Best Of

ieldan wrote: »

I'm Brazilian, and the price of the game for us is half the minimum wage here, it is very expensive in our currency. I'm not asking for a price reduction, just to make this option possible.

Thank you very much!

The game is not live yet.

Currently, the game is still in what is essentisllt a supporter mode - sure people get access to alpha and beta for supporting, but that isn't the game.

While I don't want to speak for Steven, I imagine he would not want financial support from people if they are having to pay via installments - he would simply suggest you hold on to that money and put it to better use.

When the game is released, not only will there not be a purchase price at all, but the subscription will be regionalized to match your local economy.

I'm sad that it took me a whole day to figure out the shorthand explanation but here it is. It's probably not worth a Splinter Topic but bear with me it's a bit of a tale. Perhaps one that will be interesting 'historical reading' for some at least.

FF11 has had the Mog House functionality as far as I know since launch. Mog Houses allow you to decorate your private instanced space (the ability to allow visitors was added much later)..

Depending on the Elemental Balances of your furniture, you got a Moghancement, which is a buff to something.

No matter what you do, some players will consider one Moghancement (or some subset group of them) to be the best ones. If those happen to be easy to attain or can be built up gradually with no significant downside, fine. Content.

The moment one of them offers what some vocal influencer (even in world chat) considers an optimal advantage, some set of players will switch from 'this is fun, slowly building up and experimenting with decorating my house, it's like leveling' to 'why is this game gatekeeping the good stuff just to inflate hours/make me RMT?'

It's not that Moghancements are bad, it's that someone hit the wrong switch in players' brains. Originally it was just them and you could only have one at a time. Could you rearrange your entire house to switch from 'Tiny chance of retaining more materials when you fail a synth with this specific crystal' to 'lose less EXP when you die' because you expected to be doing hard content? Yes. Was it worth it? Good question.

Competitive players measure against each other and that's a large part of this trigger. Well-informed players measure against 'obvious optimals' and that is another.

Moghancements had to not be particularly good on purpose to avoid the above. And even within that, it was still talked about in this way. To be clear your overall options were:
"Lose less exp on death." "Gain slightly more money from mob drops in a game where very few mobs drop money and it is a tiny amount relatively" and "gain more Conquest points (Node Exp basically)".

This system is 'not rewarding' on purpose. It is not impactful on purpose. It is tedious to min-max entirely on purpose. Because 'singular, low impact choices' are one of the few ways to keep your playerbase from becoming a toxic separatist column of people arguing over whether optimizing is right.

Ashes needs to have more spaces where Intrepid demonstrates an understanding of this, without it, it will get the usual novelty rush, then the world-chat ignorance phase, then the falloff. Ashes has, so far, made six separate decisions that fast-track it directly into the world-chat ignorance phase.

A lot of the things that make Ashes 'unique' are the equivalent of having powerful Moghancements for players to fight in world chat over. I don't think this is a positive kind of uniqueness for a game to have.

Sophisticus wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Sophisticus wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

This doesn't work well in Ashes or similar games because it has absolutely open trade between players and the death penalties are not 'full loot'.

Those requirements are part of the already-thin veil of 'defense' the game has against people who get boosted via who they know and the resultant RMT.

I really wish Ashes had gone with the full loot concept. That solves so many problems.

Yeah, including the need to have servers capable of holding more than 500 players concurrently.

You dont like full loot?
Albion is very successful in this regard and has a well-functioning economic system (but I was never the economic player in it).

Most people don't like full loot.

Albion and EVE between them basically have the market covered in regards to people that are willing to accept a persistent world MMORPG with full loot.

There isn't space in the market for a game of the scope Ashes is trying to be.

Ludullu wrote: »

Does "full loot" imply that you just lose all your shit, instead of just dropping it? Cause I fail to see how, in any way, that prevents rmt. You just kill a dude, loot all his rmt stuff and that's it. I'd imagine that tracking these kinds of interactions would be pretty much the same as tracking all trading interactions in the game.

Full-loot is normally combined with many other aspects, but it is not about preventing RMT in the context that I brought it up.

I was referring to the idea that games clamp the best gear a character can wear to prevent level 1 characters from being given exceedingly powerful gear 'for their level' (this also applies to newbies ofc).

In a full-loot game, this practice of 'letting people give a level 1 character a full Heroic Set' is better resolved. An inexperienced player will lose that Heroic Set faster than an experienced player, and therefore wouldn't be as likely to benefit from any RMT to get such gear.

I'm still not saying that's a solution in any way, there are layers and layers that need to be put 'on top of that' for anything resembling 'fun gameplay'. Ashes is not enough like EVE to be using that, and it is built for long leveling.

I can hand off/help Day-1 Level 20s Purple Gear in TL (via guild), and they can wear it, but they also aren't going to be 'less than max level' for the next 500+ hours, and because of how it works that's only the start of the gearing process and they can't trade it, etc.

People are still selling guilds in TL world chat for related reasons.

Ludullu wrote: »

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

full loot means you will respawn naked

I know that part. That's not my concern here. People keep saying how full loot somehow impacts the economy and shit, but I do not remember people mentioning that on death your loot simply disappears. Usually the design is "the killer can pick it up".

