Returned to PvP for the first time since March.. Sorely disappointed

[Turt]

I decided to resume my taunters tongue run where I left off in the Haligtree. Not my wisest idea. First invader mopped the floor with me using dual nagi's. I mean I'm hella rusty so fair enough.
Same invader invaded again and proceeded to spend 2 minutes backstabbing me out a deathblight glitch. Not the funnest of times I will admit.
Third invader was cool though. Can't complain about an unga bunga enjoyer.

But after realising just how out practice I was, I decided to return to the arena and refresh myself. Honestly, it wasn't so bad. But it became quickly evident to me that there were only about 15 of us duelling at this hour. I ran into many of the same faces. Some faces more welcoming than others. Is the arena already that dead? (rl125 is still the meta right?)

Ultimately, my disappointment in Fromsoft's handling of Elden Ring's online mode still continues to be largely negative. Despite steam saying over 20,000 players are active, I'm running into many of the same people. And despite a plethora of patches, PvP still feels largely unbalanced. Not to mention I was experiencing many net issues during my interactions as well. And since I'm encountering many of the same players (at what I'm assuming is still meta level), it gives off the impression that the online community has really dwindled.
I'm really only writing this to vent my frustrations after a not so pleasant return, but I am curious about what the thoughts are of some of the more active players in the PvP community.

[ressenmacher]

I've noticed the same low population hosting and invading at low levels. I think, fundamentally, that the PvP modes are very empty because they're just...really badly put together.

FROM needs to decide whether they want to have multiplayer or not, and then commit to that decision by either not including it or by backing it with sufficient dev time and maintenance to make it a good experience. This half-assed measure that's been going on for the lifetime of the series is just the worst of both worlds.

[Toast]

I’ve been getting a lot of action lately. I’m grinding to max, currently at 590. Getting summoned as a hunter, at least 5-8 times an hour. As well as seeing different faces in arena, when I take a break from the frog man grind. Think people are just preparing for the dlc, so the average level has gone up.

[Sparhawk 59]

The problem is multiplayer is in all their games but a lot dont like the invasion part and either play offline or move to mods. They should have had a dedicated system for doing online play with invasions and with coop. People say the mod gives a better experience with friends which the main game should have had. Now we know in past history its always taken the modders to come in and fix the souls games to enhance and make them better maybe someone will make an invasion/pvp mod one day for the dedicated

[Turt]

Publicado originalmente por ressenmacher:

I've noticed the same low population hosting and invading at low levels. I think, fundamentally, that the PvP modes are very empty because they're just...really badly put together.

FROM needs to decide whether they want to have multiplayer or not, and then commit to that decision by either not including it or by backing it with sufficient dev time and maintenance to make it a good experience. This half-assed measure that's been going on for the lifetime of the series is just the worst of both worlds.

I do agree that the PvP (especially invasions) feels very hastily put together, and it probably was. A lot of these recent big title games have been releasing rushed, and while Elden Ring released better than most, it was without question rushed to an extent. Ultimately some things had to take priority over others, and it seems PvP was one of those things that less prioritised than others. Which is honestly for the best as most people came for the PvE. I love the PvP and invasions in souls games. Its a unique feature that is almost fundamentally tied to the souls genre itself. But in the case of Elden Ring, I do think the game would have benefited more if PvP were scrapped all together or later implemented in a DLC when the game was ready.

[Turt]

Publicado originalmente por Toast:

I’ve been getting a lot of action lately. I’m grinding to max, currently at 590. Getting summoned as a hunter, at least 5-8 times an hour. As well as seeing different faces in arena, when I take a break from the frog man grind. Think people are just preparing for the dlc, so the average level has gone up.

Glad to hear you're getting good action! Still 5-8 times a hour is very little, though you are at a much higher level. For comparison, I ended up doing some invasions in Ds3 around sl60. I was getting instantly connected to hosts and never having to wait for more than a minute at most. It does make sense that the meta level would have increased a bit. The meta level is usually determined by where most of the PvE'ers are so PvP'ers can get the most matches. I'll have to try out 150 sometime and see how that goes.

[Turt]

Publicado originalmente por Sparhawk 57:

The problem is multiplayer is in all their games but a lot dont like the invasion part and either play offline or move to mods. They should have had a dedicated system for doing online play with invasions and with coop. People say the mod gives a better experience with friends which the main game should have had. Now we know in past history its always taken the modders to come in and fix the souls games to enhance and make them better maybe someone will make an invasion/pvp mod one day for the dedicated

I definitely understand the desire to want jolly coop without red man bad interrupting, but I've always felt like invasions have been a fundamental staple of the souls genre. It could be frustrating and annoying, but I feel if Fromsoft did a better job at balancing their general PvP then it wouldn't be complained about as often.
I remember the early days of my taunter tongue run. Had people throwing rot pots that could insta rot without having any way to cure it. I was a lot better at PvP back then, but even I struggled greatly. I wouldn't blame any new players for using Seamless Coop after going through experiences like that. It does make me wonder how Fromsoft will handle online with their next souls release. Whether or not they will listen to the new crowd or keep doing what they do.

