About mandatory PvP.

Azherae

Mag7spy wrote: »

I think a battleground mode being moba inspired would be a great idea for games to do. Pretty sure ashes plans to have battlegrounds, the mode new world had was pretty cool to jump into for some pvp.

Yes which is fine, but you asked what I want from owPvP. And that was my answer. To me personally, if all the owPvP is just the same thing I said before that I've seen, it's just going to be an annoyance to most people.

Azherae

NiKr wrote: »

A few months back (or maybe weeks? what is time?) I suggested an addition to the BH system where the PK's victim's resources would have a higher chance of dropping and would be marked with the owner's name, and the BH system itself would reward the bounty hunters for returning those resources back to the owner. I feel like this could alleviate the "loser never gets anything" problem.

I also bundled up that suggestion with another addition to the system, but that one will only become relevant after we see what Intrepid has designed on their own first.

I don't consider this sufficient. Once we see their version I'll gladly discuss lots of things, probably. I have three solutions of my own that I can see working depending on how they implement combat. But for now, as the man said 'wait and see if we're surprised'.

I'm just glad that not as many people follow this game that closely yet.

Dolyem

Azherae wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

So you want a mmo where people attack first and ask questions later and are never afraid to fight? Even in older mmos that wasn't the case looking at another player was a red flag, either you are fighting, if you are lucky they are leaving or they might try to backstab you.

To have a mmo like what you want where people are more keen on fighting each other imo would be more similar to some battle royale games where you don't have fear of losing anything. When i played shadowbane Id hunt players or be hunted it was fun but was also a lot to deal with to lose your farm.

Bdo is closest to that mind set but that is because also how it is designed. Even on a more hardcore pvp servers that isn't something that is going to happen, i think what you are thinking of is a bit of an exaggeration and definitely not a PvX type game. There would never be honor or fair fights, power and numbers and a lot of running to not lose your year. On top of large guilds camping people so they can never leave.

PvX is the best way with limits it makes the experiences more memorable then just having everyone trying to murder each other 24/7

I wish you were capable of having conversations without projecting so much/making assumptions about what other people want or how.

I don't feel like trying to explain this to you though, maybe you're right and I don't want a PvX game and therefore won't like Ashes. That's a better simpler conclusion.

When you say you want other players looking like mobs that means to fight them, to get loot, etc. Any player that sees a mob would attack, that isn't projecting that is normal in any kind of mmo. Im simply saying what would happen in a game like that. I also have experience with tons of old mmorpg and i know how full loot PvP is without limits.

I gave an example of the closest one which was Bdo and people in that game aren't that quick to attack everything in it. My only main assumption is you either want more hardcore pvp servers or pve players so they can make the PvX server more hardcore.

I ask and try to figure it out based on the information you give me, long story short there is no mmorpg out there that people play that are like that, or they were not successful enough to come to the light.

Again if you want a mmo where you look at players like mobs you are looking at more of s shooter type game its different in a PvX type game...

If I'm getting the wrong understanding just explain it to me better, that was the example you gave me.

Ok I'm giving this one try, I'm not even gonna require you to 'not project', but I'm gonna stop if you go off on any weird TANGENTS.

Here's the problem with owPvP in almost every game and imo why it fails.

The attacker has mitigated their main risks before they begin. Can we agree on this? In 90% of situations, if the attacker was carrying a lot of good materials of their own, they don't want to attack a random.

So what do they do? They attack people they know they can beat. They attack with advantage. They attack with low risk. That's a skill, it's a valid skill and maybe that's what owPvP games are all about. I just also think that's why those games are niche or fail.

The player who has something to lose doesn't usually want to initiate the fight. Whether that's mats, the time it took to get wherever they are and don't want to respawn. The attacker is therefore 'a person with low risk, whose gain is the fight itself even if they lose', the defender is 'a person with high risk, something to lose, often less skill, and with little to gain if they win'.

I don't want to see this again. The main thing where this doesn't matter is Objective based PvP and farming spots, but even in the case of the farming spot, it's usually the same. Because the one who wants the spot and actually thinks to ATTACK for it, is probably still taking the lesser risk. It can be satisfying to be the defender and defeat that type of person, but 'PvE' players normally don't want to do this. They expect to lose without benefit.

This whole 'there will be winners and losers' thing is not, in my mind, an excuse for the loser gaining NOTHING. But because MMOs are no-matchmaking, usually poorly balanced games, the loser DOES usually gain NOTHING, not even 'an increase in personal skill or knowledge'.

Yes, there is probably no such MMO. I just don't know why that is. Why it is so important that owPvP rely on 'being so different from MOBAs and games where people can gain something, however small, from losses', that the response is 'no you don't want an MMO go play a MOBA'.

As I said, maybe I do. I will have a new MOBA to play soon enough. Perhaps I'll be happier there.

I promise I am not jabbing at you but what I gathered from this is basically that you don't want players to have to lose to other players. I feel most PvE players naively go into PVP MMOs thinking they can avoid the conflict but act shocked and disappointed when they can't. Maybe if they go into a PVP or PVX game fully expecting conflict and being mentally prepared for it as an inevitability and requirement to play, they would be less upset about it when they get killed or "lose"? Or even excited when they fight back and win?

Azherae

Mag7spy wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

We can go if they killed a green or the person fought back, yes they won't gain anything if they lose and as it should be the person attacking would gain more in a sense. But that is the point of the Corruption system, if they are corrupted then they are at risk of losing what they had gained. Any player would see them and be like If i kill that person free of risk for myself I might get some good loot off them. Or the person that was killed by them might come with their friends to kill that person.

It causes there to be a push and pull, that yes he won the fight but you aren't a winner till you are back in town and have placed the items in your storage. One thing i hope is spawn points and towns are decent locations away where you can store such items else I feel issues might come up if its two feet away.

Back to the Pve player, the corrupt system is designed so its not a frequent event that happens every second the moment you step out of town. The game is a PvX game at the end of the day so it should be balanced between PvP and Pve.

