Amazon Game Studios - New World = Learning opportunity

New world shares a lot of similarities with the Ashes of creation vision. In my opinion, AoC has a lot more potential but New World can still be seen as an amazing learning opportunity.

Intrepid studios, please, watch the community feedback on New World when it comes out. Learn from their mistakes and especially from their future succeses.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Ferryman

Ventharien wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

This is why no game with a persistent world with full loot PvP has ever existed nor will ever exist.

I really don't understand players that want this.

Any time you see a game claiming to have this, you just know it is either never going to be released, or will be changed within weeks of the first PvP play test.

This is incorrect as there are several games with persistent server worlds full pvp full drop items. Though it is very fair to say these are niche titles with much smaller audiences in the later life of the games.

I agree that full loot PvP games are a niche but I guess some games does that better than others. Albion Online is a good example when something has done well, at least if we examine the popularity. Fractured has also a good potential to cater hardcore PvP and PvE centric players in the same concept. I understand Amazon's struggle with the full loot and how it caused too much toxicity. If I compare New World and Albion, in Albion there is also lower level PvE zones so people are at least in some cases safe, and in addition, Albion is more group oriented than New World what it comes to open world activities.

Noaani

Ventharien wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

This is why no game with a persistent world with full loot PvP has ever existed nor will ever exist.

I really don't understand players that want this.

Any time you see a game claiming to have this, you just know it is either never going to be released, or will be changed within weeks of the first PvP play test.

This is incorrect as there are several games with persistent server worlds full pvp full drop items. Though it is very fair to say these are niche titles with much smaller audiences in the later life of the games.

Name one.

EvE doesn't have full loot, nor full PvP - there are more safe areas in EvE than in Ashes. Also, with how large the world is, PvP is far from a given - it happens every few months, but when it does, it happens on a large scale.

Albion Online doesn't have full loot or full PvP (more often than not, a PvP "death" isn't even a death).

Darkfall is a mess.

What else is there?

Ferryman

@noaani FYI EvE Online and Albion online has full loot PvP rules. Yes there are some safe zones without full loot rules but e.g. in Albion the major part of the world is under full loot PvP rules so it is really wrong to claim opposite.

Noaani

ferryman wrote: »

@noaani FYI EvE Online and Albion online has full loot PvP rules. Yes there are some safe zones without full loot rules but e.g. in Albion the major part of the world is under full loot PvP rules so it is really wrong to claim opposite.

The question was about full PvP full loot.

Neither game has that.

No game will ever have that.

Damokles

noaani wrote: »

ferryman wrote: »

@noaani FYI EvE Online and Albion online has full loot PvP rules. Yes there are some safe zones without full loot rules but e.g. in Albion the major part of the world is under full loot PvP rules so it is really wrong to claim opposite.

The question was about full PvP full loot.

Neither game has that.

No game will ever have that.

Albion Online does have full PvP Full loot if i remember correctly.

Ventharien

noaani wrote: »

Name one.

EvE doesn't have full loot, nor full PvP - there are more safe areas in EvE than in Ashes. Also, with how large the world is, PvP is far from a given - it happens every few months, but when it does, it happens on a large scale.

Atlas, Ark, Rust, Conan Exiles, Contaminated, most recently there's Last Oasis. There are a few others too. It's a pretty common genre actually. With a community that jumps between games as they fall out of populatity.

Ventharien

It was actually the restrictions that IS proposed regarding the open world and pvp that got me interested in Ashes in the first place. I love open world pvp, and player driven content, and it's these two that have made the craziest most memorable experiences i've had in any game. But with most people having these weird things called lives, having a persistent world, where players can build and destroy, doesn't work out. It's just too tempting for people to attack when you're most vulnerable, which is valid, and that's when you aren't even there, which is boring and frustrating. Life is Feudal tried to address this with protected areas that you had to declare war upon to attack, but dropped the ball in not thinking that us clever evil gamers would game the system and drop 50 war decs on the same settlement. IS current intentions answered alot of those hangups and honestly game killing systems, and hopeful will be on their toes when enevitably when eek every little advantage the system can gives to win.

Wandering Mist

Damokles wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

ferryman wrote: »

@noaani FYI EvE Online and Albion online has full loot PvP rules. Yes there are some safe zones without full loot rules but e.g. in Albion the major part of the world is under full loot PvP rules so it is really wrong to claim opposite.

The question was about full PvP full loot.

Neither game has that.

No game will ever have that.

Albion Online does have full PvP Full loot if i remember correctly.

Albion Online has full PvP full loot drop in certain zones. From what I understand when New World had full PvP full loot drop they did it for literally the entire world. The devs were then surprised that higher level players were spawn-camping newbies in the starting zones......

