Did anyone buy this game for the promise of PVP?

General Discussion
Prev 1 3 4 5 7 Next

WoW pvp by most metrics is considered a joke by other gamers

It is now...... It's why I quit. It's no longer an mmo.

Tell you what though, it was real fun while it lasted.

Same deal with the Diablo series.

The only glory days I ever heard from WoW pvp was just during TBC which was quite short lived. Even then I don't think that pvp really matched some of the sandbox MMO's out there. Head to some MMO forums and those people who play exclusive pvp based MMO's will let you know what they think about WoW PvP during the TBC era. It's not exactly pleasant lol.

Lol. Actually, it's directly responsible for the most popular and played esports today.

Yea that is true to an extent. WC 1 and 2 made RTS games more popular, but SC1 is what really pushed the boundaries into what a good RTS game can do. WC3 didn't do so well in box sales and has a smaller following now than SC1 has. And WC3 is newer.

WC set the foundation, but SC1-2 made it legitimate.

That's like saying Diablo hc, well... I never hear that get mentioned outside of hc diablo fans.

pvp is what made hc fun.

hc is what made diablo fun.

online player on player interactions is what makes this genre fun, diablo was a hostile playscape and it was the other players, not the pve, that created this immersion.

Well to be fair, Diablo HC isn't exactly original. There are games with a 1 death = game over mechanic, so if nothing else when people mention hard games with that sort of mechanic, you could say that they are lumping Diablo HC into the mix.

I'm not saying that pvp didn't make this game fun by any stretch.

All I am saying is that when most people think of competitive pvp, diablo is pretty much the furthest game from their minds. Unless you are talking about people who have vested interest in diablo pvp
Diablo came with a full loot, ff mechanic, so yes, it was origional.

when I talked about wc3, yes, you undermined how many played the rts but more importantly you forgaot all about mobas.

and wow, BC sucked. Vanilla, naxx40/aq40 and world pvp. Vanilla wow was a very decent mmo.

I'm talking about HC in concept, aka you die once and it's over.

I didn't undermine how many people played it. It simply did not do as well as SC1 or SC2. IT certainly did do better than WC1 and WC2. But that's to be expected. The fact that MOBA's came out is a byproduct of Blizzard amazing world editor. Not because of the game itself. Literally MOBA's could have spawned from SC2. To add on to that, TD's stemmed from SC1, so...

I hear so. I don't deny that Vanilla WoW was decent. I'm saying that most people consider WoW PvP, even vanilla WoW world pvp, to not be good, if by nothing else than the fact that WoW literally was not built around PvP. It was a PvE game with PvP added.
pvp in d2 was very good especially with some rules. end of the story
Just because something isn't an esport doesn't mean there aren't competitions. It's just not hte sole focus.

Dueling and ironman is a perfect example with d2.

D2 is one of the best games of all time because it incorporated all these gameplay types into itself. You could play hc pvp or you could play sc pve and they were both fulfilling. It was gorgeous.

That is where the love comes from. All over, from all types of gamers.

And don't forget how much Blizzard promoted pvp........ I mean, that should go without saying though, right?

This is where I ask you what competitive means.

I mean, any game has some sort of competition where people try to beat others in certain confines of the game. Heck Mario 1 has speed runs.

I consider something competitive once it starts getting sponsorship.
10/20/2013 11:31 AMPosted by ellisD
Who the hell buys Diablo for PVP ? If you want that crap there are a TON of games that offer what you want.Dont bring the pissing contest into my game.

Lol, what is loot based gaming for then?

Are you serious? Lol dude......

Thats the problem, this is a loot grind game, when it should be a level grind game.

This is where I ask you what competitive means.

I mean, any game has some sort of competition where people try to beat others in certain confines of the game. Heck Mario 1 has speed runs.

I consider something competitive once it starts getting sponsorship.

It's an adjective. Rivalries certainly don't need sponsorships, do they? Aren't games themselves competitive and challenging by definition?

I certainly have no problems calling speed run challenges competitive.... be they mario or quake.

then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on the subject :p
To say things from board games or card games or even sports aren't competitive? Come on man. Video games are a game like any other.

Just because me and my father weren't payed to play 1 on 1 in the backyard, to say it isn't competitive is being kind of..... I dunno the word for it. Facetious?

But to say that it's competitive is disingenuous.

People hold large scale tournaments where actual money is involved to watch people compete in games like SC2, SF4, Counter strike, Dota, League of Legends etc. That is a far cry away from a handful of people collecting on a forum and designating a date to versus each other. That's a lan party without the lan.

In the strictest sense of the word, yes this game is competitive. But I certainly wouldn't say its even remotely a major contender for competitive games out there, and I think the lack of coverage almost speaks for itself on that one.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum