How is Ashes different?

The fantasy class of massively multiplayer online role-playing games is stagnating. The genre's archetype, World of Warcraft, had the positive effect of opening the hobby to the general public, but in its undisputed success, created a development bubble populated by projects that struggle to differentiate themselves from WoW, yet invariably end up duplicating it.

The core philosophy that WoW and all its progeny cannot escape is that no matter how much time, financing, creativity, talent and will, developers possess, they cannot produce content faster than the user base can play it. All deviations from this basic premise end up creating experiences which struggle to make the player feel unique, and fail. This, coupled to an attachment to antiquated pen and paper metaphors such as stats, deny the true capabilities of the computers these MMORPGs run on.

So my question to this community is what really makes Ashes all that different? I've seen some youtube videos, and Ashes looks very pretty, but if quests are the same for all players, then how does the player feel unique? If attack patterns have no element of creativity, then how will we know a player has skill? If vendor loot is still the predominate reward for questing, and more valuable items have unlimited supply, then how will we know our items have value?

These are just some of the reasons why we play these games and then leave them. We get bored doing the same things. We have no way to express ourselves besides loot that everyone else has. We see no point in having a player house for our stuff, when items don't actually have value beyond where we obtained them.

My intent is to find out what excites you about Ashes, so I can get excited too. Ultimately, what I am looking for is a place, not a game.

Thanks,

Taylors
«13

Comments

  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    The main thing that sets Ashes apart is the node system. It is, essentially, the core of the game.

    Players impact nodes, and nodes impact what content is or is not open on the server at any given point in time.

    If you were to read up on any one aspect of Ashes in order to see what makes it different (and I do suggest reading about it) then the node system is where you should look.
  • TalentsTalents Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited January 13
    The fantasy class of massively multiplayer online role-playing games is stagnating. The genre's archetype, World of Warcraft, had the positive effect of opening the hobby to the general public, but in its undisputed success, created a development bubble populated by projects that struggle to differentiate themselves from WoW, yet invariably end up duplicating it.

    The core philosophy that WoW and all its progeny cannot escape is that no matter how much time, financing, creativity, talent and will, developers possess, they cannot produce content faster than the user base can play it. All deviations from this basic premise end up creating experiences which struggle to make the player feel unique, and fail. This, coupled to an attachment to antiquated pen and paper metaphors such as stats, deny the true capabilities of the computers these MMORPGs run on.

    The main problem for these points was because no big Western MMORPG after WoW tried to differentiate itself from WoW. For 8 or so years after WoWs release, every developer tried to copy what WoW did, and failed because they just tried to make a generic Themepark MMORPG that was the same as WoW. This lead to the Western MMORPG market dying because they looked at all the MMORPGs that tried to copy WoW and thought "Gee, guess no one likes MMORPGs anymore because none of the WoW clones succeeded", so they stopped making them. Then mobile gaming and other games came in which were cheaper to make but brought in more money, so everyone stopped making MMOs.

    The "The core philosophy that WoW and all its progeny cannot escape is that no matter how much time, financing, creativity, talent and will, developers possess, they cannot produce content faster than the user base can play it." point is because most of the released Western MMORPGs were pure Themepark MMORPGs. This meant the content was basically entirely reliant on developer made content in order for players to have something to do. They had to pump out more dungeons, more raids, more content in order to keep players playing since players had nothing else to do except these dungeons and raids.

    Ashes is one of the first big Western MMORPGs in a long time to try and make a Themebox or Sandpark MMORPG. A mixture between the generic Themepark MMORPG that relies on developer content, and a Sandbox MMORPG that doesn't entirely rely on developers to keep pumping content, but relies on players to create their own content with each other, usually through ways such as player conflict. The big upside of this genre type is that while there is still developer content such as story, new raids, new areas, etc., there is also a large amount of room for players to interact with each other and keep themselves busy while the developers create the new content. This comes in the form of Castle Sieges, Node Sieges, Caravans, World Boss contention, and more.

    Also, in regards to your "everyone having the same loot" point, I understand that. I fucking HATE MMORPGs that has everyone in the city running around in the same gear. Ashes will hopefully be able to avoid this by making the gear actually rare and difficult to get (also the fact that any class can wear any gear should help as well). There are multiple gear tiers such as the generic Common, Uncommon, Rare, Epic for example, but then there's also 2 tiers above that, Legendary and Legendary Unique. Legendaries are very rare bits of equipment that will be an actual challenge to get, not like in modern WoW where everyone is running around the BiS Legendaries. Then, there's the tier above Legendaries called Legendary Uniques which is what I am very very excited about. Legendary Uniques are pieces of equipment in which there is only one single piece of it on the entire server. This means if you have it, you have it, no one else does. I've been waiting for a big MMORPG to do this forever and I'm happy to see Ashes finally take a stab at it.
    nI17Ea4.png
  • How is ashes different?

    It's bankrolled by a mad lad who seems to have played, and enjoyed all of my favorite old school MMOs.

    This page is what sold me on AOC.
    https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Design_pillars

    L2,SWG, and EVE are some of my favorite MMOs. I see AOC as the next evolution of these games.

    I love open world games that let the players make their own story through socialization, and deep economic and crafting systems.
    CctsKnC.png
  • MorekMorek Member, Braver of Worlds
    When I backed AoC during their KS campaign, I was longing for a new MMO/MMORPG. I had played WoW since I was 10, was around for SWTOR 3 years before they launched on the forums like I am now with AoC and I many more. None seemed to capture my every waking moment after I "played" them. I was just making new toons and hoping to find something new to do or meet some new friends. It is sad to keep playing the same thing over and over again for years.... for me at least.

