Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

New World Talks PvP Wars And PvE Invasions In New Dev Diary

2

Comments

  • TacticalZombehTacticalZombeh Member UncommonPosts: 379

    Iselin said:


    sschrupp said:



    I love horde defense type scenarios in games, so the invasion sounds like a ton of fun.


    If you get selected. Once per day. 40 players chosen randomly from those who signed up the day before + 10 that the guild leader selects.



    I've seen that, but it doesn't seem different than a typical raid in an MMO where you can only take (back in the day) 40 people and either the guild leadership or DKP often determined who could go, along with "Main" Tanks/Healers/CC'rs.
  • YashaXYashaX Member EpicPosts: 2,781

    Iselin said:


    Amathe said:

    The invasions sound a little (just a bit) like ring wars in eq, where a whole zone full of players battled a large number of NPCs. Of course, back then, the battle was more with your isp and graphics card, as all that action produced crash after crash.


    In Dark Age of Camelot we counted seconds per frame not frames per second.



    Ah so that's where the ESO devs got the idea from!
    IselinbcbullyKyleran
    ....
  • BruceYeeBruceYee Member EpicPosts: 2,075
    If this 50vs50 territorial battle royale is the pinnacle of the pvp for this game what will the pinnacle for pve be? surely not the heavily scripted invasions of the fort we saw in the video?

    At first glance when watching this video I got a feeling they were copying WAR castle sieges but instanced... Then watching it a 2nd time got a serious Ashes of Creation Battle Royale vibe.

    Someone on here a while ago said as a joke "They are probably turning it into a Battle Royale game" and now I think they were in a sense partially right.

    Look at the chain of events...

    4 years of development - "This is an open world full loot pvp MMO game"
    4.5 years of development - "This is now a PVE game with limited PVP" You know what other game said this? H1Z1. the battle royale was one part of the game that was 200x more popular than the limited pve part and where most of the income for that game can from.

    The "now this is a PVE game" for New World was the friggin distraction to keep the fans fighting each other while they carefully change the entire game into some instanced territory control battle royale type game. Just like someone else in this thread said "where are the factions?" Yeah I wanna know the answer to that too cause this just looks nothing like an open world MMO with factions and PVE. The guilt in every single one of the dev's eyes says it all about the huge overall change in direction. Where are the PVE encounters in the OPEN WORLD?!? Show the progression system if there is any if the game is actually an MMO too cause in that video everyone looks almost exactly the same just like in other battle royale games... Maybe they are going to lock in a new genre...
    "Guild Royale" "Territory Royale" "Siege Royale"

    Battle royal definition is - a fight participated in by more than two combatants; especially : one in which the last fighter in the ring or the last fighter standing is declared the winner.

    ^ this definition is essentially how every castle siege will end because if there's one opponent standing on the flag node it won't cap, right? This game is now a friggin BR folks...

    Video at 2 minutes "New level of social dynamism that no other game has".
    If they believe these words and they believe they have something so different why would they even bother creating that PVE content like in those 'classic' games? They are clearly mining for gold trying to scramble and come up with some new type of hit game with the ashes of the now obviously abandoned MMO...

    The people wanting PVE in this game got screwed and the people wanting open world PVP got screwed cause now everyone is getting another damn Battle Royale...

  • RhoklawRhoklaw Member LegendaryPosts: 7,442
    What I find interesting is the amount of people that hate or dislike this game leave more comments than those of us who are looking forward to it. I guess bitching about something once in a thread isn't enough. They need to bitch about same shit 10x in every thread.

    Anyhow, innovation isn't exactly a strong suit of any game development company lately, so it's nice to see a game that at least utilizes some of the mechanics of other games I enjoyed, such as DAoC, Rift and Conan Exiles.

    I have to agree with @Asheram about the "kids" enjoying toxic OWPvP gankfest. Which is totally fine with me and one of the main reasons I avoid those games.
    Vinterkrig

  • YashaXYashaX Member EpicPosts: 2,781
    Rhoklaw said:
    What I find interesting is the amount of people that hate or dislike this game leave more comments than those of us who are looking forward to it. I guess bitching about something once in a thread isn't enough. They need to bitch about same shit 10x in every thread.

