I like a mixture of

• The near endless replay value as every opponent behaves uniquely and inconsistently. They are like the complexity of "champion mobs only multiplied by 1000.
• The ability to directly improve my game play. I find duels an excellent opportunity to learn and far greater challenge than scripted PvE often provides.
• The opportunity to be humbled - The resulting determination to improve.
• Meeting other like-minded players with these similar mind-sets.
  
  I dislike elements of toxicity due to game types that focus on inter-dependency rather than co-operation, aka moba style gameplay. In games or objective orientation or where you can't /talk to the other team, I have not experienced this as an issue. Yet.

PvP gives something that PvE does not.

Humans are the most dangerous game until sentient artificial intelligence is created.

PvE difficulty scaling will necessitate needing harder/better/stronger/faster armor and weapons to deal with the increase in difficulty but there won't be anything "new" to learn from that. Once you figure out the tactics and abilities of enemies they will be figured out.  That means you have to wait for each new season to fight a new enemy that hopefully has some new ability you haven't seen to get that moment where you need to learn, explore, and overcome again.

I am far too impatient to wait that long between "Oh shit" moments, so PvP is a desired aspect I'd like mixed in to keep the game fresh and give me something to do when the PvE grind gets too monotonous.

So as someone that gets bored easily after I figure something out, PvP is the best way to keep a player like mine's attention stuck to the game between new seasons and content.

@Taeryn,

I am addressing this to you because you asked. I would rather have pm'ed but that feature is not available. Most people with an issue concerning PvP do not hate PvP per se. Rather they love PvE. Some persons incapable of objective thought have formulated the idea such individuals simply hate PvP and in that erred judgement they are quite naturally, wrong. Many of us that dislike PvP in this situation, and every situation is unique, do so because because we do not care for features that usurp development assets to build other facets of a game not related to PvE. We have this dislike because we have seen this occur time and again. In an age of multiplayer centric titles many gamers want a Single Player title that isn't bled or watered down for the sake of Multiplayer. There are some very imperceptive people in this world that do not understand nothing is built for free. They do not understand that everything has an associated cost and PvP is one of those things that does cost. Maybe these persons and their skewed perceptions live in their parent's basement and think money grows on trees. The first time they have to work for a living they are in for a shock. 

Individuals may attempt to argue and say the cost is minimal, which is a laughable statement when they have zero idea what a development cost can run in terms of money, time, and assets. This is like pregnancy. You either are or you are not. You either pull PvE assets, personnel, and money to build PvP features or you do not. The sort of thinking that tries to split hairs and judge impact as minimal only seek to rationalize the issue in order to feel better about their point of view. It is what it is. And it costs. But let's keep this simple. An hour. For every hour spent building something in PvP that is an hour where something is not developed for PvE. So you see, many ignorant people have it wrong in that they think PvE fans sit around and boil with hate just knowing that PvP exists somewhere in the world as if it is a heresy that must be obliterated. No. What a ridiculous assumption. I am not sure what type of delusional individual surmises that scenario but they are wrong. Simply wrong and by spreading their ridiculous ill informed point of view in a forum or some crybaby video they only serve to create more misunderstanding. So you asked why the dislike for PvP. Simple. It isn't a dislike of PvP for the sake of PvP. Rather it is the fact that PvP development for a title means less PvE development.

Addendum. What I find most ironic is the attitude that PvP naysayers should simply shut up. Do not question. Apparently some people, if they ever read it, have forgotten the conversation between Loken and Sindermann and what Loken was made to realize as to why he was needed in the Mournival.

Just gonna reply in bits and pieces instead of making a huge multi quote thing.

"Individuals may attempt to argue and say the cost is minimal, which is a laughable statement when they have zero idea what a development cost can run in terms of money, time, and assets."

Again, like I stated in a different thread, that assumption is based on info we do not have. We know there will be PvP, but NOTHING else. If it was literally just duels and nothing else, that IS a minimal impact. It's literally at the most basic form one map and the friendly fire option ticked on, and an objective added to kill the other player. On the other hand, if it was a MOBA like system (which would be TERRIBLE for more reasons than MOBA) then yeah, it'd be a pretty huge impact. But we can't say either way until there's some actual in game PvP system they put in and people get a chance to test it.

"There are some very imperceptive people in this world that do not understand nothing is built for free."

 No, I think most people here understand that, but on both sides people are overreacting. PvP isn't all or nothing except in the sense of "is there any PvP whatsoever in this game?" Overwatch PvP and D3 PvP are both examples of PvP, but on COMPLETELY different levels. (I cut the rest of it because it's just ad hominems.)

"So you see, many ignorant people have it wrong in that they think PvE fans sit around and boil with hate just knowing that PvP exists somewhere in the world as if it is a heresy that must be obliterated. No. What a ridiculous assumption. I am not sure what type of delusional individual surmises that scenario but they are wrong. "

And yet, there ARE people like that, and like the saying goes, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. It's equally important to counter the people who ARE complaining loudly so it doesn't seem like they represent the player base, especially this early on when PvP is barely more than a concept currently! Plus, at the opposite end of the spectrum there are people who assume ALL the PvE resources are being pulled off PvE to work on PvP which is just as stupid. (I also assume you're talking about people boiling with hate that there might be PvP in this game)

"It isn't a dislike of PvP for the sake of PvP. Rather it is the fact that PvP development for a title means less PvE development."

Again, depends on the level of resources put into it. It also depends on what PvP requires. Most of the assets for PvP are already here. We have the models. We have the tiles. The devs have been messing  around with duels (which is little more than an option to enable/disable friendly fire). After that, they need to decide what kind of PvP they want. TDM? how big? 1v1? 3s? Outside of that, CTF? TF2/Overwatch style Payload? A mix? There's a lot to offer there, and if done well is a great addition to the game. It all just depends on how far the devs want to go into PvP. 

