PvP vs PvE

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

I'm a stalwart member of the Rocket Defence Force.

Why? Because it's so refreshing to see someone doing something different for a change.

We are entering a bit of a renaissance in gaming where people are voting with their feet and developers are being freed from the shackles of the big publishers. The recent successes such as minecraft are empowering people and developers. It's a great time.

But what I see is people constantly asking for DayZ to have PvE only servers. Safe zones etc.

To me these sorts of ideas belong in... other games. DayZ is all about tension, uncertainty , risk and most importantly player interactions - driven by the pressures of the game and tempered by the constant danger of betrayal. These features to me make DayZ and without that constant edge its, well just another game like many other out there.

I don't pretend to know Rockets mind but I can read his posts and see what he says his vision is, and personally I believe he is going to stick to that vision no matter what, success or failure. The mod has already made BI a shed tonne of money so his bargaining power to get ownership over the game is strong, as shown by his position of project lead for the standalone.

I fervently hope DayZ progresses this way , and I'm pretty sure most of the community are here for the same reasons as me.

So lets have a little poll see what people think.

TO clarify: PVE means servers or zones where you CANNOT kill other players.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Strategos

[NightRipper 284]

No to PvE, yes to a better "end-game."

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

Lol well lets keep focused here :)

[DarkwaveDomina 1099]

Before I answer, I need to ask someting...

This is a sandbox game, but I already consider myself a "primarily PvE" player. By which I mean I don't expect there to be safe zones or quests, or any daft crap like that, I just avoid Cherno/Elektro and try not to get in to engagements with players unless one is in my way. I'm simply a survivor and don't believe in "consensual PvP" in this particular game, I like PvP being a persistent threat.

So, what option do I choose? I don't want PvP to be impeded by any sort of mechanics at all, it's avoidable as is, but I don't see an option there that seems to fit my point of view.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Ulfhedjinn

[Zymi 64]

I don't mind PvE as long as there are seperate characters for PvP and PvE.

[SillySil 295]

PvE as in zombies are actually something more than just indicators that there are people around? Count me in.

[Zarathustra (DayZ) 87]

PvE servers and safe zones would destroy the game. In Rocket's own words:

the greatest threat comes not from the Zombies but from the breakdown of society and from the other people.

This is a PvP game; stop trying to undermine that. You will not get PvE servers; there will be no compromise on this. Go and play something else.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Zarathustra

[DarkwaveDomina 1099]

Okay, assuming that "PvE option" means consensual PvP and safe zones etc. I chose I don't think there should be a PvE option, that's not DayZ.

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

Hah was just replying Ulf , but you beat me to it.

I've added a bit of clarity to the bottom of the OP for the TLDR crowd.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Strategos

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

PvE servers and safe zones would destroy the game. In Rocket's own words:

This is a PvP game; stop trying to undermine that. You will not get PvE servers; there will be no compromise on this. Go and play something else.

I hope your not suggesting im trying to undermine this ? :)

[core.- 28]

Do you know whats ruining gaming these days? It isn't as simple as skill modifiers taking away pure skill in reaction time and anticipatory skills. It isnt as simple as milking gamers for their money cause they will take what they can get If there was an easy answer it would probably be more along the lines of:

Catering to each demographic.

Gaming was great in its hayday when gaming was difficult, hard to complete and near impossible to master. But most importantly there were no handicaps and a level playing field. LEVEL PLAYING FIELD YOU SAY!? BUT THAT PERSON INVESTED MORE THEN HALF THEIR LIFE TO MASTERING THEIR REACTION TIME AND LEARNING THE GAME! HOW IS THAT A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD!?

Because anyone "has" the ability to accomplish this feat. Some have talent. Some have natural skill. Some spend alot of hours of hard work to accomplish the same goals. Anyone can do it with enough time and motivation. This is where the clincher comes in. You dont have the time, or the motivation to become as good at the game as others that choose to do so? Fine. Accept that fact. Wait you cant accept that fact? Feel free to bitch and moan to the developers, call those people aimbotters and nolifers. Go ahead. No one is stopping you. It still however does not change the fact that you are less skilled than they are at a level playing field game.

(For anyone missing the essence here: This is about skill modifiers that simplify and attempt to nullify user input skill to even "the odds" thereby handicapping "progamers" and allowing even "noobs" to get a killing spree.)

DayZ is nothing more then a continuation of a proud tradition of level playing field gaming that was upheld nearly 2 decades ago.

Take the game for what it is or find a different sandbox to play in.

I strongly believe that catering to such demographics and segregating the community is a foolish move that too many developers have supported for too long.

tl;dr Seperation of pvp and pve servers will allow people to choose the easy way out which is a foolish move for a game whose developer has the mindset of a developer of 18 years ago and would lead DayZ away from that which makes it great.

[Travst 8]

In my experience, if there is a PvE option, then the two camps will fight about every change to the game. PvE folks want better gear and a greater variety of clothing. True PvP folks don't give a crap about gear progression. Then there's the group who grew up on WoW.... they want PvP in which they can dress up in costumes and wield mega-weapons and totally dominate the game because they can play all day, every day. :P

[SillySil 295]

Changed my vote to "no" then.

