Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
When profit is taken care of is extremely subjective and the answer is never for most companies.
And I'm saying that that's the most logical thing to assume is meant when it comes to the post we are referencing.
He doesn't want the desire for more profit to negatively impact gameplay, which is the same thing you stated essentially.
I am simply clarifying.
I am not the one that mis-stated anything here.
I mean, I can respect your option if the game is a niche one and just doesn't fit you, but wouldn't it be easier to just find friends to go out into the world with so you can mitigate the ganking?
No, because the people that want to gank would just take friends with them in order to mitigate the mitigation.
More of disagreed and then re-stated which seemed unfair to Sunboy:
Sunboy wrote:
When IS think profit is more important then gameplay.
Noaani wrote:
I don't think this is a very good reason at all.
Without profit, there is no Intrepid, no Intrepid means no game. No game means no gameplay.
Intrepid need to put profit first, but do it in a way that doesn't compromise gameplay.
I didn't say you could completely avoid any ganking but still, taking a friend or two would result in you avoiding/winning most.
Not to mention that taking friends is fun by default and something you would/should do even without such a situation.
But yeah, if you just don't fit in the game's niche, it is what it is.
Personally I really hope AOC will be full of Hillsbrad Foothills-s and Strangelthorn Vale-s.
If they disagreed with me, they can bring it up.
On my server in that game, the bulk of "gankers" were in groups of 5 - 20.
Having a friend or two just means more of you get ganked.
This statement is pretty straightforward to begin with... Not sure why a dissection of this statement is even needed.
Can't comment on personal experinces or games I'm not that familiar with, especially since within the exact same game experiences can differ a lot from server to sever and from a stage a game's evolution to another, but if finding allies to gank people with is so easy then finding friends to ward off ganks should logically be just as easy especially since from the sounds of it, it would be a generalized ''issue''.
Finding friends to 'try' to ward off ganks.
You know what gankers do with their time? Practice PvP and ganking.
Do you even want to play a game where 'constant practice' doesn't lead to some skill advantages?
Note, this is only a response to your 'logically just as easy' part. If your friends all happen to be above average PvP-ers with developed techniques for countering the type of person who specializes in PvP ganking, more power to you.
Ye I know since that's what I usually do in mmo-rpgs and knowing this is why I probably find it so easy to ward off ganks.
1. Let me flip that question. Do I want a game where effort and skill are rewarded as upposed to the ''let me, the nanny, hold your hand'' mmo-rpgs of today? Ye, totally. And, at the end of the day its meant to be a PvP game....
2. Depends on the game and many other factors but most ppl you will find for your gank squad won't be the ''constant practice'' type. And I repeat... at the end of the day it's a PvP game.
Okay I shall revise my sentence to make you happy:
More of disagreed with and re-stated which seemed unfair to Sunboy, and also bothered me enough to say something about it.
There are lots of games that are meant to be PvP games. And PvP games that offer nothing of value to those who lose at them are bad games.
Not just 'for retention'. Not just 'for those who don't want to try'. They're objectively bad games. Particularly MMOs. You can't lump all 'MMOs of today' together and then use that as a reasoning why something they took too far should be something that we avoid at all costs in design.
We were at 'gankfest' in the design consideration.
If a gatherer logs in, with middle of the road PvP skill, and they call their friend who they believe likes PvP in this sort of game, to protect them, unless that friend is good, or perhaps even talented, they still just get ganked.
A single ganker or ganker group on a 50-win streak has made 50 targets 'experience ganking' and none of those targets has experienced anything else from those interactions.
So in your response #2, which I feel is just your own belief and therefore I can't argue against directly, it's true that Ashes is a PvP game and therefore people who play it are going to experience PvP. The subthread of conversation, though, started with 'I would quit if the Corruption system didn't help to lessen that'. Basically, if that 50-winstreak person didn't really end up caring.
I mean, I don't know what you'd expect, that's the very concept of losing.
Yes, AOC will be a niche game and that's good because look how trying to please everyone ended up for New World.
