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.

AoC isn't as Niche as everyone thinks

1246713

Comments

  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Solvryn wrote: »
    Asherons Call lasted for officially seventeen years and is still going on private servers, same for all of these games. DAoC is still going on its official website.
    And how many people were playing them compared to EvE and ArcheAge and Lineage II?
  • Ayeveegaming1Ayeveegaming1 Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Dygz wrote: »
    Ravicus wrote: »
    Not directly no. But you do know that many people want to multi box right? I have seen it in many games in the past. Maybe it would include more than casuals that want to do this, but It is more prominent for solo players to do this as they do not need a guild.
    *edit
    This would make the solo player that is used to multi/boxing min/maxing to want to make the game easier being that they could not do this.
    Um. You are conflating solo players with casual players. And it's just a small subset of solo players who multibox. Casuals probably are not hardcore enough to multibox.

    Lots of solo players are in guilds, by the way.
    Sorry If I did conflate that. It was not my point to disseminate that. I was just making the point that some people are used to using multiple accounts to bypass working with groups by multiboxing. Sorry for the confusion.
    vmw4o7x2etm1.png
  • DepravedDepraved Member, Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Azherae wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Ravicus wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    CROW3 wrote: »
    Fantmx wrote: »
    Respectfully I think you are missing the point of why they are saying niche. It doesn't have anything to do with old schools days. I played EQ from beta. It was as old school as it gets. But I could always opt out of pvp and always had something to do as a PvE player for hours and hours a day.

    I think part of why the word niche is being used is because we are hearing more and more the line "this game may not be for you" which started to ramp in use at the time open seas pvp was released. And so the more we use that line the less people we will find interested. So, niche.

    Agreed. Which is why I don't think the OP's premise is accurate. My use of 'niche' is coming from a product marketing perspective. If you're targeting a micro-segment of a consumer audience you're going to be in a niche position. Selling artisanal pour over coffee with fusion spices for $15 a cup is a niche market. In this case gamers > mmo players > not strict pvp audience / not strict pve audience, combined with a tagline of 'this may not be for you.'

    This @Ravicus

    The question isn't 'why did you walk into my Artisanal Pourover Coffee Establishment in the first place?'

    It's 'why are you expecting this spice blend that I have chosen not to offer?'

    And the answer is usually 'well I thought it was an obvious blend to offer'.

    The person doesn't know the precise spice blends available before they walk in. And so they walk back out.

    To further your analogy, and what you wrote states. A customer walks into the coffee shop. He reads what they have and before they buy anything, they see they do not have what they want, and does not purchase anything. They then leave as an informed coffee buyer to not go back to that shop.

    Yes, I agree entirely. The problem with Ashes is that at the moment, it's not quite that simple, it's a little closer to the following timeline.

    "Guys I am gonna open a Pourover with Spice blends, really good spice blends (gives some examples)."

    The public goes wild! All the old Pourovers have closed down or fallen into disrepair or use old tech and don't accept Google Pay (or something). A new one would be great!

    "Ok guys I'm going to offer a lot of blends from the old days, but note that my staff won't combine all the spice combinations, I have to keep it realistic and on theme, so this shop may not be for you."

    Public (right or wrong) still clamors for it, all expecting their favorite 'most obvious' spice blends to be available.

    "Ok guys I'll let you know which spice blends once we open our mall kiosk, we'll be testing which ones are best for the theme and flavors, here's a list of what we definitely won't be allowing."

    Public still eager, except everyone who left because of the things on the disallowed list.

    Now from here it's just 'removing people' as one adds to the disallowed list.

    The whole reason I'm here is because Intrepid might need to know if they are removing customers they actually want by 'not offering certain blends' that they could theoretically offer. That's why I always ask people for clarification on the exact reason they are opposing something, and what they like instead, and whatever else. I am not sure Intrepid can afford to just go 'eh, I'll offer what I feel like and anyone who doesn't like it can just not come', but idk how much money Steven actually has. I only know that he's said 'Taking feedback'.

