SunScript wrote: » Right. So this thread gets very very close to the core reasons I don't bother much with posting on these forums and generally just let Azherae do it. I'm gonna try to break them down into simple chunks below.
SunScript wrote: » All those people who meme about griefing PvE enjoyers, I find unbearably coddled by easy mode games and in my experience they just tend to run away when things get serious. There's too many of them on the forums. By all means, please attack whoever you want, but there's this conflation running around that for some mysterious reason PvE enjoyers aren't also hardcore PvP players. So let me introduce myself, I am a PvE enjoyer whose ambitions for Ashes are to own a shop where I sell all the jewelry I craft and to act as my group's enforcer/bodyguard by being so elite at PvP no one can touch my gatherers. Get that conflation out of here.
SunScript wrote: » The second reason is that I strongly dislike Steven's design as presented so far, because Corruption as a system completely misses the point for a certain category of players in MMOs. The maniacs. Those people who get their jewelry shop looted once and then completely dedicate their entire remaining existence in that game to single mindedly chasing the offender wherever they go, with the purpose of griefing them until they quit playing. We all enjoy winning, but for these maniacs winning is secondary to the purer goal of making sure the only content their target gets is 'being chased'. The goal is seizing their target's time. I feel like Steven and people on these forums don't even believe those people exist. I know they do, because I am that maniac.
Azherae wrote: » I pity the person who assumes that Carebears can't fight. But you do you.
mcstackerson wrote: » I wouldn't say there is a flaw here, it's more that this isn't a fishing sim. In Ashes, when you fish, you aren't in a fishing tournament competing with other fishers, you are pulling resources out of the world. Player conflict is something ashes wants to encourage and one of the ways they do that is by limiting resources and giving the ability to fight over them. Yea, if someone wants to play a fishing simulator and loads up ashes, they might not have the best time but that doesn't mean people won't enjoy it. Also, If fishing tournaments become a thing the devs want to support, they could find ways to prevent pvp from interrupting them.
Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » I wouldn't say there is a flaw here, it's more that this isn't a fishing sim. In Ashes, when you fish, you aren't in a fishing tournament competing with other fishers, you are pulling resources out of the world. Player conflict is something ashes wants to encourage and one of the ways they do that is by limiting resources and giving the ability to fight over them. Yea, if someone wants to play a fishing simulator and loads up ashes, they might not have the best time but that doesn't mean people won't enjoy it. Also, If fishing tournaments become a thing the devs want to support, they could find ways to prevent pvp from interrupting them. I only speak of flaws relative to 'combining the concept of a living world with similar social rules/appeal to cooperative players' and 'owPvP'. As Dygz would say, 'people who don't perceive this as an issue will very likely enjoy Ashes, these are likely to be people who enjoyed L2, EVE, and ArcheAge'. Now from my own perspective I can add this for any devs. "Your world of Nodes is not appealing enough to me while it contains this flaw." I don't necessarily think you (the devs) CARE about that, but this is still mostly a thread about 'why PvE players/worldsim enjoyers/microcompetition fans' might have opinions about Ashes that should get a little more respect than they sometimes do.
And this is why PvE focused players ask for: Instanced Content TL style events Flagging systems Safe Zones Protection from PvP below certain levels and other protections... But generally don't ask for 'harsher Corruption'. They 'accept' that some people really believe the Corruption will work to help enforce stuff, but the thing they log into these games for is not solved by greater Corruption unless it's so strong that it becomes flagging/Safe Zones. And even then, still insufficient half the time, in terms of achieving the goal of 'I am having a PvE skill competition that does not boil down to PvP if a strong PvP person wants to get involved'. Ashes is a PvP game to those players until we see something that performs this function.
mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » I wouldn't say there is a flaw here, it's more that this isn't a fishing sim. In Ashes, when you fish, you aren't in a fishing tournament competing with other fishers, you are pulling resources out of the world. Player conflict is something ashes wants to encourage and one of the ways they do that is by limiting resources and giving the ability to fight over them. Yea, if someone wants to play a fishing simulator and loads up ashes, they might not have the best time but that doesn't mean people won't enjoy it. Also, If fishing tournaments become a thing the devs want to support, they could find ways to prevent pvp from interrupting them. I only speak of flaws relative to 'combining the concept of a living world with similar social rules/appeal to cooperative players' and 'owPvP'. As Dygz would say, 'people who don't perceive this as an issue will very likely enjoy Ashes, these are likely to be people who enjoyed L2, EVE, and ArcheAge'. Now from my own perspective I can add this for any devs. "Your world of Nodes is not appealing enough to me while it contains this flaw." I don't necessarily think you (the devs) CARE about that, but this is still mostly a thread about 'why PvE players/worldsim enjoyers/microcompetition fans' might have opinions about Ashes that should get a little more respect than they sometimes do. I feel like you are starting to play Dygz's semantics game of taking what they have said and deciding it's meaning to fit your purposes. The game can do both, giving you reasons to cooperate with and fight against players. Those aren't mutually exclusive things. I don't think it's right to say they don't care, it's more people who have low to no tolerance for pvp aren't the target audience for Ashes. As the Helldivers devs said, "A game for everyone is a game for no one." Maybe future intrepid games will be designed to appeal to those players.
Ace1234 wrote: » @Azherae And this is why PvE focused players ask for: Instanced Content TL style events Flagging systems Safe Zones Protection from PvP below certain levels and other protections... But generally don't ask for 'harsher Corruption'. They 'accept' that some people really believe the Corruption will work to help enforce stuff, but the thing they log into these games for is not solved by greater Corruption unless it's so strong that it becomes flagging/Safe Zones. And even then, still insufficient half the time, in terms of achieving the goal of 'I am having a PvE skill competition that does not boil down to PvP if a strong PvP person wants to get involved'. Ashes is a PvP game to those players until we see something that performs this function. I have a feeling Stevens philosophy on this is the social interaction aspect, "if you want to have a pve only fishing competition, then get the community to make it happen", or some other equivalent scenario; which he probably views that happening through the pvpers in the community taking control of that body of water to pave the way for the pvers to host their competition, or something like that, because I just don't see Intrepid making instanced content for every possible mini-system in the game for those who want to focus on that, though it probably would be feasible and immersive still to have in-game structures like coloseums and what not to fullfill the role of these types of specific instanced content, but we will have to wait and see. I have a feeling from the esports dev discussion they might consider exploring potential solutions similar to this.
Azherae wrote: » Ace1234 wrote: » @Azherae And this is why PvE focused players ask for: Instanced Content TL style events Flagging systems Safe Zones Protection from PvP below certain levels and other protections... But generally don't ask for 'harsher Corruption'. They 'accept' that some people really believe the Corruption will work to help enforce stuff, but the thing they log into these games for is not solved by greater Corruption unless it's so strong that it becomes flagging/Safe Zones. And even then, still insufficient half the time, in terms of achieving the goal of 'I am having a PvE skill competition that does not boil down to PvP if a strong PvP person wants to get involved'. Ashes is a PvP game to those players until we see something that performs this function. I have a feeling Stevens philosophy on this is the social interaction aspect, "if you want to have a pve only fishing competition, then get the community to make it happen", or some other equivalent scenario; which he probably views that happening through the pvpers in the community taking control of that body of water to pave the way for the pvers to host their competition, or something like that, because I just don't see Intrepid making instanced content for every possible mini-system in the game for those who want to focus on that, though it probably would be feasible and immersive still to have in-game structures like coloseums and what not to fullfill the role of these types of specific instanced content, but we will have to wait and see. I have a feeling from the esports dev discussion they might consider exploring potential solutions similar to this. I don't think anyone wants Intrepid to do that. I think things are fine as they are. If you want to have a fishing competition, first you need to have a PvP competition. And then maybe you need to keep having a PvP competition. And if you're not quite perfect enough at your PvP competition, your fishing competition is ruined, so you better be good at PvP. PvX.
