Best Of
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
Pvpers can pve as well, while a lot of pvers are scared shitless of pvp, so I doubt it'll be much of an issue.Here and now, in this forum? This means quite little to nothing (here are fans enaged that quite everything which was told will be cool and will therefore defend it, perhaps due to lack of experience or due to not fully see the market and what other players like - such as not be excluded and called "casual", because casuals are needed to build up pve stuff, to enable pvp players to change it afterwards) Let's see what happens during the next weeks/month during testing and at release, and afterwards ;-)
Testing will also show the same thing as this forum, except even to a worse degree. Thousands of people who paid AT LEAST $100 to test a game that doesn't exist. They're already so damn deep into sunk cost fallacy that I'm not even sure if anyone's gonna be as objective as they might think they are.
Though I'm more than sure that all the twitch viewers (especially Asmongold's) will shit on every piece of Ashes design, because it doesn't appeal to the masses in pretty much any way.
Ludullu
3
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
I’m going to be honest, I stopped reading that wall of whine after the first paragraph. This is an MMO RPG, not a single player RPG. It’s designed for group play because that’s what most people want. You can pull whatever numbers out of your backside that you want, it’s not going to change the fact. MMO’s became a thing because people wanted online group interactions in games. If that’s not you that’s okay, you can solo things too. Sure, it’s going to take you longer, that’s not the fault of anyone but you. Don’t like it? Join a guild or make a regular group of friends in game or not to play with. Whining that it’s not fair that the group of 6 over there can kill things way faster more often and more efficiently than you can solo is not the answer. Whining that you are constantly being killed by other players, which the corruption system should help curb, is not the answer. Are you going to be killed by other players for your stuff, simple answer is yes. Are you going to be more of a target if you choose not to be in a guild, again yes. Is leveling faster and acquiring higher end stuff sooner going to be harder for you? Yes. Whose fault is that? I can tell you 100% for sure it’s not the players that do choose to be in guilds, it’s your fault for making things harder for yourself. That’s the whole risk versus reward thing. Do you have to join a guild or a regular group? No. Will it make things easier for you if you do? Yes.
Think of it like this. You want to build a new house in the real world. Are you going to do it solo? That would be extremely difficult and very time-consuming, not to mention weather and/or vandalism can and will most likely set you back. After you gather all the resources and even start building it will take you a minimum of months to complete that house not including the weather/vandalism damage. Are you then going to whine and complain that companies that use teams of people to do the same thing in a fraction of the time it’s taking you? Wait… Is your name Karen by chance?
Think of it like this. You want to build a new house in the real world. Are you going to do it solo? That would be extremely difficult and very time-consuming, not to mention weather and/or vandalism can and will most likely set you back. After you gather all the resources and even start building it will take you a minimum of months to complete that house not including the weather/vandalism damage. Are you then going to whine and complain that companies that use teams of people to do the same thing in a fraction of the time it’s taking you? Wait… Is your name Karen by chance?
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: »Thousands of people who paid AT LEAST $100 to test a game that doesn't exist. They're already so damn deep into sunk cost fallacy that I'm not even sure if anyone's gonna be as objective as they might think they are.Here and now, in this forum? This means quite little to nothing (here are fans enaged that quite everything which was told will be cool and will therefore defend it, perhaps due to lack of experience or due to not fully see the market and what other players like - such as not be excluded and called "casual", because casuals are needed to build up pve stuff, to enable pvp players to change it afterwards) Let's see what happens during the next weeks/month during testing and at release, and afterwards ;-)
For an adult with a job (most vet MMO players) that isn’t much of an investment as you think.
It is an investment for a teenager with a part time job and a car note, but those aren’t (or weren’t) the ones intended to be drawn in by the nostalgic MMO design format of Ashes.
Caeryl
4
Re: Loot System Changes
That's only true within individual open pvp fights without a real goal, but within pve parts of the game or pvp with goals that's not true, there is always ROI.Ludullu_(NiKr) wrote: »I'm talking about the rewards here. There's a lot of activities that don't see returns on investement for a loooong time, no matter how much time you put into them.
And: I'm talking about the time here, not the rewards. If time for a goal is invested, it should provide progress for the character, otherwise investing time for that goal makes no sense. PK-ing, ganking, is one example for this. But this behaviour shouldn't be supported, good thing AoC is not doing this.
