Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!

Dev Discussion #40 - Enemy Indicators

16791112

Comments

  • SolrSolr Member
    I prefer a little bit more old school but you should still be able to see the health of the opposing mob/player. I like the idea of a sort of beastiary for mobs that fill with information about the mobs in combination with some kind of dmg/def bonus for yourself and your party (if this does not exsist the information will just be availible online). The beastiary can be filled with both you killing mobs as well as learing from scrolls made by scribes.
    The strength of an opposing player should never be availible, not level, not anything. The only information you should have at hand is the gear they are wearing so it is imortant that you can differentiate between different tiers of gear just by looking. Here is where the problem of cosmetics lie...
    In scenario based arenas, character inspection should be availble for less rendomness and blitzing.

    last thing, healthbars and indicators should only show when targetet/hovered, not always. This also means that enemies that are hidden (behind objects as well) should not have their healthbar/indicators shown making more "dirtier" playstyles avaible.
  • mcstackersonmcstackerson Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    Noaani wrote: »
    Yes, there is an objective impact but whether that impact is good or bad is subjective. Ashes with more fast travel would be a different game than Ashes without.

    The point is - the discussion on fast travel HAS that argument, the discussion on indicators does not.

    It isn't that the argument isn't strong, it is that it doesn't exist. There is no objective impact on the game - it is a purely subjective matter.

    Not only is it subjective - it is subjective where the opinion to have no indicators does not hold up at all once questioned (as you no doubt understand right now).

    If i understand how you are using objective than if the game makes you look at the creature in game and fight it to figure out its level instead of looking at the interface, that is objectively impacting how you play the game.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    edited April 2022
    I think the point is that this is a thread about preference - which is inherently subjective, rather than an objective argument.
  • I prefer the Intended Audience indicators. Coming up to a new creature and seeing a big ornate Nameplate indicating it's intended for a party of 8 gives me that "oh shit, turn around" feeling and I love it. I think indicators for Solo (standard), 3 (hard), 5 (elite), 8 (legendary), 1/2 raid, full raid, would be good.
    f51pcwlbgn8a.png
  • SymrolSymrol Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Personally would go with an indicator that doesn't give me the level but a general feeling of if I'm capable of fighting this or not and if It should be grouped for.
    Along with the way others have suggested that maybe after defeating X number of the enemy you would be able to more accurately gauge their health/level.

    As for players I would prefer no indicator except knowledge of gear their wearing, though the problem with this comes when people are wearing skins/transmog. You would have no way to even guess your enemies level. So I'm a little torn and not sure what would be best.

  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    Noaani wrote: »
    Yes, there is an objective impact but whether that impact is good or bad is subjective. Ashes with more fast travel would be a different game than Ashes without.

    The point is - the discussion on fast travel HAS that argument, the discussion on indicators does not.

    It isn't that the argument isn't strong, it is that it doesn't exist. There is no objective impact on the game - it is a purely subjective matter.

    Not only is it subjective - it is subjective where the opinion to have no indicators does not hold up at all once questioned (as you no doubt understand right now).

    If i understand how you are using objective than if the game makes you look at the creature in game and fight it to figure out its level instead of looking at the interface, that is objectively impacting how you play the game.

    The original point was that it had no positive objective impact - not just no objective impact.

    Forcing players to attack a mob in order to figure out if it is appropriate for them, many levels too low for them or many levels too high for them - or indeed if it is aimed at solo, group or raid - is not a positive thing.

    All it is doing is creating a barrier to enjoyment of the game, for no actual benefit.
  • CROW3CROW3 Member
    Well, technically no one is forcing anyone to attack anything. We have fairly limited info when deciding to attack another player, why not have consistent info with mobs?

    That would be more pvx.
    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    edited April 2022
    Nice. So that means I should wear trash gear when I'm not in the mood for PvP so that gankers think I'm 10 levels lower and gain massive Corruption if they kill me.
  • CROW3CROW3 Member
    Dygz wrote: »
    Nice. So that means I should wear trash gear when I'm not in the mood for PvP so that gankers think I'm 10 levels lower and gain massive Corruption if they kill me.

