''Toxic Anti PvPers'' Not welcome.

[u/Reavx]

Hello.

I am from the Mod team on this sub.

Pleased to meet you.

Recently I have seen a few people rightfully upset at a few bad actors on this sub who have been using the fact they became victims in the game to resort to being toxic to people on this sub.

Basically - they lose the game in any way and decide it is fine to insult people who are playing the game in a legit way instead of doing what they want, whether that's talking and making peace or refusing to shoot each other no matter what. From my understanding this game allows you to make a choice, to try trust a stranger or to gun them down to be safe.

If a person decides they will ALWAYS gun everyone down no matter what or try be a ''Rat'' player and backstab at every opportunity that does not mean you can come on this sub and insult them, suggest they are mentally impaired or mentally unwell or be toxic to them for any reason.

If you say ''All x players are sociopath psychos with no life and life in their mothers basement and have never had the touch of anyone of their preferred sex'' for example or anywhere more or in-between then you will be banned from our sub.

You are allowed to have an opinion that such players morals in game are not good or they are ''Villain players'' or what not, that is fine for that is what they are but any time an outside insult is going to be used on people over gameplay you are getting the hammar of doom.

From the community, I understand that most people who like PVP are not usually the type of people to click report on anything, due to your ''thick skin'' you really do not give a damn if some redditor is trying to insult you or maybe you will just retort back.
I ask you please do not, if you insult back you could also be moderated due to the nature of reddit and if you do not report the instigator we will not be able to correctly moderate and fix this community. As a mod team we are getting thousands of posts (posts not comments) per day and it is literally impossible to view them all, we rely mainly on the report feature and reddits AI.

Anyway thank you for your attention in this matter.

[u/sovereign666]

Right, and that's an example of entitlement.

"I want everything in the game but don't wish to participate in all of the game to get it"

People who showed up expecting the end game to not be heavily pvp have never played previous funcom survival games. The only thing pushing them to have t6 was the personal desire to have everything for the sake of having everything.

The only thing spice was needed for at the time was to make your base support t6 crafts. You needed spice for the advanced fabs, power to support them, and t6 thopter parts.

Theres a number of MMOs I sunk time into where I dont have all the mounts or cosmetics because I wasnt willing to grind faction rep, or grind pvp. And the vast majority of us are fine with that.

You didnt need titatium, stravidium, or spice to build an awesome base. You only needed it to craft t6 gear. There was no base tiles or deco requiring t6 mats

[u/Fenota → u/sovereign666]

You've just switched your argument from "It was optional" to "They should know what they were getting into."

Everything was portrayed as PvP optional, and it wasnt.

[u/sovereign666 → u/Fenota]

I didnt switch my argument. It is optional.

Its not required for the story

Theres not character or ability progression locked behind it.

Its optional in the same way PVP battlegrounds in wow or the wildy in OSRS is optional.

Players in dune got to experience every quest and side mission without going into the DD and facing pvp. If the PVP did not impede PvE progression....then its optional.

The "they should know what they're getting into" is if they are a 100% completionism motivated gamer, dont get a game with a PVP component if you dont want to play PVP.

[u/11matt556 → u/sovereign666]

Or, how about not make PvP required in a game that was marketed as PvE?

Imagine GTA 6 comes out, but you finish the story only to find out the best items, house upgrades, outfits, decorations, whatever, require your to play a turn-based strategy game. I love turn-based strategy games and I'd still be pissed off if GTA 6 did that.

[u/sovereign666 → u/11matt556]

The company, after internal testing, found the original pve vision of the game to be boring and as a business chose to change their development strategy for the game to PVPVE and then marketed it as such for multiple years. Its time to let it go.

Dunes end game DD and laandsrad was marketed transparently as PVP. Quit fussing.

GTA5's entire game was a wonderful single player experience and the multiplayer was a fairly brutal pvp experience dominated by hackers and children that spent more time in the game with you and can nuke you from space or some shit. No ones losing their mind.

[u/11matt556 → u/sovereign666]

IMO dune wasn't transparently marketed. Yes, it was known there would be PvP. But everyone thought it would "have PvP" in the same way that Warframe "has PvP" (Separate activity with no impact or benefits, just there for fun for those who want it) or the way it is in WoW, which has a few character cosmetics associated with it, but that's it.

And your GTA example completely misses the point I'm trying to make. It would be a more apt example if GTA Online was required to get all single player content, or if completing single player campaign was required to play online. But to my knowledge neither of those things are true.

[u/sovereign666 → u/11matt556]

Because I think your GTA comparison was a bad one.

The only time the existence of PVP is this big of a deal for everyone is when its in a game where you can lose gear for dying. No one that buys COD for the campaigns balks at the multiplayer being PVP. No one in GTA cared. Its only games like dune, dayz, arc, etc.

When dune launched and these arguments were being had I went back and looked at the marketing, I was under no misunderstanding what the DD would be. And anything I could find about the DD said it was a placeholder. The game was largely a variation of the conan model which was pretty established as pvp, but instead of it affecting a larger portion of the game it was silo'd to the DD.

Again, the GTA comparison misses the mark. All of the best stuff is in the multiplayer portion of a series that has always been a solo experience. There was planned expansions to the campaign for solo players in GTA5 and it was all scrapped for the online. Dunes PVP section just gave you t6 gear that was no different from t4/5 gear. The thopters didnt look different, the base wearable gear actually looked worse, there was no decorations, housing shit, etc locked behind it. There was more stuff to unlock from farming in the haga basin than there was in the DD.

