Arc Raiders had a free playtest this weekend, and some players are arguing that the game needs a PvE-only mode. In the game players are tasked with scavenging resources from an open map infested with enemy robots alongside other players, with players not in your group effectively being another type of enemy. This, of course, has some players saying that fighting enemy robots is enough, that they don’t need the extra stress of having to fight off other players too. The pro-PvP players are, of course, saying that this is what the game is, and if you don’t like it you should go play something else.
It’s not like that’s never been done before. Sea of Thieves is another PvPvE game, and not too long ago it too got a PvE-only mode.
What do you say about this? Should a game that wants to be both PvE and PvP also offer exclusive modes?
Sure if it’s either limited progression/loot, or seperate progression entirely. People will just farm on low risk PvE missions for high tier resources and upgrade to end game gear. I’ll be honest, I’m not sure how Sea of Thieves handles this.
The Arc (name of the robots) can be challenging but they are also easy to pick off at range. Maybe if the arcs were stronger in PvE? This then defeats the purpose of appealing to an even more casual crowd. People were already calling for Arc nerfs.
The devs originally pitched this game as a co-op PvE game akin to something like Helldivers 2. Their monetization model is practically the same to HD2. They decided to swap to PvPVE claiming it just wasn’t fun though many speculate Nexon, their publisher/owner, had a say in it. I have doubts Nexon influenced the gameplay but Nexon is Nexon afterall.
From my experience playing the tech tests and latest server slam, it’s real easy to avoid PvP and only fight the Arc if you so choose. You’ll run into players eventually but I’ve had an easy time making friends with strangers. Last server slam had more PvP due to limited upgrades available.
I’m not opposed to a PvE only mode if it meant the game is still playable after the servers shut down.
Sea of Thieves gives like 1/4 the rewards when you’re on PvE but otherwise it’s all cross-compatible
Or just different loot. Destiny actually had a fairly decent approach to this. Some gear was PvE only from enemy drops, and other gear could only be found in the PvP shop (which required grinding currency in PvP to purchase). There was some gear that was categorically better for builds, but the devs tried to keep the exclusive stuff fairly balanced. So like the PvP stuff wouldn’t try to make you outright overpowered in PvE, for example. It meant you could take the same gear across the two different modes, without being able to simply get OP by focusing on one mode entirely.
The devs struggled with balancing the gear between the two modes, (looking at you, Gjallarhorn), but the idea wasn’t awful.
The gear exclusive to PvE means only usable in PvE or only lootable in PvE? If the former, well that’s the same as my seperate progression suggestion. If the latter, how good is the PvE loot in PvP? Can it be really strong against other players or is better gear locked behind PvP? If can be really strong, people will grind out low risk PvE for good gear hence my limited loot suggestion.
You mention the devs struggled to balance between both modes and I’m willing to bet Embark is a smaller studio compared to Bungie. Trying to balance a whole different genre is a lot of effort for not much gain. People who want only PvE will rarely touch PvPvE due to toxicity or skill issues (as cringe as that sounds).
I don’t want to tell others what to do with their art, but I would certainly appreciate that. For every PvPvE game if they replaced the human opponents with NPCs I would probably be happy. I avoid PvP games. There is enough toxicity in the world without willingly subjecting myself to something that has been specifically created to generate toxic situations and behavior.
Yes, because gamers turn into scum whenever PVP is involved.
Yup, it’s amazing how quickly PvP sucks the fun out of a game. People immediately turn into sweaty tryhards and min-maxers when PvP is required.
People cheat way too much, and will exploit whenever it’s PvP and it sucks the fun out of it entirely.
I don’t even bother anymore.
A game doesn’t have to offer anything, if they can offer modes without compromising on their artistic integrity good for them otherwise just make the best game they can without requiring they cater to the largest demographic.
It’s complicated, but I think no. But maybe they could have certain maps where it’s PVE. I’ve recently played the pve only fork of The Cycle Frontier, another pvevp extraction shooter that got shut down a few years ago, and the pve only mode is considerably easier, to the point where the tension from the full game is not present. So a game designed to be PvEvP would probably feel soulless without part of its intended game design.
No. They have a vision and implementation that they want to balance and trying to shoe horn another game mode isn’t exactly easy for them to try and balance while attempting to maintain the core game.
Everyone has already given great answers, so I’m going a bit off-topic. I recommend checking out Forever Winter for a PvE experience similar to Arc Raiders. Read the reviews, try it, refund under 2 hours played if it’s not for you
I’ve had my eye on Forever Winter for a little while, but the mixed reviews put me off it.
Also, I really like Arc Raiders’ aesthetic.
I honestly think FW is a better game than Arc, but with a ton of janky more. Beung a small indie team, they can’t compare in terms of polish, but the vision and the work they’ve been putting into the game are a great sign of what’s to come. With ARC, although I do somewhat trust Embark, I’m not sure they have a good vision for it.
Pretty sure Lazerpig made a 20min rant video about this exact topic, specifically regarding why Sea Of Thieves sucked as a result of its forced-PvP for PvPers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGWOgMcMJ8c
Literally can only be improved by it. The only people it hurts are people who want to do PVP with players who don’t want to do PVP, and I’d rather that kind of scumbag not play the games I play in the first place
Exactly. The only people it would affect are the ones who want to be able to steamroll over the casual or PvE players. And those players are a fucking blight, even among other PvP players.
