Is the goal truly PvX?

This is a general question on both how players interpret Intrepid Studio's vision, as well as what players actually desire.

I seem to see a general consensus that PvP is the main focus. But I'm wondering is PvE really even a big part of the game? Sure there are NPC mobs and bosses but their importance seems to be dwarfed by the ability to PvP around them. Most people seem to only want their PvE if it also has PvP.

Rust is a PvP game, just because PvE elements exist in Rust doesn't mean people call it a PvX game.

So is this game PvX? Or is it just a PvP game?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Nova_terra

Mag7spy wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

Ironhope wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

I doubt this type of player will choose to play Ashes.
We shall see.

I wish you were right but the sad reality is that such players will flood Ashes of Creation when it launches.

Launch is irrelevant. Tons of people try new MMORPGs and quickly stop playing.
But...PvEers are more likely to continue playing Throne and Liberty than Ashes of Creation.
Based on the current game designs.

Interesting that the creators of L2 have chosen to make their sequel more PvE-based than L2.

"Great PvP experiences are always welcome but it looks like NCSoft will be putting most of its eggs in the PvE basket. The developers revealed that the vast majority of players prefer PvE content and the game will focus on creating challenging content that hardcore players enjoy in the endgame."
https://www.mmorpg.com/editorials/throne-and-liberty-could-be-2023s-big-next-gen-mmo-launch-2000126568

I honestly think PvE players would player play AoC than TL. Western audiences prefer wester games even more so one that doesn't have p2w.

Them focusing on some pve is nothing new in their messaging as they admited to not having good pve content before and want to do it in this case. It doesn't change the fact there is unpunished PK flagging during the night, game is going to be more on the pvp side than AoC.

Pvers don't understand how strong the corruption is for AoC, you need to actually see how the rest of their pvp works before you can any any statements like this. Cause again effectively during night it is like the ocean from AoC but everywhere. Which to me sounds good btw lol.

I think you are right in that a large section of PvEers may find the game interesting and fun, specifically people who may not be as entrenched (Dygz and Co.) in their views. Which is an absolutely understandable position, especially given that a lot of us come from a long history of MMOs (I consider myself young blood at 30 years old and SWG back in 2003) and preferences are what they are. But based on the "promises (subject to change tm)" and the explanation we have been given it sounds like this may be a game for a larger PvE audience. This will also be caveated by the fact that we have seen nothing yet and A2 and beyond will be the decider but again I believe this could find that balance where PvEers can enjoy this space given the severity of the expected corruption penalties.

Dygz

akabear wrote: »

If L2 PvE / PvP was measured in time played.. L2 was a PvE game.
60min PvE grind to make up a 2min PvP round death..

If L2 PvE / PvP was measured by in-game wealth.. L2 was a PvE game. No wealth from PvP but needed to work damn hard to gear up.
6 months of grinding / playing market to gear up to lose in 30 sec of PK rampage!

If L2 PvE / PvP was measured in time in combat.. L2 was a PvE game.
PvE for 10-30 hrs and may not even have a PvP round unless seeking out pvp.

Seems irrelevant.
Whatever degree of PvE you may consider L2 to be... the devs have specifically stated that its successor, Throne and Liberty, will be more PvE-focused.

I don't measure PvP-centric games by time spent in PvP v PvE.
I certainly don't measure PvP-centric games by wealth.
I measure PvP-centric games by the mechanics that prevent non-consensual PvP.

Kubitz2

Nova_terra wrote: »

I think you are right in that a large section of PvEers may find the game interesting and fun, specifically people who may not be as entrenched (Dygz and Co.) in their views. Which is an absolutely understandable position, especially given that a lot of us come from a long history of MMOs (I consider myself young blood at 30 years old and SWG back in 2003) and preferences are what they are. But based on the "promises (subject to change tm)" and the explanation we have been given it sounds like this may be a game for a larger PvE audience. This will also be caveated by the fact that we have seen nothing yet and A2 and beyond will be the decider but again I believe this could find that balance where PvEers can enjoy this space given the severity of the expected corruption penalties.

