Why Don't More Games Have Invasions? | Elden Ring PVP

[@blacktootherson]

I’m very much a mid tier souls player but I always thought invasions were awesome even when dying brutally.

[@Kurai_69420]

Unironically, I think as the last patches set in, something similar to what happened in AC6 will happen to Elden Ring, that being a huge part of the pvp playerbase leaving because none of the core issues are ever gonna be fixed. I expect a huge resurgence in the pvp for Dark Souls 3 and maybe even 2 in the coming months.

[@deepism]

Elden Ring has only been able to retain about 3% of its post-launch playerbase, versus Dark Souls 3 which retained 16%, over the same amount of time Elden Ring has been out up to this point (two years). That's a 433.3% difference. I think you might be right about players returning to DS3 for the better multiplayer experience.

[@Dr.Vinheim]

I went back to ds12 and 3, currently making a few twink builds on ds2

[@OnaxcliiFreiheit]

I want to be optimistic and say that if, for what ever reason, FROM no longer includes invasions, then another studio will. Bottom line is, no one likes having their power fantasy destroyed after coming home from a soul-crushing job by another player giving them a reality check--that "you will always appear to be strong in isolation" It's for this reason that most studios would wisely stay away from the mechanic as a whole, unfortunately. The broader audience is hard pressed to participate in PVP if there's nothing in it for them. As I said before, Covenant rewards--both for PVP and PVE would mildly influence players to at least TRY PVP

[@ismaellucas960]

Wow, what a great achievement you have managed to waste many hours of your life in Elden Ring PVP. I congratulate you. I hope you do not regret doing something more productive with your time and your life. 😂

[@ismaellucas960]

Do these people in the comments have no brain cells or what? Haha You talk as if being good at Elden Ring PVP is as important as eating or going to sleep or even as important as going to work or doing academic studies.

[@ismaellucas960]

It seems like the only thing you have in your life is your ability to defeat players who are new to the game. I hope you don't regret doing something more productive with all that wasted time in the future.

[@brad2400]

Tbh...if from stops adding in the invasion mechanic ill never play another one of their games...i hate pvp but i dont want to fight the same handful of bosses a hundred times invaders are a necessity to keep things interesting.

[@alessandrobaggi6129]

@ismaellucas960 You are dense like a brick: would you like a great influx of clueless and non-passionate new players in your favorite game that whine until the nature of the game gets changed? Change game if you don't like invasions, don't change how OUR games work... 🤬

[@moonlighthorchata]

Resident Evil 6 has invasions. It's called Agent Hunt. Two people can invade someone's campaign as long as the host has it turned on. You can spawn as most zombies/BOWs depending on the level it is. Controls were a bit wonky as a zombie but kills were so satisfying and fun. I felt bad for this person in the graveyard level I kept invading, spawning as the dog and ripping the hosts throat out. If you lunge at the player with a certain attack you both button mash to either remove infected or infected doing tons of damage. I wish Doom Eternal did this with the special demons in campaign. Let players invade someone's campaign as a demon and if the host wins they get armor, health, ammo, customized special armor for certain amount killed and other rewards. Same with demons for killing the host

[@spacedoohicky]

I must add that you can invade solo hosts in LotF. So you're more likely to invade simply because you can invade anyone at any time. The world is seamless so you can invade right after players have finished a boss fight. There is only rest in the hub area. Otherwise if a player is logged in, and anywhere else they can be invaded.

[@dingdong6563]

Image having a pvp game with 0 skill based match making. This is probably why. People hate losing and having no chance just because they are new and inexperienced with pvp. This is why I think ds2 and ds3 got invasions right. The games include different ways to approach and interact with pvp. This is by either constantly using resources to remove the ability to be invaded for a short time, to essentially try hiding from invaders' radars(dark souls 2)(while also having the most balanced pvp experience) Or by increasing the number of invaders that can pile up while also giving you a reason to activate invasions in pve(dark souls 3). Dark souls 1 simply makes getting invaded feel intense and scary. The gravelording and the forest covenant make the experience of the game more disheartening(very thematic). Invasions, in another sense, are simply a bad design if not used thematically or are used to make the player think before using that humanity/ember. In ds2's case tho, it's used to either conceal yourself or restore your max hp to aid in exploration or hiding one's self from the scary red man.

