HC PVP MMORPG's DON'T WORK.
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 08. 2022
- Patreon: / joshstrifehayes
Twitch: / joshstrifehayes
Discord: / discord
Twitter: / joshstrifehayes
Reddit: / joshstrifehayes
JoshStrifeHayes Main CZcams Channel:
/ joshstrifehayes
JoshStrifePlays (2nd CZcams)
/ @joshstrifeplays
JoshStrifeReplays (Full Twitch VODs)
/ @joshstrifereplays
Podcast channel, Tangent Tavern:
/ @tangenttavern8946
Josh Strife Hayes Clips on TikTok ► / joshstrifehayes
Official clip channel of Josh Strife Hayes. Channel is not directly managed by Josh himself.
Channel run by Vipaza
/ vipazav
#shorts #JoshStrifeHayes #twitch #clips - Hry
I've commented it on other Josh vids and I'll comment it again:
NOBODY wants to play a Hardcore Full Loot PVP game. They want to WIN a Hardcore Full Loot PVP game. The unfairness is the point, they don't crave a challenging fight, they crave the superiority of the curbstomp.
And it tastes best when you start as the underdog. You weaklings don't understand the fun of persistence and that you can be a perfectly fine casual in a guild full of hardcore neckbeards and jump into the fun whenever. Preparation is the leveling of full loot games. You just craft an extra set ahead of time, lol.
We don't all have a 5 minutes attention span and enjoy our shit gone every 5 minutes. This shit came with he MOBA games and is good for tik tok kids but drives me absolutely insane.
@@baaadmofo lol calling people weaklings because they don't think like you shows your predatory nature you need to be treated not rewarded for it.
@@baytownoutlaw9992 my treatment is called 'competition'. You wouldn't get it. It was removed from the world in the early 2000s
@@baaadmofo Lol competition go play a real pvp game. All kinds out there
@@baaadmofo you want an advantage over your competition that is why you want to pvp in a mmo. gear or lvls outweigh player skill
"We have too many hardcore players in the wilderness and not enough casual players for them to kill. How do we entice the casual players into the wilderness to be killed?" Why does this sound like the musings of some evil mastermind?
It also does to show how screwed up the entire hardcore PvP mentality is though.
Its literally giving PvE players incentives to be greifed(Which is a net negative for the game no matter what) and to let the PvP Vultures someone easy to hurt to fuel their egos.
Another negative is that doing this causes the Vultures drive others away and get complacent with easy wins again the unprepared. So when people who want real pvp players show up they stomp the complacent unprepared Vultures. The Vultures will simply leave as Vultures want easy wins not fair fights.
@@Warcrafter4 exactly why I gave up on pvp in mmo's. I remember when Neverwinter was still decent and doing pvp - they had a whole team vs team thing which was removed for some reason, meaning the pvp was relegated to open world. First time I wondered into a pvp zone as a max level player just exploring, I get instantly killed by some rogue. Basically what I expected would happen, just wanted to explore something that looked cool. Watched the same guy fight someone who actually wanted to fight and he got demolished, which basically sums up any time I've played a game with pvp in the open world. Entirely pointless.
Because hardcore PvP derive joy from making others suffer. That is what they consider the "reward" of PvP, and it's honestly why my attitude is Fuck Hardcore PvP'ers, it's a good thing they're going extinct".
@@RoxxiTheDiceGoblin i agree with that entirely. There's no fun in pvp without challenge, where both sides have the ability to fight back.
It doesn't necessarily have to be balanced either; I have a sort of old chess game that pits a defender with less soldiers against an invader with more soldiers. Its challenging and the enjoyment is in outsmarting a superior force (on the defender side) but you can do that because both sides have virtually equal power, just one is slightly larger.
Pvp in most mmos is ruined by people that just throw money at it, or a lack of separation between high level players and low level players. And of course, the scum who hop on for hours a day simply to ruin someone elses fun.
@@callmequaz9052 Not neecssarily. THis video made it painfully obvious that Josh and Callum haven't tried GW2's PvP in depth for example. The most popular PvP mode in GW2 doesn't separate high tier and low tier PvP'ers, BUT, that doesn't ruin it's enjoyment. Why? Because killing players isn't the focus of it. The focus is capturing and holding objectives, sieges and shit.
Highly skilled players still get to shine by taking into account their group size and abilities, or by being map roamers, people who roam around like for 3 v1's or 1v1's or such and capturing objectives solo. The reward isgetting currency that you can use to buy gear that makes you better in PvE, but you can also get that gear through PvE, but people still play GW2's PvP in droves, why? Because it is FUN. The mecahnics are fun, the gameplay is fun, everything about it is just fun. Fuck, I'm not a PvP'er, usually I hate PvP in fact, but I LOVE GW2's PvP. When I played GW2 actively, I genuienly could not get enough of the PvP mode.
"Hardcore pvp", meaning you lose stuff when you die, or the enemy can loot your body, is just a massive red flag to me. Because the game will be full of griefers and gankers rather than meaningful pvp. It happens every single time, without fail.
Even on some "casual pvp" type games, you'll end up with a large number of people who only want to pvp when they have a massive advantage and there's limited risk to themselves. Ie, they'll jump someone who's fighting a mob, attack in 2v1, 3v1, or more odds stacked in their favor, etc. And they tend to be the whiniest when they actually lose those encounters, blaming luck, ping, lag, "I wasn't even trying", etc.
I've played on enough of those games over the years that I don't even bother with them anymore.
Yeah, you’re completely right. Forced-PvP zones are often inhabited by some of the most toxic and childish members of a game’s community
Completely agree, there's a game I play that whenever you go to pvp open spots, if you catch them by themselves they just run away but when there's more than 1 they start jumping you and be the most toxic people ever.
Try Outlands. About 4000 people, hardcore full pvp, and incredible community.
“Hardcore PvP” is way too romanticised by those who like it. Same for open-world PvP in general
God, yes. For every story of that totally epic Southshore vs. Tarren Mill battle that crashed the server XDXDXD you've got hundreds of hours of being camped by bored max level mages and rogues. World PvP is arse, and unless you've built your game like, fucking, Warhammer Online, then you're just making your player base annoyed for the sake of a handful of arseholes with nothing better to do till their raid starts or their mother calls them down for dinner.
Yup. These people should think about playing ARK: Survival Evolved, because it's basically the same - there's usually one huge tribe on a server that wipes anyone who is not a part of that tribe and sometimes chinese swarm will come to the server and they will have a huge pvp battle. You also get the amazing experience of losing 500 hours of progress in one day.
That's really the best hardcore pvp mmorpg, but it's not "massive" enough because each server can hold up to 100 players at most.
The best way to sum this whole argument is actually painfully simple to me.
You don't design *good* PvP to be fun for the winner, you design good pvp by making it fun for the loser.
Explains why there are so many loosers playing video games nowadays.
@@baaadmofo who do you laugh at when loosers stop playing? yourself? casuals are the second life line of any games after whales
@@baaadmofo If you like pvp, you should want this. The more fun a pvp experience is for more people, the more people will play and keep playing.
Plus, of course, that means there's more people who'll play more and possibly get better at it.
And then there's the fact that a healthy pvp environment will draw in more new players.
@@LyricalDJ I don't care about sucking up to hordes of new players and whatever your view of 'fun, healthy pvp' is. I want persistency and consequence and don't care about fairness at all. Outgeared? Zerg. Outzerged? Rat. Outratted? Move. - Carebeares destroyed pvp in mmos
@baaadmofo I mean if you're going to falsely assert that people who don't like shitty game design which activly hinders player retention are just weaklings who need to "git gud," go off I guess. 😂
You'll agree it's all fair competition if I then say people who really like full loot pvp mmo's are sociopathic losers who couldn't hack it in the real full loot PVP MMO, our capitalist system so they come to niche, shitty video games to achieve the same feeling of dominating someone who couldn't defend themselves.
Wait, sorry, I said fair competition! It's not exactly fair when your baseless assumptions are compared to my actual true statements. Guess you should git gud then.
BTW, I hope you got out of whatever crypto scam you were invested in before you lost all of your actual money.
His the thing. I'm a PvE player and I hate the mentality of locking rewards behind PvP, to me when a game does that it means that they want me to go and die in PvP so that the PvP fanatics can have fun in my expanse. I don't like to play PvP, I don't want to play PvP, I'm bad at it and I don't want to get good at it, I don't want to put in the time, because i don't like it. So to the game to use me (by locking rewards behind pvp) to make other players have fun is insulting to be honest, it means they value me less than they value them.
@@hashimrahman51 which again, is a bad design idea. cause your pushing your player base away. pvp should be fun on its owe with out needing extrinsic rewards. if its not, then rework it.
@@hashimrahman51 Yes they do find other games. Its why games that pull this stunt(and PvP mmos in general) tend to die fairly quickly.
Then what do you propose? PvP has literally 0 rewards? And then you will tell players who enjoy PvP to find another game?
@@randomdeliveryguy do pvp with pvp rewards and pve with pve rewards
@@cixamachado Wut, you just said you don't want any rewards in PvP. Did you mean you don't want PvE progression rewards in there?
Oh man, there's a lot to talk about here. I really think this is a topic people grossly overthink and try to come up with some 200 iq 'balanced' solution, when in reality it's fairly straightforward. Let me use my fun MMO character in the PVE boss fights, but also in PVP!
On the topic of OSRS - As far as MMOs go, as much as I love runescape, it is a terrible representation of how to do PVP. Runescape PVP is *not* well designed.
1. It requires a very special type of account, one that is restricted from certain quests and levels outside the rest of the content.
2.The amount you can lose makes people want to avoid the wilderness content all together because you cannot use your B.I.S gear you've worked for months/years to obtain.
3. The skills required are different than the rest of the game. You can do 95% of the content of the game without learning weapon swaps, tick manip, prayer swap, use veng runes... etc etc. There is a disconnect for MOST players. Most of the game is a chill point and click you can play in another tab, but the PVP is a tick manipulator that requires very precise clicks and learning concepts like PID. You get absolutely 0 practice for runescape pvp while playing the entire rest of the game, so it turns people off.
4. Despite so much skill required (I could never kill torvesta or a popular PVP youtuber consistently) there is still a level of RNG involved in runescapes combat system, which is lame as hell for anything PVP.
PVP does not inherently need high stakes in order to be popular and fun. Runescape players often bring up Last Man Standing "If you suck at PVP just play LMS" because you get the levels, the items, and everyone is on a much more even playing field. It's true that LMS is a great addition, and does allow people to practice without losing anything, my points 1 and 3 are still very important. Why would you spend a bunch of time learning to PVP at LMS, if your account isn't made for pvp in the wildy?
This is where MOBAs and BRs come in. Just as Josh said, people play Fortnite because it's quick, fun, PVP action with low stakes. If you lose or get bad luck on loot, just try again. Take League of Legends. It has an action combat system just like an MMO, there is a serious level of skill involved, your character doesn't do "random damage" sometimes, and there are high stakes with the ELO system and ranked ladder. That being said... millions and millions of people play normal queues and ARAM. You know why? Because the combat system in league of legends is fun! It's a 100% pvp only game, and people can still play even if there is nothing at stake.
Why can't an MMO let me play as my super fun character with a fun combat system, practice my combos on the PVE and in little fun duels with my friends for some good ol' fun, and then let me take that into PVP where I don't lose my entire bank because I lost 1 fight?
Why can't we compete for rare rewards instead of bank loot? Like a special cape you can only get for 100 wins in the PVP. What about a helmet trim that you can only get if you have 10 games finished with 0 deaths in your K/D/A?
If you truly do think stakes / rewards / loot actually matter, why was Call of Duty Black Ops in 2010 the most popular game in the entire world with NO ranking system at all?
People do not hate PVP because "they're just noobs". 100 million people play league of legends, 25 million people play call of duty, 30 million people play fortnite. People hate bad PVP systems, not PVP itself. Runescape, and other hardcore PVP games, are poorly designed, period.
100% agree all these shitty full loot PvP MMOs do one thing better than other genres, greifing and guess what not a lot of ppl seem to like that.
Nostalgia isn't a real leg to stand on, which was the crux of Callums argument. Just because it's something expected doesn't mean it's good. When people who have been playing the game from the beginning are still scared of the wilderness today, you know something went wrong. It's an experience a small subset of players enjoy.
Funny seeing the best LoL content creator here!
Well said, though there's still some degree of stakes in individual fights in the games you mentioned-- it's just on a much shorter scale of time. I don't have much experience with fortnight, just a couple dozen games with friends, so I can't say much about it, but in League of Legends there's a sense of satisfaction for me in taking good trades, farming well, or even solokilling an opponent. What happens in the laning phase will have consequences later in the game, and have some weight to them because of that, but none of it will matter after a nexus falls, so it's not *too* much weight.
Maybe other people don't get this sense of satisfaction from laning, but I suspect I'm not alone in getting enjoyment from stakes that persist to the end of a game.
Lol all I had to do was read 1. To realize this dude just wrote a book without understanding anything.
