Glorious Alpha Two Testers!

Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.

Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.

Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.

Casual vs. hardcore players as seen by Steven

1356710

Comments

  • Sybil_LanelSybil_Lanel Member, Alpha Two
    Dygz wrote: »
    Eh, I think PvX will be the new standard for MMOs eventually. PvE centered MMOs just keep growing more and more stale and PvP players will move to PvX for it's more meaningful PvP.

    PvE players will get bored, finally put up with a little PvP, stop acting like a cat in water, and join PvX games because PvP makes PvE more interesting.

    PvP and PvE were meant for each other, they just take some seriously hard work to blend.
    PvX is a car salesman term that just means PvPers also have to do some PvE. Any WoW or EQ PvP server is PvX.

    What truly matters is whether there is PvE-Only server or some mechanic that allows people who don't enjoy PvP much to turn PvP off (like New World).
    PvEers don't get so bored that they put up with PvP. If PvEers get bored, they stop playing and wait for new PvE content to be added.

    I like PvP sometimes, but I always move from PvP-optional servers to PvE-Only servers.
    PvP does not make PvE more interesting.

    Yeah I definitely understand what you mean. I used to play a lot of Destiny 2 and the worst feeling ever was being told I needed to do crucible(D2 PvP) for a PvE exotic. I've also been told from the PvP crowd they hate the opposite occurrence being told to do PvE for a PvP exotic. I'm also the type of competitive player that cares about skill so if I want to PvP I play Valorant. If I want to PvE I play an MMO.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    if I want to PvP I play Valorant. If I want to PvE I play an MMO.
    This is a thing I wish players would grasp.

    There are far better genres for PvP gameplay than MMO's.

    One of the key things in PvP is that you want players in game representation (player character) to be roughly equal. That makes for the best PvP.

    The point of an MMORPG (or any RPG) is to make your player character stronger - character progression.

    As such, the concept of PvP and MMORPG's are actually diametrically opposed.
  • LinikerLiniker Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    This is a thing I wish players would grasp.

    There are far better genres for PvP gameplay than MMO's.

    One of the key things in PvP is that you want players in game representation (player character) to be roughly equal. That makes for the best PvP.

    The point of an MMORPG (or any RPG) is to make your player character stronger - character progression.

    As such, the concept of PvP and MMORPG's are actually diametrically opposed.

    best PVP I ever had in a video game happened in MMOs, glad ashes is gonna bring that back

    img]
    Recrutamento aberto - Nosso Site: Clique aqui
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    if I want to PvP I play Valorant. If I want to PvE I play an MMO.
    This is a thing I wish players would grasp.

    There are far better genres for PvP gameplay than MMO's.

    One of the key things in PvP is that you want players in game representation (player character) to be roughly equal. That makes for the best PvP.

    The point of an MMORPG (or any RPG) is to make your player character stronger - character progression.

    As such, the concept of PvP and MMORPG's are actually diametrically opposed.

    This is why i question you playing PvP in mmorpgs when you are making hardcore PvE takes. Makes me think you have not actually experienced pvp...

    Some of the most memorial moments for pvp is in mmorpgs all the way back from shadowbane.
  • LudulluLudullu Member, Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    The point of an MMORPG (or any RPG) is to make your player character stronger - character progression.
    Have there ever been pvp d&d campaigns or anything like that? Cause I feel like mmos are the exact genre that let people's characters interact with each other in more ways that "help me kill this mob".

    And if there have been such campaigns, then your statement is just incorrect.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    NiKr wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    The point of an MMORPG (or any RPG) is to make your player character stronger - character progression.
    Have there ever been pvp d&d campaigns or anything like that? Cause I feel like mmos are the exact genre that let people's characters interact with each other in more ways that "help me kill this mob".

    And if there have been such campaigns, then your statement is just incorrect.

    Probably some tabletop ones.

    But I'd you were DM'ing such a game, you would likely do what you could to keep things as equal as possible.

