New World, Old Problems

System · February 2020

New World, Old Problems

Tim takes a look at Amazon's New World, breaking down some of his fears that MMORPG history could repeat itself.

Amathe · February 2020

I wonder if they will also be shocked by:

Buying gold
Selling items for real money
Selling characters for real money
Selling raid access and raid drops for real money
Player casinos
Spam in general chat
Spawn camping
Corpse camping
KSing
Items Duping
Exploits
etc

Or is this not only the first mmorpg they have made, but also the first one they have played?

koldmiser · February 2020

"Mega guilds lock the server down and gameplay stagnates. Players begin to prey on weaker targets and avoid the mega guild. Overly hardcore players obsessively camped the crafters out of the game. Once the crafters left the game’s economies began to collapse. Once that happened the player base dwindled until there weren’t enough players to keep the game running and it died. "

This is why I cringe every time I see the words "Open world PVP". My first experience with open world PVP was when Dark Age of Camelot added the Mordrid server and that's exactly what happened and it happens over and over again in these games with open world PVP.

And don't get me wrong, I like PVP, but I like it on my terms.

druez · February 2020

Amazon makes me nervous with these changes. The game looks great, but we will see. I still support open world PVP, but it needs to have consequences. Especially for the "player killers". If and when they die, huge stat loss or a drop in levels. Maybe some kind of jail time etc...

I used to love the concept of order vs chaos and guild wars in Ultima Online. Those were awesome.

Amazon definitely has the money and resources to make a truly great MMO. Only time will tell how this turns out. I know me and my crew are ready to try it.

wyldmagik · February 2020

"if they give the players what they want"

Lol, majority of those players will be toxic douche bags that will sit on the forums for next few years slating every change the devs make, every time someone has a good idea and yet never playing the game that much but more playing the forum troll game.

It is much more simple than every journo likes to drag out.

Release two types of servers for the masses, and see which one holds its numbers.

veegeedee · February 2020

I'm not really sure about this idea of PvPers being enough to prop any game up for longevity. We have yet to see a western MMO with a PvP focus last in any real sense or even bring in true masses. The only exception to this is possibly EVE and in that case you would have to ignore the game being in reality almost entirely PvE outside of when a massive Corp decides it wants to get involved in a big war every few years. Every major MMO success concerning western consumers has been PvE focused. Unfortunately that means high development costs to create a constant stream of content every few months.

We have spent what feels like the last 10 years or so waiting for a mythical sandbox with near full PvP and emergent PvE that MMO fans will refuse to put down. Nothing has come remotely close upon actual release and everything else has either been canceled or turned out to be a crowdfunding scam.

Mendel · February 2020

"I am not saying any of those ideas are genius, but what I am saying is all of them are better than taking a sandbox built from day one for PVP then making it into a theme park with optional PVP mere months before launch."

Sorry, Tim, but I can't agree that AGS has changed a PvP game into a theme park. That's just how people reacted to the 'change of focus' news. New World still appears to have a very heavy PvP component. Maybe it will feature more restrictions than previously announced, but that doesn't turn it into a theme park.

We will have to wait and see how effectively people can 'opt out' of PvP until the game launches. But from what I have seen from subsequent statements by AGS, there is a strong likelihood that basic progression functions (achievements, rewards, housing and other items) will require some degree of PvP to be successful. So, opting out of PvP might severely restrict the player's play style -- that's my guess, anyway.

The ultimate form of opting out is for the PvE player to simply not play. That will probably place extra burdens on the game being as successful as Amazon hopes it will be.

xpsync · February 2020

and people wonder why classic is still going strong af with mmorpg players.

We took an 8.3 break but pretty much back to full time classic lately and omg it's packed with players.

Peeps say what they will about BFA but i rather like it, I absolutely love the corruption gear concept, fun gear folks what's da problem? Yes i know the "perceived" problems excel and chart peeps have. Pro/Con gear exists in classic too.

I should mention that i've not pinned my whole life on wow for the last decade plus either so... coming from a more on the "new to wow 2.0 side", and i dunno coming out from months of classic, meh BFA is pretty cool tbh, love watching the MDI, and now running M+ dungeons with my crew is pretty cool too.

However in the end nothing can beat a true MMORPG such as classic (as an example) and is why i also play SWG:Legends.

The rest of the industry can pretty much go f itself.

