Freehold system makes me more hopeful for Ashes of Creation.

Honestly, hearing about this Freehold system has rekindled my interest in Ashes of Creation. The fact that they might stick to their original design instead of pandering to casual players is quite exciting.

Finally, there might be a game where guilds are able to control meaningful content inside an MMORPG, instead of it being a themepark borefest where everyone gets everything.

I am curious, though. If you are a casual or solo player interested in Ashes of Creation, what are you expected to achieve and do inside the game? Because in my eyes, with the current design, you are just going to be a pawn that guilds will use for their own gain/fun.

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Noaani

Trustmebro666 wrote: »

Honestly, hearing about this Freehold system has rekindled my interest in Ashes of Creation. The fact that they might stick to their original design instead of pandering to casual players is quite exciting.

Finally, there might be a game where guilds are able to control meaningful content inside an MMORPG, instead of it being a themepark borefest where everyone gets everything.

I am curious, though. If you are a casual or solo player interested in Ashes of Creation, what are you expected to achieve and do inside the game? Because in my eyes, with the current design, you are just going to be a pawn that guilds will use for their own gain/fun.

As someone that is absolutely not casual, would be running one of those guilds that control things (if myself and my guild decided to play), the current design of Ashes is horrid.

Being able to control some content at the guild level is actually great - but only if there is still enough content for those not controlling anything to have a game to play.

As it stands now, if you aren't controlling content that requires a guild, you don't have a game, you have scraps - and some players here, as well as Steven, seem to somehow thing players will not only pay for that, but will also spend their time on it.

That is actually delusional.

If you don't control that content, you also have no avenue of meaningful progression so that you can get yourself and your guild in to a position where you can contest to be able to control some content.

The game isn't going to have people that aren't affiliated with such guilds - at least not for more than a few weeks.

What all this means is that the notion of multiple servers with 10k cuncurrent players each is literally a meme.

BlackBrony

Noaani wrote: »

Trustmebro666 wrote: »

Honestly, hearing about this Freehold system has rekindled my interest in Ashes of Creation. The fact that they might stick to their original design instead of pandering to casual players is quite exciting.

Finally, there might be a game where guilds are able to control meaningful content inside an MMORPG, instead of it being a themepark borefest where everyone gets everything.

I am curious, though. If you are a casual or solo player interested in Ashes of Creation, what are you expected to achieve and do inside the game? Because in my eyes, with the current design, you are just going to be a pawn that guilds will use for their own gain/fun.

As someone that is absolutely not casual, would be running one of those guilds that control things (if myself and my guild decided to play), the current design of Ashes is horrid.

Being able to control some content at the guild level is actually great - but only if there is still enough content for those not controlling anything to have a game to play.

As it stands now, if you aren't controlling content that requires a guild, you don't have a game, you have scraps - and some players here, as well as Steven, seem to somehow thing players will not only pay for that, but will also spend their time on it.

That is actually delusional.

If you don't control that content, you also have no avenue of meaningful progression so that you can get yourself and your guild in to a position where you can contest to be able to control some content.

The game isn't going to have people that aren't affiliated with such guilds - at least not for more than a few weeks.

What all this means is that the notion of multiple servers with 10k cuncurrent players each is literally a meme.

This was my conclusion as well. Unless you enjoy gathering random stuff, basically all advancement is not possible unless you belong to a large guild.
You might get into node wars, or random caravan PvP, but no node in the map will exists without the presence of a large guild. Not even having small guild will be a good solution.
People still haven't given me good reasons on another thread on why a casual would protect their nodes when their own no property in it.

Liniker

Yes, the freehold system is indeed sticking to their original vision - ashes was never a solo-friendly game.

However, there is still plenty of content and ways to play as a solo, just not as easily as playing in a group.

As for your last statement, it makes me question if this is a legit post, or you are one of the Multiple, multiple alt accounts from QQing casuals made to try to spam push their agenda and get intrepid to change the system

it wouldn't be the first time we hade these bait posts around here

Liniker

Ok, now I know you are indeed just another alt account pushing yours or your streamer's agenda.

I'd ask @Vaknar and @Roshen to keep an eye on these. People are artificially trying to inflate the number of negative feedback around here. Not cool.

Trustmebro666

Liniker wrote: »

As for your last statement, it makes me question if this is a legit post, or you are one of the Multiple, multiple alt accounts from QQing casuals made to try to spam push their agenda and get intrepid to change the system

My last statement is from the point of view of someone who is part of these so-called 1% guilds that would be controlling this game. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion with the thread topic being "Freehold system makes me more hopeful for Ashes of Creation."

I don't want this game to change, and I'm truly curious about what kind of expectations the people who shouldn't be excited for such a hardcore guild-driven game have.

Liniker wrote: »

Ok, now I know you are indeed just another alt account pushing yours or your streamer's agenda.