    It’s a strategy.

    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • Noaani wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Yes, there is an objective impact but whether that impact is good or bad is subjective. Ashes with more fast travel would be a different game than Ashes without.

    The point is - the discussion on fast travel HAS that argument, the discussion on indicators does not.

    It isn't that the argument isn't strong, it is that it doesn't exist. There is no objective impact on the game - it is a purely subjective matter.

    Not only is it subjective - it is subjective where the opinion to have no indicators does not hold up at all once questioned (as you no doubt understand right now).

    If i understand how you are using objective than if the game makes you look at the creature in game and fight it to figure out its level instead of looking at the interface, that is objectively impacting how you play the game.

    The original point was that it had no positive objective impact - not just no objective impact.

    Forcing players to attack a mob in order to figure out if it is appropriate for them, many levels too low for them or many levels too high for them - or indeed if it is aimed at solo, group or raid - is not a positive thing.

    All it is doing is creating a barrier to enjoyment of the game, for no actual benefit.

    To your own enjoyment. You do not speak for everyone. Lots on this topic have said none or very little. If it is what they want then it is probably what they would enjoy. They didn't ask which you think is better. They asked what your preference was
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited April 2022
    1sab3la wrote: »
    [If it is what they want then it is probably what they would enjoy.

    People often talk about what they think they would enjoy - without considering what it actually means.

    That is why I question obvious cases of this when it is from people I know and have had discussions with on various topics in the past - and is also why these threads have no impact at all on how the game is developed (you can't develop a game using ill-considered opinion as a guiding force).
  • Noaani wrote: »
    1sab3la wrote: »
    [If it is what they want then it is probably what they would enjoy.

    People often talk about what they think they would enjoy - without considering what it actually means.

    That is why I question obvious cases of this when it is from people I know and have had discussions with on various topics in the past - and is also why these threads have no impact at all on how the game is developed (you can't develop a game using ill-considered opinion as a guiding force).

    They simply asked your preference. Have you played a mmo as such? I doubt it..

    Again you have an opinion and do not speak for everyone. Your opinion is an opinion on what others might or might not like. It's pretty lame. Seems the majority who don't want indicators simple say that's what they want. The people who want little to none simply say that also.

    For some reason it is people like you who want full indicators who seem to tell everyone else they don't want what they think they want. No one asked for your professional opinion and even then I doubt your a professional gaming consultant.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    1sab3la wrote: »
    Your opinion is an opinion on what others might or might not like.
    I have not once said what others opinion should be.

    What I have said is that not having indicators doesn't objectively add to the game in a positive way.

    People can say they have the preference for it. That is find, but is subjective not objective.

    I also never said people don't want what they said they want. I did, however, question what they wanted and found their reasoning wanting. Now, rather than co tonuing the debate (as it is) as to why no indicators may be better, you are instead debating my debating - a surefire sign that you have no actual point ts left to debate on the topic.

    You know how it is - if you can't argue against the point, argue against the argument.
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    If noaani doesn't enjoy a feature, no one will.
    Because noaani knows that anyone who disagrees with him simply doesn;t know what they would enjoy.

    I'm pretty sure that people think about what they would actually enjoy when someone asks them their preference.

    The devs will decide if they want to support the most popular preference. But, even if they choose not to support the most popular preference, they will at least have some idea of what the most popular answer was in the dev discussion.
  • Noaani wrote: »
    1sab3la wrote: »
    Your opinion is an opinion on what others might or might not like.
    I have not once said what others opinion should be.

    What I have said is that not having indicators doesn't objectively add to the game in a positive way.

    People can say they have the preference for it. That is find, but is subjective not objective.

    I also never said people don't want what they said they want. I did, however, question what they wanted and found their reasoning wanting. Now, rather than co tonuing the debate (as it is) as to why no indicators may be better, you are instead debating my debating - a surefire sign that you have no actual point ts left to debate on the topic.

    You know how it is - if you can't argue against the point, argue against the argument.

