Will AoC Really Have Enough Content Throughout The World?

I've been playing Mortal Online for a while now (maybe 4 months), and it appears to be similar in design to how Ashes of Creation is going to be. There's a really big open world (it's takes a few hours to cross on foot in game) and nothing inside of the game, such as dungeons, is instanced.

Due to this, despite having a really big world, Mortal Online feels heavily as though it's lacking in content. As an example, I'm someone who has grown fond of Lockpicking on there. Most of the time I log on however, and the chests are already looted by other players. It's a re-occurring theme across the entire game world. Everything there is to do always feels like it's farmed out by other players and it's difficult for me as a player to ever accomplish much.

I saw on AoC Twitch that there are expected to be 8,000 to 10,000 players on each server, and in the past it was said that everything is trying to be made to scale. How will Ashes of Creation, as an open world game, have enough content to hold up to that many players without some feeling like there just isn't anything to do? How big will the map for AoC be? Will there be any dungeons or raids in the game that are instanced?

So far from my experiences in this other game, I personally feel like having all the dungeons be open world is perhaps not the best design for a game with a lot of players. In Mortal Online all the best dungeons will be farmed out by one guild, and everyone else is out of luck. One guild dominates the entire server and prevents everyone else from being able to do anything. A single guild owns almost half of the world. Will the design of Ashes of Creation prevent something such as this from happening?

Comments

  • TL;DR They are addressing your concerns.

    Ashes is not your traditional themepark mmo like WoW, FFXIV, and a host of others. It is also not a true sandbox like SWG. They are going with what they call a "themebox." So while there will be curated content that players can unlock through different actions of node leveling, exploration, and other actions, there will also be an element of making your own adventures and activities. The idea is to give you so many different options that you get distracted. Today the plan was to run over to that nearby node and do some dungeon content, but along the way you find a resource cluster or a rare mob you just have to tame and have. Next thing you know you have spent hours doing stuff besides that dungeon plan you had. If you are someone that wants your experience dished up to you in a linear "go here, do this, then go here and do this" fashion, you are probably going to have a rough period of adjustment. Those content burners that like to race to "endgame" are going to be similarly affected.

    Guilds will have a local impact, but will have a hard time "controlling every open world dungeon" just from the way the node system is designed and the limitations already in place as to member count vs power level. They have been aware of the issue from other mmos where these problems reared their head and have promised on systems and mechanics to curtail it. Will there be people that try? Of course. But I imagine they will also have a hard go of it. The mega guilds that are prevalent in other games are there because they make profit for those who control them through being able to sell gold and RMT. Ashes has removed most of that motivation and anything that falls through the cracks will be found and removed. No worldwide fast travel, limited speedy travel in local areas, and the size of the planned world also put a stop to zergs and "One Guild To Rule Them All" dynamics.

    Most dungeons and content will be open world, but there will also be limited instanced content also. If they find something isn't working due to "unforeseen player interactions" they can always adjust it. They have stated a few times that if certain systems or mechanics are truly experience breaking, they will adjust. To the point of closing it down and revamping.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited July 2018
    I've been re-visiting some of the Past LiveStreams ( and almost done ) As i read through your concerns, I'm distinctly reminded of all the TimeStamps that i recall typing-out ... So i know the answer (not literally), but i'd have to timestamp many segments to bring clarity ... without pushing the NDA . 

    [...]

    From what i can gather, Ashes of Creation is designed to where PvEers, PvPers and RPers have to rely on each other (promoting the Community-Asepct) ... but it is still possible to still do some Solo-play if you desire (  https://youtu.be/qnk1sfUXaEw?t=35m53s   ) i changed this TImeStamp