    It's up to them to decide if it's worth changing X because it makes Y group leave. Our part is to define 'why X is a problem' and 'Which group we're part of' when leaving or considering leaving. Intrepid will handle analyzing 'did they want or expect this person to play at all?'

    when you buy something, do you want 100 options or just 3?

    also, by removing things, people who aren't the target audience might leave (before the game is out), but guess what? new people who are the target audience might join.

    you cant offer everything to everybody and you cant give them too many options.

    It's good that you're defending the approach, but I think the way we view the world is just too far removed for any productive conversation to happen.

    Basically I fundamentally disagree with everything in this post, but I think it's because we just have entirely different bases.

    I think my Marketer doesn't agree with you, but I'm not the specialist in consumer sentiment management. She's unlikely to care to engage, so maybe you can have this discussion with @CROW3 if that works out. I'd be glad to learn from any discussion you two did have, or 'learn from the fact that CROW3 doesn't actually have the discussion'. Either's good.

    if your marketeer disagrees, then you need to re-read those books and re-take thouse courses :D
    havent you noticed lots of things that are sold come in 3? subscriptions, products, etc. think abou tthat for a second.

    if you disagree about target audiences, then what can i tell you? thats how things work o.o

    Unfortunately I think I have a bias against arguments from people who have this sort of reaction, which is both ironic and hypocritical considering that I want to say this sort of thing in arguments a lot.

    It's probably because when I say it, people latch onto it as rude or bad form, so it irritates me that others get away with it when I don't.

    I'm jealous of you, honestly, but I do think it doesn't add much to conversations. Then again, if people are wrong they're wrong and one should be able to just call them out until someone with better knowledge can actually challenge your position.

    I can't challenge yours with my current level of expertise, so I leave it to the pros.

    i dont think you were rude. but look at intrepid packages for example, they have 3 packs and 1 premium pack, 2 for betas 2 for alphas.

    looking at diablo 4 from blizzard, 1 pack, one a lil bit more money (there is a reason for this), then 1 premium pack. look at wow editions, again 3 packs. look at cod, 3 packs. sure there are exceptions, but you dont offer 1 thing or a million options to people.

    have you ever wondered why all fast food places use the color red on their brand (and more often than not add yellow)? its not random or cuz it looks good. there is a reason for that.

    the marketer in you can disagree all you want, and anybody can disagree as well, free speech and all that hooray!. but you guys are disagreeing with decades worth of research and practice by people who know more than all of us combined.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    CROW3 wrote: »
    That's a bit of a strawman comparison. 7-11 sells coffee, Starbucks sells coffee, and Philz sells coffee. Each have different approaches to the consumer segment for who is buying coffee when. If Starbucks doesn't want to focus their product line on 3rd wave artisanal coffee, it doesn't mean they start selling coke and pepsi. They just have a broader consumer base they are marketing toward.
    Yeah, I mean Ashes might be able to be a Philz coffee... sure.
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    Solvryn wrote: »
    This thread turning into a fight to be right thread.

    Yuuup, i don't understand the point of arguing target player base lol. Many games have copied WoW only to all be dead which technically would be capturing more of a large group. Many gamers aren't wanting to play WoW and want different types of experiences

    Some people want a game like Ashes, some want the game but are overly fearful it will fail if thy don't capture casual WoW level players etc, some want to fear monger to use that in their arguments to create changes..

    The only challenge that matters is making a good game, that is the reality right now. If the game is good it will gain /maintain its player base and be able to actually grow.
  • KingDDDKingDDD Member, Alpha Two
    Fantmx wrote: »
    KingDDD wrote: »
    Fantmx wrote: »
    KingDDD wrote: »
    NiKr wrote: »
    KingDDD wrote: »
    Where's your screenshot come from and is it the total number of servers added, region based, or what?
    It's just "ctrl+f" on that page.
    KingDDD wrote: »
    The faction imbalances happened over time and really kicked off when server transfers became vogue sometime in 2007 or 2008. Only blizzard could tell exact population and player activity per server at specific time periods.
    In other words it's been the case for over 15 years. So, in theory, 3 gens of gamers are used to seeing non-pvp "pvp" servers.

    We can all praise and shout off the rooftops about how our beloved mmos were so damn great 15 years ago, but that won't change the current realities of gaming. Anyone who wants pvp went to mobas and brs and everyone who wanted to play mmos are playing ff14 and wow, which are both as pve as it gets.