I agree. There is so much fear mongering and worst case scenario talk, that I stopped reading most of the threads.

I see a big potential, that many PvEers will come to enjoy the system. If I look at the open world flagging system, my first thoughts are not about a griefer paradise.

I see situations, where I see someone harassing a gatherer by attacking, but not killing, and me joining with the gatherer and killing that guy together. Or whispering the gatherer to strip, and letting the guy kill him, so I can kill the now red guy and reap the rewards. I'd share with the gatherer, when he's back.
There is also one thing, that isn't mentioned very often. If there are less carebear-PvEers in a game, the ressources become scarcer and more valuable. The game mechanics(random spawns/landmanagement) don't support fixed farming routes. If pure PvE players decide that AoC is not for them, because they want there routine mining routes, that they farm on respawn, without the risk of PvP, thats not a bad thing. Gathering might even become the most profitable activity of the game.

All speculation of course, but not less probable, than the doomsday scenarios.

Mag7spy

Dygz wrote: »

akabear wrote: »

If L2 PvE / PvP was measured in time played.. L2 was a PvE game.
60min PvE grind to make up a 2min PvP round death..

If L2 PvE / PvP was measured by in-game wealth.. L2 was a PvE game. No wealth from PvP but needed to work damn hard to gear up.
6 months of grinding / playing market to gear up to lose in 30 sec of PK rampage!

If L2 PvE / PvP was measured in time in combat.. L2 was a PvE game.
PvE for 10-30 hrs and may not even have a PvP round unless seeking out pvp.

Seems irrelevant.
Whatever degree of PvE you may consider L2 to be... the devs have specifically stated that its successor, Throne and Liberty, will be more PvE-focused.

I don't measure PvP-centric games by time spent in PvP v PvE.
I certainly don't measure PvP-centric games by wealth.
I measure PvP-centric games by the mechanics that prevent non-consensual PvP.

You realize people can flag and kill you freely at night without penalty, right?

Kubitz2

Dygz wrote: »

I measure PvP-centric games by the mechanics that prevent non-consensual PvP.

Wouldn't you like that sweet, sweet revenge for everytime you got non-consensually killed in past games?

Imagine you see someone shoutout in chat, that someone just PKed him for no reason. You see the red dot appears near you. You start chasing.....he can't get away(speed debuff)....he's no real challenge(debuffs), but he is full of nice loot....people cheer you on in chat...the mayor announces a bounty...there he is......there he dies....time to dance on his corpse....evil has been defeated.

Did I mention, that there is a game, that promises mechanics like that?

Arya_Yeshe

Dygz wrote: »

akabear wrote: »

If L2 PvE / PvP was measured in time played.. L2 was a PvE game.
60min PvE grind to make up a 2min PvP round death..

If L2 PvE / PvP was measured by in-game wealth.. L2 was a PvE game. No wealth from PvP but needed to work damn hard to gear up.
6 months of grinding / playing market to gear up to lose in 30 sec of PK rampage!

If L2 PvE / PvP was measured in time in combat.. L2 was a PvE game.
PvE for 10-30 hrs and may not even have a PvP round unless seeking out pvp.

Seems irrelevant.
Whatever degree of PvE you may consider L2 to be... the devs have specifically stated that its successor, Throne and Liberty, will be more PvE-focused.

I don't measure PvP-centric games by time spent in PvP v PvE.
I certainly don't measure PvP-centric games by wealth.
I measure PvP-centric games by the mechanics that prevent non-consensual PvP.

Your take on this is really smart!

This is what I am talking about when I say that devs in many games have hidden the PvP gear behind a wall of PvE grinds and they forced the PvPers to grind for gear for hundreds of hours!

