Lesson No.1: Combat system can push a large amount of players away from the game.
I for example, am never going to touch BG3 due to the turn based-goofy-top-down-whatever type of combat it has. I realize that it's a great RPG and there's a lot of depth, but due to the combat system that's just so unfun, and unenjoyable to me, it's enough for me not to play the game.
Now I don't care if the game has THE best combat system out there, but it just has to be good enough in order to not drive a large number of players away.
Bruh I can take off my shoes and throw them at you. I can leap around, i can shove you off ledges, I can pick a corpse up and slam you with it, I can light all sorts of things on fire (then dip my weapons in said fire to hit you with), I can freeze puddles, I can turn into all sorts of animals, I have a massive list of spells that do various things from combat to out of combat utility.
But hey, if turn-based is so horrible for you that you shriek in terror and run the other way, I feel sorry for you having never played pokemon when you grew up.
And this is what I contribute that ashes should take note of. The vast amount of generic actions people can take in combat. Being able to use your environment to your advantage and deal with enemies in a strategic manner like causing them to fall off a cliff or lighting the flora in an area on fire. These add a depth of strategy to bg3 that can help you deal with very difficult situations. You just need to be smart enough to create it.
That's cool and all, and I realize it has a lot of depth, but it's still turn based. My main point here is that a lot of people actively avoid the game because of that.
So I prefer action combat to tab combat, but play them both.
But action and tab combat would turn me off to BG3 because it’s Dungeons and Dragons style gameplay.
The problem is, Intrepid is trying to make a quality game for the few at the top, and is hoping others will hang around in hopes of one day being at the top.
if that were really the thinking then that's not gonna happen at $15/month, maybe with FTP and cosmetic
The problem here is that it is Stevens experience in MMO's. His guild in Archeage was full of sycophants wanting to please Steven in order to gain advantage of some kind.
Since a number of those people are purported to be developing Ashes, it seems they had the right idea.
If you look at Ashes through the lense of it being made by someone that has the experience in MMORPG's of ruling over others with an iron fist, of telling people what to do and expecting them to just do it, the game really does start to look quite disturbing - unless you are someone that wants to rule over others with an iron fist, and tell people what to do and expect them to just do it.
I hope Steven will see the problems during Alpha 2 and do something about them.
The problem is, Intrepid is trying to make a quality game for the few at the top, and is hoping others will hang around in hopes of one day being at the top.
if that were really the thinking then that's not gonna happen at $15/month, maybe with FTP and cosmetic
The problem here is that it is Stevens experience in MMO's. His guild in Archeage was full of sycophants wanting to please Steven in order to gain advantage of some kind.
Since a number of those people are purported to be developing Ashes, it seems they had the right idea.
If you look at Ashes through the lense of it being made by someone that has the experience in MMORPG's of ruling over others with an iron fist, of telling people what to do and expecting them to just do it, the game really does start to look quite disturbing - unless you are someone that wants to rule over others with an iron fist, and tell people what to do and expect them to just do it.
The problem is, Intrepid is trying to make a quality game for the few at the top, and is hoping others will hang around in hopes of one day being at the top.
if that were really the thinking then that's not gonna happen at $15/month, maybe with FTP and cosmetic
The problem here is that it is Stevens experience in MMO's. His guild in Archeage was full of sycophants wanting to please Steven in order to gain advantage of some kind.
Since a number of those people are purported to be developing Ashes, it seems they had the right idea.
If you look at Ashes through the lense of it being made by someone that has the experience in MMORPG's of ruling over others with an iron fist, of telling people what to do and expecting them to just do it, the game really does start to look quite disturbing - unless you are someone that wants to rule over others with an iron fist, and tell people what to do and expect them to just do it.
I hope Steven will see the problems during Alpha 2 and do something about them.
My concern is that what I see as a bug, Steven sees as a feature.
From what I can tell, the above is actually the design intent behind the game, not some accident or oversight.
The problem is, Intrepid is trying to make a quality game for the few at the top, and is hoping others will hang around in hopes of one day being at the top.
if that were really the thinking then that's not gonna happen at $15/month, maybe with FTP and cosmetic
The problem here is that it is Stevens experience in MMO's. His guild in Archeage was full of sycophants wanting to please Steven in order to gain advantage of some kind.
