An RPG where people ignore dungeons and lore is not a good thing. And that is pretty much my point.
If Ashes becomes a game where most players ignore dungeons and lore due to an indundation of FPS players, that's a disaster.
Because sure, that's an MMO. But, RPG players want to be playing an RPG with other RPG players; not just an MMO with decent combat.
An RPG player prefers to play Rolelaying Games. MMOPRGs included. MMORPG players typically hope to RP to some degree while playing, even during combat.
No. Steven is specifically trying to put the RPG back into MMORPG, rather than provide a generic MMO.
I think I agree to a certain extent as to what you're trying to get at here.
In my mind, "role playing", where whatever class you are, a players unique elements can sometimes be a stand out factor as to why a party has succeeded or opened up another avenue for exploration and engagement that could possibly lead to another form of excitement that they weren't expecting. IE The rogue can open up another pathway for the party by scouting and stealing a key from a dungeon NPC or through finding one, The Bard can "play the piper" on a dungeons mobs and they assist in defeating the boss for his party, giving a unique scenerio/loot, stuff of this nature however, with extreme limitations in relation to what could happen in a d&d campaign.
You talk about bringing the "RPG" back but while you're focusing on the 'RP' I'd like to focus on the 'G'!
A game, to the majority, involves winners and losers, without that element, it is far from a game and it's, more accurratly, an Experience!
Currently in the mmo limelight (laughably because it's a 5 man co-op) is FF14, it, like many other console "games" where you have a story you follow and you can turn on the easy mode to breeze through if you'd like, is a payed for experience, only a handful of times in those "games" you actually have to switch yourself on and fight for your life so that you don't lose, that is the only playing/game to be had.
Now, if FF14 is so good, where is that huge pool of players playing LoL/CoD/CS:GO/FIFA etc
It's easy to dismiss them as "the wrong audience", especially if you're happy with the current pool of players and being a big vocal voice within a "community" inside a decent pool of people who are timid but well mannered, mature (in a closed sense) and are happy to talk about all kinds of weird and qwerky stuff "The fins on the ocean set are so cute (insert anime meme)". - MMORPG's haven't hit the high user counts (relative to % of kids who had a PC and were online), since the days of UO, Legend of Mir, early L2, Runescape, early WoW and whatever is purely because they started to lose in the "Game" department. -
Nearly everything was driven by players, it brings heaps of fun and drama, the genre was a unique experience and a game (even tho the highest lvls/no lifes had most of the fun). Then the future of this genre came and they are practically single player games with online features, only the Korean mmo's maintained form but they sullied their games with major P2W and "daily/weekly/themepark" practices. @Dygz quite insulting in a sense, to label all mmo's of the past decade or so generic, the Koreans had some wonderful, immersive and fun concepts that Steve will use and is using.
BACK TO THE TOPIC, "will PvP players effect the casual playerbase" absolutely not.
For starters, there is no such thing as a strictly PvP (or PvE only, no matter how much some of you may believe that you are!) player unless a developer narrows a game so that there is "PVE+PVP" players, like in WoW where you can earn great gear and rewards from doing 1 type of thing only which is light years away from what the game originally set out to do.
Any player, regardless of playing preference, will go through interesting, immersive, social and even brutal content if they can see the appeal and if it improves their standing in the world.
The only difficult challenge I can see an mmorpg that incorperates everyone having, is to maintain control of the people who "no life" the game, for whatever power/experience advantages that brings (usually massive economy benefits) in an open world where many forms of action can take place, inlcuding PK'ing BUT still provide them with challenge and conquest.
Because sure, that's an MMO. But, RPG players want to be playing an RPG with other RPG players; not just an MMO with decent combat.
These people might stiill be continuing to enjoy eating the Apples off of the "mmorpg" tree but if a Dev can make them a Pizza, they will fold. I understand your concerns though, it will be a failed game if a player can reach milestones just from forming a party or solo'ing in an open field, getting to max level and gaining most of their gear/skill requirements simply through playing with the economy, then this person proceeds to be part of a "virus" that is PK'ing and interfering in mostly a negative way but really, 9 times out of 10 the game wasn't good enough to give him a different avenue of fun.
Many "Trolls/Negative people" or simple PK'ers exist only because devs did not provide them with enough avenue of entertainment. There will be far less of them if the game is good though, not that it should be abolished tho as it would sully player choice.
RP communities are way niche and are never to be catered to - why? because they use custom spoken rules on behavior and speech.
Trying to force RP on players is only recipe for disaster that almost nobody appreciates.
Also putting "RPG" into MMORPG is tricky, because everything needs to be looked at with the perspective of a group play - what works perfectly well in single player environment is not something that could be copy pasted into an mmo
“Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil.”
― Plato
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
In my mind, "role playing", where whatever class you are, a players unique elements can sometimes be a stand out factor as to why a party has succeeded or opened up another avenue for exploration and engagement that could possibly lead to another form of excitement that they weren't expecting. IE The rogue can open up another pathway for the party by scouting and stealing a key from a dungeon NPC or through finding one, The Bard can "play the piper" on a dungeons mobs and they assist in defeating the boss for his party, giving a unique scenerio/loot, stuff of this nature however, with extreme limitations in relation to what could happen in a d&d campaign.
I consider roleplaying to be playing the game from the perspective of the character rather than from the perspective of the player. Best when that includes player character interaction.
A game, to the majority, involves winners and losers, without that element, it is far from a game and it's, more accurratly, an Experience!
A game is a form of play that include rules - often with challegenges - decided by skill, strength or luck.
Winners and losers depends on how competitive the game is. There are also cooperative games.
Currently in the mmo limelight (laughably because it's a 5 man co-op) is FF14, it, like many other console "games" where you have a story you follow and you can turn on the easy mode to breeze through if you'd like, is a payed for experience, only a handful of times in those "games" you actually have to switch yourself on and fight for your life so that you don't lose, that is the only playing/game to be had.
There are many types of MMO. MMORPG being one type. MMOFPS being another. MMO Community Sim yet another.
I don't play RPGs to fight for my life. I play RPGs for the experience of living virtually in a Fantasy or Sci-Fi setting. When I play RPGs, I prefer to use Charisma and Stealth skills to bypass combat. Brains over Brawn.
Sure, when I want to fight for my life, I'll play an FPS.
I expect RPGs to also have decent combat. But, RPGs should not be playedas if they are an FPS.
And it's a disaster if an MMORPG has very little RP due to the game being inundated by gamers who ignore RP and just try to play it like an FPS.
Now, if FF14 is so good, where is that huge pool of players playing LoL/CoD/CS:GO/FIFA etc
It's easy to dismiss them as "the wrong audience", especially if you're happy with the current pool of players and being a big vocal voice within a "community" inside a decent pool of people who are timid but well mannered, mature (in a closed sense) and are happy to talk about all kinds of weird and qwerky stuff "The fins on the ocean set are so cute (insert anime meme)".
I have no clue what any of that is supposed to mean.
You basically said, "What do apples have to do with oranges?"
MMORPG's haven't hit the high user counts (relative to % of kids who had a PC and were online), since the days of UO, Legend of Mir, early L2, Runescape, early WoW and whatever is purely because they started to lose in the "Game" department.[/b]
Who cares? It's not a competition of numbers.
But, yes, MMORPGs have stalled because by 2010, we reached a place where players race through all the static content in a few weeks and then are stuck at endgame, repeating dungeons and raids for 18-24+ months while the devs work on the next expansion.
That's like reading The Fellowship of the Ring in a couple weeks and then spending the next two years rereading the final chapter while you wait for the release of The Two Towers.
MMORPGs need to find a way to truly have Ever Questing. Which is why a system like the Node system is so crucial.
So, no, it really has nothing to do with losing the "game" aspect of MMORPG and everything to do with losing the RP aspect, as the story stagnates.
Nearly everything was driven by players, it brings heaps of fun and drama, the genre was a unique experience and a game (even tho the highest lvls/no lifes had most of the fun).
Depends on how you like your fun and drama.
I don't agree with your assessment, but if you love PvP, I can see why you have that perspective.
