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!

Tab target is just sad

1235

Comments

  • NiKrNiKr Member
    Merek wrote: »
    Loosely? Headshots are featured in multiple games that aren't "shooters". Examples are, Mortal, Gloria Victis, Chivalry, Mordhau, Mount & Blade, Skyrim (Elder Scrolls), etc. Just because I hit you in the head and you die, that doesn't make the game a "shooter". And the "high precision reticle targeting", sure that's part of shooters but any game with mechanical requirements to aim an attack could fall into that category.

    ESO doesn't allow you to manually aim in the sense that NW does, so you're aware, when I referred to Elder Scrolls I meant the main games, the RPG singleplayer titles. The reason I brought them up was because the idea that "headshots" equate to "shooter" is just not correct.

    Mortal Online, that's an easy one, Gloria Victis and Darkfall too but I don't believe headshots were a thing with Darkfall, haven't looked at it for a long time, it does allow for manual aiming though. At the end of it all, my issue with "headshot" or "shooter" comments weren't about my wish for said mechanics to be in this game, it was because they're just wrong.
    So pretty much all of your examples are about action low/non-magic medieval games that have body separation when it comes to targeting, because that's just how you make a medieval action game.

    They are all either small scale or single player games and from a quick look through a few videos of gameplay their speed of combat seems really low (even when players are on horses).

    Ashes will be a high magic, high speed, huge scale mmo with hybrid combat (GV, MO looked way more action-based than hybrid to me, at least when it came to archers), so pretty much the exact opposite of all the things you listed.

    Darkfall seems like the closest one and, as you yourself said, it didn't even have headshots. So, as I said before, this high precision gaming doesn't seem to fit AoC's design direction and the closest example of what Ashes represents only proved my point.
  • CROW3CROW3 Member
    I enjoyed MO2, and I’m glad Ashes is not heading in the same direction. If that means headshots are out, I’m ok with that.

    When I need to scratch that 1-shot, head-splatter itch that’s what the M110 rifle is for in Insurgency: Sandstorm.
    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • VaknarVaknar Moderator, Member, Staff
    As a reminder, Ashes of Creation will feature a hybrid combat system. You can read more about that here, on the wiki! https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Combat_targeting
    community_management.gif
  • Dizz wrote: »
    LordBlank wrote: »
    Fantmx wrote: »
    The MMO market is nowhere near dying out and combat is not the next step. The next steps are:

    1) a living, breathing world that responds to player decisions in a way that doesn't take constant content creation by the developer and

    2) Smart AI

    MMO longevity has nothing to do with type of combat.

    MMO isn't dying out because MMO just means massive multiplayer online. That means games like destiny 2 and any online game by nature is an MMO. What will die out are MMORPGs. What's the average age of wow players?

    Ummm, online game or game need internet connection does not means it's a MMO, a MMO need to have the ability to allow massive multiplayer to play the exactly same content at the same time, destiny 2 don't have that, but GW2 and WOW and FF14 adn BDO etc have that kind of ability and contents, so yes MMO genre is dying.
    Dizz wrote: »
    LordBlank wrote: »
    Fantmx wrote: »
    The MMO market is nowhere near dying out and combat is not the next step. The next steps are:

    1) a living, breathing world that responds to player decisions in a way that doesn't take constant content creation by the developer and

    2) Smart AI

    MMO longevity has nothing to do with type of combat.

    MMO isn't dying out because MMO just means massive multiplayer online. That means games like destiny 2 and any online game by nature is an MMO. What will die out are MMORPGs. What's the average age of wow players?

    Ummm, online game or game need internet connection does not means it's a MMO, a MMO need to have the ability to allow massive multiplayer to play the exactly same content at the same time, destiny 2 don't have that, but GW2 and WOW and FF14 adn BDO etc have that kind of ability and contents, so yes MMO genre is dying.

    Hi Sherlock, what do you think MMO stands for? I'll give you a hint, the O means online. "In 1974, Mazewar introduced the first graphic virtual world, providing a first-person perspective view of a maze in which players roamed around shooting at each other. It was also the first networked game, in which players at different computers could visually interact in a virtual space. The initial implementation was over a serial cable; however, when one of the authors began attending MIT in 1974, the game was enhanced so that it could be played across the ARPAnet, forerunner of the modern Internet."
  • DizzDizz Member
    edited October 7
    LordBlank wrote: »
    Dizz wrote: »
    LordBlank wrote: »
    Fantmx wrote: »
    The MMO market is nowhere near dying out and combat is not the next step. The next steps are:

    1) a living, breathing world that responds to player decisions in a way that doesn't take constant content creation by the developer and

    2) Smart AI

    MMO longevity has nothing to do with type of combat.

    MMO isn't dying out because MMO just means massive multiplayer online. That means games like destiny 2 and any online game by nature is an MMO. What will die out are MMORPGs. What's the average age of wow players?

