Just watched the vod, I don't even know what tattoo based respec means. No idea what that's even talking about, gonna have to re listen to it. And I of course agree with Steven's thoughts about guild corruption.
But I know the split body leaning Steven said they have right now is probably a disappointment for you Azherae. It sucks that we aren't all going to be pleased with certain things. There are certain things I'm not pleased with and there will probably be more as systems get fleshed out and tweaked. But I know combat is a big one, not just some small thing.
He said that's the way they're "leaning" so technically anything's possible still. But who knows how free movement combat would ultimately turn out (if that's what's chosen), you might end up liking it in some kind of way, or maybe the way it feels on a certain class. I dunno, grasping at straws here. Just sucks. It'd suck for me if it didn't go my way, sucks for you if it doesn't go your way. So it just sucks either way in a sense.
So, this thread had me trying to figure out what it is that I find "off" about Ashes.
Obviously, I want solid raid content on top of an actual good game - but as the MMO I have spent the second most amount of time in had no raid content to speak of this isn't specifically a deal-breaker. This is not what is putting me off the game, even if it is not attracting me to it.
What I find off about this game is the disconnect between the initial premise of the game, and the current state of the game.
Ignoring any actual specific details about the game, just look at what it was being pushed ass. Ashes was supposed to be innovative and new, and to attempt to drive the direction of MMO's in general. This was the original kind of language Steven was using back in the day.
One need look no further than the opening paragraph of the kickstarter page for the game to get a real feel for what Intrerpid wanted for the game (emphasis my own)
Ashes of Creation is an open-world, non-faction based, no P2W, high-fantasy MMORPG. Join us as we change the face of the genre.
The problem is, as the development of the game has gone on, there has been less and less innovation, with more and more regression in to what other games have done.
This is a sign of Intrepid not being willing to take risks at all (amusing, considering Stevens take on risk vs reward). The more risk averse you are in your decision making, the more conservative the decisions you make will be.
Not only does this not push the genre forward with new innovation, but it can actually see that genre regress by bringing back long dead features from 18 year old MMO's.
I honestly can't think of the last thing I saw from Intrepid that made me think "hey, that's innovative".
I can kind of understand this though, as the key thing that is required for innovation to be realized in any company is for there to be an understanding that failure is indeed an option. It is when you remove failure as an option that you force those conservative decisions to be made - the same decisions that stifle innovation.
That, to me, is what I see ass being wrong with this game. It is not the innovation that it tried to claim it was going to be.
Not only does this not push the genre forward with new innovation, but it can actually see that genre regress by bringing back long dead features from 18 year old MMO's.
Ashes is mostly like Lineage 2 with modern combat and the node system. To me, the node system is the major innovation and the rest is catching an old MMORPGs systems up with modern times. Not the most innovative thing they could do, but innovative enough considering that every game is praised for being a WOW clone.
I don't see this as regression because when the Lineage 2 guys moved on to make ArcheAge they went in the direction South Korea was going with MMORPGs(p2w). Steven is taking the good concepts from L2 in the direction North America, went with MMORPGs while retaining the good stuff from ArcheAge.
This makes sense because Steven is always talking about L2 and ArcheAge. I would have been a ArcheAge fanboy if it was not for the dumb factions and p2w nonsense. I think that you might actually like Ashes if you liked ArcheAge.
The good news is once again the dev update gave me hope for the game. If we did not get these updates every month, I think I would have no hope for Ashes. I have heard you say you don't really watch them, I think?
If so, you should really give at least the Q&A your time.
I still don't get it lol. Like mobile respecs basically? Mobile stat augments you can apply to change how you wanna play in that moment?
0
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Love the mechanics that have come from other games.. have to say that the recent play of NW, for a non-craft / gatherer player in past.. their system totally hooked me and found it such a great integral part that every venture outside town with other objectives ended up repeatedly reverting to more gathering and later more crafting. The landscape and sounds were just great.. if they can replicate even 50% of that I would be all over it and hang up the bow!
L2 has aged, and I cannot stomach the graphics and the grind nowadays.. but it WAS great and suited me in its time..
As foir AoC, I don`t see much if anything that is groundbreaking.
What I do believe however and is its saving grace, is that multiple great ideas, systems and mechanics are being collated and compiled, with amplification and refinement combining great elements from multiple great games of present, past and distant past which theoretically should give AoC a solid start.
But it is the mix of other game ingredients where the grand recipe will become palatable or not to wide and sustained audience.
Just the fact that game has a number of elements that are a direct result of community actions also takes it from theme park to sandbox. Sandbox in a sense that it is the players that thereby provide the content.
0
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I think that you might actually like Ashes if you liked ArcheAge.
This, combined with the fact that no one is trying to make a truly innovative MMO, or trying to remake any of the more popular MMO's from L2's time (popular in the West, at least), is why I am still here.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited August 2021
Really only appealing to me if we can actually see the tattoos on our toons, but...