Absolutely they should. PvPvE is great but its way too intense and sweaty for a long session.
Oh, sry I am easy to trigger on this point:(
My experience with PvPvE games is they tend to be incredibly toxic, with some people just trying to get started, and others picking on them for fun.
I have several friends who vow not to play PvPvE games again after bad experiences in games like Last Oasis and Worlds Adrift, although they were interested in playing both of those games in a PvE format.
Personally I find the extra danger from considering other players “another type of enemy” to be interesting. But also those types of games tend to breed to most toxic communities.
The problem is that they’re beyond another type of enemy. There’s a a sizeable portion of players that loves just killing other players, not to loot them (because they’re nebvies, there’s nothing to loot), not to defend something, or whatever, just to relish in the carnage of helpless others.
I’m like your friends, I just never play a game if there’s any PVP involved. It’s not worth it. I play to have fun, not to be a perpetual victim.
nobody is helpless in pvp games like arc, i’ve squad wiped people who had far higher end gear than me during the play test, and had the same done to me. if you don’t enjoy competition then don’t play a pvp game??
Not just your experience, all of the games I’ve seen have a steady pulse of reviews about giving up due to of older players shitting on newbies, with devs silently endorsing it or having their hands tied by management because either “that’s the way it’s meant to be played” or they have a microtransactions shop and this toxicity encourages petty rage spending to catch up.
And it works, because despite the mixed or barely positive reviews, these games still enjoy a steady stream of players enjoying the cycle of abuse.
I’d consider it an exploitation of the “do unto others what was done unto me” psychological thing we humans tend to have going on.
They don’t /have/ to, but I will say if they don’t it removes any chance of me ever buying it.
I was up and ready to buy Dune launch week, but then I noticed there was no full PVE mode and I had no way of creating a PVE environment by self hosting or by other means. This blew all interest I had in the game.
To me it makes logic sense that a studio that offers a PvPvE should offer a PvE experience as well. The framework is basically already there, and in some cases won’t even require more resources to do. In the case of Dune they could easily have made PvE use the same servers, but have players marked as PvE invisible to other players not in the party, or give them a ghost effect to people not in PvE mode so they know not to try and fight them.
Any studio in my eyes refusing to acknowledge the casual non-pvp group are just throwing money away. I have easily dumped 100$ into both Ark SE and minecraft with how many times i’ve purchased them for different platforms, and these are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head. I would have never have bought either if they lacked the ability to go PvE only.
I would love to play a PVE game where players just jump in and out of fights or locations or something like that, but I refuse to buy PVP games. They always end up as a repetitious failing grind for me. A game where it is essentially a single player game that allows coop is my ideal game.
Honestly, Ark was so close with that aspect with the Obelisks. It would have been so cool to allow for char based PvP toggle (meaning when the char was made it had a setting if it was PvP or PvE), then allow for the Obelisks to teleport you to the designated PvE vs PvP zone. Have PvE invisible to PvP and if the structure is owned by a player in the other zone, it doesn’t exist. Have a designated spot on the map accessible like the boss arena system that allows PvE and PvP players to mix and mingle/fight if they wanted to.
This would allow for using the same map for both modes, so lower system resources, it’s just the structures itself only show for players in the same PvP mode. So a base could exist in the same location on both PvP and PvE and the two modes would be non the wiser.
As someone with about 120 hours in Dune, I will say that I got all the way there without once fighting another player. The main map is PvE except for a few spots. I only set foot in the end-game PvP-enabled area once for about 20 seconds, and I think that since then the devs implemented a PvE-only part of that area. And most of the problems people have with the game stem from the end-game content, which I haven’t touched yet.
Yea, that was what I had found during research, end game stuff locked behind a PvP gameplay with a small section that can technically be done in PvE but has a long cooldown and requires going into PvP areas to get to.
Right. But as I mentioned you can put 100 hours into the game without fighting another player. And all the end-game stuff is for is the final tier of gear, which mostly change stats and resource gathering rates.
Yea, but I’m still not interested in spending money on a game without PvE modes. If it requires me to enter a PvP area, I’m not interested regardless of the amount of time I can spend in PvE only areas.
Honestly, I liked how runescape did PvP areas, you didn’t have to enter them, you could obtain the material via other means like the grand exchange. This is a good way of doing a PvPvE without hindering your PvE audience. How dune did it was more of a slap to the face, since its a small area thats shared with everyone that wants PvE and PvP, requires entering PvP areas to get to and has a limited resource so on congested servers it’s a big nuisance. it felt like more of a “this can say we tried” than an actual implementation.
Well, Dune does have a player-run auction house. I haven’t checked myself, but I don’t doubt that you could get end-game mats on there.
That does sound promising and does raise it a little on my list. It’s defo better than nothing.
I will say I would have loved mmos to be online/offline. You should be able to enjoy your electronic asset purchases after the game is gone. Thats not really what you asked though but to add to my non sequitors I love when its all. Go play another game and then months later its. why does no one play this game whining.
Up to the devs. There’s no objective should or shouldn’t it’s just a matter of opinion. Would it be nice? Yea. I get not wanting to play a game where you have to worry about coming into conflict with other players. I don’t like those types of games either. I also don’t buy them.
