How to keep players playing in multiplayer games at an efficient cost

  • Droper666
    Master
    Insider

    PVE game
    More and more powerful things to attain through pve you do not even have to change its appears much and people will still value it. Cosmetics are inefficient cost wise as they are subjectively interesting as they do not provide any real benefit to the players. The exception was the new Athena sails that have holes making it somewhat advantageous to use.

    PVE players are probably the most expensive to keep happy as you have to keep producing content for them to consume. The game is all about consuming content for them rather than competing with others at a core game like pvp.

    PVP
    Just killing people for the sake of killing them without stats or some way to measure your success relative to your peers is uninteresting after the novelty of the game play wears off. Most games that are very successful have clear winners and losers along with a ladder to track your progress relative to other players. These games are very cost efficient for example chess and elo. Very inexpensive to implement but millions play it with literally no content updates required. To me chess is one of the most cost efficient games ever created.

    Sea of Theives is a strange title in that it is a pvp game trying to be a pve game.I say it is a pvp game because if we used its ruleset in any mmo it would be considered a pvp server. Sure you can make friends with everyone but at its core it is a semi hardcore pvp game. It is not hardcore because you cannot steal players existing assets only newly acquired ones. It also has about as many quests and pve activities as leveling from 1 to level 10 in world of warcraft for just one faction.

    The developers to me are continually making the mistake of listening to the pve players. They are blackhole budget wise, they consume content quickly and they want more and more things to consume , only satisfied briefly and then leave to maybe come back if they haven't found a new shiny carrot to chase. The only way to really keep these players for longer periods cost effectively is to have the grind for power items that give advantages so that they can grind for even more powerful items faster.

    I think the best way to make this game survive in the longer term and keep players paying and subscribing is to add competitive systems to this game. I know the pve players wont like it, but I do not see them focusing on this game having power item farming or endless supply of funds for lets face it very quickly consumed content patches. I will added these patches so far incentivise players come back to get meaningless cosmetics at the price of playing a hit and miss pve content with fewer and fewer player returning every time.

    Players need progression as much as they need to create great stories in this game. In most cases the reason those great stories happen is because they were trying to progress in something that would give them an advantage. This game allows you to progress every 5 levels allowing you to farm better and better loot. This is not enough though as the content is just too sparse and creating the amount of content needed to will take several years and by then everyone will be pl already and some tiny player base still playing this game will be the only beneficiaries of this work. Competitive progression games amongst players in pve and pvp is to me what would serve this game better. Players compete for standings and get rewarded for reaching a certain standing is a great way to keep players playing while not having pump out more and more content for them in such a forced way.

  • Ingresa para responder
    14
    Publicaciones
    9.8k
    Visitas
  • SquaZ05
    Captain
    Founder

    @personalc0ffee said in How to keep players playing in multiplayer games at an efficient cost:

    @droper666 No, SoT is a shared world game or a PvPvE game. It is neither one nor the other. Get it correct.

    that's the thing...
    It's both a PVP and a PVE game, however if you look at the development of the DLCs and Features you notice that the push is towards PvE content. What was the last thing that was added to PvP... Features? Rewards?

    PvE has changed since the launch of the game, yet PvP just remains the same, just in different places at different times.

    If this was truely a PvPvE game, then New content should also be PvP oriented and PvE oriented.

    as it stands they add neww PvE content and features and PvP is just (you can do it while doing the new PvE events if you want)

  • SquaZ05
    Captain
    Founder

    @personalc0ffee nah, i quit playing months ago... I'm just here for the salt and possible hopes that they get their act together and fix the game, (but looking at the upcoming events i'm coming back less and less on these forums)

  • Admiral RRRSole

    @droper666 said

    Sea of Theives is a strange title in that it is a pvp game trying to be a pve game.I say it is a pvp game because if we used its ruleset in any mmo it would be considered a pvp server. Sure you can make friends with everyone but at its core it is a semi hardcore pvp game.

    No offense mate, but..
    Oh dear, another one. :/
    The entire game is created around PvE. Absolutely EVERYTHING is used in PvE, from it's maps to the bloody snakes, from NPC voyages to freaking shovels.
    Sure, weapons and ships can be used in PvP but that hardly makes it "a pvp game trying to be a pve game".

