Things we DON'T like about AoC.

While it is important to voice to the developers the things we enjoy about the game, and to encourage the game's creation, it's also equally important to voice our thoughts and opinions on things we don't like about the game and are concerned about.
What are some things you've seen that have you little concerned about or that you simply don't like?

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Ludullu

Mainly indecisiveness. I get wanting to listen to your fans and include their feedback into the development, but I also think that sooner or later your gotta finally decide on one thing and go with it. And I'd say that we're past the "later" at this point.

Tyranthraxus

The single aspect so far yours truly finds dis-agreeable?

The cosmetic sets are "all-or-none"; You can't use a really cool-looking pair of gloves from one cosmetic set with anything else - it MUST be used as the entire appearance ensemble.

Why not let us mix-and-match, given that we're paying for the cosmetics?

Liniker

So, my issues with Intrepid are what I consider minor, and this goes to show how much I love what Intrepid is doing here, theres usually a lot more serious issues that I, as a player have with games and developers, so I'm really happy these are the only ones that come to mind:

- I don't like that they are selling freehold buildings and ships without a Clear description of which freehold goes in which building type or which ship type. The whole cosmetic thing is Really confusing, they say costumes are one piece only, but during live streams, Steven will swap and mix cosmetic set pieces, they sell a mount barding accessory but Months later say you can't use it on top of a cosmetic mount skin........ they say you can't dye your cosmetics, even tho they show recolors (that weren't even supposed to be available for players, only for NPCs but well....) they sell accessories that can't be used with costumes... it just makes Zero sense and it's very very badly thought out, seems like they just don't care about it.

- I don't like that they closed their official content creator program Before the first Alpha One started, and it's been over 18 months since they opened the applications for the new content creator program, but they still haven't started inviting people in because apparently, they decided to create a new program to train content creators and hired someone for that(?)

- I don't like when we are in 5+ years in development and they still want to ask for feedback about stamina, races, or basic stuff that should already be decided, I hope this is not the case, but it appears that they are not confident in what they can do, and want to make feedback driven decisions from players... players that don't know what they want, I think most if not all people that are unhappy about something will always complain, while the large majority that is happy won't even bother saying it, so I worry about these decisions and whom they are trying to please. I trust Intrepid to make a good game, I don't trust the playerbase, people are more often than not, really stupid.

I think that's it... overall, I'm really happy and positive about the future of AoC and the game design, which is the most important.

Nerror

1. There are several things about the cosmetics shop I dislike, like the monthly nature of it, and how we still don't know what the building skins are for. I fear they'll keep doing the monthly thing after release too. I know it's already turned people from my circles away from the game that would otherwise have embraced it. Looking at social media it's also the main point of criticism of the game.

2. I dislike the open seas being PvP zones, but a lot comes down to implementation as well. If the coastal waters extend a good distance out, and there is plenty of fishing and underwater content there, it might be ok from a game-mechanics sense.

But we have this whole magical corruption system that must somehow be tied to the gods (because magic), and for some reason the gods stop caring what goes on off-shore? The only lore alternative I can see that justifies this is if corruption is not tied directly to the gods, but is a natural law of the Land, and enough salt-water somehow blocks the effect. But if salt-water somehow blocks the corruption, that needs to mean something in other aspects of the game too. Things like that matter to me, and this decision to make open seas PvP zones feels very tacked on until I know if there is solid lore behind it.

3. I dislike how long this game takes to be made

I know, shit takes time, but I don't like it.

Taleof2Cities

Not really a dislike, but I am nervous how combat will be balanced across 64 “classes” (primary archetypes with secondary flavors).

George_Black

I dont like how there is such a huge emphasis on going above and beyond on boring stuff like surveying and cartography. Who the hell plays games for these reasons? Why does IS need to spend time on such things when they also have to deal with many node related systems, complex housing and crafting (which will have sadly minigames tied to it), when there are more basic and important things like class/weapon animations, for which they have said they can't devote the time to create specific animations for the class abilities based on the equipped weapon. Why isn't the community bothered by this is beyond me. Why are we talking about surveying, gathering griefing and realistic ecosystem behaviours when Jeff Bard stated a couple years ago that combat/ability animations wont make accommodations based on weapons? Combat and ability animation detail is much more important than boring, real life simulations.

I dont like the yellow magical weapons (spear, whip, hammer etc etc) that in some cases make the equipped weapon items disappear from our characters. It is like a shortcut, which also ESO did on all the class mean dmg dealing abilities. Terrible.

I dont like the fighter magic hammer. The fighter needs physical, melee abilities before you even think about giving them arcane powers. How do you bypass physical combat for the most melee, physical class and then give it a long range spell?

