SWTOR

[Sky]

It looks to me like some people getting butt hurt

I'm sure it does, sweetheart.

[caladein]

Uh, most servers are PvE servers across most games. ( Still include arena type stuff though ).

Comparing what the rulesets are called without looking at their content isn't terribly useful.  A lot of older titles' PvP servers were borderline-FFA.  WoW's PvP servers are pretty much the same as the PvE ones with some fights every once in a while.  As a result, they're not dramatically less popular (-25% to -35%) and that's without counting all of the PvE servers' players that enjoy Arenas or the occasional Battleground.

I don't expect any game with a lot of money behind it to run with a bullet point of "Has little to no player versus player content!" and so players are going to expect it to be fun, functional, and well supported.  And that means annoying players like Paelos, overfitting, or being generically inelegant.

[Mrbloodworth]

No open world PvP = PvE.

Open world PvP = PvP.

"Battle grounds" are irrelevant, as the are ignorable and contained and exist on both types, many even use entirely contained stats, gear and progression.

WoW's PvP servers are pretty much the same as the PvE ones with some fights every once in a while.

Not even the slightest. Quest hubs do not get wiped out on PvE servers.

[Surlyboi]

No open world PvP = PvE.

Open world PvP = A general clusterfuck.

Sorted.

[Malakili]

Where does voluntarily perma-flagging on a PvE server fit into this discussion?

[Mrbloodworth]

Where does voluntarily perma-flagging on a PvE server fit into this discussion?

Its an opt-in like arenas.

[Amaron]

"Battle grounds" are irrelevant, as the are ignorable and contained and exist on both types, many even use entirely contained stats, gear and progression.

You're just ignoring Sky's point by saying that.   He doesn't want his PvE fucked up by PvP balancing.   Battlegrounds being extremely popular will certainly fuck up PvE with PvP balancing even if 90% of the servers are PvE servers.

[Mrbloodworth]

No, I'm not ignoring his point. I am correcting your assertion. Because a PvE rule set has a battleground does not make it a PvP server. More games have been moving away from them even using the same numbers and progression.

While some may choose a PvE server, and still like PvP, I can guarantee they are there mostly for the Pve, and do not want some leet dude fucking up the PvE game they are playing, UNTIL THEY WANT IT in a segragated, op-in area that has jack all to do with the rest of the game.

[Amaron]

No, I'm not ignoring his point. I am correcting your assertion.

How exactly are you correcting my assertion that PvP as an activity is popular?

[Crumbs]

"Battle grounds" are irrelevant, as the are ignorable and contained and exist on both types, many even use entirely contained stats, gear and progression.

You're just ignoring Sky's point by saying that.   He doesn't want his PvE fucked up by PvP balancing.   Battlegrounds being extremely popular will certainly fuck up PvE with PvP balancing even if 90% of the servers are PvE servers.

It will until someone finally realizes PVP should be entirely separate from the PVE game.  Not hard.  Rift took a step in this direction, and hopefully some brave company will go all the way.

[Paelos]

No, I'm not ignoring his point. I am correcting your assertion.

How exactly are you correcting my assertion that PvP as an activity is popular?

Because pretty much every game that's tried to focus on it gets hamstrung by it's inherent stupidity in the MMO format?

[caladein]

No, I'm not ignoring his point. I am correcting your assertion. Because a PvE rule set has a battleground does not make it a PvP server. More games have been moving away from them even using the same numbers and progression.

While some may choose a PvE server, and still like PvP, I can guarantee they are there mostly for the Pve, and do not want some leet dude fucking up the PvE game they are playing, UNTIL THEY WANT IT in a segragated, op-in area that has jack all to do with the rest of the game.

The point isn't that you the PvE player can or can't ignore PvP, it's that the developers can't (or don't).  Even in having only that purely opt-in setting, players like Paelos don't like it when their gameplay is changed/worsened to improve PvP.

[Mrbloodworth]

I got skys point, and I fully agree. The problem I have is muddling the terms PvP and PvE as they relate to server rule sets and popularity.

By Amaron definition of PvE, they are ALL PvP servers. He made ZERO mention of battlegrounds until later.

Because pretty much every game that's tried to focus on it gets hamstrung by it's inherent stupidity in the MMO format?

I wont go that far, but I agree, the RPG MMO combat system is a silly concept to base PvP around. That's not to say ALL MMO's have stupid PvP, or that for some, winning by gear isn't fun.


[Here we come 300!]