blat wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Ace1234 wrote: » @Azherae And this is why PvE focused players ask for: Instanced Content TL style events Flagging systems Safe Zones Protection from PvP below certain levels and other protections... But generally don't ask for 'harsher Corruption'. They 'accept' that some people really believe the Corruption will work to help enforce stuff, but the thing they log into these games for is not solved by greater Corruption unless it's so strong that it becomes flagging/Safe Zones. And even then, still insufficient half the time, in terms of achieving the goal of 'I am having a PvE skill competition that does not boil down to PvP if a strong PvP person wants to get involved'. Ashes is a PvP game to those players until we see something that performs this function. I have a feeling Stevens philosophy on this is the social interaction aspect, "if you want to have a pve only fishing competition, then get the community to make it happen", or some other equivalent scenario; which he probably views that happening through the pvpers in the community taking control of that body of water to pave the way for the pvers to host their competition, or something like that, because I just don't see Intrepid making instanced content for every possible mini-system in the game for those who want to focus on that, though it probably would be feasible and immersive still to have in-game structures like coloseums and what not to fullfill the role of these types of specific instanced content, but we will have to wait and see. I have a feeling from the esports dev discussion they might consider exploring potential solutions similar to this. I don't think anyone wants Intrepid to do that. I think things are fine as they are. If you want to have a fishing competition, first you need to have a PvP competition. And then maybe you need to keep having a PvP competition. And if you're not quite perfect enough at your PvP competition, your fishing competition is ruined, so you better be good at PvP. PvX. Yeah but.. it's not a fishing game. Fishing is one small part of the big bad world. I want a PvP competition but I keep aggroing mobs. I want potions for PvP without having to earn them first. I want I want I want. (I actually enjoy all the gameplay crossover, but you get me). I really think we're all underestimating how much space there'll be. And then add to that the corruption mechanics (I know I know). But take me as example:I play for PvP. But I don't fancy those corruption penalties too often. So it's already working.
I don't think anyone wants Intrepid to do that. I think things are fine as they are. If you want to have a fishing competition, first you need to have a PvP competition. And then maybe you need to keep having a PvP competition. And if you're not quite perfect enough at your PvP competition, your fishing competition is ruined, so you better be good at PvP. PvX.
Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » I wouldn't say there is a flaw here, it's more that this isn't a fishing sim. In Ashes, when you fish, you aren't in a fishing tournament competing with other fishers, you are pulling resources out of the world. Player conflict is something ashes wants to encourage and one of the ways they do that is by limiting resources and giving the ability to fight over them. Yea, if someone wants to play a fishing simulator and loads up ashes, they might not have the best time but that doesn't mean people won't enjoy it. Also, If fishing tournaments become a thing the devs want to support, they could find ways to prevent pvp from interrupting them. I only speak of flaws relative to 'combining the concept of a living world with similar social rules/appeal to cooperative players' and 'owPvP'. As Dygz would say, 'people who don't perceive this as an issue will very likely enjoy Ashes, these are likely to be people who enjoyed L2, EVE, and ArcheAge'. Now from my own perspective I can add this for any devs. "Your world of Nodes is not appealing enough to me while it contains this flaw." I don't necessarily think you (the devs) CARE about that, but this is still mostly a thread about 'why PvE players/worldsim enjoyers/microcompetition fans' might have opinions about Ashes that should get a little more respect than they sometimes do. I feel like you are starting to play Dygz's semantics game of taking what they have said and deciding it's meaning to fit your purposes. The game can do both, giving you reasons to cooperate with and fight against players. Those aren't mutually exclusive things. I don't think it's right to say they don't care, it's more people who have low to no tolerance for pvp aren't the target audience for Ashes. As the Helldivers devs said, "A game for everyone is a game for no one." Maybe future intrepid games will be designed to appeal to those players. You can feel whatever you like, it's why I don't talk to you. We can go back to that. I engaged for clarification, if you don't wanna accept it because of your feelings, don't.
Azherae wrote: » Yes, I definitely expect it to work on you. You are not the person that PvE-enjoyers don't want to share servers with. They don't want a 'big bad world'. What benefit is it, to them, to join it?
Ace1234 wrote: » @Azherae I don't think anyone wants Intrepid to do that. I think things are fine as they are. If you want to have a fishing competition, first you need to have a PvP competition. And then maybe you need to keep having a PvP competition. And if you're not quite perfect enough at your PvP competition, your fishing competition is ruined, so you better be good at PvP. PvX. I personally think having instanced content or "safe zones" for specialized playstyles and systems (micro-competitions) is a good thing. It would just live alongside the open world pvx game, and those that want to tackle the more emergent and complex gameplay are free to do so, and those that find their niche are also free to experience that as well. Its no different than arenas, or the idea explored in the other thread about preserving (to a degree) a pve purist experience for the portion of the game through corruption. The worry for some people is that this type of stuff can "take away from the open world/pvx design", but people who don't want to participate in pvx will play a different game anyway, so it might as well be another system in Ashes they can go to. Yes, you can have the whole "who is this game for" discussion, but one answer to that question is "everyone" or at least most people in theory. On one hand that's when the scope creep becomes a major factor, but on the other hand, thats also the beauty of MMOS, the many games within a game, even if the game as a whole isn't built around one specific audience, providing each audience is properly satisfied, of course (hense my comments in the other thread about some people just being upset that there is any content not specifically designed around them, regardless of how much content exists in the game that actually is for them.)
mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » I wouldn't say there is a flaw here, it's more that this isn't a fishing sim. In Ashes, when you fish, you aren't in a fishing tournament competing with other fishers, you are pulling resources out of the world. Player conflict is something ashes wants to encourage and one of the ways they do that is by limiting resources and giving the ability to fight over them. Yea, if someone wants to play a fishing simulator and loads up ashes, they might not have the best time but that doesn't mean people won't enjoy it. Also, If fishing tournaments become a thing the devs want to support, they could find ways to prevent pvp from interrupting them. I only speak of flaws relative to 'combining the concept of a living world with similar social rules/appeal to cooperative players' and 'owPvP'. As Dygz would say, 'people who don't perceive this as an issue will very likely enjoy Ashes, these are likely to be people who enjoyed L2, EVE, and ArcheAge'. Now from my own perspective I can add this for any devs. "Your world of Nodes is not appealing enough to me while it contains this flaw." I don't necessarily think you (the devs) CARE about that, but this is still mostly a thread about 'why PvE players/worldsim enjoyers/microcompetition fans' might have opinions about Ashes that should get a little more respect than they sometimes do. I feel like you are starting to play Dygz's semantics game of taking what they have said and deciding it's meaning to fit your purposes. The game can do both, giving you reasons to cooperate with and fight against players. Those aren't mutually exclusive things. I don't think it's right to say they don't care, it's more people who have low to no tolerance for pvp aren't the target audience for Ashes. As the Helldivers devs said, "A game for everyone is a game for no one." Maybe future intrepid games will be designed to appeal to those players. You can feel whatever you like, it's why I don't talk to you. We can go back to that. I engaged for clarification, if you don't wanna accept it because of your feelings, don't. How would you prefer me to express my interpretation of what you said? It sounded like you were making an argument based off semantics. They have called the game a living world, you decided to define what a living world is and claim what they are making is not one. Yes, I could have given my own definition or made some death is part of life argument but at the end of the day, living world doesn't seem like a phrase that should be taken too seriously, and arguing about it seems pedantic.
blat wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Yes, I definitely expect it to work on you. You are not the person that PvE-enjoyers don't want to share servers with. They don't want a 'big bad world'. What benefit is it, to them, to join it? Some of these are very cryptic! So I take that to mean, you're talking v specifically about the relentless ganker types, who'll just harass people all day for the lulz? Rather than most pvpers. I PvP constantly but I cannot stand a) outnumbering people or b) killing lowbies. But yeah many others don't seem to mind.
Azherae wrote: » blat wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Yes, I definitely expect it to work on you. You are not the person that PvE-enjoyers don't want to share servers with. They don't want a 'big bad world'. What benefit is it, to them, to join it? Some of these are very cryptic! So I take that to mean, you're talking v specifically about the relentless ganker types, who'll just harass people all day for the lulz? Rather than most pvpers. I PvP constantly but I cannot stand a) outnumbering people or b) killing lowbies. But yeah many others don't seem to mind. I'm talking about my Rogue, who will forego sleep to hunt you, and stand like a Scarecrow on your Freehold so you don't know if it is safe to farm your crops, yes. You have his explanation already. Remember what this thread is about. People sometimes want their efforts in 'competition' or even cooperation to not 'become PvP competition whenever SunScript appears'. But SunScript can appear and disappear whenever he likes. And getting more people to kill him to make him go away... won't make him go away. His goal is to change your behaviour. We tend to be a bit nicer because we will clearly tell you what we want you to change, and then 'honorably' stop hunting you if you change it. There are people worse than us. Is there anything you care about 'forcing someone else to change' enough to hunt them for 2 weeks?