    Yes, wow might've had great balanced servers back at its start, but back then even Lineage 2 had over a millions subs and was a very nice game. And the genre overall had way more pvp mmos. Times have changed.


    Yes so you are looking at the total number of servers added, not the dates for when they were added. I used 2005 as the year to measure from as thats the period of wows largest growth. The fact blizzard choose to implement more pvp servers that year illustrates the popularity of pvp servers over pve. The 15 year comment is irrelevant as the major faction imbalances were mostly from 2008 to 2012, long after world activities and any pvp beyond 3vs3 arena was dead.

    All those players that went to mobas BRs arena shooters etc want to play an mmo. There's a reason Intrepid is doing interviews with shroud and summit, and it isn't because they're pretty.

    Pvp games are more popular then ever. There hasn't been any type of major pvp mmo in well over a decade +. The feature count, graphics, cycle of astonishment will make ashes insanely popular at launch. How robust those features are and how well the game runs will determine how well they retain those players.

    The problem with trying to rely solely on the shooter, moba, BR crowds is attention span and longevity. Ashes is going to require a long attention span.

    While those games do have shorter matches compared to an MMO, I'd think thatll be a boon. Longterm play sessions haven't died in the last decade, they just morphed into 20-45 min chunks. As long as Ashes has things you can accomplish in those chunks it'll be fine. The issue will arise if players spend 20 mins getting from point a to b and accomplish nothing in that time period. The node system should solve this as it gives players a way to progress in those small chunks and at the same time encourages engagement in longer play sessions.

    But how much are we really going to be able to do in a 20 to 30 minute session in Ashes? I'm betting it is not too much.

    Harvesting, making progress toward a religious reputation, selling auctions, etc are definitely things you can do in 30 minutes while also continuing to do them for longer to get more progress. Obviously, you shouldnt get the necessary mats to craft a legendary sword in 30mins of harvesting, nor should you be able to max a reputation in that time, but that progression loop needs to be there to facilitate both a reason for logging in and staying logged in.

    How many times have people logged onto a game intending to do some small task only to get looped into larger activities by guildmates? The secret sauce for MMOs is social relationships and all systems in the game need to be designed with encouraging both positive and negative interactions between people.
  • DepravedDepraved Member, Alpha Two
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Solvryn wrote: »
    This thread turning into a fight to be right thread.

    Yuuup, i don't understand the point of arguing target player base lol. Many games have copied WoW only to all be dead which technically would be capturing more of a large group. Many gamers aren't wanting to play WoW and want different types of experiences

    Some people want a game like Ashes, some want the game but are overly fearful it will fail if thy don't capture casual WoW level players etc, some want to fear monger to use that in their arguments to create changes..

    The only challenge that matters is making a good game, that is the reality right now. If the game is good it will gain /maintain its player base and be able to actually grow.

    the reason we need to talk about target audiences is because there are people that say things like "oh if the game doesnt have this x thing it will die because pve gamers like this etc etc" which is incorrect.
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Ravicus wrote: »
    @Azherae, I am for the process it has now. Open world pvp. I generally do not go looking for fights but I will defend myself. I have always been a gatherer, and if possible the end game crafting. In this game I am (so far) going to focus on rogue play, in the role of treasure hunting, and gathering. The treasure hunting fascinates me and hope it gets fleshed out. I have a small group of friends that have been watching this game and we all still play UO, so we understand pvp combat. We constantly get raided doing champ spawns and such, which is basically like the people that are going to group up and attack caravans. To me it mimics what real life can be and the risk and rewards. Of course if the balance of this is off then I will voice my opinion and hopefully they listen. But that would be a change that would not change the core principle of the game, which is PVX. If what people are wanting to change is the core principles of the game that the developers have adamantly stated they will not, then they probably not "buy this coffee". Changes withing the core features for the better of all might be a good thing.

    Alright, got it. So you're mostly in 'CROW3 camp'.

