Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Phase II testing is currently taking place 5+ days each week. More information about testing schedule can be found here
If you have Alpha Two, you can download the game launcher here, and we encourage you to join us on our Official Discord Server for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Phase II testing is currently taking place 5+ days each week. More information about testing schedule can be found here
If you have Alpha Two, you can download the game launcher here, and we encourage you to join us on our Official Discord Server for the most up to date testing news.
Comments
Yeah you lost me, @cleansingtotem. So far all the systems in the game seem to make perfect sense to me and how it will all play into risk versus reward. The only questionable system is the family summoning system to me. I don't understand your point about "playing the game his way" seeing as you know, it's his game. Feel free to stick to your shaman if the game doesn't appeal to you as more information comes out.
Why are you even here if you think that AoC is being designed with "nothing but tedious game design"?
Indeed.
And since we are on the topic of things that don't fit with the games design, the notion of both having no combat tracker support in the game and also having a reward structure that actively encourages players to play the game to the absolute best possible degree - these two concepts are diametrically opposed.
I don't want to turn this thread in to another combat tracker thread (we all know I have one of them), but it simply does not make sense to have that reward structure without combat trackers. Either the reward structure needs to go, or combat trackers need to be bought in.
When you look at the game in detail (rather than just in broard strokes as some people seem to be doing), there are also many things missing.
The next main thing missing as I see it is a hook for any non PvP player (hence posting in this thread). PvP player only games don't really work - with EvE being the only exception, and it is only an exception because PvP only really needs to happensevery few months or so there.
When Steven said he was looking at L2 and Archeage among other games as influence for Ashes, I took that to mean he had worked out the obvious reason why both of those games failed (though I am sure the developers of the bots running around in L2 would disagree that it failed).
The reason these games fail is because when the only people in the game are there for PvP as at least half of their reason for being in the game, as soon as they are on the constant losing side of PvP, they will leave the game. Before long in any PvP MMO you end up with a group of people that always win, and a group of people that always lose - and this second group always gets smaller and smaller. When it gets small enough, the group that always win split up and then become another group that always win, and another group that always lose.
We've all seen this happen in any number of games.
What a PvP game needs to be successful long term are players that are playing that PvP game but who do not care at all about the PvP. They can't be people that are specifically against PvP, but they need to be significantly more interested in other aspects of the game.
As soon as you have this group, you are able to have the people that are always winning, and those people that were always losing in other games are now only losing to those other PvP players. They are still able to beat the people that play the game for reasons other than PvP - and since these players don't care about PvP, they don't care if they always lose at it, as long as their reason for playing the game remains in place.
When Steven said L2 and Archeage but without the mistakes, I made the assumption that he had figured out how to keep that group of players that don't really care about PvP in a game like Ashes - but there has been no solid mention of anything at all that would keep such people in this game.
Since Steven doesn't have the background in the MMO industry that veteran developers have, I am more than a little concerned that this game has no real plan to attract anyone other than PvP players, which means the game will "Archeage" itself within 18 months.
@Noaani
As much as I want to agree with you, about AoC becoming another Vapor Ware Pipe Dream, you are really off track here.
You (the player) don't "loose" anything in AoC. You don't loose experience, gear, your freehold, "almost anything" (ie. gatherables and processed goods, whoopi.) etc., Anything you loose is easily regained (your house and furnishings are mailed back to you.). You only get a "debt". Okay, if your Corrupted, you can, loose some gear, don't murder people and you won't loose your sh*t.
Guards will attack you, if you attack another player. That's their job. They are guards for a reason. How do I know this? I don't, and neither do you.
The family Summoning is an attempt to give "casual" families and friends an advantage to group, since they have less time to play (exploitable, imho).
Not sure how many more features "Steven" has to put in to make a more friendly game to Casuals (people with little time or dedication) and Carebears (people who don't like confrontation). Perhaps "Steven" should make this a Solo RPG, instead of a MMORPG.
Ya, let's add more features, like mini games and pokemon quests (gotta catch them all). That's sticking to the main core of the game, which is; Building and Burning (Ashes of Creation).
I put Steven in quotes, as to not offend the Intrepid staff. For your benefit.😁
If I kill a boss encounter, the rewards from it will be crafting materials, not gear.
If I am then killed in PvP, there is a risk that I will drop those crafting materials. Being corrupt is not the only way to lose gear in Ashes.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say about guards - I have no issue with them, never have, never will, never suggested I did.
Attempting to aim this game at casuals is a waste of time - as said. There is too much scope to lose things you have wpent time and effort on, and since casuals are by definition unable to put as much time and effort in to a game, they are unwilling to lose things that they did put that time and effort in to.
As for carebears - again, no idea what you are saying. Ashes won't have carebears in it, as PvP is not optional. However, instanced content is not designed for carebears - especially not in the case of instanced content at the end of an open dungeon that has active PvP.