    Anyhow, innovation isn't exactly a strong suit of any game development company lately, so it's nice to see a game that at least utilizes some of the mechanics of other games I enjoyed, such as DAoC, Rift and Conan Exiles.

    I have to agree with @Asheram about the "kids" enjoying toxic OWPvP gankfest. Which is totally fine with me and one of the main reasons I avoid those games.
    I think the issue for a lot of people is not that they dropped owpvp, but that it seems they haven't replaced it with anything interesting. Even more concerning is what they are describing as the "pinnacle" of both pvp and pve content seems quite weak. 

    Looking at the pvp for example, I am dubious of how compelling these 50 vs 50 fort raids are going to be. ESO already provides that kind of content almost 24/7 , and seems to do it a lot better judging by NWs promo videos.

    The pve raids look kind of fun to me, but a lot will depend on the implementation. It seems like its going to be very constrictive and limiting in terms of when you can play and who you can play with based on the information released to date, but hopefully it will be a lot more dynamic than it sounds on paper.
    BruceYee
    ....
  • wyldmagikwyldmagik Member UncommonPosts: 516
    edited May 2020
    Full of holes this game so far, lets look at a real terrible one.

    There's 1k people per server and the 'pinnacle' of pvp is 50v50 timed by 1 hour per day.

    most people wont get a look in.

    Or.. it will be the new era of, Hey I donated on your twitch stream and sub'd company leader does that get me a spot when you pick your 10 guildies for battle? P2C "pay to creep"

    Wonder how they will end up making that a fair thing lol.
    YashaX
  • GatsuZerkGatsuZerk Member UncommonPosts: 33

    Asheram said:

    I find it more enjoyable than getting ganked by zerg kill all on site rob and destroy all my stuff kids with only way to avoid that being join megaclan be megaslave farmer.



    Want to try that one more time? Perhaps in English?
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 14,938
    wyldmagik said:

    There's 1k people per server and the 'pinnacle' of pvp is 50v50 timed by 1 hour per day.

    They likely went for high poly counts and glitz so their engine can only handle 50 v 50 and even then only in one smallish instanced spot.

    I saw the large battle performance of ESO deteriorate over time - it could handle things much better in 2014 - at the same time they added higher poly costumes and transmogs and made the cash shop's huge database something you could access instantly anywhere, even in PvP.
    KyleranAsheramYashaX
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

    "... the "influencers" which is the tech name we call sell outs now..."
    __ Wizardry, 2020
  • bcbullybcbully Member EpicPosts: 10,289
    Iselin said:
    wyldmagik said:

    There's 1k people per server and the 'pinnacle' of pvp is 50v50 timed by 1 hour per day.

    They likely went for high poly counts and glitz so their engine can only handle 50 v 50 and even then only in one smallish instanced spot.

    I saw the large battle performance of ESO deteriorate over time - it could handle things much better in 2014 - at the same time they added higher poly costumes and transmogs and made the cash shop's huge database something you could access instantly anywhere, even in PvP.
    I promise you there will not be fort battles once per day. Companies will have protects. The whole idea is to not lose your territory. The best way to do that is not engage in battle. Again there will be built in protections against battle.
    SkitzoXYashaX
  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 7,546
    I don't enjoy open world PvP but this BG type scenario looks like fun. I want to be in charge of the horn.
    bcbullyAsheram
    Chamber of Chains
  • SkitzoXSkitzoX Member UncommonPosts: 189
    cheyane said:
    I don't enjoy open world PvP but this BG type scenario looks like fun. I want to be in charge of the horn.
    They do not and will not happen nearly enough to keep players interested. When they do happen they are scheduled a day in advance and only last for 30 minutes. The company leaders have 100% say in who is selected for these battles. Pvp is not available 24/7, there is no pvp zones or battlegrounds, nobody flags because the benefits don’t justify the risk so you can go hours without finding a fight and the pve is as simple and boring as it gets. It’s obvious they rushed, the systems don’t work well together and the pve content is as basic as it gets. These invasions are fun but guess what... it’s a scripted event that is the Same exact experience every time. Guess how many times you can run this same scripted event before you lose interest? With how boring the rest of the game is it’s definitely not enough to get me logging every 4 days for one event.