    Your concerns of
    • Zergs: Insta-Travel & Fast-Travel will not exist. The closest thing to is the Scientific Node ... but even that is not truly fast travel . 1st , the Scientific Node will take a long time to build . 2nd , the  ... " increase-of-travel " will not be so broken to where it'll break the Game ; it is to be presumed that the " increase-of-travel " can only be applied to certain-aspects and NOT every aspect
    • Guild Size: Guild Size will be set to ... i think it was 200 ? maybe 300 ? There will be some Mechanics that will promote Smaller Guilds i.e. ... There will be some Benefits of having a Small-close-knit-Guild ... such benefits that Huge Guilds will NOT have ... and vice versa i think. I wouldn't expect Guild Alliances to remain intact tbh
    • https://youtu.be/3UIqmWTGZ2k?t=23m27s ( More info on Smaller Guilds Vs. Bigger Guilds  ) ends at 28:01
    • More info on Smaller Guilds https://youtu.be/3UIqmWTGZ2k?t=28m27s  ends at 28:43
    • Content Concerns: Every Node unlocks Content for all Players. But since Ashes of Creation is a PvX MMORPG ... there will be some (PvP) obstacles . However, the bright-side about all of this ... its not Scripted-Content. Rather, its more Open-Ended based on the Community of each Server. I'll let this link below speak for itself ( https://youtu.be/yzBxKoH7erU?t=26m42s ) feel free to end at 27:52 ... or keep going to 28:08 . This timestamp denotes that it'll be both SandBox & ThemePark Aspects. But it will initially be SandBox and later ... the Node will provide ThemePark-aspects & more SandBox -aspects. Intrepid does not like the Term "endgame " = The "EndGame" is from Start-to-Finish ... not at the End. All activities is connected to each other , integral - an the Node puts more emphasis on the content.  ( https://youtu.be/yzBxKoH7erU?t=36m48s ) Feel to stop watching whenever you like
    Another thing to note is that the Content will have* Old-school aspects
    • Another TimeStamp denoting the different kinds of content ... please listen to the whole thing ... it gives an Early-Dev-Insight as to what sort of thought was put into the Narrative ... and the overall feel of this MMORPG imo https://youtu.be/3UIqmWTGZ2k?t=37m36s ) ends at 40:21

    The Map size is something i speculated alot actually ... I'm hoping that each Node's ZOI Region ... is roughly the size of " DarkFall: Rise of Agon " Map size
    i.e. Each ZOI = 1 DarkFall: RoA Map 

    But i have no idea of the actual Map-size tbh ... because it could be bigger : 3


    There will be a few instanced-dungeons, but they want more emphasis on Open-World Dungeons
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited July 2018
    "...  One guild dominates the entire server and prevents everyone else from being able to do anything. A single guild owns almost half of the world. Will the design of Ashes of Creation prevent something such as this from happening? "
    " The World " is divided by the Node System.  And each Node will have it's own Guilds competing against each other - trying to establish themselves. The rest would ultimately be speculation. More testing would be needed, but it's being worked on
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited July 2018
    Sorry for editing the Big Post so much ... i hate doing it, but its best i correct it now than later   :(
  • 8,000 - 10,000 Concurrent users with a larger population per server (since not everyone is on at the same time)

    Not all the dungeons are open world, most but not all.  

    Also, lacking fast travel one guild can't dominate everything, unless they are a massive zerg community and can spend all day traveling the entire world all the time.  That would get boring very quickly.   


  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited July 2018
    IS may not like the term endgame, but that doesn't negate the need for endgame content.  As of right now, I don't see Ashes a full themebox either.  Ashes is as much of a themebox as SWG was (from what we've seen so far).  Player interaction and interdependency is fantastic and certainly helps with long term player retention, BUT there needs to be a massive content backbone for that to be built on.  My fear is that the Ashes devs are relying too heavily on few static content dungeons, along with node dynamic rng content spawns.  Players will blow through that content very easily within the first year, if not sooner, and that is when boredom sets in.  You can only pvp, and castle siege so much before you lose interest.

    I suspect IS will find themselves in a real crisis mode after the first year, just like every other failed mmo to date, whose devs refused to understand that you have to DROWNED today's mmo players in content, and not stop if you want to keep them around.  That is the only way to keep high player retention.  Every other game interaction, interdependency, mini games, etc. only works when you have the content backbone to keep people engaged.  Every thing else is just icing.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited July 2018
    @Warkov I think a large-part of what you described is something that Jeff mentioned early-on in the Development Process ... " the Wiki Problem "

    https://youtu.be/gcbYJllGfnQ?t=46m18s  ( ends at 46:51 )

    In other words, Players blow-through content if they already know* exactly what they need to do, know where its at ... and

    if they've done it so many times without anything changing
     *cough* SWTOR 


    I do propose a randomizer-mechanic to where the Journey will be different
    via Randomizer-mechanic for 
    • Crafting Materials Spots
    • Entrances to SOME Open-World Dungeons
    • Roads ( which they will* when Season changes )
    • Treasure Chests
    • NPCs ( via this could prevent Farming one spot if there's a different type of NPC that spawns .... the icing-on-the-cake would be if the NPCs' A.I. were llike DarkFall - where NPCs could attack you first as opposed to the Players always attack first depending on where you're at )
    There's probably a bunch of other stuff i'm missing, but I'm sure you get my point
  • Warkov said:
    IS may not like the term endgame, but that doesn't negate the need for endgame content either.  As of right now, I don't see Ashes a full themebox either.  Ashes is as much of a themebox as SWG was (from what we've seen so far).  Player interaction and interdependency is fantastic and certainly helps with long term player retention, BUT there needs to be a massive content backbone for that to be built on.  My fear is that the Ashes devs are relying too heavily on few static content dungeons, along with node dynamic rng content spawns.  Players will blow through that content very easily within the first year, if not sooner, and that is when boredom sets in.  You can only pvp, and castle siege so much before you lose interest.

