you cannot combine vegan food with meat, well sure... you could, but it wouldn't be vegan anymore
Realm Versus Realm, as in DAOC squares that circle.
Yeah but the PVE was crap
No it was not, I preferred WoW and AC from those days, but it was not bad. And once again there is no reason a RvR MMO cannot have the best PvE there is, nothing about RvR inhibits great PvE.
I disagree. one will always effect the other. That is why it has never been done right. To this day. It is possible but so far noone has done a good job doing it. Perhaps PotBS did it best. Or Wushu
I certainly think many PvE players think PvP will always effect them and it is likely that has put of some from playing RvR. But they are wrong to have such concerns, RvR is a great balance between the two play styles. There may be lessons to learn from the two games you mention to make an even better balance, but if so that would just be icing on the cake for the perfect wedding between PvE and PvP which is RvR.
PVP crowd is a very vocal minority that has ruined many good games. That minority thinks that griefing noobies is pvp. Sadly some devs fall for it.
In MMORPG's thats true. New World is closer to rust/ark.
That we shall see. I come from 10+ years of playing EVE and if this game provides the frame players will provide the content. But if this is truly like crapark or rust then its doomed before it even launched. Just like in RL all it takes is one dumb person with no life to ruin months of what you built in just seconds just because he or she can. But unlike in RL there are no consequences. This is why rust and ark are bad in the long run and never retain creative people.
No fate but what we make, so make me a ham sandwich please.
Since nobody thought to write this so far in this thread, I want to thank the author for a very well written article. I sort of feel the same way as the author, except that I do think it's a bit dramatic to feel that just because you see a battle nearby of PVP that doesn't impact you, that it is so immersion breaking, but to each there own.
I liked the WOW model, I like the ESO model as well..this as a PVEr. I agree that it would be nice as a PVEr not to have zones I want to explore, but can't because it is PVP. I don't know why, but I get anxiety running around Cyrodiil just to complete some quests or pick up skyshards, but I try not to take it too seriously and think of it as fun that there is some level of danger...just like I can appreciate that danger in WOW where there were zones at launch that flagged you to PVP just to run through them. Those zones weren't all that important in the scheme of things and back at launch and perhaps were just a way to introduce PVErs to PVP.
Anyway, I'm all for have separate servers or putting Cyrodiil into an instance for PVE and one for PVP (which they should still do :-)).
Here's hoping this game lives up to it's potential and I hope the developers continue to flush these choices out which is the point of where they are in the development cycle.
PVP crowd is a very vocal minority that has ruined many good games. That minority thinks that griefing noobies is pvp. Sadly some devs fall for it.
In MMORPG's thats true. New World is closer to rust/ark.
That we shall see. I come from 10+ years of playing EVE and if this game provides the frame players will provide the content. But if this is truly like crapark or rust then its doomed before it even launched. Just like in RL all it takes is one dumb person with no life to ruin months of what you built in just seconds just because he or she can. But unlike in RL there are no consequences. This is why rust and ark are bad in the long run and never retain creative people.
EVE is its own genre imo. Sure people include it in the MMORPG tag but I'd just label it EVE. Majority of EVE is afk-ish anyways. It doesn't relate or affect any other game.
Amazon has already stated that they found an immense amount of people ganking lowbies over and over. Of course the PvP crowd will ignore this fact and keep claiming PvP games fail because of PvE drama. Quite the opposite really as PvE crowds have little to no affect on how PvP works. If a game allows PvP, it allows PvP. The fact it doesn't allow you to gank lowbies all day just says something about the PvP crowd.
DAoC has been discussed multiple times of how PvE and PvP can work well together in a RPG progression setting. At this point, the only ones still arguing are the sociopaths.
^ This.
This is how it has always been, and was definitely a thing during the last testing phase(s) in New World.
All of the most popular PC games are PvP. They will definitely favor the PvP content over the PvE.
What most popular PC games are PvP?