    However, the general D&D rule is mo player vs player fighting - for good and obvious reasons.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    if I want to PvP I play Valorant. If I want to PvE I play an MMO.
    This is a thing I wish players would grasp.

    There are far better genres for PvP gameplay than MMO's.

    One of the key things in PvP is that you want players in game representation (player character) to be roughly equal. That makes for the best PvP.

    The point of an MMORPG (or any RPG) is to make your player character stronger - character progression.

    As such, the concept of PvP and MMORPG's are actually diametrically opposed.

    This is why i question you playing PvP in mmorpgs when you are making hardcore PvE takes. Makes me think you have not actually experienced pvp...

    Some of the most memorial moments for pvp is in mmorpgs all the way back from shadowbane.

    I dont really give a shit what you question, nor what you think.

    If I play a PvP game and see bad things about it, you question if I even played it. If I didnt play a game and say bad things about it, you say I am in no position to talk about the game.

    Basically, if anyone has anything negative to say about PvP, you find yourself unable to actually discuss the issue and resort to arguing pointless detractions.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Liniker wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    This is a thing I wish players would grasp.

    There are far better genres for PvP gameplay than MMO's.

    One of the key things in PvP is that you want players in game representation (player character) to be roughly equal. That makes for the best PvP.

    The point of an MMORPG (or any RPG) is to make your player character stronger - character progression.

    As such, the concept of PvP and MMORPG's are actually diametrically opposed.

    best PVP I ever had in a video game happened in MMOs, glad ashes is gonna bring that back

    Yeah, people not wanting a fair fight will find what they want in an MMO, much more than they will in a fighting game, FPS or MOBA.
  • LudulluLudullu Member, Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    But I'd you were DM'ing such a game, you would likely do what you could to keep things as equal as possible.
    And a good pvp mmo would have a good class/gear balance so that people are quite equally powerful.
    Noaani wrote: »
    However, the general D&D rule is mo player vs player fighting - for good and obvious reasons.
    Then mmos did in fact just add another dimension to the rpg genre. And later on other games (namely mobas) took their features and just distilled them into pure pvp.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    NiKr wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    But I'd you were DM'ing such a game, you would likely do what you could to keep things as equal as possible.
    And a good pvp mmo would have a good class/gear balance so that people are quite equally powerful.
    A good RPG will have an insurmountable difference between a level 20 and a level 50, or a level 50 in tier 2 gear vs a level 50 in tier 5 gear.

    Without this progression, you have a shit RPG.

    With this progression, you have shit PvP.

    In both cases this is in comparison to other alternatives, rather than as an absolute.
    Noaani wrote: »
    However, the general D&D rule is mo player vs player fighting - for good and obvious reasons.
    Then mmos did in fact just add another dimension to the rpg genre. And later on other games (namely mobas) took their features and just distilled them into pure pvp.

    I would say they took the features and gave them a proper home.

    Match based PvP is far superior than persistent PvP.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Depraved wrote: »
    by pvp do you mean killing other players or competing against other players?
    Why not both??

  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Well In theory they can participate in sieges. Under the assumption that they are uncapped in terms of players. Any guild would have to be crazy to allow a casual cleric to have a siege spot over their fully kitted cleric who participated in guild activities consistently for 8 months. I don't think most guilds would allow casuals a spot over hardcore players. We saw the same thing happen in other games.
    Casuals can participate in sieges, but they will probably be playing some other game that is more casual-friendly than Ashes.

  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Veeshan wrote: »
    If PvE players ever unite and fight back agaist PvP players they can win just by pure numbers but they dont they just complain and hope somone else fixes there problem instead of dealing with it
    Disliking PvP really has nothing to do with who wins.
    And, there is no "problem" that needs to be fixed.
    Just play the games that have the features, mechanics and server rulesets that you like.
    Don't play the games that don't have server rulesets you like... if you don't want to.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Vyril wrote: »
    I'm always confused by your treading water responses, as if you didn't read what this game was about when you signed up.
    For one thing, I signed up to support the development of Nodes and the Archetype/Augment systems - as well as to support concepts like Dwarfs inspired by Polynesia.
    But...I was always skeptical about Corruption being enough of a deterent for PvP that I would feel comfortable playing Ashes because, even though I enjoy PvP sometimes (probably less than 5% of my play session)... when I am not in the mood for PvP combat, really there should be 0% chance of me being "forced" into PvP combat.
    I typically move from PvP-optional servers to PvE-Only servers.

    So - I'm curious about how you get people who don't like PvP much to play Ashes.
    Corruption was supposed to be the solution.
    But, last year Steven made a change which adds permanent zones with no Corruption.
    That's a deal-breaker for me.
    That makes the game too much like EvE Online and ArcheAge. Games I have no interest in playing because they are too PvP-centric. And really the same for Lineage II.

    With so many EQ devs from SOE on the team - including the Lead Game Designer - I expected Jeffrey Bard to want to accomodate players who don't absolutely hate PvP combat. Because for EQ (and WoW) the PvE-Only servers have the highest populations.
    But, Jeffrey left Intrepid Studios. And there hasn't been anyone else there with the clout to moderate Steven's hardcore PvP mindset - if even Jeffrey could do that.

    The game design has changed significantly since Jeffrey left.
    And there are now some deal-breakers in the design that cause me to have, like, a 5% interest in playing the game at launch.
    If the TheoryForge Community plays after launch, I might pop in every once while for 20-30 minutes, but...
    I expect the vast majority of my gameplay to take place in other MMORPG(s) where it's easier to completely avoid PvP combat when I'm not in the mood for PvP combat.
  • Noaani wrote: »
    if I want to PvP I play Valorant. If I want to PvE I play an MMO.
    This is a thing I wish players would grasp.

    There are far better genres for PvP gameplay than MMO's.

    One of the key things in PvP is that you want players in game representation (player character) to be roughly equal. That makes for the best PvP.

    The point of an MMORPG (or any RPG) is to make your player character stronger - character progression.

    As such, the concept of PvP and MMORPG's are actually diametrically opposed.

    I agree mostly. Casual players who want to enjoy their little time, they might want to take the most out from quests and will read every note they find or watch cut-scenes even if those are skippable. Would a PvP environment make them invulnerable while they read?
    Also the PvP environment would put a pressure to level up fast and to return resources often to storage instead of just exploring.
    But given enough time, every AoC player will end up having one fully leveled character.
    While casual PvP-ers prefer games where without time sink they can just jump into the action, guilds can gear up such casual players when needed.
    Their presence on the battle field can still be important as scouts or during battle. Let's say 5 vs 5 hardcore would end in deadlock, having 5 casuals on your side would help win.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    I think PvP combat is a natural desire for competetive gamers and that there should be no surprise that competitive gamers will enjoy playing online with masses of other players - and while killing non-competitive players may not be quite as fun as killing competitive players - at the end of the day, a win is a win.
    pwn those you can pwn.

    Similarly, people who love E-Sports desire to turn all MMOs into E-Sports - because that's how they love to play online games.