    I suspect IS will find themselves in a real crisis mode after the first year, just like every other failed mmo to date, whose devs refused to understand that you have to DROWNED today's mmo players in content, and not stop if you want to keep them around.  That is the only way to keep high player retention.  Every other game interaction, interdependency, mini games, etc. only works when you have the content backbone to keep people engaged.  Every thing else is just icing.
    I have to agree.

    Despite everyone saying how good Archeage would have been without the P2W aspect, I personally think that games biggest flaw was an almost total lack of worthwhile PvE content.

    I'm hoping Intrepid take more of an EQ/EQ2 direction with this (and the development teams experience suggests that will be the case).

    It wasn't uncommon in EQ2 to have 15+ viable pieces of content for any given player to run. When ever I heard complaints about not enough content in that game, I'd ask them if they have completed a specific quest deep in to any given dungeon - and almost without exception the answer I'd get back was "I haven't run that dungeon yet - but I still have nothing to do".
  • Eragale said:
    • NPCs ( via this could prevent Farming one spot if there's a different type of NPC that spawns .... the icing-on-the-cake would be if the NPCs' A.I. were llike DarkFall - where NPCs could attack you first as opposed to the Players always attack first depending on where you're at )
    If IS could emulate the same kind of combat that I experienced in Diablo III, that would be terrific. I highly doubt that is possible in an MMO, but I can fantasize.

    Despite that, there may be ways to improve open-world combat as well as creating immersion (killing boar after boar while other boars just mill about aimlessly is rather unrealistic and off-putting):
    • Create aggro-clusters, where triggering the aggro of one mob may trigger the aggro of one or two others. The cluster would not need to be tightly grouped, and could be slightly dispersed to add to the surprise :D ). The cluster should also be randomly created as well, so that players never know when they may pull more than they intended.
    • Include 'alpha' mobs among the regular mobs. These alphas will not be identifiable until aggro is triggered and combat initiated. They should have 25%-30% more HP and do 25%-30% more damage. Perhaps we can even add a more uncommon 'paragon' that boasts 45%-50% more HP and damage (also not identifiable until combat is initiated).
    • For more intelligent mobs, perhaps have them spread the word among themselves when too many of them are killed, resulting in them banding together to chase out the mass-murderers.

    Anything that makes grinding more dynamic and adds an element of unpredictability would go a long way towards making the game more fun.

  • Keep in mind AOCs world is changing, Nodes change, its not going to be the same cities the entire length of the game. =) 
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited July 2018
    Nefelia said:
    • Create aggro-clusters, where triggering the aggro of one mob may trigger the aggro of one or two others. The cluster would not need to be tightly grouped, and could be slightly dispersed to add to the surprise :D ). The cluster should also be randomly created as well, so that players never know when they may pull more than they intended.
    • Include 'alpha' mobs among the regular mobs. These alphas will not be identifiable until aggro is triggered and combat initiated. They should have 25%-30% more HP and do 25%-30% more damage. Perhaps we can even add a more uncommon 'paragon' that boasts 45%-50% more HP and damage (also not identifiable until combat is initiated).
    • For more intelligent mobs, perhaps have them spread the word among themselves when too many of them are killed, resulting in them banding together to chase out the mass-murderers.


    The first of these was a mechanic in EQ2.

    While much of the game was made up of individual creatures, a lot of the group content was made up of "encounters". If you target one creature in an "encounter", it would appear as if you were targeting them all (name plate, target ring etc).

    They even went as far as having some AoE spells and abilities that would affect the area - as normal, but some were encounter specific so you could use them to attack one encounter while ignoring any other encounters that may have been in the area.

    Having "alpha" mobs is a good idea. All it takes is giving them an ability that causes any mob in the area of effect that is of the same faction as the caster to attack that casters target.

    In practice, this will simply see players carefully clear away as much of the content around this "alpha" as they can before engaging it in combat. However, it is still more immersive.