Also ive played dota for 20 years and I've never felt i gained something from losing, only that a hour of time my was spent losing lmao. In a battle royale i don't feel the lose as much because you are like i loss but i killed a bunch of people atleast. Your view point on it isn't losing its how close can you get tot hat number one spot.

Ok, I'll count that as a tangent. We're just different types of people.

I play games where I usually learn something from losing. I'm not going into matches thinking about how many people I kill, I'm thinking about 'did I get better at this game, can I see where I don't make X error anymore'.

That's just what I look for in games, if Ashes isn't going to provide that, so be it.

If you are a hardcore pvper and they have enough action combat in the game you will get that. But that isn't the average player mind set. For you though im sure it be fine and great and you can learn to be a better pvper losing or winning.

Part of the reason i advocate for action combat, skill should be able to influence mmos in this age we don't have the same limitations as 20 years ago.

Just when I was finally starting to get out of the habit of overexplaining everything I say with caveats, here you are... (this isn't about you, just my own personal struggles that I'm venting).

I always get that. OTHER people don't always get that. Then they're miserable. I want opponents. I want fun, I don't want to feel like I'm frustrating, annoying, or griefing people MORESO than an elite mob when I attack them. Because I WILL attack them.

So that's what I am asking for. "Make it so that people can learn this, so that they're inspired to learn this."

So some context for you. My team's fighting game content is almost entirely based around 'helping people get better and understand how to play the games without having the learning curve of being stomped on by real people who know all the tricks already'. We aim to showcase to beginners and people who aren't doing so well that 'hey if you understand THESE specific things, you can still have fun even when losing against top players'.

I understand that MMOs are not that. I am learning that apparently people don't want MMOs to BECOME that either. That's not strange, Fighting Gamers don't want that either. They keep complaining that games are more accessible now, that they can't just overwhelm new players with their superior knowledge, better execution, etc.

That's just not me. So just as I dream and push for this in one genre, I dream and push for it in this one. I'm sure the diehard fans will 'push me out' eventually. I'll hope that they don't push out everyone I'm 'trying to help' at the same time. Or maybe I should hope that they do, so that those people can have more fun with their gaming.

Mag7spy

MMOs can have that concept just not owPvP that is why there are limits to it or should be. It is a fun experience because of the good and the bad for owPvP.

As far as having more of a mobas feel, mmos need to have arena, and battlegrounds and of course siege. Those would provide plenty of that feeling, just owPvP is for something else completely and their system and designs are built to make that as strong and fun experience as it can be to cause some drama from what i see.

Only fighting game i played was soul calibur and i was ranked top 10 in the world lol.

Azherae

Dolyem wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

So you want a mmo where people attack first and ask questions later and are never afraid to fight? Even in older mmos that wasn't the case looking at another player was a red flag, either you are fighting, if you are lucky they are leaving or they might try to backstab you.

To have a mmo like what you want where people are more keen on fighting each other imo would be more similar to some battle royale games where you don't have fear of losing anything. When i played shadowbane Id hunt players or be hunted it was fun but was also a lot to deal with to lose your farm.

Bdo is closest to that mind set but that is because also how it is designed. Even on a more hardcore pvp servers that isn't something that is going to happen, i think what you are thinking of is a bit of an exaggeration and definitely not a PvX type game. There would never be honor or fair fights, power and numbers and a lot of running to not lose your year. On top of large guilds camping people so they can never leave.

PvX is the best way with limits it makes the experiences more memorable then just having everyone trying to murder each other 24/7

I wish you were capable of having conversations without projecting so much/making assumptions about what other people want or how.

I don't feel like trying to explain this to you though, maybe you're right and I don't want a PvX game and therefore won't like Ashes. That's a better simpler conclusion.

When you say you want other players looking like mobs that means to fight them, to get loot, etc. Any player that sees a mob would attack, that isn't projecting that is normal in any kind of mmo. Im simply saying what would happen in a game like that. I also have experience with tons of old mmorpg and i know how full loot PvP is without limits.

I gave an example of the closest one which was Bdo and people in that game aren't that quick to attack everything in it. My only main assumption is you either want more hardcore pvp servers or pve players so they can make the PvX server more hardcore.

I ask and try to figure it out based on the information you give me, long story short there is no mmorpg out there that people play that are like that, or they were not successful enough to come to the light.

Again if you want a mmo where you look at players like mobs you are looking at more of s shooter type game its different in a PvX type game...

If I'm getting the wrong understanding just explain it to me better, that was the example you gave me.

Ok I'm giving this one try, I'm not even gonna require you to 'not project', but I'm gonna stop if you go off on any weird TANGENTS.

Here's the problem with owPvP in almost every game and imo why it fails.

The attacker has mitigated their main risks before they begin. Can we agree on this? In 90% of situations, if the attacker was carrying a lot of good materials of their own, they don't want to attack a random.

So what do they do? They attack people they know they can beat. They attack with advantage. They attack with low risk. That's a skill, it's a valid skill and maybe that's what owPvP games are all about. I just also think that's why those games are niche or fail.

The player who has something to lose doesn't usually want to initiate the fight. Whether that's mats, the time it took to get wherever they are and don't want to respawn. The attacker is therefore 'a person with low risk, whose gain is the fight itself even if they lose', the defender is 'a person with high risk, something to lose, often less skill, and with little to gain if they win'.

I don't want to see this again. The main thing where this doesn't matter is Objective based PvP and farming spots, but even in the case of the farming spot, it's usually the same. Because the one who wants the spot and actually thinks to ATTACK for it, is probably still taking the lesser risk. It can be satisfying to be the defender and defeat that type of person, but 'PvE' players normally don't want to do this. They expect to lose without benefit.

This whole 'there will be winners and losers' thing is not, in my mind, an excuse for the loser gaining NOTHING. But because MMOs are no-matchmaking, usually poorly balanced games, the loser DOES usually gain NOTHING, not even 'an increase in personal skill or knowledge'.

