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.
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.
Comments
I also don't want to say that its "one of those things that you know it when you see it", because that is a cop-out.
Perhaps the closest thing I can think of is that if it takes the first guild to kill the encounter less than 500 earnest attempts, it isn't top end content. It isn't a definition I would stand behind, it is more of an indicator to assist someone that knows nothing about top end content as to the kind of difficulty being discussed.
Not every MMO has top end PvE content, and in those games that do not every content cycle has top end encounters.
WoW has perhaps 4 in total.
This is said in the pitch. "If you want a city, or marketplaces or the comfort of your own home, it’s up to you to build it." (All of this) -->"If a city is encroaching on your territory, it’s up to you to destroy it. Allies and enemies, friends and foes, these are words determined by you, not by us - there is no red and blue team for you to fall back on. (And this especially) ---->Your grudges, your wars, your peace are real things, created by you, and the history of conflict is the history of the players." (Directly talks about PvP without saying the words PvP). Note it doesn't say history of AI, or mobs, or the environment.
So no I wouldn't agree with that.
As I said. I understood what they were trying to build when I looked at all the Kickstarter info. To me its still the same vision, and is why I backed and have no reservations about doing so.
"Come join us as you wont like the taste of the Grapefruits we're throwing at our enemies."
"Never settle for what you think you know" - C. Krauthammer
Yep, and when you put it all together with mentions of destroying nodes, and conflict, and player agency, in a rpg world, noting that they never specifically said PvE or PvP is what enables you to go “maybe we will see elements of all these games these individuals worked on”. You have said in another thread that you don’t consider questing to be PvE content but filler. They never mention raids, or dungeons, world bosses, any of that typical stuff. I never saw it as this, but rereading it now I could see someone assuming it was almost entirely PvP.
I don’t notice all that many mmorpgs without PvP options either. Could say it’s almost a given in some ways.
They weren’t making a planetside style game, correct, but how would someone expect planetside devs to relate to an mmorpg? Maybe it’s the massive battle side of planetside when you consider the comments about nodes, and destruction in an open world setting?
The best I’m saying is that people should have expected all of the games these devs worked on, that were put front and center, to contribute to your over all assumption on how the game would play.
If they only put up promotions of EverQuest development work done I would have expected something close to EverQuest, just planetside something similar to that, swg something similar to that. When I take all of those games together though in the context of what we are currently seeing, I think that list was very representative of what we are getting.
so you cant define it, its also not something that you know it when you see it.
its not really the difficulty, but you use difficulty to explain it as an indicator?
if its difficulty on first try or until you clear it, can we say that old nes games were top pve content?
i mean try finishing contra, ninja gaiden or any mega man, but then once you learn the patterns, you can finish the games without taking a hit. so is the difficulty based on how long it would take you to learn it? or is it about reflexes and reaction time?
but difficulty can be subjective as well, ro at least time to learn. some people learn faster than others.
how can you say that ashes doesnt have top pve content when you havent seen the full game yet and cant even define what is top pve content, or at least what elements are present in top pve content? and before you say something like "from what ive seen in aoc, it doesnt have it" like ive seen you say before, you just said its not something you know once you see it.
what are the 4 top end pve content in wow and what elements make them top end?
we need to agree on what elements constitute top pve content, and this has to be objective, not subjective, before we can evaluate aoc and say wether it has top pve contento or not
This is the point, in hindsight it makes some sense and seems to fit what we have (sort of). Without hindsight, there are many different ways it could be understood.
Quests are absolutely content. And I am saying many people did assume this, and have found that Ashes is not that game.
Because it really isn't.
I mean... if you text search PvP on the Kickstarter page, you won't find the text for PvP.
Seems likely, though, that people would have played the video.
Even if you missed the video at the top of the page...
A Google search should have lead the vast majority of backers to the Ashes of Creation Kickstarter Livestreams held daily the first week of the Kickstarter.
I'm pretty sure those were also advertized by the various game news sources, like MMORPG.com.
You just love throwing numbers out there lmao. You are trying to use manipulation to be like most people in the world won't like something so I'm right. Honestly please the bigger the game the more eyes are on it, of course there are going to be a crap ton viewing it, doesn't mean they would have played the game to begin with. It also doesn't mean they won't give it a chance and see how it is like.
And no your friends don't matter they aren't special so that point means literarily nothing. The only thing that matters is on release all the types of people that will play the game and the results after. The pvers that enjoy the game regardless of pvp, the pvpers that enjoy this type of game, the 90% of players that don't pay attention to any of this stuff and will just play it on release and judge if it is a good game or not.
