ArcheAge: We don’t serve your kind in here!

aaThere’s no doubt that the ArcheAge beta is some kind of popular right now, and I have no reason to think that the launch won’t be a big event.  Whether or not I’ll be playing is still up for debate, however, as it’s dependant on two factors: If free players will be able to obtain housing (last I heard Trion was talking about this) and if the studio will create a PvE-only server.

Because frankly I do not want to roll on one of the current servers.  The community is downright toxic from many reports that I’ve been hearing, and I think that the griefing potential of PvP activities is contributing greatly to that.  The downside to sandboxes: there are just so many more ways you can screw with other players than kill them in mindless combat.  In alpha — where you had to pay $150 to get in, I might remind you — there have been stories of jerks trying to outdo each other and chat channels that must be moderated by Satan, or at least Jerry Springer.

I don’t want to be a part of that.  If I’m going to play the game, I want to be able to explore the entire world without worry that someone would think it was funny to sink my trade ship an hour into a journey.  So I went on the official forums (I know, I broke Syp Rule #1) to see if there was any movement for a PvE server.  What I found was pretty illuminating in regard to the current ArcheAge culture as a whole.

You would think that a request for a PvE server would be met with a reasonable “why not?” from the community, but nope.  There’s sheer hostility and panicked entreaties for the studio to do no such thing.  It would ruin the spirit of the game!  It’s not how ArcheAge is meant to be played!  Don’t cater to those stupid carebears, we don’t want their kind in here — or if we do, they should be fair game!

“Let the people who like the pvp play on a pvp server and the people who like pve enjoy the immersive world of Archeage peacefully,” the original poster said.

The responses?

  • “In my opinion, ‘PVE server’ goes against everything that AA stands for.”
  • “I am sure you can enjoy the game without actually PvPing as well. However, you’ll just have to be very careful and cautious. But hey, if you are in dire need of protection and don’t fancy fighting players yourself, you can always hire someone to protect you!”
  • “Just hope not, the game is all about PvP, so Carebaears just don’t join ArcheAge”
  • “PvP is integral part of the game and removing it makes the game pointless.”
  • “TRION already knows it has a niche player base and will likely not deviate from PvP, which is what the majority wants.”
  • “We need people who do not want to play on a PVP server on a PVP server, that way the ‘good guys’ will have someone to protect.”
  • “If you’re in a sandbox, you should damn well be able to kick down sand castles in every area, rather than be unable to in certain areas.”
  • “However, the core of the game is designed with the threat of PVP in mind. Without that element, you will be playing a broken game and you will end up getting bored of it very fast.”
  • “They won’t create PVE servers even it that could give them 1000% more revenue because they don’t want the game to have PVE servers. Believe me when i say, if you hate your gameplay being interrupted by gankers, then don’t bother with this or any game that was created with PVP as its essence.”
  • “It’s frustrating to be doing trade runs to get ganked by 5 higher level people. I can understand that. But it’s what this game is practically built on. The PvE aspect of the game isn’t very strong. “

It keeps going with all kinds of conflicting logic.  I love the “we need you carebears to protect!” line because when have you ever seen “heroic” players defend those just trying to play the game they want?  I’ll be ganked by both groups, morelike.

What I get from the anti-PvE crowd is that they are definitely threatened by the notion of a PvE server because that will take the gankees away from them.  I mean, if your PvP server is so wonderful and contains the full ArcheAge experience, wouldn’t people WANT to play on it if given the choice?  No, you know that they’ll choose to cut PvP out of their sandbox experience as when Trammel went live for Ultima Online.  Having a PvE server isn’t threatening unless you know that it will be more popular and suck sheep away from your hunting grounds.  I think these posters know that and fear it.

“Sandbox” doesn’t have to mean “always containing the threat of PvP.”  If you like player conflict, it’s cool, and I am all for you having a place to do it.  But I’d love to play in a sandbox world that doesn’t have it.  So I’m holding out hope that Trion will evaluate the beta culture and create a server for PvErs.  At least in my case, it will be a major deciding factor whether or not I’ll play, and I’m OK with saying that.

About these ads

35 thoughts on “ArcheAge: We don’t serve your kind in here!