If we can see inventory items on our belts and backpacks, it should be feasible to see the tattoos.
Nikua, Py'Rai, Ren'Kai and Tulnar I would think might have stat tattoos as part of their cultures.
The problem is, as the development of the game has gone on, there has been less and less innovation, with more and more regression in to what other games have done.
Yeah, I get this feeling as well. I hope Steven stays true to his original vision for the game. I do think it's possible for people to convince him otherwise, and that he needs to make the game more similar to the current popular MMOs in order to make the game popular and not fail. People make that argument all the time. I don't think they are correct though. So many people are interested in the game (even before alpha) solely because the game systems that were described are way more appealing than the current MMO options.
They have recently been working on getting the basics done, such as the backend and networking, so a lot of those innovations are not visible to the typical player. I think combat is the only outward-facing game system that is in heavy development right now where we could see some innovation. I think we will get a sense for how much innovation they can come up with in the genre when they start focusing on stuff like the artisan system, dungeons, and naval systems, and just PvX related systems in general.
Competition breeds innovation. The mmo market is weak and has been miserably weak for years. Plagued with p2w, the same gameplay loops as the one that came right before it, terrible social mechanics that make them more like lobby games, dead, boring worlds. The genre has gone backwards in quality, like the wrong way.
So to compete you don't even have to do anything innovative. Just go back to the ancient art of making good games.
I think Ashes is innovating though with the node system and the changing content in the world. That's about it. Maybe a couple other small things. But that alone is huge. It's going to create gameplay and gameplay loops that haven't really been seen before in mmos.
the same gameplay loops as the one that came right before it
This is, imo, the issue.
Not having the same gameplay loop, but the idea that MMO's should be the only genre that doesnt have the same gameplay loop.
Pick basically any other genre of game, and look at the gameplay loop. Sporting games are about winning a game, and then winning another game, and winning another game. No one buys the latest NBA title complaining that it's all basketball.
Or racing games. Get a car and a track, and go faster around it than anyone else. Then do that again, and again. No one buys Forza and complains that it's all driving.
No one complains that Doom is all about shooting implausible enemies.
No one complains that Flight Simulator is all about flying.
No one complains that Mortal Kombat is just about fighting.
Go as far down that rabbit hole as you like, no one complains about the core gameplay loop being present in any other genre.
The gameplay loop for MMO's should be to arrive at a new encounter, work on that encounter, kill that encounter and then move on to the next encounter. This applies on a solo, group or raid level.
This is what made MMO's great back in the day. The problem isnt the fact that it is the same gameplay loop over and over, it is that developers have tried to diversify that gameplay loop and in the process completely forgotten what the core gameplay loop of MMO's is supposed to be - at least from a PvE perspective (the core gameplay loop of PvP MMO's is still somewhat under-defined, which may be why I find most of them to be lacking direction).
There is absolutely no problem with the core gameplay loop in an MMO being repeated over and over again. The problems are when developers start thinking daily quests or some other such nonsense is the core gameplay loop.
Rather than complaining about gameplay loops in MMO's, us players should be demanding that developers bring them back to what they should be.
Innovative doesn't mean revolutionary or completely game changing. WoW was innovative back in the day by "stealing" all kinds of ideas and systems from existing games and polishing the hell out of them in comparison.
The node system is the main innovative feature of Ashes, and it affects the entire game pretty much. If they succeed with their vision, they might even dethrone Eve Online as king of a lot of those player driven systems. That is huge and that is enough to change the face of the genre. Other MMOs will feel stale and boring if Ashes can pull off an actual player driven fantasy world that isn't just marketing buzzwords.
They are also trying something with combat, but I honestly see that as less innovative even if they succeed. At least in terms of impact.
Just watched the vod, I don't even know what tattoo based respec means. No idea what that's even talking about, gonna have to re listen to it. And I of course agree with Steven's thoughts about guild corruption.
But I know the split body leaning Steven said they have right now is probably a disappointment for you Azherae. It sucks that we aren't all going to be pleased with certain things. There are certain things I'm not pleased with and there will probably be more as systems get fleshed out and tweaked. But I know combat is a big one, not just some small thing.
He said that's the way they're "leaning" so technically anything's possible still. But who knows how free movement combat would ultimately turn out (if that's what's chosen), you might end up liking it in some kind of way, or maybe the way it feels on a certain class. I dunno, grasping at straws here. Just sucks. It'd suck for me if it didn't go my way, sucks for you if it doesn't go your way. So it just sucks either way in a sense.
When Intrepid gives information, it builds up 'faith', something like when a politician talks. "Design Capital", let's say. When there's a 'gaffe' or a 'slip', some of that is spent or lost. It's a combination of 'trust' and 'the veil'. Affects different people differently and because it's subjective, it's possible for a listener to misinterpret a situation.