    When I came across AoC on KS, I saw something different. They had more than enough content planned in the KS to make a full game and they hadn't even finished all their backer goals. On top of it already being funded by Steven himself and this was more so a way to advertise, I knew that this game might be big enough to save the genre. It was a gamble at the time to throw down some mad dough on a project not coming out for years, but I would have hated myself if I missed this train.

    This game is not only going to be a hit, but it is going to change the genre I believe. For most of the same points above, the Node system is pretty unique and what not. Being able to influence the world has never been so easy before. I personally really love to get lost in games. I love logging on and having the ability to do almost anything and just wander around with no objective until I fall upon a new area full of different players and quest. See, every game is different in that regard, the world that is, but I enjoy exploring those different worlds until I get bored. With the Node system, new hubs will be popping up every few months and others leveling up to max to offer something that wasn't before. Just that alone makes me smile knowing that nothing is set in stone.

    The class system seems pretty run of the mill, but we honestly don't know much about the classes themselves and the augment system fully. Mixing two classes together that might be completely unconventional on paper might seem stupid, but could be something different and weird that you will enjoy. 64 'potential' classes based on 8 archetypes sounds like a tall order, but the ideas that come to mind offers so much diversity that how can you not find something you like to play.

    If you like open world games that are 'yuge, this one will make you wonder why this hasn't been done before. Take a look at the world map of Verra and try an imagine the size. It is like trying to picture 10,000 of something, but we really don't understand or comprehend how large the number is. Same idea here... the world is so large that it is unthinkable at this point until we get in there.

    AoC is going to be a whole new experience from any other game you have played. Will some things be similar to others? Yes, but its about what makes it different and fun that will make a lasting impression on you. The game is still not fully in Alpha yet and not everything is known, but that is to be expected from a game of this caliber. Maybe not enough is known yet for you to be hyped and later down the road a year or two from release it might snag you. Who knows, but I can tell you this is going to be a game you will want to play with your friends every night if you try it out.

    I suggest read some of the wiki, watch some YT vids, and just let your brain wonder a little and picture what it might be like, just like reading a book.
    giphy.gif
  • Honestly, why it has to be so different? Is it not enough to be good on it's own?

    I love the traditional fantasy nerdyness and traditional MMORPGs mechanics when done correctly!
    wich not always happens and seems like this game is going to nail it. Im not an mmo expert like the majority of people in this forum, and im just looking for an awesome game to play, wich btw has it's own unique mechanics.
  • For me it would be the node system. Knowing that power & influence dynamics are not permanent. Sieges can be organized against nodes and new guilds can take control over castles if they are strong enough. This alone is enough for me to call AoC a home and not just another game.
  • Wandering MistWandering Mist Moderator, Member, Founder
    (Copy-pasted from another similar thread)

    I agree that if you've only watched some of the gameplay footage from Ashes, it doesn't look that special. Pretty looking for sure but nothing ground-breaking in terms of mmorpgs.

    HOWEVER, what sets Ashes of Creation apart from the other mmorpgs, and the reason I'm excited for it, is in the node system and the dynamic world it produces. No other mmorpg I know of has taken this concept as far or given the players so much agency over what the world looks like.

    On top of that I very much support the core principles that Ashes is built upon:

    1. Bringing back social interaction in mmorpgs
    2. Bringing back risk/reward in mmorpgs
    3. getting rid of pay2win and pay2convenience mechanics

    These aren't things that can really be shown off in gameplay footage just yet, but they are still there and are definitely what I'm looking forward to about the game, that set it apart from the other modern mmorpgs.

    23in6tvjikn1.gif
  • My intent is to find out what excites you about Ashes, so I can get excited too. Ultimately, what I am looking for is a place, not a game.

    What excites me may not be what excites you. In the end, you won't know if you'll enjoy it until you play it. With no box cost, give it a month's subscription when it comes out, and see for yourself. If you don't like it, then you've only spent a month. If you do, then buy another month and then re-evaluate.
    Daveywavey-member.png
  • daveywavey wrote: »
    My intent is to find out what excites you about Ashes, so I can get excited too. Ultimately, what I am looking for is a place, not a game.

    What excites me may not be what excites you. In the end, you won't know if you'll enjoy it until you play it. With no box cost, give it a month's subscription when it comes out, and see for yourself. If you don't like it, then you've only spent a month. If you do, then buy another month and then re-evaluate.
    Noaani wrote: »
    The main thing that sets Ashes apart is the node system. It is, essentially, the core of the game.

    Players impact nodes, and nodes impact what content is or is not open on the server at any given point in time.

    If you were to read up on any one aspect of Ashes in order to see what makes it different (and I do suggest reading about it) then the node system is where you should look.
    Talents wrote: »
    The fantasy class of massively multiplayer online role-playing games is stagnating. The genre's archetype, World of Warcraft, had the positive effect of opening the hobby to the general public, but in its undisputed success, created a development bubble populated by projects that struggle to differentiate themselves from WoW, yet invariably end up duplicating it.

    The core philosophy that WoW and all its progeny cannot escape is that no matter how much time, financing, creativity, talent and will, developers possess, they cannot produce content faster than the user base can play it. All deviations from this basic premise end up creating experiences which struggle to make the player feel unique, and fail. This, coupled to an attachment to antiquated pen and paper metaphors such as stats, deny the true capabilities of the computers these MMORPGs run on.