Shadowbane? Darkfall? Dark Age of Camelot?
The most popular games are the ones where everyone can pick it up and play it. And they are not PvP games. Did you check lately if used to live in a parallel universe where PvP was the most popular thing in your reality, but somehow you got transported into our reality where PvP is a niche market?
Pretty sure he's talking about Fortnite, Overwatch, LoL, etc.
And which of those games are MMOs?
NONE?!
But, how can that be?
Those games are what killed PvP focused MMOs.
No one wants to tediously grind out levels and gear for hours and hours before they get to the PvP in an MMO anymore. In Fortnite or LoL you can get into a PvP match thats a level playing field in minutes.
It's funny how when a game is being made with PvP at its core, all of the people who hate PvP flock to it and inject their opinions of what PvP should be.
Amazon has already stated that they found an immense amount of people ganking lowbies over and over. Of course the PvP crowd will ignore this fact and keep claiming PvP games fail because of PvE drama. Quite the opposite really as PvE crowds have little to no affect on how PvP works. If a game allows PvP, it allows PvP. The fact it doesn't allow you to gank lowbies all day just says something about the PvP crowd.
DAoC has been discussed multiple times of how PvE and PvP can work well together in a RPG progression setting. At this point, the only ones still arguing are the sociopaths.
^ This.
This is how it has always been, and was definitely a thing during the last testing phase(s) in New World.
Yeah, I do like how the PVPer's ignore this statement. They just need to face the fact that PVE focused MMO's make more money. Amazon is a huge company that's about making money not giving the very loud vocal minority what they want. They won't miss the PVPer's that won't play this game at all.
There is a demand for both in a same game/world but you have to make sure both sides have fun. Eve is a perfect example of this working pretty good. Reward and risk need to be together for both sides if you want to be a murderer and kill innocents there needs to be penalties involved that arent game breaking. Same with pve they need a reason to risk leaving the guard protected areas. the balance needs to be there for both sides as well as the penalties etc. Unholy wars tried it but failed..
There are so many games out there already that are pve focused. How often does a pvp focused open world mmo come out? If you wanna reshash good pve content there are so many games out there. Gotta be honest here this contributor admitted hes pretty selfish and for good reason PvE heroes want every damn new mmo to be catered to them and it's ridiculous.
There are so many games out there already that are pve focused. How often does a pvp focused open world mmo come out? If you wanna reshash good pve content there are so many games out there. Gotta be honest here this contributor admitted hes pretty selfish and for good reason PvE heroes want every damn new mmo to be catered to them and it's ridiculous.
What is ridiculous is PvPers don't understand why devs aren't creating PvP mmorpgs. It's all about making money and there just aren't enough PvPers to sustain an mmorpg on their own.
Mobas, battle royale, and shooters are where the money is. They are much cheaper to make than an mmorpg, are perfect for micro transactions, and can pull in players of all ages. As mentioned before in the comments here players also don't feel cheated of time and hard work when they die because the next round everyone comes back in with a level playing field. The only thing they have to worry about is learning the maps and off they go over and over again.
Good thing this is just an opinion by some random nobody. The reality is we don't want "instanced duels". If I wanted to 1v1 somebody I'd just go play street fighter. I want open world pvp and a unique experience not found in other games. That's what NW used to be. You can be a highwayman, trader, mercenary or bounty hunter. Now you can't be any of those things,
I think the problem AGS was facing is that too many players weren't being highwaymen, traders, mercenaries, or bounty hunters. All they were doing was running rampant killing lower level players over and over again. AGS made it very enticing to do this with partial looting of kills and learned that the risk vs reward is too high to stop it. Hell, even games that don't give you any reward for killing lowbies will still have players doing it for the sheer joy of screwing with other players.
Why is an advertised pvp centered game having an alpha with a bunch of pvers testing. Of course they dont like pvp bc they dont pvp. Like asking someone to taste test chocolate but they hate the taste of chocolate. Nonsense.