Since a number of those people are purported to be developing Ashes, it seems they had the right idea.
If you look at Ashes through the lense of it being made by someone that has the experience in MMORPG's of ruling over others with an iron fist, of telling people what to do and expecting them to just do it, the game really does start to look quite disturbing - unless you are someone that wants to rule over others with an iron fist, and tell people what to do and expect them to just do it.
how do you know this?
You know Archeage is the game I have spent the second most amount of time playing, right?
The problem is, Intrepid is trying to make a quality game for the few at the top, and is hoping others will hang around in hopes of one day being at the top.
if that were really the thinking then that's not gonna happen at $15/month, maybe with FTP and cosmetic
The problem here is that it is Stevens experience in MMO's. His guild in Archeage was full of sycophants wanting to please Steven in order to gain advantage of some kind.
Since a number of those people are purported to be developing Ashes, it seems they had the right idea.
If you look at Ashes through the lense of it being made by someone that has the experience in MMORPG's of ruling over others with an iron fist, of telling people what to do and expecting them to just do it, the game really does start to look quite disturbing - unless you are someone that wants to rule over others with an iron fist, and tell people what to do and expect them to just do it.
how do you know this?
You know Archeage is the game I have spent the second most amount of time playing, right?
nope i dont keep track on what people do with their lives xD
what i mean is, were you in his guild? did you see this first hand? did an unhappy member of his guild tell you this? how do you know?
also, as a guild leader, dont you want people to do what you ask? if you have a strategy for something and everybody starts doing their own thing, your guild isnt coordinated and you will fail. maybe your plan isnt the best, but its better than people doing other things or not even participating.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Steven has told us about his guild and how he used to play MMORPGs.
Including saying that he hopes gamers will not play Ashes as ruthlessly (and toxically) as he did L2 and ArcheAge.
what i mean is, were you in his guild? did you see this first hand? did an unhappy member of his guild tell you this? how do you know?
The game had a small community.
also, as a guild leader, dont you want people to do what you ask?
The answer to this is actually more complex than you would think. It is not an automatic "yes, I want my guild to do as I ask".
The part of the answer that is relevant here is that I don't want the games systems forcing people to do as I ask.
I want people in my guild to be able to see leaving my guild but continuing to have fun in the game to be a valid option - just as I want people in your guild seeing that same option.
One more thing. I'm hoping Ashes avoids a lot of the inventory management cruft in BG3. There are ways of allowing numerous items have interesting functions without forcing players to spend a significant amount of time creating a system to organize items lest they be drowned by looting.
what i mean is, were you in his guild? did you see this first hand? did an unhappy member of his guild tell you this? how do you know?
The game had a small community.
also, as a guild leader, dont you want people to do what you ask?
The answer to this is actually more complex than you would think. It is not an automatic "yes, I want my guild to do as I ask".
The part of the answer that is relevant here is that I don't want the games systems forcing people to do as I ask.
I want people in my guild to be able to see leaving my guild but continuing to have fun in the game to be a valid option - just as I want people in your guild seeing that same option.
I see what you mean.b ut if a boss spawns, don't you want your whole guild to go and fight for it?
I played Archeage, but I can't say I played for a looong time. at some point, I had to stop playing it and games in general for a few years because of real life. I cant also say that I knew Steven. I probably did but I don't remember.
if a boss spawns, don't you want your whole guild to go and fight for it?
I wouldn't expect to need to ask people to come to a boss spawn - killing them is the reason people are in my guild in the first place.
My expectation is that should someone in my guild not wish to play the game in that manner any longer, they opt to leave the guild and play the game in the manner they then wish to play it in.
The way Ashes looks to me, if you leave one players sphere of influence, you will essentially need to get in to another sphere of influence in order to have a game that is worth playing.
If you think back through my arguments over the past year, you'll see that they are almost all based on this being how I see the game right now. People need to be able to have a game to play outside of the sphere of influence of others, but Ashes look determined to not allow for that.
if a boss spawns, don't you want your whole guild to go and fight for it?
