Noaani wrote: » I'm not saying it is a lie, I am saying it is customer relations. "We'll take your feedback into consideration" is a statement that every customer service representative is familiar with, but that feedback is never taken in to consideration.
Jahlon: @Steven 😇 were some of these combat changes things you wanted to do, but were holding off until the back end testing? Like a fix one thing at a time sort of deal? Steven: @Jahlon No, they were based on feedback from the community during the 20th test
daveywavey wrote: » Noaani wrote: » I'm not saying it is a lie, I am saying it is customer relations. "We'll take your feedback into consideration" is a statement that every customer service representative is familiar with, but that feedback is never taken in to consideration. I can't tell you how many times I've had to say that to a customer, knowing full well that the Product Team isn't going anywhere near it... "I'll send this through to our internal feedback forum..."
Marcet wrote: » You are down to make a worst game just for the sake of winning an argument
Noaani wrote: » Marcet wrote: » You are down to make a worst game just for the sake of winning an argument Nothing you or I say here will have any impact on the game.
Marcet wrote: » Now that you see you can't "win", you just drag everyone down the well with you! Yeah!
BigPapa wrote: » Listening to feedback doesn't mean that they have to actually act on all of the feedback.
Noaani wrote: » BigPapa wrote: » Listening to feedback doesn't mean that they have to actually act on all of the feedback. Intrepid have a several thousand page design document for this game.' You and I do not have access to that document. Everything in that document is a "red line", as that is the game they are making. In what way would you or I be able to make productive suggestions for the game that fit in with that several thousand page document, that actual industry veterans with decades of individual experience - or centuries of combined experience - wouldn't have already have thought of? I really don't understand the thinking behind people when they assume they know better than actual veterans of a specific industry. It's like people think Ashes is some mod for a game made by a bunch of people trying to break in to the gaming industry, rather than a game staffed by people pulled from almost all western MMO's.
Jahlon wrote: » Noaani wrote: » BigPapa wrote: » Listening to feedback doesn't mean that they have to actually act on all of the feedback. Intrepid have a several thousand page design document for this game.' You and I do not have access to that document. Everything in that document is a "red line", as that is the game they are making. In what way would you or I be able to make productive suggestions for the game that fit in with that several thousand page document, that actual industry veterans with decades of individual experience - or centuries of combined experience - wouldn't have already have thought of? I really don't understand the thinking behind people when they assume they know better than actual veterans of a specific industry. It's like people think Ashes is some mod for a game made by a bunch of people trying to break in to the gaming industry, rather than a game staffed by people pulled from almost all western MMO's. @Noaani May want to quit while you are ahead. There are already several things documented that Steven has been explaining to various groups in the community, things that come from that 4k page Game Design Document, and when he starts explaining them the original design doesn't survive initial contact. For example, why has the military node blog been delayed? Because they had a major design change after listening to feedback and making a change. Steven: Military Node Leadership is going to be based on 1v1 Combat in a tournament style.... Players: Uh Steven, you aren't balancing combat for 1v1 combat so how is that going to work... Steven: Yeah good point..... <<a short while later>> Steven: Ok, so we are still going to have 1v1 Combat, but you are doing to engage in that combat with a champion that you build so that all players of all main archetypes can have an equal chance to be the mayor of a military node.
Noaani wrote: » Intrepid have a several thousand page design document for this game.' You and I do not have access to that document. Everything in that document is a "red line", as that is the game they are making. In what way would you or I be able to make productive suggestions for the game that fit in with that several thousand page document, that actual industry veterans with decades of individual experience - or centuries of combined experience - wouldn't have already have thought of? I really don't understand the thinking behind people when they assume they know better than actual veterans of a specific industry. It's like people think Ashes is some mod for a game made by a bunch of people trying to break in to the gaming industry, rather than a game staffed by people pulled from almost all western MMO's.
