Are Dev's Bad, or do MMO PVP Games Not Work?

[Slayerik]

Dont give me that BS. (a) I killed roughly 3 -4 bill in crap in my Eve carreer and lost about 1-2 bill. Second. I flew dominixes in sole of the worst fucking hellholes in eve. I thought I was shit till one say I had a bit of spare cash and I though "Hey lets splash on some t2. Should not make THAT much of a difference"

The result was 3 months of utter carnage as I blew everything to hell. Same guy, same skill, same tactics. T2 was the only difference.

So go pounce on some newbies and think you are winning. I had over 40 million skill points and I wound up flying cov ops becasue I would up not believing any of my kills were anything to do with personal skill.

And nano domis I bet :)

Not trying to get in another Eve pissing contest...your points are valid and I won't concede mine.

[Arinon]

The enemy is persistence.  It seems to be the major thread that ties the genre together.  If you rip that out you end up with completely different games.

What does persistence give you?  Typically a hardcoded advantage over the new guy.  Not fun when you're losing.

What games have done a persistent world with a flat power curve to avatars?  I've only really played about half of the example games in the thread.   Can those games maintain a subscriber base without the lure of power creep?

All the shit thrown in to justify a monthly charge (both to devs and to consumers) tends to get between you and fights.

[Rasix]

The thing about EVE is that you don't lose everything, you lose the ship you were flying and everything it was fitted with, but any established player will have at least half a dozen ships fitted for different purposes, and it never breaks the game for you to lose a spaceship.

That is how I, and about 10% of the userbase of Ultima Online played the game pre-trammel. Too bad the other 90% of the people playing didn't see that memo.

Handful of regs - Free
Brown healer rob - Free
Dear Hat - Free
Halberd - Free
Dropping in pvp tuff guys in a manner of seconds: Priceless.

You could heavily mitigate item and skill level discrepancies in early UO.  Most people would laugh at what kind of skills/gear my character ran around with.  Game inched towards gear + skill level > player skill and situational awareness.  Oddly enough, this is what makes the game difficult to consider coming back to even on a purely pve/recreational level.  Mudflation is a bitch.

Insert Quote
I didn't play AC either.

For me there seems to be a real connect between good PVP games, and item/territory gains and losses.

AC had item loss.  AC also had people fighting over territory.  

Good pvp, in your mind entails risk, but most of the good PVP you're mentioning also has real easy ways to mitigate that risk.  I've seen permadeath work well in PVP oriented muds because there were enough ways for the non brain dead player to avoid it.

[eldaec]

The thing about EVE is that you don't lose everything, you lose the ship you were flying and everything it was fitted with, but any established player will have at least half a dozen ships fitted for different purposes, and it never breaks the game for you to lose a spaceship.

That is how I, and about 10% of the userbase of Ultima Online played the game pre-trammel. Too bad the other 90% of the people playing didn't see that memo.

While this is getting dangerously close to forbidden chart related subjects, EVE does have other innovations which allow this to work.


EVE territory mechanics and design support players in controlling territory to make it safe for PvE activity even in 0.0, and even non-allied players can go hang out somewhere like Providence and rely on CVA for protection from pirates.

EVE has its own form of Trammel in the shape of Empire space, and while it doesn't offer perfect protection from Slayerik, CCP has shown they will shrink loopholes as they arise to stop ganking being too common in Empire.

It's much easier to run from combat if you don't want it in EVE than it was in pre-trammel UO.

EVE has more territory, which is easier to hide in, and if you avoid obvious through-routes it is not unusual to go undisturbed in a star system for hours at a time.

What games have done a persistent world with a flat power curve to avatars?  I've only really played about half of the example games in the thread.   Can those games maintain a subscriber base without the lure of power creep?

Planetside, which has the retention problems your post suggests.

DAoC is flat in the end game, only getting to the end game was an unbelievable chore.

Guild Wars also avoids power growth beyond the pve levelling, though the sport-pvp concept has the problem of new players not being able to break into teams, and random pug arenas got old fast.

[ajax34i]

Not an expert by any means, but I think that to a lot of devs, "PvP" means "let the players generate the content", and that doesn't really work. 

