test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Why do Pve'ers fear a pvp revamp?

191012141519

Comments

  • bitemepwebitemepwe Member Posts: 6,760 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    I would like to point out to the poster above me and anyone else reading this, that in this game in particular ive noticed something quite unusual.

    It is the hardcore PvE community that seems to have the biggest ego in this game. Not the PvP one.

    But that is my personal experience, ive run into some serious *******s in the PvE crowd.

    In contrast the majority of the PvP crowd, at least from who I know and have associated with, are among the most congenial and accomodating people ive ever met in any mmo. For example, the Pandas might tear your face off in a match, but ive been on TS with them, even been invited there on a number of occasions for PvP events and other stuff.

    They actually WANT you to come stay and pewpew. Follow me?

    Its a lot different than I am used to from my SWG days, where a typical PvPer was a kiddie troll trying to make you quit.
    Quoted for truth. A lot of PvE elitism and antiPvP hate rhetoric being blindly thrown around in this thread.
    The funniest has been the hate that starts because the pvp crowd in another game is foul innattitude and is used as evidence that the PvP crowd in Sto is just as bad.

    At least the pvp crowd started a school to help those willing to learn to pvp. I havent seen a STF pve school yet, though I have seen a lot of pve pug attitudes and insults thrown around when somebody doesnt perform to anothers expectations.
    Leonard Nimoy, Spock.....:(

    R.I.P
  • rylanadionysisrylanadionysis Member Posts: 3,359 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    Haw haw haw!

    Amusing I admit but that is very seriously how the self-declared "hardcore" PVPers on Old Republic think they can resolve everything. It's entertaining, if a little depressing to watch in local chat. It's like a supervisor not breaking up schoolchildren brawling in the yard just to see how far it escalates.

    Whats even funnier is in the older star wars game, SWG, my Jedi actually COULD fight 10 people at once.

    So at least my gauntlet throw down is stemmed in 10 year old history :(

    Cant do it here though, i be gettin popped.
    Gold.jpg
    Fleet Admiral Rylana - Fed Tac - U.S.S Wild Card - Tactical Miracle Worker Cruiser
    Lifetime Subscriber since 2012 == 17,200 Accolades = RIP PvP and Vice Squad
    Chief of Starfleet Intelligence Service == Praise Cheesus
  • bricbat1bricbat1 Member Posts: 14 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    oh how i miss my old sfc3 that was when pvp was really fun ... btw klingons were whiners then too lol
  • doalxkdoalxk Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    If they actually did PvP balance changes that were only pvp changes (i.e. so they can't horribly break it for everyone else), then I'm all for spending some time working out some balance changes and mechanics changes for PvP. Since I think they've only actually done that once ever (with the cryo pulsewave), I'm not holding my breath.
  • talajtalaj Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    The STO Forums gives you the opinions of a small fraction (the most vocal) of the STO player base. When you look in many of the threads you see many of the same names voicing the same arguments. I am a member of 3 cross faction fleets, two of which have maxed out rosters. Whenever the word forums in mentioned any of the fleet channels, you get responses ranging from "Wait...what forums?" to "lolforums". To say it is representative of anything other than a small minority of vocal players is silly.

    No, what is representative - and was my point - is the fact that PvP queues DO take ages (the moaning on the forums and in this thread is a byproduct of that fact), AND that carrot-on-a-stick PvPvE maps DO see more activity (and the requests for more PvPvE maps is a byproduct of that fact) - but not because people want to PvP. Ker'rat would be dead if it weren't for the fact that 1st place on the PvE objective has a chance to net you nice purples (and it's a back-to-back repeatable activity) - and a lot of the time there people avoid PvP at all (from experience).
    Apples and oranges. From reading that link it appears to me that they blundered a mechanic and it seems that the law of unintended consequences paid them a visit.

    No, they didn't blunder a mechanic. They tried to incorporate open world PvP into a PvE-centric game via factions - the standard method of developing a background that allows for PvP to happen - and it failed big-time because of the massive amount of ongoing work that was required to balance abilities between PvE and PvP - not least because like many other PvE MMOs gear progression is integral to maintaining active gameplay. That's why Rift's PvP consists of Warfronts and Conquest, where bolstering fundamentally narrows the gap between players in differing levels of gear, and significantly dampens the power of abilities, effects of healing, CC etc.
    MANY MMOs fail, due to any number of reasons, to poor planning, horrible rollouts, game breaking bugs, atrocious customer support, not delivering promised content, not living up to expectations....

