First, back in 2004, Blizzard didn't have the fanatical fanbase that it has now. That fanbase is due to WoW, which blew up in popularity in early 2005 (Feburary and March, mostly).
However, L2 launched in 2003 in Korea. This means that the playerbase had the choice of a new game in November 2004, or a game with a years worth of polish. L2 had every advantage here, yet history tells us what way the playerbase went. The western audience saw the game and largely decided it wasnt for them.
Also, you may note that I didn't say the NA servers weren't profitable. I said they were barely paying for themselves. With the Korean market keeping the game in a somewhat state of development, running the NA servers bought in an additional few tens of thousands a year after expenses. As such, they were somewhat worth having, but they would not have been able to continue active development of the game on that.
As to Archeage, the changes they made to things like Thunderstruck Trees, and then further in to the general monetization of the game, these were all done after the game lost a massive chunk of its population. Thus loss happened 6 to 10 weeks after launch. Again, the western audience saw the game, and largely decided it wasnt for them (though I played it for 5 years or so).
By the time we got to where people were complaining about balance and such, the game had lost almost 75% of its launch day population.
Blizzard was huge even back in the day, Starcraft was enormous in the Korean scene, absolutely massive. The esports scene blew up in the early 2000's. It wasn't do to World of Warcraft, and to think that is truly inaccurate. The reason why World of Warcraft became so popular, is due to the massive following Blizzard has had in it's fan base, reaching all the way back to Warcraft, Starcraft, and Diablo. I would know, I was an addict to Starcraft back in the day, as well as the Warcraft titles. Diablo also being huge, but wasn't my biggest cup of tea as I'm not a fan of isometric dungeon crawlers. All this gave way to the massive success of World of Warcraft. When you have three mega IP's like this, it gives you all the advertising you need...As we've seen with all their titles after, and the backlash they honestly deserved from their newer games and failings.
In terms of L2, you are correct It came out in 2003, in Korea. The North American release was in April 2004. With World of Warcraft closed beta dates happening in March, June, and July of 2004, leading to it's quick turn around to release. This was not by coincidence, I find it funny how you say the western audience didn't find L2 was for them, as it was the complete opposite. The servers grew in population as more servers were added through the first few chronicles.
NC Interactive came into existence in 2001, and bought arena net (Guild Wars), then changed it's name shortly after into NCWest as it lead into the launch of Lineage 2 in the west of 2004. It was their first official NCSoft developed title to be published to the west. It had no where near the marketing power or exposure as Blizzard, not in the slightest...I only found out about the game from a friend who offered me his CBT key since he was planning to play World of Warcraft, and was able to enjoy the game starting from the beta phases.
I once again find it Humorous you're stating it brought in tens of thousands a year after expenses...not having any data and actual statistics to go by...That is just purely speculation with a lack of any evidence. Judging by the fact that it lead to further studio development in NCWest, increasing headcount and leading into the eventual release of Aion would prove otherwise. Let's agree to disagree. There isn't any data going back this far that is accurate, or that is public, so you can't state anything as fact when there isn't the data to back it up. Stating so is completely disingenuous and misinformation. But to say they only brought in profit in the 5 figures after expenses a year, is honestly laughable. But what I can state, is that the population of the game grew with new servers added over the first few expansions (chronicles). Once again, no offense meant if it sounds as such.
In terms of Archeage...Let's be honest here, it wasn't solely thunderstruck trees that killed the game. Archeage didn't "die" because people didn't like what the game had to offer. It died from gross negligence on Trion's side, as well as the adopted p2w models that XLGames was embracing. Receiving patch 1.2 for the NA launch was a sign of what was to come. The whole head start fiasco, labor point exploitation that was made worst along with predatory stances taken by trion in the cash shop...Apex duping destroying the economy, cash shop rng gambling with regrade, and the list goes on. The game was an utter disgrace from launch. It literally had no chance to be successful considering the P2W climate taking over, and the catastrophe that is Trion Worlds.
It had the potential to be massive...But XLGames and pretty much all Korean MMO's shifting to P2W, Trion's adopting of the cash shop patch for the western market at launch, as well as complete mishandling of the game led to it's demise...It wasn't losing players due to lack of interest in the game. It died before the game could even realize it's potential due to greed and stupid decisions. Saying player's largely decided it wasn't for them is incredibly disingenuous....Many people wanted the game in a non p2w form that was handled correctly to let it flourish...We never got that, it was never delivered, but the interest was there.
Keep in mind, you just finished saying that Ashes is borrowing heavily from L2, specifically the risk vs reward philosophies.
Now, I'm not saying those things need to change. What I am saying is that they exist, and the way Koreans consume MMO's (in cafes, with friends, even back in 2003 with L2 and earlier with the original Lineage), they are more forgiving of loss. When you are playing with tour friends, if you lose 10 PvP fights in a row, you open another beer and joke with your friends about how bad you are. It's like going bowling - you dont need to be good at it to have fun doing it with your friends.
In the west, it you lose 10 PvP fights in a row, especially in an open world game, you are logging off for the night - or potentially for good.
The other MAJOR difference between Korean and western (specifically BR and NA, but EU to a lesser extent), is the fact that there is a much higher percent of troll's outside of Korea, and those trolls are willing to go to much greater lengths. This was shown well in Archeage again, with most servers having days or weeks on end with people blocking bridges, preventing trade runs. XL ,were told about it, but refuses to believe people would spend their time in game doing that - because in their years of publishing games in Korea, they had literally never seen anything even close to it.
These differences in consumption need to be taken in to account in game design. Intrepid seem to have an idea if the troll aspect of this, but the other issue seems (from my perspective) to be completely missed by them.
A lot of your thoughts here are based once again on speculation. Just out of curiosity, have you lived in Korea and experienced all this first hand? Because there is a lot of assuming here, which seems to be a trend with a lot of your takes, once again, no offense, you know how the internet and tone can be taken in the wrong light. But I've been in these situations you speak of, in filled party with guildies as we constantly fight for a room in Cruma Tower...Whether we were on the side coming back to fight again after dying, or clearing those trying to take the room from us, you can flip a coin depending on the day...But it was the most memorable experiences I've ever had in an MMO. Just because players haven't experienced such a PvX system in the current times, shouldn't automatically take the stance that players won't enjoy it or are up for it...They haven't tried it yet. It was also MUCH more punishing in L2, what AoC is giving us is a much tamer and watered down variant of the harsh penalties that L2 brought upon you, so if you are worried about it being too hardcore, fear not, it won't be based on Steven's design direction...You need to give the player base some leeway and credit, and stop assuming that players will hate it.
Judging by the fact that Lineage 2 was successful in the west for a long life span, and that Archeage had over 2 million registered users at launch for the west, shows that this style of system has interest...Lineage 2 was not very well known, but those that did get to enjoy it find themselves lucky to play such a gem, Steven included, considering many of his systems tie around L2's. Archeage had the chance of following up on that trend with a very large amount of interested players, especially having the original creator of Lineage at the helm was a huge boon, but collapsed due to negligence and P2W infesting the game...These two facts prove there is a market, that is just untapped, and assuming Ashes needs to about face and cater to the Themepark style of PvE is a huge misread.
I will not denounce that people troll in the west, I can not speak for Korea, but in the west I can attest to this many times over in the games I've played and agree with you...It's rather annoying actually at how childish players can be. But why would you even bring this point up? We literally have a developer that has experienced all of this and came from the west. Do you honestly believe Steven has not thought about appropriate actions and design choices to combat these issues?
For example, Steven has already shown he understands the flaws in L2's Karma system with his corruption system, applying appropriate counter measures to reign in excessive pk'ing, eliminating the possibility of PK alts entirely, and so on. Every time I hear his responses to possible exploitation or problems that arise in MMORPG's he's played, and plans he has in place, he's shown an impressive amount of understanding and realization of the problems at hand that need to be addressed.
There are not many players who have been able to experience an untainted version of what the PvX system that Steven is embracing has to offer, except old school L2 players. We are definitely in the minority. But for all the fires I see being started, or sounding the alarm considering the game doesn't have Themepark like PvE boss instances with legendary loots is just a bad take imo.
Now is there a possibility that problems would arise that have not been accounted for? Absolutely...But do you honestly think that Steven would not quickly and decisively patch said issues? Here's a man who is a player like us, who has spent a fortune of his own money building up this game from scratch...No massive corporation overlords, or shareholders to be beholden to...The game will live or die by the choices he makes, and his wallet along with it. I find it incredulous that he would not fix any broken elements that arise...But in terms of design direction, that will not change, he's stated it before, he's seen it work as I have, and Archeage's initial registered player base prove there's a market for such a game...as long as it's handled properly, and greed is kept out of the equation, I believe the game will flourish and bring a breath of fresh air to the genre.
/end wall of text...apologies...haha *drinks beer*
@Noaani I can get behind summoned bosses. Also had an idea while back based on the higher barrier to entry to the content the least likely you have to deal with as much pvp. Though I'd have to find the post again il do that later though.
@Noaani I can get behind summoned bosses. Also had an idea while back based on the higher barrier to entry to the content the least likely you have to deal with as much pvp. Though I'd have to find the post again il do that later though.
I could potentially get behind an idea like this, though my initial instinct is for all content to have the same "amount" of PvP in total - if you remove it from one area you simply add it to another area.
I guess an argument could be made that in achieving that higher barrier to entry for some content, you will have had to have completed a good amount of PvP.
In regards to summoned encounters, my actual preference is for a game like Ashes to have many different types of encounters. Some instanced (assuming PvP is added back in some way), some summoned, some cage fights (as per another thread), some pure open world fights that are to be fought over. As long as there is a philosophy whereby people can't use content to escape PvP, literally all of them would fit just fine in to the concept of Ashes.