I wouldn't expect to need to ask people to come to a boss spawn - killing them is the reason people are in my guild in the first place.
My expectation is that should someone in my guild not wish to play the game in that manner any longer, they opt to leave the guild and play the game in the manner they then wish to play it in.
The way Ashes looks to me, if you leave one players sphere of influence, you will essentially need to get in to another sphere of influence in order to have a game that is worth playing.
If you think back through my arguments over the past year, you'll see that they are almost all based on this being how I see the game right now. People need to be able to have a game to play outside of the sphere of influence of others, but Ashes look determined to not allow for that.
so players in stevens guild didn't want to play in a certain way but they didn't leave the guild? how did he force people to do anything?
so players in stevens guild didn't want to play in a certain way but they didn't leave the guild? how did he force people to do anything?
Stevens guild in Archeage was full of sycophants - people that were hanging around Steven because they wanted something from him. They would stay in his guild because, well, they wanted something from him. As such, he was able to just tell them what to do, and they would do it - because they wanted something from him.
That part about people wanting something from him that I said three times above is key. The fact that they wanted something from him was why they stayed in his guild. It is literally what a sycophant does - they hang around people they think they can get something from.
The problem is, Intrepid is trying to make a quality game for the few at the top, and is hoping others will hang around in hopes of one day being at the top.
if that were really the thinking then that's not gonna happen at $15/month, maybe with FTP and cosmetic
The problem here is that it is Stevens experience in MMO's. His guild in Archeage was full of sycophants wanting to please Steven in order to gain advantage of some kind.
Since a number of those people are purported to be developing Ashes, it seems they had the right idea.
If you look at Ashes through the lense of it being made by someone that has the experience in MMORPG's of ruling over others with an iron fist, of telling people what to do and expecting them to just do it, the game really does start to look quite disturbing - unless you are someone that wants to rule over others with an iron fist, and tell people what to do and expect them to just do it.
I hope Steven will see the problems during Alpha 2 and do something about them.
My concern is that what I see as a bug, Steven sees as a feature.
From what I can tell, the above is actually the design intent behind the game, not some accident or oversight.
The game can fail and should fail if Steven makes mistakes in game design or in predicting player behavior. For example the prime time creates the need of enough players on each server.
Objective-based PvP events such as node sieges, castle sieges, guild wars, and node wars will occur within a prime-time window somewhere between 3PM and 9PM server time. This is subject to testing.[9][10][30]
Steven might have to change the game design, either to make the game better for more players or to get rid of the prime time and have one world wide server.
I don't believe the alpha 2 players will stick around and play enough the game if they don't like it.
And those voices when they leave will count more than what we post now in forum.
Just a couple of comments because reading this thread nearly made my brain dribble out of my ears.
"Niche" is a relative term. You can have niches within niches. To describe something as niche you first need to define the "population". BG3 is a niche product within the scope of computer gaming. It is not a niche product within the scope of RPGs.
Baulders Gate is not an "Isometric" game. Isometric design relates to or is characterized by equality of measurements. It is fundamentally crystallographic and BG3's camera is not.
People need to be able to have a game to play outside of the sphere of influence of others,
Then they should play a single-player game. Not an MMORPG.
That's all.
This is probably the worst take in this thread - worse than people thinking BG3 is isometric (you are correct in your statement that it is not).
Assuming you actual read and understood what I was saying, your comment here is you saying that you think players in guilds should not feel like there is a viable way for them to leave their guild while still being able to play the game. You are saying that you think players should feel bound to their guild, trapped in it - that leaving the guild means leaving the game.
I don't think that is something you believe to be true - which is why I consider the above to be a horrible take.
Not interested in wallowing in your pedantic pig shit nonsense. You put words in other people's mouths and don't even understand the ones coming out of yours.
Not interested in wallowing in your pedantic pig shit nonsense. You put words in other people's mouths and don't even understand the ones coming out of yours.
I don't put words in other peoples mouths - not on purpose at least. I repeat my understanding of what it is they have said and give them the opportunity to clarify.
That is what I did above.
In the context of what I have been saying, you disagreeing says to me that you want people to essentially be bound to their guild.
