Survival MMO Last Oasis’ early access has been plagued by connection issues

    
51

“Problematic” is the term of the day when it comes to woodpunk survival MMO Last Oasis. The title went into early access on Steam last week, but what should have been an exciting time of game discovery turned into a series of frustrating days as players had difficulties just getting into the game and staying there.

The rampant connection issues prompted a special message from the producer, who explained what happened and how the team is working to make the game stable from their own homes.

“We are investigating all of those things and we have a lot of leads right now, our engineering department is fully focused on fixing that and making sure that everyone can enter and enjoy Last Oasis ASAP,” he said.

Source: YouTube
Update
And another one.

51
LEAVE A COMMENT

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

I was in the pre-early-access testing (back when the servers were up and stable). The game has huge potential, the walkers are fun, the environment is huge, combat’s ‘ok’, and crafting’s interesting too. The biggest problem right now is the playerbase, even pre-launch. I play a lot of PVP games, but there’s a massive difference between PVP and griefing/ganking – whatever you choose to call it. Whe players spawn in wearing nothing but rags and waving a stick, getting run down by a multi-player walker and a crew of 3, who just want to kill you, that’s not PVP. They don’t steal anything from you, they don’t want anything – other than to prevent you from progressing, and ensuring new players just log off and don’t come back. We saw it in Worlds Adrift, and the early, enthusiastic playerbase just drifted away in droves… leaving sour griefers with no targets, cos they sure as hell don’t want a fair fight with equally geared players.

laelgon
Reader
laelgon

… And they’re taking the servers offline for a week.

Reader
Raimo Kangasniemi

Am I wrong to observe that PvPers these days seem to concentrate on window shopping, hopping in large numbers into new PvP games but as the player numbers decline after endless ganking etc, soon move to the next one, leaving behind a husk that will be left to linger or shuts down?

Why don’t the PvPers concentrate on making better ones of the existing PvP sandboxes – and start counting, there are surprising amount of – success instead?

Why don’t commit to existing games – Last Oasis included – and make most of them by building actual long-lasting PvP communities in and around them?

Reader
Nim

Probably because you’re oversimplifying, and blaming PvPers for the demise of games that were inherently broken. Give me a list of the “surprising amount” of existing PvP sandboxes, and I will explain to you why people actually quit them. Here’s a preview “The servers were a mess, the game was incredibly buggy, and exploiting/hacking was rampant,” is going to apply to most of them.

Reader
Deadly Habit

Add in devs pull 180 in design to appeal to PvE crowd and nerf/buff more than working on other broken buggy systems when it comes to build viability having variety balance constantly changing meta or being broken.

Reader
Raimo Kangasniemi

Albion Online, Archeage (Partially). Atlas, Darkfall: New Dawn (might be dead, though), Darkfall: Rise of Agon, Elite Dangerous, EVE, Gloria Victis, Last Oasis, Legends of Aria, Live is Feudal, Lineage II, Mortal Online, Profane, Ultima Online, Wild Terra, Wurm Online, Xsyon (Partially)…. And so forth.

Reader
Nim

Wow, okay, so while most of those games do generally qualify as sandboxes, half of them have PvE servers/modes ,some are so old that nobody plays them because they are only appealing to long-time veterans, and as previously stated, some of them simply failed because they were buggy/exploity messes.

So if you were trying to back up your “PvPers ruin everything” thesis you didn’t do a great job.

But please, tell us which of those games the PvPers should be forced to play henceforth so all future titles will only cater to your play-style.

Reader
Deadly Habit

Elite, UO official servers, and Wurm are far from PvP focused and oriented, let alone FFA PvP everywhere which is where the core of the argument comes from. Is Atlas even an MMO in pure supported player numbers in a single instance or is it just clustered servers/instanced/zones (wondering the same about this title)?

