Originally Posted by
KusoWat
A lot of the issues people have in PvP is at (very) low elo and against a healer that clearly doesn't belong there. Now this game's rating and matchmaking is in question because not only are the varying skill levels too wide, in Feast the people higher on the spectrum can't direct/teach their team. Frontlines has no matchmaking other then picking people from a hat, so skill levels are all over the place. Addtionally, Frontlines and Feast have mechanics that makes healing even harder than it already is, such as battle high/fever, adrenaline, culling stacks, and heavy medal stacks.
PvP focused games tend to have a legitimate matchmaking system (or atleast close) that places nearly equally skilled players together/against each other. Imagine getting placed against a diamond rated player(s) in your silver/gold tier in your LoL/OW/etc. ranked game and getting absolutely outplayed at every interaction. That's what happens in this game repeatedly and one of the reasons people find themselves disliking PvP.
Majority of this game's playerbase prefer to avoid adversity/challenge and thus ultimately dislike PvP because that is exactly what it is. It's not so much the PvP is terrible, but the way varied skill levels are matched, the width of the skill gaps, and general populace mentality to the nature of PvP.
Since when does one have to give evidence to an opinion on what they find to be fun?