+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: MMO's that cater to both PVE and PVP can never be best in both aspects. /Discuss

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2011

    Default MMO's that cater to both PVE and PVP can never be best in both aspects. /Discuss

    I have been playing MMO's for years now, started with EQ1, DAOC, EQ2, lots more DAOC, WoW, AOC, Aion, etc., the list goes on.

    My main point here, is out of all of those games, the ones that focused on having either a PVE system with little PVP or the ones that focused on great PVP and little PVE succeeded.

    For example, DAOC was an amazing PVP game, it is really a miracle how things ended up being so balanced. I understand they also had their troubles with CC dr's, etc., but it was a great systems. The game focused on end game pvp and the PVE in it was only really there to get gear to pvp in.

    I believe Rift will not make a great jump in the market without giving up on of their sides. Rift developers need to choose between a pvp or pve game and stick to it.

    The reasons that focusing on both sides are not conducive to a games health are thus:

    1) Gear for PVE will constantly get better, to push that carrot alittle further for raiders, PVP has to keep up in this aspect so dragon killers do not overrun the pvp scene and the QQ begins. The same goes for PVP gear being better in some aspects for PVE when you don't get what you want to drop.

    2) The literal content that both aspects require is astounding. Precious development hours will be split up between PVP or PVE.

    3) Nerfing or buffing around either aspect usually messes up the other one. Nerfing certain DPS specs in PVE causes problems in PVP and vice versa, by focusing on only one aspect, this reduces the concern for the other.

    4) With pvp no longer focused and driven by PVE gear progression, a new 50 would have a better chance to compete in an environment where gear is no longer an issue.

    This is how pvp ranks worked in DAOC. When you killed a player, you got a certain amount of points, these added up and you gained ranks, more ranks gave you more points. The amount of time to reach the higher ranks took a very long time, much longer than R8 in this game takes.

    Realm Ranks and Abilities - Many powerful abilities become available through points obtained by killing enemy players in RvR. Abilities can range from a full self-heal to uninterruptible spell casting for a brief time. Ability points become progressively more difficult to obtain as the character gains ranks in RvR. However, the difference between a high rank and low rank player can be immense even when they have equal equipment and are the same level. Each realm rank has ten levels and there thirteen realm ranks.

    5) Warfronts condone the "AFK to gear" path and undermines PVE players spending time in a raid, working for their gear. I am not saying that everyone AFK's in warfronts, but raiders dont get loot for losing or if all 20 people are afk.

    One only use warfronts until 50, past that they must use open world pvp to get ranks. The easy fix to this currently would be for players to only go up to rank 8 in warfronts, past that one must do open world pvp. They could make the prestige bonus from this be alot higher to facilitate the move.

    6) WoW currently owns the PVE game market. WoW left a lot of PVPers with a bad taste in their mouth over all of its decisions. A lot of players are looking for that great PVP game right now, as long as games cater to both sides, it seems PVP gets the crap.

    I can understand that I got a bit off topic with my bullet points at times, but I was wondering how everyone else views the current MMO's and how they try to give birthday cake to everyone. I also understand that although its a game, its also a business and they try to get as many players as possible. I fully believe that by focusing on a great PVP game, they will potentially lose a lot of PVE players, but gain PVP players en masse.


    Rift would benefit to only focus on one aspect of the game. (PVP hopefully)


  2. #2
    Shield of Telara kissmybuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    On Top



    Players have to "need" each other or they will knife each other.

    Devs have to find ways to unite all playstyles in some common purpose or it becomes "us vs. them".

    If it becomes "us vs. them" neither side will ever be happy because players will claim the devs pander to the other groups of players. Same goes for the different classes, souls, whatever.

    I played SWG back in the day, and remember when player owned bases in player built cities united crafters, PVPers, PVE loot******, roleplayers, merchants, entertainers, soloers, team players, etc.

    The only "us vs. them" was directed at the other faction.

    When that happens, it makes both PVE and PVP better for players of different playstyles.
    Last edited by kissmybuns; 08-13-2011 at 11:54 PM.

    <Amazonia> Leader - Sunrest Server
    It's only a game ... until you get a piece of Asph.

  3. #3
    Ascendant Eughe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010


    What? My heal does one set of values in pve, but....does a completely different set of values in pvp?


    The title should be, MMO's that -pander- to both PvE and PvP can never be best in both aspects.

    You can design battle for the pve crowd and make skills be of significance there, all the while allowing those same set of skills be logical in pvp without it breaking it.

    But when you go and change everything on the whim because some dual wielder says so, thats when the problem arises.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2011


    Its not that there needs to be more separation between PVP and PVE, its the fact that they clash against each other. Sure we could have a pve ability hit for 200, and the same ability in pvp hit for 100, that wont change a dragon killer going out and getting a legendary weapon and hitting for 1k in pve and 500 in pvp, see what I'm saying?

  5. #5
    Shield of Telara Elerina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011


    One word: Capitalism.

    I'm sure each developer has some fancy dreams of how amazing his work could be and whatnot. In the end there is always someone checking the numbers and really dictating how amazing things even need to be to make it worth the effort ;)

    So, while it might be a good idea, it will never happen. Quality, creativity etc. etc. doesn't really matter. In the end the might $ dictates what happens.

    End of story

+ Reply to Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts