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.
Well said my friend.
Let's hope the never ending story begins sooner rather then later.
So do I my friend, but I cannot take any credit for it. All the credit and plaudits deserve to go to @AutumnWillow. A very kind gesture on her part and I'm truly grateful
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.
Our passions have divided us in the past, but today I stand united with you @Dygz.
So do I my friend, but I cannot take any credit for it. All the credit and plaudits deserve to go to @AutumnWillow. A very kind gesture on her part and I'm truly grateful
For myself, and I can only speak for myself, I can say that, in the past, I've only struggled through "end game" because I was often our guild's MH or OH. One or the other, so of course, I had to do the grind to get the gear to do more grind to get more gear ... I mean, I can't let my team down, right?
Did I enjoy it? No. It was, in fact, the reason I kept leaving treadmill games. I hated it. I wanted to be off exploring, or leveling up alts, or doing anything but running that bloody treadmill. But I did it because ... can't let the team down.
What folk like me find refreshing about AoC, @Severok, is the idea that "end game" doesn't mean a treadmill. It doesn't mean continuously doing the same bloody thing, over and over and over, to get better gear to do the next same bloody thing over and over and over ... it's a chance to say "Huh. Ok, so I wanna spend the day finding where to harvest such-and-such and then work on my crafting/processing/whatever." Or "Huh, I haven't been over east since they developed that node, I think I might wanna wander over there and see what's what." It means, in short, that my daily tasks will assume less of a treadmill status and more of a "What do I wanna do today?" I won't be bound by constantly having to feel like I can't miss this daily, or that daily, or the extra points from doing this world quest ... so on and so forth.
AoC is sparking interest with those of us who want more "game" and less "grind." I have a job. I love my job, but I have a job. I play a game to lose myself in wonder, and exploration, and the relationships I build within the community. I can spend several hours chatting with folk while I'm doing whatever menial little task I've set myself, and enjoy it. It's something that appeals to me, mightily, and as the devs have said many times, about many things they're not including, "If you want that game, that game's out there. But it's not this game."
I can readily appreciate that because, as I've stated elsewhere, nowhere else is there this game.
AoC is sparking interest with those of us who want more "game" and less "grind." I have a job. I love my job, but I have a job. I play a game to lose myself in wonder, and exploration, and the relationships I build within the community.
@Isende, this is exactly how I feel. Beautifully written!
I mean I guess I could have chosen my words more carefully, however replayability will still be a thing. Exploration, node sieges, caravans, resource gathering, crafting are all events that will be repeatedly done, even though it is an overarching dynamic system. Im not saying I buy into the weekly raid resets and daily quests because those are torture, and they are why I don't stay with other MMOs. I am happy Ashes is breaking the mold in that regard.
But suggesting theres going to be absolutely no type of replay or repetition is objectively wrong. The repeatable events that build the overarching dynamic system need to be engaging and rewarding to make us want to keep doing them. That is all I was really trying to say. Treadmill or not there will be replay involved. If sieges are dull people arent going to stay in the game, hence the reference to that as "end game" content.
Don't get me wrong Im as hopeful as the next guy, but I'm trying to stay in reality so I don't get my expectations too overblown.
Indeed Severok, It's the way the boundaries are formed by design that differentiate.
the current Endgame linear system based on clockwork repetition with RNG filler till you hit a wall and the devs make a new wall erasing all the effort made previously.
Or the center hub with many spokes reaching out to a horizon that is not always tangible.
I have already made posts regarding themepark/sandbox< Ashes Themebox/Sandpark
But core and enjoyable elements of both systems can coexists and should.
Not sure if it was a backhanded compliment, but I'd like to think I have accrued enough knowledge and wisdom overtime to keep by balls of steel afloat after jumping in the deep end.
I mean I guess I could have chosen my words more carefully, however replayability will still be a thing. Exploration, node sieges, caravans, resource gathering, crafting are all events that will be repeatedly done, even though it is an overarching dynamic system. Im not saying I buy into the weekly raid resets and daily quests because those are torture, and they are why I don't stay with other MMOs. I am happy Ashes is breaking the mold in that regard.