Even without all the bugs it had no chance of doing anything because its core design kept shifting and in trying to please everyone it ended up pleasing nobody (as usually happens).
But maybe I got it all wrong, how should losers be rewarded for losing?
I mean, by definition middle of the road skill is where most people will be at so what's the problem?
Yes, the game will be a challenge for people.... very good, that's what games are supposed to be, challenges or the intellect and dexterity.
I ask you again, if a player who feels like ganking today could raise 5-20 people easily enough, who can't the group planning to gather?
And again, this is a PvP orientated game, not a gathering orientated game...
New World is a gathering orientated game and look how that turned out, people calling it ''Bot experience simulator''.
1. I ask again, what else would you want? For the game to be a nanny that holds the hand of bad players and slaps the bottom of good ones so ''everyone will feel equal''? If your point was that the corruption system should not be removed... ye I agree, but let's not take this too far and make the PvP game non-PvP orientated.
2. I disagree, losing often teaches you more than winning. One of the first lessons for many being ''I need friends, I need to learn to play, I need better gear'' which is like.... basic mmo-rpg logic.
Yeah I know what the discussion start from, I just asked if it wouldn't be easier to make friends (and now I'd add become a better player) rather than quit?
Yeah I totally agree, never claimed we're doing anything else besides speculating when talking about AOC's future/how the game will look when it comes out.
This being said, we're on AOC's development forums so yeah....
Agreed, it's definitely far from "just as easy". Gankers have more to gain by ganging up on people. They get to split all the resources that are dropped, while the only thing you gain for grouping up and scaring them off, is not losing your stuff.
Without the corruption system properly increasing the risk to gankers, it really would get bad enough to quit over.
- P2W
- Addons.
Both have been said no to by Steven hence I am here.
Aside from these, the various systems being implemented are pretty complex and would need quite a bit of testing to be configured right individually and with respect to each other to be unexploitable. For example: family summons.
So, I would mostly power through if there is a bad phase in the game if visible improvements are being made. Basically, Gameplay > New content. Bugs are fine, it is a software afterall. Profit would ofc be a priority and should be as well cuz at the end of the day it is a business, not a charity.
Rest it depends on how the community is on the whichever server I end up in. Its more subjective than objective after this. You could end up being a part of a good guild and decide to continue even if you are a bit unhappy with the game or happy with the game but not with the community, so you end up quitting.
Gankers use their time hunting and if they don't manage to gank anybody to rob them of their resources at the end of the day they get 0.
If the defensive group manages to resist, at the end of the day they get resources.
Didn't say the corruption system should be removed, but ganking will and should be part of this game definetly and countering it won't be that hard or complicated and will definetly be a better alternative than quitting AOC.
In a game with a matchmaking system for example, the ranking lost is technically the 'gain' for most players. If we assume that the game is fun when facing opponents of somewhat equal skill or level (the point of most successful competitive games, though not necessarily MMOs) then reducing your rank to match your skill is a benefit to you.
Open world PvP MMOs don't offer this.
If the combat system of a game allows you to make progress in understanding or skill through the combat experience, and therefore actually become a better player, then this is sometimes a gain. MMOs very seldom offer this, and Ashes' design explicitly indicates that it won't usually.
Some other games make this bearable by at least not having you lose anything when you lose the conflict that would set you back from winning future conflicts (again, losing rank points is a benefit for most people). Ashes explicitly doesn't offer this except to the members of the gank group that don't have any Corruption (and if the Corruption system is poor, then it will be possible to have large groups that participate in PvP and ganking but don't gain the Corruption).
A game teaching you what you need to win does not make it a good game. Many people don't need that help, especially with YouTube. They know what they need, they just can't get it, and MMOs are more vicious than other games in that way.
At least with other competitive games, people need knowledge and time and sometimes hands-on experience. In MMOs like Ashes you need allies, gear, and those things, and you must somehow get them while being ganked if the system is bad. Human nature alone works against this.