  1. I’m do share a lot of your senitments. The world in AA is great and I love spending time there but….it probably won’t happen for all the reasons you mentioned. The last time I played daily (3 months ago), I didn’t see much in the game to help players help other players. Guild functionality was virtually non-existent. There was a game mechanic that allowed enemy players to attack me but members of my party couldn’t defend me. It just seems super competitive when i just want to relax in this virtual world…which works if you stay in the under lvl 30 zones.

    Land is another topic that is a major issue. Having a plot for your farm/house is a must but it’s a limited commodity so what happens when all the plots in “safe” areas are used up? Also, its possible to grief other players simply by placing plots in odd combinations, creating unusable space between plots and limiting the # of plots. It’s partially mitigated by the weekly tax payments but it’s a significant problem for me.

  2. Blimey.
    I just had a beta invite through but to be fair the game is doing nothing to appeal to me. I may take a look to say I have been there but beyond that the vibes coming from the game don’t suite me or my play-style.

  3. It’s funny how I think relatively the same thing about Wildstar. An end game that caters to raiders? The want to bring back that 40-man raid “feeling”? Doesn’t make me feel welcome. I know there is plenty of other stuff the game has, but raiding appear to be a big focus. Knowing, though, that the last 5% is out of reach is maddening. Similar to running a marathon, but not being allowed to cross the finish line.

    I see it as ArcheAge being the same way. Don’t like a little more hardcore PvP? Well, the game does have plenty of other stuff, too, PvP is not the only thing, but it is a big focus of the game.

    As far as Trion goes, they have titles like Rift that don’t have that open world PvP. So, in their diversification, it makes a lot more sense to have their titles not try to pull from the same audience. They wouldn’t gain anything from overlap.

    Not every game has to be made with trying to reach the biggest audience. The market is too big now to try to keep up with a “for everybody” approach.

    As far as having jerks… every game has jerks. I’m still willing to give ArcheAge a shot as I personally haven’t encountered these people yet. So I can’t say, for certain, how they will “ruin” my experience, when they haven’t done so yet.

  4. I think I’ll skip this one.

    These are not the kind of people I’d ever want to meet in real life. Let them have their outlet for screwing with people (better they get it out online). I won’t be bait for them, nor will I join them.

  5. I’m with you, 100%…but…When is enough enough? PvPers have been the read-headed stepchild of the MMO world (sorry to gingers) for YEARS. It’s a play style that people love, but in terms of games that cater to that style, compared to games that cater to PvE, it’s been no contest.

    I don’t begrudge these people wanting to have a game for themselves, and I don’t think it’s really worthwhile to be sad about not having this specific game offer a full PvE experience when that’s what makes up the bulk of the offerings here in the West.

  6. Well, the anti-PvE crowd has plenty of evidence from the past that having a PvE alternative to their open world PvP will draw players away. That is pretty much the tale of Ultima Online. Trammel came along and the victims most sauntered off to that so they could tend bar, build their house, and harvest resources in peace.

    Unfortunately, the biggest hole in their argument is that, in today’s market, there are many PvE alternatives. They are called “other games” and carebears will go back to them if AA turns out to be an Asian import gank-fest hellhole for PvE.

    The only thing that could mitigate that is if the game offers something you just cannot get elsewhere. This is the reason EVE Online survives. It is a nest of scum and villainy where you can be griefed in many ways, but it also has a complex market and industry system that beats out any single player Taipan inspired space trucker game you care to mention. And even then, it can only hold maybe 200K actual players, most of whom run at least two accounts.

  7. I love the concept of AA, but I have the same reservations you do. What’s keeping me away from the game is the staunch PVP inclusion (people can say that you can avoid it if you play safe, but I’m not dumb, I played pre-Trammel UO).

    Fair and balanced PVP is one thing. But people like to feel powerful, and ganking other people who just want to explore or build a farm is their idea of fun. I’ve already heard enough griefing from people who are stabbing their own faction in the back at every chance. And this is only beta.

    I’m not holding my breath for a PVE server since it feels like PVP is at the core of the game’s design. It’s a real shame, though, because everything else would have gained a customer in me.

  8. So here’s what happens if they make PvE servers. Now they have to support those servers, Now all facets of the game have to be balanced once for a server with PvP and once for a server without. Now maybe PvE players don’t have enough to do so they start complaining that the devs only care about PvP, so more changes have to be made.