    Just because you can; doesn't mean you should.
    But, there should be no surprise that there are people who want to be able to do that stuff.
    (In the case of Ashes, if Steven can successfully launch and maintain an MMORPG that hardcore PvPers love - he should give it a try. Because the hardcore PvPers don't have a bunch of hardcore PvP MMORPGs available.)
  • Raven016Raven016 Member
    edited July 2023
    Dygz wrote: »
    So - I'm curious about how you get people who don't like PvP much to play Ashes.
    Corruption was supposed to be the solution.
    But, last year Steven made a change which adds permanent zones with no Corruption.
    That's a deal-breaker for me.
    That makes the game too much like EvE Online and ArcheAge. Games I have no interest in playing because they are too PvP-centric. And really the same for Lineage II.
    The answer is
    Dygz wrote: »
    If the TheoryForge Community plays after launch, I might pop in every once while for 20-30 minutes, but...
    I expect the vast majority of my gameplay to take place in other MMORPG(s) where it's easier to completely avoid PvP combat when I'm not in the mood for PvP combat.
    Other players can also do the same, they might come to AoC because they are used to play with their guild mates who switched to AoC. It is awkward to join them on Discord voice channel and still play a different game.
    But If you think from the perspective of a solo mmorpg player who teams up with random people and joins guilds spontaneously in AoC then you are right. If they don't like the game they have no reason to stay, if they want to have control over when PvP happens.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Raven016 wrote: »
    You made a typo here.
    Thanks! I fixed it.
    Raven016 wrote: »
    Other players can also do the same, they might come to AoC because they are used to play with their guild mates who switched to AoC. It is awkward to join them on Discord voice channel and still play a different game.
    But If you think from the perspective of a solo mmorpg player who teams up with random people and joins guilds spontaneously in AoC then you are right. If they don't like the game they have no reason to stay, if they want to have control over when PvP happens.
    I'm Braver of Worlds, so... I won't be spending more money to play.
    If I had to pay a subscription to play - I definitely would not play at all - regardless of whether friends are playing.

    I don't think I'm thinking from the mindset of a solo player. I'm thinking from the mindset of casual players who, when they play MMORPGs, refuse to play on PvP servers.
    Players who want to have control over when PvP happens won't be playing Ashes.
    (Also, feels to me like you don't know how casual quilds/communities work - casuals would most likely not play with their "guildmates" who choose to play Ashes. They would most likely be in a Discord channel, with their casual guildmates, for an MMO that is more casual-friendly than Ashes.)
  • akabearakabear Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Among non-mmo pvp games I have played that feeling from a win or the gravity of a loss is incomparable to that of the MMORPG, L2, when knowing the end result of the quick skirmish, a strategtic pk, a planned battle or even unexpected encounter could result in loss or gain of gear that took over a year to obtain, worth in the thousand of dollars if ever did go the RLT route.

    You feel the continued pain of your loss by that one pvp death taking 1-3 hours of pve time to regain. And that knowledge of being resurrected in a fight to possibly double or tripple your losses should you die again, all to look after your group or clan.



  • Dygz wrote: »
    (Also, feels to me like you don't know how casual quilds/communities work - casuals would most likely not play with their "guildmates" who choose to play Ashes. They would most likely be in a Discord channel, with their casual guildmates, for an MMO that is more casual-friendly than Ashes.)
    That's true, casuals who would come to AoC would come with PvP oriented guilds.
    They would be casual PvP-ers or PvX-ers
    I have no idea if a pure PvE guild will come into a game where the concept is to gather resources to prepare for node siege. Maybe if they have no freeholds to lose? But then why play the game? That is what I asked on the Ashen Forge pinned thread
    Raven016 wrote: »
    I want to know if Steven sees Ashes of Creation an interesting game experience if no PvP would happen at all, by player choice, encouraged / enforced by a very powerful guild controlling the entire server.
    By guild I mean the already existing guilds on discord, not the in-game guilds.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    akabear wrote: »
    Among non-mmo pvp games I have played that feeling from a win or the gravity of a loss is incomparable to that of the MMORPG, L2, when knowing the end result of the quick skirmish, a strategtic pk, a planned battle or even unexpected encounter could result in loss or gain of gear that took over a year to obtain, worth in the thousand of dollars if ever did go the RLT route.

    You feel the continued pain of your loss by that one pvp death taking 1-3 hours of pve time to regain. And that knowledge of being resurrected in a fight to possibly double or tripple your losses should you die again, all to look after your group or clan.
    L2 took the character progression aspect of MMORPG's and reduced it down to almost nothing.

    This is based on extensive discussion on these forums with many people that have talked at length and with great fondness for that game.

    It is actually kind of proof that PvP and RPG shouldn't exist together - the best example people have of both are when one is reduced to almost not existing.