[@arsenii_yavorskyi]

LotF has low player count because most of the players aren't on PC, they're on PS5, but thanks to crossplay it's not a problem.

[@vince_9643]

Anyone remember when DOOM eternal was going to have invasions? It’s a shame they never actually implemented that it would’ve been pretty cool

[@brad2400]

Frankly im probably one of those people that hate being invaded i despise pvp however i recognize that its an irreplaceable part of the experience and so i willingly participate and usually have fun doing so if im trying to coop and get summoned into the weird pvp area at first step ill stay until i die it is what it is its a minor inconvenience at worst and a fun time at best

[@Panurome]

Because the devs of other games would be scared of the backlash of adding invasions which might make some people not buy the game, which isn't really an issue with fromsoft games because people are going to buy their game regardless

[@TheTraveler980]

In this day and age? Friction in gaming is less appealing to gamers than ever before, so I would not think so. Elden Ring makes the friction in PvP the weakest in exchange for PvE being stronger, especially since other players and tools allow them to avoid conventional means of victory.

[@ismaellucas960]

Elden ring got its game of the year award for its pve not its pvp and i'm sure it would have gotten it without invasions anyway and i'm sure if it didn't have invaders the game would still be a financial success for fromsoftware, PVP is simply not necessary PVP could be removed from these games and they would still be a huge success with their PVE

[@alessandrobaggi6129]

@ismaellucas960 Why do you want to change a thing you don't like from the start? Go away, find other games. Or play offline... Ah, yes: no hand-holding offline... 😏

[@TheTraveler980]

@@alessandrobaggi6129 That's really the debate. Players want help without compromise in games like this.

[@ShadowNemesis575]

Simply because not everyone likes an invasion system so it probably won't bring in many new players and if its implementation is bad it will simply drive away a chunk of your core fanbase as well as making a proper invasion system would require a game studio to put in genuine effort into good connections between players which most studios are not willing to do. Look at series like DMC and Dragons Dogma: people have been BEGGING for them to have a proper multi-player (that isn't just a tower mode in DMCs case) yet they couldn't be asked to do that so they aren't gonna do an invasion system and they are passionate about their games. Even in Fromsoft's games you can't get majority of the fanbase onboard with invasions to the point where people will hack, disconnect, and download mods specifically to not have to deal with invasions while interacting with the mechanics that usually forces invasions. When that is the case it will take a very loud and convincing voice in a studio to get them to try invasions. Again Fromsoft are well known in part for invasions but EVEN THEY BARELY focus on the pvp in their games, let alone invasions. Invasions CAN appeal to a lot of players but it very heavily depends on how well it is implemented, what are the parameters for being invaded, and what you get out of it on both sides being invaded and invading.

[@psycbn]

It's crazy to think people thought the dlc would fix anything when we are still using p2p connection near 16 whole years after the first entry, which honestly is the biggest detriment to most of the games

[@mojolotz]

Because they're not good pvp game design for the general public. They are slow to start up, inherently unfair, Have no worthwile reward system and are not matchmade (so they're even more unbalanced). All that is what makes invasion fans love invasions but it's a VERY rare breed lemme tell ya.

[@OrangeWaterLemons]

Deathloop, sniper elite 5 (and also the new one whenever that drops), metal gear solid V, and Watch Dogs 1/2 all have some form of ‘invasion’/asymmetrical PvP. All completely different vibes from a FromSoft game but still good fun. Would be interesting to see a video comparing the experience to souls invading if you ever give them a shot.

[@everettdaly5621]

I like invasions. I'll be real with you though; the question in the title sucks. Everyone knows why there aren't more games with invasions, and you walk over the answer several times very early in your video. If there's no one to invade, there aren't any invasions. The real question you should be asking is "why don't players like invasions?" because that's the same question the developers have to struggle with. Invasions are fun, but they're anti-immersive. I don't feel like I'm in Limgrave when I get invaded in Limgrave. I look at the invader's face, his toolkit, and I feel like I'm on the internet. It's very difficult to replicate that "my first invader in Sen's Fortress" feeling and there's basically no reason to BE an invader until your build is complete, i.e. your PvE run is done. It isn't properly integrated into the game.

[@notchbeard9007]

Pretty obvious why, its non-consensual pvp, not many people enjoy that.