    The point is that looking at it proportionately, PvP-centric MMOs have a much higher fail rate than PvE-centric ones - usually because they don't live up to expectations.
    An MMO that narrows it's focus and gameplay also narrows it's playerbase, and therefore it's income potential.

    Were the PvP demographic actually of significant size, that would be a viable case. It isn't though; it's a small minority, so it becomes a case of whether revenue generated from that small minority, will actually be enough to cover the cost of, and more importantly generate a profit from, paying attention to it.
    I do not PvP. It's not my cup of tea. But why should you or I or anyone else take away or limit the aspect of the game that others DO enjoy and has the potential to bring others who also looking for that style of play. So far, STO has failed the PvP community miserably.

    I'm taking nothing away from anybody - Cryptic will run their own numbers on whether paying any serious attention to PvP is going to be worth it or not. I'm merely stating the fact that there's plenty of readily available evidence and precedent to support the notion that their projections will be along the lines of what I'm saying here.
  • abystander0abystander0 Member Posts: 649 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    on the other hand you can't be all things to all men.

    and while you should maybe give your weaknesses some attention you should also play to your strengths.

    not even WoW is all things to all men.

    damn game has had 3 times as many people people try it and say "no" than were playing it (at the time) according to Rob Pardo in interview once. that's at least 30+ million potential MMO players that had a look and said "no" to WoW...meaning the MMO market is far, far bigger than most people realize.

    That's true, I know many people who gave WoW a try and it just didn't appeal to them.
    That's part of the problem right there: seems just about any issue or greivance that can be said can be answered with "dude duel me". It doesn't resolve much but is definitely an ego-stroking exercise. I guess it's hard to see the problem can't be solved by showing off or waving an e-youknowwhat.

    Old Republic is polluted in Fleet chat with "dude duel me" tough talk. PVP in that game is signifigantly more enjoyable, but even so, it has some obnoxious kids too.

    If this isn't some veiled "dude duel me", I stand corrected. But I doubt it.

    I didn't get that at all from his post. It could just be he wants to see for himself to see what the problem might be, and to offer suggestions or tips as to how to improve his ship for Player vs player. Many times problems with a particular build are not apparent in PvE, or that a particular build worked very well in certain situations and not in others. PvE is much more forgiving than PvP since NPCs don't frontload for an alpha strike.

    I am saying this from interactions I have had with fleetmates who PvP quite often, who are more than willing to share their knowledge and help those who ask. It's hard to know what happened without actually seeing it, and knowing what the variables were.


    I am not trying to be combative, I just thought another viewpoint might be useful.
  • mimey2mimey2 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    mosul33 wrote: »
    Really?? Something non-combat wich just recently got nerfed, for allmost 2 seassons no one complain about it, then YOU complained, and a few of ur PvP friends along with you, about the 25 mil expertise holding project and its now nerfed :( And it was a good oportunity for fleet credits, not an exploit...

    It never was an exploit, you are right. I also never claimed it was.

    And yes, I did bring it up, because I realized that not every fleet could realistically handle 25 million...50 million...75 million, or more Expertise on all those giant tier 3 upgrades. I could understand say...leaving the tier 3 dil mine at that level or something, but the Embassy and the recently added Spire on top of that? It's a bit insane.

    Maybe a lot of people on these forums could handle any amount of expertise costs thrown at them. And good on them. But just because the people here on this forum can, doesn't mean a large amount of the playerbase can, and continue to deal with such huge expertise costs with each new holding.

    Yes, some of the folks on that thread were/are PvPers. Doesn't mean that they were the ONLY ones agreeing with me though. Also doesn't mean the only people not in agreement were only PvEers.
    I remain empathetic to the concerns of my community, but do me a favor and lay off the god damn name calling and petty remarks. It will get you nowhere.
    I must admit, respect points to Trendy for laying down the law like that.
  • elessymelessym Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    talaj wrote: »
    I'm taking nothing away from anybody - Cryptic will run their own numbers on whether paying any serious attention to PvP is going to be worth it or not.

    Actually, Cryptic already made this official long ago: http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/05/12/cryptic-developer-star-trek-online-pvp-is-fail/

    Everyone that thinks that work should be done on STO PvP should internalize the following statement: "Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way."

    It should also be noted that a month after saying that he had huge plans and significant changes were on the way for PvP, the only dev working on PvP left the company.
    "Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way." -Gozer, Cryptic PvP Dev
  • rylanadionysisrylanadionysis Member Posts: 3,359 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    talaj wrote: »



    The point is that looking at it proportionately, PvP-centric MMOs have a much higher fail rate than PvE-centric ones - usually because they don't live up to expectations.



