Flanker wrote: » 18 as I can now ]
Kilion wrote: So just so I understand your concern correctly: You worry that Intrepids current rate of experience accumulation is set in a way that the content they have been building so far can be skipped to a big degree?
Flanker wrote: » Correct
Flanker wrote: » 1. The average player would reach level 50 within approximately ~2 months. It means the only future updates he will care about are those related to endgame. Therefore, Intrepid will be forced to prioritize endgame content to prevent those players from leaving; this will not stop and will only get worse over time.Well by his own words content can just be skipped yet he cries about that there won't be any content Endgame so people will leave.Although I don't know how he played any of it to know.. Kilion wrote: » Exactly. With most players basically being weekend gamers, calling for more than 225 hours until max levels when that isn't too much of a changing point to begin with makes no sense Flanker wrote: » I find it very interesting, that you keep saying that "level doesn't matter" (which is true) and "there is no endgame" (which is true). If it doesn't matter, how come extending leveling is an issue? This also perplexing because doesn't Flanker claim that levelling needs to be slowed yet he agrees with @Kilion that it doesn't matter? If levels don't matter why bother extending it to begin with? On top of that he now agrees there is no endgame! In all seriousness I think people are missing the bigger picture we look at it from our own perspective and maybe a bit of little selfish one at that. I mentioned about the average gamer and the pressure they will feel pressure of course being lack of time but it's not so much them getting to cap as it is trying to keep up with their friends or trying to join guilds that expect a half decent level of progression, finding groups your level or how about something simple like a node levels up as with the creatures and now you have to pack up and find another node leaving your home base. I am not saying we need to placate to the casual gamer I am saying lets not to ignore what this game is about groups, friend and guilds not solo people and if you run off half of them with stupid ignorant shit suggestion like this the game isn't going to last long.
Kilion wrote: » Exactly. With most players basically being weekend gamers, calling for more than 225 hours until max levels when that isn't too much of a changing point to begin with makes no sense
Flanker wrote: » I find it very interesting, that you keep saying that "level doesn't matter" (which is true) and "there is no endgame" (which is true). If it doesn't matter, how come extending leveling is an issue? This also perplexing because doesn't Flanker claim that levelling needs to be slowed yet he agrees with @Kilion that it doesn't matter? If levels don't matter why bother extending it to begin with? On top of that he now agrees there is no endgame! In all seriousness I think people are missing the bigger picture we look at it from our own perspective and maybe a bit of little selfish one at that. I mentioned about the average gamer and the pressure they will feel pressure of course being lack of time but it's not so much them getting to cap as it is trying to keep up with their friends or trying to join guilds that expect a half decent level of progression, finding groups your level or how about something simple like a node levels up as with the creatures and now you have to pack up and find another node leaving your home base. I am not saying we need to placate to the casual gamer I am saying lets not to ignore what this game is about groups, friend and guilds not solo people and if you run off half of them with stupid ignorant shit suggestion like this the game isn't going to last long.
Flanker wrote: » It was used as an example to emphasize that if I was a "normal" player, I wouldn't care if leveling took thousands of hours in Ashes as long as it is fun.
Just for reference - I wasn't making fun of people who can't play a lot, don't take it seriously.
I never said that Ashes must be a game for me and it's not the reason why I say it. Based on everything I know at the moment, I believe longer leveling will be a net positive for a game overall. Not because it fits my personal preferences and I'm trying to rationalize it somehow.
Chaliux wrote: » No offense meant
I grinded IRL a lot (same as I grind in MMOs lol) and I can chill for the next couple of years. Also, I'm kind of stuck at my house with my cat for 953 days already, and my parents, friends and literally everyone I knew left the country because of the war. If anyone is curious.
I'm aware of that and once again: I never said that Ashes must be a game to please me in all ways, shapes or forms.
Correct. And that's why (according to Steven) every single level will be rewarding and certain level milestones will be more rewarding than the others.
