What sets it apart

To me there were a couple of things that set AoC apart from others MMOs. All of them were positives in my eyes.

1) Body blocking. This has unfortunately been removed. I understand that it would've been difficult to implement well, the problems involved and how difficult it is to code.

2) Nodes. Obviously interesting. It turns the world into an ever-shifting amalgam and allows for more macro ambitions to thrive.

3) Massive loot-based on death penalties. This has been turned down too much according to me. I understand this is controversial but I saw it as a necessity to stand out compared to the competitors.

Is there's anything else I've missed that should interest a potential player. And yes, the graphics are gorgeous in the dev showcases, but unless there's gameplay to complement it, to me its void of value.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

maliessa

I'm not sure I understand what you are asking here. You want someone to list "all the things" that should " interest a potential player", for you specifically here? Like a sell job? Since the game is far from launch, it's not really about attracting players now, it's about testing systems and gameplay as it comes online.

You listed a few random things that are important to you??? then demand "If there is anything else I've missed that should interest a potential player"....

It sounds like you are somewhat still uninformed of the games base design, goals, and plans if you think those three things are the "only things" that set AoC apart from other MMOs. Or maybe you don't care and you are just weirdly focused on those points? Have you even read or watched anything on the VAST detail that has been posted by the developers? It sounds like you haven't done much research tbh.

NoodleDoodle

I'm in the discussion forum am I not? I was referred here from the discord. The discussion I'm trying to have is one regarding what constitutes a quality MMO game.

Given the historical context of MMOs being in a bit of a rut the last, well let's call it 15 years.

The things I listed are not random. If you could pin pinpoint important aspects of a quality MMO game, I'd be happy to have you do so. Which is what I was trying to ask in the post.

Perhaps I'm a bit uninformed, I haven't followed AoC actively for about a year and a half. But I did read just about everything available before then. I'd be happy if you updated me on important changes. If you don't, my interpretation will simply be that you're generally uninformed and rather dull.

Vyllz

NoodleDoodle wrote: »

To me there were a couple of things that set AoC apart from others MMOs. All of them were positives in my eyes.

1) Body blocking. This has unfortunately been removed. I understand that it would've been difficult to implement well, the problems involved and how difficult it is to code.

2) Nodes. Obviously interesting. It turns the world into an ever-shifting amalgam and allows for more macro ambitions to thrive.

3) Massive loot-based on death penalties. This has been turned down too much according to me. I understand this is controversial but I saw it as a necessity to stand out compared to the competitors.

Is if there's anything else I've missed that should interest a potential player. And yes, the graphics are gorgeous in the dev showcases, but unless there's gameplay to complement it, to me its void of value.

I understand there are concerns about certain features in Ashes of Creation, like the removal of body blocking, the adjustments to death penalties, and how unique the game will feel. But it's important to remember that AoC is still in development, and community feedback is key to how it evolves.

One of the core features that truly sets AoC apart is the Node System. This system allows player actions to directly influence how the world develops, creating a dynamic and unique experience on every server. Nodes can grow from small camps to sprawling metropolises, unlocking specific content, resources, and political dynamics based on how the community interacts with the world.

Additionally, AoC is built on clear design pillars like an engaging story, a reactive world, meaningful player agency, and a risk vs reward philosophy. All of this is aimed at delivering an immersive and impactful MMORPG experience, where your choices and actions shape the world around you.

While some features have been adjusted during development, it’s crucial to remember these changes are being made to improve gameplay balance and long-term health of the game. The project is very much alive, ambitious, and continues to grow thanks to the active involvement and constructive feedback of the community.

NoodleDoodle

REHOC wrote: »

I understand there are concerns about certain features in Ashes of Creation, like the removal of body blocking, the adjustments to death penalties, and how unique the game will feel. But it's important to remember that AoC is still in development, and community feedback is key to how it evolves.

One of the core features that truly sets AoC apart is the Node System. This system allows player actions to directly influence how the world develops, creating a dynamic and unique experience on every server. Nodes can grow from small camps to sprawling metropolises, unlocking specific content, resources, and political dynamics based on how the community interacts with the world.

Additionally, AoC is built on clear design pillars like an engaging story, a reactive world, meaningful player agency, and a risk vs reward philosophy. All of this is aimed at delivering an immersive and impactful MMORPG experience, where your choices and actions shape the world around you.

