Jump to content
varenvel

PVE mode , hear me out

Recommended Posts

I want PVE. Thought there was going to be PVE and honestly they should put it in. let alone to try out your stuff or just learning. The watching youtube videos to learn how to play is a piss poor argument. I don't care if they said no. I going to keep asking for it and many others want it too.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HotFuzz31 said:

I want PVE. Thought there was going to be PVE and honestly they should put it in. let alone to try out your stuff or just learning. The watching youtube videos to learn how to play is a piss poor argument. I don't care if they said no. I going to keep asking for it and many others want it too.

Doesn't matter what you think or what you're going to keep doing lol

They've already said no and for testing your weapons there will be a firing range of sorts.

Other than that PVE isn't what this game is aimed for and don't get any hopes too high.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The simple solution here should be that the whole OPEN WORLD Tarkov be the PVP and the individual raids be the PVE. I agree that the game needs a PVE only element as BSG stated themselves that EFT is going to be a realistic and story driven game first. The gaming community as a whole has too many people that'd just play to ensure as few people as possible get to actually experience the story, even with the Karma system BSG has in mind. Obviously there would need to be BEAR and USEC NPCs, which wouldn't be hard, just reskinned scavs and then leave the SCAVS AI as it is now, or at least as they were from the previous version of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Arbiter1337 said:

Doesn't matter what you think or what you're going to keep doing lol 

   Actually it does, that's what testing is for, and that's what Beta testing Forums are for.

They've already said no and for testing your weapons there will be a firing range of sorts.

   Doesn't mean that wont change in the future, Have you not yet learned to not take Devs at their word, EVER?

Other than that PVE isn't what this game is aimed for and don't get any hopes too high.

    The game isn't aimed for PVP strictly either, If you watched any interview with any developer since the Alpha was playable then you'd know that the game is to be a realistic story driven game first, with PVP in it. EFT can still be realistic and story driven with a PVE mode as well for people who actually want to experience the story. Devs say "no" and change their minds all the time. BSG isn't and won't be any exception. That's the point of creative freedom.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Arbiter1337 said:

Doesn't matter what you think or what you're going to keep doing lol

They've already said no and for testing your weapons there will be a firing range of sorts.

Other than that PVE isn't what this game is aimed for and don't get any hopes too high.

People of payday said they never add micro transactions and look where they are

Im still in hopes maybe devs change their mind , if they made broad pool and seen how many people are interested they would change their mind maybe , there is always hopes , dont starve did get multilayer also finally despite developer said no for years

 

Reason i made this post i know PVE player base is big in games , PVP population dies the fastest and coop is what keeps games active , even 6 year old games are still being played very very often and are in top 100 steam play list because they have coop

pvp games? if player base is big and game is top notch AAA it lives for a while , but some pvp AAA games even die out in 6 or less months , fastest i seen is 3 months(on really good game)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, varenvel said:

People of payday said they never add micro transactions and look where they are

Im still in hopes maybe devs change their mind , if they made broad pool and seen how many people are interested they would change their mind maybe , there is always hopes , dont starve did get multilayer also finally despite developer said no for years

 

Reason i made this post i know PVE player base is big in games , PVP population dies the fastest and coop is what keeps games active , even 6 year old games are still being played very very often and are in top 100 steam play list because they have coop

pvp games? if player base is big and game is top notch AAA it lives for a while , but some pvp AAA games even die out in 6 or less months , fastest i seen is 3 months(on really good game)

I do not disagree. PVE isn't my thing, Devs stated they don't want it and personally i couldn't care less but if it comes it then thats good i guess. As long as Gears don't transfer between PVP to PVE and versa.

Never the less good luck with your crusade guys. :)

Edited by Arbiter1337

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Arbiter1337 said:

 As long as Gears don't transfer between PVP to PVE and versa.

 

and this here would be the thing about it. can't mix gear and characters. it would be silly to have the mode cross over as they already found out. Keep it separate and the work is mostly done.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love a PVE mode.  I have had this thought occur to me several times while playing.  It'd be really nice if me and my friends could just practice against the AI - sort of like offline mode but with friends.    Not everyone wants to play high-stress high-risk PvP all the time, especially with all the problems PvP currently has like players spawning 5 feet away from each other (death on spawn) and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One can only hope for PVE to stay in the final product.

But hope is pretty low at this moment, if the DEV'S are committed to their current vision.

Which is there total right just to keep things clear.