[@alessandrobaggi6129]

Then find another game, don't ruin the formula for who's already there enjoying it. 😤

[@Wyrdist]

@@alessandrobaggi6129 “don’t ruin it” bruh FS isn’t gonna read his comment and take his advice, the same way he isn’t gonna take your advice

[@Alias0225]

@@alessandrobaggi6129 Or I could simply play offline. Invade my offline world oh wait you cant so I get to enjoy the game how I like.

[@rod99ttett90]

But It's consensual pvp, you have to activate it yourself

[@Wyrdist]

@@rod99ttett90 people will say this, but won’t say the same thing about how getting ganked and completely getting obliterated in a 3v1 is a part of invasions

[@arsenii_yavorskyi]

I like Lords of the Fallen (both of them), and I think the beating it received from the internet was entirely undeserved.

[@rigel9228]

I'm sorry but people who think that souls games are clunky would unironically get an aneurysm if they attempted to play LotF 1

[@Alias0225]

It was really buggy at launch and suffers from a lack of enemy variety. You fight the same enemies for basically the whole game and some are just reskins. Plus the default ending is really lame. I still liked it though.

[@Pp-sr4cs]

Personally, being a casual player, I always play offline, every souls game. When I play, I want to be immersed in the game, have fun and some challengs. I've got nothing against invasions and as a mechanic I love it, but since I am not spending and grinding these games, I am nowhere close to the level of those who do. Almost every single invasion, although somewhat competitive, I lose, and whenever my opponents starts to use meta strats/weapons, it gets annoying. Some stories of those invasions, completed DS1, started new game, had lots of humanity, some guy proceeds to abuse roll catch backstab and do that explosion spell. Or Elden Ring invasions with bloodhounds step, nakagiba's dual wield and other gimmicks. I'd never take out invasions out of these games, it's great that you can disable/enable it yourself.

[@spacedoohicky]

I think generally most devs are normal people who think every player wants to only enjoy a power fantasy being a hero. Someone at Fromsoft is not normal, and wanted to give players the opportunity to be the villain. Not a lot of people consider this since most people think everyone wants to be goody two shoes. Lords of the Fallen is more in depth than first impressions. I would say it's more involved gameplay wise than Elden Ring. The mechanics appear to be designed with PvP in mind. The main PvP "covenant" is a covenant with the central bad guy. Being an invader actually influences how your character evolves, and you get corresponding rewards that are only available to invaders. On the other hand there is a secret malevolence to the game you have to experience yourself. It makes being an invader seem less like the bad guy, and more like an anti-hero. I won't explain more, but this aspect is what makes the game really engaging if you continue towards the last 50% of the game. Also LotF has very good potential build diversity. The builds most people make is sort of homogeneous because well most players are not very creative, but for build nerds the world is your oyster.

[@LyllianaofMirrah]

as others have pointed out DARK SOULS's PvP Was part of the lore and the game. you have a reason why you join certain allegiance. you join darkmoon to invade reds and punish them for killing hosts. you join Aldrich to stop Host from killing Aldrich. you invade and pillage as a red to give humanity to the white spider lady or give tongues to rosaria. and you can be a agent of chaos as a mad spirit. it's all Roleplaying PvP with rewards. ELDEN RING's PvP was optional and nobody expect to play PvP especially people who only heard that the game is huge and can be played with friends and they only use builds for destroying bosses and didn't know there's pvp invasion. but for DARK SOULS PvP Invasions was part of the story and lore. and players already expect and knows about the invaders. as everybody KNOWS ELDEN RING was hyped to be an open world game and you can play it with friends but the people hyping it up didn't tell anyone about invasion or consequences of using finger remedy, thus tons of people complaining about invaders.

[@Tilespawn]

Is this gonna become another Steelovsky reacts video?

[@breakout8904]

Duh

[@makochama0]

I've heard mostly negative things about Lords of the Fallen, but it would be interesting to see what the invasions are like.

[@arsenii_yavorskyi]

negative things such as?

[@rigel9228]

​@@arsenii_yavorskyi I mean, on launch the multiplayer was pretty much comically broken but i think they more or less fixed it by now

[@austin0_bandit05]

Its one of the better souls-likes ive played. Like just a step below Lies of P and Nioh 2. But most importantly it's a good alternative for PvP.