Which means that the items simply shift hands and rmt can happen as easily as if that was a direct trade of them. Hence my confusion, in this context.

Tarkov proves that systems such as full loot encourage players to RMT and other forms of cheating, not discourage it.

If you are at risk of losing what you have on you when you die, you pay enough money to be strong enough to not die.

Sophisticus wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

This doesn't work well in Ashes or similar games because it has absolutely open trade between players and the death penalties are not 'full loot'.

Those requirements are part of the already-thin veil of 'defense' the game has against people who get boosted via who they know and the resultant RMT.

I really wish Ashes had gone with the full loot concept. That solves so many problems. But oh well.

I get your point about open trade and lack of full loot. That definitely does reduce friction for potential RMT.
But I’d argue that level gated gear is a fragile band aid against those problems. It doesn’t stop boosting or RMT. it just slows it down.

But I don't have a solution for RMT either. I only know that such vertical power scaling in particular will damage the game just as much as RMT. RMT will always be RMT, with or without obstacles. Even with such requirements.

What should not be forgotten: If you have strong vertical power scaling overall, then it is also a strong incentive for many to engage in RMT i think.

Intrepid has indicated that they will have an incredibly strong stance against any form of RMT.

Note that I am NOT claiming that I understand how, have faith in this, or anything like that. To me, the game is full of RMT holes.

But the idea is that they have at least 'promised' (maybe that's too strong a word) to handle it.

Lachesis wrote: »

All the non human races look well proportioned and nice overall, but the human races look really off.

This is why i am firmly convinced that these MUST. BE. Placeholders. Around +50% of the Game's Popularity will depend on how well you create your Character and let it look.

Imagine having Nine cool Races at start and then You realise they are lesser fleshed out like in way older Games.

Lachesis wrote: »

The have the same look as games like veilguard or other recent AAA titles that have ugly character models

Beware !!
This will be political for a short Moment.



Oh. Well " THAT " was intentionally created shitty by the eternal Developer Crowd of :

" I am a not goodlooking - most likely Single-Loser Developer - which hates the West and mainly male Playerbase, because i am probably a MORDIBLY obese, middle-aged or soon-to-be middle-aged Woman and i have feelings of Vengeance pent up in my because of my miserable Emotions and/or Life. "


I am not kidding You.
The Reason why things like "USAID" need to get hindered or even prevented, is that THESE. PEOPLE. need to have lesser Ressources.
Because they want nothing else than INTENTIONALLY ruining Franchises and Fun for as many People as possible all around them,

because they view it as "Justice" -> that when "THEY them/selves" (lol) in their Lifes aren't happy -> that they try to prevent AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE from also being happy and having Fun in their Lifes.






But enough of the Reality that most People do not even DARE to address.

Lachesis wrote: »

Is this something that will get fixed and im just a cry baby or is the intended look.

You are NOT a crybaby if you want the Characters to look way better in the finished Game.

If you are, then i am also a crybaby.

Lachesis wrote: »

I know people will try and act like im calling it woke or something but thats not it,

... ... ... Veilguard WAS woke.

This is why it flopped so badly. (hehehehehehe)

Lachesis wrote: »

I just dont get* why they all have janky proportions and stand like they are kids asking their mom for phone games

Damn.
Here it is again.
The politic Aspect.



The "Males" in that Game were designed like "WEAK Stoner-Men" with happily smiling, sky-high Faces at times, right ?

That was intentionally made so -> that they look "LESS threatening" to the modern Audience which doesn't even really exist,
and which is expected to have Anxiety or even Panic Attacks if they would "EVER" have a Discussion with an angry, masculine Working-Class Man, which looks like he can beat everyone's behind with no problem.


I am NOT joking. i promise. These Developers - and sometimes/"often"(?) middle-aged, single Women who at times are noticeably obese - either "hate", or "despise", or "FEAR" -> able-bodied Men.

Because they were fed the "Nonsense" at some Time in their Lifes -> that in Order to be something like GIRLBOSSES or strong Women,

they need to "ERASE" any actual, capable, masculine and strong Men from their Lifes. If they can not do it in Reallife, they should at least do it in VideoGames.
This is also why they hate noticeably attractive, good-looking female Characters because these Characters remind them of what peak female Beauty and attractiveness is like -> which most if not all of these Video-Game developing Women will never possess.



Aren't we all tired of these "modern Audience VideoGames" ?

Which are something like a "REVENGE-CRUSADE" against the Western World.





Here comes the Fun-Part which i love to end my Comment with.


I don't even " NEED " - to ask or beg any of You - to boycott these beyond badly written and badly designed Videogames.
Because i need to look only at their Failure and non-existing Sales Numbers to " KNOW " that most of You share my Opinion and Worldview on VideoGames.



And who else is also smart ? And most likely a bit smarter than most of us ? The Developer-Team of Intrepid and Sir Steven himself from what i have observed and watched for the last Years. .


Sir Steven "knows" : if he wants to see Ashes of Creation be a Success,

ALL HE NEEDS to do and have -> is decent developing-Time, decently developed Content -> and the Game must NOT. BE. WOKE. - and then it's Time after many Years of hard Work and Money-investment, to cash in and then enjoy it when his MMO-Dream finally bears fruit.