Can you imagine how a PvE carebear would feel if the good crafting materials were hidden behind a wall of hundreds of hours in the arena?

Arya_Yeshe

This game is called Domina, it's a small indie game, I like that when we win a fight we get products from the market, gold, more slaves, more gladiators, cards.

So I like getting materials through PvP too, even if it's small prizes

To me it is interesting the PvP gear is not hidden behind a wall of PvE, I like everything mixed and some stuff completely random

Kubitz2

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

This is what I am talking about when I say that devs in many games have hidden the PvP gear behind a wall of PvE grinds and they forced the PvPers to grind for gear for hundreds of hours!

Can you imagine how a PvE carebear would feel if the good crafting materials were hidden behind a wall of hundreds of hours in the arena?

Hmmm.....maybe have them work together....like dungeon crawlers take crafters into the difficult dungeons and have PvPers defend them from other groups. The crafters/gatherers get the ressources and craft the best gear for everyone. You know....like a game, that is focused on social interaction....where the different fractions have to work together.....like......naaaaaah, will never work. Forget it.

Noaani

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

akabear wrote: »

If L2 PvE / PvP was measured in time played.. L2 was a PvE game.
60min PvE grind to make up a 2min PvP round death..

If L2 PvE / PvP was measured by in-game wealth.. L2 was a PvE game. No wealth from PvP but needed to work damn hard to gear up.
6 months of grinding / playing market to gear up to lose in 30 sec of PK rampage!

If L2 PvE / PvP was measured in time in combat.. L2 was a PvE game.
PvE for 10-30 hrs and may not even have a PvP round unless seeking out pvp.

Seems irrelevant.
Whatever degree of PvE you may consider L2 to be... the devs have specifically stated that its successor, Throne and Liberty, will be more PvE-focused.

I don't measure PvP-centric games by time spent in PvP v PvE.
I certainly don't measure PvP-centric games by wealth.
I measure PvP-centric games by the mechanics that prevent non-consensual PvP.

Your take on this is really smart!

This is what I am talking about when I say that devs in many games have hidden the PvP gear behind a wall of PvE grinds and they forced the PvPers to grind for gear for hundreds of hours!

Can you imagine how a PvE carebear would feel if the good crafting materials were hidden behind a wall of hundreds of hours in the arena?

The difference is - PvE players wouldn't play that game, they would play one that is better suited to what they want.

PvP players would do well to take heed of the general intelligence of the average PvE player. If the game isnt suited to you, dont play it.

Now, people want just PvP and no PvE will have some real trouble finding that I an MMORPG, but that is because other game genres took that market segment from them. To realize this, even if not understand or accept it, all you need to do is remember how LOL's release decimated the populations of all PvP MMO's at the time (WoW's PvP scene has never recovered, WAR lost so many players they shut the game a few years later,it affected every PvP MMO that could be considered current at the time).

Back when L2 launched, the concept of fighting another person over the internet was new and novel. Not many game genres allowed for it. Now though, FPS, BR and MOBA games have all shown that they are far better suited to facilitating this than an MMORPG could ever be - and so this is where most players wanting just PvP have gone.

This is why the MMO PvP scene has been a sideline in games as a whole, or a major feature of second rate games since 2009.

Ludullu

Noaani wrote: »

Now, people want just PvP and no PvE will have some real trouble finding that I an MMORPG, but that is because other game genres took that market segment from them. To realize this, even if not understand or accept it, all you need to do is remember how LOL's release decimated the populations of all PvP MMO's at the time (WoW's PvP scene has never recovered, WAR lost so many players they shut the game a few years later,it affected every PvP MMO that could be considered current at the time).

Back when L2 launched, the concept of fighting another person over the internet was new and novel. Not many game genres allowed for it. Now though, FPS, BR and MOBA games have all shown that they are far better suited to facilitating this than an MMORPG could ever be - and so this is where most players wanting just PvP have gone.

