PDA

View Full Version : PvP Battlegrounds. Do you want it?



Angelo
Jul 11, 2011, 06:18 PM
PvP is something that's pretty commonplace and popular in just about every online game.

For those of you unfamiliar with the 'battlegrounds' model in current MMOs, it's basically just an instanced map where you have two teams either try to complete objectives while fighting eachother.

PSPo2 had some pretty interesting versions of this, but they were still pretty small and fairly buggy. I did have a lot of fun with them.

Battle mode (in the Phantasy games) traditionally has players start out with the same gear, at the same level. I think this was fine, but it'd be more interesting to see the franchise get up to speed with the 'battlegrounds' of today.

Having two teams with their customized characters and gear competing for points or prizes could breathe a ton of life into a game like this and keep us playing even once we've hit the cap.

Now before anyone tells me 'go back to WoW', the last thing I want is to turn this game into some terrible, played out, WRPG-looking, mill of monotony.

D-Inferno
Jul 11, 2011, 06:22 PM
It would be awesome if PSO2 had a more dedicated Battle Mode/PvP; not only would it greatly increase the replay value, but it would also add a little bit of competition to the whole game.

BIG OLAF
Jul 11, 2011, 06:42 PM
No. Phantasy Star isn't really about PvP. At least not to me. It's a co-operative game series, not competitive.

Shinji Kazuya
Jul 11, 2011, 06:44 PM
Sure. If it's something similar to Phantasy Star Portable 2 Battle Mode then yes.

yoshiblue
Jul 11, 2011, 06:46 PM
If its anything like FEZ i'm all in. Otherwise no.

Vashyron
Jul 11, 2011, 06:52 PM
Don't really mind, if it's "good" I'll join in, if "bad" I'll stay the heck away.

zombiemoshpit84
Jul 11, 2011, 06:54 PM
why would anyone say no to this?! its not as if you HAVE to battle. its optional... i respect your opinion OLAF but i dont see how it could hurt unless there are titles, items or quests exclusive to sed battle arena. this would be a bad idea IMO what would be cool if instead or those type of rewards you could wager small amounts of meseta instead. in pso there were those "my build is better then your build" moments that could be settled in a fare contest. psu was lacking this.

Pillan
Jul 11, 2011, 07:06 PM
I have to say that I much prefer the philosophy that Sonic Team has taken with the previous games. That is to say, release the game. Fix the character/class stats in the sequel, and add battle mode to that. No point in having a battle mode when HUcast's max stats are the same as HUmar's minus the TP.

Dragwind
Jul 11, 2011, 07:19 PM
I'd welcome the idea as there's plenty of potential yet again, but wouldn't be that upset if it didn't exist.

Zyrusticae
Jul 11, 2011, 07:20 PM
See, there's several fundamental problems with having a PvP mode.

First is the simple resource drain - that is to say, it requires developers to take time off from doing whatever else they would be doing for the regular game to develop the PvP modes. There's a lot of potential content that could be lost there.

Second is the core gameplay, which really isn't built for PvP. If I were to venture a guess, PvP in PSO2 would be a matter of who lands the first blow. It's NOT built for it. I'd much rather have a game that works more like a 3D fighter, with jabs and heavy strikes and everything in-between. As it is, it'd just be a spamfest.

Finally, related to the second point, game balance would very quickly suffer from the inclusion of PvP. Either that, or PvP itself is almost entirely pointless because the game is NOT balanced for it. I don't want to play tacked-on PvP, thank you very much, and I even less want to play PvP where my victory is determined at the outset by my class.

yoshiblue
Jul 11, 2011, 07:21 PM
It would be broken. In FEZ there wasn't really any stats other then HP and MP. Armor and weps didn't do much either. It was all skill based (other then the shadow steping and some famous laggers) and constant rebalancing. Who can land their hit and how they use that skill to help themselves and others.


See, there's several fundamental problems with having a PvP mode.

First is the simple resource drain - that is to say, it requires developers to take time off from doing whatever else they would be doing for the regular game to develop the PvP modes. There's a lot of potential content that could be lost there.

Second is the core gameplay, which really isn't built for PvP. If I were to venture a guess, PvP in PSO2 would be a matter of who lands the first blow. It's NOT built for it. I'd much rather have a game that works more like a 3D fighter, with jabs and heavy strikes and everything in-between. As it is, it'd just be a spamfest.

Finally, related to the second point, game balance would very quickly suffer from the inclusion of PvP. Either that, or PvP itself is almost entirely pointless because the game is NOT balanced for it. I don't want to play tacked-on PvP, thank you very much, and I even less want to play PvP where my victory is determined at the outset by my class.

Even if it wasn't balanced, people would play it. Yoshi vs Marth, who do you think would most likely win?

Tetsaru
Jul 11, 2011, 07:29 PM
I'm kinda on the fence on this one. While I think it could potentially be cool, the iterations of it in previous games have been really shitty:

PSO's PvP mode was horribly imbalanced. If you had a good ranged attack or Megid, you pretty much dominated. As for Go-Go Ball(?), I never got online on PSO, so I can't say anything about it... wasn't it like a soccer game of some sort? Kinda seems out of place to me, but whatever.

The closest thing PSU had to PvP were the online event minigames: Floader and Airboard races (which both controlled like SHIT and were the only appearances vehicles made online, to my knowledge), and that one weird one with the big room and the fences and traps trying to kill you, which I didn't play that much of because I thought it was stupid. And if I recall, PSU offline didn't even support multiplayer, so you were pretty much screwed in that regard. However, I liked the idea of having a casino in the game, despite the fact that there wasn't really any PvP involved (closest thing was probably the giant roulette wheel and people betting on different spaces). Hopefully PSO2 can expand upon that feature.

PSO Ep. III's card battles was probably the coolest PvP feature in my opinion, but then again, I never got online with it. I could see PSO2 possibly bringing this back and having various cards drop as items from enemies, similar to how FFIX did with its Tetra Master mini-game. Of course, you'd still have the issue of people constructing much better decks than you, and certain "tiers" of decks being established as a result. However, if the casino made a comeback, then I think this could be a cool game to implement into it.

Overall, I just think there needs to be some new, more fun, and more polished PvP modes available that aren't necessarily "go kill each other." I also like the idea of having multiple teams competing against each other, like some sort of "capture the flag" or other objective-based missions. Throw in some unique items that the teams could win (or find hidden on the maps!) and use in actual combat outside of the PvP modes, and I think people would start to take an interest in it.

Mike
Jul 11, 2011, 08:06 PM
The soccer lobbies were fun. However, all battle modes have been horribly balanced so I would say no.

zombiemoshpit84
Jul 11, 2011, 09:00 PM
See, there's several fundamental problems with having a PvP mode.

First is the simple resource drain - that is to say, it requires developers to take time off from doing whatever else they would be doing for the regular game to develop the PvP modes. There's a lot of potential content that could be lost there.

Second is the core gameplay, which really isn't built for PvP. If I were to venture a guess, PvP in PSO2 would be a matter of who lands the first blow. It's NOT built for it. I'd much rather have a game that works more like a 3D fighter, with jabs and heavy strikes and everything in-between. As it is, it'd just be a spamfest.

Finally, related to the second point, game balance would very quickly suffer from the inclusion of PvP. Either that, or PvP itself is almost entirely pointless because the game is NOT balanced for it. I don't want to play tacked-on PvP, thank you very much, and I even less want to play PvP where my victory is determined at the outset by my class.
first, pvp is not a resource drain. its the devs job to make the game. pvp is part of the game. second, to say a game isnt built for pvp is something you would say about a game you have already played. its just too soon to comment on any balance issues. that being sed its clear you are talking about past ps games NOT PSO2.

yoshiblue
Jul 11, 2011, 09:39 PM
Hey with all the unbalancing of the classes in their games so far. One would expect this one to be unbalanced as well.

NoiseHERO
Jul 11, 2011, 09:41 PM
If PVP wasn't taken WAAAAAAY too seriously to begin with.. it wouldn't matter if we had it or not. But just having it would be more things to do in this game in general.

yoshiblue
Jul 11, 2011, 09:44 PM
Heh heh. You should check out Mabinogi's EvG war. They take that a little too far.

ARASHIKAGE
Jul 11, 2011, 10:05 PM
Of course I voted yes for PvP, although I didn't play it much on PSO, I hear it is still fun and some players even play it competitively now days. If you take away the rights to buff and debuff, and Megid (basically nurff forces), evening things so it's rather balanced. Still boring though in my opinion. As it was mentioned before if you don't want to battle you don't have to, so there's no reason not want it. Although we will have at one guy in the lobby spamming; "who wants to battle me?" over and over again.

Personally I think it adds something more to the game; a sense of pride and achivment. Debates can be settled or you can just blast your friends for fun. Really why would anyone be so against this?


Even if it wasn't balanced, people would play it. Yoshi vs Marth, who do you think would most likely win?

Well among skilled SSB Melee players, Marth is the higher tier and is a better overall fighter. But Yoshi can't be effected while returning to the level so that takes away Marth's "gimping" capabilities. If it was a seasoned Yoshi player I might give the nod to Yoshi on this one.

I'm sorry was this not a real question?

FOkyasuta
Jul 11, 2011, 10:06 PM
Eh. They might just bring the battle mode some how. Even if it is like a arena of some sort.


Heh heh. You should check out Mabinogi's EvG war. They take that a little too far.

Snipe.

Zyrusticae
Jul 11, 2011, 10:11 PM
Even if it wasn't balanced, people would play it. Yoshi vs Marth, who do you think would most likely win?
Of course people will play it. That doesn't matter - what matter is how many. It's simple allocation of limited resources - they can't throw an infinite number of devs at it, SOMEONE is going to be redirected to it and the rest of the game suffers for it as a result. That part of the game must be well and truly awesome to justify the expense. If only a small handful of hardcore faithful play it (like in Champions Online's PvP), it simply ends up a waste of time and money.


Also, Smash Brothers is actually built for PvP. PSO2 is not, and probably never will be.\


first, pvp is not a resource drain. its the devs job to make the game. pvp is part of the game. second, to say a game isnt built for pvp is something you would say about a game you have already played. its just too soon to comment on any balance issues. that being sed its clear you are talking about past ps games NOT PSO2.
Y'know when someone says something so incredibly ignorant that you don't even know where to begin?

This is one of those posts.

yoshiblue
Jul 11, 2011, 10:19 PM
Well among skilled SSB Melee players, Marth is the higher tier and is a better overall fighter. But Yoshi can't be effected while returning to the level so that takes away Marth's "gimping" capabilities. If it was a seasoned Yoshi player I might give the nod to Yoshi on this one.

I'm sorry was this not a real question?

It was. Thats why I said who is to most likely win. But your right, A skilled Yoshi would best marth. I have to keep myself from telling smash bro war storys.



Of course people will play it. That doesn't matter - what matter is how many. It's simple allocation of limited resources - they can't throw an infinite number of devs at it, SOMEONE is going to be redirected to it and the rest of the game suffers for it as a result. That part of the game must be well and truly awesome to justify the expense. If only a small handful of hardcore faithful play it (like in Champions Online's PvP), it simply ends up a waste of time and money. Also, Smash Brothers is actually built for PvP. PSO2 is not, and probably never will be.\



Heh, I saw tiers( A term I kinda hate hearing) and decided to put Smash Bros into it.

NoiseHERO
Jul 11, 2011, 10:22 PM
Wasn't part of the reason this game got moved to being PC only... was so we wouldn't have these imaginary "limited resources" problem? It's not like we KNOW what they're gonna do with the other 95% of the game we haven't seen yet.

yoshiblue
Jul 11, 2011, 10:36 PM
Theme Parks! NiGHTS! Cafes! Coffee! Space! Space battles! Boarding partys! Drama! Explosions! Crash landings! Summons! Transformations! People! Creatures! Sweet rides! A mall! Black markets! Illegal ship modifications! Morons! Raids! Evil! Good! Opportunists! That one guy! Green Hill Zone! BANHAMMERS! Eco the Dolphin! Frecken monkeys! Oddly dress civvies! The list gos on!!!

Zyrusticae
Jul 11, 2011, 10:37 PM
Wasn't part of the reason this game got moved to being PC only... was so we wouldn't have these imaginary "limited resources" problem? It's not like we KNOW what they're gonna do with the other 95% of the game we haven't seen yet.

Oh my god.

REALITY CHECK TIME: Resources are always limited. ALWAYS. It is about as imaginary as the light of the sun and the ground beneath your feet is freakin' imaginary. Funding is limited; funding informs staff size, which means the number of staff working on the project is limited; and the number of staff working on the project informs the amount of man-hours going into its production, hence, there is a limited quantity of production resources going into the game. Do not try to pretend Sega is rolling in money and can magically conjure up developers from thin air!

BIG OLAF
Jul 11, 2011, 10:42 PM
The main problem I have with PvP is that it just gives people another reason to try and be "better" than everyone else; another reason to act like an asshole, and would just lead to too much trouble. For instance:

In lobby:

*random guy walks up to me*

Random Guy: "Hey, scrub. Want to PvP?"

Me: "Erm, no thanks. I'm just waiting for a friend to get on."

Random Guy: "Yeah right. You probably know I'll beat you, faggot. You suck."

Me: .....

I think it would lead to more problems than solutions in terms of social gameplay aspects. That's all. I was just commenting on the fact people were saying "You don't have to play it just because it's in the game!". True, but that won't stop others from ridiculing you for not wanting to partake in it.

NoiseHERO
Jul 11, 2011, 10:55 PM
Oh my god.

REALITY CHECK TIME: Resources are always limited. ALWAYS. It is about as imaginary as the light of the sun and the ground beneath your feet is freakin' imaginary. Funding is limited; funding informs staff size, which means the number of staff working on the project is limited; and the number of staff working on the project informs the amount of man-hours going into its production, hence, there is a limited quantity of production resources going into the game. Do not try to pretend Sega is rolling in money and can magically conjure up developers from thin air!

Your exaggerated overreactions must make trolls feel REALLY happy. Calm down. o_O

You're acting like it's a greatest sin leading to the end of the world over something that's not your choice anyway. :0

It's not like we haven't had PVP before, and they seemed to have PLENTY of room for it in the past whether it worked out or not, it was there.

