Thanks for watching, leave a like if you want me to play more Alphas ...what could go wrong.. ** Update - They have announced Early Access for the 18th Of June so they can get feedback.... do you know what else gets you feedback and doesn't cost players money? More Alphas. This game is being rushed to the steam store at the cost of quality. **
As someone who has worked with game publishers and stakeholders before, I'd wager their eagerness to hold true to their previous early access promises from 2021 is because of the investors expecting the promised milestones. It all depends on how the communication happens, some stakeholders/publishers are more lenient and might even give further funding to postpone a release, but in this case I believe it is to measure demand in initial interest and prospects with ARPU & ARPPUs (Average Revenue Per User / Paying User). Their tax information is freely available (because Finland) and you can see that the company has spent a total of 10.5 mil euros between 2019 and 2022, so they shouldn't be running out of money any time soon. It just might be that in order to get their money, they might need to uphold their road map, which includes the early access. This is just how the industry works and it's often hard to fight against it.
Good comment. I agree they are appealing to their investors here. The pressure's clearly on. However, if their intentions were to simply gauge interest, they could have just sent out a survey or used the upcoming preview weekend to do so. I'm guessing the infographics aren't cutting it for the board anymore. They are looking to post revenue before the end of Q2 and by YE. It's going to backfire on them in the end.
With the tiered early access tho... I completely feel they will have the WoW token because they cant push back against the investors. My faith in this title plummeted.
Great video. The Pax Dei devs are former Blizzard, CCP, and Ubisoft employees, as well. Despite their "smoll indy dev" appearance, this game is already being handled like a low-key triple-A launch. Rushed early access, vague and misleading infographics, and a monetization plan that's currently more developed than the game itself. All signs point to PXD becoming another half-baked, early access cash-grab. I hope this is not the case, but I'm not as obtuse as I look. Also, I think it's funny how everyone talks about the building in this game while showing pictures of that janky looking Asmon "castle". However, no one mentions that you have to keep an active monthly sub to maintain the "deed" to your lot and structures. I literally can't wait to see all the people with lots stranded on the side of a mountain once the mass exodus begins. Mass Paxodus they'll call it.
The building system doesn't strike me as all that different from ARK, Rust, Palworld, Enshrouded, and half a dozen other titles that seem to use essentially the same system (even the same textures in some cases). It's really nice as a basic no-frills system, but that's about it really -- no one is going to be building a scale replica of the Taj Mahal or the Eiffel Tower with it... and my inner creative that weaned his pixel teeth on epic creative Minecraft builds kinda finds that a bit disappointing :(
@@olencone4005 Enshrouded was the first game that came to mind for me, too. Despite people acting like you need a master's in engineering to maximize plot space, it's not a complex building system at all. Less complex than Valheim, even.
Dude.. I have to commend you for the editing job. Watched 100% of this video and I had no intention of playing this game (even less now.😬). Highly entertaining edit. I now also have “Coping and Seething” stuck in my head on repeat…
Ahhh yes the crafting. Im personally responsible for cutting down 350,000 of the 9 million trees harvested in Alpha 2 , i used em to make either one whole Viking shield or 50,000 viking shields. I blacked out and dont remember.
super immersive crafting, 10/10 super fun and engaging systems right there. so incredible i hope the developers get a medal for creating an extremely overcomplicated and boring and dull crafting system which doesnt respect your time.
@@pvprangergod4024 honestly were you paid by Mianframe to make this post? You did not play much did you. The crafting system was hot garbage and that is lowering garbage to the level of this poorly put together game.
God I wish I had a time machine. I'd make sure ' early access ' never became a thing. Games used to be made by small teams with heart, with the game being developed as a passion project. It used to be that alpha testing was done completely in house by the devs, and beta testing was done by a VERY small group of friends of the devs or a LIMITED group of people chosen to receive advance copies of the game. There was NO access to the general public and games were generally complete when they left beta and went to retail release. I miss those days. As much as we all love gaming I don't think it will ever get any better until the game industry crashes and burns to the ground. Greed, and the rush for money is just too strong of a driving force.😢
I'm honest: I understand all the points and agree. But I would even pay money to spend some more time in the game. I played over 100 hours in the second Alpha and the game totally hooked me from its atmosphere alone. It is the Valheim MMO while lack a ton of features for sure. May it won't even be finished any time soon (or even ever). But I enjoyed just running around, go hunting, mark materials stuff on my map and just look at buildings from other people. It just gives a similar wipe like first time on a ship in Valheim. That alone is worth for me to support the dev (as long it has no monthly fee during EA), because I know I would come on my cost. Maybe its disappointing after a couple of days (or weeks) for sure, but I bought so many games I spend less time in the past that it would be worth it for me personally. They can even wipe it once a month or seasons-like during developement. But I know a lot of people that just enjoyed the game as I did. But as you said i totally agree with your points.