Yes, there is probably no such MMO. I just don't know why that is. Why it is so important that owPvP rely on 'being so different from MOBAs and games where people can gain something, however small, from losses', that the response is 'no you don't want an MMO go play a MOBA'.

As I said, maybe I do. I will have a new MOBA to play soon enough. Perhaps I'll be happier there.

I promise I am not jabbing at you but what I gathered from this is basically that you don't want players to have to lose to other players. I feel most PvE players naively go into PVP MMOs thinking they can avoid the conflict but act shocked and disappointed when they can't. Maybe if they go into a PVP or PVX game fully expecting conflict and being mentally prepared for it as an inevitability and requirement to play, they would be less upset about it when they get killed or "lose"? Or even excited when they fight back and win?

If that's what you took from it, then so it is.

I honestly don't know how to explain it to you. I also am pretty bad at understanding how you don't get it, so let's just leave it at that.

Dygz

Mag7spy wrote: »

In shadowbane it was full loot, so when you die you dropped everything except for equipped gear. So you could end up losing a hour or hours of farm as you are so far away from town at grinding spots and such. People had a very rare rune (i did as well) that allowed you to track anyone on the map to. So people might scout out your group and then come gank you to try to take all your farm and any rare items you have on you.

I guess.
"Play to Crush" is at the far end of my distaste for combat so... Ino need to worry about fear there, since I would never play that game in the first place.

Ferryman

Azherae wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

So you want a mmo where people attack first and ask questions later and are never afraid to fight? Even in older mmos that wasn't the case looking at another player was a red flag, either you are fighting, if you are lucky they are leaving or they might try to backstab you.

To have a mmo like what you want where people are more keen on fighting each other imo would be more similar to some battle royale games where you don't have fear of losing anything. When i played shadowbane Id hunt players or be hunted it was fun but was also a lot to deal with to lose your farm.

Bdo is closest to that mind set but that is because also how it is designed. Even on a more hardcore pvp servers that isn't something that is going to happen, i think what you are thinking of is a bit of an exaggeration and definitely not a PvX type game. There would never be honor or fair fights, power and numbers and a lot of running to not lose your year. On top of large guilds camping people so they can never leave.

PvX is the best way with limits it makes the experiences more memorable then just having everyone trying to murder each other 24/7

I wish you were capable of having conversations without projecting so much/making assumptions about what other people want or how.

I don't feel like trying to explain this to you though, maybe you're right and I don't want a PvX game and therefore won't like Ashes. That's a better simpler conclusion.

When you say you want other players looking like mobs that means to fight them, to get loot, etc. Any player that sees a mob would attack, that isn't projecting that is normal in any kind of mmo. Im simply saying what would happen in a game like that. I also have experience with tons of old mmorpg and i know how full loot PvP is without limits.

I gave an example of the closest one which was Bdo and people in that game aren't that quick to attack everything in it. My only main assumption is you either want more hardcore pvp servers or pve players so they can make the PvX server more hardcore.

I ask and try to figure it out based on the information you give me, long story short there is no mmorpg out there that people play that are like that, or they were not successful enough to come to the light.

Again if you want a mmo where you look at players like mobs you are looking at more of s shooter type game its different in a PvX type game...

If I'm getting the wrong understanding just explain it to me better, that was the example you gave me.

Here's the problem with owPvP in almost every game and imo why it fails.

The attacker has mitigated their main risks before they begin. Can we agree on this? In 90% of situations, if the attacker was carrying a lot of good materials of their own, they don't want to attack a random.

So what do they do? They attack people they know they can beat. They attack with advantage. They attack with low risk. That's a skill, it's a valid skill and maybe that's what owPvP games are all about. I just also think that's why those games are niche or fail.

The player who has something to lose doesn't usually want to initiate the fight. Whether that's mats, the time it took to get wherever they are and don't want to respawn. The attacker is therefore 'a person with low risk, whose gain is the fight itself even if they lose', the defender is 'a person with high risk, something to lose, often less skill, and with little to gain if they win'.

I don't want to see this again. The main thing where this doesn't matter is Objective based PvP and farming spots, but even in the case of the farming spot, it's usually the same. Because the one who wants the spot and actually thinks to ATTACK for it, is probably still taking the lesser risk. It can be satisfying to be the defender and defeat that type of person, but 'PvE' players normally don't want to do this. They expect to lose without benefit.

I can agree with this mostly. I have background from Albion which contains hardcore owPvP rules. First thing you consider before entering full loot zones is that you wear something you can afford to lose. If you go ganking with a group you can easily take less valueable gear because now you have numbers to compensate the gear power.

Moreover, some core and hardcore guilds works in way that guild provides the gear for the members. Of course members loots, gathers resources and crafts that gear together and/or they have dedicated players/characters for that purpose. Anyway, this removes almost totally the personal risk and fear of losing the gear. If you die in a fight you just take new set from the bank and you are good to go.

Obviously not every guild function that way but just shows how the risk can be mitigated almost to the zero. Yes and the attacker(s) has always the advantage of surprise and they are more prepared to fight. Usually defenders loses regardless they fight back or not. Of course skilled PvP players can turn the fight for their favor and even smaller groups can compete with good tactics and teamplay from defensive position.

Again I agree that owPvP games can easily fail or at least struggle with the rules to get them right. Even so I consider Albion as a succesful owPvP MMORPG because it has succeeded to reach a large playerbase. There can be several reasons for that but they have added themepark elements to the sandbox foundation and constantly releasing new content for different type of players. Even PvE centric players has their own safe corner in the game world, but kind of limited though.

Dygz

Azherae wrote: »

Here's the problem with owPvP in almost every game and imo why it fails.

The attacker has mitigated their main risks before they begin. Can we agree on this? In 90% of situations, if the attacker was carrying a lot of good materials of their own, they don't want to attack a random.