But suggesting theres going to be absolutely no type of replay or repetition is objectively wrong. The repeatable events that build the overarching dynamic system need to be engaging and rewarding to make us want to keep doing them. That is all I was really trying to say. Treadmill or not there will be replay involved. If sieges are dull people arent going to stay in the game, hence the reference to that as "end game" content.
Don't get me wrong Im as hopeful as the next guy, but I'm trying to stay in reality so I don't get my expectations too overblown.
Even that is not really replayability, though. We won't be exploring a static world, rather we will be exploring a world that's constantly changing. Villages and towns will rise and fall. Same for freeholds. And all of that generates new content; not content that we replay.
Sieges and caravans and gathering are <u>activities</u> that we repeat, but they aren't <u>encounters</u> that we replay. That's the difference. Endgame content is like re-reading the last chapter of a book, day after day...while waiting for a sequel to be written. It's fine to "repeat" the activity of reading. Re-reading the last chapter ad infinitum - not so much.
It's unlikely that sieges will be dull... the specific objectives of each siege will be different. The level of preparation for each siege will be different. The activity repeats, but doesn't actually replay.
Sieges aren't even max level content, let alone endgame content. Sieges are just part of normal gameplay.
I look at Pantheon combat and consider that to be dull. So, I suppose Ashes gameplay could be dull and we all hope it won't be dull, but that has nothing to do with endgame. If normal gameplay is dull, we won't care enough about the game to reach max level.
I recall in one of the twitch streams Steven referring to (choose your own adventure) books. Which makes the repeated final chapter analogy Dygz described somewhat tantalizing.
But i might just end up fishing and playing parlor games.
I mean I guess I could have chosen my words more carefully, however replayability will still be a thing. Exploration, node sieges, caravans, resource gathering, crafting are all events that will be repeatedly done, even though it is an overarching dynamic system. Im not saying I buy into the weekly raid resets and daily quests because those are torture, and they are why I don't stay with other MMOs. I am happy Ashes is breaking the mold in that regard.
But suggesting theres going to be absolutely no type of replay or repetition is objectively wrong. The repeatable events that build the overarching dynamic system need to be engaging and rewarding to make us want to keep doing them. That is all I was really trying to say. Treadmill or not there will be replay involved. If sieges are dull people arent going to stay in the game, hence the reference to that as "end game" content.
Don't get me wrong Im as hopeful as the next guy, but I'm trying to stay in reality so I don't get my expectations too overblown.
Even that is not really replayability, though. We won't be exploring a static world, rather we will be exploring a world that's constantly changing. Villages and towns will rise and fall. Same for freeholds. And all of that generates new content; not content that we replay.
As said, replay is repeating what has already passed. Ashes is to be a dynamic ever changing world dependent on player actions or inactions. No two servers will be on the same page and always in flux. Who can determine the out come of a siege or which road people will travel?
I think we will be in for an interesting trip down roads never traveled before. Let me take the detour any day.
I'm interested to hear thoughts on the fact that instanced content will be an included feature in AoC and how people expect that this content will not need to be re-playable. Whilst the design vision is definitely to provide a dynamic open world sandbox environment with a constantly evolving world story and open world events, raid/dungeon content is a big component of MMOs for the majority of the community that play them.
In an ideal world it would be great if a game could provide new instanced content every week/month and you would clear the content only once and move on to the next. Unfortunately the amount of work that goes into this kind of content makes this an unrealistic goal. Additionally, whilst I can appreciate that what a lot of people are saying is that they are driven in MMOs by exploration, discovery and story telling, again the majority of the player base is drawn to the MMO genre by the goal of character progression which at its root boils down to leveling up and loot.
My interpretation of the developers goals for this game is to provide a rich and dynamic open world environment that constitutes the heart and soul of the game but also contains elements of traditional themepark MMOs (such as instanced dungeons and raids) which are done better... hopefully. To say that nothing in this game would need to be repeatable is probably setting yourself up for disappointment in my opinion.