    The main problem for these points was because no big Western MMORPG after WoW tried to differentiate itself from WoW. For 8 or so years after WoWs release, every developer tried to copy what WoW did, and failed because they just tried to make a generic Themepark MMORPG that was the same as WoW. This lead to the Western MMORPG market dying because they looked at all the MMORPGs that tried to copy WoW and thought "Gee, guess no one likes MMORPGs anymore because none of the WoW clones succeeded", so they stopped making them. Then mobile gaming and other games came in which were cheaper to make but brought in more money, so everyone stopped making MMOs.

    The "The core philosophy that WoW and all its progeny cannot escape is that no matter how much time, financing, creativity, talent and will, developers possess, they cannot produce content faster than the user base can play it." point is because most of the released Western MMORPGs were pure Themepark MMORPGs. This meant the content was basically entirely reliant on developer made content in order for players to have something to do. They had to pump out more dungeons, more raids, more content in order to keep players playing since players had nothing else to do except these dungeons and raids.

    Ashes is one of the first big Western MMORPGs in a long time to try and make a Themebox or Sandpark MMORPG. A mixture between the generic Themepark MMORPG that relies on developer content, and a Sandbox MMORPG that doesn't entirely rely on developers to keep pumping content, but relies on players to create their own content with each other, usually through ways such as player conflict. The big upside of this genre type is that while there is still developer content such as story, new raids, new areas, etc., there is also a large amount of room for players to interact with each other and keep themselves busy while the developers create the new content. This comes in the form of Castle Sieges, Node Sieges, Caravans, World Boss contention, and more.

    Also, in regards to your "everyone having the same loot" point, I understand that. I fucking HATE MMORPGs that has everyone in the city running around in the same gear. Ashes will hopefully be able to avoid this by making the gear actually rare and difficult to get (also the fact that any class can wear any gear should help as well). There are multiple gear tiers such as the generic Common, Uncommon, Rare, Epic for example, but then there's also 2 tiers above that, Legendary and Legendary Unique. Legendaries are very rare bits of equipment that will be an actual challenge to get, not like in modern WoW where everyone is running around the BiS Legendaries. Then, there's the tier above Legendaries called Legendary Uniques which is what I am very very excited about. Legendary Uniques are pieces of equipment in which there is only one single piece of it on the entire server. This means if you have it, you have it, no one else does. I've been waiting for a big MMORPG to do this forever and I'm happy to see Ashes finally take a stab at it.

    I will definitely look into the Node system, but I am totally unimpressed with the Sandbox games, and I have played (and beta tested) a LOT of them. Anyone remember Sausage Lake? A world where you can do anything sounds great, but turns out to be a meaningless experience. Without context, 'anything' ends up being grinding.

    As to the loot, what I do not understand is why these games do not provide context to the items themselves. In my mind, this would solve the unique problem completely. If I gave you two identical looking bricks, one in each of your hands, and asked what their value is, likely you would say not much, and arguably equal. But if I could prove that the brick in your left hand came from the house Abraham Lincoln was raised in, then suddenly that identical brick has more value. The difference is the left brick has a provable history. Why can't every item in the game have a history? Who owned it, how many times it killed spiders, when it was enchanted, and on and on. Then there might be a REASON to keep that first sword you ever acquired. It would grow as you grow as a player. And the first crafted sword suddenly has value, not because of its killing potential, but because of its history of being the first one created, and by whom. This is just database info, so I do not understand why this doesn't exist.

    Taylors
  • (Copy-pasted from another similar thread)

    I agree that if you've only watched some of the gameplay footage from Ashes, it doesn't look that special. Pretty looking for sure but nothing ground-breaking in terms of mmorpgs.

    HOWEVER, what sets Ashes of Creation apart from the other mmorpgs, and the reason I'm excited for it, is in the node system and the dynamic world it produces. No other mmorpg I know of has taken this concept as far or given the players so much agency over what the world looks like.

    On top of that I very much support the core principles that Ashes is built upon:

    1. Bringing back social interaction in mmorpgs
    2. Bringing back risk/reward in mmorpgs
    3. getting rid of pay2win and pay2convenience mechanics

    These aren't things that can really be shown off in gameplay footage just yet, but they are still there and are definitely what I'm looking forward to about the game, that set it apart from the other modern mmorpgs.

    The node system looks interesting, and definitely novel, but alone, I don't think that it differentiates this game from WoW. In the end, after months of play, it looks like it will still be rinse and repeat. I think for a true WoW successor to exist, at least part of the development needs to be given to the players. Until the player community can create content, we are dependent on the developers, and as good as they are, they do not have the resources or time to make content faster than we can consume it.

    The other issue I have is uniqueness purely through loot. Why not uniqueness through skill? Or Knowledge? How will Ashes make it so going to a wiki does not provide me all the secrets to finding things, solving things, etc. This is another trope of WoW that limits the player's ability to discover and distinguish themselves.

    Taylors
  • daveywavey wrote: »
    My intent is to find out what excites you about Ashes, so I can get excited too. Ultimately, what I am looking for is a place, not a game.

    What excites me may not be what excites you. In the end, you won't know if you'll enjoy it until you play it. With no box cost, give it a month's subscription when it comes out, and see for yourself. If you don't like it, then you've only spent a month. If you do, then buy another month and then re-evaluate.

    The cost of a game is not a factor to me, and I do not say that to brag. What I mean is that I am willing to pay for a game that truly delivers on what it promises.

    Taylors
  • Wandering MistWandering Mist Moderator, Member, Founder
    (Copy-pasted from another similar thread)

    I agree that if you've only watched some of the gameplay footage from Ashes, it doesn't look that special. Pretty looking for sure but nothing ground-breaking in terms of mmorpgs.