So what do they do? They attack people they know they can beat. They attack with advantage. They attack with low risk. That's a skill, it's a valid skill and maybe that's what owPvP games are all about. I just also think that's why those games are niche or fail.

No. The reason that owPvP fails in MMORPGs is because it's trying to mix playstyles that don't mix well together.
In the original version of RPGs, PvP was exceedingly rare. There's a whole slew of activities and experiences that drew people to RPGs that had absolutely nothing to do with attacking other players. RPGs were primarily cooperative endeavors against NPC adversaries.
Gamers - especially gamers fond of competition and combat - were attracted to the open world possibilities of copeting against the ultimate opponents - each other.

I don't care at all about my attacker's mitigation.
What I care about is not being attacked by other players when I'm not in the mood for PvP.
PvP is the least of my interests in playing an MMORPG. While I can tolerate PvP sometimes - it can be OK at times - when I'm not in the mood and want to focus on the other enjoyable aspects of MMORPGs, I want to be able to focus on those other things without some other player forcing me to do what they want me to do.
Some other player forcing me to do what they find fun instead of what I find fun is not fun.

Back to my fish analogy...
It's like going to growing up in a town where the fish restaurants never served fish eyes.
Decades later the fish restuarants begin serving fish eyes and there's a significant population who love eating fish eyes, so these restaurants begin including fish eyes on the menu.
Which is fine, I get to eat the fish I like. They get to eat their fish eyes.
I think fish eyes are gross for the most part. Every once in a while I actually partake of fish eyes even though it's the last thing on the menu I'd want to eat.
All of that should be fine.
What pisses me off, though, is when I have actually scarfed down a few fish eyes. I've had my fill and really can't stomach any more. I go order some fried shrimp, which I've already paid for, but the waiter brings me more fish eyes. "I know you ordered fried shrimp, but the people at the table over their decided you should have boiled fish eyes instead."
"Mmmn. I actually had some of those a few minutes ago. Wasn't too bad, but... I can't stomach any more. I just want to have some fried shrimp now. How about you save those for tomorrow. Good chance I'll return and I can have some then, but right now, I'd just like to have my fried shrimp."
"Nope. Sorry. This is a fish restaurant that serves fish eyes. When you chose to eat here, you consented to letting people who love bolied fish eyes force you to eat boiled fish eyes even when you want to eat a different kind of fish. So... maybe you can have your fried shrimp later, but first you have to eat these boiled fish eyes. And, hey! Don't worry. These boiled fish eyes are free!"
Nothing can be done to make that situation feel better for the person who does not like to eat fish eyes.
The people who love fish eyes are like, "But, you don't even have to pay for the fish eyes!! That's great! Free food!" And, "Hey! I love boiled fish eyes, so if someone makes you eat boiled fish eyes when you don't want to, we'll come join you and scarf down a bunch so that you only have to eat a few of them. That will be awesome. But, you should keep going to that restaurant. It's great."


Nobody cares who gets to eat the boiled fish eyes first.
Nothing can be done to make me enjoy that.
If the fried shrimp and crab legs are excellent, you might get me to be able to tolerate that. If the occassions I'm forced to eat boiled fish eyes when I'm not in the mood for boiled fish eyes are rare enough that I don't rage quit...
But, people who don't like boiled fish are going to try to avoid eating boiled fish eyes as much as possible.
"Then why are you going to a restaurant that serves boiled fish eyes?"
"Because that's not the only fish served at that fish restaurant."

Mag7spy

Was there a point where you didn't realize this was a PvX game with ashes of creation? Or you knew but you wanted them to make it move pve friendly anyway?

No. The reason that owPvP fails in MMORPGs is because it's trying to mix playstyles that don't mix well together.
In the original version of RPGs, PvP was exceedingly rare. There's a whole slew of activities and experiences that drew people to RPGs that had absolutely nothing to do with attacking other players. RPGs were primarily cooperative endeavors against NPC adversaries.
Gamers - especially gamers fond of competition and combat - were attracted to the open world possibilities of copeting against the ultimate opponents - each other.

That isn't true you are thinking like a pve player and trying to create something you want. owpvp is completely fine and doesn't fail because its owPvP, its something people enjoy and always has been apart of a lot of mmorpg.

Though there is a difference having a PvE experience with added pvp simply because its fun for people. Most mmorps like that weren't created with PvX in mind but pve with added PvP. Generally those mmorpgs had more money and their target was making the most money possible. Some mmorpgs that had a focus on PvP were smaller companies without the budget to create content towards mainly WoW or some of the other larger studios so them failing ins't much of a surprise as if they were pve it would have gone down the same way. There was no really competing against companies that had more money, strong ip, strong player base, etc.

You don't want to pvp?
This point I'm never going to understand....someone kills once maybe twice through the day so what. You don't need to PvP them, just either go back tot he area and let them get more corruption, or find a new spot to do your mob killing and gathering. If you see someone watching you for long periods of time like they are trying to see if you are endlessly collecting n and never dropping stuff at town leave and clear your loot inventory. nothing is stopping you from playing the game and enjoying it you don't need to fight back, the system will protect you.


owPvP fails in MMORPGs MMORPG have been failing.

MMORPGS have been failing for ages. Wow has fallen off, new mmorpgs that pop up die soon after for a bunch of reasons like lack of content or pay to win. People havnt been interested in mmorpgs for awhile or doing these rpgs elements in a mmorpg because they always feel subpar compared to a full rpg. To the people that say or no pve servers and this mmorpg is dead half the mmorpgs out there are dead, or expecting a player base than is much more on the smaller side of things. If PvE was that big a deal mmorpgs wouldn't be fall off but clearly that isn't the case. You have the same crowd that plays them and their reach doesn't even grasp at some of those other games out there with player numbers.


PvX is the way in the form of something new.