Exactly the same - except I played Conan Exiles (which I encouraged the Pax Dei Devs to play because the building/crafting/progression is so smooth and natural) not Valheim.
It's honestly far too early to start pulling the rug from under Pax Dei given that it's in early alpha. Plus, the devs have always been upfront with everyone in advance that the combat is just a placeholder (though I think that's only been communicated in the Discord, so if you aren't seeing the messages from them in there then you might miss it). First playtest was exclusively to test the modular building system and crafting system, then the second playtest was to test the PvP system. It wasn't a focus on the combat mechanics, but just the core systems to know whether they work as intended as a baseline. I think a lot of people have wrongly conflated that to mean that they should expect a polished or finished thing but that's never been the case, so yes the combat should have been expected to be hack-and-slash basic as it's not been fleshed out yet. It will probably be another few years still before the full combat mechanic system is fully fleshed out, and probably best people who put a lot of emphasis onto combat mechanics wait until then if that's what they're looking for; big difference between an alpha tester and a beta tester lol. That's because there's a lot of other systems that need to be introduced and tested as well. As for the Early Access, really that's come on the back of a lot of requests from people asking for perpetual testing to be extended beyond the Friends and Family Test. It is still however an alpha test, big emphasis on alpha lol. I think the perception of Early Access has really been hurt a lot by developers who release completed games under the EA banner, when in fact what they should have done is release it as completed or a sale via pre-order, so now people have high expectations from games in early development which aren't really pragmatic. Not to discredit any viewpoints - I think anyone would agree that the current placeholder for combat mechanics is not good; but it is just a placeholder and that needs to be remembered, to be fair. Alpha testing really isn't for everyone also, so park the game on a wish list and revisit it in a couple of years time because it's going to be a while before all the different baselines are tested first.
Good analysis but this comment jarrs "...the second playtest was to test the PvP system. It wasn't a focus on the combat mechanics, but just the core systems to know whether they work as intended as a baseline" - can you explain how you can have a PvP system without combat mechanics? I detest PvP with a burning passion but this is where I think the devs made a huge mistake in the wilderness alpha - it is difficult to test and get any useful feedback on PvP if your combat system, whilst revamped, is still largely placeholder. I think they should have focused on getting the feedback on the systems changes rather than promising a PvP test only to have a bunch of people scream that combat was awful. They attracted a lot of bad reviews because they mishandled expectations in that regard.
@@shammylevva - It will sound rather basic, but it would really be to test whether PvP is enabled in the correct location, and disabled in the correct locations. Testing that damage is in fact applied in PvP against another player, and that death does happen; as well as dropping the full inventory and equipped items. Then also testing to see whether it is having any other unwanted effects (for instance making sure it is not resetting character skill levels, things like that). Then also testing whether you can access the gravestone in PvP (as you can't in non-PvP, by contrast) for looting; making sure you can actually loot the items from that gravestone, etc. Then beyond that they'll be wanting to check whether the code for PvP causes bugs with other code in the game; an example in A2 could be the weapon and shield bug after death, where you had to unequip the items and re-equip them again to use them because there was a visual bug that still showed those two slots as still equipped to the player only (while everybody else did not see you wielding a weapon and shield). So it's all about really finding the kinks in the code to get it working as intended before expanding on it. I agree that it does seem a little odd to be testing a PvP system while using a placeholder for combat, but I suspect it has probably come on the back off a lot of people enquiring as to PvP aspects of the game, as the devs seem to be trying to juggle between what they themselves have planned and what feedback they're getting. I know that there are plans to expand the PvP system beyond what was in A2 (for instance, one of the things they're looking to introduce is a clan/guild war system where I think it would be possible for warring clans/guilds to PvP in the open world as opposed to having to go to a dedicated map), but what that is going to look like ultimately is not really known yet as I think they're probably still thinking of how best to incorporate it. I think the next area they are probably going to work on will be trading and logistics systems, because those two things were mentioned *a lot* in A2 feedback, as well as in A1 feedback. But once the game goes into perpetual testing then they will have a constant stream of feedback going in, whereas beforehand really outside of the Friends and Family test, they've only really had two runs of feedback from the A1 and A2 test respectively - and in both cases they had actually listened to the feedback. Also in both tests they would have been doing more work on the actual game performance and stability as well - I remember in A1 specifically on the last day the devs had asked as many people as possible to meet at the same location and essentially just do whatever you wanted to push the system to its limits (so plopping down lots of build structures, dropping lots of items on the ground to cause a mess, etc). The comments from people regarding the combat mechanics are not unwarranted, but I don't think it's really applicable yet because at the end of the day this is still in early alpha development; and as far as early alpha goes, they are actually in good standing right now; really a lot of the emphasis at this point is on game stability and underlying systems, and that's what they seem to be focusing on which is what I'd expect at this stage. Yes they received some critical reviews on the combat elements, but honestly I think the majority of those are coming from people who have had their expectations of Early Access warped because of how EA itself has been abused (rounding back to what I said earlier about some developers releasing finished games under the EA banner when it was unnecessary to do so); and I think some developers do that just to get better first-impressions and reviews. People are much more likely to be positive about a game released under EA if it has a lot of the content to it already completed, but it does come at the expense of those who use EA as it was intended for (which I think can be seen from how some people have reacted to PD in part).
