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

ArchivedUser

Isende said:

AutumnWillow said:

-snip-

Just curious. Are there many new games that have characters level capped and raid ready within a few days early into launch? Or is trend to this from older games trying to drum up interest by boosting new players 

I ask this because can't think of any but I must admit that I haven't been playing many of the recent Mmos. 

You're asking, specifically, about launch of new games. I can't answer to that, other than to say that yes, within hours, there are people who've reached level cap in several of the games I've participated in launches for. Raid ready? Well, those folk are earlier to raid-readiness than others.

I can also speak to my experience of expansion launches; this time, there are whole guilds who push themselves to the new level cap, just so they can be the first into the new raids.

It's that mindset that I think people speak out against; the rush to "end game" or whatever you want to call it, just to be the "first" and to be the most prepared and first to achieve things in raids, so on and so forth.

lexmax said:

AutumnWillow said:

Just curious. Are there many new games that have characters level capped and raid ready within a few days early into launch? Or is trend to this from older games trying to drum up interest by boosting new players 

I ask this because can't think of any but I must admit that I haven't been playing many of the recent Mmos. 

In WoW you can level a new character to max level in under 6 hours. After that you can be carried by your mates through raids and get endgame raiding gear in another few hours. 

For wow (which I've yet to play so forgive me if my assumption is wrong), due to the nature of the game's content and WoW being a much older game, they have to keep pushing new players to the "end game" "end level" (whats the term we're supposed to use again?) content  quickly since that's where the majority of the population is.

For the expansion game, I'm guessing it's one of those endless loot treadmill type games, where the only objective is to get the best loot available so wasting time finding nice leveling gear is pretty pointless. 

I was just asking that question because I thought it was mentioned that gamers were being conditioned to be able to hit the level capped content quickly and I assumed it was a new MMO fad that I didn't know about.

But I agree with @Dygz that from the looks of things, capping your adventurer level seems to be but a small factor in the grand scale of your actual contribution to the world of Ashes.

TL;DR I think that if the devs are able to carry out what they have planned, the concerns stated here probably won't be realised. 

ArchivedUser

AutumnWillow said:

I was just asking that question because I thought it was mentioned that gamers were being conditioned to be able to hit the level capped content quickly and I assumed it was a new MMO fad that I didn't know about.

But I agree with @Dygz that from the looks of things, capping your adventurer level seems to be but a small factor in the grand scale of your actual contribution to the world of Ashes.

TL;DR I think that if the devs are able to carry out what they have planned, the concerns stated here probably won't be realised. 

First paragraph - it's a trend that's been about 10 years in the making, give or take a couple. I know when it began in WoW; it was during Wrath, and then got really built up and became "the" thing with the addition of gear scores and gear checking and meters. In short, those things enabled people to have an easy-peasy outline of what they "should" be pursuing in order to be viable, and they took the place of the journey, replacing that journey with a simple set of instructions that look like "Get levels. Get gear. Get more gear. Get more gear. Now you can raid to ... get more gear. Oh, and don't forget the big numbers!"

Second paragraph - agree completely

Third paragraph - agree even more completely, and that's one of the things I, personally, am most grateful for.

ArchivedUser

In WoW, max level content and endgame content are fairly interchangeable.
People start endgame content within a couple of hours or a couple of days of hitting max level.
And then folks have to wait 12-24 months for the devs to provide new content with an expansion.

Because hitting max level takes 3 months at most and endgame lasts for 12-24 months, we have a whole generation of gamers who consider progression to max level to just be an unnecessary time-sink/grind which slows players from reaching the endgame (the real game).

ArchivedUser

What motivates people to play traditional games is usually obvious: In chess you capture the opponent's king. With adventure games you find the treasure or defeat the final boss. In battle royale shooters you're the last one standing; and so on. Gameplay in these games ends when some victory condition is achieved.

Then there are games where this is not the case. Open world games like Minecraft and GTA V epitomise this, where the bulk of the gaming experience can occur beyond the victory condition. Building, socialising, exploring and resource accumulation motivate people to continue playing long after the last boss is defeated.

There are also simulator games that don't have an overt victory condition at all. Key examples here are Flight Simulator and Second Life. In these game players strive to gain achievements, accumulate resources, or perfect skills and appearances. Betterment, whether in single player or in competitive multi-player settings, keeps players engaged long after all content has been explored.