    Or (in my perspective) the new 'leader' of the 'Treasure Hunters' feedback group if you stick around. You didn't mention any very strong focuses on PvE Raiding, direct Node Management, large scale PvP, Detailed Roleplaying, or Hard Econ Mercantile stuff, so I don't think you're in the space where 'someone else speaks for you' in terms of game loops you want based on that, but you can correct me. (mostly in terms of pointing out things that would make your experience worse, in other people's suggestions, I mean).

    Seems that the game is definitely for you as of now, I hope to have fun and useful discussions in the future with you.
    ♪ One Gummy Fish, two Gummy Fish, Red Gummy Fish, Blue Gummy Fish
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Ravicus wrote: »
    I pretty much agree with this. To me it depends on what the people want that needs to be changed. If its a core principle or something less that does not affect the core principles.
    It's not really an issue of what needs to be changed.
    Steven should make the game he wants to make.
    Ashes is not made for everyone.
    And it's also not going to capture the diverse playstyles Steven initially claimed he hoped to capture - just like it's not going to release before 2020.

  • CROW3CROW3 Member, Alpha Two
    Depraved wrote: »
    but look at intrepid packages for example, they have 3 packs and 1 premium pack. looking at diablo 4 from blizzard, 1 pack, one a lil bit more, then 1 premium pack. look at wow editions, again 3 packs. look at cod, 3 packs. sure there are exceptions, but you dont offer a million options to people.

    We seem to have shifted the conversation between market segmentation and product packaging. These are two very different things. Addressing the broader point, attempting to please everyone is a stupid strategy in any endeavor; commercial or otherwise. But, no one here is attempting to defend that position.

    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • FantmxFantmx Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    KingDDD wrote: »
    Fantmx wrote: »
    KingDDD wrote: »
    Fantmx wrote: »
    KingDDD wrote: »
    NiKr wrote: »
    KingDDD wrote: »
    Where's your screenshot come from and is it the total number of servers added, region based, or what?
    It's just "ctrl+f" on that page.
    KingDDD wrote: »
    The faction imbalances happened over time and really kicked off when server transfers became vogue sometime in 2007 or 2008. Only blizzard could tell exact population and player activity per server at specific time periods.
    In other words it's been the case for over 15 years. So, in theory, 3 gens of gamers are used to seeing non-pvp "pvp" servers.

    We can all praise and shout off the rooftops about how our beloved mmos were so damn great 15 years ago, but that won't change the current realities of gaming. Anyone who wants pvp went to mobas and brs and everyone who wanted to play mmos are playing ff14 and wow, which are both as pve as it gets.

    Yes, wow might've had great balanced servers back at its start, but back then even Lineage 2 had over a millions subs and was a very nice game. And the genre overall had way more pvp mmos. Times have changed.


    Yes so you are looking at the total number of servers added, not the dates for when they were added. I used 2005 as the year to measure from as thats the period of wows largest growth. The fact blizzard choose to implement more pvp servers that year illustrates the popularity of pvp servers over pve. The 15 year comment is irrelevant as the major faction imbalances were mostly from 2008 to 2012, long after world activities and any pvp beyond 3vs3 arena was dead.

    All those players that went to mobas BRs arena shooters etc want to play an mmo. There's a reason Intrepid is doing interviews with shroud and summit, and it isn't because they're pretty.

    Pvp games are more popular then ever. There hasn't been any type of major pvp mmo in well over a decade +. The feature count, graphics, cycle of astonishment will make ashes insanely popular at launch. How robust those features are and how well the game runs will determine how well they retain those players.

    The problem with trying to rely solely on the shooter, moba, BR crowds is attention span and longevity. Ashes is going to require a long attention span.

    While those games do have shorter matches compared to an MMO, I'd think thatll be a boon. Longterm play sessions haven't died in the last decade, they just morphed into 20-45 min chunks. As long as Ashes has things you can accomplish in those chunks it'll be fine. The issue will arise if players spend 20 mins getting from point a to b and accomplish nothing in that time period. The node system should solve this as it gives players a way to progress in those small chunks and at the same time encourages engagement in longer play sessions.

    But how much are we really going to be able to do in a 20 to 30 minute session in Ashes? I'm betting it is not too much.