    Edit to add - having two or more alphas within range of each other would be a good way around this.

    The last idea above would be problematic. it would essentially prevent dungeon runs as we know them, as when you get half way through a dungeon, the remaining inhabitants would all come screaming out at you.

    More realistic maybe, but not good in terms of content enjoyment.
  • Noaani said:

    The first of these was a mechanic in EQ2.
    Huh. Never played EQ. Good to know that some of my random ideas are not so off-the-wall as I had first figured.

    Having "alpha" mobs is a good idea. All it takes is giving them an ability that causes any mob in the area of effect that is of the same faction as the caster to attack that casters target.

    In practice, this will simply see players carefully clear away as much of the content around this "alpha" as they can before engaging it in combat. However, it is still more immersive.
    Well, I did specify that there would be no indication that the Alpha would be any different from its peers. It would have the same size, appearance, and name as the other mobs of its kind. Perhaps the name would change to include the 'Alpha' prefix once combat is actually initiated, but there would be no hint whatsoever before that point.

    The same would apply for the Elites.

    The last idea above would be problematic. it would essentially prevent dungeon runs as we know them, as when you get half way through a dungeon, the remaining inhabitants would all come screaming out at you.

    More realistic maybe, but not good in terms of content enjoyment.
    Good point... I was thinking only in terms of open world content.

    Perhaps a better approach would be to have a sort of 'wail' or 'cry' that certain intelligent mobs in the open world could use when in danger to call its peers to its aid. When attacked, the mob would trigger a sort of rally that would attract nearby allies.

    The problem with that would be the predictability that players would quickly learn to exploit. And yet, it is still a better option than the standard 'bubble-reality' most mobs exist in.

    I'll give an example:  I break into a bandit base and start carefully triggering the aggro of the bandits one by one until the base is clear. Given the size of the aggro-range, chances are I've spent ten or so minutes killing off the bandits one-by-one while in plain sight of their peers.

    This absolutely kills immersion, and makes a mockery of whatever task I am trying to accomplish. 

    A sort of cry for help or alert by these bandits would make a lot of sense in this scenario, boost immersion enormously, and increase the challenge.
  • I get the feeling that AoC is the EQNext that never happened.  With the EQ franchise having an uncertain future, I think AoC has a chance to take up the torch with their extensive but fluid content system.  Glad to see a lot of old systems and ideas coming back in a day and age when technology is more capable for realizing it.
  • Nefelia said:

    A sort of cry for help or alert by these bandits would make a lot of sense in this scenario, boost immersion enormously, and increase the challenge.
    It would boost the challenge, but in a non-liner way.

    In good games, in regards to PvE, there is *ALWAYS* more challenging content. Mechanics like this don't need to be added to give players more challenge, as if players want more challenging PvE content, they would be running that more challenging PvE content.

    Players are always on any given piece of PvE content because it offers exactly the level of challenge they are after at that point in time.

    Now, as I said above, this mechanic could be used to increase the challenge of PvE content. If that is the case though, people would still only run the content that it was in because that content offered exactly the challenge that the player in question was after at that point in time.

    If the player didn't want that level of challenge, they would take on different content.

    Basically, what I'm saying is that as a mechanic it is viable as a way to increase challenge (though it does so as a single massive spike, which is not always good), but it won't have any effect at all on the overall challenge that players opt to take on.
  • You can't deny that it would improve immersion though. ;)

    That is one of my pet-peeves when it comes to open world content in general. You just mow down squads of targets one (or two, or however many you prefer to pull) at a time while their peers just carry on in complete ignorance 20 or so meters away.

    This is one of the reasons I much prefer combat in games like Diablo III to any combat I have ever experienced in an MMO. If you attack a creature in Diablo III you also end up drawing in hostile creatures within the limited line of sight of that original target (sometimes from off-screen even). It makes for far more dynamic and realistic hunting.

    Of course, I realize that Diablo III is not an MMO and has a completely different map and point of view. I would like to see MMOs adopt some of the elements that make Diablo III superior, if it is in any way feasible. My aim is to offer suggestions that could improve the dynamism and immersion of combat without having to completely redesign the way that MMO combat is handled.

    Perhaps I am in the minority when it comes to this issue?
  • I was there at the beginning of Mortal Online, and hung around for quite a few years. I was also a beta tester and a mod. Mortal Online is a cautionary example of the fate that many of these types of games face (i.e. open-world PVP sandbox). Darkfall Online was also a similar type of game which suffered a similar type of fate.

