[Megathread] Amazon's New World MMO

[Katchii]

It's not compulsory to participate. Mandatory means you HAVE to do it; in this context required by the game. That was never the case.

It would be literally impossible to not participate in PvP with this design though. If you could explain or describe how you could completely avoid participating in PvP of any kind with that design, I would concede. I just don't see how that would be possible.

You arguing this point is like saying game a designed to be primarily PvP is filled to the brim with aggressive PvE mobs, that are constantly attacking you and that you have to defend yourself against if you want to actually play the game and not die constantly, and then saying you don't HAVE to participate in PvE.

[Fencers]

It would be literally impossible to not participate in PvP with this design though. If you could explain or describe how you could completely avoid participating in PvP of any kind with that design, I would concede. I just don't see how that would be possible.

Rn away, not fight back. Concede defeat.

You arguing this point is like saying game a designed to be primarily PvP is filled to the brim with aggressive PvE mobs, that are constantly attacking you and that you have to defend yourself against if you want to actually play the game and not die constantly, and then saying you don't HAVE to participate in PvE.

That is not totally correct; you don't have to fight the AI either. But many things require you to do so.

Both PVP and PVE are significant aspects of the gameplay, but PVP was not compulsory. I am not saying they did not exist or were/are important design choices. But PVP was not mandatory and ignorable.

[Katchii]

Rn away, not fight back. Concede defeat.

That's still "participating" though because you have to change your play style, what you're doing and deal with it as part of your gaming session. You're a viable target, and therefore have to plan accordingly. Dealing with other players would be part of what you do every time you play, whether you're attacking them or going out of your way to avoid them. It still has a direct impact on how you play the game. It cannot simply be ignored.

That is not totally correct; you don't have to fight the AI either. But many things require you to do so.

Both PVP and PVE are significant aspects of the gameplay, but PVP was not compulsory. I am not saying they did not exist or were/are important design choices. But PVP was not mandatory and ignorable.

Your first sentence directly contradicts this .Running away is a conscious decision, not fighting back and conceding defeat would result in you dying and therefore have a very tangible effect on your game play session. PvP would absolutely not be ignorable, you'd have to deal with it in some way, as you're forced to be an unwilling participant. Whether you actively engaged in a PvP battle and attacked an enemy player is irrelevant. They would attack you and affect your game play, and your entire play session would be shaped by the fact that you would always be a viable target for someone.

[Fencers]

That's still "participating" though because you have to change your play style, what you're doing and deal with it as part of your gaming session. You're a viable target, and therefore have to plan accordingly. Dealing with other players would be part of what you do every time you play, whether you're attacking them or going out of your way to avoid them. It still has a direct impact on how you play the game. It cannot simply be ignored.

It can. None of it was required. It was not like a player hit you and you could do nothing else but fight them. That would be mandatory.

I ignored PVP totally for a long time.

Your first sentence directly contradicts this .Running away is a conscious decision, not fighting back and conceding defeat would result in you dying and therefore have a very tangible effect on your game play session. PvP would absolutely not be ignorable, you'd have to deal with it in some way, as you're forced to be an unwilling participant. Whether you actively engaged in a PvP battle and attacked an enemy player is irrelevant. They would attack you and affect your game play, and your entire play session would be shaped by the fact that you would always be a viable target for someone.

My first sentence (of what you are quoting) is; That is not totally correct; you don't have to fight the AI either. But many things require you to do so.

How does that contradict the bolded section you are emphasizing? There were quests required to do in order to continue play, largely PVE based in the beta. In the alpha, there was a couple but I can't recall the details because I didn't bother to do them. Eventually, you had to do these PVE segments. They were compulsory.

You did not have to do the PVP segments. They were not compulsory; i.e. mandatory.

[Katchii]

It can. None of it was required. It was not like a player hit you and you could do nothing else but fight them. That would be mandatory.

I ignored PVP totally for a long time.

If you have to change how you play to account for PvP being automatically turned on, you are affected by PvP. As I said, just because you don't directly attack another player doesn't mean the PvP environment is not affecting you.

I am incredibly skeptical that you totally ignored PvP, as in, you played and experienced the game as if PvP didn't exist.

Running away from other players, conceding defeat or just not fighting back and dying are not ignoring PvP, that's just you not attacking another player. You're still having to address PvP directly.

My first sentence (of what you are quoting) is; That is not totally correct; you don't have to fight the AI either. But many things require you to do so.

The first sentence of the entire post, not just of what I quoted. Which is why the next words I used are directly related and directed towards the first sentence of your post.

How does that contradict the bolded section you are emphasizing? There were quests required to do in order to continue play, largely PVE based in the beta. In the alpha, there was a couple but I can't recall the details because I didn't bother to do them. Eventually, you had to do these PVE segments. They were compulsory.

You did not have to do the PVP segments. They were not compulsory; i.e. mandatory.

See my statement above. Just because you are not actively engaging in PvP by attacking another player does not mean you are not affected by it. It's mandatory that you deal with it somehow in situations where you cannot turn it off.

[Proskill]

what is gonna be the most popular faction for most benefits?

[PACOX]

what is gonna be the most popular faction for most benefits?

Depends on the server. I would hold off a few hours to pick a faction and wait to see who has the most land. You're holding yourself back if you pick the underdog. There's no real incentive not to pick the biggest one and nothing right now in place to promote balance.

[Edge-]

Man...part of me is hype and wants to pick this up but I'm still kinda mixed on the beta. Combat felt kinda meh to me (at least 1h sword/shield) and I kinda felt pressured to level up quickly and get through zones...but at the same time I do quite enjoy just mindlessly going around harvesting shit.