    HOWEVER, what sets Ashes of Creation apart from the other mmorpgs, and the reason I'm excited for it, is in the node system and the dynamic world it produces. No other mmorpg I know of has taken this concept as far or given the players so much agency over what the world looks like.

    On top of that I very much support the core principles that Ashes is built upon:

    1. Bringing back social interaction in mmorpgs
    2. Bringing back risk/reward in mmorpgs
    3. getting rid of pay2win and pay2convenience mechanics

    These aren't things that can really be shown off in gameplay footage just yet, but they are still there and are definitely what I'm looking forward to about the game, that set it apart from the other modern mmorpgs.

    The node system looks interesting, and definitely novel, but alone, I don't think that it differentiates this game from WoW. In the end, after months of play, it looks like it will still be rinse and repeat. I think for a true WoW successor to exist, at least part of the development needs to be given to the players. Until the player community can create content, we are dependent on the developers, and as good as they are, they do not have the resources or time to make content faster than we can consume it.

    The other issue I have is uniqueness purely through loot. Why not uniqueness through skill? Or Knowledge? How will Ashes make it so going to a wiki does not provide me all the secrets to finding things, solving things, etc. This is another trope of WoW that limits the player's ability to discover and distinguish themselves.

    Taylors

    It definitely won't be rinse and repeat like in WoW, for the simple fact that the available content will depend on how the world is developed by the players. The node system also links into the world PvP and gives it meaning as a core system, unlike in WoW where world PvP is very much an optional thing that the majority of the playerbase ignore.

    I'm not sure what you mean with your second paragraph, as that's more a problem with the internet than the game. It's almost impossible to have a game without there being a ton of information available online about it. Even games that rely entirely on randomness and procedural generation have guides for how to achieve the best results.

    23in6tvjikn1.gif
  • edited January 13
    (Copy-pasted from another similar thread)

    I agree that if you've only watched some of the gameplay footage from Ashes, it doesn't look that special. Pretty looking for sure but nothing ground-breaking in terms of mmorpgs.

    HOWEVER, what sets Ashes of Creation apart from the other mmorpgs, and the reason I'm excited for it, is in the node system and the dynamic world it produces. No other mmorpg I know of has taken this concept as far or given the players so much agency over what the world looks like.

    On top of that I very much support the core principles that Ashes is built upon:

    1. Bringing back social interaction in mmorpgs
    2. Bringing back risk/reward in mmorpgs
    3. getting rid of pay2win and pay2convenience mechanics

    These aren't things that can really be shown off in gameplay footage just yet, but they are still there and are definitely what I'm looking forward to about the game, that set it apart from the other modern mmorpgs.

    The node system looks interesting, and definitely novel, but alone, I don't think that it differentiates this game from WoW. In the end, after months of play, it looks like it will still be rinse and repeat. I think for a true WoW successor to exist, at least part of the development needs to be given to the players. Until the player community can create content, we are dependent on the developers, and as good as they are, they do not have the resources or time to make content faster than we can consume it.

    The other issue I have is uniqueness purely through loot. Why not uniqueness through skill? Or Knowledge? How will Ashes make it so going to a wiki does not provide me all the secrets to finding things, solving things, etc. This is another trope of WoW that limits the player's ability to discover and distinguish themselves.

    Taylors

    It definitely won't be rinse and repeat like in WoW, for the simple fact that the available content will depend on how the world is developed by the players. The node system also links into the world PvP and gives it meaning as a core system, unlike in WoW where world PvP is very much an optional thing that the majority of the playerbase ignore.

    I'm not sure what you mean with your second paragraph, as that's more a problem with the internet than the game. It's almost impossible to have a game without there being a ton of information available online about it. Even games that rely entirely on randomness and procedural generation have guides for how to achieve the best results.

    I guess we'll have to see how the nodes are implemented. Five permutations, with consequential differences in dungeons, quests, etc, still sounds a bit canned. But the idea seems sound.

    I think there is a way to make the game unique for each player. If on player creation, a hash is run against some permanent aspect of the player (like their name), then that hash can be used as a seed in the randomization of database elements the player interacts with in the world. As an example, let's say the player is walking down a path, an orc jumps out, says, 'ooga booga', and runs away. In the back end, 'ooga booga' was the 15th word on a list that ties orc words to english ones. But it is only the 15th word for that player, because of that unique randomization seed. Since each person has a different hash, the randomization would be different for everyone, and on the back-end, no overhead would be used (because the master list of names never changes, only the randomized version presented dynamically to the player). So in that same scenario, another player's 15th word would be 'shazowie'. Since randomization is unique for each player, going to wiki would suddenly become meaningless.

    Taylors
  • daveywavey wrote: »
    My intent is to find out what excites you about Ashes, so I can get excited too. Ultimately, what I am looking for is a place, not a game.

    What excites me may not be what excites you. In the end, you won't know if you'll enjoy it until you play it. With no box cost, give it a month's subscription when it comes out, and see for yourself. If you don't like it, then you've only spent a month. If you do, then buy another month and then re-evaluate.

    The cost of a game is not a factor to me, and I do not say that to brag. What I mean is that I am willing to pay for a game that truly delivers on what it promises.