    This is the only point I am going to address, the rest of your back and forth with the other guy... ehh ill leave that be, but this one..

    Is a flat bald faced lie. The currently industry standard Co-op PvP game, be it console or MMO is outselling any other genre besides sports games. You can go look up any number of statistics or ranking sites, any reviewer site, and so forth.

    It is also very likely the reason that certain PvP centric MMOs (of which there have not been many at all actually) are doing so well even in this bleak market compared to the three purely PvE MMOs a YEAR that are failing (some less than 2 years old).

    So the notion that PvP is not an industry selling point is simply false and misleading. I think you honestly know that too.

    While most MMOs double cater to both crowds, and many indeed require PvE to gear for PvP, there are so many successful MMOs out there with large and healthy PvP communities that I am surprised you dont even include them.

    PvP sells, and it always has. It always will (at least until such day that an AI is created that can think and react like a human can)
    Gold.jpg
    Fleet Admiral Rylana - Fed Tac - U.S.S Wild Card - Tactical Miracle Worker Cruiser
    Lifetime Subscriber since 2012 == 17,200 Accolades = RIP PvP and Vice Squad
    Chief of Starfleet Intelligence Service == Praise Cheesus
  • talajtalaj Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    elessym wrote: »
    Actually, Cryptic already made this official long ago: http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/05/12/cryptic-developer-star-trek-online-pvp-is-fail/

    Everyone that thinks that work should be done on STO PvP should internalize the following statement: "Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way."

    It should also be noted that a month after saying that he had huge plans and significant changes were on the way for PvP, the only dev working on PvP left the company.

    That sort of takes the biscuit, doesn't it....
  • ghyudtghyudt Member Posts: 1,112 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    yes, because there were no "hard" video games ever before, during and after the birth of internet multiplayer "PvP"...

    if you want "hardcore PvP" go play EvE...which like most PvP focused MMOs topped out at less than half a million players...

    That's because most people don't want to pay for such a crappy game. I got a years subscription on it, and it was so bad I didn't even play it 6 months. You have no control over your ship, its all computer flown, the weapons are TRIBBLE, the skills take days or even weeks to upgrade before you can do anything useful, and the pvpers are more concerned with camping out on jump gates waiting for players to come through than actually finding out how good they really are. Eve, as a whole, sucks.
  • elessymelessym Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    The currently industry standard Co-op PvP game, be it console or MMO is outselling any other genre besides sports games.

    That is a ridiculous distortion. You're talking about a shooter, which is an entirely different kind of game.

    Or maybe you'd like to start using Tic-Tac-Toe for PvP statistics?

    The fact is that PvP-centric MMORPGs are generally failures, because PvP and RPG progression don't mix.
    "Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way." -Gozer, Cryptic PvP Dev
  • edited December 2013
    This content has been removed.
  • rylanadionysisrylanadionysis Member Posts: 3,359 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    elessym wrote: »
    That is a ridiculous distortion. You're talking about a shooter, which is an entirely different kind of game.

    Or maybe you'd like to start using Tic-Tac-Toe for PvP statistics?

    The fact is that PvP-centric MMORPGs are generally failures, because PvP and RPG progression don't mix.

    Name five PvP centric MMOs that have ever existed. Do not use Google.

    Go.
    Gold.jpg
    Fleet Admiral Rylana - Fed Tac - U.S.S Wild Card - Tactical Miracle Worker Cruiser
    Lifetime Subscriber since 2012 == 17,200 Accolades = RIP PvP and Vice Squad
    Chief of Starfleet Intelligence Service == Praise Cheesus
  • amalefactoramalefactor Member Posts: 511 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    This is the only point I am going to address, the rest of your back and forth with the other guy... ehh ill leave that be, but this one..

    Is a flat bald faced lie. The currently industry standard Co-op PvP game, be it console or MMO is outselling any other genre besides sports games. You can go look up any number of statistics or ranking sites, any reviewer site, and so forth.

    It is also very likely the reason that certain PvP centric MMOs (of which there have not been many at all actually) are doing so well even in this bleak market compared to the three purely PvE MMOs a YEAR that are failing (some less than 2 years old).

    So the notion that PvP is not an industry selling point is simply false and misleading. I think you honestly know that too.

    While most MMOs double cater to both crowds, and many indeed require PvE to gear for PvP, there are so many successful MMOs out there with large and healthy PvP communities that I am surprised you dont even include them.