Again I'm just interested to hear how people think that the views expressed in this thread would work with this type of content. Please take into account that the reason that I am here on these forums and have pledged toward this game being developed is solely because I am over traditional themepark MMO design and months long content droughts with no reason to log in and play. I'm not interested in being criticised for being an "end-game advocate" nor having a discussion about the semantics of end-game, elder-game, max level content... Looking forward to hearing peoples constructive thoughts on the above
@Karemalis The goal is to have enough 'horizontal' progression that you should always have something you can be doing without need to 'grind dailies/dungeons/weekly raids while waiting for more vertical progression to be added to the game'. You hit maxed level? How's your Artisan class coming? That done? How's your religion working out for you? And so on. The rate of progression is also not going to be 'theme park' speed, you are not intended to hit level cap in a week while maxing a profession, becoming the 'one true apostle of your god' and conquering the creeping darkness beneath the land.
Economics is also a critical part of the game, unlike with theme park MMOs, which is always constantly in a state of flux if done correctly.
There is also the dynamic nature of the world, so you might log in and find that a node has unlocked a tier of new content to progress through.
Will you never ever repeat content? No, that's a silly notion but you're also not going to hit level cap and run the same dungeon 7 days a week for 6 months until a major update releases a new dungeon to run 7 days a week for 6 months. The mind set that the situation I just described is acceptable design is what people in here have a problem with.
There is no 'endgame' there is only 'the game' and your circumstances (whether it be level or quality of gear or rank in your religion or your political office) within that game.
Instances dungeons are intended to be rare and primarily to allow everyone to experience the same narrative - instead of missing the narrative because they weren't online at the time.
Instanced doesn't necessarily mean replayable. You can raid a dungeon and not repeat it. You can raid a dungeon and discover when you return that the content has changed. The most difficult part of creating content for a dungeon is designing the building itself. Generating mobs to populate a dungeon isn't particularly difficult.
What's most important is that there is content that requires a raid - not that the raid is replay able. Monster Coin events, caravans and city sieges and castle sieges could all require raids.
I don't agree that most people are drawn to MMORPGs primarily to reach max level. And we know that lots of people who play MMORPGs are willing to replay the same content at max level, even without character progression.
In tabletop RPGs, we could be stuck at max level for years but, there would be new dungeons and new stories to explore. In MMORPGs, new stories stop shortly after reaching max level. So, it's easy to think that the focus is on reaching max level. And on replaying raids at max level. Because that's been a limitation of MMORPGs for the last 20 years.
Most RPG players are interested in character progression but that's not necessarily just vertically increasing power - "leveling UP". Story progression, horizontal progression, relationship progression, housing decoration, pet collection... Ashes promises to make character progression considerably more engaging than just replaying the same content while leveling the Adventurer role UP.
Ashes is a themebox. There will be some elements of traditional MMORPGs - like dungeons and raids. That doesn't mean that they will be designed the same in Ashes as in traditional MMORPGs. Probably shouldn't assume that the primary thing for raids to do is replay content. No one has said that nothing will be
For Ashes, the distinction between end-game, elder game and max level content is important. Because in Ashes, max level content is not synonymous with end-game content. Not even close to being synonymous. Labels are primarily useful to help us understand concepts. I find it important to stress the difference between max level content and endgame content in Ashes because in Ashes reaching max level in the Adventurer role isn't anywhere close to reaching the end of playable content (and replay able content will be relatively rare).
In Ashes, It's also of note that perhaps not all instanced (not necessarily Endgame) content will be accessible without specific conditions being met referring mainly to node* development. So rather than the individual having to level up and meet gear checks typically. The criteria of the world environmental conditions have to theoretically reach max level before access is granted or lost due to other community/world events shut it down.
This system alone subdues the Selfish Single player motivation and encourages community interaction to achieve, whereby the population as a whole levels up....
EndGame by definition :the defining/final moment in an activity/process.
I still believe it is a symptom of player conditioning inappropriate and detrimental to the MMO genre.
