Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Comments
https://www.amazon.com/ALPI-River-Stone-Stress-Toy/dp/B00E46M2D4
Amazon is so P2W.
If that rock is created as a reward within the game, it deserves the name ¨Nelsonrebel¨.
On the other hand, if they go to the store I demand that they call it ¨P2Winstone¨
Those cosmetics aren't ever coming back. There is no option to get them again inbetween now and when the game launches. By your logic it is already too late and this game is P2W. So once again, I have to ask, why are you still here if you are convinced this game will be P2W? Steven is not going to change his mind, the majority of players agree with Steven, the cash shop is what it is. Why are you still going to play it?
That is not dead which can eternal lie. And with strange aeons even death may die.
You know what I could actually get behind that name if it goes to the store.
At the very least while no one will agree with your personal definition on this topic, you'll have given us a fond item to laugh about in the future.
How evil of Amazon!
Birdie demonstrates a clear understanding of the concept, "P2W" that matches my understanding so I'm gonna have to side with them.
Why does it bother you that I disagree and propose something different?
Is it impossible to share a space with someone who thinks differently?
I accept that you agree with the proposed model and do not consider it P2W.
I do not intend to change your way of thinking, it is your choice, you choose how to see and interpret things.
But the world is not reduced to those who think like you, there is always room for debate, even when there is no single answer to something.
Each one has its arguments which can be true and false at the same time.
A matter of perspective and interpretation, everything is relative.
My presence is just one more, drawn by the promise of the old school and the absence of P2W.
What I found when I got inside the project is that, from my perspective, it is not so.
While I acknowledge Steven's effort to minimize the impact of the items for sale to avoid the P2W effect, this does not include a large number of players who are affected by the presence of extra payouts.
The shocking effect of the "old school" fades little by little.
And this thread in the forum is simply that, the expression of a user attracted by promises that from their perspective are not fulfilled and wants to convey it.
Does this mean that Steven has to change the chosen model?
It's his choice, not mine or yours.
His project, his ambitions, his conditions.
If he determines that it should be, fine.
If he determines that he should change it, fine.
After all, the forum is just that, a place to comment, not a jury whose members must render a final verdict.
You’re presenting these ideas as if you’re just making a reasonable proposal and it’s up to Steven to decide. But it’s not, unless there is access to a time machine what you’re asking for isn’t possible.
Basically, to use your own words, it was his choice and it’s done and set in stone. So what is the point of this thread?
Why would people file a lawsuit when they acknowledge that their contributions were to "support" the development of the video game?
Why sue when the cosmetic benefits purchased are just "pixels" that have no weight in the game and make no difference?
What's the problem with such items being added to in-game rewards if they are not a determining factor in the "winning" aspect?
¨They're just cosmetics¨
Users would keep their alpha and beta testing participation privileges and keep their cosmetic rewards.
Why would it be inconvenient if another player gets the same objects while playing, if they are not important, if the true center of importance revolves around other factors?
I think you're grossly underestimating the issue with a developer ensuring a kickstarter legal promise....Its very dangerous waters to break a legal promise.
Not to mention the guys that spent 5-10 thousand dollars on the Order of the Phoenix initiative (I think thats what it was called anyway) they are signifigant backers that paid a lot of real money and they accepted some small tokens, early access, and a shiny cosmetic skin all to help support ashes and get the word out for this beautiful vision.
I'm 100% ok they they get a bit of an extra shiny showing that they did so. Its cool that they did that and theres nothing wrong with them having a tiny exclusive for cashing up 10,000 dollars to show that they helped bring AoC to life.
It's really not that light of an issue. Another problem then turns into this - If AoC were to go back on their word with the Cosmetics, and even if the majority of backers were ok with letting those skins into the world, everything ashes has said or promised becomes worthless and players wouldnt touch this game from all the negative reactions that would follow
And the legal issues behind it.
That being said, I dont care if my leader of men packages Angel or Demon skin is released in the game in a different or re-skinned way. Or even an eventual re-release of it later down the line.
I agree it is just cosmetic to me, its worthless but I like cosmetic stuff 🤷🏻♂️
But I'm certainly not going to be daft enough to not realize the implications of Intrepid ignoring their promises.
But eventually we'll probably see similar reskins of stuff from the Kickstarter anyway, its just something that players will be willing to pay for and in the future it becomes less of a hurdle
I fully understand the consequences of not fulfilling the agreed promises.
Now, suppose that the game after its launch does not have the expected success, the number of subscribed players does not meet the demands and the sales of cosmetics do not compensate for said lack of income.
What are the alternatives?
A - Cancel the game.
B - Leave it in maintenance mode without major updates.
C - Remove the subscription (Free to Play) and exploit the store to the maximum.
In the case of option A, the valuable cosmetics of the 10K pack and all the rest are forgotten, like pixels fading into thin air.
In the case of option B, after not being successful and subsequently presenting a lack of content, a few current subscriptions can be maintained and the valuable cosmetics of the 10K pack and all the others will walk through a sparsely populated game world and with a lack of relevant content.