No matter what you want to think any new mmorpg isn't going to have content that will ever compare to the older mmorpgs with years of additional content and refinement. I honestly do think ashes is on a good path to having a good amount of content (in the form of PvX so pvp and pve working togethe) but I'm still realistic. Though in how they are doing the sandbox with player interaction between each other and the content in the game its being spread out in a smart with and having the player interaction that people want from games both in a PvE and PvP sense. owPvP being important even if its only 10% of the pvp in the game as it adds an atmosphere that will create moments that will be memorable.

Azherae

Mag7spy wrote: »

Was there a point where you didn't realize this was a PvX game with ashes of creation? Or you knew but you wanted them to make it move pve friendly anyway?

No. The reason that owPvP fails in MMORPGs is because it's trying to mix playstyles that don't mix well together.
In the original version of RPGs, PvP was exceedingly rare. There's a whole slew of activities and experiences that drew people to RPGs that had absolutely nothing to do with attacking other players. RPGs were primarily cooperative endeavors against NPC adversaries.
Gamers - especially gamers fond of competition and combat - were attracted to the open world possibilities of copeting against the ultimate opponents - each other.

That isn't true you are thinking like a pve player and trying to create something you want. owpvp is completely fine and doesn't fail because its owPvP, its something people enjoy and always has been apart of a lot of mmorpg.

Though there is a difference having a PvE experience with added pvp simply because its fun for people. Most mmorps like that weren't created with PvX in mind but pve with added PvP. Generally those mmorpgs had more money and their target was making the most money possible. Some mmorpgs that had a focus on PvP were smaller companies without the budget to create content towards mainly WoW or some of the other larger studios so them failing ins't much of a surprise as if they were pve it would have gone down the same way. There was no really competing against companies that had more money, strong ip, strong player base, etc.

You don't want to pvp?
This point I'm never going to understand....someone kills once maybe twice through the day so what. You don't need to PvP them, just either go back tot he area and let them get more corruption, or find a new spot to do your mob killing and gathering. If you see someone watching you for long periods of time like they are trying to see if you are endlessly collecting n and never dropping stuff at town leave and clear your loot inventory. nothing is stopping you from playing the game and enjoying it you don't need to fight back, the system will protect you.


owPvP fails in MMORPGs MMORPG have been failing.

MMORPGS have been failing for ages. Wow has fallen off, new mmorpgs that pop up die soon after for a bunch of reasons like lack of content or pay to win. People havnt been interested in mmorpgs for awhile or doing these rpgs elements in a mmorpg because they always feel subpar compared to a full rpg. To the people that say or no pve servers and this mmorpg is dead half the mmorpgs out there are dead, or expecting a player base than is much more on the smaller side of things. If PvE was that big a deal mmorpgs wouldn't be fall off but clearly that isn't the case. You have the same crowd that plays them and their reach doesn't even grasp at some of those other games out there with player numbers.


PvX is the way in the form of something new.

No matter what you want to think any new mmorpg isn't going to have content that will ever compare to the older mmorpgs with years of additional content and refinement. I honestly do think ashes is on a good path to having a good amount of content (in the form of PvX so pvp and pve working togethe) but I'm still realistic. Though in how they are doing the sandbox with player interaction between each other and the content in the game its being spread out in a smart with and having the player interaction that people want from games both in a PvE and PvP sense. owPvP being important even if its only 10% of the pvp in the game as it adds an atmosphere that will create moments that will be memorable.

Are you talking to me, to Dygz or to Intrepid/overall audience? I can't tell because nearly everything you said is a projection if you are addressing me or Dygz, and a repetition of 'market copy' if you aren't.

Either way, I request that you name for me a standard new RPG, just RPG, that has the same or more success than FFXIV. You've made some claims about 'MMOs feeling subpar compared to a full RPG' but I must not be playing games enough these days because I don't know what you're talking about at all.

Mag7spy

Azherae wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Was there a point where you didn't realize this was a PvX game with ashes of creation? Or you knew but you wanted them to make it move pve friendly anyway?

No. The reason that owPvP fails in MMORPGs is because it's trying to mix playstyles that don't mix well together.
In the original version of RPGs, PvP was exceedingly rare. There's a whole slew of activities and experiences that drew people to RPGs that had absolutely nothing to do with attacking other players. RPGs were primarily cooperative endeavors against NPC adversaries.
Gamers - especially gamers fond of competition and combat - were attracted to the open world possibilities of copeting against the ultimate opponents - each other.

That isn't true you are thinking like a pve player and trying to create something you want. owpvp is completely fine and doesn't fail because its owPvP, its something people enjoy and always has been apart of a lot of mmorpg.

Though there is a difference having a PvE experience with added pvp simply because its fun for people. Most mmorps like that weren't created with PvX in mind but pve with added PvP. Generally those mmorpgs had more money and their target was making the most money possible. Some mmorpgs that had a focus on PvP were smaller companies without the budget to create content towards mainly WoW or some of the other larger studios so them failing ins't much of a surprise as if they were pve it would have gone down the same way. There was no really competing against companies that had more money, strong ip, strong player base, etc.

You don't want to pvp?
This point I'm never going to understand....someone kills once maybe twice through the day so what. You don't need to PvP them, just either go back tot he area and let them get more corruption, or find a new spot to do your mob killing and gathering. If you see someone watching you for long periods of time like they are trying to see if you are endlessly collecting n and never dropping stuff at town leave and clear your loot inventory. nothing is stopping you from playing the game and enjoying it you don't need to fight back, the system will protect you.


owPvP fails in MMORPGs MMORPG have been failing.

MMORPGS have been failing for ages. Wow has fallen off, new mmorpgs that pop up die soon after for a bunch of reasons like lack of content or pay to win. People havnt been interested in mmorpgs for awhile or doing these rpgs elements in a mmorpg because they always feel subpar compared to a full rpg. To the people that say or no pve servers and this mmorpg is dead half the mmorpgs out there are dead, or expecting a player base than is much more on the smaller side of things. If PvE was that big a deal mmorpgs wouldn't be fall off but clearly that isn't the case. You have the same crowd that plays them and their reach doesn't even grasp at some of those other games out there with player numbers.


