PVE Loving Game Design Experts are Sprouting in Abundance

Anyone notice a shift in the attitude?

Since the map size and open pvp rules change, there have been a plethora of PVE loving (newly discovered) game development experts that now believe there are issues at Intrepid with their staff and vision? Lack of experience, no Lead Game Designer, developers that wont stand up to Steven, etc. It seems pretty crazy to me.

Its like they think there must be problems because the studio has a slightly different vision than they do.

Thoughts?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Taaku

Abarat wrote: »

Thoughts?

Nope, cuz i'm not actively involved with the games development. I can throw my ideas out there, but it's really none of my business what the actual developers choose to do.

Ludullu

Eh, it's the usual ebb and flow of opinions. And this wave of pvers was triggered by the Lucky Ghost's video and Asmon's reaction to it. And then you just have a chain reaction of people thinking that THEY'VE GOT THE ANSWER!

If the gathering showcase in this dev stream is as amazing as the other recently revealed stuff, I expect to see even more pvers coming here and telling us that the game will die if they can be attacked while gathering.

Mag7spy

This is only the start when its closer to release and on wow hardcore pvers ready to jump on the new mmorpg their streamers are playing going to be here in zergs saying pver server when. And wanting all dungeons to be open at the start (not connected to nodes) and wanting instances.

CROW3

Just the normal reaction to the release of some video / spotlight, those are just coming in greater frequency recently.

Veeshan

I still dont think openworld PvP these guys are crying about will be a huge thing your more likely to get Pve grief i feel in most cases. Due to size of the world and lack of fast travels your gonna get pockets of higher pvp area where PvP guild have taken up residence in the node, So i feel most PvP gonna occur around area of the map that has higher levels of pvp where other portions away from where pvp guild set up there node there living out of will be relativly low amount of pvp.
Now if PvE players outnumber PvP players as they claim then this should be the case, not to mention alot of PvP players dont grief ontop of that which reduces it further (Killing somone once and moving on isnt griefing atleast to most people) camping them is and killing underleveled player are though which should be addressed via corruption system atleast outside of node wars/war declarations which from my understanding bypasses corruption system.

Depraved

Abarat wrote: »

Anyone notice a shift in the attitude?

Since the map size and open pvp rules change, there have been a plethora of PVE loving (newly discovered) game development experts that now believe there are issues at Intrepid with their staff and vision? Lack of experience, no Lead Game Designer, developers that wont stand up to Steven, etc. It seems pretty crazy to me.

Its like they think there must be problems because the studio has a slightly different vision than they do.

Thoughts?

well, look. how many times do you call your internet service provider to tell them your service is fine, and theres nothign wrong with it, and you arent experiencing any issues? 0 right?

you only call when you have a problem. this is what happens here. people who are happy with the direction of the game wont post saying everything is fine and they are happy. its only a small minotiry of people who post to complain cuz they dont like something.

you can tell its a small minority because its the same 10-20 people posting in every thread, aside from new accounts every now and then that make a new thread to complain about something

Kubitz2

It shows perfectly, what is wrong in the current mmorpg landscape. All the big AAA mmos try to please these two audiences, represented by Asmon and LG.

The LuckyGhost crowd:
-wants to play solo but at the same time have the biggest crowd possible in the the background, to not feel lonely. Group content should be solo gameplay with other gamers, or completly soloable if you want to. Guilds are a voice-chat to join while sologaming.

The Asmon crowd: - PvP combat is the most important thing. Griefing is no real problem, except when a lowbie, no-skill carebear doesn't leave MY grindspot or gathering route because then he griefs me. PvP should be skillbased, fast, competetive and balanced for duells/arena. The best shall rule.

Yes, both would protest vehemently to be categorized thus, but their recent vids justifies it imho.

Every big current/new mmorpg tries to please one or the other, while not alienating the other side too much. Development is expensive and corporate-shareholders won't tolerate game designs that alienate one or both of these audiences. Profit rules.

I hope and believe, that AoC doesn't prioritize either direction, but focuses on enjoyable groupplay.
And yes....I think that the PvP in AoC will not be designed in the way most PvPers want it to be. It will be much more designed to be enjoyable for casuals, than they would like.

Lust69

Kubitz2 wrote: »

It shows perfectly, what is wrong in the current mmorpg landscape. All the big AAA mmos try to please these two audiences, represented by Asmon and LG.

The LuckyGhost crowd:
-wants to play solo but at the same time have the biggest crowd possible in the the background, to not feel lonely. Group content should be solo gameplay with other gamers, or completly soloable if you want to. Guilds are a voice-chat to join while sologaming.

