fabula wrote: » George_Black wrote: » First things first. Do you associate new content with instanced raids? I do not consider the leveling experience to be a part of the content I am talking about because this is just a one off thing you do once per character and unless a person hardly plays at all, most of their time will not be spent leveling up. Content would then be any activity you can do in the game after you reach max-lvl or if you don't care about leveling up at all. This includes things like dungeons/raids, all the pvp activities such as sieges and wars and all tradeskill activities. It doesn't matter if its open-world or instanced.
George_Black wrote: » First things first. Do you associate new content with instanced raids?
fabula wrote: » Content would then be any activity you can do in the game after you reach max-lvl or if you don't care about leveling up at all. This includes things like dungeons/raids, all the pvp activities such as sieges and wars and all tradeskill activities. It doesn't matter if its open-world or instanced.
Noaani wrote: » You aren't supposed to end up with more content, you aresupposed to end up with content you've not yet done. Sure, all the previous max level content isn't worth doing, but this is only an issue if you're the kind of person that wants new content when they are ready for it, and not a moment earlier. Developers need to add new content as soon as the games top end players have completed the existing content (ideally). If that means you miss out on some top end content, start getting through it faster instead of complaining.
fabula wrote: » Noaani wrote: » You aren't supposed to end up with more content, you aresupposed to end up with content you've not yet done. Sure, all the previous max level content isn't worth doing, but this is only an issue if you're the kind of person that wants new content when they are ready for it, and not a moment earlier. Developers need to add new content as soon as the games top end players have completed the existing content (ideally). If that means you miss out on some top end content, start getting through it faster instead of complaining. My point has nothing to do with the speed someone completes content. I'm stating that a better return on investment is to have older content still be relevant to some degree and get some play time instead of being abandoned because the trash mobs of the next expansion give better stuff than the top tier raid from the previous expansion. In the context of AoC that would be for materials from dungeons and raids of one expansion to still be in demand in the next. The specifics and issues have to be worked out but it makes sense since they are already going to be doing that for all the gatherable materials anyways.
fabula wrote: » My point has nothing to do with the speed someone completes content. I'm stating that a better return on investment is to have older content still be relevant to some degree and get some play time instead of being abandoned because the trash mobs of the next expansion give better stuff than the top tier raid from the previous expansion.
JustVine wrote: » Content staying relevant is something desired because in the end sometimes an activity is fun, and the fact that it is economically rewarding means you get to have fun AND make money. When content is either removed or supersede there is a chance the replacement is not fun for the same set of people and that sucks big time.
Noaani wrote: » No, that wouldn't be better. Most MMO back ends are designed where each zone exists on the server, and has hardware dedicated to it based on how busy the developers expect it to be. When a new expansion comes out, developers don't want you to stick in the older content, because that means they need to assign more resources to it. They want as many people on the smallest amount of content as possible, so they dan concentrate the highest amount of server resources on that part of the game as possible. Now, while it is possible Ashes back end won't be designed this way, literally every MMO I have spe t the time to learn about has been designed this way, with exactly one exception - Rift. So, it is in both the developer and the players best interest for older content to be basically scrapped as new content is added to the game. Even from a player perspective, after having run content for 9 to 12 months, why would anyone want to have to carry on running it? The only people that wish content could stay relevant in the next cycle are those that didn't run it while it was max level. This is why the speed at which people run content is the key factor.
fabula wrote: » If you have everything you want and you cannot progress anymore what motivates you to log into the game daily?
George_Black wrote: » I dont understand the fascination with low lv areas. Why go back to killing wolves when I am lv50 fighting demons and stuff. I dont care to go back to the low lv stuff. They are not relevant to me. I want a new expansion with new areas. And since AoC wont be based on instanced raids (raids that wont award the best gear), they should go ahead and release new gear with new expansions. Make the players populate the new areas. The low lv areas will always be populated by low lv ppl until it's time for a new server. And I will not miss them.
George_Black wrote: » Lv5 nodes will prevent nearby nodes from becoming lv5 (unless the dominant falls in a siege). The population of the nearby nodes will interract with the lv5 areas for higher lv mobs, not their own nodes. Their nodes will remain places for low-mid lv adventuring.