I see a good bit of PVP discussion...
...is there any chance that PVP fighting is real time head to head? Typically in these games they never are due to connection, server restrictions etc. I see some comments where it implies that PVP will be an active head to head fight which imo is unlikely as hell.
Answers
I am unaware of any major $$$ games that do AR successfully - that didn't stop them.
Also, I am not sure why it will be 'impossible'.
If it is turn based then I won't even bother with PvP. I know the diehard Pokemon fans say 'but that is the way it has always been'...but that isn't enough of a reason not to adapt and improve.
Fwiw I'm not disagreeing with anyone. I want true head to head. But I've played other games like this and in the scale of Go it just doesn't happen. Doing AR is not comparable in terms of power in comparison to active host server real time PVP. It wouldn't just be huge it would be going to the moon versus going to mars. Both seem similar but are not even close in current tech as far as I know. I'm hoping someone with more in depth knowledge can chime in
And how does that happen? If we are connected by a cord or something maybe but blue tooth isn't passing that info fast enough to work plus folks driving around panel vans with Pikachu painted on the side would make that creepy anyway. Maybe 1% of players would even bother.
To simplify, the "battle" is a TON of real time info to exchange. Without a server how do you propose it happen?
The panel van scenario is also valid for trading...even valid for the game as it stands now.
My point about AR is that although no one had ever done it before, didn't mean that it can't be done...even though many thought it couldn't be done yet.
As for this 'massive amount of data' from battle - registering a press or a swipe doesn't take 'massive amounts of data'
I am not here to solve their dev difficulties, and anything I say can only be a guess.
With that said, I am not sure why you continue to say that it won't work - apart from claiming an app is like space travel.
First off, I've read this site for a long time and I really appreciate your comments. They are some of the best, most thought out, and reasonable responses to be found. Thank you for that.
My thoughts, as they are, are in regards to not only their dev abilities but those abilities within every huge money game that tried at real time PVP but never did it. It sure as hell isnt because they tried not to it was because it was impossible. You said "why use the sever" above and the answer is that's the only way for it to happen outside of a cord connection or a Bluetooth type connection. Outside of that if wifi spots (sponsored maybe) were battle spots that could work although the sever load would still be enormous.
The only thing I'm trying to say is that lots of games with tons of money wanted real time PVP and to my knowledge (which may be limited) not a single one did it. If real time isn't possible I think we have some real options that could make the game worlds better even if it isn't the true head to head both you and I dwsh could/would happen.
My main reason for saying it's unlikely is that other games with similar or more money on the line wanted to do it but couldn't. For obvious technical reasons that are really tough to overcome.
Thanks for the compliment...sometimes I think I ramble, so it is nice to hear.
I enjoy a good robust discussion, and the best ones are where I am made to rethink everything I think I know, because I get shot down...or make me think of other factors.
Lots of other games have/want a far more complex battle system than 'press' 'hold' or 'swipe'...so they have that in their favour.
For fear of contradicting myself, I would do it as a 'turn based', but in a manner where each players turn is .5-.8 of a second - and you have a chance to miss your turn, so not guaranteed your turn - meaning the opponent doesn't need to wait for you to have your turn before going again.
To the naked eye, you would not see it as turn based - instead it would appear as a real time fight.
I chose .5 seconds, as no move is faster than that, but you would need 'reaction time' so expanding that to .8 would give that.
Sure, there would be an issue with lag and this can effect the outcome - but this is no different to any other game online. (eg the amount of times I have died in Counter Strike to an inferior opponent due to lag is huge)
I don't think it is as impossible now as it has been in the past. We have more bandwidth and more processing power on a phone that we used to have on a desktop when the original FPS games were released.
I think the tech around today is capable of it, more than ever before in the past.
That seems reasonable. It would mitigate the real time aspect needed for fights to happen as they do in gyms.
That said games like Counter strike won't let you play if your connection isn't grade A. We are talking folks out on cell connections. Waaaaay poorer unless we make the battles from home or on wifi. Which is what I'm kind of getting at. I think folks hear PVP is coming and think they'll just wander around and fight on cell service wherever. I'm trying to figure out how this might play out in reality while hoping it's all that we all wish for.
The original Counter Strike was played on PentiumII 266, with 256Mb of RAM, and a dial up connection...and that was if you had the best around at the time.
These were single core processors, and SD RAM.
This is far lower spec than any phone or any data plan on the market today. If developers can't work with the massively improved processor,RAM and bandwidth specs we have available on phones today then they just don't make devs the way they used to.
Haha I'll go ahead and agree they don't make devs as creative as they used to for part of it.
I'll also say that while I don't really care about spoofers/botters in general as they effect me in this instance I think they would sink servers even in just returned info by having accounts fake battle 24/7. We talk about botters and spoofers too much in terms of how they impact us and the game in general but they could pose the real blocks to PVP as we want it for this reason.
I would suggest the real drain on servers is the millions of accounts used to run trackers and maps.
Sure, the spoofers are the greatest effect on players, who play the game legit - but the sheer volume of accounts used for trackers is what will be putting a strain on the system.
Sure, the spoofers affect players, but the trackers put a strain on the expensive resources.
I believe that this is why Niantic are concentrating on the trackers more than spoofers.
Sure, from a players perspective the spoofers are worse - but from a resource perspective, trackers and even 3rd party apps that allow people to log in multiple times is a greater strain on the system.