@@saltybulldog3241 - No they're not. You can select one of three different EA packs, and that single purchase lasts the entire duration of EA (until the game is fully released). There's no subscription during EA, or any other costs. The EA packs also count toward the box cost of the game, too. You don't have to select the 99.99 pack, you can opt for the 39.99 or 59.99 packs, or none.
@@saltybulldog3241 simply not true. They are charging $40 for the game with no other fee and that gets you the Early Access now PLUS the full game on release, in at least a years time.
I think a big issue is that the meaning of early access has drifted from the intention of early access. Nowadays you only get one launch and to use it on an EA launch is scary. Sadly they want to do EA as it was intended. They said they need the funding and the systems they're ready to start implementing they need more people than their team allows. It's a GREAT example of when to do early access. Just people are going to look at it and nope right out. EDIT: just realized this video is 11d old and predates the announcement they made on June 4th.
Not refuting your opinions but i have played this game in the alpha and i really enjoyed myself to a great extent. I am for one really looking forward to the 18 june early access play :-)
Just don't understand how anybody could make a video game these days and leave combat for last. It's not the worst game in the the world, but it's definitely not for me. Ashes of Creation Alpha 2 can't get here soon enough.
Have you played many mmos lately? Pretty textures and cosmetics are important. Noone wants to actually fight and be challenged in a video game, that would be crazy
I mean tbf ashes of creation just looks like a tab targeting press 3 buttons mmo, unless they make an actual good combat system it will be just another tab targeting boring combat game
Sandbox full loot MMOs will always die due to griefing and a lack of content to keep people playing. The majority of popular MMOs are all theme park MMOs like FFXIV, ESO, WOW, Guild Wars 2, etc. with RuneScape being the only exception, but that game at least has a ton of social elements to satisfy the more sociable MMO players, which is something that’s lacking in MMOs these days. Point is that Sandbox PVP full loot MMOs don’t offer anything worthwhile to anyone other than hardcore PVPers, which are a niche audience and MMOs need tons of players to stay afloat, so catering to a niche audience is basically suicide.
pvp works fine if you design the entire game around it. if you just slap it on and then claim your game is now a pvp game, don't expect anything to work at all.
Agree except that the first MMORPG my wife and I played - Order and Chaos Online on iPad - eased us into PvP (including the occasional griefing) by putting Main Quest objectives in some PvP zones (no drops at first) - and we realized PvP heightens excitement and the downside is way way less than we feared (and the reward was progressing the Main Quest). It's like overcoming gear fear in Escape from Tarkov, which despite the constant terror does give you some ways to progress (e.g., secure container, Scav runs) so it is actually possible for even casuals to play.
I really hate how isolated people have become in MMOs, my fondest memories are sitting in town talking with random people that walked by for hours in Tibia - Thankfully community is still like that there mostly---- FULL LOOT MMO's are the fucking best, if they have an option for something like an amulet of loss where it protects your items, top tier. MMOs have gotten so soft and the casual crowd always zips in and ruins any of it.
I mean, those were different times. People mainly use social media to be social now, and they don't feel the need to do that in a video game, is my guess.
@@allthatishere Mechanics in the games forced people to interact, Dungeon finders, auction houses are great tools but they also strip away from meeting people. In 2005 we had full chats but also used Ventrilo for voice chat but you still met strangers everywhere. + Games you just walk through people, no reason to stop. The other big thing I think people don't talk about is how spoil heavy the games have gotten. I dont care about spoilers story wise but just the sense of jumping in a game and not knowing anything creates way more immersion, now you watch trailers, wikis, articles before you even buy it
I was surprised at the state when I logged in for the last Alpha...so much so that I have zero interest in checking it out again anytime soon. Rough doesn't begin to describe it.