I would say that back in the day, it took longer to level. And also just being able to live in and explore a Fantasy setting was captivating. Being able to play an RPG with a bunch of other people any time you wish, rather than having to wait weeks or months until your RPG group all have time to meet up, was thrilling.
But, yeah, once you've explored the available world and finished all the quests for one faction or both factions - there's not much point to repeating content over and over.
I often joke about how frustrating it is to know that Fippy Darkpaw will always be in the same place doing the same thing for decades - regardless of how many times you kill him. The same is true for endgame dungeons and raids.
I really only need to kill a boss once. Rather than being stuck in Limbo, like Sysyphus, for years while waiting for new content.
Which is why the Node system is so important. Ashes is not a static world. Cities will rise and fall.
Not only do we have to build our cities, we also have to defend them.
Then the future of this genre came and they are practically single player games with online features, only the Korean mmo's maintained form but they sullied their games with major P2W and "daily/weekly/themepark" practices.
I mean...when everyone is doing the exact same thing in a static world, there's not much reason to converse with other players. Freeport is always going to be where Freeport is. Unless an expansion makes a change. Everytime I take a Level 50 character through the Shadowlands, the same quests will be there.
I don't need to talk to anyone else about my journey because my journey is exactly the same as everyone else.
And always will be.
The same is not true for Ashes because Villages will not remain the same. Mob populationswill not remain the same. Mayors and Monarchs will not remain the same. If we're gone for a few weeks, we're going to want to talk to other people to learn what's new and to learn what happened while we were gone.
So, we should expect quite a bit of socializing and character interaction in Ashes.
@Dygz quite insulting in a sense, to label all mmo's of the past decade or so generic, the Koreans had some wonderful, immersive and fun concepts that Steve will use and is using.
I'm not the one using MMO as a generic term.
I'm the one saying that an MMORPG is different than an MMOFPS. Also different from an MMO Survival Game. And different than an MMO Hack & Slash.
Rather than saying, "Hey, I'm an FPS player who loves open worlds, so I'm gonna go play that new MMORPG even though I'm gonna ignore all the RP and dungeons and lore."
I understand your concerns though, it will be a failed game if a player can reach milestones just from forming a party or solo'ing in an open field, getting to max level and gaining most of their gear/skill requirements simply through playing with the economy, then this person proceeds to be part of a "virus" that is PK'ing and interfering in mostly a negative way but really, 9 times out of 10 the game wasn't good enough to give him a different avenue of fun.
I have no concerns about how an individual player chooses to play.
FPS style play is what leads to having groups and raids where what people want to do is race through a dungeon as quickly and efficiently as possible with cookie cutter META builds.
That kills RP. It kills exploring all areas of a dungeon to see what's new or different. It explores working with characters to determine how the build they like to play can synergize with others in the group to overcome specific challenges.
I'm not concerned about the individual - I'm concerned about the FPS playstyle becoming the norm.
Where people are "ignoring dungeons and lore" just to engage in open world PvP - because "players are the content".
Though, actually, it's mostly a theoretical concern.
As a response to the notion of Ashes marketing to FPS players who want to play a new MMO.
Rather than trying to entice gamers to play a new MMORPG, specifically.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
RP communities are way niche and are never to be catered to - why? because they use custom spoken rules on behavior and speech.
Trying to force RP on players is only recipe for disaster that almost nobody appreciates.
Also putting "RPG" into MMORPG is tricky, because everything needs to be looked at with the perspective of a group play - what works perfectly well in single player environment is not something that could be copy pasted into an mmo
You don't have to force RP on players.
At it's base RP is just playing the game from the perspective of your character rather than from the perspective of the player. Leaving OOC conversations to a minimum.
Custom spoken rules and behavior are not inherent to RP.
Everything does not need to be looked at from the perspective of group play, rather it's looked at primarily from the multiplayer perspective. Multiplayer does not have to be in a formal group.
But, yes, having abilities/skills that synergize encourages RP and multiplayer interaction.
Building and defending and attacking and destroying Villages and Cities encourages RP.
"Who's the current Mayor of Drythorne?" "Last time I played, this are was governed by Py'Rai instead of Vek, WTH happened?" Rather than, "Did you see who won American Idol?"
