Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
This is why I see it happening. Most successful MMO's break a trend, they don't just follow them all.
As to the mount thing, people wanting to collect them is fine. Developers putting them in the game is fine. Developers forcing people that want them to kill top end raid encounters content cycle after content cycle is not fine.
The top end of any activity in an MMO (the top half, really) should be for the people that want to do that activity, and no one else.
Breaking the trend does not equal success, though. Crowfall broke the trend, Wildstar broke the trend, That MMORPG with a show on the Sci-fi channel... That broke the trend. Where are those games now?
Right now, the two most successful MMOs are just stroking each other's dicks. Waiting to see what the other does and taking what works and trying to make it better. "Look however you want" has been a big part of it. Every time a restriction is lifted in WOW or FFXIV the communities' cheers.
FFXIV is so successful it had to stop sales this week. Think about that. No MMORPG has ever had to stop sales because sales numbers are too high. Early this year, they ran out of new CD keys... FFXIV, is an example of a game that only follows the trends.
I think any game that tries to go against "look how you want" is going to have a hard time. I agree, there are people out there that want what you want. I even want to see it myself in a few games. I just don't think those games will ever be large or the next big thing. Not when cosmetics are such a good business model.
It's kind of like asking Americans to give up cars and embrace public transportation. There are a lot of people out there that would like to see it. My self included, but I am not giving up my car any time soon.
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
This doesn;t mean it will be an instant success - of course it doesn't.
However, if someone out there is stupid enough to think that Crowfall would ever have been successful (it literally never had a chance at being successful as an MMORPG), then there is no reason at all to think the same couldn't happen with literally any other game concept, let alone one that actually has a chance of being successful.
As to your analogy of public transport, yeah, obviously that isn't going to happen. However, it isn't going to happen because of how poor public transport is in most of America. Before you tell people to do that, you need to first build an acceptable public transport system, both hyper-locally (as in, moving a few blocks), locally (across town), and cross country.
Build them up to the point where they are cost effective, convenient, clean, comfortable, timely, widespread and not cramped, and you have a chance of convincing people to leave their car at home.
Likewise, in a game, if you give people the tools they need to be able to make their character look good, the vast majority of people won't care if it doesn't look exactly how they want. As long as you have made a system where players do have options, the number of people that are going to care that their Ebony armor has to look like Ebony armor rather than looking like a silk robe is really minimal.
Like, really minimal.
I find the opposite to be true. When I make a character in Diablo 2 I don't give a shit what they look like because I have no options. If I want to play Sorc in D2 I am a girl, If I want to play in D2R I am an uglier girl... I don't give a shit because I play D2/D2R for the game play and I never had or was told I would have choices.
Modern MMORPGs tend to give me a lot more choice in how I look. So I find myself caring a lot more about the little things I can't change. Something as simple as the Elfs in FFXIV having slightly longer necks makes the race unplayable to many(self included). If the sorc in D2 had the same neck, no one would give a shit.
It was not a problem in D2 because you did not have a better option. Ashes is saying they want to give us a lot of options. They have given us the cookie, but not the glass of milk. They are giving us options and restrictions at the same time, so the restrictions stand out.
If players have access to a dye called "Ebony" and the tool tip says "it's the darkest dye in the game.". Then you put it on your armor, and it's only slightly darker than a middle of the road grey. People will be upset about that small detail. It is going to be more infuriating than not having the choice at all.
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
Hahaha, yeah, I'd have to learn to keep my mouth shut then, wouldn't I?!
Something something piper perri surrounded meme...
Hahaha, that gave me a surprise when I searched to find out who that was! Glad I wasn't on my work PC!
NEVER!!!
Wouldn't be any fun with out some good trash talking.
Yeah, in games where the look is the look and nothing else. people will bitch over small details associated with how things look.
When the look is a product of the function, there isn't that same scope - much as is the case in D2. In D2, you look like the gear and character you have.
End of story.
Because people know this to be the case, it is not an issue, even for people that enjoy playing around with how they look in other games.
I guess you should be thankful this month's cosmetic pack did not come with a giant candy cane axe for a weapon skin.
Selling cosmetics is a sure fire way to convince me that looking cool and self-expression is more important than things looking like what they are... Which is the case for Ashes and Most MMORPGS. MO2 is the only current MMORPG I can think of that doesn't do this. I love it, but MO2 ain't winning any popularity contests.
