Best Of
Re: Ashes of Creation on Linux/Proton Compatibility Layer support
Right, so you've spent the last few posts talking about crafting in MMO's on your steam deck, and when it is pointed out that PvP in Ashes is unavoidable, all of a sudden you're like "well of course I PvP on my steam deck as well!".Only have to say, 3 million Steam Decks sold and growing. This could be a real opportunity.
I don't really see steam decks as being great for MMO's.
Everyone I know that has one has a gaming PC, and using their steam decks for gaming while out. The thing there is, you dont have a great internet connect most of the time, and so probably dont want to be playing a PvP based MMO.
I use my steam deck to MMO all the time. Its great!!!! On the go I tether it too my phone and do crafting while I wait for my wife when she is in a store. Linux gaming has grown allot over the past 2 years because of steam deck. Many are building gaming PC's using Steam OS as well. I know I am not the only one, as there are many guides to get WoW, ESO and the like running on Steam Decks. Its Epic.
For crafting I could see it, but not for general play.
I wouldnt call that a win, nor would I call it "epic".
One mans lame is another persons epic. Some of the best MMO time has been spent crafting, gathering and grinding NPCs while watching a movie with my wife. Zen gaming time is epic.
Yeah, in some games for sure.
Try that zen gaming grinding NPC's in Ashes and see how long that zen state lasts for.
Keep in mind, I am specifically saying that the Steam Deck wont be used that much specifically for Ashes, for the reasons outlined above - I am not talking about MMO's in general.
I think your wrong but that's what forums are for. This will not be my first PvP MMO. I'm used to dealing with random PvP in any form it comes. I know exactly what I'm asking for. I'm also 100% know what Ashes is. I'm an OG backer and been following the game closely. Again, I know what I am asking for. Peace out
Sure bud, no doubt you just forgot to mention it before now.
Noaani
1
Re: Just dropped the $120
Likewise, I dropped $120 on it. Happened to have some left over money on paypal collecting dust.
Sure they'll make better use of it then I was.
Sure they'll make better use of it then I was.
Yoh
2
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
[quote="AirborneBerserker;c-469128"
Actually I'm pretty upset because I wont ever be able to PvP on any kind of equal footing. That's all I do in MMOs is PvP. I've played MMORPGs since 99 and have done a total of 3 raids. 1 through LFR during whenever it came out on WoW to see what it was like(I was not impressed), and the other 2 in SWtoR which was the last guild I joined.[/quote]
This should have been your opening statement. Not 3 pages in.
it sounds like your more interested in lobby based games where everyone is the same. It also explains why you dislike the Archetype systems.
If your just looking to log in and PvP on equal footing then I hope you find what your looking for. I would suggest tempering your expectations for what AOC is trying to be.
Actually I'm pretty upset because I wont ever be able to PvP on any kind of equal footing. That's all I do in MMOs is PvP. I've played MMORPGs since 99 and have done a total of 3 raids. 1 through LFR during whenever it came out on WoW to see what it was like(I was not impressed), and the other 2 in SWtoR which was the last guild I joined.[/quote]
This should have been your opening statement. Not 3 pages in.
it sounds like your more interested in lobby based games where everyone is the same. It also explains why you dislike the Archetype systems.
If your just looking to log in and PvP on equal footing then I hope you find what your looking for. I would suggest tempering your expectations for what AOC is trying to be.
Re: Looking back on Rangers. (Rangers being weapon locked)
I don't see a problem with ranger meaning "ranged weapon specialist". In fact, I've played other games where that's what "ranger" means; it means someone fighting at range. It doesn't necessarily mean a WoW Hunter, or a Ranger from Dungeons and Dragons or Lord of the Rings.
I would also like if "Ranger" meant having skills that interact with all ranged weapons, whether they were bows, wands, orbs, and so on. And that would make "Ranger" a more fitting archetype name than "Archer" since it would be about more than bows.
Essentially, it would be the ranged weapon mirror to the Fighter, which is the melee weapon specialist.
They could create a class that does that.
A class that throws arrows, bolts, rocks fireballs, ninja stars (and logic, out the window).
But when people talk about ranger the mind goes to the shadowy, hooded watchmen of the woods. And frankly, there is a way bigger audience for such a class than there is for a non coherent, ranged attacks specialist with random abilities.
Re: [NA] Blackrock Guard (18+) | PVX & Light RP | PST (UTC−08:00) | Live for More!
You guys all-orc guild?
Killure
1
Re: Looking back on Rangers. (Rangers being weapon locked)
George_Black wrote: »Nobody is confused. People realize that the animations/abilities of the archetypes dont match the play as you want design.
You have 2 people on this topic saying exactly that:
One person saying that they cant play a Fighter using a spellbook (rightly so, because that would be weird).
And another person saying that the Ranger works only with bow and that archetypes should unlock more skills/weapons (which is impossible to do from a Dev standpoint).
The system wont satisfy anyone.