    As a reference, the amount of character progression that happens in L2 in a year happens in a decent RPG based MMORPG in a matter of weeks.

    However, literally everything else you have talked about above is an MMO thing, not a PvP thing. That sense of winning or losing having a major impact on your gameplay for the next while is quite real in top end PvE.
  • Individuated SoulIndividuated Soul Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    No amount of whining is going to change the fact that pvp is a core concept of ashes and will stay so. For that I am thankful.
    jfpdwtk
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    if I want to PvP I play Valorant. If I want to PvE I play an MMO.
    This is a thing I wish players would grasp.

    There are far better genres for PvP gameplay than MMO's.

    One of the key things in PvP is that you want players in game representation (player character) to be roughly equal. That makes for the best PvP.

    The point of an MMORPG (or any RPG) is to make your player character stronger - character progression.

    As such, the concept of PvP and MMORPG's are actually diametrically opposed.

    This is why i question you playing PvP in mmorpgs when you are making hardcore PvE takes. Makes me think you have not actually experienced pvp...

    Some of the most memorial moments for pvp is in mmorpgs all the way back from shadowbane.

    I dont really give a shit what you question, nor what you think.

    If I play a PvP game and see bad things about it, you question if I even played it. If I didnt play a game and say bad things about it, you say I am in no position to talk about the game.

    Basically, if anyone has anything negative to say about PvP, you find yourself unable to actually discuss the issue and resort to arguing pointless detractions.

    Im point out you aren't into pvp and don't have much experience in it. It doesn't match the strong view point in relation to pvp you say as if it is fact. Ie you saying players are predictable, yet have not done serious rp.

    This goes back to when i was asking you question on BDO and you refused to answer them properly in relation to PvP. Everything is pointing to you not actually doing serious pvp. These aren't deep questions you hold close to your heart, nor do you need to be doing all top end pvp.

    But your vibe, your words, your opinions all sound like someone that is focused on pve and doesn't really pursue pvp. A lot of my people feel the same based on a lot of things you say.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Im point out you aren't into pvp and don't have much experience in it.
    I really enjoyed PvP at times in Archeage, and enjoy it in the game myself and my guild are playing now.

    The problem was, the game had to cut it's RPG aspects to facilitate it.

    Character progress was slow in real terms. There were many item upgrades, but they were always very, very small. When ever there were patches with new character progression (or, more to the point, with easier access to progression), the quality of PvP suffered because some people would very quickly become much better than the rest.
    This goes back to when i was asking you question on BDO and you refused to answer them properly in relation to PvP. Everything is pointing to you not actually doing serious pvp. These aren't deep questions you hold close to your heart, nor do you need to be doing all top end pvp.
    Do you see me doing that with you and Archeage?

    You very clearly didn't play the game as much as I did - probably not at all.

    Does that mean I dismiss your opinions on PvP simply because you didn't play that game for as long as I did?

    No, no I don't.

    Rather, I point out the differences in those opinions based on the different games we have played.

    That is the proper, non-dick move.

    Any dismissal of you and your opinions I have is based purely on you and your personality, not based on how long you played a given game.
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    Noaani wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Im point out you aren't into pvp and don't have much experience in it.
    I really enjoyed PvP at times in Archeage, and enjoy it in the game myself and my guild are playing now.

    The problem was, the game had to cut it's RPG aspects to facilitate it.

    Character progress was slow in real terms. There were many item upgrades, but they were always very, very small. When ever there were patches with new character progression (or, more to the point, with easier access to progression), the quality of PvP suffered because some people would very quickly become much better than the rest.
    This goes back to when i was asking you question on BDO and you refused to answer them properly in relation to PvP. Everything is pointing to you not actually doing serious pvp. These aren't deep questions you hold close to your heart, nor do you need to be doing all top end pvp.
    Do you see me doing that with you and Archeage?

    You very clearly didn't play the game as much as I did - probably not at all.