    Ummm, online game or game need internet connection does not means it's a MMO, a MMO need to have the ability to allow massive multiplayer to play the exactly same content at the same time, destiny 2 don't have that, but GW2 and WOW and FF14 adn BDO etc have that kind of ability and contents, so yes MMO genre is dying.
    Dizz wrote: »
    LordBlank wrote: »
    Fantmx wrote: »
    The MMO market is nowhere near dying out and combat is not the next step. The next steps are:

    1) a living, breathing world that responds to player decisions in a way that doesn't take constant content creation by the developer and

    2) Smart AI

    MMO longevity has nothing to do with type of combat.

    MMO isn't dying out because MMO just means massive multiplayer online. That means games like destiny 2 and any online game by nature is an MMO. What will die out are MMORPGs. What's the average age of wow players?

    Ummm, online game or game need internet connection does not means it's a MMO, a MMO need to have the ability to allow massive multiplayer to play the exactly same content at the same time, destiny 2 don't have that, but GW2 and WOW and FF14 adn BDO etc have that kind of ability and contents, so yes MMO genre is dying.

    Hi Sherlock, what do you think MMO stands for? I'll give you a hint, the O means online. "In 1974, Mazewar introduced the first graphic virtual world, providing a first-person perspective view of a maze in which players roamed around shooting at each other. It was also the first networked game, in which players at different computers could visually interact in a virtual space. The initial implementation was over a serial cable; however, when one of the authors began attending MIT in 1974, the game was enhanced so that it could be played across the ARPAnet, forerunner of the modern Internet."

    I can't tell why you call a person Sherlock you don't really know, I just assume that is just part of communication.

    I don't really care about what game company or medias claim what the game type the game is, like lots of game use the term "open world" but what is that about and lots of the games advertised as "open world" but they just games don't always need switch to loading screen or scene transaction but while they start use the term "ope world" a lot mostly were trying to tell people "open world" game equal the game world feels free and alive like a real exist world, so to me the terms they used are mostly to advertising instead of try to tell people the essences of the game.

    I don't play and didn't follow Destiny 2, I only followed some information about Destiny 1 in that time on game website or twitch stream, to me Destiny is more like a multiplayer online hakoniwa shooting game, which means the game essence is shooting game and use game modes like choose between PVP or PVE contents or choose the which PVE stage you want to play before you really enter the content you want to play and have ability to play with other few people online.

    To answer your question do you consider that Diablo 2 or Diablo 3 and Lost Ark that they all are MMOs? I mean if I follow what you said to categorize those games will end up they are all MMOs and further I can say Elder Ring is a MMO or Monster Hunter is a MMO or Splatoon is a MMO or Valorant is a MMO or LOL is a MMO or even most mobile waifu gacha games are also MMOs, what you said about MMO you only focus on "multiplayer" plus "online" instead of the whole "massive multiplayer online" which means to meet your definition of MMO the game just need to be multiplayer online game that lots people play it instead of games have abilities to let massive numbers of players share exactly one same game world and playing together at the same time.
    A casual follower from TW.

    ↓Good youtube channel to learn things about creating games.↓
    Masahiro Sakurai on Creating Games:
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCv1DvRY5PyHHt3KN9ghunuw
  • wintertidewintertide Member
    edited October 7
    People have a strange definition of action. As if action RPGs haven't been a thing for decades and how 99% of them do not have reticles, and most of the ones that do, don't act like first or third person shooters.
  • mozsta69mozsta69 Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    I was impressed with the hybrid system they showed. Super excited to see more. It was always sold as a hybrid system which meant there was always tab targeting, so not sure why the expectation of it not being a full blown FPS game.
  • beretta7 wrote: »
    It all just comes down to preference in the end but I have a REALLY hard time believing in this day and age that there are more gamers that just want to tab target and no challenge. I know there are still people that would prefer that monotony, but I think the only reason that these forums might slightly lean toward tab is that most FPS gamers etc don't even bother with MMORPG's due to garbage combat. When in fact MMORPG's are the best genre out there and they should be here. I'm one that will put up with the shitty combat experience to have the immersion but I also believe we should be moving this genre forward and I guess Steven wasn't the guy to do that unfortunately.

    What is the challenge in a open world for combat like Dark Souls? You run away, you dodge, you wait for stamina, you keep dodging. How is that challenging?
  • CawwCaww Member
    edited October 7
    Dizz wrote: »

    I can't tell why you call a person Sherlock you don't really know, I just assume that is just part of communication.

    Since you may not know, the reference to "Sherlock Holmes" (a fictional detective) is a sarcasm meant to imply a person doesn't know what they are talking about or are unaware of the obvious situation. In the context of this thread the meaning of "online" has come into question and is part of the greater conversation you were addressing.