I can tell you from experience why Aria failed, they’ve pulled a 180 on the ruleset from PvP to PvE to a more extreme PvP implementation along with persisting bugs, constant systems and balance changes that ran off a lot of the original backers, failure to deliver content and make self imposed release dates, and most recently a paid DLC announced while in Early Access.

Reader
Nim

Game is discounted through April 2nd, I can wait a week for them to sort out the worst of these servers issues before buying it. I will say that if they don’t have safe zones for carebears they should really consider adding them. World’s Adrift completely alienated the carebear demographic with their git gut attitude, ask Bossa how that worked out.

Reader
Jack Kerras

Trade areas convey 15 minutes of immortality for both you and your walker when you pilot a walker into them; you can do your trading, and if you get it done within ten-or-so minutes, you can pretty easily settle in for a safe exfiltration (which takes two minutes and stops on damage) before you run out of immortali-time.

That, combined with the ability to move quickly from oasis to oasis carrying an entire base with you, plus the requirement for actual resource to move from place to place, seems like it’ll make it easier for small-team or solo players to atomize even after they’ve been spotted by a big gank-zerg at a trade station. The ability to safe-exfil while PVP-proof is great because it gets ahead of the ‘we’ll just park them in and cut their walker to pieces when the timer is out’ deal.

Newbie zones really need to be safer, though, or people who band together as a large group and murder unguilded, solo newbies over and over again need to be punished. That shit is bad for games; there is no opportunity to ‘git gud’, no satisfaction in playing a game wherein they have no recourse, and in general zerg-ganking like this is purely negative behavior which has no place in a functioning community. It hurts other players and it hurts the people who do it, no matter how much they crow about freedom or agency.

Reader
silverlock

Looks cool but still just another gankbox in the end.

Reader
Munchmeat2

Why are PVP games always labeled “gankboxes” by people here on MoP? I have 2000 hours in Ark and that game has given me more fond memories than any MMO I have ever played. Not every server is PVP too.

A lot of RP servers exist with strict rules for player vs player engagement. Survival games with a good admin and a solid rule set can blow any of the mindless WoW clones out of the water when it comes to PVE content too.

I don’t get this longing for MMOs that are strictly PVE? Why not just play an amazing single player RPG that has some actual depth and story?

Reader
silverlock

If you have large groups of players roaming the starter zone killing new players then it’s just a gankbox nothing else matters about it at that point.

I played LiF and I didn’t consider that a gankbox for two reasons one the starter zone “tutorial island” was safe and two because it was actually hard and pointless to kill a player with nothing and you got hit with a karma penalty to boot.

Reader
Robert Mann

LiF MMO went to ‘Green and Red zones’ as well, with the green zones being completely PvE friendly. It was still somewhat toxic as people tried to claim huge areas of land through terraforming and fences just to safely farm stuff for the PvP areas (because why not, there was no downside).

The experiment of quite such free trade and simple borders didn’t work well (since the borders were abused to try to snipe people and be safe against retaliation).

laelgon
Reader
laelgon

The green and red zone was a good idea, but they needed to think it through more. The guild I joined for the new map abused the hell out of it. Built all the warehouses, farms, crafting buildings, etc… in the green zone border, with a basically empty guild claim right next door in the red zone. It became too easy to the point that people just burnt out after a couple months.

Alomar
Reader
Alomar

Also had many great times playing RP-PvP servers in survival games, especially Conan Exiles, these past few years since mmo’s have been garbage. It’s just ignorant pve’ers who simply aren’t capable of anything more complicated/skillful than slow, scripted, and repeated combat that have hard-ons against pvpers and everything we enjoy.

Reader
silverlock

It takes skill for six kitted out players to kill one bran new player really?

ozarubaba
Reader
ozarubaba

Let’s put it this way, a PvP player can do everything a PVE player can do.

;)

Reader
Witches

That’s a myth, good players are good players, they don’t need to hide behind a certain type of gameplay to justify something.