The reason for this is simple - I am saying that the above is how I see the games development going. People will feel as if they can't leave their guild without leaving the game.
Your response to that was that people in this situation should play a single player game.
How am I to take that other than as you thinking players should be bound to their guild, unable to leave without also leaving the game?
So, I pointed out how I took what you said - and gave you the opportunity to clarify if you wanted.
You didn't clarify, so should I then take it that I was right in what it was you were saying, or were you mistaken as to what I was saying?
. I repeat my understanding of what it is they have said and give them the opportunity to clarify.
So my understanding of what you just said is that you think I am the greatest person that has ever lived? That you wish to bow before me and worship the ground on which I walk? Is that correct? If you don't clarify that means you must have said that.
See how utterly stupid that is? That is what you do. You put words in people's mouths and then demand they clarify YOUR misunderstandings. It's disingenuous, exhausting, nonsensical, and frankly, annoying AF.
. I repeat my understanding of what it is they have said and give them the opportunity to clarify.
So my understanding of what you just said is that you think I am the greatest person that has ever lived? That you wish to bow before me and worship the ground on which I walk? Is that correct? If you don't clarify that means you must have said that.
See how utterly stupid that is?
That is an incorrect understanding of what I said.
I mean, in this case it is utterly stupid, because you had no reason to assume what I meant was what you said.
In my case above, I have every reason to assume that if I say "the game is being designed so that people feel they can't leave their guild without also leaving the game", and you say "they should play a single player game", then taking that to mean you don't believe people should be free to leave their guild is actually a valid take on what you are saying.
Anyone actually reading the discussion would have a valid reason to assume that was your opinion - in fact, you kind of left no realistic space for people to think you feel any other way about people leaving their guild in Ashes - you specifically said people wanting to do that should play a single player game when that was your reply to what I had said.
However, even in my first post, I said that I don't think that you actually think that. By that I mean you probably just saw a portion of the post in question, quoted it, cropped it and replied to it without actually knowing what was said. I specifically gave you the opportunity to put thngs straight.
Rather than doing that, you went full on desultory.
That is what you do. You put words in people's mouths and then demand they clarify YOUR misunderstandings. It's disingenuous, exhausting, nonsensical, and frankly, annoying AF.
So, you say that I reiterate back to people what it is I took them to say, based on context, and then ask them to clarify it.
And you think that is me putting words in other peoples mouths?
My dude, my dear, sweet child, you have no clue.
What that is that you just described and then called "disingenuous, exhausting, nonsensical, and frankly, annoying AF" is what the rest of the world calls "discussion".
Keep in mind here, friend, you are the one that quoted me and then put in your own incredibly bad take (or simply misunderstood the discussion and threw in an out of place comment that made you look very disconnected).
I didn't engage you in discussion here, you engaged me. The problem here is that you are the one that is too proud to admit that you commented without understanding the point you were commenting on - and so you are trying to pass the blame on to me in what ever way you can, despite me giving you ample opportunity to clarify yourself.
The problem here is that it is Stevens experience in MMO's. His guild in Archeage was full of sycophants wanting to please Steven in order to gain advantage of some kind.
Since a number of those people are purported to be developing Ashes, it seems they had the right idea.
So what tf are you doing here following their game? this is not normal, if you actually believe the shit you say (which I don't think you do) it would be absolutely insane, and I mean like mentally insane, to be following this project and spending time on the forums.
I've seen a lot of weird people in MMO forums over the years, but you are definitely special, what WHIT3 said its just the perfect definition of most of the discussions you have with people:
You put words in people's mouths and then demand they clarify YOUR misunderstandings. It's disingenuous, exhausting, nonsensical, and frankly, annoying AF.
The way Ashes looks to me, if you leave one players sphere of influence, you will essentially need to get in to another sphere of influence in order to have a game that is worth playing.
People need to be able to have a game to play outside of the sphere of influence of others, but Ashes look determined to not allow for that.
Yea, ashes is determined to be an actual MMORPG and not a singleplayer game with shared world, imagine that.... but hey, this isn't an issue for you, remember? you, as the PVE Carebear we all know you are, said this:
If I am playing this game, I'll have a guild that is at the very least competing for top spot on the server (the only way we won't be competing is if no one is good enough to compete against us).