Ace1234 wrote: » @Azherae I don't think anyone wants Intrepid to do that. I think things are fine as they are. If you want to have a fishing competition, first you need to have a PvP competition. And then maybe you need to keep having a PvP competition. And if you're not quite perfect enough at your PvP competition, your fishing competition is ruined, so you better be good at PvP. PvX. I personally think having instanced content or "safe zones" for specialized playstyles and systems (micro-competitions) is a good thing. It would just live alongside the open world pvx game, and those that want to tackle the more emergent and complex gameplay are free to do so, and those that find their niche are also free to experience that as well. Its no different than arenas, or the philosophy behind the idea explored in the other thread about preserving (to a degree) a pve purist experience for the portion of the game through corruption. The worry for some people is that this type of stuff can "take away from the open world/pvx design", but people who don't want to participate in pvx will play a different game anyway, so it might as well be another system in Ashes they can go to. Yes, you can have the whole "who is this game for" discussion, but one answer to that question is "everyone" or at least most people in theory (providing you stick to the design pillars). On one hand that's when the scope creep becomes a major factor, but on the other hand, thats also the beauty of MMOS, the many games within a game, even if the game as a whole isn't built around one specific audience, providing each audience is properly satisfied, of course (hense my comments in the other thread about some people just being upset that there is any content not specifically designed around them, regardless of how much content exists in the game that actually is for them.)
Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Azherae wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » I wouldn't say there is a flaw here, it's more that this isn't a fishing sim. In Ashes, when you fish, you aren't in a fishing tournament competing with other fishers, you are pulling resources out of the world. Player conflict is something ashes wants to encourage and one of the ways they do that is by limiting resources and giving the ability to fight over them. Yea, if someone wants to play a fishing simulator and loads up ashes, they might not have the best time but that doesn't mean people won't enjoy it. Also, If fishing tournaments become a thing the devs want to support, they could find ways to prevent pvp from interrupting them. I only speak of flaws relative to 'combining the concept of a living world with similar social rules/appeal to cooperative players' and 'owPvP'. As Dygz would say, 'people who don't perceive this as an issue will very likely enjoy Ashes, these are likely to be people who enjoyed L2, EVE, and ArcheAge'. Now from my own perspective I can add this for any devs. "Your world of Nodes is not appealing enough to me while it contains this flaw." I don't necessarily think you (the devs) CARE about that, but this is still mostly a thread about 'why PvE players/worldsim enjoyers/microcompetition fans' might have opinions about Ashes that should get a little more respect than they sometimes do. I feel like you are starting to play Dygz's semantics game of taking what they have said and deciding it's meaning to fit your purposes. The game can do both, giving you reasons to cooperate with and fight against players. Those aren't mutually exclusive things. I don't think it's right to say they don't care, it's more people who have low to no tolerance for pvp aren't the target audience for Ashes. As the Helldivers devs said, "A game for everyone is a game for no one." Maybe future intrepid games will be designed to appeal to those players. You can feel whatever you like, it's why I don't talk to you. We can go back to that. I engaged for clarification, if you don't wanna accept it because of your feelings, don't. How would you prefer me to express my interpretation of what you said? It sounded like you were making an argument based off semantics. They have called the game a living world, you decided to define what a living world is and claim what they are making is not one. Yes, I could have given my own definition or made some death is part of life argument but at the end of the day, living world doesn't seem like a phrase that should be taken too seriously, and arguing about it seems pedantic. I don't care how you express it. The fact that your mind goes in that direction at all is the reason I don't interact with you. That's why the best course of action here is for me to not do that.
blat wrote: » Azherae wrote: » blat wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Yes, I definitely expect it to work on you. You are not the person that PvE-enjoyers don't want to share servers with. They don't want a 'big bad world'. What benefit is it, to them, to join it? Some of these are very cryptic! So I take that to mean, you're talking v specifically about the relentless ganker types, who'll just harass people all day for the lulz? Rather than most pvpers. I PvP constantly but I cannot stand a) outnumbering people or b) killing lowbies. But yeah many others don't seem to mind. I'm talking about my Rogue, who will forego sleep to hunt you, and stand like a Scarecrow on your Freehold so you don't know if it is safe to farm your crops, yes. You have his explanation already. Remember what this thread is about. People sometimes want their efforts in 'competition' or even cooperation to not 'become PvP competition whenever SunScript appears'. But SunScript can appear and disappear whenever he likes. And getting more people to kill him to make him go away... won't make him go away. His goal is to change your behaviour. We tend to be a bit nicer because we will clearly tell you what we want you to change, and then 'honorably' stop hunting you if you change it. There are people worse than us. Is there anything you care about 'forcing someone else to change' enough to hunt them for 2 weeks? Oh mate you're talking to the right person then. Hunt me all day (nohomo yeah). Deliver those juicy PKs straight to my door. Seriously this is what it's about eh? PvEer gets the rage and goes on a murderous rampage. Yes.