    The ONLY thing strictly PvP are the mindset of some players.

    Take a good hard look at everything Rare has created in this game, all of that time and effort, then you honestly expect anyone to believe that it wasn't originally intended to be a PvE game? I'm certain that the PvP part just happened along some time later like a happy coincidence.

    Haven't you noticed how all of these events are attempts to draw more peace between crews? Working together to defeat the megalodon in the Hungering Deep, working together to achieve all of the silly highchair commendations and now working together in a deliberately staged alliance mechanic to defeat skeleton ships, again to get commendations exclusive to server friendly players.

    I agree that it's low in substance but all of that content is still centered around PvE.
    The game was rushed out of the door and onto the shelves at least a year too soon and we have Micro$oft to thank for that.

    But still, all of their updates are focused on co-op crews working together. This is not strictly a PvP game, it never was and by the direction it's going it may never be.

    Don't be too surprised if PvP is phased out completely. They were aware that Merrick's megalodon event lessened PvP activity by 50% yet they continued down that same path, even created the alliance system. If PvP was ever their goal they wouldn't have taken such a gamble.

  • ENF0RCER
    Captain
    Insider
    Founder

    @Droper666 I agree with your analysis, cost over content is a major achilles heel in this game. With no real end game or outline hook this game will struggle in keeping it's core player base. It may try to over come this by trying to widen it's base to everybody like fortnight. The issue here that seems to be the most devisive is the role of PvP in this game. It's seem there are a few adiment players who want this to be mostly a PvE game with a small PvP element and another group who want the exact oppsite. I alway felt it needs to have a balanced mixture of both. When this game launch both elements were under developed. Now mostly the PvE elements were improved. Still the PvP while slightly better then luanch still has glaring flaws but when these are address there are player that feel this would harm PvE and i find that rediculas as PvP is very easily avoidable in most cases. It's completly opportunistic style. Now some want a PvP arena which is already facilitated by the forts and soon skelly ships. Why not have designated zones at certian times for just PvP Duels? People keep arguing that the loot you get from the ship is the reward, its not. While it's nice it does'nt serve that function as the point of loot is to earn gold, which is insuffient way to earn gold to buy cosmetics which is the real reward. Cosmtics, commandations and titles are the real reward as they are there to show off your accomplishment as proof and serve as pieces in your story. None of the them do this and thats the key progression/hook in the game. So the question is what kind of PvP progression will the community accept. They said no to leader boards, no to ranks, no to bounties and no to cosmetics. I don't know what else is left. I'm sure come tomorrow there's going to be a big stink on the forum of the Cure Crew event for daring to give commendations for PvP.

  • UrihamRayne
    Legend
    Insider
    Founder

    An arbitrary +1 on a sword is not good game design for progression in a multiplayer game with an emphasis on player interaction/combat, yet this is basically your suggestion. From my understanding you consider that the game should cater more to pvp players by giving them better tools than everyone else as they progress through levels, and that would solve the game's inherent content problems? Is this a prank?

    No, the design of this game is absolutely in conflic with that concept of power creep, you simply cannot expect a healthy pvp environment where players have inconsistent battles dependant on numerical advantagess coming from their tools. The game already struggless with balance problems with crossplay, it also has the unfortunate reality of uneven crews fighting one another, adding an arbitrary "progression" will only exorbitate the tenuous "balance" we have here.

    The correct way of working on the content roadmap for SoT is by developing an engaging gameplay experience that accompanies the player in his journey from 0 to legend, by giving the player a good variety of activities to partake in, perhaps even allowing the player to gain access to different new things to do the more he progresses through the ranks. Instead of a boring boost to some atribute, the player himself feels more experienced and more capable than he was before, knowing tricks, world events, locations, landmarks, combat tactics... in short actual organic progression, and the variety in activities will keep them playing to see what more they can unlock once they become legends, which is also something that can come with its own miriad of new things to do and partake in, while all that happens PVP will occour, therefore the game should be building in new tools for players to experiment in combat so that every new encounter feels fresh due to a different strategy/approach/conflic/interest and so on.