When you described what you like, a lot of that is like guild wars 2 pvp except you don’t use the gear you get in PvE. However, their WvW does have you use your own gear
You can't force someone who doesn't want to participate in content. Throw in all the rewards you can think of but if the player feels like he's forced to do something he has no interest in, he'll just quit instead if participating gets too necessary.
In essence you're asking a player "Do you like the rest of the game enough to take part in this activity you don't like to get your fancy hat / end game crafting material / whatever?". And for a portion of those players that is a quit moment since your progression is locked behind a barrier. Even for those that keep playing it lowers the future quit barrier since they remember the disappointment of not being able to get the thing.
That's exactly what burnt me off Lost Ark. Even though I hate honing with a passion, I hated more that I had to do every activity to cap resources daily rather than doing what I want and it contributing to a general cap. I'd rather play Guardian fights all the time to cap rather than having to do islands, do chaos, do cube, etc. to cap.
FFXIV PVP FOMO can go fuck itself.
that was the last straw for me with destiny 2. I wanted to fully upgrade my majestic armor or whatever it was, and to do that you had to win matches in the lighthouse, which was basically the highest level pvp area. To even get into that activity, you need to do normal pvp in the crucible and get your ranking up.
I suck at pvp, I hate pvp, and I never play pvp, and I have a limited time to complete the armor. after spending a day or 2 making almost no progress in my ranking I just quit. I was already annoyed at changes they were planning to make wiht the next xpac.
Which Callum appears to be arguing for briefly; "if you want the mining tool, go do PvP, you can't demand the developers cheapen the value of the item for you".... but that's what HC PvP is trying to demand of it's own players, you have to value PvP as much as we do; And the history of the MMO genre shows that developers don't have that luxury either, you can't make players love what you love, instead they just move on. Listening to these videos however I often get the sense that because so much of their formative years were spent with such a very specific set of MMOs (Runescape in particular), they're more prone to justifying what, in a much wider context was shown to be a dead end for MMO development; we saw the same over at Ultima Online, where you still get people who were teenagers in 1999 trying to defend full loot PvP as it was in UO at that specific time as the pinacle of game design... when even UO itself abandoned the idea 20 years ago now, and no game since has ever really brought it back, not even EvE Online (you may get killed, but you can't lose your entire fleet and everything in it). In effect, there isn't really a debate to be had, it was settled a long time ago, we just seem to keep having it because nostalgia is such a powerful drug.
That's why I had to quit Blade and Soul. I loved the rest of the game, but progression became locked behind pvp, and I'm not going to put up with that at this stage in my life. Make it 100% completely seperate from pve so we aren't required to do that just to continue to pve.
Josh: Doesn't it feel weird how the thing that is furthest from pvp has to do pvp to enhance that thing.
Callum: Let's hamstring in some mining into the wilderness to make it feel like the dragon pickaxe makes sense.
as someone who plays Runescape and hates PVP. any time something forces me to go into the wilderness, i just stop doing it. because i will walk in, immediately get tracked down and murdered just for trying to do my PvE shit. doesn't matter if i only have my three items, they will murder me *just because they are dicks*
STOP MAKING PEOPLE GO INTO THE WILDERNESS FOR PVE STUFF.
Hardcore PvP in any game is toxic. the only people who enjoy hardcore pvp are those that enjoy stealing hard work from others.
Nah, hardcore pvp in any game not designed exclusively to be a pvp game is toxic because the devs are either incompetent or cross the streams...
Or because they make the game a team game and then fuck up matchmaking, because they both dont want to bother to make it a "solo to team" progression game from the base thus have the "without huh massshuamkinng auuur game wont be pooplar to sell enough" cash first mentality, just as e.g. solo que in dota 2 got fucked a few patches out of beta when they disabled pure solo que because 2 man and 3 man teams had to wait 15-20 minutes for a game instead of 1-5, yet didnt have the foresight to then generally make it all except pure 5v5 unranked... you cant have it both ways.
Wilderness is mostly empty when i go you must be going on the highest pop world hahahaha
I was a PKer. That's all I did. From 2002 onwards, I just made different pvp builds.
And I agree. I don't want to hunt you, you're not fun to fight against. You may have accidentally brought good stuff with you so I'm killing you anyway just in case, but I'm not enjoying it. It wasn't a challenge and I was in zero danger.
Clues leading to the wilderness was a terrible idea. I wanna fight people that are there to fight, because they brought the good stuff for sure.
I haven't played Runescape, but there are a ton of games that promise PvP and PvE are separate and you can choose which you'd like to participate in. And then you need a certain amount of PvE items to even get to the PvP areas, and PvE quest #10 of the chain requires 5 herbs that only grow in the PvP zone.
i've been doing black chins recently and honestly every pker has been absolute dogshit, just pray mage and run with dinhs/black dhide and with 6 brews you can tank anyone
My response to Callum is simply thus: if you don't want people who don't want to PVP to come into PVP for the rewards, then tell the devs to stop putting non-PVP related rewards into PVP. They want to put in pvp specific weapons and armor, fine as long as their are similarly statted items available in PVP. Same for PVP themed titles. But the moment they start putting crafting gear or recipes, or purely cosmetic rewards that anyone can use into it, then blame the devs.
We dont' want PVP and we're thrilled to *not* engage with it at all. And yet devs seem to think its their duty to "encourage" us to play by enticing us into it. Or in the case of FromSoft, *forcing* us if we want to co-op with our friends.
TL;DR - blame the devs, not the PvE-ers, who are just trying to play the game.
That right there is the biggest issue I have with Elden RIng. I have a friend who bought it at the same time I did, so we could coop. I figured out how to make the coop item, died to the first knight camp, opened the chests in the knight camp, died to the knight camp. Finally got a set of claws, figured out how to join my friend, and literally after finally clearing the knight camp together, got invaded by a pair of players, one of whom did every status effect at once and took my entire health bar in one hit. PvP sucks, and the only way to PvE with a friend is to open the door to whatever sadist with a glowing sword wants to wander in, completely irregardless of where you are or what level you are. "Oh, just started out? Here's someone with 600 hours in with a sword bigger than you are"
@@SnivyTries I remember one time I got a failed run on Dark Souls because of a stupid PvP moment. I was going from Andre to the Gargoyles, just cleared the mob outside the church, and an invasion happens. For some reason, during the time the animation for the invasion was playing, I got hit several times by nothing and got CURSED!
And since I died to curse, that meant my HP was cut in half. Going in the glass canon build I was going for, that meant I died for one hit of anything more powerful than a mob Hollow, and since curses prevent you from reversing hollowing, that meant I couldn't do coop and get help with the Gargoyles, either from another player of Solaire!
And at a time I couldn't buy any items to dispel curse, because they're only available after defeating the Gargoyles!
I deleted the save file and started a new one because playing the game from scratch was faster than grinding to get through the Gargoyles or beating the boss without taking a single hit to get to the curse lifting priest...
No. If you don't want PvP exclusives, the no PvE exclusives EITHER. That means EVERY SINGLE SKIN available for PvE must be buyable in PvP too.
That is, of course, insane. As that means PvP will be able to get everything easier in the end.
Exclusivity matters. You want the PvP skins? You PvP. Just like if they want the PvE skins, they are FORCED to PvE. It is fair and wholistic. That is their special thing. You want it because it looks cool? Then jump into the meat grinder like everyone else. I don't see you offering every single special skin/mount/etc you have to them.
You are not entitled to the same skin in a different color. You shouldn't have a sniffler's chance of finding something even similar to it. It should be unique, just as your raid gear should be.
@@Nempo13 "That means EVERY SINGLE SKIN available for PvE must be buyable in PvP too."
I fail to see the downside.
@@Nempo13Literally only you have a problem with this. PvE players have no issues with PvP players being able to get the same stuff as them.
"at some point developers must say, though shit, if you dont want to play pvp, you dont get rewards"
True.
At some point players must say, though shit, and stop playing the game because the rewards are forced in pvp for the only purpose of playing pvp.... Oh wait...
True, never understood that. Why bring pve items into PVP space. Let just people who want to PVP do so among themselves instead of feeding unwilling participants to them.
@@Necrosian TBH I want the flip side too. Don't force those who only enjoy the PvP to go through the PvE for the best stuff. Then you have the problems that we do now where people are just looking for carries through end game content to get that restricted loot to go back to the part of the game that they enjoy. They don't want to learn anything about the PvE part of the game, and we shouldn't be forcing them to do so.
@@leadpaintchips9461 In a perfect world there would be seperate progressions for PvP and PvE, but both of those take money to develop, so devs usually focus on one of those and neglect the other or if the are stupid split attention and don't satisfy anyone.
@@Necrosian Very true, and the 'payout' only really benefits for one of the two, so focusing on one is just a better business decision.
Separate progressions for PvP and PvE, with no cross-pollination of items or mechanics: absolutely yes. We happen to already have that too. PvE players can play MMOs with large, exploration virtual worlds, and pvp'ers can go play literally any other competitive game out on the damn market.
Josh: *maybe we shouldn't force people in the wildy for non pvp related activities
Callum: *haha i just wanna dropkick some skiller idiots back to Lumbridge*
Having non-PvP activities in open PvP areas is one of the stupidest design decisions any MMO can make.
@@roguebanshee the only way it might work, if you have a sort of bodyguard hiring system. where you can hire another player for protection. and a client can "rate" their experiance. (this would make it so that people who try to use it to "lure" players could get negative ratings, having them be less desired in the system)
But yeah, its def the Safest option to keep PvP and PvE separate.
@@TheDwagonHD if you need another system to fix a flaw you made it's a bad system and should be removed entirely.....
maybe respect that not everyone wants to play your way but is interested in the world you made.....and so you shouldn't be running a forced deathmatch game and allow safe areas for not deathmatchers?? eww can't have that right?? pfft
@@roguebanshee
Yup. Pretty much stacks all of the risk to the non-pvp player and all the rewards to the pvp player. Completely breaking the risk/reward balance should be a pretty obvious problem.
I played archeage briefly and I think I only made boxes to deliver to the center island once. After that I just camped the delivery point and stole them from other people. There was no risk for me (other than just dying which didn't actually do anything except waste a few minutes to respawn) but I managed to farm enough of other peoples resources that I got the ship I wanted by effectively stealing it from them. I quit soon after that.
@@roguebanshee I like how ESO handled that. You could join the campaign and do wtf ever, like grind mobs. But if you were a player that dislikes that sense of danger, there was very little incentive. My only gripe there would be you weren't doing anything meaningful to the campaign just messing around like that, iirc. But it works better than a straight pvp server cuz even tho I love pvp and pvp servers, sometimes I don't have the time to be disrupted by a ganker.
This is one of the times where Callum is extremely wrong.
It doesn't matter what you do or add, you should never be making a PvPer do PvE or vice versa. The Pickaxe example should be fixed in the easiest way: REMOVE it from PvP entirely and do something involving Mining in PvE to get it, don't involve PvP where no one wants it, and again, vice versa.
Callum once again missing the forest due to the tree in ignoring "you shouldnt have anything pvp/pve related in pve/pvp". Design 100 absolute baseline, do not cross mutually exclusive gameloops, you fuck them all up and please noone with a product that doesnt display any of your skills as a designer.
Well no, that can still work... but you can't just have it be a bunch of Gank squads or 1v1 "DUELZ MEH, BRO" tryharding ... it has to be a twist on the PvE formula to some degree where the NoLifer player is effectively handled like a raid boss with his own limitations for how many mechanical exploits and "tricks" he's allowed to use ...having no gear, or just summoning Adds or something instead.
@@iller3 A raid boss that shows up at random while you're fighting another raid boss with gear meant for the first raid boss not the second. All of this to get a pickaxe for mining.
I swear to God, runescape pkers are all the same
@@Greenleaf_ Eh, I wouldn't mind that if it wasn't a >90% chance of dying to the second raid boss because they showed up at the exact moment I looked away to sneeze...
Disagree with Callum on this. PvP should be encouraged by PvP rewards. That way only people who want to PvP are involved and PvE'ers aren't being used as an easy targets.
Callum is literally the average wildybro who thinks pvp is dying because none of the pve'rs will go risk in the wildy, and no pvper will EVER fight another pvper, real pvp hasn't happened in osrs in fucking years. It's literally all just seal clubbers looking for easy targets.
@@deeznuttes9340 pvp in all mmos is like that.
People wanting to flex/humilliate a victim. They don't want a challenge, just the dopamine rush of winning.
@@calibula95 Not just MMO sadly. Even in Mobas many player just want the "usually win" build but once they got outsmarted, they blame their teammate for not helping instead of adapting new strategies.
Even more apparent that most prolonged games are not a result of intense fighting but the victor refuses to end the game (and some threw a winning game at the last second).
@@calibula95 Kind of disagree, WoW has a ladder ranking system where you're rewarded for playing and rewarded more for winning and the gear is good for PvP and meh for PvE aside certain classes. PvP and raiding are the 2 things WoW has perfected in my opinion. Arena's are fast and fun, BG's are super enjoyable most of the time and the rewards are good and great if you're good.