This is why the MMO PvP scene has been a sideline in games as a whole, or a major feature of second rate games since 2009.

This is exactly why I want some new mmo to revolutionize the pvx design. Player stories are made through pvp and those player stories could then influence a deep lore-based story, all while the day-to-day gameplay is of the best possible quality throughout the whole pvx spectrum. But I guess it just takes too much money and someone willing to throw it all away on a huge risk. Steven's the closest thing we've got to that, but we'll have to see how the E part of the PvX will pan out.

Nova_terra

Noaani wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

akabear wrote: »

If L2 PvE / PvP was measured in time played.. L2 was a PvE game.
60min PvE grind to make up a 2min PvP round death..

If L2 PvE / PvP was measured by in-game wealth.. L2 was a PvE game. No wealth from PvP but needed to work damn hard to gear up.
6 months of grinding / playing market to gear up to lose in 30 sec of PK rampage!

If L2 PvE / PvP was measured in time in combat.. L2 was a PvE game.
PvE for 10-30 hrs and may not even have a PvP round unless seeking out pvp.

Seems irrelevant.
Whatever degree of PvE you may consider L2 to be... the devs have specifically stated that its successor, Throne and Liberty, will be more PvE-focused.

I don't measure PvP-centric games by time spent in PvP v PvE.
I certainly don't measure PvP-centric games by wealth.
I measure PvP-centric games by the mechanics that prevent non-consensual PvP.

Your take on this is really smart!

This is what I am talking about when I say that devs in many games have hidden the PvP gear behind a wall of PvE grinds and they forced the PvPers to grind for gear for hundreds of hours!

Can you imagine how a PvE carebear would feel if the good crafting materials were hidden behind a wall of hundreds of hours in the arena?

The difference is - PvE players wouldn't play that game, they would play one that is better suited to what they want.

PvP players would do well to take heed of the general intelligence of the average PvE player. If the game isnt suited to you, dont play it.

Now, people want just PvP and no PvE will have some real trouble finding that I an MMORPG, but that is because other game genres took that market segment from them. To realize this, even if not understand or accept it, all you need to do is remember how LOL's release decimated the populations of all PvP MMO's at the time (WoW's PvP scene has never recovered, WAR lost so many players they shut the game a few years later,it affected every PvP MMO that could be considered current at the time).

Back when L2 launched, the concept of fighting another person over the internet was new and novel. Not many game genres allowed for it. Now though, FPS, BR and MOBA games have all shown that they are far better suited to facilitating this than an MMORPG could ever be - and so this is where most players wanting just PvP have gone.

This is why the MMO PvP scene has been a sideline in games as a whole, or a major feature of second rate games since 2009.

I agree with almost this entire post as I do believe PvP has been sidelined due to the fact that MMO PvP is not truly the "essence" of player vs player the same way CS:GO - LOL - DOTA - etc capture that better. But I don't think MMO PvP players are the same type of player. Coming from someone with 3-4k hours in DOTA and hundreds in the other games mentioned (am a PvP player). There is something captured in an MMO in terms of having a character that is persistent that has me returning to MMOs time and time again since once the game is over in DOTA my character is as well.

I think as the evolution of games and genres continue, there is a space for PvP players/PvE players in hybrid systems and even games with solely instanced PvP as I have made peace with as I do very much enjoy PvE for what it is. But I think the very narrow population of "PvP and PvP only" would be better suited for other games but again. That is an extremely small demographic.

Noaani

NiKr wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Now, people want just PvP and no PvE will have some real trouble finding that I an MMORPG, but that is because other game genres took that market segment from them. To realize this, even if not understand or accept it, all you need to do is remember how LOL's release decimated the populations of all PvP MMO's at the time (WoW's PvP scene has never recovered, WAR lost so many players they shut the game a few years later,it affected every PvP MMO that could be considered current at the time).

