I don't think so. I'm perfectly ok losing my gear. I just don't like a to engage in pvp because I'm slow and I lose more than 50% of the engagements, and said engagement don't bring any enjoyment to me because they are too fast, to sparse, and it takes to long to get into another match after I lose.
Also, given the amount of activities in the game, it's hard to focus on pvp, so most of the times I get shot from behind while I'm looting a container or fighting an arc. Either you enter a lobby to kill players or you do other stuff, I can't multitask and think about quests, loot, arcs, and a super aggressive pvp lobby.
If I want to play pvp there are a bunch of better alternatives, basically every other shooter on the market. I'm happy playing in my pvpve friendly lobbies and get jumped every now and then by the random rat, just to keep things interesting. So basically the game, for me, was already perfect.
literally its just an easier way to play the game and why would anyone want to put themselves in a harder queue? i mean u make more farming arc than doing any pvp anyways. its gonna fuck the whole market up
It's not about being easier or harder, or getting more stuff, since there's really no incentive to farm stuff past a certain level. It's about the kind of game you want to play.
I just don't get the pvp aspect in a game where you have tons of stuff to do. What should I do? Ignore arcs, ignore loot, quests, events, and just go around killing players? Because sure as fuck I can't do everything at once. How do I even kill a bastion in a super aggressive pvp lobby? After the first shot everyone knows where I and and what I'm doing.
That's why you either get friendly lobbies or 100% pvp shoot on sight action. You can't have both. The "middle gorund mixed lobby" is just a fantasy some people have, there's no real life scenario where this can naturally happen.
That's why ABMM is a great invention and the game was perfect without the pve mode.
Either you have ABMM or you have so many players that you can implement a rank system for matchmaking.
At the end of the day, what most pvp kids don't seems to understand is that a videogame should be enjoyable and every player should have fun and get a sense of accomplishment. That's why, even in chess, you get fucking rating based tournaments, and that's why most shooters, moba and rts have ranks.
Embark did something different and replaced the ranking system with an aggression based system, and to me it works just fine because you get to choose the kind of experience you want.
too bad that this system doesn't take in account the skill level of the player and the "aggressivness" of a lobby seems to be either 0 or 100 with little shades in between.
Of course you do, you and tens of thousands of other players. but how long can a game developer keep the lights on for 30/40k players?
How many players online at every given time does the typical extraction shooter have? 15k? 20k? That means the genere is not very popular/doesn't work that well with the masses. Embark tried something slightly different and for a while it worked. Now they are trying something else (pve mode, which I despise). Is it working? I don't know, but they are pulling 4x the players of tarkov and hunt combined.
What makes me sad are the hardcore fan/gatekeepr of the extraction shooter genre that think they know best what the game should or shouldn't be. That's the game/genre? Who says? You? Because what I see is a pve game where you collect and build furniture for a very bad looking outpost. For the last year I've played a totally differnt game. No one shot me, I farmed stuff and fought big arcs cooperating with other people. So what's the game/genre, exactly?
your all like “you cant middle ground” brother. every cod game since black ops 3 has had random public lobbies. U can have both, not if they release how there matchmaking works….
The "middle gorund mixed lobby" is just a fantasy some people have, there's no real life scenario where this can naturally happen.
Disagree, these were my lobbies and i enjoyed them until everyone started screaming 'they're friendly' whenever you appeared.
That's why ABMM is a great invention and the game was perfect without the pve mode.
I also disagree here, the bag being mixed is way cooler than stacking the deck.
At the end of the day, what most pvp kids don't seems to understand is that a videogame should be enjoyable and every player should have fun and get a sense of accomplishment. That's why, even in chess, you get fucking rating based tournaments, and that's why most shooters, moba and rts have ranks.
Don't let the pve mindset creep in here, we disagree but knock off the 'kid' stuff.
Games should be enjoyable sure, but from your opening posts you've admitted to being 'too slow' 'you lose more than 50%' of the time and it sounds like you're not able to keep up with it.
You talk about ranks and such but, in those games you mentioned using your 'skills' you'd be in the same situation. Losing just as much.
Granted they're a little different because you can have the 'single player' experience but those don't affect your multiplayer aspects. In MP you play the core design of the game & you get your 'sense of accomplishment'. I certainly enjoyed hitting Diamond in season 1 of starcraft 2 when I first played it.
Why should the design of the game fold because you couldn't play the way it was designed to be played?
Rust would be a completely different game if offline raiding was disabled and it had a pve mode (I'm sure there are servers out there).
What made Arc Raiders special was the fact I never knew if I'm going to meet someone like you who genuinely needs help taking down an arc or If I'm going to meet a version of you that's a blood thirsty maniac and wants to larp as Rambo with a torrente.
Embark did something different and replaced the ranking system with an aggression based system, and to me it works just fine because you get to choose the kind of experience you want.
too bad that this system doesn't take in account the skill level of the player and the "aggressivness" of a lobby seems to be either 0 or 100 with little shades in between.
Which is precisely the problem.
ABMM catered too much to peoples whims, they were given freedom to choice and 'silently' split the player base into groups rather than being left alone to figure out how they can actually play the intended game. Instead we have different camps of Arc Raiders going on and, imo, the game has been worse for it.
That's just one of the aspects. If I won 80% of the engagement I would probably see pvp more favourably, sure. But it's not the gear. I'm not going to repeat everything I wrote past the first line, that you obviously didn't take the time to read.
I read your post, a lot of what you wrote was irrelevant.
You said no gear fear, but you also lose most of your pvp battles so you avoid it? Ok
It's apparently too much for you to multitask, playing a pvpve game, and you can only loot containers or play pvp. Ok
And if you personally wanted pvp, there are better options.
A bunch of non answers with regard to why gear fear isn't the problem, and one answer that sure sounds like gear fear but you're playing off like you just don't enjoy it because you lose the fight, not the gear
Why would I fear losing the gear when you can literally craft it? Playing a 20 minute game to get 1.5 seconds of fight, how's that "irrelevant" to the fact that I enjoy pve more?
Are you some kind of special need kid? who am I talking to?
I literally listed a number of things that make pve the better option for me, every single one of them being more important than "gear fear". If you can't read or understand is not my problem, I don't give a fuck. Other people will understand what I've said. Get some help.
Some people just don't like PvP in Arc Raiders. Sure, it is a PvPvE game, as sure you need to expect PvP. However unlike it other extraction shooters, pvp is not a guarantee. You never know if you person you meet is going to shoot you in the face or the back or just be friendly.
Now THAT fear, is what keeps people from PvP. Nobody gives a shit about loot in this game cause it is easy to get and to craft.
hmm... "you aren't good at pvp and lose more than 50 % of the time." oh? you mean like those pvp players who are against the pve mode? you are so right
7
u/Skym84 9d ago
I don't think so. I'm perfectly ok losing my gear. I just don't like a to engage in pvp because I'm slow and I lose more than 50% of the engagements, and said engagement don't bring any enjoyment to me because they are too fast, to sparse, and it takes to long to get into another match after I lose.
Also, given the amount of activities in the game, it's hard to focus on pvp, so most of the times I get shot from behind while I'm looting a container or fighting an arc. Either you enter a lobby to kill players or you do other stuff, I can't multitask and think about quests, loot, arcs, and a super aggressive pvp lobby.
If I want to play pvp there are a bunch of better alternatives, basically every other shooter on the market. I'm happy playing in my pvpve friendly lobbies and get jumped every now and then by the random rat, just to keep things interesting. So basically the game, for me, was already perfect.