@@michaelm6179 that's the sweet spot in game design imo, about pvp vs pve. Lock behind the game's pvp things that are good or exclusive for pvp, and not for the rest of the players who don't give an F.
My problem is when you can't get something crafted because you need a pvp exclussive ressource, or tokens, or whatever. That sucks.
Edit:
The other issue is class balance, because I've seen many things that were viable/cool in pve (not in WOW, it was another game) be nerfed to oblivion because it was "unfair" in pvp. That makes my blood boil.
I prefer the _"Too many Wolves, not enough Sheep"_ analogy anytime this topic comes up because it communicates to everyone **exactly** what is happening behind the U.I. to the "E.L.O." or simulated match-making that happens between players.... and ultimately, it turns the players who THOUGHT they were wolves, into sheep and then those _internet tough guys_ also eventually quit (but usually not before posting a bunch of rants to the forums crying about class "balance" or something instead of blaming the unforgiving game mode itself).
Fun fact: Elo is actually not an acronym, but named after the Hungarian-American physics professor who created it, Arpad Elo. I definitely thought it was an acronym for a long time, though
And yet for years Rust had a huge CZcams fanbase purely around wolves hunting other wolves lol
@@mitchellhorton9382 Someone else tried to make a comparison to Rust to, but this video is about why HC mmorpgs don't work. Rust isn't an rpg mmo and is fundamentally different from the games Josh and Callum use as examples. People playing mmorpgs play them because they want consistent progression. To be able to build and craft and show off what they earned.
Rust works as a HC mmo because there is no real meaningful progression because of the server wipes. Nothing you make is really yours and progression is pointless when everything is wiped out every few weeks.
It forces wolves back into sheep and levels the playing field and everyone has to start over. Which is why it will always be niche inside a niche for mmorpg players.
@@Chaosqueenngami this so much, and then pple forget monetization, all those who advocate for wolfs go spend 100k in immoral lol
If players don't PvP unless there is an incredible reward for it, then your PvP is shit. Then forcing PvE players to do said shit PvP because of the rewards will not create more PvPers, it will only create more people who hates PvP and hates the devs for making such a dumb design decision.
Make your PvP fun and you'll have PvP players, plain and simple.
No thanx.
When I play for PvE, I don't like being forced in to PvP regardless how good PvP is.
Playing Salem right now. Not because of the prospect of perma death. Certainly not for the PvP. I'm playing it purely for the PvE content since this content I really enjoy. I will quit the moment some asshole comes along and starts wrecking the things I've spent months building up.
@@Kindlesmith70 that's the thing - it shouldn't be forced. It should be fun to make people consider playing it. If it's forced it doesn't matter how fun it is, people like you or me aren't going to bother with it. If it's fun and a choice, then a lot of people might consider it.
@@callmequaz9052 Ok, let me rephrase myself.
PvP in Salem is an option. I am in no way forced to fight or kill another player in the game. If I decided not to engage with it, I am choosing not do pvp, however this does not prevent someone else from killing me off.
I'm am making this comparison to death match games where the entire point is to kill another player, and you really can't opt not to do so since that is the entire game.
What would be ok for me is if there were zones for PvP that have no ties back into PvE content. Anything you gained from the PvP content is purely for the PvP content.
@@Kindlesmith70 yeh thsts what I was trying to say. Having pve content locked behind pvp sucks for everyone except for the whales that want a power fantasy.
I like pvp, just not when I'm forced to engage with it for pve stuff.
it has been done before in RF online, sadly the code is shit and cheaters everywhere, PvE guys farm materials for the PvP guys (oversimplification) who defend the PvE guys from enemy, PvP rewards is distributed for all players in the race
"I want this reward inspite of the gameplay of the wilderness." and "Tough shit you don't get it" This is what happened to final fantasy 14. PVP was horrible and not worth the time or effort to be in. But every time Square would waste time and money making rewards for pvp they were either written off by more than 95% of the community 4% would do it ONLY for the reward and 1% were there because they for some reason loved pvp in FFXIV. Last I checked 10% of the playerbase has participated in a single match of PVP. but I assure you everyone wanted the Maki gear that came with it. So you know what happened when the devs said "Tough shit you don't get it." People got their reward and stopped giving a shit about it. This flood of people ruined the enjoyment for the people that enjoyed it because they either steam rolled or were on the team with the people that were there for the reward and not the PVP.
So you forcing PVP onto PVE players sounds like a HARDCORE!!!!! (The caps are necessary) player's wet dream it actually does not help in the long run ever. World of warcraft has the exact same problem tying PVE rewards to PVP gameplay. Ask anyone that tried for some of the meta events. PVE players flooded the game cheesed their reward through the path of least resistance then fucked off. Ruining a majority of PVP events through one method or another. So putting exclusive shiny stuff that PVE players need or want behind a PVP wall will not save your PVP content. It will be exploited and then forgotten.
This was eventually fixed by making the PVP palatable to a wide audience. Not the armor, not trinkets, not a dragon pick axe. If you want a lot of people to PVP you need to make it so a lot of people want to pvp.
Spot on. This also reminds me of the times Blizzard tried to promote HotS by offering you rewards in other games for playing through a certain event.
I tried getting back into HotS one time when one of these events was running and the matches were FLOODED with Overwatch-players, most of which completely threw the game and then lashed out at anyone who called them out.
Forcing players to play a game or do certain content they don't like, because its the only way to obtain stuff for games or content they actually like and want to play is stupid. It never has the intended effect and never will have, it just creates animosity between different groups of players.
I remember in alterac valley some people hated losing so as soon as things looked bad they'd just go fish. They would still get their rep reward to get the purple gear they wanted but not be invested in the fight...I mean I enjoyed fighting till the end every time win or lose but a lot of people hated it.
@@iitim2152 Alterac Valley was originally about PvP, groups splitting off to do objectives whilst the bulk of the armies pushed the main road in a great tug of war. However player quickly worked out that you got more honor and reputation just beelining the objectives and finishing the map whilst you ignored fighting. Soon the meta was the 2 armies rode past each other instead of clashing, straight towards the enemy base and it was a race to who could take the base before the other faction. This left little actual PvP remaining, most in the small tactical forces left to recapture/defend the graveyards once the zerg had passed through it, this is where you had true buttclenching PvP experience, since losing that graveyard meant people who got picked off in the zerg got sent all the way back home to respawn and usually resulted in a loss.
Personally I wish the achievements for pvp were instead of "so many wins" should be "participated so many times" so that way, even if you lose; you're making progress.
The amount of times I started pvp only for the other 2 teams to capture all the nodes and then rush together, at your spawn is far more than normal. It can be fun, but not when you literally can't walk anywhere without 5-6 limit breaks on you :/
@@cattysplat Yes... I spent thousands of hours in Av I understand the evolution of it lol. Full disclosure BC was my quit point, when I replaced TUF in a few minutes of leveling I was like " So everything I worked so hard for is now useless... " and quit.
It's so funny to me to watch all these wannabe hardcore people nowadays argue about full loot PvP when back in the days 15-20 years ago the consensus was that only weirdos and aggressive schoolkids play PvP in such games, because they can fool somebody into a disadvantageous situation to get easy loot off them.
There's a reason WoW PvP got as giant as it was back in 2006-2011. And the reason is, of course among many other things, the same as to why WoW in general got as popular as it was: there was zero disadvantage to losing any fight you pick in the world. WoW was a game for "filthy casuals", and because of that it exploded into 12 million active subscribers, a very large portion of whom were actively PvPing. What other game back in the days or after that made PvP as popular as WoW made it? I can only think of Dark Souls, another revolutionary game where you lose no loot upon dying in PvP. Games with PvP loot sure have their audience, but this audience is so niche and so disconnected from the rest of the playerbase that no game that target specifically them can ever become popular enough to matter. What would be interesting is if popular MMOs each introduced a separate server specifically for this type of players to have their fun. But I recon the idea is so factually unpopular that even a server of these people won't be able to sustain itself, let alone a separate game made for them.
we need to stop pretending that grinding is a hardcore activity. it's not.
the grinders that want full loot pvp aren't hardcore players, they just want to steamroll people.
designing to please them is by definition only fun for the half of the playerbase that has grinded the most, AKA it's self destructive.
the "I love when you die and lose all your stuff" people already have basically every battle royal to pick from.
I'd disagree, BRs aren't really hardcore in this sense. There is no building really when a match lasts 15-30 minutes. You don't have a character really. It's pure PvP, that's all. More hardcore than CoD or other arcade shooters for example though. Maybe that's what made them so popular, idk.
Cheky Breky
I quit Atlas because I got sick of losing my nice, new Schooner within 20 minutes to someone who just had a bigger, better ship and destroying me when I just wanted to explore. Full loot is fucking awful
Josh: "Getting a mining pickaxe for PvP is kinda weird."
Callum: "I totally agree Josh, that's why the pickaxe should only be obtainable in a PvP zone and used to mine PvP-area ores, so that that the vocation matches the reward!"
What if mining would make pvp worse? That would be fun.
Let's say you can mine in the wildy and bring this untradable (stackable?) ore to a trader for rewards. But in the process of doing this, pvp somehow will become less rewarding.
It's like a cat and mouse game where you can mine to get xp and ore, and sneak away to get rewards and debuff pkers.
It’s slightly comforting knowing that the ppl who both have all the free time and the ppl who want a second job aren’t a big enough overlap to sustain its own game. That said, your right that the game loop is fundamentally going to make the loser quit the game.
How many games have you played and enjoyed in your life where you've lost? Probably all of them at some point. I can say something blanketed that could potentially be a quitting point for any player but there's no data on it. It's a sweeping generalized assumption based on nothing.
@@NotTheWheel I think what matters is the time investment needed, not just lost. I don’t mean just dying in rust, but if getting to a new tier of equipment, or having to build a second base of operations in a game, anything that puts a giant time/effort gate on progress, it seems to come down less to who is determined enough to get it, and more, who has the 8 hours a day.
@@internetbard4384 My objection to be would be why have goals that are easily achieved. One of the easiest things to do in any MMO is to program a bot to do basic open world PvE content. Are players so limited in their faculties that they can face no adversity at all? Risk/Reward is a key cornerstone of Game Design. How much effort is it in comparison between different types of players of differening economic factors or even time? They are innumerable in their multitudes of varients and cannot be categorized with a sweeping brush.
When we are considering the player experience from this lens we're only taking into consideration base assumptions and generalizations based off negative player experience. It doesn't represent the gameplay loop of it entirely. It isn't a litmus test we can use to gauge player experience or engagement. Even negative experiences are part of a social structure in a MMO and play important roles in how communities and players deal with these hurdles. They are naturally formed and developed. How can one say it doesn't work when there are no indicators of it not working as intended - you cannot separate a game from negative experiences and leave only good ones.
When you try and separate PvP from the world the only two game states are FF14 and Modern WoW. FF14 which to recently and some may still agree has a lackluster PvP experience and Modern WoW has such a stigma separating high end PvE and PvP that the general PvP experience suffers for it.
Wilderness has had it's share of troubles but time and again majority player base consensus rules it to be a main stay feature and in fact the game suffered at any changes that altered it. Much like EVE a PVP zone nullsec has lead to vast player made histories and famous wars/battles. So there is more to show that the game as it stands is better with these zones than without.
@@NotTheWheel look at the drop off rate of any popular game. A good 30% of gamers never make it past a tutorial
@@internetbard4384 That is literally a josh callum talking point and not applicable to this circumstance. That's using one metric to prove something completely different. New players on tutorial island won't even be able to make it to the wilderness their first session.
As far as I'm concerned the wilderness is far and away the worst part of runescape and honestly every time I reach some sort of point where I feel like I need to go into for something I seriously consider just quitting. In fact sometimes I do. It really sucks that I have to either not experience/obtain some pve content (most specifically the mage capes - which tilts me off the face of the earth as theres no non-wildy equivalent) or spend hours having my time wasted as I am continuously killed over and over by people who I have no desire to fight and are using accounts specifically designed to fuck me.
I'm ok not having the mage cape, what saps the fun for me is when everyone in the community tells me that my own decision is wrong.. And it happens a lot.. Every damn time I pull a magic staff out.. 'Why don't you just go get the cape?'.. 'It's not that hard'... 'Dont be such a wimp'....
I wonder why I haven't played in months...
PvP is now opt-in.
@@thorscape3879 we're talking OSRS, not RS3.
@@mierkov5204 I didn't watch the stream so I didn't know. They only say RS in the video not OSRS or RS3.
The question boils down to convincing people who have jobs or other obligations that prevents them from playign as much... to agree to become literal kill-fodder for high-investment players who then also gets to take your shit that you've worked hard for the past weeks to get.
The incentive you need for that is ... immense. Maybe even impossible.
It's an issue of bracketing really.
If there was a system that either heavily dissuaded or completely prevented these no-life PVPers from killing greenhorns and instead pitted them against others of their own kind (like how brackets and ranks work in most PVP games) then the issue wouldn't be as bad.