I'd ask @Vaknar and @Roshen to keep an eye on these. People are artificially trying to inflate the number of negative feedback around here. Not cool.

There is absolutely no need to artificially try to inflate the number of negative feedback when it comes to Ashes of Creation. They are already receiving enough without that. Also, people who are posting two times in a row like this should be kept an eye on. That's just terrible forum etiquette. You could have easily done all of this in a single post.

Liniker

Trustmebro666 wrote: »

There is absolutely no need to artificially try to inflate the number of negative feedback when it comes to Ashes of Creation.

lol are you new to Ashes? same happened with the PK discussion, the large majority wants PVE servers or Opt in PVP

what was Steven's response? game is not for everyone.

This game is not designed by feedback, they explained multiple times that this is not a game made by committee, they take feedback to understand why people like or don't like the systems, sorry.

also, in this case, I'm not sure its even a 50/50 there are plenty of content creators and their communities giving positive feedback, most of my community liked the changes so... even then, seems like a 'loud minority' case.

Which is fine, it goes to show that intrepid really nailed it with this showcase, it was so good that made you go and spam 20 alt accounts to try and change a game so you can own a freehold at day 1 level 1 lol

Trustmebro666

Liniker wrote: »

Trustmebro666 wrote: »

There is absolutely no need to artificially try to inflate the number of negative feedback when it comes to Ashes of Creation.

lol are you new to Ashes? same happened with the PK discussion, the large majority wants PVE servers or Opt in PVP

what was Steven's response? game is not for everyone.

This game is not designed by feedback, they explained multiple times that this is not a game made by committee, they take feedback to understand why people like or don't like the systems, sorry.

No, I'm not new, and what I meant is that Ashes is receiving negative feedback from the MMORPG community because it's not what the majority wants. This isn't artificially inflating the negative feedback. Your mind is so focused on the idea that "evil casuals" are coming for your game that it's the only thing you see. Or maybe you just lack reading comprehension?

Let's try again. My topic for the game is "Freehold system makes me more hopeful for Ashes of Creation," which is positive towards the whole system being hardcore and guild-driven. Why would I create alt accounts to be positive about Ashes of Creation? You cultist members are shilling enough, I don't need to do that.

Songcaller

Can't make a niche game fit millions of players. Just doesn't work like that. We'll probably end up like albion online with two servers lol.

Fantmx

Interesting choice of first splash.

Raven016

Noaani wrote: »

Trustmebro666 wrote: »

Honestly, hearing about this Freehold system has rekindled my interest in Ashes of Creation. The fact that they might stick to their original design instead of pandering to casual players is quite exciting.

Finally, there might be a game where guilds are able to control meaningful content inside an MMORPG, instead of it being a themepark borefest where everyone gets everything.

I am curious, though. If you are a casual or solo player interested in Ashes of Creation, what are you expected to achieve and do inside the game? Because in my eyes, with the current design, you are just going to be a pawn that guilds will use for their own gain/fun.

As someone that is absolutely not casual, would be running one of those guilds that control things (if myself and my guild decided to play), the current design of Ashes is horrid.

Being able to control some content at the guild level is actually great - but only if there is still enough content for those not controlling anything to have a game to play.

As it stands now, if you aren't controlling content that requires a guild, you don't have a game, you have scraps - and some players here, as well as Steven, seem to somehow thing players will not only pay for that, but will also spend their time on it.

That is actually delusional.

If you don't control that content, you also have no avenue of meaningful progression so that you can get yourself and your guild in to a position where you can contest to be able to control some content.

The game isn't going to have people that aren't affiliated with such guilds - at least not for more than a few weeks.

What all this means is that the notion of multiple servers with 10k concurrent players each is literally a meme.

In all this chaos, it feels good to see somebody who understands what is happening.
I don't know why you say "the current design of Ashes is horrid".
But I definitely agree that there must be some "meaningful progression" for all kind of different players.
Often players who played before an mmorpg see such games only through the prism of their past experience. They think activities they liked are good for the game and activities they hate are bad and developers should not implement them or if they do, should reserve them for low level/casual players.

But there are so many kind of players who simply enjoy the game in a different way.
Trying to make the game only for a subset can indeed lead to a low population.
The "meaningful progression" must be really good to prevent players throwing in the towel after their first node is destroyed.

Caww

There won't be too many casual players willing to have a monthly $15 sub lying around unused throughout the year, either AoC has an appeal to many players or it becomes obscure. I'm hoping for mass appeal so some "pandering to casual players" will be required.

Demostrathe

Caww wrote: »

There won't be too many casual players willing to have a monthly $15 sub lying around unused throughout the year, either AoC has an appeal to many players or it becomes obscure. I'm hoping for mass appeal so some "pandering to casual players" will be required.

pretty sure steven himself said the games not gonna be for everyone and thats ok with him

Trustmebro666

Caww wrote: »

There won't be too many casual players willing to have a monthly $15 sub lying around unused throughout the year, either AoC has an appeal to many players or it becomes obscure. I'm hoping for mass appeal so some "pandering to casual players" will be required.

