Mandatory PVP will hurt this game, thats just the facts, it might not kill it right away but it will hurt it.

[Iron Mal]

Before you jump down my throat, I agree with a lot of you. PVP makes a lot of games more fun to play, it adds higher stakes to the game and keeps you on your toes. Hell, I'd even say that it may make you a better player in general because you'll learn.

Here's the reality though, many of you; not all but many and if you're honest with yourself you know I'm right; are not mature enough for a full PVP game.

I've been playing MMOs all my life, from RS to Rappelz to Maplestory to WoW, SWG, 9Dragons, GW 1/2, LOTRO, COH, etc.. That list could go on forever, MMO players hop around a lot I know many of you do the same so I know you'll know what i mean when I say that a lot of these guys really pushing for the PVP stuff in MMOs are just going to do what people used to do in a lot of those older MMOs we played. You know when the max level guys would sit outside the safe zone towns and just pick off players under level 10?

You can call people babies, you can tell them to get gud, you can call them whiners all you want the reality is that that kind of behavior in MMOs is bad for business which means it's bad for us if we want to play the game and it's bad for the player count because what ends up happening is the general public just straight up abandons the game. PVP players are probably not even 20% of the general MMO playing public so day one, week one, year one the numbers are okayish but after that they have a sharp decline, it happens all the time and thats when the public has taken their collective ball and gone home.

Some of you would be cool and fight fair and wouldnt just continuously grief players and you know what, if that sounds like you, good on you man, you're a bro but you're not the majority.

The sad reality is the reason why PVP is optional in most MMOs is because of that fact right there, it kills the player count because people ♥♥♥♥ with the general guys too much and they leave which means less money for the company and before you know it everyones in the steam forums going "+1 BRING THE GAME BACK!! PLEASE!!" but by then it's too late.

Like I said you can think Im wrong but if you do and this game does have mandatory PVP, please be sure to leave a comment and I'll see you back here in a couple years when the "Thanks for playing!" message pops up on their twitter page.

[EmperorVolo]

Ya it hurt the ♥♥♥♥ out of Rust. This ain't an MMO buddy. Just like Raid Shadow Legends isn't an MMO. Everyone call everything an MMO Call of Duty is listed as an MMO.

Raid Shadow Legends youtube ads call it an MMO.

The problem is MMOs only definition any more with this current gen is just mass people. So what defines "Massive"? Who ever is making the game. That's it. There's nothing more to this label than that and perceived expectation. Warframe is called an MMO but you play in squads of 4.

This allows them to be in more categories for awards, taxes, and other things to help them as a studio but it's not actually useful for defining a game any more.

The world MMO has no meaning any more.

[Butch]

But it is an actual MMO, you will see eventually.

[Mellowdy]

MMO is an acronym. It's short for Massive Multiplayer Online.

[Mellowdy]

Originally posted by EmperorVolo:

Ya it hurt the ♥♥♥♥ out of Rust. This ain't an MMO buddy. Just like Raid Shadow Legends isn't an MMO. Everyone call everything an MMO Call of Duty is listed as an MMO.

Raid Shadow Legends youtube ads call it an MMO.

The problem is MMOs only definition any more with this current gen is just mass people. So what defines "Massive"? Who ever is making the game. That's it. There's nothing more to this label than that and perceived expectation. Warframe is called an MMO but you play in squads of 4.

This allows them to be in more categories for awards, taxes, and other things to help them as a studio but it's not actually useful for defining a game any more.

The world MMO has no meaning any more.

Warframe DOES have massive multiple players who are online. So does Raid (I hate the ads too.) and so does Call of Duty. None are offline and they aren't single player no co-op. There are instance based MMOs like Fallout 76 (opinions vary on this game, so just skip the theatrics). MMO is a NOT a word, it's an acronym.

[Sir Víve]

Might not kill it right away? Most PvE games I've played died after about a month, but that is expected with limited content in a game. There is usually the hardcore group left that contribute maybe 2-4k concurrent playerbase if the game has any social aspects to it.

Plus, mandatory PvP implies that there is nothing else you can do without having PvP forced on you at every step, which just isn't true for this game. "PvP with a reason" is not mandatory. PvE that supports a PvP gameloop is an option afaik with this game.

The mandatory PvP game you seem to be describing is what I considered bad attempts at sand-box PvP with lots of missing potential to make it better. That is what I'm hoping Dune: awakening does—makes it better and fills that potential.

Also, I don't play open-world PvP games because I want every fight to be a fair 1v1 duel. I like that some fights are unfair and you have to find ways to overcome them or avoid them. If I want 1v1 or fair rule-sets, I'd play a Moba or match based game.

[Mellowdy]

I agree mandatory PvP hurts MMOs but not other games. I mean look at Elyon, it was so hyped when it came out but I haven't seen any big streams with it since then

[Sayuri]

**IS THE GAME GOING TO HAVE PVP?**
*Yes, Dune: Awakening has player-versus-player combat. You can do it individually, or you can band together with other players. *

**ARE YOU FORCED TO PVP?**
*No, the game world has specific regions for PvP. While outside of these regions, you are not an eligible target nor combatant for PvP. *

Just pointing out that according to their FAQ there is not forced PVP in this game, but we shall see when the game launches if it holds to that

I for one am looking forward to this game and all that you can do in it and getting to explore all of the game with my friends

[ThugDragonz]

What will kill it is the cheaters.