  • LinikerLiniker Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Mag7spy wrote: »

    lol the ranger aiming at the ground with the reticle like 1 meter away from the enemy, and people losing their shit saying there is no "action" in Ashes because of the soft lock... I guess BDO is not an action game as well cuz their soft lock is a lot more "noob friendly" and "no skill" than Ashes soft lock

    oficial-baner2.png
    Recrutamento aberto - Nosso Site: Clique aqui
  • Liniker wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »

    lol the ranger aiming at the ground with the reticle like 1 meter away from the enemy, and people losing their shit saying there is no "action" in Ashes because of the soft lock... I guess BDO is not an action game as well cuz their soft lock is a lot more "noob friendly" and "no skill" than Ashes soft lock

    Soft lock should be in mmorpgs and it is fine with it being "noob friendly" the point is to have that skill element of tracking and focus. It isn't meant to create expert shooters or FPS combat.

    It keeps the skill element higher and reduces ability to kite with easy mode and having tab target attack people off screen.

    This keeps it in line with action while also ensuring the barrier to entry is not giant. It scales higher in pvp when it comes to peoples movements and such.


    AoC needs to tweak the action camera a bit on the UI side as the colors kind of mix together on your soft lock target (I don't feel like the arrow above the head is enough imo) Also it feels a bit more tight there should be more leeway in how close you need to be aiming towards your target for soft lock.

    Again the point isn't to make it a barrier of entry to do content in the game.

    The conversation gets worse when people argue against action camera having some sort of bonus and wanting full tab and people wanting action combat. There are more arguments that here should be, everything AoC has shown is pretty much good to a high quality on what id expect. There shouldn't be complains on how the system works, besides ironing out a few things to improve it a bit.

    Long story short how it works is almost there and good, there shouldn't be complains on either side. Balance is a different issue besides the fact on talking about how it works.
  • wintertide wrote: »
    People have a strange definition of action. As if action RPGs haven't been a thing for decades and how 99% of them do not have reticles, and most of the ones that do, don't act like first or third person shooters.

    action is hat you feel in your soul
  • Dizz wrote: »
    LordBlank wrote: »
    Dizz wrote: »
    LordBlank wrote: »
    Fantmx wrote: »
    The MMO market is nowhere near dying out and combat is not the next step. The next steps are:

    1) a living, breathing world that responds to player decisions in a way that doesn't take constant content creation by the developer and

    2) Smart AI

    MMO longevity has nothing to do with type of combat.

    MMO isn't dying out because MMO just means massive multiplayer online. That means games like destiny 2 and any online game by nature is an MMO. What will die out are MMORPGs. What's the average age of wow players?

    Ummm, online game or game need internet connection does not means it's a MMO, a MMO need to have the ability to allow massive multiplayer to play the exactly same content at the same time, destiny 2 don't have that, but GW2 and WOW and FF14 adn BDO etc have that kind of ability and contents, so yes MMO genre is dying.
    Dizz wrote: »
    LordBlank wrote: »
    Fantmx wrote: »
    The MMO market is nowhere near dying out and combat is not the next step. The next steps are:

    1) a living, breathing world that responds to player decisions in a way that doesn't take constant content creation by the developer and

    2) Smart AI

    MMO longevity has nothing to do with type of combat.

    MMO isn't dying out because MMO just means massive multiplayer online. That means games like destiny 2 and any online game by nature is an MMO. What will die out are MMORPGs. What's the average age of wow players?

    Ummm, online game or game need internet connection does not means it's a MMO, a MMO need to have the ability to allow massive multiplayer to play the exactly same content at the same time, destiny 2 don't have that, but GW2 and WOW and FF14 adn BDO etc have that kind of ability and contents, so yes MMO genre is dying.

    Hi Sherlock, what do you think MMO stands for? I'll give you a hint, the O means online. "In 1974, Mazewar introduced the first graphic virtual world, providing a first-person perspective view of a maze in which players roamed around shooting at each other. It was also the first networked game, in which players at different computers could visually interact in a virtual space. The initial implementation was over a serial cable; however, when one of the authors began attending MIT in 1974, the game was enhanced so that it could be played across the ARPAnet, forerunner of the modern Internet."

    I can't tell why you call a person Sherlock you don't really know, I just assume that is just part of communication.

    I don't really care about what game company or medias claim what the game type the game is, like lots of game use the term "open world" but what is that about and lots of the games advertised as "open world" but they just games don't always need switch to loading screen or scene transaction but while they start use the term "ope world" a lot mostly were trying to tell people "open world" game equal the game world feels free and alive like a real exist world, so to me the terms they used are mostly to advertising instead of try to tell people the essences of the game.

    I don't play and didn't follow Destiny 2, I only followed some information about Destiny 1 in that time on game website or twitch stream, to me Destiny is more like a multiplayer online hakoniwa shooting game, which means the game essence is shooting game and use game modes like choose between PVP or PVE contents or choose the which PVE stage you want to play before you really enter the content you want to play and have ability to play with other few people online.