Steven 'spent all his design capital' for ME in a few words, during that stream.
I learned that the 'combo system issue' that I saw in the test is probably a real thing with a real problem, through a set of small hints.
I learned that they're still in the pitch phase for certain things despite making a decision based on a flawed test.
I learned that they're still in the modeling phase for Node positions/simulation to the point where 'developers are offering models written in Java and these are somehow impressing people'.
I learned that the reason we didn't see things above Village wasn't necessarily because they were 'working but not stable' but because they might not be working or properly simulated yet either.
I learned that the combat system which is basically rudimentary and doesn't currently address any of the things that would cause the game to have a balanced base in my opinion is 'good and we're going forward'.
I learned that the risk vs reward aspect isn't actually 100%, there are ways it doesn't apply and things it doesn't apply to, that can easily be manipulated, and I lost a lot of faith in why it's that way, which leads to a lot of change in the open-world interaction. Basically that 'those who step forward' take risks, those who 'pull at their heels' risk 'less than they risk by stepping forward'.
I expected some hint or announcement of what they're doing about Jeff Bard leaving, but I guess that will come later... maybe.
Steven 'spent all his capital' for me. It's not to say Intrepid can't build up more of it, but when you've been told a lot of things that 'could go either way', and someone suddenly presents you with multiple signs that it all means the opposite of what you believed, 'philosophically', it's easy to shift.
I had faith before. I only have cautious wariness now. But it is also true to say that I didn't think I was part of the target audience for this game before, except for the faith. Now that it's gone, I don't anymore.
Hopefully they continue to do as they always do, transparently show things, rebuild it, or don't. I like being able to know that they're still testing models for the NodeWorld simulation at this point. I just don't like the implication of it relative to the status of development and design.
Steven 'reframed the narrative' for me in little ways, as someone who has worked in similar levels of projects in a different industry, and a lot of things I saw but didn't speak on before, now have a decidedly different 'cast' to them.
But, absolutely nothing confirmable, as always, it's all speculation and bias. I just, as mentioned prior, never specifically thought I was part of the target audience, and I lost all of the 'stuff that was starting to make me believe that'.
My first MMO was Asheron's Call and it was basically a sandbox game. There was no hand holding, the default classes were terrible and if you made one you would have to remake your character. Every bit of character creation was adjustable; you selected your starting attributes, starting skills such as Primary/Secondary skills. ES reminds me of AC with regards to character creation.
I played AC for years but I never reached max level. You leveled by killing mobs, not doing quests. Quests were found through hints that Town Crier's would give you after you gave them some pyreals.
Leveling was grinding Lugians or Drudges or Olthoi or Mosswarts. That was kind of boring to me, so I picked up loot at fort that adventures would leave behind (so they could grind more), take it back to town, sell the junk and trade with the better bits.
AOC is going to have multiple paths of advancement, and that appeals to me. As does the emphasis on community and working towards common goals.
No one complains that Doom is all about shooting implausible enemies.
No one complains that Flight Simulator is all about flying.
No one complains that Mortal Kombat is just about fighting.
I get your point but those are much simpler games. There's only so much you can do with them. I don't think were going to see a caravan mechanic in the next NBA 2k22. Mmos can have more complex and diverse gameplay loops.
I've lost count of all the Eastern mmos that have come out in the last few years that are carbon copies of each other. And they're still coming out, somehow sucking people in.
But what attracts me to Ashes is all the different avenues of progression, the different gameplay loops. It's not Wow that has had the same gameplay loop for like 17 years. Quest, get pre bis, raid in instances/do afterthought pvp. New dlc - quest, get pre bis, raid in instances/do afterthought pvp.
In Ashes there's so many more options. One of those options will be "arrive at a new encounter, work on that encounter, kill that encounter and then move on to the next encounter." But I can also progress and acquire wealth by being a pirate, being a trader, being a caravan raider, being a bandit, being a master crafter and selling my stuff, potentially running an in game business like a tavern, being a fisherman like in Archeage.
I'm fine with dungeon raiding being a core gameplay loop, but I don't want it to be the only one or be forced to do it as the only real way to progress in the game. If I want to make my fortune and gear myself out competitively compared to everyone else, I'd like the option to spend my days out on the sea mostly, fishing or stealing other peoples fish. Or traveling the land as a trader, or stealing from those traders. And when I get tired of that maybe I go do some dungeons, or maybe I get a guild together of really good pvpers and we can build a reputation that allows us to merc ourselves out for money.
So many options and gameplay loops, I could go on and on.
You're vague to the point I can't pick up everything you're putting down Azherae. But I definitely get it in general. I've felt that way about most games that came out for the past 5 or 6 years.