A lot of my friends will not touch this game, I even bought a copy for one and in just about 10 minutes of installing it, he was done with it.    He does not like it. It's really unpopular with the gaming community as of right now, SidAlpha just tarnished this game with the casual crowd.  This project will be the deciding factor if i should ever fund a early access title, if it becomes something great cool beans. Now if it flops................. I will never fund a early access title from a unknown developer ever again! This will make or break them.                            

If history has taught us is a developer can go back on his word. i.e. Microtransactions

Just better hope Kotton, Eroktic and DDG don't happen to move on to a different game than EFT.

Then it will be a matter of time before people move on from this.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if not, hopefully if there is a next game from them. They can make a singleplayer EFT type of game for the PVE crowd. It would sell like hot cakes.

Just a thought for the dev's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Am 30.12.2017 um 23:43 schrieb tobiassolem:

Coop PVE is unrealistic, this just can't be in real life, and therefore it has no place in EFT.

I have to disagree, it's also no way to compare it. You can't compare PvE or PvP with real-life realism. The way I see it, the current free for all, everyone kills everyone gameplay in PvP is unrealistic. After all, we choose to belong to BEAR or USEC who should fight together. I think the most realistic part of the game is PvE because you clearly belong to your faction (in my case USEC) and fight against an enemy (apparently scavs). And those scavs may or may not shoot each other.

Am 31.12.2017 um 01:17 schrieb Fronk:

I wholeheartedly do not want a PVE mode, or any mode that allows for handholding while you loot.

 

If you are being killed in 10-30 seconds, you need to change how you play this game.  The point of a survival game is survival, not "rush the crates and see if we can throw something in our secure containers before being killed."

Not to be rude, but why do you care? If you only play PvP anyway, why does it matter to you if others would like to enjoy PvE that is completely separated from PvP?

And from what I've seen, the "rushers" still seem to win many firefights while the cautious players lose to the rushers. Why? I've always been sh*t at shooters. The hardcore style that I like about Escape from Tarkov makes me play very carefully. Yet I get shot by not-so-careful players all the time. Not complaining, just saying.

vor 4 Stunden schrieb TheSpec32:

A lot of my friends will not touch this game, I even bought a copy for one and in just about 10 minutes of installing it, he was done with it. 

 

This.

I bought it and I instantly fell in love with PvE. Bots are powerful and smart but not ridiculously OP. Now, when going to PvP the frustration starts. As mentioned, I'm garbage at such games, yet they can be fun. I chose to try the Scav mode first. I spawned right next to another scav that then shot me (Weren't we supposed to be a team?). Back to almighty PvE then. After the scav cooldown, I started another game as a scav. I killed one person but I couldn't search the body. Then after sneaking around in a building, I wanted to approach the body and I got shot from somewhere again.

I get that this is the way the game is. I just don't see myself actually bringing ANY loot home. Why even touch PvP then? To spawn, die and lose everything and in the end have an empty stash and no way to play the game? This is the mentality that can kill this game. When people that aren't good at this game just won't touch it anymore. They're too bad to bring home loot from PvP, and they aren't allowed to bring home loot from PvE. SO WHAT'S THE DAMN POINT?

As mentioned before, I would absolutely LOVE it if PvE was separated from PvP. Have a dedicated PvE stash. Let those shy and unskilled players (including me) have fun with the game in a dedicated PvE like others have it in PvP. No holding hands. Just switch the players for bots like you've done it already. The only thing missing to make this an amazing PvP and PvE game is a dedicated PvE stash. This can't be so hard, can it? I beg you!

 

The lack of this theoretically simple addition and the fact that this game runs at only 20 FPS on lowest settings even though I easily meet the system requirements makes me think about requesting a... dare I use this controversial word... refund. And I really don't want to. I want to love this game and this can be archived with only one little thing.

Edited by TheUniT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how lots quote realism , while this is probably most unrealistic game ever made(your member of private military group and you kill your buddies daily and face no repercussions , even if world would end tomorrow and we would be bunch savages , they would face probably death penalty from own group sooner or later and be outcasted)

even if we consider developer vision whe its finished , bringing up realism card is stupid , i can understand when developers say "its their vision" as its their game , but quoting realism in video game is laughable , realism is just game play element who can make game more fun , but even ARMA can only be considered vaguely realistic if we really look closer.