[@maxkraus7063]

nah the pussification of gaming is real, i doubt we wanna see anything similiar in this era. And with ER activily pushing the pussification the others will follow along. watch dogs invasions were fun

[@ianwilliams2632]

bloody hell it's Thursday already?? "So that I will be forged in fire and not so resigned to death" -- you're talking about RSC, but it perfectly applies to Souls, which touched a certain gamer-generation's psychological needs so well that it could only have come out when it did. I feel like it was so specific to an era that is over. More importantly, as we can see from the outcry of normie newcomers to ER in the early days, invasions are considered toxic, cancerous, putrid, borderline internet bullying. Most corporations don't want that reputation. And yes, the authentic From Souls games are just great games, and that's often what's lacking as a baseline today, especially in AAA.

[@deepism]

As somebody who started with Dark Souls: Prepare to Die, I gotta say Elden Ring just cannot hold my attention like the Dark Souls series did. No because Elden Ring is different, but because it doesn't have that multiplayer endgame that previous titles did. My opinion isn't opinion, it's fact, and I say that because I looked up and compared Elden Ring's post-launch player retention versus Dark Souls 3. According to Steam Charts, Elden Ring had almost 1,000,000 players at launch, now that number has reduced to 30,000 (3% retention) as of today. Dark Souls had just shy of 130,000 players at launch, and reduced to just short of 21,000 (16% retention) over the next two years. Dark Souls 3 had 433.3% MORE player retention than Elden Ring has. Albeit overall unsurprising given how little attention Elden Ring gives to multiplayer, this should still be extremely alarming to both Fromsoft and the dedicated Soulsborne community that've stuck with the franchises.

[@CFallescence]

If we're talking about invasion systems in other games Destiny has a gamemode called Gambit that they gave up on because no one liked it because of its shitty balancing. The couple times I played it, it was a blast. Also I hope FS considers adding rollback or something to their games so we dont have to deal with shitternet all the time

[@TheTraveler980]

This may also explain why cooperative games such as Helldivers 2, Monster Hunter Wilds, Deep Rock Galactic, Warhammer Darktide, etc., are on the rise in demand while games such as Concord, some fighting games, and even Call of Duty recently are on the decline. A community is needing a goal to reach with each other, not against each other. Hell, there can be competition in cooperation too, such as who can land the most hits, heal the most damage, inflict the most debuffs, etc. while achieving that same goal together.

[@OrangeWaterLemons]

Fighting games are doing better than they’ve ever done right now, and black ops 6 is getting more praise than any CoD since 2019

[@TheTraveler980]

@OrangeWaterLemons Oh yes, the higher praise must be from how much more tenacious for both installing and starting Bllack Ops 6 is, or what the cash shops in fighting games sell.

[@CFallescence]

Concord and cod were getting thrashed because they're shit (except for bo6 supposedly) no one but people who don't play shooters calls the older cods dogshit

[@zwidowca1]

​@@TheTraveler980in co-op the best you get it coopetition. You don't actually compete, because you want to accomplish a common goal. How much you pull your weight in a coop game is also rather subjective, since builds can replace skill in these games completely.

[@TheTraveler980]

@@zwidowca1 Last game I saw do coopetition was Borderlands 3, too.

[@flucke1000]

Watch dogs has a invasion system ig

[@endofen9107]

I like how Absolver handled pvp-matchmaking.

[@Ironkeep58]

On the point concerning Lords of the Fallen, I have a good amount of Invasions and they are for the most part a good experience(at least for me). I stopped because of the incredible number cheaters but you should give it a try. The PVE is fixes and it is how it should have launched

[@spacedoohicky]

How are they cheating?

[@Ironkeep58]

@ Infinite health, no hitbox, one hit kills and weirdly invisibility

[@spacedoohicky]

@@Ironkeep58 Oh, that's too bad.

[@OnlyWaifuYT]

Because casual gamers don't like it when other gamers beat them.

[@theaveragenormie7151]

No one likes getting pwnd, it's just that casuls get pwnd almost every time unless they get a million advantages handed to them and since they're getting pwnd way more often they're less likely to try and care about PvP.