    PvP sells, and it always has. It always will (at least until such day that an AI is created that can think and react like a human can)

    For as much as you try to imply how insignifant I am to your Olympian perspective, you certainly seem to bring me up a lot. :rolleyes:

    Healthy communities grow. They are not artificially made. That goes for PVE and PVP crowds, and sometimes subvariants of both.

    A good example of that in a game I play that is nothing but PVP is Planetside 2. The MLG "esports" types get tons of attention from the developers and have even sponsored official "professional" events. That were laughably embarassing ego-strokes to the favored teams participating. To this day the MLG enthusiasts keep trying to peddle their version of "what this game and everybody in it needs" and to an increasingly less sympathetic general community, they are dismissed more by the day due to rotten attitudes, arrogance, and generally attacking anyone that might have even had the potential of being interested.

    Sound familiar? If you crawl out of your bubble for a moment, it might.
  • amalefactoramalefactor Member Posts: 511 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    Name five PvP centric MMOs that have ever existed. Do not use Google.

    Go.

    How many times are you going to pull that little trick?

    Are you ready to retroactively go and do that to all of your nice broad claims of why we all need more PVP?

    A hint and a genuine suggestion: Drop the condescending TRIBBLE. It's one thing to be skeptical of someone's claims, but your way of putting it is downright childish. Yes yes I know how much you love the Willie Wonka meme and want to emulate it in your posts, but if you have not noticed yet, it generally doesn't persuade people except those who already agree with you.

    You're a minority here, and only getting those who agree with you to agree with you isn't going to win you any positive attention.
  • elessymelessym Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    patrickngo wrote: »
    It's called "Replayability". EQ had it in spades, but eventually the devs could not keep up-and that was/is an ENTIRELY PvE game.

    like, 100%.

    Actually, EQ had PvP. Several different flavors in fact.
    "Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way." -Gozer, Cryptic PvP Dev
  • rylanadionysisrylanadionysis Member Posts: 3,359 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    How many times are you going to pull that little trick?

    Are you ready to retroactively go and do that to all of your nice broad claims of why we all need more PVP?

    A hint and a genuine suggestion: Drop the condescending TRIBBLE. It's one thing to be skeptical of someone's claims, but your way of putting it is downright childish.

    It isnt about more pvp.

    It isnt about getting more people to pvp

    It is about not ignoring PvP, purely because PvP sells.

    Id like to add I play everything in this game, just FYI.
    Gold.jpg
    Fleet Admiral Rylana - Fed Tac - U.S.S Wild Card - Tactical Miracle Worker Cruiser
    Lifetime Subscriber since 2012 == 17,200 Accolades = RIP PvP and Vice Squad
    Chief of Starfleet Intelligence Service == Praise Cheesus
  • amalefactoramalefactor Member Posts: 511 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    patrickngo wrote: »
    talaj, when developers create games that revolve exclusively around THEIR style of gameplay, those games are inevitably both very niche, and very-short-term, regardless of whether the game is ALSO PvE OR PvP focused.

    where a niche-one-style-uber-alles situation occurs, the game ends up tanking in the long run.

    It's called "Replayability". EQ had it in spades, but eventually the devs could not keep up-and that was/is an ENTIRELY PvE game.

    like, 100%.

    EVE is entirely PvP-the solo and PvE content are negligible, ignored, and EVE is growing while other MMO's are dying.

    But, see, EVE doesn't JUST cater to one style of play within it's focus.

    aka there is no "One True Build" that wins everything.

    when PvP players discuss "Power Creep" and "Balance" it's often in the context that the devs have gone toward a model where there is an increasing reliance on "The One True Build". (and you can't tell me you haven't seen this in the STFs!)

    that "One True Build" problem may change every update, but it's always there. The Jem'Bug (Jem Hadar Attack Ship) was the "it Ship" for a long time, not just in PvP, but among the STF/PvE crowd too.

    Tell the truth now, when you see a guy in a Galaxy in your STF PuG, what is the first thought that comes to mind? Or a klingon in a BoP?

    Or a Raptor?

    I remind you that the Ausmonauts (a fleet that does both) occasionally run what is purported to be the hardest content in the game in T1 ships. They used to also do it in Shuttles until the Developers locked that out.

    you know, running CSE, in Mirandas. Succcessfully.

    but PvE specialists will TRIBBLE-storm-and-rage-quit if you show up with the wrong ride, using the wrong abilities, with the wrong weapons or other layout. I've seen them do it.

    I wager you have, too.

    now moving on...


