Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
What you want is only possible when there is no competition. It just so happens that pretty much every aspect of this game has some form of competition in it, unlucky.
i thought minecraft was the most popular mmo and it has open world pvp, and its a sandbox, so lots of the content comes from the player.
i mean mc has more registered accounts than the top 5 mmorpg together lol and has more daily players than any of them.
but i guess what people really like is social interactions, not solo mmorpg, thats why roblox, imvu, and habbo hotel have more players than the "top 5 mmorpg" and there is pvp in some of those too xd
PvP is not really the best fit for MMORPGs, specifically.
Potentially good for eradicating endgame.
We'll have to see if there are better alternatives for that by the time Ashes releases.
lol? Wow pve crowd starting to show up.
You say this as if a game that doesn't have enough content for its players is a good thing.
No.
Minecrsft is the most popular game, but persistent online versions of it are tiny in comparison.
no, thats not an easy solution, and not everyone wins that way. the target audience for the game loses. this game is for people who like open world pvp, not for people who dont like open world pvp, therefore is designed around open world pvp. if you change it, then that will affect other systems and you will have to change them as well, basically making the game not ashes of creation, it would be something else, maybe wow 2.0 and we arent here for that.
I mean, this isn't true.
This is what people that feel the need to essentially romanticize PvP say. It isn't how PvX games play out in practice.
There. I fixed it for you.
Ow pvp. No PvP only zones.
That would be a PvP game.
Archeage is a PvP game, and it has some zones where most PvP is disabled, and times in other zones where all PvP is disabled.
Yet it's still a PvP game.
I would make this a one way door too so people inside can exit to engage the other group before thge gate goes down if everyone leave the room boss resets.
They could, but there is one major issue with this.
If you are going to have that level of deep, intricate curated content, you need to build up to it. You can't just go from trash tier to god tier.
In order for there to be that build up, there needs to be an entire raid progression.
A raid progression is a lot of work from the developers.
If raid bosses are open world, that means only one guild is getting the kill per week. It also means only one guild is working on that progression at a time, since open world.
This means developers would find themselves spending more time on raid content than all players combined spend on raid content. It is normal for developers to spend more time on raid content than any one guild would spend on that content, but with instancing, you have many guilds running that content on each server rather than just one guild. Instancing increases the bandwidth of players on a given piece of content.
This is what makes encounters that take so much time viable from a business perspective. This is why instanced content exists - it allows more people to be working on progression, it allows more people to experience the work and effort developers put in.
A proper raid progression like players today understand it isn't viable without instancing. Deep PvE encounters aren't viable without raid progression. Thus, deep PvE encounters aren't viable without instancing.
or make the events that trigger the bosses to happen more often.
or make enough open world bosses that one guild cant take them all at the same time
etc
etc
etc
etc
but yes i agree cant go from trash to god tier.
people think if is adds a top pve instance at max level pve players will automatically flock to the game. it wont happen
If the boss spawns every day, then one guild will kill it every day and get geared out from it very quickly.
That is why most instances have a weekly lockout - it slows sdown gear based progress.
With open world bosses, you need to assume that no more than 3 guilds on a server will be killing them, and in most cases it will be the same guild spawn after spawn. If a guild is already killing the mob every spawn and that mob is spawning daily, that guild is outgearing everyone else on the server at an actual alarming rate.
In terms of making enough open world bosses, this is more viable but also isn't. If you do that you will have a situation where a guild is splitting it's players up. You pick one mob and start off with the minimum number of players you'll need to definately get that kill, then you pick your second choice mob and send enough players there to guarantee that you'll prevent a rival guild from killing it until that portion of your guild above has killed their mob and is able to get to where this second mob is. Then both of those groups move on to the mob that was your third pick that also has people preventing a kill, then the you carry it on with a third and fourth and sixth.
This will take longer in Ashes than in other games, but if killing these mobs is your nights gameplay, it will be likely that one moderately large guild (a few hundred) will still end up with most kills. At the very least, the over all design of the system needs to be based on the assumption that one guild will get half of all open world encounter spawns.
Where this option of having many bosses can work is as your entry level encounters to a raid progression (as in, tier 1 of at least 5). If they are entry level, top guilds can get everything they want from them and then assuming the second (and more likely third) tier has enough content, they simply won't have time to concern themselves with tier one encounter any more. Where even this use falls down is on servers with very large guilds - a guild of 6 or 7 hundred will have all of these encounters locked down perpetually, no matter how many of them the developers produce.
Triggered spawns is a valid option, but larger guilds will simply have that triggered spawn camps and when your guild triggers that spawn, they will be just behind you ready to take you on - triggered spawn encounters work well as one type of encounter among many, rather than being the stand out encounter. They are great at providing variety to a raid progression, rather than at being a fix to any given issue.
The thing is, this whole issue is something Bill Trost solved (or his team solved) over 20 years ago. The solution to the above problem isn't some unknown entity or anything. It is known, and the person responsible for it is currently developing this game.
Thus, the question isn't coming up with a way to solve the above issue, the question is whether or not Intrepid want to solve it. If they want top end raid content, the path to it is VERY clear - *IF* they want it.
Here is my list of PvX MMORPG's, both released and in development;
That is all.
The thing is, since there isn't an actual definition of PvX, no one can say I'm wrong - they can just disagree subjectively.
I would do this to end bosses in the OW dungeons so the very last boss in a dungeon is a difficult challenge to overcome so there wouldnt be to many of them and killing them could effect the world or dungeon for some way. They should be memorable when they are defeated.
Assuming the game has the infrustructure in place to support that (ie, a raid progression that players have enough access to so that there are many guilds able to compete for this encounter), then yeah, that works.
Oh, are we talking about PvP games now?
Plenty have come out since L2.
Considering L2 to be a PvX game as opposed to a PvP game is like considering FFXIV to be a PvX game rather than a PvE game.
You have shown endless times that you have no clue what PvX game is. Why do you think your opinion on L2 matters to anyone?
From AoC wiki:
He also considers pvp takes no skill and people do the exact same thing and can predict their moves making combat the same. Part of his reason to push for pve lmao.
Ultima online
Ragnarok online
Lineage
Tera
Aion
Albion
Mortal Online
BDO
EVE
Revelations Online
Granado Espada
Blade and Soul
Forsaken World
Perfect World
Archeage
Minecraft
im probably forgetting a couple. some of these tilt more towards pvp or pve. and a couple of these arent purely pvx all the time as they separate pvp and pve to some extent, even if they don't separate the gear, however, they have an optional pvx mode, so i still included them.
you could also say gw has an optinal pvx mode if you play in the ow pvp map, and wow was pvx at first, although not required to progress
i think tibia is also pvx, but i didnt play it so cant confirm. i dont remember rift too much but i think it can be included here.
ill update if i remember more games. oh and of course ashes of creation, and probably throne and liberty, but we will see with that one.
So... again... PvX MMORPG is a meaningless term. It's just a synonym for a PvP-centric MMORPG.