There are players than want to PvE to get gear so they can PvP. There are others that would rather PvP to get the gear to PvE.
There's more freedom for players to do what they enjoy when there are alternate forms of progression.
The issue I have with this is basically as Steven has stated.
Ashes as a game needs players out in the open world, competing for resources, fighting over caravans, generating conflict that leads to guild wars, node wars and sieges.
The game as a whole is basically nothing without these things happening.
Why then would Intrepid give players a reason to log in to the game and literally spend their time outside of all of the above in an arena system that forsnt require them to participate in all of the above?
It straight up isnt a fit for this game. It is diametrically opposed to what Ashes is.
I liked when @Azherae said "Fortunately Ashes will probably have quite a few people willing to pay their Mercenaries to literally PvP, and pay them in 'PvE gear' or enough coin to get it."
It sounds like a fun system if the economy can support this. I'm just worried that if a team of PvErs funneling their resources into PvPers is required to play at a competitive level, it's going to alienate the players that don't have access to that type of support.
Seeing as how arenas are instanced PvP scenarios that are confirmed to NOT be a part of open world PvP, then what would be the point of them if they required a ton of resources to get into and didn't reward anything worthwhile? The wiki says that arenas will reward gear enhancements at the end of 6 month seasons, achievement ranks, currency, and enhancement stones that grant PvP-focused benefits to gear. That sounds great but the question becomes what is the barrier to entry?
There are players than want to PvE to get gear so they can PvP. There are others that would rather PvP to get the gear to PvE.
There's more freedom for players to do what they enjoy when there are alternate forms of progression.
The issue I have with this is basically as Steven has stated.
Ashes as a game needs players out in the open world, competing for resources, fighting over caravans, generating conflict that leads to guild wars, node wars and sieges.
The game as a whole is basically nothing without these things happening.
Why then would Intrepid give players a reason to log in to the game and literally spend their time outside of all of the above in an arena system that forsnt require them to participate in all of the above?
It straight up isnt a fit for this game. It is diametrically opposed to what Ashes is.
I liked when @Azherae said "Fortunately Ashes will probably have quite a few people willing to pay their Mercenaries to literally PvP, and pay them in 'PvE gear' or enough coin to get it."
It sounds like a fun system if the economy can support this. I'm just worried that if a team of PvErs funneling their resources into PvPers is required to play at a competitive level, it's going to alienate the players that don't have access to that type of support.
Seeing as how arenas are instanced PvP scenarios that are confirmed to NOT be a part of open world PvP, then what would be the point of them if they required a ton of resources to get into and didn't reward anything worthwhile? The wiki says that arenas will reward gear enhancements at the end of 6 month seasons, achievement ranks, currency, and enhancement stones that grant PvP-focused benefits to gear. That sounds great but the question becomes what is the barrier to entry?
How many people do you actually think are going to have gear funneled to them exclusively so they can PvP and simultaneously have a high skill level at it? You do realize all of those PVEers are going to be needing that same gear to progress in PVE? The only scenario I see it happening in are mega guilds. And that would be like, a couple people getting geared, if not only the guild leader. And even then, you still have access to those same items, it'd just take more time for you to get them without assistance from a guild.
There are players than want to PvE to get gear so they can PvP. There are others that would rather PvP to get the gear to PvE.
There's more freedom for players to do what they enjoy when there are alternate forms of progression.
The issue I have with this is basically as Steven has stated.
Ashes as a game needs players out in the open world, competing for resources, fighting over caravans, generating conflict that leads to guild wars, node wars and sieges.
The game as a whole is basically nothing without these things happening.
Why then would Intrepid give players a reason to log in to the game and literally spend their time outside of all of the above in an arena system that forsnt require them to participate in all of the above?
It straight up isnt a fit for this game. It is diametrically opposed to what Ashes is.
I liked when @Azherae said "Fortunately Ashes will probably have quite a few people willing to pay their Mercenaries to literally PvP, and pay them in 'PvE gear' or enough coin to get it."
It sounds like a fun system if the economy can support this. I'm just worried that if a team of PvErs funneling their resources into PvPers is required to play at a competitive level, it's going to alienate the players that don't have access to that type of support.
Seeing as how arenas are instanced PvP scenarios that are confirmed to NOT be a part of open world PvP, then what would be the point of them if they required a ton of resources to get into and didn't reward anything worthwhile? The wiki says that arenas will reward gear enhancements at the end of 6 month seasons, achievement ranks, currency, and enhancement stones that grant PvP-focused benefits to gear. That sounds great but the question becomes what is the barrier to entry?
How many people do you actually think are going to have gear funneled to them exclusively so they can PvP and simultaneously have a high skill level at it? You do realize all of those PVEers are going to be needing that same gear to progress in PVE? The only scenario I see it happening in are mega guilds. And that would be like, a couple people getting geared, if not only the guild leader. And even then, you still have access to those same items, it'd just take more time for you to get them without assistance from a guild.
Did you read what I wrote? You just repeated the point I was making...
The amount of players that will be able to participate and benefit from a system like that is going to be extraordinarily low.
There are players than want to PvE to get gear so they can PvP. There are others that would rather PvP to get the gear to PvE.
There's more freedom for players to do what they enjoy when there are alternate forms of progression.
The issue I have with this is basically as Steven has stated.
Ashes as a game needs players out in the open world, competing for resources, fighting over caravans, generating conflict that leads to guild wars, node wars and sieges.
The game as a whole is basically nothing without these things happening.
Why then would Intrepid give players a reason to log in to the game and literally spend their time outside of all of the above in an arena system that forsnt require them to participate in all of the above?
It straight up isnt a fit for this game. It is diametrically opposed to what Ashes is.
I liked when @Azherae said "Fortunately Ashes will probably have quite a few people willing to pay their Mercenaries to literally PvP, and pay them in 'PvE gear' or enough coin to get it."
It sounds like a fun system if the economy can support this. I'm just worried that if a team of PvErs funneling their resources into PvPers is required to play at a competitive level, it's going to alienate the players that don't have access to that type of support.
Seeing as how arenas are instanced PvP scenarios that are confirmed to NOT be a part of open world PvP, then what would be the point of them if they required a ton of resources to get into and didn't reward anything worthwhile? The wiki says that arenas will reward gear enhancements at the end of 6 month seasons, achievement ranks, currency, and enhancement stones that grant PvP-focused benefits to gear. That sounds great but the question becomes what is the barrier to entry?
How many people do you actually think are going to have gear funneled to them exclusively so they can PvP and simultaneously have a high skill level at it? You do realize all of those PVEers are going to be needing that same gear to progress in PVE? The only scenario I see it happening in are mega guilds. And that would be like, a couple people getting geared, if not only the guild leader. And even then, you still have access to those same items, it'd just take more time for you to get them without assistance from a guild.
Did you read what I wrote? You just repeated the point I was making...
The amount of players that will be able to participate and benefit from a system like that is going to be extraordinarily low.
Which is as intended, as far as I understand it.
Steven's gaming history and what little of his philosophy I actually understand from checking into it, indicates that this is EXACTLY the desired outcome.
Strong single leaders that achieve it by coordination and domination over those who have less skill in that sphere. It's relatively antithetical to the design types required for eSports.
But I wasn't talking about 'top' gear. I'm just pointing out that this is very likely to be 'what Steven wants'. This is likely why the PvP Season rewards factor Caravans, Guild Wars, and the Arena rather than just the Arena.
I would, at this time, doubt that a 'mostly Arena' player would stand much chance of receiving rewards, based on this.
There are players than want to PvE to get gear so they can PvP. There are others that would rather PvP to get the gear to PvE.
There's more freedom for players to do what they enjoy when there are alternate forms of progression.
The issue I have with this is basically as Steven has stated.
Ashes as a game needs players out in the open world, competing for resources, fighting over caravans, generating conflict that leads to guild wars, node wars and sieges.
The game as a whole is basically nothing without these things happening.