    Taylors

    As I say, you've essentially got nothing to lose. Try it when it comes out. You don't need random strangers to sell you on a game. Just play it and see if you like it.
    Daveywavey-member.png
  • Too few people have yet to see the Nodes 1 & 2 videos. 2 is far more-detailed:



    Ultimately, this game is a great departure from WoW; It feels as though you're possibly hung up on the fact that it's medieval-style high-fantasty. Even the combat system is a departure from WoW's mechanics, in that it's open-space hack-and-slash, as opposed to single-focus tab-targeting.

    A big element for a lot of us is that there will also be no P2W, as there is in WoW. You definately won't see the Blizzard team at PAX getting standing ovations for this!
  • CadacCadac Member
    In addition to the many fine points made above, you won't be playing in an ugly digital daycare center for preteens. So you have that to look forward to.
    Additionally, there will be consequences, and repercussions for failure. If your node fails an event, the whole node will suffer. If you fail your own story quest, it is dead, and you will need to do some heavy lifting to get it back.
  • Too few people have yet to see the Nodes 1 & 2 videos. 2 is far more-detailed:



    Ultimately, this game is a great departure from WoW; It feels as though you're possibly hung up on the fact that it's medieval-style high-fantasty. Even the combat system is a departure from WoW's mechanics, in that it's open-space hack-and-slash, as opposed to single-focus tab-targeting.

    A big element for a lot of us is that there will also be no P2W, as there is in WoW. You definately won't see the Blizzard team at PAX getting standing ovations for this!

    I left WoW WAY before P2W. I was on one of the first dozen servers, and left it 10 months later, after I played all that could be played. Point is, that is not a factor to me when making the comparison, but on a separate note, I am glad they are not doing it. Still, WoW did it ultimately because the community left, and they needed a means of bringing in revenue. So not fair to compare that aspect of WoW with Ashes. Who know what Ashes will do if the community decides to leave.

    As to the combat, I have learned, from playing literally hundreds of these games since the late 80s, that mechanics do not make the game. The mechanics themselves rarely translate into 'fun'. I think they CAN make a game fun, if the mechanics are the point of the game, but merely making mechanics different is not enough to do so. In the end, you want your character to do something, you click the buttons that allow them to do it. Where is the creativity in that? Many games have permutated this basic concept, but in the end, it's all very similar. If I cannot express myself and 'communicate' through my avatar's actions, then I am simply trying to achieve a goal through consistent button-clicking strategies. No matter how diversified I make my class (using the Ashes definition) if everyone else of the same class is constrained by a similar button build, then we are effectively all the same. How do I then show my skill? Why would someone want ME on their team vs another person with a similar build?

    Do you see what I am saying?

    Taylors
  • @Jahlon of the Paradox Gaming Network (on YouTube) has a "Ashes 101" video series that might be worth checking out. The videos are roughly 15-20 minutes long each and cover a wide variety of informative & well--structured details regarding the core mechanics of the game and it's systems.

    These might be useful in answering some of your questions. I've learned a LOT about the game from them.
    Stephen Sharif is my James Halliday (Anorak)

    17102045741am-vaoep.png

    “That is not dead which can eternal lie,
    And with strange aeons even death may die.”

    -HPL
  • Too few people have yet to see the Nodes 1 & 2 videos. 2 is far more-detailed:



    Ultimately, this game is a great departure from WoW; It feels as though you're possibly hung up on the fact that it's medieval-style high-fantasty. Even the combat system is a departure from WoW's mechanics, in that it's open-space hack-and-slash, as opposed to single-focus tab-targeting.

    A big element for a lot of us is that there will also be no P2W, as there is in WoW. You definately won't see the Blizzard team at PAX getting standing ovations for this!

    I left WoW WAY before P2W. I was on one of the first dozen servers, and left it 10 months later, after I played all that could be played. Point is, that is not a factor to me when making the comparison, but on a separate note, I am glad they are not doing it. Still, WoW did it ultimately because the community left, and they needed a means of bringing in revenue. So not fair to compare that aspect of WoW with Ashes. Who know what Ashes will do if the community decides to leave.

    As to the combat, I have learned, from playing literally hundreds of these games since the late 80s, that mechanics do not make the game. The mechanics themselves rarely translate into 'fun'. I think they CAN make a game fun, if the mechanics are the point of the game, but merely making mechanics different is not enough to do so. In the end, you want your character to do something, you click the buttons that allow them to do it. Where is the creativity in that? Many games have permutated this basic concept, but in the end, it's all very similar. If I cannot express myself and 'communicate' through my avatar's actions, then I am simply trying to achieve a goal through consistent button-clicking strategies. No matter how diversified I make my class (using the Ashes definition) if everyone else of the same class is constrained by a similar button build, then we are effectively all the same. How do I then show my skill? Why would someone want ME on their team vs another person with a similar build?

    Do you see what I am saying?

    Taylors

    I'll speak just to your last point about showcasing your skill over others and what I believe you were getting at specifically - the combat skill gap (effectiveness gap between "skilled" players and "unskilled players" with identical gear and skills) Firstly and most importantly, frankly at this point combat is still in development stages and we don't know how the skill gap will apply, nor do we know how large the skill gap will be. If you have suggestions, by all means voice them in the forums and help the development team.

    That said, a few comments:

    Even in circumstances where all players have access to the same skills and gear, skill gaps can still be quite large. Things like map awareness, in depth knowledge of enemy skills and the associated effects, effective counters for those skills, effective class combination attacks and how and when to use them, team interaction, movement dynamics, and map knowledge and control... all are extremely important and contribute to the skill gap. Look at Guild Wars 1 PvP for example. In GW1, PvP created characters were granted access to all the same gear, and skills; nobody had access to anything someone else didn't, and yet the skill gap was still very very large (sufficiently large that an Esports scene developed). That game had NO active targeting abilities - ie. you selected your target and clicked your skills), and yet the skill gap was significant between tournament players and typical PvP players. AoC combat (based on what we have seen so far) seems to incorporate many of the same principles.

