Worries about gameplay...

[Nalessa]

Uhm, Is PvP the answer for "competitive aspect" ?

You can have PvE competitive.

Diablo leaderboards for example are all about just PvE.
Or the guilds in WoW trying to get first world kills on mythic bosses.

There's bound to be a bunch of crazies in this game who're gonna try and solo kaiju, or last as long as they can anyway and compete with the other ones as to who can do it first.
Or who can mine the most, frag the most enemies, find new enemies/locations the first, etc etc ...

 

[0V3RKILL]

The issue with PvP is that they balanced the frames around PvP, and they hadn't separated PvP frames from PvE. They took too long to separate the frames while still balancing around PvP, thus driving a lot of the PvE community away. A good example of this is when they nerfed the recon frames pretty hard because they were overwhelmingly strong in PvP, while being just okay for thumping. The nerf put them in a good spot for PvP, but made them useless for thumping.

Of course, this went both ways. Engineers were too good in PvE, but okay for PvP. Nerfing them to put them in line for PvE made them useless for PvP.

I agree with your post, that is my fear. I don't want the pvp to affect the pve in any way. if they have a way of separating the nerfs they do I wont mind at all. Load into pvp world and all the stats and changes take effect for that pvp world alone not pve. What they did with firefall was horrible. They ruined the pve to balanced the pvp and in the end no1 was happy not even the pvp players...they left to play the new counter strike game and that was it. So, the pve players were left behind with a messed up game and that I don't want. Cause we may have a lot of shooters and pvp games out there. But we don't have many mmofps

 

[Arca9]

I would love to have something competitive. As a matter of fact this is the sole reason why i have nearly 500 hours in overwatch. Because i want to play to improve.


You can only improve so much vs PVE characters that are designed for normal gameplay. We need a zone that takes pve to a new level for players to test their strength and skills. (And gear)

 

[Despair]

And i would really love to see what level of competition can be reached in PVE

 

[Degiance]

That 500 hours seems like nothing when compared to people who stick with PvE content expanding to 2-15 years.
Competition doesn't improve the games longevity* and more often than not it's there to satisfy the needs of people who just yell the loudest. (There being this Finnish saying how empty vessels make the loudest/most noise.) Then the moment the previous set of competition has gotten out-dated or repatative so there has to be constant updates, balancing just to keep these arbituary folk satisfied that will leave the moment the wind blows another direction. (Im fairly certain everybody has met these guys more than once. Their like locusts.)

But if you really really really have to shoehorn in PvP competition at least cut it in two. Indirect PvP (Where people compete againts each other indirectly like stats or scores or kill count in gauntlet like events people could maybe bet on. Cause where is competition there is always gona be people betting on it so why not aswell beat them to the punch?) and then Direct PvP where players are actually facing each other in either serious or non-serious manner. (I'd prefer the non-serious kind since it seems to diminish the rage factor quite alot. Like the Unreal tournament football thing except maybe you could do massive omnirframe tackles assisted by jets. Or some type of ridiculous form of martial arts where you cannot fly and your put in this small square ring and you need to blast your opponent off with this massive wind blower like Omniframe sumo wrestling.)

*by longevity i mean you can look at all the competitive games and how they are in this massive witches wheel they just have to keep feeding it to keep things going. That is sure way for a game to burn out especially if its just starting.

 

[AdmiralStryker]

The main competition of this game should be provided by the AI enemy that should adapt to counter us. While indirect PVP is okay, direct PVP should not ever be a focus of game development. If it's going to be implemented, give it a Sunken-Harbor style arena and leave it. Don't balance it. It should not be paid attention to. It's not a point of this game and should not be a selling point of it either.

 

[zdoofop]

I had enough of competitive gameplay pvp. I want to play em8er to relax and enjoy what I'm doing with other clan members and friends. I just want a pve relaxed and fun open world. If I want competitive gameplay I go to battlefield or CoD especially now that they are starting to go WWII.

this. If you want to pvp, there are plenty of other game to do it in. If you want to play em8er, play em8er the way it was meant to be enjoyed: as pve.

 

[EvilKitten]

...but don't forget that most shooter players tend to prefer fighting each other.

Um...Not to be Evil but...where is the evidence for this? I enjoy shooters and I hate PvP, and I suspect that there are many others like me. I'm not sure making a statement that "most" shooters prefer PvP, should be made without some hard number studies to back that up.

 

[Torgue_Joey]

ATLEAST NOT TILL PVE IS POLISHED AND DONE.