All these points you try to make your words feel stronger as false evidence, just falls short.
As usual your narcissist qualities show trying to belittle other peoples point (without actual facts) to try to make it seem like yours are stronger. You sense of entitlement and arrogance is unmatched here on the forums that is for sure.
Life would be boring if we all were perfect or everything thought the same, its through conflict that we can make our takes stronger.
The issue starts when you are debating your takes and and trying to be like "I do top end pve so im right trust my experience you don't know what you are talking about!"
That kind of take is full of narcissistic tendencies, there should be no reason to mention why you did unless you are looking to be looked at as special and better than others. What you do is use your experiences to explain solutions and problems while using examples of many types of games.
edit
When you start breaking down other games and using those as examples if you have many years of experience. The conversation will be more fruitful and less emotionally charged and the issues that come with that. The target of debate would be around the points one brings up in relation to games with what works and doesn't. Over the ego argument of "hey trust me bro"
I was expecting the devs to want to support Casual Challenge players and players who typically play on PvE-servers. And I accepted the pitch that only those who never want to experience PvP at all should have issues with Corruption being an insufficient PvP deterent.
Since the departure of Jeffrey Bard, every couple of months we get a reveal of new Hardcore Challenge features and mechanics and an ever increasing focus on ubiquitous competition and PvP mechanics and rulesets. I no longer consider Ashes to be attempting to appeal to EQ/EQ2 players in general.
I guess I might say that there will be some crossover with the EQ/EQ2 gamers who played on PvP servers and PvP-Optional servers. Probably the Hardcore Challenge gamers who played on those servers.
Part of the issue is that Steven says, "Ashes is not made for everyone." but, he's not clear about who it's made for and who it isn't made for.
And some of us are only now starting to discover we're on the "not made for us" list.
1) Nodes. Having an evolving world instead of a static one is the main thing that attracted me to follow the development.
2) No P2W. Sadly I now have to consider this to be a feature.
3) Big beautiful world to explore. Seasons, biomes, no fast travel, ...
4) Player crafted items that aren't subpar to drops. Echoes of SWG.
5) Earlier I would have said the classes and augments, but since then I've tempered my expectations because I lack concrete infos to really have an opinion
I am desperatly waiting for augmentations also. I find it a very interesting concept that changes the whole outcome of the prime archetype. Being a rogue/cleric that could possibly be something akin to looking like a lich would be wonderful for my roleplay style.
Exploration, gathering & crafting, dynamic nodes, and ocean / water content all caught my eye from the start. That said, Ashes main differentiator is PvX - which is what I've sought in MMOs since UO. Be attacked by and attacking players is part of the narrative, which is why I played on PvP servers in other mmos.
The story I want to be a part of is one where the world is a dangerous place. Monsters, rugged biomes, and PLAYERS are part of that dangerous world. I don't box my experience as 'PvE' or 'PvP,' I want to play in a world where those boxes don't exist and there's just a world we explore & survive & battle and what happens happens.
Honestly i hate crafting / life skilling. New world made it a bit more fun, them building upon that from new world and making it feel randomly generated and like materials you gather are almost like loot boxes that can have random other elements in it really peak my interest. Feels like that kind of things is finally evolving in a more dynamic way over in the past feeling very static.
Actually I'd like to disagree here with you two
While the frustration of being forced into PvP is definitely one of the biggest things, anxiety and fear definitely is another thing. Though it does depend on the game design.
In games like WoW, it's mostly frustration, rather than anxiety. You really lose nothing by getting PK'd, other than your time and maybe pride. The main emotion here is frustration, because someone just interrupted your gameplay.
In games like Ashes, Albion Online, etc. it's going to be a little bit different. Here, fear and anxiety are more prominent, because you actually lose stuff when you die. You don't just lose a few minutes of your time, you lose all that time you previously spent gathering materials, or getting gear. It feels like you spent all that time for nothing, because you now have to do it all over again, because someone just PK'd you. Alternatively, you could go back and try to PK that person and get your stuff back, but if you're someone who dislikes PvP, it's unlikely you would do that.
My hopes is that if the guilds work properly (the way I might like to do it) would be to have the people do what there desired roles would be. There are gatherers that love to gather, the refiners who would refine, and the crafters who would craft. Now for people that do not like doing that could contribute to the defense of the nodes, or getting blue prints from boss drops for the crafters. The crafters in turn could provide weapons and armor for the person who deserves and earned them. (crafters could basically have an armory to have weapons and armor available in bulk)
That could be the case, i know for my guild I'll be having people doing that and ones in charge of looking over others and such.
