I want to expand this conversation and talk about the generation(s) below us.
GenZ grew up on Minecraft and Fortnite - those games are significant to them in a similar way to how WoW has been the behemoth of its time. This generation will be reaching peak gaming age (18+) around the time AoC releases. Is there any intention for these players to find a home in AoC?
We need to talk about the fact that Minecraft servers are destructible open-world PvP territorial games - which is close to what AoC wants to offer. So I have a few concerns:
Completely destructible world - I know AoC is aiming for destructible nodes via sieging (etc), but these players will be accustomed to 'build a wall, tear down a wall' level of destructibility (and creation). Could Ashes match this standard in, say, the building/destruction of freeholds?
Instancing - The largest Minecraft server as of 2020 was Hypixel with avg 100k players (only?!), with the next most popular server EndoMC with just under 16k players, and the numbers below that trail off slowly. Most of the kids I know have joined minecraft servers with their friends, and given the popularity of the game, this suggests they don't have a taste for shared, open-world content with STRANGERS. This isn't a problem for older generations, but can you get them out of the instanced lobby mindset? (Potentially related to previous comments about the need to be #1 in your instance)
First Person Reticle - if tab-target is the standard playstyle of WoW vets, reticle-based gameplay is the bread and butter of this generation. Hybrid combat needs to deliver on that front - could they get a test-group from this demographic specifically for the action side of the hybrid combat?
If Ashes can hit these, I think you'll secure some of the GenZ market, but I wonder if Ashes is postured to exclude the generations below us entirely.
Personally, I'm between the WoW and Minecraft generations, so I'll be fine if action is thrown out and we go full tab-target - but I do feel tab target is an artifact of the past, in a similar way to how turn-based combat preceded tab-target.
for all we know there could be vassal alliances from one side of the map to the other.
Maybe alliances from one port to another protecting shipping routes and player transportation
It is quite an interesting idea for a game regardless of a RP perspective vs traditional/non-traditional gameplay perspective.
Each server is going to play out differently. Is there a possibility for a higher percentage of the player base to play a specific way? quite possibly. does that mean they will? not necessarily.
@Vhaeyne there is a good chance that like minded players will group up not just at a node but their vassals too.
I'm not implying dramatic spike in a certain demographic per se, but there is a good chance for some nodes to be trading orientated, crafting, supporting each other as most alliances do.
As long as the participants are ok with the risk vs reward system, they could support each other regardless if one loses a node in the vassal chain.
I picture the game as more than just a 1 node vs 1 node as there is potential for multiple nodes to team up. From the different types of nodes ie military, scientific, divine, economic etc. it creates a good range to support multiple demographics within the broader demographic of PvX Node vs Node.
It's an evolved version of GvG.
I certainly like the idea of group forming around nodes for group oriented goals and there being soft friction against other group of players at other nodes.
@Vhaeyne there is a good chance that like minded players will group up not just at a node but their vassals too.
I'm not implying dramatic spike in a certain demographic per se, but there is a good chance for some nodes to be trading orientated, crafting, supporting each other as most alliances do.
As long as the participants are ok with the risk vs reward system, they could support each other regardless if one loses a node in the vassal chain.
I picture the game as more than just a 1 node vs 1 node as there is potential for multiple nodes to team up. From the different types of nodes ie military, scientific, divine, economic etc. it creates a good range to support multiple demographics within the broader demographic of PvX Node vs Node.
It's an evolved version of GvG.
It's possible. I would take that reality over the one where the game dies due to an unmanageable population spike. Anything to soften that blow. We know it's likely to happen to some degree.
I want to expand this conversation and talk about the generation(s) below us.
GenZ grew up on Minecraft and Fortnite - those games are significant to them in a similar way to how WoW has been the behemoth of its time. This generation will be reaching peak gaming age (18+) around the time AoC releases. Is there any intention for these players to find a home in AoC?
We need to talk about the fact that Minecraft servers are destructible open-world PvP territorial games - which is close to what AoC wants to offer. So I have a few concerns:
Completely destructible world - I know AoC is aiming for destructible nodes via sieging (etc), but these players will be accustomed to 'build a wall, tear down a wall' level of destructibility (and creation). Could Ashes match this standard in, say, the building/destruction of freeholds?
Instancing - The largest Minecraft server as of 2020 was Hypixel with avg 100k players (only?!), with the next most popular server EndoMC with just under 16k players, and the numbers below that trail off slowly. Most of the kids I know have joined minecraft servers with their friends, and given the popularity of the game, this suggests they don't have a taste for shared, open-world content with STRANGERS. This isn't a problem for older generations, but can you get them out of the instanced lobby mindset? (Potentially related to previous comments about the need to be #1 in your instance)
First Person Reticle - if tab-target is the standard playstyle of WoW vets, reticle-based gameplay is the bread and butter of this generation. Hybrid combat needs to deliver on that front - could they get a test-group from this demographic specifically for the action side of the hybrid combat?
If Ashes can hit these, I think you'll secure some of the GenZ market, but I wonder if Ashes is postured to exclude the generations below us entirely.
Personally, I'm between the WoW and Minecraft generations, so I'll be fine if action is thrown out and we go full tab-target - but I do feel tab target is an artifact of the past, in a similar way to how turn-based combat preceded tab-target.
That is an interesting direction to consider. I personally have sort of assumed an unspoken 'Ashes is an attempt to bring some of the old into the new', based on some more indirect assertions from Steven. But as several threads in this forum remind me, it can get easy to get caught up in preconceived notions based on 'what, worked or was acceptable back then' when 'bringing in the old'.
