I think the Risk v Reward folk are thinking that means that casuals and solo players will not want to play Ashes, even though Steven (and Jeffrey) have said those playstyles are also supported.
Without risk vs reward there would not even be a game. So I suspect some special type of risk vs reward is meant that is not part of every game. Mainly involving the type of risk. I have not watched everything Steven ever said about this topic, but does any one know what according to Steven makes AoC stand out from the average mmo? It is not clear to me. Partial loss of loot on being defeated by another player. Anything else?
O wait, loosing your home, comes to mind. That is special. Anything else?
Stupid question of me. Sorry.
Steven normally explains the node system when asked what makes ashes stand out or different.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I like this because it makes me think carebears are like tiny fish...
Right. And this is my point. You assume that it's the carebears who are the tiny fish, but it's just as likely that the hardcore PvPers are the tiny fish and that the top end raiders are the tiny fish.
Every playstyle is going to have to compromise.
But, yes, that's why I've said that who the target audience is different than who will actually play.
Case in point: Hybrid combat
The target is both the Tab Target audience and the Action Combat audience, but...
Who will end up playing?
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Without risk vs reward there would not even be a game. So I suspect some special type of risk vs reward is meant that is not part of every game. Mainly involving the type of risk. I have not watched everything Steven ever said about this topic, but does any one know what according to Steven makes AoC stand out from the average mmo? It is not clear to me. Partial loss of loot on being defeated by another player. Anything else?
O wait, loosing your home, comes to mind. That is special. Anything else?
Stupid question of me. Sorry.
Just watch the video that Vhayene posted and that I've reposted several times and quoted.
Review Page 4.
Steven and Jeffrey also discuss what makes Ashes stand out from the average MMORPG and how that relates to Risk v Reward.
The game not being for everyone is self evident in the systems and gameplay loops involved.
A lot of people are going to get upset and leave when they realise they can't PvE mindlessly with no risk of PvP (being killed and looted). Inversely a lot of hardcore PvPers will leave when they realise they can't solely subsist off of PvP without at least having a social network including PvE players.
The game not being for everyone doesn't mean anyone is unwelcome. On the contrary I think everyone should give the game a shot and a lot of people who don't think they'd be interested might find themselves actually having a lot more fun than they expected if they just give it a chance.
It doesn't just stop with the PvX nature of the game (which by the way, I think is a good answer to who the target audience is: people who want a social, sandbox, pvx mmo).
There are other design choices that many of us desperately want, that a lot of other MMO's crowds might get turned off by. Some of those include no fast travel, actual death penalties, destroyable player housing, very limited instanced content (no safe spaces), no daily quests, etc.
No game is for everyone. We all like different things. Some people are going to love AoC and it will be their favourite game. Some people aren't going to like it, and that's okay.
The people who don't start crying when they risk escorting a caravan and are rewarded with death and loss of resources.
The people who don't end up crying when they risk killing gatherers and are rewarded with Corruption.
The people who don't end up crying when they risk using DPS meters and are rewarded with bans.
The people who don't end up crying when they realize Action Combat has RNG.
They people who don't end up crying when they realize there are more casuals playing than hardcores.
The game not being for everyone doesn't mean anyone is unwelcome. On the contrary I think everyone should give the game a shot and a lot of people who don't think they'd be interested might find themselves actually having a lot more fun than they expected if they just give it a chance.
Right. Again.
There is a difference between who is the target audience and who will play, but... "One of the really exciting parts of it is, players are all different, communities are all different...
Each server is going to have a different feel to it. You're going to be able to look and check out what happened on that server when you're making a decision about which server to go to. And you can see what the character (of that server) is, what kinds of players are playing on that server, what things they've done, what things they've unlocked and make those decisions based on that. What communities do I fit best?"
--- Jeffrey
There are other design choices that many of us desperately want, that a lot of other MMO's crowds might get turned off by. Some of those include no fast travel, actual death penalties, destroyable player housing, very limited instanced content (no safe spaces), no daily quests, etc.