So you are good! you gonna be at the top spot don't worry about other players
I'm happy to see you agree entirely with everything I have said. Apology accepted.
Sure thing, Mag.
I'm still not sure if you think players should be bound to their guild or not though. I mean, you essentially said that is what you think, but you've not clarified that this is true despite being asked perhaps 3 times now.
Yea, ashes is determined to be an actual MMORPG and not a singleplayer game with shared world, imagine that.... but hey, this isn't an issue for you, remember? you, as the PVE Carebear we all know you are, said this:
There is a difference between an MMO that is designed as a single player game and an MMO where players are free to leave their guild but still find enough of a game to play.
MMORPG as a genre should absolutely require working with others to get the most out of the game. However, it shouldn't require being in a guild in order to have a game to play.
So you are good! you gonna be at the top spot don't worry about other players
But it is this very fact that is the reason I am not asking any of my guild to play Ashes.
I don't want the people in my guild - my friends - to feel they can't leave the guild should that be what they want to do.
If that is something you do want, then cool, I'm super happy for the people in your guild. However, I don't.
so players in stevens guild didn't want to play in a certain way but they didn't leave the guild? how did he force people to do anything?
Stevens guild in Archeage was full of sycophants - people that were hanging around Steven because they wanted something from him. They would stay in his guild because, well, they wanted something from him. As such, he was able to just tell them what to do, and they would do it - because they wanted something from him.
That part about people wanting something from him that I said three times above is key. The fact that they wanted something from him was why they stayed in his guild. It is literally what a sycophant does - they hang around people they think they can get something from.
if thats how they wanted to play, i dont see anything wrong with that. unless you mean he was being a complete asshole and they stayed with him for the benefits.
if i join a guild, i will help my guildies and the leader, but i also expect help in return. there is nothing wrong with that.
if thats how they wanted to play, i dont see anything wrong with that. unless you mean he was being a complete asshole and they stayed with him for the benefits.
I don't have an issue with how Steven ran his guild in Archeage. The point of bringing it up was to give an explination of why I believe the game is being developed in the way I think it is, and a reason as to why I believe it is a feature, not a bug.
Past that illustrative purpose, there is no real reason to talk about it in this discussion, imo.
if i join a guild, i will help my guildies and the leader, but i also expect help in return. there is nothing wrong with that.
Yeah, that is all a part of joining a guild.
But what about if you join a guild, help them all out, and then after a week they come along demanding "guild tax", or tell you that they are leaving that node and moving to a different one that you won't want to move to, or some other equally bullshit thing. Players need to be able to leave the guild they are in, and still have a game to play.
I don't get why people think anything else would be the case.
if thats how they wanted to play, i dont see anything wrong with that. unless you mean he was being a complete asshole and they stayed with him for the benefits.
I don't have an issue with how Steven ran him guild in Archeage. The point of bringing it up was to give an explination of why I believe the game is being developed in the way I think it is, and a reason as to why I believe it is a feature, not a bug.
Past that illustrative purpose, there is no real reason to talk about it in this discussion, imo.
if i join a guild, i will help my guildies and the leader, but i also expect help in return. there is nothing wrong with that.
Yeah, that is all a part of joining a guild.
But what about if you join a guild, help them all out, and then after a week they come along demanding "guild tax", or tell you that they are leaving that node and moving to a different one that you won't want to move to, or some other equally bullshit thing. Players need to be able to leave the guild they are in, and still have a game to play.
I don't get why people think anything else would be the case.
i never said that was wrong. i dont see why i wouldnt be able to leave the guild if i wanted to. i can join another one and play. also, guilds probably wont have everybody in one node anyways but i get your point. if im in a guild and they say well we arent going to be doing raids anymore, then im free to leave and join a guild that does raids. i dont see why i wouldnt be able to? or i could organize it myself with the members that are interested.
i think people should be able to leave their guild and have a game to play as well. if you are talking about competition between guilds and you cant play the game because your guild is the one controlling most of the resources, you can still leave and play the game. you might not kill the best raid, but you can do other things and buy the item from the raid.
Comments
So I prefer action combat to tab combat, but play them both.
