116 replies to this topic

[Stormdragon]

Aym, on 02 June 2012 - 11:48 AM, said:

These polls have horrible problems. First off since MWO was conceived and developed as PvP everyone is technically here to play MWO because of PvP. Second we're all going to quit playing at some point, so the second question is irrelevant. Middle ground options should be given for the first two questions. Since I can't give a good answer to them in their current incarnation, I can only answer the third, and that is a resounding yes I would pay extra for pve single and/or multi-player packs.

Yeah that right there says it all; almost half said they would....Piranha knows there is an opportunity there.

[Revage]

Potentially interesting line of thought, chasing down that 'just another' trend. If adding PvE to MWO would make it 'just another grindfest', does the fact that it is so far going to be strictly PvP with a limited few modes make it 'just another mindless shooter'? If PvE means that you might as well be playing WoW, does the PvP so far mean you might as well go play Battlefield, or Call of Duty? Sure, you can argue that mechwarrior inherently requires more thought when designing your mech, but that neither supports the PvE or PvP side, only the fact that the game is mechwarrior. You can say one way or the other requires more skill in playing it, and thus provides you individually more entertainment, but then it's only specific to you and you could have gotten a challenge out of competing in any other shooter on the market at present.

The lure is that it is Mechwarrior that we are going to play, the designs, and associated with that, the lore. Any exploration of those will be entertaining to a true fan of Mechwarrior, be it PvE or PvP. If the only goal is to compete, there are plenty of bland, loreless shooters on the market today. This should not be one of those. Every avenue of experiencing the Mechwarrior universe should be open, and some of those avenues should include things like raids on supply caravans, or air fields, or bases. Unless some players REALLY want to play the poncho-wearing caravaner, the turrets in bases, or be online 24/7 in the event that a raid happen SOMEWHERE, some PvE should be included in this game, if only to fill in the blanks during off-hour gaming.

Furthermore, the lore aspects of the game shouldn't be barred for players by either poor internet connections that make them ineffective in PvP, lower money (real or C-bill) invested in their mechs making them less effective, poor team draws keeping them from completing a lore-item, or just outright being a HORRIBLE player.

PS: I suppose the above is as much a rant for lore-based content as it is for PvE, but I place them on equal footing in my priority list, just a liiiiittle behind PvP.

[Sassori]

Arafinar, on 02 June 2012 - 11:39 AM, said:

I see your point...... But it never fails if pve is in a game that it WILL effect
pvp through combat rules. Every online game Ive played with pve has done this.
ie: Eve Online for one CCP constantly changing game mechanics to
to appease pvp'ers and pve'ers and its always lop-sided in the nerfing.

How does it never fail? If it's a PvE scenario, why change anything? Mech's are mech's... pretty simple. There's no reason why PvP would need to change anything just because of PvE.

Doubly so if PvE is primarily outside of your mech.

CCP is changing things all the time because they discover things are /BROKEN/. If something is broke, you fix it. If in a change you accidentally underpower or overpower something else, you fix it. This whole concept that it is PvE affecting PvP and vice versa is complete trash. Only bad games do that.

[Arafinar]

Christopher Dayson, on 02 June 2012 - 12:31 PM, said:

How does it never fail? If it's a PvE scenario, why change anything? Mech's are mech's... pretty simple. There's no reason why PvP would need to change anything just because of PvE.

Doubly so if PvE is primarily outside of your mech.

CCP is changing things all the time because they discover things are /BROKEN/. If something is broke, you fix it. If in a change you accidentally underpower or overpower something else, you fix it. This whole concept that it is PvE affecting PvP and vice versa is complete trash. Only bad games do that.

1. It never fails because they change how ALL combat is done, not just for the pvper or the pve ers. if you
havent noticed this play some more.
2. As for "outside" is grinding away at bots outside? Are you speaking of all the glorious crafting, mining?

3. If you do not think one effects the other,well youre more than welcome to your opinion, but have watched em do it
since the beta.

[Ordy]

as a realitive noob to online gaming, what is PvE?? PvP is Player vs Player??