    Harvesting, making progress toward a religious reputation, selling auctions, etc are definitely things you can do in 30 minutes while also continuing to do them for longer to get more progress. Obviously, you shouldnt get the necessary mats to craft a legendary sword in 30mins of harvesting, nor should you be able to max a reputation in that time, but that progression loop needs to be there to facilitate both a reason for logging in and staying logged in.

    How many times have people logged onto a game intending to do some small task only to get looped into larger activities by guildmates? The secret sauce for MMOs is social relationships and all systems in the game need to be designed with encouraging both positive and negative interactions between people.

    That is the goal.
    q1nu38cjgq3j.png
  • AzheraeAzherae Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Depraved wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    Ravicus wrote: »
    Azherae wrote: »
    CROW3 wrote: »
    Fantmx wrote: »
    Respectfully I think you are missing the point of why they are saying niche. It doesn't have anything to do with old schools days. I played EQ from beta. It was as old school as it gets. But I could always opt out of pvp and always had something to do as a PvE player for hours and hours a day.

    I think part of why the word niche is being used is because we are hearing more and more the line "this game may not be for you" which started to ramp in use at the time open seas pvp was released. And so the more we use that line the less people we will find interested. So, niche.

    Agreed. Which is why I don't think the OP's premise is accurate. My use of 'niche' is coming from a product marketing perspective. If you're targeting a micro-segment of a consumer audience you're going to be in a niche position. Selling artisanal pour over coffee with fusion spices for $15 a cup is a niche market. In this case gamers > mmo players > not strict pvp audience / not strict pve audience, combined with a tagline of 'this may not be for you.'

    This @Ravicus

    The question isn't 'why did you walk into my Artisanal Pourover Coffee Establishment in the first place?'

    It's 'why are you expecting this spice blend that I have chosen not to offer?'

    And the answer is usually 'well I thought it was an obvious blend to offer'.

    The person doesn't know the precise spice blends available before they walk in. And so they walk back out.

    To further your analogy, and what you wrote states. A customer walks into the coffee shop. He reads what they have and before they buy anything, they see they do not have what they want, and does not purchase anything. They then leave as an informed coffee buyer to not go back to that shop.

    Yes, I agree entirely. The problem with Ashes is that at the moment, it's not quite that simple, it's a little closer to the following timeline.

    "Guys I am gonna open a Pourover with Spice blends, really good spice blends (gives some examples)."

    The public goes wild! All the old Pourovers have closed down or fallen into disrepair or use old tech and don't accept Google Pay (or something). A new one would be great!

    "Ok guys I'm going to offer a lot of blends from the old days, but note that my staff won't combine all the spice combinations, I have to keep it realistic and on theme, so this shop may not be for you."

    Public (right or wrong) still clamors for it, all expecting their favorite 'most obvious' spice blends to be available.

    "Ok guys I'll let you know which spice blends once we open our mall kiosk, we'll be testing which ones are best for the theme and flavors, here's a list of what we definitely won't be allowing."

    Public still eager, except everyone who left because of the things on the disallowed list.

    Now from here it's just 'removing people' as one adds to the disallowed list.

    The whole reason I'm here is because Intrepid might need to know if they are removing customers they actually want by 'not offering certain blends' that they could theoretically offer. That's why I always ask people for clarification on the exact reason they are opposing something, and what they like instead, and whatever else. I am not sure Intrepid can afford to just go 'eh, I'll offer what I feel like and anyone who doesn't like it can just not come', but idk how much money Steven actually has. I only know that he's said 'Taking feedback'.

    It's up to them to decide if it's worth changing X because it makes Y group leave. Our part is to define 'why X is a problem' and 'Which group we're part of' when leaving or considering leaving. Intrepid will handle analyzing 'did they want or expect this person to play at all?'

    when you buy something, do you want 100 options or just 3?

    also, by removing things, people who aren't the target audience might leave (before the game is out), but guess what? new people who are the target audience might join.

    you cant offer everything to everybody and you cant give them too many options.

    It's good that you're defending the approach, but I think the way we view the world is just too far removed for any productive conversation to happen.

    Basically I fundamentally disagree with everything in this post, but I think it's because we just have entirely different bases.