People don't know that DPS meters are a rising tide that lifts all boats... They see it as a tool for toxicity instead of a tool for improvement. I think the day DPS meters are universally seen as a tool for good might be the same day that everyone agrees that things looking like what they are is of high importance.
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
Not really. Were you offended
After i had done it, i did think i could have left that out. But, i didn't want to power up the PC again, just to edit it. And i forgot about it the next day.
But i still don't see a reason as to remove a race, or perhaps a class, later on, if we looked at polls for that. Just because they aren't so popular..
Not everybody has bought cosmetics
Lol! Nope - just pointing out the obvious, and maybe some irony. 😆
It isn't, but not because of anything cosmetic.
I'm not saying everyone needs to agree. Not everyone agrees that PvP in an MMO is a good thing, yet look how many games are trying and failing to make that work.
Just Crowfall ATM, All the other ones are dead or living in their niche.
The "What you see is what you get" focus seems like it would be more of a Pantheon thing, but I hardly hear anything about that game anymore.
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
https://visionaryrealms.com/further-funding-acquired-for-pantheon-rise-of-the-fallen/
It has been in development for a few years longer than Ashes and still isn't quite into the Alpha yet.
On the other hand, having most players choosing the "better" race for a class for stats, reinforce the stereotype that lore often try to tag the races with. Dwarves = fighter. Elves = archers.
This, in turn, allows people who like to play against types to choose an unusual race/class combo. You can't do that if their isn't a type in the first place. It has advantages in a PvP context if people expect a certain class because they see a specific race. They approach the fight with a set of tactics in mind but then have to change everything on the spot because that's not how you fight against the class that is in front of them.
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
There is nothing wrong if someone playing a class that doesn't follow a stereotype. Better to expect racial/class stereotypes than have stats that force you into optimising
You are basically saying that you think players should be free to pick a race they like based on the games lore, and then throw that lore away to be the class they want, with no penalty at all.
If you want to stick to the games lore, there should be stats to each race - if not a lock on some race/class combinations.
I do think races should have augments though. And the augments should be unique and interesting, and generic enough to be useful to any role. And needless to say, they should be balanced... We don't want a race that can teleport and another one that adds sparkly effects.
I actually loved when races were stat specific in WoW. I love the augment idea but I also fully support racial base stats and possibly even class locking although I admit it seems kind of silly to class lock in a game with 64 variants of classes
Yes! Throw that lore out! Individuals are individuals!
In the game, "lore" is just history and culture. It has nothing to do with individuals.
Characters are individuals.
I appreciate and respect American history as an American, but I am way more likely to get into a story about Roman history.
To use the class analogy, I would be way more interested in learning the way a Roman soldier fought over the way a Civil War Soldier fought. Some Americans really like Samurai and would gladly learn their ways over any other combatant. No one is going to say an able-bodied American would have penalties in learning to be a Samurai if given the chance. It just sounds stupid.
If we just bar races from being able to do certain things well, then we are just creating restrictions that make the world more bland.
An orc with a big club is very predicable compared to an orc with a rapier...
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
An Orc with a rapier is still probably going to try and hit you over the head with it.
I'm going to ignore the comment about an American Samurai. I am sure you understand that the difference between an American human and a Japanese human is not the same as the difference between an Elf and a Tulnar.
A far better analogyl would be that an ox is far more suited to pulling a plow than a trout is.
While we talk about different races in game, it is more accurate to consider this game to have four species, and some of those species have multiple races within them.
A pointless stereotype.
I don't agree that there should be any difference from a player prospective. If you said as a whole Elves are weaker than Tulnar that may be true in the same sense that women have less muscular bodies than men. Is your body stronger than any of the strongest women? I doubt it. There is nothing saying an elf cant be yoked out of their minds. There is nothing saying a Tulnar can't be smarter than an Elf.
It's not better. In fact, you purposely exaggerated to make your point sound more reasonable than it is.
Five species... I don't think we know that they are "species". Maybe half-elf and half orc exists. If interbreeding is possible, then everyone is at least closely related genetically. To the point that I would expect Individuals to be capable of reaching the same heights when it comes to max stats or abilitys.
That last bit is significant. "half-bloods of different races." To me, this really blows the lid off the idea that races are so different that it should restrict player choices.
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.
Lions and tigers are different species. They are vastly different animals. Tigers are larger, faster and stronger on average.