I didn't remember to get a close look, but how does the bank/stash system work? I couldn't tell if they were shared between all territories (I assume so), and/or if there were any weight limitations (I imagine so). I'm a huge hoarder and would be happy to just mindlessly harvest all the things and figure out the crafting system at some point.

[Maljinwo]

I didn't remember to get a close look, but how does the bank/stash system work? I couldn't tell if they were shared between all territories (I assume so), and/or if there were any weight limitations (I imagine so). I'm a huge hoarder and would be happy to just mindlessly harvest all the things and figure out the crafting system at some point.

They aren't shared.
However if your faction controls two territories, for example, you can transfer stuff between territories

[Edge-]

They aren't shared.
However if your faction controls two territories, for example, you can transfer stuff between territories

Thanks, I was worried that'd be the case. That's kinda frustrating, guess I'll just keep waiting on this one until it goes on sale or I can't wait any more. Kinda a bummer, but I think I get what they were going for with that design decision.

[Proskill]

and what server EU side are streamers gonna play on? just to avoid it

[meckeard]

I couldn't find this online but how do you move in this game? I prefer the WASD keys.

[rogoth]

I couldn't find this online but how do you move in this game? I prefer the WASD keys.

it uses the same WASD keys for movement, the camera is a little more janky and doesn't have great ways to change the movement speed for it but it works like any other 3rd person game.

[meckeard]

it uses the same WASD keys for movement, the camera is a little more janky and doesn't have great ways to change the movement speed for it but it works like any other 3rd person game.

Good to know. Thanks!

[BeepBoo]

It can. None of it was required. It was not like a player hit you and you could do nothing else but fight them. That would be mandatory.

Getting killed when you otherwise don't want to engage is still you participating in pvp... You literally don't have a choice in that instance.

You did not have to do the PVP segments. They were not compulsory; i.e. mandatory.

Like I said in my original response: stop nit picking, because as far as most players are concerned, getting to end-game and getting the best gear is the entire goal they play for, and that meant PvP in the original guise.

"but you don't HAVE to have that goal!"
No one cares about your pedantic arguments.

[Fencers]

If you have to change how you play to account for PvP being automatically turned on, you are affected by PvP.

Firstly, "being affected by PVP" is different than PVP being mandatory. Also, who is changing the way they play; how?

What is forcing you to press the attack button?

I don't even know what you mean by changing the way you play, frankly. That seems so broad as to apply to anything.

As I said, just because you don't directly attack another player doesn't mean the PvP environment is not affecting you.

This is another argument entirely from my post earlier. It's not relevant to what I was talking about- mandatory, compulsory PVP.

I am incredibly skeptical that you totally ignored PvP, as in, you played and experienced the game as if PvP didn't exist.

I did indeed.

I just gathered items and shuffled them to town to make pies and watermelon juice. I ignored most of the PVE "quests" too.

I remember specifically being out in the woods near the marsh on the southeast of Windsward area (back then these areas were different than they are now) and there was a long elevated bridge connecting two sides of a canyon. There was a lot of PVP in this area but also good gathering spots. Some zombies were around here as well.

I spent about 2 hours in those woods and was jumped once. I didn't fight back, healed myself a few times and the guy ran away. It wasn't required that I fight that person. It was not mandatory to PVP.

I continued gathering stuff and making pies the same as if those higher-level zombies had nipped me.

Running away from other players, conceding defeat or just not fighting back and dying are not ignoring PvP, that's just you not attacking another player. You're still having to address PvP directly.

That is ignoring PVP. PVP is directly engaging in a battle with another player(s). It is not mandatory to do so.

The first sentence of the entire post, not just of what I quoted. This is why the next words I used are directly related and directed towards the first sentence of your post.

Okay. Well, I just addressed that above then.

See my statement above. Just because you are not actively engaging in PvP by attacking another player does not mean you are not affected by it. It's mandatory that you deal with it somehow in situations where you cannot turn it off.

I do not agree with this whatsoever. Mandatory gameplay means players must do it- you have to do the driving missions as part of the main story in Vice City. Driving is not mandatory to play the game, however.

Being "affected by it" is something else you are introducing and another issue in itself.

PVP is a significant part of game design. That has largely always been so. Mandatory PVP is another implication and has not always been so. The only way to PVP with another player is to fight them. There is no Player vs. Player gameplay if you are not engaging with other players over combat. They want the fight and you are giving it to them- that's PVP. You're just fighting each other.

what is gonna be the most popular faction for most benefits?

Sybndicate in all likelihood. It's been the most popular for a while now.

[BeepBoo]

That is ignoring PVP. PVP is directly engaging in a battle with another player(s). It is not mandatory to do so.

"I'm just getting shot at by this gunman, but I'm ignoring it! I'm obviously NOT in a gun fight! Especially if I'm just running away!"

[kaminaris]

Firstly, "being affected by PVP" is different than PVP being mandatory. Also, who is changing the way they play; how?

What is forcing you to press the attack button?

I don't even know what you mean by changing the way you play, frankly. That seems so broad as to apply to anything.

That is pure nonsense. With that logic League of legends PvP is completely optional since you can just fight mobs and never fight back players.
Actually ANY game ever released has optional PvP since you can just never shoot/fight back

[Katchii]

[SNIP]

So to you, attacking someone is the only thing that makes it PvP?

Agree to disagree I guess, but I honestly can't wrap my head around your viewpoint, it's bonkers to me.

And as @kaminaris said, this would make literally any game with PvP as a major component mean that it's "optional" per your definition, because if you simply choose not to attack you're not participating, which is ludicrous.

[Maljinwo]

Thanks, I was worried that'd be the case. That's kinda frustrating, guess I'll just keep waiting on this one until it goes on sale or I can't wait any more. Kinda a bummer, but I think I get what they were going for with that design decision.

I wouldn't mind it if Fast Travel was cheaper honestly
Or if they give us mounts