I am hoping that the nature of the game breaks some conventions I have found in MMO's. World events may make it advantageous to have a number of lower level characters rather than a fully levelled character with BiS gear in combat, whether it is a siege for PvP or a World Boss for PvE. Which will allow new players to find a place in the community while not diminishing the value of the time and effort that more established players have put in the game. With new World events occurring which are not known beforehand the strategies and best skill and equipment choices may be in constant flux making new challenges for players that want to focus solely on combat and possibly giving relevance to a variety of choices for builds and relieving the need to meet a predefined Meta.
With the other goals in the game, including politics, crafting, housing, etc., there should be new tasks for players at any level to focus on to make the game fun and interesting. Finally, the greatest challenge with this game maybe maintaining good relations with as many players and guilds as possible out of self interest to maintain what has already been attained in the game. Where in other games I have played the goal was to find a steady supply of 3, 11, 23 or whatever number of other players in game to complete content and ignore, or worse, the rest of the server.
That seems like an unsuccessful strategy for AoC. This excites and terrifies me about AoC, as I may have seen my picture used in a dictionary for the definition of introvert. Which reminds me of a bad joke, "How do tell if an analyst is an extrovert? He looks at your shoes when he talks to you." (I apologize, humour may not be my strong suit) This means that community building skills may represent for lack of a better term 'end-game content'. Anyone that has attempted that will tell you that it may be frustrating, tiring, exasperating, etc. but it is never boring. ( I also apologize for the WoT but I tried paragraphs but the post still seems too long.)
I don't agree that most people are drawn to MMORPGs primarily to reach max level. And we know that lots of people who play MMORPGs are willing to replay the same content at max level, even without character progression.
@Dygz kinda hit the nail on the head with this one. I think this is a fallacious thought, that "most people are ..." anything. To be more correct, you could say "most people I know." Because a large portion of what we know is what we hear from the people we most associate with; we hear what they say, and we imbibe their thoughts/beliefs/opinions in with that hearing.
For most of the people I know, the goal is not in fact to reach max level. It is not that we are willing to replay the same content at max level, even without character progression. More, it is that that's currently all that's on offering out there, right now.
The difference here lies again, I think, in age and experience. At 48, I can still remember games before "end game" and the cash grab that expansions became. I can still remember a time when players dictated their "end game" play, not the game.
That's the core element i was trying to invigorate. There was a time before Endgame in MMOs and it is apparent the Intrepid team consists of members who know that time existed. But I also wanted to attempt to expose an MMO audience that may not be aware of such a period of time within the genre.
I look at MMOs today and try to pin down when the End game epoch shifted down the path to where we are now with a genre that has lost it's 'Massive' element.
If everyone has the same legendary item then what is legendary about it?
It's not really something that can be pinpointed... it was a gradual shift caused by expansions of core content that consists of spreading out across a massive world as you outlevel the previous zones. Instanced dungeons and raids don't help to provide a feeling of masses of players. Nor does alienating disparate playstyles.
Though part of the problem is that some people seem to think "massively" is supposed to be connected to grouping, when actually it's just having masses on the same server at the same time - as opposed to "co-op" play, which was just 4-10 players. A lot of the feeling of massively multiplayer came from congregating in the major cities. Which was still a thing back when I played 4 years ago.
Legendary meant something when few people would reach max level or spend hours camping while waiting for a legendary mob to appear. Also when relatively few people would be willing to stick around and repeatedly raid. Now, most players think that repeatedly raiding for BiS gear is the whole point of MMORPGs. Since progression is only about 1/8 of the game experience.
A lot of the feeling of massively multiplayer came from congregating in the major cities.
For the old-school WoW players; remember when they made Shattrath defunct by taking away the portals? Then again, with Dalaran. Why did they do this? So that players would be forced to venture to the new areas set up as "homes" for them. Prior to Shatt, there were Org and Stormwind. Then Shatt. Then Dal ... and so on. We lost cohesiveness at these points.
Rift went through much the same thing, as they added expansions. So much that we were accustomed to doing in our factions' "home" cities suddenly became meh in comparison with what we could do in the new cities, and so on and so on.
It'll be an interesting experience to see how this works with a dynamic world that changes based on sieges/etc. I mean, just when we've all established our favorite pub, it's destroyed with the node. I'm curious to see how that'll hold up.