All playstyles will find they have to compromise. Yes.
Some people won't like it. And that's OK. Yes.
More than anything, I think the biggest hurdle for the more casual minded players will be the time commitment necessary to really enjoy the game. The people who can't put much time with the game will be the ones hurt the most with the loses of resources and what not.
As much as some toot about risk vs reward, if you play enough you'll win some and lose some, but it won't be that big an issue in the long turn. Oh, sure, it plays a big role in the mindset and motivation of people, but with any persistence in playtime, most loses can be regained.
For those with less time, any big lose seems a very harsh punishment because of how long it could take to get it back.
As for me, the "problem" I have with the risk vs reward argument is that if the risk is mostly based on not getting the reward or losing a previous one, I'm not really affected since I'm not reward driven: I get my fun in overcoming the risk, not by what comes after.
My main worry with AoC is just the attempt at "realistic"ish graphics and whether they will deliver with Tulnar.
Graphics cuz attempt at realism usually ends up with an mmo, graphically being out dated. Games like WoW? Still look beautiful almost 20 years better. Obviously, they upgraded and shit, but not in a big manner.
As for tulnar ... well, I want to make a dragonborn 🤣
But back to the point, I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
Problem is, what does HE think is too punishing. He's an ex Archeage player, many of us here are not, including me.
I played Archeage for a few months until the p2w just got completely out of control. And I can't remember at all how harsh the pvp loot loss was. I know if you were running a trade pack and you were killed, you dropped the trade pack and the guy that killed you got it. But when he turned it into the npc, he got somewhere around 65% of the reward, you, the creator of the trade pack, still got 35%. That's all I remember.
Anything other than that, I'd have to be reminded about. I don't remember it as being particularly harsh. Certainly not compared to the many full loot pvp mmos out there where the loser drops everything, 100% full loss including inventory and all equipped gear.
But yeah everyone has a different definition of what harsh and not harsh looks like. Intrepid will find a middle ground.
My main worry with AoC is just the attempt at "realistic"ish graphics and whether they will deliver with Tulnar.
Graphics cuz attempt at realism usually ends up with an mmo, graphically being out dated. Games like WoW? Still look beautiful almost 20 years better. Obviously, they upgraded and shit, but not in a big manner.
I personally think AoC's graphics are pretty stylized. Not cartoonish, not 'realism', it feels.... Hmm what even is the right word for this. FFXI gave me a very similar feeling even though they have very different styles. 'Magical Realism' maybe? 'Nothing quite exaggerated outside of possibility but flexible'. I get a similar feeling from Archage, Morrowind, and the witcher games. Nothing is specifically unbelievable, but the pallets, shading, and over all asthetic make me really feel like myself in the world is 'fantastical'.
I think the way they did their environmental modelling gives me the strongest sense of this feeling. Their foliage, the giant mushrooms, the textures never feeling to uncontinuity with the extremely realistic looking water, instead giving areas around water an alien vibrancy.... It all slowly adds up to being this really realistic looking thing on the surface, but then you get to a wild looking mob, suddenly you are aware of the queer uncanny nature of the world around you. And yet neither you, the mob, or the environment feel out of synch.
Everything in the game looks like an alien heard a very good description of irl stuff, maybe a few drawings, and then they were like 'you have magic right?' And were already finished before you could respond. So it looks really 'accurate'. But 'imagined.'
I played Archeage for a few months until the p2w just got completely out of control. And I can't remember at all how harsh the pvp loot loss was. I know if you were running a trade pack and you were killed, you dropped the trade pack and the guy that killed you got it. But when he turned it into the npc, he got somewhere around 65% of the reward, you, the creator of the trade pack, still got 35%. That's all I remember.
Anything other than that, I'd have to be reminded about. I don't remember it as being particularly harsh. Certainly not compared to the many full loot pvp mmos out there where the loser drops everything, 100% full loss including inventory and all equipped gear.
But yeah everyone has a different definition of what harsh and not harsh looks like. Intrepid will find a middle ground.
Tbh, the only mechanic I hate overall and will hate in AoC, is xp loss on death. I don't find it a viable death penalty and its only s hurdle that kills the fun. At least to me. I dont like when the player loses stats or xp just because they died. Already have to deal with that shit in dark souls 😆
I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
Problem is, what does HE think is too punishing. He's an ex Archeage player, many of us here are not, including me.
Archeage loss in PvP proper was almost non-existent. The only time PvP was a loss was if you had a vehicle out and it was destroyed - this is also the only way to lose more than one pack at a time, and losing one pack isn't exactly a big deal.
Death was considered a viable means of fast travel.
If Archeage PvP loss was too much for you, don't even consider Ashes - quite honestly.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
Problem is, what does HE think is too punishing. He's an ex Archeage player, many of us here are not, including me.
Archeage loss in PvP proper was almost non-existent. The only time PvP was a loss was if you had a vehicle out and it was destroyed - this is also the only way to lose more than one pack at a time, and losing one pack isn't exactly a big deal.
Death was considered a viable means of fast travel.
If Archeage PvP loss was too much for you, don't even consider Ashes - quite honestly.
I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
Problem is, what does HE think is too punishing. He's an ex Archeage player, many of us here are not, including me.
Archeage loss in PvP proper was almost non-existent. The only time PvP was a loss was if you had a vehicle out and it was destroyed - this is also the only way to lose more than one pack at a time, and losing one pack isn't exactly a big deal.
Death was considered a viable means of fast travel.
If Archeage PvP loss was too much for you, don't even consider Ashes - quite honestly.
I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
Problem is, what does HE think is too punishing.
My point was (and is) that using Archeage as a point of reference here is absolutely pointless.
What does Steven having been an Archeage player have to do with anything here, when that game had an incredibly low death penalty?
That is pretty much xp loss. You have to earn it back.
Indeed.
Experience loss would actually be preferable to experience debt in any situation other than when you stand to lose a level.
Experience loss is just that, you die and now have less experience than you had and can then simply carry on with your day as normal.
Experience debt (in Ashes, at least) is a debuff, you die, take on a debt and that debt comes with a debuff. This means that rather than just being able to carry on with your day, you have a debt you need to work off that is causing you to be less effective in combat, and gain fewer rewards from the same.
That is pretty much xp loss. You have to earn it back.
Indeed.
Experience loss would actually be preferable to experience debt in any situation other than when you stand to lose a level.
Experience loss is just that, you die and now have less experience than you had and can then simply carry on with your day as normal.
Experience debt (in Ashes, at least) is a debuff, you die, take on a debt and that debt comes with a debuff. This means that rather than just being able to carry on with your day, you have a debt you need to work off that is causing you to be less effective in combat, and gain fewer rewards from the same.
Doesn't matter, not a fan of either. I don't mind losing gear, but xp is
I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
Problem is, what does HE think is too punishing. He's an ex Archeage player, many of us here are not, including me.
Archeage loss in PvP proper was almost non-existent. The only time PvP was a loss was if you had a vehicle out and it was destroyed - this is also the only way to lose more than one pack at a time, and losing one pack isn't exactly a big deal.
Death was considered a viable means of fast travel.
If Archeage PvP loss was too much for you, don't even consider Ashes - quite honestly.
I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
Problem is, what does HE think is too punishing.
My point was (and is) that using Archeage as a point of reference here is absolutely pointless.
What does Steven having been an Archeage player have to do with anything here, when that game had an incredibly low death penalty?
And like I said twice already, what he defines as too punishing might not be what the players think/ want
I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
Problem is, what does HE think is too punishing. He's an ex Archeage player, many of us here are not, including me.
Archeage loss in PvP proper was almost non-existent. The only time PvP was a loss was if you had a vehicle out and it was destroyed - this is also the only way to lose more than one pack at a time, and losing one pack isn't exactly a big deal.
Death was considered a viable means of fast travel.
If Archeage PvP loss was too much for you, don't even consider Ashes - quite honestly.