[Amaron]

Ok I'm confused where we are at now so I'm going to summarize what I think is going on please correct my confusion:

1)  Sky says lets remove PvP ENTIRELY from PvE mmo's.  He doesn't want it to exist because then the designers will fuck up the PvE.
2)  I say not going to happen in a game shooting for 1mil+ subs because a lot of people want to at least PvP a little.
3)  Bloodworth comes out of nowhere and says PvE servers are more popular. (uhh okay?)
4)  Talk about how people on PvE servers still PvP.
5)  Somehow people start talking about whether or not PvP is more popular. (uhh why?)
6)  Everyone forgets the original point.

Because pretty much every game that's tried to focus on it gets hamstrung by it's inherent stupidity in the MMO format?

I never once even remotely discussed "focusing" on PvP.   I have only said that people who want to PvP once in a blue moon outnumber "PvE purists" (which is fairly ambiguous I admit).

By Amaron definition of PvE, they are ALL PvP servers. He made ZERO mention of battlegrounds until later.

I am still confused how we got on servers and where I said anything even remotely like that.

[caladein]

I got skys point, and I fully agree. The problem I have is muddling the terms PvP and PvE as they relate to server rule sets and popularity.

You're the one that brought up servers and rulesets!

E: As an aside, a version of 5, that PvP is sufficiently (not more) popular, is why 2 is correct.

[Mrbloodworth]

When you say "PvP", with out specifying battlegrounds or arenas, you imply open world. Server types are set by open world activities.

You're the one that brought up servers and rulesets!

I did indeed.

[Amaron]

When you say "PvP", with out specifying battlegrounds or arenas, you imply open world. Server types are set by open world activities.

Nooooo.   When I say PvP I imply Player versus Player.

[Mrbloodworth]

When you say "PvP", with out specifying battlegrounds or arenas, you imply open world. Server types are set by open world activities.

Nooooo.   When I say PvP I imply Player versus Player.

Which is not as popular as PvE.

[Amaron]

When you say "PvP", with out specifying battlegrounds or arenas, you imply open world. Server types are set by open world activities.

Nooooo.   When I say PvP I imply Player versus Player.

Witch is not as popular as PvE.

Agreed.  I never said it was more popular.

edit: Ha caught your ninja edit there!

[Sobelius]

I could see some interesting PvP in SWTOR built around the idea of Battlezones that normalized everyone's stats and gear (on both sides) and reduced or removed CC. Winning a Battlezone contest would give you some benefit or boost in your PvE game, but not vice versa.

I was one of those players who absolutely abhorred PvP in the MMOs I'd played. The first game to really change my mind about it was WAR -- specifically the Tier 1 Battlegrounds. It was some of the most fun I'd had in an MMO -- especially when I could play in a Battleground PUG and sometimes we'd actually work together and have fun even if we lost (as opposed to just getting rolled over and over because too many on the "team" were really just flying solo).

Looking back, I think the Tier 1 Battlegrounds were enjoyable PvP mostly because no one had (or needed to have) any unbalancing stat-buffing gear AND that classes on both sides had relatively comparable powers with little to no CC. After Tier 1 things fell apart until, by Tier 4, fights became merely gear- and Renown Rank centric, and of course had a ton of varying PvE CC abilities that drained the fun from PvP fights.

[Sjofn]

Not even the slightest. Quest hubs do not get wiped out on PvE servers.

They do sometimes, actually.

[Lantyssa]

Not even the slightest. Quest hubs do not get wiped out on PvE servers.

I've seen it happen plenty of times in WoW.  Griffons are ever popular targets, too.

[Fordel]

When you say "PvP", with out specifying battlegrounds or arenas, you imply open world. Server types are set by open world activities.

How do you reach that conclusion?

Someone saying they like PVP doesn't mean they want a FFA gankfest by default.


Should we say people who like PVE all want 100 man raid encounters too? 

[Paelos]

Because pretty much every game that's tried to focus on it gets hamstrung by it's inherent stupidity in the MMO format?

I never once even remotely discussed "focusing" on PvP.   I have only said that people who want to PvP once in a blue moon outnumber "PvE purists" (which is fairly ambiguous I admit).

Way to make a stand on that argument.  

People who sorta don't give a shit always outnumber people who are hardliner on anything.

[Amaron]

Way to make a stand on that argument.  

I'm glad you heavily agree that my original comment wasn't a tower of controversy despite Bloodworth shipwrecking it into a PvE vs PvP pissing contest.

[Paelos]

Well I think we started with something good, and now we've whittled it down so much it's a wonder why you even bothered.

Go big or go home. Chicks dig the long ball. TITS OR GTFO!