Gen Z likes community, strategy, and immersive changing worlds as much as any other generation. I agree Intrepid should be keeping different generational expectations in mind.
I am not personally worried about the completely destructible part you bring up as long as Ashes succeds in that 'changing world through identifiable player actions' feelling they are aiming for. Just give nodes enough options to feel really community custom and citizens a feeling of control irt supporting mayoral set goals (maybe even being able to have a small amount of 'disagreement with the mayor by not supporting a project.) That's close enough to cooperative mega build oriented MC communities that it wouldn't feel foriegn or overly restrictive. Especially given freeholds.
I think the instancing part being a problem is largely dependent on how free the frontier lands, really feel free and how effective guild zerging will feel. Node communities definitely have more of a bridge opportunity to be in between complete strangers and friends. The longer, people are incentivezed to stick around the less strange a stranger who is at the same fishing spot and market stall every feels. But at the same time, how impactful guild conquering smaller communities and large waves, of migration going outward as metros and towns crowd feels to 'group of friends setting up in the boonies' and how much they really loose when those, things happen is gong to be a huge decider on this. This is why I have advocated design that preserves a sense,of community and agency on loss for node content
I still think sticky reticle hits a solid sweet spot between tab and full action for me and im definitely also in between those two milestones like you. I think It'd be a reasonable compromise to a newer generation. I am less certain about tab. It's not the best equivalent but Age of Empires isn't exactly /un/popular with Gen Z (albiet based on my totally ancedotal experiences.) My point with bringing that up is if you make 'tab only' more about 'reactive strategy' its likely to have a core audience that could relate to it regardless of generation. But as it stands I still think action combat skewed is a good design guidance relative to this gen.
I want to expand this conversation and talk about the generation(s) below us.
GenZ grew up on Minecraft and Fortnite - those games are significant to them in a similar way to how WoW has been the behemoth of its time. This generation will be reaching peak gaming age (18+) around the time AoC releases. Is there any intention for these players to find a home in AoC?
We need to talk about the fact that Minecraft servers are destructible open-world PvP territorial games - which is close to what AoC wants to offer. So I have a few concerns:
Completely destructible world - I know AoC is aiming for destructible nodes via sieging (etc), but these players will be accustomed to 'build a wall, tear down a wall' level of destructibility (and creation). Could Ashes match this standard in, say, the building/destruction of freeholds?
Instancing - The largest Minecraft server as of 2020 was Hypixel with avg 100k players (only?!), with the next most popular server EndoMC with just under 16k players, and the numbers below that trail off slowly. Most of the kids I know have joined minecraft servers with their friends, and given the popularity of the game, this suggests they don't have a taste for shared, open-world content with STRANGERS. This isn't a problem for older generations, but can you get them out of the instanced lobby mindset? (Potentially related to previous comments about the need to be #1 in your instance)
First Person Reticle - if tab-target is the standard playstyle of WoW vets, reticle-based gameplay is the bread and butter of this generation. Hybrid combat needs to deliver on that front - could they get a test-group from this demographic specifically for the action side of the hybrid combat?
If Ashes can hit these, I think you'll secure some of the GenZ market, but I wonder if Ashes is postured to exclude the generations below us entirely.
Personally, I'm between the WoW and Minecraft generations, so I'll be fine if action is thrown out and we go full tab-target - but I do feel tab target is an artifact of the past, in a similar way to how turn-based combat preceded tab-target.
I don't know that Ashes should try to market to anyone except their target audience. Whoever that is. If you watched that video, Jahlon brought up a good point. Wildstar tried to make everyone happy and ended up making no one happy.
While I was one of the few guys there that was mostly happy with Wildstar. I was not happy to watch it die around me. I think if Wildstar picked a target audience and focused on making that audience happy, they may still be around.
I also think that younger players can enjoy things without being targeted by marketing. When I was 11 years old. An adult showed me Diablo 1. It changed my life to the point that I never wanted a console again. I became obsessed with fantasy games and multiplayer games. I am pretty sure the target audience for Diablo 1 was not 11-year-old boys.
If the game is good. People will take notice and become a part of the target audience.
I want to expand this conversation and talk about the generation(s) below us.
GenZ grew up on Minecraft and Fortnite - those games are significant to them in a similar way to how WoW has been the behemoth of its time. This generation will be reaching peak gaming age (18+) around the time AoC releases. Is there any intention for these players to find a home in AoC?
We need to talk about the fact that Minecraft servers are destructible open-world PvP territorial games - which is close to what AoC wants to offer. So I have a few concerns:
Completely destructible world - I know AoC is aiming for destructible nodes via sieging (etc), but these players will be accustomed to 'build a wall, tear down a wall' level of destructibility (and creation). Could Ashes match this standard in, say, the building/destruction of freeholds?
Instancing - The largest Minecraft server as of 2020 was Hypixel with avg 100k players (only?!), with the next most popular server EndoMC with just under 16k players, and the numbers below that trail off slowly. Most of the kids I know have joined minecraft servers with their friends, and given the popularity of the game, this suggests they don't have a taste for shared, open-world content with STRANGERS. This isn't a problem for older generations, but can you get them out of the instanced lobby mindset? (Potentially related to previous comments about the need to be #1 in your instance)
First Person Reticle - if tab-target is the standard playstyle of WoW vets, reticle-based gameplay is the bread and butter of this generation. Hybrid combat needs to deliver on that front - could they get a test-group from this demographic specifically for the action side of the hybrid combat?
If Ashes can hit these, I think you'll secure some of the GenZ market, but I wonder if Ashes is postured to exclude the generations below us entirely.