Ultima Online and Star Wars Galaxies were my two favorite MMO's. Obviously UO was a bit different pvp wise than SWG and certainly different from most Western MMO's. Once you left the guard zone it was always about being aware of who was around you and if you died you got looted... even mobs would loot you. Most of the time nobody really bothered me and after I got decent at fighting I don't think I was ever attacked by a "pk" first. Yet the market is also very different today. I think if UO was released now the experience would be much more negative... and everyone I knew other than two people quit UO as it was. Especially when EQ was flaunting the "no forced pvp" it it's early FAQs.
The other other game I really did much player conflict in was DAoC and I played that probably longer than any other MMO. I quit when classic was rolled into the ToA servers for reference and had started at launch... Personally I think the entire frontier concept is a great idea and could be changed up to offer different incentives etc as opposed to trying to copy it in a new game.
As for "New World" when I started testing it... and at that time it was going to be pvp almost everywhere. Well I stopped testing rather quickly. I wasn't upset that the game was that way.... in fact I was more than happy for people who wanted a game like that.
It certainly shouldn't have been a mystery as to where the money was with pvp and pve. So in my opinion this decision on pvp and pve should have been made and stuck with before development started.
Amazon wants to make a successful game. The data they received during the tests indicated that open world PvP was not how to do it. Probably the first studio I can think of to do so instead of pretending that they are the ones that are going to do it right. Good for them.
Since then I'm sure they have made changes to offer more PvE content.
And don't forget that PvP is still in the game. It is just structured and no longer open world.
There are so many games out there already that are pve focused. How often does a pvp focused open world mmo come out? If you wanna reshash good pve content there are so many games out there. Gotta be honest here this contributor admitted hes pretty selfish and for good reason PvE heroes want every damn new mmo to be catered to them and it's ridiculous.
What is ridiculous is PvPers don't understand why devs aren't creating PvP mmorpgs. It's all about making money and there just aren't enough PvPers to sustain an mmorpg on their own.
Mobas, battle royale, and shooters are where the money is. They are much cheaper to make than an mmorpg, are perfect for micro transactions, and can pull in players of all ages. As mentioned before in the comments here players also don't feel cheated of time and hard work when they die because the next round everyone comes back in with a level playing field. The only thing they have to worry about is learning the maps and off they go over and over again.
That's funny because it's not true.
"Facepunch studios programmer Garry Newman has posted a yearly review that contains a bit of interesting fact: Survival game Rust has now made more money than his eponymous Garry's Mod, or Gmod. With Rust having grossed $142 million at 9 million copies sold"
And Rust is one of the most "toxic" game communities.
The only reason the New World was made is because of these open-world survival PVP games, it will fail being indecisive with going one way or another because both communities are going to get bored.
Rust is a shooter/survival game. Not sure why you're using that as your example. Everyone knows that shooters are popular.
While I agree full loot needed to go, I don't think any Alpha demographics were accurate. I, and most I knew, only tested it for a day or two then moved on waiting for release. It's likely the demographic that stuck around for nothing but guild war land claiming was more toxic. Therefore, there wasn't the average pvp population to either offset those numbers or simply stop the trolls by killing them back. It's a sandbox afterall, the players are meant to change the world and counter things not the devs.
Haxus Council Member 21 year MMO veteran PvP Raid Leader Lover of The Witcher & CD Projekt Red
you cannot combine vegan food with meat, well sure... you could, but it wouldn't be vegan anymore
Realm Versus Realm, as in DAOC squares that circle.
Yeah but the PVE was crap
No it was not, I preferred WoW and AC from those days, but it was not bad. And once again there is no reason a RvR MMO cannot have the best PvE there is, nothing about RvR inhibits great PvE.