[Sassori]

Arafinar, on 02 June 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:

1. It never fails because they change how ALL combat is done, not just for the pvper or the pve ers. if you
havent noticed this play some more.
2. As for "outside" is grinding away at bots outside? Are you speaking of all the glorious crafting, mining?

3. If you do not think one effects the other,well youre more than welcome to your opinion, but have watched em do it
since the beta.

1) To say that anything 'Never Fails' means that every single game that has PvP and PvE alters one because of the other. That's simply not the case so your straw-man fails right there. Especially with FPS style games that have PvE campaign modes and PvP multiplayer modes /or/ Co-Op modes.

2) I never once mentioned 'grinding' anything nor crafting anything, the fact that you think all PvE is grinding shows how biased you are to the whole idea of having a game with PvE and PvP both involved. PvE for MW:O could be entirely outside of your mech, doing missions for your House/Employer in order to get access to Lostech without having to buy it on the cash shop or the like for example. Yet more ways PvE and PvP don't nerf each other.

3) I said they don't /HAVE/ to affect each other. As for CCP, that's only /one/ game, and certainly not all of them. As a matter of fact most of the nerfs that come down the pipe are PVP affecting PVE, and that only in very minor ways. Let's face it, PvE is so /EASY/ in EVE that it's a joke from day one. Clearly, there's no PvE is the cause of PvP nerfs.

Ordy, on 02 June 2012 - 12:47 PM, said:

as a realitive noob to online gaming, what is PvE?? PvP is Player vs Player??

Player vs Environment.

[Ordy]

Thanks

[Arafinar]

Christopher Dayson, on 02 June 2012 - 12:48 PM, said:

1) To say that anything 'Never Fails' means that every single game that has PvP and PvE alters one because of the other. That's simply not the case so your straw-man fails right there. Especially with FPS style games that have PvE campaign modes and PvP multiplayer modes /or/ Co-Op modes.

2) I never once mentioned 'grinding' anything nor crafting anything, the fact that you think all PvE is grinding shows how biased you are to the whole idea of having a game with PvE and PvP both involved. PvE for MW:O could be entirely outside of your mech, doing missions for your House/Employer in order to get access to Lostech without having to buy it on the cash shop or the like for example. Yet more ways PvE and PvP don't nerf each other.

3) I said they don't /HAVE/ to affect each other. As for CCP, that's only /one/ game, and certainly not all of them. As a matter of fact most of the nerfs that come down the pipe are PVP affecting PVE, and that only in very minor ways. Let's face it, PvE is so /EASY/ in EVE that it's a joke from day one. Clearly, there's no PvE is the cause of PvP nerfs.



Player vs Environment.

Ok,its was a wide brush,yes so Ill say "most games". As for "most" games grinding ,crafting and running instances and missions
(better?) ARE PVE. You said "There's no reason why PvP would need to change anything just because of PvE." Happens all the
the time. Again if you havent noticed many others have. CCP was an example of just one game.


BTW: if you actually play, come on over to Delve and look me up:)

Edited by Arafinar, 02 June 2012 - 01:01 PM.

[Solis Obscuri]

I think having a basic bot AI to let people run "training sims" against could be a nice feature. Well, that or a skirmish mode to practice against friends with no reapair cost or C-Bill gains.

I really don't want to see dev time wasted developing lots of mission content and grind rewards at the expense of PvP, though. I've seen that happen in other games with good PvP, and its been really detrimental - unless there's a big enough staff to actaully deal with both, it's much better to focus primarily on one or the other, IMO, and the core of this game is online PvP.

Edited by Solis Obscuri, 02 June 2012 - 01:09 PM.

[DocBach]

I would love some kind of offline mode, even if its just against bots. I don't care if I don't get any sort of progression from playing offline, but sometimes I'm not near reliable internet and it'd be fun to slag 'Mechs on a game newer than MW4: Mercenaries.

[Thorqemada]

What means PvE?
Is a training facility with AI Bots already PvE?
I am all for a training and test facility!