Why then would Intrepid give players a reason to log in to the game and literally spend their time outside of all of the above in an arena system that forsnt require them to participate in all of the above?
It straight up isnt a fit for this game. It is diametrically opposed to what Ashes is.
I liked when @Azherae said "Fortunately Ashes will probably have quite a few people willing to pay their Mercenaries to literally PvP, and pay them in 'PvE gear' or enough coin to get it."
It sounds like a fun system if the economy can support this. I'm just worried that if a team of PvErs funneling their resources into PvPers is required to play at a competitive level, it's going to alienate the players that don't have access to that type of support.
Seeing as how arenas are instanced PvP scenarios that are confirmed to NOT be a part of open world PvP, then what would be the point of them if they required a ton of resources to get into and didn't reward anything worthwhile? The wiki says that arenas will reward gear enhancements at the end of 6 month seasons, achievement ranks, currency, and enhancement stones that grant PvP-focused benefits to gear. That sounds great but the question becomes what is the barrier to entry?
How many people do you actually think are going to have gear funneled to them exclusively so they can PvP and simultaneously have a high skill level at it? You do realize all of those PVEers are going to be needing that same gear to progress in PVE? The only scenario I see it happening in are mega guilds. And that would be like, a couple people getting geared, if not only the guild leader. And even then, you still have access to those same items, it'd just take more time for you to get them without assistance from a guild.
Did you read what I wrote? You just repeated the point I was making...
The amount of players that will be able to participate and benefit from a system like that is going to be extraordinarily low.
Which is as intended, as far as I understand it.
Steven's gaming history and what little of his philosophy I actually understand from checking into it, indicates that this is EXACTLY the desired outcome.
Strong single leaders that achieve it by coordination and domination over those who have less skill in that sphere. It's relatively antithetical to the design types required for eSports.
But I wasn't talking about 'top' gear. I'm just pointing out that this is very likely to be 'what Steven wants'. This is likely why the PvP Season rewards factor Caravans, Guild Wars, and the Arena rather than just the Arena.
I would, at this time, doubt that a 'mostly Arena' player would stand much chance of receiving rewards, based on this.
I agree that the design you are describing is antithetical to esports. So, if you're saying that's likely what Steven wants based off of his gaming history and philosophy, why would he say that the game will naturally move in the direction of esports if they make the gameplay compelling, competitive, and fun? Doesn't that seem very counterintuitive?
Personally, I would still spend 99.99% of my time in arenas even if they rewarded nothing. If PvE is required to play arenas, I will PvE just enough so that I can spend all of my time there anyways. Either way, I would end up in arenas unless the way it was structured forced me to play other gamemodes. Increasing the barrier to entry doesn't change the outcome, it just makes the process more tedious for all the players that want to focus on arena PvP.
I don't think anyone would have any issues if a player only wanted to PvE and do dungeons or raids, but there's motivation to force PvP-only players to PvE for some reason and I don't see either scenarios doing more good than harm.
There are players than want to PvE to get gear so they can PvP. There are others that would rather PvP to get the gear to PvE.
There's more freedom for players to do what they enjoy when there are alternate forms of progression.
The issue I have with this is basically as Steven has stated.
Ashes as a game needs players out in the open world, competing for resources, fighting over caravans, generating conflict that leads to guild wars, node wars and sieges.
The game as a whole is basically nothing without these things happening.
Why then would Intrepid give players a reason to log in to the game and literally spend their time outside of all of the above in an arena system that forsnt require them to participate in all of the above?
It straight up isnt a fit for this game. It is diametrically opposed to what Ashes is.
I liked when @Azherae said "Fortunately Ashes will probably have quite a few people willing to pay their Mercenaries to literally PvP, and pay them in 'PvE gear' or enough coin to get it."
It sounds like a fun system if the economy can support this. I'm just worried that if a team of PvErs funneling their resources into PvPers is required to play at a competitive level, it's going to alienate the players that don't have access to that type of support.
Seeing as how arenas are instanced PvP scenarios that are confirmed to NOT be a part of open world PvP, then what would be the point of them if they required a ton of resources to get into and didn't reward anything worthwhile? The wiki says that arenas will reward gear enhancements at the end of 6 month seasons, achievement ranks, currency, and enhancement stones that grant PvP-focused benefits to gear. That sounds great but the question becomes what is the barrier to entry?
How many people do you actually think are going to have gear funneled to them exclusively so they can PvP and simultaneously have a high skill level at it? You do realize all of those PVEers are going to be needing that same gear to progress in PVE? The only scenario I see it happening in are mega guilds. And that would be like, a couple people getting geared, if not only the guild leader. And even then, you still have access to those same items, it'd just take more time for you to get them without assistance from a guild.
Did you read what I wrote? You just repeated the point I was making...
The amount of players that will be able to participate and benefit from a system like that is going to be extraordinarily low.
Which is as intended, as far as I understand it.
Steven's gaming history and what little of his philosophy I actually understand from checking into it, indicates that this is EXACTLY the desired outcome.
Strong single leaders that achieve it by coordination and domination over those who have less skill in that sphere. It's relatively antithetical to the design types required for eSports.
But I wasn't talking about 'top' gear. I'm just pointing out that this is very likely to be 'what Steven wants'. This is likely why the PvP Season rewards factor Caravans, Guild Wars, and the Arena rather than just the Arena.
I would, at this time, doubt that a 'mostly Arena' player would stand much chance of receiving rewards, based on this.
I agree that the design you are describing is antithetical to esports. So, if you're saying that's likely what Steven wants based off of his gaming history and philosophy, why would he say that the game will naturally move in that direction if they make the gameplay compelling, competitive, and fun? Doesn't that seem very counterintuitive?
Personally, I would still spend 99.99% of my time in arenas even if they rewarded nothing. If PvE is required to play arenas, I will PvE just enough so that I can spend all of my time there anyways. Either way, I would end up in arenas unless the way it was structured forced me to play other gamemodes. Increasing the barrier to entry doesn't change the outcome, it just makes the process more tedious.
Basically?
Steven says a lot of things.
Particularly back when that was said.
You are an eSports style competitive player so your preference and outcome is not surprising. I'm not saying that Steven 'didn't know how eSports worked' when he said that, I'm moreso saying that the original concepts of the game were MUCH more 'flexible', let's say.
Or maybe not. Since they're still not particularly 'inflexible'. They could maybe have made an 'eSport' out of Ashes of Creation Apocalypse, for example.
I personally don't hold Intrepid to the wording of things they said before Alpha-1, but I'm not necessarily suggesting that you don't. The easiest thing to do would be to ask on next month's Q&A and see if they're at the point where they can give a clear answer.
I don't think anyone would have any issues if a player only wanted to PvE and do dungeons or raids, but there's motivation to force PvP-only players to PvE for some reason and I don't see either scenarios doing more good than harm.
I am opposed to pve-onlies only doing pve. The whole point of AoC taking design inspiration from AA and L2 is to prevent that. PvE will require people to PvP and all PvP, therefore, should require people to PvE. That's the PvX balance of the entire system.
The only acceptable exception to that, to me, would be the military mayor selection, but even there we have no real idea how the champion system will be set up. And from previous statements it seems like you'd have to PvE as much as you could in order to make the best champion, so even there the PvX balance is upheld.
[why would he say that the game will naturally move in the direction of esports if they make the gameplay compelling, competitive, and fun? Doesn't that seem very counterintuitive?
That's simple - he didnt say that.
If you understand Steven, what he said in that quote is that Intrepid plan to make Ashes gameplay compelling, competitive and fun, and if players build an esport out of that, Intrepid may then support it.
