Meaningful trade and professions (thoughts on disparity between combat and trade systems)

TL;DR: I'd like to see a take on trade/profession systems in an MMO where progression and expertise are as lauded and rewarded (i.e., parity) with the quality of rewards given to combat and raiding proficiency.

Why are tooling and support systems for player to player transaction (excepting auction/trade) still effectively non-existent; particularly given the history of issues and resolution cost to players and game support alike?

Why can't I get the same kinds of rewards for being someone who reaches the pinnacle of my trade and profession as when I am at the pinnacle of my class or skill set? Where are the "end game" versions and why aren't they of similar "shiny"? [1]

Why is it that people who go (often extremely) out of their way to help OTHERS have fun in these games are less noted or rewarded than who is on the latest leader board? I have yet to see a game offer rewards to guild leaders and officers who maintain strong clans/guilds/alliances in these games. I'd like to see a game offering that both recognizes and rewards the people (and work) that goes into creating, nourishing, and growing a clan, guild, house, node, etc.

Seriously - how the heck can anyone expect people to want to value different things in these games when the mechanics never do?

I guess what I'm saying is that I'd like to see trade and profession systems that offer tracks that do not require combat in the same way that getting "end game" gear doesn't require trade and profession.

I mean, after all, it's not really an apples to apples comparison given the focus on 'nodes' and 'building persistence and significance' therein, shouldn't this be changing for a game/world touting nodal progression along multiple paths?

If this game can offer trade and profession systems, support economic contracting and related reliability and reputation data [2], it would make me very happy indeed, and I suspect I'm not alone.

From where I sit, listing trades and professions and methods I'd enjoy would seem more fruitful if I felt any of the above was likely to change with this game (or any other within the MMO genre, frankly).

Also: Spellcrafting please. Happy to submit extensive PBI/stories to explicate if anyone 'upstairs' is interested.

[1] - Rhetorical question; combat has always been treated as "more important", even as everyone also readily admits that what keeps folks paying and playing when combat no longer delights are the social relations forged over time.

[2] - Eve Online's market for transport is likely one of the best examples I know, right down to being able to view the statistics of a given player/account over time for statistics of relevance to a potential shopper.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Dygz

The other MMORPGs we’ve had in the past 20 years have had endgame content.
The designs for EQNext, Revival, Chronicles of Elyria and Ashes of Creation put an end to the endgame.
And it’s not just I who says that.
The Ashes devs continue to say the same thing I do:

People could say high level content.
And that would be the same content that max level Adventurers and max level Crafters are pursuing.
It’s not endgame content though because endgame content refers to the repeatable static content, like dailies, dungeons and raids, that’s basically just busy work while the devs work on creating new content.

mark - 1:16:18

https://youtu.be/6CwaEg-b20k?t=4579
“Endgame isn’t something we really subscribe to from a concept standpoint. There’s a lot of options and avenues and progression that players can have in different areas of the game.”
— Steven

“And with Nodes, everything is going to be changing all the time.”
— Jeffrey

So any stubbornness regarding terms is not about me. I am just regurgitating what the Ashes devs have said.

Noaani

dygz wrote: »

mark - 1:18:37

All your quote is saying is that the concept of end game content in Ashes will not be the same as the concept of end game content as we know it. It is not saying that end game content will not exist in Ashes.

As rock solid proof of this statement (that there will be end game content in Ashes), I direct you to the start of the answer that you quoted the end of above...

Same video, 1:15:25,
(in answer to a question on how much time would need to be invested to keep a character up to date)

Steven: That's a super subjective question. It depends on what up to date means, it depends on what mandatory means, it depends on what your goals are, I guess.

If your goal is to have best in slot gear, then you're probably going to want to be experiencing a lot of end game content because that's going to be where the legendary items become available and stuff like that.

It's like you purposely omit things. It was right there in front of you, only a minute or so behind where you pulled a quote from, and yet you failed to hear it.

So, once again, Ashes will have end game content. The CONCEPT of it will be different to other MMO's out there, but it WILL have end game content.

The stubbornness, as well as the belief that Ashes won't have ANY end game content is totally on you. If you want to continue to believe it, go for it. I will follow up any post you make on it with actual truth though, because I don't want your misinformation turning people off of this game.

Dygz

Nope. What is most telling are the quotes I posted.
Steven answered the gist of the question - how many hours will we need to play after reaching max level in order to keep our characters up-to-date? - by using the term used in the question. And then, after answering the question as asked, made a point to state that the dev team does not subscribe to the concept of endgame for Ashes of Creation because reaching max level does not mean there is an end to experiencing new content - that is the primary purpose of Nodes and their relation generating new content as they progress and develop. Which is why Jeff mentions that at the end of that topic: "With the Node system itself, we will never get to that point [endgame]."

