As far as I can tell PvX means that PvP is an integral part of everything in the game.
To the extent that we are expected to contemplate economic warfare every time we choose which bag we're going to bring when we go out to pick some flowers.
Ah, I think I get it. instead of "just having pvp", pvx games have both but even the pve content is linked to pvp, so in a way there's "more" pvp, even though the game is not just purely pvp.
I would say this is just how any PVE-only player will view any amount of PvP in an MMORPG.
Which is why it depends on what is meant by PvE-Only player.
Because I am a PvP sometimes player. I enjoy PvP sometimes.
But, I typically move from PvP-Optional servers to PvE-Only servers because I don't want to play on the same servers as gamers who believe in auto-consent.
Honestly I have just come to accept that any MMORPG with PvP is just a PvX game. I would say the main difference with Ashes is that instead of just having them exist in the same game like most MMORPGs, it is trying to synergize them as much as possible. Which is good.
Right. We agree.
Which is why it becomes muddled when Steven says that Ashes is not a PvP game.
And that Corruption should make Ashes comfortable for anyone except those who never want to experience PvP.
Now if there was no limit to types of PvP and how much you could do, I would agree with you more. Open Ocean PvP could be considered more PvP heavy than the rest of ashes, but I also feel like we need to see what content we will be fighting over there. It very well may balance out.
It's fine. I think auto-consent (Corruption-free) FFA PvP on the Open Seas is great for the target audience.
I don't care what the content is there. I just do not want to play an MMORPG where there is a permanent location that auto-flags me as consenting to PvP when I'm really not in the mood to PvP - I'm just there to explore the map.
As far as I can tell PvX means that PvP is an integral part of everything in the game.
To the extent that we are expected to contemplate economic warfare every time we choose which bag we're going to bring when we go out to pick some flowers.
Ah, I think I get it. instead of "just having pvp", pvx games have both but even the pve content is linked to pvp, so in a way there's "more" pvp, even though the game is not just purely pvp.
There's a whole explicit design consideration in them that comes up a lot.
A PvP game by definition has to 'give you' a chance, or there are no competitors. Fighting games in particular fail because of this, because just 'having a character' is not even remotely 'a chance'.
A PvX game can go 'it's up to you to earn your chance', and expect you to be able to PvE well enough while under the threat of PvP to actually gain anything.
We get a Microcosm effect of this in Open Betas for fighting games when they don't offer access to Training mode and just throw you into matchmaking. With no access to the test position, only experienced players can 'PvP' properly.
Sorry, my native language is Erlang.
1
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
trust me you wont be ow pvping that often in ashes. its not as hardcore as you think.
you are right tho when you say pvp is an integral part of the game
I won't really be pvping at all. (I think we probably don't agree on the meaning of Hardcore.)
I'll just be exploring the map and ignoring everything else.
Available to have some beers in-game and attend some parties and events.
I think this clip from today's live stream is very relevant to this discussion, especially with all the recent discussions I had with @Dygz or @Noaani about this same thing lol
I think this clip from today's live stream is very relevant to this discussion, especially with all the recent discussions I had with @Dygz or @Noaani about this same thing lol
seems like steven reads the forums xD
I like to think Steven has been reading all of our discussions and has finally just decided to lock it in with that explanation
4
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I think Steven still danced around the issue.
What he talked about is not deviating from the core vision of the game due to player feedback.
I think he’s not being asked to change the core vision around PvP.
He’s really being asked to clearly state that Ashes is a PvP-centric game.
And then if he wants to talk about PvX - great.
Because the PvEers who don’t play PvP-centric MMORPGs don’t care about PvX.
PvX is not going to entice PvEers who don’t play PvP-centric MMORPGs to play Ashes.
I think Steven still danced around the issue.
What he talked about is not deviating from the core vision of the game due to player feedback.
I think he’s not being asked to change the core vision around PvP.
He’s really being asked to clearly state that Ashes is a PvP-centric game.
And then if he wants to talk about PvX - great.