I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
Problem is, what does HE think is too punishing.
My point was (and is) that using Archeage as a point of reference here is absolutely pointless.
What does Steven having been an Archeage player have to do with anything here, when that game had an incredibly low death penalty?
And like I said twice already, what he defines as too punishing might not be what the players think/ want
Yes, I picked that up the first time.
You have still said nothing at all about why Archeage was mentioned though.
I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
Problem is, what does HE think is too punishing. He's an ex Archeage player, many of us here are not, including me.
Archeage loss in PvP proper was almost non-existent. The only time PvP was a loss was if you had a vehicle out and it was destroyed - this is also the only way to lose more than one pack at a time, and losing one pack isn't exactly a big deal.
Death was considered a viable means of fast travel.
If Archeage PvP loss was too much for you, don't even consider Ashes - quite honestly.
I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
Problem is, what does HE think is too punishing.
My point was (and is) that using Archeage as a point of reference here is absolutely pointless.
What does Steven having been an Archeage player have to do with anything here, when that game had an incredibly low death penalty?
And like I said twice already, what he defines as too punishing might not be what the players think/ want
Yes, I picked that up the first time.
You have still said nothing at all about why Archeage was mentioned though.
Because most players these days didn't really play archeage but games like WoW and FF14. There is a different way of thinking and different boundaries.
I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
Problem is, what does HE think is too punishing. He's an ex Archeage player, many of us here are not, including me.
Archeage loss in PvP proper was almost non-existent. The only time PvP was a loss was if you had a vehicle out and it was destroyed - this is also the only way to lose more than one pack at a time, and losing one pack isn't exactly a big deal.
Death was considered a viable means of fast travel.
If Archeage PvP loss was too much for you, don't even consider Ashes - quite honestly.
I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
Problem is, what does HE think is too punishing.
My point was (and is) that using Archeage as a point of reference here is absolutely pointless.
What does Steven having been an Archeage player have to do with anything here, when that game had an incredibly low death penalty?
And like I said twice already, what he defines as too punishing might not be what the players think/ want
Yes, I picked that up the first time.
You have still said nothing at all about why Archeage was mentioned though.
Because most players these days didn't really play archeage but games like WoW and FF14. There is a different way of thinking and different boundaries.
These three games all have basically the same death penalty - which is why I STILL don't get why you bought up Archeage.
These three games all have basically the same death penalty - which is why I STILL don't get why you bought up Archeage.
I have heard an adult man over discord yelling and banging on his desk as hard as he can in EVE.
"WARP!!!! WARP!!! GOD DAMN IT!!! WARP!!! PLEASE GOD!!!!"
I have never heard that reaction to impending death in FFXIV, WOW, or ArcheAge.
The idea of someone panicking to get away from other players in those games is unheard of. Because the consequence of death is nonexistent.
These three games all have basically the same death penalty - which is why I STILL don't get why you bought up Archeage.
I have heard an adult man over discord yelling and banging on his desk as hard as he can in EVE.
"WARP!!!! WARP!!! GOD DAMN IT!!! WARP!!! PLEASE GOD!!!!"
I have never heard that reaction to impending death in FFXIV, WOW, or ArcheAge.
The idea of someone panicking to get away from other players in those games is unheard of. Because the consequence of death is nonexistent.
LOL.
Who would have thought witnessing panic was a game seller.
These three games all have basically the same death penalty - which is why I STILL don't get why you bought up Archeage.
I have heard an adult man over discord yelling and banging on his desk as hard as he can in EVE.
"WARP!!!! WARP!!! GOD DAMN IT!!! WARP!!! PLEASE GOD!!!!"
I have never heard that reaction to impending death in FFXIV, WOW, or ArcheAge.
The idea of someone panicking to get away from other players in those games is unheard of. Because the consequence of death is nonexistent.
LOL.
Who would have thought witnessing panic was a game seller.
These three games all have basically the same death penalty - which is why I STILL don't get why you bought up Archeage.