The more varied the content available, the better - at least initially. If it is found that one type of encounter is greatly favored they can make more, or if one is disliked as a concept they can simply not make any more.
First, back in 2004, Blizzard didn't have the fanatical fanbase that it has now.
Blizzard was huge even back in the day, Starcraft was enormous in the Korean scene, absolutely massive.
You'll note that I said the Blizzard fan base wasn't fanatical, not that it wasn't large. The Blizzard fanbase back then wouldn't simply buy every Blizzard game like they do now or did a few years ago).
leading into the eventual release of Aion would prove otherwise.
While L2 did indeed fund much of Aions development, it wasn't with the proceeds from the NA servers. You can agree to disagree if you want, but the information is out there if you look (I went from not knowing a lot about L2 to knowing a reasonable amount about the behind the scenes over the last 3 or so years - there are people happy to talk about it).
In terms of Archeage...Let's be honest here, it wasn't solely thunderstruck trees that killed the game.
I specifically said that it wasn't Thunderstruck trees that killed it - the server population had already dropped off dramatically by that point. By the time Trion made that change, they had come to the realization that the games population would never be very high, and so started monetizing it as much as they could.
its funny you talk about things like labor point exploits, item duping and regrading as being issues with Archeage - these were all things that were present in the Korean version of the game, but simply weren't considered issues due to the way players in Korea play MMO's.
Keep in mind - Archeage is still somewhat popular in Korea. It only dropped off the top 50 games played in Korea last year. it is worth pointing out though, Lineage 2 is at number 20. This is not a list of MMO's - it is a list of all games in Korea. Aion is also on this list - at number 10 (the notion that Aion was made FOR the west is laughable, sorry).
Point is, these games are massive in Korea, which is why they are the games that Korean developers make. They aren't nearly as big in NA/EU though, and need alterations to reach that level.
I mean, is anyone even willing to argue that Lineage 2 was in the top 1000 games played in NA last year?
You'll note that I said the Blizzard fan base wasn't fanatical, not that it wasn't large. The Blizzard fanbase back then wouldn't simply buy every Blizzard game like they do now or did a few years ago).
To this point, I agree to an extent. There was already a massive following of Blizzard, which was rightly earned due to their three famous IP's, WoW tipped them past and was the icing on the cake.
While L2 did indeed fund much of Aions development, it wasn't with the proceeds from the NA servers. You can agree to disagree if you want, but the information is out there if you look (I went from not knowing a lot about L2 to knowing a reasonable amount about the behind the scenes over the last 3 or so years - there are people happy to talk about it).
Where did I ever stated it funded Aion's development on the NA side?, I stated Lineage 2's success in the west lead to an increase in staff at NCWest (Western subsidiary of NCSoft), which lead into Aion from a release perspective for the west, which further increased staff at NCWest. Which lends completely against the 5 figures of profit you pulled out of thin air for the western market profits of L2 yearly. NCSoft saw the NA market as a potential option for additional revenue...They would hardly invest their time and effort if it wasn't an option for a good source of income. They also skipped the idea of allowing a publisher take the reins and not invest heavily, but instead launched it themselves at additional cost under NCWest...To think they only made 5 figures of profit yearly for the west is quite a thing to say.
In regards to people happy to talk about L2, I can attest to this, as I have done many times myself. The game has fond memories for the player base that experienced it from launch.
I specifically said that it wasn't Thunderstruck trees that killed it - the server population had already dropped off dramatically by that point. By the time Trion made that change, they had come to the realization that the games population would never be very high, and so started monetizing it as much as they could.
Ahhh, mb on that. I misread that portion, but everything else I stated was valid and completely accurate. The game had P2W right after launch, and failed rapidly due to mishandling and the rapid adoption of p2w elements in the cash shop. Assuming that the western market looked at the game and disregarded Archeage as you stated is hugely inaccurate. It had a very large interested majority of 2 million, yet was doomed from the get go. It wasn't given an appropriate launch to reach it's true potential, which is one of the reason why we even have Ashes of Creation to begin with, as Steven has previously mentioned it was the straw that broke the camel's back. In regards to L2, it fostered growth in NA in its early years, which adds to the point of NA interest. Blanketing both games as having a lack of interest from the western audience due to their style, and therefore should adopt more PvE themepark content is an absolute wrong take.
its funny you talk about things like labor point exploits, item duping and regrading as being issues with Archeage - these were all things that were present in the Korean version of the game, but simply weren't considered issues due to the way players in Korea play MMO's.
Keep in mind - Archeage is still somewhat popular in Korea. It only dropped off the top 50 games played in Korea last year. it is worth pointing out though, Lineage 2 is at number 20. This is not a list of MMO's - it is a list of all games in Korea. Aion is also on this list - at number 10 (the notion that Aion was made FOR the west is laughable, sorry).
Point is, these games are massive in Korea, which is why they are the games that Korean developers make. They aren't nearly as big in NA/EU though, and need alterations to reach that level.
I mean, is anyone even willing to argue that Lineage 2 was in the top 1000 games played in NA last year?
They weren't an issue due to the fact that we have fundamentally different playing restrictions and standards between the West and Korea. They have to register there game account to a Korean social security number. So getting your account banned for being an idiot who cheats would leave you in a very tough bind. You are completely disregarding this fact and painting the games as having a lack of interest in the west as a result of the developer and publisher's failings, when it's clearly the opposite.
The failures of Archeage fall on the developer for not properly adapting said content and systems to the west. We've seen it time and again from Korean MMO's, where the developer either restricts their publishers from modifying the game to the appropriate standards for the target audience. Or worse, hand control to a predatory publisher that's aim is to milk as much as they can while being completely incompetent (Trion). None of these factors have anything to do with interest in the game, which you said is lacking, which both games showed the exact opposite.
In regards to your point in Korea. I don't doubt both games are popular in Korea, especially from NCSoft. Lineage has a massive fan base, as can be seen by the amount of their players and quarterly earnings reported by NCSoft. Which has many lineage titles btw (Unfortunately now mostly all mobile p2w garbage), as well as Aion and BnS. I'll disregard the Aion for the west comment, as I clearly never stated that and touched on already...
The games indeed are massive in Korea...NCSoft has always had a large fanbase in Asia since their initial release of Lineage 1. Korean's do enjoy a certain style of MMO's that differ from the western counterparts. But once again, stating that they aren't nearly as big in the NA/EU is a distorted viewpoint to take considering everything mentioned. Lineage 2 was successful in the west for some time, but did not have enough market penetration, presence to the public, and advertising to make it self known. Archeage was a catastrophe in the making, whose actions by Trion and the p2w nature of XLGames destroyed aby hope of the game succeeding in the west. The interest of 2 million registered users evaporating in a very short window...Just as it would any other western MMO of that time that would be released in the same manner.
I mean, is anyone even willing to argue that Lineage 2 was in the top 1000 games played in NA last year?
lol. This honestly made me laugh. Of course it wouldn't. The game is nothing but a shell of it's former self, once it went F2P the game was doomed, we don't enjoy P2W mechanics, and gameplay changed for the worst after a few years which resulted in the F2P model. You really need to stop reaching for straws with your views/arguments, they are incredibly filled with holes. No offense meant once more. But you point Korean MMO's need to adapt their model, and AoC in hand...Which is EXACTLY what they are doing. The game has heavy inspiration from Korean MMO's, but is being developed for the west, which none of the Korean MMO's obviously have been. All the problems that we see in Korean MMO's brought to the west will be non existent. There won't be any P2W with a sub model, content that is designed around the western market, but with a flair of what made the old school Korean MMO's, as well as MMO's of the gold era so successful without the P2W and Korean POV in gaming...You are literally getting exactly that. Yet not having a themepark instanced loot boss pinata will cause the game to lose appeal? Give me a break.
I mean, is anyone even willing to argue that Lineage 2 was in the top 1000 games played in NA last year?
After having watched the TL beta streams - western players don't even fucking know what L2 is, let alone having played it
Man, watching Project TL was extremely depressing, especially as a former L2 player. When Steven added his 2 cents during the last dev update, I could feel the hurt in his soul...haha. Took a few things that made L2 good, and stripped out everything else, dumbed down the rest, and slapped in mobile p2w and state it's in the Lineage universe...Sad panda.
It's quite insulting, blatant attempt at mashing mobile p2w mechanics into a desktop MMORPG with the release of TL. Trying to expand that filth into the desktop sphere and water down PC standards and acceptability of mobile mechanics is just downright depressing. Corporate and shareholder obligations at its absolute worst. Sad to see what NCSoft has turned into, every single game they release now is mobile...A mega money maker that has shifted all their IP's to mobile p2w garbage...Sad day...
It's quite insulting, blatant attempt at mashing mobile p2w mechanics into a desktop MMORPG with the release of TL. Trying to expand that filth into the desktop sphere and water down PC standards and acceptability of mobile mechanics is just downright depressing. Corporate and shareholder obligations at its absolute worst. Sad to see what NCSoft has turned into, every single game they release now is mobile...A mega money maker that has shifted all their IP's to mobile p2w garbage...Sad day...
I mean, they're just making what people are buying. If majority of their consumers (especially the big spenders) were truly not ok with this shit, NCsoft wouldn't be doing it.
It's quite insulting, blatant attempt at mashing mobile p2w mechanics into a desktop MMORPG with the release of TL. Trying to expand that filth into the desktop sphere and water down PC standards and acceptability of mobile mechanics is just downright depressing. Corporate and shareholder obligations at its absolute worst. Sad to see what NCSoft has turned into, every single game they release now is mobile...A mega money maker that has shifted all their IP's to mobile p2w garbage...Sad day...
