Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Impressions of Amazon's New World - MMORPG.com

135

Comments

  • HatefullHatefull Member EpicPosts: 2,116
    rodarin said:
    same thing different title. as much as people have always loved 'sandbox' theyre all now seeing (with the way these developers deliver it) that sandbox is code for cheapest and easiest way to build a game world. basically have some skill trees some PvP and some building and you have a game.

    thats why wildcard/snail can throw them out as fast as they do there is literally nothing beyond character creation to worry about (once you have world built).

    These things were all the rage and even still are for the first few days. But games where destroying things is the main 'content' are never going to work.

    These games also dont work because of the gap between people who are online 24/7 and people who have 'lives'. Youre never going to be able to balance or equalize it. Its not even 'hardcore' its simply hours put in.

    Also not addressed will be the raiding rulesets or offline or online or all the stuff that has ruined every other game like this.

    They all try and reinvent something that doesnt work. With Bezos it should be expected I suppose but this is going to end up being a 'failure'.

    But from reading this and other articles I suspect it will eventually be heavily monetized and the obvious target for that will be skill and attribute points.

    But it has every failed element of ARK/Atlas and then some by the looks, Although the land claim aspect as shown with Life is Feudal can be done fairly well. The major issue is trying to take land away from someone which atlas has never and will never figure out. Because with 24/7 games getting a 'fair' system is impossible even with a declaration system where there is a time and date set for defender and attacker to be there (akin to the old pirates of the burning sea system) because even with that there are log in issues, lag/latency issues and any other number of problems.
    They literally said, in the article, had you actually bothered to read it, that the attackers and the defenders AGREE upon a time for the assault to commence.

    As far as your assertion that time and place don't work, wrong again, Lineage 2 (as well as others) has this system and it worked well. I was personally involved in several castle fights where there were literally hundreds per side attacking or defending. It worked fine. Not sure if it is still like this as I quit when it went F2P.

    The article further states, not all system are in place, they said that they (amazon) considers it in an Alpha state, so for all the other brain deads that didn't bother to actually read the article and are throwing their opinions around, it's not complete, they aren't selling early access (yet) or stating its ready for release. Reading is fundamental. For the record...aren't both Ark and Atlass still running servers? Oh yeah, they are, so please explain how they have "failed" let me guess, you don't like them so they failed.

    Also, your oversimplification of what makes a Sandbox game is laughable. Maybe a bad sandbox, but not a good one.

    Obviously, each and every one of you are entitled to your opinion, but damn, at least try once in a while to get close to something approaching a fact.
    Sovrath

    If you want a new idea, go read an old book.

  • MasoodVoonMasoodVoon Member UncommonPosts: 50



    DMKano said:

    Hate to say this but they should seriously consider turning it into a battle royale game.







    Jeff Bezos wants a word with you, and he ain't happy coming off the attempted blackmail he endured from the National Enquirer this week. :D



    Yeah, perhaps he states as proof an anonymous source that doesn't exist WaPost style! True to form that would be.

    I am expecting this to be like ark/atlas but perhaps I am wrong. If you like these types of games it will be exciting. If you like MMO's, LoL, or Fortnite then you might think it "generic" because you just don't like these games.
    HatefullKyleran
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483



    DMKano said:

    Hate to say this but they should seriously consider turning it into a battle royale game.







    Jeff Bezos wants a word with you, and he ain't happy coming off the attempted blackmail he endured from the National Enquirer this week. :D



    Yeah, perhaps he states as proof an anonymous source that doesn't exist WaPost style! True to form that would be.

    I am expecting this to be like ark/atlas but perhaps I am wrong. If you like these types of games it will be exciting. If you like MMO's, LoL, or Fortnite then you might think it "generic" because you just don't like these games.
    If combat really is a matter of pressing 2-3 different buttons to perform rather generic attacks (as implied in this thread), that's not an indicator of flavor so much as lack of flavor in combat.

    Even games like Dark Souls, with their sluggishly basic combat actions system, gives the player the ability to perform different attacks depending upon context and as well as including a parry/block and riposte system.  Are there any such counter-attack systems in New World?  I'm honestly curious, as the implications made in this thread appear to indicate there aren't.

