Hot Take: Why waste time on races no one is going to care about?

Talking mostly about Niküa here. We know they are never going it see their architecture in a major node. I have already seen people complain about it and propose wacky systems to make the node architecture more balanced. Tulnar and Empyrean will dominate, and we will see a good amount of humans. Only Dünir if they fix them.

It's like, why not just scrap Niküa? Less than 5% of the player base is going to pick them... The orcs and wood elves are going to be less than 10% for sure(better but not great). They could hold off on these races for now.

Instead of having things come in pairs for no reason. Why not just scrap the races and put stuff in, people like actually later? Or not put them in at launch all together to save budget and development time?

We all know in our heart of hearts that some of these races are a just not going to see much play, and better races could be put in their place after launch.

I would rather see more exciting races down the line in an expansion personally. They could do polls to see what races to add or remove from the game. We don't need nine whole ass races at launch, when realistically only five are going to be hype.

Feel free to tell me how crazy and wrong I am.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

insomnia

CROW3 wrote: »

insomnia wrote: »

But then again, i'm not some selfish manchild that only thinks about myself.

Rofl - whatever points you argued were lost with this. 😆

Not really. Were you offended

After i had done it, i did think i could have left that out. But, i didn't want to power up the PC again, just to edit it. And i forgot about it the next day.

But i still don't see a reason as to remove a race, or perhaps a class, later on, if we looked at polls for that. Just because they aren't so popular..

Vhaeyne wrote: »

insomnia wrote: »

You seriously belive that most people that want to give this game a go/is going to play this game, visits the forums or participated on those polls?

I addressed that already. I said the polls are not the ground truth. They just show a trend that I have seen. I also have only seen 1-2 people on this forum excited about nikua. One of them admitted to liking them because they are: "the underdogs". I also said I could be crazy, post one. A hot take is not meant to be a scientific white paper. It's my take based on what I have seen.

And i don't care if a very small percentage, wants to play them. They said they are part of the races, so they should be there at release. But then again, i'm not some selfish manchild that only thinks about myself.

Plus some might change their oppinion on what they want to play when racials are in/at release

We had that discussion and I agreed. Go read one of Justvines posts in this thread. I don't think Ashes should change anything because of promises and sales made. I am just asking the general question... Why put all of this work into something that is not going to be valued as much as say.. Tulnar.

We also discussed racials a lot. Which is why the discussion has been about accurate visual representation for a while now. Because, in the case of Ashes, having racials is kind of stupid when you can use a cosmetic to put a paper bag on any race whos face you don't like. Which is why I think for Ashes you might as well just have "backgrounds" you pick from that are separate from race appearance. I don't think it will happen, but it makes more sense.

Not everybody has bought cosmetics

CROW3

insomnia wrote: »

Not really. Were you offended

After i had done it, i did think i could have left that out. But, i didn't want to power up the PC again, just to edit it. And i forgot about it the next day.

Lol! Nope - just pointing out the obvious, and maybe some irony. 😆

Atama

Speaking of Diablo, Path of Exile is a Diablo clone that's an MMORPG (well, I'm not quite sure how "massively multiplayer" it is, but I think it's generally considered an MMO). They are pretty canny in that by default even with high end gear you look like a crazy hobo with a sword casting magic spells. So everything is free to play unless you care about how you look, in which case you can buy cosmetics just like Ashes of Creation. And I won't lie, I've dropped some cash on nice-looking gear to make my characters look like adventurers fighting evil and not the weird guy at the bus stop who yells at himself.

Noaani

Vhaeyne wrote: »

I love it, but MO2 ain't winning any popularity contests.

It isn't, but not because of anything cosmetic.

I'm not saying everyone needs to agree. Not everyone agrees that PvP in an MMO is a good thing, yet look how many games are trying and failing to make that work.

Vhaeyne

Noaani wrote: »

Vhaeyne wrote: »

I love it, but MO2 ain't winning any popularity contests.

It isn't, but not because of anything cosmetic.

I'm not saying everyone needs to agree. Not everyone agrees that PvP in an MMO is a good thing, yet look how many games are trying and failing to make that work.

Just Crowfall ATM, All the other ones are dead or living in their niche.

The "What you see is what you get" focus seems like it would be more of a Pantheon thing, but I hardly hear anything about that game anymore.