Personally, I'm between the WoW and Minecraft generations, so I'll be fine if action is thrown out and we go full tab-target - but I do feel tab target is an artifact of the past, in a similar way to how turn-based combat preceded tab-target.
I don't know that Ashes should try to market to anyone except their target audience. Whoever that is. If you watched that video, Jahlon brought up a good point. Wildstar tried to make everyone happy and ended up making no one happy.
While I was one of the few guys there that was mostly happy with Wildstar. I was not happy to watch it die around me. I think if Wildstar picked a target audience and focused on making that audience happy, they may still be around.
I also think that younger players can enjoy things without being targeted by marketing. When I was 11 years old. An adult showed me Diablo 1. It changed my life to the point that I never wanted a console again. I became obsessed with fantasy games and multiplayer games. I am pretty sure the target audience for Diablo 1 was not 11-year-old boys.
If the game is good. People will take notice and become a part of the target audience.
I don't think marketing was really their point. Design philosophies age and change. Using older ones, is valid, but if you neglect a certain subsection of your intended audiences /expectations/ due to more evolved design philosophies being their main expectation setters, your going to lose peopke who didn't need to be lost if a little design mindfulness and problem solving relative to those expectations was in place. That's what my key take away from their point was.
I want to expand this conversation and talk about the generation(s) below us.
GenZ grew up on Minecraft and Fortnite - those games are significant to them in a similar way to how WoW has been the behemoth of its time. This generation will be reaching peak gaming age (18+) around the time AoC releases. Is there any intention for these players to find a home in AoC?
We need to talk about the fact that Minecraft servers are destructible open-world PvP territorial games - which is close to what AoC wants to offer. So I have a few concerns:
Completely destructible world - I know AoC is aiming for destructible nodes via sieging (etc), but these players will be accustomed to 'build a wall, tear down a wall' level of destructibility (and creation). Could Ashes match this standard in, say, the building/destruction of freeholds?
Instancing - The largest Minecraft server as of 2020 was Hypixel with avg 100k players (only?!), with the next most popular server EndoMC with just under 16k players, and the numbers below that trail off slowly. Most of the kids I know have joined minecraft servers with their friends, and given the popularity of the game, this suggests they don't have a taste for shared, open-world content with STRANGERS. This isn't a problem for older generations, but can you get them out of the instanced lobby mindset? (Potentially related to previous comments about the need to be #1 in your instance)
First Person Reticle - if tab-target is the standard playstyle of WoW vets, reticle-based gameplay is the bread and butter of this generation. Hybrid combat needs to deliver on that front - could they get a test-group from this demographic specifically for the action side of the hybrid combat?
If Ashes can hit these, I think you'll secure some of the GenZ market, but I wonder if Ashes is postured to exclude the generations below us entirely.
Personally, I'm between the WoW and Minecraft generations, so I'll be fine if action is thrown out and we go full tab-target - but I do feel tab target is an artifact of the past, in a similar way to how turn-based combat preceded tab-target.
I don't know that Ashes should try to market to anyone except their target audience. Whoever that is. If you watched that video, Jahlon brought up a good point. Wildstar tried to make everyone happy and ended up making no one happy.
While I was one of the few guys there that was mostly happy with Wildstar. I was not happy to watch it die around me. I think if Wildstar picked a target audience and focused on making that audience happy, they may still be around.
I also think that younger players can enjoy things without being targeted by marketing. When I was 11 years old. An adult showed me Diablo 1. It changed my life to the point that I never wanted a console again. I became obsessed with fantasy games and multiplayer games. I am pretty sure the target audience for Diablo 1 was not 11-year-old boys.
If the game is good. People will take notice and become a part of the target audience.
I don't think marketing was really their point. Design philosophies age and change. Using older ones, is valid, but if you neglect a certain subsection of your intended audiences /expectations/ due to more evolved design philosophies being their main expectation setters, your going to lose peopke who didn't need to be lost if a little design mindfulness and problem solving relative to those expectations was in place. That's what my key take away from their point was.
Marketing was not really my point. I said the word, but I more meant changing the game in a way that would be appealing to people outside the target audience. I could have worded things better.
I want to expand this conversation and talk about the generation(s) below us.
GenZ grew up on Minecraft and Fortnite - those games are significant to them in a similar way to how WoW has been the behemoth of its time. This generation will be reaching peak gaming age (18+) around the time AoC releases. Is there any intention for these players to find a home in AoC?
We need to talk about the fact that Minecraft servers are destructible open-world PvP territorial games - which is close to what AoC wants to offer. So I have a few concerns:
Completely destructible world - I know AoC is aiming for destructible nodes via sieging (etc), but these players will be accustomed to 'build a wall, tear down a wall' level of destructibility (and creation). Could Ashes match this standard in, say, the building/destruction of freeholds?
Instancing - The largest Minecraft server as of 2020 was Hypixel with avg 100k players (only?!), with the next most popular server EndoMC with just under 16k players, and the numbers below that trail off slowly. Most of the kids I know have joined minecraft servers with their friends, and given the popularity of the game, this suggests they don't have a taste for shared, open-world content with STRANGERS. This isn't a problem for older generations, but can you get them out of the instanced lobby mindset? (Potentially related to previous comments about the need to be #1 in your instance)
First Person Reticle - if tab-target is the standard playstyle of WoW vets, reticle-based gameplay is the bread and butter of this generation. Hybrid combat needs to deliver on that front - could they get a test-group from this demographic specifically for the action side of the hybrid combat?