    Does that mean I dismiss your opinions on PvP simply because you didn't play that game for as long as I did?

    No, no I don't.

    Rather, I point out the differences in those opinions based on the different games we have played.

    That is the proper, non-dick move.

    Any dismissal of you and your opinions I have is based purely on you and your personality, not based on how long you played a given game.

    Actually you constantly dismiss people and look for reasons to do that.

    I'm merely stating an obversions based on interactions with you and what you say. I'm trying to find out your extent of experience in pvp so I can make a better judgement. Though you seem to be shying away from talking about much of anything pvp related. Does not seem normal for someone that is into pvp to not talk about their experiences or share information.

    If you think im going to slight you for not being in a top guild etc, that isn't the purpose. Though I'm mindful of the extent you actually did pvp something is not adding up.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Mag7spy wrote: »

    Actually you constantly dismiss people and look for reasons to do that.
    No, I dimiss opinions if they are significantly different to my understanding.

    This gives people the option of backing themselves up, if they feel strongly about what it is they are saying.

    Ask NiKr, this is exactly what happened when we started talking about L2. I dismissed his comments as essentially rose-tinted goggles, he backed himself up, and has changed my opinion on some aspects of the game.

    When someone dismisses your opinion, you don't back yourself, you attack - with your default seeming to be some meaningly "how long have you played X game" - a question that only ever matters if you are specifically talking about the in depth, very fine details of that one game.
    If you think im going to slight you for not being in a top guild etc, that isn't the purpose. Though I'm mindful of the extent you actually did pvp something is not adding up.
    The thing you see as not adding up is one of the things you are in the best position to see - of all the people here.

    Look at fighting games. As PvP, they are significantly better matched than anything in an MMORPG could ever be. Every match you start with a finely tuned character that has an exact skill set and stats. The design is for them to be as balanced as it is possible for them to be.

    This results in far better fights than a game where the skill set, the details of those skills, the stats of the character, literally everything is a variable. There is no balance.

    This opens things up to far worse fights.

    Fighting games can have fights that are one sided - but only due to player skill. This is the same for MOBA's, FPS, BRs, even RTS games. Anything where it is match based.

    MMO's can have fights that are one sided due to the characters not being even remotely equal. The thing is, MMORPG's need to have that unbalanced aspect to it in order to still be an RPG.

    Thus, logically speaking, the best PvP comes from match based games.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    No amount of whining is going to change the fact that pvp is a core concept of ashes and will stay so. For that I am thankful.

    I don't want to change it, I enjoy PvP - even in MMORPG's.

    What I am doing is just telling it how I see it. Not every game needs to min/max it's design.
  • edited July 2023
    Noaani wrote: »
    akabear wrote: »
    Among non-mmo pvp games I have played that feeling from a win or the gravity of a loss is incomparable to that of the MMORPG, L2, when knowing the end result of the quick skirmish, a strategtic pk, a planned battle or even unexpected encounter could result in loss or gain of gear that took over a year to obtain, worth in the thousand of dollars if ever did go the RLT route.

    You feel the continued pain of your loss by that one pvp death taking 1-3 hours of pve time to regain. And that knowledge of being resurrected in a fight to possibly double or tripple your losses should you die again, all to look after your group or clan.
    L2 took the character progression aspect of MMORPG's and reduced it down to almost nothing.

    Only someone who never properly played Lineage 2 could ever make such statement, that's just ignorant mate.
    6wtxguK.jpg
    Aren't we all sinners?
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Noaani wrote: »
    akabear wrote: »
    Among non-mmo pvp games I have played that feeling from a win or the gravity of a loss is incomparable to that of the MMORPG, L2, when knowing the end result of the quick skirmish, a strategtic pk, a planned battle or even unexpected encounter could result in loss or gain of gear that took over a year to obtain, worth in the thousand of dollars if ever did go the RLT route.