Having a dynamic world rather than a static world fosters RP tremendously.
Housing and Freeholds in the open world, rather than being instanced, also helps foster character interaction and RP.
But, if you can have an MMORPG where what people primarily do is PvP in the open world with no objective-based goals and where the bulk of the players are ignoring dungeons and lore - that is a travesty.
And an epic fail. Certainly nothing to brag about.
Oh they most certainly are a BIG part of the content.
I'm very much interested and keen to get invested, competively, all in the sport of being a reliable and good standing player. In my "world", I, my avatar, my character, how I engage and who is choose to engage with is a big part of my content and I will be content for other people, good or bad, that is a TRUE community (not when streamers/reddit/forums refer to community).
I am very much interested in working a node, to death and loyalty, with whoever I deem worthy/nice/fun. Player driven, not linear stories and accomplishments.
I'm concerned about the FPS playstyle becoming the norm.
So getting heavily invested in lore and interesting/wacky dungeoning is normal or the only correct course? I'm not at all against concepts of letting these types of players explore the world and finding little tid bits of information regarding the worlds origin but forced stories, like all the enemies from WoW etc I couldn't give a damn about, that is not fair for people who came here for a unique multiplayer experience when companies focus so heavily into these elements, a real mmo can prioritize better than a console game or reading a good book.
The same is not true for Ashes because Villages will not remain the same. Mob populationswill not remain the same. Mayors and Monarchs will not remain the same. If we're gone for a few weeks, we're going to want to talk to other people to learn what's new and to learn what happened while we were gone.
So, we should expect quite a bit of socializing and character interaction in Ashes.
"A bit", it's bleeding mandatory
This will be a game where results and players will surprise and entertain you, players are a huge part of the content.
I did read it all and I said early in this thread, yes I'm excited for the node system too, it's cycles/development and what exploration avenues it will bring.
I'm still very much not happy that people like yourself are of the opinion that players or content needs to be segmented and I'm very against your opinion of mmorpg's are all about investing people in story and lore. Story and lore are, imo, are to be kept to such a minimum and should be used in only such a way to elevate the people (players) who exist in the world and their standings with each other, that is a real MMO, friends/alliances/enemies, you make your own story.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
"Players are the content" and "players are part of the content" is not the same message.
Strawman arguments don't help the discussion.
I haven't said anything about "the only correct way to play". That's your addition to the discussion.
Again, strawman arguments don't help the discussion.
I didn't say that MMORPGs are all about investing people in story and lore.
That's another strawman.
I don't know what you read, but you failed to understand what I wrote.
But, if you can have an MMORPG where what people primarily do is PvP in the open world with no objective-based goals and where the bulk of the players are ignoring dungeons and lore - that is a travesty.
What are you you worried about? when has that ever happened honestly and who do you think is advocating for it? this mystery MMOFPS crowd (which doesn't even exist as no FPS game is socially setup for any kind of massive multiplayer experience).
You're accusing me of strawmanning you? fine, if you want to avoid the topic you crack on, you're completely correct, ye ye.
I didn't say that MMORPGs are all about investing people in story and lore.
Uh huh... , I'm just going to say now, I'd completely expect a person like you to defend a PvE only thread.
On topic, like this thread should be, most of these ashe's for damn sure...
An open world PvP concept isn't going to effect casual players...because Steve's a pretty determined guy, the end.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited May 2022
Okeydoke wrote: The fps/tps battle royale craze has subsided a lot. There are many gamers who traditionally are shooter game players, who are looking for something more. They're looking for an mmo, they say it outright. And they're looking for an mmo with real, fleshed out, open world pvp, as well as good pve.
Ashes will draw in a substantial amount of these types of players.
- Atlas, Ark, Rust, Albion Online, Archeage series, Darkfall series, Mortal Online series, DAOC, Warhammer Online, Black Desert Online, Conan Exiles, Lineage, Eve, Guild Wars 2, Crowfall(lol), just off the top of my head, there's even more. All of these games prove to varying extents that there's a market for more pvp focused mmos.