You look at a PVE game and it can't just be a set of gameplay rules and combat mechanics; it has to have quests, story/plot lines, many diverse areas, raid zones, advanced AI, trinkets, pets, seasonal fare, all sorts of crap.  You look at PVP games, and often they're just "Ok, here are the combat mechanics, here's 6 scenarios to fight over, go!"

To hell with that.

Of course, having 2534 keeps (each custom-made with unique artwork and flavor), 6000 scenarios, 10,000 battleground areas, etc etc. for players to experience and never get bored because they can always go to the next one and see something new, that requires a huge playerbase, all concentrated, else the world feels empty.  So maybe CCP did stumble onto the winning formula (everyone on one server). 

I don't know.

[Nebu]

Players making their own content works just fine and while not massively popular, has proven to be a system with longevity (UO, DAoC, SL, ATitD).

I think the shock comes to developers when they see what players do with the tools that they were given.  Perhaps they become disillusioned when the players do something with the sandbox than they had neither hoped for nor expected.

[LC]

Shadowbane did not have full looting/item loss. You only dropped the items in your bag/inventory. You never dropped anything that was equipped. Also shadowbane was more item dependent than UO.


One of the devs (Warden) said (on the beta forums) the reason was that his girlfriend cried because she dropped her pretty armor in an earlier beta/alpha phase.

[Slayerik]

Shadowbane did not have full looting/item loss. You only dropped the items in your bag/inventory. You never dropped anything that was equipped.


One of the devs (Warden) said (on the beta forums) the reason was that his girlfriend cried because she dropped her pretty armor in an earlier beta/alpha phase.

Ah shit, you're right. And to think I played SB for way longer than I should have too...

[Venkman]

Even in levels-based games, PvP works best is when they're in settings where the levels don't apply. The soft cap in DAoC, R5 in SB, UO (which had some disparity but not much that mattered), Planetside (levels just let you have more options), and GW (everyone just easily got to 20), WAR ranks players to 80% of the tier and WoW players get ridiculed unless they enter a BG at the tier cap  

That indicates to me that everyone realizes levels and PvP don't mix, but they can co-exist in the same game. You just relegate one to being a content and ability/customization gate while the other is more about smart use of those abilities and/or player dexterity. With that of course goes the sort of immersion players think* they want with the big RvR zone control stuff.

* Only because players claim it but less stick with it.

[Nija]

EVE has its own form of Trammel in the shape of Empire space, and while it doesn't offer perfect protection from Slayerik, CCP has shown they will shrink loopholes as they arise to stop ganking being too common in Empire.

You are right. This is an important thing that is missing from everything, essentially, except Eve. There needs to be a greater "Empire Space" where people can see everything the game has to offer under the strict, but not overbearing, control of the developers. NPC guards that show up and kill you - no stealing from players, whatever.

They also, in my opinion, definitely need those outlier areas that let the players create their own content. Even if that is Nazi Germany vs Poland.

Single server stuff is F'ing brilliant too. Especially considering my current situation where I'm on my 3rd WAR server already.

[Righ]

need to add Lineage 1 and 2 PvP 

Lineage (1):

Death Penalty? Yes. Loss of XP, possible to de-level and lose abilities.
Item Loss? Yes. Limited by alignment.
Item Dependent? Somewhat.
Dev kill? Too grindy for fat lazy Americans. Still big in places where they speak funny.
Indy or AAA? Indy that became AAA PDQ.

Lineage 2:

Death Penalty? Yes. See above.
Item Loss? Yes. See above.
Item Dependent? More than above.
Dev kill? See above. And then some.
Indy or AAA? Very much AAA now.

[LC]

EVE has its own form of Trammel in the shape of Empire space, and while it doesn't offer perfect protection from Slayerik, CCP has shown they will shrink loopholes as they arise to stop ganking being too common in Empire.

You are right. This is an important thing that is missing from everything, essentially, except Eve. There needs to be a greater "Empire Space" where people can see everything the game has to offer under the strict, but not overbearing, control of the developers. NPC guards that show up and kill you - no stealing from players, whatever.

They also, in my opinion, definitely need those outlier areas that let the players create their own content. Even if that is Nazi Germany vs Poland.

