Best Of
Re: Why did you stop to play an MMO you once loved?
Ultima Online, just got tired of drama with the admin team (it was a "private" shard).
Lineage 2 - I got tired of the grind and poor content variety.
WoW - one day I logged in and just felt sick, I suppose that's the way you feel if you gorge too much on something. Still I have some fond memories of my Tauren shaman open world PvP, and levelling my human warlock whilst playing BB King in the background. I came back a decade later for a nostalgia trip, but my interest in the game fizzled out. The game didn't feel much like a MMO, and the open world content felt too easy.
GW2 and SWTOR - I liked them both for different reasons, but overall the copy/paste nature of the game activities and again, PvE content which in the open world did not encourage use of your classes to the fully potential made it boring in the long run.
The Lord of the Rings Online - the landscape difficulty made it interesting, and the old school nature of some content was weirdly refreshing. The game was pretty atmospheric, despite its age, however content felt a bit uninspired around level 30+ if I remember correctly. That specific zone quest line felt weak, and I felt zero motivation to continue playing at that point. In the end server latency / server performance issues were also immersion breaking.
A side note: For some reason I enjoyed quite a bit both GW2 and LOTRO crafting experience as a solo player. In GW2 crafting was the reason why I ended levelling 5 different classes at the same time and levelling up different crafting schools.
Overall the passing nature of the levelling zones was one of the reasons why I disliked in a lot of MMOs. You barely ever felt a reason to come back to a "low" level zone as you have already completed all content there and roaming mobs were no threat at all. One of the reasons why I liked GW2 more with its level scaling system, which adjusted your level to the zone content. That alone made the game world feel more like a living, breathing world.
Lineage 2 - I got tired of the grind and poor content variety.
WoW - one day I logged in and just felt sick, I suppose that's the way you feel if you gorge too much on something. Still I have some fond memories of my Tauren shaman open world PvP, and levelling my human warlock whilst playing BB King in the background. I came back a decade later for a nostalgia trip, but my interest in the game fizzled out. The game didn't feel much like a MMO, and the open world content felt too easy.
GW2 and SWTOR - I liked them both for different reasons, but overall the copy/paste nature of the game activities and again, PvE content which in the open world did not encourage use of your classes to the fully potential made it boring in the long run.
The Lord of the Rings Online - the landscape difficulty made it interesting, and the old school nature of some content was weirdly refreshing. The game was pretty atmospheric, despite its age, however content felt a bit uninspired around level 30+ if I remember correctly. That specific zone quest line felt weak, and I felt zero motivation to continue playing at that point. In the end server latency / server performance issues were also immersion breaking.
A side note: For some reason I enjoyed quite a bit both GW2 and LOTRO crafting experience as a solo player. In GW2 crafting was the reason why I ended levelling 5 different classes at the same time and levelling up different crafting schools.
Overall the passing nature of the levelling zones was one of the reasons why I disliked in a lot of MMOs. You barely ever felt a reason to come back to a "low" level zone as you have already completed all content there and roaming mobs were no threat at all. One of the reasons why I liked GW2 more with its level scaling system, which adjusted your level to the zone content. That alone made the game world feel more like a living, breathing world.
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
Starting to think no this is a troll thread and I have been had.
Well done good sir.
Well done good sir.
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
AirborneBerserker wrote: »I did not strawman anything. I asked a simple yes or no question and rather then just saying yes and agreeing to something that is just a basic fact about people, you spouted off a bunch of things which have nothing to do with anything I said.
I gave you a clear answer: I know that Intrepid makes mistakes and if you cant even filter that from 13 words, how are we to discuss complexer systems than that?
AirborneBerserker wrote: »Do any of the things you stated prevent the Devs from making a mistake? No, they don't. Did I ever claim any of those things, no I haven't, in fact I have said the opposite. So who is committing the strawman fallacy here?
What are "those things"? You want to discuss this, be specific.
AirborneBerserker wrote: »So now let's look at a couple of the reasons why the devs might make a mistake. The node system is completely new and has never been implemented in a MMORPG before.
