"PvX" for Ashes: some clarity

Noaani

NiKr wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

How many workplaces do you know that allow their workers to spend hundreds of hours working on just what ever they want, rather than what the product requires them to work on?

I ain't got a clue I was just trying to imagine how exactly would a mob-developing process go down. Is it purely and exactly what Steven says to do or do the devs just get a request along the lines of "I want this type of mob that can do this type of thing" and then have to make that to the best of their abilities.

And I feel like if its the latter, the devs could make a proper hardcore mob and then present it to Steven saying "this is an example of what we can do at max output. Does it fit your vision or not?"

But maybe I'm just delusional about the dev process overall

The first decision about an encounter is usually the difficulty and purpose (is the encounter there as a raid check, to introduce a new mechanic, that sort of thing). Encounters aren't (or - should not be) developed in isolation, they are a part of progression.

In the same way any given ability any given class has needs to work within that class, those abilities and the way they all work together also need to function in a way where that collection of abilities also works as a class within a group or raid - a raid encounter and all of its abilities needs to work within itself as an encounter, but that encounter also needs to work together with the other encounters in the content cycle to make a logical progression.

It's as I have been saying for a while, PvE development is significantly harder than PvP development - assuming the developer wants to do a good job.

Dygz

Strevi wrote: »

For sure there are players who do not call themselves PvP-ers but play the PvP aspect of the game too if it is there, rather than doing scripted quests over and over to get a rare drop from a boss.
Those players are the target audience, not the pure PvE-ers or pure PvP-ers who obviously want more of their favorite aspect of the game, untainted by the other play-style.

Yeah, but... I'm one of those players who likes PvP sometimes.

Strevi

Dygz wrote: »

Strevi wrote: »

For sure there are players who do not call themselves PvP-ers but play the PvP aspect of the game too if it is there, rather than doing scripted quests over and over to get a rare drop from a boss.
Those players are the target audience, not the pure PvE-ers or pure PvP-ers who obviously want more of their favorite aspect of the game, untainted by the other play-style.

Yeah, but... I'm one of those players who likes PvP sometimes.

Strange things happen when the moons of Vera are in conjunction.

Mag7spy

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

PvE players don't want to do anything PvP and will avoid it without trying to attempting to grow.

I disagree with this statement entirely.

I spent 10 years as a purely PvE MMO player, then moved over to a mostly PvP setting.

In my experience of top end PvE players, most of us are quite happy to PvP, but we dont want to play a game to PvP if it means we cant also have top end PvE (why few PvE players stuck with Archeage).

Put a game up that has top end PvE on par with any other game on the market, put some PvP aspects in, and you'll pull both top end PvE players, as well as many PvP players who will love the chance to take on said top end PvE players and take their top end loot.

That is what Ashes *should* be.

I don't believe this applies tot he normal player just wanting to play a pve mmorpg and isn't really in any kind of constant end game scene. But hopefully I can be wrong, just not may experience talking to some people that do pve and confused at them avoiding pvp content like the plague or me needing to do some serious convincing.

Players only wanting PvE are probably not interested in PvP, this is true.

In my experience though, this is a very small group of people. Most people would be happy with an amount of PvP along side good PvE - the problem is that all games with open world PvP so far have been more PvP focused with PvE as an afterthought.

This is why it appears that many PvE players dont want PvP - there are no games where PvP is the minor aspect to PvE being the major aspect - and as such these games are lacking in quality PvE.

Some people would look at PvE playera not playing those games and come to the reasonable conclusion that PvE players dont want to PvP, when in reality it is just that PvE players dont want to compromise on a game with sub-par PvE.

And honestly, why should they?

If a game wants to attract PvE players that are accepting of PvP, they need to have PvE to attract then - which means being on par with other games.

If your PvP isnt on par with other games, then you only have PvP to attract people, in which case you are a PvP game, not a PvX game.

Guess it will be interesting to see how AoC turns out since I can't think of any other mmorpg that has a focus on pvp and is doing pve as well. With seeing how players react to it if the pve does hold up.

There aren't any that are doing PvP and attempting to have PvE that is anything other than a support for that PvP.

So far, I see no reason to assume Ashes will be any different. Steven has said they intend to have good PvE, but has not dared to discuss how they plan on having it actually work.

Going by Steven's experience, I see no reason at all to expect PvE past what L2 and Archeage have done. He seems to consider these to have good PvE, where as PvE players consider these games PvE to be so bad that PvE preferred guilds will leave the game after seeing just how much of a joke they are.

I mean, I'd love to see it, obviously, but Intrepid won't be able to do it unless they replace Jeff with someone with the testicular fortitude to tell Steven he is wrong about his own game, while on a livestream.