There needs to be some kind of carrot (or whatever the fuck sheep like to eat) to lure the sheep out of the safe pasture and into the forest. Something so tasty they would regularly risk their lives for it.

[Slayerik]

need to add Lineage 1 and 2 PvP 

Lineage (1):

Death Penalty? Yes. Loss of XP, possible to de-level and lose abilities.
Item Loss? Yes. Limited by alignment.
Item Dependent? Somewhat.
Dev kill? Too grindy for fat lazy Americans. Still big in places where they speak funny.
Indy or AAA? Indy that became AAA PDQ.

Lineage 2:

Death Penalty? Yes. See above.
Item Loss? Yes. See above.
Item Dependent? More than above.
Dev kill? See above. And then some.
Indy or AAA? Very much AAA now.

Nice Righ, updated :)

[Sir T]

And nano domis I bet :)

Not trying to get in another Eve pissing contest...your points are valid and I won't concede mine.

Fair enough

(For the record, I never flew a nano-domi. Did fly a nano type Typhoon once though)

[Arinon]

stuff

Both Planetside and Guildwars involved the unlocking of character options no?  I would consider this a power curve. Flexibility, even if you can only leverage it outside of a hot zone, is definitely an advantage.  Guild Wars especially had you playing with a partial deck of skills to draw from unless you paid your dues in the horrendous PvE of that game.

DAoC most definitely had a power curve with realm ranks and like, the entire ToA expansion. Even using the term 'end game' kinda implies the curve had to be traversed.  That fact that someone might have capped off a character is kinda moot.  In a game with time based advancement you get to kill targets that are still in the capping out process.  That's the draw/trap.

If you separate those still advancing and those capped out, you pretty much have two games.  The second one better be damn fun because with PvP the first one ends up being a tutorial.

I don't think Diku and PvP go that well together for very long, but I keep playing them anyway.  The games I stick with for any length of time these days are the ones that relegate PvP to the sidelines.  They just need to make new games fast enough that there is always one less that 3 months old.  Problem solved!

[Venkman]

Righ raises a good point about the Lineages. You might want to break your consideration between various markets. Afaik, Lineage 1 and Lineage 2 never hit it well in the US and EU, so the main appeal of their core systems is for a different culture.

[Slayerik]

stuff

Both Planetside and Guildwars involved the unlocking of character options no?  I would consider this a power curve. Flexibility, even if you can only leverage it outside of a hot zone, is definitely an advantage.  Guild Wars especially had you playing with a partial deck of skills to draw from unless you paid your dues in the horrendous PvE of that game.

DAoC most definitely had a power curve with realm ranks and like, the entire ToA expansion. Even using the term 'end game' kinda implies the curve had to be traversed.  That fact that someone might have capped off a character is kinda moot.  In a game with time based advancement you get to kill targets that are still in the capping out process.  That's the draw/trap.

If you separate those still advancing and those capped out, you pretty much have two games.  The second one better be damn fun because with PvP the first one ends up being a tutorial.

I don't think Diku and PvP go that well together for very long, but I keep playing them anyway.  The games I stick with for any length of time these days are the ones that relegate PvP to the sidelines.  They just need to make new games fast enough that there is always one less that 3 months old.  Problem solved!

Comparing a BR 20 in old PS with a BR 1 , and a level 10 in any game and a level 20 doesnt even come close. Even as a low ranked noob I was fuckin people up in PS.

[Jayce]

I think it's important to draw a line between two very different kinds of PvP:

1. Battleground-type.  Also called "sport" PvP.  This is very akin to FPS, where the "world", be it the entire map or just the scenario, resets.  GW, SB (I think?), and WoW battlegrounds and arena are in this category. 
2. Persistent. EVE, UO, AC Darktide, and (sort of) Planetside.  Gains stay gained until you lose them again.  I guess you could break this into item loss versus territory loss, but it seems like the two go together.

I tend to favor #2.  I lost my taste for #1 after Quake 1, though it took me a while to figure out why I didn't like it.  So I'll talk about #2.

