A little too close for my comfort but the boys sweated it out in the end.
First I will admit that I was not one of the players that argued for mounts in the game. The world of Aeternum feels small enough that even the farthest depots are not that tough of a run. Part of what makes it feel small is that it is jam packed with things to stop and do along the way; something of interest is never more than a few steps away. Mounts would ruin that feeling.
However, now that we've seen how BIG the new zone Brimstone Sands mounts start to make some more sense. Before we get into what I would like to see out of mounts lets list a few things I don't want.
With the "please don't" covered; lets look at a few things I'd like to see starting with a few ideas I'd lift from other games.
The first idea I'd steal is the way Roach (the horse) works in The Witcher 3 (and no I am not talking about Roach randomly appearing on a roof -- see picture above). When you call your horse in The Witcher it appears from just off screen; no magic horse from your pants. This obviously is difficult to pull off in a multiplayer game, but if the mount could appear from a cloud of azoth and charge towards you that'd be neat.
Secondly, the horse in The Witcher will automatically follow paths/roads and the player can basically AFK to their destination if its at the end of the road. This would be awesome in my book; I already spend a ton of time on the roads of Aeternum and the world is beautiful so I'd love kicking back and watching the scenery pass by.
In Albion Online players can have pack mounts that can both be ridden but also can be used for increased storage as long as the player stays in range. This would be awesome with the gathering that can be done in New World; I can just imagine an hours long logging spree without having to stop every few minutes to zip back to town. Since we don't want mounts out in town the pack mount would just be stabled with the extra storage capacity available just like town storage.
Next I'd steal a couple features of Guild Wars 2 mounts. First, the way you unlock mounts via in game quests and objectives is a great way to engage the player instead of just making it something they purchase. Next progressing your mount so that it can do more and more makes the mount system in Guild Wars 2 its own entire horizontal end game progression system. Lastly the way mounts control in Guild Wars 2 is definitely worth stealing. Mounts in Guild Wars 2 have unique control characteristics (which can improve with leveling them up); not all mounts can stop or turn on a dime - some are slower to turn and some are faster to stop and some are slow but can bounce really high.
While we don't want the flying or "silly" side of Guild Wars 2 mounts (for example the kangaroo mount that is meant for jumping puzzles) we want the core concept that mounts are their own track of content for the player to explore, progress, and then ultimately feel like they have some skill in using rather than just being a flat speed boost.
Another idea I'd like to see mounts take on is a role in combat of some sort with the possibility for armor that gives them different abilities just like light/medium/heavy armor for players. I don't want the combat aspects to be defining but whenever I think of mounts in games I also think of charging down my enemies, flying off the mount, and launching into an attack. If my enemy is taking off on a mount I want mechanisms to knock them off and engage them in combat.
I am hopeful that there is some care and thought put into mounts for New World so they do not just become a visual speed boost. They need to fit into the game just as any other system. If we look at things like music became a tradeskill and how musical instruments fit into crafting then I'd hope to see mounts and mount accessories fit right in. And I really, really like the idea of mounts appearing out of a mist of azoth at full gallop when called.
Want to mount up? Leave a comment.
It took me reading a few posts to wrangle what my younger self held as opinion on the topic of business models for games, but here is my "years later" assessment of that journey.
With that last bullet I am going to hop off the autobiography train and focus on "games are a business and have to make money first". In my older age I find this really odd as a position for a consumer of a product to take, but as a gamer who really-really wants to see my niche of games (MMORPGs) have new options to try. Basically I want to "vote with my wallet" for games that I want to be successful or from developers I want to be successful.
Speaking of "voting with my wallet" that brings us back full circle to business models. In the subscription model players have a single vote; my vote counts the same as yours -- either I am a subscriber or I am not. In a micro-transaction model each player's vote is variable. A player in a free 2 play game may abstain from voting by just playing for free or a player may be a whale
There are so many issues with this. The biggest problem of video games making money is that it preys on human weakness. For some of us it's just a case of "I have more money than time so I want to buy my way ahead or buy things that are fun", but for others it preys on impaired decision making (children, addiction, FOMO, etc) and works to extract maximum cash. Yet, I still defend that a game is a business first and has to make money.
To the post I kicked this off with on why free 2 play works (which is really to say micro transactions work) is that it does let players invest at their level so developers/publishers can maximize per-player return. I do still believe as I mentioned in that post that good game design can keep the playing field level.
At the simplest level for my argument are the games that "just sell cosmetics"; games like New World where after you buy the game you can play for free (no subscription) but then there is a store that offers all sorts of goofy outfits and stuff to put in your house; none of which affects power level when playing. If you really like and want to support the game then drop $50 on the store, but there is no requirement to do so.
In the more complex category are games with things like battle passes/premium/season pass (for my purposes just called battle pass). I think battle passes came from a marriage of game design and business model. For many games battle passes offer unique rewards and drive players to participate in the game in a certain manner. Good game designers marry battle passes with great game play and it's a great experience. Every time I jump back into Apex Legends I snag the battle pass and it is worth it. In Guild Wars 2 I've bought multiple living seasons (which are battle pass like). Battle pass is the modern day subscription, but this time around players get a benefit.
Of course there is the opposite end of this where battle passes are required to make any meaningful progress and the entire game is designed to get you to pay up. This is where I start drawing the line as it falls into an area of abusing players. This is basically why I don't play any mobile games; every single one I've ever looked into, while looking fun, are just designed to make me depart with my cash.
In conclusion: I support game companies making money and I believe good game design can go hand in hand. It is important to keep this in mind when looking at future games; the sooner they outline the business model the more likely it is the game design will support it in a positive manner. The later a game decides on it's business model the more likely it is to be abusive and/or insufficient to be successful for the game.