I'm good, got my two MMORPG's and yeah forget the radar, forget the drama, forget the trolls, forget the hate, forget the endless hoping for, i'm here to f'ing play mmorpg's, and it's so much better to play hard instead of bitching and complaining and whining on and on about how f'ed up the genre is, and about big biz corps every little move.

I mean ok some of it is justified at times but as an example any little thing blizz does creates an explosive internet reaction, duh this guy signed a f'ing contract to not do said things, he does said things and the internet explodes into FREE F'ing HK... omg wow such juvenile behavior, and anyone could know this by actually understanding the very real problems there such as a known confessed MURDER can yes WALK FREE as an example, that maybe joining on the lemming train here might be better if the real root problems were understood first but nope, i hate blizz for what ever personal reason so Free HK baby. lmao

Anyway tangent! So yea he clearly breaks the rules, and was punished for it. It's like this guy robbed a bank but meh no worries bruh, Free Prisoners man! new movement.

The internet as a whole has hit new highs in drama, hate, The internet "More toxic than ever" sign up today, don't miss out. I mean i couldn't see social as much of a contributing factor here in that that it allows every anon pos being able to spread their hatred of their unhappy life and self loathing and force it all over everyone else as part of the problem, well? nah ofc not right, i mean everyone is already barfing their lives out all over the internet anyway and then they get offended and upset when a troll says something uncalled for, lmao peep makes me f'ing laugh i swear.

Anyway thankfully i have options and i took them, and most of all stopped wishing for a rejuvenation, second coming, rebirth of mmorpg's genre, and most of all dramatically reduced as in avoiding the drama as much as possible and...

OMFG is it ever nice to be back playing the living chit outta mmorpg's again. It's what gamers do.

Valentina · February 2020

Personally I am glad about the changes they've made, these are changes that were overwhelmingly desired during the Alpha process. I do agree though that I see no harm in creating two server-types and seeing how it plays out, I don't see the harm in that at all.

Marid · February 2020

Most people don't do PvP so it was a wise business decision on Amazon's part to ditch the OWFAPvP focus of their game in favor of far greater popularity.

Caldicot · February 2020

Hopefully they will learn their mistakes from this game so they can nail the new lotro mmo.

olepi · February 2020

I remember the launch of Xsyon. It was open-world full loot PvP.

We got a big tribe, so we couldn't really be attacked. We built a great village. Then the others came and chopped down every tree in sight, so we had no wood resource. This went on until we literally had nothing to do.

I remember another open-world PvP game where people camped at the respawn point, and killed you as you respawned over and over.

To me, open world non-consensual PvP is code for no content, and a world full of toxic griefers.

Groqstrong · February 2020

Marid said:

Most people don't do PvP so it was a wise business decision on Amazon's part to ditch the OWFAPvP focus of their game in favor of far greater popularity.

You can have both, the point of the article was amazon jumped the gun without properly finding a solution to make both sides happy.

In any case i dont see it being much of a problem i think the pvpers are still gonna show up, and i think the pve players will be the ones disappointed with the lack of content.

I also believe this game has a major backing from Amazon and it will improve over time for both sides. I will be playing at launch.

NicoleC · February 2020

Original alpha gameplay definitely needed a change or New World was going to die fast as a griefer and spawn camper paradise. But I was astonished by the severity of the changes. I'm still paying attention, but they haven't said anything yet that makes me WANT to play the game.

If people think one 50v50 battle a day per server is going to be fair PVP that many players get to engage in, I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale... cheap.

ChildoftheShadows · February 2020

Eve Online, Dark Age of Camelot, Ultima Online, OSRS are all examples of pvp games with good rule sets that are still alive today because of the passion the players have for them as PVP games. You don't need WoW numbers to be considered a success.

Creating separate pvp and pve servers is not always a solution. You have to design the game around a lower number of simultaneous players before splitting into separate servers makes any sense, for one. Then on top of that, you will always either have two different groups complaining about updates that affect the other, E.G. a pve change affects pvp or vice versa, OR you are creating two completely different games.

There is never an "Oh, it's easy" answer. The only logical answer is to decide what game you are going to make and do it. Period. No switching, no splitting the servers up unless you've planned for that from day one.