To generalize a few of these points:

- Have a big world.  AC DT got this right, EVE gets it right, even UO got it right if you could find space for a house.  Make it possible to "set up shop" far from anywhere.
- Don't have a level or other type of grind before the PvP.  Let a newbie be useful in some way.  AC1 fails, EVE wins. SB tried to mitigate it by making the leveling process fast.
- At the same time let the veterans get something worth striving for.  This is one really hard part.  Even EVE doesn't quite get this right.
- Item dependency has to be limited.  You can't make people lose something it takes over a day to get back.  However they should have the ability to risk losing something powerful for an advantage.
- Maybe this is debatable, but I don't think winning should be based on twitch.  Lag and disconnects are too big a factor.  Factors like thinking ahead and game knowledge should be the deciding factors.

[UnSub]

Why is it no dev house can seem to make a game with that Counterstrike kind of replayability and grab? Are we closer, or farther away than 1997?

Counterstrike is free, with no real death penalty, a limited form of item loss, puts you into an auto generated team and plays quick matches that reset the map constantly.

WAR scenarios are very close to what Counterstrike is.

Heh, you could make the argument that MMOs make PvP too complex by giving about 80 different abilities per character and then timers to force you to use a lot of those abilities. Counterstrike just lets you point and click.

The problem is that 'meaningful' PvP only feels good when you are winning. Getting stomped into the dirt is less fun, as is being in a permanent world where you are almost guaranteed to always be a bug unless you are willing to devote a 40 hour work week to PvP.

[Jayce]

The problem is that 'meaningful' PvP only feels good when you are winning. Getting stomped into the dirt is less fun,

Not true.  The agony of defeat doesn't stop athletes from chasing the thrill of victory.  Not everyone has the guts for it, sure, but that's why there are pure PvE games.

as is being in a permanent world where you are almost guaranteed to always be a bug unless you are willing to devote a 40 hour work week to PvP.

This would be a design flaw IMO.  A common one, to be sure.

[UnSub]

The problem is that 'meaningful' PvP only feels good when you are winning. Getting stomped into the dirt is less fun,

Not true.  The agony of defeat doesn't stop athletes from chasing the thrill of victory.  Not everyone has the guts for it, sure, but that's why there are pure PvE games.

as is being in a permanent world where you are almost guaranteed to always be a bug unless you are willing to devote a 40 hour work week to PvP.

This would be a design flaw IMO.  A common one, to be sure.

I actually think game devs should think more about sports psychology when they build PvP games.

Also, time in game = training. As you get more training, you improve. At some point, that training is going to help you win in an otherwise matched contest. That can't be a design flaw. (Rare random loot drops that require lots of time investment in-game are, of course, an incredibly stupid idea but I'm glad the MMO industry is moving away from that kind of idea.)

[Fordel]

Both Planetside and Guildwars involved the unlocking of character options no?  I would consider this a power curve. Flexibility, even if you can only leverage it outside of a hot zone, is definitely an advantage.  Guild Wars especially had you playing with a partial deck of skills to draw from unless you paid your dues in the horrendous PvE of that game.

I can't speak for Guild Wars release, but by the time I started playing Guild Wars (around their first "expansion") you could get any Skill/Item for PvP within hours. Probably less. If you were SUPER impatient, you could simply pay an extra 20 bucks or something and have *every* PvP item/skill unlocked.

There's no barrier to entry in GuildWars PvP, outside of the social/player-skill aspect (which is admittedly very large at times). I could setup any template for any class in Guildwars in a Saturday afternoon and it isn't like you lose any of it. Once it's unlocked, it's unlocked for any PvP character (heck skills are even unlocked for your HeroHenchmen in the pve campaigns too, most of my henchmen have better skills then my actual PvE characters).

No where even remotely in the same league as WoW or DaoC or any other MMO I've played.

[eldaec]

The problem is that 'meaningful' PvP only feels good when you are winning. Getting stomped into the dirt is less fun, as is being in a permanent world where you are almost guaranteed to always be a bug unless you are willing to devote a 40 hour work week to PvP.

DAoC had plenty of situations you could lose in a fun way (and plenty of ways to lose in an unfun way).

EVE, Planetside, Shadowbane and the rest are the same.

Mostly it depends on whether losing is instant death to a steam train after spending a lot of time setting up. Or whether you get to take your shot, be involved in something a little epic, and lose after a pitch battle.