Rather than adding more features like you suggest, this game first needs to make sure it has a stable population. That is what I am here debating - not adding bloatware. Without a sizable population in the game that are not specifically there for PvP (but who are also not against PvP), then this game will not last more than 18 months as a serious option for MMO players.
With the exception of this game, no one is attempting to copy L2, nor Archeage or EvE.
There is literally no way this game is ever going to be genre defining unless it sorts itself out. This is the kind of claim you make when you only expose yourself to that same very small, niche section of the MMO's out there, and then try and make one yourself. You think the experiences you had in those niche games were representitive of all games - which is absolutely not the case.
Its partly because of Lazy Peon's video. In that video, it was implied that PvX meant, PvE, PvP, and crafting. So a lot of people thought that that they would be able to do either and progress through each individually. But that isn't Steven's definition of PvX. So you can't blame others for not knowing.
I'm afraid I've gotten a little bit of that vibe as well. I really hope that Steven realizes that times have changed and that, completely emulating a game from the 2000s, won't really work anymore.
Well the only thing that has changed is that most modern MMO's copy WOW in one way or another, and they give in to solo instanced player cries. NEW World as an example, pvp was core to the games design, it had big following high hopes, then they completely changed it to cater for Carebear comunity. So it got big backlash, and now its know for biggest disappointment, so they delayed the game for a year, to sort their shit out, and or just to wait till people forget that its not the game they been excited about.
Actually a cautionary tale for Steven, to continue with his vision and not to give in to make this game more carebear friendly.
And I believe that big part of MMO comunity simply dont play MMO's anymore, as there's nothing to play apart from all this modern shit, with 100s progression paths, fishing and all kinds of minigames.
I never really followed New World - not keen on a game made by Amazon. Right from the start the game looked wrong - and it still looks wrong now. Can't really comment on the game other than that.
As to a big part of the MMO community not playing MMOs any more - yeah, you are right. Perhaps not how you think though.
The next MMO developer to put out a game that has next generation graphics, solid combat systems, engaging crafting and solid PvE content for at least 5 different player counts (1/4/8/16/24 would be what I would aim at) will have a solid subscription game for at least 12 years.
That game isn't Ashes, obviously. But Ashes also isn't going to be live for 12 years.
There is a massive core of PvE MMO players without a game at all right now, where as most PvP players are playing FPS, BR or MOBA games quite happily.
Is there anything wrong with emulating success? Nope. WoW is successful. Is it as good as it once was? No, its not. But it does have strong elements that brought in a lot of MMORPG players. That's why almost everyone you've talked to has heard of/played WoW.
For a game that is looking to redefine the genre, you shouldn't just learn from the past. You should learn from the present as well.
No, they didn't receive backlash for changing the core philosophy of the game. They received backlash for the toxicity. Amazon wasn't prepared for the toxicity that an open world game entailed, and instead of trying to fix it, they chose to escape it instead. As for the game being a disappointment, that remains to be seen.
That's a very negative way to look at things. You can say what you want, but the games that you call "shit", are still up and running, while the games that you call "non-carebear", are dead.
Its important to learn from the present as well, not just from the past.
Also, based on the replies to this post, I haven't seen people ask for instancing. It seems like most of them just want challenging PvE content, regardless of whether its instanced or not. So I think that you're misunderstanding what people are trying to convey in this thread.
I agree completely. By not making challenging PvE content, you are missing out on a HUGE portion of the MMO playerbase. I really hope that AoC decides to remedy this.
@AxelBlaze Please read this.
THIS is what is being discussed.
No one is suggesting instancing all bosses, no one is saying that PvP and PvE need to be separated.
We are saying that some bosses should be instanced, and that PvP and PvE can occasionally be separated.
These are very, very different points.
Some bosses? You mean the ones that drop top end loot? If so thats same as all boses as noone will be interested in fighting over sub par loot, when theres option to get top end loot in an instanced boss fight, as that will be much easier.
And in any case most of us arguing that there should be no separation at all, as it goes against core game design of pvx.
well, emulating wow success, is what was downhill for a mmo genre, plenty of games who tried are now dead and they werent even that popular.
Non carebear games are not all dead and some that are, are dean not because of their core mechanics, but because of other reasons such as p2w cash shops.
If you follow this thread more closely, most people advocating for "more chalanging" pve content, wants instanced raids or something that would let them enjoy this content without being interupted by other players
I have specifically said that I would expect the best loot in the game to come from open world content.
Seriously, pay attention to the conversation.
Sorry, I missed where you said this.
In which case, Steven has already said he intends for a ratio of 20% instanced to 80% open world content.
Why have I seen this line being repeated across three different posts? How come people misunderstand someone across 3 different posts that discuss the same topic?
