Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

The most beautiful Naval game that will die like POTBS did...hear me out


Recommended Posts

All games die at some point, why people treat Eve like the immortal holy grail of gaming is beyond me. One day too it shall fall.

 

 

So there's no difference between a game running for over a decade and a game burning down faster than the time it took to develop?

POBS took six years to develop, and basically burned in two

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say no. Why? Because I like the historical background. British empire. Pirates etc. It's what you call atmosphere. I always played football games with original names and teams. I had never interests in fantasy names.

Players creating their own nation? So one can choose the name and others have to deal with it? "Hoogy Boogy Taka created assault flag against Candy Land". No thank you.

So we would have a fantasy trash mmo instead of a historical based mmo.

I don't think the game will die like you said. Look at World of Warcraft. Completely different as EVE and much much more succesful. I don't want EVE with ships. I want Naval Action. Of course you can copy some elements from other games. But I would like to see first some kind of port battle mechanics like POTBS first. And I am sure this would change many things.

More and different pve/pvp quests. More different ships.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the game will die like you said. Look at World of Warcraft. Completely different as EVE and much much more succesful.

 

EVE isn't the only successful model but you need to look at the models that worked and failed and see what can be learned.

 

WOW plays a very good game of content release. Too much content release, I think, makes people feel like they're just stuck in "the grind" forever. Not enough content release and they grind it out and have nothing else to do. The MMORPG world is full of games that failed to balance content release correctly. WOW has managed, for years, to do a nice job of getting new, interesting content out there at just the right rate.

 

I dare say that Naval Action is not trying to be a WOW-type game based on rapid and large content releases. Also, it can't be a game of vertical power progression because we can't just keep adding new armor, new swords and new pants to the game.

 

Naval Action could just be a shallow game of big ship pew pew but it will be dead within a year with that plan (and it would be an accelerating death...once prime time falls under 300 people or so, new players won't find anything of interest to do and the game will quickly head to the dump).

 

 

I think this game's long term interest, development and expansion relies on creating a good wargame.

 

If there's another plan, I'd love to hear it, but the alternatives that are usually brought up require a huge development team to pump out content or it's an arena-combat game that's going to be dead within a year because there's no long term interest to drive the game.

Edited by Slamz
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, an appropriate and interesting path for NA would be to simulate an officers career over years, compressed to months of game play.

That would mean:

* A wider range of satisfying and interesting missions and battles, which would reduce the...

* ...race to the top. A slower pace of grind.

* Large, skiw swings in the political balances, so who you fight, where you fight and what you fight over changes over real world months.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, an appropriate and interesting path for NA would be to simulate an officers career over years, compressed to months of game play.

 

You talking PvE or PvP?

 

PvE would require a lot of content to make that interesting. Can't just have people grind bots in missions.

 

PvP would get tricky because "you fight who you fight", meaning high ranks can fight low ranks and so forth. Who you fight won't change. All you can really change is how much a player has to grind before he can fight that Victory on even ground. Until he grinds his way to max level, all you're doing is putting him at a disadvantage versus veteran players.

 

You could try to implement rules about who can fight who but I think that's a disaster for a PvP game. I can spell it out if you're interested but the short version is "it's a disaster".

 

 

That's why I keep trying to push the wargame aspect. It doesn't require a ton of endless content. It doesn't require grinding. It should aim to put people on equal PvP footing pretty quickly. It does require a lot of good, deep game mechanics, but once they are created the game should be set for a good, long run.

 

Any leveling scheme will make me ask "what happens when you're done leveling". Wargames never need to end.

Edited by Slamz
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A thought I had, while not being totaly worked out or anything, just a nice thought. Is to have two servers, one server could have the carribean map and the other the european map. So PvP1 could still be carribean and PvP2 could be Europe. And make it so that these two servers are supporting eachother. As to speak, the carribean colonies would need to provide resources for the war in Europe (as they probably did in the time) and other resources like money etc. is to be provided from the european ports.