Back when L2 launched, the concept of fighting another person over the internet was new and novel. Not many game genres allowed for it. Now though, FPS, BR and MOBA games have all shown that they are far better suited to facilitating this than an MMORPG could ever be - and so this is where most players wanting just PvP have gone.

This is why the MMO PvP scene has been a sideline in games as a whole, or a major feature of second rate games since 2009.

This is exactly why I want some new mmo to revolutionize the pvx design. Player stories are made through pvp and those player stories could then influence a deep lore-based story, all while the day-to-day gameplay is of the best possible quality throughout the whole pvx spectrum. But I guess it just takes too much money and someone willing to throw it all away on a huge risk. Steven's the closest thing we've got to that, but we'll have to see how the E part of the PvX will pan out.

Yeah, that is what I was hoping Ashes would be.

PvE needs to come first in a PvX MMO, and PvP needs to only be applicable in specific situations. An MMO is never going to compete with a MOBA, BR or FPS for the PvP segment, even people that prefer PvP to PvE will get the bulk of that PvP fix in other genres.

What an MMO needs to do is basically what you say, be the best PvE MMO it can be, and then add in PvP aspects that fit in with this.

Imagine a good PvE MMO, but with Ashes caravan system being an integral aspect of crafting. The sieging component of Ashes could be another good avenue to add PvP to an otherwise PvE game. Make it so theat both siege engines and rewards from top end raids in this game need to be transported via the caravan system, and you have a far more interesting game, with far wider appeal.

It wont appeal to PvP players that want all PvP all the time, but as I've said, those players are better served in other genres.

Ludullu

Noaani wrote: »

Imagine a good PvE MMO, but with Ashes caravan system being an integral aspect of crafting. The sieging component of Ashes could be another good avenue to add PvP to an otherwise PvE game. Make it so theat both siege engines and rewards from top end raids in this game need to be transported via the caravan system, and you have a far more interesting game, with far wider appeal.

I still, probably naively, believe that it can be achieved with a proper tuning of the corruption+BH system with maybe some small additions if necessary, but I doubt my assumptions can be properly tested because I'm not Steven and can't just say "do it this way first and we'll then see where to go from there". My assumptions are almost most likely based on biased idealism, so I'm sure that clouds my outlook on this stuff too.

Dygz

Kubitz2 wrote: »

Wouldn't you like that sweet, sweet revenge for everytime you got non-consensually killed in past games?

Nope. Revenge does not interest me at all.

Kubitz2 wrote: »

Imagine you see someone shoutout in chat, that someone just PKed him for no reason. You see the red dot appears near you. You start chasing.....he can't get away(speed debuff)....he's no real challenge(debuffs), but he is full of nice loot....people cheer you on in chat...the mayor announces a bounty...there he is......there he dies....time to dance on his corpse....evil has been defeated.

Did I mention, that there is a game, that promises mechanics like that?

I dunno what would be enticing me to give chase.
People cheering me on in chat would be irrelevant.
None of what you described appeals to my playstyle.

Dygz

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Can you imagine how a PvE carebear would feel if the good crafting materials were hidden behind a wall of hundreds of hours in the arena?

Again... this basically describes the Open Seas, in my view.
Yes.

Dygz

NiKr wrote: »

Player stories are made through pvp...

I suppose this is true for people who enjoy PvP.
Player stories can also be made through PvE. Which is what I prefer.

NiKr wrote: »

...and those player stories could then influence a deep lore-based story, all while the day-to-day gameplay is of the best possible quality throughout the whole pvx spectrum. But I guess it just takes too much money and someone willing to throw it all away on a huge risk. Steven's the closest thing we've got to that, but we'll have to see how the E part of the PvX will pan out.

I don't agree that describes Steven's vision of PvX.
In Ashes, PvX just means PvPers will need to do some PvE. And that PvE will lead to more PvP.
So... it's really just about supporting more PvP in a PvP-centric game.

