Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
The players you are talking about will care about advancing their character. They are going to be spending most of there time doing pve, pvp, crafting, etc and progressing their character. Having there node de-leveled might have them alter plans a bit but shouldn't stop their characters progression or significantly alter what they are doing in the game.
I think you hit upon a key item here that needs to be (slightly) expanded on. The games with the geargrind/endgame are themepark games. Further, the "success" of these games (still operating when they're so old) has, in my experience, far more to do with the players of those games. How do I mean this? Simple. There are players in these games who've played together, as a group/guild/other, for years and sometimes decades. That level of social interaction is huge and actually drives a great deal of the retention within these games. So when you take a sandbox game that is focused on re-building communities, you actually have a better recipe for success than many may think.
@stabby, I get what you're saying, but you're looking at it only from a cash standpoint; in other words, you're assuming that the reason they're building this game is because they want money. In fact, Steven Sharif, the creative director of the game, has expressed very much his desire to bring community back into the game. Not sure it's him, but think so; if I'm wrong, I'm very confident someone will correct me. Anyway, as my understanding has it, Steven has money. Like, the man <em>has</em> money. The reason he got into creating this game wasn't because he wanted the money, but because he's a gamer who's gamed for 25 years (meaning he's closer to my age bracket) and he has a nostalgia for the times when communities were the core foundation and holding power of games. Now, if someone wanted to make money, you're right; they could do everything you list out, and they'd be rolling in the dough.
But what does that do for the people who've invested their time & energy in that game, when those people have to wait, sometimes, years for new content? When those people only have the boring repetition of dailies and gear grinds to look forward to, as they chat with their buddies & pals? Why does that have to be "the" recipe for a successful MMO?
I've said this before, in quite a few places now, and I'm pretty sure as people come to recognize me they'll laugh cuz they know what I'm going to say; however, I shall repeat myself yet again.
If we're fortunate enough not to die, we age. As we age, responses and reaction times lessen. Further, our idea of what's important changes. However, it is ludicrous to think that, because we've aged, we wish to give up one of our most satisfying hobbies -- gaming.
For me, I began my gaming career in shooters, and then in head-to-head matches at LAN parties. And let me tell ya, when you're the only female who also has a female skin on the computer in a LAN party -- you know, back in the day when female skins died either on their backs with all four limbs splayed out, or with their cheeks pressed into the ground, arse up in the air -- I died LOTS. I could go head-to-head with some damned good players.
But I've aged. I've gotten older, and my tastes have changed, and I'm looking for a game that takes <em>me</em>, the not-traditional-by-today's-standards gamer, into account. If you just build another MMO with the same money-grabbing recipe as all the rest, then what have you created that is truly different?
And for the devs, I'd wager that's as much a part of why they're doing what they're doing as anything else. Sandbox game that changes due to player interaction; sandbox game that allows their players to develop their crafting to an artisan level that has meaning; sandbox game that allows their players to build communities where we will become known and loved/hated, but known, within our community. Yeah, that's stepping out on a limb, in this day and time, and I for one absolutely applaud Steven, and Intrepid, for this path.
If you want endgame, as has been pointed out, there are plenty of other games out there where you can whet your desires. But there aren't plenty of games out there for players like me.
1: Even in EQ and WoW, first thing I do is run my character to a location that is different than my race.
In Ashes, we will arrive through a portal determined by our race, but we can choose to start building a city wherever we want.
That's not themepark. Also, we can choose to destroy the city and build elsewhere - which also is not themepark.
2: Before players are directed into a series of quests, they will probably start gathering the materials necessary to build a village. Once the village pops and NPCs appear, tasks and events and narratives will be generated from what those players are doing. Also opening up specific types of mobs. That's not themepark. Themepark is a static world with scripted quests and mobs.
In Ashes, players will be building the park.
3: In Ashes, players don't run out of stuff to do at the starting location. The starting location levels along with players. The starting location can also de-level. If players in a Scientific Metropolis decide they no longer want a fast travel network, they can choose to remove it or replace it with something else. Or other players may successfully siege the Metropolis and disable the fast travel network.
That is not themepark.
4: As soon as players arrive in the world and begin PvE activities, they automatically strengthen nearby nodes. Sandbox; not themepark.
5: The node continues to grow in strength by both sandbox and themepark gameplay.
6: It's not really possible to "do all the tasks" for the 4-6 levels of the node. Even after the node reaches max level, it will continue to generate tasks, narratives and events based on the activities of the players nearby. Some of those will be local tasks, narratives and events... some of those will be global tasks, narratives and events.
So, again, a combo of sandbox and themepark.
7: A siege happens and all that hard work is undone.
8: Even if a siege doesn't happen, a coup could happen. And the layout of the Metropolis could change. If a siege does happen, a completely new type of city could be built in that location. A Niküa Scientific Metropolis might replace a Vek Divine Metropolis.
The tasks and events and narratives generated would be significantly different for a Niküa Scientific Metropolis than for a Vek Divine Metropolis.
Also, it could be decided to abandon that node and build the metropolis at a different node in the region. Which would also generate new tasks, events and narratives...even if a new Vek Divine Metropolis was built to replace the old Vek Divine Metropolis.
If a Niküa Divine Metropoilis were built in the same location as a Vek Divine Metropolis... that would also change the tasks, events and narratives. Different tasks, events and narratives if it was a Ren’Kai Divine Metropolis replacing a Vek Divine Metropolis.
There will be continued changes to the world from players devoted to other nodes that impact one's home metropolis. Raids will be in constant flux rather than static scripted content because players will be able to control mobs and bosses.
So... not static, not scripted and not themepark.
9: Endgame is rinse and repeat STATIC, SCRIPTED content. Ashes doesn't have rinse and repeat content. Ashes is not a static, scripted world. Ashes is a dynamic world that constantly changes based on what the players are doing. It takes up to 3 months to build a Metropolis and another 3 months to completely destroy a Metropolis. And there are 5 Metropolises that can be built (hopefully 6 with the Underrealm being added to the game)... and destroyed. Which gives us plenty to do while waiting for new content.
But, that's not rinse and repeat of static, scripted content - that's rinse and repeat of dynamic content that is constantly adapting to what the players are doing. Players are able to change the map. Players are able to change the cities. Players are able to change the the types of mobs that live in a region. Players are able to change the types of NPCs who are in a region.
Players are able to build their own homes, rather than just living in dev created pre-fab or instanced homes.
Players can move their homes or build new homes over in new locations.
But, that is all just basic gameplay - not endgame gameplay.
Because Ashes doesn't have an endgame. There is no gap to fill.
There is no "done the node thing".
I am an Explorer.
I will need to constantly explore the world because the villages and towns and cities and metropolises will constantly be changing.
It won't be that I just uncover all of the fog of war on the mini-map and I know, forever, where all the towns are. Or I know where all the fast travel networks are. That town that I helped save 3 months ago may be completely wiped off the map. Or it may have become a city. Protecting a freehold now in a city in winter will be very different from protecting that same freehold 3 months ago in a town during summer. Just exploring what's currently available at that freehold and the neighboring freeholds will be a blast.
Also, discussing our adventures will be highly entertaining because we won't all of have experienced exactly the same adventures.
Because the available adventures will be dynamically changing.
There really is no gap to fill.
First, someone briefly mentioned that this is a sandbox game; I'm not sure that's getting enough attention. You see, in a themepark game that has any sort of story growth, you have to have some mechanic in there to keep your players playing (paying) while you go up to years between launching updates to the story. In this way, many MMORPG players have become inculcated to the idea of dailies, geargrinds, and endgame. However, in a sandbox game where players drive the shaping of the world, it's not a guarantee that that model would still be a desirable model. Just something to think on.
Next. @stabby, you make some good points, but I'd like to make some points back to you. You state that, if devs want to make money, they follow the recipe of what's already out there and is proving to make money.
I'm not sure if my info is 100% accurate, but I'm 100% sure that if it's not, someone will correct me, so here goes. Steven Sharif is the creative developer of this game, and he has said a couple of things. First of all, he's stated that he's been gaming 25 years, which puts him roughly in my age bracket as a gamer. Second, it needs to be understood that the man <strong>has</strong> money. So his interest in building AoC didn't come from a standpoint of "Sow, I can make this game, make lots of money, woohoo! That's what I wanna do!" Quite the reverse; his viewpoint of a good game is based on nostalgia for a time when games were other than they are today. Second, he has stated that his goal, with this game, is to bring back the community feeling that has such nostalgia for him.
Someone posted that there are legacy games which still have a large player base; was that you, @stabby? Can't remember and since I can't quote a bloody thing, and I'd have to go back to another page, we'll just not worry too much about that. Anyway, one of the things folk don't take into account with these legacy games is that a large portion of their player retention is based on their community; they've played together with their cohorts for a long time. They've built relationships with these people. And in any community, when something new comes along, there will be some excited about potentially exploring that something new and others who're perfectly content where they are, thank you very much. So, the wanderers eventually come back to the fold because the new thing they explored didn't have the holding/staying power of what they already have back in the old thing. Thus, a lot of the reason for player retention when you're talking years and sometimes decades is based more on social implications than the gameplay itself.
Next. Let's talk, again, about players, and aging. Yep, I've mentioned this before and I bet there are some who're familiar with me now and know what I'm going to say. That's ok; there's a new audience, and not everyone knows what I'm going to say!
Anyway. I'm 48 years old. I began gaming a long time before many of you were born. When I began PC gaming (remember Doom, anyone?), shooters and RPGs were about it, and I began in shooters. Later, I expanded to LAN parties with muliplayer themepark games (remember Halflife, anyone?). As, most often, the only female at these LAN parties running around in my Lara Croft skin, I died. Lots. I mean, this was back in the day when female skins died in one of two ways -- either on their backs with all four limbs flung out, or on their faces, arse up in the air. So I died LOTS. But I became a pretty good PvP player due to that. When I got into WoW (my first MMORPG), I was blown away by the simple, stunning feature of being in a world with thousands, millions of other players. I lost myself in the story, embraced the lore, and never looked back. I still PVPd back when I first got into WoW. However, again, I'm 48 years old. My reactions have slowed down, and my need to compete with other players has changed to a desire to constantly build my characters up as completely and fully as possible. But for anyone to think that they'll just stop gaming as they age is silly; it's one of our oldest, most favorite hobbies, and we've made a lot of friends through gaming.
Additionally, when I began in WoW, community was still huge. So when I talk about Steven, and others, looking back on the heyday of their gaming years with nostalgia for the community, I really do know where I'm coming from. Being able to find a game that again builds up that sense of wonder, of discovery, and of community, is huge. I mean, everyone else out there is doing the same thing, in respect to MMORPGs and players like me are left hungry for what has been lost.
So, the short version of everything I've typed above is that, yes, the devs could go the same route as every other MMORPG out there, and make money. But if they went that same route, there would not be this big, shiny, new <em>thing</em> that brings back for so many of us fond memories of what we first discovered, when we first began interacting on a large scale with other players within the same world. You can't have a grind-based mechanic in a game, where toxicity and elitism become the norm, and also have a world where a community is born and given the ability to grow.
And for every person that answer is different. Some find costume collection meaningful, others want their character to get more powerful.
I hope that the struggle for nodes will give enough meaning. Defending your node, attacking rivals, trying to build a metropolis, seize a castle, establish an inn/tavern on your free hold that is widely used, gain control of the market as an economic powerhouse, rise through the arena ranks, get elected mayor of a metropolis.
Steven keeps talking about meaningful conflict and i think the best thing about AoC is that it will feel meaningful. rarity, uniqueness and impact on the world set this game apart.
First, someone briefly mentioned that this is a sandbox game; I'm not sure that's getting enough attention. You see, in a themepark game that has any sort of story growth, you have to have some mechanic in there to keep your players playing (paying) while you go up to years between launching updates to the story. In this way, many MMORPG players have become inculcated to the idea of dailies, geargrinds, and endgame. However, in a sandbox game where players drive the shaping of the world, it's not a guarantee that that model would still be a desirable model. Just something to think on.
Next. @stabby, you make some good points, but I'd like to make some points back to you. You state that, if devs want to make money, they follow the recipe of what's already out there and is proving to make money.
I'm not sure if my info is 100% accurate, but I'm 100% sure that if it's not, someone will correct me, so here goes. Steven Sharif is the creative developer of this game, and he has said a couple of things. First of all, he's stated that he's been gaming 25 years, which puts him roughly in my age bracket as a gamer. Second, it needs to be understood that the man <strong>has</strong> money. So his interest in building AoC didn't come from a standpoint of "Sow, I can make this game, make lots of money, woohoo! That's what I wanna do!" Quite the reverse; his viewpoint of a good game is based on nostalgia for a time when games were other than they are today. Second, he has stated that his goal, with this game, is to bring back the community feeling that has such nostalgia for him.
Someone posted that there are legacy games which still have a large player base; was that you, @stabby? Can't remember and since I can't quote a bloody thing, and I'd have to go back to another page, we'll just not worry too much about that. Anyway, one of the things folk don't take into account with these legacy games is that a large portion of their player retention is based on their community; they've played together with their cohorts for a long time. They've built relationships with these people. And in any community, when something new comes along, there will be some excited about potentially exploring that something new and others who're perfectly content where they are, thank you very much. So, the wanderers eventually come back to the fold because the new thing they explored didn't have the holding/staying power of what they already have back in the old thing. Thus, a lot of the reason for player retention when you're talking years and sometimes decades is based more on social implications than the gameplay itself.
Next. Let's talk, again, about players, and aging. Yep, I've mentioned this before and I bet there are some who're familiar with me now and know what I'm going to say. That's ok; there's a new audience, and not everyone knows what I'm going to say!
Anyway. I'm 48 years old. I began gaming a long time before many of you were born. When I began PC gaming (remember Doom, anyone?), shooters and RPGs were about it, and I began in shooters. Later, I expanded to LAN parties with muliplayer themepark games (remember Halflife, anyone?). As, most often, the only female at these LAN parties running around in my Lara Croft skin, I died. Lots. I mean, this was back in the day when female skins died in one of two ways -- either on their backs with all four limbs flung out, or on their faces, arse up in the air. So I died LOTS. But I became a pretty good PvP player due to that. When I got into WoW (my first MMORPG), I was blown away by the simple, stunning feature of being in a world with thousands, millions of other players. I lost myself in the story, embraced the lore, and never looked back. I still PVPd back when I first got into WoW. However, again, I'm 48 years old. My reactions have slowed down, and my need to compete with other players has changed to a desire to constantly build my characters up as completely and fully as possible. But for anyone to think that they'll just stop gaming as they age is silly; it's one of our oldest, most favorite hobbies, and we've made a lot of friends through gaming.
Additionally, when I began in WoW, community was still huge. So when I talk about Steven, and others, looking back on the heyday of their gaming years with nostalgia for the community, I really do know where I'm coming from. Being able to find a game that again builds up that sense of wonder, of discovery, and of community, is huge. I mean, everyone else out there is doing the same thing, in respect to MMORPGs and players like me are left hungry for what has been lost.
So, the short version of everything I've typed above is that, yes, the devs could go the same route as every other MMORPG out there, and make money. But if they went that same route, there would not be this big, shiny, new <em>thing</em> that brings back for so many of us fond memories of what we first discovered, when we first began interacting on a large scale with other players within the same world. You can't have a grind-based mechanic in a game, where toxicity and elitism become the norm, and also have a world where a community is born and given the ability to grow.
It is easy to believe, and I'm guilty of it too, that our opinion is the most logical and therefore the most correct. But that discounts the myriad other opinions of myriad other human beings who think their opinions are also the most logical/correct. This is why I can say, @stabby, that you make some good points, but I also believe that those of us who disagree with you ain't exactly wrong.
Time and time again we've seen MMO's launch that try to break away from the "norm" of theme parks and exclude aspects of existing MMO mechanics that actually work, and are very popular. This is their mistake. You can get innovative and still include aspects of what interests existing MMO's player bases. I'm here in these forums because I think AoC has that potential. So far my only real disagreement is that they aren't setting aside servers for consensual only combat. I think this will cost them a lot of potential customers.
There is a 99% chance I will try this game when it launches. I'll make videos dissecting every aspect of game play. It's up to them if those are accolades or flames. We desperately need new games in this genre. I hope AoC is successful! I really want them to be. I just hope it's not another Rift.
http://massivelyop.com/2017/05/04/ashes-of-creations-steven-sharif-on-his-business-history-30m-funding-goal-and-pvp/
[Snip]
</blockquote>
I see you and Dygz (though, Dygz has done a fair job defending his points) talk a lot about consensual PvP and its implications. However, you in particular always make claims that "It will lose customers because of non-consensual PvP" (I'ma call it OWPvP). Where is your source on this? You know a few people in your circle? You've read a few forum posts? Because I can tell you why the vast majority of people left BDO, and it wasn't OWPvP. It was the endless grind and soul crushing RNG mechanics. I can tell you why the vast majority of people left AA and it wasn't OWPvP. It was a rocky launch with <em>blatant</em> P2W mechanics.
I'm willing to bet that there are far more people that are just ok with OWPvP than are against it. I'm willing to bet there are even more who <em>crave</em> OWPvP than are against it. Your solution fractures the player base by putting the majority of the crafters into one server. It contradicts Intrepid's core concept of meaningful risk in all aspects of gameplay. And yes, other players are a risk.
And that, to me, is the bottom line. You are trying to propose a solution that defeats everything that Intrepid is trying to build. Player interaction. This includes building each other up and tearing each other down. At an individual level and at a global level. It's how the game works. It's the game that Intrepid wants to build. And you want to take out one of the core elements of their vision, and you have the gall to say that it's a "good investment"?
I see you and Dygz (though, Dygz has done a fair job defending his points) talk a lot about consensual PvP and its implications. However, you in particular always make claims that "It will lose customers because of non-consensual PvP" (I'ma call it OWPvP). Where is your source on this? You know a few people in your circle? You've read a few forum posts? Because I can tell you why the vast majority of people left BDO, and it wasn't OWPvP. It was the endless grind and soul crushing RNG mechanics. I can tell you why the vast majority of people left AA and it wasn't OWPvP. It was a rocky launch with <em>blatant</em> P2W mechanics.
I'm willing to bet that there are far more people that are just ok with OWPvP than are against it. I'm willing to bet there are even more who <em>crave</em> OWPvP than are against it. Your solution fractures the player base by putting the majority of the crafters into one server. It contradicts Intrepid's core concept of meaningful risk in all aspects of gameplay. And yes, other players are a risk.
And that, to me, is the bottom line. You are trying to propose a solution that defeats everything that Intrepid is trying to build. Player interaction. This includes building each other up and tearing each other down. At an individual level and at a global level. It's how the game works. It's the game that Intrepid wants to build. And you want to take out one of the core elements of their vision, and you have the gall to say that it's a "good investment"?
It's no secret that I hate PvP. I feel that I'm being pushed out of this genre. People like me that don't like PvP and don't want to be forced into it have no new game to go to. So yes, I'm very outspoken about this fact. I don't want to participate in PvP and don't want to be forced into running a horse in circles inside a town to avoid it. What's wrong with that? I hate conflict. PKers have ruined my desire to ever PvP again. I want nothing to do with it.
I look at PvP as a major deterrent. It's the only thing preventing me from creating an amazing fansite, guild and contributing to AoC's kickstarter. PvP players have ruined games for me. I don't want it anymore. It's that simple.
I'm sorry that my preferred game play is creating such a ruckass. that's why I stopped posting to begin with. Maybe it was a mistake to return to these forums. Sorry guys for voicing my opinion.
Don't start the victim game please. It's not your opinion, it's your solution. I attacked your ideas, in on way did I target <em>you</em>. Please don't try and force a narrative on me like that.
I used the term "crafter" in a bit of a hyperbolic fashion to mean someone not interested in PvP. I recognize that there is a population. However, I doubt there are that many. At least not enough to realistically hinder the game's launch or worth dedicating resources to appease. You make very concrete claims that there is, and I'm asking you to prove it beyond your own opinion. I also stated that OWPvP is a part of what makes AoC what it is. You can go through a bunch of the Q&A's to confirm that. It's something that adds an element of danger and tension to an otherwise predictable environment. I'm aware you are against that. However, you are the minority. So unless you have real, verifiable evidence to show this is a bad idea, your opinions will be taken as 1 opinion out of many.
A PvE only server shouldn't find the majority of the crafters on that server.
Crafters are well protected by corruption and PvP adventurers acting as bodyguards.
PvP adventurers are not going to expect a baker to help out when they're dying in PvP combat.
PvP adventurers will expect a PvE cleric to help out when they're dying in PvP combat.
Steven has recently tried to correct his early statements as being "meaningful conflict" - that's not necessarily PvP combat.
It's possible to have meaningful conflict without player avatars killing other player avatars.
Destroying player buildings is a form of PvP conflict which still significantly impacts the world, regardless of whether player avatars kill other player avatars.
So, it's hyperbole to state that a PvE server defeats everything Intrepid is trying to build. Ashes offers a wide variety of player interaction - even if player avatars killing player avatars is excluded. In some ways, having avatar v avatar cobat disabled fosters more player interaction. And still includes building each other up and tearing each other down.
The focus is simply on objects and constructs rather than killing avatars.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crafters, PvE adventurers, casual PvP adventurers and hardcore PvP adventurers are all eager to experience PvP conflict.
There are many who don't want to participate in direct avatar v avatar combat in order to resolve the PvP conflict.
If there were far more people who are OK with OWPvP, we should be able to see that reflected in a comparison of PvE servers to PvP servers in games that have both.
If Ashes does as well EVE with no PvE servers - that's great for Ashes.
Those for whom the OWPvP in Ashes is too intense will just have to wait for games to release that include PvP conflict and without requiring avatar v avatar combat as the primary resolution.
But that really is a separate topic.
I think endgame needs to be rephrased to “is there something actually worth doing once i hit max level”
And for every person that answer is different. Some find costume collection meaningful, others want their character to get more powerful.</blockquote>
Again, endgame is what you do when you've completed the available content and you're waiting for the devs to implement new content.
It's not just about reaching max level - often people will hit max level on several characters... exploring different races and classes, etc. Endgame is about the repeatable content...dailies, dungeons and raids... which, for me, is like re-reading the last chapter of a novel day after day after day while waiting for the next sequel to become available.
For me, reaching max level isn't as important as always having something actually worth doing. I don't have to be uber in order to have fun in an MMORPG. I do have to have new stories - rather than static stories. I'm only going to re-read a good book a handful of times. or re-watch a great movie or TV episode a handful of times.
I don't need Gandalf or Stephen or Batman to keep growing and growing an growing and growing in power. I need for them to have different stuff to do. Killing Sauron in the same battle day after day, week after week is boring.
I will happily start over at 1st level, if the adventurers will be new and fun.
What we need is a dynamic world continues to evolve week after week, month after month rather than a static world which stops for several months at at time.
That's what Ashes promises.
@Isende
What I love about the EQNext/Ashes design is players spending months together building a city.
I tend to use social media to build community. But, when you see the same players in the same region day after day working to help you build a city - you're going to bond with those people. You will be very likely to want to help those people in other ways besides just city-building. And, when that city is being attacked, we'll be more likely to have many avatars defending the city - rather than running off to level elsewhere, secure in the knowledge that the city can't actually be destroyed.
It's not just about reaching max level - it's about working together to build a world.
To your statement "For me, reaching max level isn’t as important as always having something actually worth doing. I don’t have to be uber in order to have fun in an MMORPG." I have to say, Yes. Concur. Agree. One hundred percent. There is so much to games that is never explored, never experienced, because people now only know how to grind that gear/endgame treadmill. I mean, just in WoW alone, I think of how much has been lost. Who, who started playing the game post-2010, really knows the extent of the richness of the lore in the game?
The building of the world is huge, and I'm looking very forward to it. The exploration. And, me being me, the constant ability to play new classes and class combinations which will inevitably lead to my having an army of alts again. Such is fun, to me!
(quoting people is busted for me, so this will have to suffice)
You make excellent points. This is exactly the kind of response I was looking for. A well defined solution, rather than a simple opinion that devolves into whining. Turning off OWPvP for random 1 v 1 conflicts but still leaving the other forms (sieges, caravans, battleground, etc.) seems like a workable solution. My only real problem with it is the question of is the problem big enough to devote the resources to that solution? There is a very real cost to segregating the player base. So far, aside from several individuals, I have seen nothing that leads me to believe that there is as large of a demand for this style of server. Intrepid only has so many resources, and if devoting them to a separate server that turns out to be unnecessary would take from content in other areas, I'd be against it.
Corruption works well for the Crafters and hardcore PvPers; not so much for the PvE adventurers and the casual PvPers.
But, we will just have to get a clearer vision of the whole picture.
Seems like we shouldn't need arenas if there is OWPvP everywhere 24/7. But arenas are part of the design.
And Steven is spending more time now differentiating between PvP conflict and PvP combat.
Also Steven stressed supporting casual players, today, in addition to hardcore players - which should include middle of the spectrum(s); not just the extremes.
The devs don't want to create different ruleset servers at all -as far as I can tell- not even RP servers.
If they don't even have a separate RP server, there's no way they're going to have a separate PvE-Only server.
But, we've still got 3 or 4 years to work out the kinks.
I think working them out is going to be way more challenging than most people are acknowledging... but, it'll be well worth it if we can actually get everyone playing happily on the same servers.
Most mmo players these days post WoW have perception that mmo doesn’t truly start tell you reach endgame. For Ashes the game starts as soon as you log in, that is a important concept to convey since the majority of mmo players have never played a more Sandbox style mmo and Ashes might be their first non-thempark mmo.
</blockquote>
I agree with this 100%.
My focus has always been PvE content, more specifically raiding. I played WoW in the old days, some Rift and Wildstar, which all had great raiding content but were not so great in other areas in my opinion.
In the context of AoC I guess I can see the sandbox aspect (or more like dynamic player driven triggering of predefined events or content, which is safer and better if done right than pure sandbox but much more work i think) can be the source of a long-term engagement in the game and I can see myself enjoying it as well, but I hope that persistent group- and raid-dungeons will be part of AoC too to give players like me a home and some kind of a goal.
I play mmos to kick dragon butts and wear their scales as my armor basically. I enjoy other parts of mmos too and a lot of the aspects of AoC sound very intriguing but my focus is raiding.
I listened to a lot of Podcasts about AoC but I guess it is still too early to really know for sure if this is the game I'm looking for. Maybe some of you have some opinions or info for me and help me get a clearer picture of what to expect.
It's to little early to discussed such stuff however I give you some info!
One of the live streams the question is how many people can be in a party/group
Steven replied with around 8 ( not set in stone )
For raiding size groups!
Steven replied with around 40ish
What level will you have to be in order to raid Most mmo's have it where you gotta be max level in order to raid!
Steven replied with Their will be multiple Raids for many level ranges ( So you don't have to be max level to raid basically )
Whats the max level
Steven said about 50ish
The latest Stream just said it will take a lot of time to level
it could take a month.. its still being discussed, but it sound like they don't want it to be supper easy to lvl up
( do realize one of the things they said is they don't want to make you feel like you are just grinding.....There will be many stuff you can do to get XP and level up! )
For further information I suggest you check out Deathsproxy Videos!!! <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exzc1P2ka1A&list=PLJvvIDgksu7OluQF-IeSzwh_AlEMe8m7s" target="_blank">Right Here</a>
Hope this helps For further information may I suggest you open your own topic :P
Info down below! ( Want to dive into the community join the Discord)