    This has, over time become one of the most boring games I’ve ever played. People will buy it because it’s new and from Amazon but it’s terrible atm.
    KyleranbcbullyIselinYashaX
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 14,938
    cheyane said:
    I don't enjoy open world PvP but this BG type scenario looks like fun. I want to be in charge of the horn.
    You're just a horney person I guess :)
    bcbullyAsheram
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

    "... the "influencers" which is the tech name we call sell outs now..."
    __ Wizardry, 2020
  • xpsyncxpsync Member RarePosts: 1,576
    A hope? - A chance.
    There are two ways of arguing with a woman, and neither one works. - John Marston

    Currently Playing; SWG:Legends, Wow r/c, DoS2
  • VinterkrigVinterkrig Member RarePosts: 1,895
    Rhoklaw said:
    What I find interesting is the amount of people that hate or dislike this game leave more comments than those of us who are looking forward to it. I guess bitching about something once in a thread isn't enough. They need to bitch about same shit 10x in every thread.

    Anyhow, innovation isn't exactly a strong suit of any game development company lately, so it's nice to see a game that at least utilizes some of the mechanics of other games I enjoyed, such as DAoC, Rift and Conan Exiles.

    I have to agree with @Asheram about the "kids" enjoying toxic OWPvP gankfest. Which is totally fine with me and one of the main reasons I avoid those games.

    If by kids you mean people adults who like the competition that may happen at any time creating a fun threatening environment instead of the carebear world of butterflies and rainbows where none of the PvE mobs are a real threat at any point in time, yeah.. kids. 

    Sorry for not being bad at games and liking MMOs/survival style games with some actual threat. 

    The people who formerly didn't like this game and whined to get it changed are really hilariously high brow towards the people who thought they were getting a survival mmo with open PVP from a AAA company for once. 

    Spare us your condescending tone about people being "kids" for liking something you don't. 
    bcbullyYashaX
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 14,938
    SkitzoXX said:
    cheyane said:
    I don't enjoy open world PvP but this BG type scenario looks like fun. I want to be in charge of the horn.
    They do not and will not happen nearly enough to keep players interested. When they do happen they are scheduled a day in advance and only last for 30 minutes. The company leaders have 100% say in who is selected for these battles. Pvp is not available 24/7, there is no pvp zones or battlegrounds, nobody flags because the benefits don’t justify the risk so you can go hours without finding a fight and the pve is as simple and boring as it gets. It’s obvious they rushed, the systems don’t work well together and the pve content is as basic as it gets. These invasions are fun but guess what... it’s a scripted event that is the Same exact experience every time. Guess how many times you can run this same scripted event before you lose interest? With how boring the rest of the game is it’s definitely not enough to get me logging every 4 days for one event.

    This has, over time become one of the most boring games I’ve ever played. People will buy it because it’s new and from Amazon but it’s terrible atm.
    Just about everyone currently playing and saying anything about it is saying the same thing: Pretty but boring seems to be the overwhelming consensus.
    Vinterkrig
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

    "... the "influencers" which is the tech name we call sell outs now..."
    __ Wizardry, 2020
  • McSleazMcSleaz Member UncommonPosts: 111
    This game would be Great if it didn't have PvP.
    bcbully
  • Pr0tag0ni5tPr0tag0ni5t Member UncommonPosts: 228
    PVP: 1 hourish long skirmish Defending/Attacking a Fort. Rando's can join either side if they wish.

    PVE: Your Fort is attacked by waves of NPC's.....end of PVE content....
    - No raids
    - No 'dungeons'
    - No Thanks.

    Hard Pass.
    bcbully

    image
  • RhoklawRhoklaw Member LegendaryPosts: 7,442
    First off, to those of you complaining that there won't be any PvP outside of the scheduled 50 vs. 50, why is that? If you're so hardcore PvP then flag up and stay flagged up. If you can't find anyone else flagged up to fight than what does that tell you? If you do find someone else flagged up then you got your PvP. One way or the other, the outcome is destined. Either a lot of people want to PvP and will flag up or no one will flag up because no one gives a shit about OWPvP. Not really hard to comprehend the logic in that.
    bcbullyVinterkrigAncient_Exile

  • YashaXYashaX Member EpicPosts: 2,781
    Rhoklaw said:
    First off, to those of you complaining that there won't be any PvP outside of the scheduled 50 vs. 50, why is that? If you're so hardcore PvP then flag up and stay flagged up. If you can't find anyone else flagged up to fight than what does that tell you? If you do find someone else flagged up then you got your PvP. One way or the other, the outcome is destined. Either a lot of people want to PvP and will flag up or no one will flag up because no one gives a shit about OWPvP. Not really hard to comprehend the logic in that.

