Using players' actions to create evolving lore with each expansion

As the game progresses and the devs create expansions to change the world & mechanics, it would be interesting to see in-game lore addressing both the history of the world (old patch), and how things have changed (new patch). And to bolster AoC's theme of a player-driven world, they could tie this lore with the game-wide experiences of players.

An example: assume Ashes releases with some unbalanced features (like ever other mmo in existence). Maybe the Economic node is too powerful. It's too useful to the players and auction house connections too valuable. Quickly, we see economic metropolises dominating every server, directly because of player actions, not because it was planned by the devs. There's memes and meta surrounding the issue.
For the next expansion or patch, the devs nerf the economic node and buff the other node types. In the lore explaining these changes, they could mention the "Age of Gold" and how the bustling trade and industry of the first settlers unknowingly caught the attention of a gold-hoarding dragon who flew across the land, stealing from every city, ransacking every auction house (now you've got a new raid boss). In addition to node balancing, the expansion could add features reflecting this event. New mob types, like bandit goblins who steal money when they deal damage. Golden armor for player or mount. NPCs sharing dialogue about how the world once was filled with gold-hungry cities and how things have changed.

One of the most unique draws of AoC is how players literally change the world. I hope that the actions of players can also become part of Verra's evolving history and lore.

*Edit - To clarify, I'm not talking about events or player-driven changes that take place in specific servers.

Expansions change the whole game.
I would like it if those changes that effect everyone are explained with in-game lore.
If that lore addresses game-wide player action (like in the example), even better.

History of a server and history of the game as a whole are two separate stories

**Edit
Not server-specific actions. Game-wide actions, as in, patterns, meta, non-server-specific commonalities between players. The commonality does not have to be a broke system like in the example. Any pattern. Any common experience between all players. We will all be playing the same game, even if servers create minor differences

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Warth

I'd like some player made history.
I do however think, that it wouldn't be appropriate for the Developers to write said history depending on what happened across all server.

Instead it should be written by players for players separately for each server. Like about,

the great siege of Winterfell
the 30 way between the Horde and the Imperium
The frost dragon, that cause a 2-month long winter because nobody managed to slay it
...

Said info could be found in the library of each server. So when new players join or tourists from other servers, they'd be able to read up on the history of the server that was collected by the players.

BaSkA_9x2

I wouldn't mind having some Easter Eggs every now and then, but that's about it. I'm not a fan of big lore influence from players.

DeadDuckling

Warth wrote: »

I'd like some player made history.
I do however think, that it wouldn't be appropriate for the Developers to write said history depending on what happened across all server.
Instead it should be written by players for players separately for each server

I definitely agree servers need their unique histories addressing the events of the players.
When an expansion releases, however, those changes to gameplay and the world effect everyone across all servers.
I would enjoy lore explaining these game-wide change, and if that lore is driven by the players' actions, all the better

Asgerr

The issue with these is that you'd need to implement said player lore, creating different content for it, for each different server, as every server will be different. In one server Economic nodes might have never risen to power enough to warrant the lore be applied to that one server.

DeadDuckling

Asgerr wrote: »

The issue with these is that you'd need to implement said player lore, creating different content for it, for each different server, as every server will be different. In one server Economic nodes might have never risen to power enough to warrant the lore be applied to that one server.

Sure, if an Economic node's rise to power is unique to a few servers, and not wide-spread across the game, then we could assume that the nodes are balanced and it won't need to be addressed in an expansion or patch.
However, if there is an unbalanced feature that effects all players across all servers, then the devs will add fixes to the next expansion that will change the whole game. Lore explaining those game-wide changes would be great. If that lore is player-driven, even better

Warth

DeadDuckling wrote: »

Asgerr wrote: »

The issue with these is that you'd need to implement said player lore, creating different content for it, for each different server, as every server will be different. In one server Economic nodes might have never risen to power enough to warrant the lore be applied to that one server.