If we have, cool something to kill time when we're not grinding for rares 24-7.

If we don't, meh I can live without it.

RemiusTA
Jul 11, 2011, 10:56 PM
of course i want PVP. It's a great past time to grinding.

Zyrusticae
Jul 11, 2011, 11:05 PM
Your exaggerated overreactions must make trolls feel REALLY happy. Calm down. o_O
This is impossible. I am never calm. I am ALWAYS angry and ALWAYS raging. There is absolutely no situation that does not send me flying into a frothing, unfathomable rage[/sarcasm].

Really, don't try to discern my emotional state from my ramblings. That is incredibly silly. Just because I am offended by stupidity and tend to use a condescending tone does not mean I am angry or having an aneurysm.

Also, I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt and not assume they are trolling me (although in some cases, I kind of wish they were because they make me fear for the state of the human race).

Dragwind
Jul 11, 2011, 11:21 PM
The main problem I have with PvP is that it just gives people another reason to try and be "better" than everyone else; another reason to act like an asshole, and would just lead to too much trouble. For instance:

In lobby:

*random guy walks up to me*

Random Guy: "Hey, scrub. Want to PvP?"

Me: "Erm, no thanks. I'm just waiting for a friend to get on."

Random Guy: "Yeah right. You probably know I'll beat you, faggot. You suck."

Me: .....

I think it would lead to more problems than solutions in terms of social gameplay aspects. That's all. I was just commenting on the fact people were saying "You don't have to play it just because it's in the game!". True, but that won't stop others from ridiculing you for not wanting to partake in it.

That actually made me chuckle a bit, because I see that happen in nearly every MMO I've ever played. Yes, that will happen but your response is probably the best way to avoid it. Just say no thanks and move on.


I don't see any reason why there wouldn't be some form of PVP. Sega has proven they haven't entirely let it go, and PSO2 being, well, a PSO game, it should have some sort of BA mode....

but please, just no tiny spikey-haired HUmars hiding behind walls with handguns again, please

NoiseHERO
Jul 11, 2011, 11:26 PM
This is impossible. I am never calm. I am ALWAYS angry and ALWAYS raging. There is absolutely no situation that does not send me flying into a frothing, unfathomable rage[/sarcasm].

Really, don't try to discern my emotional state from my ramblings. That is incredibly silly. Just because I am offended by stupidity and tend to use a condescending tone does not mean I am angry or having an aneurysm.

Also, I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt and not assume they are trolling me (although in some cases, I kind of wish they were because they make me fear for the state of the human race).

Your "condescending tone" just sounds like angry video game nerd, so yeah.

CALM YO SHIT, SON!

Zyrusticae
Jul 11, 2011, 11:39 PM
Unfortunately for you, my writing during a "calm" state is indistinguishable from my previous writing. :roll:

Angelo
Jul 11, 2011, 11:49 PM
The main problem I have with PvP is that it just gives people another reason to try and be "better" than everyone else; another reason to act like an asshole, and would just lead to too much trouble. For instance:

In lobby:

*random guy walks up to me*

Random Guy: "Hey, scrub. Want to PvP?"

Me: "Erm, no thanks. I'm just waiting for a friend to get on."

Random Guy: "Yeah right. You probably know I'll beat you, faggot. You suck."

Me: .....

That even happened in PSO with B-mode.

Another thing I want to point out is that in most modern games, PvP is not balanced for 1v1. That's the trend, and it's a damn good one. It just seems like Phantasy Star is a franchise that could benefit from cooperative PvP battlegrounds.

NoiseHERO
Jul 12, 2011, 12:06 AM
Unfortunately for you, my writing during a "calm" state is indistinguishable from my previous writing. :roll:

NOpe!

RemiusTA
Jul 12, 2011, 12:34 AM
When i get out of an argument on these boards, and then go into another topic and see the other arguments going on, i really feel stupid because i realize just how dumb you look when you fight over trivial stuff.

These arguments are dumb.


1) PVP is not a "resource drain". If it's on the schedule of development for the game, its what they want to work on. It isn't "taking time" out of anything else, unless they specifically say it is. And usually when that happens, it doesn't end up making the cut.

2) PVP and social problems....no. Just no. That's really a personal problem if you're deeply insulted because someone gets mad at you for not wanting to PvP. It's no different than someone getting mad at you because you dont want to run White Beast. Ignore them and go on with your business...

3)Nobody is asking for Tekken 6 / Blazblue balance with Halo Reach / Gears of War 3 gameplay options. Just PvP, something similar to PSP2 except fleshed out.


And as long as the game ITSELF is solid, then the PVP will be equally as fun. PSP2 introduced blocking and dodge rolling, but still suffered from terrible photon art imbalances and whatnot. PSO2 features all of the above with a new combo system. And probably a new blocking / dodging system, as well as class balances. But more importantly, the environments can be Dynamic because you can jump now. This means multi-level stages.

All they need are a plethora of normal PVP and standard rules PVP (set level, set equipment, ect ect). There's nothing more awesome than playing a guy in PVP, killing him and stealing his super rare weapon just to kill him with it later. Capture the Flag, Free for All, Team Battle, King of the Hill....the new possibilities with PSO2's engine could be endless for great PVP applications, guys.


But more importantly than PvP, we should be discussing an Arena mode or something. I'd like to see some platforming stage races with puzzles and stuff. When you really think about it, there is a crapload of things they could do.


It really makes me LOL when someone suggests a new way to enjoy the game and people shoot it down. Why would you do that :-0

Angelo
Jul 12, 2011, 12:41 AM
But more importantly than PvP, we should be discussing an Arena mode or something. I'd like to see some platforming stage races with puzzles and stuff. When you really think about it, there is a crapload of things they could do.


That would be really cool. Maybe even for people who aren't fans of direct player confrontation, something like 'see who can kill the most mobs in the room' could be pretty cool. Like a little mini Maximum Attack G (Do they still call it that? I'm an old-timer) whenever you want between friends.

RemiusTA
Jul 12, 2011, 12:46 AM
Anyone remember the Subterranean Desert from PSO Ep4? Remember the final block of it, with the quicksand areas and the part where you fight over the bridge with lava under it, with fireballs jumping past you while you fight?

I was thinking stages with hazards similar to that would be awesome. Platforming and avoiding traps, as well as not falling down in hazards while you battle.

I could see it getting annoying, but as long as PSO2's attacks dont wizz you off uncontrollably, i can see it working pretty well. In the trailer the Lock-on system seems to work pretty well.

I can see situations like that also being really great for teamwork. Rangers can stay out of danger and snipe, forces can dip in and out for support and ranged attacks, and hunters can keep the other players safe by jumping from platform to platform fighting off the enemies.


I dunno, just quick brainstorming. Combine that kind of stuff with Player vs Player action, and you have some great fun.

Angelo
Jul 12, 2011, 12:48 AM
Bah... you're getting me hyped for shit that isn't even in the game!

RemiusTA
Jul 12, 2011, 12:51 AM
yeah ill shut up now : /


Honestly, the chance of stuff like that ending up in the game is pretty low. But it couldn't be too difficult to implement. Programming the AI for the enemies would be the only real significant effort from them. But since they have shown lots of random pre-scripted sequences happining in the stages anyway, if they were to script them then it could still be really fun to play.

NoiseHERO
Jul 12, 2011, 12:51 AM
It really makes me LOL when someone suggests a new way to enjoy the game and people shoot it down. Why would you do that :-0

Because new Ideas are concentrated evil the represent nothing but malicious sodomization of this game because it has to be absolutely perfect by being "MY IDEA."

Because PSO2 is windows 7.

FOkyasuta
Jul 12, 2011, 12:58 AM
Because PSO2 is windows 78.

Didn't hear the news huh?

NoiseHERO
Jul 12, 2011, 01:01 AM
I did,

But they said "Windows 8 is not YOUR idea"

You know that "It was my idea" crap windows 7 was advertising.

Or at least this is what my random news feeds tell me.

RemiusTA
Jul 12, 2011, 01:21 AM
i like windows 7. Puts XP and Trashsta to shame.

BIG OLAF
Jul 12, 2011, 01:23 AM
2) PVP and social problems....no. Just no. That's really a personal problem if you're deeply insulted because someone gets mad at you for not wanting to PvP. It's no different than someone getting mad at you because you dont want to run White Beast. Ignore them and go on with your business...

Well, I was just stating how I feel, which I'm allowed to do. It's not "just no" to me. Thanks.

I think the reason that I find myself in a "situation" with you ofttimes is because sometimes you're just so (for lack of a better word) rude. I mean, instead of saying something like "no, just no", you could have said "well, I don't think that's the case, because.." Honestly, I think that's why a lot of people give you flak sometimes. You should attempt and choose better wording, because it sorta does make you come off as, as Siyamak said in the other thread, some kind of posting elitist.

That's my two cents. Not meant to be offensive. Just advising. No need to spark another giant debate.

RemiusTA
Jul 12, 2011, 11:10 AM
I wasn't talking to anyone in particular, Olaf.

BIG OLAF
Jul 12, 2011, 11:11 AM
Obviously. That doesn't really diminish my point, though.

Zyrusticae
Jul 12, 2011, 11:21 AM
1) PVP is not a "resource drain". If it's on the schedule of development for the game, its what they want to work on. It isn't "taking time" out of anything else, unless they specifically say it is. And usually when that happens, it doesn't end up making the cut.
Gawd, seriously? You've got to be kidding me.

How can PvP in PSO2 be anything other than a useless third leg? Has Sega EVER made a decent PvP game?

Have you played PvP in Vindictus? Because it's very similar to what'll end up in PSO2 - an unbalanced, pointless mess that consists of pretty much no skill whatsoever.

I mean, chripes, think about how PvP games normally function! Fighters work by having a variety of attacks with different levels of priority, creating a complex rock-paper-scissors contest to lock an opponent down with mind games. Shooters... well, they're shooters.

PSO2, on the other hand, would consist almost entirely of people poking at each other until one gets caught in the other's series of hit stuns, completely unable to do shit until they're done with their combo. That, or it's just a boring-arse DPS race.

Prove me wrong. Show me a single ARPG-type game with PvP that actually works and isn't a worthless side show. I'm waiting.

Angelo
Jul 12, 2011, 12:34 PM
Gawd, seriously? You've got to be kidding me.

How can PvP in PSO2 be anything other than a useless third leg? Has Sega EVER made a decent PvP game?

Have you played PvP in Vindictus? Because it's very similar to what'll end up in PSO2 - an unbalanced, pointless mess that consists of pretty much no skill whatsoever.

I've also played Tera, which played similar to PSO and had some fairly balanced battlegrounds.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkze3WTv8Cg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kU8Q9_tb0Wc&feature=related

Continent of the 9th actually has a very, very similar combat system to PSO2 and their PvP community is very active, and the team PvP is nicely balanced..


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzUzm2O0c9k

Edit: I totally forgot about DC Universe! While a genre that comes a bit out of left field... the action combat is nice and the PvP community is HUGE. In fact the game is nearly based around faction vs faction. Actually, this game has EXACTLY what I'm talking about in terms of 'capture the flag' and battlezones with lava pits/traps/etc.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BHF17iOw48&feature=related

Either way, saying a feature in a game is a 'drain' because it doesn't interest you is sort of a strange thing to say. I considered C-mode a 'drain' of resources because I never played it, but if it's content that people enjoyed then it's not really a drain.

If they went this game to do well internationally it would be kind've nice to see them put some effort into PvP. It seems the Japanese fans really favor time attacks and C-mode, while it seems like a fairly niche and hardcore thing over here. In the West gamers really enjoy their PvP and battlegrounds, while it seems to be a bit of a niche thing in Japan. Not trying to create an east vs west argument.

I've played B-mode in all the Phantasy Star games, Vindictus, C9, DCUO and Tera so I'm not going to lie and say that PvP is never unbalanced, but I will say that in some cases it can balance out quite nicely, especially in team vs team environments.

RemiusTA
Jul 12, 2011, 12:39 PM
Gawd, seriously? You've got to be kidding me.

How can PvP in PSO2 be anything other than a useless third leg? Has Sega EVER made a decent PvP game?

Well, there's Virtua Fighter. I think it's boring, but apparently it's quite balanced.



Have you played PvP in Vindictus? Because it's very similar to what'll end up in PSO2 - an unbalanced, pointless mess that consists of pretty much no skill whatsoever. You do realize you just compared a released Nexon game (seriously? Nexon?) to an alpha Sonic Team game that we barely know any info on aside from that you can slash jump shoot and block. That makes no sense, bro.


I mean, chripes, think about how PvP games normally function! Fighters work by having a variety of attacks with different levels of priority, creating a complex rock-paper-scissors contest to lock an opponent down with mind games. Shooters... well, they're shooters. Most games simplify intricate frame counts by simply adopting a parry-counter system.

Honestly, i believe good fighting games are best built upon their defensive systems. Predict and Punish, with a bit of mixup based on your moveset. If PSO2 is strictly Just-guard, then the game will basically be a contest of bait and counter. If you are allowed to guard normally, then it really wont be much different than a lower fighting game. Even super powerful moves can be baited and punished accordingly.





PSO2, on the other hand, would consist almost entirely of people poking at each other until one gets caught in the other's series of hit stuns, completely unable to do shit until they're done with their combo. That, or it's just a boring-arse DPS race. That's....exactly how most fighters play, dude. Blazblue? Tekken 6? Street Fighter? The whole game is either a) poking to induce a defense flaw to open up for a combo, or b) predicting what the opponent will do in order to get a counterhit. Then there is c), throw out random moves, get them blocked and then severely punished.

Like i said, the defensive system is what will truely tell the story. You need your attacks to be built with PvP in mind of course, but the biggest factor is how you're able to put the variable of you getting hit or not within your own hands.



Prove me wrong. Show me a single ARPG-type game with PvP that actually works and isn't a worthless side show. I'm waiting.Okay. Like i said, most games simplify intricate frame counts by simply adopting a parry-counter system.

Examples?



Final Fantasy Dissidia. Move startups/cooldowns are more or less standard throughout the roster, but approaches are what's mainly the difference. The point of the game is basically to force an opponent to block or dodge at the wrong time.