In case C, sustaining the game through the store takes it to the extreme of what was promised by dabbling in items of convenience, power-ups, upgrades, etc. The cosmetic stuff of the 10K pack and all the others will be in the middle of the P2W party.
It is clear that all the agreed premises and their permanence in time are based on a single result, the indisputable success of the game.
Eliminating paid objects as exclusive content to use in the game, avoiding harming those who consider it relevant in their gaming experience can be a solution, or may be not.
Keeping the current model may be the solution, or may be not.
That is why I insist, it is Steven and his team who have the last word, it is not my intention to pretend that it is in my capacity to determine what is best to achieve success, simply to share my perspective of success which despite not being taken into account can reflect a different vision which at some point ends up being relevant.
I changed my profile picture, do you like it?
No idea
Your options are objectively wrong though.
In my opinion theres no question Ashes will struggle a little at the start of the game, its a very new studio, with a very unique take on PvXSandbox/Sandthempark world. People will be cautious at first. But hell ESO was by far the worst launch MMO game I remember and yet now its one of the top three in the world. I dont really care about launch unless its something super major, because its always a mess no matter what type of game.
And AoC is almost a perfect game conceptually speaking.
But that doesnt make legal real world issues dismissive or the principals behind breaking your word with the cosmetic issue.
Dont you get thats half the reason people looked into AoC because Steven and Intrepid are some of the biggest Advocates against the AAA studios constantly breaking their word and doing things they promised not to do?
Why do you think so many people have pledged so much into this games vision?
Its not hard to see.
And the cosmestics being cosmetic isnt the issue
Its funding, its profits for the employees and to make room and grow without preying on players with massive box costs for every DLC/expansion/in game advantages/ lACTUAL p2w items
The truth is buddy that people dont give a shit if cosmetics are part of shop. And most people realize if you want to make an MMO stable, successful, and profitable enough to
keep content going WITHOUT introducing REAL ACTUAL pay to win in this day and age, a cosmetic shop is kind of given.
The fact these devs only have skins for mounts (and not actual mounts making you actually work ingame for it) is amazing.
And the fact other cosmetics will already have equivelants is another thing thats amazing. And the best cosmetics (besides probably the Avatar one) will already be part of the endgame rewards is amazing.
MMO's are expensive dude, its not just a disc game anymore with content.
Cosmetics will never affect yours, or other peoples gameplay, its just another role play aspect for looks.
It is unequevocally not Pay to Win. Its just silly to say otherwise despite your objections.
That is not dead which can eternal lie. And with strange aeons even death may die.
¨But hell ESO was by far the worst launch MMO game I remember and yet now its one of the top three in the world¨
I was there, since beta.
Do you remember which was the model with which it was launched and with which it ended up to this date?
Do you remember the promised payment and content delivery models as they ended?
Do you remember the promise that the Plus model would contain all the content in the future and then the DLC appeared as an additional payment even within the PLUS plan?
It is exactly what I explained a little while ago in my other post.
The impending failure leads to drastic changes or extinction.
Better to get ahead and avoid forcing fate.
Which is a shame, I really loved running around on my black panther mount and hiding from guards after stealing from a shopkeeper. Also searching everywhere for skyshards. There were some fun times eventually ruined by an uninspiring advancement path that I grew tired of.
And surely you have acquired your little monkey for participating.
And the game went from being a mandatory monthly subscription and payment of the base game and future expansions to free to play with a cosmetic store, seasonal lootboxes and convenience objects.
When all the content was promised for the future within the ESO PLUS plan and then the famous debate about ¨it is a DLCs only in the pack, not the expansions¨ appeared and began to be charged separately, even for those who had the PLUS plan active.
Promises, changes.
I really enjoy going for the "limited" time stuff, it motivates me to play that game. Talking cosmetics/titles.
If there are SO many cosmetics that are rotating, it takes away any "Wow, this guy has that??"
or like (sorry) gladiator titles in WoW. You know that guy is good at PvP, for example. You get a title and a mount, you stand out.
Then you have PVE stuff which is supposed to be exclusive but people can just buy titles/mounts anyway so it's pay to win, whether thats in game currency or real money paid.
I hope AoC turns the MMO world upside down.
Bad comparison, the people pushing development decisions for ESO are ethically bankrupt. That game currently sustains itself off the IP alone.
At the moment your only concern could be access to cosmetic items and exclusive titles to use in the game which will not be available in the game and are only accessible by purchasing packages in the store, in addition to those included in the kickstarter campaign packages which is no longer available.
If your goal is to be able to access all the titles or cosmetic objects that can be used in the game, these will be a permanent restriction if you do not invest extra money.
What gave rise to my post and the P2W effect that it means for those who set their goal in the collection of cosmetics and / or in addition, titles.
The comparison was from Nelsonrebel, not mine, I just comment on it
Ok I'm gonna give some clarification here, even though you picked only one sentece out my entire post there XD very sneaky of you to skirt around my other points. But ignoring them wont change what people read.