 

Like I said this is not totaly worked out or thought out, it would just be nice to have two servers communicate to eachother, and explain eachothers needs. And changes in one server could affect the other server.

 

Small idea:

- Have a random exit port set each day where traders can drop of cargo to go to europe (or the other way round from europe to the carribean). This could be contract wise, where you buy a contract for a big amount of goods with a high price reward. You only get payed if you supply the full amount of goods. These goods could then be used to fullfill the ship building needs in Europe. And thus the one could have an effect on the other.

 

None of this is though trough, but I think if the game uses allot of variables in its gameplay it could always give for advanced prolonged tactics on one server that could guarantee nice victory on the other server. Offcourse there would and should be people playing on both servers. The game would look bigger and more complex this way.

 

This will offer allot of possibilities for the game, but like I said its a small thought, and I have not realy thought this trough (like what the flaws of this concept are).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A thought I had, while not being totaly worked out or anything, just a nice thought. Is to have two servers, one server could have the carribean map and the other the european map. So PvP1 could still be carribean and PvP2 could be Europe. And make it so that these two servers are supporting eachother. As to speak, the carribean colonies would need to provide resources for the war in Europe (as they probably did in the time) and other resources like money etc. is to be provided from the european ports.

 

Like I said this is not totaly worked out or thought out, it would just be nice to have two servers communicate to eachother, and explain eachothers needs. And changes in one server could affect the other server.

 

Small idea:

- Have a random exit port set each day where traders can drop of cargo to go to europe (or the other way round from europe to the carribean). This could be contract wise, where you buy a contract for a big amount of goods with a high price reward. You only get payed if you supply the full amount of goods. These goods could then be used to fullfill the ship building needs in Europe. And thus the one could have an effect on the other.

 

None of this is though trough, but I think if the game uses allot of variables in its gameplay it could always give for advanced prolonged tactics on one server that could guarantee nice victory on the other server. Offcourse there would and should be people playing on both servers. The game would look bigger and more complex this way.

 

This will offer allot of possibilities for the game, but like I said its a small thought, and I have not realy thought this trough (like what the flaws of this concept are).

 

This is a nice idea, however sadly (and I'm no expert on these matters) I do not believe that this can be done given how all servers are completely separate.

 

Another way to do something like this however, would be to expand the server pop limit & actual map size to include parts of Europe and so forth. Possibilities are indeed endless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's also silly to ignore the history of online gaming. Carve your own path but pay attention that you aren't following an existing path that we already know went off a cliff.

 

Fair point. There are lessons to be learned from other games, though I'd rather Naval Action learn from its own mistakes and it has been doing a decent job of it. EVE has been very successful with a player-driven world, but I would be excited to see if Naval Action could pull off a player-driven world that is different (and still successful), such as players pledging loyalty to AI Kings/Democracies that have whims/goals of their own which players try to support to great benefit. Differentiation is the key word here. I've never played POTBS nor have I ever cared to even from the little bit I've seen, yet Naval Action despite being similar to POTBS has grasped hundreds of hours of my attention due to differentiation. There are some in this thread who think that Naval Action will live and die by the POTBS sword, though I'm frankly not seeing the logic there or perhaps I'm just sodded in the head.

 

So far, I feel the developers have headed in the right direction, albeit with a few speedbumps here and there.

 

It's a little early to call doomsday like some folks have.

Edited by Sir Robert Calder
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a nice idea, however sadly (and I'm no expert on these matters) I do not believe that this can be done given how all servers are completely separate.

 

Another way to do something like this however, would be to expand the server pop limit & actual map size to include parts of Europe and so forth. Possibilities are indeed endless.

 

The way I thought of it is to still have one server run the carribean map, and the second server run the europe map. Totaly seperately, so you can't sail from the one map to the other map. Like now the changed done to the map are only applied effectively at server maintenance (like port swaps).

