So about that PvP

[Quintus]

Before launch I tried to put it out there that the massive PvE community would buy it and dip but the small, dedicated PvP community would stick around and grow IF you built this for them. But you said no and caved to the PvEers. Looking at the charts now the game has a lower and lower peak and is headed for obscurity and failure. That post I made got flamed into oblivion by the horde of PvEers and this one will too, but that doesn't make the situation any less clear. You can put PvP last on your roadmap, but by the time you get there Dune will be out, "Odyssey (Blizzard)" might be out, heck, even Ark 2 might be out. This could have been a true contender. Unfortunate.

[umop-apisdn]

There's already friendly fire; if you want to beat up your friends, nothing's stopping you except that you'll run out of friends.

What else are you missing for PvP?

[Kaya]

Originally posted by Quintus:

Before launch I tried to put it out there that the massive PvE community would buy it and dip but the small, dedicated PvP community would stick around and grow IF you built this for them. But you said no and caved to the PvEers. Looking at the charts now the game has a lower and lower peak and is headed for obscurity and failure. That post I made got flamed into oblivion by the horde of PvEers and this one will too, but that doesn't make the situation any less clear. You can put PvP last on your roadmap, but by the time you get there Dune will be out, "Odyssey (Blizzard)" might be out, heck, even Ark 2 might be out. This could have been a true contender. Unfortunate.

Ark2 is gonna be PvE only as well.

[umop-apisdn]

The problem with "forced" PvP in multiplayer games is that it makes the co-op players shy away entirely, because of environments like Ark, Rust, etc. When looking through the list of survival games, it seems like every single one of them that lists "PvP Combat" as a feature turns into a grief-fest with no longevity; it's weird... almost like people don't absolutely love getting hammered by people with end-game weapons and armor when they're running around in a T-shirt with a stick.

"Ok, how do I open my inventory to equip a weapon? Ah, there we go. Now... if I right click on the... why am I dead? What was that, a homing plasma missile!? Dude, I have a stick and a loincloth... Oh, and now that I've respawned, I don't even have that.
Screw this game."

It's the fastest route to empty lobbies that I'm aware of; no one can survive the gankers long enough to learn how to play. Eventually, even the griefers get bored, because there's no one to gank anymore... and the game dies.

[Bardock]

Originally posted by Kaya:

Originally posted by Quintus:

Before launch I tried to put it out there that the massive PvE community would buy it and dip but the small, dedicated PvP community would stick around and grow IF you built this for them. But you said no and caved to the PvEers. Looking at the charts now the game has a lower and lower peak and is headed for obscurity and failure. That post I made got flamed into oblivion by the horde of PvEers and this one will too, but that doesn't make the situation any less clear. You can put PvP last on your roadmap, but by the time you get there Dune will be out, "Odyssey (Blizzard)" might be out, heck, even Ark 2 might be out. This could have been a true contender. Unfortunate.

Ark2 is gonna be PvE only as well.

There is no official statement on the part of WC/Snail. These are speculations that are quite nonsense.

WC will not be so stupid to push his gigantic PvP com. in front of the head.

Originally posted by umop-apisdn:

The problem with "forced" PvP in multiplayer games is that it makes the co-op players shy away entirely, because of environments like Ark, Rust, etc, where newbies get slaughtered before they've even really figured out how to play.

"Ok, so if I right click on the... why am I dead? Shotgun to the chest? Dude, I have a stick and loincloth... screw this game."

It's the fastest route to empty lobbies that I'm aware of; no one can survive the gankers long enough to learn how to play, so eventually... no one is playing.

There will probably be separate pvp and pve servers. All the newcomers have to find out is on which kind of server they join. there you can get to know the game in peace and decide for yourself whether you stay there or switch to the other.

[LudwigVH]

Originally posted by Quintus:

Before launch I tried to put it out there that the massive PvE community would buy it and dip but the small, dedicated PvP community would stick around and grow IF you built this for them. But you said no and caved to the PvEers. Looking at the charts now the game has a lower and lower peak and is headed for obscurity and failure. That post I made got flamed into oblivion by the horde of PvEers and this one will too, but that doesn't make the situation any less clear. You can put PvP last on your roadmap, but by the time you get there Dune will be out, "Odyssey (Blizzard)" might be out, heck, even Ark 2 might be out. This could have been a true contender. Unfortunate.

The numbers haven't dropped because of a lack of PVP, they have dropped because all currently available content has been completed already, nice try on trying to spin the story in your favor.

Another early access game I play was solely intended as PVE only. Has more available content than this game. PVP requests came in, though the majority of people were against it. PVP got implemented and the complaints are constantly coming in because of bases getting destroyed to the ground. FYI, it takes way more effort and time to gather resources and build in that game. Even when reading the dedicated server info that is available on their discord, just about all of them are PVE.

