Perhaps you’ve never seen Invasions in Dark Souls. People hide behind huge monsters that they know spawn on the map and kite people into them. They hide up ahead of you round corners and wait near explosive barrels. It’s hilarious! It makes for great pvp fights. You think a rogue is gonna wait in the middle of the road honourably and bow to someone before they fight. HELL no that’s not Diablo Rogue RP fantasy. I’m gonna hide round a corner just as you’re about to walk round it and THEN attack you
People love world pvp for exactly this. Because it’s not fair. Because it feels organic and like a real fight. Like someone jumping out trying to assassinate you. You think this should be some honourable duel? That’s not what world pvp is. That’s what a DUEL feature would be for! Here’s how it would work. You keep world pvp off, wait until you see someone, and request a duel from them. They might have duel requests off if they don’t want to be bothered, but those that leave it on will be able to offer you a chance for an honourable duel.
These are all problems that exist in normal pvp anyway. I think every single point you’ve made from the very beginning is literally answered in the very first post.
Zone based pvp does nothing to mitigate any of the problems you’ve mentioned as they are all just worries about balance issues. Literally every single one of them.
Open world has no reason not to exist according to any of your reasoning at all. I disproven every point you’ve made simply by saying:
You can have a pvp toggle and turn it off.
These are just balance issues that you have no idea if they even exist yet as it’s just made up scenarios from your imagination based on a game and classes you’ve never played before and have no idea how they play. And balance doesn’t affect whether open world pvp should or shouldn’t be added. It’s literally a different conversation that you are somehow trying to tie to world pvp it doesn’t even make sense.
Agreed.
The only sensible way to add PvP is if they completely separate PvE and PvP balancing. All skills should be able to function differently in PvE and PvP.
if they ever start rebalancing skills for PvE due to PvP issues… Blizzard deserves all the criticism they will get.
Btw, give all players two “builds”, one for PvE and one for PvP, that automatically switches when you enter a PvP zone. You cant ever switch them yourself. That should help with the PvE and PvP separation as well.
That is also a solution for sure. Albeit if they have cosmetic rewards from PvP, probably not a good solution.
If you decide to add PvP, it kinda becomes your issue to also balance it. Just dont hurt PvE because of it.
You wont face that player outside of the PvP zone, though? Since you are no longer in the PvP zone.
How is it a surprise if you see it coming from a damn mile? You talk about offering people PvP and they accepting it. You see someone standing at their advantageous zone and they offer you a duel. Should you accept it for the sake of getting flanked in a way that you didn’t totally see it coming? Should you? Oh yes, that Rogue totally not gonna run behind that corner when you accept the duel. That Barbarian won’t leap to another pathway for a flank later too. How is it gonna work and be natural at the same time? This is the contradicting point.
Again, third person ARPGs offer better controls on player decisions compared to isometric ARPGs. You can get blindsided by such trap once but you learn to shrug it off as rolling on the ground have invincibility frames (iframes) in such games plus longer sightline because it’s third person where you can peek at corners. In Diablo 4 there won’t be such thing at all. Subgenres are different.
Secondly, there’s a distinct difference of getting invaded and accepting a duel offer. Former is a one sided thing, latter is mutual and there would be no surprises how many fictional sceneries going in your head.
Yes? Because it wouldn’t deter people away from PvP at the first moment try when accept a duel that they can not visually win. This may not sound “natural” to you, but I support PvP zones more than open world PvP for keeping a community around it for longer.
Killstreaking player will be marked on everyone’s map. I don’t think that them leaving the area will remove that, nor they will be imprisoned there like a wild animal either.
A threatening player who killed a few of other players without dying will be able roam the world but at the cost of getting hunted. That’s what I gathered from the blogs at least.
Every post you’ve made so far just = “I don’t understand the basic concept of world pvp and being able to toggle it on and off or a duel feature or that other people like to do world pvp”
It’s clearly too high a concept for you to understand that other people like world pvp and you can turn it off.
Do you? You compare Dark Souls invasion with mutually accepted PvP. Where’s the surprise factor that makes you giggle in your head? Of course people gonna offer others at spaces that they’re advantageous at and you’ll see it coming from a mile. How is it not social engineering and luring someone?
Go play wow. It has duels and world pvp. Now you may understand the concept of the difference between the two and that they can exist at the same time.
I’m not here to convince you that other people like world pvp. just take my word for it and move on.
WoW is a third person MMORPG with many different skill options to answer different things, it has very distinct verticality and terrain but some skills auto-aim and so on. Dark Souls have an etiquette but a different game than Diablo; it’s a third person game, has iframes, invasion being one sided. However at both games repositioning is not as fast as modern Diablo games and they offer better sightline plus less reliant on randomization of stat ranges.