That is not how things work, you hire someone to create and support the vision you have...Not someone to make you have development issues and waste money trying to fight against what is desired.

If you want to have a view point you don't believe the studio can do it, that is up to you to have that assumption and only believe triple A studios can do it without them giving you any evidence. EQ next failed to deliver and took everyone's money so....I'm content to waiting and seeing what they do before assuming they can't do it. I lose nothing for having faith and seeing the product before I judge.

Steven I'm sure has hired some great designers, though things are in his vision as employees talking about design and such behind closed doors you can't say how the discussions go as you don't know. They have variety of talent new and old to the industry and their experiences together will hopefully create a great game for pve and pvp.

Mag7spy

Noaani wrote: »

NiKr wrote: »

I don't really know how the hierarchy in a dev studio works, but couldn't AI/mob devs just make good stuff and then present it to Steven?

How many workplaces do you know that allow their workers to spend hundreds of hours working on just what ever they want, rather than what the product requires them to work on?

And while it is absolutely possible to produce top end PvE content faster than that, it is only possible if the systems and tools to do so are in place. Without those systems and tools, hundreds of hours for good content is an understatement.

As to L2's world instances, as I said last time we talked about them, I don't dislike them, they do an acceptable job of half of the point of actual instances.

You aren't spending hundreds of hours creating them, you present your design idea as on the studio's goals in mind. If their goals are pvp those will be presented, same with pve and the different categories. Then working towards prototypes when they have the design or designs they want to go with.

Abarat

Dygz wrote: »

I'm not paying players to "protect" me from other players.
If you enjoy that gameplay - that's great!

Rich, famous, powerful people like you pay people to protect them all the time.

Abarat

Tragnar wrote: »

If you drive a PvE player away by non-consensual PvP he is lost forever. Give PvE player a reward for doing PvP and he might become casual PvP player

Isnt that exactly what the current plan is? you will be able to get the reward of harvestables ... a currency of sorts. Isnt the game doing exactly what you are proposing as the solution.

Noaani

Mag7spy wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

PvE players don't want to do anything PvP and will avoid it without trying to attempting to grow.

I disagree with this statement entirely.

I spent 10 years as a purely PvE MMO player, then moved over to a mostly PvP setting.

In my experience of top end PvE players, most of us are quite happy to PvP, but we dont want to play a game to PvP if it means we cant also have top end PvE (why few PvE players stuck with Archeage).

Put a game up that has top end PvE on par with any other game on the market, put some PvP aspects in, and you'll pull both top end PvE players, as well as many PvP players who will love the chance to take on said top end PvE players and take their top end loot.

That is what Ashes *should* be.

I don't believe this applies tot he normal player just wanting to play a pve mmorpg and isn't really in any kind of constant end game scene. But hopefully I can be wrong, just not may experience talking to some people that do pve and confused at them avoiding pvp content like the plague or me needing to do some serious convincing.

Players only wanting PvE are probably not interested in PvP, this is true.

In my experience though, this is a very small group of people. Most people would be happy with an amount of PvP along side good PvE - the problem is that all games with open world PvP so far have been more PvP focused with PvE as an afterthought.

This is why it appears that many PvE players dont want PvP - there are no games where PvP is the minor aspect to PvE being the major aspect - and as such these games are lacking in quality PvE.

Some people would look at PvE playera not playing those games and come to the reasonable conclusion that PvE players dont want to PvP, when in reality it is just that PvE players dont want to compromise on a game with sub-par PvE.

And honestly, why should they?

If a game wants to attract PvE players that are accepting of PvP, they need to have PvE to attract then - which means being on par with other games.

If your PvP isnt on par with other games, then you only have PvP to attract people, in which case you are a PvP game, not a PvX game.

Guess it will be interesting to see how AoC turns out since I can't think of any other mmorpg that has a focus on pvp and is doing pve as well. With seeing how players react to it if the pve does hold up.

There aren't any that are doing PvP and attempting to have PvE that is anything other than a support for that PvP.

So far, I see no reason to assume Ashes will be any different. Steven has said they intend to have good PvE, but has not dared to discuss how they plan on having it actually work.

Going by Steven's experience, I see no reason at all to expect PvE past what L2 and Archeage have done. He seems to consider these to have good PvE, where as PvE players consider these games PvE to be so bad that PvE preferred guilds will leave the game after seeing just how much of a joke they are.

I mean, I'd love to see it, obviously, but Intrepid won't be able to do it unless they replace Jeff with someone with the testicular fortitude to tell Steven he is wrong about his own game, while on a livestream.

That is not how things work, you hire someone to create and support the vision you have...Not someone to make you have development issues and waste money trying to fight against what is desired.