    Beam Overload "Double Tap"-a tactic developed among the PvP crowd, this bled over to the PvE crowd, and when PVE players started using it widely, it got nerfed.

    Didn't start with PvE, started in PvP.

    Aux2Batt/FAW is the flavour of the month-everywhere. It recently got a fix-it was in extensive use among PvP for a LONG TIME before it became popular among PvE.

    but when it did, when it became "The One True Build" for those STF time-trials people, the Developers noticed it, and the proc rates and crit rates were adjusted.

    Tric Mines: another case where PvP'ers used it for months, some years, before the Developers found anything wrong with it. They only found something WRONG with it when PuGs started clearing No Win Scenario and people were blowing up Borg Cubes without doing the other steps in Cure, and Tac Cubes in thirty seconds in Infected.

    Breen Cluster Torp-again, in use by the PvP community as a bread-and-butter "Kill it fast", when the spec to really, REALLY make it kill stuff fast was adopted in the PvE crowd, the Devs suddenly found a reason to change the crit mechanic to individual crits for each of those little mines, instead of having all of them crit at once...

    T4 Romulan Shield heal: the Developers ignored feedback from TRIBBLE TESTING on this one, released it with a math error. PvP'ers noticed it first, but the devs didn't act until there were large numbers of PvE players who were basically playing through their grind content in 'God Mode"-as in no respawn in NWS or STF runs.



    and so on.

    The Developers don't even NOTICE when something is being abused in PvP, but when the spec to abuse it in PvE gets out and people start using it extensively on the grind content to speed up the grind, THEN it gets nerfed, and usually not in the way the PvP group would have suggested-instead of a minor adjustment, it gets hit with the whole-nerf-tree.

    Fact; there hasn't been a Developer with the PvP portfolio since Gozer left. when a Nerf happens, it may have been noticed in PvP FIRST, but it's a good bet that what REALLY happened, is that PvE speed runs have passed a certain point, or an exploit has caused something else to break and it's suddenly important enough to address.

    I suspect the last time something was addressed based on PvP feedback, was the SNB DoFFs, which had zero impact in PvE.

    (SNB doesn't DO anything in STF...)

    Everyone is guilty of using anecdotes to try to back up claims, myself included, but I fail to see how yet another "this pvp group is uber epic and can complete all content while doing handstands and brushing their teeth" statement is anything but aggrandizement, alienating to anyone not already in your camp. You probably know the "topper" at the water cooler at work, if you work at an office. Don't be that guy.

    Making broad generalizations about how PVEers act is equally problematic as doing the same for PVPers, except for the handicap you have to contend with that there's a lot less of you, with less influence and less spending power. Simply insulting PVEers left and right and telling them how elite and enlightened and superior PVPers you know are is just as farcical as that "PC Gaming Master Race" gag going the rounds of the internet right now.

    PVPers find overpowered things first. Hooray. I don't see where you're going with that except indirectly demanding more attention.
  • amalefactoramalefactor Member Posts: 511 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    It isnt about more pvp.

    It isnt about getting more people to pvp

    It is about not ignoring PvP, purely because PvP sells.

    Id like to add I play everything in this game, just FYI.

    As the old saying goes, if PVP sells, then who is buying?

    I hear a similar mantra in an admittedly ALL pvp game. In that game game: "MLG MAKES MONEY." So far, SOE's little MLG experiement has been a money sinkhole and has even made an TRIBBLE of a lot of players that didn't deserve it, due to cheerleading, favoritism, and outright cheating on the part of an announcer named Jax, around War Report 25 if I recall correctly.

    Simply saying "We make money!" requires substantiative evidence that it would work here. At present, it's a flavor of the month beatdown exercise, especially ground PVP (Ground PVP is so borked right now I can only assume you're only defending space since ground PVP is simply that easy to dominate with flavor builds).

    You seem so happy to say "prove it" and even with condescension "name X, no google, go." Take your own medicine and stop making trickle-down-effect claims about how catering to a constantly-dissatisfied fringe group somehow benefits the rest of the playerbase.
  • rylanadionysisrylanadionysis Member Posts: 3,359 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    Everyone is guilty of using anecdotes to try to back up claims, myself included, but I fail to see how yet another "this pvp group is uber epic and can complete all content while doing handstands and brushing their teeth" statement is anything but aggrandizement, alienating to anyone not already in your camp. You probably know the "topper" at the water cooler at work, if you work at an office. Don't be that guy.

