"Dynamic World"

All settlements should be equally viable.

In the recent Copium Clinic interview, Steven stated that this was his ideal, but it had to be toned down.

I say fuck that.

Tone it back up!

I would rather they copy-paste existing POIs all over the map than have nodes where there’s nothing going for them.

Every node should start out equally as a low-level zone and have reasons it would be a viable max-level settlement.

If they can’t create a balanced world map, every server will be the same—and the dream of a dynamic world is dead.

Make Ashes the ideal version of Ashes.

I don’t want to play Ashes of Compromise.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

nanfoodle

Lol

Ludullu

Yep, the game changes everfuther from what was promised at the start. A sad inevitability.

lamina5432

guildmate of mine left this in the discord phase 3 feedback told him he should make a post about, don't think he will

https://discord.com/channels/256164085366915072/1411099100723679382/1412886022877872159

Azherae

Predictable...

Caww

the clustering of a few population points would definitely contribute to a stagnation of play but AoC needs a lot of players to make each spot fully develop so that in itself may cause the problem

Vhaeyne

nanfoodle wrote: »

Lol

Explain?

Azherae wrote: »

Predictable...

Explain?

Azherae

In my arrogance, observing how the other compromises have been made and the design state and type of the game's economy efforts, I had lost faith in their ability to execute Nodes to the originally implied level of quality.

The 'scaffolding' just isn't there, in my opinion, and they have 'delayed' (I don't actually have any opinion on whether or not this is true, hence the quotes) conceptual development as long as they probably reasonably can.

The expected outcome of that, in my experience, is cutbacks.

Vhaeyne

Azherae wrote: »

In my arrogance, observing how the other compromises have been made and the design state and type of the game's economy efforts, I had lost faith in their ability to execute Nodes to the originally implied level of quality.

The 'scaffolding' just isn't there, in my opinion, and they have 'delayed' (I don't actually have any opinion on whether or not this is true, hence the quotes) conceptual development as long as they probably reasonably can.

The expected outcome of that, in my experience, is cutbacks.

Thanks for taking the time to explain.

Currently I think the game is pretty great for what I like.
I am on the game as much as I can be and have been most phases.
I also don't mine the update pace.

To me taking the time to get this stuff right would be worth it.

Especially seeing the way, the nodes develop every fresh start.

Azherae

To be even clearer, I should say that my perception is:

"In order to get this right they have to start over again."

It's less an issue of 'Oh, we're making a conscious decision to change the path we are on in order to achieve something different and therefore it is resulting in a cutback' and more of a 'We can't get to where we planned from where we are in any way without backtracking'.

This is why despite sharing your feelings about the potential of the game, my group and I are much less enthusiastic. As software devs and engineers (mostly) ourselves, this has all the markings of a failed project, not so much a 'Well maybe we should pivot' situation.

nanfoodle

Vhaeyne wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

Lol

Explain?

Azherae wrote: »

Predictable...

Explain?

You want to rip up that main thing we were sold to get into Ashes? Drop nodes? Lol is all I have from that. There is a few reasons I backed the kick starter. Nodes and dynamic world was a big reason.

Aszkalon

Azherae wrote: »

In my arrogance, observing how the other compromises have been made and the design state and type of the game's economy efforts, I had lost faith in their ability to execute Nodes to the originally implied level of quality.

The 'scaffolding' just isn't there, in my opinion, and they have 'delayed' (I don't actually have any opinion on whether or not this is true, hence the quotes) conceptual development as long as they probably reasonably can.

The expected outcome of that, in my experience, is cutbacks.

Am i probably "too" optimistic when i say,

even if at Release/Launch the Nodes will be somewhat cut-down from what they originally aimed for -> like for Example with a whole Node Stage missing,

can we hope for - (and BEG) - that Intrepid will after Release in the next Years afterwards do their best to further improve the Nodes to what they originally aimed for at Release ?

I know how this sounds. But it is definitely better than just giving up and saying : " Meh!! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Nothing can be done. Developers are just not good enough. " - or other kinds of negative BS which should never be the Norm.

Azherae

Aszkalon wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

In my arrogance, observing how the other compromises have been made and the design state and type of the game's economy efforts, I had lost faith in their ability to execute Nodes to the originally implied level of quality.

The 'scaffolding' just isn't there, in my opinion, and they have 'delayed' (I don't actually have any opinion on whether or not this is true, hence the quotes) conceptual development as long as they probably reasonably can.

The expected outcome of that, in my experience, is cutbacks.

Am i probably "too" optimistic when i say,

even if at Release/Launch the Nodes will be somewhat cut-down from what they originally aimed for -> like for Example with a whole Node Stage missing,

can we hope for - (and BEG) - that Intrepid will after Release in the next Years afterwards do their best to further improve the Nodes to what they originally aimed for at Release ?

I know how this sounds. But it is definitely better than just giving up and saying : " Meh!! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Nothing can be done. Developers are just not good enough. " - or other kinds of negative BS which should never be the Norm.

I can't help you with that.

My job is usually analytics, I'm the one who gets paid to tell business owners all that 'negative BS which should never be the norm'.

Also, it's not like this is a situation where 'no one could have seen this coming'. If it helps your understanding at all, the thing that I would bet is getting cut back is not how the Nodes look or how much content they have exactly, but 'the incentive design balance that would make them equal enough'.

I'll be really glad to see any modern MMO that really commits to improving the game post-launch even though it might not make them more money quickly. So by all means, continue to be optimistic, as you already seem to always be.

Vhaeyne

nanfoodle wrote: »

You want to rip up that main thing we were sold to get into Ashes? Drop nodes? Lol is all I have from that. There is a few reasons I backed the kick starter. Nodes and dynamic world was a big reason.

I think we are arguing for the same thing.

I never said anything about dropping nodes. I am arguing to make alpha and beta take longer to make sure all nodes have value if anything.

I want the dynamic world and I want all nodes to be equally appealing.

nanfoodle

Vhaeyne wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

You want to rip up that main thing we were sold to get into Ashes? Drop nodes? Lol is all I have from that. There is a few reasons I backed the kick starter. Nodes and dynamic world was a big reason.

I think we are arguing for the same thing.

I never said anything about dropping nodes. I am arguing to make alpha and beta take longer to make sure all nodes have value if anything.

I want the dynamic world and I want all nodes to be equally appealing.

Sorry I misunderstood. Ty. I dont see this game launching any earlier then 2 years. Would not be shocked if it was 3. You only get one launch. Its rare gamers give a second chance. Steven did decide to make the bones of a very ambitious game.

Aszkalon

Azherae wrote: »

I can't help you with that.

My job is usually analytics, I'm the one who gets paid to tell business owners all that 'negative BS which should never be the norm'.

Woe is You, truly. (lol)

You make it sound like YOU are one of the People directly responsible for certain Games and Franchises failing by telling them the negative BS that should never be the Norm, Azherae.

You must be sarcastic. Or are you acting intentionally like you don't understand ?

Who in their right mind would want a Developer Team that can not get Stuff done ? You know - the Stuff which all these endlessly annoying Doomsayers are always talking about.

" Uuuugh it's never gonna be finished !! "
" It's going to be a Scaaam. "
" It's coming out in 2071 when my Grandchildren will play iiiiiiit. "
" Developers just can't get it up anymore and this already since the likes of 2015 !!!! "

Seriously,
WHO - WANTS - to hear this pathetic Misery-Circlejerk constantly and every single Month or couple of Months again ??

I believe Sir Steven in a Heartbeat when he says other Companies wouldn't have even announced their Game yet at this Point of Development.

Child Item