    There is so much wrong with what you have said here that it is hard to know where to start.
    bcbullyAncient_ExileRhoklaw
    ....
  • AsheramAsheram Member EpicPosts: 4,590
    edited May 2020
    Amazon?bezos has the money they should make 2 server types, their original idea and the pve one with pvp set battle times.

    They have the $$$ to see which server does better as far as population.

    Plus they should add all pve content to pve servers first, not allow pve characters playable on pvp servers and vice versa and only 1 character slot for pvp servers.

    edit- also remove the giant anime hammers in a new world setting as when I hear new world I think of the american colonists not naruto.
    Ancient_Exile
  • BruceYeeBruceYee Member EpicPosts: 2,075
    YashaX said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    What I find interesting is the amount of people that hate or dislike this game leave more comments than those of us who are looking forward to it. I guess bitching about something once in a thread isn't enough. They need to bitch about same shit 10x in every thread.

    Anyhow, innovation isn't exactly a strong suit of any game development company lately, so it's nice to see a game that at least utilizes some of the mechanics of other games I enjoyed, such as DAoC, Rift and Conan Exiles.

    I have to agree with @Asheram about the "kids" enjoying toxic OWPvP gankfest. Which is totally fine with me and one of the main reasons I avoid those games.
    I think the issue for a lot of people is not that they dropped owpvp, but that it seems they haven't replaced it with anything interesting. Even more concerning is what they are describing as the "pinnacle" of both pvp and pve content seems quite weak. 

    Looking at the pvp for example, I am dubious of how compelling these 50 vs 50 fort raids are going to be. ESO already provides that kind of content almost 24/7 , and seems to do it a lot better judging by NWs promo videos.

    The pve raids look kind of fun to me, but a lot will depend on the implementation. It seems like its going to be very constrictive and limiting in terms of when you can play and who you can play with based on the information released to date, but hopefully it will be a lot more dynamic than it sounds on paper.

    Man I wish it was that simple but for me New World is possibly the biggest MMO missed opportunity that I think the world will ever see if you can even consider it a MMO now... let me explain...

    They start off as a "Colonial America" open world MMO game. There were only two types of human beings that existed in "Colonial America" at that time 1. indigenous 2. explorers/conquistadors and they can't have colonist white dudes killing the locals en masse to complete quests for modern PC reasons so the game was designed as full OW PVP cause I guess there's nothing wrong with white dudes killing each other. Then they change that part of the game that was supposed to be the core content of the game which was...

    1. Do your MMO business(crafting gathering building etc) in a beautiful early America landscape all while trying not to get ganked by others trying to take your stuff. < This was it, the game that was pitched for 4 years. For me that was enough to look forward to the game for 4 years. At 4.5 years they say never mind we're changing it to only PVE but how's that possible when you can't kill the locals so they come up with npcs that somewhat resemble zombies but look like a straight copy paste from Resident Evil and NOT a colonial setting like originally promised.

    Now the game has zombie invasions, an instanced pvp zone and housing that is closer to Wildstar hub public quests than the housing they originally had planned.

    The greatest missed opportunity for MMO's is because this company had a blank check when it came to funding and as time went on the features kept getting simplified to the point now where it's an instanced tower defense battle royale.

    Some of the kickstarter MMO projects like CU are a good example of not having enough funds to complete a proper MMO well I think New World is the exact opposite of that which is having TOO much money and not having a clue what to do with it. The direction changes they've made aren't free... years of development discarded like how they did could've probably tanked other game companies overnight. Those decisions weren't like us deciding if we want Burger King or McDonalds for lunch they had to be discussed, debated then approved all at great length. In the end we the players/fans don't get what was originally proposed but whatever it is now or they decide to change it to tomorrow.
    Ancient_Exile
  • RhoklawRhoklaw Member LegendaryPosts: 7,442
    YashaX said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    First off, to those of you complaining that there won't be any PvP outside of the scheduled 50 vs. 50, why is that? If you're so hardcore PvP then flag up and stay flagged up. If you can't find anyone else flagged up to fight than what does that tell you? If you do find someone else flagged up then you got your PvP. One way or the other, the outcome is destined. Either a lot of people want to PvP and will flag up or no one will flag up because no one gives a shit about OWPvP. Not really hard to comprehend the logic in that.