An example of an MMO that's achieved a sort of balanced PvP system? Google an old Korean MMO called "Survival Project". Insanely simple battle system, yet ridiculously fun and competitive matches. I used to play alot when i was younger, but all but the Korean versions are shut down now.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wu85m2HLYmc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yT3uw8d4zI&feature=related

Surprisingly deep battle system. 2 attacks (ranged and melee), a run button, and a defense button. An MP bar for attacks, a BP bar for movement. That's it. [spoiler-box]You equipped different element items, which all simply altered your basic attack attributes. Wind = Speed over Power+Stamina. Water = Stamina over Power+Knockback. Fire = Power over Speed. Earth = Knockback over power. Different types of items altered these differently (sword/axe/staff/bow).

Combine that with the defensive/movement items, and throw in status effects (negating healing, removing ability to run, poison, ect) and special item abilities (Acceleration, invisibility, absorption, ect) And you have some hella fun team battles. [/spoiler-box]

Take a simple concept and build upon it, and you have something surprisingly deep. That game is THE deepest MMO i've ever played. It is, in fact, competitive.



Super Smash Brothers Melee. (although that falls more in the category of a bit more in-depth fighters once you get into it, because it involves combos.) You block moves you dont want to be hit by, Sidestep moves you see coming, and attack when you get the chance. Maybe a bad example for this conversation, but you get the point.



Simple can evolve to very complicated quickly as long as you design the game with the options in mind.


But of course, PSO2 probably wont be designed with PvP in mind. Doesn't matter. If a game doesn't TRY to be competitive in nature, it can still be great to play other people in. Just look at Marvel vs. Capcom 3, or Super Smash Bros. Brawl. Nobody is asking for Phantasy Star: Third Strike or anything.

bns1991
Jul 12, 2011, 03:02 PM
I want it. I think they should definitely do it.

Akaimizu
Jul 12, 2011, 03:14 PM
I think it would be fine, just that you just have to accept that in all likelihood, it'll be an unbalanced mess. But people will try and have some fun at first, only to neglect the whole thing later. No longevity in these things.

Of course, Challenge mode stuff should always be in. Considering they are neat ways to always benefit party play and supporting each other. They do so in a typical better fashion than normal missions do.

I thought they had an interesting idea in PSP2, by having battlegrounds with jumps and other things in it. Kind of something to really spice up the gameplay. Technically, the only thing breaking it was something that could be tweaked a little. A few small adjustments, and it could definitely have been a nice constant distraction away from regular PS play. Since it hints at the idea of a battle mode that plays quite differently than the regular play, yet including enough familiar mechanics to not divorce it entirely, I thought it was a novel approach.

Of course, SEGA can do lots of great PVP. Just that Sonic Team has never made that their forte (unless it is racing, and they licensed someone honed on racing games like Sumo). (Though I'm still in love with the Sonic R music) Technically, if they grabbed folks from other Sega divisions, they could make a kick butt PVP. SEGA did give us Virtua Fighter and Virtual On.

AzureBlaze
Jul 12, 2011, 03:58 PM
Has anyone from OLD PSO battle mode come in here?
I may well be the only one left.

Anyway, back on Dreamcast, you could find a balance among your own class (HU vs HU for example--or teams with 1 force on each, or one ranger on each & etc) FO fighting had to be done only among forces, for the most part, because you could attack over/through walls & etc.

But I wanted to post because the idea of "Battle Rules" has been left out of the discussion.
It was a feature from PSO that actually made battle good. PSU and the portables kind of got rid of it, and Gamecube messed it up. It should at least be brought up again.

Most of the battles talked about here seem to be people coming in with their natural equipment and just free for alling or doing capture the flag, or collect the most money/drop money when you die. There were rules like that too, with huge levels, but they never caught on much.

Only certain rules with rather small battlegrounds were most popular.
Rule 6, the most popular rule, took place in 1 small room with walls and laser fences. It might not sound exciting but people really had it to a high art. It reset your level, and your stuff. You could use traps, and wepdropped when you died. You could only use the things you found in crates on the level. If you died you had a set number of respawns (lvling by like 5 every time)

For battles like how they had it set up...you had to use totally different strategy than you did with the monsters. It was really hard to do well against other people. Because the RULE had so much control, it kept it interesting. Not a lot of people did the 'natural rule 1' which let you in the way you were (all your stuff, class, lvl, mag etc) as it WAS kind of dull. So if you were only expecting something like that, you'd be against it.

Battle wasn't for everyone
It was really hard to do well, but the hardcore community was pretty big until the Cube
But I would rather see some kind of mode, with rules, than another white beast
More ways to use a game are always better in my opinion
PSO didn't open with PVP either, they threw it in later on, once everyone had been satisfied with lots of other extra quests & etc. Then once BA was implemented, they went on and added more normal content for everyone too. (original PSO made the idea work, can it happen again?)

You can prob. still find videos around on youtube of people posting their exploits at this, though I don't know how interesting it'll look if you're not quite sure what's going on, and you never tried it.

RemiusTA
Jul 12, 2011, 04:05 PM
PSO Episode III. Sonic Team is more than capable at good PvP.


Well, they were. They just have to focus on it. Granted, the people who did EpIII are seemingly not the same people who did PSU or PSP2. But regardless, they are more than competent in creating in-depth versus systems.




But I wanted to post because the idea of "Battle Rules" has been left out of the discussion.


Absolutely. This is what made PSO's battle mode fun for anyone who actually played it.

It adds flavor and surprise to the matches. I dont know how the Dreamcast rules differed from the Gamecube rules, but i always had fun either way. And then, there was the super hilarious fact that if you entered Battle Mode and didn't go through any rulesets and just played the game regularly, it'd be the same except for the fact you could target your teammates. (me and my buddies offline would use it to battle our characters for laughs. Of course Forces were broken in that mode of PvP)

yoshiblue
Jul 12, 2011, 04:14 PM
Has anyone from OLD PSO battle mode come in here?
I may well be the only one left.

Anyway, back on Dreamcast, you could find a balance among your own class (HU vs HU for example--or teams with 1 force on each, or one ranger on each & etc) FO fighting had to be done only among forces, for the most part, because you could attack over/through walls & etc.


This alone has shown me a new light to PvP in PSO.

Zyrusticae
Jul 12, 2011, 08:16 PM
Well, there's Virtua Fighter. I think it's boring, but apparently it's quite balanced.
Not the same team at all.


You do realize you just compared a released Nexon game (seriously? Nexon?) to an alpha Sonic Team game that we barely know any info on aside from that you can slash jump shoot and block. That makes no sense, bro.
I fail to see how the company of origin has anything to do with anything. There's a word for that line of argument, I believe it's considered a fallacy...

If you're going to argue at all, do it by comparing the damn games. I'm going by what we've seen in the trailer and by the precedent of their previous games.


Most games simplify intricate frame counts by simply adopting a parry-counter system.

Honestly, i believe good fighting games are best built upon their defensive systems. Predict and Punish, with a bit of mixup based on your moveset. If PSO2 is strictly Just-guard, then the game will basically be a contest of bait and counter. If you are allowed to guard normally, then it really wont be much different than a lower fighting game. Even super powerful moves can be baited and punished accordingly.But so far we have seen no variety in the move sets displayed.

Which, of course, means nothing at this point since the game is still into development, but it still seriously worries me. If there is no variation in the moves there can be no strategy, period.


That's....exactly how most fighters play, dude. Blazblue? Tekken 6? Street Fighter? The whole game is either a) poking to induce a defense flaw to open up for a combo, or b) predicting what the opponent will do in order to get a counterhit. Then there is c), throw out random moves, get them blocked and then severely punished.
No, fighters often have intricate juggle/combo mechanics that require precise timing and knowledge of a character's move set. They also usually have some kind of combo breaking or recovery mechanic.

Most ARPGs have preset combos with absolutely zero variation allowed. You get hit once, you get locked into this boring-arse pre-built target combo with nothing to do except wait for the animation to finish.

If the game could get anywhere near the intricacy of fighting games, it would be a winner. I do not have that much faith in them.



Like i said, the defensive system is what will truely tell the story. You need your attacks to be built with PvP in mind of course, but the biggest factor is how you're able to put the variable of you getting hit or not within your own hands.
You're just repeating yourself here.

Again, I do not believe Sega will do this right. I believe the game will consist of a lot of pre-built combos, with a low number of possible variations and a low number of overall attacks.

I would be VERY pleasantly surprised to see them prove me wrong. Very surprised, indeed.


Okay. Like i said, most games simplify intricate frame counts by simply adopting a parry-counter system.

Examples?
[snip]
Very interesting.

Survival Project's mechanics are quite different, particularly with the raucous amount of knockback involved. I can't see it being anything close to how PSO2 is going to play, however, especially with the current huge emphasis on combos.

I've never played Dissidia, but looking at videos I can kind of see how PSO2 could follow in its wake. Kind of. I mean, Dissidia has all this jumping and flying and homing in going on, and I can't see that happening in PSO2 - that is to say, the movement in PSO2 seems a lot slower. Actually, that's another point of contention for me - the relatively slow movement speed makes getting in and out of engagement range a rather laborious process, and that's especially concerning in PvP, where being able to close in on an enemy before they can easily react is paramount.


But of course, this IS entirely a silly thing to argue about, because we, indeed, haven't seen much at all of the game's combat mechanics in-depth, and it's certainly all subject to change quite a bit over the course of development.

I will refrain from commenting further until we at least see some up-to-date alpha footage.

Angelo
Jul 12, 2011, 08:35 PM
You didn't comment on all the cool PvP ARPG examples I listed :[

Side-note. The problem with the Dissidia example is that it's so strictly tailored to 1v1 combat.

yoshiblue
Jul 12, 2011, 08:36 PM
Dissidia was unbalance however. Cloud was easy to hit, Squall was unstoppable unless you had a ring that absorbed ex and bursted, Kefka's magic was broken, shanttoto was also unstoppable if you did a certain combo. I could go on but I won't. Onion Knight FTW!!!

You could try to look at Fantasy Earth Zero vids.

Angelo
Jul 12, 2011, 08:44 PM
Dissidia was unbalance however. Cloud was easy to hit, Squall was unstoppable unless you had a ring that absorbed ex and bursted, Kefka's magic was broken, shanttoto was also unstoppable if you did a certain combo. I could go on but I won't. Onion Knight FTW!!!

You could try to look at Fantasy Earth Zero vids.

Duodecim was a lot more balanced. The game became much less of a 'only attack when dodge/block fails'. The original was just a counter fest.

Zyrusticae
Jul 12, 2011, 09:27 PM
You didn't comment on all the cool PvP ARPG examples I listed :[

Side-note. The problem with the Dissidia example is that it's so strictly tailored to 1v1 combat.
That would be because I somehow missed it. ^^;

Tera worries me, honestly, because it plays so much like an MMO, only with actual hit detection. That's about its only real distinction from, say, Aion. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it's a bit of a stretch to refer to it as an ARPG. It's more of an AMMORPG (and yes, there is a difference).

Cot9th is a prime example of what I don't want to see. :-P So much of it was just kiting around, waiting for someone to make a mistake. This is a very personal, perhaps frivolous wish, but I'd rather see people blocking attacks rather than running away all the damn time. Something about the constant evasion gets to me, in a this is unbelievably cowardly sort of way. Plus, it's just no fun to watch.

DC Universe Online I have not heard good things about. I'll pass, thank you very much.

I guess my #1 wish would simply be a fighting game-style ripoff of blocking. Not parrying, not Just counters, actual blocking that you can hold down. And when an opponent attacks you while you're blocking, they're at a frame disadvantage so you have an opportunity to counter-attack. I'd like to see that more than anything else.

Bit of a pipe dream, really. If they go with anything, they'll probably just go with the implementation we've seen in PSPo2. Still, it's nice to dream...

ShinMaruku
Jul 12, 2011, 09:38 PM
I would say if they could do bgs properly with removing all the rng in a pvp mode and can properly deal with Balance, I'm sure they can try their hand.
But since this is a PVE game I say fuck the pvp they will fuck up in the eyes of the hardcore pvp people. Build a pve game with all they got.

Angelo
Jul 12, 2011, 09:51 PM
That would be because I somehow missed it. ^^;

Tera worries me, honestly, because it plays so much like an MMO, only with actual hit detection. That's about its only real distinction from, say, Aion. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it's a bit of a stretch to refer to it as an ARPG. It's more of an AMMORPG (and yes, there is a difference).

Cot9th is a prime example of what I don't want to see. :-P So much of it was just kiting around, waiting for someone to make a mistake. This is a very personal, perhaps frivolous wish, but I'd rather see people blocking attacks rather than running away all the damn time. Something about the constant evasion gets to me, in a this is unbelievably cowardly sort of way. Plus, it's just no fun to watch.

DC Universe Online I have not heard good things about. I'll pass, thank you very much.

I guess my #1 wish would simply be a fighting game-style ripoff of blocking. Not parrying, not Just counters, actual blocking that you can hold down. And when an opponent attacks you while you're blocking, they're at a frame disadvantage so you have an opportunity to counter-attack. I'd like to see that more than anything else.

Bit of a pipe dream, really. If they go with anything, they'll probably just go with the implementation we've seen in PSPo2. Still, it's nice to dream...

Well the thing about C9 is that the class in that video is kind of a cowardly class. But I think you can more or less see how it could be executed correctly.

It's a shame you didn't seem to find any interest in any of those videos. I've played all 3 games and think they're really awesome and had a blast with the PvP. Oh well.

RemiusTA
Jul 12, 2011, 11:56 PM
Not the same team at all.

Hey. You said Sega.



I fail to see how the company of origin has anything to do with anything. There's a word for that line of argument, I believe it's considered a fallacy...

If you're going to argue at all, do it by comparing the damn games. I'm going by what we've seen in the trailer and by the precedent of their previous games. Nexon = Korean, Sonic Team = Japanese. Nexon = known for F2P games like Maplestory, Sonic Team = known for highly commercial titles, like Phantasy Star and...well, Sonic the Hedgehog. There is a difference between the companies, primarily their development histories. Comparing a random game i never even heard of to another game by a completely different company that is still in it's alpha phase with largely unknown battle system? LoL.