MMOs combine aspects of all of these genres and therefore can mean many different things to different people. Achievements, exploration, collection, PvP, resource gathering, mini-games, adventure, socialising, self-improvement, treasure hunting, survival, crafting, defeating end bosses, questing, role-playing; these are all things that excite and motivate people in MMOs.

To speak about a single victory condition in a MMO is as questionable as claiming a single definition of success in everyday life. Which brings me to the topic of "endgame". This idea harkens back to the linear concept of games ending after a victory condition is achieved. Over time, this limiting definition has evolved into a somewhat oxymoronic notion that the end of content is where the game really begins.

While the idea of endgame holds for themepark MMOs like WoW, with static backdrops and linear progression to a single victory condition, it really has no relevance to open world or themebox MMO games like Ashes, where progression and victory mean entirely different things to different players and where the world is constantly evolving based on player interaction.

ArchivedUser

AutumnWillow said:

Isende said:

Uzial said:

I think everyone misses the point of the dynamic node based world.

Typically people want to create a guild with the mindset of dominating the server and any opposing guilds / factions. I have done this and literally killed a server including pvping the GM's who came into the pvp area with no rules set wo there were fair game. After getting thumped they made me stop but the point is eventually we ran everyone off the server and that was the end. Pretty Dismal and the game itself deserved to be ended.

 That aside The NODE system should provide us with continuous events that change the world even to the point where there is a catastrophic event(s) that destroy a major city (node) by either pvp or the will of the gods as the earth swallows half the city and turns it into an underground labyrinth that must be rediscovered and developed. I can think of endless permutations that would challenge players, who would then have to progress back through a different method ( questing, Archeology, religion, discovery etc..)  than just the brute force supplied by their epic/legendary end game items. As an example i remember in Asherons Call when the dev's had a world event that destroyed Arwic which was a major hub in the game. The destruction was devastating and New Arwic took a long time to rise back up.  Don't limit the dev's or your selves by settling for the typical "end game" garbage. Immersive play that involves only 10 to 20% of the best players groups  (typically the absolute end games is only accomplished by that number in MMORPG's) won't keep your game alive in this generation.  A changing world that needs everyone will keep it alive and flourishing

How many of today's MMORPG players are willing to commit themselves to months of gameplay for an objective, when so many have been conditioned to be level capped & raid-ready within days?

Just curious. Are there many new games that have characters level capped and raid ready within a few days early into launch? Or is trend to this from older games trying to drum up interest by boosting new players 

I ask this because can't think of any but I must admit that I haven't been playing many of the recent Mmos. 

It is literally a commodity to be sold.  "Get throigh all of the quests and storyline up to yhe current expansion with a lvl 60 character and trinkets to trade for gear for 49.99!"

ArchivedUser

AutumnWillow said:

Isende said:

Uzial said:

I think everyone misses the point of the dynamic node based world.

Typically people want to create a guild with the mindset of dominating the server and any opposing guilds / factions. I have done this and literally killed a server including pvping the GM's who came into the pvp area with no rules set wo there were fair game. After getting thumped they made me stop but the point is eventually we ran everyone off the server and that was the end. Pretty Dismal and the game itself deserved to be ended.

 That aside The NODE system should provide us with continuous events that change the world even to the point where there is a catastrophic event(s) that destroy a major city (node) by either pvp or the will of the gods as the earth swallows half the city and turns it into an underground labyrinth that must be rediscovered and developed. I can think of endless permutations that would challenge players, who would then have to progress back through a different method ( questing, Archeology, religion, discovery etc..)  than just the brute force supplied by their epic/legendary end game items. As an example i remember in Asherons Call when the dev's had a world event that destroyed Arwic which was a major hub in the game. The destruction was devastating and New Arwic took a long time to rise back up.  Don't limit the dev's or your selves by settling for the typical "end game" garbage. Immersive play that involves only 10 to 20% of the best players groups  (typically the absolute end games is only accomplished by that number in MMORPG's) won't keep your game alive in this generation.  A changing world that needs everyone will keep it alive and flourishing

How many of today's MMORPG players are willing to commit themselves to months of gameplay for an objective, when so many have been conditioned to be level capped & raid-ready within days?