[@davidsmoke751]

Add another thing Sony's trying to buy from soft if they get their woke hands in any more of our games are souls players are in major trouble

[@dingdong6563]

Image having a pvp game with 0 skill based match making. This is probably why. People hate losing and having no chance just because they are new and inexperienced with pvp. This is why I think ds2 and ds3 got invasions right. The games include different ways to approach and interact with pvp. This is by either constantly using resources to remove the ability to be invaded for a short time, to essentially try hiding from invaders' radars(dark souls 2)(while also having the most balanced pvp experience) Or by increasing the number of invaders that can pile up while also giving you a reason to activate invasions in pve(dark souls 3). Dark souls 1 simply makes getting invaded feel intense and scary. The gravelording and the forest covenant make the experience of the game more disheartening(very thematic). Invasions, in another sense, are simply a bad design if not used thematically or are used to make the player think before using that humanity/ember. In ds2's case tho, it's used to either conceal yourself or restore your max hp to aid in exploration or hiding one's self from the scary red man.

[@ismaellucas960]

You guys got unprecedented egocentrism and arrogance by beating new players who have no chance of winning JUST because you’ve been playing longer and they haven’t… for a reason games that focus on pvp match players by skill like leagues for example the most of the games are never going to put someone with 10,000 hours in the game against someone who has 10 it’s absurd to think that this is fun for the player who has 10 hours bottom line truly serious pvp games are NEVER going to match a DIAMOND LEAGUE player against a BRONZE LEAGUE player it’s just not fun for the bronze leaguer…

[@lykos9836]

​@@ismaellucas960most of those new players give up and kill themselves on their own with a ledge or just stand there.

[@Tarnished_Onryo]

Yea man I've quit invasions and therefore quit making elden ring invasion content. I just dont enjoy it anymore. What a wreck invasions have become

[@emotionaljonxvx]

I feel you, it's been exceptionally rough. I've been considering going back to older games but, even then, it's hard when the community is across the board at something of a low point.

[@Malisteen]

im miserable about the from acquisition news. it'll mean the death of souls altogether. far fro. the worst news ive heard this week, or will hear any given week for the rest of my life i expect, but but a sour patch in the midst of a bitter, bitter field even so.

[@paolo2696]

The only positive I could see from the Sony acquisition is technical investment, maybe FromSoft could switch to the Decima engine. But as a rule, consolidation in any industry is rarely good news. We've seen what's happened to Bungie, and to studios acquired by Microsoft.

[@BloodyInitiate]

I think From’s only success in this is due to the complete lack of competition. They are not strong programmers. Almost every developer I play competitive games from could program it better than From. However it is already extremely hard to balance and program multiplayer games with vast arsenals. From has taken up the gauntlet NOT to create a great PVP experience, but as a bandaid for their own limited programming capabilities in their PVE ambitions. The original purpose of invasions is “we can’t make anything as tough and dangerous as a player.” Therefore their greatest edge is just their willingness to do it + they already make games people are happy to play (providing the population). I think you hit on some of the truth of the quality too, which is that Souls PVP is fueled by what it COULD be, rather than what it is. Even when I played if more heavily in DS2 I did not consider it a final acceptable product. Griefers are a REAL problem too. They are not an easily overlooked or easily ignored problem. “Git Gud” isn’t good enough.

[@casualsatanist5808]

Most games that have some sort of invasion mechanic either make the invader stupidly overpowered, or stupidly underpowered. I have only played ER from fromsoft, but the few invasions that did happen were pretty cool. No idea why you can just kick the invader by entering a fogwall tho?

[@rampant1apart]

Eh, I like pvp where everyone wants to be there.

[@ismaellucas960]

Elden ring got its game of the year award for its pve not its pvp and i'm sure it would have gotten it without invasions anyway and i'm sure if it didn't have invaders the game would still be a financial success for fromsoftware, PVP is simply not necessary PVP could be removed from these games and they would still be a huge success with their PVE

[@brad2400]

They would be a success sure but theyd lose any replayability theres no point fighting the same bosses hundreds of times

[@Wyrdist]

@@brad2400 I know so many people who just replay the game and don’t care about PvP at all

[@Alias0225]

@@brad2400 I replay these games countless times to do exactly that. Also a game doesn't NEED replayability. You can play a game once enjoy it and never play it again. I played and enjoyed Heavy Rain and Beyond two Souls and never touched them again.