Atama

Vhaeyne wrote: »

The "What you see is what you get" focus seems like it would be more of a Pantheon thing, but I hardly hear anything about that game anymore.

It's apparently still alive.

https://visionaryrealms.com/further-funding-acquired-for-pantheon-rise-of-the-fallen/

It has been in development for a few years longer than Ashes and still isn't quite into the Alpha yet.

Conrad

I personally would prefer if races lost all stats and we picked them for the lore/aesthetics. I really hate races with stats because instead of optimising just the class, ppl optimise everything and you start getting majority masses

Conrad

As for human sized bosses, I'm all for them. Who in here thought against Zenos and won? That guy is a human sized badass who beats the living shit out of you and your friends quite a few times. Guy is a dick but he is strong af and when you fight him, he feels like an elite boss who's human sized. Bosses don't need to be huge to have impact. To the contrary, human sized bosses from personal experience have greater impact

Percimes

Conrad wrote: »

I personally would prefer if races lost all stats and we picked them for the lore/aesthetics. I really hate races with stats because instead of optimising just the class, ppl optimise everything and you start getting majority masses

On the other hand, having most players choosing the "better" race for a class for stats, reinforce the stereotype that lore often try to tag the races with. Dwarves = fighter. Elves = archers.

This, in turn, allows people who like to play against types to choose an unusual race/class combo. You can't do that if their isn't a type in the first place. It has advantages in a PvP context if people expect a certain class because they see a specific race. They approach the fight with a set of tactics in mind but then have to change everything on the spot because that's not how you fight against the class that is in front of them.

Vhaeyne

Conrad wrote: »

As for human sized bosses, I'm all for them. Who in here thought against Zenos and won? That guy is a human sized badass who beats the living shit out of you and your friends quite a few times. Guy is a dick but he is strong af and when you fight him, he feels like an elite boss who's human sized. Bosses don't need to be huge to have impact. To the contrary, human sized bosses from personal experience have greater impact

That fight was 1v1... I mostly skip the story, but I do remember the 1v1s. I think you fight him other times in like 4-man groups. I can't remember a raid where you fight him, and he's normal-sized. There were a few small bosses early in FF, but they realized it doesn't really work that well.

Conrad

Percimes wrote: »

Conrad wrote: »

I personally would prefer if races lost all stats and we picked them for the lore/aesthetics. I really hate races with stats because instead of optimising just the class, ppl optimise everything and you start getting majority masses

On the other hand, having most players choosing the "better" race for a class for stats, reinforce the stereotype that lore often try to tag the races with. Dwarves = fighter. Elves = archers.

There is nothing wrong if someone playing a class that doesn't follow a stereotype. Better to expect racial/class stereotypes than have stats that force you into optimising

Noaani

Conrad wrote: »

Percimes wrote: »

Conrad wrote: »

I personally would prefer if races lost all stats and we picked them for the lore/aesthetics. I really hate races with stats because instead of optimising just the class, ppl optimise everything and you start getting majority masses

On the other hand, having most players choosing the "better" race for a class for stats, reinforce the stereotype that lore often try to tag the races with. Dwarves = fighter. Elves = archers.

There is nothing wrong if someone playing a class that doesn't follow a stereotype. Better to expect racial/class stereotypes than have stats that force you into optimising

You are basically saying that you think players should be free to pick a race they like based on the games lore, and then throw that lore away to be the class they want, with no penalty at all.

If you want to stick to the games lore, there should be stats to each race - if not a lock on some race/class combinations.

Atama

I don't think races should have stats.

I do think races should have augments though. And the augments should be unique and interesting, and generic enough to be useful to any role. And needless to say, they should be balanced... We don't want a race that can teleport and another one that adds sparkly effects.

Dolyem

Atama wrote: »

I don't think races should have stats.

I do think races should have augments though. And the augments should be unique and interesting, and generic enough to be useful to any role. And needless to say, they should be balanced... We don't want a race that can teleport and another one that adds sparkly effects.

