Why and where will AoC fail

First I want to mention that it won't fail because of PvP system, but other open world system although it has very good design on paper it will fail realistically because other games failed in same way.

Take New World for example. It has great open world design. Corrupted branches to complete with 5 players in order to obtain shards that later on you can craft orbs to open dungeons, or elite areas full of chests, again take 5 friends and go lose yourself in an hour or more killing elites and world bosses / mini bosses and loot chests for rewards. It all sounds great, but what people really did? They were zerging with 30+ people and finishing everything within 10-15mins, there were multiple places like these elite areas and they would finish all 4 in an hour. Consider that you can do that once per day.

This will be main problem that I am afraid can happen just because MMOs had bad impact on many players. They treat games as business models and they will optimize everything for themselves. It's not problem of morality instead it's problem of reasoning. Why would you not play "properly" and have fun in a harder way, but to immerse yourself as well, instead these people will rush and look for instant gratification for their small and pity pleasures. They will turn this game upside down I am afraid.

What do you think, if there are going to be such PvE events, will players destroy immersion completely?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Ludullu

What I think should happen is all the alpha testers gotta find all the ways to ruin the game for themselves, explain those ways to Intrepid and let them try and put mechanics into the game that prevent those ways of gameplay.

Players will always ruin their own experience and then fucking complain about how the game is ruined and is now shit. Dumb people are dumb.

xMrWoolf

AoC is about 12x bigger ( on land ) then new worlds entire map not to mention the underrealm of AoC is about 2.5x bigger then NWs entire map.. AoCs entire map is 32.5x bigger then new world.. AoC will have ALOT of zones/dungeons/content to do. why is one zerg or two zergs going to be a problem? even if your guild and another guild want to farm the same area id sudgest declaring a guild war and fight over the area and the loser heads off to farm somewhere else. where is the issue here? it sounds like a great game mechanic.

im not saying i want to see a zergfest but i also think you dont understand how large the map is and to constantly see zergs running 24/7 is unlikly. even if you are talking end game zones which will most likely be limited and not in abundance its safe to say we should be fighitng for these resources and privilege to farm them.

Taleof2Cities

New World had opt-in flagging for PvP.

Ashes doesn't.

novercalis

NiKr wrote: »

What I think should happen is all the alpha testers gotta find all the ways to ruin the game for themselves, explain those ways to Intrepid and let them try and put mechanics into the game that prevent those ways of gameplay.

Players will always ruin their own experience and then fucking complain about how the game is ruined and is now shit. Dumb people are dumb.

then they find ways to ruin the new stuff, rinse n repeat lol

tautau

AoC has no end-game.

The AoC map changes every time a node levels up. Six levels and 118 nodes = 708 potential maps of different dungeons.

Swarms of drastically new systems such as mayors, animal husbandry, bounty hunters and tavern boards.

64 archetypes with different enchantment routes, religions, guild skills, armor and weapon and jewelry enhancements plus the different races means every single person on your server will likely be playing a character different than anyone else.

I don't think we have to worry about AoC 'failing', we may well be playing it happily for a couple decades, or more.

Mr_MaDrupalow

The zerging in New World was terrible, just as the Economy...that was the worst part, it made me leave after about 240 hours.
As @xMrWoolf said before the AoC map is way bigger then the map in New World, same as the Server limits. In New world they where around 2200 p.P. Server In Ashes they aim for 8-10K slowly going up to 15K because of the queues which most likely will occur. And at a later stage they aim for 50K per server. Which makes the bigger map obsolete, since the density will be about the same like in NW. 50.000/1200km² = 42 People per km². While New World had 2200/40=55 people per km²
Edit : That would make AoC's map even 30 times bigger ! CRAZY !
But the crucial difference is that AoC enforces PvP whilst in NW it was toggleable as @Taleof2Cities mentioned. Zergs will occur less and will be only possible with a Raid, which can always be dissolved with the help of people who like slaying "rolling meatballs" or epic Raid vs. Raid slayings and at the end the Zerg should be way smaller

@tautau If I remember right they changed it to 85 Nodes + 5 Castles with each 3 specific Nodes attached to the Castle so 105 in total.

Mastru

New World was a horrible MMO. There only existed about 5-10 different enemies. Skeletons at the lvl 60 dungeons were exactly the same as the level 1-5 ones. The game was also a complete technical mess riddled with inexcusable bugs and exploits.

I've also never in my life seen such a disparity between boss encounters, lvl 20 and lvl 40 dungeons being enjoyable and one of the 60 dungeons being the most boring boss fight I've ever encountered in my life.

I don't understand how you can compare Ashes to New World.

George_Black

I never had such problems in L2.
Clickbait much?
Disrespectful and harmful title

JamesSunderland

"Take New World for example." This loses me every time....

Ironhope

VekoCrnogorac wrote: »

Take New World for example. It has great open world design. Corrupted branches to complete with 5 players in order to obtain shards that later on you can craft orbs to open dungeons, or elite areas full of chests, again take 5 friends and go lose yourself in an hour or more killing elites and world bosses / mini bosses and loot chests for rewards. It all sounds great, but what people really did? They were zerging with 30+ people and finishing everything within 10-15mins, there were multiple places like these elite areas and they would finish all 4 in an hour. Consider that you can do that once per day.

I can see this being a problem with open dungeons but I can also see many ways this could be fixed.

For example, if instead of 8 people you got 30 make the boss difficulty and elite mob spawn rate and trap damage and stuff like that so difficult it just becomes unfeasible.

I mean they did basically announce something in this spirit considering that the faster you clear out part of the dungeon, the harder the next part will be.

If they do it right you won't have such a problem.