    Making broad generalizations about how PVEers act is equally problematic as doing the same for PVPers, except for the handicap you have to contend with that there's a lot less of you, with less influence and less spending power. Simply insulting PVEers left and right and telling them how elite and enlightened and superior PVPers you know are is just as farcical as that "PC Gaming Master Race" gag going the rounds of the internet right now.

    PVPers find overpowered things first. Hooray. I don't see where you're going with that except indirectly demanding more attention.

    Ya know, you just called me condescending in a previous post, but this is probably the most arrogant post I have ever read on these forums, dead serious.

    You come off like youre some kind of authority here.

    "majority, minority, we haz moar muny than you so we win the war"

    Shut the hell up.

    Not only was I making a distinctive point: That point being that no one can claim the majority of PvP centric MMOs have failed when there have been only about 8 in the history of the genre... at least in the west... of which 6 are still in operation, 4 are doing very well, and two are outperforming everyone else with EVE topping the charts.

    But I was also about to make the point: PvE centric MMOs (of which we have a much larger pool of "anecdotes" to pick from) grow stale and fail at more than five times the rate of pure PvP ones.

    To jump to that and give some grandiose speech about "youre wrong im right because theres so many more of us" is ludicrous. Of course there are more PvE players in a PvE centric game.

    Really dude?
    Gold.jpg
    Fleet Admiral Rylana - Fed Tac - U.S.S Wild Card - Tactical Miracle Worker Cruiser
    Lifetime Subscriber since 2012 == 17,200 Accolades = RIP PvP and Vice Squad
    Chief of Starfleet Intelligence Service == Praise Cheesus
  • oldkilldareoldkilldare Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    Name five PvP centric MMOs that have ever existed. Do not use Google.

    Go.
    eve, ****, conan, warhammer, and fallen earth

    do i get a cookie ?

    could probably list more if i thought about it

    how about shooter only ones ?

    firefall, world of tanks, planetside 2, tribes, and destiny (although that's not out yet and they keep trying to deny it's an mmo)

    extra cookie ?

    no cookie ? :(

    edit -for some reason that game that begins with A and has 4 letters and in which everyone has wings is censored oO
  • abystander0abystander0 Member Posts: 649 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    talaj wrote: »
    No, what is representative - and was my point - is the fact that PvP queues DO take ages (the moaning on the forums and in this thread is a byproduct of that fact), AND that carrot-on-a-stick PvPvE maps DO see more activity (and the requests for more PvPvE maps is a byproduct of that fact) - but not because people want to PvP. Ker'rat would be dead if it weren't for the fact that 1st place on the PvE objective has a chance to net you nice purples (and it's a back-to-back repeatable activity) - and a lot of the time there people avoid PvP at all (from experience).

    In my list I did mention that more of these zones would be a good idea.

    As I said, I don't PvP anymore, so I don't have a firm grasp of why people go in there other than to blow up other players or to test PvP skills or builds. Though it sounds like people just want risk free loot from your description. The risk should be commensurate with the reward. There is no real loss to being destroyed in PvP other than annoyance.
    No, they didn't blunder a mechanic. They tried to incorporate open world PvP into a PvE-centric game via factions - the standard method of developing a background that allows for PvP to happen - and it failed big-time because of the massive amount of ongoing work that was required to balance abilities between PvE and PvP - not least because like many other PvE MMOs gear progression is integral to maintaining active gameplay. That's why Rift's PvP consists of Warfronts and Conquest, where bolstering fundamentally narrows the gap between players in differing levels of gear, and significantly dampens the power of abilities, effects of healing, CC etc.

    Your description makes it sound like there was a miscalculation or lack of forethought of how they were going to integrate this new mechanic into the game and the time it would take to properly balance it all out. Not necessarily the fault of a PvP mechanic itself, just a poor implementation.

    It still has no bearing on STO since NO ONE has suggested anything like open PvP, which I would be steadfastly against. PvP should be a play style choice. PvPvE zones are voluntary.
    The point is that looking at it proportionately, PvP-centric MMOs have a much higher fail rate than PvE-centric ones - usually because they don't live up to expectations.

    That was partly my point. The failure was not necessarily because of PvP gameplay, but due to promises not kept, or expectations not being met.
    Were the PvP demographic actually of significant size, that would be a viable case. It isn't though; it's a small minority, so it becomes a case of whether revenue generated from that small minority, will actually be enough to cover the cost of, and more importantly generate a profit from, paying attention to it.



