Best Of
Re: Cleric and bard - please do not turn support classes into heal/buff bots.
Yeah, especially if you could mix it up a bit, and for example gain Divine Power from melee attacks instead of just casting spells.A two handed mace swinging warrior priest looking healing class would be dope.
As well as a medium to long range heal bot.
I like both and hope they can be created.
Re: What surprised you in the FireBrand fight?
The lack of motion probably. For being such a huge fight space, very little of it was used
Caeryl
1
Re: [Feedback Request] Alpha Two Citadel of the Steel Bloom & Firebrand Preview | August Livestream
I enjoyed the stream and Firebrand looked pretty impressive for this stage of development and for a mid-level, open world boss. This boss and Tumok are both well done for mid-level raid bosses. However, for a high quality MMO, I would expect much more in terms of difficulty and fight drama for legendary bosses at the later stages of the game.
As far as criticism, the only big issue I saw is the fog and lighting effects are a bit out of control when facing the sun. For example:
As far as criticism, the only big issue I saw is the fog and lighting effects are a bit out of control when facing the sun. For example:
Gaul_
4
Re: Hearthstones and Pistols: Discussion
UGH BUT THINK OF THE PIRATE FANTASY
There were pirates before pistols were invented.
Re: [Feedback Request] Alpha Two Citadel of the Steel Bloom & Firebrand Preview | August Livestream
Really bigly improvement on sound!
Frykman
3
Re: Is/Should Armor (be) Class Specific?
I'm not sure about that, although there is a potential upshot if they do.
They could do something like GW2 did, where armor style and design is particular to each class. You could have the same armor on two or more classes, but it'll look different on each, which in turn creates greater class identity.
It think I'd rather have strong class identity rather then more customization options.
They could do something like GW2 did, where armor style and design is particular to each class. You could have the same armor on two or more classes, but it'll look different on each, which in turn creates greater class identity.
It think I'd rather have strong class identity rather then more customization options.
Yoh
1
Re: Please NO Blackpowder Weapons
Steven said even crossbows are too high tech for Ashes. I wouldn't worry about it.
Re: Removing Waypoints During Questing: A More Immersive Exploration?
Democracy... everyone is entitled to an opinionMajorGeraldX wrote: »I don't agree with you ....
This is why i'm asking the question, "Do you need a waypoint to find your way and prevent yourself from getting lost?"
I'm trying to figure it out
Re: Instanced Content Should Not Offer Power Gains
Ok first off if you actually carefully listen to all the Steven's discussion of "Instanced' content is dose NOT sound like the typical WoW experience.
He dose not say "20% of Dungeons are instanced" he says "20% of CONTENT is instanced".
What he's described might better be called "locked room" stages in dungeons. Aka your party goes into some space that becomes cut off from the rest of the world for a time as you do a boss fight or face some other PvE challenge under a strict group size cap, which will either TPK you or that you finish and exit from. It has always been expressed as a sub-section of a larger challenge with the threat of PvP before and after.
It dose not implay an unlimited throughput capacity of players or a fully private pvp free dungeon. When some people are 'in' the instanced content others might be blocked from spawning a new instance. Instancing is not by definition a spigot of infinite loot output any more then the open dungeons already are.
I do not expect to see a single example of a classic WoW instanced dungeon in which you can walk up to the quest giver hit a button and be teleported to a whole private dungeon experience and then pop back into the world at the quest giver for the reward. If an instanced starting room exists then it will exits you into a public section that you then need to run through to get a reward and exit. Alternativly you might fight through a dungeon with a large group but the final 'boss' fight requires that you split into groups of 4 each of which must fight the boss alone and then exit, in such a senario parrelel instancing is used to prevent unreasonable waiting.
