The Daily Grind: should PvP rewards give PvE benefits?
Filed under: The Daily Grind
Not everyone likes PvP. We're fine with that. De gustibus non est disputandum, as the Romans used to say: don't argue over tastes. But what happens when a game's designers need to assess motives for PvPing, and allocate it some sort of reward? Should they make PvP rewards useful for PvP and nothing else, ensuring that players who don't want to PvP won't feel left out, or should they encourage PvP by giving PvE benefits to PvP rewards?As a sort-of example, we ran a feature on the PvP minigames in City of Heroes. Although you don't have to defeat any other players to get those rewards, you do have to enter PvP zones and risk being beaten senseless. Two rewards in particular, the Shivan and the Nuke, are highly useful in PvE. What's worse for non-PvPers is that the PvP zones contain badges, one of which is required for a Villain accolade (a special mega-badge that grants a power not available otherwise). Age of Conan is also on the verge of incorporating PvP XP and PvP gear, though it remains to be seen how the gear will compete with what's already available. So far as we can tell, it will look a lot better, at least.
Do you PvP? Should PvP-linked rewards only ever be useful in a PvP context, or should they have PvE applications too? Are non-PvPers justified in complaining if PvP activity gives PvE rewards, or should designers not try to make everything for PvE available to everyone, regardless of preference?
_thumbnail.jpg "Aion Beta: Asmodian Ascension Quest")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Kaoy said on 8:44AM 8-18-2008
I only PvP for 3 reasons:
1.) If a PKer targets me, I will defend myself.
2.) If I am in a guild, or am playing a faction based game and have friends to fight with, I will take part for the fun and stratagy of a group fight.
3.) Practicing with a friend of mine just incase scenerio 1 or 2 occur.
Obviously, I am not the most active PvPer in the world. That said, I still think that PvP should have rewards for everything. Think about it. PvE obviulsy rewards both, but some don't really like fighting AI. Crafting supports both, but alot of people don't like spending thier time crafting things. Money supports both, but some people prefer not set up shops or take the time to deal with the auction houses some games have.
Just because you don't like some part of the game, you shouldn't complain that those that find enjoyment in it get some kind of reward for it. Yeah, it sucks if you ABSOLUTLY have to have the best of everything and PvP is the easiest way to do so, but it's your choice wether or not to do that. Like I pointed out, not every likes PvE, because they find it boring and slow and predictable. Everyone still has to put up with it though.
Reply
Ghen said on 9:27AM 8-18-2008
I don't like when PvP rewards are hands down better than their PvE counterparts. I like systems that balance the two so they can be similar in power but different in details.
Reply
Jeromai said on 10:21AM 8-18-2008
I'm still waiting for a system that allows the twain to be completely separate. A PvE set of gear, and a PvP set of gear. Make it easy to swap between them (not put on and removed one by one).
Rewards should expand the options (horizontal breadth), not just power level (vertical increase) of each aspect, so if you do PvE activities, you get slightly more powerful and have more options in PvE, and ditto for PvP.
Why? Some people don't like PvE or PvP. Why force them to do an activity they don't like by dangling some external motivation like a reward? They're just going to think of it as tedious grind to get to the good stuff and get tired of it and your game.
By separating the rewards, you know the people who are out PvPing -want- to PvP, and vice versa. People who play FPSes don't need to be forced into PvPing. If you need to dangle unrelated motivation, then you need to take a good hard look at whether that aspect of the game is fun. Things like fame, glory, leaderboards, kill stats and other social rewards, tend to motivate PvPers more than being able to kill a static boring mob more easily anyhow.
Separating the rewards should also help to make PvE expansion easier, since you don't have to worry about something added completely unbalancing the PvP side of things, or vice versa.
For those that do both, well, good, two ladders of progress to chase, and you can see that you're tier 3 in PvE and tier 5 in PvP, or what-have-you.
Reply
Heraclea said on 10:34AM 8-18-2008
I am not a big fan of PvP. Part of this stems from the fact that my usual mains are non-stealthed, armored melee characters. These characters are disadvantaged in PvP in most games I have played. Even if they have big burst damage, they have to get into melee range to use it. And few games I have played even allow broad-spectrum survivability to function in PvP. In most games, the playability of melee characters is tied to the AI features of NPC mobs that don't work on other players.
That said, I will participate some in PvP. Now, in City of Heroes, you have to enter PvP free-fire zones for some game rewards, but actually engaging other players is not required. All of the mentioned rewards actually come from PvE activities that happen to take place in a free fire zone. In Age of Conan, by contrast, there is no incentive at all for non-owners of a battle keep to enter the open PvP zones (on PvE servers).
The worst situation is when specific forms of PvP are required. I quit World of Warcraft when it was announced that you would have to obtain an arena PvP rating to upgrade gear earned in battleground PvP. Since the battlegrounds were an occasionally enjoyable form of grinding, but arena PvP is rated on a ladder system and required gear I never acquired and a talent spec that was suboptimal in PvE, this effectively shut me out of the main upgrade path outside of raiding. And since I didn't enjoy WoW style raiding, either. . . .
Reply
Tytanya said on 12:21PM 8-18-2008
More often than not players are classed as PvP'ers or PvE'ers as if that is a somehow justifyable position, but most people will do both to some degree or another and at one time or another. Unfortunately an intolerant minority of players can't contemplate mixing with the other even for a small fraction of their time online, its very very sad and seems to have become a legitimsed form of racism. Is it really right to tackle such an issue by erecting fences and segregating people or should the overall design look at the specific problems and deliver a more progressive answer.....I'd like to hope the latter.
That said in a game world you shouldnt be forced into a contrary gameplay for any essential reason...tho neither badges nor the Shivan shard are essential just desirable and that form of content is a risk/reward factor that is all too rare imo
Reply
Rhaegar said on 1:34PM 8-18-2008
PvP should absolutely reward PvE-related rewards, and vice-versa. What WoW is doing now by trying to segregate the two is killing the game. If I had to guess, I would say that most people want to play both. Trying to seperate them into different progression paths forces players to choose which one to devote their time to, and results in a less complete and enjoyable experience for everyone.
Reply
Cray said on 9:48PM 8-18-2008
I firmly believe MMOs need to lift the segregation of the PVP and PVE. Otherwise its not a true MMO. There needs to be very little differences between the two types of gameplay in order to reduce the jarring level of gameplay.
I've seen it all too many times a PVE player enter the world of PVP and struggle horribly and never to return to the PVP venue.
If game makers can find a way to improve the balance of both PVE and PVP, the quality of game play will rise and eradicate the need for segregation.
Reply
Ghiest said on 8:19AM 8-19-2008
"I don't like when PvP rewards are hands down better than their PvE counterparts"
Exactly, I don't like being forced to pvp just to get weapons that hardly ever (4 months and counting) drop just to be effective in the next tier content
Reply