Diablo 4 - Who want to hear more about PVP?

General Discussion
183

That’s a bold claim. It’s not all black and white.
If you’re talking about REAL competitiveness, we’re talking about a money prize or at least full control by the player, right? It doesn’t work that way in real life either, why should it be that way in digital?

The well known board game backgammon has tournaments with a money prize pool (I’m surprised in 2020 they held it somewhere) but it doesn’t change the fact that everything relies on a dice roll and people played this game for fun along the centuries. Bridge and poker have tournaments, but it all relies on cards, your memory and your chance; there are things that you can not control but fans accepted it.
Do those examples change the fact that people enjoy these games for fun? People enjoy board games like chess, which is very competitive by nature, card games around friends or even try PvP in DnD, which is closest thing to an ARPG as a board game.
You may be angry at your uncle for beating you at backgammon or poker in a very hot summer night, that’s not competitiveness. If you get beaten in a video game while playing a public casual match, that’s not competitiveness either. There tons of other non-comp board, card and video games out there, it’s a facet of the thing and randomization will be a big portion of these for the lackluster UI or control.

Only real fans accepted them as competitive games while rest of the world enjoys it as much as those fans who play competitively without the feeling of rivalry.
For Diablo 4 same thing gonna apply. Some fans will accept D4 PvP as it is to make it challenging. They’ll become passionate and will look for a work around for its shortcomings even. When that doesn’t work they’ll give feedback to the developers. That doesn’t change how other people treat PvP’ers. If game gets a comp scene, that be just extra even if it doesn’t seem fitting.

1 Like
184

They mentioned PvP is a pillar of the game and that they’ve been designing it with pvp in mind since the start. I think for now they want to get the core of the game down and work out pvp after. I believe they could lower the damage of all skills, in Just pvp like most games do. It wouldn’t be a fun game if you’re able to 1 shot in Diablo 4.

185

I’m not sure if D2 would or would not be well received today. If you had a remastered version with a few of the bugs fixed I think it would do very well and the pvp would be a large contributor for that. D2 PvP did a lot right. People wouldn’t still be playing it if it didn’t and yes the numbers are dwindling but it is still played. Actually, I would guess most of the people that still play (outside of ladder resets) are the pvpers.

And as to your Classic WoW response, rogues are the most broken 1v1 class. If you catch them out of stealth, they’re pretty bad. Thats shaman could frost shock them and run away without that rogue ever hitting them. And no one wants a rogue for competitive BGs. Every dog has his fight on Classic WoW. You have to pick and play what is important to you.

186

To encourage reality checks, maybe?

Yeah, like Challenge Rifts.

Of course, the problem with THAT is you have all the proponents that say PvP is what drove them to play and farm gear, so if you kill that aspect…

Yeah, it really is. Player versus player activity is competition.

No. Doesn’t alter the fundamentals, though.

Sure it is. You played a game where the intended outcome is a winner and a loser. That’s a competition. It’s not a serious competition, but it is one nonetheless.

Besides, you can’t tell me that when someone goes to play PvP in a video game their intention is usually to lose. You know better than that - people play in order to win, whatever their definition of “win” might be.

1 Like
187

No, their intention is usually to “have fun”. Being angry at your uncle or brother because he beat you at poker, backgammon or broke your hi-score in a videogame doesn’t change the fact that you had fun.
You having ulterior motives to win is just a side dish to the whole thing. Losing and making mistakes is part of getting better in a video game; you have to accept this part first.

Having to compete, like you capitulate, eventually happens in any sort of versus scheme but if there’s no solid ground of rulesets, control and strict restrictions no one in their right mind would take any game as truely competitive.

People play video games for having fun. If you have to beat everyone and everything to be the best, then fun comes second and that’s not the point. Fun comes first, unless you chose games as a career option (speedrunning? comp FPS/RTS player?) to get monetary benefits. That’s where you draw the line about true competitiveness where randomness and uncontrollable variables are minimized by personal experience.

In D4’s case, any sort of restriction could apply if they learnt anything from D2’s lengthy PvP rulesets in case they don’t want PvP balance to impact PvE. It’s almost the same formula and this time they have direct connection for feedback and statistics held by online system. I believe that’s easier than most of you think and large communities made by trading bonds would take care of the rest.

188

I would have to agree.
But at the same time, something like BLC and Battlerite has pretty damn good PvP. The isometric perspective is not the problem, the problem lies with the itemization.
If the itemization and skills are designed with PvP in mind, PvP in an action ARPG can work.

Jay Wilson used to promise, that skills can have two entirely different tooltips, one for PvP, one for PvE. We never saw that implemented though.