I get your point but those are much simpler games. There's only so much you can do with them. I don't think were going to see a caravan mechanic in the next NBA 2k22. Mmos can have more complex and diverse gameplay loops.
Yeah, but that's the problem.
Caravan systems are not a part of the core gameplay loop of an MMO - they are an added "feature" that is not necessary for that core gameplay loop.
It would be like having to book your teams transport and hotels in an NBA game.
I mean, that kind of thing would actually be fine, if - and ONLY if - the core gameplay loop of the game (basketball matches in the case of an NBA game) were as good as they could be, AND if that additional feature were optional to participate in with no major impact on that core gameplay loop to those that didn't participate in it.
For some reason, MMO's have decided to focus more on these non-core gameplay loops and this has come at the direct cost of the core loop.
That, imo, is the number one issue with the genre.
Get that core loop as good as you can possible make it, and then look at adding in secondary and tertiary loops to the mix in ways that don't detract from that core loop.
Every other genre understands this - it's time MMO's did as well.
I mean, ask Steven what he considers the core gameplay loop in Ashes, I bet he doesn't have a single answer - and that would be a major problem.
I don't know what Steven's answer would be if asked about Ashes specifically. I think in general the core gameplay loop of mmo's is build your character, acquire money/items/resources, progress your character and gear, use your character for what you think is fun in the game.
Steven would probably say, "we've built a whole world full of options to do exactly that, choose your path."
The gameplay loop for MMO's should be to arrive at a new encounter, work on that encounter, kill that encounter and then move on to the next encounter. This applies on a solo, group or raid level.
That is the core of an MMO. Everything in the game should be feeding in to that.
However, I'll add the caveat of
(the core gameplay loop of PvP MMO's is still somewhat under-defined, which may be why I find most of them to be lacking direction).
All other loops in MMO's should be feeding in to that loop of arriving at an encounter, working that encounter out and killing that encounter.
Quests should be there to direct players around the game world. Basically, they exist to assist in the first portion of the loop - players arriving at an encounter.
Crafting is a secondary loop to assist in the third part of the primary loop - killing the encounter.
The problem with this loop from a developers perspective is that it requires the constant addition of new encounters in order to keep people playing the game. This is why EQ is up to it's 27th (soon to be 28th) full expansion - they are constantly adding new content in order to keep that core gameplay loop alive.
Rather than committing to this rate of new content additions, most developers have taken one of two other routes. Either fill the game with mundane tasks preventing players from participating in that core gameplay loop (WoW), or enhance PvP aspects of the game in order to turn paying subscribers in to content, rather than making content for them (Archeage/BDO).
Both of these detract from what I strongly believe should be the core gameplay loop of all MMO's.
Other than the different word choices of what were describing as the core gameplay loop of an mmo, I think we pretty much agree on it. It's all about encounters (what I described as using your character for what you think is fun in the game.) What's the point of me being a world wide trader and making all kinds of money if there are no encounters in the game for me to use my now rich and geared out character on.
I think I place a lot more importance on the journey to the encounter than you do though. And I think my definition of encounter is broader too. Sounds like you're just referring to pve, I may be wrong. But I look at pvp as being just as much a part of the term encounters.
I think Ashes is going to have it all. It may not be perfectly to your liking, I don't think it'll be perfectly to my liking either. I can definitely envision days where I just can't find anyone my guilds at war with, no one my nodes at war with, I just can't find any damn pvp. And I'll sit there and wish I was in a faction based game where I can always find players of the enemy faction, pvp on demand.
But I dunno, there's literally always going to be something to do in Ashes imo.
In other words, the game has no core gameplay loop.
I don't really see it that way. There's always going to be encounters to be working on and figuring out. World bosses and dungeon bosses. Enemy nodes and guilds. The combination of the two. Sieges will be encounters that players have to work at and practice and strategize over. Just running a caravan will be a potential encounter. I could go on, game will be full of encounters.
In other words, the game has no core gameplay loop.
I don't really see it that way. There's always going to be encounters to be working on and figuring out. World bosses and dungeon bosses. Enemy nodes and guilds. The combination of the two. Sieges will be encounters that players have to work at and practice and strategize over. Just running a caravan will be a potential encounter. I could go on, game will be full of encounters.
It isn't a case of there being something to do or not - there is always something to do in literally every game.
It is a case of those things that you are doing making sense, and working towards a single loop.
Lets imagine you are a crafter in Ashes. You have to get materials to craft items to use or sell in order to get better gear in order to be able to get materials bought in. It is it's own, complete gameplay loop - it literally doesn't need the rest of the game other than players to attack caravans.
Not only that, but the rest of the game could exist just fine without that system. I'm not saying it should - I'm saying it could.
So, you have two games (there are actually three, sieging, PvE, and maybe four with naval content) in Ashes that could essentially exist without each other and don't actually even need each other, all competing to be the "primary gameplay loop" of the game.