As Noaani said, there is no game that has had full PvP full loot drop everywhere and survived to prosper.

mcstackerson

Wandering Mist wrote: »

Damokles wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

ferryman wrote: »

@noaani FYI EvE Online and Albion online has full loot PvP rules. Yes there are some safe zones without full loot rules but e.g. in Albion the major part of the world is under full loot PvP rules so it is really wrong to claim opposite.

The question was about full PvP full loot.

Neither game has that.

No game will ever have that.

Albion Online does have full PvP Full loot if i remember correctly.

Albion Online has full PvP full loot drop in certain zones. From what I understand when New World had full PvP full loot drop they did it for literally the entire world. The devs were then surprised that higher level players were spawn-camping newbies in the starting zones......

As Noaani said, there is no game that has had full PvP full loot drop everywhere and survived to prosper.

Eh, I think you two are trying to morph your argument.

It looks like you were agreeing that full loot pvp was too niche and when ferryman pointed out some games that had it you, changed to no game can have full loot pvp everywhere. I don't see this distinction being made earlier and find it kind of knit picky.

Wandering Mist

mcstackerson wrote: »

Wandering Mist wrote: »

Damokles wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

ferryman wrote: »

@noaani FYI EvE Online and Albion online has full loot PvP rules. Yes there are some safe zones without full loot rules but e.g. in Albion the major part of the world is under full loot PvP rules so it is really wrong to claim opposite.

The question was about full PvP full loot.

Neither game has that.

No game will ever have that.

Albion Online does have full PvP Full loot if i remember correctly.

Albion Online has full PvP full loot drop in certain zones. From what I understand when New World had full PvP full loot drop they did it for literally the entire world. The devs were then surprised that higher level players were spawn-camping newbies in the starting zones......

As Noaani said, there is no game that has had full PvP full loot drop everywhere and survived to prosper.

Eh, I think you two are trying to morph your argument.

It looks like you were agreeing that full loot pvp was too niche and when ferryman pointed out some games that had it you, changed to no game can have full loot pvp everywhere. I don't see this distinction being made earlier and find it kind of knit picky.

*shrugs* Nobody clarified what "full loot pvp" meant so technically we aren't morphing anything. You assumed we meant the same as you did, but we didn't.

Ventharien

Oh no, I literally meant pvp kill anywhere full drop. And a few that have improved systems, with some limited safe spots, especially early level, or a rotating war timer or war declaration in others. But there are definately titles in such a genre. In fact, people who play games like that were expecting New World to be their next game to play. Till they shot for a broader audience with the pvp restrictions.

Wandering Mist

Ventharien wrote: »

Oh no, I literally meant pvp kill anywhere full drop. And a few that have improved systems, with some limited safe spots, especially early level, or a rotating war timer or war declaration in others. But there are definately titles in such a genre. In fact, people who play games like that were expecting New World to be their next game to play. Till they shot for a broader audience with the pvp restrictions.

Can you blame a developer for striving for a bigger audience? Like I said before full drop loot pvp is very niche and if a developer doesn't think they can draw in enough players to keep the game running they will change things.

Noaani

Ventharien wrote: »

Oh no, I literally meant pvp kill anywhere full drop. And a few that have improved systems, with some limited safe spots, especially early level, or a rotating war timer or war declaration in others. But there are definately titles in such a genre. In fact, people who play games like that were expecting New World to be their next game to play. Till they shot for a broader audience with the pvp restrictions.

The only titles (including the ones you listed in an earlier post) are all self styled survival games.

A survival game is not an MMORPG. They are different in terms of genre in the same way MOBA's are a different genre to RTS games.

Atlas is currently the only survival game I know of that is branding itself as both a survival game and an MMORPG, and it is losing players faster than it is gaining them - and it has not even launched yet.

That game is a perfect example of why a game can't be both an MMO and a survival game at the same time - they are different audiences. Eventually, every game will need to decide if it want's to be a survival game or an MMORPG.

If people want a survival game, there are plenty of them out there.

Ashes is not a survival game, nor has it ever claimed to be one.

mcstackerson

Wandering Mist wrote: »

Ventharien wrote: »

Oh no, I literally meant pvp kill anywhere full drop. And a few that have improved systems, with some limited safe spots, especially early level, or a rotating war timer or war declaration in others. But there are definately titles in such a genre. In fact, people who play games like that were expecting New World to be their next game to play. Till they shot for a broader audience with the pvp restrictions.

Can you blame a developer for striving for a bigger audience? Like I said before full drop loot pvp is very niche and if a developer doesn't think they can draw in enough players to keep the game running they will change things.