No one cares to prove which group is really the most skilled, when you have skill being the best or being 12th best is just as rewarding.

Only at a low skill level is it really relevant, and i’ll give you that, a low/mid level pvp guy will be better than a low/mid level pve guy 9 times out of 10, congrats i guess…

ozarubaba
Reader
ozarubaba

tbh, that’s the irony : a pvp player will often be better at pve than a pve player..

I’m not trying to prove anything, I wouldn’t dare try to prove anything on an anonymous online commenting board.

I know it’s true though, from experience. PVE is straight forward, and most of the time, when it gets hard, it requires method, “procedure”. Whether is solo or in a group.

That doesn’t work so much in PVP, PVP requires talent because (and I’ll just point out one thing) in PvP, you’re not fighting a script.

Reader
Raimo Kangasniemi

That is just baiting.

Reader
Deadly Habit

Because for some anything with non-opt in PvP in the MMO sphere that isn’t trying to cater to the PvE crowd first and foremost = bad, and since for some reason (they run of out content in their PvE MMOs and jump to the new shiny games like moths to a flame repeatedly) any new game that doesn’t appeal to their niche must be denounced.

Notice how you rarely see the opposite from the PvP crowd as they’re aware they’re a niche and just looking for a game to not pull a 180 design wise or try to cater to the PvE crowd as well (New World, Legends of Aria, etc).

Dunno when a game being advertised as does exactly as it says on the tin to appeal to a niche rather than false promises and implementations of systems to try to appeal to everyone and failing due to that became a bad thing.

Reader
Robert Mann

Except they do. There’s a constant presence asking for OW PVP in PvE focused games. Go travel some forums, it’s not one sided.

I agree that it’s not cool either way trying to change the direction by force. I’m a big believer that we need more diverse ideas and offerings. I will still call games gankboxes or other such names… not because I want to change them, but because I am looking to avoid no-limits PvP. I’m perfectly happy with the idea of wars and PvP on good behavior, but I have absolutely no desire to deal with asshats in PvE or PvP when I’m playing for fun. Any game that fails to give me the tools to deal with that is in a bad place as far as I am concerned.

Reader
Deadly Habit

Hey as long as you don’t get offended when people use the term carebear or game jumper for the PvE crowd we cool, just there seems to be a very vocal subset of people who can’t fathom that a new game might not be their niche and they always seem to come out of the woodwork for any title involving open world non consensual PvP.

Both audiences are looking for a new long term home game wise, but for some reason when PvP oriented games are far from the majority market share of releases said people can’t just say, not for me, and move on to the next title that does fit their wants.

Reader
Utakata

Well presuming the shoe fits here…

…but if you have evidence it’s not, then feel free to elaborate. But keep in mind, this does not include anecdotes or rule sets decided by players. It has to be not-a-gankbox out the box or the download by definition. That is, no FFA PvP and/or have ways to turn the PvP off through the entire game.

To be fair though, we who don’t like it have the option of not playing it. And I am going presume Mr. silver has no interest in playing this outside the passing observation. As also I don’t think the stuff you enjoy needs to be really defended or justified. /shrug

Reader
Robert Mann

It’s not all games with PvP, just the ones that are all reward for little to no risk in attacking people who have effectively no fighting chance. Sadly, this means most PvP servers…

Reader
Raimo Kangasniemi

Why don’t gankers just play amazing co-op RPGs where they can slaughter endless NPCs with their buddies, why do they need to have low level newbies to kill instead?

Now I like RvR – but organized RvR with goals to achieve, safe areas and PvE content. Not the kind of ‘ganking for the sake of ganking’ done by antisocial misfits in almost all of PvP games.

Reader
Deadly Habit

Because AI behavior and tactics is nowhere near as unpredictable and random as other human players, currently no matter how much smart AI learning and rng/proc gen elements you put to NPCs they won’t mimic having someone behind the controls on the other side of the screen. At least that’s why I love PvP, and along with it I want it to be high risk and reward to do so, so full loot, XP/skill loss, bounty systems, or even permadeath.

