In preparation for his full blown review, MMORPG.com's Bill Murphy takes a look at, and gives us his impressions of, the early game for Flying Lab Software's Pirates of the Burning Sea.

When Pirates of the Burning Sea first launched, I can recall being really excited to get into it, start swinging my cutlass, and battening the hatches. I had dabbled in the beta and was eager to see the game at release. Then, for some reason or another I never actually got around to joining the fray. Maybe my thirst for the Johnny Depp movies had faded and my lust to play a pirate disappeared with it, or maybe this was one time when the hype of a new launch was actually resisted by this humble writer. In any case, I've recently begun playing the title which is now two years live, and I'm slowly starting to wonder why I waited so long.

Read Looking at the Early Game.

"PotBS is a game that relies heavily on instancing. Port towns are instanced, the open sea is its own instance, and each time you fight a ship on said sea you are transported to a private instance for you and your team/enemies. Still, unlike in other games where such a set-up might bother me, it doesn't here. The load times are short enough, and perhaps the necessity for having each section of the game presented in this manner makes enough sense for the loading screens to not throw off my sense of immersion. Of course I'd love it if there was nothing but hundreds of ships all over and in every port in one massive replica of the Caribbean, but something tells me that this development task would be nothing short of Herculean."

Let us know how you feel about those loading screens after a week of play?

As for the non instanced world?  WWIIoL.  Naval combat.
It doesn't have to be to RL scale.  It doesn't have to include every little cove.
The WWIIoL game may only include 3 types of ship - but it shows that it can be done.

Oh... and if you intend to do a series (I don't know why since PotBS news stories tend to get a couple of hundred hits at most?) then PM me and I will tell you how to break the economy tutorials.
And a few other bugs too.

FLS would 'fix' bugs by closing the ticket.

Sorry but that is an awfully shallow review. Some things that might leap out at you as you continue to play:

Naval combat is not in any way shape or form "realistic"; as you advance it becomes progressively more and more based on "magical"-like special abilities and miraculous special item usage such as sudden repairs while zooming along at full speed.  The lack of any depth system to the water and other factors makes many of the lighter ships completely pointless rapidly. The sailing speeds are in many cases ridiculous and you will see many ships behave more like drug running racing boats than sailing ships.

Avatar combat is incredibly stale and simplistic, not only is everything heavily instanced but you will fight over the same handful of scenario maps over and over and over.

(This I will admit is dated, but barring some massive changes) The economy only seems complex on the surface, it is in fact incredibly simplistic and in many ways pointless.

The PvP and "factional" combat system is dominated by gimmickry and exploitation of game mechanics and revolves much more around how each side manipulates the system than any kind of battlefield skill or even numbers.

On the bright side, if you like catchy tunes and pretty colors it is a very pretty game...

Originally posted by ericbelser

Sorry but that is an awfully shallow review. Some things that might leap out at you as you continue to play:

Naval combat is not in any way shape or form "realistic"; ...

Avatar combat is incredibly stale and simplistic, not only is everything heavily instanced but you will fight over the same handful of scenario maps over and over and over.

...

On the bright side, if you like catchy tunes and pretty colors it is a very pretty game...

 

 

Well on the brighter side :

Both critics AND users rated it higher than Star Trek Online...
http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/piratesoftheburningsea

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/startrekonline

Originally posted by ericbelser

Sorry but that is an awfully shallow review. Some things that might leap out at you as you continue to play: 

Maybe you found it to be a shallow review because it ISN'T A REVIEW?

Right there, in the introductory text, it specifically states that this article is being done as a prelude to a review. This was, as stated, really just a look at the first few hours of gameplay.

This game is ok, but it missed the boat (pun intended) by attempting to open up personal avatars at launch, rather then just focusing on becoming the tall ship EvE imo.

If it had just been a bag assed wide open ocean dotted with resource laden islands and the player ability to establish colonies on them it could have been awesome. I could go on about 1000 ideas how a pirate mmo could be good, but in the end what we needed in PotBS was more sandbox.

Like so many releases around the time it went live, it had a ton of unrealised  'potentiol'.

Originally posted by Stradden

Originally posted by ericbelser

Sorry but that is an awfully shallow review. Some things that might leap out at you as you continue to play: 

 

Maybe you found it to be a shallow review because it ISN'T A REVIEW?

Right there, in the introductory text, it specifically states that this article is being done as a prelude to a review. This was, as stated, really just a look at the first few hours of gameplay.

Prelude to a review, never heard of one of those before, is that like reading the box? Or a press release by the company?

 The title of the article is "Looking at the Early Game"...not "looking at the tutorial"; apologies if I expected more than a brief shill piece.