I dont like that mounts can be summoned/unsummoned. BDO has done mounts best so far (although I hate with passion the green PARKING neon sign above the mounts). I wish using mounts was less about a speedbuff in mmos and more specific. And by specific I mean ONLY when you need to travel long distances. It's a video game and not a singleplayer story driven at that. The open world should be about adventure. Use your legs, fight off mobs, get where you need to get by dealing with obstacles (pvp/pve). If you need to travel to a different map area, get on a mount and head to the nearest town in the area you want to play on.

I dont like the "play as you like", false choice abundance (but in reality very narrow meta) that games offer when classes don't have structure.

I would rather see the 8 main archetypes reaching lv 20 and then each one of them splits into 2 specialized true classes (or maybe 3 for some of the archetypes) and there you have it. Real classes with unique abilities and a narrower but true choice of weapons/armor to equip them with.
A Tank can become a paladin or a dark avenger at 20
A fighter can become a warlord or a mercenary
A rogue can become an assassin or a spy etc etc etc.
Steven said they are confident with making the 64 classes appealing, but that still doesn't address the meta problem.

Anyways, none of the above problems would make me not want to play AoC. Not even close.
What I look for in an mmo is open world pve/pvp, slow progress and no p2w or instances. AoC covers all that, with the addition of many more systems. I find the philosophy of the devs to be by far the best of any mmo out there.

Tyranthraxus

Liniker wrote: »

So, my issues with Intrepid are what I consider minor, and this goes to show how much I love what Intrepid is doing here, theres usually a lot more serious issues that I, as a player have with games and developers, so I'm really happy these are the only ones that come to mind:

- I don't like that they are selling freehold buildings and ships without a Clear description of which freehold goes in which building type or which ship type. The whole cosmetic thing is Really confusing, they say costumes are one piece only, but during live streams, Steven will swap and mix cosmetic set pieces, they sell a mount barding accessory but Months later say you can't use it on top of a cosmetic mount skin........ they say you can't dye your cosmetics, even tho they show recolors (that weren't even supposed to be available for players, only for NPCs but well....) they sell accessories that can't be used with costumes... it just makes Zero sense and it's very very badly thought out, seems like they just don't care about it.

- I don't like that they closed their official content creator program Before the first Alpha One started, and it's been over 18 months since they opened the applications for the new content creator program, but they still haven't started inviting people in because apparently, they decided to create a new program to train content creators and hired someone for that(?)

- I don't like when we are in 5+ years in development and they still want to ask for feedback about stamina, races, or basic stuff that should already be decided, I hope this is not the case, but it appears that they are not confident in what they can do, and want to make feedback driven decisions from players... players that don't know what they want, I think most if not all people that are unhappy about something will always complain, while the large majority that is happy won't even bother saying it, so I worry about these decisions and whom they are trying to please. I trust Intrepid to make a good game, I don't trust the playerbase, people are more often than not, really stupid.

I think that's it... overall, I'm really happy and positive about the future of AoC and the game design, which is the most important.

Yours truly is not particuarly bothered by any of the content-creator decisions, since the world of content creators seems to be based upon a world of whimsy and popularity - both things that SS seems to (rightfully!) bear little regard for; If he did, then AoC would just be developed as another soul-less cash-grab, pandering to modern corporate profit-projections, such as the need to dumb-down games for the context of mindless mobile games that value your currency-sacrifice over both your commitment of time and dedication, as a player.

@Nerror brings up a valid point in the cosmetic building skins. This isn't much of a complaint to me, since most of what's been presented so far is obviously either a Stronghold skin, or a merchant-booth skin, given the limited scope of possibility.

@George_Black 's points come up with a bit less gravitas for me, since AoC's intrinsic appeal for yours truly is its unique game-mechanics; Why NOT have more in-depth systems, than generic? Why should the Nodes be the only significant game-mechanic that separates AoC from projects/games of the past?

Ultimately? All mediums have both their great and unique characteristics, as well as their draw-backs - pretty much the same as any other medium that has existed in any context, throughout all of history. Chess was once new and exciting to the world - but it is limited to 2 players and VERY structured unit capacities; AoC will have it's awesome unique features, some commonly-shared traits with other games of the past, and also it's downright unpleasant aspects, by the time Launch finally arrives.

It's a passion-project, at the end of the day. Yours truly is happy to wait as long as it takes, to see a game possessing both strong vision and unique promise come to its fruition!

Xenra

More of a concern than something disliked is if they will cover or have covered what would happen to someone involved in the crafting aspect and in general high end aspects of the game but either lack skill or suffer misfortune cannot support their own character. My recollection of how gearing will work regarding details is a bit foggy for me.