None of them are going to succeed at that, meaning the game simply will not have a primary gameplay loop, but rather four aspiring, competing loops.
I think I place a lot more importance on the journey to the encounter than you do though.
I wouldn't necessarily say that. I enjoy a good quest, and am all for secondary systems in games to facilitate this third of the core gameplay loop.
In the same way that crafting is a secondary loop that assists players in killing an encounter (and harvesting is a tertiary loop that supplies crafters), naval content should, imo, be a secondary loop that assists players in reaching far off encounters.
This is also the part of that primary loop that should be subject to PvP, so it is at least on par with killing the encounter in terms of how important it is in the over all picture of a good MMO.
meaning the game simply will not have a primary gameplay loop, but rather four aspiring, competing loops.
I dunno I think we just have different philosophies heh. I don't see it as a problem if individual players have different views on what their primary gameplay loop is in a game. I think that's more a trait of sandbox mmos maybe. And that's part of the point of sandbox mmos.
So, you have two games (there are actually three, sieging, PvE, and maybe four with naval content) in Ashes that could essentially exist without each other and don't actually even need each other, all competing to be the "primary gameplay loop" of the game.
Yeah I guess all 4 of those games could be separate games. But it's so much cooler that they're all in one game.
Yeah I guess all 4 of those games could be separate games. But it's so much cooler that they're all in one game.
If the game had a development staff four times the size of any game, sure.
As it is, they have one fairly small (comparatively) team trying to make four gameplay loops that they want to each compete individually with other games, rather than trying to make one.
I mean, there is a reason the Bioshock games and Borderlands games are independent from each other, or Civilization and X-Com, or NBA and PGA (all 2K game franchises).
Just mashing together two gameplay loops in to one game doesn't mean it will be good, it means you will have a game with two gameplay loops that are half as good as they should be.
Again, this isn't an issue specific to Intrepid, it is an issue with the MMO genre as a whole.
Comments
But I know the split body leaning Steven said they have right now is probably a disappointment for you Azherae. It sucks that we aren't all going to be pleased with certain things. There are certain things I'm not pleased with and there will probably be more as systems get fleshed out and tweaked. But I know combat is a big one, not just some small thing.
He said that's the way they're "leaning" so technically anything's possible still. But who knows how free movement combat would ultimately turn out (if that's what's chosen), you might end up liking it in some kind of way, or maybe the way it feels on a certain class. I dunno, grasping at straws here. Just sucks. It'd suck for me if it didn't go my way, sucks for you if it doesn't go your way. So it just sucks either way in a sense.
Early in L2 I wanted my Gladiator class to be more tanky, so that I have a chance to survive ganger attacks and deal back some of my big dmg.
So I would often gather materials to make a -4 DEX +4 CON tattoo.
My character would lose 4 dex and gain 4 con.
If I wanted to focus on pve I would do two -4 CON +4 STR. It was a fairly costly process on higher lvs.
Obviously, I want solid raid content on top of an actual good game - but as the MMO I have spent the second most amount of time in had no raid content to speak of this isn't specifically a deal-breaker. This is not what is putting me off the game, even if it is not attracting me to it.
What I find off about this game is the disconnect between the initial premise of the game, and the current state of the game.
Ignoring any actual specific details about the game, just look at what it was being pushed ass. Ashes was supposed to be innovative and new, and to attempt to drive the direction of MMO's in general. This was the original kind of language Steven was using back in the day.
One need look no further than the opening paragraph of the kickstarter page for the game to get a real feel for what Intrerpid wanted for the game (emphasis my own)
The problem is, as the development of the game has gone on, there has been less and less innovation, with more and more regression in to what other games have done.
This is a sign of Intrepid not being willing to take risks at all (amusing, considering Stevens take on risk vs reward). The more risk averse you are in your decision making, the more conservative the decisions you make will be.
Not only does this not push the genre forward with new innovation, but it can actually see that genre regress by bringing back long dead features from 18 year old MMO's.
I honestly can't think of the last thing I saw from Intrepid that made me think "hey, that's innovative".
I can kind of understand this though, as the key thing that is required for innovation to be realized in any company is for there to be an understanding that failure is indeed an option. It is when you remove failure as an option that you force those conservative decisions to be made - the same decisions that stifle innovation.
That, to me, is what I see ass being wrong with this game. It is not the innovation that it tried to claim it was going to be.
Ashes is mostly like Lineage 2 with modern combat and the node system. To me, the node system is the major innovation and the rest is catching an old MMORPGs systems up with modern times. Not the most innovative thing they could do, but innovative enough considering that every game is praised for being a WOW clone.
I don't see this as regression because when the Lineage 2 guys moved on to make ArcheAge they went in the direction South Korea was going with MMORPGs(p2w). Steven is taking the good concepts from L2 in the direction North America, went with MMORPGs while retaining the good stuff from ArcheAge.