I'm not disagreeing. Being locked into a bow is a bad move. I was advocating for a generalized ranged weapon template rather than needing a bow to do every skill. Now, if they set it up so that there are an equal number of moves for different ranged weapons, that would probably work, though that might be another can of worms.
I don't see a problem with ranger meaning "ranged weapon specialist". In fact, I've played other games where that's what "ranger" means; it means someone fighting at range. It doesn't necessarily mean a WoW Hunter, or a Ranger from Dungeons and Dragons or Lord of the Rings.
I would also like if "Ranger" meant having skills that interact with all ranged weapons, whether they were bows, wands, orbs, and so on. And that would make "Ranger" a more fitting archetype name than "Archer" since it would be about more than bows.
Essentially, it would be the ranged weapon mirror to the Fighter, which is the melee weapon specialist.
I'd honestly be okay with that if that was the direction they wanted to go in, but yeah as of right now it doesn't even feel like "ranged weapon master" the class it's solely limited to bows.
I personally would like to see the more hooded shadowy huntsmen of the forest similar like aragorn or the d&d ranger (which i believe is one of the major inspirations for the class) but that's more a matter of opinion and preference and either option would still be much more in line with intrepid ideology of weapon diversity. in line with you described it hereYou just can't do that with the ranger as it is right now, currently missing out on 4 abilities (potentially 7) including two of the rangers main mobility tools (Air Strike and Call of the Wind) and one of their main damage dealers (snipe) Is just far beyond "Slightly suboptimal" that it's going to force players hands. That is then on top of having a ton of other skills that are themed and subtexted to just the bow and arrow.We can play a Mage who carries a sword, your Tank can zap people with a wand.
Either which way they go, whether that be ranged attack specialist or the more naturey huntsmen style they've got to do more to improve weapon diversity.
That said I am actually with Chicago when he said that Ranger/Fighter should be much more archer and weapons focused, that just makes sense when you pair what I envision as the naturey huntmens paired with the weapon master class. And yeah only minor changes are happening with subclasses, but really all it takes it a little flavoring and slight tweaking of mechanics to shift those things, and turn into more of a ranged weapons specialist. In fact I'd be totally okay if the Ranger archetype as we have it now was where Ranger/Fighter ended up (although I think that a more general ranged weapon specialist makes more sense), as long as the base archetype is just more flexible than it currently is.
I agree with you, I'm an advocate of making it more agnostic in regards to what ranged weapons you can use.
George_Black wrote: »George_Black wrote: »How do you imagine the animations of the current ranger skills when you equip a staff a spellbook, a wand or a greatsword?
Here answer this @Atama.
Dont shy away and give a true answer. Saying that people get confused by the term class and saying that ranger is free to intrepertation seem dismissive and evasive to me.
"Don't shy away and give a true answer." What are you, a reporter trying to nail down a politician? A thread can talk about different things, and not every post has to address every single topic everyone brings up in every previous post in the thread. It may seem "dismissive and evasive" to you, but that's something you're going to have to figure out how to deal with.
Atama
1
Re: [Feedback Request] Alpha Two Citadel of the Steel Bloom & Firebrand Preview | August Livestream
I think the combat is almost there, but it didnt hit the sweet spot there even tough its getting very close!
I will point substanticial examples of:
At 6:36 the character is out of combat, but still it is absolutely rigid and ready for a fight at all times, the character is never relaxed and his arms are always in a stance of being ready to fight, the character's supporting foot, which is the right foot, is positioned backwards, while the left side of the body is projected forward:
https://youtu.be/T1gJiGXStHA?t=399
This would never be the case in GW2
At 7:21, haracter's kneeling animation is another case of bad timing, making the animation look like a Powerpoint slideshow, the animatio progresses in a flat timeline when it should have different speeds, it should start slowly, then speed up and at the momment the knee his the floor then the animation should be slowed again.
https://youtu.be/T1gJiGXStHA?t=440
It's not important if we kneel slowly like that in real life, it doesn't look in a game animation, we have to do a few things differently than in real life so the animation becomes enticing.
At 10:06, Steven casts that spell which the character puts his arms up and do that gesture, this is not cool since the arms have a flat speed, this one is a bit painful to watch.
https://youtu.be/T1gJiGXStHA?t=606
Etc, this bad timing
At 1:35, this orchestra conductor shows it all, the video also has spell effects to make it easier:
https://youtu.be/cvbyoZJJYvo?t=95
The people in this video are not even in the gaming industry.
AoC:
I am being ruthless here about this, sorry.
The Dragon's animations and effects are amazing, the dragon is in another level and have no problems. Now someone has to go back and update every animation of every character
LOL
I will point substanticial examples of:
At 6:36 the character is out of combat, but still it is absolutely rigid and ready for a fight at all times, the character is never relaxed and his arms are always in a stance of being ready to fight, the character's supporting foot, which is the right foot, is positioned backwards, while the left side of the body is projected forward:
https://youtu.be/T1gJiGXStHA?t=399
This would never be the case in GW2
At 7:21, haracter's kneeling animation is another case of bad timing, making the animation look like a Powerpoint slideshow, the animatio progresses in a flat timeline when it should have different speeds, it should start slowly, then speed up and at the momment the knee his the floor then the animation should be slowed again.
https://youtu.be/T1gJiGXStHA?t=440
It's not important if we kneel slowly like that in real life, it doesn't look in a game animation, we have to do a few things differently than in real life so the animation becomes enticing.