And there are tons of fallacy types in the argumentative sense. I don't remember which would apply to me even if it did, and im not about to look it up, but i can assure you have used plenty of them in the initial post too.



But so far we have seen no variety in the move sets displayed.

Which, of course, means nothing at this point since the game is still into development, but it still seriously worries me. If there is no variation in the moves there can be no strategy, period.
The system, as we've spectulated, seems to be built around using different moves at different points in the combo. It's safe to say there will be variety, as there was variety seen in the gameplay video. If you're looking for an entire moveset per weapon then you really need to look elsewhere, lol. And you're completely forgetting that this is Phantasy Star, and bringing a single weapon into battle is stupid (unless it's ultra rare, or a PSU weapon with a high-tier PA).



No, fighters often have intricate juggle/combo mechanics that require precise timing and knowledge of a character's move set. They also usually have some kind of combo breaking or recovery mechanic.

Most ARPGs have preset combos with absolutely zero variation allowed. You get hit once, you get locked into this boring-arse pre-built target combo with nothing to do except wait for the animation to finish.
I play fighting games alot. Combos are only half the equation to a battle between any two decent people.

And honestly, most of the combo/juggle systems aren't that amazingly complex. Moves have set hitstun (usually increased depending on how the attack started, and decreased by proration), certian moves cancel into others, and if they dont, you use the hitstun of the last to quickly pick up into another.
[spoiler-box]
Another good example would be Naruto: Ultimate Ninja Storm. You basically mash circle (Yes, the directions literally tell you to MASH CIRCLE to do combos) to attack, spam the R triggers to defend, and press triangle once for a special and twice for an ultimate.

Because you are able to instantly counterattack from any move in the game, the game is notorious for basically having combos be pointless because they'll only get you killed faster by turtlers. But even with this terrible fact in mind, the game STILL has an amount of depth to it, even with such a terrible flaw. Approaches and pokes with certian attacks are important, and predicting the enemy's movements can still allow you an edge in battle. (Just, anyone with large combos are pretty useless.)[/spoiler-box]




If the game could get anywhere near the intricacy of fighting games, it would be a winner. I do not have that much faith in them. As well you shouldn't. PSO2 isn't a fighting game, and it doesn't try to be. Even if Devil May Cry 4 had a PvP mode it'd probably be medicore, and it's one of the most solid action games on earth. But nobody is asking it to become a fighting game...we just want a fighting mode.



You're just repeating yourself here.That's because it was important, and i was positive you'd miss the point. So maybe i should elaborate. The attacks and combos are not as important as the player's given abilities to avoid, block, parry or even break combos. Because if you are allowed to make a player MISS, or punish them for doing an attack that has high vulnerability, then you can still have a worthwhile PVP system.

Or, if you're allowed to block certian moves, or forced to dodge others for danger of guard breaks, then out of these two very small additions, you have just added a level of depth to your game. For example, If Sword special attacks Guard Break sabers, then you are forced to avoid certain moves, but counter attack others. This puts strain on the saber user for rushdown, but strain on the sword user in case he misses an attack and now eats a faster saber combo. Sound familiar? It's Rock-Paper-Scissors. Just an insanely simplified form.



Again, I do not believe Sega will do this right. I believe the game will consist of a lot of pre-built combos, with a low number of possible variations and a low number of overall attacks.

I would be VERY pleasantly surprised to see them prove me wrong. Very surprised, indeed.
It's PSO2. Once again, it is not a fighting game, you should not be anticipating Devil May Phantasy Star 2. Im really only showing you that it wouldn't be very difficult for them to make such a game PVP stable -- all it would take was a little insight and a few tweaks. But do realize, they have only shown 2 weapon types with multiple abilities shown for each weapon.
[spoiler-box]
Rifle was shown with burst fire, grenade launcher, and a full-automatic clip fire.

Sword was shown with the regular 3-hit combo, an air launcher, a Tornado Break move (aerial and ground), and a spinning attack (aerial only) that seemingly sets you up for more combo potential (and team juggling, as shown by the Ranger) and a dashing "chase" like attack. Thats 3 grounded hits, an air launcher, 3 air hits, a spinning aerial attack, a dashing attack, and an AoE spinning attack. Thats like...almost every function the PSU sword could do, compacted into one and usable in combo strings.
[/spoiler-box]



Very interesting.

Survival Project's mechanics are quite different, particularly with the raucous amount of knockback involved. I can't see it being anything close to how PSO2 is going to play, however, especially with the current huge emphasis on combos.
You missed the point again, I pointed out Survival Project to show you how far a project can go with a PvP system using very simplistic base mechanics. It isn't very similar to PSO2, but it doesn't have to be very different, either.



I've never played Dissidia, but looking at videos I can kind of see how PSO2 could follow in its wake. Kind of. I mean, Dissidia has all this jumping and flying and homing in going on, and I can't see that happening in PSO2 - that is to say, the movement in PSO2 seems a lot slower. Actually, that's another point of contention for me - the relatively slow movement speed makes getting in and out of engagement range a rather laborious process, and that's especially concerning in PvP, where being able to close in on an enemy before they can easily react is paramount.
Movement speed problems can be easily adverted with startup / recovery frames on attacks, which im sure every move will have, as they've had them since PSO, and PSU had them as well. You miss a powerful attack, you're left wide open for it. Player runs up and smacks you, just like how that enemy you missed shoots you with a fireball and kills you. And once again, i mentioned Dissidia because of the way it was played. There were very, very few "true" combos in Dissidia outside the regular series of gatling attacks. You opened up your opponent by making them either a) run into an attack or trap, or b) defend or dodge at the wrong moment, leaving them open for attack.


Understand, nobody is asking for an in-depth, super competitive PvP system. I just want to jump in a room with 4, 6 or 8 people, and have some fun teamplay / free-for-all / gimmicky battles. The more balanced and solid the better of course, but honestly it's not that big a deal to me; if i want a competition, ill just pop Blazblue into my PS3.

And uh, what are we even arguing about? Whether or not PSO2 could be a fighting game, or whether or not it's a waste of resources?

NoiseHERO
Jul 13, 2011, 12:08 AM
Aparently PVP is a waste of resources because it wouldn't make this game any more fun for ANYONE. Because SEGA might not balance it right. Our tiny and very important and very scarce resources can't possibly handle a mission that activates a few pieces of coding that re-arranges some numbers for balancing and let's us use friendly fire, then proceeds to bring up a score board before exiting the mission.

Because you know... If PSO didn't have that stupid PVP we would have had enough room for 2 more expansions and PSU's clothing system in Dream cast graphics and an extended soundtrack in all of the new stages. Or Ranewms/wearls or Humarls and mounts and open fields.

FOkyasuta
Jul 13, 2011, 12:11 AM
If trolls are around, Course theres gunna be at least a thought of PvP.

RemiusTA
Jul 13, 2011, 12:19 AM
Aparently PVP is a waste of resources because it wouldn't make this game any more fun for ANYONE. Because SEGA might not balance it right. Our tiny and very important and very scarce resources can't possibly handle a mission that activates a few pieces of coding that re-arranges some numbers for balancing and let's us use friendly fire, then proceeds to bring up a score board before exiting the mission.

Because you know... If PSO didn't have that stupid PVP we would have had enough room for 2 more expansions and PSU's clothing system in Dream cast graphics and an extended soundtrack in all of the new stages. Or Ranewms/wearls or Humarls and mounts and open fields.


Totally. 100%.

Because boy, PSU just did so great without PVP it was amazing. Those were the good ol' days. It was only until PSP2/i where they started wasting their precious resources and the gameplay suffered so bad.

Genoa
Jul 13, 2011, 03:51 AM
It is EXTREMELY difficult to make games that have a very balanced PvE system AND a very balanced PvP system.
You usually end up getting classes that simply better at PvP and end up being short in the PvE department or vice versa.
I understand PvP could attract more players and make a larger audience. But then you just bring a different breed of players that simply play to PvP, causing various types of elitists that are either all PvE or all PvP. The remaining players who participate in both or play in the shallow end of one or the other get swept away by the elitists.
It also causes more problems in forums all over. People creating specific groups/teams/guilds specific to either PvE or PvP or the attempted PvP+PvE (not to be confused with PvEvP)
Flame wars everywhere ;__;
Lots of QQ'ing


No, just... no >_>

And Phantasy Star Online 2 isn't going to be a MASSIVE multiplayer online game, they couldn't afford to host servers specific to either PvE or PvP. (I mean lets face it, it might be huge in japan, but everywhere else it's extremely fan based)
And implementing the two together would just mean the PvP content would be lackluster. And if the PvP is lackluster, there's absolutely no reason to try and balance the classes to be fair in PvE and PvP.
So why not just have an extremely successful PvE game? :x

RemiusTA
Jul 13, 2011, 04:14 AM
It is EXTREMELY difficult to make games that have a very balanced PvE system AND a very balanced PvP system.
You usually end up getting classes that simply better at PvP and end up being short in the PvE department or vice versa.
I understand PvP could attract more players and make a larger audience. But then you just bring a different breed of players that simply play to PvP, causing various types of elitists that are either all PvE or all PvP. The remaining players who participate in both or play in the shallow end of one or the other get swept away by the elitists.
It also causes more problems in forums all over. People creating specific groups/teams/guilds specific to either PvE or PvP or the attempted PvP+PvE (not to be confused with PvEvP)
Flame wars everywhere ;__;
Lots of QQ'ing


And Phantasy Star Online 2 isn't going to be a MASSIVE multiplayer online game, they couldn't afford to host servers specific to either PvE or PvP. (I mean lets face it, it might be huge in japan, but everywhere else it's extremely fan based)
And implementing the two together would just mean the PvP content would be lackluster. And if the PvP is lackluster, there's absolutely no reason to try and balance the classes to be fair in PvE and PvP.
So why not just have an extremely successful PvE game? :mad:



.....what?

No, like seriously. Where on earth are you guys pulling this from? A battle mode somehow creating a community-shattering fissure between the innocent PvE players and the douchebag elitist people who like to attack eachother? You mean like how PSO was chocked full of douchebags because of its PvP mode? Or how PSU was destroyed by those darn time attackers? Or how PSP2's precious community was overrun by the tsunami of elitist bastards who only wanted to play Battle Mode?


What on EARTH are you guys TALKING about?


And this is Sega we're talking about. They can afford whatever the hell they want to. Phantasy Star Universe is still running now, Phantasy Star Portable 2 and Infinity were massive successes. Even if by some ungodly abysmal chance they released some kind of PvP system that MAGICALLY crept over to the PvE system and "ruined" the game, it would be patched and rebalanced within the week and forgotten just as quick as if it never happened.

You guys are the most paranoid lot i've ever conversed with....

yoshiblue
Jul 13, 2011, 04:17 AM
Can be as worse then say the beta's eHarmony lobbys lol.

Genoa
Jul 13, 2011, 04:19 AM
Obviously you're not looking far enough ahead or have not compared other games that have attempted to balance both fairly.
You can't be fair to both
You please one audience or you please the other.
Not EVERYONE can have their way and be happy.
PSO has never really been about PvP, and many players have complained numerously on how different PSU was and cried for something "more like PSO"
And now they're finally bringing back tradition and people want "something new and different that hasn't been done yet"
... real PvP.

Make up your damn mind about what you REALLY want from PSO2 or go back to wow

yoshiblue
Jul 13, 2011, 04:25 AM
I'm more for the PvE. Only Azure gave me a little hope for PvP. I can't really say that PSO2 will be PSO 2.0 but thats cool too. Plus before anyone comes in and says "Oh, Yoshi must be another PSO purist", I have played PS:P the longest out of all the Phantasy Star games I have ever played. :3

Genoa
Jul 13, 2011, 04:37 AM
Let my clarify myself.
-= Do I like PvE? Yes I do, I'm quite fond of the grindy parts of RPGs.
-= Do I like PvP? Yeah, they're not as predictable as environmental mobs, never know what's going to happen.
-= Do I like PvEvP? HELL no, things like Dredgion in Aion make me sick. You either get jumped while you're fighting mobs, you jump them when they're fighting mobs, or you fight eachother and when one side is looking like it's about to lose they run off into mobs and train the other group to death with PvE.
Forget that crap

-= Do I like PvE and PvP?
I would like to think so, but I have yet to see a game succeed at BOTH.
The game either sucks at PvP and has great PvE
Sucks at PvE and is basically all about PvP
Or they both suck and the only way to be good is to be the "good" classes that are really just the "broken" or "OP" classes.

NoiseHERO
Jul 13, 2011, 08:14 AM
The whole point really, is for pvp to be some small cheap non complicated thing that won't really effect anyone at all. Even if BECAUSE of this not a lot of people use it. It'd still be a cute little thing to have.

Sure a lot of us can live without it, mean while some people might be really interested. But saying it would completely crush or change this game entirely JUST because it did it to other games(Which would bring in a whole nother argument related to PS not being those games at all anyway)

It just sounds like you're exaggerating. I don't think anybody that wants pvp expects it to be any more complex than it has in the past, which is exactly why it WON'T be a problem to have it. Adding in PVP would be like adding one more character to smash bros brawl.

[Insert Sarcastic "Big deal"]

Zyrusticae
Jul 13, 2011, 02:17 PM
[snipped for awesome, awesome length]
Fair enough. Like I said, I'm just gonna refrain from commenting on how it could turn out until we actually know more about the combat system. I've just had bad experiences with this sort of thing. If I ever actually played an ARPG with PvP that didn't just plain suck, maybe I would be more receptive to it.

And I was arguing how the PvP could only be terrible, btw, in case you really couldn't figure that out.


And this is Sega we're talking about. They can afford whatever the hell they want to. Phantasy Star Universe is still running now, Phantasy Star Portable 2 and Infinity were massive successes.
lolololololol

Come on, really, there are only two developers on the entire planet who can afford indefinite development cycles: Valve, and Blizzard. (Riot Games MIGHT be coming up on that level, they've been seeing massive successes with LoL.) Everyone else has to deal with budgetary constraints. It's the simple reality of the business.

Quite frankly, I'm amazed Sega is even still in business considering how long they've been churning out gawd-awful Sonic games. The fact that PSO2 is being made is something of a miracle.