Just curious. Are there many new games that have characters level capped and raid ready within a few days early into launch? Or is trend to this from older games trying to drum up interest by boosting new players 

I ask this because can't think of any but I must admit that I haven't been playing many of the recent Mmos. 

It is literally a commodity to be sold.  "Get throigh all of the quests and storyline up to yhe current expansion with a lvl 60 character and trinkets to trade for gear for 49.99!"

ArchivedUser

Well, MMORPGs are supposed to be persistent worlds.
RPGs, in general, are supposed to be dynamic, persistent worlds with a story that continues to progress due to player actions. Easier to do with tabletop RPGs.

Single player RPGs end once the characters reach max level and all the quests/bosses have been completed.
Same, really, for MMORPGs. Except devs have added endgame content to keep people occupied and paying subscriptions while the devs work on expansions.

But, yeah, lots of ironic oxymorons tied up with MMORPGs.
Endgame content.
Ever quests.
Persistent world.

(I need a button)

ArchivedUser

Glowingwren said:

AutumnWillow said:

Isende said:

Uzial said:

I think everyone misses the point of the dynamic node based world.

Typically people want to create a guild with the mindset of dominating the server and any opposing guilds / factions. I have done this and literally killed a server including pvping the GM's who came into the pvp area with no rules set wo there were fair game. After getting thumped they made me stop but the point is eventually we ran everyone off the server and that was the end. Pretty Dismal and the game itself deserved to be ended.

 That aside The NODE system should provide us with continuous events that change the world even to the point where there is a catastrophic event(s) that destroy a major city (node) by either pvp or the will of the gods as the earth swallows half the city and turns it into an underground labyrinth that must be rediscovered and developed. I can think of endless permutations that would challenge players, who would then have to progress back through a different method ( questing, Archeology, religion, discovery etc..)  than just the brute force supplied by their epic/legendary end game items. As an example i remember in Asherons Call when the dev's had a world event that destroyed Arwic which was a major hub in the game. The destruction was devastating and New Arwic took a long time to rise back up.  Don't limit the dev's or your selves by settling for the typical "end game" garbage. Immersive play that involves only 10 to 20% of the best players groups  (typically the absolute end games is only accomplished by that number in MMORPG's) won't keep your game alive in this generation.  A changing world that needs everyone will keep it alive and flourishing

How many of today's MMORPG players are willing to commit themselves to months of gameplay for an objective, when so many have been conditioned to be level capped & raid-ready within days?

Just curious. Are there many new games that have characters level capped and raid ready within a few days early into launch? Or is trend to this from older games trying to drum up interest by boosting new players 

I ask this because can't think of any but I must admit that I haven't been playing many of the recent Mmos. 

It is literally a commodity to be sold.  "Get throigh all of the quests and storyline up to yhe current expansion with a lvl 60 character and trinkets to trade for gear for 49.99!"

Haha, yeah, I've friends who play wow and tell me about it. I'm aware of that phenomenon at least. 

My question was whether new games (not so much older games + expansions) rush players as quickly to the high level content. 

For older games with established high level player bases, I find it's more understandable to speed up the leveling. Because if you want to get friends to join you, it's going to be tough to tell them that they'll have to farm/grind for a few months before you'll get to play together.  Or that you're going to have to farm with a friend for a few months before you get to try the new expansion content with the friend. 

ArchivedUser

Glowingwren said:

AutumnWillow said:

Isende said:

Uzial said:

I think everyone misses the point of the dynamic node based world.

Typically people want to create a guild with the mindset of dominating the server and any opposing guilds / factions. I have done this and literally killed a server including pvping the GM's who came into the pvp area with no rules set wo there were fair game. After getting thumped they made me stop but the point is eventually we ran everyone off the server and that was the end. Pretty Dismal and the game itself deserved to be ended.

 That aside The NODE system should provide us with continuous events that change the world even to the point where there is a catastrophic event(s) that destroy a major city (node) by either pvp or the will of the gods as the earth swallows half the city and turns it into an underground labyrinth that must be rediscovered and developed. I can think of endless permutations that would challenge players, who would then have to progress back through a different method ( questing, Archeology, religion, discovery etc..)  than just the brute force supplied by their epic/legendary end game items. As an example i remember in Asherons Call when the dev's had a world event that destroyed Arwic which was a major hub in the game. The destruction was devastating and New Arwic took a long time to rise back up.  Don't limit the dev's or your selves by settling for the typical "end game" garbage. Immersive play that involves only 10 to 20% of the best players groups  (typically the absolute end games is only accomplished by that number in MMORPG's) won't keep your game alive in this generation.  A changing world that needs everyone will keep it alive and flourishing

How many of today's MMORPG players are willing to commit themselves to months of gameplay for an objective, when so many have been conditioned to be level capped & raid-ready within days?

