Last Oasis discusses FFA PvP balance and invites clans to a beta test

    
9

So we all understand that Last Oasis is an FFA PvP sandbox, a fact that its devs are loudly and happily crowing about. That said, they also appear to appreciate that FFA PvP shouldn’t mean “kill every new person you meet on sight,” either. Managing that balance through game mechanics is the topic of the game’s latest dev video.

While the video doesn’t exactly explain how gameplay systems will mitigate the murder blender mentality, game producer Lucas Stannis and game director Florian Hofreither promise that engaging in PvP will require players to consider risk factors in terms of resource cost, the area players are in, and the time it takes to attack a target. Additionally, the devs pointed back to the ability for large clans to claim ownership of an oasis and earn rewards for keeping it safe such as a cut of gathered resources and taxes on item sales, all of which was detailed in the game’s last video about safety, which can make for a juicy target for pirates but also carries an inherent risk of clan-based retaliation.

With that said, what’s intended and what actually happens in testing are often two wildly variable things, and so Last Oasis is formally extending an invitation to PvP-minded clans who can be “brutally honest in their feedback, both positive and negative,” to reach out to its community managers on the game’s Discord for consideration. This clan-centric beta testing is expected at some point in early February.

source: YouTube

9
LEAVE A COMMENT

Please Login to comment
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
PurpleCopper
Reader
PurpleCopper

If this was smaller in scope and not a MMO I can see it working. But as a full fledged MMO? ehhhh….

Reader
Jon Wax

The beatings will continue until morale improves!!

Churro Flamínguez
Reader
Churro Flamínguez

“Have at it, guys. Another FFA-PvP-sandbox-fest. Have at each other guys, and smack each other silly until you get tired.

“Just, you know, be nice about it.”

Funny how that rarely seems to work out.

Reader
Carebear

These ffa pvp failures are spreading faster than coronavirus in China…

Reader
Robert Mann

And with the normal mentality: Those who own such an oasis will instead be looking to crush the random people who visit without some hoop jumping contact system that actually makes those completing it more likely to be the actual problem for the owners. The reasoning will be “Either they take more resources we could just use ourselves, or they are a spy.”

Games like this can try to mitigate that, but the simple truth is that without a reason to trust people, distrust becomes the norm. It is, after all, far more logical to assume that the random person you meet in a place of murder and mayhem is there to cause you trouble, than to think otherwise. Add in a lack of actual reason to care about people outside the group, unless they are allied through outside contact, and…

You get the same gankbox experience that either dies or leaves the servers half empty with those remaining be more or less peaceful after the PvP zerg leaves to the next game. What I have seen from this just doesn’t have the draw to me to last afterward at all, but I could be wrong there. Maybe there’s more people really drawn to that woodpunk desert thing than I expect?

Mewmew
Reader
Mewmew

One of the few times I’ve enjoyed PvP (very rare for me) was this roleplaying MMORPG where roleplaying was very heavily enforced. You *had* to roleplay to play.

It was a very small client with an overhead view, the graphics were fairly poor, but everyone in-game was there to roleplay and the experience was very interesting. It was Open PvP, but you didn’t really feel danger. There wasn’t ganking, and when people did fight you they even role played it, a much stronger person may let you live or play out that you got them, etc. It was really amazing.

I’d love to see that kind of thing happen in some big MMORPG. You *could* do it with volunteer players that would keep things in line, but otherwise it would be difficult. It worked with that small game because people were vetted going in, there were just not many people playing and it was easy to make sure everybody was serious about roleplaying, but I really wish I could see that on a large scale. It was amazing and actually made PvP mean something and be interesting.

I don’t even remember the name of the game now sadly, as much as the systems had this lasting impact on me. Maybe the name will pop up in my mind again unexpectantly sometime.

Reader
Arktouros

I mean they’re not wrong. Coming up with a good environment where there’s a healthy risk vs reward balance is pretty key.

Where the issue almost always invariably comes up is that as human beings we are exceedingly good at mitigating risk.

K38FishTacos
Reader
K38FishTacos

and again

Reader
Natalyia

I’ll believe it when it’s still not a gank-on-sight murderbox a year after release. And still running a year after release. I wish them the best of luck though, if they pull it off there’s an audience for it.

The fundamental problem is once a player (or group of players) has a level/gear advantage over the average (or lord help them, the new) player, then the situation never recovers.

The powerful crush the helpless, and the helpless have no reason to spend miserable hours being ganked trying to catch up. They’ll just go elsewhere with their time and money.

“Time to attack, resource costs and risk factors” sounds like same old same old ideas that haven’t worked in the past, and aren’t likely to work here. Add in the sub-group whose goal is the dismay and ruination of the person on the other side of the screen (not the defeat of the in-game character), and this just doesn’t feel like it’s got good odds of working – those folks don’t care about “risk factors” or “resource costs.”