These are different species of the same genus. They can breed.
horses and donkeys are different species. They are vastly different animals. Horses can be both larger and smaller than donkeys when fully grown, as well as both faster and slower.
These are different species of the same genus. They can breed.
Species in Verra being able to reproduce with each other does not suddenly mean any differences between the them have to disappear. If it doesn't work that way in real life, there is no need for it to work that way in biology.
Lets go back to that plow. If we take the above example of a horse vs a donkey. A Clydesdale would be able to pull that plow significantly longer than any donkey on the planet. No matter what you do with donkeys as a species, they will never be able to match a Clydesdale in this regard. The same thing when putting a donkey up against a champion racehorse. A donkey simply can not run that fast - the fastest ever recorded donkey is almost a third the speed of the fastest horse.
Yet not only can these two animals breed, but the breeding between these two species is so common that people forget that when you have a female horse and a male donkey, the resultant animal is called a mule.
To add to that, mules were specifically bred because they were more patient than the horse (important with agricultural work), and smarter than the donkey. These two species themselves were lacking these traits, and so interbreeding the species was the means to solve it - not eradicating the differences between the two species that could breed with each other. Sure, mules were not as good at agricultural work as a good horse was - they are not as strong and do not have the same endurance. However, their more amicable nature makes up for this in a good number of situations.
This is very much an all or nothing approach. It is ignoring any chance of nuance.
Lets imagine a very basic game. Characters have 10 to all stats at creation, gender reallocates some of those stats, and then players have 5 stat points to allocate as they wish.
Next we assume that males gain a point in strength, and lose one in wisdom. Females gain one point in charisma, and lose one in strength.
Now if we assume two players, one playing a male and one playing a female both put all five of their points in strength, the male will have 16, the female will have 14. This means that a female that puts everything in to being a strong as they can be will be stronger than most male characters, but only 87.5% as strong as the strongest males - in this game.
In order to provide some real world context to this, if we look at Olympic weightlifting records, the record male total is 473kg, while the record female lift is 333kg.
Now, I couldn't lift either of these, and I am going to assume no one posting here could either. As such, both of these people are stronger than any of us are, yet the strongest female is only lifting about 70% of what the strongest male is lifting.
Translate that back to a game (because I KNOW someone is going to get triggered by the above - sorrynotsorry). The strongest elf should be stronger than most Tulnar, but not stronger than the strongest Tulnar.
The smartest Tulnar should be smarter than than most Elves, but not smarter than the smartest elf.
You points only potentially work for outlining the most of the most "X" traits. Player characters are never the most of the most anything in good RPGs. If they were, that would be boring. Imagine a DM telling a wizard player that he is the smartest and most powerful wizard in the world. That sounds like an awful campaign to me, there would have to be some sort of major twist to that to make it remotely exciting.
The smartest Tulnar and the Smartest Elf should be NPCs. Players should all operate in the same spectrum of heroic enough to want to stand up for the little guy, but weak enough to where there is always something to struggle against. Otherwise, it's just not interesting.
Within the spectrum of power a player can obtain, it is not unreasonable to imagine that a human is as strong as an ork if a female of any race is as strong as a male of that race...
To me, it seems crazy to have your opinion for a game like Ashes, where almost nothing in the game is what it is visually.
In MO2 where the game was designed around genetic differences to the point that changing the weight of your character changes how they move. Your opinion makes sense.
MO2 tells you visual differences are important to the game. Ashes tells you the exact opposite in many ways.
Via the Ashes character creator, the smallest skinniest female human is just as strong as the largest, most muscular male human. They will have the same stats and potential. They can be the exact same character if you give them the exact same build. The difference visually could be more than an elf male and a human male. It has already been shown in game that the only way to tell if something is even an elf or human is to zoom in on their ears.
Ashes also sales you the ability to change the way your race looks with racial skins. Change the way your gear looks with cosmetics. Change your mount, your boat, the shit on your land, random ass pets... Literally nothing in Ashes is what it is. Skill cosmetics may be a thing in Ashes at some point, seeing how well that works for PoE.
At what point do we stop this madness where we think accurate visual representation is important in Ashes or any game that has a cosmetic cash shop for that matter?
They already sold the ability to look like a god-damn angel. Do we really care if that angel has the stats of a nikua or an orc? No, because it's not the way things work in Ashes. They have already told us this shit is not important with the racial cosmetics.
This is my personal feedback, shared to help the game thrive in its niche.