Basically, what he was saying is that Intrepid do not intend to make Ashes an esport - they plan to make it the best MMO they are able to make it. On the other hand, if the esport community find a way to get an esport out of it, if Intrepid can support it without degrading the game, they will.
if only 1% of players get the top gear cuz they are in the top guilds, that means 99% of the players will have gear that isn't the top gear. you can still compete fairly vs them without having to worry about any gear advantage. I mean, the top is just for the top, not for everybody. you can still get to the top 1.01%
also, eq arenas still give a stat advantage. it's just obscured T_T ill elaborate more (again) later.
also, just cuz something is an esport, doesn't mean its that great.
i mean this guy in my country won a big SF tourney in USA and he got 10k-15k. nice but imagine how many hours he spent to be able to be that good, and how many years, and everybody else who spent a similar amount of time lost. probs a Mcdonalds job would make u more money in that much time or even less. slapping the word e-sport onto something doesn't make it automatically good
[why would he say that the game will naturally move in the direction of esports if they make the gameplay compelling, competitive, and fun? Doesn't that seem very counterintuitive?
That's simple - he didnt say that.
If you understand Steven, what he said in that quote is that Intrepid plan to make Ashes gameplay compelling, competitive and fun, and if players build an esport out of that, Intrepid may then support it.
Basically, what he was saying is that Intrepid do not intend to make Ashes an esport - they plan to make it the best MMO they are able to make it. On the other hand, if the esport community find a way to get an esport out of it, if Intrepid can support it without degrading the game, they will.
You're arguing semantics. And, he actually did say that.
The quote is, "If we make the gameplay compelling, competitive and fun, that naturally it will move in that direction." Was that hard to understand because I moved the end of the quote to the front? It doesn't change the meaning.
if only 1% of players get the top gear cuz they are in the top guilds, that means 99% of the players will have gear that isn't the top gear. you can still compete fairly vs them without having to worry about any gear advantage. I mean, the top is just for the top, not for everybody. you can still get to the top 1.01%
also, eq arenas still give a stat advantage. it's just obscured T_T ill elaborate more (again) later.
also, just cuz something is an esport, doesn't mean its that great.
i mean this guy in my country won a big SF tourney in USA and he got 10k-15k. nice but imagine how many hours he spent to be able to be that good, and how many years, and everybody else who spent a similar amount of time lost. probs a Mcdonalds job would make u more money in that much time or even less. slapping the word e-sport onto something doesn't make it automatically good
Stat differences due to each individual archetype having access to unique stat bonuses or modifiers within their builds is entirely different than stat advantages afforded by gear. The first is a given and a non-issue, but this thread is talking about the second. Are you capable of recognizing the distinction?
The example you provided is irrelevant. I have a friend who played a game for less than 4 months and won 70k USD for 15th place in a tournament. Neither anecdote is relevant. Time spent does not directly correlate to how good someone is at something. How good at someone is at something relative to time spent and the efficacy of the time spent varies drastically from person to person.
This is the reason why people at the top of their craft tend to stray away from charging by the hour for their services. They're punished for their efficiency. Most people are paid by the hour because their time is the most valuable thing they can trade, whereas an expert will be paid in accordance to the value they provide.
You want to know why the guy in your country only won 10-15k in a SF tournament? The amount of people playing, and the amount of eyes watching the game are significantly less than other games like Fortnite. Fortnite has a lower barrier to entry, SF has a higher barrier to entry as you admitted by the fact that he needed years to get to that level. Which is exactly what I said by esports need a high population of competitors and viewers to be successful. Where do you think the majority of the money comes from? SPONSORS AND ADVERTISEMENTS. A company isn't going to pay money to advertise in a game with no one watching or playing it. And the players that have the potential to play at the highest levels in games aren't going to waste their time playing a game they aren't going to get paid in. Thank you for proving my point though.
that was my point. slapping e sports onto something doesn't make it automatically great. it could be good, or it could be crap T_T
my point about the stats in eq arenas is that some classes will never reach a needed stat to be able to perform well, and they can only do so in the regular game modes, therefore giving everybody else a stat advantage (which is one of the arguments for eq arenas) while giving other classes a major boost. it doesn't work well in a holy trinity, unless you are ok with that choice. it also allows for easier fotm abusing (which is a stat advantage, and contradicts the main argument) plus q manipulation.
unless the normal game mode is a p2w game (which ashes isn't) eq arenas aren't always more fair.
my point about the stats in eq arenas is that some classes will never reach a needed stat to be able to perform well, and they can only do so in the regular game modes, therefore giving everybody else a stat advantage (which is one of the arguments for eq arenas) while giving other classes a major boost. it doesn't work well in a holy trinity, unless you are ok with that choice. it also allows for easier fotm abusing (which is a stat advantage, and contradicts the main argument) plus q manipulation.
unless the normal game mode is a p2w game (which ashes isn't) eq arenas aren't always more fair.
From my experience, these stat 'break-points' are generally found in MMOs with vertical progression and P2W elements. Take BDO for example. In the equalized arenas, certain classes are significantly stronger when have max gear, but they fall off hard when they don't. I would think a similar issue in Ashes would be unlikely with the shift to horizontal progression upon reaching max level. Equalized arenas tend to be fair as long as the game is designed for the arenas to be representative of the PvP at the highest end-game as the same balancing principles can be applied to both gamemodes. If not, with no split balancing, I've noticed they tend to be unbalanced where certain classes reign supreme (or the other way around where arenas feel balanced but the highest end-game PvP does not).
There are players than want to PvE to get gear so they can PvP. There are others that would rather PvP to get the gear to PvE.
There's more freedom for players to do what they enjoy when there are alternate forms of progression.
The issue I have with this is basically as Steven has stated.
Ashes as a game needs players out in the open world, competing for resources, fighting over caravans, generating conflict that leads to guild wars, node wars and sieges.
The game as a whole is basically nothing without these things happening.
Why then would Intrepid give players a reason to log in to the game and literally spend their time outside of all of the above in an arena system that forsnt require them to participate in all of the above?
It straight up isnt a fit for this game. It is diametrically opposed to what Ashes is.
I liked when @Azherae said "Fortunately Ashes will probably have quite a few people willing to pay their Mercenaries to literally PvP, and pay them in 'PvE gear' or enough coin to get it."
It sounds like a fun system if the economy can support this. I'm just worried that if a team of PvErs funneling their resources into PvPers is required to play at a competitive level, it's going to alienate the players that don't have access to that type of support.
Seeing as how arenas are instanced PvP scenarios that are confirmed to NOT be a part of open world PvP, then what would be the point of them if they required a ton of resources to get into and didn't reward anything worthwhile? The wiki says that arenas will reward gear enhancements at the end of 6 month seasons, achievement ranks, currency, and enhancement stones that grant PvP-focused benefits to gear. That sounds great but the question becomes what is the barrier to entry?
How many people do you actually think are going to have gear funneled to them exclusively so they can PvP and simultaneously have a high skill level at it? You do realize all of those PVEers are going to be needing that same gear to progress in PVE? The only scenario I see it happening in are mega guilds. And that would be like, a couple people getting geared, if not only the guild leader. And even then, you still have access to those same items, it'd just take more time for you to get them without assistance from a guild.
Did you read what I wrote? You just repeated the point I was making...
The amount of players that will be able to participate and benefit from a system like that is going to be extraordinarily low.
I did. Not once in what I quoted you did you mention the amount of players benefiting from that system being extremely low. But I'll take that as your answer.
I agree that the design you are describing is antithetical to esports. So, if you're saying that's likely what Steven wants based off of his gaming history and philosophy, why would he say that the game will naturally move in the direction of esports if they make the gameplay compelling, competitive, and fun? Doesn't that seem very counterintuitive?
harm.
Other than mentioning one time in a quote more or less saying that if it works out Intrepid will consider it, when has the development of Ashes attempted to push Esports? It's not the priority of development, it's just something Intrepid will endorse if it ends up working out with what gets released.
Personally, I would still spend 99.99% of my time in arenas even if they rewarded nothing. If PvE is required to play arenas, I will PvE just enough so that I can spend all of my time there anyways. Either way, I would end up in arenas unless the way it was structured forced me to play other gamemodes. Increasing the barrier to entry doesn't change the outcome, it just makes the process more tedious for all the players that want to focus on arena PvP.
harm.