    I think my Marketer doesn't agree with you, but I'm not the specialist in consumer sentiment management. She's unlikely to care to engage, so maybe you can have this discussion with @CROW3 if that works out. I'd be glad to learn from any discussion you two did have, or 'learn from the fact that CROW3 doesn't actually have the discussion'. Either's good.

    if your marketeer disagrees, then you need to re-read those books and re-take thouse courses :D
    havent you noticed lots of things that are sold come in 3? subscriptions, products, etc. think abou tthat for a second.

    if you disagree about target audiences, then what can i tell you? thats how things work o.o

    Unfortunately I think I have a bias against arguments from people who have this sort of reaction, which is both ironic and hypocritical considering that I want to say this sort of thing in arguments a lot.

    It's probably because when I say it, people latch onto it as rude or bad form, so it irritates me that others get away with it when I don't.

    I'm jealous of you, honestly, but I do think it doesn't add much to conversations. Then again, if people are wrong they're wrong and one should be able to just call them out until someone with better knowledge can actually challenge your position.

    I can't challenge yours with my current level of expertise, so I leave it to the pros.

    i dont think you were rude. but look at intrepid packages for example, they have 3 packs and 1 premium pack, 2 for betas 2 for alphas.

    looking at diablo 4 from blizzard, 1 pack, one a lil bit more money (there is a reason for this), then 1 premium pack. look at wow editions, again 3 packs. look at cod, 3 packs. sure there are exceptions, but you dont offer 1 thing or a million options to people.

    have you ever wondered why all fast food places use the color red on their brand (and more often than not add yellow)? its not random or cuz it looks good. there is a reason for that.

    the marketer in you can disagree all you want, and anybody can disagree as well, free speech and all that hooray!. but you guys are disagreeing with decades worth of research and practice by people who know more than all of us combined.

    I'm so lost.

    I feel like it is, as CROW3 said, a strawman, maybe?

    It FEELS more like you made up stuff you think I don't agree with to then tell me how wrong I am for disagreeing with it. I didn't mention anything about triple packs... or... any of that basic marketing stuff? You made some broad sweeping generalizations, and I disagreed with their applicability to a niche product with fricative design elements.

    Maybe I should have said that I found your points irrelevant, moreso than disagreeing with them? Honestly, lmk if you wouldn't consider that rude either, it's helpful to be able to say it sometimes.
    ♪ One Gummy Fish, two Gummy Fish, Red Gummy Fish, Blue Gummy Fish
  • DepravedDepraved Member, Alpha Two
    CROW3 wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    but look at intrepid packages for example, they have 3 packs and 1 premium pack. looking at diablo 4 from blizzard, 1 pack, one a lil bit more, then 1 premium pack. look at wow editions, again 3 packs. look at cod, 3 packs. sure there are exceptions, but you dont offer a million options to people.

    We seem to have shifted the conversation between market segmentation and product packaging. These are two very different things. Addressing the broader point, attempting to please everyone is a stupid strategy in any endeavor; commercial or otherwise. But, no one here is attempting to defend that position.

    im not saying you are, but lots of people are saying things like "if the game doesnt have this x thing that solo pve players like, the game will die" which is not true.

    the reason i mentioned packaging was to talk about options. you dont give people 1 thing and you dont give them a million options. someone was talking about options and how having more is better, thats it.
  • Ayeveegaming1Ayeveegaming1 Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    @Azherae Yes, I am not familiar with the node system or playing the economy, I have never been good at that. As far as PvE raiding I am for it because rogues could be valuable in a raid group as far as finding treasures, traps, and doors. I probably will be in a guild, as I will want to use mats that I have gathered to contribute to the crafters to make gear for me. I could see myself in large scale pvp, defending nodes or something like that, but I do not go looking to be in a large raiding group. I have dabbled in the past in RP and if there is a dedicated community for it I probably will participate.
    vmw4o7x2etm1.png
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Solvryn wrote: »
    This thread turning into a fight to be right thread.
    I mean... there really is no right to fight for.
    We can try to explain our points of view and predictions for how niche the game will be, but...
    Ultimately, we just have to wait to see what actually happens.