While some features have been adjusted during development, it’s crucial to remember these changes are being made to improve gameplay balance and long-term health of the game. The project is very much alive, ambitious, and continues to grow thanks to the active involvement and constructive feedback of the community.

There are always concerns when one is to determine how valuable a product is to ones hobby. I can come across as rather critical, but its just me refusing to be a fan; if I want something to be good, I try to balance out my bias by being well stingy I suppose. I think perceived issues are important to discuss. It's much better to acknowledge issues before rather than after they happen. Otherwise we're powerless. If they persist, then we know the issue lies elsewhere and one can move on.

How far along has the node system come? I love the way the idea plays out in my head, but I'm a bit afraid it will be different in practice.

Which risk are we talking about when the on-death loot drop is all but gone? To me the game seems rather risk-free. Will they have a perma death server you think?

Vyllz

NoodleDoodle wrote: »

REHOC wrote: »

I understand there are concerns about certain features in Ashes of Creation, like the removal of body blocking, the adjustments to death penalties, and how unique the game will feel. But it's important to remember that AoC is still in development, and community feedback is key to how it evolves.

One of the core features that truly sets AoC apart is the Node System. This system allows player actions to directly influence how the world develops, creating a dynamic and unique experience on every server. Nodes can grow from small camps to sprawling metropolises, unlocking specific content, resources, and political dynamics based on how the community interacts with the world.

Additionally, AoC is built on clear design pillars like an engaging story, a reactive world, meaningful player agency, and a risk vs reward philosophy. All of this is aimed at delivering an immersive and impactful MMORPG experience, where your choices and actions shape the world around you.

While some features have been adjusted during development, it’s crucial to remember these changes are being made to improve gameplay balance and long-term health of the game. The project is very much alive, ambitious, and continues to grow thanks to the active involvement and constructive feedback of the community.

There are always concerns when one is to determine how valuable a product is to ones hobby. I can come across as rather critical, but its just me refusing to be a fan; if I want something to be good, I try to balance out my bias by being well stingy I suppose. I think perceived issues are important to discuss. It's much better to acknowledge issues before rather than after they happen. Otherwise we're powerless. If they persist, then we know the issue lies elsewhere and one can move on.

How far along has the node system come? I love the way the idea plays out in my head, but I'm a bit afraid it will be different in practice.

Which risk are we talking about when the on-death loot drop is all but gone? To me the game seems rather risk-free. Will they have a perma death server you think?

I appreciate your thoughtful approach and I think it's valid to be critical. Constructive criticism is what helps this project grow.

Regarding your question about the Node System, it's actually quite far along in development. In Alpha Two, we've already seen real-time node progression, with players influencing which nodes evolve, what content unlocks, and how conflicts arise based on those player driven developments. It’s not just theory anymore; it's actively being tested and improved. Of course, it’s not perfect yet, but that’s what this phase is for, to refine it based on feedback like yours.

As for risk, I get your point. The full loot drop on death has definitely been toned down from the original idea, but the risk reward loop in Ashes isn’t solely tied to loot loss. It’s baked into systems like caravans, node sieges, corruption penalties, political systems, and even economic risk with local markets. The developers want risk to exist without turning the game into a griefing playground that drives players away. (Like Albion Online for example)

About permadeath, Steven has mentioned in the past that Ashes will not have that kind of server officially. The philosophy is to have meaningful loss and consequence without making the game punishing to the point of alienating the majority of players.

I think the best way to see how all this plays out is to keep an eye on the ongoing testing phases. I’d honestly encourage you to jump in during Alpha Two or Beta if you can. It’s one thing to imagine how the systems will work, but seeing them in action is what really shows how unique AoC is shaping up to be.

Azherae

NoodleDoodle wrote: »

How far along has the node system come? I love the way the idea plays out in my head, but I'm a bit afraid it will be different in practice.

So far it is not particularly near where it is intended to be. Almost none of the features are online relative to other 'similar' games, particularly now, but it was always going to be a long haul.

There aren't any particular signs that it will be different in practice from what's been outlined. They'd have to run out of time/money or something, in which case there would be larger problems.