You and all like minded players are welcome to do this. You'll be playing the game as it is intended, even if you are doing the minimal amount needed to compete. And instead of seeing it as a barrier to entry, accept that the game is designed to be played as a whole, not as a game to only experience pieces of. Otherwise the games concept of a dynamic world is broken due to an entire corner of players ignore the world for instanced gameplay instead. If you don't wish to participate in the game as it is designed, then find a game that better suits your needs. No need to change a game with an established design philosophy for the sake of your playstyle preference.
I don't think anyone would have any issues if a player only wanted to PvE and do dungeons or raids, but there's motivation to force PvP-only players to PvE for some reason and I don't see either scenarios doing more good than harm.
Right here. With the games current design of PvX, all players must progress through both PVE and PVP, not one or the other separately. I am against either PVEers or PVPers being able to segregate themselves from the other.
[why would he say that the game will naturally move in the direction of esports if they make the gameplay compelling, competitive, and fun? Doesn't that seem very counterintuitive?
That's simple - he didnt say that.
If you understand Steven, what he said in that quote is that Intrepid plan to make Ashes gameplay compelling, competitive and fun, and if players build an esport out of that, Intrepid may then support it.
Basically, what he was saying is that Intrepid do not intend to make Ashes an esport - they plan to make it the best MMO they are able to make it. On the other hand, if the esport community find a way to get an esport out of it, if Intrepid can support it without degrading the game, they will.
You're arguing semantics. And, he actually did say that.
The quote is, "If we make the gameplay compelling, competitive and fun, that naturally it will move in that direction." Was that hard to understand because I moved the end of the quote to the front? It doesn't change the meaning.
Ok, let's assume the quote is literally only what you have written above, as opposed to what it actually is in context.
If Intrepid make the game compelling, it will naturally move towards esports.
What this means is that they are not going to make the game specifically to fit being an esport, they are going to make the game compelling.
Your suggestion literally makes the game less compelling. It literally removes the factor that compels many players to play the open world aspect of the game.
Thus, even if we take your out of context quote that you clearly just got off the wiki rather than listening to the comment, even then, it doesnt support making changes for esport.
What Steven was actually saying, if you pull all context back in to place, is that Intrepid are making an MMO, and want to make it as compelling as they can. If the community manages to pull an esport out of that, cool. However, the goal is to make the game as compelling an MMO as possible.
How you can read anything else in to either the actual full in context quote or your out of context quote above is beyond me. They are literally saying they dont plan on altering the game for esport, and you are reading it as they want to alter the game for esport.
You've still not answered the question as to why Intrepid would want to use esport to promote a portion of the game they dont want players using too much, either. I mean, the point of a game supporting esport is to bring more players in to the game. If Ashes has an arena based esport, that would see people wanting to sign up to the game to just play in that arena. That isnt what Ashes is.
If Intrepid want an arena esport, they would make a stand alone game for it post launch. The MMO is just not suitable for it.
It's pretty funny watching you explain all of that again when all I did was link the quote you said he didn't say. I understand that Intrepid wants to make Ashes compelling. It's difficult to interpret that quote differently. But, you can go and explain it a third time if you wish.
And, whether or not the game would become more or less compelling is subjective, because I would find the game more compelling if it had esports and equalized arenas, and it sounds like you would find it less. The difference is, I don't feel as if my experience is lessened because someone else's experience improves. People have different preferences, giving people the freedom to play how they want instead of railroading them into playing 'all content' for the sake of it is limiting. Intrepid can do what they want with Ashes, it's their game. I'm looking forward to it regardless of what direction they take. However, a successful esports scene is excellent for marketing and whether or not the players interested in arenas, only play arenas, matters naught. Either way, more players means more money whether they're PvEing, PvPing (both open world and/or arenas), or any combination of the three.
I don't think anyone would have any issues if a player only wanted to PvE and do dungeons or raids, but there's motivation to force PvP-only players to PvE for some reason and I don't see either scenarios doing more good than harm.
Right here. With the games current design of PvX, all players must progress through both PVE and PVP, not one or the other separately. I am against either PVEers or PVPers being able to segregate themselves from the other.
How do we progress through PvP as a new character?
The open world could be our PvX "arena" but is not while we level up.
It even discourage PvP.
The corruption is amplified if a lvl 50 kills a lvl 10 but only if the low level is non combatant.
If two lvl 10 players want to spontaneously fight eachother, a lvl 50 can anytime kill both without any penalty.
So those smaller levels should go and fight NPCs only and collect berries until they level up.
I don't see the arena as a solution because it takes players out from the open world. I'd rather want the open word change a little.
September 12. 2022: Being naked can also be used to bring a skilled artisan to different freeholds... Don't summon family!
I don't think anyone would have any issues if a player only wanted to PvE and do dungeons or raids, but there's motivation to force PvP-only players to PvE for some reason and I don't see either scenarios doing more good than harm.
Right here. With the games current design of PvX, all players must progress through both PVE and PVP, not one or the other separately. I am against either PVEers or PVPers being able to segregate themselves from the other.
How do we progress through PvP as a new character?
The open world could be our PvX "arena" but is not while we level up.
It even discourage PvP.
The corruption is amplified if a lvl 50 kills a lvl 10 but only if the low level is non combatant.
If two lvl 10 players want to spontaneously fight eachother, a lvl 50 can anytime kill both without any penalty.
So those smaller levels should go and fight NPCs only and collect berries until they level up.
I don't see the arena as a solution because it takes players out from the open world. I'd rather want the open word change a little.
It has to do with progression. Obviously as someone starting off your priority is to become stronger. In the beginning there isn't excessive competition due to common resources being enough. Id say the beginning of almost every MMORPG i have played focuses on learning the basics for the first 5-10 levels, teaching the player the games systems, and even how their selected class works at its core. But as those lower level players progress in the world, the resources they need to progress further increase in value, and as a result become contested by other players due to scarcity. And risking fighting at low level is a risk those players will need to weigh due to the reality of others possibly intervening. It will also be tested extensivley in alpha 2. The game itself isn't going to be PVE and PVP simultaneously 100% of the time. But the games intended design requires both to progress your character in either aspect. You will need to PVE to become capable through gaining gear, and you will have to directly compete with others to acquire those items.
How do we progress through PvP as a new character?
The open world could be our PvX "arena" but is not while we level up.
It even discourage PvP.
The corruption is amplified if a lvl 50 kills a lvl 10 but only if the low level is non combatant.
If two lvl 10 players want to spontaneously fight eachother, a lvl 50 can anytime kill both without any penalty.
So those smaller levels should go and fight NPCs only and collect berries until they level up.
I don't see the arena as a solution because it takes players out from the open world. I'd rather want the open word change a little.
It will be on Intrepid to design their farming locations in such a way that lvl10s don't pvp around lvl50s. Yes, people will see each other here and there regardless of their levels, but if a lvl50 has nothing better to do than going around looking for flagged lowbies - there's something wrong with the game's design.
The only time highbies in L2 came to lowbie locations to kill someone was when two warring guilds had their lowbies interacting and it snowballed into a huge fight through the classic "ey, I've got high lvl friends! don't touch me!" argument.
It's pretty funny watching you explain all of that again when all I did was link the quote you said he didn't say. I understand that Intrepid wants to make Ashes compelling. It's difficult to interpret that quote differently. But, you can go and explain it a third time if you wish.
And, whether or not the game would become more or less compelling is subjective, because I would find the game more compelling if it had esports and equalized arenas, and it sounds like you would find it less. The difference is, I don't feel as if my experience is lessened because someone else's experience improves. People have different preferences, giving people the freedom to play how they want instead of railroading them into playing 'all content' for the sake of it is limiting. Intrepid can do what they want with Ashes, it's their game. I'm looking forward to it regardless of what direction they take. However, a successful esports scene is excellent for marketing and whether or not the players interested in arenas, only play arenas, matters naught. Either way, more players means more money whether they're PvEing, PvPing (both open world and/or arenas), or any combination of the three.