The moment you allow any form of open-world PvP, the mass appeal goes out the window. So, it's safe to say that AoC won't have mass appeal. I guess the biggest challenge will be throwing a bone to casual players without losing the integrity of the game. Personally, I don't think that's even possible with the core pillars of AoC. If you start tip-toeing around casuals too much, it will just become another theme park borefest in the end.

DrDefault

Noaani wrote: »

Trustmebro666 wrote: »

Honestly, hearing about this Freehold system has rekindled my interest in Ashes of Creation. The fact that they might stick to their original design instead of pandering to casual players is quite exciting.

Finally, there might be a game where guilds are able to control meaningful content inside an MMORPG, instead of it being a themepark borefest where everyone gets everything.

I am curious, though. If you are a casual or solo player interested in Ashes of Creation, what are you expected to achieve and do inside the game? Because in my eyes, with the current design, you are just going to be a pawn that guilds will use for their own gain/fun.

As someone that is absolutely not casual, would be running one of those guilds that control things (if myself and my guild decided to play), the current design of Ashes is horrid.

Being able to control some content at the guild level is actually great - but only if there is still enough content for those not controlling anything to have a game to play.

As it stands now, if you aren't controlling content that requires a guild, you don't have a game, you have scraps - and some players here, as well as Steven, seem to somehow thing players will not only pay for that, but will also spend their time on it.

That is actually delusional.

If you don't control that content, you also have no avenue of meaningful progression so that you can get yourself and your guild in to a position where you can contest to be able to control some content.

The game isn't going to have people that aren't affiliated with such guilds - at least not for more than a few weeks.

What all this means is that the notion of multiple servers with 10k cuncurrent players each is literally a meme.

Exactly, that's what a lot of these people defending this news don't understand fundamentally. I'm an active player in Albion online, a far more hardcore pvp game than Ashes wants to be, and if Sandbox interactive completely got rid of the option for guilds to be able to build their own crafting stations on their islands, then a large majority of the player base would just quit because they'd refuse to deal with the cartels bullshit.

Noaani

Liniker wrote: »

Yes, the freehold system is indeed sticking to their original vision - ashes was never a solo-friendly game.

@Liniker

The problem is that Ashes is now a solo-hostile game.

Noaani

Liniker wrote: »

Ok, now I know you are indeed just another alt account pushing yours or your streamer's agenda.

I'd ask Vaknar and Roshen to keep an eye on these. People are artificially trying to inflate the number of negative feedback around here. Not cool.

I wouldn't worry about that.

They have access to all the information they reasonably need to determine if someone is posting from multiple accounts. If they are actually attempting to collect player sentiment, that isn't an issue.

I mean, I for one have three accounts to this game, yet only post on one.

Caww

Demostrathe wrote: »

pretty sure steven himself said the games not gonna be for everyone and thats ok with him

That statement is true, he has said that and is not shy about it, however, I would like to point out that they are going thru a lot of effort to create the Corruption system to alleviate common issues that casuals would have with raw PvP activities, based on that, he has not given up on a broader, mass appeal and most likely will want the highest sub. rates possible. To accomplish this, many game functions, including the FH system, will need to be adjusted for that purpose.

Songcaller

Caww wrote: »

Demostrathe wrote: »

pretty sure steven himself said the games not gonna be for everyone and thats ok with him

That statement is true, he has said that and is not shy about it, however, I would like to point out that they are going thru a lot of effort to create the Corruption system to alleviate common issues that casuals would have with raw PvP activities, based on that, he has not given up on a broader, mass appeal and most likely will want the highest sub. rates possible. To accomplish this, many game functions, including the FH system, will need to be adjusted for that purpose.

Perhaps we can get rid of the corruption system if all the casuals leave

BlackBrony

Caww wrote: »

Demostrathe wrote: »

pretty sure steven himself said the games not gonna be for everyone and thats ok with him

That statement is true, he has said that and is not shy about it, however, I would like to point out that they are going thru a lot of effort to create the Corruption system to alleviate common issues that casuals would have with raw PvP activities, based on that, he has not given up on a broader, mass appeal and most likely will want the highest sub. rates possible. To accomplish this, many game functions, including the FH system, will need to be adjusted for that purpose.

I mean, if you can't have nice things, why stay? Oh look at my "instanced housing" it's so nice. LOL. That's gonna be more than 50% of the population. Being happy about having instanced housing.

Individuated Soul

Noaani wrote: »

Liniker wrote: »

Yes, the freehold system is indeed sticking to their original vision - ashes was never a solo-friendly game.

@Liniker

The problem is that Ashes is now a solo-hostile game.

I think it's incorrect to think this way. The game is being designed to meet the design pillars and philosophy of the creator. Where casuals fall within that is by consequence rather than intentional design.

Child Item