I have heard an adult man over discord yelling and banging on his desk as hard as he can in EVE.
"WARP!!!! WARP!!! GOD DAMN IT!!! WARP!!! PLEASE GOD!!!!"
I have never heard that reaction to impending death in FFXIV, WOW, or ArcheAge.
The idea of someone panicking to get away from other players in those games is unheard of. Because the consequence of death is nonexistent.
LOL.
Who would have thought witnessing panic was a game seller.
I take it you don't play horror games.....
Touché. No, indeed, I don't experience the thrill, only the powerlessness the gameplay they often rely on.
Comments
Steven normally explains the node system when asked what makes ashes stand out or different.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
Every playstyle is going to have to compromise.
But, yes, that's why I've said that who the target audience is different than who will actually play.
Case in point: Hybrid combat
The target is both the Tab Target audience and the Action Combat audience, but...
Who will end up playing?
Review Page 4.
Steven and Jeffrey also discuss what makes Ashes stand out from the average MMORPG and how that relates to Risk v Reward.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
A lot of people are going to get upset and leave when they realise they can't PvE mindlessly with no risk of PvP (being killed and looted). Inversely a lot of hardcore PvPers will leave when they realise they can't solely subsist off of PvP without at least having a social network including PvE players.
The game not being for everyone doesn't mean anyone is unwelcome. On the contrary I think everyone should give the game a shot and a lot of people who don't think they'd be interested might find themselves actually having a lot more fun than they expected if they just give it a chance.
It doesn't just stop with the PvX nature of the game (which by the way, I think is a good answer to who the target audience is: people who want a social, sandbox, pvx mmo).
There are other design choices that many of us desperately want, that a lot of other MMO's crowds might get turned off by. Some of those include no fast travel, actual death penalties, destroyable player housing, very limited instanced content (no safe spaces), no daily quests, etc.
No game is for everyone. We all like different things. Some people are going to love AoC and it will be their favourite game. Some people aren't going to like it, and that's okay.
Yes… and you cast it where the fish you want to catch live and run. It’s all intentional with a target in mind.
I still wonder if AoC will create a PvX player segment. It’s entirely possible depending on their success.
Random aside: @bloodprophet - Burning Blade was also my first server in 2004.
The people who don't end up crying when they risk using DPS meters and are rewarded with bans.
The people who don't end up crying when they realize Action Combat has RNG.
They people who don't end up crying when they realize there are more casuals playing than hardcores.
Right. Again.
There is a difference between who is the target audience and who will play, but...
"One of the really exciting parts of it is, players are all different, communities are all different...
Each server is going to have a different feel to it. You're going to be able to look and check out what happened on that server when you're making a decision about which server to go to. And you can see what the character (of that server) is, what kinds of players are playing on that server, what things they've done, what things they've unlocked and make those decisions based on that. What communities do I fit best?"
--- Jeffrey
All playstyles will find they have to compromise. Yes.
Some people won't like it. And that's OK. Yes.
As much as some toot about risk vs reward, if you play enough you'll win some and lose some, but it won't be that big an issue in the long turn. Oh, sure, it plays a big role in the mindset and motivation of people, but with any persistence in playtime, most loses can be regained.
For those with less time, any big lose seems a very harsh punishment because of how long it could take to get it back.
As for me, the "problem" I have with the risk vs reward argument is that if the risk is mostly based on not getting the reward or losing a previous one, I'm not really affected since I'm not reward driven: I get my fun in overcoming the risk, not by what comes after.
Graphics cuz attempt at realism usually ends up with an mmo, graphically being out dated. Games like WoW? Still look beautiful almost 20 years better. Obviously, they upgraded and shit, but not in a big manner.
As for tulnar ... well, I want to make a dragonborn 🤣
But back to the point, I will play as long as punishments for losing whatever is not too big, be it your loot or your house stored shit and how well balanced the game is between pvp and pve. A lot of simple but important stuff
That's the one of the most important things. Other than the most hardcore of full loot pvpers, I don't think anyone wants brutally punishing loot losses. I think Steven is smart enough to know that. The man has a plan.