As it has been said, i don't think it's as niche as you think. We have MMOs that have full loot. Survival games have decent audience and they are basically one persistent server away from being an MMO.

We will have to see how it pans out but I can see a risk with the move. Instead of going for an under-served audience, they are going for the audience that current MMOs cater to and if there is one thing we have learned, it's hard to get people to leave their MMOs. They will have to provide a very unique gaming experience to get people to move. They are also doing this with a new IP so they can't crutch on fans from previous media.

We will have to see. I just hope they did the move because they thought it would be better for the game and not because they think it would get them more money.

noaani wrote: »

Ashes is not a survival game, nor has it ever claimed to be one.

I don't think anyone is asking for Ashes to become a survival game or implement full loot, at least in this thread.

Just because a feature can work in a MMO doesn't mean ashes needs/should incorporate it.

Ventharien

@noaani They are survival games, but if you have a open persistent multiplayer world, i'd say you're an mmo. Atlas has a much more connected and organic 'world' so it's easy to call it an mmo, and if you knew the audience that plays these games, and the track record of the developers, it will most certainly release, especially after they export a version of it to consoles. Another that has already released is Life Is Feudal. Your statement that a game must choose between an mmo or a survival is incorrect. Now how successful that game will be, and how long lived it's audience is, is a very different story. New World pivoted to a much more lucrative and longer lived model. The games that i stated above all suffered from a central flaw, if the purpose of the game is to win (in many peoples eyes anyway) then you are best served by crushing as many threats as are possible. In this case though those threats are people who understandably don't feel like rebuilding/regathering again and again, and never being able to retaliate (play the game). So they quit, which weakens the community, and starts a snowball that eventually ends the game in a sense (hardcore fans will stay to the last no matter what the game is) Also 80% of us are murder hobos the second we get behind a keyboard. So for any persistant pvp game to work in my opinion, there needs to be measures in place to limit us. Corruption, and siege timers are ways IS is trying too. And hopefully they'll be more without adversely affecting the experience.

@Wandering Mist Oh 100% no, PVE will aways net a bigger haul. It's their game to develop as they feel fit after all.

@mcstackerson Oh i don't think anyone here is wanting that. I'd love to have weather effects have some bearing on combat, or our stats, but going the full food, water dealy just ends up being tedious, or ignored.

Noaani

Ventharien wrote: »

They are survival games, but if you have a open persistent multiplayer world, i'd say you're an mmo.

Single player mode
Local server mode
100 player per server limit
Dev kit inclusion.

I consider each of these things individually to exclude a game from being an MMO if any one is present.

Every game you listed contained at least one of these - except Atlas.

I fully agree with you that Atlas will launch. Consoles are not going to save it though, as it is already on consoles, and players (at least Xbox players) are leaving the game even faster than PC players as they are at a massive disadvantage (control issues, render issues, communication issues).

So, the game will launch, but I give it 18 months before it has either closed it's servers (potentially leaving the game open for local server play), or has drastically rebranded itself similar to how Archeage rebranded itself.

It won't turn a profit in it's current state though.

Ventharien wrote: »

The games that i stated above all suffered from a central flaw, if the purpose of the game is to win (in many peoples eyes anyway) then you are best served by crushing as many threats as are possible. In this case though those threats are people who understandably don't feel like rebuilding/regathering again and again, and never being able to retaliate (play the game). So they quit, which weakens the community, and starts a snowball that eventually ends the game in a sense (hardcore fans will stay to the last no matter what the game is)

This has been my argument right from the start (well before this thread started).

If PvP is left unchecked in any game where the developers have a desire for players to exist that are not solely PvP focused (ie, any game with complex PvE), then the game will not be a success in that state.

Either the PvP needs to be given focus, or the PvE needs to be given focus. Both can not exist. Again, this is if PvP is left unchecked (aka, full PvP).

Ventharien wrote: »

So for any persistant pvp game to work in my opinion, there needs to be measures in place to limit us. Corruption, and siege timers are ways IS is trying too. And hopefully they'll be more without adversely affecting the experience.

100% agree with this statement.

Ventharien wrote: »

Oh 100% no, PVE will aways net a bigger haul.

Tell that to Epic.

PvE will net a bigger haul in a persistent world. PvP will net a bigger haul in a non-persistent world.

Sarevok

noaani wrote: »

ferryman wrote: »

@noaani FYI EvE Online and Albion online has full loot PvP rules. Yes there are some safe zones without full loot rules but e.g. in Albion the major part of the world is under full loot PvP rules so it is really wrong to claim opposite.

The question was about full PvP full loot.