Yes smurfs exist, but that's a lot harder to do in a n MMO where you need to spend ages to get anywhere. Not in League where you can just make another account.
Repeating an action the most and paying to do it faster if understandable. You're not learning new things are developing skills.
PVP shouldn't* work like this.
You should learn to get better with skill and knowledge. Paying for an unfair advantage is against the very idea.
If a person finds something enjoyable, they will do it with whatever time they have.
It needs an incentive for the no-lifers to protect the sheep from no-lifers who want to skin the sheep. Make it fun and profitable to play as a shepherd.
This is why you couldn't pay me to do this kind of PvP.
Smurfing in OSRS wasn't too hard I watched my cousin do it fairly quick. Made a new toon leveled up the combat skills he wanted bought green dhide and a poison dagger and then started wildy killing on his new lvl 40 pvp only toon
I personally *despise* forced PvP in games. Especially in the open world. Open world PvP is almost always "Who strikes first". As a non-runescape player, the wilderness sounds like a right nightmare. Locking very real progression behind unfair PvP that you can't train for beyond "Lose everything if you even try" is absolutely stupid. Progression from the wilderness (from what I gleaned from their conversation) is just going to cause an even larger gap in gear and skill, making it completely unfriendly to new players especially. It's also one of the reasons why I can't be fucked to play something like Black Desert Online. I quite enjoyed the combat in that game, but then I learned that there was forced PvP after level 50, and suddenly the game didn't seem at all appealing.
I find it kinda funny how Callum calls it "PK" and not PvP, because I think we all know there's very little PvP in ganking someone. At that point it is basically just a backstab. Ganking, and all content that allows it to happen, isn't really encouraging PvP. There's no skill in stabbing someone who's asleep.
I personally much prefer FFXIV's PvP. I play it for the fun of it, and if I get some cosmetic rewards or ranks along the way, great! One of my friends really wanted a cosmetic attire from PvP, but hated the PvP. He had to choose between hours of no fun, but getting his cosmetics, or he would value his time over a cosmetic. He chose the latter. He's still alive and well, and doesn't even regret missing out. If it becomes tied to progression, he wouldn't have had that choice. And adding losing items on top of that? I'd quit the game instantly. Fuck that.
"Open world PvP is almost always "Who strikes first"" Yeah that's runescape. If you're trying to make progress, your inventory is full of items specific to the work you are doing, and your armor almost certainly isn't optimised. I once got snared by a pker who appeared, while I was fighting a boss, in the time it took me to sneeze.. Used all my food and potions while trying to escape, but all his other snares landed too because he was a higher level so I just had to let him take my gear...
Once my friend got the drop he needed, I left that boss for good. Accepted that I'm never getting that item, just gotta throw dozens and dozens and dozens of extra hours into grinding instead :p
Here is an idea about PvP, What about if instead of loosing your inventory/gear, whenever you step into pvp area/arena you start making some passive income of sorts (or some loot collection in the area), that will increase based on time stayed in arena/kills or other factors and basically if you successfully leave area you can cash out or if you get killed you drop it and others can loot it.
That means you will not lose your main progression when you die but you still gain some reward if successful.
That reminds me a lot about the dark zones in TC: Division. Your main gear couldn't be taken by players if I remember correctly, but you had a goodie bag of stuff that you had that you could fill with stuff you got from the high level NPCs in the area. Other players could come across you and either work with you or try to kill you, taking your stuff from the goodie bag. Either that or wait until you try to extract your contaminated gear and then claim it since you're in a much more predictable location.
Unfortunately I don't think I've heard of a PvP looting system like this in any other game, either because Ubisoft has patented it and are extremely aggressive about that stuff or no-one else has thought it'd work, since while Division was good, it wasn't wildly successful.
Positive reward system. The only people who want negative reward systems are the top dogs and those who are friends with the top dogs, the bully squad, because they get to beat everyone up and take their stuff.
It was tried with bounty hunter and ect..
You know what happened?
Botted down to hell so bad jamflex had to shut it down
@@deividasma7343 hmm but in this case the failure was not with the system itself, but games own issue where it was unable to keep bots at bay.
anyhow my idea was that all these HC pvp ideas floating around should have additional reward/loss mechanic instead of punishing players for progress that was not gained through PVP. As I said earlier similar to what somebody above mentioned, have a pvp goodie bag that either spawns some special currency for survival/kills/looting and have that bag as reward/loss depending if you survive or not. This way it would not affect main progress and as Josh was saying you can actually jump back into action with minimal to no loss to your progress and keep learning on how to do better.
@@rnailo Trust me it will be botted down to hell.
If looting part touches PvE drops then every single npc will be botted down, if its killing each other again super easy to bot farm it
They first need to sort out their bot problems which will never happen in reality
LMS to this day has bots, not as many as before but still enough to ran into few in couple of rounds
On top there are plenty of safe combat minigames with quite nice rewards making your system ineffective
Also if wildy will be "safe" to pvp in with the goodie reward being the prize for the kills then what stops people from rolling in max gear stomping everyone with anything under their power level 80% of the time
There are 2 solutions:
#1. Remove wildy again and keep PvP worlds for pvp
#2. Fix the bot issue.
With how hard is for them to detect mobile bots its just not happening....
In mmos it's especially hard, you either make the gear not that important and all about skill. But then that means the reward is bad. Or you make gear important and steam roll over everything that doesn't have as good a gear as you.
In other games of this concept like Eacape from Tarkov, with the right amount of skill and luck you can kill the a player with the best gear in the game with a head shot. But mmos can't have that kind of situation and eill always fail because of this.
You got this exactly right! In tarkov there always feels like there is a chance. In RS/Albion not so much
tarkov is fucking dogshit cyka blatt bro trash
The advantage is just too stacked in favor of experienced and geared PvPers in MMOs. The slow combat facilitates predictable outcomes like a chess match, the lack of options outside of "outkill/heal your opponent" and "chain CC" is very binary and only gets better the more you do it, so newbies get absolutely crushed into the ground making it a terrible first experience, of which most never return to PvP.
so put headshots in mmos?
@@stetsons6364 sort of kind of. I can't imagine a working mmo system with for example melee headshots
Also another thought specifically directed at Josh and Callum: they both need to look into Planetside2 ... not as an example of _"How to build an MMO-FPS"_ because honestly it's completely **failed** as a shooter due to how poorly its Netcode + hitbox interactions can be EXPLOITED in infantry fights. But rather how the Vehicle vs. Vehicle _side-meta_ in it interacts because those organizational levels and "skill ceilings" aren't about face rolling or grinding, and they're beyond most "Hardcore" dedication you've seen in Halo or WOW arenas.
The unique dichotomy this presents, is that newer players could absolutely still participate in these Air and Ground squads and they could have a real impact on the outcomes. But if they wanted to stop dying entirely, (which is a HUGE incentive for everyone in online gaming), they had to have been playing for months or even years to retain all of the situational awareness and _TactiCOOL™_ muscle memory to be even with the tryhards.
i swear that every time any sort of discussion about hardcore pvp in wich your power depends on loot and you lose any amount of sayd loot on defeat i have to say that it is entirely flawed from the start. in any modern game when you lose something you "lose a life" and are sent back to the last checkpoint with the same power you had at that time even if you lost money and have to take it back, you don't lose the capabilities you have to try again, losing loot to a sweatlord who doesn't need it makes you lose that power to try again to recover whatever you lose and now what you lose to isn't only more powerfull agains you but also may have gone to fuck off somewhere else, there isn't any way to recover wharver you grinded until the dice smile upon you cause someone muged you when you where minding you own business.
and i have to repeat this, hcpvp is just a mugged in the streets simulation game, only mugged never mugging
The one point you are forgetting with this PVP talk is that it is a game and if you make a game like real life (taking a month or a year to build back from a loss) then yes folks are gonna say fudge it I am done.
they do say that to be fair , and you are correct , a certain type will like it but those are usually people with nothing else who play too much. I was one of them till i had to grow up
Time has never been a player issue in MMOs. People grind and raid for hours and hours. You chose to play a slow game when you decide to play an MMO. PvP is more of an experience problem. The experience is too punishing, humiliating, unrewarding, too difficult if newbies matched with the experienced. Most people who have a bad first experience will never return.
@@cattysplat Time is literally the reason for certain mechanics in MMOs, including P2W's popularity. I agree with the issues you presented for PvP, but it just comes down to one simple thing, some people have never and will never enjoy it. It's not ever going to be a fun experience for most players.
If I were making a game with item loss pvp I would take this approach: The PVP areas have high value resources. The only thing you lose in the PVP areas are the resources you collect there.
You don't lose your armor, you don't lose your weapons, you lose the things you've been collecting.
Reason being is that it provides incentive for people to fight back. In OSRS you can't fight back 9 times out of 10 because you didn't want to risk your armor and weapons and you left them in the bank. Then PVP becomes a game of cat and mouse.
If you're caught out, you're just going to die. And that really isn't PVP. It's only really fun for the cats. It isn't fun for the mice. Just imagine a PVP game where the meta for one of the opponents in any given interaction is to quickly log out of the game before any PVP can actually happen.
Not only that, but OSRS PVP is highly resource based. You need an inventory full potions, food, and runes and you simply can't carry all that in addition to your skilling tools and the resources you're collecting. The looting bag was a step in the right direction to address this, but I'm not sure it was enough.
What you suggest as a bad pvp meta is how I see games like dark souls and elden ring. If I engage with the combat, lag and poor anti-cheat will ensure I return to the bonfire, get invaded on my way back, and hand him two victories. Or I can Alt-f4 immediately, reboot and keep walking with no setback, no lost resources, and I force the invader into more loading screens. The worst part is this is vastly superior to engaging in the really bad pvp I can't otherwise refuse to engage with.
There is at least 1 mmorpg that did that.
It technically had consequences free pvp everywhere, with some dungeon/raid bosses able to summon players to protect them against the attacking pcs (so, pvp during boss fights).
And then in the latter parts of the game, a few things were added : a pvp championship, granting the winner a temporary uber weapon, and "treasures" (iirc, 3 different unique treasures) that gave access to uber powerful passives that you had to level up by going pk at specific times. Getting killed during that timing made you drop the treasure, but you could keep the passive skill (well, an inner skill, ie in that game the thing that determines your base stats, your max stats, and gives you a passive, but you can only have one active at any given time).
People can PK the pkers trying to pk the skillers tho, the wilderness is perfect, people are shitty
In Asheron's Call when you died you lost your technically most valuable items, the number depended on your level. So the meta was to just not sell lightweight expensive loot, and to keep enough of it in storage that you could restock a bunch of times. Once you lose all of it you'd be at risk so before that happened, you'd get your leveling gear out and go do some work. Also, there was a log-out thing like you mentioned, there was even a way to break the animation so you could be running, jump, and slide while logging, but it was risky because if they were fast enough you're helpless. It was not that big a deal because PvP was mostly a group effort if you were one of the good guys. Safety in numbers. And any time the bad guys came with their big guns, we'd call in ours. There was a civil war for our town caused by someone breaking the peace during a high-profile cross-alliance player wedding and dudes were coming from everywhere to fight the PKs who really committed and bound themselves to respawn there. There were spells and arrows flying all over town (projectiles didn't auto-hit) They took over the place and made it their stronghold, we made a new alliance and moved to a better more populated city.
@@slayerdark0 Honestly,, tying certain rewards to playing as a PvP "cop" who hunts down actual player-killers could work wonders for an ecosystem like this. Encourage PvPers to fight each other, and protect the PvE players who want to do quests. Could even give the cop players access to magic buffs like loot-protection, that would place a little safety bubble around a player's dropped items when they died, stopping other players from looting them. And allow the cops to cast this buff on "innocent" players, granting them a degree of safety from PvP.
Basically, make the protection from PvP player-driven, instead of systems-driven, and see what happens.
Engaging in PVP should reward PVP. There should be no PVE rewards for PVP. If PVP rewards are even remotely comparable to anything you need to succeed at PVE, you're only going to create more discourse between the two communities. PVP players will be more than happy to use PVE equipment to their advantage even if they have to engage in PVE content to get it, but PVE players will hate every second that they are forced to deal with another player that they don't want to.
Dark Souls/Elden Ring Invasions are a perfect example of this. PVE players are absolutely frothing at the mouth to shut down invasions because its not a mechanic they want to engage with, but are forced to if they wish to COOP.
If zergs weren't such a problem in MMOs with wide-scale PVP (ESO Cyrodil, Guild Wars WvW), it would be the perfect way to incentivize a primarily PvP MMO. Just look at Planet Side 2, it works fine, but FPS games translate better into this medium than fantasy 3rdPerson/TopDown games. The near-instant death of a gun and a grenade cuts down a zerg fast enough that it never becomes a problem, but in a fantasy game players want to have magic spectacles and long-winded lives.
Foxhole is another amazing example of a HC PVP MMO because it is a 100% player driven war. Everything, from making guns and uniforms and trauma kits in the capital, to having a player manually drive those guns to the many frontlines, are done for the sole purpose of assisting the PVP.