EQNext had the better design for what you hope for.
But, that's not going to be a thing in Ashes, as far as I can tell.

Ludullu

Dygz wrote: »

EQNext had the better design for what you hope for.

I was fairly excited for what EQNext was supposed to be, but then it imploded.

Azherae

NiKr wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Imagine a good PvE MMO, but with Ashes caravan system being an integral aspect of crafting. The sieging component of Ashes could be another good avenue to add PvP to an otherwise PvE game. Make it so theat both siege engines and rewards from top end raids in this game need to be transported via the caravan system, and you have a far more interesting game, with far wider appeal.

I still, probably naively, believe that it can be achieved with a proper tuning of the corruption+BH system with maybe some small additions if necessary, but I doubt my assumptions can be properly tested because I'm not Steven and can't just say "do it this way first and we'll then see where to go from there". My assumptions are almost most likely based on biased idealism, so I'm sure that clouds my outlook on this stuff too.

I mean 'beating a world boss spawns a Loot Caravan' is one of the most 'obvious' designs for this, right?

Your PvP group leader just immediately takes over from your PvE leader as soon as the mob falls. Instant 'FFA PvP' to deal with, but without the crazy hassles of figuring out how to 'most perfectly grief people'.

Could even give people a delay or spawn it somewhere slightly different to start if it was a boss in a dungeon.

I'm sure someone at Intrepid has thought of this, if they're literally making Artisans have to be there for certain bosses.

Ludullu

Azherae wrote: »

I mean 'beating a world boss spawns a Loot Caravan' is one of the most 'obvious' designs for this, right?

The biggest issue with this is the zerging potential. I guess you could have a limit on how many people one side can have, but then you'd have to tie the caravan to the pve raid group because otherwise the attacking side could register some of their people for defense too and fail it on purpose.

And in the usual context of "pvers don't pvp", that raid group would be shit against the same-sized pvp-centric group. Maybe you could assign someone else for the defense and you'd point to your guild's pvp raid group, and maybe they'd be teleported to the picked location of the caravan (same as the newly updated caravan spawn system), but at that point we're so deep into maybes and unknown sides of the mechanics' design that I dunno if it would feel good to play it out.

You'd also have to make those caravans sink-less, or at least I feel like people would hate it if their well-earned loot poofed out of existence after a super difficult boss fight that took a ton of attempts.

Oh, and there's also the potential of the defending side registering their own players (or mercs) for the attack side and filling out the limit so that their enemies couldn't do the same.

And I feel like all of these issues would be non-existent if the game supported some proper agro control of mobs and/or a few different pvp mechanics before the fight for the right to farm the thing (or at least the dibs to farm first).

Noaani

NiKr wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Imagine a good PvE MMO, but with Ashes caravan system being an integral aspect of crafting. The sieging component of Ashes could be another good avenue to add PvP to an otherwise PvE game. Make it so theat both siege engines and rewards from top end raids in this game need to be transported via the caravan system, and you have a far more interesting game, with far wider appeal.

I still, probably naively, believe that it can be achieved with a proper tuning of the corruption+BH system with maybe some small additions if necessary, but I doubt my assumptions can be properly tested because I'm not Steven and can't just say "do it this way first and we'll then see where to go from there". My assumptions are almost most likely based on biased idealism, so I'm sure that clouds my outlook on this stuff too.

It may be possible - like you I'm not willing to say definitively in either direction.

However, what is clear is that Intrepid have no desire to do this. Their idea of PvX is everyone else's idea of PvP - in terms of an MMO at least.

That puts Ashea in that corner of the genre that will only really attract PvP players, but wont atteact PvP players that are getting their PvP fix on genres better suited to it.

Bold prediction here - we will see one more generation of PvP MMO's, and that is it. PvP after that will be relegated to the side - where it is the best fit for an MMORPG.

The part about this that is of most interest to me is what that will do to action vs tab in subsequent generations of MMO's.

Child Item