This makes sense because Steven is always talking about L2 and ArcheAge. I would have been a ArcheAge fanboy if it was not for the dumb factions and p2w nonsense. I think that you might actually like Ashes if you liked ArcheAge.
The good news is once again the dev update gave me hope for the game. If we did not get these updates every month, I think I would have no hope for Ashes. I have heard you say you don't really watch them, I think?
If so, you should really give at least the Q&A your time.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
Can confirm.
In L2 it was just another way to customize your character to meet your needs.
Even if they were graphical, I would expect them to be able to be hidden.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
L2 has aged, and I cannot stomach the graphics and the grind nowadays.. but it WAS great and suited me in its time..
As foir AoC, I don`t see much if anything that is groundbreaking.
What I do believe however and is its saving grace, is that multiple great ideas, systems and mechanics are being collated and compiled, with amplification and refinement combining great elements from multiple great games of present, past and distant past which theoretically should give AoC a solid start.
But it is the mix of other game ingredients where the grand recipe will become palatable or not to wide and sustained audience.
Just the fact that game has a number of elements that are a direct result of community actions also takes it from theme park to sandbox. Sandbox in a sense that it is the players that thereby provide the content.
Yep sounds like it, but task / craft / quest and/or grind based to create and change.. rather than just coin.. if like L2
I did mention it was costly.
Dont be confused.
It's an item you slot on your equipment tap and it affects your characters main stats.
Lose 4 dex gain 4 con. Simple as that
If we can see inventory items on our belts and backpacks, it should be feasible to see the tattoos.
Nikua, Py'Rai, Ren'Kai and Tulnar I would think might have stat tattoos as part of their cultures.
Ahh ok I gotcha. I had just never heard of it before, I never played Lineage 2.
Yeah, I get this feeling as well. I hope Steven stays true to his original vision for the game. I do think it's possible for people to convince him otherwise, and that he needs to make the game more similar to the current popular MMOs in order to make the game popular and not fail. People make that argument all the time. I don't think they are correct though. So many people are interested in the game (even before alpha) solely because the game systems that were described are way more appealing than the current MMO options.
They have recently been working on getting the basics done, such as the backend and networking, so a lot of those innovations are not visible to the typical player. I think combat is the only outward-facing game system that is in heavy development right now where we could see some innovation. I think we will get a sense for how much innovation they can come up with in the genre when they start focusing on stuff like the artisan system, dungeons, and naval systems, and just PvX related systems in general.
Innovation requires risk of failure.
So to compete you don't even have to do anything innovative. Just go back to the ancient art of making good games.
I think Ashes is innovating though with the node system and the changing content in the world. That's about it. Maybe a couple other small things. But that alone is huge. It's going to create gameplay and gameplay loops that haven't really been seen before in mmos.
This is, imo, the issue.
Not having the same gameplay loop, but the idea that MMO's should be the only genre that doesnt have the same gameplay loop.
Pick basically any other genre of game, and look at the gameplay loop. Sporting games are about winning a game, and then winning another game, and winning another game. No one buys the latest NBA title complaining that it's all basketball.
Or racing games. Get a car and a track, and go faster around it than anyone else. Then do that again, and again. No one buys Forza and complains that it's all driving.
No one complains that Doom is all about shooting implausible enemies.
No one complains that Flight Simulator is all about flying.
No one complains that Mortal Kombat is just about fighting.
Go as far down that rabbit hole as you like, no one complains about the core gameplay loop being present in any other genre.
The gameplay loop for MMO's should be to arrive at a new encounter, work on that encounter, kill that encounter and then move on to the next encounter. This applies on a solo, group or raid level.
This is what made MMO's great back in the day. The problem isnt the fact that it is the same gameplay loop over and over, it is that developers have tried to diversify that gameplay loop and in the process completely forgotten what the core gameplay loop of MMO's is supposed to be - at least from a PvE perspective (the core gameplay loop of PvP MMO's is still somewhat under-defined, which may be why I find most of them to be lacking direction).
There is absolutely no problem with the core gameplay loop in an MMO being repeated over and over again. The problems are when developers start thinking daily quests or some other such nonsense is the core gameplay loop.
Rather than complaining about gameplay loops in MMO's, us players should be demanding that developers bring them back to what they should be.
The node system is the main innovative feature of Ashes, and it affects the entire game pretty much. If they succeed with their vision, they might even dethrone Eve Online as king of a lot of those player driven systems. That is huge and that is enough to change the face of the genre. Other MMOs will feel stale and boring if Ashes can pull off an actual player driven fantasy world that isn't just marketing buzzwords.
They are also trying something with combat, but I honestly see that as less innovative even if they succeed. At least in terms of impact.