If Ashes can hit these, I think you'll secure some of the GenZ market, but I wonder if Ashes is postured to exclude the generations below us entirely.
Personally, I'm between the WoW and Minecraft generations, so I'll be fine if action is thrown out and we go full tab-target - but I do feel tab target is an artifact of the past, in a similar way to how turn-based combat preceded tab-target.
I don't know that Ashes should try to market to anyone except their target audience. Whoever that is. If you watched that video, Jahlon brought up a good point. Wildstar tried to make everyone happy and ended up making no one happy.
While I was one of the few guys there that was mostly happy with Wildstar. I was not happy to watch it die around me. I think if Wildstar picked a target audience and focused on making that audience happy, they may still be around.
I also think that younger players can enjoy things without being targeted by marketing. When I was 11 years old. An adult showed me Diablo 1. It changed my life to the point that I never wanted a console again. I became obsessed with fantasy games and multiplayer games. I am pretty sure the target audience for Diablo 1 was not 11-year-old boys.
If the game is good. People will take notice and become a part of the target audience.
I don't think marketing was really their point. Design philosophies age and change. Using older ones, is valid, but if you neglect a certain subsection of your intended audiences /expectations/ due to more evolved design philosophies being their main expectation setters, your going to lose peopke who didn't need to be lost if a little design mindfulness and problem solving relative to those expectations was in place. That's what my key take away from their point was.
Marketing was not really my point. I said the word, but I more meant changing the game in a way that would be appealing to people outside the target audience. I could have worded things better.
Yeah, wasn't really trying to focus on marketing... just trying to see the bigger picture of target demographics.
I think I get what @Vhaeyne is saying though, that it's more important to have a unified vision than it is to try to please everyone. I thought there might be a lesson or two to draw from minecraft servers and their audience.
@JustVine interesting take on the destructibility of, I guess, "social" objects being the focus in Ashes. That probably HAS to happen for the game to actually be successful at all (I honestly find it difficult to imagine the full potential for this - though it excites me). But still, I have a hunch that creation/destruction of basic objects with physical dimensions that others can see is important to selling the realness of the world to GenZ - in a similar way to invisible walls being really immersion-breaking for us. I have no proof tho
I'll be super happy when sticky reticle is all working - but I am curious what genZ would think. (Their precision with the reticle amazes me sometimes). Might come down to a stickiness slider.
@maouw
you'd be surprised how many games have aim assist features hard coded into the games design which caters to "GenZ" era and demographic.
I'm not saying they're better or worse at aiming with reticles but games seem to have definitely catered to that already. It's unfortunate for those who prefer games to not have feature in it regardless of console/controller/mkb.
There are some games who keep it raw but a majority of them have an aim assist coded into the game based on however their design is whether it be based on item stats or softer hit box mechanics.
Most games have it as a toggle or some form of hard coded. It's rarer to find a game that is based around the genz that doesn't have it.
I dont think it will be an issue for "GenZ" and the new generation.
Games like ESO which are burst damage and more action combat tend to have a softer hit box allowing players to land ranged abilities easier. There are many MMORPG especially ones catering to action combat that do this as well. It also aids in preventing netcode issues with lag etc because of how things were designed around the game, engine and servers at the time.
If you look at FPS, most games around the time of battlefield 3 all have aim assist hard coded in some form. There is a lot of cheese in those games now to make them more "fun" for everyone. Even destiny 2 dropped the ball with it by allowing mkb players to have to use it with the console/controller users because apparently the peripheral you use is the reason why they cant be good at a video game.
I was always taught blame the user not the tool.
Tab targeting is essentially the easiest hard coded form of aim assist in MMORPG's especially considering how many spells and abilities have tracking and looser ranges for combat interaction.
Activision, Blizzard, Bethesda, EA, they generally have Aim assist features in most of their games that require a free-aiming mechanic aside from tab targeting in MMORPG's
3
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
While I think I am a part of the target audience and I worry about Ashes attracting too wide of an audience. I am not worried that Ashes will fail if it is a very niche game. Niche games like MO1, DDO, EQ1, EQ2, UO, and GW2 are all alive with new content updates and active player bases. Even FFXI had an update not too long ago. I don't think Ashes needs to worry about expanding the target audience. Especially now, when the game has not been given the chance to fail yet.
The target audience is every MMORPG player.
What may be different is having every playstyle on the same server - especially since the consequences for ganking are more debilitating in Ashes than they were for Lineage 2.
heh -if we're talking about the generational aspect of this topic, there is a theme in RDR2 of the disappearing West that really resonated with me.
That's similar to how I feel about the direction of many games these days, where the 'figure it out' gap is getting smaller and smaller, with more and more being handed over to players. The struggle to understand how Verra works and how to be successful is one of the unique aspects of AoC I find really appealing. This is one of the qualities I liked about Valheim.
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Hunh. I didn't find it a struggle at all to figure out how Valheim works.
"Successful" is probably subjective. I'm not sure how that pertains to Ashes. Doesn't seem like there will be much of a struggle to figure out how Verra works.
The challenge of an MMORPG should not be figuring out how the game works.
Much like chess.
How chess works is not challenging to figure out. Consistently winning could be a challenge.
Hunh. I didn't find it a struggle at all to figure out how Valheim works.
I don't mean the game mechanics, I meant more understanding the world. What it provides, what you can use in your favor etc. Valheim's interactions were super simple, but what can I build what can I combine, what can I use to explore further or defend myself (especially against those death-squitos when they1-shot you the first time).