    They only asked for your preference. You know how it is. When your worried you might not get your way and put something in the game you might not preference make up stuff with an opinion you can't back up. Again show me a bad mmorpg with no indicators you played. Even if you could which you haven't the point still remains. No one asked you anything other than your preference. You go on to basically tell others they wouldn't actually like it. After all you had the conversation.. I'm sure all game experts in the industry with actual game titles and projects you have personally released. Say what you want but if you read through the post you fit a type
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    1sab3la wrote: »

    They only asked for your preference.
    Yes, they did.

    That does not mean that we can't have a discussion among ourselves about it though.

    This is, after all, a discussion forum.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    Dygz wrote: »
    If noaani doesn't enjoy a feature, no one will.
    Because noaani knows that anyone who disagrees with him simply doesn;t know what they would enjoy.

    If this were the case, I wouldn't have asked for the reason behind someone's choice here.

    However, that is what I did, I asked the first person I saw that had that preference that I thought may be able to explain their reason. I just found the resulting attempt at justification as to why they want that to be extremely lacking.

    If there was a good enough reason (which would have to be something I had not considered at all), then I would happily change my mind - as I did on the tank naming situation (I initially thought it should be changed, but had it pointed out that they would be called tank by players regardless), and on fast travel (I was initially for fast travel, but was convinced it should be limited).
  • JustVineJustVine Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    edited April 2022
    You can say 'this is about preference' but in reality it will actually impact what activities I can or cannot do, as it obfuscates necessary information to push limits. So the real question is actually 'is this worth limiting gameplay and pushing people towards using 3rd party sites more often than they otherwise would in the name of 'flavor and immersion''? So far no one has made a compelling argument to me on the hardcore no indicators side to convince me it's worth giving up hunting mobs that are at the very edge of what I can fight as an activity I describe in a previous post. To resummarize some of those key points, if there are no indicators its a random guess that isn't really worth my time just for the thrill of the hunt. I'll probably just stick to mobs that I need mats from and if the challenge is 'random' to me I'll probably be less engaged with the experience as a result. I know some people like randomized experience to this level, but to me the randomization already happened at mob spawn. Obfuscating it more just makes it tedious and takes away my agency in the situation for little to no benefit.

    As a new point of discussion: This issue also effects PvP as it determines how much I can calculate risk relative to fighting a player while surrounded by mobs. If I know the mobs are weaker than me in a given area I can fight them and chase them more confidently. Obviously I don't really need indicators in this situation. However, if I know the mobs are equal level with some much higher level I know I can possibly run away/chase them but I have to be careful. In this case there is a skill in weaving through enemy mobs and making tactical decisions based on the at a glance information. Indicators in this instance can literally make or break an encounter since as of Alpha 1 the level range was big enough in mobs (which I fully support) that meant some mobs could literally kill you while others could sort of kill you if you weren't paying attention. Without indicators you have no real way of knowing and will just try to avoid all mobs whether chasing or attacking, limiting the level of strategy and skill that will be used in the game.

    Given the fact that mobs killing you absolves an attacker of corruption this is a really big deal in the over all psychology of the game and I think, therefore, people should be given enough information that it's not a blind gamble and that there is some INFORMED risk vs reward here. I think it's best there is some form of difficulty indicators therefore to prevent the game from feeling frustrating and random when you are trying to run away or pursue a player.

    I don't agree with having no nameplates and relying on indicators on the mobs physical design because the design work required to show difficulty in the mobs actual design requires a lot more work on the devs part for the mild benefit of a pure immersion bonus.
    🔦🔱⚔️Selling pro pain and pro pain accessories. ⚔️🔱🔦
  • The answer to this is easy. Make conning a function of your targeting HUD, then make these toggle HUD elements. Everybody gets to pick what they prefer. Anybody that really wants one way or the other for other players is just being toxic.
  • CROW3CROW3 Member
    edited April 2022
    JustVine wrote: »
    You can say 'this is about preference' but in reality it will actually impact what activities I can or cannot do, as it obfuscates necessary information to push limits. So the real question is actually 'is this worth limiting gameplay and pushing people towards using 3rd party sites more often than they otherwise would in the name of 'flavor and immersion''?