It’s not just about trusting the developers. It’s also about the life experience of a gamer.
I’ve been playing games for like 21 years now.
Diablo never had decent PvP.
In theory it can be done. Whether it will be is another matter entirely.

Are you talking about D3? Does the phrase “shut up, PvP guy!” mean anything to you?
Or are we talking D4? They did mention, that there will be PvP, but I don’t remember them saying, that it will be a “pillar of the game”. I’d have to watch the whole thing again, unless you have a link with a time stamp…

If the game is unbalanced or totally luck based, it’s not fun for me. And no, I wouldn’t get angry at those, whom I’m playing against, rather I would get angry at the devs for making the game unbalanced or totally luck based.

That’s not to say, that card games are all about luck, but luck is definitely a major factor. Balance (or the lack of it) is also a major factor.

189

I have no idea why that happened but I remember what happened. I’m just banking on them getting smarter.

In many MMORPGs, PvP is generally a game of rock-paper-scissor with many variables to balance. Among many classes, class-A may have a build called X-build, and this X-build can be pretty much overpowering to class-B’s Y-build; however, Y-build can kill Z-build of class-A easily as well.

I have no idea why you refuse this idea and want game to be a perfectly competitive chess like game (David Brevik wanted this franchise to start as a turn based game, maybe he was right? wink wink) or removed. What’s with this attitude of perfection?
People gonna have fun and this will be despite all the randomization and shortcomings that genre has. By time as community grows, they will have personal experience and will learn how to diminish the randomization that game offers in a way. I have no idea what you have against this either.

No, your fish ain’t gonna climb that tree. There won’t be a best of all builds or many equal-power builds when you consider variables like; point-backdraw animations of skills, progressed characters’ stats, positioning and weapon damage values.
With limited interaction of the genre, a rock-paper-scissor game that forces you to adapt your stats depending on the build you versing against, is the best design you can get.

This started to get hysterical. People gonna have fun, that’s all. When was the last time you people played poker or backgammon? Anyone forced you to play it lately?

190

Most people define “have fun” as “winning.” Funny that.

You don’t go in intending to lose and make mistakes. It happens, sure, but that’s all in the pursuit of the goal - which to get better and win.

Uh huh. And people engage in PvP to win against other people - because that’s what they find “fun.”

192

Are you just a troll?

I’ve tried to find what you’re arguing. The closes thing I’ve found is you saying you are fine with PvP as long as it doesn’t affect PvE. You just want the parts of the game you enjoy to be good. You can correct me if I’m wrong. That’s a fair request.

Why doesn’t competition work in ARPGs? Isn’t that all ARPGs are at this point? The people who play Diablo 3 are competing for the highest Grift. The people who still play PoE want to be the first to do X every season.

Do you live in a different reality than I do? Because in my reality Whatever ARPGs are doing isn’t working. PoE and Diablo III are the two largest ARPGs by a long way. Both of them are dead a few days after each season and/or league start.

Here’s my argument for PvP

7 of the top 10 games right now are strictly PvP (the 3 that aren’t are FIFA, Demon Souls, and WoW - I could make a strong argument that fifa is PvP and a lot of wow is too but we wont go there). Eyes means players. Players means money.

My experience in gaming has taught me that people who pvp are also ususally on average more dedicated to a game. On Diablo 2, people had to play more to get the best gear to be really competitive at pvp. On WoW you have for a long time had to do all PVE content to get gear to master arena.

I think pvp makes your game better. Unless you just want SSF forever. Then why are you on the forums?

1 Like
193

I don’t know about most MMOs. I have played WoW, Aion, DC Universe and some other MMOs.
WoW had decent PvP in a rather small window of time, season 3 and 4, 7 and 8. Other than that, it was lame and took no skill… and not because of “rock paper scissors”, but rather the amount of depth.
And I am talking about 3v3 Arenas, not 1v1.

Since you brought up card games, I’ll make an analogy of how WoW played out in a rather similar manner to bridge belot.
The goal of that card game is not to win an individual hand, but rather to obtain enough points across multiple hands in order to reach 151.
The same way, in WoW the goal was not to win an individual match, but rather to select stable enough comp, so you can reach the rating you were satisfied with. Sure there were some hard counters, the same way you can lose an individual hand in that card game, but if you were good enough, you’d be able to take the easy hands and even win vs some hard counters and reach your rating.

I am not refusing anything. I am all for PvP, as long as it’s made well.
Doesn’t have to be “chess-like”.

What I am saying is, that unfortunately there were instances of good PvP in WoW (even though in a rather narrow time window), and in Diablo there really haven’t been. I hope they make it good, but I highly doubt it will be.

It would have been boring and lame, it it wouldn’t have been even remotely successful of a game. It would have been almost like a solo D&D experience, kinda like Neverwinter Nights, but worse and even more forgettable.

