Games

No. They have a vision and implementation that they want to balance and trying to shoe horn another game mode isn't exactly easy for them to try and balance while attempting to maintain the core game.

Oh, sry I am easy to trigger on this point:(

Their initial switch from a pve only game was motivated by data and metrics that showed them it was a better choice to make an extraction shooter (they said themselves somewhere that the game just wasn't fun). I trust they made the right call, so I would say a pve only mode in Arc Raiders would dillute the tension of each round played.

That being said, I'm also very risk averse, so I dislike the pvp part of the game. While I think its a necessary part of the gameplay, and that it brings awesome uncertainty and adrenaline, I think Embark should try and create incentives for more cooperation between players, encourage pvp as a conscious, intended, risky choice rather than a reasonable option when encountering other players.

From Tech Test 2 to the current Server Slam, they've apparently buffed the robots/arc enemies strength, I think that's a step in the right direction, even if I haven't personally noticed a change 🤷‍♀️

I mean obviously depends on how much time the dev's have on it, and what the cost etc... to make both are.

If you make a game that's expecting PVP to be the primary advantage, and the PVE is meant to be a minor time sink to add some stakes to the PVP mode, then obviously the PVE players once they start playing, will complain of the game being unfun, unbalanced etc... and then the development will have to start stretching out into other portions of the game etc...

On the other hand if the games PVE mode actually does hold on it's own, and the majority of the PVP is effectively people that enjoy attacking people that don't want to be in that fight... then maybe an alternative server etc... isn't a bad idea.

Obviously no one is entitled to anything, it's up to the developers to make the game they want. Players are welcome to play what they want.

In terms of a "would this be a good business decision or good for the game", well that depends widely on the game.

The game was originally planned to be a PvE only game, but the game wasn't fun according to the data by their playtesters

There's work that is involved in properly making and balancing and creating content for a different mode. You design the entire game around how you play it, in those case PvPvE. So no, they shouldn't. And neither should devs be forced to make a game they don't want to make. If you remove the PvP from the game as-is, you will lose out on a lot of what the game is supposed to be, and the interactions and moment-to-moment gameplay you have. Not to mention you're gonna split the playerbase which is rarely healthy for a multiplayer game.

There's a reason PvP is included, and that's because it a straight up impossible to implement the sort of dynamism and unpredictability PvP adds.

There's not a lot of games like Arc Raiders, and it is the kind of game that I want. Not every game is, or should be made, for everybody. That's how you get the sort of environment of undifferentiated AAA games where they all look and play the same all designed by committee to appeal to the greatest amount of possible to earn as much as possible