I actually love the pvp of the Dark Souls/ER games, but yeah, when you absolutely want to just play on your own and do the main stuff in the game, it becomes a chore to engage with every invader. Though in Dark Souls 3, I tend to do challenge runs online and its hilarious to see a person too immersed in the pvp scene get really confused while a half naked guy with a dagger is facing their meta build down with some form of resistance.
I've seen and ran across plenty of examples of PvP primary players not giving a damn about PvE content and just wanting to take the path of least resistance to get the rewards while just being miserable the whole time. They'll look for carries or just put in the absolute minimum effort and royally screw over group content just because they feel forced to be there.
Well actually the reason Planetside works isn't because of TTK of the team fighting them, it's Because friendly-fire and running each other over makes short work of any unskilled "Ball" of newbs.... just ask any New-Conglomerate main, lol, LMAO
There are already a wealth of MMOs with contained PVP experiences where the fun is in the PVP. If combat is fun, people will play it even if there is no reward. Runescape has no fun in it's combat (fight me), so nobody wants to PVP for any reason other than lording power, trolling or getting gear.
ESO has an interesting approach in the Imperial City. You earn a special currency through various activities in the area, particularly killing NPCs. If you die to another player, you lose half of what you are carrying of that currency to that player. You can go and put it in your bank at any time, but there is a bonus to what you get depending on how much you are carrying. That way you have good control over the risk you take, but there is still a reward for getting PVP kills, because you can hardly do anything without picking up at least a small amount of that currency.
You can use the currency to buy materials, set items and some other stuff, most of which can be sold to other players for gold, so there is an incentive to get those items, even if you don't need them yourself, and there is a way to get them without engaging in PVP at all.
Unfortunately, of the different PVP formats in ESO that is the least populated one.
Problem is that IC is full of gank builds and you need a big group if you want to farm a good amount of the things.
Please do a "Worst MMO" episode for Albion Online. 🙏🙏🙏🙏 The community is starving for some content on the game
I loved pvp when I was younger and it had nothing to do with rewards, but pvp itself.
Only reward was getting out as winner, idk why pvp needs to be forced by some ridiculous rewards.
If anything it puts pressure on pvp aspect , or even worse forces people who do not want to participate into pvp and such situations, where they are forced in such unwanted situations.
The only players who will ever engage in "Hardcore PvP" are either people who are forced to for PvE purposes (a PvE'er having to jump the Wildy Wall to mine an ore or slay a creature), and the PvP player who wants to ruin the experience for PvE players. At least in Runescape, if people want to PvP for "skill" and to win legitimate fights, that's what the Duel Arena is for.
That's why Hardcore PvP games don't work. There will ALWAYS be more wolves than sheep, it's just how it is. There will ALWAYS be someone waiting for that PvE'er who only has an adamant pickaxe and like three pieces of ore on them.
I believe the solution is to...just allow players to select if they want to engage in high-risk content. Give an option for PvE players to be invisible to the PvPers, and restrict their ability to collect items to ONLY what they themselves drop. (This would stop scavengers from having free reign over items not picked up by the killers, since to get them you'd have to keep the pvp flag on)
Or, if you want to encourage everyone to PvP in Wildy, give everyone the same set of armor so everyone's equal, have some level of investment that scales with your current reward, and actively reward players for participating in the content. (Like...have a toll bridge with a changing room, you pay a certain amount of gold based on your number of kills, then you enter the wildy with a preselected set of armor, food, and your initial buy-in on your person. PvPers can either risk going for fresh kills and inflate their risk, or focus on valuable kills and spare the PvE'ers, who might just be there to do one task or something.
Even in PVP MUDs back in the heyday of dialup, the fiercest player vs player battles were usually about level caps, hangup penalties, drop pct levels or which class' skills or spells needed nerfing lol
Haha!
The muds I played allowed say a lvl 100 to stand a chance against a lvl 200 (they would lose, but had enough health to run off).
I havent played any of these pvp mmporgs they are talking about, so not sure if the same thing happens there, only wow where someone at maxlvl-1 gets one-shot more or less.
So this mud I played in middle school was dominated by rangers and ninjas and stuff, everybody wanted highest crit/backstab dmg
So me, my two wigger bros from across town, my girlfriend and my girlfriends sister said f it and made weird looking cats with odd race/class combos... 1) we seemed unworthy of combat from the meta-humping top list cats and 2) we were all made out of intensely annoying stuff to fight
I made a witchunter because the mage guys were brutal... didn't even have to fight them, because theyd blow their mana doing grand total of 0 damage to me, realize I had 5x their hp + 5-6x damage abil in simple combat in any kind of melee + armor class of a f'n Sherman tank while they're wearing some kinda magical cloak and slippers. They'd bounce faster than one of Donald trump's personal checks 😂
My girlfriend and her sister cracked us tf up with their Bards though 😆 they're obviously spell up specialists, but since nobody on there played bard nobody remembered they were also complete thieves beneath... they'd bump rob everyone walking through town and get random junk in amounts way greater than you'd collect from 30% drop rate pvp. Might be meh. Might be TWO CLASSES UNIQUE (limit 1 per realm) GREATEST WEAPONS IN AN HOUR?! Holy crap Katie, way to spam yo telemate macros lol
And the wigger Bois were a thief and a warrior (lowest xp charts) who learned through trial and error how to break anyone's scripts and stack rooms like Wiseau level disaster artists 😂
"WHO UNLEASHED THE BANSHEE ON MY SCRIPT?"
"ey yo, she singin' me some Fugees bruh- stfu" 😂😂😂
PvP in MMOs sucks in general. I've played MMOs since Everquest and a speckling of PvP throughout my tenure. From what I gather there are 3 types of people who do PvP:
--People who PvP for the sport of it, who don't mind challenging an equal who has equal access to the same skills/gear, normally because they have the wherewithal to calculate the most efficient/best approach and test it accordingly.
These people are good when isolated by themselves (versus themselves), but the core issue is that the reward is usually something that is outside the fair arena they already play in (like getting a PVE item for PVP success. Unwanted. Unutilized.). If they end up beating their opponent, then they're only confirming the suspicions that they were the best to begin with. If they lose, they will keep trying to "solve the puzzle" of their approach or skill gaps in game play. This self refinement via win/lose is what engages these types of people to the gameplay and puts them in their own category.
This leads to weird issues, since this is a closed loop the "rewards" that don't really matter beyond pride. And because it is normally a closed loop (equal footing for all participants) that these people are drawn to, there is a "best build" or "best rotation" or "best approach" in the game. There is a point where everything becomes quantified and exactified and min/maxed to such a degree that the competitive spirit falls apart. Its no longer a game of skill (and if it is, its limited and niche), its who starts their rotation first, or engages first, or approaches first. It ends up in many mirror matches and boring samey-ness. More often than not a coin flip, and that is never satisfying.
Its the same reason you have games that have "seasons" or "expansions" on content to spice up the exchange. Its why even games like Street Fighter, and League of Legends create new rulesets or redefine old characters. It is to keep engagement high knowing that the data will inevitably be parsed and acted on. In MMOs the only thing they can do is add RNG/grind to the gear and stats, where the knowledge of opponent potential is hidden, to make it "interesting", which leads to the next type of PvP'er
-- People who PvP for the sense of domination. Although superficially similar in the vein of PvPing for sport, they are completely different. Their focus is also to win, but they care nothing about the rules or brackets of the game. They don't care if they're level 100 versus your level 1, if you're a 5 year old and they're a 40 year old man, or if you have no interest in fighting at all. For them, it is a victory of the kill. They are in many ways the antithesis of the PvP for Sport, only in that they don't seek equal footing for kills. *They want to be the Bully,* and MMOs that provide stat/gear advantages provide just that. Exacerbated by pay to win formats.
These people often clash with the aforementioned PvP'er for sport, because although they have advantages in gear and stats, many of these types of people lack the skills and reflexes to go toe-to-toe with those who have the skill to strategize a win versus their opponent. This, however, is also contingent on the game's PvP philosophy. If the game cares about fairness, then your playerbase will have far less Bully PvP'ers, and a lot more Sport PvP'ers, and vice versa. It is why Pay to Win PvP games are riddled with Bully PvP'ers. Also games that force PvP against lower skilled/disinterested PvE opponents are filled with Bully PvP'ers. After all, Bully PvP'ers care only about the number of kills, not the quality of their opponent.
There can be a straddling of these two categories, but generally speaking they're going to primarily fall into one or the other. It really just depends on how the player interacts with the last category;
-- People who PvP for fun/forced. These people aren't really interested in Player versus Player for the competitive aspect at all. Either they're goofy and just want to do dumb things to make people laugh, or are forced into it by the MMO's attempt at meshing PvP and PvE together in some awkward overlapping system. These Fun PVP'ers are often the wildcard of interactions, and in my opinion, are what make PvP the most interesting. They aren't worried about prestige, and simply enjoy doing what they do. I feel worse for the PvE'ers who are forced into PvP in any capacity, because their motivation comes from an entirely different place. These types of players are cooperative players who enjoy tackling the Bosses of MMOs together with friends, forming bonds and socializing and growing stronger because of it. Fighting against other people is the last thing they want to do.
Unfortunately it is the last category that determines the viability of your PvP aspect of MMOs. When PvE players say "enough is enough" or when Fun PvPers can no longer have fun due to being killed so quickly, they start to quit off. This has a cascade effect where the Bully PvP'ers have to fight other Bully PvP'ers until the more skillful (or whale, depend on MMO) Bully PvPers remain versus the actual Sport PvP'ers. From there (Depending on MMO design), the Bully PvPers will quit/die off as gear and items normalize. Leading to Sport PvPers being the only ones left. And when Min/Maxing is reduced to gear and levels, the PvP becomes bland and uninteresting to them and your PvP component is dead.
And that, my friends, is why PvP sucks in MMOs. Its antithetical to what MMORPGs originally were. They were social games for people who enjoy interactions of all types. Though there were components of competition, they were meant to be enjoyed leisurely. It wasn't a race, it was simply a place. A place you'd go to escape the troubles of your life. Creating a family of friends in a digital space.
Bang on. I'm number 3, and number 2 is the reason I actively avoid the wilderness - drop all wildy clues, no mage cape, etc etc...
I have the option not to engage with those players, so I take that option. I don't want to give them the satisfaction, and that behavior annoys me more than others - the same way the sound of chewing might annoy you more than me.
If my only choice is 'Let them bully you, or don't go there' I will always pick 'don't go there'.
I already get enough fun drained by people insisting that I get mage cape if I want to join them on raids, put too much content in the wilderness and I won't even be welcome in the game... Why would I keep playing?
Here's where I come after years and years of MMO'ing: PvP shouldn't be a thing inside PvE games. It always messes with fun/balance and eventually everything becomes homogenized muck. Every MMO goes through this. WoW's arenas would have been perfect for it existing outside the game. Heck even battlegrounds could be its own thing. But nope, PvP will always end up with changing a world/class/spell/item... because it gets 'abused'/'used cleverly'.
You mean pve shouldn't be a thing in my pvp mmo.
This. Anything that has both pvp and pve will have to make compromises for one or the other.
Are you going to balance so that 'skill expression' (god, I hate that term) is a priority, chopping out the potentially broken or vastly suboptimal choices for pvp? Or are you going to fulfill the pve fantasy, throwing off balance for having each base choice actually be meaningful?
I like the way ffxiv does it even though they haven’t completely succeeded yet. They have pvp but it is totally disconnected from the pve experience to the extent that even the skills change for the classes. I think it’s an interesting path to take though, two separate game modes in the same game.
@@CrispAndBurned think ghostcrawler (the lead systemdesigner for riots mmo) said they might do something similar. Where abilities between pvp and pve are different. Cus its easier to balance them separately.
@@TheDwagonHD I think they will have more pressure than most to have good pvp in their mmo so tentatively hopeful they figure out something fun
I was reading about how, in British colonial India, the rulers decided they wanted fewer cobras on the city streets. So they implemented a reward for turning in dead cobras. Quickly people began breeding cobras to turn in for a profit. When the leaders figured out this was happening, they ended the reward program and thousands of captive bred cobras were released into the city, resulting in more cobras then before the program. This type of decisionmaking happens with game devs so often it's embarrassing.
PvP in an MMORPG has to serve a specific purpose. It has to be designed into the game to serve a role for the players that they can agree with. EVE Online makes sure all players know that PvP is a constant, thus turning players into the mobs...which is why the community attracts a certain type and stays constant but eternally small.
I am not a fan of PvP unless it serves an in-game, in-story purpose. Period.
Narrative pvp kinda sounds interesting in concept, maybe like whoever wins gets to influence the ongoing storyline or the ending if both players are in a group and had to fight each other if both disagree on their choices or it’s faction pvp on a wide or small scale (if the mmo or online rpg has choice and consequences in the storyline). Like how the tabletop rpg dungeons and dragons rather handles pvp in a more “narrative” sense, not mechanically.
DND is not designed with pvp in mind, purely a cooperative pve experience, pretty much the same thing with mmos or online rpgs but added pvp as an afterthought in themepark mmos. I find this pvp concept matter in storytelling or narrative very interesting to do if it can be done right.