You are literally not getting it. You clearly understand nothing at all about this game as it stands right now.
Your suggestion would see people logged in to the game, on servers, taking up server resources. These servers have player caps.
If 1k people are on my server in the arena, then that is literally 1k less people that are able to be on my server out in the open world.
That has a direct, measurable impact on the gameplay of everyone else on the server. It isnt a case of my experience being lessened because yours is improved, it is a case you your suggestion literally taking players away from the open world.
Even if it brings players to the game, the way the arena is those players will still have to log on to game servers and will thus still take up a spot in the server population cap.
There is no viable way around this.
As to a successful esport scene being great for marketing, not really. It's great for marketing games that are based around matches (RTS, FPS etc), it is not great for games with persistent world and persistent characters.
It has never been successful as a marketing tool in such games.
Just host your own tournaments with people needing to use equal gear whatever that maybe.
If it is only horizontal progression when you reach max level that would not feel good. Games that are like that feel pretty meh, no point doing raids or anything without more vertical gain.
These points sound like someone that more so doesn't want there to be gear so he can log on casually and play end game without worrying about gear chase. My 2 cents.
It's pretty funny watching you explain all of that again when all I did was link the quote you said he didn't say. I understand that Intrepid wants to make Ashes compelling. It's difficult to interpret that quote differently. But, you can go and explain it a third time if you wish.
And, whether or not the game would become more or less compelling is subjective, because I would find the game more compelling if it had esports and equalized arenas, and it sounds like you would find it less. The difference is, I don't feel as if my experience is lessened because someone else's experience improves. People have different preferences, giving people the freedom to play how they want instead of railroading them into playing 'all content' for the sake of it is limiting. Intrepid can do what they want with Ashes, it's their game. I'm looking forward to it regardless of what direction they take. However, a successful esports scene is excellent for marketing and whether or not the players interested in arenas, only play arenas, matters naught. Either way, more players means more money whether they're PvEing, PvPing (both open world and/or arenas), or any combination of the three.
You are literally not getting it. You clearly understand nothing at all about this game as it stands right now.
Your suggestion would see people logged in to the game, on servers, taking up server resources. These servers have player caps.
If 1k people are on my server in the arena, then that is literally 1k less people that are able to be on my server out in the open world.
That has a direct, measurable impact on the gameplay of everyone else on the server. It isnt a case of my experience being lessened because yours is improved, it is a case you your suggestion literally taking players away from the open world.
Even if it brings players to the game, the way the arena is those players will still have to log on to game servers and will thus still take up a spot in the server population cap.
There is no viable way around this.
As to a successful esport scene being great for marketing, not really. It's great for marketing games that are based around matches (RTS, FPS etc), it is not great for games with persistent world and persistent characters.
It has never been successful as a marketing tool in such games.
No, you are not getting it.
It's better that those 1,000 people play Ashes arenas then not play the game at all. Either way they won't be in the open world, but at least one of those still benefits the game as a whole. You're so focused on the open world aspect and your own personal enjoyment of it that you are incapable of thinking about what others may want.
You also have a terrible mindset. "No viable way around this" "Never been successful (before)" There is always a way to do things better. But you choose to look at what isn't possible instead of what is, you're just going to limit the potential of yourself and those around you in the long run. More power to you though if that's how you want to conduct yourself when presented with a problem to solve. Situations are rarely so cut and dry that one way is the only way forward. Solutions can be found that benefit multiple perspectives, and you're too shortsighted to be open to them in the first place.
Oh
I didn't take it that way
I pictured it being exactly like GW2
In this instance you get gear that only works in this instance.
That's my point though. People that only care about arena pvp wouldn't have to play the game at all, because they'd be given the gear to participate in the arena pvp. To me that's bullshit. Obviously GW has a different design, but that whole game's design is different from what Ashes is trying to do, which is why I don't think that this kind of arena mechanic would work (or even should work).
I get your point.
But why is it bullshit in one direction but not the other? I have no interest in arenas, and I can completely ignore the whole system. I don't really miss out on anything.
People in general will just gravitate to the part of the game they enjoy the most, and dislike being forced to do other activities they find less interesting.
Imagine grinding and getting materials to craft something but then there being a requirement that I have to play 50 arena matches before I can craft it so I equally pvp and PvE... That just sounds horrible.
It's pretty funny watching you explain all of that again when all I did was link the quote you said he didn't say. I understand that Intrepid wants to make Ashes compelling. It's difficult to interpret that quote differently. But, you can go and explain it a third time if you wish.
And, whether or not the game would become more or less compelling is subjective, because I would find the game more compelling if it had esports and equalized arenas, and it sounds like you would find it less. The difference is, I don't feel as if my experience is lessened because someone else's experience improves. People have different preferences, giving people the freedom to play how they want instead of railroading them into playing 'all content' for the sake of it is limiting. Intrepid can do what they want with Ashes, it's their game. I'm looking forward to it regardless of what direction they take. However, a successful esports scene is excellent for marketing and whether or not the players interested in arenas, only play arenas, matters naught. Either way, more players means more money whether they're PvEing, PvPing (both open world and/or arenas), or any combination of the three.
You are literally not getting it. You clearly understand nothing at all about this game as it stands right now.
Your suggestion would see people logged in to the game, on servers, taking up server resources. These servers have player caps.
If 1k people are on my server in the arena, then that is literally 1k less people that are able to be on my server out in the open world.
That has a direct, measurable impact on the gameplay of everyone else on the server. It isnt a case of my experience being lessened because yours is improved, it is a case you your suggestion literally taking players away from the open world.
Even if it brings players to the game, the way the arena is those players will still have to log on to game servers and will thus still take up a spot in the server population cap.
There is no viable way around this.
As to a successful esport scene being great for marketing, not really. It's great for marketing games that are based around matches (RTS, FPS etc), it is not great for games with persistent world and persistent characters.
It has never been successful as a marketing tool in such games.
No, you are not getting it.
It's better that those 1,000 people play Ashes arenas then not play the game at all. Either way they won't be in the open world, but at least one of those still benefits the game as a whole. You're so focused on the open world aspect and your own personal enjoyment of it that you are incapable of thinking about what others may want.
You also have a terrible mindset. "No viable way around this" "Never been successful (before)" There is always a way to do things better. But you choose to look at what isn't possible instead of what is, you're just going to limit the potential of yourself and those around you in the long run. More power to you though if that's how you want to conduct yourself when presented with a problem to solve. Situations are rarely so cut and dry that one way is the only way forward. Solutions can be found that benefit multiple perspectives, and you're too shortsighted to be open to them in the first place.
How does it actually benefit the game when the games goal isn't to make money, but to be an amazing MMORPG? Making the game less of a dynamic world to suit other playstyles isn't in line with this goal, and Steven has even said that the game won't be for everyone, due to the fact that it's designs wont be what others want.
And before you go on about money always being a goal, yes they want it to succeed and be profitable, but the main goal is to make Steven's dream MMORPG come true, and he even said he would see it completed using his own income if there wasnt enough funding. Money isn't the main goal here.
Oh
I didn't take it that way
I pictured it being exactly like GW2
In this instance you get gear that only works in this instance.
That's my point though. People that only care about arena pvp wouldn't have to play the game at all, because they'd be given the gear to participate in the arena pvp. To me that's bullshit. Obviously GW has a different design, but that whole game's design is different from what Ashes is trying to do, which is why I don't think that this kind of arena mechanic would work (or even should work).
I get your point.
But why is it bullshit in one direction but not the other? I have no interest in arenas, and I can completely ignore the whole system. I don't really miss out on anything.
People in general will just gravitate to the part of the game they enjoy the most, and dislike being forced to do other activities they find less interesting.
Imagine grinding and getting materials to craft something but then there being a requirement that I have to play 50 arena matches before I can craft it so I equally pvp and PvE... That just sounds horrible.