I disagree. one will always effect the other. That is why it has never been done right. To this day. It is possible but so far noone has done a good job doing it. Perhaps PotBS did it best. Or Wushu
As long as the PvP player's level is based off of PvE activity, there is a connection. As long as this connection exists, there probably won't be a successful, popular and profitable MMORPG mixing the two play styles. At least, not in my lifetime.
All developers go into a game aligned with one side or the other. Invariably, the side they favor tends to be better developed and more satisfying to the fans of that style. It's in their mindset. It's human nature.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
It's odd that so many people here put so much faith in AGS's ability be to a competent developer even though they haven't made a single game and have spent hundreds of millions. What does a game company with so much being expected of them do when they are actually expected to produce and have a poor product to show? Completely sabotage yourself by changing the core game design that you've built everything around for YEARS. I said in another thread the other day that by doing "the change" they can shift the blame from themselves onto the players. That plan is already succeeding because PVE players are arguing with PVP players when just a month ago the only gripes about New World was focused at the developers, so mission accomplished?
The one justification for changing the core PvP design that has been mentioned in this thread was that "higher level players just ganked lower levels" but who designed it to be that way? Blaming and punishing PvP players for something they created. They could have changed the way regions were designed or something on their end to fix that problem. Copy the way Albion and EVE does it if low level ganking is a problem but obviously they are instead using the concern as a way to possibly cover their own failure.
Keep in mind that it took them 4 years and hundreds of millions to create a game with even fewer features than some survival games. If you add up all of CF, CU, Pantheon's crowdfunding money it doesn't even add up to what these folks have spent. Someone is sweating there and this move is a job security decision not a "good for the players" one.
Honestly I always felt like Archage did this kind of content right, certain areas were forced pvp but not all and certain quests at lvl 30+ would bring you into pvp areas. Also add the pvp flag system on top, this has always felt like a system that needed to be used more in my opinion. Full either way becomes stale because of either easy content or ganking, being in that heightened state of PVP all the time is a draw back and forces people to become disinterested. But I think there is something really exciting about being forced into certain PVP areas for PVE content but that may be because I have played MMOs for so long most content is to easy and stale these days. Also certain areas becoming war time based on player driven events is really dope but once again not used enough in an open world setting. This to me is the only way these systems can be implemented and acceptable to both parties. But there also needs to be a high factor of risk vs reward.
The truth IMHO, PVE players don't need PvP players to play and have a good time. It's about the lore, the journey, farming and building something. PvP players (atleast the unsavory players) need PVE players as that is their adventure, ruining somebody's day, stopping that player from doing what they're doing. The PvP player I'm referring to isn't looking for another PvP player, they are looking for someone that isn't expecting someone to attack them... Usually of the lower level or inexperienced type. PVE players are their content.
Even games like Darkfall realize they cannot make money off of one set of players and have attempted to introduce PVE-friendly content. Or eventually die out like the predecessors.
Businesses go where the money is.. Amazon is looking for a lucrative product that will attract all people, a tall order to be sure. But if people flock to the model then it is a win. How many games did they plan out for and have since abandoned? There was several, and now it's down to one that's not a license..
One game I know that tries to accomplish the fun of PvP and PVE is GW2. It's not perfect, but with its current model it has lasted longer. And even though it's not exactly the same, even GW1 is still going..
The truth IMHO, PVE players don't need PvP players to play and have a good time. It's about the lore, the journey, farming and building something. PvP players (atleast the unsavory players) need PVE players as that is their adventure, ruining somebody's day, stopping that player from doing what they're doing. The PvP player I'm referring to isn't looking for another PvP player, they are looking for someone that isn't expecting someone to attack them... Usually of the lower level or inexperienced type. PVE players are their content.
The difference here is that New World was a survival PvP
It was at first, but for some reason I doubt the change was only a knee jerk reaction, they must have seen balance challenges and long term viability issues ahead which drove the change in part with complaints and various metrics they watched in real time. Aslo seeing the community Rust has become and decided it wasn't worth launching a multi million dollar game to cater to toxic kids.