    There's obviously different attacks with different weapons, but do these amount to anything more than different animations?  Do we know if weapons strike in true swing arcs, or just hit register based upon an invisible hit area directly in front of the attacker?

    Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying that other survival games have these kinds of systems to add depth to their combat as a comparison bar here.  I'm saying it's 2019 and video games themselves aren't a novel experience anymore, so if they don't, they damn well should.  As such, any game that presents conflict as a core gameplay loop, but can't get any deeper than a few generic attacks in combat, earns the label "generic."
    Amaranthar

    image
  • TheocritusTheocritus Member EpicPosts: 6,939
    I'm not supporting anything Amazon anymore...They have become too big and too powerful.
    Arterius
  • ArteriusArterius Member EpicPosts: 1,370
    I'm not supporting anything Amazon anymore...They have become too big and too powerful.
    So you don't support Disney either?
    Hatefull
  • DAOWAceDAOWAce Member UncommonPosts: 327
    edited February 10
    Did you like ARK/Conan Exiles/generic sandbox survival game focused more on pvp without private servers?

    Then you'll like this!

    I was excited for it when announced, but after getting alpha access.. it's a hard pass.

    Edit: Trying to figure out why I have a "MILD" below my name, apparently I was warned for commenting on the last article about this game saying it's a generic sandbox game because it was under "NDA".  TIL the mod team here are mods for random games.

    Time to copy-paste it here since appears to be deleted and the NDA isn't a thing anymore.
    DAOWAce said:
    "Unique MMO"

    Mortal Online wants a word.

    Also, I did play the alpha (hello NDA), and it just felt like yet another survival game, with some territory control mechanics tacked on.

    Woopy. Nothing to see here.
    DMKanotweedledumb99Alomar
  • HatefullHatefull Member EpicPosts: 2,116
    DAOWAce said:
    Did you like ARK/Conan Exiles/generic sandbox survival game focused more on pvp without private servers?

    Then you'll like this!

    I was excited for it when announced, but after getting alpha access.. it's a hard pass.

    Edit: Trying to figure out why I have a "MILD" below my name, apparently I was warned for commenting on the last article about this game saying it's a generic sandbox game because it was under "NDA".  TIL the mod team here are mods for random games.

    Time to copy-paste it here since appears to be deleted and the NDA isn't a thing anymore.
    DAOWAce said:
    "Unique MMO"

    Mortal Online wants a word.

    Also, I did play the alpha (hello NDA), and it just felt like yet another survival game, with some territory control mechanics tacked on.

    Woopy. Nothing to see here.
    yeah makes sense, a game that is in Alpha seems to not be finished. Who would have thought?

    If you want a new idea, go read an old book.

  • DvoraDvora Member UncommonPosts: 480

    Forgrimm said:

    Looks like shit tbh https://youtu.be/1m6aaQktEMU



    Eh I dunno it looks like it has a nice world, runs smooth, and has better animations than most out there. Even if they were claiming all the gameplay elements were in place, which they are specifically saying they are not, a short video like that wouldnt show all of it.

    Too early to judge imo. They have the basics looking solid if a little generic on the UI.
    Hatefull
  • cochscochs Member UncommonPosts: 89
    If you think Amazon is making this game because they just want to make a great mmo, ya I've got a bridge to sell you also.   Mmo's don't make enough money to even be of slight interest to Amazon.

    This is a play to sell their engine.  I'm sure the team wants it to be a good game, but the chances that they have directives from higher up that will hobble their success, I put at medium to high.  Ulterior motives tend to do that.
    anemo
  • ThaneThane Member RarePosts: 3,334
    well if you guys think this was no "opinion", then maybe try reading the damn article till the end next time.... seriously. and if you are just here to troll, then do that.

    guess no one can stop you whiney kids
    Hatefull

    "I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"

  • Gobstopper3DGobstopper3D Member RarePosts: 839
    I don't think Amazon cares as much about the game as they do the probable Twitch audience it brings in. That is the main motivation for the game. Streaming is the number one priority for this game and the whole purpose behind Lumberyard.

