How should PvE and PvP co-exist?


#1

Tell me how you think they should coexist/interact?


#2

Basically, the reason everyone is trying to kill everyone in 3.0 is because of the ease of loot finding. So whenever we see someone, we immediately think that they might have something that will help us survive, whether food or weapons… not to mention that gun collecting is the infamous goal for every player in the server because of the huge variety of guns. Why, you ask? Because looking for food and water are too much of an easy task to fulfill. All you need is a canteen. don’t have one? Craft one with a few planks and tape and you’ll be good for a long time when you have so many wells and easy-to-craft rainbarrels as well as easy farming and feetilizers that can be crafted from rope


#3

You know, it is possible to have a group of players doing mostly PvE on a PvP server, you’ve just gotta get the right group of people or be lucky. I play PvE on a PvP server because not being able to be killed by a player, or vice versa is too boring.

Also, what Kylie said.


#4

Although all the stuff is true, it doesn’t answer the question I asked.

Thanks anyway.


#5

As you’re asking it, the answer is no: having PvP zones and PvE zones separately isn’t logical, and wouldn’t work.

It has been talked many times before: enhancing survival and evironmental aspects of the game (PvE) is what will deter people from killing to each other every single time.


#6

I’m going to keep it concise; in a good survival game, PvE and PvP should be holistically intertwined. The two should not be separated, but seamlessly coexisting.

Having different “zones” goes completely against this principle, and also breaks immersion.


#7

It’ll be just like it is currently in Unturned 3. You have servers that have PvP enabled, or you don’t.


A Post Tracking Every Single One Of MoltonMontro's Posts Starting June 16th to July 16th
#8

I’m asking peoples opinions on how it should work, I’m not advocating for separate PvP/PvE zones (I infact argued against it)

The original post is pretty clear, there’s even a tldr.


#9

How would that work though?

And I agree


#10

I didn’t ask for it.

Making the game harder doesn’t deter Kos, that method has been tried by every survival game ever.


#11

From Nelson’s posts it doesn’t sound like they will be separated like in 3.0

Mentions of PvP being “end game”


#12

They already can and will co-exist.

It’s just that it will be more PvE based so that enemies will always be a threat in the game and not some minor hindrance in the current game. A good PvE game makes a good PvP game in terms of the amount of trying to kill on sight (Convenient for casuals), because you should be more worried about the enemies

I don’t see what’s the concern


#13

I think you’re heavily misinterpreting some of Nelson’s posts then.


A Post Tracking Every Single One Of MoltonMontro's Posts Starting June 16th to July 16th
#14

I don’t have a concern…
.I’m asking for peoples opinions lol and all I get is people disagreeing with an idea I never suggested or just not answering the question.

/Fail thread.

Making the game hard won’t prevent rampant Kos, many games tried that route.


#15

Edited the original post to be just a question.


#16

I was assuming you had one. Like, why ask if 2 basic types of gamemode could coexist?

People thought you made a suggestion because you bring up something people never heard of nor thought about it (Zones)


#17

Yes I thought from reading posts that PvP would be more of a late game thing so I assumed there must be away to prevent early game pvp’ing.

But now I see people think it’s just going to be pvp “always turned on” but player will Kos less because the game is more difficult, but I don’t think that will work.

Of course there will separate pve only servers but that’s a different issue, I was wondering how Kos will be less on servers with PvP enabled specifically


#18

Systems that encourage not murdering each other. Nothing is going to “prevent” early-game PvP, it’s just a discouragement.


A Post Tracking Every Single One Of MoltonMontro's Posts Starting June 16th to July 16th
#19

actually, it wont get rid of it, but it will make it less likely. If people have to pay more attention to surviving zombies, they will less likely try to murder everyone they see. Yes, there will be little kids who constantly try to kos everyone they see because they think 4.0 will be pvp based instead, but its more likely that they will get bored before they even manage to get the stuff needed to kill someone else. Or when they try to punch someone to death they die because the other person might have a slightly better weapon, or knows the games control. Yes, makingt he game harder wont prevent it, but it will make it less likely to happen.
.
Edit, molt already said what I said, basically XD
.
edit 2. I now understand what you meant, and I guess that could work, making certain areas like say, a military base or a hospital a place where people can pvp would be interesting, cause then it would make sense, because survivors would fight over the right to loot places like those.


Post tracking AJ inserting unnecessary periods between his paragraphs
#20

Can you please put some examples? Because as far as I’ve seen, only few survival games has been made hard and realistic enough to make people progress in this order (or alike):

  • Find decent gear to survive first days
  • Cooperate with other players to achieve further success*
  • Settle up a base
  • Gain strenght and defend
  • Gain certain control over the looting areas (this implying a very possible gameplay-wise conflict with a rival group)

(*) This one may be switched with the next one or skipped according to preferences

Instead, this is what I currently see in Unturned and most (non-hardcore) survival games:

  • Get any sort of weapon
  • Kill anyone and steal their stuff
  • Raid their bases and gather even more stuff
  • Kill anyone and steal their stuff
  • Raid their bases and gather even more stuff
  • Kill anyone and steal their stuff
    …