If you’ve followed my content for any length of time, you’ll know that I love shooters, extraction titles, survival games, and post-apocalyptic adventures. Whether we’re talking Call of Duty, Escape from Tarkov, or Fallout, if it’s a game that lets you wield weapons in a fight against others, whether that’s a single-player journey or a slice of multiplayer madness, I’m there.
But in recent months, the entire landscape has become downtrodden under the weight of an inexorable debate that has left gamers exhausted. It’s the PvE vs. PvP debate, and it feels like it’s creeping into every corner of gaming. It has become the new console wars, in many ways.
But why? What’s so important about this?
Nothing is Wrong With PvE
Here’s a PSA right off the bat: There is nothing wrong with PvE.
If you’re a gamer who chooses to play against computer-controlled enemies rather than human players, that’s just fine. In recent years, the concept of a shooter fostering a PvE-backed environment has become too much of a trend for some to bear, and it’s typically a vocal minority pushing an agenda, one that says you’re bad if you can’t fight real players.
Let’s take Escape from Tarkov as an extremely prolific example.
In 2024, Battlestate Games released a PvE variant of the legendary extraction shooter, poised to run concurrently alongside the PvPvE offering that had dominated the space for many years. It became quite a hit because it gave ‘casual players’ a way to enjoy the game away from several key concerns:
- Network instability
- Lack of time to grind
- Cheaters
- Lower skill levels
- Malicious players
- ‘Sweats’
Today, Battlestate Games constantly stresses that the player base is about equal between PvE and PvP, but that doesn’t stop the former platform from being lambasted by hardcore PvP players with an axe to grind. In almost every post on social media concerning Escape from Tarkov’s PvE platform, you’ll see the ‘traditional’ players tearing it to shreds.
But why? It might split the player base somewhat, but it’s not hurting them, nor is it going to. It seems that a cultural divide has surfaced, and quite a virulent one at that.
If you prefer PvE, you’re sh*t at games.
If you prefer PvP, you’re a tryhard sweat.
But Escape from Tarkov is just one example.
It’s like there’s some existential threat placed on each audience by the other. It’s such a hostile environment, and it’s born of developers trying to serve as many gamers as possible. Put simply, it’s weird.
RELATED: Gray Zone Warfare Becomes ‘PvE-First’ Tactical Shooter
The Social Identity Issue
It’s all about identity, at the end of the day. And I mean that for the game as much as I do for the players.
Let’s take ARC Raiders as another example. This extraction adventure game emerged in October 2025 to an overwhelmingly positive and popular reception. It took the world by storm and completely disrupted the extraction space, but it was focused solely on a PvPvE operating model, a decision that Embark Studios, the game’s developer, was very happy with.
It took almost no time at all for users to start complaining about the lack of PvE content. Lo and behold, fast-forward one year, and Embark Studios is about to trial a PvE mode to fulfil the wishes of a portion of the player base, but the PvP-focused fans are up in arms about that revelation. They think it’s a travesty! How dare Embark give in to these cowards?
In terms of this split between identities, you’ve got two very different pictures to paint.
PvP
- I want to compete
- I want a tougher challenge
- I want to beat other players
- I want unpredictability
PvE
- I want to enjoy the world more
- I want to play collaboratively
- I prefer predictability
- I want to run fewer risks
If a developer targets one side of that coin, the other feels neglected. Why should a studio prioritize PvP when PvE players don’t have enough? Why should a developer piece together a PvE offering when PvP players are hungry for more mechanics? It’s never fair when an update lands that doesn’t target your side of that coin.
RELATED: More Tarkov Players Than You’d Think Play PvE
Giving In
In the extraction space especially, developers have opened the doors to PvE content in a major way. In the last few years, almost every single extraction title to hit the market has either launched with or later been updated to include a PvE gameplay loop.
It’s the same for first-person shooters. Battlefield has ‘casual’ modes or PvE modes that give players a much easier time. The Division made adjustments, Destiny 2 went down a similar path, Rust added more PvE progression, and even a game like Sea of Thieves decided to accommodate PvE-focused players much more.
Warframe went primarily PvE, Fortnite started offering stacks of PvE content, and countless MMOs and large-scale multiplayer titles started leaning into the PvE loop:
- Fallout 76 removed most PvP content
- ARK: Survival Evolved got PvE locks
- New World got rich PvE servers
- Marvel Rivals got a PvE mode, and the player count exploded
- EVE Online received PvE content
- Marathon got PvE modes
- Call of Duty titles moved into PvEvP modes in some cases, and DMZ was almost exclusively PvE
I could list dozens more.
RELATED: Marathon’s PvE Mode Tripled The Player Count
But why are so many developers leaning into this concept?
Put simply, PvP-only retention is pretty awful and inconsistent. Having that lack of diversification is harmful to the longevity of a game, and offering a platform to suit both types of gamers is the best way forward.