    Ignoring labels...
    I think Ashes can garner at least the population numbers of EvE Online.
    And I think Steven will be ecstatic if he can sustain those numbers.
    If he can garner significantly higher numbers - even better.
    It's a win/win.
    And really, we probably are just arguing semantics and/or minutae.
  • DepravedDepraved Member, Alpha Two
    i miss @Arya_Yeshe. i wonder what happened to him. i wanna see what he has to say about all these freehold thing
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    Depraved wrote: »
    i miss @Arya_Yeshe. i wonder what happened to him. i wanna see what he has to say about all these freehold thing

    Are you assuming a gender
  • DepravedDepraved Member, Alpha Two
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    i miss @Arya_Yeshe. i wonder what happened to him. i wanna see what he has to say about all these freehold thing

    Are you assuming a gender

    yassssssssss. i think he said he was a guy lmao. plus no women is as psychopathic as he is :D:D:D based on his ultima online confessions lmao
  • DepravedDepraved Member, Alpha Two
    there are no girls on the internet
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    i miss @Arya_Yeshe. i wonder what happened to him. i wanna see what he has to say about all these freehold thing

    Are you assuming a gender

    yassssssssss. i think he said he was a guy lmao. plus no women is as psychopathic as he is :D:D:D based on his ultima online confessions lmao

    It would be a she not a he.
  • DepravedDepraved Member, Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    i miss @Arya_Yeshe. i wonder what happened to him. i wanna see what he has to say about all these freehold thing

    Are you assuming a gender

    yassssssssss. i think he said he was a guy lmao. plus no women is as psychopathic as he is :D:D:D based on his ultima online confessions lmao

    It would be a she not a he.

    his name and avatar are female, but he said he was a guy!

    also, there are no women on the internet
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    i miss @Arya_Yeshe. i wonder what happened to him. i wanna see what he has to say about all these freehold thing

    Are you assuming a gender

    yassssssssss. i think he said he was a guy lmao. plus no women is as psychopathic as he is :D:D:D based on his ultima online confessions lmao

    It would be a she not a he.

    his name and avatar are female, but he said he was a guy!

    also, there are no women on the internet

    Tell ya people said she was male and she said she wasn't lol.

    Also she said this.
    vkkcxz7bkdja.png


    I think you are mixing up Azherae
  • DepravedDepraved Member, Alpha Two
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    i miss @Arya_Yeshe. i wonder what happened to him. i wanna see what he has to say about all these freehold thing

    Are you assuming a gender

    yassssssssss. i think he said he was a guy lmao. plus no women is as psychopathic as he is :D:D:D based on his ultima online confessions lmao

    It would be a she not a he.

    his name and avatar are female, but he said he was a guy!

    also, there are no women on the internet

    Tell ya people said she was male and she said she wasn't lol.

    Also she said this.
    vkkcxz7bkdja.png


    I think you are mixing up Azherae

    that doesnt prove anything!
    and azherae said she was a girl. my theory is he only thinks he is a girl.
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    i miss @Arya_Yeshe. i wonder what happened to him. i wanna see what he has to say about all these freehold thing

    Are you assuming a gender

    yassssssssss. i think he said he was a guy lmao. plus no women is as psychopathic as he is :D:D:D based on his ultima online confessions lmao

    It would be a she not a he.

    his name and avatar are female, but he said he was a guy!

    also, there are no women on the internet

    Tell ya people said she was male and she said she wasn't lol.

    Also she said this.
    vkkcxz7bkdja.png


    I think you are mixing up Azherae

    that doesnt prove anything!
    and azherae said she was a girl. my theory is he only thinks he is a girl.

    Where is your proof?
  • DepravedDepraved Member, Alpha Two
    edited July 2023
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    i miss @Arya_Yeshe. i wonder what happened to him. i wanna see what he has to say about all these freehold thing

    Are you assuming a gender

    yassssssssss. i think he said he was a guy lmao. plus no women is as psychopathic as he is :D:D:D based on his ultima online confessions lmao

    It would be a she not a he.

    his name and avatar are female, but he said he was a guy!

    also, there are no women on the internet

    Tell ya people said she was male and she said she wasn't lol.