But action and tab combat would turn me off to BG3 because it’s Dungeons and Dragons style gameplay.
I hope Steven will see the problems during Alpha 2 and do something about them.
how do you know this?
My concern is that what I see as a bug, Steven sees as a feature.
From what I can tell, the above is actually the design intent behind the game, not some accident or oversight.
You know Archeage is the game I have spent the second most amount of time playing, right?
nope i dont keep track on what people do with their lives xD
what i mean is, were you in his guild? did you see this first hand? did an unhappy member of his guild tell you this? how do you know?
also, as a guild leader, dont you want people to do what you ask? if you have a strategy for something and everybody starts doing their own thing, your guild isnt coordinated and you will fail. maybe your plan isnt the best, but its better than people doing other things or not even participating.
Including saying that he hopes gamers will not play Ashes as ruthlessly (and toxically) as he did L2 and ArcheAge.
The part of the answer that is relevant here is that I don't want the games systems forcing people to do as I ask.
I want people in my guild to be able to see leaving my guild but continuing to have fun in the game to be a valid option - just as I want people in your guild seeing that same option.
I see what you mean.b ut if a boss spawns, don't you want your whole guild to go and fight for it?
I played Archeage, but I can't say I played for a looong time. at some point, I had to stop playing it and games in general for a few years because of real life. I cant also say that I knew Steven. I probably did but I don't remember.
My expectation is that should someone in my guild not wish to play the game in that manner any longer, they opt to leave the guild and play the game in the manner they then wish to play it in.
The way Ashes looks to me, if you leave one players sphere of influence, you will essentially need to get in to another sphere of influence in order to have a game that is worth playing.
If you think back through my arguments over the past year, you'll see that they are almost all based on this being how I see the game right now. People need to be able to have a game to play outside of the sphere of influence of others, but Ashes look determined to not allow for that.
so players in stevens guild didn't want to play in a certain way but they didn't leave the guild? how did he force people to do anything?
That part about people wanting something from him that I said three times above is key. The fact that they wanted something from him was why they stayed in his guild. It is literally what a sycophant does - they hang around people they think they can get something from.
The game can fail and should fail if Steven makes mistakes in game design or in predicting player behavior. For example the prime time creates the need of enough players on each server.
Objective-based PvP events such as node sieges, castle sieges, guild wars, and node wars will occur within a prime-time window somewhere between 3PM and 9PM server time. This is subject to testing.[9][10][30]
Steven might have to change the game design, either to make the game better for more players or to get rid of the prime time and have one world wide server.
I don't believe the alpha 2 players will stick around and play enough the game if they don't like it.
And those voices when they leave will count more than what we post now in forum.
"Niche" is a relative term. You can have niches within niches. To describe something as niche you first need to define the "population". BG3 is a niche product within the scope of computer gaming. It is not a niche product within the scope of RPGs.
Baulders Gate is not an "Isometric" game. Isometric design relates to or is characterized by equality of measurements. It is fundamentally crystallographic and BG3's camera is not.
Finally.
Then they should play a single-player game. Not an MMORPG.
That's all.
Assuming you actual read and understood what I was saying, your comment here is you saying that you think players in guilds should not feel like there is a viable way for them to leave their guild while still being able to play the game. You are saying that you think players should feel bound to their guild, trapped in it - that leaving the guild means leaving the game.
I don't think that is something you believe to be true - which is why I consider the above to be a horrible take.
That is what I did above.
In the context of what I have been saying, you disagreeing says to me that you want people to essentially be bound to their guild.
The reason for this is simple - I am saying that the above is how I see the games development going. People will feel as if they can't leave their guild without leaving the game.
Your response to that was that people in this situation should play a single player game.
How am I to take that other than as you thinking players should be bound to their guild, unable to leave without also leaving the game?
So, I pointed out how I took what you said - and gave you the opportunity to clarify if you wanted.
You didn't clarify, so should I then take it that I was right in what it was you were saying, or were you mistaken as to what I was saying?
So my understanding of what you just said is that you think I am the greatest person that has ever lived? That you wish to bow before me and worship the ground on which I walk? Is that correct? If you don't clarify that means you must have said that.