Mostly it's because Ashes doesn't require Arenas at all.
This is a level of design semantics that I personally feel can't possibly end in anything good unless people make a serious effort to come to the same understanding of what the game is 'for' without their own preferences (not even biases) involved.
Ashes is a persistent open world MMORPG that does not need an Arena to even function.
It does, however, need owPvP to function (as described). To the point where we tell people consistently 'no, you can't take it out'.
Oh
I didn't take it that way
I pictured it being exactly like GW2
In this instance you get gear that only works in this instance.
That's my point though. People that only care about arena pvp wouldn't have to play the game at all, because they'd be given the gear to participate in the arena pvp. To me that's bullshit. Obviously GW has a different design, but that whole game's design is different from what Ashes is trying to do, which is why I don't think that this kind of arena mechanic would work (or even should work).
I get your point.
But why is it bullshit in one direction but not the other? I have no interest in arenas, and I can completely ignore the whole system. I don't really miss out on anything.
People in general will just gravitate to the part of the game they enjoy the most, and dislike being forced to do other activities they find less interesting.
Imagine grinding and getting materials to craft something but then there being a requirement that I have to play 50 arena matches before I can craft it so I equally pvp and PvE... That just sounds horrible.
How about... ask Intrepid for a completely separate game completely focused on arenas with MMORPG style classes when they have time after Ashes is completed and released? Instead of putting a game inside of another game that goes against its dynamic world design and PVX goal?
It's pretty funny watching you explain all of that again when all I did was link the quote you said he didn't say. I understand that Intrepid wants to make Ashes compelling. It's difficult to interpret that quote differently. But, you can go and explain it a third time if you wish.
And, whether or not the game would become more or less compelling is subjective, because I would find the game more compelling if it had esports and equalized arenas, and it sounds like you would find it less. The difference is, I don't feel as if my experience is lessened because someone else's experience improves. People have different preferences, giving people the freedom to play how they want instead of railroading them into playing 'all content' for the sake of it is limiting. Intrepid can do what they want with Ashes, it's their game. I'm looking forward to it regardless of what direction they take. However, a successful esports scene is excellent for marketing and whether or not the players interested in arenas, only play arenas, matters naught. Either way, more players means more money whether they're PvEing, PvPing (both open world and/or arenas), or any combination of the three.
You are literally not getting it. You clearly understand nothing at all about this game as it stands right now.
Your suggestion would see people logged in to the game, on servers, taking up server resources. These servers have player caps.
If 1k people are on my server in the arena, then that is literally 1k less people that are able to be on my server out in the open world.
That has a direct, measurable impact on the gameplay of everyone else on the server. It isnt a case of my experience being lessened because yours is improved, it is a case you your suggestion literally taking players away from the open world.
Even if it brings players to the game, the way the arena is those players will still have to log on to game servers and will thus still take up a spot in the server population cap.
There is no viable way around this.
As to a successful esport scene being great for marketing, not really. It's great for marketing games that are based around matches (RTS, FPS etc), it is not great for games with persistent world and persistent characters.
It has never been successful as a marketing tool in such games.
No, you are not getting it.
It's better that those 1,000 people play Ashes arenas then not play the game at all. Either way they won't be in the open world, but at least one of those still benefits the game as a whole. You're so focused on the open world aspect and your own personal enjoyment of it that you are incapable of thinking about what others may want.
You also have a terrible mindset. "No viable way around this" "Never been successful (before)" There is always a way to do things better. But you choose to look at what isn't possible instead of what is, you're just going to limit the potential of yourself and those around you in the long run. More power to you though if that's how you want to conduct yourself when presented with a problem to solve. Situations are rarely so cut and dry that one way is the only way forward. Solutions can be found that benefit multiple perspectives, and you're too shortsighted to be open to them in the first place.
How does it actually benefit the game when the games goal isn't to make money, but to be an amazing MMORPG? Making the game less of a dynamic world to suit other playstyles isn't in line with this goal, and Steven has even said that the game won't be for everyone, due to the fact that it's designs wont be what others want.
And before you go on about money always being a goal, yes they want it to succeed and be profitable, but the main goal is to make Steven's dream MMORPG come true, and he even said he would see it completed using his own income if there wasnt enough funding. Money isn't the main goal here.
Because a game can make money and be an amazing MMORPG at the same time. Why is that even a question? Read the second two and last two sentences in the post you quoted because they apply to you as well.
If I am an arena player, PvE players don't take anything away from arenas or my enjoyment of the game. You and a few others are looking at arena PvPers like they're some type of parasite for Ashes as if we don't also bring our communities, spend money, and contribute to the content, viewership, and population for the games we play.
It's pretty funny watching you explain all of that again when all I did was link the quote you said he didn't say. I understand that Intrepid wants to make Ashes compelling. It's difficult to interpret that quote differently. But, you can go and explain it a third time if you wish.
And, whether or not the game would become more or less compelling is subjective, because I would find the game more compelling if it had esports and equalized arenas, and it sounds like you would find it less. The difference is, I don't feel as if my experience is lessened because someone else's experience improves. People have different preferences, giving people the freedom to play how they want instead of railroading them into playing 'all content' for the sake of it is limiting. Intrepid can do what they want with Ashes, it's their game. I'm looking forward to it regardless of what direction they take. However, a successful esports scene is excellent for marketing and whether or not the players interested in arenas, only play arenas, matters naught. Either way, more players means more money whether they're PvEing, PvPing (both open world and/or arenas), or any combination of the three.
You are literally not getting it. You clearly understand nothing at all about this game as it stands right now.
Your suggestion would see people logged in to the game, on servers, taking up server resources. These servers have player caps.
If 1k people are on my server in the arena, then that is literally 1k less people that are able to be on my server out in the open world.
That has a direct, measurable impact on the gameplay of everyone else on the server. It isnt a case of my experience being lessened because yours is improved, it is a case you your suggestion literally taking players away from the open world.
Even if it brings players to the game, the way the arena is those players will still have to log on to game servers and will thus still take up a spot in the server population cap.
There is no viable way around this.
As to a successful esport scene being great for marketing, not really. It's great for marketing games that are based around matches (RTS, FPS etc), it is not great for games with persistent world and persistent characters.
It has never been successful as a marketing tool in such games.
No, you are not getting it.
It's better that those 1,000 people play Ashes arenas then not play the game at all. Either way they won't be in the open world, but at least one of those still benefits the game as a whole. You're so focused on the open world aspect and your own personal enjoyment of it that you are incapable of thinking about what others may want.
You also have a terrible mindset. "No viable way around this" "Never been successful (before)" There is always a way to do things better. But you choose to look at what isn't possible instead of what is, you're just going to limit the potential of yourself and those around you in the long run. More power to you though if that's how you want to conduct yourself when presented with a problem to solve. Situations are rarely so cut and dry that one way is the only way forward. Solutions can be found that benefit multiple perspectives, and you're too shortsighted to be open to them in the first place.
How does it actually benefit the game when the games goal isn't to make money, but to be an amazing MMORPG? Making the game less of a dynamic world to suit other playstyles isn't in line with this goal, and Steven has even said that the game won't be for everyone, due to the fact that it's designs wont be what others want.
And before you go on about money always being a goal, yes they want it to succeed and be profitable, but the main goal is to make Steven's dream MMORPG come true, and he even said he would see it completed using his own income if there wasnt enough funding. Money isn't the main goal here.
Because a game can make money and be an amazing MMORPG at the same time. Why is that even a question? Read the first and last two sentences in the post you quoted because they apply to you as well.
If I am an arena player, PvE players don't take anything away from arenas or my enjoyment of the game. You and a few others are looking at arena PvPers like they're some type of parasite for Ashes as if we don't also bring our communities, spend money, and contribute to the content, viewership, and population for the games we play.
With the suggested methodology for achieving it though, you actually do NOT.
The communities do not often blend much more than they might have even if you were playing separate GAMES.