One idea design wise I’m surprised I haven’t seen implemented in many or any of the open world PvP games I’ve played is skill stat debuffs to groups the larger they get and longer they’re travelling together in a certain proximity to combat the whole zerg rush stuff.

Reader
Utakata

Poor answer. You, the OP player gank the less geared/leveled. They hit’s the release spirit button. Pretty predictable, oppose to a matched NPC with a crazy AI variables.

The more correct answer (and applying Occam’s Razor): You get your rocks off killing something that has a player behind it as opposed to programming, sophisticated or otherwise. So it’s more about power and control. /shrug

Reader
Deadly Habit

No I don’t get my rocks off ganking people who can’t fight back, in fact you seemed to miss the bulk of the whole comment that you replied to that says quite the opposite.

My favorite MMORPG title that is niche as hell is Haven and Hearth where just the act of learning a PvP skills means you can be killed offline with permadeath on that character wiping months of game time grind and progress. Risk vs Reward. EVE would be a close second in games that I played over the years. Hell some games that design on paper sounds ideal to me just don’t click for some reason for me like UO : Outlands for example, but I still love reading Raph Koster’s design books and postmortems about UO, SWG and other titles about the systems and human elements/psychology that comes into play.

I like the actual element of human challenge and the unpredictability that comes with it, warfare outside of combat be it trade or alliances and social engineering, and the actual rush of there being in game consequences for PvPing be it losing your loot on character or your whole character altogether. Stuff like FPS games, Battle Royales, smaller scale MP survival sandboxes, or MOBAs don’t offer that.

The only thing that really comes close to this that I enjoy genre wise is roguelikes/roguelites with permadeath as well.

I know I’m a niche market player, it just sucks that there’s so few games that stick to a design focused on that due to the easy money from PvE game jumpers or outside pressure from that crowd because they burned out of content on the last new shiny game when the lion’s share of the market is designed and marketed with their niche in mind already.

As far as this game I’m still trying to figure what sets it apart from Conan Exiles or ARK which are much more established besides setting.

Reader
Utakata

…then to qualify and clarify, I wasn’t and shouldn’t be speaking of “you” personally, as the example. Rather the general population that participates in this abusive behavior. Thus, I’m not really including anecdotes for this conversation.

I stand by everything else I said though. Including your business about NPC’s and what not, which I got.

Reader
Deadly Habit

What MMO that you’ve played has NPC AI behavior that is even near to human level of skill or unpredictability along with adapting? I don’t mean artificial difficulty like scaling HP or damage or perfect robot like responses tracking players input coming from their client either.

Reader
Jack Kerras

Yeah, but in order to get to ‘behavior and tactics’, you really have to be dealing with people who you’re meeting on reasonably equal footing.

Joining a game with 15 of your guildies and rolling around as a bunch of four-man ganksquads in a brand new game just isn’t healthy for the population of the game; just a small group of people getting their jollies by repeatedly killing folks at random can have a huge impact on the early population of a game like this one.

I’m absolutely about PvP; I’ve had some great times with that, but you gotta admit, basically no game is really designed to reward getting good at PvP in order to support an enjoyment of PvE and community development… and PvP players really need non-toxic PvE havens and groups to play alongside of.

Once there are some established powers in-game, and wandering out of safe/owned areas or straying from the main flotilla comes with reward (you don’t have to split your haul or donate to the main fund) as well as risk (you could die and lose your walker), things can work really great, and sometimes fellowships of PvE-oriented players or even PvPers who act as privateers or blockade-runners can be a spectacular push-and-pull! …but in order for that to happen, people need to be able to establish themselves.