Just curious. Are there many new games that have characters level capped and raid ready within a few days early into launch? Or is trend to this from older games trying to drum up interest by boosting new players 

I ask this because can't think of any but I must admit that I haven't been playing many of the recent Mmos. 

It is literally a commodity to be sold.  "Get throigh all of the quests and storyline up to yhe current expansion with a lvl 60 character and trinkets to trade for gear for 49.99!"

Yup. Agreed. In my opinion, after Greg Street, Chris Metzen, and now Tom Chilton left WoW... it is no longer the same. It is heading towards p2w and catering to the younger generations impulses of instant gratification. When Tom Chilton left, I realized that the era of WoW that I loved, pretty much ended.

ArchivedUser

Glowingwren said:

It is literally a commodity to be sold.  "Get throigh all of the quests and storyline up to yhe current expansion with a lvl 60 character and trinkets to trade for gear for 49.99!"

Here's how to win at World of Warcraft (with US$)

1. Buy the game $70.
2. Pay the sub $15 (you only need one month).
3. Buy a shiny new level 100 character from the Blizzard Store for $60.
4. Find a guide and spend a few of hours levelling to 110.
   
5. Buy two game time cards from the Blizzard Store for $50.
6. Sell the game time in the auction house to get in-game gold.
7. Use the in-game gold to buy a carry through some end-game raids.

All of the above uses official Blizzard systems.

CONGRATULATIONS!

You are now max level with max gear in under a day and it only cost $195!

You win!

Whoever said MMORPGs should be challenging was an idiot

ArchivedUser

lexmax said:

Glowingwren said:

It is literally a commodity to be sold.  "Get throigh all of the quests and storyline up to yhe current expansion with a lvl 60 character and trinkets to trade for gear for 49.99!"

Here's how to win at World of Warcraft (with US$)

1. Buy the game $70.
2. Pay the sub $15 (you only need one month).
3. Buy a shiny new level 100 character from the Blizzard Store for $60.
4. Find a guide and spend a few of hours levelling to 110.
   
5. Buy two game time cards from the Blizzard Store for $50.
6. Sell the game time in the auction house to get in-game gold.
7. Use the in-game gold to buy a carry through some end-game raids.

All of the above uses official Blizzard systems.

CONGRATULATIONS!

You are now max level with max gear in under a day and it only cost $195!

You win!

Whoever said MMORPGs should be challenging was an idiot

Yup, absolutely true.

ArchivedUser

The impact of WoW on other MMOs is also interesting.
SWG is classic example of why imitating your competition is disastrous.
 
The "WoW clone" period.

It's hard not to use WoW as an example as it's influence cannot be disputed. even though some other MMOs have done elements of the genre far far far better.

However from my observation WoW derailed and pulled the rest of the industry with it. And with such a massive influence nobody wanted to admit they made a mistake. You can't leave known bad/broken design flaws ignored or a facet of the consumer base will adopt it as a feature* and defend it and as a result disenfranchise the rest of the community.
But you know shit happened when blizzard stopped showing official subscription base numbers. But will boast about active population 1 month after expansion.

As I said before I am confident Ashes will deliver a respectful MMO to the genre.
and cater for the the MMO community that jumped off the train before it derailed.

As far as I am concerned that impact that derailed the train was "end game mentality"
and I hope it never pulls into the station at Intrepid Studio.

ArchivedUser

WoW was just best for the available tech.
Now, we're ready for a revolutionary game design.

ArchivedUser

Dygz said:

WoW was just best for the available tech.
Now, we're ready for a revolutionary game design.

I disagree with the first sentence.

ArchivedUser

hahaha. You are welcome to disagree.