Lack of funding, underdevelopment, major p2w, major bugs, TOO focused on pvp/too harsh, garbage/nonexistent pve content, bad graphics, bad performance, bad mechanics, bad monetization. That's been the plague of many pvp mmos, they're just not good at a very base level.
So if Intrepid actually makes a good one, that avoids the mistakes so many previous one's made, there is serious potential to rope all these players in, rope back in the players like me who love pvp mmo's.
In response to that, I'm saying this is a distastrous mindset for an MMORPG.
This kills the RPG aspects of MMORPGs because then we get inundated with players who only care about the open world PvP in an MMO and care nothing about the Roleplaying aspects.
It's why we have some many players demanding cookie-cutter builds in groups and raids as they try to achieve the META...killing stuff as fast as possible. These types of players strive to place player twitch skills above character skills and unique character builds.
And Okeydoke won't care because all he really cares about is having a bunch of people to PvP with in a massively multiplayer open world.
So then we end up with crap like group leaders demanding that a Necromancer change their class to Brood Warden because they've determined that Brood Warden provides the Most Efficient Tactics Available to have the supposedly best possible player skills for the group.
Instead of working with the RP of having the best Necromancer in your group and figuring out how to use the Necromancer to defeat the challenges the group will face.
Mostly, I'm just saying, we should not be telling FPS players, "Hey, here's a new MMO where you can do what you love." Instead, we should make it clear that Ashes is an MMORPG and model how to focus on and support the RPG aspects of the game, rather than ignore the RPG aspects of the game.
What I said wasn't a "mindset for an mmorpg." We all know there's crossover between the genres. All I was trying to say is that I think Ashes will have a higher than average rate of crossover compared to many other mmos. That's it. Could be completely wrong.
Nothing about that mmos should wholesale adopt fps game features. Or that all I "really care about is having a bunch of people to pvp with." I care about a lot more than that as far as what I want in an mmo.
Any fps player that looks at an mmo and decides to play it will have to be accepting of mmo features. And vice versa when mmo players crossover to fps.
I just did not say what some people in this thread somehow think I said. I've re read them, it's not in my posts. For what it's worth, I generally like my mmo and fps features separate. I don't like Fortnite where I have to have 15 keybinds just to play a shooter. And I generally don't like full action mmos. And there's more than that, etc.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
It's fine, Okeydoke.
I am planting seeds. And it's mostly a nitpick that's not worth derailing for pages.
Comments
I think I agree to a certain extent as to what you're trying to get at here.
In my mind, "role playing", where whatever class you are, a players unique elements can sometimes be a stand out factor as to why a party has succeeded or opened up another avenue for exploration and engagement that could possibly lead to another form of excitement that they weren't expecting. IE The rogue can open up another pathway for the party by scouting and stealing a key from a dungeon NPC or through finding one, The Bard can "play the piper" on a dungeons mobs and they assist in defeating the boss for his party, giving a unique scenerio/loot, stuff of this nature however, with extreme limitations in relation to what could happen in a d&d campaign.
You talk about bringing the "RPG" back but while you're focusing on the 'RP' I'd like to focus on the 'G'!
A game, to the majority, involves winners and losers, without that element, it is far from a game and it's, more accurratly, an Experience!
Currently in the mmo limelight (laughably because it's a 5 man co-op) is FF14, it, like many other console "games" where you have a story you follow and you can turn on the easy mode to breeze through if you'd like, is a payed for experience, only a handful of times in those "games" you actually have to switch yourself on and fight for your life so that you don't lose, that is the only playing/game to be had.
Now, if FF14 is so good, where is that huge pool of players playing LoL/CoD/CS:GO/FIFA etc
It's easy to dismiss them as "the wrong audience", especially if you're happy with the current pool of players and being a big vocal voice within a "community" inside a decent pool of people who are timid but well mannered, mature (in a closed sense) and are happy to talk about all kinds of weird and qwerky stuff "The fins on the ocean set are so cute (insert anime meme)".
- MMORPG's haven't hit the high user counts (relative to % of kids who had a PC and were online), since the days of UO, Legend of Mir, early L2, Runescape, early WoW and whatever is purely because they started to lose in the "Game" department. -
Nearly everything was driven by players, it brings heaps of fun and drama, the genre was a unique experience and a game (even tho the highest lvls/no lifes had most of the fun). Then the future of this genre came and they are practically single player games with online features, only the Korean mmo's maintained form but they sullied their games with major P2W and "daily/weekly/themepark" practices.