    It’s interesting how we see this so differently. For me, this seems inside out. Limiting target information increases my ability to observe and learn. This increases my engagement with content and gives me greater ownership of the experience. The more engaged I am the greater the immersion.

    On the other hand, the more information you tell me, the less I’ll engage based on YOUR information. I’m assuming constraints and limits based on what I’ve been told, instead of what I’ve personally observed. That seems like a more limiting gameplay experience.

    I’d rather fail a few times against a mob and learn, than be told everything, and avoid that learning entirely. 😉
    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • HumblePuffinHumblePuffin Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    Murdach wrote: »
    The answer to this is easy. Make conning a function of your targeting HUD, then make these toggle HUD elements. Everybody gets to pick what they prefer. Anybody that really wants one way or the other for other players is just being toxic.

    This works one way but not the other. They have to choose where the limit is to a certain extent and that’s why they even need to ask the question.

    They already want to make an extremely customizable UI so yes if they include full indicators they can make certain hud elements adjustable so those who want a limited hud can have it. From my experience tho if the game gives you information you’re putting yourself at quite a disadvantage if you opt out of that information.

    A few games I’ve played have let you choose how far name plates render and in some games this lets you see things through walls by their nameplates. You can definitely turn it down/off but in dungeons you would be put at a severe disadvantage when you couldn’t see the mob around the corner, so most advice from people was to have name plates always on/far render distance. This exact scenario can obviously be changed so this exactly doesn’t happen, but it’s an example of most(not all) players do not want to play at a disadvantage so they will use whatever options are available to them. In this situation it’s the most enemy information they are allowed to have.

    I’ve said my preference and I’m not arguing for one way or another at this moment, but wherever they decide to draw the line on enemy indicators does matter, because the majority of the player base will most likely play at that line, including players who’s preference is limited/none because they do not want to play at a disadvantage.
  • JustVineJustVine Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    CROW3 wrote: »
    Well, technically no one is forcing anyone to attack anything. We have fairly limited info when deciding to attack another player, why not have consistent info with mobs?

    That would be more pvx.
    CROW3 wrote: »
    JustVine wrote: »
    You can say 'this is about preference' but in reality it will actually impact what activities I can or cannot do, as it obfuscates necessary information to push limits. So the real question is actually 'is this worth limiting gameplay and pushing people towards using 3rd party sites more often than they otherwise would in the name of 'flavor and immersion''?

    It’s interesting how we see this so differently. For me, this seems inside out. Limiting target information increases my ability to observe and learn. This increases my engagement with content and gives me greater ownership of the experience. The more engaged I am the greater the immersion.

    On the other hand, the more information you tell me, the less I’ll engage based on YOUR information. I’m assuming constraints and limits based on what I’ve been told, instead of what I’ve personally observed. That seems like a more limiting gameplay experience.

    I’d rather fail a few times against a mob and learn, than be told everything, and avoid that learning entirely. 😉

    This only is true when there isn't extensive wiki's that let me just ignore this 'exploration'. I'll read an area wiki, and farm mobs that will 'randomly' be stronger and have less fun as a result. Not because I read the wiki, but because I'm simply limited in what counts as meaningful exploration. The only thing you 'learn' are things that could learn on a wiki. Actual combat learning is a completely separate thing and isn't added or subtracted by information levels OTHER than 'sometimes you might just randomly die because the mob is stronger than expected.' There isn't much to learn from that type of failure in my opinion since you have no real agency over the engagement of the mobs at that point. You can't prepare your buffs or store your cooldown moves since it's random. Your therefore encouraged to play cautiously and/or be in places you can stomp on surprise enemies. Is this more immersive? Yes. Is it more fun? No, because it limits my engagement ability considerably.