We still need to learn more about crafting and how that will work (i like the idea of corrupted mats, adds more depth and scarcity)
One big question that is huge though is how does enhancing work, are they going to be tradeable as well for weapons that are enhanced. What will be the difficulty, what will be the loss or negative effects of enhancing. I feel this is the part where if you have weapons made and are ones that are enhanced will be the ones with the most valued armories.
We can only wait and see until they show how things will work with enhancing though.
I agree. And you are right, the balancing of all that stuff wont be until we are doing alpha 2.
Well i don't really mean balancing but i mean like how will things work, we still just don't know enough and enhancing will be a big part I'm feeling.
Personally i hope they do other methods that are interesting and give reason to craft a lot besides straights up gear destruction if you fail. Once we see more on crafting and enhancing we will have a much more clear picture for players.
Back when I played Allods Online, I would do low lvl PvP, battlegrounds, arenas, 1v1s, even going as far as grouping up and invading enemy faction's capital. It was fun, and you really don't lose anything other than your time.
In Archeage, it was open-world PvP vs other faction as well, often competing for certain farming spots. It was also fun.
But the main content you have to do is PvE, always. You need to gear up and increase your power level through mostly PvE activities.
So onto the topic. What is the thing that brought me to Ashes?
Well, back in 2016, a guild I was in was coming back to Archeage for a fresh-start server. We did play for a bit, but quit after a few weeks/months. In 2017, someone from the guild linked a kickstarter from a certain ex-Archeage player that is looking to make his own game, due to his frustration with Archeage, and the MMORPG genre in general.
That alone is what pulled me in. Just the fact someone who played Archeage, which was an amazing game at its core, is looking to potentially create his own, better version of the game, without p2w.
Then came the discovery of ideas and systems that are going to be implemented.
The most exciting feature for me was the class system. The game can be amazing, but if it has a boring class system, then I'm unlikely to play it for long.
Augmentation and the possibilities it brings is honestly making me get excited every time I think about it (pause). Sadly, we still don't know much about how it will work, but so far it sounds promising.
I just want to combine different archetypes, which alters the class visually, and in terms of mechanics (whether the ability turns into melee or ranged, changes dmg type, etc.).
Imagine picking a Fighter + Mage combo. Instead of rush, you blink, instead of a whirlwind, you now do a whirlwind that's augmented with a certain element, it turns into a fiery tornado that applies ignite...just imagine those possibilities for most abilities. It allows players to make some unique classes, without relying on devs to keep introducing new classes (like in WoW for example).
Archeage had a decent class system, and I often changed between different specs/builds, because it offered many possibilities.
Another game with a good class system was Rift. Though I didn't play it much, it's definitely something I would want to see in other games.
Even WoW has a decent class system, where you have 3-4 different specializations, which offer different types of roles.
Another thing is the world. It's dynamic. The node system has a big impact on how the world will look like, to the type of content it offers, it's all player driven. Another thing tied to it are the events, which again, make the world feel more dynamic and alive.
Crafting that matters is alright. But having your own farm where you can harvest resources, like in Archeage, is something I find very important (the reason I have some "strong" feelings about Freeholds).
Farming stuff in general, whether it's farming mobs in the open world, or gathering stuff, is something that I'm always looking forward to. In Archeage, I remember the Hasla weapon farm. While it was tedious at the time, when I now look at it, it was actually enjoyable. You farm weapon fragments, and together with those you get coinpurses from mobs. It was a good way to get some early end-game gear, and it was a good way to farm some gold. It was interesting, because you also had to compete for the spot with other people. It felt rewarding once you completed it.
Nowadays, I just don't find that sort of stuff anymore. In GW2, you just do events over and over again. Drops don't matter at all most of the time. WoW, it's similar, where you just run old raids/dungeons, or harvest resources, though there are a lot of rare drops that are valuable.
In Allods Online, I remember just straight up killing mobs for gold for hours, just so I could convert that gold into premium currency, to buy certain stuff from the cash shop (as p2w as you'll get in MMO, it was awful).
So I do enjoy some sort of grind, if it gives me purpose and something to work towards. Games like BDO, while they are incredibly grindy, they don't make me want to grind, because I don't see the point.
I want the gold that I grind for to matter. In Archeage, it was so I could buy APEX, aka the premium time, as well as for the gear, consumables, and other stuff. All that stuff helped me become more powerful.