    In my opinion, these games struggled to find a reasonable and consistent playerbase  because a) developers failed to add enough "sand" in their sandbox and b) developers failed to adequately manage open-world PVP . There were many other reasons why they fell short, but these two reasons are a little more relevant to the OPs discussion.

    a) Not enough sand in their sandbox. It goes without saying, if there is not enough content in the game to have a variety of fun (for a variety of different play styles) then the game will become stale very quickly. In the case of Mortal Online, the content was added too slowly, and in the case of Darkfall there was very little content added at all! This was made even worse by the fact that the Darkfall map was HUGE!!! This is something that AoC needs to be mindful of when building their game. Large populated maps are great, large empty maps are a death sentence. I have seen so many sandbox games do the large empty map thing.

    Another issue, particularly in the case of Darkfall, was that most of the added content was not actually "sand". In other words, there was little opportunity to create content and meta-game with the stuff that was added in game. It was not sand that was added but rather huge immovable concrete blocks. The latter is typically the modus operandi of themepark games.

    Sandbox games should provide us with the tools to create games within games. There are several examples of sandbox MMOs that did this right. Ultima Online stands out as one of the more laudable achievements in the sandbox MMORPG genre.

    I don't think instancing is the solution. Instancing, in my opinion, has a negative impact on the community and is an example of why modern MMOs lack that special something. Sanbox and themepark content is the solution. Large maps and lots of content couple with the sandbox tools that provide players with the keys to creating their own fun too.

    NOTE: To be fair, Mortal Online only ever had a handful of relatively young inexperienced devs working on the game. They maybe hit 15 devs at their peak. They are a very small team. This is one promising aspect of AoC. They have a large team and they are super experiences too! So exciting :)

    b). Inadequate management of open-world PVP dynamic. When this is done right, it can make the world come alive by imbuing risk and meaning into every decision and action a player makes in-game. It is an amazing experience to behold for both PVE and PVP players alike. When this is done wrong, what ends up happening is the game simply becomes dominated by the "wolves". The wolves ultimately consume the wolves, whilst also scaring away the sheep, and what you get is a situation like Darkfall Online... an ugly autistic mess of a community. Failure to have severe penalties for player-murdering results in a  VERY niche player-base which is both small and extremely toxic.

    This is my experience. I love open-world PVPs, but I also think that severe punishment for player-killers is essential. We should be free to murder someone if we are prepared to pay the price (e.g. stat loss, bounty system, etc etc). We should not be free to spree kill innocent players without the game design unleashing a can of whoop-ass on our virtual selves. For those who would argue that there should be no game mechanic to intervene, but rather it should be left up to the players to police themselves. All I have to say is... after +20 years of following MMO development, I have yet to see a game last with this free-for-all approach to open world PVP. It always gets ugly, and it always becomes tedious and boring. Take my word for it.

    In my opinion, I feel that Mortal Online also did something else wrong, and I think that Ashes of Creation is potentially at risk of making this mistake. Particular if they listen to the "let's make it like real life" crowd. For those who have actually played MO, it is apparent that MO has a very deep crafting system coupled with various other rich systems like breeding, taming, thieving, building etc.. This is a good thing! However, in my opinion, the mistake that MO made was that they mistook complexity with tedious. Mortal Online is extremely tedious, particularly when trying to farm stuff, make stuff or even build houses. It simply was not a fun game to play most of the time. Once again, I feel Ultima Online did this well, it always felt rewarding when even doing the tedious tasks at Brittania Bank :)

    The Ashes of Creation devs need to be focused on making gameplay fun but not shallow. Complex and engaging. We play these games for enjoyment, not for work away from work.

    Finally, the biggest challenge for AoC will be to release lots of content regularly. This is one of the biggest downfalls I have seen for alot of MMO games that have released over the years. Content is not enough or released too slowly.


  • Some very good points, Lithius. I'll address just the one that I am most passionate about:

    LithiusV said:


    b). Inadequate management of open-world PVP dynamic. When this is done right, it can make the world come alive by imbuing risk and meaning into every decision and action a player makes in-game. It is an amazing experience to behold for both PVE and PVP players alike. When this is done wrong, what ends up happening is the game simply becomes dominated by the "wolves". The wolves ultimately consume the wolves, whilst also scaring away the sheep, and what you get is a situation like Darkfall Online... an ugly autistic mess of a community. Failure to have severe penalties for player-murdering results in a  VERY niche player-base which is both small and extremely toxic.