PvP toxicity actively drives players away, and it can be argued that PvE content encourages stable progression and a reduction in skill-gap frustration.
As you can imagine, there’s also one big, green reason why developers lean into PvE content…
It Makes The World Go Around
Single-player and PvE content is extremely lucrative. In recent years, we’ve seen the concept of F2P PvE games skyrocket in popularity and revenue. In a Newzoo report published in 2025, it was revealed that the amount of money being made by F2P PvE games was dwarfing premium games – $113 billion to $30 billion in a year.
PvP-exclusive games generate far less money per player because, typically, cosmetics and battle passes are the only avenues into the pockets and wallets of gamers.
In a stab at analysing Steam’s repository of games and players in 2025, it was confirmed that 58% of games played were either PvE-focused or totally non-competitive. On console, that number dropped to 42%.
Sensor Tower published a spending report that confirmed that overwhelming sales numbers came from the likes of:
- PvE MMOs
- Gacha RPGs
- PvE mobile games
- PvE co-operative titles
And why is that, do you think?
PvE games don’t have to worry so much about competitive integrity, so developers and publishers can incorporate unlimited spending loops that won’t break anything.
This year, F2P playtime grew by a whopping 1.2 billion hours, and the slate of PvE-friendly games out there is mostly responsible for that. It’s a simple fact that PvE players are more monetizable, and companies like Tencent, Epic, Roblox, and MiHoYo all lean very heavily into that notion.
Leaning On Social Solutions
Now, don’t hate me, but I took to X and used Grok to get some numbers. Don’t think of it like that; I forced the silly AI agent to do my bidding, so it’s fine. I asked the system to analyze the more recent posts from the ARC Raiders team to let me know what the split was like, in cold, hard numbers.
Musk’s AI buddy told me that ‘roughly half’ of respondents to ARC Raiders’ posts express support or anticipation of PvE content, while many are reinstalling specifically for the PvE test that’s set to run from October 13 to 20. The other half busied themselves suggesting these players ‘go elsewhere’, argued that permanent PvE is ‘harmful’, and that they will ‘not engage’ with the test.
My computer-powered assistant explained:
Across the accessible samples the split is contested rather than one-sided. The strongest hard number remains Embark’s own survey result that 51% of respondents were interested in a dedicated PvE option. The October 13–20 test is explicitly framed by the studio as data collection, not a commitment to permanence.
In June, the Arena Breakout: Infinite team posted a survey on social media related to the introduction of permanent PvE content, and 85% of respondents voted yes. Funcom stressed on socials that 80% of Dune: Awakening players engaged only with PvE content. And, as mentioned, Battlestate Games has long professed the power of PvE in posts on social media.
The general pattern is that a substantial minority-to-majority slice of players in mixed PvPvE games prefer lower or zero player hostility, enough for multiple studios to test or ship optional modes after polls or internal data.
Acceptance is rising in the form of toggles and separate queues rather than replacement of PvP, and developers frequently pair the change with loot or progression adjustments to limit economy effects.
It Won’t Change
Ultimately, like Sony’s inevitable push into the digital market or the console-based rift that has driven apart the gaming community for decades, the debate between PvE and PvP content won’t change. Really, it shouldn’t, because the powerful discourse keeps a vibrant part of the gaming space alive, even if it’s for all the wrong reasons.
But going forward, we should at least be more aware of why PvE content is on the rise, and why it’s potentially keeping some of your favorite PvP-focused games afloat.
This might be me screaming into the void, but we should have a little more compassion for those who want to take the easy road and opt for PvE content. Case in point: I was an Escape from Tarkov PvP main for four years before splitting and heading into the PvE side of things, and it was the best decision I ever made.
Overnight, I eradicated almost everything wrong with Escape from Tarkov: cheaters, hit registration, desync, longer loading times, and exfil campers. It’s not always about having lower skill levels, but at times, it can be about having less time, higher anxiety levels, and an aversion to all that multiplayer-induced jank.
In the end, the PvE and PvP split isn’t just a design issue; it’s a reflection of two very different visions for what a game should be. Modern games are trying increasingly hard to merge these worlds, but the friction is going absolutely nowhere. But the numbers don’t lie: PvE content is the backbone of retention and revenue, and that’s what’s shaping the wider business.
Let me know in the comments if you’re a PvE or PvP main, or, better yet, join the Insider Gaming Discord server, and we’ll chat directly.
For more Insider Gaming coverage, check out the news that RuneScape 4 is in development, and don’t forget to sign up for our weekly newsletter
Grant has been gaming for 30+ years and in the industry for 10+. You'll probably find him playing a post-apocalyptic game or an extraction shooter somewhere.
More from Grant Taylor-Hill
Comments