I have already read one thread for this game where someone was in a coop/ multi player group and had their entire base destroyed. If PVP is something you want, go find a PVP game to play. Stop trying to shove it down the throats for those who do not want it.

[Kaya]

Originally posted by Bardock:

Originally posted by Kaya:

Ark2 is gonna be PvE only as well.

There is no official statement on the part of WC/Snail. These are speculations that are quite nonsense.

Yeah I´m sure the fact that there´s no official statement despite all these speculations means nothing ;)
But that´s rly a discussion for a different forum.

[Gex]

Originally posted by LudwigVH:

Originally posted by Quintus:

Before launch I tried to put it out there that the massive PvE community would buy it and dip but the small, dedicated PvP community would stick around and grow IF you built this for them. But you said no and caved to the PvEers. Looking at the charts now the game has a lower and lower peak and is headed for obscurity and failure. That post I made got flamed into oblivion by the horde of PvEers and this one will too, but that doesn't make the situation any less clear. You can put PvP last on your roadmap, but by the time you get there Dune will be out, "Odyssey (Blizzard)" might be out, heck, even Ark 2 might be out. This could have been a true contender. Unfortunate.

The numbers haven't dropped because of a lack of PVP, they have dropped because all currently available content has been completed already, nice try on trying to spin the story in your favor.

Another early access game I play was solely intended as PVE only. Has more available content than this game. PVP requests came in, though the majority of people were against it. PVP got implemented and the complaints are constantly coming in because of bases getting destroyed to the ground. FYI, it takes way more effort and time to gather resources and build in that game. Even when reading the dedicated server info that is available on their discord, just about all of them are PVE.

I have already read one thread for this game where someone was in a coop/ multi player group and had their entire base destroyed. If PVP is something you want, go find a PVP game to play. Stop trying to shove it down the throats for those who do not want it.

Same thoughts on all counts. Its super frustrating making a base, getting all the resources, sometimes weeks of building/crafting just for someone to go while your offline and steal everything you got and destroy everything that's left. I won't even both with those games if PvP is the only option or try the PvP severs if there's an option for both. Its just not any fun and not worth wasting my time on see if this time, if it's gonna be any different.

[Bardock]

Originally posted by LudwigVH:

Originally posted by Quintus:

Before launch I tried to put it out there that the massive PvE community would buy it and dip but the small, dedicated PvP community would stick around and grow IF you built this for them. But you said no and caved to the PvEers. Looking at the charts now the game has a lower and lower peak and is headed for obscurity and failure. That post I made got flamed into oblivion by the horde of PvEers and this one will too, but that doesn't make the situation any less clear. You can put PvP last on your roadmap, but by the time you get there Dune will be out, "Odyssey (Blizzard)" might be out, heck, even Ark 2 might be out. This could have been a true contender. Unfortunate.

The numbers haven't dropped because of a lack of PVP, they have dropped because all currently available content has been completed already, nice try on trying to spin the story in your favor.

Another early access game I play was solely intended as PVE only. Has more available content than this game. PVP requests came in, though the majority of people were against it. PVP got implemented and the complaints are constantly coming in because of bases getting destroyed to the ground. FYI, it takes way more effort and time to gather resources and build in that game. Even when reading the dedicated server info that is available on their discord, just about all of them are PVE.

I have already read one thread for this game where someone was in a coop/ multi player group and had their entire base destroyed. If PVP is something you want, go find a PVP game to play. Stop trying to shove it down the throats for those who do not want it.

The basic statement is correct what he says. as a pure pve game this game would not survive long without real end game content. of course some would come back as soon as there is new content, but just as quickly they go again, when they are through with it.

So it can't hurt to intigrate the game and another group of people playing it.

and again to chisel with: If there should be separate servers, and of it is to be assumed strongly, all your doubts are meaningless evaporated and solved.

Here, by the way, no one imposes anything on anyone. It was simply announced from the beginning so that there is pvp, whether you want to admit it or not.

[TamanduaGirl]

Right PVP made V Rising a big continuing hit with player numbers continuing to skyrocket after launch. Oh wait I had the chart upside down, never mind.
https://i.imgur.com/wZUFYdJ.png

Or we could compare to the game everyone loves to compare this to, grounded. What a failure that is due to no pvp, oh wait, looks like it's doing pretty well with spikes in players with each content update.

Anyway it's a survival game that will have a pvp mode. You can't measure pvp success and regular games the same because games that don't rely on a constantly large player base for success or to be played, well, don't need that for success. Success is just if it sells enough to more than cover the costs. There will be more sales and more new players each update even if not all old ones come back.

Players don't need to fret if others don't play it because they can forever play it on their own or with friends, no player base needed. So for players, it's a success if they enjoy it. For devs it's a success if they make enough to feel success full and pay their bills.