Only watched the intro (yet), but I have to say it before I forget. If you think that MMOs aren't social then it's really sad because that means you missed the timeframe where it was good. That's sad, because it was amazing and I miss it.
I looked up this game after a group I play with said they where going to run this game. I feel this train wreck coming, it feels like New World all over, just without the multi billion dollar budget and a company willing to shovel money into it to keep it kinda alive. It doesn't feel like a scam, it feels like well what many indie devs who suddenly become flush with money do, they get overexcited, attempt to expand the scope of the game well beyond the original, more limited scale, realize they only get 1/8th of it working, run a quick buy in alpha (Effectively what this seems to be) to get a revenue boost before the bills come due. While I did pledge to Star Citizen (And trust me, I am fully aware of the complaints surrounding *that* particular game) the reason Star Citizen can, in theory, float off their current budget (But they will never do that) and sit in alpha for so long is due to the fact that, if there was one thing CIG got right, it was to keep the game and company away from public investors. Those investors will eventually demand a product to sell, and are FAR less patient (good or bad) than players, leading to things like this, where the game has to be rushed out the door with a heavy coating of makeup to hide the fact that the game is still in, what would generiously be called, early alpha. This game, and it's Early access launch feel like just that, they prettied up the game, kicked it out the door, and hope they can get the game into a decent state before too much of the playerbase dies off.
To me the state of the game is vastly acceptable. I've seen development of games make drastic changes over the years to become a polished and perfected masterpiece. The problem I have is the monetization. It asks for way too much and gives way too little. They even have an interesting magic system in the game which to me seems like a great progression system of going through great ordeals to just start the art of magic. Which makes magic have more meaning in an rpg and it's not just some flashy stuff that everyone can grab at level 1. Sad to see a concept like this lost to a bad monetary system and a rushed deadline.
Everyone who played Alpha 2 for 8+ hours (or watched Nyce) had the same observations so of course I agree with what you say. Except you were much too kind about the combat. Based on MO2 and AoC's history I'd say they're three years away from PvP. Until then they should just give everyone a nerf foam bat. That said, they did say they are fixing everything else I complained about in Alpha 2 and I can hardly wait for EA. If enough community support is in game, I can see myself playing it for a long time.
While I agree for the most part, 1 key part to the whole dynamic is the mmo part. Rust connan and ark are survival but they are mislabeled as mmos to attract a larger audience and dont really fit the definition. This game is aiming for thousands in the same server, which is the primary reason for the monetization, they do need funding but it's also to test server stability at load.
17:32 Such a shame they closed gloria victis down. I wish I had found out about it longer than 4 months before they closed it down. Such a great game and theres nithing else like it. Niche, yeah, but still a good game imo. We need more mmos like GV. Id play MO2 but I hear its not easy to start as a new player...a gankfest filled with a**holes.
We're getting too generous with the term beta but my only concern is that its the studios very first video game that think Early Access will solely fund this MMO experience.
"pvp should be an integral part of the world" in an mmorpg always means the game will be just another griefing simulator and the servers go empty after 3-6 months because no one wants to spend their free time with assholes. just ask the last 13,000 open world pvp mmorpgs that died exactly like that.
griefing and pvp is the same thing. the only games with "griefing" are the ones with SJW moderators who ban you for pvping their friends or killing a streamer, aka favoritism.
Wholeheartedly agree. I think the route the devs are taking where PvP is entirely optional but still rewarding is the way to go. Any PvP system where you can be minding your own business and not knowingly risking anything then lose hours of work because someone gets their fun from destroying others, is one where the players will get angry and eventually (or even immediately) log out and simply not come back to the game. A game where getting resources is optional PvP vs PvE is fine as long as the reward for taking the risk by doing PvP is greater than the reward for doing PvE. I say this as someone who detests PvP with the burning passion of a million red hot suns. PvPers seem to need a risk reward and I'm fine with that as long as the PvE community can get the same materials but perhaps more grindy as the risk is lower. So 100% agree that open world PvP where players can lose everything they have built will kill a game like this - especially where the time taken to gather and grind up levels of crafting is months not days. When you choose to go after rare resources and plan a mission knowing you risk losing stuff is one thing - to have someone come along and destroy your house and take your stuff is something completely different. I'm pleased to see the reassurances that the devs are making that this will not be a game where "pvp is an integral part of the world".
@@pvprangergod4024 lol no. pvprs look for challeging opponent to fight. griefers gank people that are much too weak to hurt them. they're all cowards who never engage in fair fights, let alone challenging ones.
@@babstra55 how am i suppose to know someone is a bad player that doesnt want to fight good players? should i ask them before i fight them, maybe we sign a consent form and get married before starting pvp eachother.