On to the one sentence about ESO that you're trying to use as proof and suggest that Ashes will do....
1.The only business part of eso that changed was adding a cosmetic shop at all, and the changes to allowing it to be free to play with a base game buy (box cost).
The dlc there is still free to those with a subcription? So Im not seeing what this part is of your argument about cosmetics being p2w. Unless you refer to the chapters in which yes you're correct. That pissed off alot of people and many people left for it.
-Ashes already has and explained why their shop is cosmetic and why its there at all and is important and vital to how it plans to generate and maintain revenue along with its sub. Along with already created legal promises. The chances they'll add any pay to win is astronomicaly low, with how much they have planned in advancement and foreknowledge about how games like ESO failed in some regards there is likewise important.
This has nothing to do with cosmetics not being p2w
2. ESO's company ZoS also answer to a board and a parent company Bethesda both in regards to lore (being elder scrolls) and in business for the games revenue. They are subservient to bethesda's decisions for this reason since bethesda owns Elder Scrolls and is the parent company of Zenimax. Even if they wanted to do a different thing, the board would override or fire the devs.
-Ashes does not and is fully independent being built by one of the most anti-p2w individuals in MMO's
This still doesnt have anything to do with cosmetics still not being p2w
3. To be fair to ZoS, they did not introduce any pay to win in my opinion. They did introduce controversial loot crates (very predatory I'll admit) and they did change from a subscription model to a buy-to-play model with the Sub giving them access to all DLC. And the Shop expanded to letting players pay to aquire fully maxed skillines if they were completed on another character. But they still had to be already completed content by the players. A slight difference, but this is where ESO has gotten close to pay to win since there is no in-game method to speed level skill lines within the game.
- Ashes is already planned and examined this area and is already funded whereas ESO was basically bailed out by Bethesda because they didnt plan or have the same level of funding at the start as Ashes
This also still has nothing with cosmetics still not being p2w
4. Again none of this really relates to what I posted in the previous comment since you only picked one sentence out of my other post. I'm just humoring you because this conversation is mildly fascinating to me.
It's like examining a brand new species
Cosmetics give no p2w advantage. Its just an extra pretty skirt for you to wear ingame with slightly different colored pixels
¨1.The only business part of eso that changed was adding a cosmetic shop at all, and the changes to allowing it to be free to play with a base game buy (box cost)¨
Nope.
1- Purchase of the game and Mandatory suscription at release.
2 - Buy to Play with cosmetic microtransactions and the option to suscribe to ESO PLUS to get all future content for free and some coins for the shop, unlimited storage for crating materials, 10% increaso for gold an exp, exclusivity to use dyes, double bank space, 10% increase for research and inspiration, and more.
3 - At some point they star charging apart the cost for Expansions to ESO PLUS members arguing that the future content they were referring to were only DLC and not expansions which is false since they had never clarified it.
4 - They added then power-ups, buffers, and P2W items more frequently to the shop, up to the point of seasonal lootboxes.
5 - They promoted exclusive cosmetic items in the store for a limited time that then reappeared.
And the list go on.
¨The dlc there is still free to those with a subcription? Im not seeing what this part is. Unless you refer to the chapters in which yes you're correct. That pisses off alot of people and many people left for it¨
When they promoted ESO PLUS they promised all future content included.
Then they came out to say that in reality that future content was only the DLC and that it did not include the expansions or chapters.
A great scam.
¨2. ESO's company ZoS also answer to a board and a parent company Bethesda both in regards to lore (being elder scrolls) and in business for the games revenue. They are subservient to bethesda's decisions for this reason since bethesda owns Elder Scrolls and is the parent company of Zenimax. Even if they wanted to do a different thing, the board would override or fire the devs¨
Promises are promises, no matter who makes them, are they made to be kept, or not?
Yet regardless of rank, track record, background, history shows that need outweighs promise in the world of business and video games.
¨3. To be fair to ZoS, they did not introduce any pay to win in my opinion. They did introduce controversial loot crates (very predatory I'll admit) and they did change from a subcription model to a buy-to-play model withe the Sub giving them access to all DLC. And the Shop expanded to letting players pay to aquire fully maxed skillines if they were completed on anther character. But they still had to be already completed content by the players. A slight difference but this is where ESO has gotten close to pay to win since there is no in-game method to speed level skill lines within the game¨
Look at the changes they made and that I mentioned above and tell me that it is not P2W
¨ Ashes is already planned and examined this area and is already funded whereas ESO was basically bailed out by Bethesda because they didnt plan or have the same level of funding at the start as Ashes¨
Time will tell.
¨4. Again none of this really relates to what I posted in previous comment since you only picked one sentence out of my other post. I'm just humoring you because this conversation is mildly fascinating to me.
Its like examing a brand new species¨
I love knowing that we think the same!
It isn't me, this time.
Oh yes I did, I forgot about that.