We wonder why Niantic is concentrating on the trackers and 3rd party apps over spoofers - but this is where the real strain on the system comes from. Niantic can make servers more responsive, and less expensive for them faster, by reducing the number of accounts utilising the resources - from a resource perspective, spoofers are not as bad as trackers.
We think spoofers are worse for the game - but Niantic think trackers and 3rd party apps are worse for their servers.
...but now we are off topic.
I haven't taken this into consideration. If so, how would you suggest charge moves work? It would be pretty 'dry' (in my opinion) where it is turn-based yet pokemon are restricted to their fast attack (and after using it for X many turns, have access to their charge move). I can't imagine Niantic implementing some change that causes pokemon to gain additional moves (i.e. have, say, 4 moves instead of the current 2-move system).
I do see the point that is made where connection will ultimately restrict battles, maybe to the point of unplayable, but I think having a swipe-based or a real-time based system put in place is so much more likely.
If they were to add moves, imagine the outrage: you've invested so much time (and for some players, money) into pokemon that you deem are the best. And then additional moves are introduced. Would it be random roles? Would that legacy maxed-out snorlax you have acquire a random move of ones that are possible? If that were to happen to me, I would become emotionally engaged and perhaps go cold turkey at pokemon go.
I'm open to suggestions, but I just can't see the current battle mechanics changing over to those that are turn-based. You mention a very good point about companies with successful games and how they have been successful from having a turn-based style. But I can't see how this game could TRANSFORM without damaging itself in the process.
The current battle system does not reflect that of the main series, where typing multipliers played a HUGE role, whereas now they do not.
In the main series, SE and NVE had multipliers of 2x and .5x and STAB had 1.5x. In Go, SE and NVE have multipliers of 1.25x and .8x, BUT STAB HAS A 1.25x bonus.
This creates an advantage where pokemon with STAB moves might as well run the STAB move over the non-stab move. As well, the differences in typings aren't nearly as drastic.
Right now, dragonite ONLY eats a 1.95x STAB'd ice attack, where as in the main series, it would eat a 6x STAB'd ice attack. If typing and STAB bonuses were altered (at least for PvP),
I argue that it would both
1. Water down the effectiveness of mons that can be seen as unbalanced in the current gym system, and..
2. Widen the skill gap between players, such that players that are aware of typing dis/advantages are rewarded.
This way, a player that runs a team of Dragonite, Tyranitar, Blissey, Gyarados, Rhydon, and Vaporeon will not have a drastic advantage over another squad, due to the exposed weaknesses of these powerhouses.
The main series have four movesets. Certain pokemons had Total immunity against Cerrtain attacks. and loads of special moves like perish song, mean look, mirror coat etc
IF you got a wobba with mirror coat in the olden days you could take down a couple of pure dragon moves dragonite...
So please. Dont tell me we players above lvl 30 have an Hugh advantage.
Or do you remember Kingdra with toxic+rest move?
You could counter strpnger pokemons using your brain while now is more or less blasting yourself through.
I am completely aware of the moves available, I frequent Pokemon Showdown.
And i'm not saying players above level 30 have a huge advantage. I am providing a counter argument to your (very true) statement that current system is not balanced, as pokemon with higher base stats tend to have a significant advantage due to a lack of multipliers that resemble those of the main series.
And my swords dance dragonite with outrage could stop that mirror coat dilemma ;)
I just think the current battle system will not be able to freshly transfer over to a turn-based one; I believe that the lack of special attack and special defense stats creates a one-dimensional aspect. I also think a lack of movepool for each mon adds to a perceived 'single-dimensional' aspect about Go
Soooo...I'm going to go out on a very firm limb and say real time PVP won't happen at least not in initial "PVP". My idea for it is two fold. First, it would be nice if all players with a 6 month plus account and over level 30 could set up their own "pokestop/gym". Now this would not function like a typical stop but as a place someone could train or fight against what you place in server reported fights after results just like they do now. Also I would make all current pokestops a place where you could place or fight 50 or so random pokes. When you find one you could choose to fight a random poke in it. When you chose it it would tell you the level of the trainer and the type of Pokémon but nothing else and let you choose what yo attack it with. For even more fun all defenders could get a random buff before each fight like +20% off. Or def or HP. All players could place 25ish defenders anywhere but your home spot would dictate Ability to stay so with a limit of say 50 the Poke with the furthest home base is kicked. This would give folks a huge reason to farm and use potions instead of throwing them away.
Just typing as I think
I like the idea, but I wouldn't this be classified as something other than player versus player?
I acknowledge your argument that implementing a real-time style'd fight will have many obstacles to overcome (e.g. the server dilemma) and that it may not be feasible at this moment.
I just don't see how the current system now, one where pokemon get access to two moves, can transition into a different form of PvP, such as the aforementioned turn-base one.
Which would be more difficult for Niantic to 'solve':
- Finding a solution to providing something that can host real-time battles, or
- Finding a solution to transitioning current pokemon into a format where they can face each other without the need for a real-time battle (i.e. turn based?)
That's where i'm coming from. I like the idea especially the one with lv30+ players getting their own gyms and stops, but I don't think it's the solution that will satisfy some players' cravings (such as myself) for a PvP system where it quantifies who wins and who doesn't win.
Good stuff here. Agree, agree, agree.
Fwiw it's what passes as "PVP" in games like MCOC and such since real life PVP is so far hard to do on scale.
That said wouldn't it be nice to mix both? Limited real time PVP when in Bluetooth range (if that's possible) with a semi PVP as I described above? It's worth noting how good that would be for rural players who could make runs and place over a wide area and expect their work to stick for a minute unlike the current system.
