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

124

Comments

  • Rain_DeathravenRain_Deathraven Member UncommonPosts: 87


    After playing the alpha myself, I found this article strange and confusing. I didn't find anything about it particularly noteworthy regarding the graphics, terrain, and environment. Running on the highest settings, it all felt very generic. I wasn't impressed.

    It felt like another "sandbox" pvp grind game, basically a game without content, no missions, no story, no reason to do anything. You'll gather, craft and grind your way to a set of clothes and weapons so you can then continue to grind the next set that's slightly better. Felt like Albion online. The gather and craft mechanics were really boring and mindless activities.



    I also play the Alpha and i feel exactly like you.
  • MitaraMitara Member UncommonPosts: 755
    Where is the "edge" of this game? I dont see it at all, and that makes it sound boring and not really interesting at all.
  • DMKanoDMKano Member LegendaryPosts: 21,215
    Limnic said:
    "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.

    And a  bunch of other games.
  • DMKanoDMKano Member LegendaryPosts: 21,215
    gervaise1 said:
    As to what exactly it will be if, as, when it launches ..... ?
    A flop. 

    Just like their first game - Breakaway. 


    craftseekerFlyByKnight
  • Warhawke80Warhawke80 Member UncommonPosts: 210
    This joke will go the way of wildstar in under a year.

    At best they will Fortnight it with a predatory cash shop
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,299
    Odd.  It really looks like a dozen other games, none of which interest me.  The multiple spawn points seems to be a major focus, and will be quickly used as a fast-travel mechanism.  The anti-fast travel crowd can't really like that.  I'm not sold on this title, and the article did nothing to change that.  So, it was supposed to be an advertisement for Amazon, a complete miss.



    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • NycteliosNyctelios Member EpicPosts: 3,442
    edited February 11
    I read the points of the game and all I can think of is when I told Salem The Game devs to hurry up and put it on steam with a stable client before they would be shoved into oblivion by new games using their core concepts.

    The land claim thing that most people here are complaining and comparing (fairly) with Atlas works in Salem because of the huge world scale. Their map size is insane - Which is not the case with this title... I guess some devs simply don't see through what makes certain mechanics actually works and just want to copy them.
    MadFrenchie
    Steam ID Discord ID: Night # 6102 - GoG ID - 

    "There is a fine line between consideration and hesitation. The former is wisdom, the latter is fear." Izaro Phrecius, Holy Emperor of the Eternal Empire, Last of Royal Phrecius Family.
  • HarikenHariken Member RarePosts: 2,360


    I stopped reading at the land claim part of the article. As Atlas has shown, land claim system can be a plague and abused massively separating the player base. I hope they have some ways to counter land claiming especially with their infinite land claims they have, according to the article. Not good, no bueno.



    Wasn't this Archages big problem?
  • rodarinrodarin Member RarePosts: 2,452
    Hariken said:


    I stopped reading at the land claim part of the article. As Atlas has shown, land claim system can be a plague and abused massively separating the player base. I hope they have some ways to counter land claiming especially with their infinite land claims they have, according to the article. Not good, no bueno.



    Wasn't this Archages big problem?
    No Archeage didnt have enough land for the people who wanted it. Add in the P2W factor and it was worse. Also land serves(d) almost no purpose in Archeage other than to generate in game money, which in that game (again due to real world monetization) was basically useless. 
  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Member EpicPosts: 3,967
    rodarin said:
    Hariken said:


    I stopped reading at the land claim part of the article. As Atlas has shown, land claim system can be a plague and abused massively separating the player base. I hope they have some ways to counter land claiming especially with their infinite land claims they have, according to the article. Not good, no bueno.



    Wasn't this Archages big problem?
    No Archeage didnt have enough land for the people who wanted it. Add in the P2W factor and it was worse. Also land serves(d) almost no purpose in Archeage other than to generate in game money, which in that game (again due to real world monetization) was basically useless. 
    Archeage didn't have enough land because every time there was a launch or land rush the log-in servers went fubar and there were no restrictions on grid ownership. Single players were snatching droves of plots with bots or coordinated guild planning. They leveraged the queues, and the placement quirks to lock out everyone, then sold the land for silly prices and many times RMT'ed the gold they made.

    New Worlds land isn't really meant for singular players, from what I observed it's for guilds to claim and fuss over.
    "As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*" 

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,320
    DMKano said:
    gervaise1 said:
    As to what exactly it will be if, as, when it launches ..... ?
    A flop. 