You are free to think that way. We all have different goals, we all find different things entertaining
Please, prior to quoting, care to understand the context in which this phrase was used. I was talking about a specific segment of people who want Steven to change the game's core pillars after he said a dozen of times that it is not going to happen. I didn't use it as "an excuse to justify literally anything"
Zehlan wrote: » Interesting you play 18 hours a day so that puts you in the top 1-2% of gamers and you wanna lengthen the time for everyone which no matter what multiplier you use it will be just a blip for you and an eternity for everyone else. See the only thing this does is give you an advantage at max level i don't like the term endgame because that means there is an end which is incorrect. My point is the bigger the multiplier to the xp hours , days whatever metric you would use the more it highly benefits Flanker. some basic math because unlike flanker it doesn't lie current model is for the average hardcore gamer that's 5hr/day =45days But taking Flanker into account 18hr/day would be 12.5 days giving him a 37 days of professions rare dungeon loot drops etc not bad but not game breaking. If we take his slower policy and say multiply x4 things change considerably Same hardcore player 5hr/day =180 days Flanker 18hr/day =50 days now he would have a 130 day window to control resources dungeons crafting and it only gets worse and when you add in the average player 2.5 hr/ day =360 days they might as well not even play. So why ask for this? could it be Flanker really wants content and for everyone to stop and enjoy it?
Zehlan wrote: » Well by his own words content can just be skipped yet he cries about that there won't be any content Endgame so people will leave.Although I don't know how he played any of it to know..
Chaliux wrote: » Well, although I'm a "normal" (maybe) player AND I like the leveling a lot, I still would need to reach the end at a certain point, so an endless leveling phase just, for me, wouldnt make sense, because end level opens a bit different content, that's just the normal and usual case in MMOs and it's a good design, because it brings the needed diversity and longterm engagement, once the character reached more power than having 1-2 skills like in the first levels. Leveling is a journey, a journey with lots of fun. But journeys end.
Chaliux wrote: » It's fine, don't worry. Maybe you can just reflect your "poor" in front of casual players, because casuals usually are everything, but not poor in all meanings, because there is a trivial reason why they are casuals: Because of a healthy and good real life, which doesnt allow them to put all their time into a computer game ;-)
Chaliux wrote: » Sure, you didnt. And I just stated, that Ashes should not be build around players or player types (would be the better wording) like you - that's nothing personal about "Flanker", I would say the same to another user. So, don't take it personal.
Chaliux wrote: » About grinding IRL: Good thing. Work is nothing bad. Stopping it for bad circumstances is not your fault. Continuing work is important for a working and social society and civilazation (just think about pension, getting money once you are old, this will decrease if you are not working enough during the ages you can do it, so prosperity overall will decrease).
Chaliux wrote: » That's a good thing and several MMOs try this. Hopefully it's true for Ashes. I fully appreciate it, because leveling and getting the world and the character to know is one of the best parts of a new MMO. Beside the fact, that I dont like to pay for investing my time (but the other way round), that's the main second reason why I'm not playing in Alpha and quite sure will not play in Beta: I want to play, feel and learn the game after release in a better, less frustrating state, with not character wipes, less bugs/glithces, better polished systems and mechanics. Because my time is rare and I only invest it into reasonable and (as best as possible) finihsed games.
Chaliux wrote: » Sure, but I'm not putting "poor frequent player" in threads. That's the message I try to address to you - and as you seem to be a smart guy, you understand this. You can change perspective: Just think about "normal" players that invest 1-3 hours every evening, after work, hobbies, family into the game. Let's say from 20:00 to 23:00. If (!) Ashes considers this player time with respect, it will be succesful and get popular. If they game will be designed around 10h+ players, it will suffer empty realms within the first year. The frequent players will consume the content within 5-6 months, fully. All the rest will be far behind. And they will start to leave, player by player. The minority, the rest, will suffer from all the linked designs and mechanics soon. We've seen this in other MMOs several times. So, what you need, is, addressing content to all player types and combining them. What's the strength of a casual player? Lazy content, sometimes perhaps easy content. Two aspects a hardcore pvp player that is by heart loving to run around in 40raids and pvp-ing their enemies perhaps doesnt like, or doing boring town quests for the node progression. Ahses needs different player types for different goald and because players get different entertainment out of it - hopefully the design it well and NOT only for freuqent players.