What else would PvE be?
Is an ordered Airstrike done by AI Airfighters PvE?

Would automated defense turrets on a military base be PvE?

I think some Elements of MWO could be PvE in a broad sense and that is ok as long it offers usefull stuff to the game.

[PinTBC]

This is how I look at it. The original MPBTech on GENIE was almost wholly PvE. That game was constructed around trying to fight enough battle on a planet so that your house could claim it as its own. Those balltes for the planets were all fought PvE as the original designers couldn't figure out how to stop people from 'throwing' matches and unbalancing a planet downfall that way. The PvP in that game was hosted on Solaris.

I admit that I have not beel following the forums as closely as some, but I've had my hopes for a game that could challenge that game dashed probably longer than some of you have been alive. i am hoping that with the sheer numbers of people playing it becomes impossible to 'throw' battles enough to flip a planet. I am also hoping that the developers are linking the battles fought each day to the map of the inner sphere witht he ebb and flow of houses attacking each other, and forcing people to move to active planets.

But then again, I'd like to see real consequences of owning planets as well, maybe you lose that Catapult factory, and suddenly replacement parts are hard to come by for certain weapons, or maybe as a merc you can raid the Liao planet facility making Catpharacts to pick up some needed spare parts. It will be a shame if the inner sphere and all its intricasies is ignored here and the game simply becomes an excersize in Solaris fighting.

[8Ball-]

I'm not as much worried about pvp vs pve as I am about pvp with absolutely no rpg. Reading through the anouncements and other things direct from the devs what I see as of right now is WoT with mechs and factions.You have maps, you have the mechlab/garage and undoubtably you have the store. You get a starter mech/tank and you constantly grind for more xp, c-bills and skills so you can move up in equipment. What I'd like to see is all this with extras like a simulator/trainer with maybe some canned AI foe missions that you could improve yourself with without losing or gaining anything main game wise. And what I want most of all is to have it mean something, both to me and the faction/merc group I happen to be playing. I don't want just a bunch of battle maps that you fight over and over again without any meaning to the rest of the MW universe.(such as we've lost planet or factory or whatever X, go take it back. OK we've taken it back now go defend it. Crap we've lost it again go take it back ad nauseum.) I want the whole universe there and fleshed out.

Flame away.

[Vanguard319]

I'm kind of curious how the devs will resolve issues like running out of money to refit/rearm your mech, especially if you're a new player getting slaughtered by veterans. A PvE "merc contract" system could resolve those concerns.

For example, let's say you are a player starting out, and your budget is in the red because you made a whole bunch of noob mistakes early on. You can take on a contract for your faction that would essentially be a PvE "instant action" mission, with the difference being that completing the objectives in the mission, say a lightning raid, would reward you with C-bills, plus a percentage of combat salvage based on how many mechs you destroyed, and how many secondary objectives you completed. You can then either sell the salvage you don't need, or use it to reduce repair costs to your mech. In addition, these contracts would not be limited to solo play, but could be entered by groups for training purposes, with the pay/salvage divided between them.

[Arafinar]

WW8Ball, on 02 June 2012 - 02:28 PM, said:

I'm not as much worried about pvp vs pve as I am about pvp with absolutely no rpg. Reading through the anouncements and other things direct from the devs what I see as of right now is WoT with mechs and factions.You have maps, you have the mechlab/garage and undoubtably you have the store. You get a starter mech/tank and you constantly grind for more xp, c-bills and skills so you can move up in equipment. What I'd like to see is all this with extras like a simulator/trainer with maybe some canned AI foe missions that you could improve yourself with without losing or gaining anything main game wise. And what I want most of all is to have it mean something, both to me and the faction/merc group I happen to be playing. I don't want just a bunch of battle maps that you fight over and over again without any meaning to the rest of the MW universe.(such as we've lost planet or factory or whatever X, go take it back. OK we've taken it back now go defend it. Crap we've lost it again go take it back ad nauseum.) I want the whole universe there and fleshed out.

Flame away.