[@brad2400]

@@Alias0225 good for you but some people like to play games more than once most of those types of people are souls fans

[@rigel9228]

So, the cool thing about lords of the fallen 2 pvp/multiplayer is actually the fact they tend to listen to the community (and Steelovsky) and that they were very involved in fixing the many issues the game had. Elden Ring could not relate

[@Alias0225]

To answer the title bluntly its because its really damn annoying. Fromsoft were probably aware of the min/max sweats that smash low levels from all the previous games so they made solo invasions optional instead. This is also why the most popular Elden ring mod is Seamless co op with the option to disable invasions. The reason people play games is to experience the core gameplay which for souls games is a single player aspect not the janky netcode invaders who one shot you. I played Mortal Shell and enjoyed it. Had there been some annoying kid trying to hunt me while Im trying to experience the world it would have made for a worse experience. I played Lords of the Fallen and I enjoyed it. The one time I was invaded was from a min/max guy at the beginning of the game so I promptly went offline for the rest of my playthrough. I replay the dark souls trilogy offline because I don't want to fight annoying kids I want to play the actual game. You cant even get invaded in bloodborne unless there is a bell lady which is limited to two areas as a solo host. It shouldn't be surprising that single player type games appeal to players who enjoy a solo experience. They do not favor pvp slop so why do you think they'd care about that tiny aspect of the game? People who play games like For Honor are the ones who would engage in the pvp. Not to mention single player games are designed to be played once. It doesn't need some weird side content to try and prolong its "life span" for 10 years. Play it enjoy it finish it then move on to something else.

[@K40005]

They also made "min max sweats at low level" far more powerful with the stat boosting gear available so that's not it It was 100% because of the exploit on PC that was going around on ds3 before the launch of elden ring

[@Alphadread]

Lords of the fallen has some good ideas in regard to invasions. Wo long fallen dynasty has invasions with some good ideas too, also sniper elite 5 is a different type of game with invasions.I did not click with armored core but seems like the idea would gel well with co-op and invasions. No clue why they decided to handle it the way the did. My feeling is from is trying to move away from pvp on the whole. Id love to see invasions in the Hitman games.

[@ClassXero]

We should irl invasions.

[@Tory-JJ]

I have played every souls game . And a lot of souls like. Lords if the fallen is the best gsmr out of all them. The remake. Not the first one. Aka the one you are talking about probably. It was good. Multiple endings. Lots of weapons. Cool animations. Yep. Solid game.

[@kurenian]

Tbh, I would try invasions if Xbox didn’t lock online access behind a paywall :|

[@Zer0Main43]

1: most people don’t actually like Souls PvP, I mean nobody really likes NPC fights, why would they like actual PvP? In my opinion at least, it’s frustrating, feels unresponsive, latency makes both of those issues worse, and in general just isn’t engaging 2: people (me specifically, but I’m sure this applies to other people) don’t like the randomness it adds to the game, it turns an otherwise mostly consistent experience into one heavily impacted by things completely outside of your control or awareness, that being other people decide to invade, and being matched with you, it’s even worse in DS1 where pretty much anything anyone does while online will impact your game somehow 3: they are just an underbaked mechanic in every game, the only game where I would even consider online in general interesting is DS1 where it was built from the ground up with online interaction in mind, and even then it was riddled with bugs, jank, DS1 balancing, and again, felt more like just randomness than anything

[@ZacharyJNixon]

Jon the Don

[@liamconnelly3115]

I am somewhere between a try hard and a casual souls player. I started invading in bloodborne, but didn't get too into it until ds3. I stay at 60 +6 in ds3 and 80 +16 in ER now. Invasions keep the game alive when the majority of the player base has beaten the game and moved on. Its not perfect, I wish there were covenants in ER like they had in ds3 (did you know you had covenant invasions in bloodborne too?) But ill take what I got with ER. If Sony buys fromsoft out I will be heart broken. But my question to you, yes you reading this comment: if you could change or add anything to an invasion what would it be?

[@videocrowsnest5251]

I wonder how many game developers in general have had at least some experience with pvp? Seems to be an oddly specific issue across the board that pvp game modes or pvp in general gets underbaked/implemented in an ok fashion, and then left in a death spiral due to not getting updates for years on end outside some balancing patches or bug fixes if lucky. Actually adding content to the game mode so ofthen turns into a pipedream of asking for years, but getting nothing to happen. Game devs do get their commands from on higher up, and are not able to decide what they work on on a whim - but I generally do wonder how many have pvp experience or give pvp a go at all. If they can implement a fun game mode, why can't they then offer it content support beyond the balancing tweaks and occasional bug fixes?