 

So for example today I would apply for a contract to deliver 4000 gold to a hub port (where they imaginatly gather all the goods to put in one big fleet to sail to europe). I acomplish this and get a big reward for this. At server restart server 1 communicates to server 2 what goods/ships/players/money has been transferred to eachother and applies that information into the real world. So for example, the port capital of england now has a supply of 4000 gold for sale to be used in crafting notes etc. In return England has send some SoL to Port Royal to be used in the wars at the carribean.

 

At the same time I could imagine the carribean being a more trader based server, where lots of money can be made and for example only ships up to 5th rates can be crafted. And in Europe you would probably see allot more crafting and PvP'ing done. They have the shipyards over there to produce SoL etc. So it would in some way be historicaly more or less acurate. But there are some flaws like, what about the US nation in this whole concept, and the pirates.

 

It would give allot of variables, and allot of small things could cause great problems in the other server. Lets imagine no gold getting to England for a long time, so they can't craft high grade notes and can't craft some ships.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

,yet Naval Action despite being similar to POTBS has grasped hundreds of hours of my attention due to differentiation. There are some in this thread who think that Naval Action will live and die by the POTBS sword, though I'm frankly not seeing the logic there or perhaps I'm just sodded in the head.

 

 

POTBS had some great components but instead of moving forward it steadily moved backwards until it crushed itself with poor development decisions.

 

The comparison is easy. WoW was compared to EQ initially because the game mechanics were very similar therefore making comparisons easy. Naval action is compared to POTBS because of the same reason. Both games primary mechanics are nearly identical.

 

The reason for the doom and gloom is Naval Action is following very much the same path as POTBS only at a much faster pace. My guess is everyone who played POTBS wants Naval Action to stay a million miles away from its predecessor and every time NA inches closer to it the great whine begins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if we are having a historylesson here... i´ll throw Dark Age of Camelot into play, which was for years a very successful RvR game with some PvE attached. And it worked mostly because the community was allowed to help each other out in any way possible.. people helped each other level up, supported each other even if they weren´t in the same guild etc. and of course the RvR was defining up to this date...

sure, the quests were mostly not really necessary, although it was a nice addition to follow them now and then... but everyone had to follow at least the epic quest (which went through all levels, one or 2 steps every so much levels) to get the best out of their character, before he went into RvR ... And i know most players enjoyed it

The game died because it largely went away from it´s path, by shifting more towards item farming (artifacts and what not)  and in the same move imbalancing the RvR to ridiculous levels... and we all know that "item farming" was very soon after dominated by "Elves and Pandas" (sry, loved that, i had to copy it :D) so the developer tried even harder to copy that formular... which at the end made the game horrible in it´s former strenghth, while being subpar in trying to go the typical, average MMO path ...

they might have been able to find the right balance, if they just stayed on their path and just improved on that, like making the RvR even more epic than it already was,  instead of forcing new elements into the game that weren´t healthy for what the game was, and what makes the classic server being played up to today (i need to guess here, but is it 15 years now?)

just an additional look at older RvR games, since EvE has been mentioned enough already :)

Edited by KittyHawkes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

its too early to talk about dying - we have not yet released the game :) (its in early access)

 

But. having said that - dying is great as it clears the way for the new. Don't worry about naval action 1 dying some day. People constantly move on to newer better games and its fine.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

its too early to talk about dying - we have not yet released the game :) (its in early access)

 

But. having said that - dying is great as it clears the way for the new. Don't worry about naval action 1 dying some day. People constantly move on to newer better games and its fine.

 

Its to early to put a "the game is dead tag" on it. At least i hope so, as a fan of naval combat i like this game much better then many of the other names out there, however i feel its unfinished nature is its undoing. Reading the reviews and opinions of forum member and the steam reviews will help make this game better.

 

People will leave, but the question is why do they leave, please take this seriously. Find out what players do not stay with the game. Most of it seems to be Problems with AI, Lack of stuff to do and Open world issues like taking to long for most players to get anywhere..

 

 

 

Perhaps we could go back to the Arena style game before it came on steam? That game seems more interesting while the Open world is finished in the background.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Perhaps we could go back to the Arena style game before it came on steam? That game seems more interesting while the Open world is finished in the background.

oh please no... if i wanted arena, i´d play Winds of Luck or WoWs .... there´s a few reasons why i spend 35€ on this instead of playing free games, one of them is the open world...