I mean, they're just making what people are buying. If majority of their consumers (especially the big spenders) were truly not ok with this shit, NCsoft wouldn't be doing it.
Agreed. It's just truly sad to see though. I was holding on to a sliver of hope that they would deliver based on their TL developer preview months back. But after what we were given, literally have none left for Lineage 3 anymore. With the embracement of monetary transactions in every NCSoft title now, with mobile leanings, not holding my breath for a shift unless Korean gamers get fed up with it. Unfortunately, it's too ingrained into their society for that to happen from the looks of it.=*(.
Where did I ever stated it funded Aion's development on the NA side?, I stated Lineage 2's success in the west lead to an increase in staff at NCWest (Western subsidiary of NCSoft), which lead into Aion from a release perspective for the west, which further increased staff at NCWest. Which lends completely against the 5 figures of profit you pulled out of thin air for the western market profits of L2 yearly. NCSoft saw the NA market as a potential option for additional revenue...They would hardly invest their time and effort if it wasn't an option for a good source of income. They also skipped the idea of allowing a publisher take the reins and not invest heavily, but instead launched it themselves at additional cost under NCWest...To think they only made 5 figures of profit yearly for the west is quite a thing to say.
I'm still trying to parse this... I think you are perhaps not understanding NCSoft Wests role within NCSoft in general.
NCSoft West have zero released titles under their banner (though one in development).
Essentially - according to NCSoft West themself - they simply manage the NCSoft portfolio across the Americas, Europe, Australia and New Zealand. They are better described as Western publishers for NCSoft than anything else.
Aion was made in Korea.
This is why I am completely unsure why you are making any connection at all between an increase in staff at NCSoft West leading in to Aion. It just doesn't make sense as a thought to even have unless you think there is a connection there somewhere - but there just isn't one.
Just to be clear, the increase in staff at NCWest was due to an increase in the number of titles they were managing.
lol. This honestly made me laugh. Of course it wouldn't. The game is nothing but a shell of it's former self, once it went F2P the game was doomed
Except it is still the 20th most played game in Korea.
Literally all of the development for that game, all the decisions made for it, they were made for the Korean market since that is the target market for the game.
The fact that it is still the 20th most popular game there, and literally no one is willing to argue that it could even be in the top 1000 games here should illustrate to you my point about games needing to be different between the two markets - which is my point.
If you wish to argue that point, then explain how L2 is still in the top 20 games played in Korea (well, as of May last year), yet is nothing but a shell of it's former self here.
I'm still trying to parse this... I think you are perhaps not understanding NCSoft Wests role within NCSoft in general.
NCSoft West have zero released titles under their banner (though one in development).
Essentially - according to NCSoft West themself - they simply manage the NCSoft portfolio across the Americas, Europe, Australia and New Zealand. They are better described as Western publishers for NCSoft than anything else.
When did I ever say NCWest developed a title? I literally never uttered those words whatsoever. If you are mistaking "Released" as developed, you are truly grasping for anything at this point. You are the only one misunderstanding NCSoft West's role...As they were made specifically to publish NCSoft's titles, as a subsidiary of NCSoft. Stop google searching for some random information in order to prove a point that has no merit or standing in the debate.
Aion was made in Korea.
Obviously, it's a Korean developed MMO, at NCSoft, in Korea...This was never questioned at all and I never stated otherwise. When I said stated "eventual release of Aion" under the topic of NCWesat...That does not mean they "DEVELOPED" it. I specifically used the world released, as the word clearly does not mean develop. NCWest, a subsidiary and wholly owned by NCSoft, acted as a publisher, releasing the game to the west.
This is why I am completely unsure why you are making any connection at all between an increase in staff at NCSoft West leading in to Aion. It just doesn't make sense as a thought to even have unless you think there is a connection there somewhere - but there just isn't one.
Just to be clear, the increase in staff at NCWest was due to an increase in the number of titles they were managing.
I don't know how much clearer I can be. Why would a company, such as NCSoft, open up a subsidiary in the west (NCSoft West), open an office, hire personnel, only to end up making 5 figures worth of profit yearly? They wouldn't, they would just hand the title over to a third party publisher.
Did they do that? No, they did not. They established NCSoft West as they saw potential in making larger sums of money. Lineage 2 increased steadily in player count over the first few years, which means profit. NCSoft looks at said profit, likes what they see, and invests more into NCWest, increasing server counts and hiring more GM's. They follow up on the investment with localizing Aion and bringing it to the west. Do you really think they would go through all this hassle if they were only making a meager 5 figure profit yearly as you previously stated? No...They would not, they would of just handed it off to a third party publisher. It's very simple...Point of the matter, don't randomly pull a 5 figure profit sum when you clearly have no idea what you were talking about and passing it off as fact, and try to defend it in a failing manner. Once again, no offense meant...But it's clear as day to see.
Except it is still the 20th most played game in Korea.
Literally all of the development for that game, all the decisions made for it, they were made for the Korean market since that is the target market for the game.
The fact that it is still the 20th most popular game there, and literally no one is willing to argue that it could even be in the top 1000 games here should illustrate to you my point about games needing to be different between the two markets - which is my point.
If you wish to argue that point, then explain how L2 is still in the top 20 games played in Korea (well, as of May last year), yet is nothing but a shell of it's former self here.
It's not hard to explain. The Korean market embraces P2W, as they do not see it as a big problem. Their entire culture of MMORPG gaming is built around it, ours is not. It is in the top 20 in Korea because the game play is appealing, and they do not have an issue with P2W. It is not in the top 1000 in the west, because it is so ridiculously p2w that no one in the west would touch it except for whales. Just as every Korean MMORPG that ends up coming to the west that has embraced P2W mechanics, don't have a very large player base. The western player base frowns upon P2W.
You can't just compare apples to apples when we have complete societal differences considering what is acceptable and what is not. Hence why cheating is not a problem in the Korean MMO landscape due to the nature of a social security number required to play, yet you paint a picture of a flawed game as the reason why people cheat in the west. Those are societal differences, the games were never adapted for our market, societal preferences, with proper enforcement of TOS and guidelines, something we never get for Eastern MMO's coming to the west...That doesn't mean players don't like what the games have to offer...It just means that the developer and publisher failed in their job.
Hence why Lost Ark for example, which is a relatively new title to the west, has a massive player base in Korea, but in the west, averages now around 40k concurrent players. Western players do not like P2W, period. They will quickly move away from such titles, as P2W discourages the western base from playing a game. We saw it happen with Archeage even though it had massive interest. Yet the shining example I keep pointing out to you...That we saw growth in Lineage 2 for a few years under a sub model, which has literally zero p2w, you disregard as being "not liked by western markets". You are looking at everything in black and white, have made up statements which are false, and speculated massively...and it is failing you.
Also, not trying to pour salt on the wound...But Lineage 2 was one of the most hardcore MMO's there could be for the western market, and it still grew in player base. Let that sink in. The Korean style can survive, it just has to be adapted to a western taste, with no p2w, with good intentions behind the developer....Which all ring true for intrepid.
When did I ever say NCWest developed a title? I literally never uttered those words whatsoever. If you are mistaking "Released" as developed, you are truly grasping for anything at this point. You are the only one misunderstanding NCSoft West's role...As they were made specifically to publish NCSoft's titles, as a subsidiary of NCSoft. Stop google searching for some random information in order to prove a point that has no merit or standing in the debate.
As I said, I am still trying to work out what it actually is you were saying.
You said "Lineage 2's success in the west lead to an increase in staff at NCWest, which lead into Aion from a release perspective for the west".
There is no connection at all to be made here though - the connection you seem to have found is what I am trying to establish.
An increase in staff at NCSoft West wasn't ever due to how successful any game was. For the most part, a game that has10k players takes basically the same number of staff to perform NCSoft Wests function as it would take if that same game had 100k, or a million.
Increases in staff at NCsoft West happen when they have a new game on the horizon. Basically, the increase in staff at NCSoft West that you claim were because of L2's success and lead to Aion (see the above for where you said that) were actually simply new staff bought on because of Aion itself. They bought on new staff knowing that there was a new game around the corner.
Also, you said I am misunderstanding NCSoft Wests role - yet the role I specifically said they perform is that of a publisher (managing the portfolio of NCSofts games).
I have nothing but an understanding of that role - it is your statement again that an increase in staff at NCSoft West in any way lead to Aion that is the question at hand here.
I don't know how much clearer I can be. Why would a company, such as NCSoft, open up a subsidiary in the west (NCSoft West), open an office, hire personnel, only to end up making 5 figures worth of profit yearly?
So, I didn't say that. I said that is how much they made off L2.
There was no point in time where L2 was the sole title being managed. There was no point in time where L2 was the largest title NCSoft West managed. It was the largest title in Korea, but not in the west.
You can't just compare apples to apples when he have complete societal differences considering what is acceptable and what is not.
That... thats my point.
The difference is you seem to be claiming western audiences leave due to pay to win, I am pointing out that those audiences have always started dropping off before games move over to pay to win.
Trost coming on board is probably the best news anyone wanting Ashes to be more than just another pure PvP MMO like L2, Archeage, BDO or Albion could have hoped for (and yes, as far as MMO's go, those games are pure PvP).
Ashes in no way has shown signs of being purely PvP or being overly focused on PvP anyways, so that worry seems a bit unfounded to begin with in my opinion.
What I am optimistic about is that the final product that was New World will motivate him to be part of a better project without copy pasted towns, contradicting design choices and such. That paired with Steven being quite firm on how he wants the final game to work and the immense body of experience Trost brings should do for an improved development process.