RemiusTA
Jul 13, 2011, 05:03 PM
Those gawd-awful sonic games still sell. Sonic 2k6 was terrible (but still sold), but Sonic Unleashed did very well, and Sonic Colors is highly regarded as the best sonic game in almost 8 years. Sonic 4 was trash with the fans but still was regarded quite well with everyone else, and was sold on live/psn. And let's not forget, Sega sits on a goldmine of older generation games. They've been reselling the same collection (that most of us have in our rooms or on emulators) for years, on pretty much every platform. And finally, you have to remember that they are also a publishing company outside of Sonic Team's developments.

It's no miracle at all lol. What, do you think they've just been pulling money from nowhere? Phantasy Star Portable 2 and Infinity were barely over a year apart, and inbetween those two they've been working on PSO2 and simultaneously releasing PSU content and events. They obviously aren't in any kind of bind, Zyrusticae.



Let my clarify myself.
-= Do I like PvE? Yes I do, I'm quite fond of the grindy parts of RPGs.
-= Do I like PvP? Yeah, they're not as predictable as environmental mobs, never know what's going to happen.
-= Do I like PvEvP? HELL no, things like Dredgion in Aion make me sick. You either get jumped while you're fighting mobs, you jump them when they're fighting mobs, or you fight eachother and when one side is looking like it's about to lose they run off into mobs and train the other group to death with PvE.
Forget that crap

-= Do I like PvE and PvP?
I would like to think so, but I have yet to see a game succeed at BOTH.
The game either sucks at PvP and has great PvE
Sucks at PvE and is basically all about PvP
Or they both suck and the only way to be good is to be the "good" classes that are really just the "broken" or "OP" classes.
How many times do i have to point out "PSO EPISODE 1&2" or "PHANTASY STAR PORTABLE 2" or "PHANTASY STAR PORTABLE 2 INFINITY" before you people realize that what you are saying makes zero sense. You are seriously, seriously thinking way too hard. Stop crying over something that 1) nobody is asking for and 2) wouldn't happen anyway.

And once again, i point to Phantasy Star Online: Episode III for anyone who says they are incapable of a very decently balanced and in-depth PvP experience.

Angelo
Jul 13, 2011, 06:27 PM
Oh yeah, I sorta forgot Ep3 was based around PvP.

Zyrusticae
Jul 13, 2011, 06:42 PM
Even with all that, Sega is most certainly not sitting on piles of money they can just throw at the game. If they were we wouldn't have had the PC/PS2 version on this side of the pond decomissioned.

RemiusTA
Jul 13, 2011, 06:45 PM
That is a completely different scenario, dude.

PC/PS2 version of OUR servers were shut down because they (probably) were not returning a profit. You dont have to be rich or poor to know that something removing more money than it puts in is just an unnecessary liability. NOBODY has money to just "throw" at stuff. And the PS2 version would be removed anyway because it was holding the game back.

Adding PvP to the game has nothing to do with any of this. The game is already built for online-only. They dont have to do anything special in order to get PvP to run correctly, because you're already interacting with players 24/7. It would be no different than creating another mission or something. Tweaking character animation speeds and the other trivial things required for PvP takes more time to test than it does to implement.

yoshiblue
Jul 13, 2011, 07:01 PM
Couldn't they just release the game and sell a PvP expansion later? That way they have time to solely work on it.

Angelo
Jul 13, 2011, 07:08 PM
Couldn't they just release the game and sell a PvP expansion later? That way they have time to solely work on it.

I'd be happy with that. To be honest I hope we'll be getting some more substantial expansions this time around since the game is PC only.

ShinMaruku
Jul 13, 2011, 07:29 PM
Pvp is lovely but nobody has demonstrated a game that can do both well, Since Sega is Japanese and they are slapdash on their online content and balance I would say no.
It would be nice if it could be, but people are too tied to old ways and as a result something well done in both is impossible.

RemiusTA
Jul 13, 2011, 07:34 PM
But why do you even care? It's obvious you aren't a PvP player.

Just ignore the option and play like usual. It isn't going to affect you as a regular player in the slightest.

NoiseHERO
Jul 13, 2011, 07:40 PM
I don't think PVP HAS to be "well done" or "perfect" just for it to be in this game. <_>

The most fair way I can think of to balance PVP for this game either way would be making it so that only the same classes can fight each other. Or everyone being given default weapons that work fairly against each other. Then default stats, so nobody can whine "QQ ALL THE HIGH LEVEL NO LIFERS WITH THE BEST WEAPONS ALWAYS WIN" since it would be all based on skill(or inevitably, lag.)

It's kind of like people are just saying "I don't like it so even if I CAN ignore it and other people WOULD like it, I don't want it in this game." Which is the same thing that bugged me about some people being racist against bikinis.

BIG OLAF
Jul 13, 2011, 07:40 PM
Just ignore the option and play like usual. It isn't going to affect you as a regular player in the slightest.

That would kind of depend on how they implement it. If there are specific in-game items/titles/rewards/whatever associated with PvP, then it would affect regular players.

But, this entire thread is speculative.

ShinMaruku
Jul 13, 2011, 07:55 PM
Nah I'm not a MMO pvp player because they have issues due to legacy stuff. I seen many a pve game get ruined due to pvp because the systems are too tied together.

NoiseHERO
Jul 13, 2011, 08:07 PM
I still seriously doubt this game would have PVP so major that it would split the community and break the game into a drama frenzy, then top it all off by being unbalanced.

In fact I wouldn't be surprised if we simply just got a few pvp based missions here and there.

I'm sure PVP ruins a lot of games, but as was argued for the past two pages, it's not impossible to have a decent or non-game breaking PVP system. ASSUMING it would be major. Which again would be highly doubtful.

Shinji Kazuya
Jul 13, 2011, 08:28 PM
Well, I'm with Michaeru. I don't really think it will have something Lineage II/ Aion like.
I'd say that it probably will be something like PSO and PSP2 battle modes but this is all assumptions anyway.

Zyrusticae
Jul 13, 2011, 09:09 PM
That is a completely different scenario, dude.

PC/PS2 version of OUR servers were shut down because they (probably) were not returning a profit. You dont have to be rich or poor to know that something removing more money than it puts in is just an unnecessary liability. NOBODY has money to just "throw" at stuff. And the PS2 version would be removed anyway because it was holding the game back.

Adding PvP to the game has nothing to do with any of this. The game is already built for online-only. They dont have to do anything special in order to get PvP to run correctly, because you're already interacting with players 24/7. It would be no different than creating another mission or something. Tweaking character animation speeds and the other trivial things required for PvP takes more time to test than it does to implement.
I don't know where you're getting the faith that Sega can't cock it up horrifically, but I don't have that sense at all.

Honestly, the PC version on our side would have done just fine if they had advertised in any significant fashion - or even put out a free trial, for that matter. They didn't, so we ended up with only a small quantity of hardcore faithful that weren't enough to keep the game afloat. And why didn't they advertise? I'd venture it had something to do with the money supply. Either that, or the management was piss-poor. Neither scenario inspires confidence.

Of course, yes, it doesn't matter if it's really badly done as long as the other half of the game isn't terrible. I don't know why you're under the impression that it could not possibly affect the PvE side, however, because it most certainly has in the past.

I'll be saying "I told you so" when they start nerfing stuff for PvP reasons.

KILLER52
Jul 13, 2011, 09:44 PM
i think the same way if players would stop seeing who is better then each other then ppl would find better weapons or sheilds n make friends

RemiusTA
Jul 13, 2011, 09:44 PM
There is no reason to nerf ANYTHING PvE side for PvP reasons, because they can program your entire moveset to change during a PvE mission.

PSO, PSU, PSP, PSP2, PSP2i, they're all instance-based MMOs. Just how an enemy can be altered to use different attack patterns or have different stats, they can do the same with players. Not exactly the same process, but you get it.


And for the last time, NOBODY is asking for Street Phantasy : Continuum Tekken. We just want a PvP mode.


For the Umpteenth time, do i have to point to PSO:EpI&II or PSP2i?

Or did i forget about all the times they nerfed the PvE portion of the game for the sake of the PvP aspects? Oh, yeah thats right, they didn't, because it didn't matter. Correct me if im wrong. (But im not, so dont even waste your time.)

BIG OLAF
Jul 13, 2011, 09:51 PM
PSP/2/i were MMOs? Erm. I can see someone saying PSO/U were MMOs (even though that's false, too), but I really don't think the Portable games were even close.

Zyrusticae
Jul 13, 2011, 09:52 PM
For the record, I never played PSO battle mode and I don't have a PSP so I've never played the PSP series (gawd, those acronyms are confusing).

So don't be surprised if I stubbornly cling to my belief that they could only cock this up, since that's all my previous experiences have told me they can manage.

RemiusTA
Jul 13, 2011, 10:01 PM
PSP/2/i were MMOs? Erm. I can see someone saying PSO/U were MMOs (even though that's false, too), but I really don't think the Portable games were even close.

Yeah, im not about to go through this again.
(http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ComicallyMissingThePoint?from=Main.CompletelyMissi ngThePoint)

[spoiler-box]It would be perfect had they not renamed the trope i was going to use. [/spoiler-box]


For the record, I never played PSO battle mode and I don't have a PSP so I've never played the PSP series (gawd, those acronyms are confusing).

So don't be surprised if I stubbornly cling to my belief that they could only cock this up, since that's all my previous experiences have told me they can manage. ::facepalm::

Well you know what, i think im gonna go join a Quantium Physics board and start arguments with everyone about how the theory of relativity is ruining physics now.

And the fact that you didn't even know PSO had a battle mode only strengthens my argument tenfold.

BIG OLAF
Jul 13, 2011, 10:04 PM
I wasn't missing any point, I was correcting your silly categorization.

r00tabaga
Jul 13, 2011, 10:15 PM
Wow, I guess things haven't changed much round here lately. <goes back into hole>

Shinji Kazuya
Jul 13, 2011, 10:18 PM
Wow, I guess things haven't changed much round here lately. <goes back into hole>

http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/9952/ohboyherewegoagain.jpg

Would you look at that? They are at it again! Big surprise.

RemiusTA
Jul 13, 2011, 10:26 PM
Im ignoring this topic for the rest of forever

this is ridiculous


edit: in fact, i refuse to take part in an argument that goes on for more than 2 responses anymore. Because that's all it should ever take. I could understand if the arguments in this topic were due to OPINIONS, but these guys really believe that PvP would rip the game apart or something. Even from a FINANCIAL standpoint. What why i dont even


the more i argue here, the more i realize how incredibly stupid i (and whoever i'm probably arguing with) sound from the outside. And outside of said argument, we probably would get along pretty well anyway. So i just gonna stop doing it : /

Zyrusticae
Jul 13, 2011, 11:56 PM
Comparing game development with quantum physics doesn't do you any favors.

Just sayin'.

Really, though, this argument is tied almost entirely to the competence of the team making PSO2. It is, indeed, pretty stupid to argue about it for any great length of time because there are simply too many "unknowns" and "what ifs".

Though I think the safest option is to always assume incompetence until proven otherwise. ESPECIALLY with Sega.

RemiusTA
Jul 14, 2011, 12:21 AM
Comparing game development with quantum physics doesn't do you any favors.

HAHAHA this is why im just going to stop. Missing the poiinnnnntttttt oh my jesus



Though I think the safest option is to always assume incompetence until proven otherwise. ESPECIALLY with Sega.Sega isn't as incompetent as people love to think. I mean, you can be pessimistic about everything, but once you look back on it, it really wont get you anywhere or make you feel any better about anything. But when it gets to the level of pessimism apparent in this topic, it can only be annoying.

inb4pessimismvsrealismargumentimgoingtoignore

Nitro Vordex
Jul 14, 2011, 12:21 AM
Did I post in this thread already? I forgot and I'm too lazy to look.

Oh well.

I say no. PSO's battle mode sucked. PSU never had one, it probably would have been even worse. Maybe in future, have a decent PvP if it doesn't suck in PSO2. [/post]

BIG OLAF
Jul 14, 2011, 12:25 AM
Im ignoring this topic for the rest of forever

this is ridiculous

orly?


HAHAHA this is why im just going to stop. Missing the poiinnnnntttttt oh my jesus

Sega isn't as incompetent as people love to think. I mean, you can be pessimistic about everything, but once you look back on it, it really wont get you anywhere or make you feel any better about anything. But when it gets to the level of pessimism apparent in this topic, it can only be annoying.

inb4pessimismvsrealismargumentimgoingtoignore

Sorry, had to. It was this...sick urge. It was weird. I don't feel quite myself.

Zyrusticae
Jul 14, 2011, 12:37 AM
HAHAHA this is why im just going to stop. Missing the poiinnnnntttttt oh my jesus
You used a terrible analogy to try to compare the current situation with arguing on a quantum physics board that the theory of relativity is going to ruin everything.

Seriously, what am I supposed to get from that, other than "this analogy is terrible but I'm going to use it anyway because I'm sick of trying to use reason and logic"? The theory of relativity in quantum physics has absolutely fuck-all to do with the addition of PvP in PSO2.

If you're trying to say [new]:[old] or [complicated addition]:[status quo], there's craptons more analogies you could use to make the point that are infinitely more digestible, and not only that, the analogy itself fails when you consider that PvP is not even remotely new or hard to understand.

So, yes, your analogy sucks, deal with it. If I "missed the point" it's because your point was horribly obfuscated to begin with. :-?

(And I still don't understand how in the world you manage to not see Sega as incompetent after repeatedly poor Sonic games and the utter fail that was PSU.)

RemiusTA
Jul 14, 2011, 01:49 AM
[spoiler-box]
blah blah blah, shitty argument


LOL WELL I IGNORED PSO BATTLE MODE ALSO I NEVER PLAYED PSP2 WHICH DEFINITELY HAD BATTLE MODE OUT THE BOX


::facepalm::

then why are you wasting your time arguing about something you 1) know absolutely nothing about, and 2) didn't pay attention to anyway, even though it definitely existed in both PSO (which you played) and PSP2 (which you haven't touched) and definitely didn't affect it's PvE mode in the slightest.