[Turt]

Glad to see some familiar faces here!

[Sparhawk 59]

I agree with you i have done all aspects in all the ds games but they do have flaws. ER more so as its so big only 4 players and the server cant cope it seems

[Honk1]

Publicado originalmente por ressenmacher:

FROM needs to decide whether they want to have multiplayer or not, and then commit to that decision by either not including it or by backing it with sufficient dev time and maintenance to make it a good experience. This half-assed measure that's been going on for the lifetime of the series is just the worst of both worlds.

I agree that the multiplayer experience is not perfect (although playing Lords of the Fallen has given me a better appreciation for it's quality), but I strongly disagree with this kind of reasoning.

If you don't like the multiplayer, you don't need to play it. Removing it would only make the singleplayer experience better if Fromsoft had diverted resources from it's development to the multiplayer component of the game and the singleplayer component was worse as a result. I don't think that is the case.

I've gotten a lot of enjoyment out of the multiplayer in it's current state. Without it, I would probably just have beaten the game once and moved on. With it, I played it several times with different builds doing PVP and coop during my playthroughs. I think that's true for other players as well and outright removing the multiplayer because some people are frustrated with it's shortcomings would make the game a lot worse for these players.

[Stu -1]

Publicado originalmente por Honk1:

I've gotten a lot of enjoyment out of the multiplayer in it's current state. Without it, I would probably just have beaten the game once and moved on.

this will be coming from the viewpoint of someone with zero interest in the pvp in this game.

opposite happened for me. i shelved the game due to invasions. i'm a complete souls beginner. don't really love the gameplay loop. fight something till eventually you win. repeat. but wanted to give this a shot with friends when i read 'coop' etc. thought it might be the most accessible souls game for me. didn't realise it meant coop enables pvp. maybe i got unlucky (and it was like 1+ years ago, so maybe it was the height of invasion season?). but we'd get invaded by die hard pvp-ers constantly whilst just trying to figure out the game lol.

for me, i can appreciate if this is the game design. no hard feelings. i just won't play one again. (not that i expect that to bother anyone of course). was a LITTLE annoyed at myself for not reading up on the coop mode before purchasing. i personally don't see any issue with allowing a mode that lets people coop without pvp. like the mod does. unless the pvp-ers are admitting part of the kick they get is ganking completely unprepared and unwilling players that pose no challenge? im guessing that's a yes though.

[ressenmacher]

Publicado originalmente por Honk1:

If you don't like the multiplayer, you don't need to play it. Removing it would only make the singleplayer experience better if Fromsoft had diverted resources from it's development to the multiplayer component of the game and the singleplayer component was worse as a result. I don't think that is the case.

This is the heart of it, and you make a good point; ultimately, I don't know to what extent multiplayer might have sucked up resources, and to what extent those resources would have been transferable to other areas.

If it is, though, I wonder if it could have been better spent - though I suppose that describes Elden Ring in general.

Publicado originalmente por Stu -1:

...unless the pvp-ers are admitting part of the kick they get is ganking completely unprepared and unwilling players that pose no challenge? im guessing that's a yes though.

It varies a lot; there are a few legitimate sadists who are using the game as a tool to hurt people, but I think the anti-coop mod backlash is largely rooted in a fear of losing the playerbase necessary to support the invasions they love.

Publicado originalmente por Turt:

...I do think the game would have benefited more if PvP were scrapped all together or later implemented in a DLC when the game was ready.

I dunno about being DLC added. PvP requires so much additional balancing and bugfixing that to drop it on a game that late might be too much - that's like a year of balance patches that have to get done all at once.

[Shinkiro]

Publicado originalmente por ressenmacher:

This is the heart of it, and you make a good point; ultimately, I don't know to what extent multiplayer might have sucked up resources, and to what extent those resources would have been transferable to other areas.

If it is, though, I wonder if it could have been better spent - though I suppose that describes Elden Ring in general.

I think most of their resources were dedicated to single player tbh (as they are single player rpg's) and the online MP generally suffered from a few years of COVID development. They definitely said they had issues with the open world mapping and game engine with certain parts of it.

Publicado originalmente por ressenmacher:

It varies a lot; there are a few legitimate sadists who are using the game as a tool to hurt people, but I think the anti-coop mod backlash is largely rooted in a fear of losing the playerbase necessary to support the invasions they love.

Much like there's legitimate sadists who abuse summoning to try and troll and hurt invaders (this is far more common though), basing your opinions of a game function on player behaviour isnt on objective view and is basically a worthless statement as it doesnt mean anything and anyone saying as such while trying to justify a point shouldn't be taken seriously.

But yes, a game function that requires at least twice the amount of players to be hosting to actually function would be greatly hurt by the ability to exclude oneself from it and still reap the benefits. It would also degrade the quality of invasions as it becomes a more ab-usable mechanic which would make gank groups and exploit users incredibly more common.