@Dygz quite insulting in a sense, to label all mmo's of the past decade or so generic, the Koreans had some wonderful, immersive and fun concepts that Steve will use and is using.
BACK TO THE TOPIC, "will PvP players effect the casual playerbase" absolutely not.
For starters, there is no such thing as a strictly PvP (or PvE only, no matter how much some of you may believe that you are!) player unless a developer narrows a game so that there is "PVE+PVP" players, like in WoW where you can earn great gear and rewards from doing 1 type of thing only which is light years away from what the game originally set out to do.
Any player, regardless of playing preference, will go through interesting, immersive, social and even brutal content if they can see the appeal and if it improves their standing in the world.
The only difficult challenge I can see an mmorpg that incorperates everyone having, is to maintain control of the people who "no life" the game, for whatever power/experience advantages that brings (usually massive economy benefits) in an open world where many forms of action can take place, inlcuding PK'ing BUT still provide them with challenge and conquest.
These people might stiill be continuing to enjoy eating the Apples off of the "mmorpg" tree but if a Dev can make them a Pizza, they will fold. I understand your concerns though, it will be a failed game if a player can reach milestones just from forming a party or solo'ing in an open field, getting to max level and gaining most of their gear/skill requirements simply through playing with the economy, then this person proceeds to be part of a "virus" that is PK'ing and interfering in mostly a negative way but really, 9 times out of 10 the game wasn't good enough to give him a different avenue of fun.
Many "Trolls/Negative people" or simple PK'ers exist only because devs did not provide them with enough avenue of entertainment. There will be far less of them if the game is good though, not that it should be abolished tho as it would sully player choice.
Trying to force RP on players is only recipe for disaster that almost nobody appreciates.
Also putting "RPG" into MMORPG is tricky, because everything needs to be looked at with the perspective of a group play - what works perfectly well in single player environment is not something that could be copy pasted into an mmo
― Plato
A game is a form of play that include rules - often with challegenges - decided by skill, strength or luck.
Winners and losers depends on how competitive the game is. There are also cooperative games.
There are many types of MMO. MMORPG being one type. MMOFPS being another. MMO Community Sim yet another.
I don't play RPGs to fight for my life. I play RPGs for the experience of living virtually in a Fantasy or Sci-Fi setting. When I play RPGs, I prefer to use Charisma and Stealth skills to bypass combat. Brains over Brawn.
Sure, when I want to fight for my life, I'll play an FPS.
I expect RPGs to also have decent combat. But, RPGs should not be playedas if they are an FPS.
And it's a disaster if an MMORPG has very little RP due to the game being inundated by gamers who ignore RP and just try to play it like an FPS.
I have no clue what any of that is supposed to mean.
You basically said, "What do apples have to do with oranges?"
Who cares? It's not a competition of numbers.
But, yes, MMORPGs have stalled because by 2010, we reached a place where players race through all the static content in a few weeks and then are stuck at endgame, repeating dungeons and raids for 18-24+ months while the devs work on the next expansion.
That's like reading The Fellowship of the Ring in a couple weeks and then spending the next two years rereading the final chapter while you wait for the release of The Two Towers.
MMORPGs need to find a way to truly have Ever Questing. Which is why a system like the Node system is so crucial.
So, no, it really has nothing to do with losing the "game" aspect of MMORPG and everything to do with losing the RP aspect, as the story stagnates.
Depends on how you like your fun and drama.
I don't agree with your assessment, but if you love PvP, I can see why you have that perspective.
I would say that back in the day, it took longer to level. And also just being able to live in and explore a Fantasy setting was captivating. Being able to play an RPG with a bunch of other people any time you wish, rather than having to wait weeks or months until your RPG group all have time to meet up, was thrilling.
But, yeah, once you've explored the available world and finished all the quests for one faction or both factions - there's not much point to repeating content over and over.