In Allods, like I mentioned, it was for p2w items from the cash shop. So again, it was to make myself more powerful.
Even in WoW, you can grind for a token aka sub time (though last I checked the prices were way way too high, that I don't think I can ever get that much gold in a month).
GW2 offers some lengthy grinds, like legendary weapons, but I do not care. It's way too complicated, it takes way too long, and the reward just isn't worth it. At best, you get a more convenient item that maybe looks better, and that's about it. No power increase, nothing. GW2 is basically all about the journey, rather than reward. While I myself want the journey to be as enjoyable as possible, I do prefer the reward (something GW2 doesn't really offer me).
So to summarize that whole thing. I want vertical progression, and I want rewards to matter. I do not want a constant gear treadmill necessarily, but I do need something to strive for, something that will make me more powerful, which means I will be stronger in PvP and PvE. Again, that is something Ashes will offer, where other games will not.
All in all, it's the overall experience. It's not because of a particular system that I'm excited about Ashes, other games have similar systems. It's due to all of those systems being present in one game, and due to the design pillars of the game. The only real concern I have is the implementation, but that's something we'll have to wait until the launch to see and experience.
Well, at least he takes accountability when he is wrong and admits it, rather than obfuscating and making excuses and convoluted reasoning about why he is not really wrong at all.
This is not just Noaani's opinion, it is a known fact.
Uh.Oh. Daddy is mad.
This feels disingenuous.
So, a market for the things that comes out of that is a key element.
Other than that we have the node system, the seasons, the large map for exploration. Also the way the systems are interwoven interest me as well. Even if all of that would be fourth, and fifth and so on
So for the elephant in the room, while I am aware that PvP is going to be a central aspect of AoC, to me, it's just the engine needed to drive the market and crafting. It has very little direct value to me, and aside from when it is needed, defending caravans or nodes for instance, I don't really see myself actively seeking it out. And even when I do, it's probably more going to be about enduring than enjoying it.
At some point I was kinda hoping to get PvP action in a similar vein of the PvP-lakes in Warhammer Online but I'm not quite sure I will be getting that. At this point in time it feels like PvP in AoC is likely to be either too organised or not organised enough to hit that sweet spot in between the two.
That said, my interest is somewhat selective, so I can't really claim to be your average PvEr. Or maybe that is your average PvEr?
I can understand that. Sounds like a rather nuanced take. And I fully agree with some things in that regard.
Personally I think the open oceans auto flagged PvP isn’t that great of an idea. My personal hope is that the “open waters” qualifier will be reduced in size. I think a zone like that could provide interesting objective based flagged combat around objectives like rich treasure deposits/epic fishing spots/trade routes in a similar flavor to the caravan system, without taking up the entirety of the naval space.I don’t really have any experience with naval content though so that’s just my gut take.
My personal view, but the only people I really feel this game has no chance of “being for” are players who do not enjoy any kind of challenge, players who want instant gratification, players who want nothing more than to murder hobo all day.
With alllllllll the levers and systems put in place that we know about and potentially all of those that we do not know, I feel that there is more than a possibility that corruption may be enough of a PvP deterrent for you, or that getting a freehold is possible for a casual with commitment to that goal (meaning someone who is not sinking huge amounts of daily/weekly time in the game).
Maybe those levers get to a point that it’s still a no go for you. Testing and IS’s reaction to that active testing feed back will probably give us a much better idea if it’s just untenable for some people. I don’t think you fall into any of those 3 categories I listed tho, so I personally still feel there is hope for you and those like you with similar mindsets. I could 100% be wrong but I’m going to remain positive about it.
When you mentioned you like to explore and such, it reminded me of one of the things they mentioned. Archeology, and the ability to discover new dungeons and such.
On pve servers people would always line up for scheduled pvp like Tol Barad and Wintergrasp in WoW. De facto pvp like arena and battlegrounds have high participation on pve servers. You'll even see people doing "off the cuff" pvp like attacking/defending towns, open world pvp objectives, and dueling on pve servers. Heck, FFXiv has high participation in their battleground-esque content and that game is about as pve focused as it gets.
I think the much better dividing line to place is between players that like consensual pvp and those that like non-consensual pvp. Can they turn and walk away or can they not. In my experience the majority of players enjoy pvp, but they want the choice.
I've noticed a common theme in various Ashes forums where everyone wants to put the consensual and non-consensual pvp players into the same basket and the pve players into another basket just to suit their point. That's an us vs them strawman because the pve only players aren't even here. They create a Boogeyman just to have an enemy and it serves no purpose.