The money spent then has to be assigned to the person whose job it is to sit and pore over the balance spreadsheet for months.
The content contribution is mostly only viewership of a game mode that doesn't affect the ingame much other than to throw more people in whose only goal is to be boosted to the 'competitive' level.
You've already said explicitly that in terms of the 'Persistent MMO population' part, you intend to add basically nothing personally.
It's certainly not impossible, but as I understand the points made so FAR, Dolyem's suggestion would do a BETTER job of all the things you said, than reducing the barriers to entry for Ashes' Arenas.
Comments
I liked when @Azherae said "Fortunately Ashes will probably have quite a few people willing to pay their Mercenaries to literally PvP, and pay them in 'PvE gear' or enough coin to get it."
It sounds like a fun system if the economy can support this. I'm just worried that if a team of PvErs funneling their resources into PvPers is required to play at a competitive level, it's going to alienate the players that don't have access to that type of support.
Seeing as how arenas are instanced PvP scenarios that are confirmed to NOT be a part of open world PvP, then what would be the point of them if they required a ton of resources to get into and didn't reward anything worthwhile? The wiki says that arenas will reward gear enhancements at the end of 6 month seasons, achievement ranks, currency, and enhancement stones that grant PvP-focused benefits to gear. That sounds great but the question becomes what is the barrier to entry?
How many people do you actually think are going to have gear funneled to them exclusively so they can PvP and simultaneously have a high skill level at it? You do realize all of those PVEers are going to be needing that same gear to progress in PVE? The only scenario I see it happening in are mega guilds. And that would be like, a couple people getting geared, if not only the guild leader. And even then, you still have access to those same items, it'd just take more time for you to get them without assistance from a guild.
Did you read what I wrote? You just repeated the point I was making...
The amount of players that will be able to participate and benefit from a system like that is going to be extraordinarily low.
Which is as intended, as far as I understand it.
Steven's gaming history and what little of his philosophy I actually understand from checking into it, indicates that this is EXACTLY the desired outcome.
Strong single leaders that achieve it by coordination and domination over those who have less skill in that sphere. It's relatively antithetical to the design types required for eSports.
But I wasn't talking about 'top' gear. I'm just pointing out that this is very likely to be 'what Steven wants'. This is likely why the PvP Season rewards factor Caravans, Guild Wars, and the Arena rather than just the Arena.
I would, at this time, doubt that a 'mostly Arena' player would stand much chance of receiving rewards, based on this.
I agree that the design you are describing is antithetical to esports. So, if you're saying that's likely what Steven wants based off of his gaming history and philosophy, why would he say that the game will naturally move in the direction of esports if they make the gameplay compelling, competitive, and fun? Doesn't that seem very counterintuitive?
Personally, I would still spend 99.99% of my time in arenas even if they rewarded nothing. If PvE is required to play arenas, I will PvE just enough so that I can spend all of my time there anyways. Either way, I would end up in arenas unless the way it was structured forced me to play other gamemodes. Increasing the barrier to entry doesn't change the outcome, it just makes the process more tedious for all the players that want to focus on arena PvP.
I don't think anyone would have any issues if a player only wanted to PvE and do dungeons or raids, but there's motivation to force PvP-only players to PvE for some reason and I don't see either scenarios doing more good than harm.
Basically?
Steven says a lot of things.
Particularly back when that was said.
You are an eSports style competitive player so your preference and outcome is not surprising. I'm not saying that Steven 'didn't know how eSports worked' when he said that, I'm moreso saying that the original concepts of the game were MUCH more 'flexible', let's say.
Or maybe not. Since they're still not particularly 'inflexible'. They could maybe have made an 'eSport' out of Ashes of Creation Apocalypse, for example.
I personally don't hold Intrepid to the wording of things they said before Alpha-1, but I'm not necessarily suggesting that you don't. The easiest thing to do would be to ask on next month's Q&A and see if they're at the point where they can give a clear answer.
The only acceptable exception to that, to me, would be the military mayor selection, but even there we have no real idea how the champion system will be set up. And from previous statements it seems like you'd have to PvE as much as you could in order to make the best champion, so even there the PvX balance is upheld.
That's simple - he didnt say that.
If you understand Steven, what he said in that quote is that Intrepid plan to make Ashes gameplay compelling, competitive and fun, and if players build an esport out of that, Intrepid may then support it.
Basically, what he was saying is that Intrepid do not intend to make Ashes an esport - they plan to make it the best MMO they are able to make it. On the other hand, if the esport community find a way to get an esport out of it, if Intrepid can support it without degrading the game, they will.
also, eq arenas still give a stat advantage. it's just obscured T_T ill elaborate more (again) later.
also, just cuz something is an esport, doesn't mean its that great.
i mean this guy in my country won a big SF tourney in USA and he got 10k-15k. nice but imagine how many hours he spent to be able to be that good, and how many years, and everybody else who spent a similar amount of time lost. probs a Mcdonalds job would make u more money in that much time or even less. slapping the word e-sport onto something doesn't make it automatically good
You're arguing semantics. And, he actually did say that.
The quote is, "If we make the gameplay compelling, competitive and fun, that naturally it will move in that direction." Was that hard to understand because I moved the end of the quote to the front? It doesn't change the meaning.
Stat differences due to each individual archetype having access to unique stat bonuses or modifiers within their builds is entirely different than stat advantages afforded by gear. The first is a given and a non-issue, but this thread is talking about the second. Are you capable of recognizing the distinction?
The example you provided is irrelevant. I have a friend who played a game for less than 4 months and won 70k USD for 15th place in a tournament. Neither anecdote is relevant. Time spent does not directly correlate to how good someone is at something. How good at someone is at something relative to time spent and the efficacy of the time spent varies drastically from person to person.
This is the reason why people at the top of their craft tend to stray away from charging by the hour for their services. They're punished for their efficiency. Most people are paid by the hour because their time is the most valuable thing they can trade, whereas an expert will be paid in accordance to the value they provide.
You want to know why the guy in your country only won 10-15k in a SF tournament? The amount of people playing, and the amount of eyes watching the game are significantly less than other games like Fortnite. Fortnite has a lower barrier to entry, SF has a higher barrier to entry as you admitted by the fact that he needed years to get to that level. Which is exactly what I said by esports need a high population of competitors and viewers to be successful. Where do you think the majority of the money comes from? SPONSORS AND ADVERTISEMENTS. A company isn't going to pay money to advertise in a game with no one watching or playing it. And the players that have the potential to play at the highest levels in games aren't going to waste their time playing a game they aren't going to get paid in. Thank you for proving my point though.
my point about the stats in eq arenas is that some classes will never reach a needed stat to be able to perform well, and they can only do so in the regular game modes, therefore giving everybody else a stat advantage (which is one of the arguments for eq arenas) while giving other classes a major boost. it doesn't work well in a holy trinity, unless you are ok with that choice. it also allows for easier fotm abusing (which is a stat advantage, and contradicts the main argument) plus q manipulation.
unless the normal game mode is a p2w game (which ashes isn't) eq arenas aren't always more fair.
I did. Not once in what I quoted you did you mention the amount of players benefiting from that system being extremely low. But I'll take that as your answer.
Other than mentioning one time in a quote more or less saying that if it works out Intrepid will consider it, when has the development of Ashes attempted to push Esports? It's not the priority of development, it's just something Intrepid will endorse if it ends up working out with what gets released.
You and all like minded players are welcome to do this. You'll be playing the game as it is intended, even if you are doing the minimal amount needed to compete. And instead of seeing it as a barrier to entry, accept that the game is designed to be played as a whole, not as a game to only experience pieces of. Otherwise the games concept of a dynamic world is broken due to an entire corner of players ignore the world for instanced gameplay instead. If you don't wish to participate in the game as it is designed, then find a game that better suits your needs. No need to change a game with an established design philosophy for the sake of your playstyle preference.