That's simply not true, of course aoc is a very pvp focused game. For everyone who can not handle this, aoc is the wrong game
The deeper you go the more corruption you gain from lingering in the area going up towards 1-5 levels making the tick increase grow as you go into more dangerous areas. Though upon entering from the entrance you gain a bubble that gives you a large buffer from actually being corrupted. As well you can only gain so much corruption from the area before you reach max stacks (to prevent max corruption gain) Once you reach the max, it lowers you maximum hp at a smaller amount and it will continue until you die.
Death to mobs or to corruption stack ticks make you drop all the items in your inventory and destroying it on the spot so it can not be reclaimed. If someone pks you though and takes the corruption hit the items are available to be picked up but each item take adds more corruption to your character
Upon adventuring in the area taking items also add corruption to your character drop wise you you are unable to take everything without also risk. But like the self protective bubble you get on entering there can be some drops the replenish those drops, as well as finding rare random spawn things throughout the dungeon that also replenish the buff by a certain percent.
So it becomes a very hard dungeon the deeper you go the better the loot but the higher chance you have of also losing what you gained from within it. If you make it to the deepest part of the dungeon you will be able to make it to the boss dealing with its mechanics and trying to ensure you keep your protective barrier up to not end up dying and losing everything.
Upon defeating the boss you simply need to escape back where you came from for whoever is left being a survivor and trying to not die to the corruption or the monsters that have respawned.
Generally the point of this being a high risk area means there is a high cooperative elements. Meaning random pvpers / griefers, etc won't really be able to impact your group and your content since they most likely wouldn't survive. It would have to be more of a set group that knows what they are doing to be able to challenge you reducing the amount of people that will actually pvp. While adding different challenges and mechanics for the content. Though this would only be one special type of area and not a standard.
That's simply not true, of course aoc is a very pvp focused game. For everyone who can not handle this, aoc is the wrong game
There is a big or significant (whatever you want to call it) focus on PvP, with that I agree. But my point was about whether it is OVERLY focused on PvP - to it's own detriment. I think not to the degree to which we can actually can make such a statement without having played anything close to the current development.
I agree that if someone resents PvP this probably won't be the right game for them but, again, I don't see Ashes being too focused on PvP at all. I'd argue that the portion of PvP is a bit lower than 50% (but that is the topic of another thread currently on the front page)
Instanced content is indeed one form of content that would satisfy the points I was making. However, if instanced content were added to Ashes for the sake of the content, as opposed to for the sake of the world/lore etc, then it would need to come with an increased PvP risk of some form.
[...]
One suggestion I have made in the past is that the better rewards for killing an instanced boss need to be transported from the location of the instance to the nearest metropolis (a metropolis nearby should be needed to unlock any raid content). Additionally, a world wide announcement of the kill would probably be in order - so as to alert everyone to the fact that you are running a caravan from that location to the metropolis. This should guarantee some PvP - and even better, it will have a totally different feel to it than just fighting over an encounter.
This isn't the only way additional PvP elements could be added to instanced PvE content, but it is one way. Additionally, instanced PvE content isn't the only way to guarantee access to content.
Another form of guaranteed content is forced spawn. Have a guild collect a given number of tokens of some form (it doesn't matter what, body parts, scroll fragments, it's all the same mechanically), and go to either a specific location, or any one of many locations and spawn an encounter. With this, the guild can control when (and potentially where) the encounter takes place.
Another way to guarantee content to people is to have so much open world content (due to both number of encounters and respawn time) that there is not going to be a shortage. I'm not advocating for this specific method, I am just stating that it exists as a method.
Wait, what? How did this answer never get discussed much further? Not trying to sound dramatic, this just really surprised me.
Someone asked you to clarify what you would want AoC to have more of in terms of PvE, and you went: "Bet. Here's 2 PvP things the game should have, and also 1 surface-level PvE thing they might add, though I wouldn't personally advocate for that one."
Huh?! =D
I agree with you on everything you suggested in that comment, but can you answer the actual question too please? =') Because that was a pretty essential question for this thread.
And I guess you'll say something similar to how the game is meant to be PvX, and therefore PvP opportunities can beget more interesting PvE, but still: It's you who's asking for more PvE to pull in PvE players, so should you not have ideas in mind that actually involve different/more PvE?
I agree with you on everything you suggested in that comment, but can you answer the actual question too please? =') Because that was a pretty essential question for this thread.
I gave the answer.
instanced content and caged encounters - with the proviso that they be accompanied with an increase in PvP in some manner.
Those two things - that you seemed to think were PvP additions - were additions to what we know of about the games PvE.
That is how little PvE this game has from what we know so far, and that is why I am arguing for more.
I agree with you on everything you suggested in that comment, but can you answer the actual question too please? =') Because that was a pretty essential question for this thread.
Those two things - that you seemed to think were PvP additions - were additions to what we know of about the games PvE.
The addition of transporting rewards to a city and advertise the event for PvP contestation is...a PvP addition.
I agree that the forced encounter seems to be a PvE addition. I misread its connection to the other ones. In fact it almost seems to exist to deny PvP.
All your suggestions seem to centre around PvP becoming more opt-in. Defeats the PvX philosophy in my eyes, but we might be going in circles at this point.
I agree with you on everything you suggested in that comment, but can you answer the actual question too please? =') Because that was a pretty essential question for this thread.
Those two things - that you seemed to think were PvP additions - were additions to what we know of about the games PvE.
The addition of transporting rewards to a city and advertise the event for PvP contestation is...a PvP addition.
The things I was suggesting to be added were the instanced content and cage fights. We know of nothing at all like this in the game as yet. So far, all "PvE" content in the game comes hand in hand with PvP during that PvE. There is some notion of story based instanced content, but that is not something we have any details on, other than the suggestion that it isnt repeatable.
The addition of the PvP elements was as a means of pointing that such things can (and should) be added to the game without reducing the over all PvP in the game. It was a into that you can separate out some of the PvE from PvP elements without diminishing the PvP element.
I agree with you on everything you suggested in that comment, but can you answer the actual question too please? =') Because that was a pretty essential question for this thread.
Those two things - that you seemed to think were PvP additions - were additions to what we know of about the games PvE.
The addition of transporting rewards to a city and advertise the event for PvP contestation is...a PvP addition.
The things I was suggesting to be added were the instanced content and cage fights. We know of nothing at all like this in the game as yet. So far, all "PvE" content in the game comes hand in hand with PvP during that PvE. There is some notion of story based instanced content, but that is not something we have any details on, other than the suggestion that it isnt repeatable.
The addition of the PvP elements was as a means of pointing that such things can (and should) be added to the game without reducing the over all PvP in the game. It was a into that you can separate out some of the PvE from PvP elements without diminishing the PvP element.
So only way there is more pve content is if it is instanced based? So it isn't about the amount of pve content that can exist it is more about adding content where pvp can become impossible during fights.
Would you have any other ideas that add more PvE content without separating the two. Because to me I don't see them lacking pve content based on that.
So only way there is more pve content is if it is instanced based? So it isn't about the amount of pve content that can exist it is more about adding content where pvp can become impossible during fights.
Would you have any other ideas that add more PvE content without separating the two. Because to me I don't see them lacking pve content based on that.
The only way to have pve of higher quality is to prevent pvp from happening during the encounter. "More pve" can come in whatever form Intrepid can come up with, but better pve should be in a few instances (still keeping the 80/20 split) and definitely several "cage" encounters.
L2 worked just fine with cage design, so I'm sure Steven has at least considered that approach. Hell, the volcano dragon was pretty much that, except he didn't limit entrance when the fight started. But I'd assume that's just a few additional lines of code, so there's already base design that's related to cage encounters.
And as Noaani said, there can still be pvp in the overall encounter, but just not directly during the pve part. Variety is the spice of life, so having only "there's a mob that everyone can hit and pvp around" design would be dull.
So only way there is more pve content is if it is instanced based? So it isn't about the amount of pve content that can exist it is more about adding content where pvp can become impossible during fights.
Would you have any other ideas that add more PvE content without separating the two. Because to me I don't see them lacking pve content based on that.
The only way to have pve of higher quality is to prevent pvp from happening during the encounter. "More pve" can come in whatever form Intrepid can come up with, but better pve should be in a few instances (still keeping the 80/20 split) and definitely several "cage" encounters.
L2 worked just fine with cage design, so I'm sure Steven has at least considered that approach. Hell, the volcano dragon was pretty much that, except he didn't limit entrance when the fight started. But I'd assume that's just a few additional lines of code, so there's already base design that's related to cage encounters.
And as Noaani said, there can still be pvp in the overall encounter, but just not directly during the pve part. Variety is the spice of life, so having only "there's a mob that everyone can hit and pvp around" design would be dull.
Then it has nothing to do with more PvE and about removing the pvp part out of it.
Also I don't agree you can have great designs that resolve around contested content but that is not even the point I'm trying to make.
If i hear something lacks pve content than I'm hearing their is a lack of actual content to do in the world for people that doesn't come close to the demand. If the discussion is they want pve content where pvp doesn't happen that doesn't mean lacking pve content.
PvP happening at the end of the day doesn't mean pve content doesn't exist suddenly.
So only way there is more pve content is if it is instanced based?
To add to what NiKr said above, it is also about access to content.
A siege is PvP content for up to 1,000 players at a time.
If Intrepid add in an open world encounter to the game (including the caged fights mentioned above), and put a 3 day respawn timer on it (which is short), that is one encounter for 40 people once every three days. The thing is, e days later it is probably more PvE content for that same 40 people.
If Intrepid add another encounter that spawns on a different day than the above, that is more PvE content for that same group of 40 players.
The only way to make it so open world encounters are content for different people is to have many encounters spawn at the same time.