NoodleDoodle wrote: »

Which risk are we talking about when the on-death loot drop is all but gone? To me the game seems rather risk-free. Will they have a perma death server you think?

I'm not sure why you are under the impression that the on-death loot drop is gone. If anything, players in specific situations stand to lose more than was originally pitched. Since this is the general definition of 'Risk' that Steven uses, we would actually have to say that risk has gone up.

If you perceive the game to be risk-free, you might need to clarify why.

NoodleDoodle

Azherae wrote: »

I'm not sure why you are under the impression that the on-death loot drop is gone. If anything, players in specific situations stand to lose more than was originally pitched. Since this is the general definition of 'Risk' that Steven uses, we would actually have to say that risk has gone up.

If you perceive the game to be risk-free, you might need to clarify why.

I mean the idea that you can engage in risk taking by engaging in the corruption system is rather interesting. I believe there's been proper thought put into the system. It solves a lot of problems. And yet, to me it feels a bit off. Then again, it's just a feeling. I think it stems from the system being not entirely intuitive.
But in the end, I'm content as long as there will be some notorious names of people scourging the country side. I think it's a much needed component to making the world feel alive.

daveywavey

NoodleDoodle wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

I'm not sure why you are under the impression that the on-death loot drop is gone. If anything, players in specific situations stand to lose more than was originally pitched. Since this is the general definition of 'Risk' that Steven uses, we would actually have to say that risk has gone up.

If you perceive the game to be risk-free, you might need to clarify why.

I mean the idea that you can engage in risk taking by engaging in the corruption system is rather interesting. I believe there's been proper thought put into the system. It solves a lot of problems. And yet, to me it feels a bit off. Then again, it's just a feeling. I think it stems from the system being not entirely intuitive.
But in the end, I'm content as long as there will be some notorious names of people scourging the country side. I think it's a much needed component to making the world feel alive.

You engage in risk-taking by engaging in the PvP system. The Corruption system is to reduce non-consensual PvP. It's there if you want it, but it's not supposed to be the norm.

Azherae

NoodleDoodle wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

I'm not sure why you are under the impression that the on-death loot drop is gone. If anything, players in specific situations stand to lose more than was originally pitched. Since this is the general definition of 'Risk' that Steven uses, we would actually have to say that risk has gone up.

If you perceive the game to be risk-free, you might need to clarify why.

I mean the idea that you can engage in risk taking by engaging in the corruption system is rather interesting. I believe there's been proper thought put into the system. It solves a lot of problems. And yet, to me it feels a bit off. Then again, it's just a feeling. I think it stems from the system being not entirely intuitive.
But in the end, I'm content as long as there will be some notorious names of people scourging the country side. I think it's a much needed component to making the world feel alive.

It's very difficult for good systems with any amount of depth to be intuitive to everyone.

And the Nodes system itself is what is supposed to make the world feel alive. The territory control part, combined with the interpersonal dynamics that will come from knowing people on your server and any agreements or disputes you have with them.

Even though this doesn't really set Ashes apart from all other games, it definitely has a meaningful impact when compared to games that choose to not have it or to remove it (Black Desert Online, etc). The corruption system is important, but that's not going to be the main way people will be 'known' in Ashes, unless they change their minds about server transfers or inter-server events.

NoodleDoodle

Azherae wrote: »

It's very difficult for good systems with any amount of depth to be intuitive to everyone.

I don't think that is so. The thing that most often clashes with intuitive gameplay with depth is when it's meant to be be played a certain way. When things are developed with recipes in mind. Gear sets with bonuses, symmetric skill systems etc.

Azherae

NoodleDoodle wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

It's very difficult for good systems with any amount of depth to be intuitive to everyone.

I don't think that is so. The thing that most often clashes with intuitive gameplay with depth is when it's meant to be be played a certain way. When things are developed with recipes in mind. Gear sets with bonuses, symmetric skill systems etc.

Well, you were originally talking about the Corruption system, so can you explain how one would avoid a meta relative to Corruption, even by changing it?

I'm very familiar with the two philosophies of gaming relative to player freedom, but Corruption doesn't seem like a place where it's possible for the two to reach a middle ground.

How would one make a Corruption system with depth that won't result in it being unintuitive?

Child Item