    To answer your question do you consider that Diablo 2 or Diablo 3 and Lost Ark that they all are MMOs? I mean if I follow what you said to categorize those games will end up they are all MMOs and further I can say Elder Ring is a MMO or Monster Hunter is a MMO or Splatoon is a MMO or Valorant is a MMO or LOL is a MMO or even most mobile waifu gacha games are also MMOs, what you said about MMO you only focus on "multiplayer" plus "online" instead of the whole "massive multiplayer online" which means to meet your definition of MMO the game just need to be multiplayer online game that lots people play it instead of games have abilities to let massive numbers of players share exactly one same game world and playing together at the same time.

    I said Destiny 2, not 1. Stop living in the past and come to the present day. The Future is now. To infinity and beyond. Action combat is the way and any game where multiple people can play online together is an MMO. Is doesn't even have to be in a shared open world. Fortnite by definition is an MMO. Overwatch is an MMO. Do not take whatever warp view you have to change the basic definition of an MMO.
  • CROW3CROW3 Member
    LordBlank wrote: »
    I said Destiny 2, not 1. Stop living in the past and come to the present day. The Future is now. To infinity and beyond. Action combat is the way and any game where multiple people can play online together is an MMO. Is doesn't even have to be in a shared open world. Fortnite by definition is an MMO. Overwatch is an MMO. Do not take whatever warp view you have to change the basic definition of an MMO.

    These are cute semantic games. So I’ll make the phrasing short and specific for you:
    - Destiny 2, Overwatch, and Fortnite are not MMORPGs they are MMOFPS
    - Ashes is being designed as an MMORPG
    - Ashes is not an MMOFPS, and it is not going to become an MMOFPS

    If an MMOFPS is what you’re jonesing to play - there are plenty of options laid out above.

    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • DizzDizz Member
    LordBlank wrote: »
    Dizz wrote: »
    LordBlank wrote: »
    Dizz wrote: »
    LordBlank wrote: »
    Fantmx wrote: »
    The MMO market is nowhere near dying out and combat is not the next step. The next steps are:

    1) a living, breathing world that responds to player decisions in a way that doesn't take constant content creation by the developer and

    2) Smart AI

    MMO longevity has nothing to do with type of combat.

    MMO isn't dying out because MMO just means massive multiplayer online. That means games like destiny 2 and any online game by nature is an MMO. What will die out are MMORPGs. What's the average age of wow players?

    Ummm, online game or game need internet connection does not means it's a MMO, a MMO need to have the ability to allow massive multiplayer to play the exactly same content at the same time, destiny 2 don't have that, but GW2 and WOW and FF14 adn BDO etc have that kind of ability and contents, so yes MMO genre is dying.
    Dizz wrote: »
    LordBlank wrote: »
    Fantmx wrote: »
    The MMO market is nowhere near dying out and combat is not the next step. The next steps are:

    1) a living, breathing world that responds to player decisions in a way that doesn't take constant content creation by the developer and

    2) Smart AI

    MMO longevity has nothing to do with type of combat.

    MMO isn't dying out because MMO just means massive multiplayer online. That means games like destiny 2 and any online game by nature is an MMO. What will die out are MMORPGs. What's the average age of wow players?

    Ummm, online game or game need internet connection does not means it's a MMO, a MMO need to have the ability to allow massive multiplayer to play the exactly same content at the same time, destiny 2 don't have that, but GW2 and WOW and FF14 adn BDO etc have that kind of ability and contents, so yes MMO genre is dying.

    Hi Sherlock, what do you think MMO stands for? I'll give you a hint, the O means online. "In 1974, Mazewar introduced the first graphic virtual world, providing a first-person perspective view of a maze in which players roamed around shooting at each other. It was also the first networked game, in which players at different computers could visually interact in a virtual space. The initial implementation was over a serial cable; however, when one of the authors began attending MIT in 1974, the game was enhanced so that it could be played across the ARPAnet, forerunner of the modern Internet."

    I can't tell why you call a person Sherlock you don't really know, I just assume that is just part of communication.

    I don't really care about what game company or medias claim what the game type the game is, like lots of game use the term "open world" but what is that about and lots of the games advertised as "open world" but they just games don't always need switch to loading screen or scene transaction but while they start use the term "ope world" a lot mostly were trying to tell people "open world" game equal the game world feels free and alive like a real exist world, so to me the terms they used are mostly to advertising instead of try to tell people the essences of the game.

    I don't play and didn't follow Destiny 2, I only followed some information about Destiny 1 in that time on game website or twitch stream, to me Destiny is more like a multiplayer online hakoniwa shooting game, which means the game essence is shooting game and use game modes like choose between PVP or PVE contents or choose the which PVE stage you want to play before you really enter the content you want to play and have ability to play with other few people online.