 

as for PVE outline is already there made , question is if developers would possibly go a bit out of the way and finish it as there even for pvp playerbase pvp mode could be served as tutorial for them , learning map  , how core mechanics works , and then they can jump into pvp , while PVE's stay , enjoy "team play" and encouragement of team play , instead "kill him before he has thought to kill me"

we both could enjoy same game if it was made both modes are separate , they could even just "add small amount of servers and see if this mode is popular" and eventually add more if its popular enough

 

Noone is really forcing or demanding "half of development time and servers" but i would understand if they would say no in the end , but would be nice if they discussed possibility on one of the meetings of  implementing it.

Edited by varenvel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TheUniT said:

 

I have to disagree, it's also no way to compare it. You can't compare PvE or PvP with real-life realism. The way I see it, the current free for all, everyone kills everyone gameplay in PvP is unrealistic. After all, we choose to belong to BEAR or USEC who should fight together. I think the most realistic part of the game is PvE because you clearly belong to your faction (in my case USEC) and fight against an enemy (apparently scavs). And those scavs may or may not shoot each other.

 

You can disagree to any extent you wish. That is your right. However you are actually quoting Nikita Bujanov, COO of Battlestate and essentially lead game designer of Escape From Tarkov. The impression I have is that he is making EFT in accordance to set goals (that do not, at all involve a PvE-mode with friends).

As for why BEAR and USEC are shooting each other, you need to look into the lore which isn't actually in the beta (yet) but can be found on these very forums, alongside many other parts that are coming.

1 hour ago, varenvel said:

I like how lots quote realism , while this is probably most unrealistic game ever made(your member of private military group and you kill your buddies daily and face no repercussions , even if world would end tomorrow and we would be bunch savages , they would face probably death penalty from own group sooner or later and be outcasted)

even if we consider developer vision whe its finished , bringing up realism card is stupid , i can understand when developers say "its their vision" as its their game , but quoting realism in video game is laughable , realism is just game play element who can make game more fun , but even ARMA can only be considered vaguely realistic if we really look closer.

"Realism" in this scenario means that the devs are striving toward an engine with realistic guns, realistic ballistics, realistic damage system, fatigue, skills, and economy. Realism in this sense is also locked to the fictional universe in which the game is set, which is in an alternative future reality. Whether there are repercussions in a lawless, locked-off province where private armies have lost contact with headquarters and have no orders - is entirely within or outside the realm of reality, as instances of both have occured in history. Nowhere does it say that just because you belong to the same private military subgroup, that you are "buddies". In war zones there are many examples of friendly fire (it even had a name in Vietnam; fragging), whether or not it is reasonable inside this fictional story is certainly up to debate. 

Your debate would however be with the storywriters who made up the entire background of the game. You could look into the lore of Russia 2028 for example, or the tidbits of text strewn across some of the subforums here. Or you could keep writing hyperboles based on anecdotal and subjective arguments. Whatever you prefer.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The work has already been done.  The Dev's still make their vision of the game.  Leaving PvE in but a separate save/account/whatnot hurts no one but brings in more money for the Dev's.  There is no "Changing their minds" or "compromising their vision."  They still make the same game, just leave in the offline mode and maybe add Co-Op now or later on.

 

To the people that keep saying it will never happen...  Look at history.  All sorts of things.  People said blacks would never vote, said women would never vote, said the housing market would never crash, said Wall Street would never break 10k, etc etc etc.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 30 Minuten schrieb GhostZ69:

The work has already been done.  The Dev's still make their vision of the game.  Leaving PvE in but a separate save/account/whatnot hurts no one but brings in more money for the Dev's.  There is no "Changing their minds" or "compromising their vision."  They still make the same game, just leave in the offline mode and maybe add Co-Op now or later on.

 

To the people that keep saying it will never happen...  Look at history.  All sorts of things.  People said blacks would never vote, said women would never vote, said the housing market would never crash, said Wall Street would never break 10k, etc etc etc.  

Well said. The game mechanic is there. AI, everything works. Simply allowing us to stash stuff from PvE (and obviously lose stuff if you die) and perhaps keeping it on a different save/character/whatever is all that's required.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheUniT said:

Well said. The game mechanic is there. AI, everything works. Simply allowing us to stash stuff from PvE (and obviously lose stuff if you die) and perhaps keeping it on a different save/character/whatever is all that's required.

it has to be separate from the PvP character. its the only way it would work. Just give us two separate characters, stashes, whatever. easy peasy, appeals to both sides, more money to devs

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dev's vision of EFT is still not defined, they want realistic survival game where you have to get from A to B and if you are killed all your stuff are gone. That is fair enough, builds a lot of tension and it's more rewarding to survive, but here is the thing, currently there is only one mod, a mod where taking a loot means zero since you gonna lose it very soon, perhaps in next match if not in the same match where you get it. Current mod has ONLY one thing, ESCAPE, which means, it's better just to start with pistol and run by edge of map until you reach extracion (not really rewarding but it's better than going in with full gear and lose it all, then you are broke). Perhaps there would be more mods, which would make game much more diverse.