A lot of the feeling of massively multiplayer came from congregating in the major cities.
For the old-school WoW players; remember when they made Shattrath defunct by taking away the portals? Then again, with Dalaran. Why did they do this? So that players would be forced to venture to the new areas set up as "homes" for them. Prior to Shatt, there were Org and Stormwind. Then Shatt. Then Dal ... and so on. We lost cohesiveness at these points.
Rift went through much the same thing, as they added expansions. So much that we were accustomed to doing in our factions' "home" cities suddenly became meh in comparison with what we could do in the new cities, and so on and so on.
It'll be an interesting experience to see how this works with a dynamic world that changes based on sieges/etc. I mean, just when we've all established our favorite pub, it's destroyed with the node. I'm curious to see how that'll hold up.
I agree. The removal of portals and such in capital cities is a contrived mechanic to force players to explore new content. I think if you love your node so much and you've invested so much time in it, then that will act as a huge incentive to participate in its defense. Even if you're casual, every little bit of crafting, gathering etc counts. People like RPers, who may not normally seek out a traditional role in combat, might want to be spies or loremasters to help with defensive and offensive strategies. The point I'm making (very poorly) is that threat of real destruction is probably a natural way to bring people together, rather than some contrived mechanic.
Both building and destructibility. Taking months to build a city -including specific buildings, like a library or temple- will motivate us to defend. Especially if our augment progression and ranks are halted while those buildings are destroyed - even if the node doesn't de-level.
Comments
Well said my friend.
Let's hope the never ending story begins sooner rather then later.
Yet I'm oddly proud of how terrible it is.
Did I enjoy it? No. It was, in fact, the reason I kept leaving treadmill games. I hated it. I wanted to be off exploring, or leveling up alts, or doing anything but running that bloody treadmill. But I did it because ... can't let the team down.
What folk like me find refreshing about AoC, @Severok, is the idea that "end game" doesn't mean a treadmill. It doesn't mean continuously doing the same bloody thing, over and over and over, to get better gear to do the next same bloody thing over and over and over ... it's a chance to say "Huh. Ok, so I wanna spend the day finding where to harvest such-and-such and then work on my crafting/processing/whatever." Or "Huh, I haven't been over east since they developed that node, I think I might wanna wander over there and see what's what." It means, in short, that my daily tasks will assume less of a treadmill status and more of a "What do I wanna do today?" I won't be bound by constantly having to feel like I can't miss this daily, or that daily, or the extra points from doing this world quest ... so on and so forth.
AoC is sparking interest with those of us who want more "game" and less "grind." I have a job. I love my job, but I have a job. I play a game to lose myself in wonder, and exploration, and the relationships I build within the community. I can spend several hours chatting with folk while I'm doing whatever menial little task I've set myself, and enjoy it. It's something that appeals to me, mightily, and as the devs have said many times, about many things they're not including, "If you want that game, that game's out there. But it's not this game."
I can readily appreciate that because, as I've stated elsewhere, nowhere else is there this game.
But suggesting theres going to be absolutely no type of replay or repetition is objectively wrong. The repeatable events that build the overarching dynamic system need to be engaging and rewarding to make us want to keep doing them. That is all I was really trying to say. Treadmill or not there will be replay involved. If sieges are dull people arent going to stay in the game, hence the reference to that as "end game" content.
Don't get me wrong Im as hopeful as the next guy, but I'm trying to stay in reality so I don't get my expectations too overblown.
It's the way the boundaries are formed by design that differentiate.
the current Endgame linear system based on clockwork repetition with RNG filler till you hit a wall and the devs make a new wall erasing all the effort made previously.
Or the center hub with many spokes reaching out to a horizon that is not always tangible.
I have already made posts regarding themepark/sandbox< Ashes Themebox/Sandpark
But core and enjoyable elements of both systems can coexists and should.
Not sure if it was a backhanded compliment, but I'd like to think I have accrued enough knowledge and wisdom overtime to keep by balls of steel afloat after jumping in the deep end.