    I'm taking nothing away from anybody - Cryptic will run their own numbers on whether paying any serious attention to PvP is going to be worth it or not. I'm merely stating the fact that there's plenty of readily available evidence and precedent to support the notion that their projections will be along the lines of what I'm saying here.

    I didn't mean to say that was your aim. I get your points, but what you are stating is not necessarily fact, but your own conclusions, which are based on your own observations. Cryptic tends to be gun shy with hard numbers.

    The PvE vs PvP discussions tend to devolve into "us" or "them" fights with no middle ground. I think there is room for some compromise.
  • amalefactoramalefactor Member Posts: 511 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    Ya know, you just called me condescending in a previous post, but this is probably the most arrogant post I have ever read on these forums, dead serious.

    You come off like youre some kind of authority here.

    "majority, minority, we haz moar muny than you so we win the war"

    Shut the hell up.

    Not only was I making a distinctive point: That point being that no one can claim the majority of PvP centric MMOs have failed when there have been only about 8 in the history of the genre... at least in the west... of which 6 are still in operation, 4 are doing very well, and two are outperforming everyone else with EVE topping the charts.

    But I was also about to make the point: PvE centric MMOs (of which we have a much larger pool of "anecdotes" to pick from) grow stale and fail at more than five times the rate of pure PvP ones.

    To jump to that and give some grandiose speech about "youre wrong im right because theres so many more of us" is ludicrous. Of course there are more PvE players in a PvE centric game.

    Really dude?

    Whine about condescension, then be condescending. Even add Bill O'Reilly "shut up" to it for good measure. Add a Reddit warrior "Really?" at the end for effect and stir.

    Living hypocrisy. Grow up.

    Lucky for me and most of the playerbase, if you're the champion of your cause here, it's going nowhere and staying there.
  • amalefactoramalefactor Member Posts: 511 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    In my list I did mention that more of these zones would be a good idea.

    As I said, I don't PvP anymore, so I don't have a firm grasp of why people go in there other than to blow up other players or to test PvP skills or builds. Though it sounds like people just want risk free loot from your description. The risk should be commensurate with the reward. There is no real loss to being destroyed in PvP other than annoyance.



    Your description makes it sound like there was a miscalculation or lack of forethought of how they were going to integrate this new mechanic into the game and the time it would take to properly balance it all out. Not necessarily the fault of a PvP mechanic itself, just a poor implementation.

    It still has no bearing on STO since NO ONE has suggested anything like open PvP, which I would be steadfastly against. PvP should be a play style choice. PvPvE zones are voluntary.



    That was partly my point. The failure was not necessarily because of PvP gameplay, but due to promises not kept, or expectations not being met.



    I didn't mean to say that was your aim. I get your points, but what you are stating is not necessarily fact, but your own conclusions, which are based on your own observations. Cryptic tends to be gun shy with hard numbers.

    The PvE vs PvP discussions tend to devolve into "us" or "them" fights with no middle ground. I think there is room for some compromise.

    I'd say that even now some compromise is possible, but certainly not with the OP's "they fear us" mentality, nor with the contradictory elitism/victimhood thing.

    "We are so elite, we find all the best builds, we break the game regularly but no one pays attention to us WAAAAAAAAH".

    It's repulsive.
  • rylanadionysisrylanadionysis Member Posts: 3,359 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    As the old saying goes, if PVP sells, then who is buying?

    I hear a similar mantra in an admittedly ALL pvp game. In that game game: "MLG MAKES MONEY." So far, SOE's little MLG experiement has been a money sinkhole and has even made an TRIBBLE of a lot of players that didn't deserve it, due to cheerleading, favoritism, and outright cheating on the part of an announcer named Jax, around War Report 25 if I recall correctly.

    Simply saying "We make money!" requires substantiative evidence that it would work here. At present, it's a flavor of the month beatdown exercise, especially ground PVP (Ground PVP is so borked right now I can only assume you're only defending space since ground PVP is simply that easy to dominate with flavor builds).

    You seem so happy to say "prove it" and even with condescension "name X, no google, go." Take your own medicine and stop making trickle-down-effect claims about how catering to a constantly-dissatisfied fringe group somehow benefits the rest of the playerbase.

    I cant say whether PWE could ever fix the games mechanics enough to make the PvP aspect more attractive or not. We may very well be past the point of no return where it might require a full on skill revamp and no one (myself included) wants that. Do we need it? Maybe, but it would destroy the playerbase the same way the SWG NGE did.

    We need not lose the last bastion of retention for hundreds of players by ignoring it either. Yes i said hundreds, as there are a great deal more of us than you think. I only hesitate to say thousands because I cant quantify them for sure. But hundreds absolutely.