The PVE (which is even now in a good state) should exists, so that you can enjoy that survival element, loot stuff, gear up, relax, hoard stuff, then you can choose to take that stuff with you into online match. That means that people would enjoy and grind through PVE and "gamble it" in online match. PVE is local only so no servers are affected, just servers for PVP (cheaper maintance of game)  So you go in, maybe you lose all of your stuff, then just go play PVE until you gear up again. That way when a new player buys the game, he can grind like everyone else in PVE and then when he is confident enough, try luck in PVP. This makes game really fair. Possiblites to make PVP a next logical steps are numerus, in order to encourage to go into PVP from PVE. 

So you start playing and your opponents are better and they kill you, instead of being salty AF for losing all of stuff that took you several matches and S load of tries to collect you just be mad, go into PVE and get it back. Perhaps lock Levels 3 and 4 to only get it through PVP, like you can find gold bars only in PVP matches which you can use to buy Level 3 and 4 stuff. Those Gold bars would make everyone search for and fight over stashes, game has point instead of being just a deathmatch. Something like that.

One of reasons why I got this game is, this is STALKER: CoP with Call of Chernobly mod ONLINE, that mod has no campaign, you just go explore, loot, buy, sell stuff. You do generic quests to get some items and be occupied. Minus of that CoC is that it's lacking MP and because of that it gets repetitive. EFT could build on that idea.

Edited by FoxFort

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 36 Minuten schrieb FoxFort:

-snip-

 

I disagree, I think grinding in PvE and taking that gear to PvP is OP and exactly what the Battlestate devs want to avoid. I still think both should be separated.
I agree, however, the game could use some unique modes. Right now you basically grind loot and try to keep it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, tobiassolem said:

You can disagree to any extent you wish. That is your right. However you are actually quoting Nikita Bujanov, COO of Battlestate and essentially lead game designer of Escape From Tarkov. The impression I have is that he is making EFT in accordance to set goals (that do not, at all involve a PvE-mode with friends).

As for why BEAR and USEC are shooting each other, you need to look into the lore which isn't actually in the beta (yet) but can be found on these very forums, alongside many other parts that are coming.

"Realism" in this scenario means that the devs are striving toward an engine with realistic guns, realistic ballistics, realistic damage system, fatigue, skills, and economy. Realism in this sense is also locked to the fictional universe in which the game is set, which is in an alternative future reality. Whether there are repercussions in a lawless, locked-off province where private armies have lost contact with headquarters and have no orders - is entirely within or outside the realm of reality, as instances of both have occured in history. Nowhere does it say that just because you belong to the same private military subgroup, that you are "buddies". In war zones there are many examples of friendly fire (it even had a name in Vietnam; fragging), whether or not it is reasonable inside this fictional story is certainly up to debate. 

Your debate would however be with the storywriters who made up the entire background of the game. You could look into the lore of Russia 2028 for example, or the tidbits of text strewn across some of the subforums here. Or you could keep writing hyperboles based on anecdotal and subjective arguments. Whatever you prefer.

 

im not even discussing realism , developers are free to make their vision and lore , but i wont ever get "player" quoting realism or saying "they wont add it because its not realistic" , its a game , its hardcore realistic to some extent but that's about it. lots things even in realistic games have to be compromised because they simply would not make game fun , even scraped sometimes during development(i seen some be scraped even in dayz)

and yes friendly fire happens , but when group would know its intentional they would not let person go and in current form its death match. but this been explained and discussed earlier so i not see point in expanding that now(as game is still not finished). but even in stalker whos considered "dark suvival" kill own faction , quite soon enough they become hostile to you

as for story , their game , i wont debate what they want to do. its their world to create as its their vision.

but as comes to game play being fun , adding separate game mode would bring more players its a fact , question is is it that large i think it would be (or small developers think it would be not worth the hassle) that's where pool comes in

13 hours ago, TheUniT said:

I disagree, I think grinding in PvE and taking that gear to PvP is OP and exactly what the Battlestate devs want to avoid. I still think both should be separated.
I agree, however, the game could use some unique modes. Right now you basically grind loot and try to keep it.

i understand balance issues , i played dayz and i know to balance would be best to leave it as separate mode , people just could farm easy good gear in PVE and then wreck people pvp , thats why my first suggestion was if implemented keep it separate mode with own skills/inventory/quests/everything separate from first mode

Edited by varenvel
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, varenvel said:

and yes friendly fire happens , but when group would know its intentional they would not let person go and in current form its death match. but this been explained and discussed earlier so i not see point in expanding that now(as game is still not finished). but even in stalker whos considered "dark suvival" kill own faction , quite soon enough they become hostile to you

as for story , their game , i wont debate what they want to do. its their world to create as its their vision.

but as comes to game play being fun , adding separate game mode would bring more players its a fact , question is is it that large i think it would be (or small developers think it would be not worth the hassle) that's where pool comes in

i understand balance issues , i played dayz and i know to balance would be best to leave it as separate mode , people just could farm easy good gear in PVE and then wreck people pvp , thats why my first suggestion was if implemented keep it separate mode with own skills/inventory/quests/everything separate from first mode

Let's say you and I meet somewhere in Tarkov, we're both USEC. And in this particular example I'm a murderous fragging son of a ... . And I shoot you. How would anyone else know what I did? In the scenario described; you would be dead, and anyone I met after would have no idea what just happened (unless of course they witnessed it). One of the reasons why this happens in Tarkov, is the same reason why it happens in any zone where there is a perceived lack of consequences for actions. You can see it in riots, and in hardcore survival situations. There are stories from ships sinking of people literally stepping on others trying to survive.

Thomas Hobbes has been refuted many times, but there are situations where I think his point actually is relevant, and in some sad, dark way I believe that without society and comfort - many individuals will abandon morality. This is why I believe its so important to have society, and why its important to socialize. And this is why I think its a good idea to join a group/clan or whatever also. 

One other thing, "fun" is a very limited view of what games should be. Personally I prefer "flow". A game can be frustrating, annoying, gut-wrenchingly sad, or extremely challenging to any sense, and still be very good. Hence why game flow is more important in my opinion. Escape From Tarkov might not be fun at all times, but it certainly has a lot of the other parts I like.

I think you just have to either accept that EFT won't be the PvE-heaven you'd prefer. At least not yet. We'll see if Battlestate opens up the game for modding sometime down the line (after all Unity is extremely moddable). 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/12/2017 at 3:48 AM, FoxFort said:

Even though PVE is only here for beta testing part, removing it from final product would be, Devs Shooting themselves in the foot.

Why remove the good part from EFT?  BTW if plenty of players wish PVE to stay in final product then why not let it?

BTW I am fully into PVE having it's OFFLINE progressing system, standalone SinglePlayer experinece. 

Let's say devs decide to remove PVE, so now you only got MP where will you lose you gear all the time, the playes will be leaving the game since no point in playing and grinding when you gonna lose all of it with one death, there is insurance, but higher tier stuff cost more money. DEVs will for sure slip in micro-transactions at some point, where you have to pay real money in order to buy insurance. But people have already bought the game, investing from 35€ to 100€ for this? Plus it will not have a standalone SinglePlayer experience? This will kill the game soon after release. EA would be proud.

Good SinglePlayer is and will be the most important part of video games, if this game with HUGE potential for SinglePlayer experience would cut it out. At current roadmap, this has micro-transactions written all over it. There is no bright future for EFT. 

 

This game has never had a single player mode, and it will not have it.
People smoke too much or have been cheated too many times in life is sad but that's it ... if you pay the most expensive version is because you want to help in the development, you will not win anyone for that and less if you are a noob.
Leave the game and leave us alone with your pay2win nonsense and stop inventing nonsense, no microtransactions in this game
What a nightmare is the people ...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 4 Minuten schrieb adr666:

This game has never had a single player mode, and it will not have it.
People smoke too much or have been cheated too many times in life is sad but that's it ... if you pay the most expensive version is because you want to help in the development, you will not win anyone for that and less if you are a noob.
Leave the game and leave us alone with your pay2win nonsense and stop inventing nonsense, no microtransactions in this game
What a nightmare is the people ...