    It'ss not about catering to pvp or pve, its about building a game that has a strong foundation and on top of that foundation a deep gameplay experience that is unique to it, to make a memorable mark in the sandbox genre, a Rare game.

  • ENF0RCER
    Captain
    Insider
    Founder

    @admiral-rrrsole So you belive that pvp was never meant to be in this game. Thats interesting as i rembered clearly being marketed as a PvEvP game from the start. I must of missed something. So when excatly do you belived they added PvP in? If this indeed is the case then we do have a case of false advertising. I don't belive this to be thr case thou.

  • ENF0RCER
    Captain
    Insider
    Founder

    @urihamrayne I don't think @Droper666 was talking about characters stats for PvP. I think he was refering to player stats you know like the what the commedations do. He is right that some PvE'er want character progression to keep them intereated cause it fulfills the power fantisy and feeling of accomplishment which most PvE games cater to, while there is no such progression in PvP but were not talking about power creep for this element which would be cosmetics based only but is instead given to PvE grind. There no way to measure skill in this game in a game thats skill based. Every encounter with a enermy crew is a clean slate. Your rep means nothing to another player accept what quest that they can give you. There is know sense of accomplishment if the grind is just a representation of how much time you put in. Not what challenging feats you accomplished. Also theres no way of making your mark in this game without going to 3rd party sources like mixer/YouTube, Reddit etc...

  • Stundorn
    Castaway
    Insider
    Founder

    Just to say.
    I hate any progression and i love SoT because it is like it is, only horizontal progression about cosmetics.
    Change it and i'll instantly leave.
    The other thing is pvp 's purpose is to create some tension in every (pve) situation and to maybe make the life on the seas a dangerous life.
    This game is about playing a game and not gaming the system.

  • BlatantWalk4260
    Castaway

    Op is already miss informed as to what this game is when he states this game is a pvp game trying to be a pve game. The game is a pvevp game where it combines both elements to form a game. This game is design more for social and community activities and the chance that players may or maynot blow each other to pieces.

  • BlatantWalk4260
    Castaway

    @admiral-rrrsole reapers mark is suppose to revitalize that some

  • BlatantWalk4260
    Castaway

    @squaz05 actually the alliance system opened up for things like team battles and such how pvp plays out is up to the people in the session

  • SquaZ05
    Captain
    Founder

    @blatantwalk4260 said in How to keep players playing in multiplayer games at an efficient cost:

    @squaz05 actually the alliance system opened up for things like team battles and such how pvp plays out is up to the people in the session

    and what did the alliance system end up actually doing?

    people started creating alliance servers to power level to Pirate Legend

    Also Alliances were created to team up to do the PVE events. the PvP was a happy side effect.

  • John Hatter
    Marauder

    I think the trick with PVP based content is it would be hard to implement without throwing off the balance. It is easy in an MMORPG scenario when you can just cut off part of the world and say "pvp here" or instanced arenas, etc. With SoT the PVE and PVP share the same space by design. Even open world PVP back when it was the hip thing in World of Warcraft had to have checks and balances via town guards, guild intervention or in severe cases GM intervention. These things were used to protect the PVE element enough to be 'healthy'(success of said elements is debatable but irrelevant for this conversation).

    While I am sure the approach does not satisfy the diehard PVPer I think they are doing well with how they are tackling it. By not adding straight up PVP content to tip the scales and adding more oppurtunity to PVP through neutral use features I think the game holds to the balance well enough. People approaching you for an alliance can just mean the targets come to you. The new flag (one of these days I'll commit to what its called) will open various opportunities for PVP mischief. Even events/content while viewable as PVE focused are increased PVP opportunities. Anything designed to bring us together is also designed with the betrayal in mind.

    I think we get stuck on labeling. I feel like this game just 'is'. PVP and PVE at the end of the day are just features/mechanics. It's not that they are adding PVE features but that they are adding neutral tools and features that we instinctively label PVE when we can just as easily think outside the box and use it as a PVP tool. Alliance betrayals being the easiest example.

Ingresa para responder
14
Publicaciones
9.8k
Visitas
1 de 14