@@pvprangergod4024 excuses. you 100% know what gear they have and who the geared guys are in your games. you can spot lowbies miles away and that's why you target them. we've all seen big 'pvp heros' like you and you're all the same, cowards. a real pvper would only play games without gear or stat differences, but you guys only gravitate to mmorpgs because it allows you to choose weak victims so there's no danger of ever losing a single fight.
Saw that they were selling keys to the Early Access so I'm doing my research to see if it's worth it. Sounds like it's not. Don't want to pay to play an incomplete game. I'll wait. By the way, I saw you mention Palia. I started playing it not long ago and I've found it pretty enjoyable. A bit glitchy in some respects but nothing terrible in my opinion. I just checked the Steam player count for it and it's currently got over 11k active players which I think is a respectable amount? Doesn't cost anything to play so it's got a one-up on Pax Dei in that regard.
$60 for a sandbox without story, without another player. So you pay $60 for what? Survival and building house? We have a lot of game like that, we even have it in Fallout 4
This feels like a very barebones rust. Which sucks cause I think a Rust fantasy clone would actually work. The scope for this game is too large and too vague while its mechanics are shallower than a dry puddle.
Honestly, some of us really dont care about combat in this type of game tho, i really have zero care about anything related to combat for this as i habe completely different plans for it, besides, im getting too old so i literally have skill in competitive/combat stuff 😂😅
i am here after realizing pax dei actually releases next week. how the fuck is this game being released??? there was barely any content in it and missing major systems. i don't even think the combat was working yet. i legit thought this game was still 2-3 years away as right now it feels like just a bunch of assets and WIP systems. there is no "game" there yet
I think people should really read and understand what the game is. LOL, It is a bare bones concept of a game at this point. Has great building and crafting but that is really it right now. They are transparent about it. I would advise against buying it unless you really wish to test and give feedback. Give it a few years for a complete game
After playing the latest alpha, you can tell all their effort has gone into the base building which makes sense because they plan on charging for that feature. The PVP/PVE in this alpha was HORRIBLE! If you want to survive as a MMO your combat must be epic. Since the endgame is supposed to revolve around PVP then to me this should be the FIRST thing you perfect in your build. I'm not very hyped at all for this game, still waiting on the idiots (aka AGS) to get T&L + Blue Protocol ported.
Two months after the "Early Access" release, the Game dropped from 11k Peak to just above 5k Peak and from 6k average to just above 2k average. They actually managed to loose more then double their Player-Base in just their first two months. Those numbers alone speak volumes, while the reviews never changed from a "mixed" on Steam either. Another asset-flip for the trash pile of History. Imma go play Enshrouded.
But in all seriousness, they need to completely revamp the combat, like NOW! On top of that they need to more easily marked zones like PVP PVE PVPVE zones on the map, this can be done with a filter box that toggles those indicated zones on/off on the map AND minimap. These two things require them to DROP EVERYTHING and focus on if they want to have a chance of not disappointing people on day-1.
This game looks like a scam if I ever saw one. It actually looks so bad that I’d be surprised if these devs don’t cancel the title after they steal a bunch of money six months after the early access release.
This will game will probably die, as fast as New World, releasing it to EA seem like a move to gain more capital, seem like that the seeding money is all gone by now. This won't make casual players happy, did they say if the EA is monthly sub?
Hey, I know what to do--don't buy early access games! Or, alternatively (hear me out now), buy them and then whinge because they are too early access (whatever that means exactly)--because it's the internet and that is always entertaining. What it comes down to is this--if people either want to, or are dumb enough to, buy early access, companies will sell early access, in the same manner other companies sell other things.
@@sawmanUK I mean, it's in an alpha state. The only difference is that you're paying for it. So it's a paid alpha. If we lived in a sane society, that would make it a full release, and we would judge these games/companies accordingly.
PvP-focused MMO where you play solo 90% of the time and just group up for wars and preparing for war. I leveled to max in all Professions but then could not find a reason to keep playing and quit 18 months ago. Revisited Fallout 76 and found same thing. In Pax Dei and AoC I am hopeful for an actual community in the game itself, not just Discord.
$250 so you can do fetch quests and play with tab target combat & get banned for "griefing" because you killed the same guy twice in a row or becuase they were a streamer and friends with a discord moderator KEK money well spent my friend!
Fomo got the better of me (only time I swear) and I put up the $250 on the last day. AoC is looking better all the time and I believe the main option now is active targeting. I'm sorry you didn't get into Pax Dei Alpha 2 - I loved it so much and cant wait to play EA. AoC is my backup plan.