See how utterly stupid that is? That is what you do. You put words in people's mouths and then demand they clarify YOUR misunderstandings. It's disingenuous, exhausting, nonsensical, and frankly, annoying AF.
I mean, in this case it is utterly stupid, because you had no reason to assume what I meant was what you said.
In my case above, I have every reason to assume that if I say "the game is being designed so that people feel they can't leave their guild without also leaving the game", and you say "they should play a single player game", then taking that to mean you don't believe people should be free to leave their guild is actually a valid take on what you are saying.
Anyone actually reading the discussion would have a valid reason to assume that was your opinion - in fact, you kind of left no realistic space for people to think you feel any other way about people leaving their guild in Ashes - you specifically said people wanting to do that should play a single player game when that was your reply to what I had said.
However, even in my first post, I said that I don't think that you actually think that. By that I mean you probably just saw a portion of the post in question, quoted it, cropped it and replied to it without actually knowing what was said. I specifically gave you the opportunity to put thngs straight.
Rather than doing that, you went full on desultory. So, you say that I reiterate back to people what it is I took them to say, based on context, and then ask them to clarify it.
And you think that is me putting words in other peoples mouths?
My dude, my dear, sweet child, you have no clue.
What that is that you just described and then called "disingenuous, exhausting, nonsensical, and frankly, annoying AF" is what the rest of the world calls "discussion".
Keep in mind here, friend, you are the one that quoted me and then put in your own incredibly bad take (or simply misunderstood the discussion and threw in an out of place comment that made you look very disconnected).
I didn't engage you in discussion here, you engaged me. The problem here is that you are the one that is too proud to admit that you commented without understanding the point you were commenting on - and so you are trying to pass the blame on to me in what ever way you can, despite me giving you ample opportunity to clarify yourself.
So what tf are you doing here following their game? this is not normal, if you actually believe the shit you say (which I don't think you do) it would be absolutely insane, and I mean like mentally insane, to be following this project and spending time on the forums.
I've seen a lot of weird people in MMO forums over the years, but you are definitely special, what WHIT3 said its just the perfect definition of most of the discussions you have with people:
Yea, ashes is determined to be an actual MMORPG and not a singleplayer game with shared world, imagine that.... but hey, this isn't an issue for you, remember? you, as the PVE Carebear we all know you are, said this:
So you are good! you gonna be at the top spot don't worry about other players
Sure thing, Mag.
I'm still not sure if you think players should be bound to their guild or not though. I mean, you essentially said that is what you think, but you've not clarified that this is true despite being asked perhaps 3 times now.
MMORPG as a genre should absolutely require working with others to get the most out of the game. However, it shouldn't require being in a guild in order to have a game to play. But it is this very fact that is the reason I am not asking any of my guild to play Ashes.
I don't want the people in my guild - my friends - to feel they can't leave the guild should that be what they want to do.
If that is something you do want, then cool, I'm super happy for the people in your guild. However, I don't.
if thats how they wanted to play, i dont see anything wrong with that. unless you mean he was being a complete asshole and they stayed with him for the benefits.
if i join a guild, i will help my guildies and the leader, but i also expect help in return. there is nothing wrong with that.
Past that illustrative purpose, there is no real reason to talk about it in this discussion, imo. Yeah, that is all a part of joining a guild.
But what about if you join a guild, help them all out, and then after a week they come along demanding "guild tax", or tell you that they are leaving that node and moving to a different one that you won't want to move to, or some other equally bullshit thing. Players need to be able to leave the guild they are in, and still have a game to play.
I don't get why people think anything else would be the case.
i never said that was wrong. i dont see why i wouldnt be able to leave the guild if i wanted to. i can join another one and play. also, guilds probably wont have everybody in one node anyways but i get your point. if im in a guild and they say well we arent going to be doing raids anymore, then im free to leave and join a guild that does raids. i dont see why i wouldnt be able to? or i could organize it myself with the members that are interested.
i think people should be able to leave their guild and have a game to play as well. if you are talking about competition between guilds and you cant play the game because your guild is the one controlling most of the resources, you can still leave and play the game. you might not kill the best raid, but you can do other things and buy the item from the raid.