If you want a good example of isometric ARPG duels go check NoX and Sacred and even then they weren’t really bright examples. Stop comparing Diablo, an isometric ARPG with third person ARPG with good player control.
Isometric ARPGs are full of randomization of item stats and this creates a big diversion on player experience. Additionally it does NOT offer a good sightline like the games you mention and keep giving examples of.
You’re talking about fooling someone to accept your duel offer with somewhere they can not win or retaliate because it’s “natural” and they won’t see it coming. To compare, isometric ARPG duel are not any different than DotA and LoL but they have better sightline options and decision making for positioning. This is why developers consider keeping PvP zones intact, map making influences player decision.
To curb this overworld PvP mess down developers only allow kill streak scoring player to get out there and attack others as they will be actively hunted by the rest of the players in the session. This supposed to be a reward that you deserve, and not achievable by anyone on will to reduce the chaos and not disrupt everyone’s game as D4 will be an MMO-lite rather than a full blown isometric ARPG.
If you want to attack anyone then show your skill in the game to score kill streaks instead of coming up with the idea of creating a community of elitists that offer people duels that they can not win. This is all I have said.
I expected you to surprise me for some irony. I was wrong.
In case developers add different spells that you can give an answer to any kind of attack, which would break PvE in return, overworld PvP will not be balanced or any welcoming for anyone that doesn’t open their wallet. This is what I’m against.
If you don’t think there’ll be a P2W issue in the game, you’re welcome to include world PvP. Regardless, developers have to mind shortcomings of the genre when designing something and there’s that PvE aspect in the game that they have to ensure an endgame model for.
How many times do I need to explain the same thing to you before you understand it.
If you don’t like world pvp or if someone doesn’t like the balance of it.
TURN IT OFF.
How hard is this for you to understand?
No amount of text that you write will change the fact that any of the issues you’ve mentioned, these players can just choose to not play world pvp and just play normal pvp.
And I only mentioned wow because you don’t understand the difference between world pvp and a duel. Somehow you’re trying to twist that as me wanting D4 to be an mmo? I’m not even going to do more than glance at ridiculous troll comments like this.
Yes, in the PvP zone. Nothing I have seen otherwise indicates that you can take the PvP outside of the zone.
Nah, he talked about toggling PvP on/off. That is not the same as accepting a duel (which he also talked about).
With PvP toggled on, you dont see enemies coming from miles away. It is simply always active then, and if a rogue is hiding behind the corner, well…
(edit: and I am slow and it was already explained perfectly well above, sorry WoW is a good showcase of how stuff like this can work, except for the invasions of course - in Souls invasions you are directly warned that someone has invaded, so that is different)
Pfft. No. They clearly gave some interviews about their model. It’s an openworld live service ARPG, which makes it an MMO but with lighter elements, thus MMO-lite. Instead of thousands of players in the server you’ll have way less people in one smaller session.
I think it shouldn’t be always open or given at player decision to attack anyone who has it active outside world. If there shall be such option, I think you mentioned this as well, character creation should include such detail.
If such thing were to be included first it should allowing team ups at the open world. If people need mayhem and rewards, they can scram off to the Grounds of Hatred. In case they want to duel with no interference, then they should only beeline at one target at a time.
If I gathered what you said, at the instance of one person awaiting with PvP toggled on to duel someone and encountering someone else to agree upon, a third person should NOT be able to join up or interfere in a whim.
This should only be retricated for the Grounds of Hatred where everyone on their own and can attack anyone. Only then a champion emerges to roam out there which can be a threat. Mayhem must be kept at the Grounds of Hatred and not outside.
That is one way to do it. Imo a toggle in town is better, since it means more people might be willing to participate from time to time.
I think the argument is that Fields of Hatred isnt really mayhem enough. That is Organized PvP. Not as organized as Arenas in WoW, but still more organized than world PvP.
There definitely shouldnt be any meaningful rewards from World PvP. Could have some cosmetics, albeit that too should be limited, due to it not being organized PvP.
Well, might be an idea to have places you can duel, that are not part of the World PvP. Like, right outside a town for example.
While it would theoretically be fine to deactivate “PvP On” during a duel, that also sounds highly exploitable.
Basically what Shadout said. There is an easy answer to all your fears. Intelligent people who can see this will solve all these issues for you fear not.
You may not understand it but world pvp can be implemented very easily without any of the things you mention being an issue.
WoW is a good showcase of how stuff like this can work, except for the invasions of course - in Souls invasions you are directly warned that someone has invaded, so that is different)