    Also let's not be binary about this. You don't avoid learning about the enemy just because you know it's relative strength level and best stat. This doesn't tell you: Attack patterns, Movement weaknesses, What other mobs will aggro on you for fighting it, Augmented attacks, what the best skill use and engagement range is, and what kind of cc you need to deal with. There is plenty of learning to do if we are given the level of information I am arguing for.
    🔦🔱⚔️Selling pro pain and pro pain accessories. ⚔️🔱🔦
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    CROW3 wrote: »
    On the other hand, the more information you tell me, the less I’ll engage based on YOUR information. I’m assuming constraints and limits based on what I’ve been told, instead of what I’ve personally observed. That seems like a more limiting gameplay experience.
    Honest question here - why would you listen to people that tell you what you can or can not do - even if (especially if) those people are the developers?

    For years I've done what others said isn't possible. Whether that is soloing group dungeons, soloing specific raid base population with a chance to drop some desired items, or taking two friends and running level appropriate raid dungeons.

    If I listened to people (or mob indicators), I wouldn't have thought any of that possible. However, I paid more attention to what I thought I and my friends were able to do - not what the developers thought I should be able to do.

    To me, the above statement sounds more like an issue of self-doubt than anything else, which is why I am asking the above question.
  • CROW3CROW3 Member
    We have different perspectives on a topic, @JustVine. Go figure. :D I'm certain there's a thread out there that we're going to 100% agree on. When that happens I'll ship you a small bottle of champagne!

    Fair points above. Two questions in response:

    1) Is the wiki part and parcel of the game experience for you?

    2) What's the bare minimum information you would need to not have the gameplay experience degrade / feel limited?
    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • JustVineJustVine Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    edited April 2022
    CROW3 wrote: »
    We have different perspectives on a topic, @JustVine. Go figure. :D I'm certain there's a thread out there that we're going to 100% agree on. When that happens I'll ship you a small bottle of champagne!

    Fair points above. Two questions in response:

    1) Is the wiki part and parcel of the game experience for you?

    2) What's the bare minimum information you would need to not have the gameplay experience degrade / feel limited?

    1. It depends on how good the game is at systems design and how punishing failure is. If punishment for failure is high, then I do consider it. If the systems design for itemization, bosses, or crafting is confusing and does a poor job giving you hints or things to get better answers in game, then I do consider it. Ashes is a game with a decent punishment for failure so I know myself and many others will consider it. You are arguing for a lack of hints or things to better answers in game, so I will definitely consider it if IS took your suggested approach.

    Death makes failure cost something to me. Looking up something in a wiki is free. I tend to think of it more so as 'asking the adventurers guild what THEY know'. I'd rather just ask the npc's in game or the game have a way for my character to figure it out themselves other than just trial and error by death, but eh. If IS wants to make the game 'dangerous by design with little room for error or ability to specifically seek certain difficulty levels of a target' I'll adapt. It would reduce the quality of the games over all experience in my eyes though. I'd rather save myself the trouble and save the game dev from my whining about every small error or missing piece of information in game at that point and ''just read the wiki."

    However, I have played games where I specifically do not do this including mmos, or at least minimize it to only looking at certain things while in town. To me that is what games with good design will cause me to do, since it means their systems in game are good enough and convenient enough to not cost myself and others the limited time I might have to enjoy something.

    I like exploration and immersion. That's actually why I am actually arguing for more in game information available, preferably with gradations you can progress in if you feel stumped. I like minimizing my exposure to wikis where I can since they generally just give you all information at once by design and that's not usually what I need to know. But I'm not going to avoid doing so at expense of my own fun if I'm particularly frustrated or just want to get through a certain area/set of mobs so I can get to my actual desired activity.

    2. Hmm, bare minimum..... Let's limit the scope to the topic of this question since it can vary depending what part of systems design we are talking about. When it comes to mobs in combat.

    If a target is intended for a group or not I absolutely think that convey this to the player is an absolute requirement.

    Intensity of difficulty vs myself on the name plate I think is my 'bare minimum' for basic mobs. Putting it in level format makes it easier to pin point things (and makes it easier on the colorblind) but isn't strictly necessary. I just think it lends to more strategic thought and planning. I can see arguments for not having it by level if you were able to detect their strongest stat relative to yourself, as it would favor the person who's been in the area long enough to check in PvP situations.