Right here. With the games current design of PvX, all players must progress through both PVE and PVP, not one or the other separately. I am against either PVEers or PVPers being able to segregate themselves from the other.
Ok, let's assume the quote is literally only what you have written above, as opposed to what it actually is in context.
If Intrepid make the game compelling, it will naturally move towards esports.
What this means is that they are not going to make the game specifically to fit being an esport, they are going to make the game compelling.
Your suggestion literally makes the game less compelling. It literally removes the factor that compels many players to play the open world aspect of the game.
Thus, even if we take your out of context quote that you clearly just got off the wiki rather than listening to the comment, even then, it doesnt support making changes for esport.
What Steven was actually saying, if you pull all context back in to place, is that Intrepid are making an MMO, and want to make it as compelling as they can. If the community manages to pull an esport out of that, cool. However, the goal is to make the game as compelling an MMO as possible.
How you can read anything else in to either the actual full in context quote or your out of context quote above is beyond me. They are literally saying they dont plan on altering the game for esport, and you are reading it as they want to alter the game for esport.
You've still not answered the question as to why Intrepid would want to use esport to promote a portion of the game they dont want players using too much, either. I mean, the point of a game supporting esport is to bring more players in to the game. If Ashes has an arena based esport, that would see people wanting to sign up to the game to just play in that arena. That isnt what Ashes is.
If Intrepid want an arena esport, they would make a stand alone game for it post launch. The MMO is just not suitable for it.
It's pretty funny watching you explain all of that again when all I did was link the quote you said he didn't say. I understand that Intrepid wants to make Ashes compelling. It's difficult to interpret that quote differently. But, you can go and explain it a third time if you wish.
And, whether or not the game would become more or less compelling is subjective, because I would find the game more compelling if it had esports and equalized arenas, and it sounds like you would find it less. The difference is, I don't feel as if my experience is lessened because someone else's experience improves. People have different preferences, giving people the freedom to play how they want instead of railroading them into playing 'all content' for the sake of it is limiting. Intrepid can do what they want with Ashes, it's their game. I'm looking forward to it regardless of what direction they take. However, a successful esports scene is excellent for marketing and whether or not the players interested in arenas, only play arenas, matters naught. Either way, more players means more money whether they're PvEing, PvPing (both open world and/or arenas), or any combination of the three.
The open world could be our PvX "arena" but is not while we level up.
It even discourage PvP.
The corruption is amplified if a lvl 50 kills a lvl 10 but only if the low level is non combatant.
If two lvl 10 players want to spontaneously fight eachother, a lvl 50 can anytime kill both without any penalty.
So those smaller levels should go and fight NPCs only and collect berries until they level up.
I don't see the arena as a solution because it takes players out from the open world. I'd rather want the open word change a little.
It has to do with progression. Obviously as someone starting off your priority is to become stronger. In the beginning there isn't excessive competition due to common resources being enough. Id say the beginning of almost every MMORPG i have played focuses on learning the basics for the first 5-10 levels, teaching the player the games systems, and even how their selected class works at its core. But as those lower level players progress in the world, the resources they need to progress further increase in value, and as a result become contested by other players due to scarcity. And risking fighting at low level is a risk those players will need to weigh due to the reality of others possibly intervening. It will also be tested extensivley in alpha 2. The game itself isn't going to be PVE and PVP simultaneously 100% of the time. But the games intended design requires both to progress your character in either aspect. You will need to PVE to become capable through gaining gear, and you will have to directly compete with others to acquire those items.
Not high enough. Steven's freehold should double the production.
The only time highbies in L2 came to lowbie locations to kill someone was when two warring guilds had their lowbies interacting and it snowballed into a huge fight through the classic "ey, I've got high lvl friends! don't touch me!" argument.
You are literally not getting it. You clearly understand nothing at all about this game as it stands right now.
Your suggestion would see people logged in to the game, on servers, taking up server resources. These servers have player caps.
If 1k people are on my server in the arena, then that is literally 1k less people that are able to be on my server out in the open world.
That has a direct, measurable impact on the gameplay of everyone else on the server. It isnt a case of my experience being lessened because yours is improved, it is a case you your suggestion literally taking players away from the open world.
Even if it brings players to the game, the way the arena is those players will still have to log on to game servers and will thus still take up a spot in the server population cap.
There is no viable way around this.
As to a successful esport scene being great for marketing, not really. It's great for marketing games that are based around matches (RTS, FPS etc), it is not great for games with persistent world and persistent characters.
It has never been successful as a marketing tool in such games.
If it is only horizontal progression when you reach max level that would not feel good. Games that are like that feel pretty meh, no point doing raids or anything without more vertical gain.
These points sound like someone that more so doesn't want there to be gear so he can log on casually and play end game without worrying about gear chase. My 2 cents.
No, you are not getting it.
It's better that those 1,000 people play Ashes arenas then not play the game at all. Either way they won't be in the open world, but at least one of those still benefits the game as a whole. You're so focused on the open world aspect and your own personal enjoyment of it that you are incapable of thinking about what others may want.
You also have a terrible mindset. "No viable way around this" "Never been successful (before)" There is always a way to do things better. But you choose to look at what isn't possible instead of what is, you're just going to limit the potential of yourself and those around you in the long run. More power to you though if that's how you want to conduct yourself when presented with a problem to solve. Situations are rarely so cut and dry that one way is the only way forward. Solutions can be found that benefit multiple perspectives, and you're too shortsighted to be open to them in the first place.
I get your point.
But why is it bullshit in one direction but not the other? I have no interest in arenas, and I can completely ignore the whole system. I don't really miss out on anything.
People in general will just gravitate to the part of the game they enjoy the most, and dislike being forced to do other activities they find less interesting.
Imagine grinding and getting materials to craft something but then there being a requirement that I have to play 50 arena matches before I can craft it so I equally pvp and PvE... That just sounds horrible.
How does it actually benefit the game when the games goal isn't to make money, but to be an amazing MMORPG? Making the game less of a dynamic world to suit other playstyles isn't in line with this goal, and Steven has even said that the game won't be for everyone, due to the fact that it's designs wont be what others want.
And before you go on about money always being a goal, yes they want it to succeed and be profitable, but the main goal is to make Steven's dream MMORPG come true, and he even said he would see it completed using his own income if there wasnt enough funding. Money isn't the main goal here.
Mostly it's because Ashes doesn't require Arenas at all.
This is a level of design semantics that I personally feel can't possibly end in anything good unless people make a serious effort to come to the same understanding of what the game is 'for' without their own preferences (not even biases) involved.
Ashes is a persistent open world MMORPG that does not need an Arena to even function.
It does, however, need owPvP to function (as described). To the point where we tell people consistently 'no, you can't take it out'.
You could take Arenas out.
How about... ask Intrepid for a completely separate game completely focused on arenas with MMORPG style classes when they have time after Ashes is completed and released? Instead of putting a game inside of another game that goes against its dynamic world design and PVX goal?
Because a game can make money and be an amazing MMORPG at the same time. Why is that even a question? Read the second two and last two sentences in the post you quoted because they apply to you as well.
If I am an arena player, PvE players don't take anything away from arenas or my enjoyment of the game. You and a few others are looking at arena PvPers like they're some type of parasite for Ashes as if we don't also bring our communities, spend money, and contribute to the content, viewership, and population for the games we play.
With the suggested methodology for achieving it though, you actually do NOT.
The communities do not often blend much more than they might have even if you were playing separate GAMES.
The money spent then has to be assigned to the person whose job it is to sit and pore over the balance spreadsheet for months.
The content contribution is mostly only viewership of a game mode that doesn't affect the ingame much other than to throw more people in whose only goal is to be boosted to the 'competitive' level.
You've already said explicitly that in terms of the 'Persistent MMO population' part, you intend to add basically nothing personally.
It's certainly not impossible, but as I understand the points made so FAR, Dolyem's suggestion would do a BETTER job of all the things you said, than reducing the barriers to entry for Ashes' Arenas.