Is PVE as important as PVP?

Conan Exiles General Discussion
1

It seems that there’s a significant portion of players that believes that “PVE is a niche way of playing” and that it’s not as important as PVP. This isn’t a new thing, but up until now, I have been mostly a lurker on the forums, so it hasn’t been bothering me as much.

On top of it, Funcom’s patches frequently seem to favor PVP over PVE. Sure, a DLC might come out every once in a while to keep PVE players interested, but most of the patches are there to improve the quality of PVP and literally every nerf has been PVP-motivated.

I’m aware that this is a controversial topic, but I would like to see a reasonable – hopefully civil – discussion among the players and see what people think. I would also be delighted if Funcom could shed some light on this topic too – not in terms of PR statements (“we value everyone equally”), but rather in terms of data (who plays the game more).

8 Likes
2

Funny cause I have exactly the opposite impression. Patches and DLCs focus mostly on PvE content and cosmetics while urgently pending balance and exploiting issues are frequently ignored and postponed.

I also feel like the PvE players (while a minority on officials) are by far the loudest voice on discord Reddit and this forum.

I don’t know where you got the impression that updates are affecting PvE negatively in favour of the PvP gameplay. We get frequently DLCs with purely cosmetic content, Dungeons and Emotes and got a complete combat system makeover that is tailored to console PvE experience similar to action RPG combat. Where exactly have you ever been affected negatively in any way?

If you look at the dev streams, spotlights, featured community content and contests, there is also nothing PvP related. Not once has a raiding tactic or a PvP meta been recognized in a Dev stream. The only PvP related community interactions are in the context of nerfs and exploits. Typically very frustrating issues. Can hardly say here that the PvP players get the same amount of loving attention as PvE involved players.

I don’t understand why you even come to this topic here: https://forums.funcom.com/c/conan-exiles since you aren’t involved in any of the problems discussed there. Why do you want to dispell our collected feedback from many years of playing? Is it really that important to you that stuff that doesn’t affect the way you play will not be taken seriously after all?

2 Likes
3

Are you saying he’s a disinterested party? If so, then this OP is good and I think we all can remain on a similarly-objective level.

For the longest time, it was PvP that has been the red-headed step-exile in the group. PvE is by far the most dominant, and dare I say sharing/informative of the three. I have learned as much from PvE players here, at Steam and reddit as I have from my great friends and clanmates. Furthermore, every PvP player will admit to not only traits of PvE (interesting buildings, dyed armors, cafes, freebies), we’ll tell you that we know the majority of our PvP gaming experience is indeed simply vs the environment.

1 Like
5

I think he’s referring to the topic that I linked to. It’s a topic about a PVP problem and the author was proposing to limit the building mechanics in a way that I didn’t understand. I asked for clarification about what it meant and mentioned that I was worried about PVE when it comes to restricting the building mechanics.

In return, I got an explanation, but I also got a comment about how PVE is a niche thing.

Sorry, @Olumat, but this topic isn’t about that. The linked topic is about lollipop and internal bases, and I only asked for clarification there. I created a new, separate topic for my question precisely because I didn’t want to be off-topic in your discussion. Please extend me the same courtesy :slight_smile:

6

Yeah I got it. Sorry I didn’t realise it at first :slight_smile: it’s not offtopic ofc.

1 Like
7

From what I experienced playing several types of survival games (ARK,D&L,Atlas,CE,Star’s End, Empyrion) is that PvP & PvE are always developed together, with PvE being a rule subset.

The only exception to this rule was H1Z1, which was split into 2 games: King of the Kill, and Just Survive. … The PvE game was shut down. The PvP one still runs to this day, but this isn’t mode dependant. They really screwed up the PvE game.

PvE and PvP are always 2 sides of a coin, with PvP being the head (primary mode and scope), and PvE the tails (the side that sets the inherent value).

To develop these modes separately would require twice the QA teams, twice the certification, and an ever divergent game… at some point it will evolve into 2 entirely different games running on the same engine. That’s too much or FC to handle, especially sicne they have the game running on different consoles at it is.

In the end, after much consideration, and an objective view of the PvP vs. PvE conundrum is this…

PvP is mutually exclusive to singleplayer. It HAS to be played with other players wether you like it or not, and thus HAS to be played official, and the entire game must prioritize the multiplayer aspect to accomodate PvP players.

PvE can be played solo. One can argue, if you don’t like an accomodation made for PvP, mod it away to your liking. Vice versa won’t work, because in PvP the accomodation is always multiplayer in nature.

This is why PvE is always a sub-set of PvP.

Now, personally I have always favored PvE. I’m a pacifistic preservationist. Your classic carebear.
So yeah, i get annoyed whenever PvP destroys PvE… greatest example was on ARK… They removed speed modifier on flying mounts because it became the meta in PvP.

But in the end, you can mod it for PvE… but you can’t mod away balance for PvP, because it is a natural evolution of balance.

That’s just my 2 cents.

3 Likes
8

You really summarized the problem with PvP necessary adjustments in a wellwritten overview.