[@TonguelessDanny]

A new player should never have to deal with a two thousand hour Timmy on his twink character with 999 consumables. Implement good matchmaking, implement good netcode, implement competent anti-cheat and actively ban cheaters, implement an in-game incentive. The reality of why many people dont enjoy souls invasion is because they are horribly implemented in every way imaginable. There being simply way better and free to play pvp games out there also doesn't help, why would any individual with self respect waste time on souls pvp when they could be playing an actual pvp game? And why would any studio implement invasions into their games when focusing on pure singleplayer or multiplayer is just safer and better.

[@TheAzul_Indigo]

I’ve only seen it, but since you didn’t mention it.. dark and darker?

[@emotionaljonxvx]

So I have tried Dark and Darker because it sounds like it would be exactly up my alley. I found it mechanically terrible but I have a major bias against first person games and anything that doesn't let me natively use a controller. Still, really dissatisfying combat in an otherwise pretty cool, if not very jank, setup.

[@TheAzul_Indigo]

@@emotionaljonxvxfirst person is objectively less cool because you can’t see yourself being a badass. What’s even the point? Also what’s with no controller support?

[@Panurome]

@@emotionaljonxvx Yeah the game has issues but has potential. The combat with shields is very fun but their netcode is worse than fromsoft so shields do not work properly against players. The game also revolves too much around move speedso fights end up with someone runing away for a long time If the game was a bit faster paced, the mechanics worked better in multiplayer and there were more options to deal with someone getting naked to run away it would be a really fun game

[@TheAzul_Indigo]

I’m watching this while invading.

[@emotionaljonxvx]

I got a surprising amount of activity recording footage for this video but only at 20 +5/+2. Usually I have minutes between invasions but I was getting lucky and almost getting back to back matches.

[@TheAzul_Indigo]

⁠​⁠@@emotionaljonxvxmornings for me at 10+3 between 9 and 11 I get back to back. It’s really slowed down now. I think I’m getting blocked or they’re giving up! 😂

[@spackmoose6002]

@@TheAzul_Indigo Haha, as a lightbow/whip main, I am definitely blocked by most ER regulars at this point

[@TheAzul_Indigo]

@@spackmoose6002 I went all the way to the DLC at level 10 to get flame spear, hefty pots, fire coils, and bone bow. I may be low, but at least I’m not a whip user! 🤣 (jk)

[@Hustler2_]

​@emotionaljonxvx try seamless! I have no problem finding invasions. When invasions on meta level are starting to get slow, I just cycle through my RL 50, 80, 100 characters, then return to 150 again.

[@DragonsGuy]

Because you can't guarantee a good experience with PVP. People that don't want to be invaded hate it. Even people that like invading still turn around and whine about ganks or setups that they don't like. Nobody likes running into cheaters. All of this is unavoidable with invasions, and Elden ring doesn't really do anything to mitigate or make up for the bad times for anyone. That's all fine in games where PVP is the focus, where people "opt into it", but most devs would rather not risk a forced PVP mechanic spoiling the good time of a solo or co-op game. So if you want good pvp, maybe go play a game where its good? Or you can keep complaining about a game with bad pvp that isn't going to improve and players that don't want to engage with it.

[@notinthemoodfornames8033]

why dont more people do X? probably because X isnt actually that good, and isnt liked by that many people besides yourself and your own niche community. its nice you like it, but please have a realistic understanding of the popularity of such try hard mechanics in general.

[@dingdong6563]

Bro I really just think that a pvp experience without skill based match making is a bad experience overall, I'm not agreeing that it's a shit mechanic but I think that it's done poorly in elden ring exclusively.

[@roykalager2360]

I couldn't find PvPers. And I couldn't invade. Is no one playing together online.

[@thunderstrucktb4758]

Lords of the Fallen pvp is trash. The game itself is pretty fun as a solo experience though you should give it a try.

[@zwidowca1]

Competetive hunts are a TERRIBLE IDEA! The mh community can already be a dumb and toxic cesspool and I say that after having over 2500 hours of MH experience under my belt. You don't want to give players more reasons to boost their electronic ego. Some people are already feeling high and mighty because they can use borked mechanics to cut down their hunt times. As a matter of fact I have argued with people multiple times about playing with sub optimal sets or suppprt builds, beause these trogs don't get that you don't always have to play for highest damage per minute or second.