    To answer your question do you consider that Diablo 2 or Diablo 3 and Lost Ark that they all are MMOs? I mean if I follow what you said to categorize those games will end up they are all MMOs and further I can say Elder Ring is a MMO or Monster Hunter is a MMO or Splatoon is a MMO or Valorant is a MMO or LOL is a MMO or even most mobile waifu gacha games are also MMOs, what you said about MMO you only focus on "multiplayer" plus "online" instead of the whole "massive multiplayer online" which means to meet your definition of MMO the game just need to be multiplayer online game that lots people play it instead of games have abilities to let massive numbers of players share exactly one same game world and playing together at the same time.

    I said Destiny 2, not 1. Stop living in the past and come to the present day. The Future is now. To infinity and beyond. Action combat is the way and any game where multiple people can play online together is an MMO. Is doesn't even have to be in a shared open world. Fortnite by definition is an MMO. Overwatch is an MMO. Do not take whatever warp view you have to change the basic definition of an MMO.

    I only manage to find out that Destiny 2 have game content for up to 6 players and up to 4 vs 4 PVP content, if there are more please inform me.

    Fortnite, Apex , PUBG or game like these I take few step back to say they are MMOs at least I can see over 40 players in one match/instance.

    I guess you know there is a game called WOW and during 2003~2006 we been through 40 players raids experience and massive event The Gates of Ahn'Qiraj a game content involve most players in one server, so we call games like WOW MMORPG, no matter what the base game type it is the first three letter is MMO if the game have contents and abilities to allow massive number of players play same content in the same time.

    About action combat and action elements you guys feel failed to see in ranged weapon update video, players can’t control their character like control their own body because we don’t have that technology to do that, you guys need to think again how much action element is good how much is not good.
    A casual follower from TW.

    ↓Good youtube channel to learn things about creating games.↓
    Masahiro Sakurai on Creating Games:
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCv1DvRY5PyHHt3KN9ghunuw
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited October 7
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Liniker wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »

    lol the ranger aiming at the ground with the reticle like 1 meter away from the enemy, and people losing their shit saying there is no "action" in Ashes because of the soft lock... I guess BDO is not an action game as well cuz their soft lock is a lot more "noob friendly" and "no skill" than Ashes soft lock

    Soft lock should be in mmorpgs and it is fine with it being "noob friendly" the point is to have that skill element of tracking and focus. It isn't meant to create expert shooters or FPS combat.

    It keeps the skill element higher and reduces ability to kite with easy mode and having tab target attack people off screen.

    A high skill ceiling isn't necessarily the best thing for a PvP game.

    For a PvP game to be it's best, you want ad many people as close to the same overall ability as each other as is possible. No one enjoys a PvP fight when it is overly one sided (well, those that do are not the type of players an MMO wants).

    I'm not saying I am asking for a low skill game or anything, but putting a hard cap on some aspects of player skill absolutely makes sense.
  • Noaani wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Liniker wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »

    lol the ranger aiming at the ground with the reticle like 1 meter away from the enemy, and people losing their shit saying there is no "action" in Ashes because of the soft lock... I guess BDO is not an action game as well cuz their soft lock is a lot more "noob friendly" and "no skill" than Ashes soft lock

    Soft lock should be in mmorpgs and it is fine with it being "noob friendly" the point is to have that skill element of tracking and focus. It isn't meant to create expert shooters or FPS combat.

    It keeps the skill element higher and reduces ability to kite with easy mode and having tab target attack people off screen.

    A high skill ceiling isn't necessarily the best thing for a PvP game.

    For a PvP game to be it's best, you want ad many people as close to the same overall ability as each other as is possible. No one enjoys a PvP fight when it is overly one sided (well, those that do are not the type of players an MMO wants).

    I'm not saying I am asking for a low skill game or anything, but putting a hard cap on some aspects of player skill absolutely makes sense.

    Unsure if you read my whole post you say some weird things here int he part you quoted....

    I'm not convinced you know what mmorpgs players want now a days, I feel you have a tight circle that thinks the same as you. If you talk to a lot of people they want skill to be involved their game and to matter. That doesn't mean a tiny curve as there is no perceptive if you don't have a higher element to it.

    That sounds like it isn't the type of mmo players you want, you are putting words in other peoples mouths there. So either you are saying tab target is easier to manage to keep skill levels down, or you ignore the fact about builds, rotations and such making fights completely one sided that by through player skill they can't improve mid match. As well as gear being more important than anything and creating one sided fights through tab target where they have 0 chance to win. Compared to allowing skill to move the bar on giving you a chance.

    ie Rift for example if you have decent gear you could run around 2-3 shotting people with fireballs in two seconds and it was easy. Player skill would ensure their skill would matter in landing attacks as well the other player in being able to dodge and there for giving a little more of a chance. Instead of 0% chance at all to win and you lose the fight easily with it being super one sided. This is with both people being max level and the gear meaning more than anything else

    Also this is a mmorpg I never said you are going to be able to block every single move on skill alone hence there will be a cap on what you can do.....Also if you read my post I talk about barrier to entry being reasonable as its not about the skill of aiming.