Nobody wants to get treated like a mob though. If anything it just makes the game about risk aversion. Everyone will be looking to protect what's theirs whilst limiting other's ability to take that away. In some ways this makes it pay to win, because those who can afford to multi box, who can afford to take losses, which allows them to take more risks, which gives them more rewards when they succeed.
@@xaptor8685 PvP in tabletop or D&D is extremely rare however (except in Paranoia), and the player pool is limited to the group (roughly 4-6 people). In an MMO, that group is hundreds if not thousands, all wanting to be the main characters of their own stories. And someone HAS to lose. If you go hardcore and have loss in combat, you may see a large section of your population disappear if they cannot advance their story due to losing PvP matches.
@@cattysplat This is true, which is a danger in PvP MMORPGs. You also have to watch for those that enjoy playing the spoiler, using PvP to troll other players and disrupt their games for their own enjoyment. I feel factional-based PvP can be fine if carefully monitored, given purpose and benefits, but arranged in such a way that you can still play without it.
Yes. And I don't really want match making - I want organic PvP with appropriate risk for a PK'er provided by Anti-PK'ers.
1:32 This is the line of logic that's killing MMOs. The idea of "value' coming from stuff you get rather than the experience of the game itself.
I remember in WoW a few expansions ago, part of the legendary item questline involved winning queued PvP. the legendary item was essentially required for PvE endgame content due to it's extremely high item level. This caused a lot of discontent for both PvE and PvP, because now the PvE-focused players were forced into a mode they had no interest in, no gear for, and basically just had to grind it until they'd got the required number of wins. So they didn't enjoy it. meanwhile the PvP'ers found their matches and teams flooded with PvE'ers who had no PvP gear, no experience, no interest, and were often just afk'ing in the hope that the team would win without them.
There has also been times where the best-in-slot for PvP items have been found in raids, which caused the same effect in reverse and left pug groups running raids unhappy. Forcing those 2 groups together has pretty much always left both groups unhappy
I've played a lot of MMO PvP over the years, and only a couple cases have stood out as actually fun in the long run:
SWTOR - I remember starfighter PvP being decent (if a little weird), and for the ground game the early level brackets were great. In both cases the playing field was always relatively level, with relatively few abilities to manage for a focused experience, and clear potential to outplay rather than just out-stat your opponents. No loss of progress, only rewards. The biggest flaw was the vestigial progression systems that made the game unfriendly to those just entering the mode or bracket, tilting things in favor of those at the top end.
FFXIV - I've only played the post-revamp Crystalline Conflict PvP mode, and it feels like someone looked at what makes PvP fun and actually designed everything around that from the start. 100% equalized stats, fine-tuned lists of abilities and effects, and reasonable outplay potential in a mode that can be run as often as you like with no risk of loss. Fun is the entire point. Early SWTOR PvP brackets were still more fun and varied, but FFXIV seems to be on the right track (if still rough around the edges in terms of its matchmaking systems).
Games like ARK or BDO or even old EQ2 that penalize you for losing in PvP heavily rely on that loss penalty to encourage PvPers to engage more with the grindy core progression elements of the game, and rely in part on an unhealthy sense of joy in inflicting that penalty upon others to encourage people to PvP.
I love PvP in MMORPGs. Used to play Warhammer Online for that reason. The big thing why I hate the „lose stuff on death“ mechanic, is because it forces me to do less PvP.
Gear is usually gained via PvE or Crafting. So I have to grind content I don‘t care about, everytime I want to do the Content I do care about.
Fuck that. I wanna grind my Gear once and then be done with it, so I can enjoy fighting others for the rest of the time
pushing people to wildy bosses wont work at all when they do that new update, me and everyone else doing pve will just get it changed right back or they will put the items on something else. THe only way to revive pvp is make it accessible, make a way for new players to train and practice without losing all their stuff then when they get comfortable they can go pvp. I used to play private servers back in the day to practice because i knew i wasnt really risking, im not gonna get clapped 24/7, etc. the reason pvp is dead is because it cant entice new players, its kinda a shadow activity a new player wont even know about it for awhile until told, and when they do go pvp its only sweaties and just get destroyed
There are some game design options that are generally mutually exclusive. And sadly I think that forced pvp in a mainly pve/non-combat game is one of them. Asymmetric PvP is an especially tough sell because it relies on their being more people who enjoy being hunted than their are hunters, but well, as another commenter so well put it "Too many Wolves. Not enough sheep."
The part of me that wants the nostalgia of "The scary wilderness PKers" of Runescape doesn't want it to go, but the critical part feels it causes more negative experiences than positive ones. (But PVP worlds should stay, they're cool.)
The wilderness is such a dumb idea. If you're skilling you're at such an inherent disadvantage. Your gear isn't prepped for fighting, your inventory can't be anywhere near good enough for a real fight, and the aggressor will always have the drop on you. It's not fair, it's only fun for the PKers, it's horrifically designed.
and yet the PKers thrive in this environment somehow even though all the same risks apply to them. Risk/Reward. You don't HAVE to go to the wilderness. It's a self contained area.
@@NotTheWheel I think you mean gankers. did you even read op's comment?
by default the skiller has a worse inventory than the ganker, since the skill needs space for what they collect, defensive gear and weapons if they bring it, their skilling gear, then you need food if you want to fight, potions, etc. so they already start at a disadvantage, the ganker will get the first attack on them 99% of the time because the skiller isn't going to be going around attacking every person who looks like they might be a pvper.
with all that disadvantage, why would they bring anything more than the absolute minimum and cheapest gear they can to skill, and skill alone? now they have absolutely no chance of winning and are just hoping they don't get killed before they get to the bank.
and remember, there are clues that you need to go into the wildy for. the abyss is pretty much the best RC training and requires going into the wildy. the entire wildy's PVP design is basically centered around luring in sheep for wolves to kill, which is generally only fun for 1 party.
@@NotTheWheel same risks? They’re prepped and geared for fights. It’s not the same at all.
@@NotTheWheel so how do pvmers get the mage cape they need for pvming?
@@Achonas I used PKer because that's what the OP used??? AND it's the common term that people use in Runescape. So like who didn't read the comment exactly now?
Darkfall Online did this pretty well. Anyone that set out to actually PVP was decked out in scale armor (best armor made with iron), there were higher tiers, but those required more rare resources. As the game was also NOT balanced around 1v1 combat but massive groups of 50+, having a 5% advantage doesn't necessarily tip the balance in your favour. And this is what the gear did perfectly.
There was even a even lower set of gear you could use which was simply accepted as PVP gear.
As a guild, we actually setup our personal and guild banks with "PVP bags". People in the guild with professions would contribute resources and such and the guild management prepared PVP bags. In this PVP bag was all the expected PVP gear. Next to that was the siege bags (had other gear necessary to properly damage buildings).
This allowed anyone in the guild to quickly re-equip and join the fight again.
I wanted that game to work so badly. One of the guys who made it was in my alliance on Asheron's Call's full PvP server and a lot of the inspiration came from there I think when AC 2 was such a flop our hopes were squashed so they did it themselves. My biggest problem with Darkfall was the difficulty of the combat, extremely slow progression, and the fact that the best way to level was to buy some gold online, use it for components, then go sit on a rock and cast the same spell on the same mob for hours.
@@Matemo-rf4xz The "skill" grind was obviously intentional for the longevity of the game but almost everyone kept the game running overnight and standing at the bloodwall (so that allies can hit you for skill gain). Same for the infinite swim bug to gain strength.
The game worked because of the forums and the drama among the guilds. It was therefore awesome to fight it out with 100s if not 1000's of people at the same time.
I was part of the Coalition of the Chilling (Exile Corps), and the war against Hyperion Kingdom will forever a gaming highlight.
People love the fantasy of beating up others and taking their stuff but they don't love the fantasy of getting beaten up and losing their stuff.
2:50 That is exactly why Eve Online works.
Going back to where you were only requires money that you don't lose (the time it takes to purchase and mod a new ship is relatively small), and the game makes it really clear that you are going to lose ships (if you have done the tutorial quests).
I think one of my favorite PvP experiences was in The Division in The Dark Zone. You go in with your gear to do some PvEvP to collect gear to extract, and said extraction could be interupted by other players. During your exploration you can gather keys which allow you to unlock chests for guaranteed "high end" loot for your level. You can get these keys via killing mobs or killing players, and the only thing you lose when you die was some zone specific experience, x number of keys, and whatever "contaminated gear" you had collected and not extracted yet.
This allowed you to be able to gear up quickly with the risk of being killed and lose that loot, but once you extracted it then it was yours. If you die, you simply go back to a checkpoint with all of your equipped gear and either try again or go back to the normal area for regular PvE content. Personally one of my favorite PvP experiences.
PvP is a hard sell to MMO players straight from the start. Firstly most MMOs are sold on the PvE experience, big bosses, loot drops, exploration and cooperation. Second is teaching players to PvP, you are PvEing immediately from the noob zone, there is never any reason to stop PvEing to PvP unless you want to slow progress, PvE is incredibly easy and requires very little practise to beat most monsters with only endgame raiding requiring full skill usage and understanding of your class, PvP is a huge uphill hurdle to learn about every class, spec and meta since anyone could be your opponent. Thirdly PvP is a competitive experience, most people are not competitive, most people hate losing, most people hate being made to feel stupid and most people especially don't like to get bullied for their lack of skills, you will experience all of this and more in your first PvP match, most will try it once and never return from the bad experience. People not feeling welcome is the number 1 reason for any service or experience failing, they will leave, go elsewhere and tell others not to, PvP needs matchmaking, tutorials and fundamentally the PvP community has to be willing to teach, rather than stomp all over, the new players.
would say that i did find so many bad players in FF14 that even main quest dungeon arent easy. so yeah... people overestimate the amount of bad players because of elitism and gatekeeping. I myself am not that good, but some of my friend tells me often people are basically 3 times worse than I am.
@@charlestrudel8308 the average player is a lot worse than you expect.
@@michaelrondon5472 thats the point, meaning even more that pvp just need to accept this will neer be as popular as these people want.
The main issue is that it doesn't matter how good someone is at something if they don't enjoy it. I don't enjoy PvP, I don't do it. I don't need to practice or put in work or be taught because I don't want to learn it. Same with raids, I find them tedious and boring, and I'm decent at them. I also don't want to be locked into the meta, which you need to do in order to do raids and PvP unless you want to end up getting yelled at and kicked or die.
I want to play what I want to play and no matter how amazing a game system is if I don't enjoy it I don't want to do it. The myth that better PvP will bring in PvE players is just that, a myth. All you've done is make players leave your game because they don't want to be forced.
Sounds like a most hardcore PvP players are just sociopaths with a massive gambling addiction. LOL!
The problem with PVP is the FIRST thing tryhards do is research the best build, gear, skill set, order of attack. No skill at that point. No style.
I think hardcore pvp players and normal people don't see the same thing when they think of pvp. Us normies think of it as competition. That's why fairness is important to us.
But the hardcore pvp:er is not a competitor, they are a bandit. Take what you can from whomever you can take it from, sucks to be you.
This is of course not gonna appeal to many others. Not everyone wants to be the predator, but nobody wants to be the prey. People don't put effort into things for them to become the content for others. To make it work as best as it can work you have to build all systems around the pvp, there can't be separation within the game for people to take on a non pvp role. People who don't like pvp all that much but like the gathering and crafting and slow building of their character are gonna get really frustrated and complain when that gets impeded so you have to prevent them from walking down that path for more than half a step.
You're not gonna convince someone about the sensibility of your position when their objectives are diametrically opposed to yours.
Hardcore pvp = a toxic wasteland that only appeals to the 1%, with near zero chance of the game succeeding past it being a niche.
It's why I don't play Sea of Thieves especially solo, it's not proper hardcore of course, but it's still entirely possible to lose hours of progress to a PvP encounter and just feels bad man.
It's also notable that these games that do have this "hardcore gaming experience" often have systems to combat exactly what you're describing here.
In Escape From Tarkov, sure you lose loot on death, and it can be frustrating, but you get to do free "scav raids" periodically, which allow you to get gear, and money with no personal investment, and in my experience, surviving a scav raid is more than enough to regear my character. Because of this it takes literally 10 minutes to regear. Also, almost nobody uses gear that is difficult to obtain. If it can't be bought from npc traders, or is not available on the auction house, people just don't really run it, so a decked out AK, or SKS with some decent armor is basically that game's "green dragon hide and rune crossbow" because those kinds of items can be easily purchased from traders. Very, very few players run level 6 armor and non-flea market tradable ammo. For as much as people say that game is hard to play, my experience as a pretty unexceptional player is that you basically have to try to go broke.
Rust also allows you to have bases where you can more or less safely store things, and which require a massive investment and risk to break open once they're built. Sure, it's frustrating to lose your fat-ass launch site run to another squad, but if you can get it behind some garage doors you're almost impervious to losing it short of someone spending 6 hours farming sulfur to blow your base open.