Take Sea of Thieves for instance, it's loads of fun, but the content is so watered down because it's mostly a PvP game. It looks like they want New World to be a pve quest game, nothing wrong with that I guess. Honestly I don't care, I have a few other survival games I'm playing at the moment.
We can still PvP, but it's just not going to be the beloved gankfest most folks wanted. I've ganked noobs for the lolz out of boredom, even I'll admit it's still griefing anyway you look at it. Eventually you just end up with nothing but roaming gank squads and no one doing any of the lore because everyone is too busy killing each other with no real purpose other than a chuckle.
Comments
No fate but what we make, so make me a ham sandwich please.
I liked the WOW model, I like the ESO model as well..this as a PVEr. I agree that it would be nice as a PVEr not to have zones I want to explore, but can't because it is PVP. I don't know why, but I get anxiety running around Cyrodiil just to complete some quests or pick up skyshards, but I try not to take it too seriously and think of it as fun that there is some level of danger...just like I can appreciate that danger in WOW where there were zones at launch that flagged you to PVP just to run through them. Those zones weren't all that important in the scheme of things and back at launch and perhaps were just a way to introduce PVErs to PVP.
Anyway, I'm all for have separate servers or putting Cyrodiil into an instance for PVE and one for PVP (which they should still do :-)).
Here's hoping this game lives up to it's potential and I hope the developers continue to flush these choices out which is the point of where they are in the development cycle.
There Is Always Hope!
^ This.
This is how it has always been, and was definitely a thing during the last testing phase(s) in New World.
btw: now im even more interested in the game
Mobas, battle royale, and shooters are where the money is. They are much cheaper to make than an mmorpg, are perfect for micro transactions, and can pull in players of all ages. As mentioned before in the comments here players also don't feel cheated of time and hard work when they die because the next round everyone comes back in with a level playing field. The only thing they have to worry about is learning the maps and off they go over and over again.
The other other game I really did much player conflict in was DAoC and I played that probably longer than any other MMO. I quit when classic was rolled into the ToA servers for reference and had started at launch... Personally I think the entire frontier concept is a great idea and could be changed up to offer different incentives etc as opposed to trying to copy it in a new game.
As for "New World" when I started testing it... and at that time it was going to be pvp almost everywhere. Well I stopped testing rather quickly. I wasn't upset that the game was that way.... in fact I was more than happy for people who wanted a game like that.
It certainly shouldn't have been a mystery as to where the money was with pvp and pve. So in my opinion this decision on pvp and pve should have been made and stuck with before development started.
Since then I'm sure they have made changes to offer more PvE content.
And don't forget that PvP is still in the game. It is just structured and no longer open world.
21 year MMO veteran
PvP Raid Leader
Lover of The Witcher & CD Projekt Red
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
The one justification for changing the core PvP design that has been mentioned in this thread was that "higher level players just ganked lower levels" but who designed it to be that way? Blaming and punishing PvP players for something they created. They could have changed the way regions were designed or something on their end to fix that problem. Copy the way Albion and EVE does it if low level ganking is a problem but obviously they are instead using the concern as a way to possibly cover their own failure.
Keep in mind that it took them 4 years and hundreds of millions to create a game with even fewer features than some survival games. If you add up all of CF, CU, Pantheon's crowdfunding money it doesn't even add up to what these folks have spent. Someone is sweating there and this move is a job security decision not a "good for the players" one.
Even games like Darkfall realize they cannot make money off of one set of players and have attempted to introduce PVE-friendly content. Or eventually die out like the predecessors.
Businesses go where the money is.. Amazon is looking for a lucrative product that will attract all people, a tall order to be sure. But if people flock to the model then it is a win. How many games did they plan out for and have since abandoned? There was several, and now it's down to one that's not a license.. One game I know that tries to accomplish the fun of PvP and PVE is GW2. It's not perfect, but with its current model it has lasted longer. And even though it's not exactly the same, even GW1 is still going..