Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options

How long do you want major patches to be?

2»

Comments

  • Options
    DamoklesDamokles Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Makinoji wrote: »

    Also with both of your logics, you should be afraid of how poorly IS handled their BR but you only see what you want I guess.

    The main reason why IS handled the BR though, was because they noticed that the community didnt like it and they cut their losses.
    a6XEiIf.gif
  • Options
    George_BlackGeorge_Black Member, Intrepid Pack
    Makinoji wrote: »
    Corpier wrote: »
    Makinoji wrote: »
    I love how ESO does their content releases quarterly (every 4 months) and 1 quarter is a major expansion.

    I also feel since AOC will have a dynamic world they could probably get away with longer time periods of releasing stuff but with how impatient gamers are we'll need smaller updates probably every 3 months or so.
    Things like natural disasters cutting off parts of the world or a long winter or drought would be fun to deal with for a short period.

    I strongly disagree. ESO's schedule is awful. Those developers rush out unpolished content that "fixes" what isn't broken and fail to fix bugs until they become "features". That game's pvp is a laggy mess and their pve raid scene is a clusterfuck of bugged instances and crashes that gets worse every patch. I played that game off and on for about 5 years, got like 1,400 champion points, completed all the veteran hard mode trials and dungeons, and got emperor three times before I quit. I played enough that I can confidently say that game has been going downhill due to lack of polish, lack of performance, and lack of server stability for a long time.

    This. I stopped playing for a while.
    I got back in a week ago and found two new updates.

    I played a bit on the new content and I was sooooooooo bored with it.
    Nothing challenging, just more story quests on a new corner of the map.

    I was so bored I didnt even bother to play the new instances to farm an item I need.

    I have to say you both missed the message.
    Also if IS builds their game right from the start they will avoid these issues.
    If you had any knowledge of the development of ESO you'd know that the engine as well as the coding was garbage and is part if not all the reason the game has to be continually patched over and over for the same problems.

    Also with both of your logics, you should be afraid of how poorly IS handled their BR but you only see what you want I guess.

    The eso content release every quorter is:

    1)A nerf/buff cycle (update 23 we found DoT weak. Update 24 we found DoT too strong and so we made them weaker than 23.)

    2)It is a lame story quest line of non challenging content you can finish in a day without wearing armor, in a new corner of the map.

    3)A new release of $40 houses that are only useful for decorations, since all functions: crafting banking etc etc are 20s away from any location your char might be.
    These decorations are a solo activity, all the way.

    4)New $$$ mounts outfits and other cash shop items

    I wont even mention the mess of the games performance, or the lack of variety in builds despite the play as you want moto. All fighters use dw/bow for pve and 2h/SnB for PvP.

    I will mention that for 6 years ESO pvp has been the same.
    Laggy cyrodiil.
    Dead imperial city. Dead.
    The only addition was battlegrounds which offer 0 reason to play them.

    And let's look at the latest themes of content...
    Hype-seeking CatsDragonsNecromancer back in May 2019 and we are looking forward to VampiresSkyrim for 2020.

    Definatly not the content planning I would like to see from IS.
    What eso did to their game has 0 to do with mmorpg content.

    It is a solo rpg with an optional PvP zone and Trials for PvE

  • Options
    Makinoji wrote: »
    Corpier wrote: »
    Makinoji wrote: »
    I love how ESO does their content releases quarterly (every 4 months) and 1 quarter is a major expansion.

    I also feel since AOC will have a dynamic world they could probably get away with longer time periods of releasing stuff but with how impatient gamers are we'll need smaller updates probably every 3 months or so.
    Things like natural disasters cutting off parts of the world or a long winter or drought would be fun to deal with for a short period.