Because the PvEers who don’t play PvP-centric MMORPGs don’t care about PvX.
PvX is not going to entice PvEers who don’t play PvP-centric MMORPGs to play Ashes.
I think he made it pretty clear to everyone in that clip that the game is PvX and won't change. That's a pretty firm confirmation for players that if they don't enjoy PvP, the game isn't going to change to cater towards PvE-only interests, nor interests in separating PvE and PvP.
yea, the thing is you can't force steven to accept your own definition of "PvX" or "PvP-Centric"
as I explained before, I know a lot, a LOT of pvp oriented players that think Ashes is for carebears only due to corruption... they would never call it pvp centric....
so why should they be wrong and dygz be right? or why should dygz be wrong and they be right?
theres no global definition for these terms, they are subjective,
so it doesn't really work like that, what matters is what Steven considers "PvX" and all we can do is understand what he means, and choose to either play, or not play the game
How many of you will still be engaging in in world pvp/ ganking reguardless of corruption?
I'm thinkiing that killing 1-2 players around my level that don't fight back will not be a deterrent if I really want them dead. It's hard to know at this point because we haven't seen how quickly the penalties will climb, but my impression is that 3 or more players is going to become costly for corruption penalties by the time your max level.
0
Options
FuryBladeborneMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I think Steven still danced around the issue.
What he talked about is not deviating from the core vision of the game due to player feedback.
I think he’s not being asked to change the core vision around PvP.
He’s really being asked to clearly state that Ashes is a PvP-centric game.
And then if he wants to talk about PvX - great.
Because the PvEers who don’t play PvP-centric MMORPGs don’t care about PvX.
PvX is not going to entice PvEers who don’t play PvP-centric MMORPGs to play Ashes.
How can you see it as a PVP centric game? If PVE didn't exist, the entire world would remain in its natural state. Forest, desert, etc. The only gear that could be made would be the lowest types that did not require anything from a node. The entire world is built from PVE and then fought over and destroyed through PVP. Then rebuilt in a new way through PVE again. There is not much point to PVP if the world has not been built through PVE.
I think that what is throwing you off is that PVE and PVP are really close to equal in this game. You described liking PVE games that allow you to PVP sometimes. Like an optional sideshow. It appears that more than that seems to feel like a PVP centric game. Ashes requires both PVE and PVP to drive the development and story of the world.
I think Steven still danced around the issue.
What he talked about is not deviating from the core vision of the game due to player feedback.
I think he’s not being asked to change the core vision around PvP.
He’s really being asked to clearly state that Ashes is a PvP-centric game.
And then if he wants to talk about PvX - great.
Because the PvEers who don’t play PvP-centric MMORPGs don’t care about PvX.
PvX is not going to entice PvEers who don’t play PvP-centric MMORPGs to play Ashes.
How can you see it as a PVP centric game?
Because the consideration of PvP is at the forefront of literally every decision you have to make in Ashes.
How can a game that has players permanently in such a state of mind be anything other than PvP centric?
0
Options
FuryBladeborneMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I think Steven still danced around the issue.
What he talked about is not deviating from the core vision of the game due to player feedback.
I think he’s not being asked to change the core vision around PvP.
He’s really being asked to clearly state that Ashes is a PvP-centric game.
And then if he wants to talk about PvX - great.
Because the PvEers who don’t play PvP-centric MMORPGs don’t care about PvX.
PvX is not going to entice PvEers who don’t play PvP-centric MMORPGs to play Ashes.
How can you see it as a PVP centric game?
Because the consideration of PvP is at the forefront of literally every decision you have to make in Ashes.
How can a game that has players permanently in such a state of mind be anything other than PvP centric?
I think that your description is of a player that is very stressed over PVP. Short of losing a node or freehold, I don't think it is so important as to make it the first thing you consider for every decision you make. You just incorporate some PVP options into your build and don't worry about it unless you run into the situation.
Regardless of whether I am right above, you have no world worth fighting over without PVE.
You cant even take high end resources by killing in the open world without PVE because world development was required to be able to make the gathering tools to gather high end resources.
Even if the world is fully built, there is no guarantee that it will hold and once a node is destroyed, PVE will be required to build it again.
Because PVE and PVP feed into each other and are the supportive reasons for one another, both PVE and PVP are really close to equally important.
I don't want to make you angry. You recently made the best quote I've seen on this forum in years.
"Someone could just kill him." I can still read that quote back in my head and actually lol.
I was not angry at all. Especially not at you.
Thanks for appreciating that quote. I didn't expected so many likes on it.
Was not something I made up but I experienced it, triggered it myself.
I think Steven still danced around the issue.
What he talked about is not deviating from the core vision of the game due to player feedback.
I think he’s not being asked to change the core vision around PvP.
He’s really being asked to clearly state that Ashes is a PvP-centric game.
And then if he wants to talk about PvX - great.
Because the PvEers who don’t play PvP-centric MMORPGs don’t care about PvX.
PvX is not going to entice PvEers who don’t play PvP-centric MMORPGs to play Ashes.
How can you see it as a PVP centric game?
Because the consideration of PvP is at the forefront of literally every decision you have to make in Ashes.
How can a game that has players permanently in such a state of mind be anything other than PvP centric?
I think that your description is of a player that is very stressed over PVP. Short of losing a node or freehold, I don't think it is so important as to make it the first thing you consider for every decision you make. You just incorporate some PVP options into your build and don't worry about it unless you run into the situation.
See, there would be a lot more thought than that to me.
Lets say I am a harvester. I wouldn't go off harvesting overly rare materials if I didn't have at least a few guild members online that I knew would back me up if I needed it. Common materials sure, but I wouldn't waste time with more rare materials. Assuming there is the scarcity that Intrepid seem to want, that would be as foolish as someone in EVE going out in a ship they couldn't afford to lose.
As to more common materials, I'd be looking at how close my node was to being open for a siege, and how likely it was that a siege would be happening. If I thought a siege was likely, I wouldn't bother harvesting materials. If I thought a siege was imminent, I'd be clearing out my storage related to that node. It is only if I was sure there was no siege coming that I would even bother harvesting rare materials.
Then you have running PvE content in a group. To me, the definition of a PvP or PvE centric game is where the difficulty comes from. If you have PvE that is dead easy by itself but is made difficult due to PvP, then that is PvP centric. Archeage and BDO both fit in to this - the PvE is dead easy and the only challenge is in PvP, and I have every reason to assume Ashes will be the same.
So even when you are PvE'ing, the bulk of your concerntration is related to PvP - even if only looking out for it.
I mean, you say that the game isn't PvP centric because all you would do is ensure you have some PvP options in your build - basically taking things in your build that you wouldn't take for PvE. The thing is, you wouldn't do the opposite. You wouldn't grab a PvP build that has a few options for PvE just incase some difficult PvE breaks out. You either have a PvE build with PvP options, or a PvP build.
That screams to me that Ashes is a PvP centric game. Sure, PvE still exists, but PvP is at the center.
Keep in mind, I am not complaining about the amount of PvP in Ashes - I am just stating it as I see it.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
yea, the thing is you can't force steven to accept your own definition of "PvX" or "PvP-Centric"
as I explained before, I know a lot, a LOT of pvp oriented players that think Ashes is for carebears only due to corruption... they would never call it pvp centric....
so why should they be wrong and dygz be right? or why should dygz be wrong and they be right?
theres no global definition for these terms, they are subjective,
so it doesn't really work like that, what matters is what Steven considers "PvX" and all we can do is understand what he means, and choose to either play, or not play the game
Right, but we have to understand what he does mean in order to be able to choose - so... it would be nice if he would provide clearer details about what it does mean.
The label isn't as important as Steven being very clear about what he means.
Although... I think you and Liniker and I agree well enough that EvE and ArcheAge and Lineage II are PvP-centric games or at least that the gamers who play those games are Steven's target audience.
