Take a rest and come back later?
GG for level 280 ! Welcome to Overwatch.
1 Like
I just posted a screenshot of that. There’s no PVE tag either. Many games with multiplayer aspects don’t explicitly advertise PVP features, so you’re not making any sense. Games which say they’re about PVP are PVP games.
Neutrality was an example of a fastest possible knee jerk move which wasn’t the best. Many people enjoyed the old system, where you could avoid PVP by not leaving a tower exposed. They did neutrality because of the in-game culture of Korean players, who already had the arena and had a weird honor system regarding towers. Of course, Korea’s playerbase declined to the point of server mergers, so their system didn’t cut it. We’re past release with lots of players quitting, so there’s no time to spend a year redesigning the game. Especially when their announced plans are about instanced PVP with limited numbers, which doesn’t properly replace the old system.
1 Like
You are not forced into it, you can always have neutrality by not putting up the tower. The tower is the benefit if you had gone none neutral, or at least that’s what we think before, but that’s okay.
That aside, what I don’t like about the neutrality patch is not the neutrality itself, it’s the 3 war limit, the 1 week war cooldown, and how the war cooldown is counted in the 3 war limit. It literally killed the war aspect by not allowing those that want to war, to war.
1 Like
You posted a screenshot with a feature list that shows that pvp is part of the game. That however does not make it a pvp game. “PvP game” would require that the game is only about pvp, nothing else (or the other aspects have such minor parts that they’re not worth mentioning).
You’re right, many titles with multiplayer aspects don’t explicitly say that they’re pvp. However, that does not mean that all multiplayer titles that don’t explicitly say they’re pvp titles are pvp titles.
Games that are about pvp only are pvp games.
Games that have pvp aspects but also pve aspects are not neccessarily pvp games.
Ragnarok Online, Pokemon or Super Mario Allstars for example have pvp aspects, but i’d hardly call them pvp games, despite their games mentioning “pvp” aspects in their feature list, because most people only play them for their “pve” aspects…
0/10, you tricked me into replying with the last one, but this is some terrible trolling here.
I’m not trolling.
I just don’t see how “this game has pvp arenas” in a feature list automatically means “therefore it’s a pvp game”. It could be that we have different understandings about what “pvp game” means. To me “pvp game” means that the game is only about pvp or 90% only about pvp with only minor other things shoved in.
“Has pvp aspects” certainly does not mean “pvp game” in this context.
If you have a different understanding what “pvp game” is then please say it.
I’m quite skeptical. If a game has to be only or almost only X to be an X game, then a game with a variety of characteristics wouldn’t be any type of game at all. That makes no sense. An adjective describes a characteristic it has or is officially supposed to have.
^ this
ToS is meant for PvP. War declarations and duels are boring. We need arena and guild battle badly.
1 Like
If there really was nothing to do in end game except PVP and there was just NO PvE content I would quit the game and move on. I hope IMC can consider both kinds of players here.
We need war declaration too. Open field war is vastly different from guild battle arena.
make it so that you can kill people on level maps.
Instant bot issue solved and makes leveling a whole lot more interesting lol
1 Like
Thats the point from the start lol.
I dont see what kind of nonsense both posters are swallowing in their description of the game.
Like your typical MMORPG, Tree of savior encorporates a PvE game with PvP.
This isn’t any different from GW2, RO, Wakfu, WoW, FLYFF, FFXIV, GW1, and a whole heap of other games.
Pve + PvP in an MMO is so standard now adays that they’re just wasting breath on each other.
PvP is a potential way to spend your later time in the game as is PvE.
If it was a game meant for pvp them i wonder what all the story quests and pve-levelgrinding and pve-equip collecting have to do in the game.
That being said : i agree that the limitations of guild wars should be lifted, so people can declare war on other non-neutral guilds as often as they like. Having a cooldown on that despite people wanting to do war is stupid.
[quote=“trielav, post:39, topic:298230”]
If a game has to be only or almost only X to be an X game, then a game with a variety of characteristics wouldn’t be any type of game at all.[/quote]
Of course games with many characteristics would have at least one type. TOS is a MMORPG. That alone is a type of game.
Personally, i’d categorize it as a story-driven pve-grinder with pvp aspects at endgame.
Exactly. TOS is supposed to offer both pve and pvp. That means that it is neither a pure pvp game nor a pure pve game, despite what some would like to call it.
[quote=“Gatygun, post:43, topic:298230, full:true”]
make it so that you can kill people on level maps.
Instant bot issue solved and makes leveling a whole lot more interesting lol[/quote]
If playerkilling on all leveling maps were allowed, what would stop people from harrassing and spawnkilling other players, extremely worsen other peoples gaming experience or maybe even making playing the game properly impossible for them?
To a hypothetical pvp-only player, they keep people active in the game, which creates opportunities to rmeet up, and pve serves the purpose hitting a gym serves for a boxer preparing for a bout. Of course the real answer is a game doesn’t have to be just one thing and most pvp-focused players also care about the pve parts. Similarly, ToS is a dress-up game. People take the hat farming endgame very seriously (just look at the 100k infrorocktor kills in the other thread).
Then why do I call pvp the primary endgame? Besides the way the game was advertised, Earth Tower is very inaccessible. You have to not only be near the level cap, but also have an appropriate build, so only a small portion of players can do it. Many people have been complaining about lacking motivation or having nothing to do despite not having done Earth Tower yet. PvP is easy to get into, so anyone who wants to keep busy or get some multiplayer action can join in.
What would a corresponding pve endgame look like? A guild-wide (35 players at once) dungeon that has no level penalties in combat and no daily limit on time spent. That would be a really great addition, although the framerate issue prevents it now (when you’re at 2fps enemy players are too, but mobs don’t have fps).
The downside compared to GvG is individuals can’t call in backup when they’re at a disadvantage, so it’s very unbalanced. You could make it work as an opt-in feature, though. Maybe you get 30% more exp and silver if you flag yourself for pvp for an hour.
1 Like
we need to stop thinking about what kind of a game this is
Lets just ask game creator.
And after his answer decide to stay or not to stay.
I’m personally tired to hope for good future while play the game that becoming worse and worse
I still don’t understand why people play an mmo expecting it to have an amazing pvp experience. Almost everyone knew this was going to be pve-centric from the start, of you want to play a pvp game go play one that’s 100% dedicated to pvp like dota or something.
maybe because they want live and fight in big alive world? and not in a small cage for rats
They already said what kind of game it is…
They already expect a lot of people to dislike the game.
They don’t actually expect the game to be balanced either.
At the same time they’re not bringing out super hard content that classes couldn’t do.
Yeah, thx for the link.
If only every pro-player had it before beginning, I’m sure they’d not even start to play or leave much sooner.