True, the system hasn't been tested yet, but this is not an issue for solo players, because they are not meant to be the focus group - groups and guilds are. If solo players are lucky, the system will provide them with opportunities to gruadually move into what the package of the game says: This is a group focused MMORPG.
AirborneBerserker wrote: »The gathering system operates different then any other game due to the materials shifting around the world and disappearing entirely some times.
The loss of resources has been present in games before and Steven is on record taking inspiration from games where stuff wasn't globally available through auction houses but instead have to be moved around. As for certain resources being available only during certain seasons: That doesn't seem to be a problem unless these resources are necessary for everyone to have and no alternatives exist. And if that were the case thats just an overall issue, not a single player issue.
AirborneBerserker wrote: »And as I pointed out in very beginning of my OP if your going to make a game difficult then you want the class system to as fun as possible as early as possible. Because it's the only system you know 100% of the player base will interact with.
And what makes the class system not fun? Do you think the Archetypes are badly designed? Do you doubt the meaningfulness of the augment system?
Again, because that is what I've been saying in my first comment: The timing is just odd. 7 years of archetype development and 8x8 class design plus a promise to make the system in the 8x8 pattern - If you want anyone to take this serious "It could be a problem" will not suffice, people will just shrug their shoulders and wait a few weeks until they can test the systems and provide ACTUAL feedback
Anyhow without stretching this discussion into the infinite: Yes there is a problem for solo players: They are trying to play a multiplayer game alone and Intrepid (rightfully) does not intend to cater to them at the cost of social group gameplay.
Kilion
2
Re: Consternation surrounding the 8x8 Class system and how to move forward.
It's not like we are all telling Intrepid what to do. If we tell them stuff in advance, 90% of the time, it's just going to be the same thing we were going to tell them when they showed off whatever it was. Classes are about a feeling that a player is looking for when they're trying to play your game. If I want to be a Song Warden, it's only because I think that Song Warden is going to be the thing I want to play. That thing I want to play is already in my mind.
Even if Intrepid has a different way of achieving that (maybe I'm a Trickster instead), I'm still going to end up giving them feedback that I want one of their classes to let me play the way I want. So I don't care about people who think that I shouldn't get to play the way I want in a game like Ashes, because all those people are telling me is that I should find a different game to play. And since I have games that let me do what I want already, it's up to Intrepid to provide the same or close enough if they want me to play.
Even if Intrepid has a different way of achieving that (maybe I'm a Trickster instead), I'm still going to end up giving them feedback that I want one of their classes to let me play the way I want. So I don't care about people who think that I shouldn't get to play the way I want in a game like Ashes, because all those people are telling me is that I should find a different game to play. And since I have games that let me do what I want already, it's up to Intrepid to provide the same or close enough if they want me to play.
SongRune
1
Re: Node alliances should be thought about like factions
I object to them because they are a shitty system. Everything else is just the consequence of them being shitty, not the source of the shittiness.So you object to factions because changing them is monetized by the developer? C'mon, you're moving the argument all over the place. Also, we know this won't be an issue in Ashes.
Yes, I know they are factions. They're also SUPER EASY TO CHANGE ON A WHIM, even if Intrepid decide to put some type of lockout on that action. Changing your node citizenship will be super costly and won't even mean that you're not downshifting when you change it (unless you're an inn bum).To try to get over a semantics issue, do you realize that in FFA PvP MMOs that don't have pre-set factions like horde/etc, your guilds/guild alliances are your faction? You can't PvP people in your guild(faction), and you're working together with them to accomplish objectives against other guilds(factions).
And I've already said that I'd prefer if we could attack our party/guild/raid/alliance-mates, because this allows for a much broader range of player interactions.
Yes, except both guilds and nodes will have limited memberships, which is just yet another point towards them not being factions, because afaik every game that has factions doesn't prevent you from picking a faction even if the entire damn server is already on that faction's side.And yes, many people will join the winning side when they can. But that applies to guild/guild alliances just as much as it does to node/node alliances in Ashes
So once again, faction-based games are trash. Nodes are not factions, because you can attack your mates freely (even if with consequence). Guilds are as close to factions as it comes, but you can change them waaaay easier than in any other faction-based game and your core gameplay doesn't suffer due to that change. And I will be giving Intrepid feedback that attacking our mates is more than fine, as long as it requires a conscience action and a combo of keys to do it (just as the current flagging action does, but either even more complex or just on a different key combo).