I think this clip from today's live stream is very relevant to this discussion, especially with all the recent discussions I had with @Dygz or @Noaani about this same thing lol
seems like steven reads the forums xD
Steven said the game is PvX.
I'm curious as to which conversation you have had with me where I have said the game is anything but a PvX game.
Sure, I have said it is more PvP centric - but that simply means it is leaning more on the PvP side of PvX than on the PvE side. Since WoW PvE servers are a good example of the PvE centric side of the PvX spectrum (hey, arenas are a thing, ergo PvX), I don't think there is really any reasonable debate that Ashes leans significantly more on PvP than that.
I'm honestly just going to throw this comment from you on the pile of comments from you where you are assuming a thing is being said that actually isn't. That is a really big pile.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited July 2023
Right. And, that's why I say the PvX term is meaningless because in WoW and EQ, PvP servers are PvX.
And NWO is also PvX even though the PvP is instanced.
Just saying Ashes is PvX doesn't help people know whether they are in the target audience.
I think this clip from today's live stream is very relevant to this discussion, especially with all the recent discussions I had with @Dygz or @Noaani about this same thing lol
seems like steven reads the forums xD
Im legit watching all mmorpg becoming casual nor a days. Even BDO is changing guild dec'ing and both guilds need to consent to fight each other.
Mmos with meaningful PvP are 100% dying and/or not made correctly, so there is definitely a market for it of people just waiting for one to come out.
There is an audience for it. We have to hope it's large enough to keep Ashes running for many years.
Seems like it won't be an issue.
If they have the exploration down pat, and actually good pve fights that are fun, for sure they will. PvX is best way to go about it, since it adds to pvp elements and keeps things fresh.
Ie in the last stream a fight happening around the castle they were exploring over some event would be pretty fun and leave some memories.
*im also dead tired in writing this so not much detail in exactly explaining why, but it is important.
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Not fun for me, but I'm not in Ashes' target audience, so...
That's OK. As long as the population who would find that to be fun is enough to keep the servers running, it's great!
trust me you wont be ow pvping that often in ashes. its not as hardcore as you think.
you are right tho when you say pvp is an integral part of the game
I won't really be pvping at all. (I think we probably don't agree on the meaning of Hardcore.)
I'll just be exploring the map and ignoring everything else.
Available to have some beers in-game and attend some parties and events.
what i mean is people wont be attacking you as often as you think, especially if you are just running around exploring.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited July 2023
I don’t care whether people attack or kill me.
I won’t be doing any progression so:
Starter gear
No resources
Lowest Levels possible
0 tangible rewards for attacking/killing me.
On the Mainland, it will give the highest Corruption.
I have no expectations about how often people attack/kill me and it’s a non-issue because it can’t really disrupt my progression goals.
But, if the game is designed for me to think about economic warfare every time I choose which bag to take with me when I go out to pick flowers, it’s too Hardcore for me.
I'm not interested in having an extra layer of strategy to consider -especially not related to any form of PvP - every time I just want to pick some flowers.
Works great for the competitive gamers Steven is targeting. It's just another clue that I am too Casual Challenge to be in the target audience.
My response to that design is to never Gather anything.
0
Options
HumblePuffinMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I'm not interested in having an extra layer of strategy to consider -especially not related to any form of PvP - every time I just want to pick some flowers.
Works great for the competitive gamers Steven is targeting. It's just another clue that I am too Casual Challenge to be in the target audience.
I don’t think you really need to consider it if you don’t want to. If you don’t plan to go back and contest your ashes then there’s no reason to even consider the bag that has added interaction time unless you have desire to slow someone else down.
Comments
Good choice.
Because I am a PvP sometimes player. I enjoy PvP sometimes.
But, I typically move from PvP-Optional servers to PvE-Only servers because I don't want to play on the same servers as gamers who believe in auto-consent.
Right. We agree.
Which is why it becomes muddled when Steven says that Ashes is not a PvP game.
And that Corruption should make Ashes comfortable for anyone except those who never want to experience PvP.