As a side note, I liked the unforgiving nature of death in Valheim. My primary mission was always exploration, which resulted in death, which turned my primary mission into recovery of my gear, cart, boat, etc.
I don't think game will be a lot a bout "git gud" in same terms dark souls are.
Git gud generally entails certain level of mastery a player gains through practice. However, for that mastery to take central stage other environment factors needs to take back seat. On top of that game systems player interacts or leverages needs to facilitate high differential between no mastery and high mastery.
MMO's by design have big trouble with first. As the PvP which might be test of mastery is strongly influenced by factors falls flat when there is all these other systems outside of it which drastically leverages it to one side or another. And kind of sucks in the latter too, partly because no-one really bothers as due to the former part competitive scenes of pvp never forms so there is no strong motivation to really iron it out to be good in the first place.
In a way you either design a game to reward mastery or reward winning, it's one of those cursed game design problems which have no solution. And what I sense that the game will be more about winning, meaning the meta-game and the politics will take over. Perhaps it's how it should be. Dunno.
That being said. I wish that game focuses PvP not as part of PvX but it's own thing. Meaning, your PvE advantages, gear level and so what wouldn't be as much make or break. I could dream that this would allow for "free companies" or hirelings to become a thing. Imagine a node gets sieged, and that node does not have good pvp'ers, but just hires someone to fight for them and those people are just bad arses.
We had a small RP community of now very old and abandoned game called freelancer. And we had very interesting and colorful dynamic between players who did the politics of the game and the 'muscle'.
That not being possible I would just be happy with more focus on mastery and rather strict moderation of the game, because grieving and ego will be a huge problem. I however don't think that will be the case, and I might as well need to stick to actual PvP games, but hey, we'll see. It would be interesting to see well moderated RP servers, meaning, any out of character public / local chat is an offense vs server rules n stuff like that.
As I see it current proposal is so wide that it can go any direction depending on how the particular aspects of the game are tuned. Or even welcome differently oriented players depending on particular server's culture.
At it's worst the game will be about the grind, where pvp gets in the way of the grind. And it's seen not as integral part of the game which is interesting and rewarding to engage for it's own sake, but more of an obstacle to your current goals and source of frustration. And a bit of waste of time really for people like me. But maybe someone loves it.
I think if they nail the node system and pk/criminal, economy, politics they will get alot of people playing old pxv mmorpgs, or waiting for one, and bring people from albion,eve, archeage , bdo , runescape and i believe can hit people from survival games like rust/ark
Exactly. The game is going to attract a lot of attention from games like those. And more. It's going to bring in some shooter game players, it's going to take at least a slice from WoW and Final Fantasy. It's probably even going to reel in some players that don't even really game anymore.
The risk is that it reels in too many people that are ultimately going to quit. That's a risk for every game, especially mmos, and especially pvp focused mmos. Intrepid needs to have plans for those possibilities. Launch week queues are a must, unless they figure out some workaround. But they need to have solid plans for limiting initial servers, and server transfers and/or server merges for worst case scenarios. Hopefully, and even probably, those plans won't be needed. But you have to have them. If worst case scenarios happen and you have no plan to deal with it, it would probably be permanently fatal to the game. And Intrepid needs to have some kind of educational campaign about the game before launch to let people know this isn't WoW or the like.
The game is going to have an NDA free months/years long series of Alpha 2/Beta tests. Everyone paying attention will be able to see what the game is all about. An educational advertising campaign would shore that up even more. Nevertheless, some idiots will slip through the cracks. It's 2021.
And I think there will be some people purposely trying to sabotage the game, as we've seen already in Alpha 1. Very easy to see individuals or entities buying up accounts on servers just to leave them inactive and try to screw up the population balance. There are ways to mitigate all of this, Intrepid needs to be on it.
Finally, the people who make arguments like "games dead if it doesn't do THIS!!!!!" are full of shit and completely agenda driven. You see it most often in the pve vs pvp debate and the action combat vs tab combat debate. These are intimidation and fear mongering tactics, not based in reality. The systems that they claim are death sentences for the game haven't even been implemented or tested yet and they're already trying to get rid of them. Completely agenda driven.
1
Options
bloodprophetMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
One of the big concerns for me in this thread is seeing far to many people trying to segregate the players.
Why can't AOC players just be AOC players?
Why the need by so many to segregate people into little boxes vs building a community? After all isn't that what being part of an MMORPG is all about?
When I played WOW on Burning Blade(PvP server) I felt as if I was playing a "PvP" game all of the sudden. It was still just WOW.
I see great potential for the game but people need to get out of the mindset of this game is only this one tiny thing and realize there is so much more to it.
Most people never listen. They are just waiting on you to quit making noise so they can.
6
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
If there is sufficient content, the game should cater to a variety of play styles and individuals can find their own balance and position in the world.
Streamers that decide to play seriously will just have to adjust how they play to account the transparency.
Should a significant streamer play, then I hope the server has multiple streamers & players who are bold enough to play on within different clans.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I don't mean the game mechanics, I meant more understanding the world. What it provides, what you can use in your favor etc. Valheim's interactions were super simple, but what can I build what can I combine, what can I use to explore further or defend myself (especially against those death-squitos when they1-shot you the first time).
As a side note, I liked the unforgiving nature of death in Valheim. My primary mission was always exploration, which resulted in death, which turned my primary mission into recovery of my gear, cart, boat, etc.
Yep. I think I meant all of that.
Death-squitos is learning the telegraph.
I didn't find the nature of death to be unforgiving in Valheim. It would be unforgiving if there were other players who could loot your corpse. Vanilla EQ and Vanilla WoW were way more unforgiving.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
One of the big concerns for me in this thread is seeing far to many people trying to segregate the players.