    Moreover, AoC includes active skills (skills that rely on targeting cones, ground area selection, or character movement to activate). These skills drastically increase the skill gap by requiring additional player input and decision making in addition to the other factors noted above. These skills function similarly to something like Guild Wars 2's combat system, which is another example of a combat system where the skill gap is very very large between players of low skill and high skill.

    While most of the above is from the perspective of PvP primarily - excelling at the same factors in PvE would impact other measurable PvE oriented metrics and certainly team effectiveness. If you really think that there can't be much of a skill gap in circumstances where people have the same build, class and equipment, I strongly suggest you review some PvP content from the two games I noted above as they showcase quite clearly that such an assumption is false.
  • JahlonJahlon Member, Intrepid Pack
    If you want to deep dive into Ashes of Creation from an educational standpoint as @Lore Dynamic said I'm the Ashes 101 guy.

    https://www.ashes101.com/ is a good place if you want to absorb stuff not in a wiki format.
    27eAoL8.png
    Make sure to check out Ashes 101
  • maouwmaouw Member
    @Taylors Expansion
    I know what you mean about mechanics not always translating to fun - so the only way to find out if this dynamic node system is fun is by actually trying it.
    For me, I hope to try things, give my best feedback so the game has a really good shot at coming into its own.

    Your questions are a bit premature for a game that's barely in alpha that most of us have never played - and the community has answered as best as we can. Can I flip the tables? How would you solve your dilemmas? How would you prove the brick was from Abe's home? How would you make a game where everyone has different button clicking strategies, and everyone wants everyone on their team? Surely you can see the conflict in what you're asking for?

    In regards to your idea about random hashing based on player names - a distinguishing aspect of MMOs that differentiates it from a single player game is that the world is shared: so hashing the experience across UIDs breaks up the cohesion and is thus more appropriate for a single player game - and I'd argue this would lead to an alienated community:
    "Remember when the Orc jumped out and said 'ooga booga'!"
    "u wot? no. He said 'shazowie'"
    "oh. I guess we saw different things."

    There is no shared experience of the game.

    It makes more sense to me if you share the same world, but your choices in class/race/home city/guild/friends are where you cultivate an identity within the shared world. As a consumer, you are anonymous. As a producer you have a name. That is: you will never forge an identity based on what the game prescribes to you, you forge an identity based on what you do with what you are given. So the game's responsibility is to give us flexibility to choose different paths.

    Furthermore, hashing will just make the internet create a name generator for you to get the hash that you want. Or people will keep recreating accounts until they get the hash they want (Monster Hunter loot tables have proven this).
    That said, I should acknowledge that in my experience, rolling dice for your stats in DnD is more fun than the point-buy system - so there is something to what you're saying - but hashing the player experience is not it.

    I don't know how to say this Taylors - you seem pretty jaded and your responses are quite cynical as if you want someone with silver confidence to come along and reignite passion into you. I'm not that person, but I have a feeling that the answers you seek are an internal battle more than an external one. I'm probably speaking way out of line here but TOO LATE! Live and learn by mistakes~
    I wish I were deep and tragic
  • edited January 14
    maouw wrote: »
    @Taylors Expansion
    I know what you mean about mechanics not always translating to fun - so the only way to find out if this dynamic node system is fun is by actually trying it.
    For me, I hope to try things, give my best feedback so the game has a really good shot at coming into its own.

    Your questions are a bit premature for a game that's barely in alpha that most of us have never played - and the community has answered as best as we can. Can I flip the tables? How would you solve your dilemmas? How would you prove the brick was from Abe's home? How would you make a game where everyone has different button clicking strategies, and everyone wants everyone on their team? Surely you can see the conflict in what you're asking for?

    In regards to your idea about random hashing based on player names - a distinguishing aspect of MMOs that differentiates it from a single player game is that the world is shared: so hashing the experience across UIDs breaks up the cohesion and is thus more appropriate for a single player game - and I'd argue this would lead to an alienated community:
    "Remember when the Orc jumped out and said 'ooga booga'!"
    "u wot? no. He said 'shazowie'"
    "oh. I guess we saw different things."

    There is no shared experience of the game.

    It makes more sense to me if you share the same world, but your choices in class/race/home city/guild/friends are where you cultivate an identity within the shared world. As a consumer, you are anonymous. As a producer you have a name. That is: you will never forge an identity based on what the game prescribes to you, you forge an identity based on what you do with what you are given. So the game's responsibility is to give us flexibility to choose different paths.

    Furthermore, hashing will just make the internet create a name generator for you to get the hash that you want. Or people will keep recreating accounts until they get the hash they want (Monster Hunter loot tables have proven this).
    That said, I should acknowledge that in my experience, rolling dice for your stats in DnD is more fun than the point-buy system - so there is something to what you're saying - but hashing the player experience is not it.

    I don't know how to say this Taylors - you seem pretty jaded and your responses are quite cynical as if you want someone with silver confidence to come along and reignite passion into you. I'm not that person, but I have a feeling that the answers you seek are an internal battle more than an external one. I'm probably speaking way out of line here but TOO LATE! Live and learn by mistakes~

    First off, forgive me if I sound like I'm bashing Ashes. I'm not here to do so, and I appreciate, and agree with your statement. I am here because as part of this hobby, we get excited about games that are in development. But the cycle continues to release of the game, disappointment in the game, and then finding a new game to start the process all over again. It's been a LONG time since a game has truly been groundbreaking. WoW was that, when it first came out, but it became obvious in the 'end game' (I hate that term), that it would never be more than what it was.