    Amazon will pay some high profile streamers to play it and bring in the crowds. My days of gaming are truly numbered. It's a shame that more people seem to enjoy watching players play games than they actually do playing them. I don't get it and I never will.
    RemyVorender

    I'm not an IT Specialist, Game Developer, or Clairvoyant in real life, but like others on here, I play one on the internet.

  • KabulozoKabulozo Member UncommonPosts: 861
    edited February 10
    I smell a varporware. People already have Battle Royales if they just want to pop in a map with dozens of others -> go straight and kill them -> take their loot -> profit -> next.

    Lineage 1(and 2) was the last MMO with meaningful world PVP I have played.
    Hatefull
  • rodarinrodarin Member RarePosts: 2,423
    edited February 10
    Hatefull said:
    rodarin said:
    same thing different title. as much as people have always loved 'sandbox' theyre all now seeing (with the way these developers deliver it) that sandbox is code for cheapest and easiest way to build a game world. basically have some skill trees some PvP and some building and you have a game.

    thats why wildcard/snail can throw them out as fast as they do there is literally nothing beyond character creation to worry about (once you have world built).

    These things were all the rage and even still are for the first few days. But games where destroying things is the main 'content' are never going to work.

    These games also dont work because of the gap between people who are online 24/7 and people who have 'lives'. Youre never going to be able to balance or equalize it. Its not even 'hardcore' its simply hours put in.

    Also not addressed will be the raiding rulesets or offline or online or all the stuff that has ruined every other game like this.

    They all try and reinvent something that doesnt work. With Bezos it should be expected I suppose but this is going to end up being a 'failure'.

    But from reading this and other articles I suspect it will eventually be heavily monetized and the obvious target for that will be skill and attribute points.

    But it has every failed element of ARK/Atlas and then some by the looks, Although the land claim aspect as shown with Life is Feudal can be done fairly well. The major issue is trying to take land away from someone which atlas has never and will never figure out. Because with 24/7 games getting a 'fair' system is impossible even with a declaration system where there is a time and date set for defender and attacker to be there (akin to the old pirates of the burning sea system) because even with that there are log in issues, lag/latency issues and any other number of problems.
    They literally said, in the article, had you actually bothered to read it, that the attackers and the defenders AGREE upon a time for the assault to commence.

    As far as your assertion that time and place don't work, wrong again, Lineage 2 (as well as others) has this system and it worked well. I was personally involved in several castle fights where there were literally hundreds per side attacking or defending. It worked fine. Not sure if it is still like this as I quit when it went F2P.

    The article further states, not all system are in place, they said that they (amazon) considers it in an Alpha state, so for all the other brain deads that didn't bother to actually read the article and are throwing their opinions around, it's not complete, they aren't selling early access (yet) or stating its ready for release. Reading is fundamental. For the record...aren't both Ark and Atlass still running servers? Oh yeah, they are, so please explain how they have "failed" let me guess, you don't like them so they failed.

    Also, your oversimplification of what makes a Sandbox game is laughable. Maybe a bad sandbox, but not a good one.

    Obviously, each and every one of you are entitled to your opinion, but damn, at least try once in a while to get close to something approaching a fact.
    What if no one does agree then what? These things all sound good in theory they rarely work out.

    As for lineage yeah it WENT F2P that should tell you something. If these things that have FAILED (regardless of personal opinions) actually did work the games wouldnt have failed or made massive changes that caused them to fail or in the very least monetize themselves in some way other than a subscription.

    Give me a SINGLE 'sandbox' game that is remotely decent (other than EVE which still isnt as great as people think it is and I played it for almost 10 years) So by my definition theyre all junk and every developer that has tried one has failed. And with each failure they try and move the goal post to make them more appealing.

    From what I have seen its not even alpha state. These definitions are also very blurry people make assumptions and developers or publishers or PR people say something (usually wrong) and people then use that as the absolute dogma of whatever the product is.

    So following that up the extreme negativity this little stunt they pulled will most definitely put them in a tail spin of not full on panic mode and expect fundamental and wide sweeping changes to everything they have done so far. Which by all accounts might not be such a big deal since this thing is as generic and faceless as it gets.