    End of the day you don't need to be the best player in a mmorpg nor will everyone be god tier skill wise...Just play, enjoy and have fun and fight the people you can handle and recruit players based on their skills and not simply tracker sheets ;o
  • CROW3CROW3 Member
    edited October 7
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    If you talk to a lot of people they want skill to be involved their game and to matter…

    If by ‘talk to a lot of people’ you mean, conduct a well crafted neutral survey that eliminates confirmation bias as much as possible, then you’d have some compelling evidence to speak on behalf of the surveyed players. But I don’t think that’s what you mean at all. So your loaded dice are just as problematic as anyone else’s.

    Totally fine for your opinion, but it’s your opinion.

    Closest thing I’ve seen to data around the whole ‘action’ v ‘tab’ issue for ashes was conducted by Jahlon, who runs PGN. Here are the results:

    5h5uotb2u1l1.jpeg

    This is what actual data looks like. Here’s a link to @Jahlon’s Ashes101 channel if you’re interested in his additional polls.

    https://youtube.com/c/ParadoxGamingNetwork


    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • maouwmaouw Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    CROW3 wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    If you talk to a lot of people they want skill to be involved their game and to matter…

    If by ‘talk to a lot of people’ you mean, conduct a well crafted neutral survey that eliminates confirmation bias as much as possible, then you’d have some compelling evidence to speak on behalf of the surveyed players. But I don’t think that’s what you mean at all. So your loaded dice are just as problematic as anyone else’s.

    Totally fine for your opinion, but it’s your opinion.

    Closest thing I’ve seen to data around the whole ‘action’ v ‘tab’ issue for ashes was conducted by Jahlon, who runs PGN. Here are the results:

    5h5uotb2u1l1.jpeg

    This is what actual data looks like. Here’s a link to @Jahlon’s Ashes101 channel if you’re interested in his additional polls.

    https://youtube.com/c/ParadoxGamingNetwork


    418 votes? That's a decent sample size!
    It's cool to see 95% of the population aren't purists
    I wish I were deep and tragic
  • CROW3CROW3 Member
    maouw wrote: »
    418 votes? That's a decent sample size!
    It's cool to see 95% of the population aren't purists

    Yeah, I thought it was encouraging as well. I’m really looking forward to A2 and what data that provides about … well, kinda everything; certainly about how successful the initial hybrid take is for Ashes.

    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • OkeydokeOkeydoke Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Noaani wrote: »
    A high skill ceiling isn't necessarily the best thing for a PvP game.

    For a PvP game to be it's best, you want ad many people as close to the same overall ability as each other as is possible. No one enjoys a PvP fight when it is overly one sided (well, those that do are not the type of players an MMO wants).

    I'm not saying I am asking for a low skill game or anything, but putting a hard cap on some aspects of player skill absolutely makes sense.

    I agree with this, conceptually. Not trying to wade into a Mag vs Noaani argument, fuck that lol, not picking sides. I haven't even read most of the previous posts in this thread. But I agree with Noaani's post here, conceptually at least.

    Where the disagreement might start is with the question of what is a high skill gap exactly and what is low? It's subjective. Everyone has a different definition.

    But in an open world pvp mmo like Ashes, you may not want a super high skill gap. The game doesn't end. There's no new lobby or match to go into in Ashes like there is when you get completely smoked by tryhards in an Apex Legends match. There's no skill based match making. Everyone inhabits the same world and has to compete against the same people over and over and over.

    I'd personally argue for a moderately high skill gap. Whatever the hell that means. I'd never call for a low skill gap. But there's definitely only so far Intrepid can go in creating a super high skill gap before it begins to become an actual detriment to the game.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited October 8
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    If you talk to a lot of people they want skill to be involved their game and to matter.
    I dont think you read my post very well.

    I didnt say what *I* want, I said what developers want.

    Players absolutely want a high skill ceiling. I want a high skill ceiling. I did specifically say in the post you quoted that I aren't asking for a low skill ceiling.

    Thing is, developers want players being as equal as possible. This isnt just a matter of skill,it is a matter of level progression, gear, everything.

    And even when players like you and I say we want a game with a high skill ceiling,we are still only saying that expecting the game to have many players around the same overall power level so that as many fights as possible are as fair as possible.

    Basically, while we both say we want a thing, that doesnt mean we want it in place of another thing, even if we dont realize it.
  • Noaani wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    If you talk to a lot of people they want skill to be involved their game and to matter.
    I dont think you read my post very well.

    I didnt say what *I* want, I said what developers want.

    Players absolutely want a high skill ceiling. I want a high skill ceiling. I did specifically say in the post you quoted that I aren't asking for a low skill ceiling.

