New World: Aeternum Offers Deep Dive into Season of Conquerors' PvP-Themed Seasonal Servers | MMORPG

Comments

• Dhampir Member UncommonPosts: 193

  January 15

  hmm..... see if this works..

  

  “Nothing is trivial.”
  ― James O'Barr, The Crow
  
  “Sarah: "Buildings burn, people die, but real love is forever...”
  ― James O'Barr, The Crow
  
  
• actionthunder Member UncommonPosts: 43

  January 15

  Where is the pve server.

  
• 6stack_Chris Member UncommonPosts: 121

  January 15

  You have to buy the premium track is what Reddit has been up in arms about. I have not confirmed it but their wording in the FAQ points to it is correct.

  
• Elidien_ga Member RarePosts: 535

  January 15

  Steamcharts shows an interesting trajectory for New World. Its plummeting. I wonder how the console crowd is. I doubt this new gimmick is going to help.

  
• Scot Member LegendaryPosts: 24,810

  January 15

  Amazon keeps pouring the money in, my guess is they just need one really good game to highlight AG and they will bin NW.
• Angrakhan Member EpicPosts: 2,054

  January 15

  Scot said:

  Amazon keeps pouring the money in, my guess is they just need one really good game to highlight AG and they will bin NW.

  Ive thought for a while that the whole reason New World is kept online is basically as a case study for other developers to look and see how technically to build a game. It's a combination of marketing and developer documentation. "Oh you're a new gaming studio interested in building a new MMO? Have you considered using AGS? Here, let's open the hood of New World and show you how it all works!" 
  
  It may be a mediocre game, but it probably shows pretty well as a dog and pony show to the developers. Plus, they can write off the losses as marketing expenses which probably looks better on financial reports sent to investors than a sinking ship taking on water.

  
• ValdemarJ Member RarePosts: 1,505

  January 15

  Dhampir said:

  hmm..... see if this works..

  
  Narrator: It did not.
  

  Capitalism is just feudalism with extra steps.

  
  

  ...with liberty and justice for some.
• ValdemarJ Member RarePosts: 1,505

  January 15

  Angrakhan said:

  Scot said:

  Amazon keeps pouring the money in, my guess is they just need one really good game to highlight AG and they will bin NW.

  Ive thought for a while that the whole reason New World is kept online is basically as a case study for other developers to look and see how technically to build a game. It's a combination of marketing and developer documentation. "Oh you're a new gaming studio interested in building a new MMO? Have you considered using AGS? Here, let's open the hood of New World and show you how it all works!" 
  
  It may be a mediocre game, but it probably shows pretty well as a dog and pony show to the developers. Plus, they can write off the losses as marketing expenses which probably looks better on financial reports sent to investors than a sinking ship taking on water.

  
  

  The problem, in my opinion, is that much like a few other live service games, this one is being horribly mismanaged by leadership that is completely out of touch with a majority of the player base.

  
  

  New World pivoted to a much friendlier PvE design when their PvP survival game was poorly received. What made them think pivoting back to this and leaning in hard with a battle pass was going to work? Cynically speaking, I think PvP players would like PvE players to continue subsidizing the game while enjoying the PvP focus. Most PvE players aren't interested in that.

  
  

  A similar tack is happening at Microsoft owned studios too, with Blizzard and Bethesda leaning hard into "end game raids" and PvP for D4 and FO76. The response hasn't been great and yet both teams respond with the "you think you know what you want, but you don't... we do" messaging.

  
  

  Time will tell if players are willing to adjust. I'm not. This time next year should be indicative though.
  

  

  Capitalism is just feudalism with extra steps.

  
  

  ...with liberty and justice for some.
• Wargfoot Member EpicPosts: 1,718

  January 15

  ValdemarJ said:

  The problem, in my opinion, is that much like a few other live service games, this one is being horribly mismanaged by leadership that is completely out of touch with a majority of the player base.

  
  

  New World pivoted to a much friendlier PvE design when their PvP survival game was poorly received. What made them think pivoting back to this and leaning in hard with a battle pass was going to work? Cynically speaking, I think PvP players would like PvE players to continue subsidizing the game while enjoying the PvP focus. Most PvE players aren't interested in that.