    There is so much wrong with what you have said here that it is hard to know where to start.
    I'd certainly love to hear your spin on it, because let's face it. PvP doesn't need everyone forced into it for it to work. The ONLY reason forced PvP is interesting to people like you is because you love being part of a gankfest against lowbies or part of a zergfest taking out much smaller groups. Either of those scenarios is NOT challenging in the least.

    So please, explain to me why forced PvP is so much better, because deep down inside there isn't a single reason you can come up with where it is a requirement to have meaningful PvP engagements. As I just explained, if people WANT PvP, they can flag up for it. I'm surprised you find that so hard to understand.

    Someone else suggested having multiple server types. Which would probably be the best alternative. I certainly have nothing against that alternative.
    bcbullyTacticalZombeh

  • Ancient_ExileAncient_Exile Member RarePosts: 1,303
    edited May 2020
    Rhoklaw said:
    YashaX said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    First off, to those of you complaining that there won't be any PvP outside of the scheduled 50 vs. 50, why is that? If you're so hardcore PvP then flag up and stay flagged up. If you can't find anyone else flagged up to fight than what does that tell you? If you do find someone else flagged up then you got your PvP. One way or the other, the outcome is destined. Either a lot of people want to PvP and will flag up or no one will flag up because no one gives a shit about OWPvP. Not really hard to comprehend the logic in that.

    There is so much wrong with what you have said here that it is hard to know where to start.
    I'd certainly love to hear your spin on it, because let's face it. PvP doesn't need everyone forced into it for it to work. The ONLY reason forced PvP is interesting to people like you is because you love being part of a gankfest against lowbies or part of a zergfest taking out much smaller groups. Either of those scenarios is NOT challenging in the least.

    So please, explain to me why forced PvP is so much better, because deep down inside there isn't a single reason you can come up with where it is a requirement to have meaningful PvP engagements. As I just explained, if people WANT PvP, they can flag up for it. I'm surprised you find that so hard to understand.

    Someone else suggested having multiple server types. Which would probably be the best alternative. I certainly have nothing against that alternative.

    Have you ever considered the possibility that there may be a way to Solve the Griefing Problem in OWPVP Sandbox MMORPGs?

    There is actually a thread in The Pub at MMORPG.COM which explores this potentially revolutionary idea.




    YashaXKyleran
    "If everything was easy, nothing would be hard."


    "Show me on the doll where PVP touched you."


    (Note:  If I type something in a thread that does not exactly pertain to the stated subject of the thread in every, way, shape, and form, please feel free to send me a response in a Private Message.)

  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 18,388
    I don't liek the idea of pvp ,balance ,ctf idea doesn't intrigue me at all.
    However Invasions is the type of content i love to see and take part in.The problem is implementation.Lots of devs have cool ideas on paper but in the end they just see these as gimmicks to sell their product but don't put much effort into designing them.

    Example Rifts in Trions games was a cool idea on paper but after a few rifts i was bored and didn't care anymore.So for me Invasions is the ONLY selling point of this game,is it going to be good enough to keep me engaged long term or will i take part in 2/3 and get bored and never play the game again,is the question.

    The one issue i have and it's part of the pvp fail reason and that is WHAT IF,nobody is online from your guild/clan,you just lose to invasion,you just lose to pvp?You do not have to accept or even engage in a Siege to know the fail of pvp in these games.A very large clan can just hangout in front of your fort waiting for anyone to leave and gank them,,fun yeah...oh hell no.

    So Invasions yes pvp still a huge thumbs down.

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • BloodaxesBloodaxes Member EpicPosts: 4,435
    edited May 2020
    Have you ever considered the possibility that there may be a way to Solve the Griefing Problem in OWPVP Sandbox MMORPGs?

    There is actually a thread in The Pub at MMORPG.COM which explores this potentially revolutionary idea.
    Well there won't ever be a solution that appeases both sides so that thread is useless. 
    RhoklawKyleran

Sign In or Register to comment.