I actually loved when races were stat specific in WoW. I love the augment idea but I also fully support racial base stats and possibly even class locking although I admit it seems kind of silly to class lock in a game with 64 variants of classes

Nerror

If they are going with racial stats, I would actually like to see them double down on it some. For example, a dwarf or orc killing 500 elves would get a small increase in their racial stats. And a Tulnar would get an increase in stats by killing 500 elves. The elves would also get racial stat increases by killing 500 elves, as would the humans.

Vhaeyne

Noaani wrote: »

You are basically saying that you think players should be free to pick a race they like based on the games lore, and then throw that lore away to be the class they want, with no penalty at all.

Yes! Throw that lore out! Individuals are individuals!

In the game, "lore" is just history and culture. It has nothing to do with individuals.

Characters are individuals.

I appreciate and respect American history as an American, but I am way more likely to get into a story about Roman history.

To use the class analogy, I would be way more interested in learning the way a Roman soldier fought over the way a Civil War Soldier fought. Some Americans really like Samurai and would gladly learn their ways over any other combatant. No one is going to say an able-bodied American would have penalties in learning to be a Samurai if given the chance. It just sounds stupid.

If we just bar races from being able to do certain things well, then we are just creating restrictions that make the world more bland.

An orc with a big club is very predicable compared to an orc with a rapier...

Noaani

Vhaeyne wrote: »

An orc with a big club is very predicable compared to an orc with a rapier...

An Orc with a rapier is still probably going to try and hit you over the head with it.

I'm going to ignore the comment about an American Samurai. I am sure you understand that the difference between an American human and a Japanese human is not the same as the difference between an Elf and a Tulnar.

A far better analogyl would be that an ox is far more suited to pulling a plow than a trout is.

While we talk about different races in game, it is more accurate to consider this game to have four species, and some of those species have multiple races within them.

Vhaeyne

Noaani wrote: »

An Orc with a rapier is still probably going to try and hit you over the head with it.

A pointless stereotype.

I'm going to ignore the comment about an American Samurai. I am sure you understand that the difference between an American human and a Japanese human is not the same as the difference between an Elf and a Tulnar.

I don't agree that there should be any difference from a player prospective. If you said as a whole Elves are weaker than Tulnar that may be true in the same sense that women have less muscular bodies than men. Is your body stronger than any of the strongest women? I doubt it. There is nothing saying an elf cant be yoked out of their minds. There is nothing saying a Tulnar can't be smarter than an Elf.

A far better analogyl would be that an ox is far more suited to pulling a plow than a trout is.

It's not better. In fact, you purposely exaggerated to make your point sound more reasonable than it is.

While we talk about different races in game, it is more accurate to consider this game to have four species, and some of those species have multiple races within them.

Five species... I don't think we know that they are "species". Maybe half-elf and half orc exists. If interbreeding is possible, then everyone is at least closely related genetically. To the point that I would expect Individuals to be capable of reaching the same heights when it comes to max stats or abilitys.

Verra is a world with rich and diverse cultures. Much of its important history has been dominated by the major races. Humans of the coast and plains, Orcs within the hills and the marshes, Elves in the forest and the riverlands, and the esteemed Dwarves of the mountains. The major races have held dominance through countless wars and skirmishes between the lesser races of Verra. Decades may pass between these flareups of violence. There are many minor races on Verra. Some of the minor races exist in makeshift villages or tribes if you will. Some of the major villages among the minor races are comprised primarily of the Giants, less reputable sects of Human, Gnomes, and Halflings. The Halflings are not Halflings in a traditional sense but actually half-bloods of different races.[6] – Steven Sharif

That last bit is significant. "half-bloods of different races." To me, this really blows the lid off the idea that races are so different that it should restrict player choices.

Noaani

Vhaeyne wrote: »

That last bit is significant. "half-bloods of different races." To me, this really blows the lid off the idea that races are so different that it should restrict player choices.

Lions and tigers are different species. They are vastly different animals. Tigers are larger, faster and stronger on average.

These are different species of the same genus. They can breed.

horses and donkeys are different species. They are vastly different animals. Horses can be both larger and smaller than donkeys when fully grown, as well as both faster and slower.

These are different species of the same genus. They can breed.

Species in Verra being able to reproduce with each other does not suddenly mean any differences between the them have to disappear. If it doesn't work that way in real life, there is no need for it to work that way in biology.