  
  

  A similar tack is happening at Microsoft owned studios too, with Blizzard and Bethesda leaning hard into "end game raids" and PvP for D4 and FO76. The response hasn't been great and yet both teams respond with the "you think you know what you want, but you don't... we do" messaging.

  
  

  Time will tell if players are willing to adjust. I'm not. This time next year should be indicative though.
  

  When I gave it a try it struck me as a game looking for purpose and seemed to simply cave "core concepts" in the pursuit of the loudest people on Discord.
  
  More and more, when I try out a game, I enjoy the initial experience and find a niche to exploit - and within months that niche is removed/nerfed/etc.  For example, I enjoyed the markets in New World but it took them just a couple of month to combine all of them because running about the world was too much work for some players.
  
  In FO, the PvP element that was my primary motivation for building/marketing was nerfed into irrelevance.
  
  I'm fond of declaring "read the box" - but now that only gives you 30-90 days of joy before they change the entire game in response to some loud mouth streamers.

  
• Tatdad Newbie CommonPosts: 20

  January 15

  PvP is still complete and utter trash. It’s filled with people who think they have skill. Toxic AF and bad.
  
  It’s a build based gear based PvP system. Whoever has the better gear wins. Period. It’s elitist AF as well.
• Wargfoot Member EpicPosts: 1,718

  January 15

  Tatdad said:

  PvP is still complete and utter trash. It’s filled with people who think they have skill. Toxic AF and bad.
  
  It’s a build based gear based PvP system. Whoever has the better gear wins. Period. It’s elitist AF as well.

  Yeah, that would be true in every game I've played.
  
  To be fair, the elitism comes from people who are willing to learn the mechanics, grind out the optimal builds, and put in the time to get the correct gear.  They also learn to work with others who have the same level of commitment.
  
  It is a big ask for them to include people who aren't as dedicated/skilled/gifted/etc. To take losses for charity cases defeats the purpose for their play.
  
  I'm not saying elitism is okay, but I ran a guild once where we had standards.
  I had those standards because I wasn't interested in people who didn't care enough about the game to invest the amount of time I'd put into it.
  
  It goes both ways.

  
• Kirzan Member UncommonPosts: 76

  January 25 edited January 25

  I swear these guys have zero idea what to do, what they want to do, what they're actually doing, what's going on out there, how many people are playing the game, what's the general perception of their game...
  
  So you have not very populated servers... Should that be singular? Are there more than 1 populated servers now? Anyway, let's just make this new thing that'll force people to leave their server for a while. Not only that, it's full time PVP with loss... Did NW players really ask for this?
  
  It's like they think they're World of Warcraft, who was already not stoked about splitting their MILLIONS STRONG PLAYERBASE at the start.
• olepi Member EpicPosts: 3,142

  January 25

  Wargfoot said:

  Tatdad said:

  PvP is still complete and utter trash. It’s filled with people who think they have skill. Toxic AF and bad.
  
  It’s a build based gear based PvP system. Whoever has the better gear wins. Period. It’s elitist AF as well.

  Yeah, that would be true in every game I've played.
  
  To be fair, the elitism comes from people who are willing to learn the mechanics, grind out the optimal builds, and put in the time to get the correct gear.  They also learn to work with others who have the same level of commitment.
  
  It is a big ask for them to include people who aren't as dedicated/skilled/gifted/etc. To take losses for charity cases defeats the purpose for their play.
  
  I'm not saying elitism is okay, but I ran a guild once where we had standards.
  I had those standards because I wasn't interested in people who didn't care enough about the game to invest the amount of time I'd put into it.
  
  It goes both ways.

  I managed to avoid the elitist problem and have a lot of fun in PvP playing ESO. I picked the PvP level below 50 with no CP points (not sure what they are called now). 
  
  That meant that nobody was top level, nobody had the end game gear, and nobody had extra power/abilities due to Champion Points.
  
  I did the same thing in DAOC, after getting my main mini to top level, I spent a lot of time PvP'ing wtih alts in the battlegrounds that were set for a level window, like 20-25. That way nobody is top level, nobody has top gear. The elitists that spend a massive amount of time fine tuning their character and gear wouldn't be in there.
  
  I still do that in City of Heroes in PvE pickup groups. I regularly run top level missions and recruit lower levels to join. They aren't so quick to run ahead and show off how they can take out the whole next group by themselves (and I *was* that guy once).

  ------------
  2025: 48 years on the Net.