The goal is clearly to have 'gates' in the course of the PvE content which add group size variety to the expereince, so every bit of content is not plowed through in 40 man groups, because while thouse groups are a fun experience they should not be only experience, which WOULD be the optimized case (for safety and speed) if openworld dungeosn were just open to any groupsize. Instancing is a tool used in WoW for privitazation, removal of PvP threat and mass parrellizing players through the themepark 'rides', but it is not the ONLY way that tool can be used.
He dose not say "20% of Dungeons are instanced" he says "20% of CONTENT is instanced".
What he's described might better be called "locked room" stages in dungeons. Aka your party goes into some space that becomes cut off from the rest of the world for a time as you do a boss fight or face some other PvE challenge under a strict group size cap, which will either TPK you or that you finish and exit from. It has always been expressed as a sub-section of a larger challenge with the threat of PvP before and after.
It dose not implay an unlimited throughput capacity of players or a fully private pvp free dungeon. When some people are 'in' the instanced content others might be blocked from spawning a new instance. Instancing is not by definition a spigot of infinite loot output any more then the open dungeons already are.
I do not expect to see a single example of a classic WoW instanced dungeon in which you can walk up to the quest giver hit a button and be teleported to a whole private dungeon experience and then pop back into the world at the quest giver for the reward. If an instanced starting room exists then it will exits you into a public section that you then need to run through to get a reward and exit. Alternativly you might fight through a dungeon with a large group but the final 'boss' fight requires that you split into groups of 4 each of which must fight the boss alone and then exit, in such a senario parrelel instancing is used to prevent unreasonable waiting.
The goal is clearly to have 'gates' in the course of the PvE content which add group size variety to the expereince, so every bit of content is not plowed through in 40 man groups, because while thouse groups are a fun experience they should not be only experience, which WOULD be the optimized case (for safety and speed) if openworld dungeosn were just open to any groupsize. Instancing is a tool used in WoW for privitazation, removal of PvP threat and mass parrellizing players through the themepark 'rides', but it is not the ONLY way that tool can be used.
Lodrig
3
Re: Instanced Content Should Not Offer Power Gains
The moment you introduce power gains from PvE instancing, it sets off a chain reaction that inevitably leads to similar PvP instancing with rewards.
This seems to be a foundational assumption of your post here - and it is demonstrably untrue.
Sure, some games by some developers listen to some bitching players.
However, all it takes from a developer when players complain that instanced PvE content has progression based rewards and instanced PvP doesn't, is for that developer to state outright that PvP players can - and historically do - cheese any form of instanced PvP content in order to maximize rewards.
Since these players simply can not be trusted (again, historical precedent), Intrepid simply can not in good faith add progression based instanced PvP be a thing in Ashes.
The moment Intrepid take this position, any potential notion of instanced PvP offering progression based rewards dies a well deserved death.
To then take the rest of y our points one by one;
1, having some instanced content does not detract at all from the open world aspect of the game. If you truely believed this, it wouldn't matter to you if that instanced content had rewards or not, as it simply existing would have this effect, if this effect was to ever happen.
2, see my initial point.
3, the games you listed are all PvE first games - of course the end game focuses on PvE.
The open world in WoW, as an example, was never supposed to matter. Blizzard do not consider travel to be content, they want people doing the parts of the game they enjoy most, and in an MMORPG the part people enjoy most (at least, the part 75% of all MMORPG players) is running PvE dungeons. This is *the* reason why WoW is still so popular after almost 20 years. The reason the open wprld and PvP in WoW feel like an afterthought is because they are essentially an afterthought.
4, PvE does not exist at all in an open world if PvP also exists. In every case where PvE and PvP supposedly so-exist, PvP is the only thing that matters. Thus, it is simply not possible for the best PvE in Ashes to be open world - there can be no good PvE in the open world at all.
Yes it should be carefully balanced. However, your notion of no progression based rewards is not careful balance, it is an absence of balance.To preserve the integrity and appeal of Ashes of Creation, instanced content should be carefully balanced.
I have no idea at all why you think the existence of some instanced content would mean the open world matters less. As a general notion, it just doesn't make sense.
Noaani
6