PvX is the way in the form of something new.

No matter what you want to think any new mmorpg isn't going to have content that will ever compare to the older mmorpgs with years of additional content and refinement. I honestly do think ashes is on a good path to having a good amount of content (in the form of PvX so pvp and pve working togethe) but I'm still realistic. Though in how they are doing the sandbox with player interaction between each other and the content in the game its being spread out in a smart with and having the player interaction that people want from games both in a PvE and PvP sense. owPvP being important even if its only 10% of the pvp in the game as it adds an atmosphere that will create moments that will be memorable.

Are you talking to me, to Dygz or to Intrepid/overall audience? I can't tell because nearly everything you said is a projection if you are addressing me or Dygz, and a repetition of 'market copy' if you aren't.

Either way, I request that you name for me a standard new RPG, just RPG, that has the same or more success than FFXIV. You've made some claims about 'MMOs feeling subpar compared to a full RPG' but I must not be playing games enough these days because I don't know what you're talking about at all.

The quote was not from you.
You realize final fantasy was a disaster when it released right and they have to revamp everything and re-release it? Its part of the lore with the game that the old stuff was destroyed.

You want me to name rpgs that are more successful? That isn't hard... Elden ring, dagons dogma, mass effect, dragon age, skyrim, fallout boarderlands, the witcher. I could go on not much point though. As my point was older mmorpgs have a lot of additional work added to it over the years that were apart of the golden age of mmorpgs if they survived.

Mag7spy

I don't understand you you don't see mmorpgs as subpar when you are comparing to a game focused as a rpg. MMORPG have a lot of filler and repeat stuff compared to a rpg meant to be more of a personalized experience. I don't really see a point getting into the extra details on every way a rpg will have stronger rpg elements and immersion compared to a mmorpg....Nor is that a bad thing people play mmorpgs for different elements then a single / multiplayer rpg can't give, being the mmo part.

Azherae

Mag7spy wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Was there a point where you didn't realize this was a PvX game with ashes of creation? Or you knew but you wanted them to make it move pve friendly anyway?

No. The reason that owPvP fails in MMORPGs is because it's trying to mix playstyles that don't mix well together.
In the original version of RPGs, PvP was exceedingly rare. There's a whole slew of activities and experiences that drew people to RPGs that had absolutely nothing to do with attacking other players. RPGs were primarily cooperative endeavors against NPC adversaries.
Gamers - especially gamers fond of competition and combat - were attracted to the open world possibilities of copeting against the ultimate opponents - each other.

That isn't true you are thinking like a pve player and trying to create something you want. owpvp is completely fine and doesn't fail because its owPvP, its something people enjoy and always has been apart of a lot of mmorpg.

Though there is a difference having a PvE experience with added pvp simply because its fun for people. Most mmorps like that weren't created with PvX in mind but pve with added PvP. Generally those mmorpgs had more money and their target was making the most money possible. Some mmorpgs that had a focus on PvP were smaller companies without the budget to create content towards mainly WoW or some of the other larger studios so them failing ins't much of a surprise as if they were pve it would have gone down the same way. There was no really competing against companies that had more money, strong ip, strong player base, etc.

You don't want to pvp?
This point I'm never going to understand....someone kills once maybe twice through the day so what. You don't need to PvP them, just either go back tot he area and let them get more corruption, or find a new spot to do your mob killing and gathering. If you see someone watching you for long periods of time like they are trying to see if you are endlessly collecting n and never dropping stuff at town leave and clear your loot inventory. nothing is stopping you from playing the game and enjoying it you don't need to fight back, the system will protect you.


owPvP fails in MMORPGs MMORPG have been failing.

MMORPGS have been failing for ages. Wow has fallen off, new mmorpgs that pop up die soon after for a bunch of reasons like lack of content or pay to win. People havnt been interested in mmorpgs for awhile or doing these rpgs elements in a mmorpg because they always feel subpar compared to a full rpg. To the people that say or no pve servers and this mmorpg is dead half the mmorpgs out there are dead, or expecting a player base than is much more on the smaller side of things. If PvE was that big a deal mmorpgs wouldn't be fall off but clearly that isn't the case. You have the same crowd that plays them and their reach doesn't even grasp at some of those other games out there with player numbers.


PvX is the way in the form of something new.

No matter what you want to think any new mmorpg isn't going to have content that will ever compare to the older mmorpgs with years of additional content and refinement. I honestly do think ashes is on a good path to having a good amount of content (in the form of PvX so pvp and pve working togethe) but I'm still realistic. Though in how they are doing the sandbox with player interaction between each other and the content in the game its being spread out in a smart with and having the player interaction that people want from games both in a PvE and PvP sense. owPvP being important even if its only 10% of the pvp in the game as it adds an atmosphere that will create moments that will be memorable.

Are you talking to me, to Dygz or to Intrepid/overall audience? I can't tell because nearly everything you said is a projection if you are addressing me or Dygz, and a repetition of 'market copy' if you aren't.

Either way, I request that you name for me a standard new RPG, just RPG, that has the same or more success than FFXIV. You've made some claims about 'MMOs feeling subpar compared to a full RPG' but I must not be playing games enough these days because I don't know what you're talking about at all.

The quote was not from you.
You realize final fantasy was a disaster when it released right and they have to revamp everything and re-release it? Its part of the lore with the game that the old stuff was destroyed.

You want me to name rpgs that are more successful? That isn't hard... Elden ring, dagons dogma, mass effect, dragon age, skyrim, fallout boarderlands, the witcher. I could go on not much point though. As my point was older mmorpgs have a lot of additional work added to it over the years that were apart of the golden age of mmorpgs if they survived.

Yes, I realize that. But do you understand WHY it was a disaster?