    I, and other aged hobbyists I know, have given these ideas a lot of thought, and for some, I think we do have ideas. The hashing is one of them. I do not agree that it is more applicable to a single player game, though I take your point that it would randomize them and make them more challenging as well. The real foundation behind the hashing concept is about growing through learning, not through skill advancement. Not saying exclusively, but at a minimum, in equal tandem. Learning is not really a goal of most MMORPGs, or I would argue, any of them. Let's be honest, we call them MMORPGs, but the reality is that they are all fancified MMOFPSs (where the S is combat through some fantasy trope). My meaning is that these game ultimately are designed around fighting, with some crafting, exploring, etc thrown in on the side to give people something to do while not fighting. And even those side activities usually tie into combat as well, whether it be armorsmithing or cooking temporary buffs. All are for fighting. Is that really the only thing we can think of to do in these games? That's pretty sad, because in the real world, we do ZERO fighting, and there are many forms of entertainment that we love. I find the fighting focus to be an easy way out, if you will, because doing other forms of activity are too difficult to implement. But are they? 'Combat' is really just problem solving, right? I don't want to make this post go on forever, but consider that negotiating a deal is a form of combat. Picking a lock is a form of combat. There are an infinite variety of 'combat' activities, even crafting, but none are tied to the combat system. Why? I think doing so would open these games up tremendously.

    Taylors
  • I think difference comes down to design philosophy and what the makers of this game are setting out to do. They are creating a world first and filling it with systems for players to use and interact with. Players are not restrained in how they spend their time in the world.

    Contrasts this with the locked in design of most modern MMOS. Level up -> Do endgame -> get gear -> repeat. Sure I can play whatever class I want and choose a guild to hangout with, but the game essentially has just one end goal and plan. Maybe there is some PvP as well.

    By creating systems for the players to use to cooperate and compete, not to mention a fluid and unique world created by the node system, players will be organically create their own stories.

    That is the difference to me, and why after literal decades looking for another good MMORPG and being let down I am finally letting myself have some hope again.
  • Greendino wrote: »
    I think difference comes down to design philosophy and what the makers of this game are setting out to do. They are creating a world first and filling it with systems for players to use and interact with. Players are not restrained in how they spend their time in the world.

    Contrasts this with the locked in design of most modern MMOS. Level up -> Do endgame -> get gear -> repeat. Sure I can play whatever class I want and choose a guild to hangout with, but the game essentially has just one end goal and plan. Maybe there is some PvP as well.

    By creating systems for the players to use to cooperate and compete, not to mention a fluid and unique world created by the node system, players will be organically create their own stories.

    That is the difference to me, and why after literal decades looking for another good MMORPG and being let down I am finally letting myself have some hope again.

    I'm not sure I agree that Ashes has all you say, but I understand the need to have hope. I think all of us love this hobby, and all of us want an experience that is truly remarkable. And credit to the developers, I am sure 100% of them are trying to give us that experience.

    But you have to understand the problem in order to fix it, and I have yet to see any developers really demonstrate that understanding. This is not a sandbox vs rollercoaster argument. That actually has nothing to do with the core of what makes all MMORPGs identical. It is about how content is created. And unless the players become part of that process, we will continue to stagnate. To be more specific, if you look at WoW as a rollercoaster, the node system is a theme park with five rollercoasters. At the beginning, it is going to be really cool, but over time, when we've 'ridden' them all, what will keep us interested. Another node type? I like the idea of creating more diverse experiences, which the node concept tries to do, but each node is still within the framework of the theme park, which is itself enclosed, and has strict rules. This is true of every sandbox, with one notable exception. Minecraft. While I don't consider it an MMORPG, it does allow the players to make the content and to reshape the world directly. I don't think the technology is mature enough to allow world deformation/construction in a modern MMORPG, but on a limited scale, I will bet it is. If you own a player house, for instance, turning it into a mini dungeon seems reasonable. Using the dungeon to grow an army of dark minions with the intention of overthrowing the node, while outwardly projecting yourself as an upstanding node citizen sounds like a story I would love to be part of. That happens in Eve, and it ends up being historic.

    I guess what I am saying is that there are SO many things that haven't been tried, and each game moves the needle just a tiny little bit. There needs to be some out-of-the-box thinking, or else Ashes, which I will say right now that I want to succeed, will once again create another WoW.

    Taylors
  • AtamaAtama Member, Braver of Worlds
    I, and other aged hobbyists I know, have given these ideas a lot of thought, and for some, I think we do have ideas. The hashing is one of them. I do not agree that it is more applicable to a single player game, though I take your point that it would randomize them and make them more challenging as well. The real foundation behind the hashing concept is about growing through learning, not through skill advancement. Not saying exclusively, but at a minimum, in equal tandem. Learning is not really a goal of most MMORPGs, or I would argue, any of them. Let's be honest, we call them MMORPGs, but the reality is that they are all fancified MMOFPSs (where the S is combat through some fantasy trope). My meaning is that these game ultimately are designed around fighting, with some crafting, exploring, etc thrown in on the side to give people something to do while not fighting. And even those side activities usually tie into combat as well, whether it be armorsmithing or cooking temporary buffs. All are for fighting. Is that really the only thing we can think of to do in these games? That's pretty sad, because in the real world, we do ZERO fighting, and there are many forms of entertainment that we love. I find the fighting focus to be an easy way out, if you will, because doing other forms of activity are too difficult to implement. But are they? 'Combat' is really just problem solving, right? I don't want to make this post go on forever, but consider that negotiating a deal is a form of combat. Picking a lock is a form of combat. There are an infinite variety of 'combat' activities, even crafting, but none are tied to the combat system. Why? I think doing so would open these games up tremendously.

