Amazon's New World MMO will no longer have player killing due to toxicity

[Horza]

“One of the problems we observed with this system was that some high level players were killing low level players, A LOT,” Amazon Game Studios explains. “Sometimes exclusively. This often led to solo or group griefing scenarios that created a toxic environment for many players. To be clear, this behavior was not shown by all PvP players, but enough to cause significant issues.”

“We set out to build a compelling world full of danger and opportunity that begs to be explored. The intended design was never to allow a small group of players to bully other players.” AGS clarifies that it’s not “[moving] away from PvP” and still wants it to have a “significant role” in New World, meaning “fair fights that are organized, skill based, and opted into by all participants” rather than “predatory behavior that relies on exploiting another player’s lack of experience, progress, readiness, or willingness.” (Source)

[loramin]

In other words, what happens when you (Amazon) know absolutely nothing about a 20+ year old gaming genre, and then decide to make a game in that genre with no research: you spend a lot of money to learn things any P99 player could have told you for free.

Originally Posted by Some Amazon Dev (probably)

Wait, you're telling me players will grief each other if you let them?!? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Cecily]

I have mixed feelings about this. I random PKed quite a bit in Lineage II, but PvP was (usually) more satisfying. Both parties have fun in fair fights. The fun in griefing is disproportionate to the suck of getting murdered randomly by someone you can't defend against. There's an appeal to antisocial behavior, but it's ultimately bad for keeping a player base.

[Wonkie]

Originally Posted by Cecily [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I random PKed quite a bit in Lineage II, but PvP was (usually) more satisfying.

I guess PK means slaughtering noobs. Didn't know that, cool.

[Mblake81]

Originally Posted by Wonkie [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I guess PK means slaughtering noobs. Didn't know that, cool.

The sublime joys of being a little shit.

This is part of the reason the post console release Battlefields blow hard. They refined the gameplay, removed aspects of 'griefing' so that they are more of a linear experience. Sneaking behind enemy lines, sabotaging their ships, plans, tanks.. laying mines outside of spawn areas.. anything for a goofy laugh. New games try to focus on life like graphics and realisms while using marketing as a crutch.

PVP is Anti-Grief, Balance Queefed dog vomit. Although I do acknowledge there are far more kids on computers than way back when, which spoils this a bit. Especially in the streaming age. I like blowing up old guys more than I do some snotty nosed 12 year old, plus the banter is usually better quality.

[Cecily]

Originally Posted by Wonkie [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I guess PK means slaughtering noobs. Didn't know that, cool.

If that's what you're into sure, but PKing (player killing/player killer) people usually comes with a consequence and randomly killing noobs just isn't worth the risk involved, and I guess my targets weren't exactly random. I would non-consentually murder people who wouldn't fight back who needed to be forcibly removed from an area for reasons or just to deliver a hearty fuck you to someone who deserved it.

[Wonkie]

Originally Posted by Cecily [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If that's what you're into sure, but PKing (player killing/player killer) people usually comes with a consequence and randomly killing noobs just isn't worth the risk involved, and I guess my targets weren't exactly random. I would non-consentually murder people who wouldn't fight back who needed to be forcibly removed from an area for reasons or just to deliver a hearty fuck you to someone who deserved it.

I wasn't sassing. It sounds like the rules of that game penalized resistance if there was zero hope of victory. That's one model.

Like everything, PK vs PVP comes down to informed consent. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Hopefully Amazon.com finds a better way.

[Danth]

Originally Posted by Wonkie [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I guess PK means slaughtering noobs. Didn't know that, cool.

It doesn't of course. In the environment I came up through (MMO-flightsims) we made fun of those types. Vulching/spawn camping/lowbie ganking has always been the refuge of terrible players. Good players don't do that type of thing very much because they don't need to. I like winning against folks who're themselves considered good. There's no satisfaction in clubbing baby seals who can't effectively fight back. It's only the useless folks who can't win any other way who regularly gravitate to that sort of thing.

I'm not surprised Amazon decided to curtail the ability of that crowd to ruin their game, but I'm surprised they even had to in the sense that it's naive at best to think it wouldn't be a problem in an open PvP setting. I suppose that's human nature though, every generation has to re-learn lessons of the past.

Danth

[Gatorsmash]

Originally Posted by Danth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It doesn't of course. In the environment I came up through (MMO-flightsims) we made fun of those types. Vulching/spawn camping/lowbie ganking has always been the refuge of terrible players. Good players don't do that type of thing very much because they don't need to. I like winning against folks who're themselves considered good. There's no satisfaction in clubbing baby seals who can't effectively fight back. It's only the useless folks who can't win any other way who regularly gravitate to that sort of thing.

I'm not surprised Amazon decided to curtail the ability of that crowd to ruin their game, but I'm surprised they even had to in the sense that it's naive at best to think it wouldn't be a problem in an open PvP setting. I suppose that's human nature though, every generation has to re-learn lessons of the past.

Danth

Wtf is this diarrhea?

They were attempting to make a open world pvp game like Rust, Ark/pirate reskin Ark and a few others currently in development which are making millions for their studios through funding and sales- even with Ark versions being absolute trash.

That retarded statement they put out just means one of two things since there is a toxic crowd effecting players in every single game. 1- they found out that non-tab target games are hard to program or 2- they are going woke to get broke.

Sucks because the beta had a decent glimpse of being good

[Albanwr]

PvP games will always be toxic. Unless you setup specific zones for PvP and other zones are completely safe for those who just want to play a damn game.

Dark Age of Camelot had its issues, but it was a great PvP (RvR) game.