I played the prior game for many years. Myself and literally everyone I know who played it, chose not to play FFXIV. And I mean LITERALLY EVERYONE (I don't necessarily know that many people closely enough to say, maybe 30).

So if you have an MMO and then you make a 'sequel' to that MMO and don't get the attention of your main playerbase, what do you think will happen?

Witcher 3 and FFXIV have very close numbers in terms of sales.

I should probably disengage from talking to you, but I'm the type who feels the need to point out errors. I know exactly, and I mean exactly, why FFXIV needed to be reworked, and I know that they brought on someone who looked at what that game was trying to be, and explicitly decided to make it more like WoW.

Did you not even check the numbers you were claiming personally even a little bit? You can even go back and track the timelines, there's graphs.

If your point is 'MMOs have less subscribers at launch than most RPGs manage to sell in the first 6 months', I don't know how to explain to you that this isn't a meaningful point.

I'm regretting this line of discussion already...

Mag7spy

When i say sub par I'm not talking about sales, I'm talking about the quality of the RPG elements in the game. No long convo really needed for this i don't think it is that important.

Balanz

Dygz wrote: »

During Alpha 2, the devs will tweak Corruption and respawning until it reaches a balance Steven is comfortable with.

Aren't you concerned that the Alpha 2 Player Base, having paid at least $250 up front, will react to Corruption very differently from the Launch Population, who will be more numerous, and less invested?

KeeperBrGO

Marpo wrote: »

We've reached a certain age where we just want to sit in our chairs and enjoy a good game, just stay in the predictable zone of bots and AI.

Just like me, there are many players who hate PvP, and who don't want 1% of it. I hope the kind of frustrations we're going to have are just not being able to kill a very difficult boss. I hope PvP combats in Caravans, World PvP and Nodes for example, don't take us away from AoC.

Developers, I'm really excited about what's being presented. It's all very beautiful! I'm super excited for the next tests and the upcoming release!

I'm like you friend, but is an arbitrary decision that the developers want in the game, I think in the end it's going to be positive because from what I understand they're targeting a niche that within the genre has to have these pvp mechanics which will be the core of the game, but in the end it's a niche game (which is not aimed at everyone).

Dygz

Balanz wrote: »

Aren't you concerned that the Alpha 2 Player Base, having paid at least $250 up front, will react to Corruption very differently from the Launch Population, who will be more numerous, and less invested?

No. We paid that money to test the Ashes gameplay and help support the devs as they work on the features we want to see perpetuated in future MMORPGs. With better experience, it should take as long to design and implement similar features, like Nodes, in subsequent games.

I paid $500. If Ashes ends up being too PvP-centric for my tastes, I won't play.
And hope that I won't have to wait another 5+ years for a game with Nodes and Events that feels more comfortable for me.

Dygz

Mag7spy wrote: »

I don't understand you you don't see mmorpgs as subpar when you are comparing to a game focused as a rpg. MMORPG have a lot of filler and repeat stuff compared to a rpg meant to be more of a personalized experience. I don't really see a point getting into the extra details on every way a rpg will have stronger rpg elements and immersion compared to a mmorpg....Nor is that a bad thing people play mmorpgs for different elements then a single / multiplayer rpg can't give, being the mmo part.

What? An MMORPG is an RPG.

Mag7spy

Dygz wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

I don't understand you you don't see mmorpgs as subpar when you are comparing to a game focused as a rpg. MMORPG have a lot of filler and repeat stuff compared to a rpg meant to be more of a personalized experience. I don't really see a point getting into the extra details on every way a rpg will have stronger rpg elements and immersion compared to a mmorpg....Nor is that a bad thing people play mmorpgs for different elements then a single / multiplayer rpg can't give, being the mmo part.

What? An MMORPG is an RPG.

Honestly don't want to get deep into this, half the content is not voice in mmorpgs most the time, lack of cinematics, combat int he past was very meh with tab taget (has been improved recently), not that strong a connection tot he characters int he story, pull of emotions are not as strong since you aren't as connected, things in mmorpgs are much more generic.

Id be very confused if someone said a mmorpg has the same impact as rpgs Dragons dogma, mass effect, cyberpunk 2077, fallout, final fantasy, etc.


r...r...r..r...r...r..... is the story in a mmo (skip)

Dygz

Mag7spy wrote: »

Was there a point where you didn't realize this was a PvX game with ashes of creation? Or you knew but you wanted them to make it move pve friendly anyway?

I don't think I said anything about making Ashes more PvE friendly.
Ashes has plenty of objective-based, consensual PvP.
If the non-consensual PvP is too much for my tastes, I simply won't play the game.
What I said is that you can't make people who don't enjoy non-consensual PvP enjoy non-consensual PvP. It might be possible to make non-consensual PvP more tolerable.

Mag7spy wrote: »

That isn't true you are thinking like a pve player and trying to create something you want. owpvp is completely fine and doesn't fail because its owPvP, its something people enjoy and always has been apart of a lot of mmorpg.

OWPvP in MMORPGs is niche. In MMORPGs with both PvP servers and PvE-Only servers, most of the population plays on PvE servers.
OWPvP in MMORPGs might be completely fine for those who enjoy it. But it's not particularly popular compared to MMORPG players who don't like non-consensual PvP combat.

Mag7spy wrote: »

Though there is a difference having a PvE experience with added pvp simply because its fun for people. Most mmorps like that weren't created with PvX in mind but pve with added PvP. Generally those mmorpgs had more money and their target was making the most money possible. Some mmorpgs that had a focus on PvP were smaller companies without the budget to create content towards mainly WoW or some of the other larger studios so them failing ins't much of a surprise as if they were pve it would have gone down the same way. There was no really competing against companies that had more money, strong ip, strong player base, etc.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say.
Traditionally, most MMORPGs are designed for PvE first and then have PvP tacked on. I'm not sure which games you consider to be PvX. If I can play on a PvE-Only server, the game is not PvX, even if the game also has a PvP server.