If thats what ya want, thats what ya want,we shall see.

[BlindSide]

I'm not looking for your typical MMO type instance "QUEST", But I wouldn't mind a few MW3 style campaign type missions(PvE) of that fashion would be fine. What I wouldn't want to see and what I think was being driven at earlier is the mmo style massive boss fight where you stand here an shoot while the boss does this stupid scripted routine song an dance attack routine then you rush over to another spot only to see said boss do yet another variation of the song an dance. This would have a very negative effect on my interest to say the least.

Edited by BlindSide, 02 June 2012 - 03:05 PM.

[GrizzlyViking]

So after a day of polling we have the following results.

1. Approximately 80% of people that responded to the poll were more motivated to play MWO by PvP and 20% more motivated by PvE.

2. Only about 9% would quit if there were never a PvE element introduced into MWO.

3. While not the major motivating factor for people who are here to play MWO, about half of all players that responded to the survey would be willing to pay for a PvE addition to the game.


What have we learned so far?

1. PvPers outnumber PvEers 4:1, which is a clear cut majority of MWO players.

2. Less than 1 in 10 would quit the game due to no PvE element. While 9% is a small percentage, I would say it is still large enough to take notice of from a marketing standpoint.

3. In spite of the majority of players being here for PvP about half of all players would be willing to pay for a PvE addition to the game. This point likely makes PvE a viable option for the future of MWO. We can only speculate as to whether this will be a full blown PvE add-on to MWO or if they will roll out an entirely new game that is the PvE sister of MWO, but there seems to be enough interest to support some form of MechWarrior PvE in the future. I hope if PvE is added to MWO that it is added as a separate entity within the game as in all of the past MW titles and not directly connected in any way to PvP to prevent the constant tug-o-war that happens in all games that have both elements.

My best solution would be to have two games...MWO-PvP and MWO-PvE and never the two shall meet. Simply because what we have here already is the same thing that happened in all games like these. We have the PvP camp and the PvE camp. The problems with most multi-player games like MWO is that they get conflicted by trying to appease two separate audiences within the confines of a single game. I have never seen a game that could find a balance to please both types of players, so why try? The simple solution is to make a PvE version that has no PvP and have the PvP version with no PvE. People can then choose the version that they like most and all of the drama between the two sides is eliminated. PvE for PvEers and PvP for PvPers and the people who like both could simply play both. Problem solved!

Edited by GrizzlyViking, 03 June 2012 - 05:09 AM.

[PinTBC]

Grizzly,

Your poll is in no way as clear cut as you seem to think. Your poll answers are designed to create a feeling that X number of people came to this game specifically for PvP or PvE, and of course you are getting the results you are looking for.

[GrizzlyViking]

PinTBC, on 03 June 2012 - 05:40 AM, said:

Grizzly,

Your poll is in no way as clear cut as you seem to think. Your poll answers are designed to create a feeling that X number of people came to this game specifically for PvP or PvE, and of course you are getting the results you are looking for.

You are a bit confused as to the purpose of this poll. Please re-read the initial post for clarification.

[Dragon Lady]

Revage, on 02 June 2012 - 10:32 AM, said:

Mechwarrior 1-4, including expansions, were/had PvE, and I don't recall them ever resembling your fear here.



Also, for the OP, being able to select PvP & PvE would have made a more descriptive poll. As mentioned earlier, since the game was only advertised as PvP, and has only to date confirmed PvP, you're naturally going to have your results skewed towards PvP as the people interested enough in PvE to leave over its absense, have doubtlessly already left.

I wouldn't say the game is advertised as PvP only. There is nothing in the FAQ that says anything about the game being PvP only, and it certainly took a few days for me realize that the game would be PvP only, much to my disappointment. While I don't mind PvP, since unrestricted PvP definitely adds spice to game, it does require a greater time committment than PvE does, because PvP is a lot less forgiving of inexperience or mistakes than PvE is. PvE also allows players to practice, try out new tactics, and is good for casual players who simply can only devote a few hours a week to the game.