There is a difference between max level content and endgame content. In previous MMORPGs, those have hit at the same time, so people are used to using the terms interchangeably. But, in the designs for EQNext, Revival, Chronicles of Elyria and Ashes of Creation, those terms do not mean the same thing and are not interchangeable because those designs do not include an endgame. The do all have new content that players can engage after a character reaches max Adventurer level.

Noaani

Steven wrote:

If your goal is to have best in slot gear, then you're probably going to want to be experiencing a lot of end game content.

dygz wrote:

There is no end game content in Ashes, and I will contort any statement I can find to prove my point.

Fact is, Ashes will have end game content (which is defined as content one can not be reasonably expected to START before the level cap). The comments that you are plucking out and contorting to fit your ideals are comments relating to the notion that Ashes end game content (content that one can not be reasonably expected to start before the level cap) will be somewhat different in concept to other games.

Damokles

Every type of content that only max level characters can do is end game content in my opinion!

Archived User1

T Elf

In the Live Stream before this last one Steven mentioned "end game" and when I questioned that in chat, he corrected himself. It's a term that has been long used and Steven slips sometimes, but he or other usually correct it; which is why I suggest using the term, "high level content".

Dang! I thought I'd posted this yesterday, but found it "unposted" this morning.

Caeryl

The new info from the latest livestream does have me slightly concerned, since it was framed as though crafting is only separated into Gathering, Processing, and Crafting, without restricting within the subtype.

Maybe I misunderstood, but if a crafter can be everything from blacksmith to bowyer, it wouldn’t be a very interconnect system since three characters can cover every branch of crafting.

I’m hoping more info is forthcoming to clarify.

Wandering Mist

Caeryl wrote: »

The new info from the latest livestream does have me slightly concerned, since it was framed as though crafting is only separated into Gathering, Processing, and Crafting, without restricting within the subtype.

Maybe I misunderstood, but if a crafter can be everything from blacksmith to bowyer, it wouldn’t be a very interconnect system since three characters can cover every branch of crafting.

I’m hoping more info is forthcoming to clarify.

No, you didn't misunderstand, you can in theory cover everything with just 3 characters. That said, depending on how long it takes to reach artisan level it may not be viable to have 3 characters at Artisan level. One other way they could solve the issue (if you can call it an issue) would be to have crafting skills decay. For example, if you don't create an artisan level item at least once a week you lose your artisan status in that skill. This would reward players who are truly dedicated to the craft and give players more of an incentive to specialise in certain things, thus driving the economy forward.

Azathoth

I think requiring actions to not* suffer skill atrophy would be a bad go. That becomes a weekly job, and for those that can't play weekly, they would suffer the most.

Caeryl

wanderingmist wrote: »

Caeryl wrote: »

The new info from the latest livestream does have me slightly concerned, since it was framed as though crafting is only separated into Gathering, Processing, and Crafting, without restricting within the subtype.

Maybe I misunderstood, but if a crafter can be everything from blacksmith to bowyer, it wouldn’t be a very interconnect system since three characters can cover every branch of crafting.

I’m hoping more info is forthcoming to clarify.

No, you didn't misunderstand, you can in theory cover everything with just 3 characters. That said, depending on how long it takes to reach artisan level it may not be viable to have 3 characters at Artisan level. One other way they could solve the issue (if you can call it an issue) would be to have crafting skills decay. For example, if you don't create an artisan level item at least once a week you lose your artisan status in that skill. This would reward players who are truly dedicated to the craft and give players more of an incentive to specialise in certain things, thus driving the economy forward.

Ah, that’s disappointing then. Gathering and Processing seem as though they should be more general, definitely not comparable to choosing it over any crafting profession. Gatherers can lose their gathered items at any point if they get killed, processers risk losing materials on caravans both while on the way to them and while it’s outgoing to a potential buyer. Crafters have the lowest risk, it should require appropriate tradeoff to have that safety net, and I definitely believe it should restrict each character to a particular type of crafting, maybe not only one, but someone who’s chosen to be a carpenter shouldn’t also be able to master jewelsmithing to the same degree.

I don’t see the sense in saying crafting will be highly valued and require reliance on others, yet those with enough time can absolutely be a master of all.

Dygz

noaani wrote: »

Fact is, Ashes will have end game content (which is defined as content one can not be reasonably expected to START before the level cap).

This is not how the devs define endgame content.
Also, I'm not aware of any Ashes content that can't be started before Adventurer level cap.