Sure, if an Economic node's rise to power is unique to a few servers, and not wide-spread across the game, then we could assume that the nodes are balanced and it won't need to be addressed in an expansion or patch.
However, if there is an unbalanced feature that effects all players across all servers, then the devs will add fixes to the next expansion that will change the whole game. Lore explaining those game-wide changes would be great. If that lore is player-driven, even better

There is 2 things i see problematic with your suggestion overall:

The general expectation of completely broken mechanics (That will define close pretty much all the servers based on how broken they are) being a common thing. If it is a rare occurrence, then there won't be any need for a separate subsection of lore.
If there is mechanics broken so broken that they will define most servers, then they shouldn't be waiting for 3-12 months to address them, but fix them immediately (within a couple of days/weeks). Which would again result in a separate subsection of lore being unnecessary.

DeadDuckling

Warth wrote: »

There is 2 things i see problematic with your suggestion overall:
The general expectation of completely broken mechanics (That will define close pretty much all the servers based on how broken they are) being a common thing. If it is a rare occurrence, then there won't be any need for a separate subsection of lore.

If there is mechanics broken so broken that they will define most servers, then they shouldn't be waiting for 3-12 months to address them, but fix them immediately (within a couple of days/weeks). Which would again result in a separate subsection of lore being unnecessary.

The example I provided does not have to be a broken mechanic. It is just a placeholder hypothetical. The point is that expansions will change the game and lore should explain those changes. These changes do not necessarily have to be fixing broken systems. Whatever changes or add-on take place with the expansion could be influenced by past player behavior/events, game-wide commonalities, meta etc.

Also, devs stated it could take a month just for one node to reach the final stage. So even if we were to go with the original hypothetical (we don't have to), then it will still be months before anyone could even identify that nodes are unbalanced. There are many long-term elements in mmorpgs that are not immediately apparent in betas or the first few weeks after launch.

Dygz

Every server will have it's own storyline evolve from player actions.
The dev curated lore will not be server specific.
Don't expect there to be lore to explain nerfs.

Warth

DeadDuckling wrote: »

Warth wrote: »

There is 2 things i see problematic with your suggestion overall:
The general expectation of completely broken mechanics (That will define close pretty much all the servers based on how broken they are) being a common thing. If it is a rare occurrence, then there won't be any need for a separate subsection of lore.

If there is mechanics broken so broken that they will define most servers, then they shouldn't be waiting for 3-12 months to address them, but fix them immediately (within a couple of days/weeks). Which would again result in a separate subsection of lore being unnecessary.

Whatever changes or add-on take place with the expansion could be influenced by past player behavior/events, game-wide commonalities, meta etc.

Isn't that what games have already been doing for the past decade? How is this unique to Ashes?

If zones or events are removed, added or completed, games will lore explaining it.

If classes, races, organizations or professions are introduced, games will have lore for this.

If unique new mount types, pets, enemies... are introduced, games will have lore for this.

WoW has done this, FFXIV has done this, ESO has done this, GW2 has done this.

Its kinda hard to imagine what you might be refering to without a concrete, non-placeholder, example, but:

Everything Dev-orchestrated has lore attached to it anyway. Everything player orchestrated is supposed to be different depending on the server and hence not be applicable to game wide lore. If there was something that's dependend on player choice, but still the same across all server, then it would be broken, as it directly goes afainst the design concept ov Intrepid.

Dygz

Seems to be asking for player-actions to affect those changes, but... the servers will be too divergent for that to be a thing.

Underdelve

DeadDuckling wrote: »

*Edit - To clarify, I'm not talking about events or player-driven changes that take place in specific servers.
Expansions change the whole game.

I would like it if those changes that effect everyone are explained with in-game lore.

If that lore addresses game-wide player action (like in the example), even better.

History of a server and history of the game as a whole are two separate stories

I agree that, as the game develops, (expansions, dlc, etc.) Intrepid will need to utilize Lore to introduce and explain said expansions, dlc, etc.

Last Sept. Intrepid hired Wynne McLaughlin, who was the lead writer and narrative designer for ESO, so I think (hope) this indicates that Intrepid will be taking seriously the expansion/explaining of the in-game Lore of Verra.

Asgerr

If we're to add player action into lore, it will always need to be to on a per server basis. Which could be cool, but seems lika a lot of work.

Sure, you won't get official game lore like The Great Goobbue Wall in FFXIV, but it's the price to pay for a non story driven game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksBTlg24sVc&ab_channel=BrianHeminger

Child Item