P.S. "Better than Star-Trek Online" is certainly true....but it's perhaps up there with "freshest road-kill around" :)

Originally posted by ericbelser

Originally posted by Stradden

Originally posted by ericbelser

Sorry but that is an awfully shallow review. Some things that might leap out at you as you continue to play: 

 

Maybe you found it to be a shallow review because it ISN'T A REVIEW?

Right there, in the introductory text, it specifically states that this article is being done as a prelude to a review. This was, as stated, really just a look at the first few hours of gameplay.

 

Prelude to a review, never heard of one of those before, is that like reading the box? Or a press release by the company?

 The title of the article is "Looking at the Early Game"...not "looking at the tutorial"; apologies if I expected more than a brief shill piece.

P.S. "Better than Star-Trek Online" is certainly true....but it's perhaps up there with "freshest road-kill around" :)

 

 

Well gee sorry, but they do introduction pieces all the time here.  Helps if you read the title and first few lines of the article.   Nothing wrong with them, their intent is to give a new players perspective of the game.    Just because you have become jaded about the game is no reason to condemn the article.

Yep...an "introduction" piece on a game that has been out how long? Please.

First Off I was surpsized by this article.  Pirates has been around for quite some time.   IT is an SOE game in other words part of SOE station pass if you go that route.

I found the review to be more of the same we see around here,  and that is what I call sugar coated big time.

I played pirates in beta, I am sure there have been tons of upgrades since then.   My main problem with this game is it is a lot lke STO, in fact i was almost sure they used the same engine server mechanics.  The reason why is all the instancing.  Open seas is like sector space or vice versta.   Then you have the stearing of ships in combat.

Needless to say if you dont like sto your not going to like pirates,  and the same can be said vice versa, with the exception of pirates was there first.

 And why are we doing a reviw on a game thats been out for 3 years, and has low population.  In fact its one that SOE is looking at right now to go the route of the matrix.

It's a good initial impression of a game many people know relatively little about.  After all isn't the purpose of this site to get information into the hands of gamers? I so wanted to love this game and I'm sure future installments will reveal why I can't.

There are lessons to be learned from this game.

this game woulda been the tits if they made it more like EvE and less like sid meiers pirates.

Originally posted by erictlewis

 And why are we doing a reviw on a game thats been out for 3 years, and has low population.

 

Well, i guess they take the view that MMORPGs are constantly in flux and need re-reviews now and again, especially after 3 years. A view I agree with tbh.

The size of a game's pop should never be a reason to not re-review it... I can't even see how that it's even relevant. A live game is a live game and deserves to be looked at with an objective eye.
 

Originally posted by erictlewis

IT is an SOE game - No it's an FLS game (independent company) that runs it's billing through SOE.

 I played pirates in beta, I am sure there have been tons of upgrades since then.   My main problem with this game is it is a lot lke STO, in fact i was almost sure they used the same engine server mechanics.  The reason why is all the instancing.  Open seas is like sector space or vice versta.   Then you have the stearing of ships in combat.

Needless to say if you dont like sto your not going to like pirates,  and the same can be said vice versa, with the exception of pirates was there first. - Having played both (STO in OB and PotBS just last month for Vet Trials) all I can say is if STO was HALF the game PotBS was/is it wouldn't be in such bad shape now.

 And why are we doing a reviw on a game thats been out for 3 years, and has low population.  In fact its one that SOE is looking at right now to go the route of the matrix. - Being that they don't own it all they could really do is cut the contract to handling the billing for FLS.  Whiether or not FLS would be able to find someone else to do it for them - paypal maybe - is a different question.  FLS has it's own servers and launchers so the billing part really would be the only issue.

As a pre-board member I've seen alot of this game.  Personally I love the setting, the way some of the stuff is handled and the look and personally I absolutely hate some of the directions the dev's have taken it in.  None of which has anything to do with the OP article.
 

He looked at the tutorial, and as a tutorial it's better than the stock one from launch.   Yes there is a lot to learn and yes if you don't read the pop ups you get you'll be lost.  But as he saw, it introduces the game nicely, makes you feel like you're part of the setting and get's a number of major points across.  One thing that changed that he didn't mention is each nation has it's own flavored tutorial, they're not all alike.

As to why review an old game.  Why write WoW or AoC articles?  They've been out awhile too.  New players are always coming into the community.  PotBS is a game that should have been better than it is I agree but that doesn't make it a bad game.  From a straight PvE perspective it's better than some currently out there because it does require some thinking in ship combat.  Avatar combat I think was poorly done from the start and I don't like their big change as I think it made it worse but it is doable if not particularly compelling. 

It's a nice looking game, it is over instanced, there are more land  maps now, it has pretty much zero replay (reroll as a different nation) valve as the quest missions are the same with the exception of just a handful, Ship combat does require some tactics (the bull in the china shop style won't cut it), pop is way down which hurts the overall game, Many of the PvE questlines are very well written, travel time in game is a real time sink .........