WOW! That would equate to me doing something like:



O i dont know joining a Quantium Physics Forum just to start arguments with everyone, complaining about how the theory of relativity is ruining the study of physics. Despite the fact i dont know shit about the theory of relativity except for the fact that it apparently exists.

(Which is exactly where you stand now in this argument.)
[/spoiler-box]

Look, let me wrap this argument up, from the way I see it. Listen up.

The issue with you people complaining that PSO2 with a Battle Mode would destroy the game is that you have yet to come up with any one singular plausible reason as to why, or how, it would happen. It would be understandable (afterall, these are all spectulation topics anyway), but unless you are stating an OPINION (which cannot be argued because they really dont require any logic behind them to exist), you need to have at least a tinnnnnnnny bit of sound logic supporting yourself.

Which you are doing a really, really bad job of supplying us.
For instance:

As both me and other members like Michaeru have stated, nobody is asking for a retardedly complex PvP system. And there is no reason for us to; there is NO evidence in past Phantasy Star titles that would lead us to suspect that Sonic Team would shovel any serious focus into a PvP mode aside from a few battle missions. Looking at PSO Episode I&II and PSP2, which both included PvP modes very similar to eachother despite being almost a decade apart, it's not hard to speculate on how they would implement it in PSO2, which is a direct sequel to PSO, aimed at reviving the old feeling of the game. Hummmmmm.


You and all the PvP vs. PvE Doomsayers, however, take this simple conversation into a ridiculous extremes. Scenarios that end in split communities, wasted money/development periods and ruined a PvE experience. And how do you come to these conclusions? By imprinting your experience with OTHER games (made by completely different companies, mind you) into this one, completely ignoring the resume that Sonic Team themselves built themselves with their own games, each with playable battle systems. (with their PvE and warm communities very much in tact.) Note that PSO Ep.III was a title that was almost exclusively PvP based, and was a very intricately deep title.

And using the previous Sonic games aren't really of much worth to you, either -- the last 2 console sonic games produced by Sonic Team (Sonic Unleashed, Sonic Colors) were both EXTREMELY welldone titles (with absolutely ASTOUNDING graphics, might i add). Sonic Generations is also getting positive anticipation from the fans. So if you're really going to use their track record against them, you might want to factor in that they've been consistently doing very, very good the past few years. And in the past few years they've been succeeding with the Sonic games....along comes Phantasy Star Portable 2 and Infinity. Oh yeah. And PSO2.

Annnnd so now here we are. If you dont want PvP in the game, thats understandable, but please do understand that all that other stuff is...well, nonsense. If i missed anything, please be sure to point it out. But if you still hold that opinion that PvP is the devil and that Sonic Team is destined to fail if they implement it....then i really can't help you anymore than this. I hope i've shed some insight on your somewhat misplaced pessimism.

yoshiblue
Jul 14, 2011, 02:17 AM
Your right it won't destroy the game but it could destroy the community. Say a skill is too strong in PvP but not in PvE and got nurfed, then an all out argument could break out. Thats if the player's stats contribute to both modes. I don't think PvP will be all that huge though but people see to want it. I myself could care less about PvP but with PvP included in recent games, they should just work on that after their product is released so they could work on balance, modes, rules, ect. That way most people will be happy and sega may make more money off it. Such as buying the expansion itself and PvP only items/cash shop.

PSO Ep. III included in way would be cool. Because it is mostly PvP only may please a few people. It could also be used to pass the time. As far as a track record, I dislike the PvP in both Sonic Heros and Shadow the Hedgehog. But I will admit that they have been making a comeback. To me anyways. It varies on their gross income and the works.

Genoa
Jul 14, 2011, 03:05 AM
[spoiler-box]







O i dont know joining a Quantium Physics Forum just to start arguments with everyone, complaining about how the theory of relativity is ruining the study of physics. Despite the fact i dont know shit about the theory of relativity except for the fact that it apparently exists.

(Which is exactly where you stand now in this argument.)
[/spoiler-box]

Look, let me wrap this argument up, from the way I see it. Listen up.

The issue with you people complaining that PSO2 with a Battle Mode would destroy the game is that you have yet to come up with any one singular plausible reason as to why, or how, it would happen. It would be understandable (afterall, these are all spectulation topics anyway), but unless you are stating an OPINION (which cannot be argued because they really dont require any logic behind them to exist), you need to have at least a tinnnnnnnny bit of sound logic supporting yourself.

Which you are doing a really, really bad job of supplying us.
For instance:

As both me and other members like Michaeru have stated, nobody is asking for a retardedly complex PvP system. And there is no reason for us to; there is NO evidence in past Phantasy Star titles that would lead us to suspect that Sonic Team would shovel any serious focus into a PvP mode aside from a few battle missions. Looking at PSO Episode I&II and PSP2, which both included PvP modes very similar to eachother despite being almost a decade apart, it's not hard to speculate on how they would implement it in PSO2, which is a direct sequel to PSO, aimed at reviving the old feeling of the game. Hummmmmm.


You and all the PvP vs. PvE Doomsayers, however, take this simple conversation into a ridiculous extremes. Scenarios that end in split communities, wasted money/development periods and ruined a PvE experience. And how do you come to these conclusions? By imprinting your experience with OTHER games (made by completely different companies, mind you) into this one, completely ignoring the resume that Sonic Team themselves built themselves with their own games, each with playable battle systems. (with their PvE and warm communities very much in tact.) Note that PSO Ep.III was a title that was almost exclusively PvP based, and was a very intricately deep title.

And using the previous Sonic games aren't really of much worth to you, either -- the last 2 console sonic games produced by Sonic Team (Sonic Unleashed, Sonic Colors) were both EXTREMELY welldone titles (with absolutely ASTOUNDING graphics, might i add). Sonic Generations is also getting positive anticipation from the fans. So if you're really going to use their track record against them, you might want to factor in that they've been consistently doing very, very good the past few years. And in the past few years they've been succeeding with the Sonic games....along comes Phantasy Star Portable 2 and Infinity. Oh yeah. And PSO2.

Annnnd so now here we are. If you dont want PvP in the game, thats understandable, but please do understand that all that other stuff is...well, nonsense. If i missed anything, please be sure to point it out. But if you still hold that opinion that PvP is the devil and that Sonic Team is destined to fail if they implement it....then i really can't help you anymore than this. I hope i've shed some insight on your somewhat misplaced pessimism.

You obviously can't read any of the valid points other people have already made.

You obviously have not played many games that try to implement PvP and PvE together to coexist in balance.

You have not shed any light other than your ignorance to other people's points (not opinions) and added your own commentary and fictitious understanding of gameplay mechanics.

You really brought up Episode III for a PvP argument??? .... You DO understand that is a turn-based game?
<_________________________<

And of course other people bring up their EXPERIENCES with OTHER games. Phantasy Star nonetheless is still a Multiplayer Online RPG with diverse classes and equipment.
Even despite making scenarios where everyone has an "equal opportunity" such as, Basic starting gear... does not make it "fair" combat.
Some classes are extremely gear dependent where others are more skill dependent. But Phantasy Star Online's focus has always been more PvE oriented so the game of course is going to revolve around creating characters that are equally as diverse as they are balanced.

The best PvP is always from games that focus on it heavily or it's simply the foremost objective of the game.
If you want PvP, play a game that the focus is PvP
If you want PvE, play a game where the focus is PvE
If you want both in the SAME GAME and you want it to be enjoyable in both departments, go ahead and start developing one and let us know how it works.
I'd love to see one.

I'd prefer to get my PvE fix from Phantasy Star, and when I'm feeling like some solid competition against other players... I'll play something that actually has good PvP content.
Would rather have to switch between two excellent games for when I'm feeling different about my current craving of gameplay than have both watered down in the same convenient location <_>

NoiseHERO
Jul 14, 2011, 04:58 AM
You obviously can't read any of the valid points other people have already made.

You obviously have not played many games that try to implement PvP and PvE together to coexist in balance.


And you've still completely skipped the part where PSO isn't OTHER games. As well as the part where we've never had; and we don't expect to get a PVP/battle mode that would even be big enough to make an impact on the community to begin with.

Shinji Kazuya
Jul 14, 2011, 09:20 AM
A battle mode kinda like the one on Phantasy Star Portable 2 would be nice but would have ta be much more well done.
Still, I had a lof of fun playing battle mode in there!

Milla
Jul 14, 2011, 10:33 AM
Wouldn't the jumping mechanic kinda break battle mode though? I guess it would still be okay for rangers but with people jumping around like crazy i would imagine it would give hunters a hard time and would require force to just use homing spells like Nozonde.

It would be pretty funny to watch though.

Zyrusticae
Jul 14, 2011, 12:08 PM
[spoiler-box]
O i dont know joining a Quantium Physics Forum just to start arguments with everyone, complaining about how the theory of relativity is ruining the study of physics. Despite the fact i dont know shit about the theory of relativity except for the fact that it apparently exists.

(Which is exactly where you stand now in this argument.)
[/spoiler-box]
I'm sorry, but I find this incredibly moronic.

I do not need to know shit about the PvP in the OLD games to make inferences as to how PvP might end up in the NEW game. Suggesting that their PvP is sooooo different that all my PvP experience in other games is completely irrelevant is Incredibly Silly.

Your analogy completely fails considering this. It'd be more akin to going onto a quantum physics board arguing about how a certain study or experiment is a frivolous waste of time and money. As a physicist myself, even.

PSO is not a world unto its own. Sega is not a world unto its own. It's rather funny that you insist that they're so different (I mean, seriously, equating it to the theory of relativity in quantum physics? There's only one theory of relativity, you know...), but really, they're not. If you insist on that idea, well, there is obviously nothing else to discuss.

Seriously, you're suggesting that Sonic Team and PSO2 is an island. Do you realize how absurd that is? You're suggesting that experience in other games is completely irrelevant. That none of it matters. That the ONLY experience that matters is experience with the previous games.

Well, okay, then. I will remember that. I will suggest to you that you cannot judge a single unreleased sequel without playing every single one of that game's predecessors first. I will suggest that you cannot judge an unreleased new MMO without playing all the games by that developer in the past. I will suggest that comparisons between games is utterly pointless because "they're so different", or because their developers are somehow special, even if they're not.

Because that's what you're doing here, and evidently, you cannot see the absurdity in that logic. Oi, vey!

RemiusTA
Jul 14, 2011, 01:32 PM
I do not need to know shit about the PvP in the OLD games to make inferences as to how PvP might end up in the NEW game. **the sequel** Suggesting that their PvP is sooooo different that all my PvP experience in other games is completely irrelevant is Incredibly Silly.

::pokerface::


Your analogy completely fails considering this. It'd be more akin to going onto a quantum physics board arguing about how a certain study or experiment is a frivolous waste of time and money. As a physicist myself, even.
Oh my god the focus wasn't in the "theory of relativity" vs "PvP", it was in the fact that im pretty positive you (like me) don't know jack shit about its finer points, and therefore are in no position to argue any points about it. In the sense of us two, "relativity" is "PS series PvP", which you really have no reason to comment on, seeing as you have never even touched it before. And to further make matters worse for you, you claim it would ruin the game if it were included, yet it didn't affect you in the slightest when you played a game it was infact included in.

There was nothing wrong with my analogy. Seriously, this is like the 3rd post regarding it. Stop trying to poke holes in it, I even explained it to you. Unless you just so happen to be a physicst who knows very much about Quantum Physics and the Theory of Relativity, my analogy is fine the way it is, and even if that were the case, it would simply just not apply to you anymore.





PSO is not a world unto its own. Sega is not a world unto its own. It's rather funny that you insist that they're so different (I mean, seriously, equating it to the theory of relativity in quantum physics? There's only one theory of relativity, you know...), but really, they're not. If you insist on that idea, well, there is obviously nothing else to discuss.The study of Physics existed before Einstein and Relativity, you know. Just wanted to add that in. Just another day of "completely missing the point" with PSO-World. *Sigh...* Im going to stop talking about physics now, my head hurts.

And YES, PSO is different enough from other MMOs to warrant it a world of its own. How many other games have you played that control and play like Phantasy Star Online/Universe? Go ahead, waste your time trying to find the one or two (very vaguely similar) examples you can pull from the crypts of google.



Seriously, you're suggesting that Sonic Team and PSO2 is an island. Do you realize how absurd that is? You're suggesting that experience in other games is completely irrelevant. That none of it matters. That the ONLY experience that matters is experience with the previous games.In the scope of this argument, YES, it is the only thing that matters, because 1) thats what we're comparing it to, and 2) there is no reason (or evidence) to believe Sonic Team wants to adopt a more intricate PvP system (PvEvP, factions, guilds, territories that other, very different MMOs adopt) into the damn game. We aren't talking about the other OBVIOUS lessons PSO and PSU could learn from other MMOs.

Look, just stop trying to fight this argument with semantics already. It's getting us nowhere. I never once said Sonic Team should ignore other videogames and their mistakes, and nothing i said should have suggested that. What i said is that most of the other mistakes DO NOT APPLY because of the nature of this game and its series.


Well, okay, then. I will remember that. I will suggest to you that you cannot judge a single unreleased sequel without playing every single one of that game's predecessors first. I will suggest that you cannot judge an unreleased new MMO without playing all the games by that developer in the past. I will suggest that comparisons between games is utterly pointless because "they're so different", or because their developers are somehow special, even if they're not. Once again, semantics, semantics, semantics. Keep twisting my words around, once again it gets us nowhere.

As random as the development of this game may be, being a sequel and very much open to new things as anything, it would be asinine to completely ignore all the factors that they are obviously going to pay attention to while developing the game that would lower/raise the probability of something being changed. The chance of this game going from casual, instanced PvP rooms to INTRICATE PvEvP FACTIONS GUILDS FRAME COUNTS HITSTUN BROKEN CLASSES ELITIST COMMUNITIES DEVELOPMENT FINANCES PLUMMET BABIES ON FIRE is fucking abysmal, and i dont see how the hell you people are still clinging on to it like it is, in any way whatsoever, likely to happen.


Come on, Zyrusticae. This argument is ridiculous, man. At this point i will admit any flaws that i can find in my argument if you can point them out, but jesus this is just getting sad.