We won't be exploring a static world, rather we will be exploring a world that's constantly changing. Villages and towns will rise and fall. Same for freeholds. And all of that generates new content; not content that we replay.
Sieges and caravans and gathering are <u>activities</u> that we repeat, but they aren't <u>encounters</u> that we replay.
That's the difference.
Endgame content is like re-reading the last chapter of a book, day after day...while waiting for a sequel to be written.
It's fine to "repeat" the activity of reading. Re-reading the last chapter ad infinitum - not so much.
It's unlikely that sieges will be dull... the specific objectives of each siege will be different. The level of preparation for each siege will be different. The activity repeats, but doesn't actually replay.
Sieges aren't even max level content, let alone endgame content. Sieges are just part of normal gameplay.
I look at Pantheon combat and consider that to be dull.
So, I suppose Ashes gameplay could be dull and we all hope it won't be dull, but that has nothing to do with endgame.
If normal gameplay is dull, we won't care enough about the game to reach max level.
But i might just end up fishing and playing parlor games.
As said, replay is repeating what has already passed. Ashes is to be a dynamic ever changing world dependent on player actions or inactions. No two servers will be on the same page and always in flux. Who can determine the out come of a siege or which road people will travel?
I think we will be in for an interesting trip down roads never traveled before.
Let me take the detour any day.
In an ideal world it would be great if a game could provide new instanced content every week/month and you would clear the content only once and move on to the next. Unfortunately the amount of work that goes into this kind of content makes this an unrealistic goal. Additionally, whilst I can appreciate that what a lot of people are saying is that they are driven in MMOs by exploration, discovery and story telling, again the majority of the player base is drawn to the MMO genre by the goal of character progression which at its root boils down to leveling up and loot.
My interpretation of the developers goals for this game is to provide a rich and dynamic open world environment that constitutes the heart and soul of the game but also contains elements of traditional themepark MMOs (such as instanced dungeons and raids) which are done better... hopefully. To say that nothing in this game would need to be repeatable is probably setting yourself up for disappointment in my opinion.
Again I'm just interested to hear how people think that the views expressed in this thread would work with this type of content. Please take into account that the reason that I am here on these forums and have pledged toward this game being developed is solely because I am over traditional themepark MMO design and months long content droughts with no reason to log in and play. I'm not interested in being criticised for being an "end-game advocate" nor having a discussion about the semantics of end-game, elder-game, max level content... Looking forward to hearing peoples constructive thoughts on the above
Economics is also a critical part of the game, unlike with theme park MMOs, which is always constantly in a state of flux if done correctly.
There is also the dynamic nature of the world, so you might log in and find that a node has unlocked a tier of new content to progress through.
Will you never ever repeat content? No, that's a silly notion but you're also not going to hit level cap and run the same dungeon 7 days a week for 6 months until a major update releases a new dungeon to run 7 days a week for 6 months. The mind set that the situation I just described is acceptable design is what people in here have a problem with.
There is no 'endgame' there is only 'the game' and your circumstances (whether it be level or quality of gear or rank in your religion or your political office) within that game.
Instanced doesn't necessarily mean replayable.
You can raid a dungeon and not repeat it.
You can raid a dungeon and discover when you return that the content has changed. The most difficult part of creating content for a dungeon is designing the building itself.
Generating mobs to populate a dungeon isn't particularly difficult.
What's most important is that there is content that requires a raid - not that the raid is replay able.
Monster Coin events, caravans and city sieges and castle sieges could all require raids.
I don't agree that most people are drawn to MMORPGs primarily to reach max level. And we know that lots of people who play MMORPGs are willing to replay the same content at max level, even without character progression.
In tabletop RPGs, we could be stuck at max level for years but, there would be new dungeons and new stories to explore. In MMORPGs, new stories stop shortly after reaching max level. So, it's easy to think that the focus is on reaching max level. And on replaying raids at max level.
Because that's been a limitation of MMORPGs for the last 20 years.
Most RPG players are interested in character progression but that's not necessarily just vertically increasing power - "leveling UP".
Story progression, horizontal progression, relationship progression, housing decoration, pet collection...