    Also she said this.
    vkkcxz7bkdja.png


    I think you are mixing up Azherae

    that doesnt prove anything!
    and azherae said she was a girl. my theory is he only thinks he is a girl.

    Where is your proof?

    i dont wanna dig for that ugh

    next nooani, nikr, you, crow, liniker and dygz are also girls.

    you know what? im also a girl now. lets all be grills
  • Mag7spyMag7spy Member, Alpha Two
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    i miss @Arya_Yeshe. i wonder what happened to him. i wanna see what he has to say about all these freehold thing

    Are you assuming a gender

    yassssssssss. i think he said he was a guy lmao. plus no women is as psychopathic as he is :D:D:D based on his ultima online confessions lmao

    It would be a she not a he.

    his name and avatar are female, but he said he was a guy!

    also, there are no women on the internet

    Tell ya people said she was male and she said she wasn't lol.

    Also she said this.
    vkkcxz7bkdja.png


    I think you are mixing up Azherae

    that doesnt prove anything!
    and azherae said she was a girl. my theory is he only thinks he is a girl.

    Where is your proof?

    i dont wanna dig for that ug

    next nooani, nikr, you, crow, liniker and dygz are also girls.

    you know what? im also a girl now. lets all be grills

    Sorry but Noaani is 100% a grandpa, I wont budge on that one.
  • DepravedDepraved Member, Alpha Two
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Depraved wrote: »
    i miss @Arya_Yeshe. i wonder what happened to him. i wanna see what he has to say about all these freehold thing

    Are you assuming a gender

    yassssssssss. i think he said he was a guy lmao. plus no women is as psychopathic as he is :D:D:D based on his ultima online confessions lmao

    It would be a she not a he.

    his name and avatar are female, but he said he was a guy!

    also, there are no women on the internet

    Tell ya people said she was male and she said she wasn't lol.

    Also she said this.
    vkkcxz7bkdja.png


    I think you are mixing up Azherae

    that doesnt prove anything!
    and azherae said she was a girl. my theory is he only thinks he is a girl.

    Where is your proof?

    i dont wanna dig for that ug

    next nooani, nikr, you, crow, liniker and dygz are also girls.

    you know what? im also a girl now. lets all be grills

    Sorry but Noaani is 100% a grandpa, I wont budge on that one.

    or a grandma? ;);)
  • ZippyAZippyA Member
    edited July 2023
    Love the discussion.

    One thing to add - when somebody talks of a good MMO from the past, think of "commercially viable" in the context of longevity.

    UO - 25 years still commercially viable
    AC - 18 years, dead now with no commercial servers
    EvE - 20 years and still commercially viable
    Lineage - multiple reincarnations that die after 4-5 years, otherwise not commercially viable in long run.

    Think of what Intrepid might want to choose, and what you as a player would want to pay for.
    a) big success and swift death (like many modern inclusive MMORPGs "for all"), or
    b) moderate success "not for all" and 10+ years commercially viable on official servers
  • SolvrynSolvryn Member, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    Dygz wrote: »
    Solvryn wrote: »
    Asherons Call lasted for officially seventeen years and is still going on private servers, same for all of these games. DAoC is still going on its official website.
    And how many people were playing them compared to EvE and ArcheAge and Lineage II?

    How would I know? I never played EvE, because I don’t care about it. ArcheAge has flopped and restarted countless times and I typically stay away from anything NC Soft touches.

    That doesn’t really change Ashes appeal to me as an oldschool player.
  • DepravedDepraved Member, Alpha Two
    ZippyA wrote: »
    Love the discussion.

    One thing to add - when somebody talks of a good MMO from the past, think of "commercially viable" in the context of longevity.

    UO - 25 years still commercially viable
    AC - 18 years, dead now with no commercial servers
    EvE - 20 years and still commercially viable
    Lineage - multiple reincarnations that die after 4-5 years, otherwise not commercially viable in long run.

    Think of what Intrepid might want to choose, and what you as a player would want to pay for.
    a) big success and swift death (like many modern inclusive MMORPGs "for all"), or
    b) moderate success "not for all" and 10+ years commercially viable on official servers

    imagine thinking lineage failed
Sign In or Register to comment.