Look, if PvP is included in this game when it releases, and it RUINS THE ENTIRE GAME like you say it will, i will not only admit defeat, but i will Sig your IGN on my signature and create a topic in every forum praising your super crystal ball powers. That's how little faith i have in you and Special K's absolutely ridiculous claims. This is REALLY not that huge a deal.

Nitro Vordex
Jul 14, 2011, 02:02 PM
I propose that PSO2 should have Quantum Physics, as long as it violates the theory of relative-

What the fuck are you guys even going on about anyway. Shut up and stop arguing, jesus, you both look like idiots. Cut out the huge walls of text and gettothepoint.exe

BIG OLAF
Jul 14, 2011, 02:07 PM
Shut up and stop arguing, jesus, you both look like idiots.

I'm going to have to +1 this. It's starting to get kind of sad to watch.

RemiusTA
Jul 14, 2011, 02:42 PM
Meh. Whatever.

Dongra
Jul 14, 2011, 03:23 PM
Fuck it. I'm just going to wait until the game comes out. I cannot read anymore of this.

NoiseHERO
Jul 14, 2011, 03:48 PM
Stop overreacting to other people's overreacting. :0

Shinji Kazuya
Jul 14, 2011, 04:42 PM
This is crazy! I can't believe how much laughter I get from reading these threads!

RemiusTA
Jul 14, 2011, 05:14 PM
man it sure is borrrring around here

Angelo
Jul 14, 2011, 05:54 PM
I... I just wanted to play capture the flag with laser swords...

NoiseHERO
Jul 14, 2011, 06:00 PM
It's all good, PVP argument won anyway.

Shinji Kazuya
Jul 14, 2011, 06:40 PM
I wouldn't say "PvP Battlegrounds", just something simplier to have fun with every now and then.

Griffin
Jul 14, 2011, 06:51 PM
Who knows what path Sega'll take? I certainly did not get into Phantasy Star for any PvP aspect, but it's a bonus!

RemiusTA
Jul 14, 2011, 10:56 PM
It's all good, PVP argument won anyway.

HAHAHAHA in my blind fury i never even noticed that the Pro-PvP bar was larger than the Pro-Boring bar

ahhhhhh today was a good day

Genoa
Jul 14, 2011, 11:26 PM
And you've still completely skipped the part where PSO isn't OTHER games. As well as the part where we've never had; and we don't expect to get a PVP/battle mode that would even be big enough to make an impact on the community to begin with.

PSO, the similarities to OTHER games:
An online RPG
You have different classes
They do different things
They wear different equipment
They have different stats
It's affected by multiple issues such as Latency and Computer Specs.

What's makes PSO so different:
It's blend of Sci-fi and Anime combined
It's more of a Hack&Slash Online RPG
It's made by Sega?

I don't understand, as far as mechanics... what you think makes PSO so different from other online RPGs out there. I've always thought the games theme and hack&slash properties made is quite different from all the other MMO's currently out there, but that wouldn't justify a huge difference in PvP.
I'd argue that the things that make PSO "different" than other MMO's out there is and even BIGGER reason why PvP would be extremely unbalanced and only fun for the class/classes that will curb-stomp everyone else 99% of the time.



Seriously, you're suggesting that Sonic Team and PSO2 is an island. Do you realize how absurd that is? You're suggesting that experience in other games is completely irrelevant. That none of it matters. That the ONLY experience that matters is experience with the previous games.

But please, go on and defend your PvP desires for PSO2 with your logical explanations and detailed understand of MMORPG Mechanics.

This topic needs to be closed due to reasons of pure stupid

Griffin
Jul 14, 2011, 11:35 PM
The fervor is astounding, though!

RemiusTA
Jul 15, 2011, 12:08 AM
PSO, the similarities to OTHER games:
An online RPG
You have different classes
They do different things
They wear different equipment
They have different stats
It's affected by multiple issues such as Latency and Computer Specs.

What's makes PSO so different:
It's blend of Sci-fi and Anime combined
It's more of a Hack&Slash Online RPG
It's made by Sega?

I don't understand, as far as mechanics... what you think makes PSO so different from other online RPGs out there. I've always thought the games theme and hack&slash properties made is quite different from all the other MMO's currently out there, but that wouldn't justify a huge difference in PvP.
I'd argue that the things that make PSO "different" than other MMO's out there is and even BIGGER reason why PvP would be extremely unbalanced and only fun for the class/classes that will curb-stomp everyone else 99% of the time.



But please, go on and defend your PvP desires for PSO2 with your logical explanations and detailed understand of MMORPG Mechanics.

This topic needs to be closed due to reasons of pure stupid

why are you still talking about this

Genoa
Jul 15, 2011, 02:29 AM
When someone talks to you it's polite to respond back to them.
When someone quotes my last response, I tend to respond back.
It's a modern day society and we practice things like proper communication and exchange ideas and information to each other.
Unfortunately it's not always valid or useful information, like your last post.

I hope you're understanding what I'm trying to say.
I can't exactly make things much simpler to be honest, I didn't take any communication classes in college but I'd like to think I come across quite clear.

NoiseHERO
Jul 15, 2011, 06:34 AM
And you're still putting too much thought into how much work we wanted PVP to be in this game in ther first place. Which why going over every single detail about how it'd have to be perfect or else it would "shatter this game into pieces."

You're arguing about one thing, and I'm telling you I technically want something completely different. Turning what we want "a simple side mini game where you can hit your opponents on the head, or something" into "12 serious missions where you fight to the death or have team battle from 1v1 to 12v12" only makes this a silly and pointless infinite argument.


So yeah, it's DONE, FORGET IT, NOBODY CARES ANYMORE!!

THERES NO MORE E-PEEN POINTS TO BE WON IN THIS ARGUMENT!

DROP IT!

FORGET IT!

IT'S DONE, I'M DONE! YOU'RE DONE!

RUN ALONG LIL DONE-DONE!!

Genoa
Jul 15, 2011, 11:49 AM
And you're still putting too much thought into how much work we wanted PVP to be in this game in ther first place. Which why going over every single detail about how it'd have to be perfect or else it would "shatter this game into pieces."

You're arguing about one thing, and I'm telling you I technically want something completely different. Turning what we want "a simple side mini game where you can hit your opponents on the head, or something" into "12 serious missions where you fight to the death or have team battle from 1v1 to 12v12" only makes this a silly and pointless infinite argument.


So yeah, it's DONE, FORGET IT, NOBODY CARES ANYMORE!!

THERES NO MORE E-PEEN POINTS TO BE WON IN THIS ARGUMENT!

DROP IT!

FORGET IT!

IT'S DONE, I'M DONE! YOU'RE DONE!

RUN ALONG LIL DONE-DONE!!

U mad bro?

I think we know what really happened here.

Someone is mad because logic made sense

NoiseHERO
Jul 15, 2011, 12:09 PM
I guess it is done if all you have to add now is "u mad bro?" I type ridiculous things in caps all the time.

So yeah.

It's done! 8D

Sord
Jul 15, 2011, 12:26 PM
As long as the core game gets the attention it needs, then I have no problem with a PVP area or anything. PVP is normally not really for me unless I'm playing a fighting game, but I doubt I'd have to play it in PSO2 (unless they made useful unique rewards for winning PVP or something.) So as long as they have the resources without straining other areas of the game, sure, go for it.

Not like I'm going to push the issue like you guys did. Naturally some resources are required to make anything. No idea how much Sega would expend toward it, but in my case I really don't care, because it's not like I'll be playing PVP anyways unless I have to. Even if the core game wound up sucking and PVP was put in, no one but Sega would really know if that had anything to do with stretched resources (if there was any stretching.) It wouldn't be the first time Sega did something just flat out bad. I'm just hoping for a good ol' co-op experience because that is the main reason I played PSO/U.

Shinji Kazuya
Jul 15, 2011, 01:03 PM
^ Yup, same here. Just wanna have fun doing missions together with folks all around the would.

Phinalphantasy
Jul 20, 2011, 09:06 PM
It was awesome in PSO. Why wouldn't it be cool in PSO2?
Especially if there's gonna be jumping...

yoshiblue
Jul 20, 2011, 09:07 PM
If it follows psu's way of doing things. Jumping will only get you launched either way.

RemiusTA
Jul 20, 2011, 09:44 PM
U mad bro?

I think we know what really happened here.

Someone is mad because logic made sense

No, we know what REALLY happened here, you're just mad because you have absolutely no clue what your even talking about.

It's obvious you have absolutely no knowledge whatsoever about Quantum Physics or Anatomy. If you would pay attention to the trailer, it would be obvious that 1) this game isn't using normal physics because it's a videogame and 2) the anatomy of the characters is all off (spines) which means 3) its obvious this game doesn't need to try to be balanced because it isn't even a serious artstyle. Dont you understand, they're upholding the atmosphere (so no stupid loli dresses and PSP2i fashion bullshit), and by doing this, the anatomy and physics will all take a certian form. PvP is all part of this atmosphere -- it enhances the ATMOSPHERE of the game when you're able to kill other players. It helps to add the weight of Death to the storyline.

The reason we want PvEvP is because it's the best way to enjoy the game. Don't like someone? PK dat ass. Someone took that trifluid you were needing for techniques? PK dat ass. Someone took that red box you were hoping to pick up? PK dat ass. And once you hit the level cap, what else would you want to do besides PK? Now you can finally put all your hard work to the test so the noobs can finally respect you. Then, when you want to do speed runs, it's easy to choose who to do missions with -- the people who you have trouble PKing. You call it Elitism, we call it Natural Selection. And nature is ALWAYS right, Special K.

And screw development times, they need to sacrifice a few things to get PvP right, anyway. OH LOOK AT ME IM SAD BECAUSE THEY HAD TO CUT A FEW THINGS BECAUSE OF PVP. Who cares? Story mode was trash anyway, and all MMOs fall back on PvP and PK in the end anyway. It's about time they spent money on it; it's the only LOGICAL thing to do, EVERYONE is doing it. What, you expect them to copy what they did 10 years ago with PSO? Or 6 years ago with PSU? Are you freaking serious? We're moving ahead here, and there is only one clear future: PvP gameplay.


Look, You just dont use any real logic whatsoever, man. This game NEEDS PvP, every other game has it, why not PSO2? You're just jealous that we're going to get our way, and you will not. So stop trying to reply back, you've already lost. Just sit back and welcome to PKers and Elitists to overrun your noobish little wurld.


U Jelly?

yoshiblue
Jul 20, 2011, 09:48 PM
How am I to PK without the wildies?

Zyrusticae
Jul 21, 2011, 12:13 AM
On the thread of committing necromancy on a dead horse, I have to make a specific, massive correction to a very annoying misconception some posters seem to have in here:

HARDCORE PVPERS ARE A MINORITY. PERIOD. END OF STORY.

If this were not the case, games with hardcore PvP rulesets would rule the roost. Obviously, they do not. In fact, the largest MMORPG on the planet is a carebear haven through and through. The hardcore faithful who prowl battlegrounds day and night are an order of magnitude fewer than those who casually level up to the cap and either start over again with an alt or ever-so-slowly work their way into the raiding game.

Hell, just look at Aion - the open-world PvP ended up being a detriment, because an unbelievable number of carebears simply could not handle the fact that they could be attacked and killed while they were questing. NCsoft had to apply a buff to protect newbies, that's how bad it got. The number of PvErs playing at any one point in time is often in the thousands, most of them in instances; the number of people actively PvPing is often in the double digits, with the only (and very special) exception of sieges.

Champions Online similarly has very few people actually participating in the PvP. It consists exclusively of tiered arenas, and the number of players in them is also often in the double digits, and nearly all of those players stick to T2 PvP. The number of players participating in T3 and T4 PvP is less than 10 at any given point in time. It's ALWAYS the same very few players, their presence so insignificant in financial terms that I'm amazed they even bother supporting the arenas at all.

In other words, any game company can completely omit PvP and come out ahead by a fairly large margin. The hardcore PvP faithful are simply too few in number to actually be worth catering to in anything more than little trickles here and there.

So any argument that PvP is necessary for monetary success is pure bullshit in its most undistilled form. The only people who care are in a small, VERY small, minority, and everyone who cares (including me) just has to deal with it.

And play games that actually cater to that player base. Like, say, Starcraft II. Or League of Legends. Hell, they're actually MADE for this shit. No bullshit RNG and rock-paper-scissors class balancing to get in the way of a good fight.

Angelo
Jul 21, 2011, 12:45 AM
Don't want to get too involved here.. but since it's obvious that WoW was referenced, BGs are basically all a lot of players do at end game, even the super casual ones. In fact casual players are more likely to throw themselves into a PvP scenario than to get all geared up and number-crunched over a pinpoint choreographed heroic raid (or I guess in our case, "C-Mode").

DCUO is probably the only console MMO (post FF11) that ever 'worked' and the PvP is very healthy there.

I didn't think anybody here was asking for hardcore PvP. How is that even possible in a game that has no overworld like PSO2?

I think we just want to see some resources and time go into the option. BGs are very, very popular. PSO2 also seems like a 'twitchy' action game, and shouldn't really follow the MMO rules of coloress number crunching and 'DPS'. In fact I can see a lot of people just looking at the RA's crosshairs and going 'Hey, where's the PVP?'.

As far as this community is concerned, the poll speaks for itself, and in all my years of lurking PSO-World the very last thing I would call this crowd is 'hardcore PvPers'.

Zyrusticae
Jul 21, 2011, 01:13 AM
Cool story, bro. Where's your proof? Certantly it isn't that poll above the start of this thread, is it? : 0
A self-selecting poll on a fan site with a sample size in the double digits?

The one that asks whether or not it should be included at all and not whether or not they would spend a majority of their time in it?

I don't think anyone with a brain should be using that as proof of anything, thank you very much. :roll:


My proof is recorded numbers from Aion and Champions Online. Want hard numbers? Too bad, nobody gets hard numbers on a freakin' internet forum, and the companies never release those kinds of numbers anyways (outside of generic "We have X number of subscribers now!" announcements that stop coming out once the decline starts).

I can assure you right now, however, that if you were to log on to Aion and do a /who of every instance, and then walked around the open PvP areas searching for PvPers, you would find an enormous disconnect.