I continue to suggest this to friends and acquaintances who are looking for a new good survival game they can play solo or with friends. One specifically was looking for coop (not pvp) that was 10 or more which is actually rare to be more than 4 players so this fit their need perfectly. Another was looking for a survival game that was not overly punishing if playing solo. This having difficulty setting it also is a great fir for them. And plenty of people want something between the 2 extremes and this still fits.

[Falonious]

No PVP, too many games already have this. New players getting wiped out all the time, by those who are established and prey on the new, ruins gaming experience.

[TamanduaGirl]

Originally posted by Falonious:

No PVP, too many games already have this. New players getting wiped out all the time, by those who are established and prey on the new, ruins gaming experience.

The devs said it's coming eventually but since they say "pvp mode" it sounds like it wont be part of the main game and they said it wont be a forced pvp for all thing, for sure. Form mode I'm guessing it'll be like it's own smaller pvp campaign from the main game. If people want to pvp now there's already friendly fire. People can pvp with their friends right now. The people complaining are the people you speak of, the ones who like to kill all the newbs.

I'm envisioning pvp mode will be more a team vs team mode you could play on servers, like a capture the flag sort of thing. But who knows, that's down the line. No matter it's not a threat to the core vision of PvE.

[umop-apisdn]

To be honest, the griefing and ganking aren't the only problems that PvP introduces.

In my experience, once there are enough choices available in the game that people start having interesting options as to what they bring to a fight, the PvP crowd starts whining about "balance", which usually results in all the cool stuff getting nerfed into uselessness, ruining the fun on the PvE side of things while destroying any meaningful choice on the PvP side of things.

Then everyone complains that the game is boring, albeit for different reasons on either side of the fence... and then the game dies.

All of that being said, let's save the "give us PvP" whining until after 1.0 launches. Let them finish making the core game before you start crying about not being able to beat up other players in a co-op survival builder.

[Drudackus]

Originally posted by umop-apisdn:

In my experience, once there are enough choices available in the game that people start having decent options as to what they bring to a fight, the PvP crowd starts whining about "balance", which usually results in all the cool stuff getting nerfed into uselessness, ruining the fun on the PvE side of things while destroying any meaningful choice on the PvP side of things.

While I have no real interest in PVP, I have no particular aversion to it either. It's good business to give players what they want. If you're able to create servers that allow or prevent PVP then all the better.
But the point made here is one I hadn't considered, yet, in my experience it is absolutely spot-on.
The inevitable failure to satisfy the diverse and ever-changing opinions of the player-base can be seen in the innumerable tedious arguments over balance, endless bleating about nerfs nerfs nerfs, and a resultant time wastage by devs trying to achieve the impossible.
As a developer, I would be very wary about stepping into that minefield.

[umop-apisdn]

Originally posted by Drudackus:

While I have no real interest in PVP, I have no particular aversion to it either. It's good business to give players what they want. If you're able to create servers that allow or prevent PVP then all the better.

I understand where you're coming from, but I'd like to posit the idea that at a certain point, one should put their foot firmly down. The PvP crowd is fine in the PvP games, where the only people they're aggravating are also playing those games to aggravate the other players. There are many, many games where PvP is appropriate, or even the entire point... this is not one of them, and shouldn't be.

To be quite frank, this is a co-op survival builder; it should not bother with PvP.
The "friendly fire" option is a difficulty setting, not a game mode.

[william_es]

Originally posted by Quintus:

Before launch I tried to put it out there that the massive PvE community would buy it and dip but the small, dedicated PvP community would stick around and grow IF you built this for them. But you said no and caved to the PvEers. Looking at the charts now the game has a lower and lower peak and is headed for obscurity and failure. That post I made got flamed into oblivion by the horde of PvEers and this one will too, but that doesn't make the situation any less clear. You can put PvP last on your roadmap, but by the time you get there Dune will be out, "Odyssey (Blizzard)" might be out, heck, even Ark 2 might be out. This could have been a true contender. Unfortunate.

Strangely, I've heard this argument over and over and over. Yet, strangely, it's not a magic bandaid for game success.

This is an early access game, which is not complete yet. A lot of people burned through the existing content, marked it done, and moved onto other games in the meantime (such as I did). We will all circle back around when more content comes out. I loved the game, and I'm excited to see how it develops.

So your comments about it sinking in the peak players charts basically deserves a "duh" response.

You have some very strong views on PVP, and since you believe it's the sole benchmark for success, that sounds like you should make your own game. You obviously have a winning formula.

You can make your game solely for PVP. I'm sure with the proper design, you can drive away all the "PVEr's", carebears, and gasp, the "filthy casuals" from your game, and it will just be PVP. Nothing will remain to spoil the purity of your vision.