I for myself played most of the time probably building and I very much enjoy the building system and the small items and outfits from hyboria :slight_smile:

When playing on a PvP server however I see how irrelevant all that is. There are basically 2 approaches at building. One is minimalistic bubble bases that leave as little surface as possible with maximum volume inside.
The other one is spamming building pieces with maximal HP and surface to tank as much dmg as possible over large areas.
See here for reference:
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcSLec6AJH52Obx6hrCepq-0bm1kq-tjq0GylYan0Cl8q6-sZm3b

1920×1080 356 KB

I really wish the inspiring building system would matter more in PvP and clever and creative building with smart defenses was a key factor in success :confused:

Overall I would say PvP related games need a much stricter handling of in-game mechanics and glitches. It doesn’t matter in a singleplayer or coop game if some items are overpowered or you can glitch under the world or even duplicate items. A player interested in a good experience would refrain from using it as it is against their very own interest to spoil the game.
On the other side in PvP the whole gaming experience for thousands of players is at stake if such things are overlooked. I can only ask here for more understanding that some side effects of the content we love might propose a big problem for PvP playing.

In that sense understand me here if I consider huge bases, masses of items and followers a problem. These things have the potential to lagg the server which is a keyfactor in griefing and exploiting on official servers. I don’t want to spoil the building fun but on PvP huge bases and many outposts with followers are rather destroying the game than pleasing anyone. (See the example picture above)

10

All he really wants to know is the difference between modes pvp to pve and what we as the community thinks about, are the dlcs content pvp or pve related.
Myself I believe right now its equal the dlcs are cosmetic but pvers cant really role play without the thrall system and pet system getting an over haul allowing us the put them in passive aggressive modes. the only difference right now is one you can destroy bases the other no either one cant really have role playing because our animals and thralls attack everyone and everythin. The role playing aspect is very limited to the thrall system I believe, once we can have store and shops and pubs where our thralls can actually service things the role players will come out to play on both pvp and pve. Myself pvp always and forever I enjoy the challenge.

11

PvE is a low stress version of the game, where exploration, adventure, crafting, RP and creativity are generally the goals.

PvP is a high stress environment where game mechanics, balance and exploit prevention are top priority. If constant attention isn’t paid to these things, the PvP base can get pretty vocal and why shouldn’t they? They have everything at risk. The chance of logging in to find months of hard work eliminated overnight is very real.

PvE will always have to sacrifice QoL for the PvP side, to insure that group doesn’t get stuck with an unplayable game.

PvP will always have to suffer waiting for important balance or mechanics changes, because the game producers need to keep revenue flowing with more pretty PvE content (DLCs).

Thus our forums tend to be a form of PvP.

The only solution is making two separate games, with different code bases (as Halcyon stated) and that would not be fiscally responsible to share holders.

I’m on the PvE side, but I feel PvP is usually the larger player base in these types of games, so I expect Funcom to be focused on keeping PvP viable as a priority. However, I’m not disappointed with the amount of new PvE content they dish out. I’ve really had some great times in this game and continue to do so.

2 Likes
12

This is everyone content, not PVE.

Cause I think some of DLC does nothing for me, a PVE heavy player… when i need bug fixes, and changes to how games runs so its more friendly.

This pulls away from both parties who are looking for fixes and changes and updates in general to things they do.

It keeps lights on, so PVE and PVP can keep doing what they do.

Mounts is PVE/PVP balance thing. I think this is good way for them to get both sides something.

To me, PVP needs massive rework in its own right. Alot of balance/tweaks doesnt seem to work, 1-2 youtube videos later, the new meta is updated… and all changes just switched meta a smedge. PVP changes its gear, and they move on… PVE often lose’s a good weapon or armor that made soloing content work and often doesnt get a replacement.

I use to PVP… but Domanite, Build, Survive, When there not On! Is the mantra of alot of players. Alogn with alot of bombs, or building glitches to make -near- untakeable places
PVP-C is just Meta, and waiting for them to be busy with something.
Its dull and boring to me now.

Your all killing each other just fine… and I’m staying waving my hand with "new hair styles?!
HELLO, Mummy of Set? Hello! waves franticlly All Map Locations? Hello!? Why don’t these peeps drop loot!? Hello?! Why can’t I close in roof on this tree top stand? Hello?

LOL

To me, PVP can PVP anytime they want… join in on meta, or get trashed. I got long list of stuff that needs to happen… can’t do most of it. But hey, iltest you can PVP.

Thats how I see it.

I get alot of hate… as its often just the most vocal, and people who are happy…to busy playing game to jump to forums to defend themselves.

3 Likes
13

Since all the DLC’s have been purely cosmetic things, ranging from different coloured base pieces, placeables, skins for pets, various armors that give the same stats as in game armor…yes, the game is catering more to PVE…but that’s fine.

Until they put gods back to what they were 2 years ago, the game will be, in my mind, more of a PVE game.

2 Likes
15

For the first time I agree with you. Most of our updates, patches, adjustment to mechanics has been steered towards the pve crowd. I have heard (Not proven) that most of the testlive feedback, forums etc that funcom bases their choices off of is the pve crowd.