But I wish there was some danger from environment.

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

Well said core I agree 100%

As I hoped the majority (so far) understand,

So far Rocket shows every sign of sticking to his guns which i find very reassuring.

[Mammas_Boy 7]

Hitting the nail on the head.

There are plenty of games out there to quench the thirst of the player in need of a break from violence. This game nods it's decaying head towards realism, we all know it isn't purely realism but providing places such as safe zones completely counteracts with what 'Survival' really is.

Let's not weaken the game, let's make it stronger and hope for a better community of players to start working together. Maybe if we did more of that then these 'Safe zones' wouldn't be pined after so often.

Here's to more of a community when the stand alone game reaches us! :beans: HUZZAH!

[GlassArrows 11]

IMO, sure, add PvE. Just make those servers separate from PvP server, meaning that the chracters and items from those servers cannot in any way be transferred to the PvP area. This would expand the player base, and bring more revenue to the developer which results in extended support for the game and it's DLC.

[core.- 28]

So far Rocket shows every sign of sticking to his guns which i find very reassuring.

Agreed. Rocket is in charge and he knows it. He grew up in the same enviroment as a few of us. He was in a position where he could tell everyone to "take it or leave it" and actually said it.

The take it or leave it mentality IS the mentality of all developers these days but in most cases this refers to watered down versions of predecessors. If I have to name a few: Cod hasnt changed since Cod:MW, Saints row the third? :P, Kane and clank 2, the lynchoning! etc etc

Judging from the amount of people taking it.. they must really enjoy the game... or are "unbeknownst" to themselves pure masochists.

Some of us are pure sadists though. ;)

Anyway those are just my 2 cents in this.I will support rocket for as long as he will ignore the community as much as he has now.(The difference being: Major companies ignore the communites because they have their money already. Rocket ignores the community because its the community. He fixes bugs though! and creates new ones in the process.)

[Strategos (DayZ) 190]

Showing your age there Core ;)

[skullder 0]

This is a PvP game; stop trying to undermine that. You will not get PvE servers; there will be no compromise on this. Go and play something else.

Until DayZ is free mod one can say that there will be no compromise. Things get complicated when they plan to sell this as a standalone product. Personally, if there won't be PvP / PvE server choice (with separate characters OFC) or some sort of murder punishment = no buy for me and I'll follow your advice and go buy and play something else. It would be insane to invest my money and limited time that I have for gaming in something that I have to start again over and over because some idiot shot me for fun.

[tonkin97 22]

THIS IS NOT WOW

ADAPT OR DIE!!

Edited August 9, 2012 by tonkin97

[[email protected] 22]

I think a safe area would be a good idea, but I don't get how it would work. I mean would it be a building or area of the map? Then all will happen is people will camp it farming players coming in and out. But I do think there needs to be some kinda of central hub where you can meet and talk to new players without being killed... like a chat channel ^^

Edited August 9, 2012 by FRANCEY

[Barronism 88]

Ignoring your biased post.

He made this thread in regards to another thread where the OP wanted there to be an option during the standalone version of this game for servers to host pve only servers. There would be NO difference in game play from zombies or loot in anyway, except the lack of pvp. Players could still steal from you, players could take your cars, however they couldn't sit ontop of a hill in Elektro and shoot you five minutes after you spawned just because they're bored. No one in that thread wanted anything different, they will find their own forms of entertainment and there is no reason what so ever why both sides can't enjoy the game. None at all.

Pvpers will not have to play on pve servers and vice versa. PLay what you like, that is the point of a sandbox. To play the game how you like it.

Hitting the nail on the head.

There are plenty of games out there to quench the thirst of the player in need of a break from violence. This game nods it's decaying head towards realism, we all know it isn't purely realism but providing places such as safe zones completely counteracts with what 'Survival' really is.

Let's not weaken the game, let's make it stronger and hope for a better community of players to start working together. Maybe if we did more of that then these 'Safe zones' wouldn't be pined after so often.

Here's to more of a community when the stand alone game reaches us! :beans: HUZZAH!

"Let's not weaken the game". So I guess ignoring a huge marketing and player base that would bring in a lot more money into the game to allow for the further development and increased fun of the game doesn't "weaken the game". There should be as many options to play style as possible to ensure the strongest possible future for this game. We love the game, so lets try to help it actually become something. Instead of acting selfish.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Barronism

[esham (DayZ) 25]

Safe zone like Stormwind, I don't think so. Also no to auction houses :P

[NobodieCro 11]

Why don't they add PVE and PVP ? I just don't see why not ?

In PVE finding ammo and weapons would be like finding Heli crashes (if you didn't know their locations) .

[Barronism 88]

Safe zone like Stormwind, I don't think so. Also no to auction houses :P

Read posts before replying.

None of us wanted "safe zones". The OP is misleading people to try to get you to vote no.