There's no barrier to entry in GuildWars PvP, outside of the social/player-skill aspect (which is admittedly very large at times).

When I'm talking about barriers to entry in sport-pvp the social barrier is exactly what I'm talking about.

I'm sure it is possible to set up a system of achiever end-game sport pvp without insurmountable social barriers for new players, but I've never seen it.

[Fordel]

Yea, I agree with that. I was just responding to the idea that there is some kind of 'PvE Grind' in Guildwars for PvP. If there was, it certainly isn't there now, is all I'm trying to say.

[Ratman_tf]

EVE has its own form of Trammel in the shape of Empire space, and while it doesn't offer perfect protection from Slayerik, CCP has shown they will shrink loopholes as they arise to stop ganking being too common in Empire.

You are right. This is an important thing that is missing from everything, essentially, except Eve. There needs to be a greater "Empire Space" where people can see everything the game has to offer under the strict, but not overbearing, control of the developers. NPC guards that show up and kill you - no stealing from players, whatever.

They also, in my opinion, definitely need those outlier areas that let the players create their own content. Even if that is Nazi Germany vs Poland.

There needs to be some kind of carrot (or whatever the fuck sheep like to eat) to lure the sheep out of the safe pasture and into the forest. Something so tasty they would regularly risk their lives for it.

I agree that there should be incentives for playing in dangerous territory, but leave the sheep out of it. They aren't suited for PvP, and won't have any fun.

***

I think most of us can agree that DIKU levels and geargrind is unhealthy for PvP. It can be done. It has been done. But never in a very satisfactory manner.

[Comstar]

WW2OL: (which gets no respect)

Death Penalty? Tiny. You lose nothing except time to combat of a respawn (between 10 seconds for infantry on the front, to 5 minutes for Planes to 30 minutes for a Destroyer. Average misson length is 8 minutes).
Item Loss? No
Item Dependant? No
Dev kill? First 4 years: Yes. Last 2-3 years No. It's now stable, very few bugs, can be played on low end machines. However, that first 4 years (6 if you count dev time pre-release) has nailed into a nitch game from which it will never recover. 
Indy or AAA? Indy. 15 people total. ATTD is probably the only game with less people working on it.


You all want PvP but the only full PvP game with nothing BUT PvP isn't counted. Unfortunately it has no elves with big boobs or the ability to gank people lower in the social order.

More edits- christ, EVERYTHING people say they want  on this page is IN WW2OL right now. Granted you can't build your own little empire to lord over and beat up anyone who comes inside it, you can't choose the colour of your pants and you can't use a higher agility score to beat someone, and the game's NEVER going to be finished, or have as nice graphics as the latest COD clone and is cursed with using real world weapons with all their disadvantages...but it's there, right now. 

However, WW2OL was for all intents and purposes, killed by it's own devs during it's birth, and all we have now is a stil walking corpse that's too stupid and stubben to fall over and  instead we see the EA's and Blizzards of this world spend 100 million on the next great movie world blockbuster extravaganza.

[slog]

WW2OL: (which gets no respect)


More edits- christ, EVERYTHING people say they want  on this page is IN WW2OL right now. Granted you can't build your own little empire to lord over and beat up anyone who comes inside it, you can't choose the colour of your pants and you can't use a higher agility score to beat someone, and the game's NEVER going to be finished, or have as nice graphics as the latest COD clone and is cursed with using real world weapons with all their disadvantages...but it's there, right now. 

What players say they want and what they buy are not the same thing

[Venkman]

You all want PvP but the only full PvP game with nothing BUT PvP isn't counted. Unfortunately it has no elves with big boobs or the ability to gank people lower in the social order.

How much of that is really due to superior FPS titles like COD4 though? I haven't seem much on COD5 either, as I'm tired of the whole WWII thing, but COD4 has levels and unlockables and merely lacks the progressive element of zone control. But then, the MMOs that have tried that all ended up needing to implement periodic server or zone resets anyway. That's an inherent contradiction: either the world prevents persistent player controls of zones or you allow it and reset it monthly/weekly whatever.