 

[pinkish]

^ AGREE AGREE AGREE AGREE AGREE AGREE
PVE first, and then we'll talk PVP

 

[Juggernaught]

Um...Not to be Evil but...where is the evidence for this? I enjoy shooters and I hate PvP, and I suspect that there are many others like me. I'm not sure making a statement that "most" shooters prefer PvP, should be made without some hard number studies to back that up.

While you are correct that I should provide numbers, I will not be providing them. At this time, I'm on my phone and won't feel like doing research for such a mundane reason. Instead, I will have you recall the overwhelming number of players who choose to continue playing against other players despite the repetitive nature of the game. Take Call of Duty, for example. People keep buying the games, and it's certainly not for their beautiful stories.

Let us also extend our range from shooters to games in general. Humans are, by nature, competitive. It comes from the"survival of the fittest" that is life in the wilderness. This is quite visible in the general popularity (despite the generally unpleasant community) of the MOBA genre.

I will not be providing numbers, but it's quite clear that fair competition is what keeps online games growing.

 

[pinkish]

I'm not against PVP, but one of the things I found to a problem with Firefall's PVP system is that player A with a level 10 can be challenged by Player B with a level 8 frame. And then before the match starts, player B quickly goes and switches to a level 25 frame and wins the match. I'm not sure if this was ever fixed, but I hope this doesn't become a problem for Ember. So I hope that after Ember polishes the PVE to it's prime, make PVP as fair as possible to avoid things like that.

 

[Juggernaught]

I'm not against PVP, but one of the things I found to a problem with Firefall's PVP system is that player A with a level 10 can be challenged by Player B with a level 8 frame. And then before the match starts, player B quickly goes and switches to a level 25 frame and wins the match. I'm not sure if this was ever fixed, but I hope this doesn't become a problem for Ember. So I hope that after Ember polishes the PVE to it's prime, make PVP as fair as possible to avoid things like that.

You are referring to the duel system. Standard PvP and the duel system should be discussed separately. There was instanced PvP and open world PvP, both with their own very different set of problems. The duel system was just a little bit of fun to be had whilst waiting around, although I will say that some frames dominated in that particular aspect.

 

[AdmiralStryker]

You are referring to the duel system. Standard PvP and the duel system should be discussed separately. There was instanced PvP and open world PvP, both with their own very different set of problems. The duel system was just a little bit of fun to be had whilst waiting around, although I will say that some frames dominated in that particular aspect.

There also shouldn't be as much of a power gap in Em8-er. There will be a gap, but not the kind that existed in Firefall's leveling system. Frames being designed for it will be hard to avoid though.

 

[raven0ak]

Some consideration would be event like outdoor bosses (could happen on set day each week or so) , pvp arena (I'd see on this type game it will be more on skill vs gear since gear vice competitors will be more on equal footing), competitions. (could also be "racing" from point a to point b while going through point c)

 

[Sik San]

The war is supposed to keep people engaged. Planetside 2 doesn't have much progression. It's the constant fighting, the constant push and shove that keeps people involved.

Exactly this ^.

If the gameplay is good, you can spend years playing. If it's bad - nothing will help. Like levels, new gear, costumes and other crap that modern game industry is shoveling in your face.

 

[203]

competitive (repetitive) ruined firefall. shouldn't be in ermber and if it's added, be totaly separate.

 

[Kuraja]

The only thing I fear about PVP is the fact that it forces a lot of games to change how their mechanics work. They balance a skill or change a mechanic to make it viable for PVP and often it impacts how PVE works.

 

[AdmiralStryker]

The only thing I fear about PVP is the fact that it forces a lot of games to change how their mechanics work. They balance a skill or change a mechanic to make it viable for PVP and often it impacts how PVE works.

If PVP and PVE are going to be in this game, they need to be separate, and I think a lot of people agree on that. Keep the balancing for both separate so that neither impacts the other.

 

[BunnyHunny]

There also shouldn't be as much of a power gap in Em8-er. There will be a gap, but not the kind that existed in Firefall's leveling system. Frames being designed for it will be hard to avoid though.

The power gap (during 1.3) between lvl 1 and the average lvl 40 player was smaller, than the power gap between the average lvl 40 player and a good lvl 40 player.
The gap was purely caused by skill.

What is your problem with such a high power gap?
Why should creating a good setup and playing well not result in a player being multiple times as effective as a person who put no thought what so ever in their setup and does not play well?




About this thread in general... only 55 people casted a vote, but 25 of them are against any kind of competitive aspect?
Any game that rewards skill or high impact gameplay is somehow competitive.
How can half of you be against that?
Basically all multiplayer games have some kind of competitive aspect.