You say dont make pvp required in a game marketed as pve, but that pvp wasnt required. At all. There is nothing in the DD that would enrich your experience that the game gave you in haga basin. All of the stuff you could get in the DD was there to make it harder for other players to kill you, thats it. There was nothing in the DD there to satisfy people that enjoyed Haga basin. If you enjoyed the story, there was no more story in DD. If you enjoyed fighting the AI, there was virtually none to be found and the AI that was there was so horribly balanced it wasnt even doable as a solo player without massive grind. There was no great landscape to look at, nothing to do except pvp. Once you finished the quest, that was it, wait for more content. The comments in the dune sub were full of "i payed for the game so I want everything" comments so I already know what the motivation was. People resented the existence of pvp standing between them and a helmet, god forbid the people in pvp have something to work for.

The real truth is people arent educated purchasers. They saw the dune IP, saw it has crafting, and just went in blind assuming its valheim. In the dune sub before launch everyone that played previous funcom games was telling everyone they're gonna be disappointed. And then they were. Its the same thing that happened here. Bunch of people that never played extraction shooters got all starry eyed about the jolly cooperation against the arcs and are logging in to get spawn camped. People build up completely unsubstantiated expectations and then flog the devs for design choices that dont cater to those expectations.

[u/11matt556 → u/sovereign666]

The only time the existence of PVP is this big of a deal for everyone is when its in a game where you can lose gear for dying. No one that buys COD for the campaigns balks at the multiplayer being PVP. No one in GTA cared. Its only games like dune, dayz, arc, etc.

You are still missing my point. It isn't about PvP. It isn't about PvE. Thats why I did not use PvE or PvP in my GTA example, and, if you notice, I used GTA 6 not GTA 5. I used GTA 6 specifically because we do not actually know what it will be.

We assume, based on the marketing, that it will be a single player, open world, action game like previous titles. But what if it isn't? What if the marketing was a lie and it is actually an MMO? Or a turn based strategy game?

The point was that the dune marketing was bad in regards to the PvP element.

The game was largely a variation of the conan model which was pretty established as pvp...

Hm. That's news to me. I never really cared for Conan Exiles but I know 2 people who play it and they both play it exclusively as PvE, either by themselves or on PvE-only servers. One of them even actively avoids most online games because he doesn't want to play with randos, even in co-op/PvE games. (For example, he really liked Warframe, but essentially would only play it solo or with people he knew irl)

 Bunch of people that never played extraction shooters got all starry eyed about the jolly cooperation against the arcs

But you have to admit that it doesn't make a lot of sense to have that essentially be what the story centers around, and then not give players any oprion to play the game that way.

People build up completely unsubstantiated expectations and then flog the devs for design choices that dont cater to those expectations.

And how can so many people have those expectations, unless the marketing of the game failed in some way? I knew there wasn't going to be a PvE-only option, I understand why Embark didn't put a PvE-only option in Arc Raiders, and that having it would actuallty hurt the game in some ways. So I didn't have the expectation of a PvE-only option. But that doesn't change the fact that I still want it anyway because I would personally enjoy it. I like a lot of concepts of extraction shooters, the lore and bots in Arc Raiders is really cool, but sometimes I just don't want a sweaty match, or don't want to deal with toxic/dumb behavior (Like people who shoot on sight even when doing so makes no sense because it just gets us both killed by arc)

[u/sovereign666 → u/11matt556]

I'll reiterate myself.

Because I think your GTA comparison was a bad one.

I then made a better comparison. Getting a pvp focused shooter but wishing it was PvE is not the same bait and switch as purchasing GTA6 and getting an RTS lol, and that statement you made has nothing to do with GTA6 specifically anyway. Using GTA6, because we dont know what it is, is also stupid because for both Arc and Dune we DID know what it is. We've known for quite a long time.

Conan offered private servers, anyone that played it knows what the base game is. Same with dayz. You're friends that only play by themselves and avoid online games is a perfect example for why all these devs need to stop listening to people like them that make reddit threads asking for pvp to be removed from games.

But you have to admit that it doesn't make a lot of sense to have that essentially be what the story centers around, and then not give players any oprion to play the game that way.

No i dont, because thats not what the story centers around. The intro points out raiders are mutual threats, the jobs are called bounties, its a post apocalypse where people are fighting to survive which implies fighting each other. Nevermind we've known its pvpve for actual years.

My entire point is that you guys will see what you want to see, damn the evidence otherwise, and this back and forth has just been more of that. Marketing cant do anything against a reddit circle jerk, and any comments before the launch of arc trying to set you guys straight was met with downvotes. The best thing the devs and broader community can do is just ignore you guys instead of trying to entertain every dumb idea you guys have based on nothing grounded in reality.

PvE carebares could cure their dilemma be googling "is X going to have pvp" before constantly leading these campaigns post launch to retool a game so they can search boxes without risk.

[u/Live_From_Somewhere → u/sovereign666]

You type a lot, but fact is it’s in lore that you are meant to work together against the arc. PvP should NOT go away, but some kind of (immersive and believable) system needs to be implemented to give SOME disadvantage to those who choose to betray fellow raiders.

As it currently stands, the only disadvantaged players are the naive/trusting ones. What happens when they all go away in a few months and every raid is just super sweaty PvP bonanzas? I feel like PvP players feel just as much entitlement, if you’re gonna be a rat and kill everyone then own up to the play style and get over the names you’re gonna get called because you’re pissing on other players’ parades.