Stats and item attributes create a lot of data driven problems that need third party tools to solve.

I don't want to have to go to excel spreadsheets or some third party software (or someones website) to improve my performance with the game.

How will ashes plan on addressing the vast complexity that can come with very granular items and stat builds?

I've found that the genre of card games has come a long way to help the uninitiated or unskilled have a handle on how to make effective and fun decks that achieve player driven goals. How can mmo's improve on how they help players chart what builds they've made and or what items they should use to achieve their varied desires?

Ultimately the stats and items can only support so many optimal styles of play, but charting your path through these very data driven systems can be confusing and if you have a goal in mind its often hard to figure out how best to achieve it, without relying on external sources for help.

Usually the stats are a very data driven and for good reason; balance... exploration of what character's can achieve in pve or pvp combat is left up to the players and some QA, but generally that data is only collected behind the scenes. So players whom perform poorly don't know what to improve, and those whom perform well, have no incentive to share.

Then that data is tested, collected and charted external from the game, and what's optimal is found, and then players develop different meta's of builds with that data. Then to the exclusion of low tier play, the game is balanced, and people are left scratching their heads as to why, while the already equipped are racing past the starting gate, to the next batch of data driven testing.

Only the top players are in the know of that data. If you're at all connected to these external sources, your leaps and bounds more effective then those blindly playing the game.

Data driven tools have shown up in other genres like in in DOTA 2 where there's an entirely optional subscription to have access to a data parsing player guiding tool.

I think serving players for free would be optimal, but giving them an option to pay for is still preferable because more players can effectively participate in communal activities, and feel that they are making a valuable contribution toward their goals.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

OrcLuck

@wanderingmist I disagree that they would be able to do it better. Optimally they wouldn't. Optimally the best players would be scouted for QA and there would be enough of them in QA to inform the designers of what needs tweaking, and with enough insight into the general playstyle of the other gamers to keep things fun for everyone.

azathoth wrote: »

I plan on improving my character's performance in the game by:

1) Playing it
2) Paying attention when I play it
3) Noticing when I do better or not as good
4) Understanding why I am doing better or not as good
5) Working on why I am doing better or not as good

But you know, I like to play the game and explore from the character's perspective. It's not for everyone.

See that's what I want. I want the game to be a cohesive place where you don't have to go anywhere else to do these activities well.

Ideally it wouldn't be about hard stats like dps or ability cycles, but once you get to top tier play, and where people have a personal investment in being the best, they're willing to pay for extra edges on their opponents. Whether its dual boxing or paying someone to grind stats for them.

Karthos

zomnivore wrote: »

@wanderingmist I disagree that they would be able to do it better. Optimally they wouldn't. Optimally the best players would be scouted for QA and there would be enough of them in QA to inform the designers of what needs tweaking, and with enough insight into the general playstyle of the other gamers to keep things fun for everyone.

azathoth wrote: »

I plan on improving my character's performance in the game by:

1) Playing it
2) Paying attention when I play it
3) Noticing when I do better or not as good
4) Understanding why I am doing better or not as good
5) Working on why I am doing better or not as good

But you know, I like to play the game and explore from the character's perspective. It's not for everyone.

See that's what I want. I want the game to be a cohesive place where you don't have to go anywhere else to do these activities well.

Ideally it wouldn't be about hard stats like dps or ability cycles, but once you get to top tier play, and where people have a personal investment in being the best, they're willing to pay for extra edges on their opponents. Whether its dual boxing or paying someone to grind stats for them.

Are you advocating the idea that you should pay others to help you progress in the game?

Wandering Mist

zomnivore wrote: »

@wanderingmist I disagree that they would be able to do it better. Optimally they wouldn't. Optimally the best players would be scouted for QA and there would be enough of them in QA to inform the designers of what needs tweaking, and with enough insight into the general playstyle of the other gamers to keep things fun for everyone.

Oh they will do it better, trust me. Just from a sheer amount of time put into the game, the players have the clear advantage. Games devs don't actually play the game during working hours, and have limited time to play outside of that. QA testers don't really play the game either, not in the way we do. When a QA tester is working they are generally given a list of items to check for bugs, and they do those simple tasks over and over and over searching for inconsistencies and bugs, then writing detailed reports on what they find.

The amount of time games developers spend actually playing the game is miniscule compared to how much time we will spend playing. As for the studio hiring the top 1% of players for QA testing, hardly any studio does this, simply because the skill set is completely different. As I said above, when you QA test a game you aren't really playing it. You don't need to be the best player in the world to successfully QA test a game.

EDIT: The only game I know of that actively hires players and pays them to play the game normally is League of Legends, who have a bunch of shoutcasters in their e-sports divisions. These guys play a lot of the game themselves because they need to know as much about the game as possible in order to do their commentary. These aren't QA testers though, far from it.

OrcLuck

I wouldn't know, about hiring practices. I assume though that with good enough data interpretation they wouldn't need to hire the players.

Wandering Mist

zomnivore wrote: »

I wouldn't know, about hiring practices. I assume though that with good enough data interpretation they wouldn't need to hire the players.