It's fine. I think auto-consent (Corruption-free) FFA PvP on the Open Seas is great for the target audience.
I don't care what the content is there. I just do not want to play an MMORPG where there is a permanent location that auto-flags me as consenting to PvP when I'm really not in the mood to PvP - I'm just there to explore the map.
There's a whole explicit design consideration in them that comes up a lot.
A PvP game by definition has to 'give you' a chance, or there are no competitors. Fighting games in particular fail because of this, because just 'having a character' is not even remotely 'a chance'.
A PvX game can go 'it's up to you to earn your chance', and expect you to be able to PvE well enough while under the threat of PvP to actually gain anything.
We get a Microcosm effect of this in Open Betas for fighting games when they don't offer access to Training mode and just throw you into matchmaking. With no access to the test position, only experienced players can 'PvP' properly.
I'll just be exploring the map and ignoring everything else.
Available to have some beers in-game and attend some parties and events.
seems like steven reads the forums xD
I like to think Steven has been reading all of our discussions and has finally just decided to lock it in with that explanation
What he talked about is not deviating from the core vision of the game due to player feedback.
I think he’s not being asked to change the core vision around PvP.
He’s really being asked to clearly state that Ashes is a PvP-centric game.
And then if he wants to talk about PvX - great.
Because the PvEers who don’t play PvP-centric MMORPGs don’t care about PvX.
PvX is not going to entice PvEers who don’t play PvP-centric MMORPGs to play Ashes.
I think he made it pretty clear to everyone in that clip that the game is PvX and won't change. That's a pretty firm confirmation for players that if they don't enjoy PvP, the game isn't going to change to cater towards PvE-only interests, nor interests in separating PvE and PvP.
as I explained before, I know a lot, a LOT of pvp oriented players that think Ashes is for carebears only due to corruption... they would never call it pvp centric....
so why should they be wrong and dygz be right? or why should dygz be wrong and they be right?
theres no global definition for these terms, they are subjective,
so it doesn't really work like that, what matters is what Steven considers "PvX" and all we can do is understand what he means, and choose to either play, or not play the game
I'm thinkiing that killing 1-2 players around my level that don't fight back will not be a deterrent if I really want them dead. It's hard to know at this point because we haven't seen how quickly the penalties will climb, but my impression is that 3 or more players is going to become costly for corruption penalties by the time your max level.
How can you see it as a PVP centric game? If PVE didn't exist, the entire world would remain in its natural state. Forest, desert, etc. The only gear that could be made would be the lowest types that did not require anything from a node. The entire world is built from PVE and then fought over and destroyed through PVP. Then rebuilt in a new way through PVE again. There is not much point to PVP if the world has not been built through PVE.
I think that what is throwing you off is that PVE and PVP are really close to equal in this game. You described liking PVE games that allow you to PVP sometimes. Like an optional sideshow. It appears that more than that seems to feel like a PVP centric game. Ashes requires both PVE and PVP to drive the development and story of the world.
As a friendly suggestion, offer your own definitions first, then ask for others to define those same terms.
How can a game that has players permanently in such a state of mind be anything other than PvP centric?
Regardless of whether I am right above, you have no world worth fighting over without PVE.
You cant even take high end resources by killing in the open world without PVE because world development was required to be able to make the gathering tools to gather high end resources.
Even if the world is fully built, there is no guarantee that it will hold and once a node is destroyed, PVE will be required to build it again.
Because PVE and PVP feed into each other and are the supportive reasons for one another, both PVE and PVP are really close to equally important.
I was not angry at all. Especially not at you.
Thanks for appreciating that quote. I didn't expected so many likes on it.
Was not something I made up but I experienced it, triggered it myself.
Lets say I am a harvester. I wouldn't go off harvesting overly rare materials if I didn't have at least a few guild members online that I knew would back me up if I needed it. Common materials sure, but I wouldn't waste time with more rare materials. Assuming there is the scarcity that Intrepid seem to want, that would be as foolish as someone in EVE going out in a ship they couldn't afford to lose.