So yes, I'd prefer if the game found a way to offer 'losers' something, but I don't expect it nor will I request it of Ashes since they already have their concept cemented, I'll just hope the Corruption system does what it's supposed to and... punishes people who enjoy ganking... wait... that sounds strictly worse than just finding a way to give a different 'reward' to the losing party...
Being ganked for the 13th time that day will not make you any more likely to find friends, or get gear. At best, you might 'attract the attention of someone who wants to fight, who thinks they will gain something from protecting you' (that might just be 'the thrill of combat' I guess).
Yeah I agree it should be in the game of course, just going off what Atama said where if the corruption mechanics don't work well, then ganking would be unbearable.
If it's bad enough that your can't take 10 steps out of town before getting ganked, they need to rethink the system and make it more punishing.
Edit: And same thing if nobody even dares to attack a random player, they'd need to make corruption less punishing
In the end, Corruption needs to work at the correct level primarily because normally, human nature, MMO design nature, and the difficulty of countering 'ganking', all add up to a steadily degrading experience. Maybe the world's scale and scope design will lead to Corruption not needing to be as relevant, but that just makes it so that you 'accept that you get ganked, but rarely', and the reason it is rare isn't because it's difficult, but because it's easier to hide.
"Just get friends and fight back" is usually a disingenuous answer, though. It makes sense on the surface, but there are too many factors involved to consider it a useful answer for most people.
No, it would mean the game is shit.
Let me relate an experience to you, a real experience. During the Alpha testing of this game, they temporarily turned on the PvP flag so that players could attack each other. The corruption system wasn't in place (I don't even know if they've even built it yet at this stage of testing) and I don't believe players were even supposed to engage in PvP; I think I remember a message going out to the server warning people not to.
So, I was testing, I was in the starting area with a newbie character. I had gathered some wood and was trying to turn it into an NPC in town for a quest. A guy came up to me who was relatively high level (I was I think 5, he was in his 20s) and starts attacking me. I can't even get a shot off before I'm dead.
I respawn nearby, head back to the NPC, and before I can talk to him, I'm dead again. The guy had waited for me to return and killed me.
I respawn and this time he's waiting where the spawn is, and I'm killed again. At this time I have also lost the wood that I was trying to turn in to the NPC so I wouldn't even be able to do the quest. I just log out of the game because clearly I'm unable to test anything with this harassment.
I was able to report him, I don't know if anything happened to him (the developers assured me that the behavior was definitely off-limits, I believe I talked to Margaret herself on Discord about it). I can say that when I logged back in I didn't have that problem anymore. But that might have been because he got bored of killing a low-level character repeatedly, or might have found someone else to harass, I don't know.
The point is, I saw what the game would be like without the corruption system. It's awful. Getting killed every once in a while by a player is one thing, heck that can even be fun as it adds another element of danger. And I wasn't even all that mad the first time I was killed. The second time I got killed, that was when I was frustrated, and after that third time I'd had enough.
If that sort of thing were able to happen after the game went live, it wouldn't be just me quitting. The game would die. Those sorts of MMORPGs do not survive because the toxicity drives away everyone but the pathetic and miserable dregs of gaming society. Fortunately, those pitiful griefer types are a minority, and enough of a minority that MMOs don't survive long catering to them.
I really hope AOC wont be a game who force you to constantly farm better stuff at end game.
For me there is nothing more boring and wearing....
I'm happy to talk about games I am not familiar with. I try and find out things about them from people that do know, and then I ponder what those things may mean for Ashes.
In this case though, I am talking about a game I have a lot of experience in - it is the game I have spent the second most amount of time in (Archeage).
Based on my experience in that game - a game very similar to Ashes - just getting one or two friends isn't going to do anything to prevent ganking, as gankers will work in packs. If you are going out by yourself thinking you are going to gank others, it won't take long before you realize you are in fact about to be ganged, not gank others.
Now you know this, feel free to ponder the implications of that in regards to a hypothetical Ashes without the corruption system.
Ye... dont play mmos