[Viin]

You guys are funny. 

[Sky]

Sky may have been joking about removing pvp from pve games. Because Sky thinks players should be able to have as many playstyles supported as possible, without negatively impacting other playstyles. Actual pvp is something I will take part in occasionally on a pve server, it does not negatively impact my gameplay as a solo casual as much as, say, the obsessive need of raiders to hoard all the good toys.  

My point, which was probably a few pages ago at this point, is that abilities need to affect players and npcs differently, so you're not negatively impacting my pve experience because 1337 pvp guild is abusing some ability and ruining everyone's day and it needs a nerfin'. Two COMPLETELY different games, geared differently, spec'd differently, played differently.

Maybe I wasn't joking about removing pvp. Ask me again tomorrow.

ETA:

2)  I say not going to happen in a game shooting for 1mil+ subs because a lot of people want to at least PvP a little.

I never once even remotely discussed "focusing" on PvP.   I have only said that people who want to PvP once in a blue moon outnumber "PvE purists" (which is fairly ambiguous I admit).

I'd say folks who mostly enjoy pve would rather have a solid pve experience without pvp rather than having a half-assed version of both.

[Paelos]

I wasn't joking. Diku pvp has done more damage to gamers than Hot Pockets. Dump it.

[Sjofn]

It sort of makes me kinda surprised that Mythic, Mythic is the only company that seemed to do PvP right for me ... or at least right enough. I guess it helped that the PvE was so shit-tastic, that if you were there for the PvE you were clearly insane and thus easily ignored, so if a PvP nerf happened to mess something up in PvE, no one really cared.

This is talking about DAoC of course. WAR is just ... sigh.

[Viin]

I wasn't joking. Diku pvp has done more damage to gamers than Hot Pockets. Dump it.

I think you are right - taking a PvE game and then introducing a PvP element (such as battlegrounds) creates a nearly impossible balancing task, and both PvE and PvP play suffer because of it. The only way to mix the two would be to actually make them separate in practice (pvp gear in pvp matches only, etc).

Edit: though I will say EVE handles this well, mostly because it recognizes it is a PvP game and adds some PvE elements for the carebears rather than the other way around.

[Lakov_Sanite]

I think what's funny is that somehow you are going on battlegrounds being popular as a fact. I would say less than 20% of wow subscribers actively pvp for fun, more probably for the loot.

[Fordel]

EVE doesn't handle it at all, shit lands where it lands and everyone gets to deal or quit. 



The way you handle the mix is design for PvP first then work PvE around your PvP abilities. It's waaaaay easier to adjust mob health/attack/abilities then it is to adjust player ones. You never have to worry about your mobs combining two abilities that on paper don't seem to compliment each other but in practice break the game. 



Separating your PvP and PvE environments is also a very good idea. Even on a PvE server in say WoW, you'll still get people killing NPCs in town, flight masters and what have you, in zones where the natural inhabitants can't fight back due to level differences and shit. You get stupid pvp flagging shenanigans and either Over Powered or useless guards.


You know how many times I had to deal with that in DaoC? Zero times! The PvE area's were completely locked away from the PvP areas, players from opposing realms just couldn't enter those areas, the end. It wasn't a safe zone for lowbies, it was a entire PvE game area, newb to cap. It wasn't mixed in with each other either, where you had sporadic pvp zones inside pve areas or whatever. You had your Realm's continent, this half was for PvE, then a giant wall and the other half was for PvP with all the castles and relics and whatnot going on and where the other realms could invade and you could invade their pvp frontiers in turn.

[Mattemeo]

DAoC was built with PvP as an endgame from the very beginning, though. For all their inability to police the rampant cheating and botting on their servers, Mythic created a DIKU MMO environment the right goddamn way round. I have never, ever experienced MMO PvP to rival DAoC, not in the near 10 years since I first got into proper MMOs; simply no other game out there has come even remotely close.
I cannot stand WoW PvP. It's a horrible joke that invades and pollutes the PvE game. I'd rather SWtOR never suffered or caused me to suffer the indignities of a terrible, after-the-fact tacked on PvP system. Or worse, nag me constantly about getting into it when I'd rather slam sensitive parts of my body in the fridge door. But I know that's a whole lot of wishful thinking, and a great deal of assumption on my part about the competence of the devs to do it right or not; having not played the game yet it's pure conjecture coated with despair over the situation in WoW.
Maybe Bioware will do the impossible and present a game where PvP and PvE can work together.

[Furiously]

Lotro pvp combat is not horrid.