    Just like their first game - Breakaway. 


    What, I wonder, are Amazon's success criteria. 

    They canned Breakaway of course - so whilst it couldn't be called a "commercial flop" it didn't meet whatever criteria they had set.

    Some posters have talked about creating a game to "drive Twitch". I don't see that. Twitch doesn't need help. Adding "deep Twitch integration" is almost something they have to do otherwise it would look odd. (Avoids questions like: Amazon not using Twitch. Why not. What do they know etc.)

    Possible aims:

    making money - sure - that is the end goal after all. Amazon's tendrils are so big these days though that how they might make money may not be as obvious. Leaving aside Twitch. Maybe:

    to create gaming tools that they can roll out to "studios/indies" - making their gaming platform more attractive, pulling in games etc., part of a long term goal maybe to take on Steam etc. And they make money by getting more 3rd parties to sell their games via Amazon.

    Which in turn feeds AWS. From which they make money.

    to make Amazon Prime more attractive maybe - if they turn New World or whatever into a "subscription like" game without a subscription. Hard to measure the financial gain side of this. something though.

    That further downstream they can use to drive their TV programming. Or e-sports. Or .... And again hard to measure the financial gain. Again something.

    Something more, anyway, than simply "making a game".
  • anxelesaxeanxelesaxe Member UncommonPosts: 24




    Ling story short, if you didnt like Shadowbane, Ultima Online T2A, Darkfall or Star Wars Galaxies, you wont like this game and should probably just move on.



    There is a very large group of gamers waiting for a game exactly like what Amazon is building here. There are plenty of other PvE/story based games for everyone else to choose from.


    To this day I think that Shadowbane was my favorite MMORPG of all time. That said the main things all those games have in common is they're all fucking dead, or limping along with a tiny population. While I think I'll enjoy The New World, I doubt the majority of MMO gamers are going to want anything to do with it.



    Their deaths were due to mismanagement or ineptitude more so than the games themselves. If shadowbane had been made by a competent studio by competent devs, it would still be around. Hopefully crowfall can be that but I guess we'll see. UO and SWG fell prey to WoW syndrome with their publishers trying to change them into theme parks to grab that sweet wow cash, which killed them off. Darkfall.. well... aventurine. Nothing else needs said there.

    New World is the logical next step for MMORPGs. A mix of survival elements with traditional sandbox MMORPG elements in a persistent, large world. The game aspect is building an empire with your friends, or joining an empire and helping build it up. Rivalries, expansion and politics are what keep things exciting - in other words, community. Something that has been totally lost in today's chatroom dungeon queue mmorpg landscape.
    Gdemami
  • paulythebpaulytheb Member UncommonPosts: 363
    It is difficult to satisfy a crowd that wants choices to have real meaning in the game world, but does not want to face any consequences from those choices.
    TorvalAmarantharSovrath

    ( Note to self-Don't say anything bad about Drizzt.)

    An acerbic sense of humor is NOT allowed here.

  • OG_ZorvanOG_Zorvan Member EpicPosts: 1,858
    edited February 13
    Bleh.
    Post edited by OG_Zorvan on


    MMORPG.COM took away my swinging cheerleader butt .gif.

  • spawn12345spawn12345 Member UncommonPosts: 168

    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.




    Its a stupid survival game like 1000000 before it

    Im just waiting for them to announce battle royal mode to be even more generic
  • SlyLoKSlyLoK Member RarePosts: 2,619
    If the community is there where I can focus on say combat or hunting and purchase new gear from other players I think I would have fun. But if it is like other games where you pretty much do it all yourself then I'll pass.
  • VesaviusVesavius Member RarePosts: 7,898
    After playing the alpha myself, I found this article strange and confusing. I wasn't impressed. It felt like another... game without content, no missions, no story, no reason to do anything.
    In all honesty, I find mmorpgers today very strange and confusing... Asking for story from a mmorpg? I mean, I get lore, but coming to mmorpgs for a forced storyline? I understood the console kids complaining about FO76 not having story, they are what they are, but, I would assume, seasoned mmorpgers not being able to deal with a sandbox because it didn't give them a pre written story? That kind of amazes me.