Problem is, what does HE think is too punishing. He's an ex Archeage player, many of us here are not, including me.
Anything other than that, I'd have to be reminded about. I don't remember it as being particularly harsh. Certainly not compared to the many full loot pvp mmos out there where the loser drops everything, 100% full loss including inventory and all equipped gear.
But yeah everyone has a different definition of what harsh and not harsh looks like. Intrepid will find a middle ground.
I personally think AoC's graphics are pretty stylized. Not cartoonish, not 'realism', it feels.... Hmm what even is the right word for this. FFXI gave me a very similar feeling even though they have very different styles. 'Magical Realism' maybe? 'Nothing quite exaggerated outside of possibility but flexible'. I get a similar feeling from Archage, Morrowind, and the witcher games. Nothing is specifically unbelievable, but the pallets, shading, and over all asthetic make me really feel like myself in the world is 'fantastical'.
I think the way they did their environmental modelling gives me the strongest sense of this feeling. Their foliage, the giant mushrooms, the textures never feeling to uncontinuity with the extremely realistic looking water, instead giving areas around water an alien vibrancy.... It all slowly adds up to being this really realistic looking thing on the surface, but then you get to a wild looking mob, suddenly you are aware of the queer uncanny nature of the world around you. And yet neither you, the mob, or the environment feel out of synch.
Everything in the game looks like an alien heard a very good description of irl stuff, maybe a few drawings, and then they were like 'you have magic right?' And were already finished before you could respond. So it looks really 'accurate'. But 'imagined.'
I think that captures the feeling well enough....
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Yhr9WpjaDzw
Tbh, the only mechanic I hate overall and will hate in AoC, is xp loss on death. I don't find it a viable death penalty and its only s hurdle that kills the fun. At least to me. I dont like when the player loses stats or xp just because they died. Already have to deal with that shit in dark souls 😆
Archeage loss in PvP proper was almost non-existent. The only time PvP was a loss was if you had a vehicle out and it was destroyed - this is also the only way to lose more than one pack at a time, and losing one pack isn't exactly a big deal.
Death was considered a viable means of fast travel.
If Archeage PvP loss was too much for you, don't even consider Ashes - quite honestly.
That is pretty much xp loss. You have to earn it back.
My point was (and is) that using Archeage as a point of reference here is absolutely pointless.
What does Steven having been an Archeage player have to do with anything here, when that game had an incredibly low death penalty?
Indeed.
Experience loss would actually be preferable to experience debt in any situation other than when you stand to lose a level.
Experience loss is just that, you die and now have less experience than you had and can then simply carry on with your day as normal.
Experience debt (in Ashes, at least) is a debuff, you die, take on a debt and that debt comes with a debuff. This means that rather than just being able to carry on with your day, you have a debt you need to work off that is causing you to be less effective in combat, and gain fewer rewards from the same.
Doesn't matter, not a fan of either. I don't mind losing gear, but xp is
And like I said twice already, what he defines as too punishing might not be what the players think/ want
Yes, I picked that up the first time.
You have still said nothing at all about why Archeage was mentioned though.
Because most players these days didn't really play archeage but games like WoW and FF14. There is a different way of thinking and different boundaries.
These three games all have basically the same death penalty - which is why I STILL don't get why you bought up Archeage.
I have heard an adult man over discord yelling and banging on his desk as hard as he can in EVE.
"WARP!!!! WARP!!! GOD DAMN IT!!! WARP!!! PLEASE GOD!!!!"
I have never heard that reaction to impending death in FFXIV, WOW, or ArcheAge.
The idea of someone panicking to get away from other players in those games is unheard of. Because the consequence of death is nonexistent.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
LOL.
Who would have thought witnessing panic was a game seller.
I take it you don't play horror games.....
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Yhr9WpjaDzw
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Yhr9WpjaDzw
Touché. No, indeed, I don't experience the thrill, only the powerlessness the gameplay they often rely on.