When Intrepid gives information, it builds up 'faith', something like when a politician talks. "Design Capital", let's say. When there's a 'gaffe' or a 'slip', some of that is spent or lost. It's a combination of 'trust' and 'the veil'. Affects different people differently and because it's subjective, it's possible for a listener to misinterpret a situation.
Steven 'spent all his design capital' for ME in a few words, during that stream.
I learned that the 'combo system issue' that I saw in the test is probably a real thing with a real problem, through a set of small hints.
I learned that they're still in the pitch phase for certain things despite making a decision based on a flawed test.
I learned that they're still in the modeling phase for Node positions/simulation to the point where 'developers are offering models written in Java and these are somehow impressing people'.
I learned that the reason we didn't see things above Village wasn't necessarily because they were 'working but not stable' but because they might not be working or properly simulated yet either.
I learned that the combat system which is basically rudimentary and doesn't currently address any of the things that would cause the game to have a balanced base in my opinion is 'good and we're going forward'.
I learned that the risk vs reward aspect isn't actually 100%, there are ways it doesn't apply and things it doesn't apply to, that can easily be manipulated, and I lost a lot of faith in why it's that way, which leads to a lot of change in the open-world interaction. Basically that 'those who step forward' take risks, those who 'pull at their heels' risk 'less than they risk by stepping forward'.
I expected some hint or announcement of what they're doing about Jeff Bard leaving, but I guess that will come later... maybe.
Steven 'spent all his capital' for me. It's not to say Intrepid can't build up more of it, but when you've been told a lot of things that 'could go either way', and someone suddenly presents you with multiple signs that it all means the opposite of what you believed, 'philosophically', it's easy to shift.
I had faith before. I only have cautious wariness now. But it is also true to say that I didn't think I was part of the target audience for this game before, except for the faith. Now that it's gone, I don't anymore.
Hopefully they continue to do as they always do, transparently show things, rebuild it, or don't. I like being able to know that they're still testing models for the NodeWorld simulation at this point. I just don't like the implication of it relative to the status of development and design.
Steven 'reframed the narrative' for me in little ways, as someone who has worked in similar levels of projects in a different industry, and a lot of things I saw but didn't speak on before, now have a decidedly different 'cast' to them.
But, absolutely nothing confirmable, as always, it's all speculation and bias. I just, as mentioned prior, never specifically thought I was part of the target audience, and I lost all of the 'stuff that was starting to make me believe that'.
My first MMO was Asheron's Call and it was basically a sandbox game. There was no hand holding, the default classes were terrible and if you made one you would have to remake your character. Every bit of character creation was adjustable; you selected your starting attributes, starting skills such as Primary/Secondary skills. ES reminds me of AC with regards to character creation.
I played AC for years but I never reached max level. You leveled by killing mobs, not doing quests. Quests were found through hints that Town Crier's would give you after you gave them some pyreals.
Leveling was grinding Lugians or Drudges or Olthoi or Mosswarts. That was kind of boring to me, so I picked up loot at fort that adventures would leave behind (so they could grind more), take it back to town, sell the junk and trade with the better bits.
AOC is going to have multiple paths of advancement, and that appeals to me. As does the emphasis on community and working towards common goals.
I get your point but those are much simpler games. There's only so much you can do with them. I don't think were going to see a caravan mechanic in the next NBA 2k22. Mmos can have more complex and diverse gameplay loops.
I've lost count of all the Eastern mmos that have come out in the last few years that are carbon copies of each other. And they're still coming out, somehow sucking people in.
But what attracts me to Ashes is all the different avenues of progression, the different gameplay loops. It's not Wow that has had the same gameplay loop for like 17 years. Quest, get pre bis, raid in instances/do afterthought pvp. New dlc - quest, get pre bis, raid in instances/do afterthought pvp.
In Ashes there's so many more options. One of those options will be "arrive at a new encounter, work on that encounter, kill that encounter and then move on to the next encounter." But I can also progress and acquire wealth by being a pirate, being a trader, being a caravan raider, being a bandit, being a master crafter and selling my stuff, potentially running an in game business like a tavern, being a fisherman like in Archeage.
I'm fine with dungeon raiding being a core gameplay loop, but I don't want it to be the only one or be forced to do it as the only real way to progress in the game. If I want to make my fortune and gear myself out competitively compared to everyone else, I'd like the option to spend my days out on the sea mostly, fishing or stealing other peoples fish. Or traveling the land as a trader, or stealing from those traders. And when I get tired of that maybe I go do some dungeons, or maybe I get a guild together of really good pvpers and we can build a reputation that allows us to merc ourselves out for money.
So many options and gameplay loops, I could go on and on.
Caravan systems are not a part of the core gameplay loop of an MMO - they are an added "feature" that is not necessary for that core gameplay loop.
It would be like having to book your teams transport and hotels in an NBA game.