[🅺🆈🅾🅽]

Lmfao at these carebears

[IronHack]

Originally posted by SamWhitetail:

Originally posted by EmperorVolo:

Ya it hurt the ♥♥♥♥ out of Rust. This ain't an MMO buddy. Just like Raid Shadow Legends isn't an MMO. Everyone call everything an MMO Call of Duty is listed as an MMO.

Raid Shadow Legends youtube ads call it an MMO.

The problem is MMOs only definition any more with this current gen is just mass people. So what defines "Massive"? Who ever is making the game. That's it. There's nothing more to this label than that and perceived expectation. Warframe is called an MMO but you play in squads of 4.

This allows them to be in more categories for awards, taxes, and other things to help them as a studio but it's not actually useful for defining a game any more.

The world MMO has no meaning any more.

Warframe DOES have massive multiple players who are online. So does Raid (I hate the ads too.) and so does Call of Duty. None are offline and they aren't single player no co-op. There are instance based MMOs like Fallout 76 (opinions vary on this game, so just skip the theatrics). MMO is a NOT a word, it's an acronym.

CoD is a battle royal not an MMO
Warframe is a hub match maker not an MMO
Games that allow more then 6 players but less then 1000 should use LMO Largely Multiplayer Online because claiming a game that only up to 32 people can play together an MMO is a joke. 32 players is roughly 3 parties in a lot of true MMO's that have thousands of players logged into the same world, that you can see each one of them.

I'm not hating on you Sam, I just wanted to point out and correct things in your comment. If we are going to call games MMO's just because it has online access and a lot of people play it, I guess farmville 1 is an MMO from the olden days on facebook or neopets.

[Shotgun]

Complaining about PvP in multiplayer video games has been the defining characteristic of the contemporary game-playing demographic. In every survival or MMO game I play, the forums are absolutely full of people begging for things like PvE servers and PvP toggles. The end result of this is that every single PvP-focused game gets diluted with player freedom restriction mechanisms and imbalanced PvPvE compromises to the point of being so soft and forgiving that it's not fun for anyone.

It would be smart to allow fans of the hardcore survival PvP genre to have a few titles in which they can just be themselves, seeing as how they have very few choices because most games on the market already cater predominantly to the PvE crowd. But the financial pressure to cave to the loudly-complaining forum and social media majorities ensures that most games that are ostensibly made for the hardcore market come out pre-nerfed, shallow, and impotent, but not quite enough to retain the interest of the people who were complaining in the first place.

It's impossible to appease both of these groups at the same time, and companies really shouldn't try.

[Krynnost]

Guess I'm old reading the comments of what defines an MMO in terms of player count. MMO is a decades old term to describe a game that has lots of players. To be fair, a few dozen isn't exactly a lot anymore. Any of us that had Pentium 133mhz builds with an extra phone line... well, over 8 players was a bunch 😆

[Zephos]

personally i like pvp in games like conan/ark hell i used to play the the hll out of it...but pvp in generral is just to toxic..like the op said there's always going to be assbuts standing outside starter towns just to ♥♥♥♥ with low lvls...the ones that do that are the same ones that will cry and whine when another high player comes and kills them for being a ♥♥♥♥..trust me iv seen it enough..pvp can be good but it has to be done right

[PortalShifter]

Originally posted by Shotgun:

It would be smart to allow fans of the hardcore survival PvP genre to have a few titles in which they can just be themselves, seeing as how they have very few choices because most games on the market already cater predominantly to the PvE crowd.

Those games exist. It's just that they are... VERY unpopular and therefore unprofitable.

Looking at you: Last Oasis, Mortal Online 2, The Front, etc.

[Shotgun]

Originally posted by PortalShifter:

Originally posted by Shotgun:

It would be smart to allow fans of the hardcore survival PvP genre to have a few titles in which they can just be themselves, seeing as how they have very few choices because most games on the market already cater predominantly to the PvE crowd.

Those games exist. It's just that they are... VERY unpopular and therefore unprofitable.

Looking at you: Last Oasis, Mortal Online 2, The Front, etc.

All of those games have attempted to make compromises in some form to try to appeal to a wider demographic. As I said in my previous post, when developers do that, they upset game balance in a way that makes it less fun for all types of players.

The games I'm talking about are more along the lines of old-school Ultima and EVE Online, and classic survival games like DayZ during its first few years. Such games don't get made anymore, even though there's demand for them, because massive social pressure to change their PvP-centric core gameplay is present in every single one.

If a hardcore PvP game came out that actually had proper balancing and a compelling gameplay loop (many contemporary survival games have neither), it would be popular and profitable, because there's clearly demand for games like that from players like me.

I'm not even saying that this particular title needs to be like that (although I'd personally prefer it). I'm saying that any time anyone tries to make a game like that, they're shamed into making concessions that soften the experience. More casual-minded gamers are simply unwilling for us to have even a single game like that to enjoy.