    As for ARK and Atlas, when private (modded and player controlled) servers have more people than the official servers then yes I think the games failed. At least the ones that were developed 'as is'.

    When guys in their underwear in a basement somewhere create and add content to these things that blows away anything anyone who is actually getting paid to create content for the game has delivered then what does that tell you?

    One guy literally made the best map ARK has. They hired him (he sold out) because they were probably scared of the competition. But nothing remotely decent has come out since then. Not even from him. Had he been left alone or not sold out think maybe he could have created another map even better than his original? What if he had a few people help him?

    The irony to all this is SMALL DEDICATED 'teams' can most definitely deliver a much better gaming experience than the big studios. But everyone sees Amazon the biggest of the big with all the money in the world and they expect greatness. In reality this shit show they put on is exactly what people should expect. They have all the 'talent' in the world and theyre all fighting for creative control of some sort I am sure. With no clear direction other than 'make a survival game' there are a mish mash of ideas and concepts going on. And I suspect they assume that once they have it all in a bag they will shake it and let stuff fall out or mesh together and they will eventually be able to put out something most people will like.

    I doubt it.
  • LeFantomeLeFantome Member RarePosts: 559
    edited February 10
    PvP is the only thing that matters, cant wait for this game.

    Then you know nothing about MMO..unless..it's not a MMO.

    image
  • rodarinrodarin Member RarePosts: 2,423
    I don't think Amazon cares as much about the game as they do the probable Twitch audience it brings in. That is the main motivation for the game. Streaming is the number one priority for this game and the whole purpose behind Lumberyard.

    Amazon will pay some high profile streamers to play it and bring in the crowds. My days of gaming are truly numbered. It's a shame that more people seem to enjoy watching players play games than they actually do playing them. I don't get it and I never will.
    yup this game will make what Atlas did look like charity. I would like to have the money these streamers will get in subs when they start their whole 'if you sub you can join our guild (or whatever theyre called these days) and play with me' just like they did with Atlas. I am also sure the incentives and money will be more and last longer with this as well. Amazon/twitch can fund these guys indefinitely and write it off as advertising. Like they do a few guys already who arent even playing 'their' game.

    But thats why I said above that the longevity of this thing will be more than expected because of exposure it will get. 

    Hey the critics might all be wrong it could (because of the phenomenon attached) be the next 'fortnite'. But I think most people would agree fortnite isnt a good game but its the one everyone is playing. Although if this new one can keep it rolling fortnite might be the next pubg.

    Bottomline is everyone, players, developers, producers, whatever are all looking to catch that lightening in a bottle and it has happened a few times over the past couple years. But despite all that it still doeesnt mean the things that are getting all the hype are even good. If they were they wouldnt rely on hysteria to keep them relevant.
  • KabulozoKabulozo Member UncommonPosts: 861
    edited February 10

    Forgrimm said:

    Looks like shit tbh https://youtu.be/1m6aaQktEMU



    Indie developer level graphics. The vegetation textures are good. But character models reek. The same ugly models from Skyrim almost a decade ago.

    It looks like a survival game rather than a MMO.
  • AlomarAlomar Member RarePosts: 1,182

    DAOWAce said:
    Did you like ARK/Conan Exiles/generic sandbox survival game focused more on pvp without private servers?

    Then you'll like this!

    I was excited for it when announced, but after getting alpha access.. it's a hard pass.

    Edit: Trying to figure out why I have a "MILD" below my name, apparently I was warned for commenting on the last article about this game saying it's a generic sandbox game because it was under "NDA".  TIL the mod team here are mods for random games.

    Time to copy-paste it here since appears to be deleted and the NDA isn't a thing anymore.
    DAOWAce said:
    "Unique MMO"

    Mortal Online wants a word.

    Also, I did play the alpha (hello NDA), and it just felt like yet another survival game, with some territory control mechanics tacked on.

    Woopy. Nothing to see here.

    Conan Exiles was unplayable on official servers where there was no servers over 40 cap, no restarts, and no moderation. Literally everyone played on private servers. If you can't get your comparisons right I can't take your opinion on New World seriously.