I often joke about how frustrating it is to know that Fippy Darkpaw will always be in the same place doing the same thing for decades - regardless of how many times you kill him. The same is true for endgame dungeons and raids.
I really only need to kill a boss once. Rather than being stuck in Limbo, like Sysyphus, for years while waiting for new content.
Which is why the Node system is so important. Ashes is not a static world. Cities will rise and fall.
Not only do we have to build our cities, we also have to defend them.
I mean...when everyone is doing the exact same thing in a static world, there's not much reason to converse with other players. Freeport is always going to be where Freeport is. Unless an expansion makes a change. Everytime I take a Level 50 character through the Shadowlands, the same quests will be there.
I don't need to talk to anyone else about my journey because my journey is exactly the same as everyone else.
And always will be.
The same is not true for Ashes because Villages will not remain the same. Mob populationswill not remain the same. Mayors and Monarchs will not remain the same. If we're gone for a few weeks, we're going to want to talk to other people to learn what's new and to learn what happened while we were gone.
So, we should expect quite a bit of socializing and character interaction in Ashes.
I'm not the one using MMO as a generic term.
I'm the one saying that an MMORPG is different than an MMOFPS. Also different from an MMO Survival Game. And different than an MMO Hack & Slash.
Rather than saying, "Hey, I'm an FPS player who loves open worlds, so I'm gonna go play that new MMORPG even though I'm gonna ignore all the RP and dungeons and lore."
I have no concerns about how an individual player chooses to play.
FPS style play is what leads to having groups and raids where what people want to do is race through a dungeon as quickly and efficiently as possible with cookie cutter META builds.
That kills RP. It kills exploring all areas of a dungeon to see what's new or different. It explores working with characters to determine how the build they like to play can synergize with others in the group to overcome specific challenges.
I'm not concerned about the individual - I'm concerned about the FPS playstyle becoming the norm.
Where people are "ignoring dungeons and lore" just to engage in open world PvP - because "players are the content".
Though, actually, it's mostly a theoretical concern.
As a response to the notion of Ashes marketing to FPS players who want to play a new MMO.
Rather than trying to entice gamers to play a new MMORPG, specifically.
At it's base RP is just playing the game from the perspective of your character rather than from the perspective of the player. Leaving OOC conversations to a minimum.
Custom spoken rules and behavior are not inherent to RP.
Everything does not need to be looked at from the perspective of group play, rather it's looked at primarily from the multiplayer perspective. Multiplayer does not have to be in a formal group.
But, yes, having abilities/skills that synergize encourages RP and multiplayer interaction.
Building and defending and attacking and destroying Villages and Cities encourages RP.
"Who's the current Mayor of Drythorne?" "Last time I played, this are was governed by Py'Rai instead of Vek, WTH happened?" Rather than, "Did you see who won American Idol?"
Having a dynamic world rather than a static world fosters RP tremendously.
Housing and Freeholds in the open world, rather than being instanced, also helps foster character interaction and RP.
But, if you can have an MMORPG where what people primarily do is PvP in the open world with no objective-based goals and where the bulk of the players are ignoring dungeons and lore - that is a travesty.
And an epic fail. Certainly nothing to brag about.
Oh they most certainly are a BIG part of the content.
I'm very much interested and keen to get invested, competively, all in the sport of being a reliable and good standing player. In my "world", I, my avatar, my character, how I engage and who is choose to engage with is a big part of my content and I will be content for other people, good or bad, that is a TRUE community (not when streamers/reddit/forums refer to community).
I am very much interested in working a node, to death and loyalty, with whoever I deem worthy/nice/fun. Player driven, not linear stories and accomplishments.
So getting heavily invested in lore and interesting/wacky dungeoning is normal or the only correct course? I'm not at all against concepts of letting these types of players explore the world and finding little tid bits of information regarding the worlds origin but forced stories, like all the enemies from WoW etc I couldn't give a damn about, that is not fair for people who came here for a unique multiplayer experience when companies focus so heavily into these elements, a real mmo can prioritize better than a console game or reading a good book.
"A bit", it's bleeding mandatory
This will be a game where results and players will surprise and entertain you, players are a huge part of the content.