[@MidnightatMidian]

Hahahaha!!!! Since I've discovered the souls game in 2014, there's relentless vids that say that - Multiplayer is over!!!! People are still playing tho.

[@OccasionalGoof]

Because it's a terribly toxic mechanic From hasn't managed to get remotely right across 6 games now and other game devs probably don't want to curse their game with the toxicity in the community it inevitably brings since forced PvP is a really dumb mechanic.

[@Banana-senpai]

First, about the Kadokawa acquisition. It's bad, really bad. But people act like this has something to do with Fromsoft and fail to see that Kadokawa is the biggest entertainment conglomerate in Japan, maybe bar Sony itself. it's the biggest producer of novels, anime, manga, videogames, TV... They have production companies in Taiwan, China and other South East Asian countries. They are so far reaching they don't outsource its publishing in America if they can; yes, they have editorial publishing companies in the west too. In the grand scheme of things Fromsoftware is a fucking insect in this transaction. If Sony buys Kadokawa, forget ever getting good anime, manga, games... Everything will be Sony slop. Genshin Impact's chief producer made an apology video right after the contract with Sony ended. He was fcking crying, saying he's sorry but the game is subpar because Sony wasn't allowing them to give what the game deserved. They censored Yoko Taro's Nier Automata, and imposed a vision from the production committee. From recent interviews with game directors that have worked with Sony, they impose heavy censoring directed from California to even Japanese-exclusive titles, since the headquarters moved there; they mandate that all games are pitched in English to be approved by Cali, and any complaints go through the censoring team before being considered. And games must comply with ESRB under heavy scrutiny even if they aren't produced in the United States, before being published anywhere, instead of allowing creative teams to work on their projects freely and under local laws/restrictions. Yes, it's very very bad. Now, how would I implement PvP in the next game... I think the best multiplayer mechanics would be a combination of DS1and DS3 (with a bit of Elden Ring): From DS1 I'd take the masterful bonfire placement and "Human at a bonfire" mechanic to incentivize co-op exploration and not just fog wall summon signs. This then helps with the invasions for both parties, as keeping co-opers in the invasions queue for more time allows one to be more lenient with them too and give them longer invader cooldowns (or maybe even a karma system where they can't get invaded by anyone until they beat another boss after some amount of "forced" invasions); of course the dried finger equivalent would negate these things, but no free turn-off while an invader is in the world like elden ring has. Then I'd take from Elden Ring the strict no solo-hosts invasions (with the exception of the classic dried finger of course). In addition, I think it'd be fun to play one "small" pvp-enabled area akin to the old monk / spear of the church, but not a boss, more dynamic, inspired in the old solo host invasions that one would get after defeating a boss in DS3 or after kindling in DS1, where you can only get invaded by one player who plays from an even more asymmetrical position. Something like what Djura does as an NPC in bloodborne, or the pursuer in DS2. Then, from DS3 I'd get the PvP covenant areas; man I miss gank city. One invader per host/co-oper; and I say more, you get in the invasions queue the moment you set foot in one of those areas, and the moment you accept a summon sign, one invader is instantly accepted in your world too. Of course all this with covenant rewards, and I think the idea the community had for elden ring, that is to say a shop that uses online items as currency seems very interesting. Mound-makers/executioners too and and blues too of course. Maybe you could even get red and blues automatically mirror-summoned in the gank areas, pure chaos.

[@Snoike]

Other devs don't have the cohones or creativity to ad features like invasions, which is why Fromsoft still has no legit competition.

[@djkramnik1]

I've heard some good things about watchdog (the game) invasion mechanic. Considering that souls went from multi covenants, gravelording (so PvP actively effects the PvE experience) six player experience, to the watered down elden ring PvP experience, I dunno if I can agree with ' only fromsoft has the cohones' bit there. While I still have a lot of respect for this studio I don't think you can be blissfully optimistic about their future titles in regards to PvP right now.

[@Snoike]

@@djkramnik1 Oh yeah don't get me wrong, I think the fact that From doesn't have competition is one of the reasons their PvP has stagnated or just outright regressed. And Watch Dogs is definitely not a competitor to souls games.