    All of this costs money and/or developer resources. It’s not like “Oh, we just flip this switch and it’s a PvE game.” You’ve all been around long enough to know that.

    Maybe it’s worth the cost, and maybe it isn’t. I guess we’ll know it was worth the cost with Trion announces a PvE server.

    But not every game has to be for every gamer. This one is focused on PvP. If you don’t want to PvP, I hear there are a few other MMOs to choose from.

    I do it too, so I don’t mean this as harshly as it sounds, but it’s really an entitlement thing. “There’s this game that doesn’t cater to me and I’m annoyed that the developers won’t change their focus to include me.” Right?

    I’m right there with Ocho. Tons of people love Wildstar but I’m not a raider and I’m not big into being tied to guild members to get stuff done. So should the devs now start adding solo zones for gamers like me? No, of course not. That’s not their vision. They have a vision and they’ve created a product for a specific audience. They should stick to that, and I just choose not to play Wildstar.

    There are so many MMOs out there… the only way to succeed with a new one is to find an audience and dedicate yourself to keeping that audience happy. Trying to be a game for every kind of gamer just means you wind up with another mediocre MMO that everyone plays for 3 weeks before moving on.

  9. You pretty much nailed it. They know if pve servers opened up that easy kills wouldn’t be nearly as frequent. Despite what most say that’s exactly what many pvp types want. Yes there is a minority that are honorable fighters but many will only prey on the weak and if a real fight shows up they are gone.

    All that said I wouldn’t hold your breath on a pve server. Trade routes with pvp are a major component of the game. I’m not sure if they are able to have npcs attack you on trade routes but I suppose it could be an alternative on a hypothetical pve server.

  10. I would play it if there was a pve server, Id even be happy to pay a subscription if it is a good game..

    I agree with the above posters that many pvp players pick on the ones that wander about happily on their own gathering materials or questing. It used to happen to me all the time in Aion at a certain level which is why I stopped playing that at that time. Although I think now Aion has PVE server, not sure.

    Gosh I would really love a new game to try out. I’ll keep my fingers crossed!

  11. Trion has already said that there will not be a PVE server. As for the immature, griefy community… I just use my block button a lot and it’s better. ;-)

    (More on this on my own blog soon.)

  12. When did “wanting something” as a consumer become an instant target for that hoary entitlement argument? They don’t HAVE to do a PvE server. I, personally, would like one. It would help convince me to play the game and entice my possible spending in that game.

    ArcheAge has a great product on its hands, and I think that Trion would want to get as many players in it as possible. PvE servers would be a good way to expand the potential audience.

  13. @Sprinks – Can you block people from griefing you when you’re enjoying the content that you want to do? Because that would be a mighty block button indeed!

  14. @Pete and @Ocho – Carbine is already adding solo zones. And more PvP. And more raids. It’s going for a more generalist approach to its endgame. Raiding is not the only vision they have for their endgame, which is good because I wouldn’t be playing it either.

  15. Pingback: Why This “Carebear” Thinks ArcheAge Shouldn’t Have a PVE Server « Geek Sprinkles

  16. @Syp… There are griefers and trolls everywhere… on and offline. If I lived my life to avoid them, I’d abandon the internet and never leave my house. ;-)

    As for actual TOS-violating griefing, Trion has made it clear that it isn’t OK. However, getting ganked by the enemy (or pirates, or your neighbor) isn’t considered against TOS. It is, according to Trion, the way the game is intended.

    I wrote more on the subject on my blog… http://geeksprinkles.com/2014/07/25/why-this-carebear-thinks-archeage-shouldnt-have-a-pve-server/

  17. OK perhaps entitlement is the wrong word.

    But the way I see it, you’re going into the forums and asking for the developers to fundamentally change their game so that it plays the way you want it to play, and then you’re surprised that the local forum denizens (who, after all, ARE FORUM DENIZENS) swarm to defend the status quo. They’re there and have been there because they like the game the way it is….and they’re gamers and we’re not known for calm, rational reactions to people messing with our stuff.