Lets go back to that plow. If we take the above example of a horse vs a donkey. A Clydesdale would be able to pull that plow significantly longer than any donkey on the planet. No matter what you do with donkeys as a species, they will never be able to match a Clydesdale in this regard. The same thing when putting a donkey up against a champion racehorse. A donkey simply can not run that fast - the fastest ever recorded donkey is almost a third the speed of the fastest horse.

Yet not only can these two animals breed, but the breeding between these two species is so common that people forget that when you have a female horse and a male donkey, the resultant animal is called a mule.

To add to that, mules were specifically bred because they were more patient than the horse (important with agricultural work), and smarter than the donkey. These two species themselves were lacking these traits, and so interbreeding the species was the means to solve it - not eradicating the differences between the two species that could breed with each other. Sure, mules were not as good at agricultural work as a good horse was - they are not as strong and do not have the same endurance. However, their more amicable nature makes up for this in a good number of situations.

If you said as a whole Elves are weaker than Tulnar that may be true in the same sense that women have less muscular bodies than men. Is your body stronger than any of the strongest women? I doubt it. There is nothing saying an elf cant be yoked out of their minds. There is nothing saying a Tulnar can't be smarter than an Elf.

This is very much an all or nothing approach. It is ignoring any chance of nuance.

Lets imagine a very basic game. Characters have 10 to all stats at creation, gender reallocates some of those stats, and then players have 5 stat points to allocate as they wish.

Next we assume that males gain a point in strength, and lose one in wisdom. Females gain one point in charisma, and lose one in strength.

Now if we assume two players, one playing a male and one playing a female both put all five of their points in strength, the male will have 16, the female will have 14. This means that a female that puts everything in to being a strong as they can be will be stronger than most male characters, but only 87.5% as strong as the strongest males - in this game.

In order to provide some real world context to this, if we look at Olympic weightlifting records, the record male total is 473kg, while the record female lift is 333kg.

Now, I couldn't lift either of these, and I am going to assume no one posting here could either. As such, both of these people are stronger than any of us are, yet the strongest female is only lifting about 70% of what the strongest male is lifting.

Translate that back to a game (because I KNOW someone is going to get triggered by the above - sorrynotsorry). The strongest elf should be stronger than most Tulnar, but not stronger than the strongest Tulnar.

The smartest Tulnar should be smarter than than most Elves, but not smarter than the smartest elf.

Vhaeyne

@Noaani

You points only potentially work for outlining the most of the most "X" traits. Player characters are never the most of the most anything in good RPGs. If they were, that would be boring. Imagine a DM telling a wizard player that he is the smartest and most powerful wizard in the world. That sounds like an awful campaign to me, there would have to be some sort of major twist to that to make it remotely exciting.

The smartest Tulnar and the Smartest Elf should be NPCs. Players should all operate in the same spectrum of heroic enough to want to stand up for the little guy, but weak enough to where there is always something to struggle against. Otherwise, it's just not interesting.

Within the spectrum of power a player can obtain, it is not unreasonable to imagine that a human is as strong as an ork if a female of any race is as strong as a male of that race...

To me, it seems crazy to have your opinion for a game like Ashes, where almost nothing in the game is what it is visually.

In MO2 where the game was designed around genetic differences to the point that changing the weight of your character changes how they move. Your opinion makes sense.

MO2 tells you visual differences are important to the game. Ashes tells you the exact opposite in many ways.

Via the Ashes character creator, the smallest skinniest female human is just as strong as the largest, most muscular male human. They will have the same stats and potential. They can be the exact same character if you give them the exact same build. The difference visually could be more than an elf male and a human male. It has already been shown in game that the only way to tell if something is even an elf or human is to zoom in on their ears.

Ashes also sales you the ability to change the way your race looks with racial skins. Change the way your gear looks with cosmetics. Change your mount, your boat, the shit on your land, random ass pets... Literally nothing in Ashes is what it is. Skill cosmetics may be a thing in Ashes at some point, seeing how well that works for PoE.

At what point do we stop this madness where we think accurate visual representation is important in Ashes or any game that has a cosmetic cash shop for that matter?

They already sold the ability to look like a god-damn angel. Do we really care if that angel has the stats of a nikua or an orc? No, because it's not the way things work in Ashes. They have already told us this shit is not important with the racial cosmetics.

Child Item