In order to achieve the same amount of player interaction as a single siege, Intrepid need to have 25 such encounters spawn at the same time.
Or they can have one instance with a three day lockout.
If the intention is to provide PvE content with the same amount of player participation as a siege, it really isnt a hard decision to make.
The key is in making sure any potential PvP opportunities removed due to the content being instanced are made up for. Instancing to separate PvP from the moment of PvE is done, but it is not acceptable (imo) to use instancing to remove PvP from the whole picture. That is why my suggestion requires the use of the caravan system in order to get the better rewards from the encounter, and goes as far as telling the server what it is you are doing. Assuming there are organized PvP oriented guilds on your server, you will probably find yourself having to PvP the entire way - significantly more PvP than if it was just an open world encounter.
I am making the assumption Ashes will still have open world bosses to fight over - there is no reason to assume otherwise.
What having instanced content like the above means is that there is more variety in PvE encounters, there is more variety in terms of types of PvP, there is more PvP potential in terms of amount of fighting, and there is a higher quality in terms of PvE, and there is PvE content for far more players.
So only way there is more pve content is if it is instanced based?
To add to what NiKr said above, it is also about access to content.
A siege is PvP content for up to 1,000 players at a time.
If Intrepid add in an open world encounter to the game (including the caged fights mentioned above), and put a 3 day respawn timer on it (which is short), that is one encounter for 40 people once every three days. The thing is, e days later it is probably more PvE content for that same 40 people.
If Intrepid add another encounter that spawns on a different day than the above, that is more PvE content for that same group of 40 players.
The only way to make it so open world encounters are content for different people is to have many encounters spawn at the same time.
In order to achieve the same amount of player interaction as a single siege, Intrepid need to have 25 such encounters spawn at the same time.
Or they can have one instance with a three day lockout.
If the intention is to provide PvE content with the same amount of player participation as a siege, it really isnt a hard decision to make.
The key is in making sure any potential PvP opportunities removed due to the content being instanced are made up for. Instancing to separate PvP from the moment of PvE is done, but it is not acceptable (imo) to use instancing to remove PvP from the whole picture. That is why my suggestion requires the use of the caravan system in order to get the better rewards from the encounter, and goes as far as telling the server what it is you are doing. Assuming there are organized PvP oriented guilds on your server, you will probably find yourself having to PvP the entire way - significantly more PvP than if it was just an open world encounter.
I am making the assumption Ashes will still have open world bosses to fight over - there is no reason to assume otherwise.
What having instanced content like the above means is that there is more variety in PvE encounters, there is more variety in terms of types of PvP, there is more PvP potential in terms of amount of fighting, and there is a higher quality in terms of PvE, and there is PvE content for far more players.
Essentially, it is a win all around.
That is fair to think based off not having shards and such there could not be enough content access wise that can support all types of players on the server.
When i hear lack of pve content, for me it gives the idea it does not exist on the game. If it is access to content, honestly i have no clue how that will turn out until more of the game is seen, and we see the size of the world, amount of content with the player population and spawn times of the content.
Will be interesting to see how that is approached in having the variety of content and it being challenging as well. The main issue with pve why people are more in line with instanced is you just zerg everything. I don't know how they will stop full on zergs unless they are doing it as caged which you suggested. I think that is the best way to do it as well tbh. But there are unique ways to approach it that can be developed as well or atleast in ways to make it feel different and a bit more organic.
If i hear something lacks pve content than I'm hearing their is a lack of actual content to do in the world for people that doesn't come close to the demand. If the discussion is they want pve content where pvp doesn't happen that doesn't mean lacking pve content.
But, as Noaani said, that is the case currently. The strongest few guilds will control the majority of pve content (especially bosses), because they'll be able to push anyone else out of the encounter through pvp. At which point all the other guilds simply don't have the access to pve content.
I definitely hope that the world is huge and populated enough to provide everyone with enough mid-high quality pve, with the top quality stuff being limited to power checks.
I think the easiest way to do this is with party/raid quests and "cage" triggers. Maybe there's an npc you gotta bring to a location, at which point he triggers a fight in a "cage" and then you gotta bring that npc back, but he's now a target for other people and if they kill him - your reward's gone. Or you get a key for a room in an open dungeon, where the fight happens, and you then need to go deeper into the dungeon to get your loot, but your group is now perma-flagged until you get the loot or wipe.
In other words, you have assured pve content, but you still have high risk of losing the reward for it due to pvp.
If i hear something lacks pve content than I'm hearing their is a lack of actual content to do in the world for people that doesn't come close to the demand. If the discussion is they want pve content where pvp doesn't happen that doesn't mean lacking pve content.
But, as Noaani said, that is the case currently. The strongest few guilds will control the majority of pve content (especially bosses), because they'll be able to push anyone else out of the encounter through pvp. At which point all the other guilds simply don't have the access to pve content.
I definitely hope that the world is huge and populated enough to provide everyone with enough mid-high quality pve, with the top quality stuff being limited to power checks.
I think the easiest way to do this is with party/raid quests and "cage" triggers. Maybe there's an npc you gotta bring to a location, at which point he triggers a fight in a "cage" and then you gotta bring that npc back, but he's now a target for other people and if they kill him - your reward's gone. Or you get a key for a room in an open dungeon, where the fight happens, and you then need to go deeper into the dungeon to get your loot, but your group is now perma-flagged until you get the loot or wipe.
In other words, you have assured pve content, but you still have high risk of losing the reward for it due to pvp.
To be fair we don't know how the case will actually be there is way too much unknown to assume anything. Again my point of saying there is not enough pve content is not about who has access to it.
When i hear lack of pve content, for me it gives the idea it does not exist on the game. If it is access to content, honestly i have no clue how that will turn out until more of the game is seen, and we see the size of the world, amount of content with the player population and spawn times of the content.
Obviously we dont know how much PvE content the game will have, but we can fairly safely assume there wont be enough worthwhile content for everyone with what we know so far.
To me, there are 5 types of boss encounters Intrepid should be trying to put in the game.
There are open world bosses that spawn a battleground around them, disabling corruption. These by necessity need to he fairly basic in terms of mechanics, and should have a predictable spawn time, perhaps with serverwode announcements of that fact. With no corruption their spawn should attract a massive number of people. I consider this to be PvP content more than PvE content, and this is where the beet items in the game should come from.
The point of these encounters is just outright carnage- something for players to fight over en masse.
Next down you have dungeon bosses. Still open world, but corruption is a thing, and the respawn point should be at least an hours fighting away. The respawn here should be almost totally random, and the encounters can be a little more involved than the open world bosses - but not much more.
The point of this type of encounter is to give players something where the best option would often be to cooperate to get the kill - I'd like to see a mechanic for loot to be shared across multiple raids to facilitate this.
Then there are instanced bosses. These can be as intricate as the developers can manage in terms of mechanics. This is the only real opportunity a game like Ashes has to do actual good PvE, and if they want to attract players that prefer PvE but are willing to PvP from other games, this content is the only thing Intrepid can use to entice then away. The drops for this content should be based on how difficult the encounter is, ranging from entry level raid difficulty up to the second best items. The key to making this work in a game like Ashes, as I've said before, is making sure you add back the PvP element after the fact.
The point of this content is both access to content for players in general, as well as the only means of adding PvE challenge.
Then there are cage fights. These would probably only be fought over by the top guilds on the server, as you would need to be good at PvP to have a shot, and once inside the cage the encounters can be as intricate as instanced encounters. They would probably only spawn once a week. As such, it is viable for them to drop best in slot items, though I would perhaps want to see these encounters only drop best in slot for one or two equipment slots, with the rest on the open world encounter terms above.
The point of these fights is to be the pinnacle for guilds that both PvP and PvE, as top tier skill in both are needed.
Then the last type is forced summons. This is another type of thing that can easily have two tiers. The first tier is players running group content (open dungeons) to collect items. Once enough are collected, the guild brings them to the appropriate location (ideally well out of the way of other content) and spawns a mob. These can be about as involved as the dungeon bosses, but this first tier should be fairly easy. A second tier of this can be added where the summon items drop from raid dungeon mobs, and the resulting mob is tougher.
The point of this kind of content is as an introduction to raiding at the level cap, with the second tier being an introduction to higher end raiding.
To me, that gives a massive variety of both PvP and PvE content. There is also no reason the above cant be mirrored for single group content, though I wouldnt expect the same crowds for the first content type at a single group level.
New World game design is a tough pill to swallow for anyone who played that game from it's beginning.
Hopefully Trost was somewhat of an outsider in the development of that game and can build from the epic failures of NW.
Also, bring back the resident bard. Love that guy.
Comments
Blizzard was huge even back in the day, Starcraft was enormous in the Korean scene, absolutely massive. The esports scene blew up in the early 2000's. It wasn't do to World of Warcraft, and to think that is truly inaccurate. The reason why World of Warcraft became so popular, is due to the massive following Blizzard has had in it's fan base, reaching all the way back to Warcraft, Starcraft, and Diablo. I would know, I was an addict to Starcraft back in the day, as well as the Warcraft titles. Diablo also being huge, but wasn't my biggest cup of tea as I'm not a fan of isometric dungeon crawlers. All this gave way to the massive success of World of Warcraft. When you have three mega IP's like this, it gives you all the advertising you need...As we've seen with all their titles after, and the backlash they honestly deserved from their newer games and failings.
In terms of L2, you are correct It came out in 2003, in Korea. The North American release was in April 2004. With World of Warcraft closed beta dates happening in March, June, and July of 2004, leading to it's quick turn around to release. This was not by coincidence, I find it funny how you say the western audience didn't find L2 was for them, as it was the complete opposite. The servers grew in population as more servers were added through the first few chronicles.