Edited by KittyHawkes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People constantly move on to newer better games and its fine.

 

Well, it's not like people are making tons of great naval sail combat games out there.

 

If we get bored of this one, we're pretty much out of games to play in this genre (again).

 

We'd like to invent some mechanics that let us play this game for a very long time. It can be done. Other games have done it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

its too early to talk about dying -

but not too early to be talking about "finding your identity"... especially since age of sailing seems to be very popular at moment, with quite a few games in production right now... i think it´s just fair that we brainstorm about making this awesome concept here standing out by it´s own right.. i would love to play a game like this -or better yet, exactly this^^-  for years... :)

who knows, there might be the one or the other thought that the devs can work with

Edited by KittyHawkes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh please no... if i wanted arena, i´d play Winds of Luck or WoWs .... there´s a few reasons why i spend 35€ on this instead of playing free games, one of them is the open world...

The Open world is empty, Lifeless and takes to much time to sail from one end to another. I understand making a realistic world but OW travel needs to be make viable to those with very little play time. Some of us wanna chill in Naval combat or trade a bit, not sail for an hour in the same boring open ocean scene.

 

Hence why i said revert back to the PvP Arena mode till NPCs/wars/diplomacy has been finished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Open world is empty, Lifeless and takes to much time to sail from one end to another. I understand making a realistic world but OW travel needs to be make viable to those with very little play time. Some of us wanna chill in Naval combat or trade a bit, not sail for an hour in the same boring open ocean scene.

 

Hence why i said revert back to the PvP Arena mode till NPCs/wars/diplomacy has been finished.

 

and crafting and economy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion some people probably expect too much, I have read reviews today on Steam, negative ones, all from people who had 600 hours to 1000 hours in this game. About a year ago I made a calculus of all the playtime of all my steamgames (I think I have 60 - 70 games) in an account I have for about 8 - 9 years and that was about 2000 hours of playtime. If you have played so many hours in this game, I can honestly not believe you when you say you don't like the game. You can't eat a truck of oreo's and say you don't like oreo's. You liked oreo's alot but you ate so much of them that now you don't find them special anymore, and you started to hate them.

 

I have never in the past years played a game for so many hours in such a short time like this game. I wasn't even in the sea trails part of the game,I didn't even know this game was being worked on, I didn't even knew I liked age of sail ships. I saw the game on the top sales list on steam, I looked at it, I liked the graphics, watched some you tube vids, and decided to buy it.

 

I am a gamer since i got a NES when I was a little kid, and I haven't stopped gaming since. And I can honestly say allready, this is the game I will definetly remember and talk about when 10 or 20 years from now. We have some fine tuning and some more content to add, and this ship will sail fine...

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't see what the difference is if the ports start under nation "A" or "B" or even neutral....they ALL can be conquered regardless. PoTBS did not die due to the RvR situation, it died because they kept doing more and more stuff to dumb it down and "appeal to the masses". Unfortunately, that had the opposite effect because it alienated more of the base who started to leave. This lead to fewer and fewer people and became harder and harder to get fights which just snowballed. The developers kept  tweaking the various magical abilities and ships trying to balance game play by listening to a vocal minority who had self interests instead of what was best for the game. Honestly, PoTBS started off great and went downhill rather quickly as the dev team continued to shoot itself in the foot with every new patch....that, if anything, is the only lesson to be learned from PoTBS.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

eve have open world where no fake br shit mechanics block you from killing a player even 1000 vs 1, naval action is becoming more and more a place where crybaby want to play in an ow enviroment withouth facing the risk that an ow have, more and more fake and forced limitations for make the game safer and safer, less battle time, br limits, soon limits on ships in pb, ow not means fair fight ow, means dont be stupid and sail around in a ship you not wanna los or pay the consequence

Edited by Lord Vicious
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...