Perhaps @Ryladryl just didn’t understand the question but I don’t know how to make it any simpler.
He seems to be implying that the game is alive
“the numbers”, so people do still play the game
“health of the game” and I don’t think anyone would assign the property “health” to something that is dead. But particularly after this statement
Largely incorrect
Ok? So are you 
Great point, totally agree.
They seem to pick and choose what thread to derail.
Overall very strange behavior though considering they don’t play the game.
I was in a really good invasion last night. Lots of people laughing and joking, having a good time, helping new folks learn invasions. Really fun.
You should try it sometime.
Lots of derailment in this thread. The topic about whether NW could have survived with the original PVP design has been somewhat muddled. 
I do think it could have survived, had it been opened to Chinese and SEA audiences, as that is such a huge market that AGS could have made the original design profitable from that. But this is mostly just a thought exercise of a “What If” scenario, as we can never prove this either way, since the egg of New World has already been hatched in a different form. 
How exactly would it have helped PvPers on the servers and regions they currently have
as all the PvPers that have commented on the subject insist that they would not play on servers outside their own region because the excess lag is such a major factor?
True, imo NW is still a PvP focused game given how much of the economy and content is based around it.
The number of PvE only players does surprise me though, I couldn’t imagine running the same dungeon reskins and fighting the same invasion mobs for thousands of hours.
I enjoy quite a bit of PVE myself, it is one of the many things I enjoy about New World. Most of the PVE I do, however, is to gear up and build out my various PVP builds. So really, the enjoyment of PVP is what spurs a lot of my PVE.
Hopefully both PVP and PVE improve this year, so that we can have a healthier game, with fuller servers so that players can do whatever content they want, when they want, without having to wait around for long periods of time, unable to do what they want.
They just got rid of numerous chests in Brimstone Sands after realizing that the extra loot was affecting the economy. Chest runs are strictly PVE activity. 
Crafting/Gathering, another PVE activity also is a major element to the game’s economy.
PVP “content” is minuscule in the game, and the PVPers have every right to be angry about this. One OPR map going on 2 years? No PVP Only zones or servers?
I must be playing another game.
Yes, it was indeed. especially by someone that posted another forum poster’s profile several times in the thread. Definitely, derailment, which is why the posts were removed
The game would not have survived as originally conceived, if one were familiar with the MMO world/history and played other games, and did their research, they would know that PVP ONLY games don’t do very well. They are incredibly niche and usually better handled by indie-game developers. Triple A MMOs rarely go PVP as the PVE crowd is too lucrative, the casual player has a lot more money to spend and based on history, games with some PVE elements tend to have greater success. Someone posted Josh Strife’ brilliant breakdown of this up thread.
Also as stated by another poster, opening the game to those regions would not matter as due to lag most players tend to stay on servers in their own regions.
Even the much anticipated Throne and Liberty seems to be going down a similar route as New World in that the PvP will purely be an opt in/out choice. I read this somewhere in their news or FAQs or something but this reviewer seems to be reading what I read word for word.
I think they should do this for sure and test it out.
I think PVP only servers are a waste of time and resources.
But they would be an infinite source of amusement on the forums.
Oh I agree! But the PVPers are insisting on it. I have stated numerous times to LET THEM HAVE IT for the entertainment value they would provide. Id grab some popcorn and read the posts lamenting about endless griefing, PKing of lowbies and other shenanigans and have a nice laugh added to my day!
Im right there with you. I have said the same.
I want to play on a PVP only server just to have a front row seat to the action.
I saw the developers preview of the game and it was quite exciting (check Youtube). The slogan is “PLAY FOR ALL”. They want to capture EVERY playstyle out there, PVE/PVP/PVX. it’s absolutely obvious they are trying to do that.
I liked the “THRONE” being for players that want to conquer and build. And “LIBERTY” represents players that want to do their own thing. Very interesting and exciting take.
SO to your point and to the topic, most games (at least triple A) incorporate PVE and are making PVP consensual. And the game that can balance this well will have a better chance at succeeding.
I like pvp, in small doses. I wouldn’t play a MMO where most of the content was pvp anymore, because in long sessions it tends to cause a surge in brain chemicals, and I would end up a raving nutjob on the forums.
PVP-only servers have a 20+ year history of not performing as well as pve centric servers. Dark Age of Camelot had pvp servers called “Mordred” and “Andred” in the early 2000’s, and they faded to dust after a couple years (They were clearly failing in under a year compared to the pve/rvr servers). The standard DAOC server type is still up and running after 22+ years.
That’s not to say this game couldn’t use more pvp content. But AGS focusing on the PVE crowd does make sense as a business model. But I agree pve activity should culminate in some sort of epic pvp experience for endgame, and OPR is not my idea of that (nerf muskets, had to stick that in there).
I wouldn’t mind if AGS opened a PVP-only server, if enough people want that. I wouldn’t play there, but it would be interesting to see if it follows the typical life cycle of a full pvp server.
Yeah chest runs make so much more money than territory