    Thing is, developers want players being as equal as possible. This isnt just a matter of skill,it is a matter of level progression, gear, everything.

    And even when players like you and I say we want a game with a high skill ceiling,we are still only saying that expecting the game to have many players around the same overall power level so that as many fights as possible are as fair as possible.

    Basically, while we both say we want a thing, that doesnt mean we want it in place of another thing, even if we dont realize it.

    Read your post completely well, and you seem to be talking for developers which is extremely weird considering you are a player.

    And again I don't think you read my post I talk about different levels of skill and barrier to entry being easy...
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    edited October 8
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    If you talk to a lot of people they want skill to be involved their game and to matter.
    I dont think you read my post very well.

    I didnt say what *I* want, I said what developers want.

    Players absolutely want a high skill ceiling. I want a high skill ceiling. I did specifically say in the post you quoted that I aren't asking for a low skill ceiling.

    Thing is, developers want players being as equal as possible. This isnt just a matter of skill,it is a matter of level progression, gear, everything.

    And even when players like you and I say we want a game with a high skill ceiling,we are still only saying that expecting the game to have many players around the same overall power level so that as many fights as possible are as fair as possible.

    Basically, while we both say we want a thing, that doesnt mean we want it in place of another thing, even if we dont realize it.

    Read your post completely well, and you seem to be talking for developers which is extremely weird considering you are a player.

    And again I don't think you read my post I talk about different levels of skill and barrier to entry being easy...

    It isn't entry level I am talking about, it is the top level.

    As for me "talking for developers", think about it from their perspective for a second.

    Would you rather develop a game where most PvP fights are fairly well matched, or where most PvP fights are one sided blowouts?

    If the answer is the first (which it should be, you want to retain players), how would you achieve that in an open world setting where players can attack any player they wish?

    This problem is literally the reason developers introduced brackets and matchmaking in games where that is suitable. That isnt suitablenin an open world game, and so the only option left (that anyone has come up with, at least), is to try and keep players as close together in over all power as possible.

    This isnt just a skill ceiling thing either. It is also a gear issue. It is the reason games like Archeage keep introducing easier means for players to acquire a decent set of gear every 6 - 9 months. If that gear is the minimum players should be expected to have, then there aren't nearly as many stragglers in that specific regard.

    And again, this is not to say that there shouldnt be scope for a better player to be "more powerful". I doubt a developer could achieve that, even if they tried. It is a matter of scope as to how much more power that player/character has.

    I mean, perhaps you are after a game full of one sided fights, where some people never have a shot at winning in PvP for what ever reason. More power to you if that is what you want, but in an open world game, it isnt exactly going to lead to massive success.
  • LinikerLiniker Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    edited October 8
    @maouw @CROW3 I have another similar poll with data from a bigger audience, translation is a bit off since this was written in Portuguese, this is the data s2w0u79m9gjg.jpg

    oficial-baner2.png
    Recrutamento aberto - Nosso Site: Clique aqui
  • DizzDizz Member
    Noaani wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Mag7spy wrote: »
    If you talk to a lot of people they want skill to be involved their game and to matter.
    I dont think you read my post very well.

    I didnt say what *I* want, I said what developers want.

    Players absolutely want a high skill ceiling. I want a high skill ceiling. I did specifically say in the post you quoted that I aren't asking for a low skill ceiling.

    Thing is, developers want players being as equal as possible. This isnt just a matter of skill,it is a matter of level progression, gear, everything.

    And even when players like you and I say we want a game with a high skill ceiling,we are still only saying that expecting the game to have many players around the same overall power level so that as many fights as possible are as fair as possible.

    Basically, while we both say we want a thing, that doesnt mean we want it in place of another thing, even if we dont realize it.

    Read your post completely well, and you seem to be talking for developers which is extremely weird considering you are a player.

    And again I don't think you read my post I talk about different levels of skill and barrier to entry being easy...

    It isn't entry level I am talking about, it is the top level.

    As for me "talking for developers", think about it from their perspective for a second.

    Would you rather develop a game where most PvP fights are fairly well matched, or where most PvP fights are one sided blowouts?

    If the answer is the first (which it should be, you want to retain players), how would you achieve that in an open world setting where players can attack any player they wish?

    This problem is literally the reason developers introduced brackets and matchmaking in games where that is suitable. That isnt suitablenin an open world game, and so the only option left (that anyone has come up with, at least), is to try and keep players as close together in over all power as possible.

    This isnt just a skill ceiling thing either. It is also a gear issue. It is the reason games like Archeage keep introducing easier means for players to acquire a decent set of gear every 6 - 9 months. If that gear is the minimum players should be expected to have, then there aren't nearly as many stragglers in that specific regard.

    And again, this is not to say that there shouldnt be scope for a better player to be "more powerful". I doubt a developer could achieve that, even if they tried. It is a matter of scope as to how much more power that player/character has.