Do they have a chance? Sure, but it's a slim one. They would be wise to push back the release until they have a solid idea of what they want and a solid implementation because at this point all eyes are going to be on their failures.

BruceYee · February 2020

Everyone here discussing New World like they still give any ____ about it.
They've shifted their focus to their LOTR MMO.

Any changes, announcements, discussions they have from this point forward is just a smokescreen to hide that they aren't really doing anything new just making adjustments. Another company that pushes nothing as news is Blizz and we know from the NGE that Smedley loves to copy what Blizz does so...

When you think about what New World did when they gutted the PVP game is remove features and just like Blizz with each expac will probably add it back in small increments over time and call it "new".

If they were still fully focused on the game then features would have been added not taken out just think about it.

My guess on what will happen is they'll play the "we didn't know" card when issues come up and each one will be "a problem that needs to be addressed" that will buy months of time to pretend like they are "listening to player feedback" it will all be a show.

People suggesting two servers have the right idea but I doubt they'll do it cause they don't really care about what players want like they make it seem. If they really did care they'd announce two servers tomorrow with the old and new PvP systems.

Iselin · February 2020

The only kind PvP MMOs worth my time these days are those that have some separation between PvE and PvP the way DAoC did it nearly 2 decades ago. That separation puts the decision of where to play and what to do in your hands and it's never forced on you.

There's no need to have separate servers or flagging or any other silliness: you're in the PvE zones? There will be nothing but PvE happening there. You go to the PvP zones? It's full on PvP there with no candyass flagging system needed.

It's even better when the PvP and PvE have some interdependence with simple things like realm-wide buffs that affect the PvE as well as the PvP. DAoC did that to some extent but there is a lot of room to go beyond what they did with even more impact. Not just + damage or + mitigation but also + harvesting, + crafting critical success chance, etc. The sky is the limit for someone who gets that it's in the best interest of the game to have PvErs cheer for their PvP realm mates even if they don't take part in that fight.

OWPvP has always been and will always be a shit show with others dictating what you will do and how you will play. It simulates nothing but total anarchy and the PvP is very meta gamey with no real reason to fight someone else other than just because. That's pretty brainless PvP and doesn't really belong in a fantasy setting that, when well designed, goes to great lengths to create a lore reason for everything else in the game. It's like saying that you're in this world that is threatened by a great evil that has risen from the depth and all of society is on the brink of collapse unless we fight them back... and oh yeah, go ahead and kill each other too because it's just a game.

I want a faction. I want to have a reason to fight those from other factions. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I don't want a gang wars in the ghetto simulation. I want a nations at war simulation for my PvP.

Marid · February 2020

Groqstrong said:

Marid said:

Most people don't do PvP so it was a wise business decision on Amazon's part to ditch the OWFAPvP focus of their game in favor of far greater popularity.

You can have both, the point of the article was amazon jumped the gun without properly finding a solution to make both sides happy.

In any case i dont see it being much of a problem i think the pvpers are still gonna show up, and i think the pve players will be the ones disappointed with the lack of content.

I also believe this game has a major backing from Amazon and it will improve over time for both sides. I will be playing at launch.

The point of having OWFFAPvP is so that the developers won't have to develop any meaningful content. That's why the industry shills promote it...saves the devs/publishers millions of dollars and years of development time.

As for me and my hubby, we're through with MMOs...we'll quit playing GW2 this fall, and that will be the end of it for us.

Kyleran · February 2020

olepi said:

I remember the launch of Xsyon. It was open-world full loot PvP.

We got a big tribe, so we couldn't really be attacked. We built a great village. Then the others came and chopped down every tree in sight, so we had no wood resource. This went on until we literally had nothing to do.

I remember another open-world PvP game where people camped at the respawn point, and killed you as you respawned over and over.

To me, open world non-consensual PvP is code for no content, and a world full of toxic griefers.

Great you brought up Xyson. When I played about 6 months post launch the game was mostly deserted.

Those who remained often attacked me on sight, despite being of no value except for the lulz.

I had to give props to those clever folks who dug holes beneath the respawn points so a player even logging back in would fall into and if not killed by a waiting PVPer would die of starvation or thirst as they couldn't get out.

Big fun, and as you might imagine it quickly drove me away.

Well, that along with the countless "penis" images people terraformed everywhere, entire villages of them at times.

Just not the way I roll.