Also, both of those games wipe progress regularly, and players in those games mostly enjoy the progress wipe precisely because the game stops being fun once you can run any gear you want in EFT, or once every group is just roof camping with LRs on a dragon-esque mountain of loot in their 7 floor external tc protected compounds in Rust.
Kinda makes me think that even the people who like "hardcore pvp" looting systems don't actually like them in their purest state.
Josh, 'Old' Neverwinter was a game on AOL, back in 1991.
All bets are off when you get jumped by five guys, too.
PVP brings out the worst in people. Does not matter how good you are, if you are playing against hackers.
Josh: When you lose a ship on Eve online-
Callum: SPREADSHEET COLLAPSES....
😂😭
Maybe a game should have *special shop* in where you could get good/better items/gear for somekind of aquired tokens.
Those tokens would be aquired in something like this:
PVP(with consent/duel invite) - You win you get lets say 10 tokens. If you lose you still get tokens BUT only 1-2.
PVP(player killing out in a world - just straight attacking) if you kill a player you get 1 token. Fun but not really worth the hassel.
Partying(creating a party with a player and leveling together) after some time being in a party you get 10-20 tokens and it acumulates over time.
Something like this might work.
Ofc you need to work out the details:
- How much items cost in that *special shop* so it will not be TOO EASY or TOO HARD to get.
- Somekind of AFK or other protection from fake partying only to obtain tokens without doing anything ect.
...
IMO this would push a game to have a rewarding system to PARTY and PVP so there would be somekind of drive to do those interactions with other players.
I'll say this: people who want open world/forced/hardcore pvp in MMOs or pvp where you risk losing something to gank people who aren't pvp-oriented are domesticated sociopaths. Their whole mentality and the fact that they derive pleasure from the other person losing something is screwed up. I'm glad they can have their own quarantined zones, but I don't want to be anywhere near them, and I refuse to play any game that allows them to thrive.
Josh later on turned out to be the guy that created the game in sword art online, forcing people to stay in a hc pvp mmorpg just to prove the point that some people will rather quit their existence than playing that shit.
Josh is Kayaba 😂
I think if they were to do a HC PVP MMO, it would have to be done something similar to a Roguelite, as opposed to the Roguelike it currently is. You still lose THAT gear, but each success you make before dying makes it easier to get back to the point you were prior to death, as well as giving you more options/variety the next time around.
Like each death it counts up your successes and gives you points you can spend on gear/perks/stats to start over again, so its not right back to where you were, but you aren't back at step 1 all over.
u mean like albion online?
Right but wouldn't that make actual new players have an even harder time getting into the game since the whole idea of being reset doesn't *actually* reset you?
Anyone who's experienced and dies will have far more than the average newbie, meaning the newbies are still fucked and will easily be put off (either that, or it's balanced in a way to allow real newbies to still manage a kill on restarted players, which invalidates the boost you get on your restart, and may also turn away said experienced players because they can still be killed by someone who knows barely anything about the game with barely any to no loot).
The issue resides in the fact that they'd be making it far too easy for people to give up on the game, or far too easy to be the only exclusive "good" players in the game (good being contextual, and probably based off of a first come first serve loot reward thing (and a desire to dominate the other players with their lucky early start) instead of actual skill or game knowledge, which once again invalidates the effort put in by anyone who's actually good at the game)
@@moosecannibal8224 That would depend entirely on exactly how the progression is handled in terms of gear power. It's already kinda been established (if you saw Joshs vid on this topic from a while back) that you cant really use traditional character progression anyway. Either way, my suggestion was more specifically to do with the issue of losing everything over and over, less so as a one-size-fits-all to fixes to every struggle making a HC PVP MMO would bring.
So many other hurdles to overcome, after all.
The best solution to Josh's conundrum I can think off, that introduces risk and reward for PVP without introducing player sacrifice is to make victory your only means of continuing. Using runescape as a base, imagine if you weren't allowed to bring food with you when you flag yourself for pvp, yet every time you kill someone rather than dropping their equipment the player drops food. Fighting becomes rewarding simply because it is what allows you to keep fighting, if you die rather than loosing items, you're simply kicked back to Lumbrage and have to "walk-of-shame" your way back into the wilderness to try again.
You're wrong on the EVE example. It's the same situation that you described for OSRS. You said that PvP works in OSRS because people don't take things into the wilderness that they can't afford to lose. This is the exact same scenario in EVE. The first message every veteran will tell a new player in EVE is to never fly what you can't afford to lose. That is a crucial component to surviving day-to-day life in EVE, both PvP and PvE included.
Ships are not items and should not be considered the same as an item. Buying a ship in EVE is more like buying a life in Contra or some other game. The ship gives you the ability to play as a certain class for a bit and you may survive a few encounters with it but at some point you're probably going to lose it. That is much more likely in PvP. In a 1v1 scenario, assuming the matchup is equal, you have a 50% chance to lose your ship. In 2v2 that increases to a 75% chance to lose your ship since each side will focus fire one target on the other side and that target is almost certainly going to die regardless of which side wins the encounter.
Never fly what you can't afford to lose.
Nobody actually likes full loot hard core PVP MMORPGs
They like the fantasy of it, they like the idea of removing another player's hard work from the game, but the moment it's their own progress they suddenly don't like it anymore. It's entirely schadenfreude, and the only part of it that isn't is the technical possibility that you could skip the grind to obtain a piece of better gear (which isn't actually possible because the person with better gear will win).
The reality that game devs have discovered is that nobody actually wants what some people say they want, everybody wants a game like skyrim, where every other player is in the game to be easily killed and looted. Nobody wants those other players to kill and loot them.
13:50 - I completely disagree, no content should be locked behind PvP walls. As you guys say, a large number of players will never do any PvP content, but like- at the end of the day, the PvP is the lesser stuff. Most people pick up an MMO to play the quests with their friends, or to defeat powerful bosses, etc. Most people don’t play them with the intention of doing the PvP content. Let’s look at ESO for a second here, that game has Cyrodiil, which is a huge always-on PvP zone. Surprise surprise, most of the people who go there nowadays are just there to grab the collectables and then get out quickly, because unless you have around 15 PvP-ready friends with you, you’re just gonna get completely ganked by the 5-10 squads of players who do *live* on that PvP content. I’m not saying that nobody does PvP content in MMOs because if that was true, companies would stop adding it to their games. What i’m saying is that if you have a zone in which PvP is mandatory, you shouldn’t place important stuff there (such as Skyshards and Dark Anchors in ESO), because most players don’t like the idea of being ganked when they don’t want to PvP. It should *always* be opt-in, unless the zone is solely just for the PvP squads to fight each other. If you wanted to throw in a few cosmetic items for them, then that would be acceptable if they aren’t the only good cosmetics in the game, but nobody should be told “tough crap” just because they want to unlock all the Skyshards, Dark Anchors, etc without being ganked.
The anchors are especially important here, because the entire zone is pretty much told if you’re at an anchor location and you then have to fight enemies there for 5-10 minutes without leaving. It’s like saying “hey everyone, come kill me”
4:19 why does it says ENCE over Josh?
As a non pvper i hate games that lock certain things behind pvp, if one of the reasons i quited GW2, legendary weapons besides massive grind for mats (didn't wanted buy since it feels less rewarding) i also had to do world vs world for that stupid axe, think it was called Proof of battle or something like that, i tried it a few times, got ganked every time, tried also follow groups, or try stay with other ppl, still got floored, got annoyed, got pissed, so ye...was like no ty legendary weapon, so i did my legendary raids gear. Anyhow, instead of locking things behind pvp, why not give an alternative to the pvers, like u want some pickaxe either do pvp or maybe, dunno, mine 10000 iron ore or whatever ore, or do a quest line that has u mine some stuff, or some achievements, something like that, what i am saying is, give pvers a way to get that item they saw at some dude and liked it but is locked under pvp, this way will also avoid ppl that can't and hate pvp, but they have to pvp, they get frustrated, they also ruin other ppl matches that maybe try rank up, locking stuff behind pvp for pvers that hate pvp is like too much conditioning and for me, personally i play games to relax and have fun, pvp is no fun and not relaxing at all...just my 2 cent :)
You've really only described a fundamental flaw in how gear systems work in most mmo's. Using Eve as an example, we used to have multiples of the ship we used in pvp so we could just jump right back in. Same in Albion, I keep many sets of the same gear so that I can get right back in. Most other mmo's don't have inventory and gearing systems that make that possible so the "average" player cant appreciate HC pvp.
Games need to get rid of the Sword of Uberness phenom and full loot work. DayZ for example, theres no Sword of Uberness, you loot and store and build up a cache and if you die you grab a new set and get right back in.
This, plus, your killers don't get everything when you die, just maybe half IF they're lucky
@@lordfarquard52 some combination is probably the answer, however I like full loot. Eve though doesn't have full loot as things trash when you die.
Yes I used to play a PvP game like this called Neocron back in the day, everything was shop bought or player crafted, you dropped items on death, but none of it was particularly valuable. Then they started adding rare items, then super rare items, then epic questlines with huge rewards at the end. When people died and lost these rare and time consuming items, they quit the game. Inevitably those who invested the most time and lost the best items also quit, then the game died.
What happens when you die and run out of replacement sets, and then get killed repeatedly trying to gather stuff to replace it by people with full sets. Or if you're new and don't have a big stash/ in game wallet to replace losses with?
@@autumndawn9836 The answer to that question is obvious, you build up in both scenarios. You basically just argued for deathmatch style gaming, and there is a place for that, just not in MMO's.
Personaly i'm just happy for completing all 40 wilderness achievements (+mage arena 1/2) without losing anything and never risking more than 100k . Look at what the wilderness has devolved into the past few years . No matter what future updates will bring , osrs pvp is a niche of the niche and dying community . let is friggin die at last
I’ve never had any interest in PVP or raiding. I enjoy experimenting with character builds. However I’m not looking for max or to follow a premed mid max build. Ill help if asked by another player to achieve a certain goal but I’m not looking for a group or to fill a specific roll so I’m usually a one and done type helper when asked.
The biggest issue with the wilderness in osrs is the effort put into drawing out players who DO NOT want to be there.. Constant efforts to draw pvers out SOLELY for the purpose of being targets for pvpers. It's not fun for us, so we actively avoid it and harbor feelings of spite when asked about it.
The whole idea is 'if you dont want to pvp, dont go into the wild', but then Jagex start asking 'how do we get more people into the wilderness?'.... Instead of making it more fun, they just lock fomo into the wild. Want the best gp? Go kill them revvies. Want that best pickaxe? Chaos ele for you. You want a rune crossbow? Archaeologist for you, buddy. Oh, you want any magic bonus, at all, on your cape? Sweet, go hang out in that spot where our cruelest players hang out, then go on a mission through the whole wilderness if you want it to be a good bonus...
pvp fights in early eve online raised your heart rate for sure! it was like going to a real life fight!! but it was only great if you had a corp that was willing to pitch in and help build ships for everyone together. it kept the grind super low compared to solo mining a battleship. there needs to be a way to easily promote players helping players re-grind if your going to have a HC PVP MMO
eve online is the most shaky hands inducing game Ive EVER played.. so sad it just fell apart. Loved it so much.
I don't see the point honestly. Either the purpose of hard-core pvp is to risk everything in a sweaty fight or it might as well be a battle royale game. Easily replacing gear/progress makes the whole thing like a death match. This really leans into why hard-core pvp MMOs don't last: once a war commences it goes until one side has had all of their playtime destroyed which usually results in quitting the game. It's as if you actually killed them since they no longer exist on the servers. An already niche audience continually consumes itself until the game just dies.
@@frantsel5711 right!! no other game got me as nervous for a battle than that one!!
@@chaosgyro IMO the only way it works is a careful balance of risk vs reward that will have to come from making the grind for a character rebuild either easier through mechanics / other player help (lowering risk). or make the rewards for surviving/winning pvp matches.
or even something like a consolation prize for the loser.. its not huge but it starts them off with something after death. the amount of whats given should scale as needed for balance. just some quick ideas of ways to implement a sort-of HC PVP MMO
@@chaosgyro >hard-core pvp MMOs don't last
Albion Online has hit it's 5 year anniversary, and EVE Online has been going for 15 years.
The problem isn't full loot PVP MMOs that kill the game. It's failing to design the game properly. You know, like all the non-full loot MMO's that have also failed.
I feel like I realized this way back in the early 2000s when I was playing DAoC. I was wrecking noobs repeatedly, and I realized that if they had actually lost something significant when I killed them, they wouldn't come back to get killed again. Technically they lost a lot of travel time and a token amount of gold, so it wasn't really loss-less death, but it was also trivial enough to not be a major barrier.
RudyLive42 in the comments brought up the old saying in EvE Online of "you only fly what you can afford to lose" - which actually is impossible if you think about for even a second. You may only fly what you can afford to lose into risky situations, but show me _one_ player who didn't take out a ship they just grinded days, weeks, months for - and would need to grind all over again if they lost it right then and there. First T2 ship, first T3 ship, first Hulk, first Orca, first big cargo hauler, whatever, even the first cruiser takes more money than you could possibly earn with a little early frigate in a short amount of time - you _need_ the next tier ship to make the money so you can afford to lose it. If you lose it while you use it the first few times, you can't just replace it like that - i.e. you couldn't actually afford to lose it, and yet you flew it.