Except those are intended to be lore dungeons. Not regular dungeons/raids.
https://knightsofember.com/forums/members/winner909098.54
Such content can literally only exist in an instance - this is a fact Steven may not be aware of yet (he has not played a game with the type of content he is talking about), but he will be made aware of it at some point.
If not for that comment, I would not have put any money in to this game, and would have walked away from it the day the family summons was announced (that is so far from consistent with the game that I was actually shocked by it).
If Intrepid offers me a refund on all purchases, I will happily turn my back on the game. Not becasue this isn't "the game I want" or any such, but because this game is shaping up to be a total mismatch of game systems.
However, since that refund won't happen, all I can do is get my point across as to why I think a number of decisions made about this game have been made poorly.
Theres only 2 people telling everybody that they misunderstand everything. Couldn't possibly be that nobody wants these changes nope, we just misunderstand.
Oh well? If the instances come out and they aren't to your liking, play a game with instances you enjoy. If the open world PvE isn't fun to you on launch, go elsewhere. Don't demand the game be changed to suit your needs. If the game comes out and there aren't instanced raids like you expect, clearly this is not the goal of the devs and you should find a game you enjoy.
That's not a fact, that's an opinion. Just because something hasn't been done so far doesn't mean its impossible.
He clearly intends to create challenging PvE Content in the open world. This might work out, or it might not, but stopping before you have tried is the wrong approach.
In case it turns out, that you indeed can't put it into the open world, then you can still instance it if necessary. Instancing it really isn't a lot of work.
Create a phases out copy of the part of the map, put it into that and create an entry restriction. Done.
As long as the boss design is good in itself, this isn't a problem at all. If the boss is poorly designed, then it would not have mattered at all whether they put it into an instance right away, or after a couple of weeks into testing.
Just look at ESO and GW2. They have mostly PvE that is instanced. Is it good or challenging? Hell no.
Instancing doesn't equal good pve content. Open World doesn't necessairly equal bad pve content. Is it easier to decide challenging PvE Content in an instanced environment? Certainly. Does that mean you can't try creating it in the OW first? No.
Sad, I really wish this game would appeal to everyone. That would truly make it an actual PvX game; a game where players can progress through PvE, PvP, or crafting. I don't think that Steven's definition of PvX is what PvX actually means, so people should stop referring to AoC as a PvX game.
I would have loved to see a system where players could get gear doing whatever they love. PvP players could get gear through PvPing, PvErs could get gear through PvEing, and crafters could craft gear. You could tie this all around with having repair/enchant materials, and super high level gear, drop from Open World PvPvE content. So all types of players will still be part of that social experience as you will have to do these PvPvE content if you wanted to repair/enchant your gear, or if you wanted to obtain the highest level gear. That would make it so much more enjoyable in my opinion. But alas, it is what it is.
I'm sorry you guys don't understand the definition of PvX, it was extremely obvious how the game was gonna play if you watched lazypeons video and the other PvX games they took inspiration from such as L2 and Galaxies if you have played these types of games before.
I'm sure you would have certainly loved that, but that is just simply not the vision of the game. The devs are going to have all systems intertwined so that you need to achieve success in all three. In star wars galaxies the crafted gear was very marginally slightly less as good as the best gear in the game. Not everybody gets to be special in Ashes of Creation and get all the best gear.
I don't think you do as there are some players who want content like this and probably some who haven't experienced something like this but could find they enjoy it.
Your idea of appealing to everyone seems like if wow allowed players to get the same gear from raiding that they could get from questing. this is my assumption but, If wow did this, I'd imagine it would hurt players' motivations to raid which if you enjoy that content, would hurt your experience. This is basically what you are recommending. You want to make safer PvE encounters which would hurt the incentives for players to participate in the open-world ones.
Everyone can have their own definitions but when people say PvX, at least in my experience, they are referring to PvPvE. PvPvE is content that has both a pvp and pve component to it (or at least can have it). The reason players don't consider games like wow PvX even though it has both pvp and pve content is that at the highest level, the content is separated. You have your high-level raiding and your high-level pvp in the form of arenas/RBGs where the best rewards are.
No. My idea is that there should be different item sets for PvE content, PvP content, crafting content, PvPvE content etc. So players will have incentives to do different types of content if they wish to mix and match different sets. But you could also stick to one content and buy the gear that you get from playing other types of content.
If you call isolated encounters with a particular boss safe, then yes. Just like how I would want there to be isolated 2v2 arenas, and 3v3 arenas. But I want it all to be tied together with open world content. So if you wish to enchant your gear, repair your gear, or obtain super high level gear, you have to do PvPvE content.
X refers to anything. It can be replaced by P for PvP, E for PvE, or C for PvC (crafting). Ashes is fundamentally tied to PvP. So its PvPvE and PvPvC. So calling it PvX, is a little misleading. This is partly caused by Lazy peon's video. He defines PvX in this manner, and since a lot of people came here after watching his video, you can't blame them for having a different definition for PvX than Steven's.