Want me to review more of my old posts? Want to argue with me? Leave a comment.
New World is one year old as of today and the September developer update has been posted. Feel free to watch the update and then read on for my thoughts.
My favorite release of the year was Tempest Heart. I am not a huge expedition (New World's term for a PvE dungeon) player, but playing Tempest Heart converted me. It is hands down the best MMORPG dungeon I've ever played. The visuals and sound are amazing. The fights were well done (albeit with some bugs early on) and the atmosphere as you go through the expedition is incredible (giant robot head shooting laser beams!).
My biggest disappointment of the year was 3v3 PvP arenas. The combat in PvP can just be frustrating at
times and 3v3 hits the worst parts of it such as excessive crowd control where you spend the entire match on the ground unable to do anything or alternately if you don't have the right crowd control light armor players are nearly impossible to catch and kill. Many of these elements are mitigated in other modes, but when condensed down to 3v3 in a small arena its all right there on display. Mix in that there is no solo vs group queue and right now, as a mostly solo player, the 3v3 experience is not fun.
Also its clear, to me at least, the community isn't excited about PvP arenas -- as evidenced by no one showing up for the first public tournament. It is unfortunate the team seems to be investing more into the mode so hopefully they see something I don't. I'd rather that time be spent on other parts of the game. The only thing 3v3 needs is solos vs group queue and a ranking; otherwise leave that mode alone. It is not where the game wins over players.
Whats coming next?
In the update the team talked about focusing on more solo content. I found this interesting because I think New World is easily the most solo friendly MMORPG on the market. It sounds like they want to target harder solo content where you can get a sense of fighting a boss fight like a group would but just as yourself. I am on board with that but I think the team is underselling the current content as it is all very friendly to solo players and offers solo players end game progression.
They also announced wanting to expand into hardcore raid content that is more challenging than expeditions and mutations currently. No hard details were provided, but a focus on gear specific for PvE was mentioned so that rewards feel more useful in PvE instead of the current "best" being PvP gear. While not what I am necessarily excited about it was the logical step to take for the PvE crowd. Personally I think 5-man expeditions + mutations are perfectly good content and I'd be happy seeing a dozen more of those than any multi-group raid content. But I will admit if the progression and rewards that go with it are done well then I am probably on board.
Also exciting was the mention of working on a gear management system. Unfortunately seems it is still a ways off which is disappointing. Adding gear management is the number one thing that could be done to make the game more enjoyable. It is getting nightmarish to manage my gear sets currently and directly impacting my enjoyment level when playing. I logged out the other night because I was too irritated to change my gear/attribute/weapon build because plans changed.
Mounts were also a topic of conversation. I don't think the game needs them but it is a repeating topic in the community and now confirmed it is something the team is officially working on now. My hope is the mounts are modest, mostly just horses, and don't turn everything into "mount up and alt tab while it runs in a straight line". An idea I thought would fit perfectly with New World is the way the horse works in The Witcher III: Wild Hunt. In Witcher III your horse automatically locks into the paths and guides itself so if you are on established roads it just does its thing for you. Then you can take it off the path/roads and free form it.
Some closer term changes in the upcoming October patch were covered in the video but I'll have more thoughts on those as they get closer to release. Over all I am very happy with where New World is at and where it is headed. The team has earned my trust and I foresee continued engagement with this game and it's community. Everything isn't perfect but there is so much for me to do that is in a great spot that the areas that need improvement don't intersect my play time. I love playing New World and play every day; my vote is cast.
What are your thoughts on New World's first year and future plans?
A neat infographic as well
Games Made Me is a series of posts where nostalgia gets the best of me and I dip into my gaming past for things that have made me the gamer that I am. One of those items was InQuest Gamer magazine. InQuest Gamer started in 1995 and ceased publication in 2007.
InQuest felt like it was tailored for me as a gamer. It covered the range from board games, to collectible/trading card games, and then into the realm of MMORPGs. The magazine grew up through the early days of Internet gaming (aka the golden era of MMORPGs with Everquest and Ultima Online) and overlapped the rise of games like Magic the Gathering and Pokemon. As a young gamer I could ask for nothing more.
My journey with InQuest started when I was working at a grocery store and the magazine caught my eye on the rack. It hooked me and I was mailing out one of the cards for a subscription the same day (some of you young folk may be surprised to learn we had to write on a piece of paper and put it in the mail to get things done).
While I was mostly interested in the coverage on games like Magic the Gathering (MtG) and the Pokemon TCG which InQuest covered in detail the magazine also became my primary vector into news and information about some online games called Ultima Online (UO) and Everquest (EQ). At the time our potato of a home computer could handle running text MUDs (multi user dungeons), but games like UO and definitely any sort of 3D game like EQ were out of the picture. Fortunately, there, in full color and glory, were stories from these online worlds for me to enjoy in InQuest Gamer.
The articles, like the Bad Boys article featured in the magazine cover above, warped my mind about the possibilities of online games (so much so that over 20+ years later I still remember reading them!). The Bad Boys article covered a player from UO and one from EQ. The UO portion focused on a player named Redkiller that hunted down red players (aka player killers) to protect their player built city while the EQ portion covered a player talking about the big bad dungeon and losing their stuff in it's depths. To be honest, hunting down players who killed other players and managing a player built city, sounded way cooler than fighting in a dungeon. I've been a PvP focused gamer ever since.
Reading the tales of Redkiller in that Bad Boys article convinced me that I had to play Ultima Online and the moment I had the chance to buy a non-potato computer for myself I did so and a short trip to GameStop and I had a copy of Ultima Online (which I still have that box and materials today - except the cloth map). My gaming existence has never been the same.
InQuest Gamer magazine made me the gamer I am today.