The only people I've ever heard bring this up are exactly the players who already had a decent source of income so that _could_ afford to lose some kind of "lower", yet still usable and fun ships. Basically like someone who uses their good gear to speedrun the most profitable dungeons they can manage, who then switches to some cheaper gear for some "fun PvP" or "low gear runs" or whatever.
I typically don't play games where open PVP is a thing. I'm a PVE player, and I don't want to have some higher level person just randomly kill me while I'm trying to either do a quest or travel to somewhere for materials or such. Especially if said player continues to camp the area and it's something like 'gotta return for res or exp or items' and such.
Really with that as the thumbnail lolol
The only fun I've had doing PVP in Runescape, is Soul Wars. Which is completely risk free, only losing the runes and ammo you spend on attacking with magic and ranged.
That seems especially fun because if you're running mage and doing well you never have to leave the battlefield but it's also not too hard to reequip and come back
"Eve Online" - you can't just try (pvp again)
...well... that's why a thing exists in eve pvp called "duel to hull" - you fight with someone, but you agree that you don't go all the way and kill each other, you're considered dead when you HP reaches to the hull (third of 3 healthbars), and you stop shooting at each other when that happens.
Of course, you need to put a bit of trust in to have a battle like that with someone, but when you're up-front about it, people overwhelmingly honor it.
Also that's how you test out new ship builds, you just get a friend to "fight you to hull", then go dock, repair, change the build of the ship to try something slightly different, rince and repeat. Also, these fights tend to be extremely interesting and fun, as people comment on each other's actions and builds and generally use it as a learning, as well as teaching opportunity.
its nice if most people in that game act like this. now, the problem, is having people ating that way in a new more recent game. Toxicity is sadly overwhelming today.
Shooters like UT or Q3A or even QW back in the day are hardcore in the sense that you get whatever weapon and power-up the player who died had equipped. But the difference is all items are easily and quickly obtained, so everyone effectively have the same set of gear to begin with. Games that are skill-based tend to have *less* variety of gear, not more. Look at any sportsball, how many kinds of balls, sticks, helmets, shoes etc do they have? For all practical purposes everyone has the same gear, and they only differ cosmetically (team colors, sponsors, personal choice of shoe color etc). The quarterback doesn't get a more accurate football just because they grind out 100 games! The only way to get better is to get better with what *everyone* has. Now in games like Fortnite or UT there's some skill in obtaining the gear, aka pattern running. But there have been game mods that tried to eliminate that as well, by basically having everyone always spawn with all guns and unlimited ammo, with no items to pick up - exactly to eliminate pattern running, spawn camping, etc.
I keep saying PvP and MMOs are like pizza and meatballs. They don't work well together at all, but people won't stop trying.
Some people just can't get enough meatballs in their mouth and other places.
Yeah i aint grinding a game to get all my stuff againn shit aint worth it.
I wonder how a game would be if you only lost one item per death instead, like a semi-hardcore pvp, so there was some risk/reward, but not all or nothing
@@DominicGreene72 it sounds great. Until you lose that one item that was a pain in the ass to grind. Losing stuff on death just sucks flat out, especially in games based around grinding for stuff.
seeing a lot of people saying stuff like "dont carry what you are not prepared to lose" and your missing a big point, and that is the second you carry ONLY what you are willing to risk its is exactly the same situation as not losing anything the only differance is psycological.
Now I nderstand people enjoy the grind but not everyone does and yes same exactly can be applyed the other way not everyone wants a game with no risk.
but here is another big thing that people miss and that is
"you are enjoying winning but every time you win there will be more and more people unhappy because they lost, for every person who loses there is a 50/50 chace thats one less person playing and eventualy noone will play"
I often find most high skill players miss a big point especial when there is skill based matchmaking just cos you are having fun crushing people there are for more people with less skill than you who are not having fun being crushed by you, if you dont like SBBMM because itll make the game "sweaty" then you are admiting you just want to make other people miserable.
I always appreciate how your videos don't just complain about certain aspects of games like pvp or pve, but explain the why and how of the problem and offer theoretical solutions. I too experienced the harsh reality of thinking that if i can bet the AI then I should be good in a pvp setting. Even though that experience was in a racing game not a RTS the same thing occurs. I would have to say that the point at which I dislike pvp is when they try to mix those player bases together without providing the option to opt out of one of those playstyles. An example I would give would be the original release of Ultima Online in which pvp was always possible once you left town. You were at risk of getting obliterated by more experienced players with little to no way of avoiding it. But that in and of itself was not the problem to me, the problem stemmed from the idea that Mr Hayes pointed out that if you give people the choice between high risk and high reward, or guaranteed and slow, they will choose the slow option. I would tend to make that same choice. The problem arose in Ultima when hardcore pvp players made the same choice and instead of taking the higher risk fights with other experienced pvp players, they simply chose to take the easier option of hunting down inexperienced players who may not have even been ready, let alone willing to engage with them. The developers solution did not help either. For anyone who may not know they simply separated the two playstyles by making two copies of the same map, one for pvp and one for pve. This only served to alienate the pvp community in this case because no one went to the pvp map, or if they did they ended up in the same situation of "I beat the hardest monsters so I should be good at pvp", nope. The best solution in my view actually came from the players themselves after the devs implemented guilds and guild wars to the game.The players would then plan and also advertise an event, inviting people to come and watch. This not only allowed players to engage in pvp in the same playspace, but also gave other players not in those guilds to safely observe, enjoy, and maybe even learn from watching those fights. Furthermore it gave the pvp'rs an audience, people who could congratulate and complement their talent and hard work, in some cases even ask for advise to allow more people to participate in a more enjoyable way. The people that received those accolades seemed more rewarded by this than they ever were when they got that rare drop from a boss. As you both pointed out, most of the time those rare items where so hard to get that they never got used in practical situations because "you never bring what you can't afford to lose", thus making that item far less appealing and reducing it to little more than a cosmetic item for bragging rights. By allowing the safe interactions between the two player bases it turned pvp players from the "evil game wreckers" to ambassadors for that playstyle. It also gave pve players a way to not only learn and try their hand at pvp when they felt ready, but also still provided a safe environment to re-equip after losing their stuff. If you read this far, thank you, I know this is a bit long.
The contortions your minds go through to create enough easy victims for the unbearable twats that want to go seal clubbing is amazing. How about there are a bunch of PVP rewards and those that want them can PVP and everyone else can forget they exist.
Love to see them fleeced on Kickstarter for the new hardcore pvp experience. ps. Warhammer Online was amazing.
That's a valid and good system, but they're mainly talking about the people that want all of your shit as their pvp reward. They want a high risk high reward system. the struggle is in designing a game with enough appeal and is reasonable enough to regear so the player base wont be limited to just 20 sado-masochists that play all day everyday.
@@skorpiongod I just dont see that that is a turd worth polishing.
@@Sfourtytwo neither do i, but those people exist. Their game is not meant for us and thats fine.
@@skorpiongod But ist the discussion about coercing exactly us into some loose your suff pvp shitshow?
In Escape from Tarkov a self proclaimed hardcore pvp mmo fps, you loose all your current equipment when you die. This creats a tension like nothing else. Its extremly punishing but also very rewarding. (when EFT review josh ^^)
I was thinking of EFT as well. There are clever things that make it work in that game: 1: Insurance, and the fact that looting after a big fight is risky and inventories are limited. 2: average loot you score from a good run is worth multiple kits. 3: scav runs give you a safety valve in case things go really bad. It basically boils down to "re-gearing is pretty easy" as in the video.
And that's why a minority of people only play this game. Less than 200k.
While WoW and FFXIV have multiple millions.
@@Nico78Not >While WoW and FFXIV have multiple millions.
So? By that thought, no game should be made unless it's meant to pull in the lowest common denominator. No niche games allowed. Unless you like the bare basic bones of what's the most popular, leave gaming.
Those two titles are boring as hell to me. There's nothing there to get excited about. PVP focused MMOs are way more interesting.
@@Nico78Not i think you found the numbers of concurrent eft players and compared it with the total players of wow/FFXIV.
PvP in most cases in most games is a self-defeating concept. The pro-pvp camp is never anywhere near as large their noise suggests, and the squabbling largely just comes down to wanting preserve an experience that incentivises heavily slanted engagements against players without the levels, gear, or numbers to resist or escape. In many games this kind of interaction is deliberately pushed onto players by locking end-game PvE resources and items to PvP spaces; forcing one part of the community to act as unwilling content for another because it is either too small or risk-averse to sustain itself
I don't think that type of PvP shouldn't exist in an MMO. Like Callum said, the people who are seasoned in PvP, are just going to destroy you over and over again and you're almost never going to win because you don't get the chance to learn why, when, or how. Unlike a fighting game, you can keep going, adapt, and learn the specific match-up. That's why I like how something like how WoW does it where you have a PvP queue and you just jump in, have fun, and everyone can win some XP and those PvP specific rewards.
I think a very perfect example is something like Escape from Tarkov. It's difficult, it's realistic, it's a grind, and it is always risk/reward. If that's the experience a person wants, then you should just go play those games. Why would I play an MMO if a hardcore PvP experience is what i'm after?
I don't think you should add things exclusively to PvP... just stop forcing people to do shit they don't want just because PvPers want easy victories. It's how you get spite voting & fights within the different communities.
And they might add d picks to non pvp areas. Like a good game should. I disagree with callum fullly on his take.
I would poise one slight change to Josh's statement: Full loot PvP games can work not if getting back is easy, but if getting back is fun. Generally it means the same thing, because most people don't want to essentially do a job in their free time after they get back home from doing their job, but if it takes 3 days to get back to the position of doing more PvP stuff it can be as easy as doing nothing and it would turn most people off. At the same time, if you can get back within a single second, but you need to complete a 16 input combo perfectly within that second, ost players will fail to do so and at some point quit. If the experience of getting back up is fun enough that you are fine spending your time doing it, then a full loot PvP game will work, but that would likely be a game where the full loot PvP aspect is the weakest part of the actual game.
Nobody enjoys wasting their time.
The idea of progression is the basis of all games.
People don't play "Desert Bus" the MMO.
@@Seority Some would say that playing a game is wasting your (life)time, when you could do something that would further your own capabilities or position or enhance the lives of others.
Others would say that if you enjoy wasting your time then it is time well spent.
"Progress" is a very ephemeral word. Think about the old Counter Strike, where you didn't get loot boxes with skins. The only "Progress" would have been you getting better at using the peculiarities of the game to your advantage, but even the best player could still be cought off guard and killed by a kid with an AK that just stormed through some doors. And your win/lose ratio is very much dependent on your team.
Or think about Beat'em Ups. You might get better with your inputs and reading the moves of the opponents, but no one is actually able to tell you if you got better or not.
Or consider all those simulator games. Particularly MS Flight Simulator. There are players who just enjoy watching out of the plane windows, or their trucks to drive through the desert. Where is the Progress in those?
Yes, no one likes to waste their time, but what is considered to be wasted time can vary wildly depending on whom you ask for their opinion.
@Animus Nocturnus
You dont wash dishes to then place them in a toilet.
People dont spend their time to purposely waste it.
If you're a toliet bowl eater, seek help.
@@Seority Define "wasting time".
While in THEORY your view has some merit, in practice it's impossible. Once you lose, just losing everything is never going to feel good. The loop will get repetitive after the first few times you die and it'll immediately stop being fun. You always have to remember the loop. The first go around is never going to feel as bad, but after a while the loop will begin to drag the player down and eventually they'll leave. Full loot PvP will never work because of this. Even survival games these days have private servers with rules for this reason, otherwise they'd have died long ago.
i'm wondering what with the simple arena PVP happened. you have 2 people or two groups fight each other and people can watch from the grandstand and bet on the winner in a simple official betting system.
then you have a simple leaderboard where if the worse person wins gets placed in front of the other person while if the better person winns nothing happens.
you can either directly challange someone or through matchmaking that goes the list equally up and down until it finds someone who wants to duel too and it isn't mentioned if you are the better or worse one in the ranking so that both parties fight and nobody just quits because the difference is too big.
Back in the day, I played a F2P mmo called Shaiya. Loved the game, played it a bunch. Even had an Ultimate Mode character (if you die and aren't rezzed by a lvl 30 hard/ultimate mode priest, or pay for the rez token, your character gets deleted after the timer). But what had me finally quit the game, was the loot pvp system.
I had spent weeks farming up the next tier armor set for my hard mode mage (hard mode just had you lose some level progression if you died). I was questing/grinding for levels, and got clapped by a person of the opposing faction... 3 times on respawn, and lost 3 of the armor pieces.
I was done. Especially since gear was faction locked, and they couldn't use the gear to begin with, and yeah. Just soured the game for me entirely.