I don't want an MMO developer making an FPS, because they all end up trying to get MMO players to play a pseudo twitch game that alienates actual FPS players. I want more FPS developers stealing the right MMO trappings that add depth to an experience beyond the momentary match.

[Lum]

What players say they want and what they buy are not the same thing

This. This is why fantasy Diku-style MMOs are still being made.

[UnSub]

What players say they want and what they buy are not the same thing

This. This is why fantasy Diku-style MMOs are still being made.

Nonsense! We want innovation, packed up in something safe and familiar!

[Xanthippe]

Getting back to DAOC for a minute (which was my favorite mmo pvp game), there were two basic incarnations of the pvp (3 if you count battlegrounds).  There was the original DAOC frontier - which was great, until people started grinding realm points in Emain - and then the expansion frontier, which was way too big. 

What I enjoyed most about DAOC pvp was the three-cornered war (which could and was played out in different ways), the separation between pve and pvp zones, and the idea that everyone in the frontier could participate to the benefit of his or her realm.  The rewards for winning weren't so great as to be insurmountable for the losers, and there was a little persistence in it, but not so much that the losers would just give up permanently.

Darkness Falls was a super-sweet addition, in my opinion.  The winners got to control the zone for resource gathering and xp.  Unfortunately, DAOC's pve was not interesting enough to keep me playing, particularly after ToA.

[WindupAtheist]

Why is it no dev house can seem to make a game with that Counterstrike kind of replayability and grab? Are we closer, or farther away than 1997?

If Counterstrike were to take place in some sort of Kosteresque world of "meaningful" conflict where you get kicked in the ballsack for dying, it wouldn't even be fractionally as popular. On the other hand, if you take even typical MMO combat and condense it into consequence-free fragfests of short duration you get, well, WoW battlegrounds. And that game is sort of popular.

Above and beyond anything else, people just don't like being kicked in the nuts that much.

[apocrypha]

What I enjoyed most about DAOC pvp was the three-cornered war (which could and was played out in different ways), the separation between pve and pvp zones, and the idea that everyone in the frontier could participate to the benefit of his or her realm.  The rewards for winning weren't so great as to be insurmountable for the losers, and there was a little persistence in it, but not so much that the losers would just give up permanently.

Darkness Falls was a super-sweet addition, in my opinion.  The winners got to control the zone for resource gathering and xp.  Unfortunately, DAOC's pve was not interesting enough to keep me playing, particularly after ToA.

Oh man, this, for sure.

I think the only way I've seen pvp work well in MMOs is where the rewards for winning aren't personal but realm/faction based. Relic keeps and Darkness Falls were my favourite implementations of this. When the rewards from pvp benefit pve for other players (or your own alts) or grant temporary access to content then it creates an immersive link between pvp and pve.

EVE's 0.0 alliance pvp game does this too - controlling territory by pvp'ing gives pve resources to support more pvp. WoW completely fucks this up. Pvp is totally separated from pve and occurs in sterile instances that have zero connection to the outside world. Plus it centers it all around the same kind of personal grind reward shit that killed Emain.

[Jayce]

EVE's 0.0 alliance pvp game does this too - controlling territory by pvp'ing gives pve resources to support more pvp. WoW completely fucks this up. Pvp is totally separated from pve and occurs in sterile instances that have zero connection to the outside world. Plus it centers it all around the same kind of personal grind reward shit that killed Emain.

It's apples and oranges though.  Eve is consequenceful, WoW PVP is sport.  Certain things work better for each type, and if you try to cross them over it often doesn't work. 

For example, fast and furious PVP doesn't work well if there are consequences.  No one likes to be one-shotted out of hard earned money.  If they felt like there was a chance it makes it easier to take. That's one thing that UO got wrong IMO.

[Venkman]

Ok, hazy memory here, so please correct me if I'm wrong. Didn't Darkness Falls (DF) come out before the way-too-big expansion? I recall being able to get in there or not based on how well my realm was doing in the Frontiers. But also, and more importantly, didn't the coins you got in there serve as currency to buy weapons and armor from in there?

I ask because I always felt that DF was a one-off idea that was awesome if you could get in there but never adequately followed up on because people were pissed by how often they couldn't get in because their underpopulated realm was not representing in RvR.

But like I said, could be wrong.