 

sry man but EOD is p2w.....only cosmetic products are not p2w....so simple is that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, FoxFort said:

The PVE (which is even now in a good state) should exists, so that you can enjoy that survival element, loot stuff, gear up, relax, hoard stuff, then you can choose to take that stuff with you into online match. That means that people would enjoy and grind through PVE and "gamble it" in online match. PVE is local only so no servers are affected, just servers for PVP (cheaper maintance of game)  So you go in, maybe you lose all of your stuff, then just go play PVE until you gear up again. That way when a new player buys the game, he can grind like everyone else in PVE and then when he is confident enough, try luck in PVP. This makes game really fair. Possiblites to make PVP a next logical steps are numerus, in order to encourage to go into PVP from PVE.

The lack of all of the above is exactly why I bought Tarkov. Currently and historically, I almost exclusively play shooters. And I've been playing long enough that the scripted single-player experiences that they provide are usually boring because the vast majority of AI, level design, and pacing are horribly easy to predict (whether or not they're actually easy), and sandbox games, despite allowing somewhat more player-driven decision making, tend to hamstring any freedom of action by shallow and/or restrictive procedurally generated missions.

Assuming other people get to this point as well, there's a whole community of FPS players to whom the gameplay mechanics are critical, but the core factor that makes the gameplay engaging is human involvement, if for no other reason than it's so unpredictable.

Most games either exclusively focus on PvE content with (mostly) well-developed game mechanics (STALKER, Wildlands, Far Cry) or PVP-only with bare bones systems in place, maybe with one or two gimmicks (PUBG, RB6 Siege). By extension, the vast majority of the development effort that goes into PvE games is only worth the time it takes until the mechanics are figured out and PVP-only titles are shallow cesspools of e-peen waving because you've memorized all of the maps, found the (usually singular) useful chokepoint on them, and the total lack of mechanical depth prevents any kind of interesting problem solving.

Most games try to extend the level of interest by arbitrarily scaling weapons/abilities/characters into tiers. Instead, we end up usually using the starting equipment or maybe the first set of unlocks, because we don't need or want someone holding our hand and giving us arbitrarily better gear or character power creep - it doesn't make the game any more interesting.

Tarkov is incredibly exciting and unique because it is one of the very, very few titles to be built with players like me forefront in the developers' minds. Yes, they totally could add a dedicated PvE lane, or cater more heavily to solo players, etc. But there's a solid chunk of us who would see that as flat-out wasted time, and will silently cheer every time they ignore pure PvE to focus on PvP.

  • Sad 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, adr666 said:

This game has never had a single player mode, and it will not have it.
People smoke too much or have been cheated too many times in life is sad but that's it ... if you pay the most expensive version is because you want to help in the development, you will not win anyone for that and less if you are a noob.
Leave the game and leave us alone with your pay2win nonsense and stop inventing nonsense, no microtransactions in this game
What a nightmare is the people ...

 

Aren't you a salty one. A standard practice in recent years are microtransactions, starting from indie developers to AAA ones. Server maintance costs a lot. So PVP only orianted games means that costs will be increasing over the time, the bigger the player base the bigger the costs. So that is why, the devs can freely decide to introduce it. Plans change in favour of bills not in favour of wishes.

Ofcourse it's not a defenetly. The RO2 Vietnam has no microtransactions, PVP only game, devs are firmly against it. But also they said that if needed they might include it due to maintance costs.

Bacl to PVE, that is mine wish, as I see a lot of potential, and "place holder" for it is already here. When will 2028 happen? Perhaps not before EFT is finished. And EFT is still early in development. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, FoxFort said:

Aren't you a salty one. A standard practice in recent years are microtransactions, starting from indie developers to AAA ones. Server maintance costs a lot. So PVP only orianted games means that costs will be increasing over the time, the bigger the player base the bigger the costs. So that is why, the devs can freely decide to introduce it. Plans change in favour of bills not in favour of wishes.

Ofcourse it's not a defenetly. The RO2 Vietnam has no microtransactions, PVP only game, devs are firmly against it. But also they said that if needed they might include it due to maintance costs.

Currently, BSG went for a package system (Standard to EOD) to help with this. Microtransactions are not needed because of it. So many people complain about EOD, but i would rather have EOD than microtransactions. Thats what you need to ask yourself.

PVE was confirmed as a test feature, it will not stay in the game. Other than that, BSG is working hard on core features such as quests, maps, skills, rewards, karma......... Let them finish the main ones and i' m sure you' ll get all the answers you are looking for. It' s to early to think of that in EFT :)

Edited by PIG-Mathieu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×