Similarly, you could log onto Champions online right now and find thousands of PvE-ers all over the place, and then go into a PvP instance (T3+ especially) and see the exact same players over, and over, and over, and over, and over again. Hell, it's even free to play, so the barrier of entry is null.

Go right ahead. Take a look. It's quite enlightening.

Angelo
Jul 21, 2011, 01:34 AM
Champions is a bad example, their failures were due to a lot of circumstances. I was playing the game back in it's Alpha stage and was very hyped for it, so I know it's long history from being Marvel Universe Online to it's unfortunate decay and fall.

I think DCUO is a much better example of how PvP can be streamlined into a fun and casual experience enjoyed by all.

PSO2 is also not an MMO and is more akin to a game like Guild Wars, which has a lot of focus on PvP and is a very popular franchise with a sequel on the way.

NoiseHERO
Jul 21, 2011, 06:48 AM
What is this? Bump annoying threads day? <_>

Mega Ultra Chicken
Jul 21, 2011, 08:33 AM
Yes, I wanna see a PvP system that actually works in a Phantasy Star game (unlike in PSO.)

NoiseHERO
Jul 21, 2011, 08:41 AM
Since these arguments mean nothing. I'll just let the poll decide on this communities universal interest in PVP!

Zyrusticae
Jul 21, 2011, 10:50 AM
Champions is a bad example, their failures were due to a lot of circumstances. I was playing the game back in it's Alpha stage and was very hyped for it, so I know it's long history from being Marvel Universe Online to it's unfortunate decay and fall.Champions Online did not fail as a game. Quite the contrary, post-F2P conversion it's got a very healthy player count and quite the steady income.

It's the PvP that's essentially dead atm.



I think DCUO is a much better example of how PvP can be streamlined into a fun and casual experience enjoyed by all.

PSO2 is also not an MMO and is more akin to a game like Guild Wars, which has a lot of focus on PvP and is a very popular franchise with a sequel on the way.
Perhaps, but again, both of these were built for PvP from the very beginning. In fact, PvP was a huge part of DCUO's pre-release demoes. I really doubt we'll be seeing anything close to the same thing from PSO2. I will be most surprised if we see any PvP footage at all.


Don't want to get too involved here.. but since it's obvious that WoW was referenced, BGs are basically all a lot of players do at end game, even the super casual ones. In fact casual players are more likely to throw themselves into a PvP scenario than to get all geared up and number-crunched over a pinpoint choreographed heroic raid (or I guess in our case, "C-Mode").This is a useless tack. My word against your's can only go nowhere.

Actually, I regret even bringing WoW up, as it is exempt from monetary concerns with its millions of players, allowing its dev team to largely do whatever the hell they want. There are only three other known P2P mmos with player counts in the millions: Aion, Lineage, and Lineage II (yup, all NCSoft games). Interestingly enough, those games are built with PvP in mind from the very beginning - it is NOT tacked on in any sense of the phrase.

I think Sonic Team should stick to its guns and focus on doing what the game does best. If they can do that, they will most assuredly see a high level of success.

(And to no one's great surprise, the only other MMOs with millions of players are all F2P with cash shops. Pretty sure we don't want PSO2 going down that road.)


DCUO is probably the only console MMO (post FF11) that ever 'worked' and the PvP is very healthy there.It's also got one of the fastest-shrinking player bases of any MMO in recent history, and also famed for lacking PvE content.

Not the best example, IMO.


I didn't think anybody here was asking for hardcore PvP. How is that even possible in a game that has no overworld like PSO2?
Open world PvP =/= "hardcore" PvP.

I'm not even sure why you leapt at that. A game that is entirely lobby-based isn't automatically ruled out of the "hardcore" race (DOTA/Heroes of Newerth especially come to mind here).


I think we just want to see some resources and time go into the option. BGs are very, very popular. PSO2 also seems like a 'twitchy' action game, and shouldn't really follow the MMO rules of coloress number crunching and 'DPS'. In fact I can see a lot of people just looking at the RA's crosshairs and going 'Hey, where's the PVP?'.

As far as this community is concerned, the poll speaks for itself, and in all my years of lurking PSO-World the very last thing I would call this crowd is 'hardcore PvPers'.
See above comment about the veracity of this poll.

I can certainly understand the first point. The game has potential in that department. However, I think a lot of this hopefulness is extremely silly given that we haven't even seen anywhere near enough of the game's PvE content as it is. The game has a LONG way to go before PvP can be looked at in any serious measure.

I would not mind at all if PvP were looked at seriously as post-launch content. At that level, it would get more of the attention it really needs to be a worthwhile addition to the game, and not something that's just tacked-on for the hell of it. I really can't understand the mindset that "something is better than nothing" - if that something is really awful, and leaves you wishing it either never came to be or actually got something more than token development time, is that really better than simply not having it?

I experienced tacked-on PvP in Champions Online, and that only left a seriously bitter taste in my mouth for what could have been. For months upon months the rather puny PvP community clamored for at least basic fixes to playability issues, especially with certain powers or items that made any sort of competition essentially pointless. They eventually got around to making it at least work, but it was only part of a much larger overhaul that touched nearly all of the game's systems. By that point the PvP community largely didn't exist.

I don't understand what a lot of you folks are asking for. I get the impression that, despite your words here, if they did add it and it was half-assed, you would be out there bitching with the rest of us. So why settle? What is the point? If the PvP community is dead, why even have the PvP modes in the first place? I just don't get it.

Angelo
Jul 21, 2011, 03:27 PM
So what it boils down to is that you don't think PvP can be successful in a game unless it was intended from the get-go?

I agree, it definitely helps.

Then again, we really don't know what the developers have planned for PSO2. It's obvious they're taking a different approach by having it be PC-only, which is pretty much all we really know about the game aside from speculation about the combat system.

For all we know they could have a consultant telling them the importance of some type of competitive play at launch, but again, this is all speculation.

Mikessc88
Jul 21, 2011, 11:27 PM
Ive seen a few MMOs with pvp it seems like it effects the equipment as well as breeds certain types of players. Somethings ive seen is gear/equipment that is designed to excel in pvp rather than versus the mobs. And inversely equipment designed to damage monsters. It always seems to split the players into either PVm or PVP. Either way it would be an interesting addition.

RemiusTA
Jul 22, 2011, 01:19 AM
Man can someone just lock this already. Here i am trying to turn over a new leaf with things, and this here thread just....

Anime_Angel
Jul 22, 2011, 04:26 PM
in my opinion, it'd be great to allow duels to test each others skill against other players, but what I don't want is other players killing you like on World of Warcraft lol

tehhaxorer
Jul 25, 2011, 12:26 PM
Yeah, I think PVP Battlegrounds are a fine idea and I enjoyed PVP every other game I played. It adds a lot of replayability and diversion from PVE.

Forced PVP is a different matter though.

Enforcer MKV
Jul 25, 2011, 12:36 PM
I'm gonna be in the minority here, but I'm gonna say no here. It just doesn't.....fit. I know that's a little awkward sounding, but throughout my entire time playing PSU (I know it's not the same, but it's what I have to go off of.) never once did I have PVP cross my mind. PVP just doesn't lend itself to that style of game. It's focused on doing things together against invading forces, not fighting each other. I think adding a PVP mode would only detract from the whole idea of the PS games, don'tcha think?

Kizeragi
Jul 26, 2011, 07:06 PM
My answer: Maybe.

Reasons: Well, I've never seen Phantasy Star as a PvP-esque game. I have read alot about PSP2 and its battle mode, but I dunno, would be a nice extra to have I guess. It would ultimately depend on how it's handled. If it's fair and decently balanced, I will give it a try, otherwise I won't bother. Seen enough unbalanced PvP in the many free MMO's I've been going through.

Malachite
Jul 26, 2011, 07:09 PM
I'm gonna be in the minority here, but I'm gonna say no here. It just doesn't.....fit. I know that's a little awkward sounding, but throughout my entire time playing PSU (I know it's not the same, but it's what I have to go off of.) never once did I have PVP cross my mind. PVP just doesn't lend itself to that style of game. It's focused on doing things together against invading forces, not fighting each other. I think adding a PVP mode would only detract from the whole idea of the PS games, don'tcha think?

You do know all revisions of PSO had battle mode, right? If the only PS game you've played is PSU... please don't speak of the 'idea' of Phantasy Star games, because PSU butchered just about every idea that made PS what it is, lol. So no, I don't think.

I think it'd be awesome, with this new combat engine, to fight another player. It'd just be an awesome looking fight.

•Col•
Jul 26, 2011, 07:09 PM
4v4 battles could be interesting...

Malachite
Jul 26, 2011, 07:12 PM
4v4 IMO would be insanely hectic, but not a terrible idea. I was thinking more along the lines of 1v1 or so.

But party vs party could be pretty interesting.

NoiseHERO
Jul 26, 2011, 07:17 PM
because PSU butchered just about every idea that made PS what it is, lol

SAYING STUFF LIKE THIS IS HOW ARGUMENTS START.

•Col•
Jul 26, 2011, 07:21 PM
4v4 IMO would be insanely hectic, but not a terrible idea. I was thinking more along the lines of 1v1 or so.

But party vs party could be pretty interesting.

I think it could work if it was a certain mode and not just straight up PVP.

Like a King of the Hill type mode, capture the flag, or whichever team kills more enemies within a time limit wins.

lostinseganet
Jul 26, 2011, 10:33 PM
if it was a specific mode not area you could walk in by mistake or be tricked into then yea...

Malachite
Jul 26, 2011, 10:38 PM
Yes, like PSO was.

I agree with Colaya. Having a mode like that, if it was properly executed, could add a huuge amount of depth to the game.

Ecchi
Jul 27, 2011, 12:23 AM
If fighting looks as smooth and as streamline as the vids say they are PvP would be a great addition! Times moving an so are games a Pvp arena would be great! Honestly tho I do enjoy Pso/Psu for the hunt so I wouldnt be dissapointed if it wasnt there.....Well maybe just a lil..... (:(

Radori Nighthawk
Jul 28, 2011, 11:16 AM
It was awesome in PSO. Why wouldn't it be cool in PSO2?
Especially if there's gonna be jumping...

Agreed. I loved the PSO battle modes. You had a good variety of battle mode types IMO.


Don't really mind, if it's "good" I'll join in, if "bad" I'll stay the heck away.

This. I'm all for adding it. It really is this simply put. If it's unappealing to you, don't participate in the PvP.

I'd rather have the OPTION of playing PvP then sit around and wonder why it isn't in the game period. -I'm starting at you, PSU- >____________>

Poubelle
Jul 28, 2011, 12:29 PM
PVP is good, brings in a wider audience,some online gamers would never play a game without PVP. of course PSO2's main focus will be about co-op and huge monsters, but I do hope they include PVP modes to appeal to PVP players. (I love PVP but I also don't mind it missing, if the co-op is fun enough)

Dabian
Jul 28, 2011, 12:33 PM
My take: If games had really robust AI PVE opponents we wouldn't need PVP all that much.

Angelo
Feb 9, 2012, 06:44 AM
So after playing the alpha I can't help but think about how awesome a Battle mode would be. Especially one that lets you keep your level, gear, and PAs.

the multiparty areas would be perfect for this, since a lot of times it felt like there was a sort of 'fog of war' thing going on, wondering when you'd finally meet up with the other party.

If you could mix that with the PvP gameplay from PsPo2's Battle objectives, like where each side has a 'base' and capture points, and points for killing monster spawns this could be even better than the PvE portions of the game, imo.

The incentives should be things that are purely cosmetic like costumes, room decorations, titles, etc.
Or if you want to give an actual reward... there could be PvP points you could trade in for like... grinders or something.

Either way, I'd love to see fleshed out instanced PvP in this game after seeing multi-party areas.

SELENNA
Feb 9, 2012, 11:29 AM
I said "yes" because having more options is always better. Some people obviously won't like it, but for the others it will be a welcome addition. I really don't see the problem with it, it's not like the cooperative aspect of the game won't be valid anymore with it.

moorebounce
Feb 10, 2012, 10:12 AM
If they include PvP then they would have to have maps made just for PvP.

Angelo
Feb 10, 2012, 10:18 AM
If they include PvP then they would have to have maps made just for PvP.

That's sort of the idea. PvP instances. Multi-party maps with meet up points, capture points, and bases. Like PsPo2 but on a bigger scale.

It's just too awesome of an idea.

FOkyasuta
Feb 10, 2012, 10:24 AM
That's sort of the idea. PvP instances. Multi-party maps with meet up points, capture points, and bases. Like PsPo2 but on a bigger scale.

It's just too awesome of an idea.

I smell Tournaments held by GM's and Fans alike.

Yamishi
Feb 10, 2012, 01:07 PM
Do I want it? Sure.

Do I need it? Nah.

SELENNA
Feb 10, 2012, 01:09 PM
My guess is it will be included in the first expansion

soulpimpwizzurd
Feb 10, 2012, 09:59 PM
If PVP wasn't taken WAAAAAAY too seriously to begin with.. it wouldn't matter if we had it or not. But just having it would be more things to do in this game in general.

this

it could be just something to do for fun. i'd definitely pvp while waiting for a group to get done with their errands before going on a mission with random people in lobby to kill time.

moorebounce
Feb 11, 2012, 09:07 AM
The main problem with PvP is everybody has a different opinion on what they consider being balanced. If Sega puts PvP in the game then they know going in that everybody won't be totally satisfied with that balance.

The question is why would they put PvP in a game thats meant to promote teamwork.

I vote for more content instead of PvP but if they do put it in the game at least they should make maps for it.

Crawfeesh
Feb 12, 2012, 05:29 PM
Team Pvp and multi team pvp wold be nice. As long as we don't have to do 50 things just to start a battle. *cough mostonlinegamesnow cough*

SilverFoxR
Feb 12, 2012, 09:47 PM
I don't see traditional PvP working in a game such as this. Not just the gameplay systems and resources, but the balancing would make things diffcult on it's own.

The closest thing I could see to a PvP mode would be a hunter race. The idea would simply be two teams going through an area with the same parameters set to see who could reach the goal first... whether the goal was a point in the area, a quest item to obtain and return or an enemy/boss to defeat.

Other than that, I can't really see PvP working.