    There are over 10 in our fleet alone, and we are a mostly PvE/STF fleet. Thats 10 big spenders right there. Several of which are down to the end of their game if PvP ever died.

    So I ask you this, do you really think it benefits PWE/Cryptic and the community at large if the PvPers (many if not most of whom are also PvE players) to just no longer exist?

    There is a saying regarding combat MMOs... once the PvP game dies, the rest follows suit. There is a lot of truth to this, historically.
    Gold.jpg
    Fleet Admiral Rylana - Fed Tac - U.S.S Wild Card - Tactical Miracle Worker Cruiser
    Lifetime Subscriber since 2012 == 17,200 Accolades = RIP PvP and Vice Squad
    Chief of Starfleet Intelligence Service == Praise Cheesus
  • elessymelessym Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    Not only was I making a distinctive point: That point being that no one can claim the majority of PvP centric MMOs have failed when there have been only about 8 in the history of the genre... at least in the west... of which 6 are still in operation, 4 are doing very well, and two are outperforming everyone else with EVE topping the charts.

    Prove it.
    But I was also about to make the point: PvE centric MMOs (of which we have a much larger pool of "anecdotes" to pick from) grow stale and fail at more than five times the rate of pure PvP ones.

    Prove it.
    To jump to that and give some grandiose speech about "youre wrong im right because theres so many more of us" is ludicrous. Of course there are more PvE players in a PvE centric game.

    So why, again, should a PvE-centric game waste time developing PvP?
    "Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way." -Gozer, Cryptic PvP Dev
  • rylanadionysisrylanadionysis Member Posts: 3,359 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    eve, ****, conan, warhammer, and fallen earth

    do i get a cookie ?

    could probably list more if i thought about it

    how about shooter only ones ?

    firefall, world of tanks, planetside 2, tribes, and destiny (although that's not out yet and they keep trying to deny it's an mmo)

    extra cookie ?

    no cookie ? :(

    edit -for some reason that game that begins with A and has 4 letters and in which everyone has wings is censored oO

    Have a cookie

    Now, for another cookie, how many of those games are still operating. From what youve posted I count most or all (the masked one I cant determine and one ive never heard of myself)

    -edit. Do you mean A I O N? If so that is the second largest MMO behind WoW.
    Gold.jpg
    Fleet Admiral Rylana - Fed Tac - U.S.S Wild Card - Tactical Miracle Worker Cruiser
    Lifetime Subscriber since 2012 == 17,200 Accolades = RIP PvP and Vice Squad
    Chief of Starfleet Intelligence Service == Praise Cheesus
  • elessymelessym Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    There is a saying regarding combat MMOs... once the PvP game dies, the rest follows suit. There is a lot of truth to this, historically.

    Prove it. No Google. Go.
    "Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way." -Gozer, Cryptic PvP Dev
  • amalefactoramalefactor Member Posts: 511 Arc User
    edited December 2013
    I cant say whether PWE could ever fix the games mechanics enough to make the PvP aspect more attractive or not. We may very well be past the point of no return where it might require a full on skill revamp and no one (myself included) wants that. Do we need it? Maybe, but it would destroy the playerbase the same way the SWG NGE did.

    We need not lose the last bastion of retention for hundreds of players by ignoring it either. Yes i said hundreds, as there are a great deal more of us than you think. I only hesitate to say thousands because I cant quantify them for sure. But hundreds absolutely.

    There are over 10 in our fleet alone, and we are a mostly PvE/STF fleet. Thats 10 big spenders right there. Several of which are down to the end of their game if PvP ever died.

    So I ask you this, do you really think it benefits PWE/Cryptic and the community at large if the PvPers (many if not most of whom are also PvE players) to just no longer exist?

    There is a saying regarding combat MMOs... once the PvP game dies, the rest follows suit. There is a lot of truth to this, historically.

    As soon as an opinion has the word "truth" added to it, sirens blare and red lights go off.

    Again, take your own medicine. Give solid examples, especially because you're peddling the "truth" thing and expecting to be taken seriously.

    Here's a solid counter-example in advance: World of ********. Yes, it has PVP. Yes, it has many battlegrounds. It even has an arena. However! Even the developers, who are famously arrogant and rarely admit fault for anything, have publicly conceded it was a mistake to over-emphasize arenas and "e-sport" and to press game changes upon the PVE/casual PVP playerbase according to the needs of the arena people.
This discussion has been closed.