As to more common materials, I'd be looking at how close my node was to being open for a siege, and how likely it was that a siege would be happening. If I thought a siege was likely, I wouldn't bother harvesting materials. If I thought a siege was imminent, I'd be clearing out my storage related to that node. It is only if I was sure there was no siege coming that I would even bother harvesting rare materials.
Then you have running PvE content in a group. To me, the definition of a PvP or PvE centric game is where the difficulty comes from. If you have PvE that is dead easy by itself but is made difficult due to PvP, then that is PvP centric. Archeage and BDO both fit in to this - the PvE is dead easy and the only challenge is in PvP, and I have every reason to assume Ashes will be the same.
So even when you are PvE'ing, the bulk of your concerntration is related to PvP - even if only looking out for it.
I mean, you say that the game isn't PvP centric because all you would do is ensure you have some PvP options in your build - basically taking things in your build that you wouldn't take for PvE. The thing is, you wouldn't do the opposite. You wouldn't grab a PvP build that has a few options for PvE just incase some difficult PvE breaks out. You either have a PvE build with PvP options, or a PvP build.
That screams to me that Ashes is a PvP centric game. Sure, PvE still exists, but PvP is at the center.
Keep in mind, I am not complaining about the amount of PvP in Ashes - I am just stating it as I see it.
The label isn't as important as Steven being very clear about what he means.
Although... I think you and Liniker and I agree well enough that EvE and ArcheAge and Lineage II are PvP-centric games or at least that the gamers who play those games are Steven's target audience.
Steven said the game is PvX.
I'm curious as to which conversation you have had with me where I have said the game is anything but a PvX game.
Sure, I have said it is more PvP centric - but that simply means it is leaning more on the PvP side of PvX than on the PvE side. Since WoW PvE servers are a good example of the PvE centric side of the PvX spectrum (hey, arenas are a thing, ergo PvX), I don't think there is really any reasonable debate that Ashes leans significantly more on PvP than that.
I'm honestly just going to throw this comment from you on the pile of comments from you where you are assuming a thing is being said that actually isn't. That is a really big pile.
And NWO is also PvX even though the PvP is instanced.
Just saying Ashes is PvX doesn't help people know whether they are in the target audience.
Im legit watching all mmorpg becoming casual nor a days. Even BDO is changing guild dec'ing and both guilds need to consent to fight each other.
Mmos with meaningful PvP are 100% dying and/or not made correctly, so there is definitely a market for it of people just waiting for one to come out.
Seems like it won't be an issue.
If they have the exploration down pat, and actually good pve fights that are fun, for sure they will. PvX is best way to go about it, since it adds to pvp elements and keeps things fresh.
Ie in the last stream a fight happening around the castle they were exploring over some event would be pretty fun and leave some memories.
*im also dead tired in writing this so not much detail in exactly explaining why, but it is important.
That's OK. As long as the population who would find that to be fun is enough to keep the servers running, it's great!
what i mean is people wont be attacking you as often as you think, especially if you are just running around exploring.
I won’t be doing any progression so:
Starter gear
No resources
Lowest Levels possible
0 tangible rewards for attacking/killing me.
On the Mainland, it will give the highest Corruption.
I have no expectations about how often people attack/kill me and it’s a non-issue because it can’t really disrupt my progression goals.
But, if the game is designed for me to think about economic warfare every time I choose which bag to take with me when I go out to pick flowers, it’s too Hardcore for me.
Mark 23:00 - 29:23
I'm not interested in having an extra layer of strategy to consider -especially not related to any form of PvP - every time I just want to pick some flowers.
Works great for the competitive gamers Steven is targeting. It's just another clue that I am too Casual Challenge to be in the target audience.
My response to that design is to never Gather anything.
I don’t think you really need to consider it if you don’t want to. If you don’t plan to go back and contest your ashes then there’s no reason to even consider the bag that has added interaction time unless you have desire to slow someone else down.