Why can't AOC players just be AOC players?
Why the need by so many to segregate people into little boxes vs building a community? After all isn't that what being part of an MMORPG is all about?
When I played WOW on Burning Blade(PvP server) I felt as if I was playing a "PvP" game all of the sudden. It was still just WOW.
I see great potential for the game but people need to get out of the mindset of this game is only this one tiny thing and realize there is so much more to it.
Worst thing possible is to assume all Ashes players have the same playstyle. That is just rife for toxicity.
Best to recognize and celebrate the differences for what they are.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
If there is sufficient content, the game should cater to a variety of play styles and individuals can find their own balance and position in the world.
Streamers that decide to play seriously will just have to adjust how they play to account the transparency.
Should a significant streamer play, then I hope the server has multiple streamers & players who are bold enough to play on within different clans.
Yep. Streamers don't have to stream the entire time they play.
If there is sufficient content, the game should cater to a variety of play styles and individuals can find their own balance and position in the world.
Streamers that decide to play seriously will just have to adjust how they play to account the transparency.
Should a significant streamer play, then I hope the server has multiple streamers & players who are bold enough to play on within different clans.
There will probably be an unofficial streamer server or two like other recent games that have launched. Intrepid will have to make a decision on how hardline of a stance they're going to take against stream sniping in general. There will be in game GM's, unlike most games, and that alone will give Intrepid a lot of power to take courses of action other games cant.
No matter what, streaming will be more hazardous than not streaming. Streamers will have to deal with that, and I'm sure they'll handle it in their own ways.
One of the big concerns for me in this thread is seeing far to many people trying to segregate the players.
Why can't AOC players just be AOC players?
Why the need by so many to segregate people into little boxes vs building a community? After all isn't that what being part of an MMORPG is all about?
When I played WOW on Burning Blade(PvP server) I felt as if I was playing a "PvP" game all of the sudden. It was still just WOW.
I see great potential for the game but people need to get out of the mindset of this game is only this one tiny thing and realize there is so much more to it.
Worst thing possible is to assume all Ashes players have the same playstyle. That is just rife for toxicity.
Best to recognize and celebrate the differences for what they are.
Celebrate the differences? I wouldnt go for snowboarding on a beach and then complain, nor would I go scuba diving on a ski resort.
People need to understand what they are getting into and if they are ok with the world they can choose the activities they are fun to them.
But most deffinatly an mmo shouldnt build systems for players that ONLY WANT:
pvp
Pve
Rp
Queue in raid/bg finders
Celebrate the differences? I wouldn't go for snowboarding on a beach and then complain, nor would I go scuba diving on a ski resort.
People need to understand what they are getting into and if they are ok with the world they can choose the activities they are fun to them.
Well, if that beach has snow for snowboarding and skiing and also has areas for scuba diving, it's fine.
I almost spilled my drink on my keyboard because of this! The hardest I have ever laughed from these forums.
lol Noaani even manufactured the Steven quote. It's a real quote but he like fake made it or something to appear as a quote on the forum. hahah you got roasted Dygz. There's an easy rebuttal though I'll tell you it if you want.
Comments
Ahaha, I love the way Pokemon GO came and went.
I want to expand this conversation and talk about the generation(s) below us.
GenZ grew up on Minecraft and Fortnite - those games are significant to them in a similar way to how WoW has been the behemoth of its time. This generation will be reaching peak gaming age (18+) around the time AoC releases. Is there any intention for these players to find a home in AoC?
We need to talk about the fact that Minecraft servers are destructible open-world PvP territorial games - which is close to what AoC wants to offer. So I have a few concerns:
If Ashes can hit these, I think you'll secure some of the GenZ market, but I wonder if Ashes is postured to exclude the generations below us entirely.
Personally, I'm between the WoW and Minecraft generations, so I'll be fine if action is thrown out and we go full tab-target - but I do feel tab target is an artifact of the past, in a similar way to how turn-based combat preceded tab-target.
Maybe alliances from one port to another protecting shipping routes and player transportation
It is quite an interesting idea for a game regardless of a RP perspective vs traditional/non-traditional gameplay perspective.
Each server is going to play out differently. Is there a possibility for a higher percentage of the player base to play a specific way? quite possibly. does that mean they will? not necessarily.
I certainly like the idea of group forming around nodes for group oriented goals and there being soft friction against other group of players at other nodes.
It's possible. I would take that reality over the one where the game dies due to an unmanageable population spike. Anything to soften that blow. We know it's likely to happen to some degree.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
That is an interesting direction to consider. I personally have sort of assumed an unspoken 'Ashes is an attempt to bring some of the old into the new', based on some more indirect assertions from Steven. But as several threads in this forum remind me, it can get easy to get caught up in preconceived notions based on 'what, worked or was acceptable back then' when 'bringing in the old'.
Gen Z likes community, strategy, and immersive changing worlds as much as any other generation. I agree Intrepid should be keeping different generational expectations in mind.
I am not personally worried about the completely destructible part you bring up as long as Ashes succeds in that 'changing world through identifiable player actions' feelling they are aiming for. Just give nodes enough options to feel really community custom and citizens a feeling of control irt supporting mayoral set goals (maybe even being able to have a small amount of 'disagreement with the mayor by not supporting a project.) That's close enough to cooperative mega build oriented MC communities that it wouldn't feel foriegn or overly restrictive. Especially given freeholds.