    But yes in short, if the ability to see what the difficulty gap is between myself and the enemy mob exists in a way that let's me distinguish between 'decent challenge', 'even match', 'tough', 'incredibly tough', 'overwhelming' and 'impossible to gauge' (for party level and unique, mobs), then I can do a number of things relative to the gameplay loop of 'hunt mobs at the highest level gap for additional challenge'.

    I don't 'need' the 'strongest stat detection' although I'd argue it's mostly saving a larger amount of people from going to the wiki if they are having trouble, and offers another level of 'hint' that people who want to keep a certain level of exploration can avoid (and therefore is a system that would act as yet another small buffer against someone just giving up and going to a wiki.)

    However that gradient of 'exploration difficulty' is exactly why I think you need a way to tell on name plate in some form in addition to a check style version that gives you slightly more information. People like you on the other hand can just turn off the nameplates for the full experience you seem to want and just not check a monster unless you feel you have enough experience with them such that you think your character 'earned the ability'. I feel like an opt in system to hardcore is the best compromise and I would hope they made design decisions to make us both happy in that regard.
    🔦🔱⚔️Selling pro pain and pro pain accessories. ⚔️🔱🔦
  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    edited April 2022
    JustVine wrote: »
    So the real question is actually 'is this worth limiting gameplay and pushing people towards using 3rd party sites more often than they otherwise would in the name of 'flavor and immersion''?
    No. The real question is:
    "When it comes to enemy “conning” (indication) systems in-game, what features do you like? If you do like indicators, to what extent or delineation?"


    JustVine wrote: »
    So far no one has made a compelling argument to me on the hardcore no indicators side to convince me it's worth giving up hunting mobs that are at the very edge of what I can fight as an activity I describe in a previous post.
    No one needs to provide a compelling argument or convince you of anything.
    That's not the purpose of this thread. The purpose of this thread is for people to share what they like.
    If you want to argue about the impact of the devs' decision - you can argue that with the devs.
  • JustVineJustVine Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    You are free to not join the discussion I was having with others Dygz. We were talking about the benefits and trade offs of picking one system over another (and I was hoping to move the conversation to 'possible compromises that would fit more than just one side of the issue.)

    The purpose of the thread is to share our opinions. The reason I am being vocal is because the devs might be having the same conversations we were having in this exact thread and therefore I felt it best to give them my own nuanced perspective relative to interacting with other peoples. At the very least it saves them some time having these types of articulated discussions themselves. They are free to tell me to stop themselves if they feel it isn't meeting their intended goal.
    🔦🔱⚔️Selling pro pain and pro pain accessories. ⚔️🔱🔦
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited April 2022
    CROW3 wrote: »
    We have different perspectives on a topic, @JustVine. Go figure. :D I'm certain there's a thread out there that we're going to 100% agree on. When that happens I'll ship you a small bottle of champagne!

    Fair points above. Two questions in response:

    1) Is the wiki part and parcel of the game experience for you?

    2) What's the bare minimum information you would need to not have the gameplay experience degrade / feel limited?

    I don't think these are overly relevant questions at all.

    Here is a question for you;

    You want to keep indicators out of the game so that you can explore a mobs strength or weakness your own, in a bid to increase your engagement with the game. If I am wrong here, let me know.

    Now, literally every MMO ever made allows players to do this. I gave examples earlier (that I have talked about in the past on these forums) of times when I have explored a mobs strength or weakness my own, in order to improve me gaming experience.

    I have not seen a single game that does not allow for this.

    So, the question I have for you is - what examples do you have where you have explored a mobs strength or weakness your own?

    There has to be many, as this is a aspect of gameplay that you want so deeply that you are willing to force it on all players.

    The question then becomes, if you have those many cases where you have explored a mobs strength or weakness your own in other games, why does this need to be added to the game for you? You are already capable of exploring a mobs strength or weakness your own.