  18. It seems quite straightforward to me. ArcheAge is an MMO that was designed to revolve around around trading in a dangerous environment. The danger in question is provided by players not by NPCs. If that seems like an appealing basis for an MMO, give it a try and see how well it works out in practice. If it doesn’t, steer well clear.

    The whole “Trion could make good money with a PvE server” argument is disturbing. Do you really want game companies to alter and amend their games so as to make the maximum amount of money rather than to tune them so as to make the best games? That’s a classic “be careful what you wish for” argument.

    The UO/Trammel comparison is interesting. Because technological innovations would inevitably have overwhelmed UO anyway, it’s impossible to say whether Trammel killed UO or not. It seems likely that no “PvP” MMO is going to survive long or break out of an extreme niche with just PvP players. Wolves do need sheep to prosper. The trick is to make the grass sufficiently green to attract enough sheep for the wolves to prey on, and also for the wolves to realize that if they slaughter ALL the sheep they will starve.

  19. Pingback: Archeage and the Path to Predictability | Healing the masses

  20. You know, since it’s a sandbox, you could just find other people who share your playstyle and protect one another. Perhaps send out bait ahead to scout/lure away pirates whilst the main fleet moves on and trades. I’m sure there will be plenty of trader/PvE guilds, there are in every other sandbox.

    Personally I think such opportunities for cooperation and genuine dynamism in an MMO are so rare and so enjoyable that I can’t see why you’d break that because the thought of (shock horror) other players acting against your interests is so repugnant. Is the real possibility of being ganked once in a blue moon seriously more of a problem than the tedious drudgery of yet more “dynamic events”/quests/generic PvE themepark content where you/an NPC are facetiously imperilled on a completely consequenceless trade run just to score more XP points towards an arbitrary level cap that means nothing other than to guide you through linear, generally poorly written, linear filler content that is objectively less fun than an SRPG?

  21. You really don’t have to look any further than TERA to see what kind of community will infest ArcheAge. It’s not the old school PVP crowd that understood that balance and the need for the PVE crowd to populate their servers was important.

    It’s this new school PVP crowd that really doesn’t give a damn about anything except “winning” at all costs, even if that means driving players away. They’ll be off to the next PVP game as soon as that happens, not understanding they’re perpetuating this ridiculous cycle.

    I’ll enjoy the class system and exploration for as long as i can, but i’m not interested in PVP endgame. I’ve realized the older i get, the less i care about it.

  22. If this is a PvP game, I think that is what it should stay. My opinion anyways. Pve’rs got so many games already, just let the toxic community hang out in one game, so they don’t come in the pve’rs games and make that place toxic as well. I’m sorry but asking a pvp game to change to pve, is like saying Hey mr game-producers, I don’t like fantasy, can you change this to a dramatic sci fi instead ? No.

    I never see the harm in asking to, that is what we are thought from we are little, ask if there is anything you are wondering about.
    And tbh, I think when pvp’rs find game they like, they stick with games just as long as us pve’r stick to mmo’s.

  23. Pingback: Do you want a PVE server to go with your Sandbox? |

  24. Pingback: Are you anti-Virtual World? | Star-Fired Beef

  25. I see few arguments here that don’t make much sense to me.

    1) “The game shouldn’t be changed to involve PvE!” PvE already exists within the game though; there are quests and NPCs and foes to fight. I don’t see players asking for anything to be added or changed in that regard whatsoever; rather, they want an option to play what is already there without also taking part in PvP. Taking PvP out of the mix is arguably rather simple in terms of programming and support, and shouldn’t cause any appreciable loss of dev resources. Nobody is asking for the devs to fundamentally change the nature or setting of the game at all here.

    2) “You can still PvE there! Just get a bunch of PvPers to protect you at all times and it’ll be just like a PvE game for you!” Well, no, it won’t; let’s be honest and admit that no such guard will be around at all times, which is what you want as a PvPer. If you really didn’t mind people having a PvE experience in the game with no PvP, you wouldn’t be arguing against the existence of PvE servers. Rather, you want more sheep to prey upon. That’s ok, but be honest about it.

    3) “PvP is so much better than PvE! It makes the game more exciting and fun and dynamic!” That’s absolutely true for many people, but it’s not true for everyone. Some people genuinely do like PvE games and only want to play those. Decrying their choices as being worse than your own is an exercise in lost perspective; your preferences are not the only valid ones that exist.