I think the instancing part being a problem is largely dependent on how free the frontier lands, really feel free and how effective guild zerging will feel. Node communities definitely have more of a bridge opportunity to be in between complete strangers and friends. The longer, people are incentivezed to stick around the less strange a stranger who is at the same fishing spot and market stall every feels. But at the same time, how impactful guild conquering smaller communities and large waves, of migration going outward as metros and towns crowd feels to 'group of friends setting up in the boonies' and how much they really loose when those, things happen is gong to be a huge decider on this. This is why I have advocated design that preserves a sense,of community and agency on loss for node content
I still think sticky reticle hits a solid sweet spot between tab and full action for me and im definitely also in between those two milestones like you. I think It'd be a reasonable compromise to a newer generation. I am less certain about tab. It's not the best equivalent but Age of Empires isn't exactly /un/popular with Gen Z (albiet based on my totally ancedotal experiences.) My point with bringing that up is if you make 'tab only' more about 'reactive strategy' its likely to have a core audience that could relate to it regardless of generation. But as it stands I still think action combat skewed is a good design guidance relative to this gen.
I don't know that Ashes should try to market to anyone except their target audience. Whoever that is. If you watched that video, Jahlon brought up a good point. Wildstar tried to make everyone happy and ended up making no one happy.
While I was one of the few guys there that was mostly happy with Wildstar. I was not happy to watch it die around me. I think if Wildstar picked a target audience and focused on making that audience happy, they may still be around.
I also think that younger players can enjoy things without being targeted by marketing. When I was 11 years old. An adult showed me Diablo 1. It changed my life to the point that I never wanted a console again. I became obsessed with fantasy games and multiplayer games. I am pretty sure the target audience for Diablo 1 was not 11-year-old boys.
If the game is good. People will take notice and become a part of the target audience.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
I don't think marketing was really their point. Design philosophies age and change. Using older ones, is valid, but if you neglect a certain subsection of your intended audiences /expectations/ due to more evolved design philosophies being their main expectation setters, your going to lose peopke who didn't need to be lost if a little design mindfulness and problem solving relative to those expectations was in place. That's what my key take away from their point was.
Marketing was not really my point. I said the word, but I more meant changing the game in a way that would be appealing to people outside the target audience. I could have worded things better.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
Np, clarifies it to me at least.
I think I get what @Vhaeyne is saying though, that it's more important to have a unified vision than it is to try to please everyone. I thought there might be a lesson or two to draw from minecraft servers and their audience.
@JustVine interesting take on the destructibility of, I guess, "social" objects being the focus in Ashes. That probably HAS to happen for the game to actually be successful at all (I honestly find it difficult to imagine the full potential for this - though it excites me). But still, I have a hunch that creation/destruction of basic objects with physical dimensions that others can see is important to selling the realness of the world to GenZ - in a similar way to invisible walls being really immersion-breaking for us. I have no proof tho
I'll be super happy when sticky reticle is all working - but I am curious what genZ would think. (Their precision with the reticle amazes me sometimes). Might come down to a stickiness slider.
you'd be surprised how many games have aim assist features hard coded into the games design which caters to "GenZ" era and demographic.
I'm not saying they're better or worse at aiming with reticles but games seem to have definitely catered to that already. It's unfortunate for those who prefer games to not have feature in it regardless of console/controller/mkb.
There are some games who keep it raw but a majority of them have an aim assist coded into the game based on however their design is whether it be based on item stats or softer hit box mechanics.
Most games have it as a toggle or some form of hard coded. It's rarer to find a game that is based around the genz that doesn't have it.
I dont think it will be an issue for "GenZ" and the new generation.
If you look at FPS, most games around the time of battlefield 3 all have aim assist hard coded in some form. There is a lot of cheese in those games now to make them more "fun" for everyone. Even destiny 2 dropped the ball with it by allowing mkb players to have to use it with the console/controller users because apparently the peripheral you use is the reason why they cant be good at a video game.
I was always taught blame the user not the tool.
Tab targeting is essentially the easiest hard coded form of aim assist in MMORPG's especially considering how many spells and abilities have tracking and looser ranges for combat interaction.
Activision, Blizzard, Bethesda, EA, they generally have Aim assist features in most of their games that require a free-aiming mechanic aside from tab targeting in MMORPG's
What may be different is having every playstyle on the same server - especially since the consequences for ganking are more debilitating in Ashes than they were for Lineage 2.
Every playstyle will have compromises.
That's similar to how I feel about the direction of many games these days, where the 'figure it out' gap is getting smaller and smaller, with more and more being handed over to players. The struggle to understand how Verra works and how to be successful is one of the unique aspects of AoC I find really appealing. This is one of the qualities I liked about Valheim.
"Successful" is probably subjective. I'm not sure how that pertains to Ashes. Doesn't seem like there will be much of a struggle to figure out how Verra works.
The challenge of an MMORPG should not be figuring out how the game works.
Much like chess.
How chess works is not challenging to figure out. Consistently winning could be a challenge.
I don't mean the game mechanics, I meant more understanding the world. What it provides, what you can use in your favor etc. Valheim's interactions were super simple, but what can I build what can I combine, what can I use to explore further or defend myself (especially against those death-squitos when they1-shot you the first time).
As a side note, I liked the unforgiving nature of death in Valheim. My primary mission was always exploration, which resulted in death, which turned my primary mission into recovery of my gear, cart, boat, etc.
I don't think game will be a lot a bout "git gud" in same terms dark souls are.
Git gud generally entails certain level of mastery a player gains through practice. However, for that mastery to take central stage other environment factors needs to take back seat. On top of that game systems player interacts or leverages needs to facilitate high differential between no mastery and high mastery.