Ashes promises to make character progression considerably more engaging than just replaying the same content while leveling the Adventurer role UP.
Ashes is a themebox.
There will be some elements of traditional MMORPGs - like dungeons and raids. That doesn't mean that they will be designed the same in Ashes as in traditional MMORPGs.
Probably shouldn't assume that the primary thing for raids to do is replay content.
No one has said that nothing will be
For Ashes, the distinction between end-game, elder game and max level content is important.
Because in Ashes, max level content is not synonymous with end-game content. Not even close to being synonymous.
Labels are primarily useful to help us understand concepts.
I find it important to stress the difference between max level content and endgame content in Ashes because in Ashes reaching max level in the Adventurer role isn't anywhere close to reaching the end of playable content (and replay able content will be relatively rare).
This system alone subdues the Selfish Single player motivation and encourages community interaction to achieve, whereby the population as a whole levels up....
EndGame by definition :the defining/final moment in an activity/process.
I still believe it is a symptom of player conditioning inappropriate and detrimental to the MMO genre.
It's a challenge but it's not as much fun as taking it.
With the other goals in the game, including politics, crafting, housing, etc., there should be new tasks for players at any level to focus on to make the game fun and interesting. Finally, the greatest challenge with this game maybe maintaining good relations with as many players and guilds as possible out of self interest to maintain what has already been attained in the game. Where in other games I have played the goal was to find a steady supply of 3, 11, 23 or whatever number of other players in game to complete content and ignore, or worse, the rest of the server.
That seems like an unsuccessful strategy for AoC. This excites and terrifies me about AoC, as I may have seen my picture used in a dictionary for the definition of introvert. Which reminds me of a bad joke, "How do tell if an analyst is an extrovert? He looks at your shoes when he talks to you." (I apologize, humour may not be my strong suit) This means that community building skills may represent for lack of a better term 'end-game content'. Anyone that has attempted that will tell you that it may be frustrating, tiring, exasperating, etc. but it is never boring. ( I also apologize for the WoT but I tried paragraphs but the post still seems too long.)
Thank you, @Karthos.
For most of the people I know, the goal is not in fact to reach max level. It is not that we are willing to replay the same content at max level, even without character progression. More, it is that that's currently all that's on offering out there, right now.
The difference here lies again, I think, in age and experience. At 48, I can still remember games before "end game" and the cash grab that expansions became. I can still remember a time when players dictated their "end game" play, not the game.
There was a time before Endgame in MMOs and it is apparent the Intrepid team consists of members who know that time existed.
But I also wanted to attempt to expose an MMO audience that may not be aware of such a period of time within the genre.
I look at MMOs today and try to pin down when the End game epoch shifted down the path to where we are now with a genre that has lost it's 'Massive' element.
If everyone has the same legendary item then what is legendary about it?
Instanced dungeons and raids don't help to provide a feeling of masses of players. Nor does alienating disparate playstyles.
Though part of the problem is that some people seem to think "massively" is supposed to be connected to grouping, when actually it's just having masses on the same server at the same time - as opposed to "co-op" play, which was just 4-10 players.
A lot of the feeling of massively multiplayer came from congregating in the major cities.
Which was still a thing back when I played 4 years ago.
Legendary meant something when few people would reach max level or spend hours camping while waiting for a legendary mob to appear. Also when relatively few people would be willing to stick around and repeatedly raid.
Now, most players think that repeatedly raiding for BiS gear is the whole point of MMORPGs. Since progression is only about 1/8 of the game experience.
Rift went through much the same thing, as they added expansions. So much that we were accustomed to doing in our factions' "home" cities suddenly became meh in comparison with what we could do in the new cities, and so on and so on.
It'll be an interesting experience to see how this works with a dynamic world that changes based on sieges/etc. I mean, just when we've all established our favorite pub, it's destroyed with the node. I'm curious to see how that'll hold up.
Taking months to build a city -including specific buildings, like a library or temple- will motivate us to defend. Especially if our augment progression and ranks are halted while those buildings are destroyed - even if the node doesn't de-level.