The Asmon crowd: - PvP combat is the most important thing. Griefing is no real problem, except when a lowbie, no-skill carebear doesn't leave MY grindspot or gathering route because then he griefs me. PvP should be skillbased, fast, competetive and balanced for duells/arena. The best shall rule.

Yes, both would protest vehemently to be categorized thus, but their recent vids justifies it imho.

Every big current/new mmorpg tries to please one or the other, while not alienating the other side too much. Development is expensive and corporate-shareholders won't tolerate game designs that alienate one or both of these audiences. Profit rules.

I hope and believe, that AoC doesn't prioritize either direction, but focuses on enjoyable groupplay.
And yes....I think that the PvP in AoC will not be designed in the way most PvPers want it to be. It will be much more designed to be enjoyable for casuals, than they would like.

I agree with this post. Maybe we should have a balance of both pve and pvp and we could call it pvx

Smork1

I think there is a healhy dose of FEAR on both sides, every one wants something new and they want that new thing to represent their values.

Both sides want to be the loudest in hopes to sway the direction of the game in their favour. Mixed in between all the squabble there will be valid points that hopefully the AoC team can take away from.

What I've noticed in pretty much every thread I've read on here is ONE glaring common trap people are falling into. They are responding and argueing against other people with only ASSUMPTIONS of how the game/system will work which is incredibly immature.

Yes you can draw from similar games but none from what I've seen compare to the system AoC will implement and untill we see that system in action, we should not be making up false scenarios and assumptions about the game/system.

Kubitz2

Lust69 wrote: »

I agree with this post. Maybe we should have a balance of both pve and pvp and we could call it pvx

Yes, that's what Steven calls it. But that's not my point. I'm saying that it will be a PvX game, but that's not really the issue, why people will like it or not. If I listen to Steven, when he describes his vision for his game and how he defines PvX, I hear, that he doesn't want AoC to be defined in any of those terms. What he wants is a PwP(Player with Player) game. You PvE with others. PvP with others. What you play against isn't really important, as long as it's enjoyable and rewarding.

Caww

there's a lot of PvE players out there so it's not surprising that it's a major perspective

Kubitz2

Caww wrote: »

there's a lot of PvE players out there so it's not surprising that it's a major perspective

Yes...but I bet a good portion of them have never played enjoyable PvP. They may come to enjoy PvP where you don't just die against self defined PvPers. Where gear/level differences aren't as important as in other games. Where two lowbies have a good chance to kill a higher level.
Don't scream all at once now, please, but yes, that's what I think Steven means by enjoyable PvP. That's what I mean, when I say that many PvPers won't like AoC either.

Caww

Kubitz2 wrote: »

Caww wrote: »

there's a lot of PvE players out there so it's not surprising that it's a major perspective

Yes...but I bet a good portion of them have never played enjoyable PvP. They may come to enjoy PvP where you don't just die against self defined PvPers.

This is why the huge siege events may be one of the most popular PvP events in the game, just large groups (not zergs) having honest fights where either side has a good chance of winning, not over powered one-on-one slaughters.

Dygz

It's not super-new. Tends to happen in waves, but...
This wave is probably mostly due to the recent Lucky Ghost/Asmongold vids.
LG asks people to offer ideas for how to "fix" the Corruption PvP-flagging in Ashes.

Abarat

Dygz wrote: »

It's not super-new. Tends to happen in waves, but...
This wave is probably mostly due to the recent Lucky Ghost/Asmongold vids.
LG asks people to offer ideas for how to "fix" the Corruption PvP-flagging in Ashes.

Yeah, I get that, not talking about suggestions... i am talking about how it has gone from i think it should work like this or that... to it must be because they dont have an experienced game designer since Jeff left... I believe you yourself have said/implied that @Dygz.

Thats what i mean... i get all the suggestions and debate about how things will work/should work. I am just mystified by how it has turned into trouble in the studio.

Dygz

But... you are the one interpreting not having a Lead Game Designer as being "trouble in the studio".
I haven't suggested there is "trouble in the studio".

Abarat

Dygz wrote: »

But... you are the one interpreting not having a Lead Game Designer as being "trouble in the studio".
I haven't suggested there is "trouble in the studio".

AGAIN, SEMANTICS. You said/implied the game has lost its way since what you believe is a key position has not been filled... that is trouble in the studio by any account.

Dygz

It's not semantics.
Just because you consider not filling a key position to be "trouble in the studio" does not make it true.

Abarat

I am trying, Dygz,

*edited for meanness. sorry

GrandHarfang

Is the next thread you make the one you finally propose to Dygz, @Abarat?

Child Item