Well, if a guild or group is acting like this, to just remove members and friends, than we are anyhow talking about completely different approaches how to play such a computer game.Those players will be removed one way or the other, because most groups would see them as spies for the enemies, who're waiting for the boss to get to low enough hp, in order to sabotage the farm and steal the boss.
Why should a player being afk because of picking up a phone call be removed? Or why should he if dps is 4% less than from other players (plus the current fact: No DPS meters, which is a very very good thing - so nobody knows that beside the game - that's why the game should do the loot, not a human person living out his bad behaviour)
Spy? Those players play together one year long within a guild or group, with discord, and they are spies? Oh well, interesting.
I've been playing MMOs since over 20 years with all sort of content and randoms are no bad people, elitist (or self named elistist) players are not welcomed. Players that exclude other players are the bad people, of course not those players that want to support and join a fight.I've been farming open world bosses in an owpvp mmo for 12 years. Randos are not welcomed there.
Some events are triggered due to other events before. The dungeon + afterwards Firebrand are a good example. You just CAN join this free open world dragon boss encounter whenever it is triggered and available. Perhaps you are just in a group with your friends in discord and say: "Let's join this fight" or you are just running around in that area for resource farming and then you are joining this fight by accident, random. This can and will happen, this is a fact of all other MMOs out there since 20 years that offer open world encounters and events. AoC is not the first one doing this..The design has alreadyy accounted for this. Majority of important content will be prime-time based, so, yes, it will be designed around full groups that are gathering to player during those prime times.
That was not the point. A group is full with 8 people. To always get 8 players will at every second of playing not be possible, there will be natural downtimes, so to design the entire game and loot around groups will not work and time will show this, I'm quite convinced about that due to my experience in such games.4-5-member groups will have their own little content that they can do on the side.
So my points are correct, but just are ignored from game design. That's ok, that's another discussion than. Ignoring makes it no better solution, it's just one out of other solutions and for me other solutions are better. For me every player invested time is important, I don't care if this is only considered during one difference: Being in a group or not, because again, nobody will always play everything and every minute in a group. That's not gonna happen.Groups are singular units in this game. So I don't care if some solos outdid a small part of the group's dmg, because the group overall will do way more dmg to the boss.
Invididuals can perform bad, but be in a group. The sum of 8 bad players will not be better of 3-4 individual skilled players. I can tell you pvp stories of my playing time where we (3-4 guys) outplayed a group of more people, or dungeons, where good players peform with 4 players doing everything and 1 nothing (just imagine boosting scenarios) wheres 5 players are dying at the same boss 10 times because their individual skill is bad.And as I said, group buffs and synergies will make it nearly impossible to outdps party dpsers if you're solo. That's the entire point of being in a group - sum is more than the parts.
So, sure, grouping is the usual goal and helping, but also surrounding players invest their time and perform their attacks and heals. They contribute to the fight that is going on, not only the "barrier" of being in a group is changing this fact.
Should, but what if they didn't? They just than should pass away and not contribute with their healing at this world boss event? Seriously? What a strange behaviour and thinking about game design.Healers who are helping some random party should've just found their own party, cause god knows every mmo is always short on healers. Anything else is charity work and should not have the expectation of rewards.
Of course the should and can help, if they want, and a group will like this support as things will be easier than. But this healer should get something for his time and support. Imaging a small fight with a small encounter. An 8 man group is starting to prepare a fight against a mini boss. 2 random players, a healer and a DD (perhaps friends) join the situation. It's a 10 player group than, but only one group is formed. Your "design" is the 8 man group are the elitists and better players, because of "group based" and so on and "you don't care about the randoms". And I'm different. I care. I thinkt, both can - if they want - support. If they just want to pvp, they can start doing a 2 vs. 8, will not be successful, let's guess. So, they decide to help and so it's a 10 man fight. And than 8 should get loot after 10min and 2 no loot? Very, very - I mean very - bad game design.
Will not happen. There a loot tables, with percentages. Usually. Or is it different in AoC? Show me, that's my lack of knowledge than, can happen. Otherwise it means something like this:If every damn bum was rewarded for existing near an open world boss, the game's economy would be in the shitter faster than you can say "economic decline".
Mini-Boss jungle snake drops (really just doing examples):
- 100 gold - 90% change to drop
- 3 crafting materials ABC - 40% change to drop a piece
- 1 rare shield ("blue" quality) - 2,5% chance to drop
- 1 rare dagger - 4% chance to drop
- 1 legendary sword ("orange" quality) - 0,0002% chance to drop
Why shouldnt the 2 randoms mentioned above be in a position to get 20 gold, 1 crafting material and the dagger? The supportet the kill, the where contributing with time and actions during the fight, right? They only missing point: They were not in the same group. And that's an artificial argument.
So this loot only will drop enterily for the group? Both "randoms" should get nothing?
So it will punish players that want to contribute, want to play social and support and all 10 players agree on that but loot will not be shared?
It is, playing together is one of the highest goals. That's done by being cooperative. Players want and should to play together. Your point is the barrier called "grouping", my point is that this is only an artificial barrier, a differenc in the UI and group-interface, but no social and cooperative difference during this fight just happening against a random world encounter in the open world free for everybody.Ashes is not a cooperative game.
It can bei competitive but also cooperative and social.It's competitive. Open world design dictates that and Steven wants it that way.
He says a lot, but also that he will listen on feedback. Time will show us, how this "group-only" will work.
Ok, that's an answer and opinion on that. For me this barrier is existing. Sometimes you will have situations where grouping is not possible, but playing is. Also playing together is, but group-size or other circumstances just don't allow it in a better way. In all this scenarios, that will happen quite often, all players should be respected with their playing time, as the invest the same time for the fight than a player within a group - there is no difference in this aspect. And that an individual player perhaps is even better than an individual player within a group is even more showing, what I explain.If those solos can't find themselves a group - that's their problem.
I don't understand. Whats the problem of running and playing around in the open world and than an boss event occurs and happens? Should this solo player than log out or run away? What's your proposal what should happen next? Talking to him and saying he is not allowed to support the fight or other not very social suggestions?Though it's more of a "what are you doing near a boss w/o a group" problem
That's not the point, because this situation will happen as I've mentioned them and thus there will be a lot of situations where randoms or different outher groups in different sizes will join battles. They will be there before the battle starts, although not triggered from them, they will be there during the fights and they will come shortly after the fight is over, because it's an opern world for everybody and not for ONE elitist guild where the members think and feel they can do what they want.Dungeons and boss content are meants for groups, because Ashes is a group-based game, not a single player mmo.
But he wants to be AoC to be successful and games like Lineage 2 are not successful any more and not in the existing market, he must consider that life, market and players have changed. It's the same for him, being mid 40 or whatsoever. He will definitly not play 15h a day, he will work. During his speeches to motivate his DAoC group (we all know the vid) he was bit younger, right, and nostalgia is one thing, but a MMO that will work and have meaningful designs is another.That might be nonsense in some "modern" single player mmos, but not in the games that inspired Steven. In Lineage 2 you couldn't do shit alone (valuable shit that is). And that is the exact design Steven liked and chose for his game. If he wanted to appeal to the single players - he wouldn't have chosen that design.
If it is a Lineage 2 copy with additional and different stuff, than time will show us, how this will work. All the best, we will see.
I mean, Lineage 2.. Lineage 2 Classic is dead and full of bots. No active players, right? All the rest is an afk mobile game with P2W to progress. So, if this is the basis, than we already know the future. If AoC will ONLY be design around frequent players and 10h+ a day hardcore pvp players it will run into troubles witihn the first half of a year. The ones that play the Alpha will be the ones, maybe, still playing it. The rest seems to be a very very small market, otherwise this kind of MMOs would work and there would be plenty of them out there. They are not due to several reasons.
Of course this design will not work nowadays, nostalgia by it's best, that's fine, but a solid and working MMO must be different today, respecting the time from the players first and foremost.
Maybe you know Guild Wars 1. I do. In the end it was an entirely instanced game. Some loved it. For Guild Wars 2 ArenaNet changed this design completely and Guild Wars 2 was an even better, more successful and more fun game. I've played it for several years in PvE and s(structured)PvP. So, "modern" MMOs are "modern", becaue players, the market, want them to be modern. It's ok to have old-school aspects, that's why all of us are here - but the good things out of old-school aspects, not the bad ones. Investing time and getting nothing is a bad one. Nobody will invest if nothing will come up, it will not only be a niche MMO, it will fail faster than you can say "but groups count the most".
So, agree to disagree, still.
For me, and I guess and know I'm not alone on the market with this opinion, every player that invests his time and plays/performs should get progress for his character in all means that make sense in this particular situation (so maybe exp, maybe gold, maybe gear, maybe ressources, maybe rare random world drop, what so ever). But not nothing only because of artificial barriers ignoring his invested time and performance.
Chaliux
1
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
I'm ~20 year older than I was in my MMO beginnings. I didn't change to be a social guy (hopefully), but my playing style changed a lot (sometimes to "more solo" and "less in groups" - but that's only a matter of time, not a social one for my personally). Beside being not that good in pvp as in earlier days I mainly cannot affort playing 10h a day or 30h during an entire weekend in a virtual world, as there are little things like job, family and other distracting strange things ;-)
Some of the questions I'm asking my self all the time are:
- "Is this the problem of the game, or is it my problem?"
Well, with bit self reflection. It's my problem. 20 years ago I played like an addicted player and loved it (never was addicted, just to put that message here)
- "Will AoC provide meaningful content to me, a not too bad player (Gladiator in Arena and rated battlegrouds in WoW (whoever knows what that is) high ranks in structere pvp in Guild Wars 2), but a player, that cannot invest so many hours as in the past?"
This is my main question and the entire game, I'm convinced, will rise or fall out of this question. The target group is "old school" MMO players and veterans. They all have this nostalgia. I'm in the same boat. But life changes, fortunately. The available time is different (usually reduced), it's just a fact as long as life progressed well during the last 20 years. And I'm assuming, seriously, that the main target audience will have this question in their heads OR will face this situation up from release, because not all players are watching this game during development phase, but will check up from release and not before.
- "Steven is mid 40 (I guess). He thinks about his time being 20+. He is designing a game with this nostalgia. Is he sure, that he, by himself, can invest and play in the same style and with time quota as before?"
I'm not sure. Some of the systems/features seem not to fit to this type of aged player with lots of real life matters.
So the MAIN question, for me, is and will be: Is AoC for (average to good, but also aged) players with a "casual" time quota, so possible to perform in pve oder pvp fights, but only playing 2hours a day in the evening after work? 15 hours a week? (just as examples..) and therefore, this is the context, also can find meaningful solo content, because after serveral logins that will happen after 20:00h in the evening these players perhaps only will play 1-2 hours and that's it. Will there be meaningful content?
<snipped a lot for length>
See now THIS is very real concern I also share about not just the final result, but about how the game is being designed.
We’ve seen a lot of gameplay so far, heard about a lot of intended systems, and I do have concerns about the respect to players’ time compared to what they can actually get from the game. Personally I think, more than any ‘solo v group’ aspect, the biggest issue right now is that even a hardcore player can’t do much if they can’t devote a large swatch of time each day.
MMO vets have lives now, jobs, families, so while some systems will hit that nostalgia factor, is Ashes really going to be for them? To me personally, it actually seems to be focused around younger players with excessive free time and minimal responsibilities like when current MMO vets first started out.
If you can only invest a few hours a day, and hours of work could be gone in one siege when you aren’t able to be online, well, suddenly that’s almost all your playtime progress rendered null and void other than level gains.
After all, you can’t reasonably call off work just to take part in a node siege. You can’t reasonably ditch your kid’s events or sports to go run a caravan. You can’t reasonably raid until 5am if you get up for work at 7am.
So if the game isn’t made for MMO vets, who simply can’t devote the time investment required by the design tenants of Ashes, and it doesn’t appeal to the more modern iteration of young players due to nostalgia based design tenants, then who is it for?
The hope is for a lasting game with 10k players per server, but where are those players going to end up coming from? Vets who go back to some no-living ways? Or younger players who are used to the current (not so great) design of MMOs?
Caeryl
3
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
- What‘s the reason why you think you won‘t find a suitable guild? (you never said that, but I'm assuming, because you are quite defending the sole playing part of the game)
- Or do you just dislike being part of a group?
-- If yes, why?
-- If no, why shouldn't you join one?
To that I've attached, also from that posting:
"My very beginnings in MMOs (DAoC, WoW) were not possible without groups, guilds and friends. And thats the best experience, but the most time-binding and -consuming one."
I've to attach: If somebody asks my about the best times in all my MMOs, especially WoW which was the deepest cut for me, I clearly have to state: The best memories are those that where done a) with online frieds/groups/guilds and b) in pvp.
But both are the most time-consuming aspects! And here (my personal) issue starts, not the social aspect of grouping, but to respect the other guild members and sometimes not being in a position to fulfill their expectations, because perhaps I will only login three times a week, if workload is huge and private matters are intensive.
I've played 60-70% pve and 30-40% pvp. I've played in groups and solo (mostly with my rogue ;-)) and I can remember 12h Alterac Valley (pvp battleground in World Of Warcraft), or playing pvp with them in the open world or in battlegrounds together, or PK-ing in Ironforge all those alliance players with my rogue (or some of them in our teamspeak group -> yeah... teamspeak my friends, not discord). I cannot remember my solo things, my farming, my crafting, all the dungeons run with randoms and so on.
I can remember idling in Orgrimmar and just talking to my guild members without really playing the game. All these memories are sweet. All the drama which happens in such guilds are the other side of the coin.
than I was in my MMO beginnings. I didn't change to be a social guy (hopefully), but my playing style changed a lot (sometimes to "more solo" and "less in groups" - but that's only a matter of time, not a social one for my personally). Beside being not that good in pvp as in earlier days I mainly cannot affort playing 10h a day or 30h during an entire weekend in a virtual world, as there are little things like job, family and other distracting strange things ;-)
Some of the questions I'm asking my self all the time are:
- "Is this the problem of the game, or is it my problem?"
Well, with bit self reflection. It's my problem. 20 years ago I played like an addicted player and loved it (never was addicted, just to put that message here)
- "Will AoC provide meaningful content to me, a not too bad player (Gladiator in Arena and rated battlegrouds in WoW (whoever knows what that is) high ranks in structure pvp in Guild Wars 2), but a player, that cannot invest so many hours as in the past?"
This is my main question and the entire game, I'm convinced, will rise or fall out of this question. The target group is "old school" MMO players and veterans. They all have this nostalgia. I'm in the same boat. But life changes, fortunately. The available time is different (usually reduced), it's just a fact as long as life progressed well during the last 20 years. And I'm assuming, seriously, that the main target audience will have this question in their heads OR will face this situation up from release, because not all players are watching this game during development phase, but will check up from release and not before.
- "Steven is mid 40 (I guess). He thinks about his time being 20+. He is designing a game with this nostalgia. Is he sure, that he, by himself, can invest and play in the same style and with time quota as before?"
I'm not sure. Some of the systems/features seem not to fit to this type of aged player with lots of real life matters.
So the MAIN question, for me, is and will be: Is AoC for (average to good, but also aged) players with a "casual" time quota, so possible to perform in pve oder pvp fights, but only playing 2hours a day in the evening after work? 15 hours a week? (just as examples..) and therefore, this is the context, also can find meaningful solo content, because after serveral logins that will happen after 20:00h in the evening these players perhaps only will play 1-2 hours and that's it. Will there be meaningful content? Which "system" can they play? Does it make sense to take part of a caravan escort? Does it make sense to run into a dungeon to get loot in the end, but it will be only pvp fighting during the way to the dungeon and then after 10 deaths the 2 hours are over? Will it make sense to run into the woods gathering ressources, solo, because the guild members are already running in full groups in dungeons or siege battles or whatever and there are not enough players online to group for another thing?
Or will AoC only get an elitist target group (like I was 20 years before: Playing up to 10h a day and if possible 80% during the weekend)?
(again, hopefully my messages are not to misleading, English is not my native language)
Your English is perfectly fine.
To answer your first questions, It's not that I dislike being in a group. It's that l like being able to do as I please in the game. Being part of a group means you have to do something the group agrees on. With guilds you get even less flexibility.
There is not much else to respond to in this post, I do apologize for not answering your questions before, I read them then was interrupted and forgot about them.
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
And yet I'm the one defending group-based design So who's the alone one nowAs your's is only yours ;-) But I'm not feeling alone with "my" opinion, man ;-)
Ludullu
2
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
Solo players can do stuff in Ashes.
But the focus for Ashes is massive PvP battles.
And a typical encounter is balanced for an 8-person Group with one of each Primary Archetype.
Steven is not intending to cater to Solo players.
That would be the purvue of some other game.
But the focus for Ashes is massive PvP battles.
And a typical encounter is balanced for an 8-person Group with one of each Primary Archetype.
Steven is not intending to cater to Solo players.
That would be the purvue of some other game.
Dygz
3
Re: Is there a problem for solo players
Hey Airborne (hopefully not to much of Berserker), we had a good chat here recently.
I want to start with: I can understand all of your points (believe me, I do), and nevertheless I'm giving AoC a try, although I've quite the same concerns in general.
But, I had one or two questions for you, but you skipped them. To fill the last gap, would you please answer them? I will not quote myself in my first commentary here, but here are the questions:
- What‘s the reason why you think you won‘t find a suitable guild? (you never said that, but I'm assuming, because you are quite defending the sole playing part of the game)
- Or do you just dislike being part of a group?
-- If yes, why?
-- If no, why shouldn't you join one?
To that I've attached, also from that posting:
"My very beginnings in MMOs (DAoC, WoW) were not possible without groups, guilds and friends. And thats the best experience, but the most time-binding and -consuming one."
I've to attach: If somebody asks my about the best times in all my MMOs, especially WoW which was the deepest cut for me, I clearly have to state: The best memories are those that where done a) with online frieds/groups/guilds and b) in pvp.
But both are the most time-consuming aspects! And here (my personal) issue starts, not the social aspect of grouping, but to respect the other guild members and somethimes not being in a position to fulfill their expectations, because perhaps I will only login three times a week, if workload is huge and private matters are intensive.
I've played 60-70% pve and 30-40% pvp. I've played in groups and solo (mostly with my rogue ;-)) and I can remember 12h Alterac Valley (pvp battleground in World Of Warcraft), or playing pvp with them in the open world or in battlegrounds together, or PK-ing in Ironforge all those alliance players with my rogue (or some of them in our teamspeak group -> yeah... teamspeak my friends, not discord). I cannot remember my solo things, my farming, my crafting, all the dungeons run with randoms and so on.
I can remember idling in Orgrimmar and just talking to my guild members without really playing the game. All these memories are sweet. All the drama which happens in such guilds are the other side of the coin.
I'm ~20 year older than I was in my MMO beginnings. I didn't change to be a social guy (hopefully), but my playing style changed a lot (sometimes to "more solo" and "less in groups" - but that's only a matter of time, not a social one for my personally). Beside being not that good in pvp as in earlier days I mainly cannot affort playing 10h a day or 30h during an entire weekend in a virtual world, as there are little things like job, family and other distracting strange things ;-)
Some of the questions I'm asking my self all the time are:
- "Is this the problem of the game, or is it my problem?"
Well, with bit self reflection. It's my problem. 20 years ago I played like an addicted player and loved it (never was addicted, just to put that message here)
- "Will AoC provide meaningful content to me, a not too bad player (Gladiator in Arena and rated battlegrouds in WoW (whoever knows what that is) high ranks in structere pvp in Guild Wars 2), but a player, that cannot invest so many hours as in the past?"
This is my main question and the entire game, I'm convinced, will rise or fall out of this question. The target group is "old school" MMO players and veterans. They all have this nostalgia. I'm in the same boat. But life changes, fortunately. The available time is different (usually reduced), it's just a fact as long as life progressed well during the last 20 years. And I'm assuming, seriously, that the main target audience will have this question in their heads OR will face this situation up from release, because not all players are watching this game during development phase, but will check up from release and not before.
- "Steven is mid 40 (I guess). He thinks about his time being 20+. He is designing a game with this nostalgia. Is he sure, that he, by himself, can invest and play in the same style and with time quota as before?"
I'm not sure. Some of the systems/features seem not to fit to this type of aged player with lots of real life matters.
So the MAIN question, for me, is and will be: Is AoC for (average to good, but also aged) players with a "casual" time quota, so possible to perform in pve oder pvp fights, but only playing 2hours a day in the evening after work? 15 hours a week? (just as examples..) and therefore, this is the context, also can find meaningful solo content, because after serveral logins that will happen after 20:00h in the evening these players perhaps only will play 1-2 hours and that's it. Will there be meaningful content? Which "system" can they play? Does it make sense to take part of a caravan escort? Does it make sense to run into a dungeon to get loot in the end, but it will be only pvp fighting during the way to the dungeon and then after 10 deaths the 2 hours are over? Will it make sense to run into the woods gathering ressources, solo, because the guild members are already running in full groups in dungeons or siege battles or whatever and there are not enough players online to group for another thing?
Or will AoC only get an elitist target group (like I was 20 years before: Playing up to 10h a day and if possible 80% during the weekend)?
(again, hopefully my messages are not to misleading, English is not my native language)
I want to start with: I can understand all of your points (believe me, I do), and nevertheless I'm giving AoC a try, although I've quite the same concerns in general.
But, I had one or two questions for you, but you skipped them. To fill the last gap, would you please answer them? I will not quote myself in my first commentary here, but here are the questions:
- What‘s the reason why you think you won‘t find a suitable guild? (you never said that, but I'm assuming, because you are quite defending the sole playing part of the game)
- Or do you just dislike being part of a group?
-- If yes, why?
-- If no, why shouldn't you join one?
To that I've attached, also from that posting:
"My very beginnings in MMOs (DAoC, WoW) were not possible without groups, guilds and friends. And thats the best experience, but the most time-binding and -consuming one."
I've to attach: If somebody asks my about the best times in all my MMOs, especially WoW which was the deepest cut for me, I clearly have to state: The best memories are those that where done a) with online frieds/groups/guilds and b) in pvp.
But both are the most time-consuming aspects! And here (my personal) issue starts, not the social aspect of grouping, but to respect the other guild members and somethimes not being in a position to fulfill their expectations, because perhaps I will only login three times a week, if workload is huge and private matters are intensive.
I've played 60-70% pve and 30-40% pvp. I've played in groups and solo (mostly with my rogue ;-)) and I can remember 12h Alterac Valley (pvp battleground in World Of Warcraft), or playing pvp with them in the open world or in battlegrounds together, or PK-ing in Ironforge all those alliance players with my rogue (or some of them in our teamspeak group -> yeah... teamspeak my friends, not discord). I cannot remember my solo things, my farming, my crafting, all the dungeons run with randoms and so on.
I can remember idling in Orgrimmar and just talking to my guild members without really playing the game. All these memories are sweet. All the drama which happens in such guilds are the other side of the coin.
I'm ~20 year older than I was in my MMO beginnings. I didn't change to be a social guy (hopefully), but my playing style changed a lot (sometimes to "more solo" and "less in groups" - but that's only a matter of time, not a social one for my personally). Beside being not that good in pvp as in earlier days I mainly cannot affort playing 10h a day or 30h during an entire weekend in a virtual world, as there are little things like job, family and other distracting strange things ;-)
Some of the questions I'm asking my self all the time are:
- "Is this the problem of the game, or is it my problem?"
Well, with bit self reflection. It's my problem. 20 years ago I played like an addicted player and loved it (never was addicted, just to put that message here)
- "Will AoC provide meaningful content to me, a not too bad player (Gladiator in Arena and rated battlegrouds in WoW (whoever knows what that is) high ranks in structere pvp in Guild Wars 2), but a player, that cannot invest so many hours as in the past?"
This is my main question and the entire game, I'm convinced, will rise or fall out of this question. The target group is "old school" MMO players and veterans. They all have this nostalgia. I'm in the same boat. But life changes, fortunately. The available time is different (usually reduced), it's just a fact as long as life progressed well during the last 20 years. And I'm assuming, seriously, that the main target audience will have this question in their heads OR will face this situation up from release, because not all players are watching this game during development phase, but will check up from release and not before.
- "Steven is mid 40 (I guess). He thinks about his time being 20+. He is designing a game with this nostalgia. Is he sure, that he, by himself, can invest and play in the same style and with time quota as before?"
I'm not sure. Some of the systems/features seem not to fit to this type of aged player with lots of real life matters.
So the MAIN question, for me, is and will be: Is AoC for (average to good, but also aged) players with a "casual" time quota, so possible to perform in pve oder pvp fights, but only playing 2hours a day in the evening after work? 15 hours a week? (just as examples..) and therefore, this is the context, also can find meaningful solo content, because after serveral logins that will happen after 20:00h in the evening these players perhaps only will play 1-2 hours and that's it. Will there be meaningful content? Which "system" can they play? Does it make sense to take part of a caravan escort? Does it make sense to run into a dungeon to get loot in the end, but it will be only pvp fighting during the way to the dungeon and then after 10 deaths the 2 hours are over? Will it make sense to run into the woods gathering ressources, solo, because the guild members are already running in full groups in dungeons or siege battles or whatever and there are not enough players online to group for another thing?
Or will AoC only get an elitist target group (like I was 20 years before: Playing up to 10h a day and if possible 80% during the weekend)?
(again, hopefully my messages are not to misleading, English is not my native language)
Chaliux
4