    You feel the continued pain of your loss by that one pvp death taking 1-3 hours of pve time to regain. And that knowledge of being resurrected in a fight to possibly double or tripple your losses should you die again, all to look after your group or clan.
    L2 took the character progression aspect of MMORPG's and reduced it down to almost nothing.

    Only someone who never properly played Lineage 2 could ever make such statement, that's just ignorant mate.

    Oh I never properly played it. Not even debating that point.

    I am going based on information I have gained on these forums from you, NiKr and a few others.

    The one thing you all seem to agree on is the amount of effort put in to getting gear upgrades, especially at the top end. Looking over the percentage increase of different upgrades (I don't have the information on that on hand, it was something NiKr posted a while ago), the actual upgrades aren't as big a power gain as in games like EQ, EQ2 or WoW.

    Then, add to that the fact that the above three games would often see you get upgrades every week or two and all of a sudden my perspective above should be something that no one considers ignorant. The facts absolutely support the opinion - you can disagree with that opinion if you want, but if facts support it you can't say it is ignorant.

    Edit to add; if you want to debate the actual facts - that there is more character progression in a game like EQ or EQ2 than in L2, I have a means in mind by which we can work this out - as much as progression comparisons across games can actually work.
  • edited July 2023
    Noaani wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    akabear wrote: »
    Among non-mmo pvp games I have played that feeling from a win or the gravity of a loss is incomparable to that of the MMORPG, L2, when knowing the end result of the quick skirmish, a strategtic pk, a planned battle or even unexpected encounter could result in loss or gain of gear that took over a year to obtain, worth in the thousand of dollars if ever did go the RLT route.

    You feel the continued pain of your loss by that one pvp death taking 1-3 hours of pve time to regain. And that knowledge of being resurrected in a fight to possibly double or tripple your losses should you die again, all to look after your group or clan.
    L2 took the character progression aspect of MMORPG's and reduced it down to almost nothing.

    Only someone who never properly played Lineage 2 could ever make such statement, that's just ignorant mate.

    Oh I never properly played it. Not even debating that point.

    I am going based on information I have gained on these forums from you, NiKr and a few others.

    The one thing you all seem to agree on is the amount of effort put in to getting gear upgrades, especially at the top end. Looking over the percentage increase of different upgrades (I don't have the information on that on hand, it was something NiKr posted a while ago), the actual upgrades aren't as big a power gain as in games like EQ, EQ2 or WoW.

    Then, add to that the fact that the above three games would often see you get upgrades every week or two and all of a sudden my perspective above should be something that no one considers ignorant. The facts absolutely support the opinion - you can disagree with that opinion if you want, but if facts support it you can't say it is ignorant.

    Certainly not information from me, as in this forum back on the Discussion of "Gear (weapons and armor) has approximately a 40-50% influence on a player's overall power in the game." and how meaningful gear power is in MMORPGs i talked about how Gear is insane in Archeage(Around 90-95% of a character's power) and in Lineage 2 that even tho not as insane as Archeage Gear disparity was still Crazy(around 70-75%) in terms of character power progression.

    The difference between D Grade and S Grade gear is an abyss of power, especially considering Lineage 2 Stat Multipliers and top gear features. So it's very obvious you don't "have the information on that on hand" nor the numbers context.

    The argument about the speed or effort of the upgrades just seems unreasonable in this context, i'd argue harder upgrades make them all the more meaningful for character progression.
    Noaani wrote: »
    Edit to add; if you want to debate the actual facts - that there is more character progression in a game like EQ or EQ2 than in L2, I have a means in mind by which we can work this out - as much as progression comparisons across games can actually work.

    I did not argued in any moment that "there is more character progression in a game like L2 Than in EQ/EQ2"
    Those games might aswell have more character progression(not sure if our concepts in this regard even match).
    My argument is that the statment "L2 took the character progression aspect of MMORPG's and reduced it down to almost nothing." is completely ignorant.
    6wtxguK.jpg
    Aren't we all sinners?
Sign In or Register to comment.