    I strongly disagree. ESO's schedule is awful. Those developers rush out unpolished content that "fixes" what isn't broken and fail to fix bugs until they become "features". That game's pvp is a laggy mess and their pve raid scene is a clusterfuck of bugged instances and crashes that gets worse every patch. I played that game off and on for about 5 years, got like 1,400 champion points, completed all the veteran hard mode trials and dungeons, and got emperor three times before I quit. I played enough that I can confidently say that game has been going downhill due to lack of polish, lack of performance, and lack of server stability for a long time.

    This. I stopped playing for a while.
    I got back in a week ago and found two new updates.

    I played a bit on the new content and I was sooooooooo bored with it.
    Nothing challenging, just more story quests on a new corner of the map.

    I was so bored I didnt even bother to play the new instances to farm an item I need.

    I have to say you both missed the message.
    Also if IS builds their game right from the start they will avoid these issues.
    If you had any knowledge of the development of ESO you'd know that the engine as well as the coding was garbage and is part if not all the reason the game has to be continually patched over and over for the same problems.

    It seems you haven’t kept up with the game at all.

    It’s not the same issues that are plaguing the game worst at this moment. The ESO dev team introduced very obviously nonfunctional mechanics in the latest patch, which were mentioned on the testing forums.

    To meet their schedule, they shipped all the bugs, and introduced even MORE gamebreaking bugs (as in literally crashing the game) than the test server had.

    And instead of doing the smart thing and doing a full rollback to the previous update for PC and delaying the console release to fix those issues before implementing the patch, they pushed the buggy update to consoles with no changes at all!

    There should never in any sane developers mind be a moment when they thinks it’s worse to not meet a schedule date than it is to cause massive gamebreaking problems for their players.
  • Options
    AntVictusAntVictus Member, Alpha One
    Mmm, I just want the content to be good honestly. If it's good and there is other content that is also good (busy content without the trashy feeling of being busy) then I have no problem with it. But adding an artificial time grind behind something just to squeeze a few more hours out of a persons life is annoying...looking at WoW with it's locking of reskinned races behind rep grinds for instance, it's a waste of time and resources.
  • Options
    VentharienVentharien Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    I'm curious how they will implement content additions. Since the majority of the content Ashes has will be in some way player driven, how do you place in large content packs without adversely affecting existing content? Like if they decide to add another land mass, which they've given themselves room to do by not curving the world, will it have nodes? and if it does, when people go migrate to the new stuff, how will the "old world" start to feel? And I think anywhere from 7 to 12 months for content is fine, and even longer if it's needed to make the content polished and enjoyable.
  • Options
    NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    Ventharien wrote: »
    I'm curious how they will implement content additions. Since the majority of the content Ashes has will be in some way player driven, how do you place in large content packs without adversely affecting existing content? Like if they decide to add another land mass, which they've given themselves room to do by not curving the world, will it have nodes? and if it does, when people go migrate to the new stuff, how will the "old world" start to feel? And I think anywhere from 7 to 12 months for content is fine, and even longer if it's needed to make the content polished and enjoyable.

    This is also my first thought in terms of content additions.

    I don't think I'd want to see new nodes added post launch unless they are added at the same time as new node types, and a reduction in the node maintenance required. Even then though, I could see older nodes and the areas around them becoming deserted very quickly.

    I can see three other ways new content could be added.

    The first is to just add new dungeon entrances to the world map, and have those dungeons act in a similar manner to others where node progression affects the content. To me, content additions do not always *need* to include overland areas - if the dungeon areas are good enough to stand on their own, they will.

    The second is to add in an entire new landmass that has no node system to it. This would function similarly to expansions in many other MMO's, and is kind of boring in that regard.

    The third is to add in a system between that second method above, and the full node system. Add in a new landmass with all the content, and give it a new system that functions similarly to the node system in terms of effects on content and player ability to influence and fight over, but don't actually put in any cities or player housing in with it, thus not rendering original areas redundant.