Sload_Soap · February 2020

What shocks me the most: why not do “insert immunity buff/total opt out of PvP, etc after being killed”? Why is it always “what system can we make to dictate player interaction (negative and positive) in an MMO?” Why is it not: “what TOOLS can we create to make crafters/gatherers (or any class/skill set that is forcibly gimped by a less than combat “viable” build for simply a build they enjoy) have a chance to survive a PvP encounter?”

Why not build survivability into classes/skills? Why not give crafters and gatherers particular tools that sensibly compliments their builds while also making them more proficient in its use - meanwhile the pure combat specs are less than proficient or entirely incapable of using such tools as they apply only to the crafter/gatherer/not combat profession.

Honestly, I’m glad MMO innovation is so stagnant and basically revolving around micro transactions. Leaves the door wiiiide open for actual passionate devs who think further than how much than can squeeze out of their fractured player-base.

And to point out PvE players being disappointed in the lack of content - that literally exists for virtually every MMO. The moment content is released it is consumed within weeks. Content that usually takes months to develop is basically complete within weeks, which is why you have content batches released over time to artificially extend that life cycle before its placed back in the dev cycle, reskinned and retuned and churned back out again. That’s why games like WoW are considered mini-game lobbies. There’s a plethora of instanced mini-games to play to keep the player-base from getting bored with the product.

TEKK3N · February 2020

DAoC did it right, why no developer ever bothered to copy that blueprint?

Separate PvE from PvP, and let the player decide when to play what.

Problem is, that PvE content requires lots more coding, so developers prefer to try their luck with half assed FFA PvP hoping that somewhat it will be a success.

Raapnaap · February 2020

I'm not sure if New World can dig itself out of the hole it made.

It had an excellent foundation to become a brilliant open world PvP MMORPG in 2019, all it needed was a better on-boarding experience such as adding PvP-ruleset-zones. But in the span of just months, they gutted all of that potential to make room for... Well, go check the leaks and you tell me.

They could have sticked to their original vision and absolutely cornered a market starving for a new high quality game for decades. Instead, they opted to become a mediocre and forgettable game, at the cost of completely abandoning their established audience (in a very rude way, might I add).

New World is an example to the MMO industry; How not to manage your community and develop your game.

Theocritus · February 2020

"Those who remained often attacked me on sight, despite being of no value except for the lulz."

That sounds like every PVP game I have ever played......

Morgenes83 · February 2020

Theocritus said:

"Those who remained often attacked me on sight, despite being of no value except for the lulz."

That sounds like every PVP game I have ever played......

Thats the sad truth about PvPers digging their own grave.

But now as they were to lazy to implement some significant anti-gank/grief-mechanics lets hope that we get at least some faction PvP. (Or arent we?)

Tbh I prefer open world faction PvP to open world ffa pvp if there arent mechanics preventing ganking.
Because as said ffa just leads to many people being dckheads and killing the population.

-Pvper killing every player on sight in starter zone
- players leave game, no one there to kill
- PvPer: *insert astonished Pikachu meme*

Scot · February 2020

This is just the sort of article I think we need highlighted on the front page in some way, this is what MMORPG.com is about. Any site can cut and paste from a release about an expansion or cash shop update.

But as I need to get on I will just say...Realm versus Realm.

Vorthanion · February 2020

Groqstrong said:

Marid said:

Most people don't do PvP so it was a wise business decision on Amazon's part to ditch the OWFAPvP focus of their game in favor of far greater popularity.

You can have both, the point of the article was amazon jumped the gun without properly finding a solution to make both sides happy.

In any case i dont see it being much of a problem i think the pvpers are still gonna show up, and i think the pve players will be the ones disappointed with the lack of content.

I also believe this game has a major backing from Amazon and it will improve over time for both sides. I will be playing at launch.

Not going to happen. Too many PvPers like an uneven playing field and sheep to the slaughter. Too many PVErs don't want the hassle of forced PvP or content gated into PvP areas. No matter how you design it, players on both sides won't like compromises. Separate servers has been the only solution that has ever worked well, at least for the PvE players. PvP servers usually become ghost towns as they realize everyone else is having fun on the PvE servers. This happened in so many games before now, you'd think even the most clueless developer would have figured it out by now.

Howdy, Stranger!

New World, Old Problems

Comments

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

New World, Old Problems

Comments

Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV