"End Game" mentality has to die and resurrect "Play Time" from the Ashes.

ArchivedUser

I am seeing many posts making references to "End Game"
This MMO terminology has to stop.
It is a symptom of single player game design that has crept into the MMO genre overtime to the detriment of the true "Massive Multiplayer Online" experience, which is typically associated with the current plethora of theme park MMO games.

All these theme park MMOs have a funneling content burst followed by a prolonged drought. Stitched together with daily crumb quests and login rewards to hopefully hold enough attention till the next expansion whereby all previous content becomes irrelevant or casualized overtime.

Players need to realise this and understand that it is a fundamentally flawed community breaking system.

MMO's should inherently be anti "End Game" the very notion of a final resolute is counter productive.

There was a golden age of MMO's before "End Game" where people/players just interacted and spent time engaged with common goals, pursuits or just meeting new people.

I get the Play Time vibes from Ashes,

But I would appreciate the "End Game" promoters perhaps take a step back and reassess your MMO values.

Perhaps even considering "Play Time" the true MMO motivation.

ArchivedUser

To me, "end game" is what games put in to make people feel the time they invested had payed off.

I feel this is a personality thing more than anything. I enjoy the journey, doing the quests, getting into the story, while others race to the finish, because to them that's when the game begins. Then they get bored and move on.

I really hope Ashes keeps the journey aspect of it and from what I've seen so far, I feel they will.

ArchivedUser

Endgame is the content provided to keep players busy and paying that subscription while waiting the 12-24 months for the devs to drop an expansion.

Devs have to design content that allows players a constant stream of new content - while the devs work on DLCs.

Hence building and destructibility...
spending months building our cities...
and plenty of horizontal progression in addition to vertical progression.

ArchivedUser

Wel the end game thing. Like you can spend 1000 hours at a low lvl. But ultimately once you reach your max lvl all that progress and time has become underdeveloped.

Really depends on the game, like if u look at RS no matter what state you are you are always on your best. But if u look at wow or any other grind to max lvl before youre time become valuable in some sort of a way.


IMO endgame is important.

ArchivedUser

I agree that the "End Game" terminology is somewhat misplaced in a game like AoC. 

• If there is no fixed level cap, then there is no "end" so to speak.
  
  
• Advancement of nodes, professions and religions might contribute significantly to player "power", not just level and gear. These things might be gained (or lost) over time, so the experience of growth is likely more nonlinear than other games, making the concept of "End" fairly arbitrary.
  
  
• If skill and ability are the major factors in readiness for hard content*, rather than just level and gear (read HPS and DPS) as we've come to expect in other MMOs, then there may not need to be this walled garden approach of other games.

*I'd prefer to call it "high skill" content, rather than end game content.

ArchivedUser

I kinda agree with you @Whocando about the bit where some games funnel players straight to the end game. Ashes doesn't seem to be doing that. 

Just that at one point, your character will reach the level cap. I guess endgame in ashes sense could also mean finishing up your other non-combat progressions. 

The terminology doesn't particularly bother me, it's inevitable that players will hit the level cap before new content is developed. Whether it's raiding, crafting, decorating your homestead, or even hanging around helping other players reach the "endgame".

I personally tend to prioritize getting to the end game quickly because there's where most of the loot has meaning because the bulk of my time playing the game might be at the level cap. 

ArchivedUser

The 1- 110 current max* level time record in WoW is 2hrs 14min.

Vanilla WoW 1-60 used to take weeks and was rewarding. not a chore. It was not perfect by any means but it was impactful and satisfying for the most part.

End Game other than it's max level by association, is capped and gated vertical content singularity, behind a typically menial level progression system with instant gratification rewards that have limited if any long term value. It is inherently single player but prolonged in MMO's buy repetition.
It's is Single player with friends on loop. Sustained with box priced expansions to fund the next fix.

Play Time/game time/max level progressive content; is multi faceted horizontal progression that can be enhanced with vertical progression.

there should be no "End" in an MMO.

ArchivedUser

Whocando said:

The 1- 110 current max* level time record in WoW is 2hrs 14min.

Vanilla WoW 1-60 used to take weeks and was rewarding. not a chore.

End Game is capped and gated vertical content singularity, behind a typically menial level progression system with instant gratification rewards that have limited if any long term value. It is inherently single player but prolonged in MMO's buy repetition.
It's is Single player with friends on loop. Sustained with box priced expansions to fund the next fix.

Play Time is multi faceted horizontal progression that can be enhanced with vertical progression.

there should be no "End" in an MMO.

This is most concise and insightful synopsis of WoW I've ever read.

ArchivedUser

So the issue here is the term?

I enjoy my leveling process in older MMOs and remember them fondly. Adventures and deaths at the lower levels.

I too enjoy the process of seeking improvement to my character through items and cosmetics and shiny things once there isn't any more progression through level's to be had. Many stories about those as well.

I didn't play wow though, so maybe that's why I don't really find it a concern. 

ArchivedUser

The terminology isn't as important as the meaning pertaining, but it does seem inappropriate for me.

My issue is with the prolonged player conditioning towards "End Game" as the defining factor of an MMO genre.

to the point where games are pigeon holing themselves by this self inflicted curse. A visible condition of this curse is the "exp booster" or instant max level purchase.

"End Game" is simply the expectation of post max* level content progression.
But it has overtime made Leveling merely an inconvenience to borderline irrelevance.

Leveling up should feel rewarding with each threshold and facilitate the understanding of mechanics for the player character to promote skill and ability. All the while allowing a journey and player experience. It however has to be done right and paced appropriately to not feel like a burden, which may of been the reason "Endgame" mentality eventuated.

But leveling up is not the only progression system, It should also be seen as a catalyst to promote player interactive progression.

I stopped playing WoW pre Cata around the time flying mounts were introduced.
I hardly raided then but spent countless hours logged in for whatever reason, mainly being the only Boomkin because it wasn't META and online friends at the time. But WoW is the MMO giant that most people can relate to.

I currently login* to gw2 but the lore and forced narrative isn't appealing to me, i enjoy the combat system, however most of my old in game friends left after the expansion. I do however respect that Max level is fixed and items I've acquired are still relevant 4 years later.

ESO at launch was the perfect example of terrible "End Game" though i believe much has improved. however my time spent completing the story of ESO was all I could take from the buggy launch/subscription.

I am not suggesting that Ashes shouldn't have content after max level. Safe to assume levels are implemented.
But that players should respect and enjoy the whole ice cream sundae than criticizing or demanding the cherry on top.

Not everybody likes just cherries.

ArchivedUser

Ashes doesn't have an endgame because max level doesn't mean the end of new content - where you have to wait 12-24 months for an expansion. And all there is to do is repeat old content.

In addition to all of the character progression paths, we will be trying to bring 5 nodes to max level.

Plus all the other nodes that can become towns and cities. All generating new content.

ArchivedUser

Endgame should be when you 'log out'.

I hereby approve and enjoin this effort to cast out the limiting phrases of mind control.

ArchivedUser

End game, elder-game, max level content, "play time"... this is semantics. Players use these terms just to be able to easily reference a portion of the game with which they would like to converse about. I think you will find that the majority of people on these forums are here because they have been drawn to the appeal of the MMO design that Intrepid is going for in the same way that you have. So.... I don't think you should be too concerned about the people conversing on the forums here being stuck in an "end-game/WoW" mentality. The design team have a clear vision of what they want this to be, it is early days and they obviously haven't shared it in full with us, but you should try to place a bit of trust in what they are doing.... Its not as if they are going to see too many references to "end-game" here and decide that they need to build WoW 2.0 to keep us happy.

Essentially, I agree with what you are saying and share your desire for a new MMO with meaningful content without levelling races and months of content drought. However, its a bit much to demand that people stop using such terms and letting other threads become derailed because someone referred to a raid as end-game as has happened in the recent past. We can probably safely assume there will be content to play at max level regardless of how long and rewarding the leveling/main story experience is, people are going to refer to this in some way or another...

ArchivedUser

I agree, "end game" (to me) implies the goal of the game is to reach the end, to "finish" it.  

But with MMORPGs my "goal" is to enjoy the experiences of the adventures - the journeys between point A and point B. 
To me, there should be no "end game," merely a world which facilitates adventure and allows me opportunities to partake in it. 

ArchivedUser

For some people, not just a few in fact, Endgame(referring to MMORPGs) simply means content that pretty much requires level cap to participate in.

Some will say that is wrong and that's fine and dandy, but since it is a word/phase stolen from its true meaning and applied to MMORPGs in a slang usage, there really isn't a perfect definition in the new context. Anyone that says there is, is just trying to puff their chest and be authoritative.

Not that I have any issue with defining it exactly for AoC. Just that I doubt us doing it here will change the world.

ArchivedUser

Saying "End game" denotes having an end. A stop to progress.  Ashes has no end game it is to be a work in progress and road with many turns and twists that never ends.  A mountain crumbles a cavern opens.  And don't forget every server is not going to be on the same road and under the same development. 
Ashes is going to be an interesting ride down the road.

Mythanon said above,  "End game should be when you log out."

ArchivedUser

Generally a game's concept  is flawed if you get to a point  where you are "done" and waiting for the next expansion. You saw this a lot in WoW where entire guilds would go into hibernation until an expansion because there was no reason to login anymore content-wise.

A good game will always have things to do for players that keep them involved. That can be fun PVP, events, and other sandbox things that keep a community running.

ArchivedUser

Lol. I rest my case. If you google "MMORPG endgame meaning" you can see that there are camps that are/have debated it too.

ArchivedUser

but that is the point to rebuild from the ashes also you forget that guild will break up and new guilds will rise  . its the community that will make this game 

ArchivedUser

Bringslite said:

For some people, not just a few in fact, Endgame(referring to MMORPGs) simply means content that pretty much requires level cap to participate in.

Some will say that is wrong and that's fine and dandy, but since it is a word/phase stolen from its true meaning and applied to MMORPGs in a slang usage, there really isn't a perfect definition in the new context. Anyone that says there is, is just trying to puff their chest and be authoritative.

Not that I have any issue with defining it exactly for AoC. Just that I doubt us doing it here will change the world.

This is how I always defined "Endgame" as PvP isn't an end of content there's always a new challenger always someone better. But to do competitive PvP you normally need to be max level (anything under max level is usually broken in terms of pvp).

ArchivedUser

Rumbleforge said:

I agree, "end game" (to me) implies the goal of the game is to reach the end, to "finish" it.  

But with MMORPGs my "goal" is to enjoy the experiences of the adventures - the journeys between point A and point B. 
To me, there should be no "end game," merely a world which facilitates adventure and allows me opportunities to partake in it. 

It's not the goal of the game, it's just the typical situation where we reach the end of dev created content and have to wait 12-24 months for new content.
Where level and story progression takes 3 months at best and endgame lasts 12-24 months...many people now consider endgame to be the real game and level/story progression to be an unnecessary obstacle to reaching the endgame/real game.
In games like EQ and WoW, max level can be used interchangeably with endgame because the two coincide with each other. Max level content is basically the same thing as endgame content.

In a game like Ashes, max level content does not equal endgame content.
For one thing, there are at least a handful of progression paths for which we can reach max level: Artisan, Religion, Soicial, Naval and Adventurer.
For another, we have node progression. Where leveling a node to max level takes months. And leveling different nodes generates different content. Also destroying buildings and building different buildings in a city generates new content.

So, in Ashes, the game does not end just because a character has reached "max level" because the game is not only about reaching max level on the Adventurer progression path.

The terms we used for other games don't necessarily apply the same way for Ashes. We're going to have to adjust those meaning to speak coherently about Ashes gameplay.

Ashes has a wide variety of max level content...and no endgame content. For Ashes, those two concepts aren't interchangeable.

ArchivedUser

Rivest said:

This is how I always defined "Endgame" as PvP isn't an end of content there's always a new challenger always someone better. But to do competitive PvP you normally need to be max level (anything under max level is usually broken in terms of pvp).

Since much of the content is non instanced, it's probable that there won't be level requirement. A L10 player could get obliterated by a level L20 boss one on one, but  if they play their character well and have high levels around them, then this could be a great way to gain experience and socialise with your higher level buddies.

ArchivedUser

Rivest said:

This is how I always defined "Endgame" as PvP isn't an end of content there's always a new challenger always someone better. But to do competitive PvP you normally need to be max level (anything under max level is usually broken in terms of pvp).

The nature of this game is to encourage team work and community involvement.  Max level is  by all is not really needed.  Strategy and know how accounts for much.  There is a place for lower level players in PVP sieges and such that can offer a lot. You just need to be smart enough to utilize them.  

Open world 1v1 and such fighting,  ya maybe you need to be max level.  But beware the organized teams that know how to utilize all their devoted people.

ArchivedUser

lexmax said:

Rivest said:

This is how I always defined "Endgame" as PvP isn't an end of content there's always a new challenger always someone better. But to do competitive PvP you normally need to be max level (anything under max level is usually broken in terms of pvp).

Since much of the content is non instanced, it's probable that there won't be level requirement. A L10 player could get obliterated by a level L20 boss one on one, but  if they play their character well and have high levels around them, then this could be a great way to gain experience and socialise with your higher level buddies.

Or hope for some nice loot that the higher leveled players don't need

That was me many many years ago, fresh and wide eyed, stepping into Everquest for the first time and getting wrecked by some passing giant. 

A kind druid helped me retrieve my corpse, casted SoW on me and gave me a nice pair of earrings (or were they bracers?) and I was super pleased.

Probably pne of my more significant MMO moments that got me hooked on the genre. 

ArchivedUser

The argument that end game shouldn't be a thing just doesn't make any sense.  End game is the content that gives the game replayability at level cap.  To say such a thing shouldn't exist is counter-intuitive at best.  We WANT the things that are available to do after hitting the level cap to be rewarding and fun enough to keep us coming back.  What on earth is wrong with such a suggestion?

ArchivedUser

Severok said:

The argument that end game shouldn't be a thing just doesn't make any sense.  End game is the content that gives the game replayability at level cap.  To say such a thing shouldn't exist is counter-intuitive at best.  We WANT the things that are available to do after hitting the level cap to be rewarding and fun enough to keep us coming back.  What on earth is wrong with such a suggestion?

I don't think anyone is advocating getting rid of the end game, but the concept. End game to many is a grind of sorts - redoing the same over and over in PvE to get a shiny sword or in PvP to get max rank. I think our fellows in this thread are trying to shift people's perception of what Intrepid are trying to do with Ashes in that the universe will truly be persistent and there'll never be an end, only endless cycles with evolutionary dynamics.

ArchivedUser

Severok said:

The argument that end game shouldn't be a thing just doesn't make any sense.  End game is the content that gives the game replayability at level cap.  To say such a thing shouldn't exist is counter-intuitive at best.  We WANT the things that are available to do after hitting the level cap to be rewarding and fun enough to keep us coming back.  What on earth is wrong with such a suggestion?

I think it's a matter of perspective. The argument that some of us are trying to make is that there is no "end game" needed because there should be no end. You should find as much stuff to do at 12 months in as you do 1 month in. You are not capped by "levels" because the concept is irrelivent on a game system that is not designed by "tiers. ". Instead you are only limited by the time you put into it. Think less "game on rails" and more "sandbox" in terms of context.

ArchivedUser

Severok said:

The argument that end game shouldn't be a thing just doesn't make any sense.  End game is the content that gives the game replayability at level cap.  To say such a thing shouldn't exist is counter-intuitive at best.  We WANT the things that are available to do after hitting the level cap to be rewarding and fun enough to keep us coming back.  What on earth is wrong with such a suggestion?

And that's how it works in a theme park game.  But this is not a theme park game.  The way they're designing Ashes of Creation, the whole game should be the end game.  What you'll be coming back for is to further develop your node, explore the world, encounter the world bosses that we stir from their slumber, interact with other players, plan seiges on other nodes, etc.  In a sand box, the "end game" is about the game world and what we make of it.  It's not about the theme park content the devs make for us.  This is a game WE make.  They just provide the framework and flesh it out a bit.  How it progresses and develops is entirely up to us.

ArchivedUser

Severok said:

The argument that end game shouldn't be a thing just doesn't make any sense.  End game is the content that gives the game replayability at level cap.  To say such a thing shouldn't exist is counter-intuitive at best.  We WANT the things that are available to do after hitting the level cap to be rewarding and fun enough to keep us coming back.  What on earth is wrong with such a suggestion?

The point that others are making I think is that Ashes is a fundamentally different take on the MMO genre.

Ashes content is dynamic, so there really is no concept of repetition in the same sense as other MMOs because the world changes from moment to moment.

Ashes encounters are largely outside instances, so they will likely not be gated by level, only by skill, experience and the ability to work as a team.

ArchivedUser

There should not be replay-ability. Rather there should be continuing playability at max level.
We want max level content to keep us so engaged -just like the content on the way to max level- that we don't stop playing.
Thus making it unnecessary to "come back" because we will have never left.

ArchivedUser

@Dygz, I have never agreed with you more than I do in this thread here. 



And @Kratz, I like your new sig.