I would totally agree with you if we were talking about a studio lead with experience.

We are not.

As such, their development lead (all leads at Intrepid) need to have the balls to say no to Steven, and explain to him why that is the case.

That doesnt mean saying no to everything, you pick your battles.

If an employer hires someone with expertise they themselves do not possess, that employee needs to feel they can say no to their employer. If you do not listen to your experienced employees when they say no, why are you even hiring that experience?

As someone that spend decades as that expert telling my bosses why their ideas wouldn't work how they think they would (and coming up with ideas that would work for them), and now in a position where I am that boss hiring people in fields I have no idea about and listening to and trusting their expertise, I can say without exception there is nothing worse than working for someone that will not listen to expertise that they themselves do not possess.

Abarat

so much speculation and made up arguments

Mag7spy

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

PvE players don't want to do anything PvP and will avoid it without trying to attempting to grow.

I disagree with this statement entirely.

I spent 10 years as a purely PvE MMO player, then moved over to a mostly PvP setting.

In my experience of top end PvE players, most of us are quite happy to PvP, but we dont want to play a game to PvP if it means we cant also have top end PvE (why few PvE players stuck with Archeage).

Put a game up that has top end PvE on par with any other game on the market, put some PvP aspects in, and you'll pull both top end PvE players, as well as many PvP players who will love the chance to take on said top end PvE players and take their top end loot.

That is what Ashes *should* be.

I don't believe this applies tot he normal player just wanting to play a pve mmorpg and isn't really in any kind of constant end game scene. But hopefully I can be wrong, just not may experience talking to some people that do pve and confused at them avoiding pvp content like the plague or me needing to do some serious convincing.

Players only wanting PvE are probably not interested in PvP, this is true.

In my experience though, this is a very small group of people. Most people would be happy with an amount of PvP along side good PvE - the problem is that all games with open world PvP so far have been more PvP focused with PvE as an afterthought.

This is why it appears that many PvE players dont want PvP - there are no games where PvP is the minor aspect to PvE being the major aspect - and as such these games are lacking in quality PvE.

Some people would look at PvE playera not playing those games and come to the reasonable conclusion that PvE players dont want to PvP, when in reality it is just that PvE players dont want to compromise on a game with sub-par PvE.

And honestly, why should they?

If a game wants to attract PvE players that are accepting of PvP, they need to have PvE to attract then - which means being on par with other games.

If your PvP isnt on par with other games, then you only have PvP to attract people, in which case you are a PvP game, not a PvX game.

Guess it will be interesting to see how AoC turns out since I can't think of any other mmorpg that has a focus on pvp and is doing pve as well. With seeing how players react to it if the pve does hold up.

There aren't any that are doing PvP and attempting to have PvE that is anything other than a support for that PvP.

So far, I see no reason to assume Ashes will be any different. Steven has said they intend to have good PvE, but has not dared to discuss how they plan on having it actually work.

Going by Steven's experience, I see no reason at all to expect PvE past what L2 and Archeage have done. He seems to consider these to have good PvE, where as PvE players consider these games PvE to be so bad that PvE preferred guilds will leave the game after seeing just how much of a joke they are.

I mean, I'd love to see it, obviously, but Intrepid won't be able to do it unless they replace Jeff with someone with the testicular fortitude to tell Steven he is wrong about his own game, while on a livestream.

That is not how things work, you hire someone to create and support the vision you have...Not someone to make you have development issues and waste money trying to fight against what is desired.

I would totally agree with you if we were talking about a studio lead with experience.

We are not.

As such, their development lead (all leads at Intrepid) need to have the balls to say no to Steven, and explain to him why that is the case.

That doesnt mean saying no to everything, you pick your battles.

If an employer hires someone with expertise they themselves do not possess, that employee needs to feel they can say no to their employer. If you do not listen to your experienced employees when they say no, why are you even hiring that experience?

As someone that spend decades as that expert telling my bosses why their ideas wouldn't work how they think they would (and coming up with ideas that would work for them), and now in a position where I am that boss hiring people in fields I have no idea about and listening to and trusting their expertise, I can say without exception there is nothing worse than working for someone that will not listen to expertise that they themselves do not possess.

If leads said no to supervisors or directors in my industry lmfao. That is not how it works, you you better have a really damn good reason to say so.

Does that mean they have no freedom, of course it doesn't. They have responsibilities as leads and will present their ideas, and work towards the vision of the game.

Your perspective is more in line with how thinking than I'd say even being a consumer. Does that mean you agree with every choice, of course not but if the top dogs want something that is what you have to try to deliver the best you can. Though as a lead you should be making plenty of decisions as well of course with your responsibilities.

And this is speaking from experience working with leads and talking about the good and the bad