There is a huge difference between data and actual gameplay. That's why parsing websites and mods are never truly accurate, because there are so many things that can affect gameplay moment to moment.

Azathoth

"Ideally it wouldn't be about hard stats like dps or ability cycles, but once you get to top tier play, and where people have a personal investment in being the best, they're willing to pay for extra edges on their opponents. Whether its dual boxing or paying someone to grind stats for them."

This, to me, is sad and the epitome of basement dweller.

Willing to pay for extra edges = not being good enough on merit
paying someone to grind stats = paying to play game + paying for someone to play your game

When did people start paying people to play games for them? Wtf?

It's a video game, one that doesn't currently have a legitimate league like other e-sports. Not really sure how Ashes could go e-sports, but people are always desperate to seek fame for their past times and hobbies.

Damokles

Wait a second: isnt it normal to have spreadsheets about your games? I do that since i was 12 for all my games....

Noaani

zomnivore wrote: »

Only the top players are in the know of that data. If you're at all connected to these external sources, your leaps and bounds more effective then those blindly playing the game.

There are essentially three types of data that can exist in an MMO (or anything, really).

There is third party data, which is any website you may go to.

There is second party data, which is any data the game provides you.

Then there is first party data, which is any data you have collected yourself.

Everyone has the same level of access to third and second party data. The only difference between what you know and what I know - assuming we both want to know enough - is in the data we have discovered ourselves.

Personally, I want to see a solid suite of tools in game on launch day for players to be more easily able to discover as much data as they can. This puts more people on a more level playing field.

Azathoth

"Personally, I want to see a solid suite of tools in game on launch day for players to be more easily able to discover as much data as they can. This puts more people on a more level playing field."

I think the opposite is true. It would put people on a more level playing field if everyone did this. For those players that wouldn't use the tool, or feel like the tool was too complicated, or didn't have time to use the tool because their play time is limited, it would put them at a disadvantage.

Noaani

azathoth wrote: »

"Personally, I want to see a solid suite of tools in game on launch day for players to be more easily able to discover as much data as they can. This puts more people on a more level playing field."

I think the opposite is true. It would put people on a more level playing field if everyone did this. For those players that wouldn't use the tool, or feel like the tool was too complicated, or didn't have time to use the tool because their play time is limited, it would put them at a disadvantage.

People will work this out whether there is something in game or not. Those people will have an advantage.

At least if there is an in game tool, everyone has the opportunity to easily collect what ever data they feel is applicable to them.

Putting in a suite of tools doesn't make every thing even for every one, it simply makes things more even for more people than would be the case with nothing built in.

neuroguy

This notion of "even playing field" is very strange to me in mmos. Invariably people will simply exceed each other in one way or another. You have RNG loot drops, you have variability in play-time, you have a million ways where players will no longer be equal. Then when you get to lvl cap and people are trying to min/max, you guys are still discussing an even playing field? The tools should be available, if people choose to use them or not is their prerogative. You can't complain that because you don't want to/can't use a tool that nobody should because it's not fair, it's nonsense. People should have equal opportunity to engage in something but should not be artificially on equal footing.

But regardless, this all feels like some paranoid conspiracy, this will not be a problem that "plagues" AoC... if people pay to power up their characters, I highly think that trying to get better loot and resources to make better gear will be a much more likely way. Remember, few items get bound to your character, we have SWG style variability in resource quality and durability is a thing (stuff breaks). Until you really get into BiS territory, I think there are tons of both legitimate and illegitimate (i.e. paying people on the interwebz) ways for people to NOT be on an even playing ground. You can be paranoid and accuse people of having ill-gotten gains orrrr you can just focus on your own shit and try to get gud-er. Just my opinion.

OrcLuck

You were going in the right direction and then you totally took a left turn and basically said "I don't care what people do, just have at it."

That's the status quo, I want an improvement on that. That's why I spent any effort at all in discussing it.

Azathoth

I'm not against any of this, i just don't think it inherently levels the playing field or is needed to enjoy the game. Dissenting opinions and all.

OrcLuck

Well I don't think it levels the playing field. I think it will raise the floor, for what people will manage to do. People will always be on a bell curve eventually.

I think however that if you look at World of Warcraft you can see that gear score and other things happened because this was a problem they were trying to solve once they had the hindsight to realize how big a problem it was for their community to figure this stuff out.

I don't think any of the WoW devs are particularly happy that, that happened, or that they messed up and had to change so much of the game to fix it.

Caelron

azathoth wrote: »

I'm not against any of this, i just don't think it inherently levels the playing field or is needed to enjoy the game. Dissenting opinions and all.

I'm in this boat, too. I REALLY miss the old days where you would play your character how you wanted. If all of the sudden you saw another guy (using a Rogue as an example) who was the same class, with the same gear as you, just beast-mode a creature that you've been hacking away at - you not only notice, but you'll probably start asking him questions!

I actually miss the old days where you would do your best to figure it out, then by your own experience, you'd actually tweak things and get better. I don't want to be forced (or feel like you're being forced) to go absolutely bonkers with data and numbers and 3rd party tools, just to figure out an extra 1% damage, just to be "allowed" to party with people.