MMORPGs with a focus on PvP will likely be created by a smaller company because that is a niche market for MMORPGs. Them failing is not much of a surprise.
I think I said that. We agree.

Mag7spy wrote: »

This point I'm never going to understand....someone kills once maybe twice through the day so what. You don't need to PvP them, just either go back tot he area and let them get more corruption, or find a new spot to do your mob killing and gathering. If you see someone watching you for long periods of time like they are trying to see if you are endlessly collecting n and never dropping stuff at town leave and clear your loot inventory. nothing is stopping you from playing the game and enjoying it you don't need to fight back, the system will protect you.

Depends on whether I've already had my fill of PvP for the day.
Also depends on how much time it takes for me to recover from those death penalties.
Most importantly, I'm going to be pissed if someone else forces me to partake in an activity I'm not in the mood for.
Even if it's food I like, if someone tries to force me to eat more food when I'm already full and no longer in the mood to eat anything, I'm going to be pissed off. That should not be a thing.

And, you are right, in Ashes... I will not fight back and force them to accrue Corruption. But, Corruption has to work well enough that I die from non-censual PvP no more than twice per game session. I'll have to test to know if I can stomach twice per game session.

And, yes, what pisses me off in other MMORPGs - and cause me to eventually move to PvE-Only servers, is when I've spent an hour defending a town from an enemy faction and I have my fill - then I leave and go find a secluded area to pick some flowers while I'm waiting for my PvP-flag to deflag... and some asshat from an enemy faction decides to fight me. Even though I tell them I'm no longer in the mood for PvP - come find me tomorrow - we can spend another hour on PvP then.
Since that's not the way PvPers roll - I prefer not to play on servers where non-consensual PvP is possilble.
Corruption needs to deter non-consensual PvP such that it is comfortably rare for me, else I won't play Ashes.

Mag7spy wrote: »

PvX is the way in the form of something new.
No matter what you want to think any new mmorpg isn't going to have content that will ever compare to the older mmorpgs with years of additional content and refinement. I honestly do think ashes is on a good path to having a good amount of content (in the form of PvX so pvp and pve working togethe) but I'm still realistic. Though in how they are doing the sandbox with player interaction between each other and the content in the game its being spread out in a smart with and having the player interaction that people want from games both in a PvE and PvP sense. owPvP being important even if its only 10% of the pvp in the game as it adds an atmosphere that will create moments that will be memorable.

Um. I agree that consensual, objective-based PvP in PvX MMORPGs with Nodes is the best forward. It helps create a dynamic, ongoing gameplay loop while the devs work on new content. Rather than a static endgame that lasts for years.
But, the same is not true for non-consensual PvP, which will likely remain a niche market in MMORPGs.

Ashes is a Themebox.

I dunno what you mean by owPvP being only 10% of the PvP. Pretty much all the PvP in Ashes takes place in the open world, AFAIK. Battlegrounds PvP occurs in the open world.

SirChancelot

Is it bad that I'm upset that he has claimed to play dota for 20 years and WC3 hadn't even been out for 20 years yet?

Just me?
Ok nevermind...

Mag7spy

Mag7spy

Battlegrounds shouldn't be in Ow my perception of that is different. When I say open would I'm talking about where you have to flag up to kill someone and not any other kind of PvP, also not including guild wars that is a different topic where you have to tie in social reputation.

Theplague4u

Marpo wrote: »

We've reached a certain age where we just want to sit in our chairs and enjoy a good game, just stay in the predictable zone of bots and AI.

Just like me, there are many players who hate PvP, and who don't want 1% of it. I hope the kind of frustrations we're going to have are just not being able to kill a very difficult boss. I hope PvP combats in Caravans, World PvP and Nodes for example, don't take us away from AoC.

Developers, I'm really excited about what's being presented. It's all very beautiful! I'm super excited for the next tests and the upcoming release!

Playing AOC is your chance to embrace death and learn to enjoy it. AOC is not going to be like all other games which is why it's going to be insanely popular. Join a guild and whenever you get attacked just be faster than the other guy in your group. Think of it like fish and sharks, some fish might get eaten but not all.

SirChancelot

Mag7spy wrote: »

In July...
So next month... And Dota's first version was a year later

Sorry, I just played it a LOT...
🙃

Mag7spy

SirChancelot wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

In July...
So next month... And Dota's first version was a year later

Sorry, I just played it a LOT...
🙃

Dota was before it was dota, that was just when it started to become more main steam as dota just ripped off other modes.

SirChancelot

Mag7spy wrote: »

SirChancelot wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

In July...
So next month... And Dota's first version was a year later

Sorry, I just played it a LOT...
🙃

Dota was before it was dota, that was just when it started to become more main steam as dota just ripped off other modes.

I know
It's first iteration was a tower defense with heroes
My friends and I were all over it back in high school.

Dygz

Mag7spy wrote: »

Battlegrounds shouldn't be in Ow my perception of that is different. When I say open would I'm talking about where you have to flag up to kill someone and not any other kind of PvP, also not including guild wars that is a different topic where you have to tie in social reputation.

Open world means not taking place in an instance.
Really has very little, if anything, to do with PvP flagging.
In Ashes, Battlegrounds refers to PvP combat that does not include the death penalties associated with fighting non-combatants: Sieges, Guild Wars and Caravans.

NishUK

Mag7spy wrote: »

When i say sub par I'm not talking about sales, I'm talking about the quality of the RPG elements in the game. No long convo really needed for this i don't think it is that important.

@Azherae used Sales Figures on @Mag7spy : It was ineffective.

FF14 is avaliable for consoles, has Final Fantasy in the name, I'm still hugely pissed off by the fact I bought hot garbage like 13 and 15 (did get a refund on 15 at least thank god!).

Final Fantasy is a manipulative force, if someone says name RPG's you will mention it, exactly like if FIFA with football. Sales are an incredibly weak arguement for quality in regards to top named franchises.