    This is my experience. I love open-world PVPs, but I also think that severe punishment for player-killers is essential. We should be free to murder someone if we are prepared to pay the price (e.g. stat loss, bounty system, etc etc). We should not be free to spree kill innocent players without the game design unleashing a can of whoop-ass on our virtual selves. For those who would argue that there should be no game mechanic to intervene, but rather it should be left up to the players to police themselves. All I have to say is... after +20 years of following MMO development, I have yet to see a game last with this free-for-all approach to open world PVP. It always gets ugly, and it always becomes tedious and boring. Take my word for it.
    I don't think we need to take your word for it. The history of MMOs for the past 20 years speaks for itself: every time PvP predators are given free reign to terrorize the PvE community, they end up driving a large number of players away and damaging the reputation of the game.

    There is nothing fun about getting killed by higher levelled players outside of the starting safe zones. There is nothing engaging about having to call for back-up in order to do basic PvE quests/gathering with a modicum of security.

    For a great many PvE players, getting randomly attacked by a (higher levelled, better geared, and more skilled) player out of the blue is an unpleasant experience. If it happens with any regularity, those PvE players are likely to go find a more accommodating game to play.

    I am aware that AoC will create systems to create disincentives to curb some of the excesses of the more toxic griefers. Whether these systems are enough will likely be explored during Alpha 1, and it is something I plan on testing personally.

    I feel that those who abuse poorly-designed mechanics in order to grief/PK severely disadvantaged players are a stain on the name of PvP players in general, and a blight on every game they infest. I dearly hope we can get the balance between engaging PvP and sensible PvE risk right in Ashes of Creation.
  • One thing that I will add is that Steven not only plays these games, but he has also led guilds in them. He has tried and played most of the most recent titles as well as many more dated ones. He has seen the pitfalls and failures that most of us have seen as well. He knows about content droughts, and has left games due to them.

    I know this may not be common knowledge but a lot of developers don't even play their own games or honestly even play games at all. At least not on the level that we as the consumers do.

    I can understand I guess, imagine working at subway all day and coming home to make a sandwich. No thanks. That being said, the best MMO's I have played are the ones where you see the Developers and GM's come in and play the game. They join groups, they ask questions and learn from the player base.

    I guess that was kinda off topic. But still I think this dev team is leaps and bounds ahead of others as far as seeing the big picture and what will keep us playing for years to come.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited August 2018
    @LithiusV
    I'd always assumed that they'll multiple points-of-interests throughout the World of each ZOI

    via i thought that
     per ZOI = 1 DarkFall Map.

    On another note Intrepid have already made some important remarks regarding some of the things you've said

    LithiusV said:
    " ... The Ashes of Creation devs need to be focused on making gameplay fun but not shallow. Complex and engaging. We play these games for enjoyment, not for work away from work ... "
    https://youtu.be/oZaA_rPhxrk?t=28m42s
     Feel free to start watching at https://youtu.be/oZaA_rPhxrk?t=20m57s for multiple Q&A for quests 

    i think the Questing Q&A part will end at around 29:30 btw

    LithiusV said:
    " ... Finally, the biggest challenge for AoC will be to release lots of content regularly. This is one of the biggest downfalls I have seen for alot of MMO games that have released over the years. Content is not enough or released too slowly. "
     https://youtu.be/3UIqmWTGZ2k?t=10m4s
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited August 2018
    Thanks for taking the time to find and post those links :)
    As for ZOI size; if each ZOI was the size of a Darkfall map then the size of the overall map would be insanely huge. It would literally take days to walk from one side of the map to the other. I have my doubts that the map will be that big. Would be awesome if it was that big, just as long as they had content and population to fill it.

    The fact that  Steven is a hardcore MMO gamer (and ran a large guild) was one of the most attractive aspects of the dev team for me. This coupled with the fact that it is also comprised of a bunch of senior devs (and is not Korean!!!) is a huge plus for me. You're 100% right, many devs are not serious gamers and it shows in the games they make. I'd venture to bet that many of the devs in AoC are not big MMO gamers too (for the reasons you mentioned), but I trust that Stevens vision will come through nonetheless. Or rather, pray, hope and beg that his vision will come through, heh.

    I 100% agree with you. I guess the challenge is to find that sweet spot where new (and old) players get to have that amazing experience and thrill of playing a game that has meaningful risk whilst also minimising the tedious and unfun elements of mass gankery. I don't expect the game to be griefer-free, it's a MMO after all! I just hope that it does better then many other open-world PVP games. I have heard that Lineage 2 did it well, and apparently Steven is inspired by their system.

Sign In or Register to comment.