Neither game has that.

No game will ever have that.

All niche games because who wants to invest multiple hours of effort only to have a group of players kill you and strip your lifeless corpse of all your effort? It's been a while since I have played a full loot pvp mmo and probably will never get around to it since it requires so much time investment. You harvest, craft and just when you're ready to go out and hunt other players a zerg rolls over you and takes everything. Escape from Tarkov comes to mind and I played it for a day and decided it wasn't the game for me. ArcheAge, however, was actually extremely fun when stealing trade packs from other players (faction or same faction) and had a decent karma system in place but the jail time really wasn't a big factor in choosing to flag or not. Heck, sometimes you could talk or pay your way out of your trial and get a clean slate. Best system I have seen in an MMO thus far though.

Here is a link to a reddit post of just a few games with full loot (and full-ish). Only full loot games I can think of are Rust, Last Oasis and Ark.

Full loot is not a great concept because time and effort are something most players think about when it comes to the system.

Ventharien

@noaani So long as the dev kit stays in single player mode i don't think it has a bearing on the conversation. And 100 player per server is just a more obvious limitation. How many people are playing around in any given shard, or server between handshake protocols? Especially when you can still travel between servers in most of the titles i mentioned. And most MMO's these days have a local server or 2 floating around. Not supported as the 'main' game, but neither are those the 'main' game in the above titles. My main gaming background has been MMO's, and then these survival pvp types for the last 5 or 6 years (with some more mmo sprinkled in) and with more MMO's going for that player driven economy, world, etc. i think these are valuable references on how many gamers act and play in such a framework. Hell, the New World guys were surprised at players antics, when anyone whos ever put 10 minutes into ark or rust could tell you that people have no qualms about wiping out low level groups or areas if they're incentivized in the slightest (loot) or if there aren't punishments or consequences for such tactics. And yeah i was referring to a persistent worlds in regards to pve. call of duty, fortnite and all the others show how much you can rake in with with pvp in more of a lobby setup.

Ventharien

@Sarevok I'm not sure full pvp loot drop isn't a great concept, I'm thinking to make it work requires a whole bunch of systems meant to balance destruction with creation, and it's a really hard balance to keep. I've seen some games come close, but in the end they still didn't feel like they quite make it. Though maybe it just can't be done indefinitely when we get our hands on it lol.

Noaani

Sarevok wrote: »

Here is a link to a reddit post of just a few games with full loot (and full-ish). Only full loot games I can think of are Rust, Last Oasis and Ark.

Full loot is not a great concept because time and effort are something most players think about when it comes to the system.

If you look over those games, a few things stick out.

The first is that there are a few isometric MMO's in there. These games are made by very small teams in comparison to a full scale, full 3D MMO, and require less infrastructure to run. They can afford to have a smaller playerbase than a AAA MMO. I've not looked any deeper in to any of these games, as just knowing the game is being developed on such a skeleton crew is enough to put me off.

Next there are games that claim to have full PvP, but have systems in place similar to that of Ashes. Profane is a good example here, if you consider that game to have full PvP, then so does Ashes (not sure about full loot with Profane as yet though, I assume it will be higher than Ashes, but not by much).

Then there are games where the only way to survive is to join a mega guild. These are the games that have attempted to hold on to too much of the MMO genre while making a survival game, and are the ones that simply will not last as they are now.

They are the example to hold up when saying full PvP full loot can not work in a persistent game world.

Edit to add; in regards to Archeage, I spent 3 years as the only full time pirate on my server, spending most of my time farming land in Auroria. To me, scrubs fighting over packs on the two main continents were exactly that, scrubs fighting over packs (no offense).

Fighting on the main continent meant you always had safety only a few minutes away. Farming on Auroria though, it means everyone knew where I would be, that I would be alone and without backup (literally only person in my faction) and that I had no safe areas. Even when Trion made players own land safe for them, it didn't apply in Auroria.

The crime point system in Archeage was good, but not perfect. Being able to talk/bribe your way out of a jail sentence was good, but the system had one major flaw. The game needed to make guards attack players with a high crime point total (100 would be where I would have put it). This would have meant there were real consequences to gaining crime points, rather than just a slap on the wrist. It would have meant that players would have often looked at potential packs they could steal and decide they were not worth the cost, whereas the way Archeage was set up, it was always worth the time to at least attempt to take people on that had packs - there were no substantive negatives.

This is where Ashes is improving on the system. You could look at corruption as replacing crime points, and dropping the trial/jail aspect of it and replacing it with potential item drops and inability to access essential services in towns. Now, I personally would like to see a trial/jail system added on top of that as well, but that is just me.

Child Item