    Taylors
    I do a lot of tabletop roleplaying as well as playing computer RPGs, and many tabletop systems work that way. They often call these things "task resolutions", "conflicts", or just "encounters" and use a similar system for computer hacking, lock-picking, social situations, and combat itself. Because as you say generally you have a goal, an obstacle to overcome to complete that goal, consequences for success or failure, and everything else is a matter of detail.

    I think something like this can work well in a computer game. I think the bigger challenge is getting it to work properly in a real time setting with other players.
    U752vHP.png
  • Atama wrote: »
    I, and other aged hobbyists I know, have given these ideas a lot of thought, and for some, I think we do have ideas. The hashing is one of them. I do not agree that it is more applicable to a single player game, though I take your point that it would randomize them and make them more challenging as well. The real foundation behind the hashing concept is about growing through learning, not through skill advancement. Not saying exclusively, but at a minimum, in equal tandem. Learning is not really a goal of most MMORPGs, or I would argue, any of them. Let's be honest, we call them MMORPGs, but the reality is that they are all fancified MMOFPSs (where the S is combat through some fantasy trope). My meaning is that these game ultimately are designed around fighting, with some crafting, exploring, etc thrown in on the side to give people something to do while not fighting. And even those side activities usually tie into combat as well, whether it be armorsmithing or cooking temporary buffs. All are for fighting. Is that really the only thing we can think of to do in these games? That's pretty sad, because in the real world, we do ZERO fighting, and there are many forms of entertainment that we love. I find the fighting focus to be an easy way out, if you will, because doing other forms of activity are too difficult to implement. But are they? 'Combat' is really just problem solving, right? I don't want to make this post go on forever, but consider that negotiating a deal is a form of combat. Picking a lock is a form of combat. There are an infinite variety of 'combat' activities, even crafting, but none are tied to the combat system. Why? I think doing so would open these games up tremendously.

    Taylors
    I do a lot of tabletop roleplaying as well as playing computer RPGs, and many tabletop systems work that way. They often call these things "task resolutions", "conflicts", or just "encounters" and use a similar system for computer hacking, lock-picking, social situations, and combat itself. Because as you say generally you have a goal, an obstacle to overcome to complete that goal, consequences for success or failure, and everything else is a matter of detail.

    I think something like this can work well in a computer game. I think the bigger challenge is getting it to work properly in a real time setting with other players.

    I appreciate your response, and your consideration of this concept.

    I don't see the real-time part as a challenge, any more than making combat itself work in that context. It would likely be easier, actually, because unlike actual combat, the consequences wouldn't (necessarily) be death. In negotiation, it could be reputation, for instance. In crafting, the loss of materials, or the original item. In lockpicking, the destruction of the lock (and yeah, I guess death from a trap). Time would work identically to time in combat, where (in most games) there is a de facto turn system (ability timers, for both players and mobs). These effectively become mini-games, but I would argue that every obstacle in the game should use the combat system. It is only a mini-game if the system it uses differs from the general (usually fully fledged and mature) combat system.

    I am so tired of just fighting mobs and other Players as the exclusive point of these worlds. That trope is literally 30 years old. No new things to do in 30 years?

    Taylors
  • rikardp98rikardp98 Member
    edited January 15
    @Taylors Expansion did you play the original world of warcraft vanilla for only 10months and thought you were done?

    And for the record, wow didn't "die" because lack of story/content. It died because the content you had to do was extremely boring and felt like a real grind.
  • rikardp98 wrote: »
    @Taylors Expansion did you play the original world of warcraft vanilla for only 10months and thought you were done?

    And for the record, wow didn't "die" because lack of story/content. It died because the content you had to do was extremely boring and felt like a real grind.

    Yes, plain vanilla. Did it ever grow beyond being a grind for loot, that enabled you to grind for more loot, that enabled you to grind for more loot? The story became irrelevant, a veneer that justified the grinding, not a compelling reason to want to find out more about the story. But I was never very into the Warcraft story to begin with, so maybe that part is on me.

    Taylors
  • @Taylors Expansion You said you did "everything" which means you were one of the few that completed naxxramas. If you didn't, then you didn't "played all that could be played" and you just played everything you enjoyed and raiding wasn't your thing. And I believe, especially in vanilla, that the game was always about the community and the interaction between players. You teaming up with your friends, getting stronger as you complete raids, and or battling the opposite faction in battlegrounds. Raids wasn't just about getting loot back then, it was about spending time with your guild trying to over come an obstacle and killing the last boss in the raid after many hours.

    I also think that ashes will be much more than what WoW ever was, or will ever be. Yes raiding will be a thing but you can also not raid if that's what you want. You can focus on large scale pvp, running for mayor in your node, exploring the world, start your own shop and much more.

    So I would very much recommend you reading through the wiki if you want to know more, then come back here and ask questions and your opinions.
  • @Taylors Expansion and I don't really understand why every item in the game needs a back story?
    Some basic items is just a sword and nothing more. If everything is special, then nothing is special. Items with a cool and interesting back story should be reserved for high level/powerful items
Sign In or Register to comment.