Chaliux wrote: » It's also valid for them. We've seen several games promising A and delivering B.
Chaliux wrote: » In general, with or without context, it's a marketing phrase, an excuse argument.
Chaliux wrote: » Forget, for god sake, this marketing phrasing that something is not for everybody. Of course it's not. But that's not excuse for shitty designs or mechanics.
Depraved wrote: » someone who plays 15 hours every day isn't going to hit max level in 2 weeks even if 15 x 14 = 210, because there won't even be quests or mobs that will give him enough exp in those 2 weeks until nodes develop.
Aszkalon wrote: » A looonnng time ago in Vanilla WoW -> it felt like levelling a Character up to the Max Level, had meaning. It took time - so You carefully chose which Class for Example you want to take. Because it easily took Months to level up a single Character.
I am very convinced - if People make the levelling Process as fast as it is for Example in WoW today -> then many People will quickly lose Interest in Ashes of Creation. Because it won't feel as meaningful to level Characters. If everything goes far to quick, then it will make the Game feel more empty. And this truly doesn't need to be.
Chaliux wrote: » 1. target audience This is really a difficult topic. Take us (you and me) for instance. You are, obviously, a Lineage2 fan and you are watching Ashes for several reasons, but also for the reason, that it seems to be covering several L2 designs (it's the spiritual successor, at least a bit). That's why you are arguing (and sometimes "defending") especially those aspects. And that's fine and fair, it's because that is your paradigma of a good and fun MMO ("the first cut is the deepest") and all those sentences and quotes from Steven are attracting you particularly. Not only, but particularly.
Chaliux wrote: » And as long as you've not experienced another taste and why other designs can be huge fun, how would you be able to differentiate?
Chaliux wrote: » "Your" L2 is not in the best healthy state, so you are desiring some MMO coming, which satisfies your/this needs. All mentioned things will not be true 100%, but I guess you get the message.
Chaliux wrote: » Now, take me...
Chaliux wrote: » For my personally, there is only one value which is rare, very rare: Time. That's why my approach - today - is different to my approach to gaming 20 or 10 years ago. But, I'm still a gamer, doing that not daily, but quite often in the evenings and sometimes silent weekends.
Chaliux wrote: » So, I'm not searching for an "Lineage 2 owpvp MMO" where I want to put 10h a day into the game, but I'm searching for a "high fantasy PvX MMO" where I want to put 1-3h per day into the game.
Chaliux wrote: » So, my personal balance seems to be fine, 80% of Ashes looks and sounds nice, some parts I don't like.
Chaliux wrote: » Things can potentially change, if the market is desiring it. And such changes can be a high risk, but also insisting can be a high risk, if in the end only a minority likes it.
Chaliux wrote: » You never should work 100h for something, also not, if it is fun for you. This will, definitly and always, lead to phases, where you are burned out and during or after this recovery you will have it much harder to get back to the normal working pace. The art is to combine family, job, hobbies and friends. It's not art to do only one or two out of those aspects. In the end, you will miss out something, always. Balance it - just my advice, ignore it, it's all good.
Chaliux wrote: » 100% agree. But still it should not take way too long. Leveling for 1 year is too slow (feels time-gated then), leveling 3 months is too fast. I would appreciate 6-9 months, personally.
Flanker wrote: » I find the similarities between L2 and Ashes attractive because Steven did with L2 the same thing he did with several other games: he took systems and mechanics that worked well and implemented them in Ashes game design in the same or refined way.
Well, I did. Take New World for example - it's a relatively simple casual-friendly game. I'm glad that Ashes has a node system as well and it is much deeper and complex compared to NW. There was plenty of things I didn't like in NW, but I spent a decent amount of time there because I focused on things I enjoyed instead of whining about the things I didn't like.
That's the point that people often get confused with. I never spoke about post-2010 Lineage 2 in a positive way: the path the developers has chosen since then is absolutely terrible and the overwhelming majority of ex L2 players would agree with it on the spot. When I talk about L2, I talk about it's best years and patches - those that tens of thousands (probably lower hundreds of thousands) of players still enjoy on private servers as this is the only option to enjoy them.