ArchivedUser

Welphgryn said:

Yup. Agreed. In my opinion, after Greg Street, Chris Metzen, and now Tom Chilton left WoW... it is no longer the same. It is heading towards p2w and catering to the younger generations impulses of instant gratification. When Tom Chilton left, I realized that the era of WoW that I loved, pretty much ended.

Agreed, Chris Metzen's departure was a loss to WoW.  I'm not familiar enough with Tom Chilton to comment on him.  But Greg Street?  I didn't care for him.  Far too often did I see Ghostcrawler posts where he basically said, "You don't like the changes we've made?  Tough.  We're not changing it."  I feel like he oversaw the beginning of the decline of WoW.

ArchivedUser

Possum said:

Welphgryn said:

Yup. Agreed. In my opinion, after Greg Street, Chris Metzen, and now Tom Chilton left WoW... it is no longer the same. It is heading towards p2w and catering to the younger generations impulses of instant gratification. When Tom Chilton left, I realized that the era of WoW that I loved, pretty much ended.

Agreed, Chris Metzen's departure was a loss to WoW.  I'm not familiar enough with Tom Chilton to comment on him.  But Greg Street?  I didn't care for him.  Far too often did I see Ghostcrawler posts where he basically said, "You don't like the changes we've made?  Tough.  We're not changing it."  I feel like he oversaw the beginning of the decline of WoW.

Tom was at blizzard since games release. Yeah, greg did have that attitude, but I loved the way he communicated his thoughts and plans weather or not they were agreeable. He was also responsible for many things in WotlK, which was my favorite expack. 

ArchivedUser

Welphgryn said:

Tom was at blizzard since games release. Yeah, greg did have that attitude, but I loved the way he communicated his thoughts and plans weather or not they were agreeable. He was also responsible for many things in WotlK, which was my favorite expack. 

[Agree] (with WotLK as best expack)

ArchivedUser

Cataclysm was my favorite. Healing Mt. Hyjal was perfect for my Druid.
(steamrolling screaming goblins was a bit too horrific for this carebear, though)

ArchivedUser

Dygz said:

Cataclysm was my favorite. Healing Mt. Hyjal was perfect for my Druid.
(steamrolling screaming goblins was a bit too horrific for this carebear, though)

While there were things about Cataclysm I liked, it was the expansion that killed WoW for me (at least for 4 years).  I felt it was the most aptly named expansion in the history of MMORPGs.  We left WoW 6 months into Cataclysm and went to Rift.  I did come back for Legion though.  So much story that harkens back to Burning Crusade, it caught my attention.  That, and I missed my Druid's flight form.  Being the bird is so much better than any flying mount. 

ArchivedUser

Dygz said:

Cataclysm was my favorite. Healing Mt. Hyjal was perfect for my Druid.
(steamrolling screaming goblins was a bit too horrific for this carebear, though)

Cataclysm was an interesting one. It was a huge change for me for some reason. Maybe it was because the landscape was changed and I wasn't really ready for Darkshore being changed so drastically.

ArchivedUser

Welphgryn said:

Dygz said:

Cataclysm was my favorite. Healing Mt. Hyjal was perfect for my Druid.
(steamrolling screaming goblins was a bit too horrific for this carebear, though)

Cataclysm was an interesting one. It was a huge change for me for some reason. Maybe it was because the landscape was changed and I wasn't really ready for Darkshore being changed so drastically.

I think all of us who first played WoW as a Night Elf were heartbroken by the destruction of Auberdine.  It was there in Darkshore that the feeling of awe and wonder at the size of the game world first struck me.  What I wouldn't give to have that feeling back again.

ArchivedUser

Possum said:

I think all of us who first played WoW as a Night Elf were heartbroken by the destruction of Auberdine.  It was there in Darkshore that the feeling of awe and wonder at the size of the game world first struck me.  What I wouldn't give to have that feeling back again.

[Agree] That definitely pissed me off and the thousand needles flood and theramore... although porting people to their death was quite amusing for a while

ArchivedUser

ArchivedUser

ArchivedUser

So there you have it. 

ArchivedUser

So there you have it. 

ArchivedUser

So, the multiple posts from the same person at the same time I'm seeing; this a glitch? Looks like ...

ArchivedUser

Yep.
Necro bug courtesy of @nagash.

ArchivedUser

Dygz said:

Yep.
Necro bug courtesy of @nagash.

I bring back dead post I don't spawn new ones