Maciej wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Maciej wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » I don't think it's that far fetched that people in a fantasy universe could come use the word tank to describe a field of study. Players did that once they started playing in these universes. It's possible, but the etymology is problematic. You have to differentiate between two types of worlds here, those that have mechanical armored vehicles called tanks, and those that do not. If tanks (vehicles) are not present, you would then have to explain the etymology of tank (character) as a fantasy neologism of tank (large liquid container), which gets really weird really quickly. In the context of an MMO, I'm pretty sure most people know that when you speak of a tank, you are talking about a person. Anyone who doesn't have that understanding would need an explanation anyways, an explanation that would probably involve you using the term tank even if that wasn't what the archetype was called. I don't remember when this happened but i don't think it was a mind blowing event when i heard someone refer to a person in a game as a tank for the first time. Have you heard of someone suffering some extreme event when first hearing the term tank being used in an MMO? And as i said, It's not like the archetype's name being changed would cause players to not use that term to describe tanks so players would still come in contact with it. No, that's not what the problem is, but I know where you are coming from, you are not the first person to make that argument. The issue isn't about the usage of the word Tank by the players, players are going to call tanks tanks no matter what the archetype name is (unless maybe they play on a RP realm if we have those). The problem is immersion. Do the characters wear appropriate clothing and/or armor? Check. Do the characters use appropriate weapons? Check. Do the characters use appropriate language? ____ You wouldn't expect an NPC in an RPG give you a quest that mentions DPS, would you?
mcstackerson wrote: » Maciej wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » I don't think it's that far fetched that people in a fantasy universe could come use the word tank to describe a field of study. Players did that once they started playing in these universes. It's possible, but the etymology is problematic. You have to differentiate between two types of worlds here, those that have mechanical armored vehicles called tanks, and those that do not. If tanks (vehicles) are not present, you would then have to explain the etymology of tank (character) as a fantasy neologism of tank (large liquid container), which gets really weird really quickly. In the context of an MMO, I'm pretty sure most people know that when you speak of a tank, you are talking about a person. Anyone who doesn't have that understanding would need an explanation anyways, an explanation that would probably involve you using the term tank even if that wasn't what the archetype was called. I don't remember when this happened but i don't think it was a mind blowing event when i heard someone refer to a person in a game as a tank for the first time. Have you heard of someone suffering some extreme event when first hearing the term tank being used in an MMO? And as i said, It's not like the archetype's name being changed would cause players to not use that term to describe tanks so players would still come in contact with it.
Maciej wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » I don't think it's that far fetched that people in a fantasy universe could come use the word tank to describe a field of study. Players did that once they started playing in these universes. It's possible, but the etymology is problematic. You have to differentiate between two types of worlds here, those that have mechanical armored vehicles called tanks, and those that do not. If tanks (vehicles) are not present, you would then have to explain the etymology of tank (character) as a fantasy neologism of tank (large liquid container), which gets really weird really quickly.
mcstackerson wrote: » I don't think it's that far fetched that people in a fantasy universe could come use the word tank to describe a field of study. Players did that once they started playing in these universes.
mcstackerson wrote: » Could you imagine an NPC referring to someone as a healer? I see tank as being a similar word to healer. DPS is a reference to the game's damage mechanics, tank is not. I don't see it as immersion breaking and almost see it as the opposite as it shows the characters in the universe are aware of the role and how it's used in engagements.
BigPapa wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Could you imagine an NPC referring to someone as a healer? I see tank as being a similar word to healer. DPS is a reference to the game's damage mechanics, tank is not. I don't see it as immersion breaking and almost see it as the opposite as it shows the characters in the universe are aware of the role and how it's used in engagements. "Healer" is definitely not problematic in the same way as "tank" is. "Tank" literally derives from well... tanks, a modern day vehicle. Healers have existed throughout history from ancient times, and were often even called literally healers.
mcstackerson wrote: » Just because we have something that we refer to as a tank, doesn't mean the word can't be used to describe something else, especially in another universe. As it was pointed out, we actually call multiple things tanks that serve different functions. Yes, healers have existed in our universe but the idea of someone tanking hasn't, probably because people can't reach the levels of durability required to tank. In Ashes universe, people can become so durable that they can perform the role of what has been called a "tank." This is my point, we aren't used to the word tank being used this way because the concept doesn't exist in our world but in ashes it does and because it does, i don't think it's a stretch for the characters in the universe to refer to it as a tank.
mcstackerson wrote: » Could you imagine an NPC referring to someone as a healer? I see tank as being a similar word to healer.
mcstackerson wrote: » DPS is a reference to the game's damage mechanics, tank is not.
mcstackerson wrote: » I don't see it as immersion breaking and almost see it as the opposite as it shows the characters in the universe are aware of the role and how it's used in engagements.
daveywavey wrote: » Well, in both Verra and Sanctus, they frequently use a water tank to hold lots of water. When fighting, they needed somebody who could hold off lots of enemies. For this reason, the people on Verra and Sanctus took to calling this role a "Tank", because of the similarity. There you go. You're welcome.