VekoCrnogorac wrote: »

This will be main problem that I am afraid can happen just because MMOs had bad impact on many players. They treat games as business models and they will optimize everything for themselves. It's not problem of morality instead it's problem of reasoning. Why would you not play "properly" and have fun in a harder way, but to immerse yourself as well, instead these people will rush and look for instant gratification for their small and pity pleasures. They will turn this game upside down I am afraid.

What do you think, if there are going to be such PvE events, will players destroy immersion completely?

Yeah man a lot of people are **** and will ruin their own experience.

Intrepid should make sure the game isn't analyzed to completion before it comes out, like what happened to New World but the fact is, imeciles will be imbeciles and will find ways to min-max the fun of their experience no matter what you do.

Such people won't have any fun because they don't deserve any fun and that's just fine.

At the end of the day tho, I feel that intrepid has made its systems solid enough to force even this type to play the game as intended --> taking on serious pvp risk to gather out there in the world, using caravans to transport stuff, defending your node to defend your own interests, etc

That's the best it can do.

The best we can do is be of good-faith and do our job well as testers and observers when Alpha 2 and the Beta come out.

VekoKrava

First off I want to say that I wrote ''will'' and not ''is going to'' fail.

Second - New world map might be smaller, but we all know that there will be some areas worth farming over some other areas and with that said there will be many problems. One of the problems is if it is area for 5men or 10men people won't go with 5men recommended instead they will ruin immersion and others will follow, just because how fast it will be to complete these areas for rewards.

I hope I am wrong, but when I ask now in NW to finish one elite area with 5men, people don't even whisper me to form group, they all are waiting for zergs that happen often and people go and clear these areas in matter of minutes.

Last thing - I compared New World because how that game is made, personally it is the closest MMO out there to fit my taste with good open world content and a lot of things to do and prepare yourself. Before they deleted orbs from game, you had to do corruption orbs with guild mates to make a key to open dungeon, that kind of system is what I want in every MMO, to work in order to enter ''main'' content such as dungeons / raids.
That kind of system was similar in vanilla WoW because we all were doing preparation before raids, collecting world buffs, doing professions and helping each other, even farming meat for tanks in our guilds during the day so that we can raid during the night and since that meat buff / food was expensive, we farmed it for our guild.

Again, New world open world seems perfect on paper, but what people are doing is crazy, they are literally abusing system for their fast progress, thats why I said they treat games as business model which means they want to progress faster, get more resources the fastest way and be strongest out there. When you think about it, its core point of MMOs, but it has a bigger impact on some then others, for me personally I don't look for easy way out and I enjoy grinding to immerse even if that means I will grind 2 hours longer then these type of MMO personas.

mcstackerson

Correct me if i'm wrong but New World has personal loot and rewards everyone who participates. That is a big reason to zerg since it increases your chance of success and the number of people isn't affecting the reward.

Ashes doesn't have personal loot.

Everything will drop a set amount of rewards which has to be distributed. The more people you bring, the more ways the rewards have to be split and the the less profitable the activity is.

VekoKrava

mcstackerson wrote: »

Correct me if i'm wrong but New World has personal loot and rewards everyone who participates. That is a big reason to zerg since it increases your chance of success and the number of people isn't affecting the reward.

Ashes doesn't have personal loot.

Everything will drop a set amount of rewards which has to be distributed. The more people you bring, the more ways the rewards have to be split and the the less profitable the activity is.

This I did not think of, good of you to bring that into conversation because that will play big role indeed.

Manueljf

Indeed if the loot is límited it will control the zerging. Will also encourage pvp and make those zones highly risky.

Manueljf

VekoCrnogorac wrote: »

mcstackerson wrote: »

Correct me if i'm wrong but New World has personal loot and rewards everyone who participates. That is a big reason to zerg since it increases your chance of success and the number of people isn't affecting the reward.

Ashes doesn't have personal loot.

Everything will drop a set amount of rewards which has to be distributed. The more people you bring, the more ways the rewards have to be split and the the less profitable the activity is.

This I did not think of, good of you to bring that into conversation because that will play big role indeed.

I have a feeling that steven will try his best to implement necessary changes if the game becomes a clusterfuck of "bussiness model" gaming as you mentón.

bancrofti

Man, I really don't understand either of these trends. You are speculating if a mechanic will or won't fail, but all of these mechanics are not but a concept yet. Even the classes are not but concepts. We DO NOT have the time to test; the DEVELOPERS do not have the idea yet how the concept of PvP, PvE, crafting, or any other concept they put on the table, gonna work all together inside the game world. You can't extend the bad things that happened in one game to others. You have to WAIT and see how the developers will put things to work here and THEN you will have the base to criticize as you want.

As Steven already said, everything can change. The development is still on ALPHA. I really don't know if you guys, who make this kind of trend, know what an ALPHA stage of development stands for.....

Bot

If Ashes dies it will be for no reason other than p2w or lackluster combat. I don't see any of the systems being an issue. Most MMOs that are great I feel have died as a result of a p2w structure, classes that don't resonate, or systems that weren't well thought out. Ashes has amazing concepts that I feel are very well thought out. Don't believe the game will be p2w. So it comes down to combat, which has been promising with the improvements. So far the classes look good. There are a couple of games out that (one that just went offline today) I would enjoy playing, but none of the classes appeal to me.

easy

riot mmo actually lets you pvp = aoc dead lol

Nova_terra

easy wrote: »

riot mmo actually lets you pvp = aoc dead lol

I'd put my money on the riot mmo being far closer to WoW than what AoC is shaping up to look like. So I guess it depends on the combat/feel of it but also as of today both games are pre any tangible metric to compare the two.

CROW3

Lol.

Child Item