At 10:06, Steven casts that spell which the character puts his arms up and do that gesture, this is not cool since the arms have a flat speed, this one is a bit painful to watch.
https://youtu.be/T1gJiGXStHA?t=606
Etc, this bad timing
At 1:35, this orchestra conductor shows it all, the video also has spell effects to make it easier:
https://youtu.be/cvbyoZJJYvo?t=95
The people in this video are not even in the gaming industry.
AoC:
- no antecipation: no weight and weight release
- no follow through: characters move like robots
- bad motion x time relation: the same problem the spell effects have, in the spells is just more annoying
I am being ruthless here about this, sorry.
The Dragon's animations and effects are amazing, the dragon is in another level and have no problems. Now someone has to go back and update every animation of every character
LOL
Re: [Feedback Request] Alpha Two Citadel of the Steel Bloom & Firebrand Preview | August Livestream
- Excessive lighting and fog
- Unlike FFXIV and Lost Ark (which ik are different type of mmo in terms of graphics and target audiences), this game’s fights are not as captivating. The dragon fight, in particular, felt repetitive
- Outdated animations like the dragon’s wings or that green lady or even the fire from those supports
- The dragon and the other monsters stand still until engaged, and the dragon's death animation is unimpressive
- The player's characters dont look very appealing to me idk why, also all of the characters looked kinda same
- When the dragon breathes fire, the terrain should be altered to reflect the damage. This change should be persistent throughout the entire battle with the affected area remaining scorched/burned. Also when the dragon steps on the water there are no animations and when the dragon lands or moves his tail it doesnt knock ppl off
- For the dungeon (idk what the other dungeons are like tho) we need some other challanges instead of just killing mobs, for the dragon as well bcs just hitting the dragon and run from the fire is boring imo and it is like any other mmo out there
- There should be some impact to the fight when players die, not just reviving them in no time like nothing happened
- When the dragon (or other bosses) appears maybe a cinematic should start or smthing, if u dont look up in the sky u dont even see that a dragon is coming
- Separate from this, the "64 classes" doesn't seem like a good idea for me alltho i understand the concept behind it and ik the second class will just influecne a few spells.
Overall im kinda dissapointed, it doesn't look bad, but it doesn’t look very good either. Those saying the dragon fight was 10/10 might be biased due to their investment in the game, whether through early access payments or involvement as testers. Right now i dont see why someone would leave their current playing mmo to come on AoC, but this is only based on what ive seen in that preview, i know its still in Alpha and there are a lot of things that will be improved or changed and also a lot of stuff that we havent seen yet.
- Unlike FFXIV and Lost Ark (which ik are different type of mmo in terms of graphics and target audiences), this game’s fights are not as captivating. The dragon fight, in particular, felt repetitive
- Outdated animations like the dragon’s wings or that green lady or even the fire from those supports
- The dragon and the other monsters stand still until engaged, and the dragon's death animation is unimpressive
- The player's characters dont look very appealing to me idk why, also all of the characters looked kinda same
- When the dragon breathes fire, the terrain should be altered to reflect the damage. This change should be persistent throughout the entire battle with the affected area remaining scorched/burned. Also when the dragon steps on the water there are no animations and when the dragon lands or moves his tail it doesnt knock ppl off
- For the dungeon (idk what the other dungeons are like tho) we need some other challanges instead of just killing mobs, for the dragon as well bcs just hitting the dragon and run from the fire is boring imo and it is like any other mmo out there
- There should be some impact to the fight when players die, not just reviving them in no time like nothing happened
- When the dragon (or other bosses) appears maybe a cinematic should start or smthing, if u dont look up in the sky u dont even see that a dragon is coming
- Separate from this, the "64 classes" doesn't seem like a good idea for me alltho i understand the concept behind it and ik the second class will just influecne a few spells.
Overall im kinda dissapointed, it doesn't look bad, but it doesn’t look very good either. Those saying the dragon fight was 10/10 might be biased due to their investment in the game, whether through early access payments or involvement as testers. Right now i dont see why someone would leave their current playing mmo to come on AoC, but this is only based on what ive seen in that preview, i know its still in Alpha and there are a lot of things that will be improved or changed and also a lot of stuff that we havent seen yet.
Re: Looking back on Rangers. (Rangers being weapon locked)
George_Black wrote: »How do you imagine the animations of the current ranger skills when you equip a staff a spellbook, a wand or a greatsword?
I don't think they need to re do the skills, I think they need to add more skills, furthermore I think ranger should have been a final class and the archetype should have been archer, and ranger could have been archer/fighter or something, I think intrepid are seeing ranger to much as a marksman or archer instead of a ranger
Chicago
2