NC Interactive came into existence in 2001, and bought arena net (Guild Wars), then changed it's name shortly after into NCWest as it lead into the launch of Lineage 2 in the west of 2004. It was their first official NCSoft developed title to be published to the west. It had no where near the marketing power or exposure as Blizzard, not in the slightest...I only found out about the game from a friend who offered me his CBT key since he was planning to play World of Warcraft, and was able to enjoy the game starting from the beta phases.
I once again find it Humorous you're stating it brought in tens of thousands a year after expenses...not having any data and actual statistics to go by...That is just purely speculation with a lack of any evidence. Judging by the fact that it lead to further studio development in NCWest, increasing headcount and leading into the eventual release of Aion would prove otherwise. Let's agree to disagree. There isn't any data going back this far that is accurate, or that is public, so you can't state anything as fact when there isn't the data to back it up. Stating so is completely disingenuous and misinformation. But to say they only brought in profit in the 5 figures after expenses a year, is honestly laughable. But what I can state, is that the population of the game grew with new servers added over the first few expansions (chronicles). Once again, no offense meant if it sounds as such.
In terms of Archeage...Let's be honest here, it wasn't solely thunderstruck trees that killed the game. Archeage didn't "die" because people didn't like what the game had to offer. It died from gross negligence on Trion's side, as well as the adopted p2w models that XLGames was embracing. Receiving patch 1.2 for the NA launch was a sign of what was to come. The whole head start fiasco, labor point exploitation that was made worst along with predatory stances taken by trion in the cash shop...Apex duping destroying the economy, cash shop rng gambling with regrade, and the list goes on. The game was an utter disgrace from launch. It literally had no chance to be successful considering the P2W climate taking over, and the catastrophe that is Trion Worlds.
It had the potential to be massive...But XLGames and pretty much all Korean MMO's shifting to P2W, Trion's adopting of the cash shop patch for the western market at launch, as well as complete mishandling of the game led to it's demise...It wasn't losing players due to lack of interest in the game. It died before the game could even realize it's potential due to greed and stupid decisions. Saying player's largely decided it wasn't for them is incredibly disingenuous....Many people wanted the game in a non p2w form that was handled correctly to let it flourish...We never got that, it was never delivered, but the interest was there.
A lot of your thoughts here are based once again on speculation. Just out of curiosity, have you lived in Korea and experienced all this first hand? Because there is a lot of assuming here, which seems to be a trend with a lot of your takes, once again, no offense, you know how the internet and tone can be taken in the wrong light. But I've been in these situations you speak of, in filled party with guildies as we constantly fight for a room in Cruma Tower...Whether we were on the side coming back to fight again after dying, or clearing those trying to take the room from us, you can flip a coin depending on the day...But it was the most memorable experiences I've ever had in an MMO. Just because players haven't experienced such a PvX system in the current times, shouldn't automatically take the stance that players won't enjoy it or are up for it...They haven't tried it yet. It was also MUCH more punishing in L2, what AoC is giving us is a much tamer and watered down variant of the harsh penalties that L2 brought upon you, so if you are worried about it being too hardcore, fear not, it won't be based on Steven's design direction...You need to give the player base some leeway and credit, and stop assuming that players will hate it.
Judging by the fact that Lineage 2 was successful in the west for a long life span, and that Archeage had over 2 million registered users at launch for the west, shows that this style of system has interest...Lineage 2 was not very well known, but those that did get to enjoy it find themselves lucky to play such a gem, Steven included, considering many of his systems tie around L2's. Archeage had the chance of following up on that trend with a very large amount of interested players, especially having the original creator of Lineage at the helm was a huge boon, but collapsed due to negligence and P2W infesting the game...These two facts prove there is a market, that is just untapped, and assuming Ashes needs to about face and cater to the Themepark style of PvE is a huge misread.
I will not denounce that people troll in the west, I can not speak for Korea, but in the west I can attest to this many times over in the games I've played and agree with you...It's rather annoying actually at how childish players can be. But why would you even bring this point up? We literally have a developer that has experienced all of this and came from the west. Do you honestly believe Steven has not thought about appropriate actions and design choices to combat these issues?
For example, Steven has already shown he understands the flaws in L2's Karma system with his corruption system, applying appropriate counter measures to reign in excessive pk'ing, eliminating the possibility of PK alts entirely, and so on. Every time I hear his responses to possible exploitation or problems that arise in MMORPG's he's played, and plans he has in place, he's shown an impressive amount of understanding and realization of the problems at hand that need to be addressed.
There are not many players who have been able to experience an untainted version of what the PvX system that Steven is embracing has to offer, except old school L2 players. We are definitely in the minority. But for all the fires I see being started, or sounding the alarm considering the game doesn't have Themepark like PvE boss instances with legendary loots is just a bad take imo.
Now is there a possibility that problems would arise that have not been accounted for? Absolutely...But do you honestly think that Steven would not quickly and decisively patch said issues? Here's a man who is a player like us, who has spent a fortune of his own money building up this game from scratch...No massive corporation overlords, or shareholders to be beholden to...The game will live or die by the choices he makes, and his wallet along with it. I find it incredulous that he would not fix any broken elements that arise...But in terms of design direction, that will not change, he's stated it before, he's seen it work as I have, and Archeage's initial registered player base prove there's a market for such a game...as long as it's handled properly, and greed is kept out of the equation, I believe the game will flourish and bring a breath of fresh air to the genre.
/end wall of text...apologies...haha *drinks beer*
I could potentially get behind an idea like this, though my initial instinct is for all content to have the same "amount" of PvP in total - if you remove it from one area you simply add it to another area.
I guess an argument could be made that in achieving that higher barrier to entry for some content, you will have had to have completed a good amount of PvP.
In regards to summoned encounters, my actual preference is for a game like Ashes to have many different types of encounters. Some instanced (assuming PvP is added back in some way), some summoned, some cage fights (as per another thread), some pure open world fights that are to be fought over. As long as there is a philosophy whereby people can't use content to escape PvP, literally all of them would fit just fine in to the concept of Ashes.
The more varied the content available, the better - at least initially. If it is found that one type of encounter is greatly favored they can make more, or if one is disliked as a concept they can simply not make any more.
I specifically said that it wasn't Thunderstruck trees that killed it - the server population had already dropped off dramatically by that point. By the time Trion made that change, they had come to the realization that the games population would never be very high, and so started monetizing it as much as they could.
its funny you talk about things like labor point exploits, item duping and regrading as being issues with Archeage - these were all things that were present in the Korean version of the game, but simply weren't considered issues due to the way players in Korea play MMO's.
Keep in mind - Archeage is still somewhat popular in Korea. It only dropped off the top 50 games played in Korea last year. it is worth pointing out though, Lineage 2 is at number 20. This is not a list of MMO's - it is a list of all games in Korea. Aion is also on this list - at number 10 (the notion that Aion was made FOR the west is laughable, sorry).
Point is, these games are massive in Korea, which is why they are the games that Korean developers make. They aren't nearly as big in NA/EU though, and need alterations to reach that level.
I mean, is anyone even willing to argue that Lineage 2 was in the top 1000 games played in NA last year?
Yeah, and yet at least in May last year, it was the 20th most played game in Korea - at least in cafes.
This is what I mean by these games being huge in Korea, but not here.
For reference, WoW was 16 - 6 places behind Aion.
To this point, I agree to an extent. There was already a massive following of Blizzard, which was rightly earned due to their three famous IP's, WoW tipped them past and was the icing on the cake.
Where did I ever stated it funded Aion's development on the NA side?, I stated Lineage 2's success in the west lead to an increase in staff at NCWest (Western subsidiary of NCSoft), which lead into Aion from a release perspective for the west, which further increased staff at NCWest. Which lends completely against the 5 figures of profit you pulled out of thin air for the western market profits of L2 yearly. NCSoft saw the NA market as a potential option for additional revenue...They would hardly invest their time and effort if it wasn't an option for a good source of income. They also skipped the idea of allowing a publisher take the reins and not invest heavily, but instead launched it themselves at additional cost under NCWest...To think they only made 5 figures of profit yearly for the west is quite a thing to say.
In regards to people happy to talk about L2, I can attest to this, as I have done many times myself. The game has fond memories for the player base that experienced it from launch.
Ahhh, mb on that. I misread that portion, but everything else I stated was valid and completely accurate. The game had P2W right after launch, and failed rapidly due to mishandling and the rapid adoption of p2w elements in the cash shop. Assuming that the western market looked at the game and disregarded Archeage as you stated is hugely inaccurate. It had a very large interested majority of 2 million, yet was doomed from the get go. It wasn't given an appropriate launch to reach it's true potential, which is one of the reason why we even have Ashes of Creation to begin with, as Steven has previously mentioned it was the straw that broke the camel's back. In regards to L2, it fostered growth in NA in its early years, which adds to the point of NA interest. Blanketing both games as having a lack of interest from the western audience due to their style, and therefore should adopt more PvE themepark content is an absolute wrong take.
They weren't an issue due to the fact that we have fundamentally different playing restrictions and standards between the West and Korea. They have to register there game account to a Korean social security number. So getting your account banned for being an idiot who cheats would leave you in a very tough bind. You are completely disregarding this fact and painting the games as having a lack of interest in the west as a result of the developer and publisher's failings, when it's clearly the opposite.
The failures of Archeage fall on the developer for not properly adapting said content and systems to the west. We've seen it time and again from Korean MMO's, where the developer either restricts their publishers from modifying the game to the appropriate standards for the target audience. Or worse, hand control to a predatory publisher that's aim is to milk as much as they can while being completely incompetent (Trion). None of these factors have anything to do with interest in the game, which you said is lacking, which both games showed the exact opposite.