And really, PvP takes LESS time than PvE development once the initial systems are set up. New maps? Well, new tile sets are already being made for PvE, so it requires less work to edit some of those as needed to work in PvP. The biggest "drain" on resources will be new game modes, followed by balancing, and that can be done by both the player data and in house testing, or even just basic math (X weapon has 100% more DPS than any other weapon, and Y weapon has 50% less. Therefore if we nerf X with a PvP specific nerf, and buff Y with a PvP specific buff it will be better balanced.)

"There are some very imperceptive people in this world that do not understand nothing is built for free. They do not understand that everything has an associated cost and PvP is one of those things that does cost. Maybe these persons and their skewed perceptions live in their parent's basement and think money grows on trees. The first time they have to work for a living they are in for a shock." (and) "[...]Simply wrong and by spreading their ridiculous ill informed point of view in a forum or some crybaby video they only serve to create more misunderstanding"

I feel it bears mentioning specifically that you should refrain from ad hominems if you want to seem like you have a leg to stand on, instead of being (as you put it) a crybaby because someone likes something you do not.

For the record my pronouns are he/him/his or feel free to just mention my name when referring to me specifically. 

• I see that you are feeling mis-represented but at the same time misrepresenting who you are aiming to insult. Just to re-state. The magnitude of concern and the degree of anxiety toward PvP was called into question. While I may have added some dramatised language into accusing the arguments as fear mongering, I never once accused the argument of wholesomely being wrong. In fact I agreed with most points of concern and re stated many times the magnitude as being the issue.  
• The financial cost has never been implied to be free, not once. Only proportionate to the amount of hours that go into it. Something you seem to actually agree with. In-between throwing some personal insults into the argument. My mum says hi.
• The cost to the user however has been argued to be a different matter. Not all hours are equally productive and not every hour yields the same result or progress. To presume -5% time invested leads to -5% content is an argument or rather concept that you seem to have mistaken as meaning something else. Perhaps I could have been clearer.
• Not sure if srs or not but in the same post you state that it is laughable that two different PvP projects may differ in cost. While at the same time stating it is proportionate to the time invested. Presumably you are telling us that all PvP implementations have a fixed development cost and development cycle and that the cost to neocore will be the same for making a room with friendly fire enabled, as some of these multiplayer-centric games you mention. (also congratulations to neocore on being pregnant)
  
  Feel free to disagree with others and make relevant counter arguments. But belittling someone else's efforts, views and discussion of objective points as "crybaby". This forum and these players deserve better.

In the words of one of my closest friends. Can we not "hijack" this thread please and continue to discuss what we like or dislike about pvp. 

@KvotheTheArcane,

8 hours of development. 5 hours go to PvE, and 3 hours go to PvP. You can put all the resources into this matter if you wish but here are the facts. Resources are not unlimited. That is a cold hard truth. This isn't Star Citizen, who by the way is asking backers for more funding. I am not sure what part of simple math people do not comprehend. You do not just wizard up resources, assets, people, money out of thin air. If you take from pile A to give to Pile B, there is less for Pile A. Period. That is it. The end. Pile A will be affected. From where did these mysterious resources hail? Hogwarts? Are they in a basket marked 5 Loaves and 2 fish? Where do you get developers, time, and money, and when you round them up and move them to another section they are actually still in the section they left? Wait...is this like that episode of Star Trek where they split Kirk in two? 

That is all I am going to post on this issue. And unlike some I can keep my word on leaving a thread so I am done here. And I am not really interested in a leg to stand on. The side that wants the focus on PvE are not creating entire videos telling people not to say anything, calling people paranoid and ignorant and uninformed, and neither do they have Vern Troyer patrolling the forums. One of us asked for everyone to weigh in and one side told everyone to be quiet on the matter because they were ignorant of the facts or late to the game. If you are going to point fingers it would be helpful in this instance to use both hands.

When did challenging views and presenting an argument become a form of personal attack that should be condemned?

It is a very very long stretch of imagination to turn debate into calling people uninformed and ignorant. But it seems to be ok for you to accuse people of being these things specifically. In-between insulting them directly. I hope you realise that while accusing me of thinking there are fanatics out there who are just angry and hateful, (which I haven't even done) you have put a lot of effort into making this point stand true.

For anyone who actually listens to what I create i'm fairly sure you realise I am only giving my personal view on matters and that anyone and everyone is free to disagree with me on whatever they like! 

it's a real shame but as this thread now represents nothing but emotive anger toward an opinion without any real contribution toward the OP's requested topic. I'd request it is deleted as it quite franky is below what readers deserve. 

Wow! Nice personal attacks! Your argument is so good and valid now! (No, wait, the opposite.)

Do you have any proof of this dev time you state, or are you just making numbers up? And why did you COMPLETELY ignore my post and just keep repeating "resources aren't unlimited!" I addressed that. PvP's dev time DRASTICALLY falls off once you have the game modes in, unlike PvE where you CONSTANTLY need to be creating new enemies, maps, and what not. No one is disputing that PvP requires resources.

And one side called for silencing the other? No, don't generalize the ENTIRE side because of whatever you think happened. I'm not calling for the silence of others, but I think it's not fair to start flipping out over PvP coming when we LITERALLY don't know anything other than "PvP is coming" and "It probably won't be D3's 'PvP' system."

But no, please move on. You don't contribute anything to a discussion by attacking people, making strawmen out of people's arguments AND repeating the same thing over and over while ignoring entire counter-views on the topic.