVE in Pantheon.
I prefer a hybrid. I prefer a PVE game, but with a PVP element that you have to consciencely dive into. Several examples are:
Open PVP servers always seemed to bring out the worst in people. The term 'griefing' didn't come out of nowhere. Or 'corpse camping'.
PVP arenas do point out the fact that players can be a lot harder than NPCs.
PvP in MMOs works only in duels, arenas, zones specially set aside for PvP but not open-world PvP.
If you do it open-world, it will devolve into 6 people ganking one, into people who spend 12 hours a day in game (and thus are better geared, have more levels and AAs) killng those who spend 2 hours a day in game, guilds of 500 vs guilds of 50, people who just want to exp for a while and see the world being constantly attacked and killed.
If there are enough people interested in open and unrestricted PvP put them on a separate server, where they can play with others of the same kind.
It might work if the server is 100% made of such. Mixing people who want open PvP and people who don't want it on the same server is a recipe for disaster.
Kilsin said:Do you prefer PvE or PvP or Both, and what draws you to that style over the other?
Disclaimer: We have already stated that we will be PvE based and PvP servers will be separate and have no effect on PvE. :)
For me, now, I prefer a PvE experience. I have done years of non-stop PvP in the past.. in games since and including M59, UO, WAR, more. Been there, done that, have the T-Shirt. I find it tedious and pointless now. The draw to PvE for me is the positive shared social experience, overcoming a challenge with teamwork.
However, it is my opinion that there are many interesting, innovative, and challenging ways to have players compete, in-game, without the tired old "reduce your targets hitpoints to zero" mantra being brought out.
A few simple examples:
NPC's for hire that perform all tasks NOT related to combat.
Non-lethal combat. (Tavern brawls are a common request)
Faction activities that affects an entire region, persistently yet temporarily. (this happened often enough in European noble courts IRL, historically)
PC Solo, Group and multi-group non-combat co-ordinated activities that pitch one NPC organization against another. (outfit the orcs, or outfit the humans, your choice)
The technology currently exists to allow all players, regardless of play style (solo, group, raid, pvp, pve, tradeskill, combat, non-combat, diplo, criminal, politician), to contribute to the goals of either an NPC or PC organization that affects that player, their guild, or the whole game world, positively or negatively. M59 did it in 1996, pretty sure VR can improve on those mechanics 20+ years later. Give me an overarching world-plot changing mechanic and I'll play that game forever.
The so-called "meta" or out-of-game competition that occurs when one guild locks down / prevention-kills open world raid mobs is a form of PvP, from a certain point of view. (/kenobi) It's just not 1v1 reduce your target's hitpoints to zero PvP.
What I'm describing are in-game mechanics that can positively and/or negatively affect the gameplay experience of another player, without killing that player. If you make it all opt-in, or have sane frequency caps, you can overlay this type of PvP into a PvE world without any of the nasty social problems and negative ego bruising that wolves-killing-sheep produces with respect to declining concurrency numbers.
Of course, if, to the player, the whole value of PvP is the nasty social problems and negative ego bruising that wolves-killing-sheep produces? Then I have no interest in that kind of PvP at all, in Pantheon, and I hope no development time is spent on it, at all, as it's a financial drain with no bottom for a miniscule target demographic, comparatively.
PvE for sure. There are times that I wish I was on PvP to settle issues with players, but the amount of greifers on PvP far outweigh the amount of people on PvE that I have had issues with. I don't think an MMO has gotten PvP quite right yet. If a person who normally doesn't play PvP feels comfortable in a PvP servers then I think at that point you've gotten it right.
fazool said:Aena said:Hate PvP in MMORPGs and resent every bit of time and effort spent on it instead of improving the PvE.
agreed.
lost my previous post, but I feel the exact same way as this. I think PvP is what ruined modern MMORPGs and turned them into kiddie-twitch-fests
I could not agree more, IN MY OPINION pvp just breeds a more toxic atmosphere, pitting players against each other goes against what an MMO is suppose to be about which is co-op play
Kilsin said:Do you prefer PvE or PvP or Both, and what draws you to that style over the other?
Disclaimer: We have already stated that we will be PvE based and PvP servers will be separate and have no effect on PvE. :)
MMO is PVE to me. For me, PVP games are Quake and Unreal -- stuff where everybody is equal in character ability.
I only play PvE games. I dont like the proposition that "in order for me to win, you must lose". I only enjoy games where every player can "win" by working together to overcome a puzzle/challenge/encounter.
I guess this goes back to my pen-and-paper days of Dungeons and Dragons.