In regards to your point in Korea. I don't doubt both games are popular in Korea, especially from NCSoft. Lineage has a massive fan base, as can be seen by the amount of their players and quarterly earnings reported by NCSoft. Which has many lineage titles btw (Unfortunately now mostly all mobile p2w garbage), as well as Aion and BnS. I'll disregard the Aion for the west comment, as I clearly never stated that and touched on already...
The games indeed are massive in Korea...NCSoft has always had a large fanbase in Asia since their initial release of Lineage 1. Korean's do enjoy a certain style of MMO's that differ from the western counterparts. But once again, stating that they aren't nearly as big in the NA/EU is a distorted viewpoint to take considering everything mentioned. Lineage 2 was successful in the west for some time, but did not have enough market penetration, presence to the public, and advertising to make it self known. Archeage was a catastrophe in the making, whose actions by Trion and the p2w nature of XLGames destroyed aby hope of the game succeeding in the west. The interest of 2 million registered users evaporating in a very short window...Just as it would any other western MMO of that time that would be released in the same manner.
lol. This honestly made me laugh. Of course it wouldn't. The game is nothing but a shell of it's former self, once it went F2P the game was doomed, we don't enjoy P2W mechanics, and gameplay changed for the worst after a few years which resulted in the F2P model. You really need to stop reaching for straws with your views/arguments, they are incredibly filled with holes. No offense meant once more. But you point Korean MMO's need to adapt their model, and AoC in hand...Which is EXACTLY what they are doing. The game has heavy inspiration from Korean MMO's, but is being developed for the west, which none of the Korean MMO's obviously have been. All the problems that we see in Korean MMO's brought to the west will be non existent. There won't be any P2W with a sub model, content that is designed around the western market, but with a flair of what made the old school Korean MMO's, as well as MMO's of the gold era so successful without the P2W and Korean POV in gaming...You are literally getting exactly that. Yet not having a themepark instanced loot boss pinata will cause the game to lose appeal? Give me a break.
Man, watching Project TL was extremely depressing, especially as a former L2 player. When Steven added his 2 cents during the last dev update, I could feel the hurt in his soul...haha. Took a few things that made L2 good, and stripped out everything else, dumbed down the rest, and slapped in mobile p2w and state it's in the Lineage universe...Sad panda.
It's quite insulting, blatant attempt at mashing mobile p2w mechanics into a desktop MMORPG with the release of TL. Trying to expand that filth into the desktop sphere and water down PC standards and acceptability of mobile mechanics is just downright depressing. Corporate and shareholder obligations at its absolute worst. Sad to see what NCSoft has turned into, every single game they release now is mobile...A mega money maker that has shifted all their IP's to mobile p2w garbage...Sad day...
Agreed. It's just truly sad to see though. I was holding on to a sliver of hope that they would deliver based on their TL developer preview months back. But after what we were given, literally have none left for Lineage 3 anymore. With the embracement of monetary transactions in every NCSoft title now, with mobile leanings, not holding my breath for a shift unless Korean gamers get fed up with it. Unfortunately, it's too ingrained into their society for that to happen from the looks of it.=*(.
NCSoft West have zero released titles under their banner (though one in development).
Essentially - according to NCSoft West themself - they simply manage the NCSoft portfolio across the Americas, Europe, Australia and New Zealand. They are better described as Western publishers for NCSoft than anything else.
Aion was made in Korea.
This is why I am completely unsure why you are making any connection at all between an increase in staff at NCSoft West leading in to Aion. It just doesn't make sense as a thought to even have unless you think there is a connection there somewhere - but there just isn't one.
Just to be clear, the increase in staff at NCWest was due to an increase in the number of titles they were managing. Except it is still the 20th most played game in Korea.
Literally all of the development for that game, all the decisions made for it, they were made for the Korean market since that is the target market for the game.
The fact that it is still the 20th most popular game there, and literally no one is willing to argue that it could even be in the top 1000 games here should illustrate to you my point about games needing to be different between the two markets - which is my point.
If you wish to argue that point, then explain how L2 is still in the top 20 games played in Korea (well, as of May last year), yet is nothing but a shell of it's former self here.
When did I ever say NCWest developed a title? I literally never uttered those words whatsoever. If you are mistaking "Released" as developed, you are truly grasping for anything at this point. You are the only one misunderstanding NCSoft West's role...As they were made specifically to publish NCSoft's titles, as a subsidiary of NCSoft. Stop google searching for some random information in order to prove a point that has no merit or standing in the debate.
Obviously, it's a Korean developed MMO, at NCSoft, in Korea...This was never questioned at all and I never stated otherwise. When I said stated "eventual release of Aion" under the topic of NCWesat...That does not mean they "DEVELOPED" it. I specifically used the world released, as the word clearly does not mean develop. NCWest, a subsidiary and wholly owned by NCSoft, acted as a publisher, releasing the game to the west.
I don't know how much clearer I can be. Why would a company, such as NCSoft, open up a subsidiary in the west (NCSoft West), open an office, hire personnel, only to end up making 5 figures worth of profit yearly? They wouldn't, they would just hand the title over to a third party publisher.
Did they do that? No, they did not. They established NCSoft West as they saw potential in making larger sums of money. Lineage 2 increased steadily in player count over the first few years, which means profit. NCSoft looks at said profit, likes what they see, and invests more into NCWest, increasing server counts and hiring more GM's. They follow up on the investment with localizing Aion and bringing it to the west. Do you really think they would go through all this hassle if they were only making a meager 5 figure profit yearly as you previously stated? No...They would not, they would of just handed it off to a third party publisher. It's very simple...Point of the matter, don't randomly pull a 5 figure profit sum when you clearly have no idea what you were talking about and passing it off as fact, and try to defend it in a failing manner. Once again, no offense meant...But it's clear as day to see.
It's not hard to explain. The Korean market embraces P2W, as they do not see it as a big problem. Their entire culture of MMORPG gaming is built around it, ours is not. It is in the top 20 in Korea because the game play is appealing, and they do not have an issue with P2W. It is not in the top 1000 in the west, because it is so ridiculously p2w that no one in the west would touch it except for whales. Just as every Korean MMORPG that ends up coming to the west that has embraced P2W mechanics, don't have a very large player base. The western player base frowns upon P2W.
You can't just compare apples to apples when we have complete societal differences considering what is acceptable and what is not. Hence why cheating is not a problem in the Korean MMO landscape due to the nature of a social security number required to play, yet you paint a picture of a flawed game as the reason why people cheat in the west. Those are societal differences, the games were never adapted for our market, societal preferences, with proper enforcement of TOS and guidelines, something we never get for Eastern MMO's coming to the west...That doesn't mean players don't like what the games have to offer...It just means that the developer and publisher failed in their job.
Hence why Lost Ark for example, which is a relatively new title to the west, has a massive player base in Korea, but in the west, averages now around 40k concurrent players. Western players do not like P2W, period. They will quickly move away from such titles, as P2W discourages the western base from playing a game. We saw it happen with Archeage even though it had massive interest. Yet the shining example I keep pointing out to you...That we saw growth in Lineage 2 for a few years under a sub model, which has literally zero p2w, you disregard as being "not liked by western markets". You are looking at everything in black and white, have made up statements which are false, and speculated massively...and it is failing you.
Also, not trying to pour salt on the wound...But Lineage 2 was one of the most hardcore MMO's there could be for the western market, and it still grew in player base. Let that sink in. The Korean style can survive, it just has to be adapted to a western taste, with no p2w, with good intentions behind the developer....Which all ring true for intrepid.
You said "Lineage 2's success in the west lead to an increase in staff at NCWest, which lead into Aion from a release perspective for the west".
There is no connection at all to be made here though - the connection you seem to have found is what I am trying to establish.
An increase in staff at NCSoft West wasn't ever due to how successful any game was. For the most part, a game that has10k players takes basically the same number of staff to perform NCSoft Wests function as it would take if that same game had 100k, or a million.
Increases in staff at NCsoft West happen when they have a new game on the horizon. Basically, the increase in staff at NCSoft West that you claim were because of L2's success and lead to Aion (see the above for where you said that) were actually simply new staff bought on because of Aion itself. They bought on new staff knowing that there was a new game around the corner.
Also, you said I am misunderstanding NCSoft Wests role - yet the role I specifically said they perform is that of a publisher (managing the portfolio of NCSofts games).
I have nothing but an understanding of that role - it is your statement again that an increase in staff at NCSoft West in any way lead to Aion that is the question at hand here.
So, I didn't say that. I said that is how much they made off L2.
There was no point in time where L2 was the sole title being managed. There was no point in time where L2 was the largest title NCSoft West managed. It was the largest title in Korea, but not in the west.
That... thats my point.
The difference is you seem to be claiming western audiences leave due to pay to win, I am pointing out that those audiences have always started dropping off before games move over to pay to win.
That's simply not true, of course aoc is a very pvp focused game. For everyone who can not handle this, aoc is the wrong game
The deeper you go the more corruption you gain from lingering in the area going up towards 1-5 levels making the tick increase grow as you go into more dangerous areas. Though upon entering from the entrance you gain a bubble that gives you a large buffer from actually being corrupted. As well you can only gain so much corruption from the area before you reach max stacks (to prevent max corruption gain) Once you reach the max, it lowers you maximum hp at a smaller amount and it will continue until you die.