I am not asking for a perfect PvP. I’m asking for decent one. Diablo never had that, despite claims to the opposite from people, who probably never played a decent PvP in their lives.

WoW is pathetic and it has been for almost 11 years. Again, other than season 3,4, 7 and 8, balance was non-existent, and throughout the expansion the game has been systematically dumbed down to the point, that you can’t really outplay…

If done right. Blizzard haven’t done PvP right in a very long time.
IMO SC2 was a joke.
HotS had a lot of potential, but was also systematically destroyed.
Overwatch has a lot of potential, but the experience on the ladder is crap. Even pro gamers like Seagull explained how bad the experience on the ladder is years after I have been describing the exact same thing.

Tell me a good example of Blizzard PvP throughout the last 10 years, please.

194

Truth be told, I’ve played some games with horrid pvp. While Diablo 2 pvp certainly had it’s issue, it was nowhere near as bad, and was in fact at least decent imo.

195

The stats do not support engaging PvP… they simply don’t. Not with synergy bonuses anyways.

196

What do you mean by stats? Itemization, attributes, or etc.?

197

I prefer co-op mostly. Don’t want to have PvP forced on me by another player.

198

Sure here you go boss D4 devs state D4 was designed with pvp from start

199

Because I don’t agree with you? No, that’s not the definition of a troll. Sorry.

In a word? RNG.

Well, maybe that’s 3 words. Whatever.

For 2 different reasons on the opposite end of the scale, oddly enough.

PoE is dead because it’s almost impossible to play casually. There’s too many pitfalls, too many nuances to the leveling and crafting systems.

D3 is dead because there’s been too much power creep, which makes the game too easy and too repetitive. The things that were supposed to provide variety don’t - and it’s even worse because the devs define how you play depending on which set is king.

Top games based on what criteria?

Might be true. I certainly enjoyed Destiny more when I felt the PvP was good. But that’s the point - PvP in ARPGs ISN’T good. It never has been. You give me the best example of ARPG PvP you’ve got, and I can give you 10 other PvP games I’d rather be playing.

PvP does not instantly make your game better. Case in point: Brawling.

Diablo historically has the best multiplayer PvE in an ARPG series.

Bleep if that wasn’t one of the worst PvP experiences ever made.
“Hi I’m a Chanter, I’m going to combo you.” “Hey I dodged the first attack in your combo.” “You ***! Now I can’t do anything for 5 seconds.” “Easy win.”

200

That stops people from starting, or getting to the point where they can “beat” the game. For me, and many people who have “beat” PoE in previous leagues and done 40/40 challenges it only takes a few days to really get a character to the point where you’re just grinding.

I just looked at the top 10 games by viewers on twitch. Sorry, I erased part of that paragraph proof reading that obviously was pretty crucial. It essentially connected to more eyes often means more players. And so having PvP will bring more people to the game.

I think by bringing more people to the game and by bringing high quality players it does. Idk what brawling is.

And I didn’t mean you were a troll for disagreeing. I’m fine with the disagreement. I think we should be productive and say okay, this is what we want it to look like. If that really is just NO PvP then great. Thats where you stand and thats fine with me we just disagree. Heres my wishlist for PvP:

1v1 Dueling possibility
Open size arena combat (2v2,3v3,4v4 or 1v1v1v1).
No Global Open World PvP - I’m fine if there are areas you can walk into and get shreked by someone. But I want 90%+ of the world and instances to be safe from that.
One Battleground style 3v3 or 4v4, CTF or King of the hill would be amazing.
I believe a balanced PvE will make PvP balanced enough that it will be enjoyable.

The “Arena” could be a map that already exists, and so could the BG with just minor tweaks. I’m not asking for significant development for PvP. I think if the PvE is good and we get this much, it will have its own thriving community.

1 Like
201

Not a good measure of “top games”.
PvP is more viewer friendly of course. They are basically sport. Which is what twitch viewershop measures.

Anyway, I agree that Diablo 4 should make an attempt at having PvP. Not something I personally want to participate in. Nor do I think Blizzard should do a lot of effort to support and balance it, but there is no reason not to have it as an option for those who want it. If it turns out good, it will drive a lot of players. And if it turns out a failure, not a lot of resources were lost on the attempt. Mostly likely will be a failure, hence why they shouldn’t spend too many resources on it.

FIFA is definitely PVP. One of the larger esport games as far as I know.

202

I would argue RNG makes competition in any RPG far more interesting and that it introduces another layer of difficulty that’s rolled by the hands of the players, not the game. I always find I’m less surprised in static PVP games. Give me a little bit of random with my competition and have me adapt.

203

What I really want to hear about PvP is how they’re going to balance melee classes and builds vs ranged classes and builds.