It benefits one group to the detriment of another, when coop groups can still play regardless but invaders cannot without hosts. When it comes down to it, (ignoring exploiting, trading etc as BOTH sides do it) invasions are designed around an average skilled host team being able to beat an average invader without too much trouble. Peoples skill gaps are ultimately their own problem and the solution is to improve at the game not ask for it to change for your sake.

Quite frankly they are better off ripping out online altogether than altering the formula. If someones doesnt like PvEvP they are free to not ever engage with it as in the end these are single player rpg's and all online interactions are optional.

[Stu -1]

Publicado originalmente por Shinkiro:

It benefits one group to the detriment of another, when coop groups can still play regardless but invaders cannot without hosts.

a mod was made for coop without pvp because there was huge demand for it. if your pvp mode relies on forcing non pvp players to use it against their will then the game mode is flawed imo. maybe not enough people are actually interested in playing pvp in souls games. doesn't mean they should rip out any attempt at coop modes. that just seems like you're being bitter and wanting to punish the coop players for not letting you beat them up.

[Shinkiro]

Publicado originalmente por Stu -1:

a mod was made for coop without pvp because there was huge demand for it. if your pvp mode relies on forcing non pvp players to use it against their will then the game mode is flawed imo. maybe not enough people are actually interested in playing pvp in souls games. doesn't mean they should rip out any attempt at coop modes. that just seems like you're being bitter and wanting to punish the coop players for not letting you beat them up.

Ahh yes "forcing" people to use an optional online game mechanic in a single player RPG. Anything you say at this point isnt an honest attempt at discussion anymore. It'll just be the typical toxic attitude displayed by PvErs on the forums.

Trying to shoehorn your PvE only coop experience into a PvEvP online system is the only flaw here. You will blame the system rather than admit the problem is yourselves.

[ressenmacher]

Publicado originalmente por Shinkiro:

Much like there's legitimate sadists who abuse summoning to try and troll and hurt invaders (this is far more common though), basing your opinions of a game function on player behaviour isnt on objective view and is basically a worthless statement as it doesnt mean anything and anyone saying as such while trying to justify a point shouldn't be taken seriously.

...I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here. I've never denied that players use coop as a tool to grief or abuse others - in fact,I've been vocally anti-ganking in other threads. My opinion on invasions is likewise not solely determined by the player behavior it enables - though I think the fact that the system allows and enables this kind of behavior to occur is fair criticism to hold against it.

Publicado originalmente por Shinkiro:

But yes, a game function that requires at least twice the amount of players to be hosting to actually function would be greatly hurt by the ability to exclude oneself from it and still reap the benefits. It would also degrade the quality of invasions as it becomes a more ab-usable mechanic which would make gank groups and exploit users incredibly more common.

First, I'm going to stop you right there. This is not about "reaping the benefits." Coop is not some reward people get in return for engaging in invasions - it's a way to play the game that some people enjoy, and nothing more. It isn't earned; everyone is "worthy" of it by default and there shouldn't be any expectation that you have to somehow pay into the multiplayer system at large to receive it.

Beyond that, it's totally possible that adding the option to opt out would hurt invasions. But it's also fair to note that it would help them in some ways - not least of which is that we could finally move to a situation where there's a common ground among all participants in enjoying the mechanic and striving to improve at it. And furthermore, it's important to note that if allowing players to choose whether or not to engage with invasions soley on their own merits caused a total collapse of the invasion system, that means the system was fundamentally exploitative and bad for the game, being sustained only by players who despised it and had their experiences degraded by its presence.

TLDR if the gamemode can't support a playerbase by being fun to play, the solution is to fix its problems, not keep propping it up by strongarming people into gritting their teeth and dealing with it to get what they want.

Publicado originalmente por Shinkiro:

It benefits one group to the detriment of another, when coop groups can still play regardless but invaders cannot without hosts. When it comes down to it, (ignoring exploiting, trading etc as BOTH sides do it) invasions are designed around an average skilled host team being able to beat an average invader without too much trouble. Peoples skill gaps are ultimately their own problem and the solution is to improve at the game not ask for it to change for your sake.

This argument often spins in circles, so let me put it another way: hosts are not owed invaders. Nothing is forcing people to invade, no other mechanic is tied to it; if you want to be invaded but there's no invaders on to play with you because they're all sick to death of trying to play in a bad, unbalanced system where people habitually gank them to death, well that's some tough beans, because the only thing influencing whether they engage with invasions is how much they enjoy the mechanic. And in this scenario, if you suggested trying to "fix" the problem by strong-arming people into invading by, like, locking Ancient Dragon Smithing Stones or something behind participation, you'd get rightly laughed (or rather angrily chased) off the forums.

It isn't like that in reverse, and it should be.

A toggle is the equal scenario, where both parties have equal control over and incentive to
participate in a PvP gamemode. Right now, invaders choose to invade because they find it fun; many coopers choose to play because they have to in order to enjoy what is functionally a different mechanic and playstyle.