    Fortes Fortuna Iuvat

    18 year MMO veteran 
    Retired PvP Raid Leader 
    Lover of The Witcher & CD Projekt Red

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,061
    Kabulozo said:
    I smell a varporware. People already have Battle Royales if they just want to pop in a map with dozens of others -> go straight and kill them -> take their loot -> profit -> next.

    Lineage 1(and 2) was the last MMO with meaningful world PVP I have played.
    Errr ..... no.

    If Amazon want to finish it they will finish it; if they decide to can it they will can it. There is nothing imaginary about the New World. As to what exactly it will be if, as, when it launches ..... ?
    MadFrenchieHatefull
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,388
    edited February 10
    gervaise1 said:
    Kabulozo said:
    I smell a varporware. People already have Battle Royales if they just want to pop in a map with dozens of others -> go straight and kill them -> take their loot -> profit -> next.

    Lineage 1(and 2) was the last MMO with meaningful world PVP I have played.
    Errr ..... no.

    If Amazon want to finish it they will finish it; if they decide to can it they will can it. There is nothing imaginary about the New World. As to what exactly it will be if, as, when it launches ..... ?
    I don't think it's vaporware either. They're not wrong about Lineage though. It's the only open world PvP MMO that had what we've called meaningful pvp in a framework that made sense and worked for the game. None of the themeparks had any meaning to pvp. The entire game system in Lineage promoted thoughtful pvp and political social alliances. ArcheAge (and many others) have tried desperately to recreate that and have failed. Even NCSoft hasn't been able to do it again.

    Meaningful PvP in New World? I seriously doubt it and the burden of proof is definitely on them after 2 decades of industry failure. So excuse me for not giving them the benefit of the doubt. In that context, he's right, people would rather play Battle Royale and other structured PvP games because at least they somewhat deliver on the pvp game play loop as advertised.
    MikehaEponyxDamorKyleran
    take back the hobby: https://www.reddit.com/r/patientgamers/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly
    ༼ つ ◕◕ ༽つ

  • LogsdonbLogsdonb Member UncommonPosts: 18
    The game has very few types of PVE mobs to fight with no loot drops. The only loot is from a small number of heavily camped chests. There are no quests, no dungeons, and no raids. What there is a lot of is ganking and griefing with no real limits. Your lvl 7 char can be jumped by a lvl 47 char (happened to me) who will kill you in seconds and loot everything you are carrying (not what you are wearing). Very low population on the Alpha servers as obviously the game is not much fun at this stage unless you enjoy ganking and griefing.
  • HatefullHatefull Member EpicPosts: 2,116
    Read this today. It is about as relevant as the majority of the comments on this topic and far more based in fact. Enjoy.

    If you want a new idea, go read an old book.

  • BooLadedadaBooLadedada Member CommonPosts: 4

    Taychon56 said:

    Every single comment I've read here makes me want to call you all fools. Especially


    DMKano said:


    Hate to say this but they should seriously consider turning it into a battle royale game.














    New World is a very promising mmo with an interesting premise. They are currently filling the game out which is why it feels so empty but even so the base skeleton of an amazing mmo is there. I hate to sound like such an asshole but the ridiculous negative and overall stupid nature of the criticisms of this game leave me to wonder how the hell MMOs can survive customers like you all.




    This is so True people think they know everything I am in Alpha myself and the Game like the OP said is better then some games that are considered released. We could sit here and argue for the next year on peoples opinions when they decide to Release the game it is gonna be a big hit in the pvp Genre. Not saying it is going to be better then other games I feel it is going to create a new pvp Genre of it's own not sure what they will call it but people will definitely know it is a game all it's own
  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,017
    "Food and drink, however, do serve a purpose. A well-fed character will find that they heal at a quicker pace than when they are hungry. Likewise, being well hydrated ensures that your stamina returns at a much higher rate."

    EQ2 does that.
    craftseekerMadFrenchie
  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 10,747
    Interesting looking game, but, lost me at the PVP, i need more PVE in my games to make them interesting.
    Hatefull
  • bcbullybcbully Member RarePosts: 9,696
    edited February 11
    This is great. Good time to be a gamer.
Sign In or Register to comment.