This doesn't fit your definition of endgame, either.
https://www.engadget.com/2014/03/14/working-as-intended-endgame-is-the-worst-thing-that-ever-happen/

Azathoth

I think the processed materials would generate more potential income over gathered ingredients. So i think the risk should be higher.

As for spending a few alts to do everything yourself, that is more of a play style than a game mechanic. It would be hard to limit enough gathering/processing/crafting options to an account without people claiming IS is dictating what characters they can build.

I like the current proposed state, but it could still change.

Wandering Mist

azathoth wrote: »

I think requiring actions to not* suffer skill atrophy would be a bad go. That becomes a weekly job, and for those that can't play weekly, they would suffer the most.

You're right, it does. It was just something I thought up off the top of my head to solve the "issue" of having all crafting routes on just 3 characters. Personally I don't think that's a big deal, but meh.

After a brief bit of googling, apparently Ultima Online had skill atrophy at one point, and it was hated by the players. I never played Ultima Online so I don't know if this was a bad idea in general, poor implementation of a good idea, or just the fact that players didn't like change that restricted what they could do.

Dygz

Skill atrophy seems way worse than gear degradation.
That feels like it's the equivalent of losing a level - which I know Steven is against, for sure.
I'm OK with gear degradation, I think. Gear breaking could be problematic, but I like how gear repair also keeps crafters active in a way that skill atrophy would not.

Caeryl

azathoth wrote: »

I think the processed materials would generate more potential income over gathered ingredients. So i think the risk should be higher.

As for spending a few alts to do everything yourself, that is more of a play style than a game mechanic. It would be hard to limit enough gathering/processing/crafting options to an account without people claiming IS is dictating what characters they can build.

I like the current proposed state, but it could still change.

Having multiple alts to cover the needs of a strong, focused craft is one thing. Having three alts be able to do everything related to crafting across every discipline is not the same.

I’d argue no player should be able to do that without a veritable army of alts to maintain. It goes against the goal Steven laid out of having crafting be a difficult system to do solo. I know I’d consider someone who’s mastered every crafting profession to be a master of all, which he specifically said he didn’t want in Ashes.

Azathoth

I think it's a trade off. If all your character, alt or not, does is craft and focus on a series of crafts then they don't have development elsewhere. If advancing through just craft is as quick as crafting and adventuring, I see your point.

If however the development proves to be slow, players might try to advance by also adventuring with said characters. So then you might not be able to do it with just three.

But the 'right' amount of alts necessary to do this will always remain in the realm of opinion.

Dygz

Solo really just means not in a group and in this case probably means difficult to do with just one character.
We still have to see how easy or difficult to be to trade items between alts.

One player with hardcore time will probably be able to have an alt that is a master in each path.
Each alt will probably have to also depend on adventures supplying them with resources and mobs to harvest.

But... we shall see.

Noaani

dygz wrote: »

Also, I'm not aware of any Ashes content that can't be started before Adventurer level cap.

That would be because you are not aware of any Ashes content. Neither am I. No one is.

If you think there won't be quests in Ashes that realistically require you to be at the level cap before you start, you will be disappointed. If you think there won't be dungeons in Ashes that realistically require you to be at the level cap before you start, you will be disappointed.

Ashes will have end game content. Intrepid may want to put marketing spin on it so players don't expect the same *concept* of end game content as in other MMO's, but it will still have end game content.

Just because they want to call it by a different name, doesn't mean it is a different thing. If Triumph suddenly wanted o claim that its motorbikes all use rubberized torus-shaped road interface devices, everyone on the planet - other than Triumph marketing idiots and potentially you - would still call them tires.

Steven calls Ashes end game content what it is. Sure, sometimes he corrects himself in order to conform to the company marketing line, but a marketing line is just that, marketing. At the end of the day, if he is calling it that, then that is what it will be even if it is called something different.

How do I absolutely know that Ashes will have end game content? Simple, really - as always. Without end game content, a good portion of players will get to the level cap, see that there is nothing new to do, and just move on to the next game. Without content that can't be started until the level cap, there is no incentive to play at the level cap, and so when people get to that level cap they will simply stop playing.

This may not be what *you* do, but it is what a lot of people would do.

Azathoth

Can't be started versus can't be accomplished? Anyways, another thread on this again...

I am interested in seeing how quick character progression for non-adventuring players will be. If there are some players that will focus only on crafting, even if just with alts, will they be able to keep up with artisans that craft & adventure?

In games that level your skills as part of the overall level based on usage, they should be able to keep up. In games that level based on overall xp points earned, if crafting/processing generates a lower return then they would on the low end of the leveling curve. Gatherers I think would be okay, in that they will likely need some adventuring skills.

Child Item