    Why do you have to be given missions? Have you not the agency to set your own missions? Have you never played a game like Rust and experienced how story is what happens to you and missions are what you choose to do back?

    it's like people want a return to the !!! quest giver and story that no one reads, and yet complains when it isn't there, for a game to be 'good'. I suspect that it isn't story that they miss, but a shopping list of busywork tasks for them to work through... For the game to do their thinking for them.

    It's kind of depressing.
  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member RarePosts: 3,425
    edited February 15
    I stopped reading at the land claim part of the article. As Atlas has shown, land claim system can be a plague and abused massively separating the player base. I hope they have some ways to counter land claiming especially with their infinite land claims they have, according to the article. Not good, no bueno.


    I am all for wide open land claims as long as you can lose them. They each have to be defended, and maybe multiples at the same time. That's how it should work, in my opinion.

    Once upon a time....

  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,666
    paulytheb said:
    It is difficult to satisfy a crowd that wants choices to have real meaning in the game world, but does not want to face any consequences from those choices.
    That is a very insightful comment in my opinion. Gaming options are rather binary right now though. It's either no consequences at all or completely brutal. We need systems that have multiple and varying degrees of consequence. 

    They should have just billed it as a Survival MMO like ARK only not janky. To me, if they can pull of 250+ concurrency per map and the world is persistent (even if there are lots of little servers), then it's an MMO. I think they have been trying to be coy about genre labels and that has worked against them. They just need to say what it is and then do a good job at making it that thing. Deliver on that game play loop.
    take back the hobby: https://www.reddit.com/r/patientgamers/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly
    ༼ つ ◕◕ ༽つ

    It only took 3 people 8 words to rock Blizzard to its core.
  • DvoraDvora Member UncommonPosts: 495
    Torval said:
    paulytheb said:
    It is difficult to satisfy a crowd that wants choices to have real meaning in the game world, but does not want to face any consequences from those choices.
    That is a very insightful comment in my opinion. Gaming options are rather binary right now though. It's either no consequences at all or completely brutal. We need systems that have multiple and varying degrees of consequence. 

    They should have just billed it as a Survival MMO like ARK only not janky. To me, if they can pull of 250+ concurrency per map and the world is persistent (even if there are lots of little servers), then it's an MMO. I think they have been trying to be coy about genre labels and that has worked against them. They just need to say what it is and then do a good job at making it that thing. Deliver on that game play loop.
    Have they said this is going to be a mini server (250ish) mmo?  Hard pass on any of those.
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,666
    Dvora said:
    Torval said:
    paulytheb said:
    It is difficult to satisfy a crowd that wants choices to have real meaning in the game world, but does not want to face any consequences from those choices.
    That is a very insightful comment in my opinion. Gaming options are rather binary right now though. It's either no consequences at all or completely brutal. We need systems that have multiple and varying degrees of consequence. 

    They should have just billed it as a Survival MMO like ARK only not janky. To me, if they can pull of 250+ concurrency per map and the world is persistent (even if there are lots of little servers), then it's an MMO. I think they have been trying to be coy about genre labels and that has worked against them. They just need to say what it is and then do a good job at making it that thing. Deliver on that game play loop.
    Have they said this is going to be a mini server (250ish) mmo?  Hard pass on any of those.
    Nope, just rumor mill stuff that it would have a higher concurrency.
    take back the hobby: https://www.reddit.com/r/patientgamers/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly
    ༼ つ ◕◕ ༽つ

    It only took 3 people 8 words to rock Blizzard to its core.
  • rodarinrodarin Member RarePosts: 2,452
    I stopped reading at the land claim part of the article. As Atlas has shown, land claim system can be a plague and abused massively separating the player base. I hope they have some ways to counter land claiming especially with their infinite land claims they have, according to the article. Not good, no bueno.


    I am all for wide open land claims as long as you can lose them. They each have to be defended, and maybe multiples at the same time. That's how it should work, in my opinion.
    There are a lot of way to have claims work unfortunately NONE of them have been implemented by the plethora of games that have put them in their games.