Ludullu
1
Re: So....bagpipes for the Bard class?
Bear is doing the music... so maybe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSbktQtZV1c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSbktQtZV1c
Re: Loot System Changes
Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: »I added my feedback exactly BECAUSE I read all the comments.Did you not read any of the comments? Everyone who posted input are veteran MMO players.I've played Lineage 2 for 12 years. In that time I've been everything, from a random solo player buying craft mat by craft mat in order to make a single piece of armor for myself, all the way up to a GL of a 200-member guild that used this exact looting system to fairly distribute the loot.The only possible reason you could like that thoughtless system is if you have a history of being a guild leader or an officer.
And in my 12 years of playing the game I've barely ever seen guilds that would fuck over people as much as all yall are scared shitless of. You know why? Because L2 is a party game, where your party is pretty much your family, so you have the same people playing with you day in day out.
And then those parties join each other in guild families, where everyone holds each other responsible for good culture and fairness. And if someone was such a dick that they fucked people over on loot - they'd be known across the entire server and barely anyone would even agree to guild up with them.
Yall seem to come from places where "pugs" was a normal thing and where everyone only thought about their own loot and success, so not getting a piece of drop EVEN ONCE meant that you got "fucked over".
This is why I called yall modern gamers. And if you're all supposedly "vets" and you still want an "everyone gets something" system - well, as the classic phrase goes... this game is not for you
You might have an issue with reading, jumping to conclusions and/or general comprehension. EQ1 came out before lineage 2. I started my MMO journey with EQ1.
I'm not arguing that this game might not be a good fit for me. If its not, that is OK. But I was under the impression they wanted to build this game with player feedback. My feedback, whether you like it or not, is valuable. I'm chatting with many other MMO gamers about this matter outside of this chat, and majority, but not all, agree with a modern loot system due to a history of bs dealing with loot. Other people on this and other forums mention it. Whether you like it or not, it is a thing.
The bottom line is, I feel that the challenge should be in the content itself. Not through artificial frustrations that you all are mentioning. If the game sucks so much that you need to have people figure out who gets the loot, and that being a key component of the game, I don't want to be involved in it. It's additionally pathetic to me to have a game's social hierarchy built on it, i.e guild leaders and officers passing out loot. Kiss my ass, I spent time being a key role in a event, no sweat is going to tell me whether I have rights to a piece of loot or not.
Intrepid can take my opinion, and everyone else mentioning this issue, into consideration or not. If they don't, that's cool. I'll go play FF14, GW2, or ESO and no time or frustration wasted.
Mdini
1
Re: Race & Class
A fantasy game where the vastly different races are mechanically identical makes for a nonsensical approach to the game world both mechanically and narratively.
How is anyone going to say with a straight face that it isn’t weird that a ‘stocky, classic tolkein trope’ dwarf has the same physiological base as a literal animal-person?
Culture doesn’t give you fur and it doesn’t make you half the height of other races.
I get that, but is it fun? This is a game and I have played games like ESO where you are piggin holed into a race because you want to play X class. All of a sudden you have mostly Dwarf Tanks and only Elf casters. I used to love great race abilities. Games often end up toning down these things for balance to the point they dont mean anything. Again, at what point is that fun?
Re: So....bagpipes for the Bard class?
I've been supporting the idea of bard bagpipes for years. I hope Intrepid are thinking of including them in one day 🤞
Diura
2
Re: Race & Class
A fantasy game where the vastly different races are mechanically identical makes for a nonsensical approach to the game world both mechanically and narratively.
How is anyone going to say with a straight face that it isn’t weird that a ‘stocky, classic tolkein trope’ dwarf has the same physiological base as a literal animal-person?
Culture doesn’t give you fur and it doesn’t make you half the height of other races.
Caeryl
1