I remember being a healer in WoW in Burning Crusade (BC), and out-performing people much more geared than I was, because I understood the class better and even picked a more personalized spec, instead of the cookie-cutter that was suggested. People might have been using crazy data-gathering stuff back then, too, but it wasn't "standard" or actually biased people away from other people based on any specific metrics.

At the end of the day... I just want to play the game and have fun. And we don't really have any data at the moment to figure out anything regarding this stuff, either. If people find a way to somehow get a 3rd party program to monitor in-game combat logs... go nuts. But at the same time, I'm hoping the game is designed in such a way where it really doesn't matter with so many different play styles, classes, abilities, weapons/gear, etc.

Wandering Mist

zomnivore wrote: »

Well I don't think it levels the playing field. I think it will raise the floor, for what people will manage to do. People will always be on a bell curve eventually.

I think however that if you look at World of Warcraft you can see that gear score and other things happened because this was a problem they were trying to solve once they had the hindsight to realize how big a problem it was for their community to figure this stuff out.

I don't think any of the WoW devs are particularly happy that, that happened, or that they messed up and had to change so much of the game to fix it.

WoW is a very very poor example to base your theories on, for the simple reason that combat in that game is a mess. Even your most basic spec has a ton of passive procs and underlying processes that contribute to the combat, and the base UI is incapable of tracking it all efficiently. The same goes for knowing what gear you need. In WoW you NEED third-party websites and tools because it is impossible to tell at a glance what your best gear is at any one time. And no, I'm not talking about squeezing the top 1% of performance out of your class. Gearing in WoW is so ridiculous that two pieces of gear with the same ilvl can have as much as 20% difference in their dps output. IT IS INSANE!

As for gear score, that was originally brought in because of how gear was distributed. You'll notice that in Vanilla and TBC there was no gear score, because it simply wasn't needed. Back then you could tell just from looking at someone's gear how good they were at the game. That all changed in WotLK and went downhill from there.

If Ashes gets to the same level of bullshit in its combat and gearing that WoW has, then something has gone severely wrong!

neuroguy

caelron wrote: »

azathoth wrote: »

I'm not against any of this, i just don't think it inherently levels the playing field or is needed to enjoy the game. Dissenting opinions and all.

I'm in this boat, too. I REALLY miss the old days where you would play your character how you wanted. If all of the sudden you saw another guy (using a Rogue as an example) who was the same class, with the same gear as you, just beast-mode a creature that you've been hacking away at - you not only notice, but you'll probably start asking him questions!

I get it, but you can't dictate other people's play styles just to keep yours.

The less knowledgable people are about a game the more options they are willing to try. But there is another way to really allow for this bold creativity to exist in a game and that's through gated skills. If people have access to different skills despite playing the same class, well then it's hard to know what the best playstyle is for your personal, current assortment of skills. AoC actually has the potential to fulfill this if they do the augment thing well. Specifically, access to augments. If they move away from skill-tree based augments and more augments are locked behind reputation, religion, crafting, node-related stuff etc, then 2 players with the same class may have a different set of augments available to them at any given time. They can't really play the same style necessarily. I have always been a big fan of the idea of locking entire augments/skills behind gates.

Isn't that a much more appealing idea than talent trees? If choosing between having ice or fire augments for my skills dictated what I had to accomplish in-game, like which reputation I had to grind, what parts of the world I had to travel to etc, I'd feel much better about being an ice or fire mage than if I just slapped some points on a tree. And of course, I'd eventually want to have all the augments. On a meta note, this would give a whole new set of things to do at lvl cap potentially (maybe the top rank of skills or augments would be gated as such) and it would give me direction that I'd want the world to go to and goals that would be competing with others'. For example if I need a science metropolis to get an augment for my bard but some cleric needs a religious metropolis well then we have conflicting goals and would be each pushing the world in the direction that would benefit us most.

Downsides are people crying about unfairness and difficulty/inertia in changing your load-out of augments which may make players feel "locked-in" but I think it can be well done. Well I don't know, I feel like it's a fun idea that should be toyed around with.

Dygz

The devs can dictate that though.
And it seems that the devs want a return to the gameplay that caelron describes more than they want tons of in-game meta-data tools.

bloodprophet

Gear score in WOW has always been there it was just not visible to the public. Someone data mined it and built an add-on for everyone to use. Now it is part of the game and everyone focuses on that vs using their brain to figure it out.
3rd party sites are already a thing and we know next to nothing about Ashes so far. Their will be sites with guides and calculators when the information is available to build such things.
Personally I prefer to theory craft a build and then try it out and then tweak it to want works best for me and my play style.

unknownsystemerror

They have been clear that they would actively work to make such things useless. When gearscore was specifically asked about Jeffrey said they could just add stats that would give bad data to items and render the tool useless. All the "we will do as we want, and they can't stop us!" posts are great pissing into the wind, but until they state they have changed their stance on the API being released into the wild and third-party addons there are going to be many in that camp that will be upset when they start catching warnings and bans.

Child Item