I did read it all and I said early in this thread, yes I'm excited for the node system too, it's cycles/development and what exploration avenues it will bring.
I'm still very much not happy that people like yourself are of the opinion that players or content needs to be segmented and I'm very against your opinion of mmorpg's are all about investing people in story and lore. Story and lore are, imo, are to be kept to such a minimum and should be used in only such a way to elevate the people (players) who exist in the world and their standings with each other, that is a real MMO, friends/alliances/enemies, you make your own story.
Strawman arguments don't help the discussion.
I haven't said anything about "the only correct way to play". That's your addition to the discussion.
Again, strawman arguments don't help the discussion.
I didn't say that MMORPGs are all about investing people in story and lore.
That's another strawman.
I don't know what you read, but you failed to understand what I wrote.
What are you you worried about? when has that ever happened honestly and who do you think is advocating for it? this mystery MMOFPS crowd (which doesn't even exist as no FPS game is socially setup for any kind of massive multiplayer experience).
You're accusing me of strawmanning you? fine, if you want to avoid the topic you crack on, you're completely correct, ye ye.
Uh huh... , I'm just going to say now, I'd completely expect a person like you to defend a PvE only thread.
On topic, like this thread should be, most of these ashe's for damn sure...
An open world PvP concept isn't going to effect casual players...because Steve's a pretty determined guy, the end.
The fps/tps battle royale craze has subsided a lot. There are many gamers who traditionally are shooter game players, who are looking for something more. They're looking for an mmo, they say it outright. And they're looking for an mmo with real, fleshed out, open world pvp, as well as good pve.
Ashes will draw in a substantial amount of these types of players.
- Atlas, Ark, Rust, Albion Online, Archeage series, Darkfall series, Mortal Online series, DAOC, Warhammer Online, Black Desert Online, Conan Exiles, Lineage, Eve, Guild Wars 2, Crowfall(lol), just off the top of my head, there's even more. All of these games prove to varying extents that there's a market for more pvp focused mmos.
Lack of funding, underdevelopment, major p2w, major bugs, TOO focused on pvp/too harsh, garbage/nonexistent pve content, bad graphics, bad performance, bad mechanics, bad monetization. That's been the plague of many pvp mmos, they're just not good at a very base level.
So if Intrepid actually makes a good one, that avoids the mistakes so many previous one's made, there is serious potential to rope all these players in, rope back in the players like me who love pvp mmo's.
In response to that, I'm saying this is a distastrous mindset for an MMORPG.
This kills the RPG aspects of MMORPGs because then we get inundated with players who only care about the open world PvP in an MMO and care nothing about the Roleplaying aspects.
It's why we have some many players demanding cookie-cutter builds in groups and raids as they try to achieve the META...killing stuff as fast as possible. These types of players strive to place player twitch skills above character skills and unique character builds.
And Okeydoke won't care because all he really cares about is having a bunch of people to PvP with in a massively multiplayer open world.
So then we end up with crap like group leaders demanding that a Necromancer change their class to Brood Warden because they've determined that Brood Warden provides the Most Efficient Tactics Available to have the supposedly best possible player skills for the group.
Instead of working with the RP of having the best Necromancer in your group and figuring out how to use the Necromancer to defeat the challenges the group will face.
Mostly, I'm just saying, we should not be telling FPS players, "Hey, here's a new MMO where you can do what you love." Instead, we should make it clear that Ashes is an MMORPG and model how to focus on and support the RPG aspects of the game, rather than ignore the RPG aspects of the game.
Nothing about that mmos should wholesale adopt fps game features. Or that all I "really care about is having a bunch of people to pvp with." I care about a lot more than that as far as what I want in an mmo.
Any fps player that looks at an mmo and decides to play it will have to be accepting of mmo features. And vice versa when mmo players crossover to fps.
I just did not say what some people in this thread somehow think I said. I've re read them, it's not in my posts. For what it's worth, I generally like my mmo and fps features separate. I don't like Fortnite where I have to have 15 keybinds just to play a shooter. And I generally don't like full action mmos. And there's more than that, etc.
I am planting seeds. And it's mostly a nitpick that's not worth derailing for pages.