    On the other hand, if you have no examples to offer of times you have explored a mobs strength or weakness your own, then all that shows is that you don't actually want this as a gameplay feature - because it has literally always been available to you should you simply put your hand out for it, and if you have no such examples, all that would say is that you don't even care about it enough to put said hand out.

    Neither case above is a particularly good argument for why there should not be indicators in the game.

    As to why there should not be indicators, that is simple. Not everyone plays MMO's the way you do. Not everyone wants that level of immersion or engagement - and removing indicators basically makes the game unplayable to such people.

    The point then becomes, why remove indicators to please people that either already have what they want (and know they have it), or alternatively who claim they want a thing that they can't even be bothered putting in the most miniscule effort to gain for themselves, when giving these people this thing would ruin the gameplay experience for others?

    You are welcome to your opinion. Obviously. However, you are not welcome to having said opinion without having it's absurdity pointed out to you. Not around me, at least.

    I would honestly like to know and answer to the above question though; can you give some examples of when you have gone out and explored a mobs strength or weakness your own?
  • HumblePuffinHumblePuffin Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    Another thread and comment made me think of another interaction which I feel an indicator may be mandatory for.

    Player characters wearing cosmetic armor need to have a clear way to figure out what they are wearing since plate is weak against magical damage, and cloth is weak to physical. In order to not make cosmetics in their entirety an advantage I feel you need an indicator to tell you what kind of armor they are wearing.

    Or avoid the indicator in its entirety and have cosmetics only able to be applied to the corresponding gear type. A plate cosmetic goes on plate armor only, a sword cosmetic goes on swords only. I didn’t see something in the wiki that specifically spoke about how and what cosmetics could be applied.
  • Well really do think devs do not give enough information when asking questions just ask questions in the broadest sense.

    For example dungeouns well are not the monsters in that dungeoun going to be of a certain level and if there are a few monsters in there that tougher then well would it not be tougher relative to the monsters that are in that dungeoun. Right? So maybe there is a monster that is 125% tougher than the normal monsters in that dungeoun. Another thing is are you guys planning on making all the wolves in the game exactly the same so indicators are nessary.

    Are you guys planning on putting like level 10 monsters and level 5O monsters in same dungeoun??? So indicators are neccessary??

    Zones usually are level 10 monsters in those zones some of them more tough just for variety but not level 10 and level 50 monsters in same zone. First of all I do not think that lets say a level 10 and level 50 demonic bunnIes should look the same. this is actuall pretty easy. Color, size and so on. Plus if you have a demonic bunny with special abilities there could be visual indicator of it. For a example demonic bunny with fire breath weapon could have fire auro to it. I mean there should already be fire aura in game.

    I am just going to guess that you are talking about max level zones and that they are going to lots of max level zones with some monsters being tough. Plus there was some talk about some zones being tougher the furhter you go into them. And also guessing that you are talking about semi rare spawns that are put in the open world that are more challenging. than others.

    Well in one game if you wanted to know some of the stats or get general idea of a monster it was an actuall askill. Think this would work well with visual indicators. In a game there were no hp bars or level numbers so that skill was necessary.

    Now in DnD there was something called a type I, type II type III and type Iv demons later given actual names and each one was inceasing more difficult to defeat. Plus looked meaner.

    So lets say you are in a level 50 zone and you encounter a new monster or a demonic bunny that looks bigger and meaner lets say pulsating eyes indicating tough mob then you could use this skill to see what Type of monster it actually is. if it is a type four or five or six monster then might wnat to get group but type 1 or 2 monsters might be able to solo if you are that good.

    Another thing hp bars for me break emersion so why not give players options to just turn them off.

    Another thing you could do is Lore. If one of the things that you could ask an NPC is What type fo monsters are in that area and the NPC hints tath. The spiders in a certain cave have been the end to many adventures then you would be more likely to watch out for dangerous spiders in that zone.

    As far as humunoids well a humaniod with a shield would be an indicator that they are tanky and if they had full plate then even more tanky. I mean gear is already in game do not understand why all the orcs or goblins have to look exactly alike.



    .
Sign In or Register to comment.