I mean, that kind of thing would actually be fine, if - and ONLY if - the core gameplay loop of the game (basketball matches in the case of an NBA game) were as good as they could be, AND if that additional feature were optional to participate in with no major impact on that core gameplay loop to those that didn't participate in it.
For some reason, MMO's have decided to focus more on these non-core gameplay loops and this has come at the direct cost of the core loop.
That, imo, is the number one issue with the genre.
Get that core loop as good as you can possible make it, and then look at adding in secondary and tertiary loops to the mix in ways that don't detract from that core loop.
Every other genre understands this - it's time MMO's did as well.
I mean, ask Steven what he considers the core gameplay loop in Ashes, I bet he doesn't have a single answer - and that would be a major problem.
Edit: I mean your definition of what the core gameplay loop of an mmo is supposed to be.
Steven would probably say, "we've built a whole world full of options to do exactly that, choose your path."
However, I'll add the caveat of All other loops in MMO's should be feeding in to that loop of arriving at an encounter, working that encounter out and killing that encounter.
Quests should be there to direct players around the game world. Basically, they exist to assist in the first portion of the loop - players arriving at an encounter.
Crafting is a secondary loop to assist in the third part of the primary loop - killing the encounter.
The problem with this loop from a developers perspective is that it requires the constant addition of new encounters in order to keep people playing the game. This is why EQ is up to it's 27th (soon to be 28th) full expansion - they are constantly adding new content in order to keep that core gameplay loop alive.
Rather than committing to this rate of new content additions, most developers have taken one of two other routes. Either fill the game with mundane tasks preventing players from participating in that core gameplay loop (WoW), or enhance PvP aspects of the game in order to turn paying subscribers in to content, rather than making content for them (Archeage/BDO).
Both of these detract from what I strongly believe should be the core gameplay loop of all MMO's. Indeed.
In other words, the game has no core gameplay loop.
I think I place a lot more importance on the journey to the encounter than you do though. And I think my definition of encounter is broader too. Sounds like you're just referring to pve, I may be wrong. But I look at pvp as being just as much a part of the term encounters.
I think Ashes is going to have it all. It may not be perfectly to your liking, I don't think it'll be perfectly to my liking either. I can definitely envision days where I just can't find anyone my guilds at war with, no one my nodes at war with, I just can't find any damn pvp. And I'll sit there and wish I was in a faction based game where I can always find players of the enemy faction, pvp on demand.
But I dunno, there's literally always going to be something to do in Ashes imo.
I don't really see it that way. There's always going to be encounters to be working on and figuring out. World bosses and dungeon bosses. Enemy nodes and guilds. The combination of the two. Sieges will be encounters that players have to work at and practice and strategize over. Just running a caravan will be a potential encounter. I could go on, game will be full of encounters.
It isn't a case of there being something to do or not - there is always something to do in literally every game.
It is a case of those things that you are doing making sense, and working towards a single loop.
Lets imagine you are a crafter in Ashes. You have to get materials to craft items to use or sell in order to get better gear in order to be able to get materials bought in. It is it's own, complete gameplay loop - it literally doesn't need the rest of the game other than players to attack caravans.
Not only that, but the rest of the game could exist just fine without that system. I'm not saying it should - I'm saying it could.
So, you have two games (there are actually three, sieging, PvE, and maybe four with naval content) in Ashes that could essentially exist without each other and don't actually even need each other, all competing to be the "primary gameplay loop" of the game.
None of them are going to succeed at that, meaning the game simply will not have a primary gameplay loop, but rather four aspiring, competing loops. I wouldn't necessarily say that. I enjoy a good quest, and am all for secondary systems in games to facilitate this third of the core gameplay loop.
In the same way that crafting is a secondary loop that assists players in killing an encounter (and harvesting is a tertiary loop that supplies crafters), naval content should, imo, be a secondary loop that assists players in reaching far off encounters.
This is also the part of that primary loop that should be subject to PvP, so it is at least on par with killing the encounter in terms of how important it is in the over all picture of a good MMO.
I dunno I think we just have different philosophies heh. I don't see it as a problem if individual players have different views on what their primary gameplay loop is in a game. I think that's more a trait of sandbox mmos maybe. And that's part of the point of sandbox mmos.
Yeah I guess all 4 of those games could be separate games. But it's so much cooler that they're all in one game.
If the game had a development staff four times the size of any game, sure.
As it is, they have one fairly small (comparatively) team trying to make four gameplay loops that they want to each compete individually with other games, rather than trying to make one.
I mean, there is a reason the Bioshock games and Borderlands games are independent from each other, or Civilization and X-Com, or NBA and PGA (all 2K game franchises).
Just mashing together two gameplay loops in to one game doesn't mean it will be good, it means you will have a game with two gameplay loops that are half as good as they should be.
Again, this isn't an issue specific to Intrepid, it is an issue with the MMO genre as a whole.