Rolling someone back to zero gear, zero walker, zero resource, in a map that’s going to burn up in just a few hours’ time, which is constantly hounded by roving bands of multi-crew small/fast walkers with a pilot, a gunner, and a pair of fighters with plenty of weapons and armor laid in for their respawns? There’s just nothing they can do. They may as well go home, there is no gain in targeting them except for the fun of killing them, and an awful lot of PvPers just don’t fucking know when to back it off in order to preserve healthy competitive interaction in a game they like.

No rules, no life. You need to understand that PvPers can and do cause problems for others, and that the answer is not for the others to ‘git gud’, but rather to organize; when they are unable to stay in-game long enough to do so, the game gets a reputation – the whoel GENRE gets a reputation! – and newbies just stop joining the game. I see it over and over and over and over again; I adore freeform survival games, but folks who just want to join up and kill others with beat-sticks are shooting yourselves in the foot; you always have been, and always will be.

‘Winning’ now is losing later, and from what I can tell, the intrinsic motivation will just always beat extrinsic. Even with HARSH punishments, people still gank like crazy whenever the slightest opportunity exists.

Reader
Deadly Habit

Oh there is that group, but what is so infuriating is that when a game is marketed as FFA PvP you have the slew of people pressuring devs for a PvE solution even though what the product says it does on the tin isn’t for their niche.

Like I mentioned further up, I’m really surprised nothing I’ve played yet has implemented a skill/stat debuff system that progressively gets worse the longer you travel in a group along with the larger it gets if someone in said group has attacked a solo player for example.

Koster’s covered this topic to an interesting degree in his books.

Reader
2Ton Gamer

Anyone who dismisses survival games outright as PvP gankboxes don’t know what they’re talking about and their opinions are easily dismissible. Ark has major problems as a game and as the company that runs them, but I’ve still had a ton of fun and thousands of hours of good play. No it’s not the same as an MMO, but it’s still nice in it’s own way and a nice thing to take a break from and still get some sort of game with progression and to have that sandbox feel. Conan is another great example and one that I have enjoyed watching come in to it’s own and leave Ark behind in almost every way. This new game is interesting and I’m sure I’ll check it out after it finds its footing. I almost wish Massively wouldn’t report on survival games because there are many here who are too dismissive and stuck in the mud.

Reader
Robert Mann

There’s survival games, and fun servers for survival games, that aren’t dismissed so…

The issue is that most of the official servers for these games go full out unrestricted PvP. Which is instantly going to be off-putting for people, and is what the term gankbox pretty much means.

I will 100% back that there are asshats in every content type, and I love some sandbox stuff, but any argument that a no-restriction OW PvP game is not a gankbox is just laughable.

Reader
Jack Kerras

Hundreds upon hundreds of times, this has been true.

There is no good way to solve this without restricting the freedom of players who would happily kill ten thousand newbies, and those people have a severe negative effect on the health of the games they claim to love.

Reader
Hikari Kenzaki

At this point MOP just needs a template for reporting new game launches.

Game has released to Positive/Mixed/Negative reviews but has been plagued by connection issues as the servers have been overloaded beyond planned loads.
Game Publisher has issued an apology and has/has not said they will offer compensation.

Bree Royce
Staff
Bree Royce

This has been true since 1997. :D The non-messy launches are so rare they are notable!

Reader
Hikari Kenzaki

True.
When games had to be on dedicated physical servers, there was an excuse that too many initial servers just led to merges later.
But in modern virtual or serverless games it just *shrug*

laelgon
Reader
laelgon

The combat is pretty solid, not amazing, but better than most of these games. If you could get into an actual map it ran well too, problem was logging in/out safely or going to another zone.