    I am all for 'taking' land but there has to be a reason. I dont like the random go and try and steal shit mechanic most games have. Even declaring 'war' or rivalry or whatever JUST to steal land from someone else to me should have some 'involvement'. Games track everything so there should be a threshhold of things to happen before you can even start a major conflict. Then ultimately a 'war' And then to keep it semi reasonable there should be a minimum number of people on from both sides when any timed (which I guess theyre going to try and do) battles take place. If not enough people show up from either side then its a push and some sort of 'peace' treaty is put into place where neither side can be aggressive to the other side for a certain amount of REAL WORLD time like a week , 10 days, 2 weeks a month. Whatever. If only one side has enough then the side without enough should suffer a penalty/loss (assuming there is some sort of mutual agreement for any preplanned battles) So if BOTH sides agree and one side doenst show up they lose something automatically. Some sort of claim system maybe so both sides know what the other side wants the most. I dont think any battle should result in a guild or clan or whatever losing everything they own. Sides make claims and BOTH sides have a chance to lose something. That way (in a 'balanced' situation) each side has to make a choice. Either defend or attack and run the risk of getting something as well as losing something.

    Thats just a 'simplistic' outline of what they could do.

    Other things I would look at would be limiting groups from owning too much land/property. That has what has killed every game with this sort of system even in a game like Atlas with not a lot of people and a pretty large map 12-15 groups owned 80% of the claimable land withing 3 days of servers being stable enough to claim anything and then within 3 more days they owned 90% or more of it.

    I would also implement a tax system where groups would have to pay taxes (and maybe collect some) into the system. Good gold sink and it would make groups at least sort of budget even with a land cap.

    Same with 'individual' plots/claims. You shouldnt be able to own everything or stuff you cant afford to own. Either monetarily or militarily. But I htink some hermit living way out in the middle of no where should be able to exist without griefers or try hards trying to force him off his land or claim it just because they can. I suppose if they wanted to they could put in a system where if a group really wanted to be dicks they could go through the whole process of being able to have a 'war' with this one guy but I dont think if a guy has a single plot he should lose it. Unless it is literally surrounded by a group he doesnt want to join or sell out to. Which is something else they should have selling/buying land (and some system to avoid exploiting that as well) THEN they could get it to fill in their borders. Or they could force him to be a vassel or something and then have some sort of taxation system. That way he might be more apt to sell.

    These 'sand box' games all go on the assumption that PvP and killing and combat are the only direction they can go. But thats only because the lazy developers havent put in any other mechanics.

    Put in a trade system, a monetary system, a banking system, a faction system and whatever other system that makes sense and have those open ended and a choice people could make and people wouldnt have to invent some wink and a nod system that never work.

    Everyone THINKS they want 'sandbox' which they might but not in any of the ways every sandbox game thus far has offered. Even Eve. But it at least has some of the systems I mention in it to give people more than one choice. Which for every other game BUT eve is PvP/combat destruction.


  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,048
    I loved UO and Minecraft, so I'm definitely going to keep an eye on this one.
    But if the PvP ganking is rampant, this will be another failure of a sandbox game, sadly.
    Torvalcraftseeker
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming - RAM: 16GB Kingston HyperX Savage DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Philips 40PUK6809 4K 3D TV - Second display: Philips 273v 27" gaming monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset and Razer Hydra controllers - Soundcard: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.

  • sausagemixsausagemix Member UncommonPosts: 76
    This sounds like it hasn't progressed much at all from the October test. I found it barren and boring. Crafting consists of having the level to create an item made of ingredients of such ambiguous origin that tracking them down is infuriating. The whole thing was a meandering directionless survival slog. I was hoping that it was just the early nature but the article LITERALLY states the same experience minus "this was boring". I really hope Amazon kicks things up a few levels otherwise I see their whole gaming venture going bust in a year since it doesnt make ridiculous, immediate returns. I wanted this to be great but it was just blaaaaah.
    anemo
  • anemoanemo Member RarePosts: 1,750
    This sounds like it hasn't progressed much at all from the October test. I found it barren and boring. Crafting consists of having the level to create an item made of ingredients of such ambiguous origin that tracking them down is infuriating. The whole thing was a meandering directionless survival slog. I was hoping that it was just the early nature but the article LITERALLY states the same experience minus "this was boring". I really hope Amazon kicks things up a few levels otherwise I see their whole gaming venture going bust in a year since it doesnt make ridiculous, immediate returns. I wanted this to be great but it was just blaaaaah.
    A survival game without you owning and building your own house/base, makes the grind in a grindy genre all the more unbearable. 

    Practice doesn't make perfect, practice makes permanent.

    "At one point technology meant making tech that could get to the moon, now it means making tech that could get you a taxi."

Sign In or Register to comment.