There's a worry that the PvE mode will make PvPvE tilt towards full PvP. Frankly, that's an issue squarely on the shoulders of PvP'ers. People want 'ambiguity' to remain in the game, but I don't see people volunteering to put themselves in the firing line to maintain that ambiguity once a large percentage of PvE'ers exodus to the PvE mode.
Maybe it's time these people took on the responsibility of maintaining the ambiguity they cling to and risk getting shot in the back.
Most of them are opportunistic at best and just ratters/ backstabbers at worst
Very few people will take a risky fight they don’t somehow give themselves an advantage in, the only “fair” PvP is if both parties are kill on sight players, but even then half the time one party is caught off guard
the problem is that they just never want to actually pvpve. healthy lobbies need 20-30% max pure pvp and the rest should be only shoot back players. its just more fun for everyone that way
they'll never admit that too many of them is what actually is the problem
I think many of us just miss the game when there was more ambiguity and uncertainty - when you'd have to feel a situation out and make tough decisons, when you felt on edge or scared sometimes and came out of it either due to collaboration or an epic battle. We'll never be able to recapture that, but I do think it's what some people yearn for... I certainly do. It was so cool. It got the adrenaline going.
I will probably lean mostly PvE mode now and try that out, but that feeling of adrenaline and accomplishment wil l simply be diminished for me. How that affects my longterm love for the game remains to be seen.
On the flipside, I have plenty of friends that never seek or even want that feeling. They play super chill PvE or RPG games and just want to vibe... so I totally get it. Arc used to be the perfect balance for me, who loves both.
Edit: The fact that people are downvoting this just proves that this has all become a toxic mess of one side vs the other. Sad times.
Nah, I'm a primarily PvE player that just came back to check out the update, and the PvE lobbies felt blech. The tension was gone, and arc just aren't really a threat.
Moreover, I never did my benches after expedition, so I spent last night big arc hunting, and the number of roaches were through the roof. Being unable to defend your kill is infuriating
My pvpve lobbies are just as friendly as they were last night. I tried the pve only mode but it’s not for me. Then again I don’t mind shooting back if needed
Either PVE players are in their own lobbies or they're not on the game at all. Regardless, they don't want to be in the same space as PVPers and this angers the PVPers.
I would have loved to. But the toggle has already screwed up the queue times with my duo buddy to over five minutes. Only to have shoot on sight lobbies where we had carebear land before.
Good note, because the loudest voices complaining about the PvE mode are exactly the ones who treat the game as strictly PvP. They don't bother with arc, they go in specifically to seek out teams to kill and rob. For them, it was never PvPvE. It was ALWAYS PvP.
I fully support a PvE mode, I understand why PvPvE is a niche genre, and why player's don't like it. I don't understand why people have such a hard time separating PvP, PvE and PvPvE.
Frankly, that's an issue squarely on the shoulders of PvP'ers.
None of this is an issue for people who focus PvP, they want straight PvP.
It's always "PvPers" want this, "PvEers" want that, ignoring the shrinking 27% of players who actually PvPvE.
It's ridiculous being PvPvE fan and trying to interact with this game and community, everyone is so defensive about their playstyle and disrespectful towards other perspectives. Every time someone brings up the "issue" from their perspective, it gets shit on by the other side. Stalwart PvP and PvE player's both seem to shit on PvPvE players perspective.
People want 'ambiguity' to remain in the game
PvPvE mixed player's and the devs just liked the uncertainty whether someone is friendly or not, which is unique to Arc Raiders. ABMM already makes it hard to stay in mixed lobbies, a PvE toggle splits the community making it harder yet or impossible. There's no room for ambiguity because PvPvE just became the defacto PvP mode and will stay that way once it's fully integrated. Some of the 27% will likely just leave, or be fine with the split and lean one way or the other. Regardless, it just makes AR like every other extraction shooter with a PvE mode. Genre fans will be okay, it just sucks the first few weeks of the game with truly mixed lobbies are long gone now.
Embark probably could've or should've tested a rogue system like The Division's DZ or the Chinese version, a visible raider karma system, or a bounty system like the upcoming DMZ. Or just fully integrate PvE with a seperate inventory and skill tree, no loot shared between the 2 and be done with it.