All in all it can be a fun game.  I currently don't think it's worth $15.00 a month as a maxed out PvE player, but if you play other Station Pass games then it probably is at the discount you'd be paying for it.

The leveling in game is ok, mostly missions, some are quit well written and humorous if you take the time to read the txt. 

The real end game is Realm Vs Realm and PVP at level 50. The leveling process gives you almost no training for the PVP. The PvP mechanics in the game are fantastic. It's one of the best combination of stragtic and tactical gameplay I've seen in a MMO. The core of the game is 6 person group PVP, and the larger 24v24 port balltes where factions fight for control of territory.

The PVP is highly skill based.  A competitive, focused, group of 6 players can easily sink players in much more expensive ships. Character Skill and Ship builds are also a  huge factor in your success in PVP, like many MMO's there are thousands bulids but only a handful of effetive bulids.  Unfortunately, the Pirate classes are less suited to 6v6 and Portbattles, though they make excellent commerce raiders, gankers and small group fighters. So It's often better to roll a national if we wish to be comeptive in RvR.

Because the game is so pvp based and so many people roll pirates the seas are flooded with gankers, and real hostility exists between the players of various factions. One must not enter a PVP zone alone and not expect to be engaged and often out numbered 6 to 1. The PVP is a lot of fun if your in a group of people who know what they're doing, it can be be a total boondoggle if they don't.

Is it just me who finds the title misleading?  "Looking at the Early Game"?  Maybe the author's early game, but PotBS was released two years ago.  Why wait two years before writing a review? Is this the amount of time MMORPG.com usually waits before writing reviews, or did you grace us with a review of Tabula Rasa before it went down?

I also note that this article (and, I fear, his later review) lacks an awareness of the game's history, of what the main issues were and in some cases still are. 

Originally posted by Vetarnias

Is it just me who finds the title misleading?  "Looking at the Early Game"?  Maybe the author's early game, but PotBS was released two years ago.  Why wait two years before writing a review? Is this the amount of time MMORPG.com usually waits before writing reviews, or did you grace us with a review of Tabula Rasa before it went down?

I also note that this article (and, I fear, his later review) lacks an awareness of the game's history, of what the main issues were and in some cases still are. 

Yea I thought it very misleading the games been around for quite a while, and its saying early game.

Originally posted by erictlewis

Originally posted by Vetarnias

Is it just me who finds the title misleading?  "Looking at the Early Game"?  Maybe the author's early game, but PotBS was released two years ago.  Why wait two years before writing a review? Is this the amount of time MMORPG.com usually waits before writing reviews, or did you grace us with a review of Tabula Rasa before it went down?

I also note that this article (and, I fear, his later review) lacks an awareness of the game's history, of what the main issues were and in some cases still are. 

 

Yea I thought it very misleading the games been around for quite a while, and its saying early game.

Not misleading, ambiguous. Reading the article clarifies it.

Think of it as a foreplay before sex. Tried POTBS lasted about 3 days. Not sure what it was but, I did not find anything compelling to play any more.

Originally posted by erictlewis

First Off I was surpsized by this article.  Pirates has been around for quite some time.   IT is an SOE game in other words part of SOE station pass if you go that route.

I found the review to be more of the same we see around here,  and that is what I call sugar coated big time.

I played pirates in beta, I am sure there have been tons of upgrades since then.   My main problem with this game is it is a lot lke STO, in fact i was almost sure they used the same engine server mechanics.  The reason why is all the instancing.  Open seas is like sector space or vice versta.   Then you have the stearing of ships in combat.

Needless to say if you dont like sto your not going to like pirates,  and the same can be said vice versa, with the exception of pirates was there first.

 And why are we doing a reviw on a game thats been out for 3 years, and has low population.  In fact its one that SOE is looking at right now to go the route of the matrix.

Let me address some of these points. It is like Pirates only in the most basic form, as far as i know. I played STO in Beta, and was underwhelmed.

There are many different layers to the end game (ship combat) whereas STO seemed to be whoever had the larger ship won. In PotBS, you can have a much smaller ship, and still defeat one or maybe two larger ships. The mechanics lend themselves to this.

I also must assume this pre-review is in part to the announced expansion Power and Presteige. This will add a whole new dimension to the game, introducing many new changes including Player Governed Ports.

I can understand if someone played in Beta feeling ways, but if you have not played in two years, come back. Although the population has not "grown" from its original prelaunch base, it is still a large population. Before you slam it, give it a try again. This is by far one of the most fun, mature MMORPGS i have played. It does not represent a sense of true "realism", no. If you are looking for a true to life naval sim, this is not the ga