I get it and I agree with it. On the list of the most precious things time will be somewhere in top along with freedom, which includes ability to spend time however a person wants.
Whether you want it or not, time investment will always be an important factor when it comes to MMOs - probably not in 100% of them, but in majority for sure. Yet the point still stands. You'd realize how your concerns evaporize immediately, if you start focusing on having fun in games instead of other criteria.
I've participated in many PvPs. Some of them I won, some of them I didn't. But all of them were fun.
Right, but the Steven's idea and vision is different. He is not trying to make another copy-paste MMO that is supposed to please a wide audience. We've seen many of those and there is little to no need in V.473.0
The problem is that many people feel anxious as Ashes may end up being a type of the game they never played before; and the general tendency for people to worry about literally everything despite the fact that if they look back at all the things they ever worried about - they'd realize that the overwhelming majority of those things has never actually happened.
I know what burnout is and what it feels like. I also know how to prevent it - I just balance it in a different way. Basically, after 1-2-3 months of gringing IRL, I take a few days or a week off to recover and dive into whatever I do again.
You mentioned that time is important and I agree with that, 100%. That's the reason why I hate spending 2 months on something that can be done in 1 month and that's the reason why I do everything the way I do. Our life on planet Earth is limited and my time may be VERY limited, so if I want to achieve something - I will do my best to achieve it as soon as I possibly can.
If the IRL situation will follow an unfortunate scenario, I may end up being drafted. Theoretically, it shouldn't happen due to my health issues and other certain circumstances, but oh well... we live in a crazy time when literally anything can happen. Practically, it may and most likely will be a one-way ticket for me for the reasons I mentioned. But when it comes to a choice between "fight and die" or "just die", I'd obviously choose the first one. "Do what is right and whatever happens - happens" or "Do what you are to do and come what may" - those are common sayings here. So what I'm trying to say here - it's just the way I am and that's the mindset I adopted: no matter what you do, no matter what circumstances you're in, be it in game or IRL, just always use 300% of your potential. And for god's sake - don't whine and complain.
Flanker wrote: » Chaliux wrote: » 100% agree. But still it should not take way too long. Leveling for 1 year is too slow (feels time-gated then), leveling 3 months is too fast. I would appreciate 6-9 months, personally. 6-9 months is already a huge step in the right direction compared to ~2-3. I'd be happy if that happens
Flanker wrote: » I would say there are two possible approaches here: 1. You analyze which target audience you want to focus on, listen to their feedback and, roughly saying, make a game for them. 2. You make a game based on your vision and, again, roughly saying, whoever comes - comes.
Flanker wrote: » I never said that Ashes must be a game for me and it's not the reason why I say it. Based on everything I know at the moment, I believe longer leveling will be a net positive for a game overall. Not because it fits my personal preferences and I'm trying to rationalize it somehow.
Flanker wrote: » I'm aware of that and once again: I never said that Ashes must be a game to please me in all ways, shapes or forms.
Flanker wrote: » Please, prior to quoting, care to understand the context in which this phrase was used. I was talking about a specific segment of people who want Steven to change the game's core pillars after he said a dozen of times that it is not going to happen. I didn't use it as "an excuse to justify literally anything"
Flanker wrote: » 6-9 months is already a huge step in the right direction compared to ~2-3. I'd be happy if that happens
Aszkalon wrote: » Flanker wrote: » 6-9 months is already a huge step in the right direction compared to ~2-3. I'd be happy if that happens Six Months should be enough, though. Maybe Three to Four or above - but People shouldn't need more than Six Months. We won't live forever and the aging Audience can quickly be a dying Audience - as dear Asmongold said once.
Flanker wrote: » So yeah, we ended up having a podcast with @Dygz @Fantmx and Legendary Neurotoxin (sorry, I don't know your forum name) on Theory Forge channel and we mostly spoke about the leveling topic. Here is the recording of that conversation/debate on their channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRLfYfMge0s&ab_channel=TheoryForge
Flanker wrote: » 6 months would be somewhat acceptable. I would gladly agree to that.