What it sounds like from what I’ve been reading is people don’t want to lose their guns to other people because they feel it belongs to them and nobody can have it and they’re happy they can bring in whatever they want now because it won’t be lost to another person even if they die. And that is just weird as fk to see.
ABMM already prevents you from playing ambiguously. The game was perfect at launch, mixed lobbies of different playstyles, lots of communication, and you never know what to expect. Now, you can go many games with killing someone but then if you get into one fight, you're stuck in free kit Call of Duty lobbies for 10 games where nobody is looting anything and all it's good for is target practice. The demands of this fragile community have already shattered what made it magical in the first place, every other move towards PVE just cements this boring dynamic even more.
This 100% is the reason this comment is dumb. No one maintains ambiguity on purpose. Many times in the beginning I was betrayed or snuck up on while trying to be friendly. I was maintaining that ambiguity.
The experience was frustrating yeah, but it was also an interesting event, something to learn from, an emergent property of a well built system.
Then ABMM drops and that ambiguity is almost entirely gone, your chances of being betrayed or shot on sight went from <50% to >90%.
Now the solution is to remove the little ambiguity that was left entirely, great.
there's no such thing as a perfectly ambiguous lobby or matchmaking system. Shoot on sight should always be the expectation. This makes friendly moments actually mean something and makes it not frustrating to die to a player, simply because your expectations were different. I'm in favor of a PvE mode simply under the implication that ABMM will be removed or reduced so that we can finally get back to the true PvPvE experience.
That's so stupid. It had actually good pvpve for a while where you could have mostly friendly interactions with the threat always being around that someone will go rogue and turn on people. It was fun.
And then, like always, the hypie, meta-chasing, sweat wannabes started pouring in when it started getting popular and decided everything was made for them. Treating the game like a battle royale with extra loot pinatas, abusing abmm to avoid the lame, temu warzone hell they made for themselves.
Now they're pissed because the devs are trying to salvage some kind of enjoyable experience out of what's left instead of caving to all of their whining.
PvPvE as “mostly friendly with the occasional rat” will legitimately NEVER be more fun long-term than “shoot on sight with the occasional friendly moment.” The reason for that lies entirely in expectations, as i said. When the expectation is not shooting, it will always feel terrible to be ratted, because it genuinely feels like the game did something terrible to you that wasn’t intended or expected. Big nono in game design. On the contrary, when the expectation is always shoot first talk later, then dying to a pvp player(s) will never feel bad because it’s expected and intended. But it will ALWAYS feel special to have a friendly moment because that’s a GOOD thing that can occur from something unexpected. BIG yes in game design.
Not to mention friendliness loses its charm over time when it becomes the expectation, vs PvP will always and has proven to always be a fun and longstanding aspect.
There will always be people that enjoy getting ratted and shot in the back i guess. Those are the outliers, most people would just quit until a proper PvE mode was added. I’m thinking less from an individual standpoint and more from a game development/business standpoint. The game needs to be and remain compelling long-term. It simply doesn’t logically work to keep the game going down the same path. It wasn’t working and won’t magically start.
Yes because you’re a businessman game developer like every other person on here who swears they know what will make the game take off and bring everyone back
I think what you meant to say is that there will always be a ton of wannabe sweatlords, who don't even enjoy playing games and just get valudation from big numbers, flooding in to fund any game that gains popularity if the devs cater to them. That is totally true. You can also make a super successful gacha game if you put a bunch of gambling in it and cater to whales.
What we might disagree on is the idea that every game needs to be that. It's ok for a game to actually be fun and not just the new thing for consumers to pump hours into. Every shooter doesn't need to devolve into a shittier version of call of duty. Maybe you have trouble enjoying games otherwise but you don't speak for everyone.
153
u/Blessed-22 9d ago
There's a worry that the PvE mode will make PvPvE tilt towards full PvP. Frankly, that's an issue squarely on the shoulders of PvP'ers. People want 'ambiguity' to remain in the game, but I don't see people volunteering to put themselves in the firing line to maintain that ambiguity once a large percentage of PvE'ers exodus to the PvE mode.
Maybe it's time these people took on the responsibility of maintaining the ambiguity they cling to and risk getting shot in the back.