    4) “Carebears ruin games!” Hardly. That’s a bit like saying that the existence of someone who eats their burgers with mayonnaise will somehow make your own mustard-and-ketchup burger taste worse. In terms of game balance, the devs already need to make sure the game works for PvE (see point 1 above), and having a PvE-only server does nothing to affect anyone on PvP servers except to remove some of their prey (again, let’s be honest, that’s the real complaint). If the game is fun to PvP in, then there will be people PvPing there. You shouldn’t want or depend on people who don’t want to play the same game-style as you, in order to play your game. If you’re really in this for the challenge, then fighting other wolves is more satisfying. If all you seek is soft targets to gank, then one way or another your choices will not be sustainable. See, the truth is that nobody WANTS to be a soft target; some people will play for a bit to enjoy the PvE, but if they aren’t also into the PvP, they’re going to quit soon enough anyhow. For a PvP game to be sustainable, it needs to center around more evenly matched conflicts. For that matter, if a game has PvE servers in addition to the PvP servers, that allows more people to play in a way they’ll enjoy, which means more people will be paying the devs money, which in turn means the game will get more updates. And for the record (to cut off the inevitable cries of “carebear” that always crop up in these discussions as an attempt to silence dissent), I enjoy PvP, personally, but I also like PvE; I think there’s a time and place for both approaches.

  26. Like many of you I’ve been eagerly watching AA’s development over the years. That promise of an open world where I can OWN A FARM is hard to not get excited about :)

    But I want to ask you all a question about @Ald’s point: What makes you guys think they’re doing this to cater to carebears? Why does no one think that maybe they’ve seen what communities like TERA look like and they’re shaping the gameplay of their game to steer clear of that? Maybe they don’t want the kind of PvPers who apparently want to play their game :)

    PvP isn’t the heart of this game. It’s almost never the heart of any game, even ones with serious PvP (see EVE). PvP is a feature. So is PvE. But there are other features. PvPer’s tend to see AA as an opportunity to plunder farmers. LIke …that’s why they’re excited about AA “oooh! farms to pillage!”. But the PvE’er is excited about the prospects of developing land. They have no interest in farm burning or burners of farms. Shouldn’t the game make room for both of them? There’s plenty of room for it as others have pointed out. And I think arguments which suggest AA is for PvPers is the definition of entitlement, even as those hypocrites try to point the finger at the “carebears” for being entitled.

  27. Pingback: Soapbox Derby | Me Vs. Myself and I

  28. Pingback: Are you an entitled player? | Bio Break

  29. from bhagpuss: “The whole “Trion could make good money with a PvE server” argument is disturbing. Do you really want game companies to alter and amend their games so as to make the maximum amount of money rather than to tune them so as to make the best games? That’s a classic “be careful what you wish for” argument. ”

    You deem to be forgeting the overriding factor. TRION is in the business to make money. This is very much apparent in their other games and the focus on cash shop items. Sure they will try and put out a quality update but it is almost always laced with new cash shop items. SO if they see their numbers stagnating quickly or early, you can bet your last dollar they will add a PVE server(s) if it means more subscribers/income.

  30. Pingback: Back home and some blogging catchup | GamingSF

  31. I wish people would stop making the distinction between PvE and PvP servers. In fact I wish MMO designers would abandon this concept completely. Why can’t MMO’s use a system like EVE Online where we all inhabit the same world/universe and choose what level of security we wish yet still have the freedom to move between the two as we wish.

    In a true sandbox environment the content generators and conflict drivers are the players. It’s what keeps people coming back and playing and paying for the game. Only catering to player vs player or only catering to player vs environment takes away this content generation and makes for a very stale MMO.

    Let’s hope Archeage stays true to its original design intent and does not become some bastardised version of every other MMO. Trying to force it to change into something it was not originally targetted at is a recipe for failure.

  32. Pingback: ArcheAge – It’s Not A PvP Gank-Fest | Endgame Viable

  33. Pingback: ArcheAge – sandbox MMOPG with great art | BetaGamerz

  34. Pingback: What’s So Bad About Open World PvP? | Gaming Conjecture

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s