    I mean, perhaps you are after a game full of one sided fights, where some people never have a shot at winning in PvP for what ever reason. More power to you if that is what you want, but in an open world game, it isnt exactly going to lead to massive success.

    Agree, that's one of the reasons why I prefer lean to horizontal progression in end game loop it's more easy for players who don't have that much time to play the game and it's help them to feel less far from full geared players and also help they know why they lose the fight and to feel the distance is not far to a good player even it's a illusion to an average player, yeah still can have some vertical progression like +1~+9 weapon do more RNG damage enchantment things that make hardcore players have things to chase and simple bigger numbers in general help them feel they are rewarded through playing the game, so before A2 I feel the information in wiki is good to me about gear progression, but try not to do something like gears become garbage after expansion I feel it's a waste of ideas especially epic/legendary gears.
    A casual follower from TW.

    ↓Good youtube channel to learn things about creating games.↓
    Masahiro Sakurai on Creating Games:
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCv1DvRY5PyHHt3KN9ghunuw
  • CROW3CROW3 Member
    Thanks for sharing that poll, @Liniker.

    With the increased respondent pool, it seems clear there is still a super-majority of players (84%) that would play Ashes without having some ideological attachment to the formal category of combat.

    It’s a good thread to reference for the next round of ‘If Ashes isn’t action it will fail’ posts.
    AoC+Dwarf+750v3.png
  • Sample size is too small but it clearly shows what people want as I've said with action combat.
  • CypherCypher Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
    edited October 8
    As a deeply ANTI tab target player, but one who is reasonable, I will say the current system is optimal for Alpha. It needs a bit of refinement before launch of course. But the action-side of this hybrid system is a lot closer to what I wanted than I ever expected them to go. The projectiles are exactly that, projectiles, instead of hitscan. It means they can be actively dodged or blocked instead of the server *telling you* if you block or dodge it based on stats. You can freely shoot with no target, and if something walks into the shot you get a hit. You can move/jump while shooting. The only hybrid part of it is how you’re going to hit your target as long as your reticle is red (and if they don’t dodge it) and right now it seems it can be red even if you’re aiming slightly off to the side of the target which could/should be tightened up a little bit and then I think it would be perfect (for a hybridized system). I can see myself and my group (mostly action players) enjoying the gameplay and I don’t feel like the players who are going to use tab target will have an advantage with the current system, mostly for the projectile reasoning I started with.
  • AerlanaAerlana Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    edited October 8
    about skill cap (that can be already really high with tab, not same kind of skill required than for an action... but we don't try to define which kind of skill is better there...)

    imo, a good game, and a game that can gather lot of people have to be "easy to learn, hard to master" .
    So yes, it need to have a decently high skill cap. But get it as high as possible to summit ? not sure.

    In games like LoL, MMORPG arenas, and so much other small scale PvP games, there is a MMR, so, if you are a bad player you will fight with and against other bad players. if you are excellent, you will fight with and against other excellent, if you are "grand master" then you will fight people you then encounter on tournaments to get the big cash price.

    On a MMORPG open world, you won't have such system to try to get some "fair match" allowing to have fun... and improve step by step.
    Go on a new game, discover it, be amazed, and a player, that totally hard mastered the game comes, exterminate you with no hope to even understand what happened kill you... ok fine, resurect continue, it happens again. . . You could fast get bored, feeling the skill cap to reach to be able to just play the game is so high you will need hundreds hours of training... you leave the game.


    I think for MMORPG, it is needed to avoid to reach too high summit in skill player could deploy, else the open world will be nothing but noob friendly, MMORPGs needs to have fresh new players to come, enjoy, as casual or try to get hardcore, but both need to feel they can still get to their goal even with the 2years, 3 years, 10 years late to come on the game. If those 2, 3 or more years of gameplay experience makes the other players far too strong, most newbies will just drop for another good MMORPG where they don't get rekt every 15 minutes.



    Now for action/tab, i have feeling it is a fashion, as trying to get photorealism graphism that were, for many people, the prove of quality, while is now just a question of artistict design, choices and taste. The poll make me think i was true...
    First is 5% of people fanatic to one kind, second 17% (and feels that the people saying "tab is better" on first are half on tab half on hybrid on second so both feels like "don't care... i prefer one but i just want a good game" )

    There will always be people who are fanatic about topics for video games. and maybe even more true for the complexs MMORPG which have lot of different design choice to do. But for most, people will prefer one thing, and just play if the game is globally good even if there are choices they dislike.
    A same gamer can play civilization, doom and LoL at same time, 3 totally different gameplay, 3 totally different kind of skill, 3 totally different pace of gameplay, and enjoying all of them... So i think most video game enjoyers can totally adapt to many different gameplay and enjoy them

    As personnal example being for me a proof of what i say :
    i totally hate ani-cancel, and loved to play Aion and BnS which have both lot of it...
Sign In or Register to comment.