Death to mobs or to corruption stack ticks make you drop all the items in your inventory and destroying it on the spot so it can not be reclaimed. If someone pks you though and takes the corruption hit the items are available to be picked up but each item take adds more corruption to your character
Upon adventuring in the area taking items also add corruption to your character drop wise you you are unable to take everything without also risk. But like the self protective bubble you get on entering there can be some drops the replenish those drops, as well as finding rare random spawn things throughout the dungeon that also replenish the buff by a certain percent.
So it becomes a very hard dungeon the deeper you go the better the loot but the higher chance you have of also losing what you gained from within it. If you make it to the deepest part of the dungeon you will be able to make it to the boss dealing with its mechanics and trying to ensure you keep your protective barrier up to not end up dying and losing everything.
Upon defeating the boss you simply need to escape back where you came from for whoever is left being a survivor and trying to not die to the corruption or the monsters that have respawned.
Generally the point of this being a high risk area means there is a high cooperative elements. Meaning random pvpers / griefers, etc won't really be able to impact your group and your content since they most likely wouldn't survive. It would have to be more of a set group that knows what they are doing to be able to challenge you reducing the amount of people that will actually pvp. While adding different challenges and mechanics for the content. Though this would only be one special type of area and not a standard.
There is a big or significant (whatever you want to call it) focus on PvP, with that I agree. But my point was about whether it is OVERLY focused on PvP - to it's own detriment. I think not to the degree to which we can actually can make such a statement without having played anything close to the current development.
I agree that if someone resents PvP this probably won't be the right game for them but, again, I don't see Ashes being too focused on PvP at all. I'd argue that the portion of PvP is a bit lower than 50% (but that is the topic of another thread currently on the front page)
Wait, what? How did this answer never get discussed much further? Not trying to sound dramatic, this just really surprised me.
Someone asked you to clarify what you would want AoC to have more of in terms of PvE, and you went: "Bet. Here's 2 PvP things the game should have, and also 1 surface-level PvE thing they might add, though I wouldn't personally advocate for that one."
Huh?! =D
I agree with you on everything you suggested in that comment, but can you answer the actual question too please? =') Because that was a pretty essential question for this thread.
And I guess you'll say something similar to how the game is meant to be PvX, and therefore PvP opportunities can beget more interesting PvE, but still: It's you who's asking for more PvE to pull in PvE players, so should you not have ideas in mind that actually involve different/more PvE?
instanced content and caged encounters - with the proviso that they be accompanied with an increase in PvP in some manner.
Those two things - that you seemed to think were PvP additions - were additions to what we know of about the games PvE.
That is how little PvE this game has from what we know so far, and that is why I am arguing for more.
The addition of transporting rewards to a city and advertise the event for PvP contestation is...a PvP addition.
I agree that the forced encounter seems to be a PvE addition. I misread its connection to the other ones. In fact it almost seems to exist to deny PvP.
All your suggestions seem to centre around PvP becoming more opt-in. Defeats the PvX philosophy in my eyes, but we might be going in circles at this point.
The addition of the PvP elements was as a means of pointing that such things can (and should) be added to the game without reducing the over all PvP in the game. It was a into that you can separate out some of the PvE from PvP elements without diminishing the PvP element.
So only way there is more pve content is if it is instanced based? So it isn't about the amount of pve content that can exist it is more about adding content where pvp can become impossible during fights.
Would you have any other ideas that add more PvE content without separating the two. Because to me I don't see them lacking pve content based on that.
L2 worked just fine with cage design, so I'm sure Steven has at least considered that approach. Hell, the volcano dragon was pretty much that, except he didn't limit entrance when the fight started. But I'd assume that's just a few additional lines of code, so there's already base design that's related to cage encounters.
And as Noaani said, there can still be pvp in the overall encounter, but just not directly during the pve part. Variety is the spice of life, so having only "there's a mob that everyone can hit and pvp around" design would be dull.
Then it has nothing to do with more PvE and about removing the pvp part out of it.
Also I don't agree you can have great designs that resolve around contested content but that is not even the point I'm trying to make.
If i hear something lacks pve content than I'm hearing their is a lack of actual content to do in the world for people that doesn't come close to the demand. If the discussion is they want pve content where pvp doesn't happen that doesn't mean lacking pve content.
PvP happening at the end of the day doesn't mean pve content doesn't exist suddenly.
A siege is PvP content for up to 1,000 players at a time.
If Intrepid add in an open world encounter to the game (including the caged fights mentioned above), and put a 3 day respawn timer on it (which is short), that is one encounter for 40 people once every three days. The thing is, e days later it is probably more PvE content for that same 40 people.
If Intrepid add another encounter that spawns on a different day than the above, that is more PvE content for that same group of 40 players.
The only way to make it so open world encounters are content for different people is to have many encounters spawn at the same time.
In order to achieve the same amount of player interaction as a single siege, Intrepid need to have 25 such encounters spawn at the same time.
Or they can have one instance with a three day lockout.
If the intention is to provide PvE content with the same amount of player participation as a siege, it really isnt a hard decision to make.
The key is in making sure any potential PvP opportunities removed due to the content being instanced are made up for. Instancing to separate PvP from the moment of PvE is done, but it is not acceptable (imo) to use instancing to remove PvP from the whole picture. That is why my suggestion requires the use of the caravan system in order to get the better rewards from the encounter, and goes as far as telling the server what it is you are doing. Assuming there are organized PvP oriented guilds on your server, you will probably find yourself having to PvP the entire way - significantly more PvP than if it was just an open world encounter.
I am making the assumption Ashes will still have open world bosses to fight over - there is no reason to assume otherwise.
What having instanced content like the above means is that there is more variety in PvE encounters, there is more variety in terms of types of PvP, there is more PvP potential in terms of amount of fighting, and there is a higher quality in terms of PvE, and there is PvE content for far more players.
Essentially, it is a win all around.
That is fair to think based off not having shards and such there could not be enough content access wise that can support all types of players on the server.
When i hear lack of pve content, for me it gives the idea it does not exist on the game. If it is access to content, honestly i have no clue how that will turn out until more of the game is seen, and we see the size of the world, amount of content with the player population and spawn times of the content.
Will be interesting to see how that is approached in having the variety of content and it being challenging as well. The main issue with pve why people are more in line with instanced is you just zerg everything. I don't know how they will stop full on zergs unless they are doing it as caged which you suggested. I think that is the best way to do it as well tbh. But there are unique ways to approach it that can be developed as well or atleast in ways to make it feel different and a bit more organic.
I definitely hope that the world is huge and populated enough to provide everyone with enough mid-high quality pve, with the top quality stuff being limited to power checks.
I think the easiest way to do this is with party/raid quests and "cage" triggers. Maybe there's an npc you gotta bring to a location, at which point he triggers a fight in a "cage" and then you gotta bring that npc back, but he's now a target for other people and if they kill him - your reward's gone. Or you get a key for a room in an open dungeon, where the fight happens, and you then need to go deeper into the dungeon to get your loot, but your group is now perma-flagged until you get the loot or wipe.
In other words, you have assured pve content, but you still have high risk of losing the reward for it due to pvp.
To be fair we don't know how the case will actually be there is way too much unknown to assume anything. Again my point of saying there is not enough pve content is not about who has access to it.
To me, there are 5 types of boss encounters Intrepid should be trying to put in the game.
There are open world bosses that spawn a battleground around them, disabling corruption. These by necessity need to he fairly basic in terms of mechanics, and should have a predictable spawn time, perhaps with serverwode announcements of that fact. With no corruption their spawn should attract a massive number of people. I consider this to be PvP content more than PvE content, and this is where the beet items in the game should come from.
The point of these encounters is just outright carnage- something for players to fight over en masse.
Next down you have dungeon bosses. Still open world, but corruption is a thing, and the respawn point should be at least an hours fighting away. The respawn here should be almost totally random, and the encounters can be a little more involved than the open world bosses - but not much more.
The point of this type of encounter is to give players something where the best option would often be to cooperate to get the kill - I'd like to see a mechanic for loot to be shared across multiple raids to facilitate this.
Then there are instanced bosses. These can be as intricate as the developers can manage in terms of mechanics. This is the only real opportunity a game like Ashes has to do actual good PvE, and if they want to attract players that prefer PvE but are willing to PvP from other games, this content is the only thing Intrepid can use to entice then away. The drops for this content should be based on how difficult the encounter is, ranging from entry level raid difficulty up to the second best items. The key to making this work in a game like Ashes, as I've said before, is making sure you add back the PvP element after the fact.
The point of this content is both access to content for players in general, as well as the only means of adding PvE challenge.
Then there are cage fights. These would probably only be fought over by the top guilds on the server, as you would need to be good at PvP to have a shot, and once inside the cage the encounters can be as intricate as instanced encounters. They would probably only spawn once a week. As such, it is viable for them to drop best in slot items, though I would perhaps want to see these encounters only drop best in slot for one or two equipment slots, with the rest on the open world encounter terms above.
The point of these fights is to be the pinnacle for guilds that both PvP and PvE, as top tier skill in both are needed.
Then the last type is forced summons. This is another type of thing that can easily have two tiers. The first tier is players running group content (open dungeons) to collect items. Once enough are collected, the guild brings them to the appropriate location (ideally well out of the way of other content) and spawns a mob. These can be about as involved as the dungeon bosses, but this first tier should be fairly easy. A second tier of this can be added where the summon items drop from raid dungeon mobs, and the resulting mob is tougher.
The point of this kind of content is as an introduction to raiding at the level cap, with the second tier being an introduction to higher end raiding.
To me, that gives a massive variety of both PvP and PvE content. There is also no reason the above cant be mirrored for single group content, though I wouldnt expect the same crowds for the first content type at a single group level.
Hopefully Trost was somewhat of an outsider in the development of that game and can build from the epic failures of NW.
Also, bring back the resident bard. Love that guy.