16

I use to play open world pvp in EverQuest 2 and Sony sold it to daybreak whoes answer to exploiting, hackers etc was to remove all open world pvp servers and make the game only pve. I stopped playing that game due to this. Making a game only have one style of play sucks. After reading to much in forums I hope Conan’s future is not the same. Probably just paranoid but…

17

The day CE goes full PvE is the day ARK, D&L, Atlas, PIXark and Star’s End go full PvE.

EverQuest 2 was a MMORPG. SoE was sold to investment firm Columbus Nova. The very same assfrakks who split H1Z1 into seperate PvE and PvP games and purposefully made PvE mode unenjoyable so they could axe it, and focus on King of the Kill Lootbox Royale.

The very same asshats who axed EverQuest Next with the excuse that “it wasn’t fun enough.”

“Investment firms” is where game publishers go to die AKA “Exit Strategy”. Bethesda wants to sell itself out to the investment firm “providence equity” - Primary reason of why they are being so incredibly greedy right now - To prove they are worth a buy-out.

Funcom is nowhere near selling itself out, despite having gone nearly bankrupt. The fact that they’ve bought the DUNE licence says a lot - They have a few decades left before they go retire under some investment firm.

2 Likes
18

There has been some incredibly interesting insight on this topic and I’m very grateful for it. It’s nice to see people sit down and talk :slight_smile:

I would also like to link to a comment I found on another thread, because it looked very insightful to me.

After reading all of this stuff, to me it seems like both sides are being shafted to the hilt. Most people I know – and most people I’ve seen on the forums – play either PVE or PVP exclusively and don’t engage with the other side. As a result, everyone thinks they have it worse and nobody’s really happy.

From what I can see – and please correct me if I’m wrong – these are some of the big meta-problems with the game:

  • Cheaters and exploiters run rampant on official servers. Funcom doesn’t have the manpower to police those servers, so instead they turn a blind eye and occasionally come up with a technical solution that makes things worse for everyone.
  • Funcom tries to keep the PVE players happy by producing new content, which inevitably ruins the already-precarious balance of PVP, so the new content ends up nerfed to oblivion, leaving everyone profoundly unhappy because of the time they wasted engaging with that content.
  • Abysmal QA. The game has been getting better steadily over time, but every time a patch comes out – despite being “tested” extensively on TestLive servers – it breaks a whole bunch of stuff. For a game that has been “fully released” for this long, the number of unfixed bugs is really shameful.

So it all seems to boil down to two things:

  • The game is trying to reconcile two vastly different play styles. PVP and PVE are so drastically different, that the strategy of treating PVE as a rule subset of PVP just doesn’t work well for anyone.
  • For whatever reason, Funcom seems to be really bad at making decisions. They don’t seem to be basing any of their decisions on hard data.

It’s pretty damn discouraging, to be honest. But at least it’s easier to understand what’s happening and try to adapt to it as best as I can.

3 Likes
20

PvE and PvE-C are what pays to keep the lights on. DLCs change very little for PvP. If the PvE community were to disappear, who would buy the pretty things that make money for Funcom?

PvP gets their content in the way of ‘fixes’ for the game. Unfortunately, more often than not I have seen Funcom fix an issue one patch and then two patches later it reappears and stays for far too long before being corrected again. Rinse and repeat. Optimization is what needs to happen, removing items from the game that are not used or that are too abundant in a set amount of space I can understand… but that is not going to fix the underlying problems with the game and it certainly isn’t going to stop the griefing of other players.

I truly believe that Funcom needs to consider asking for volunteers for the official servers, ones that can be given access to join servers, make judgments, and apply limited corrections pertaining to issues such as too many thralls lagging an area or clans blocking important game items.

PvP does not require DLC to enjoy the game as their pleasure is derived from the combat and conquering of others, not the social, building, immersion aspects of the game…

1 Like
23

As with any ‘job’, volunteer or paid, this is a possibility. That person would be removed from the moderator position and possibly from the game. Actions have consequences. When those consequences are harsh and applied when necessary they are typically effective.

1 Like
24

The thing is; about 95% of the PvP community left for other games. The remaining playerbase which is rly just a small fraction of the originall buyers has been condensed to a more PvE interested crowd. So by saying that PvE is keeping things alive, when in fact the vast majority got frustrated and left is rly not working well in the end. I think PvE players are the least affected players by exploits and hacks.

Your ‘nerf’ issues are rly just a fleabite, against the huge issues that PvP always and still has.

25

I’ve heard a pretty solid argument that PvP players tend to be a lot more sensitive to when balance is off because it matters a lot more to how they play.

1 Like
26

I like both PVP and PVE, I play more PVP but I still enjoy the more relaxed style of PVE, so now what do I have to choose a side and stay there?

I really hate how the PVP and PVE exclusives try to polarize games like these, plenty of us play both and would like for both to be fun to play. push for changes together instead of against each other. All I typically see in these arguments is a group of people who play the same game but with different rules, pointing fingers at each other and shouting how the other side is getting more attention, instead of focusing on the changes they actually want they focus on the changes the other “side” is getting…