MMO's by design have big trouble with first. As the PvP which might be test of mastery is strongly influenced by factors falls flat when there is all these other systems outside of it which drastically leverages it to one side or another. And kind of sucks in the latter too, partly because no-one really bothers as due to the former part competitive scenes of pvp never forms so there is no strong motivation to really iron it out to be good in the first place.
In a way you either design a game to reward mastery or reward winning, it's one of those cursed game design problems which have no solution. And what I sense that the game will be more about winning, meaning the meta-game and the politics will take over. Perhaps it's how it should be. Dunno.
That being said. I wish that game focuses PvP not as part of PvX but it's own thing. Meaning, your PvE advantages, gear level and so what wouldn't be as much make or break. I could dream that this would allow for "free companies" or hirelings to become a thing. Imagine a node gets sieged, and that node does not have good pvp'ers, but just hires someone to fight for them and those people are just bad arses.
We had a small RP community of now very old and abandoned game called freelancer. And we had very interesting and colorful dynamic between players who did the politics of the game and the 'muscle'.
That not being possible I would just be happy with more focus on mastery and rather strict moderation of the game, because grieving and ego will be a huge problem. I however don't think that will be the case, and I might as well need to stick to actual PvP games, but hey, we'll see. It would be interesting to see well moderated RP servers, meaning, any out of character public / local chat is an offense vs server rules n stuff like that.
As I see it current proposal is so wide that it can go any direction depending on how the particular aspects of the game are tuned. Or even welcome differently oriented players depending on particular server's culture.
At it's worst the game will be about the grind, where pvp gets in the way of the grind. And it's seen not as integral part of the game which is interesting and rewarding to engage for it's own sake, but more of an obstacle to your current goals and source of frustration. And a bit of waste of time really for people like me. But maybe someone loves it.
Exactly. The game is going to attract a lot of attention from games like those. And more. It's going to bring in some shooter game players, it's going to take at least a slice from WoW and Final Fantasy. It's probably even going to reel in some players that don't even really game anymore.
The risk is that it reels in too many people that are ultimately going to quit. That's a risk for every game, especially mmos, and especially pvp focused mmos. Intrepid needs to have plans for those possibilities. Launch week queues are a must, unless they figure out some workaround. But they need to have solid plans for limiting initial servers, and server transfers and/or server merges for worst case scenarios. Hopefully, and even probably, those plans won't be needed. But you have to have them. If worst case scenarios happen and you have no plan to deal with it, it would probably be permanently fatal to the game. And Intrepid needs to have some kind of educational campaign about the game before launch to let people know this isn't WoW or the like.
The game is going to have an NDA free months/years long series of Alpha 2/Beta tests. Everyone paying attention will be able to see what the game is all about. An educational advertising campaign would shore that up even more. Nevertheless, some idiots will slip through the cracks. It's 2021.
And I think there will be some people purposely trying to sabotage the game, as we've seen already in Alpha 1. Very easy to see individuals or entities buying up accounts on servers just to leave them inactive and try to screw up the population balance. There are ways to mitigate all of this, Intrepid needs to be on it.
Finally, the people who make arguments like "games dead if it doesn't do THIS!!!!!" are full of shit and completely agenda driven. You see it most often in the pve vs pvp debate and the action combat vs tab combat debate. These are intimidation and fear mongering tactics, not based in reality. The systems that they claim are death sentences for the game haven't even been implemented or tested yet and they're already trying to get rid of them. Completely agenda driven.
Why can't AOC players just be AOC players?
Why the need by so many to segregate people into little boxes vs building a community? After all isn't that what being part of an MMORPG is all about?
When I played WOW on Burning Blade(PvP server) I felt as if I was playing a "PvP" game all of the sudden. It was still just WOW.
I see great potential for the game but people need to get out of the mindset of this game is only this one tiny thing and realize there is so much more to it.
Streamers that decide to play seriously will just have to adjust how they play to account the transparency.
Should a significant streamer play, then I hope the server has multiple streamers & players who are bold enough to play on within different clans.
Death-squitos is learning the telegraph.
I didn't find the nature of death to be unforgiving in Valheim. It would be unforgiving if there were other players who could loot your corpse. Vanilla EQ and Vanilla WoW were way more unforgiving.
Best to recognize and celebrate the differences for what they are.
There will probably be an unofficial streamer server or two like other recent games that have launched. Intrepid will have to make a decision on how hardline of a stance they're going to take against stream sniping in general. There will be in game GM's, unlike most games, and that alone will give Intrepid a lot of power to take courses of action other games cant.
No matter what, streaming will be more hazardous than not streaming. Streamers will have to deal with that, and I'm sure they'll handle it in their own ways.
Celebrate the differences? I wouldnt go for snowboarding on a beach and then complain, nor would I go scuba diving on a ski resort.
People need to understand what they are getting into and if they are ok with the world they can choose the activities they are fun to them.
But most deffinatly an mmo shouldnt build systems for players that ONLY WANT:
pvp
Pve
Rp
Queue in raid/bg finders
I almost spilled my drink on my keyboard because of this! The hardest I have ever laughed from these forums.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
lol Noaani even manufactured the Steven quote. It's a real quote but he like fake made it or something to appear as a quote on the forum. hahah you got roasted Dygz. There's an easy rebuttal though I'll tell you it if you want.
You can target a segment of players, but it doesn't necessarily mean each individual player is swayed...thus it's not for everyone...
Nevertheless it's pretty hard to target EVERY mmo player.