    With that last idea, if the content is interesting enough and different enough based on the state of that new node system, people will fight over it just to get the content they want.
  • Options
    MeowsedMeowsed Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    I'm expecting them to just constantly replace a ton of quests and dungeons as the world evolves. Maybe add some new node functionalities. Probably add a new class in a few years. Definitely add an extra progression system or content type after a year (since they have lots of ideas that won't fit in the base game release).

    Certain content will almost definitely become obsolete as expansions are released, but even before that we'll see a lot of content popping up and disappearing naturally, due to the dynamic nature of the world. So I don't think it will be a big deal compared to the normal player-driven shifts in content.

    I doubt they'll add new landmasses though. Unless they come with very new systems. For example, they might add a few underwater nodes. And if they do, they won't be designed such that everyone who wants to participate in the new content need to move to the new nodes. Most people will probably stay in their old nodes and just make trips to the new zones if they want to check it out.

    They just can't do the typical thempark expansion where they say, "This is the new end-game zone. All end-game content goes in these new nodes now. Old areas are entirely neglected." Which brings me back to my original point: They'll probably focus a lot of their post-launch development on adding or replacing content (stories, quests, dungeons, events) within the original zones.
    Mega troll frmr1cq9w89im2.jpg
  • Options
    VentharienVentharien Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    noaani wrote: »
    The third is to add in a system between that second method above, and the full node system. Add in a new landmass with all the content, and give it a new system that functions similarly to the node system in terms of effects on content and player ability to influence and fight over, but don't actually put in any cities or player housing in with it, thus not rendering original areas redundant.

    Maybe a colony like system? requiring a node parent to for material and support?
  • Options
    DamoklesDamokles Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    edited March 2020
    Here are a few types of content updates that they could implement:
    - Timelocked events. That would mean that they create a large scale event all over the known map, where for example volcanoes begin to erupt everywere and we have to fight against fire elementals etc. Give every metropolis a huge raid to clear and bind some worldboases to some open world events, with new resources that let you craft thematic armor and weapons another event type could be something with corruption or with aggressive mutated tulnar or something.
    (Once every few months)

    - island expansions. It is what it sounds like, they could implement islands of different sizes with new creatures and each island could only have one or two nodes on it (2 only if they are really massive)
    (twice a year)

    - WoW stile expansions. Exactly what it sounds like, they just add a new continent (like the island expansions but with more land, creatures and new resources)
    (Once a year, but it would be better if they went with every 2 years and the first type in combination with this)
    a6XEiIf.gif
  • Options
    New content every 4 months. Bug/exploits fixed weekly. Class balances bi-weekly. Cash shop updates every 2-4 weeks.
  • Options
    MollyNightmareMollyNightmare Member, Pioneer, Kickstarter
    I want it to last as long as possible. Aslo I hope they would implement achievements (like WoW, rift etc..). That would make content for those who love achievement hunting last even longer and get sick cosmetics/mounts and what not.
  • Options
    Wandering MistWandering Mist Moderator, Member, Founder, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    Sarevok wrote: »
    New content every 4 months. Bug/exploits fixed weekly. Class balances bi-weekly. Cash shop updates every 2-4 weeks.

    Those are rather specific. Any particular reason for those numbers?
    volunteer_moderator.gif
  • Options
    BotBot Member
    I think 4-6 months is deal, it really depends on the game's content though. If the game is more pvp-oriented then you should wait longer between major updates and for a game that's more pve-oriented you want shorter wait times. So a pure PvE game really I'd want 3-4 months, buta more PvP type game I'd want closer to 6-8 months. It also depends on what the major update consists of. If major updates is just more dungeons and bosses, I'd say 4-6 is good since it gives time to learn mechanics and maximize your ability to beat them. Whereas if major update includes stuff like major skill rebalance/additions like GW2 when they release a new expansion that introduces new builds then I think you can go up to 8-12 months if you're also adding new dungeons, bosses, and etc on top of it since it really freshens up the game.
Sign In or Register to comment.