Unfortunately it still has all the problems of a survival gankbox, despite what the developers said. If you play solo you’re just going to ganked in the starter zone by a group of players screaming racial slurs over voicechat, so pretty much par for the course. Seems on the path for a repeat of Atlas. Zerg clans, exploits, and server issues all leading to a steep population drop-off. Which is honestly a shame, because there’s a lot of solid stuff in it. Riding even a small walker is fun, and it seems like there’s a high skill ceiling with the grappling hook.

driveled
Reader
driveled

“If you play solo you’re just going to ganked in the starter zone by a group of players screaming racial slurs over voicechat”
That hasn’t been my experience at all. Everyone I’ve ran across in voicechat has actually been friendly even when we’re fighting but most encounters haven’t been hostile. Additionally, once you leave the starting zones you cannot return thus high level players can’t go into the newbie zones.

I’m having a great time so far and hope they can get this sorted out because this game has tons of potential.

If you don’t enjoy PvP focused games then you don’t have to play. The MMO market is primarily PvE games I don’t understand why PvE players feel the need to stomp their feet every time something that doesn’t cater directly to them is released.

laelgon
Reader
laelgon

My complaint isn’t about PvP, it’s about bad design. I enjoy PvP, but I want PvP MMOs to do more than put people in a box and say “Ok, now murder each other endlessly” because it’s a design that consistently hemorrhages players due to snowballing, lack of content, and toxic communities.

I’ve found a decent group and I’m having fun, I just don’t expect it to last.

Reader
Deadly Habit

That’s one thing I don’t get is the people who play MMOs or go into them trying to avoid the multiplayer part or do everything just on one character (and the design behind the games that allow this), especially when it comes marketed as free for all open world PvP. It seems completely counter intuitive to the point of the genre of the social interaction aspect.

Reader
Robert Mann

I think a big part of that is that there are tons of people here who want a good PvE sandbox game… and aren’t getting any. It’s a long list of PvP focused titles on the sandbox side, so frustrations run high.

Reader
Deadly Habit

Sandbox just tend to work better with PvP with some exceptions I can think of like Minecraft, PvE works better with themeparks and structured quests and end goals content wise and as persistent worlds get built and established/destroyed. Though I would argue the bulk share of the MMO market and titles out/coming out caters to the PvE crowd, not the PvP niche.

laelgon
Reader
laelgon

I don’t know that it’s better, it’s just easier to make a big map, add some base building, and let players loose to murder each other for six months before the population moves onto the next. Building something more complex takes money and time that these indie studios making sandboxes don’t usually have. EVE is the biggest sandbox running, and I don’t think it’s a coincidence that it provides a lot for PvE players to do and doesn’t treat them purely fodder for PvP players.

Reader
Deadly Habit

Haven and Hearth is my fave still and I used to be a no lifer style EVE player back when, but even that has to do world resets/wipes due to the issues design/content that come up in any persistent character/world system the longer it runs and is established be it a video game or pen and paper game/campaign.

But yeah I haven’t touched this one as I have similar games already established like Conan Exiles or ARK that have way more content and I have yet to see what this offers that’s unique outside of the setting/vehicle look.

Reader
Nim

There are plenty of good PvE sandbox games; they’re just not massively multiplayer.

Reader
Jack Kerras

I’ve had extremely good luck here. This combat is WAY better than most combat in games like it; I’ve been looking for Mount-and-Blade combat to get out of M&B for years and here it is… and in an aesthetic I enjoy, too!

I’ve had a lot of friendly players, though, and no epithet-shouting gank-hordes, although I’ve heard the stories to be sure.

I absolutely think there should be mods whose whole job it is to pop in on servers, find people doing things like screaming racial slurs and repeatedly ganking people who have no defenses and no resources to drop, and ban them on the spot.

Toxic players poison everyone around them. The fact that they are ‘a part of the playerbase’ is no good excuse, and the game will be healthier for longer without them. They pays their (three hundred) dime(s), and if they’re going to be absolute shrieking assbags to everyone around themselves, they takes their chances.

Human moderation is one of few good answers to this, and it’s unsustainable at scale.

Reader
Fisty

Good luck to em. Something in me wants to try all the survival games, especially an MMO (assuming there’s people).