But say you are a high level involved in many aspects of the game either pvp or pve. Is there any protection from material/financial devastation? With the capturing and destruction of other players utilities is there a chance that your higher level character will not be salvageable? Say you cannot afford tax/upkeep of your crafter facilities and basically now trapped without progression paths of growth, such as pvp has ransacked everything to the point the node blacksmith is a hobo with a hammer now. Or be it a character who via pvp or turn of events lost the means to recup their weapon or pvped and lost their weapon entirely. I'm sure many would be turned off by the idea of needing to regress their character's progress to the point that they no longer find enjoyment from it.

I suppose it comes down to I don't like the loss of resources in a game that you invest so much time collecting them. Or at least to the point that it risks compromising what you have made and established. Risk and reward have merit in game but I can imagine some would not wish to be in an environment where financial devastation could make things unplayable to a entertainment standpoint.

Ironhope

I don't think Intrepid realizes how important combat is and how much it matters to people first coming into contact with the game (be it an early alpha, people don't understand and don't care).

They could deliver on every system they promised and more, if the combat isn't top tier, it's all for nothing.

The fact they're still asking for stuff like ''stamina or no stamina'' is very worrying.

On one side I understand that

1) combat, ironically is one of the easiest to crate aspects of the game comapred to systems like the nodes function and sieges, sea travel and combat, raids and dungeons, castle sieges, etc and it makes sense why they would focus on it towards the end

2) combat and class design (on which combat depends) is one of those things you need to think more about so it's better to give it 1-2 years of deep design and brainstorming and them implement in more detail, rather than jump into it from the start

but still, I don't think Intrepid realizes the risk here and I'm worried they will lose more and more support if they release pre-alpha combat the way it is (it's one of the main reasons why the november stream was so poorly received).

People don't understand this is a pre-alpha.

Open development like Intrepid is doing is nearly unseen.

Most MMO developers release ''alphas'' when their game is nearly finished and do it as a publicity move, they don't have actual development alphas, so people don't even understand what alpha means, which is even less relevant since they don't care and judge the game first sight as it is as if it would never change in the years of development to come.

And the first thing they judge the game by, besides first sight graphics and models is the combat.

And the combat better be in far better shape in the future streams involving it and in very good shape when alpha 2 arrives, otherwise it iwll bleed more and more support.

WarwickFreemason

The only minor irritant for me is there has not been any deep discussion on how server hosting is going to be handled; yes has there has been minor discussions in Q&A but even if it is a 5 minute segment, I would be much at ease seeing how they plan to handle this.

It’s not flashy or exciting but you’d be surprised how much an mmo relies on decent management of server traffic & hosting

WHIT3ROS3

There is nothing I "Dislike" but there are a few minor things that I think could serve the project well.

I personally would like to see some kind of roadmap and would have no problem with it being completely dynamic. It would be nice to see Intrepid cast away the fear of having to show only higher-end visuals. I understand why they don't but for example, If you were to open up the character creator today. What would it look like? Has there been much added since we saw it last? Are we going to see an updated version of it again or was that the only taste before seeing it in alpha 2? Some kind of loose milestones that the audience can see that give a general idea of where development is and how it's progressing would be nice.

Uboon

Instant mounts - I prefer persistent NPC mounts that you have to park and protect.

Naval combat - I would rather play the game and have that added later.

Decision times - I would prefer a team of professional game designers deciding how to implement specifics like blocking instead of iterating through multiple stages of communication with players. Read our suggestions, chat to the management, bang go for it. Then don't redesign until Alpha 2 and even then take community feedback lightly.

Text on screen - I dread the day 500 player name tags appear on my screen! Plus guild tags etc.

Lack of roadmap - This is open development, let's be open about our future goals. What, for example, was the future massive staff ramp up [accidentally?] alluded to at the start of the Dec stream by the guy on the left?

Abarat

Tyranthraxus wrote: »

Liniker wrote: »

So, my issues with Intrepid are what I consider minor, and this goes to show how much I love what Intrepid is doing here, theres usually a lot more serious issues that I, as a player have with games and developers, so I'm really happy these are the only ones that come to mind:

- I don't like that they are selling freehold buildings and ships without a Clear description of which freehold goes in which building type or which ship type. The whole cosmetic thing is Really confusing, they say costumes are one piece only, but during live streams, Steven will swap and mix cosmetic set pieces, they sell a mount barding accessory but Months later say you can't use it on top of a cosmetic mount skin........ they say you can't dye your cosmetics, even tho they show recolors (that weren't even supposed to be available for players, only for NPCs but well....) they sell accessories that can't be used with costumes... it just makes Zero sense and it's very very badly thought out, seems like they just don't care about it.

- I don't like that they closed their official content creator program Before the first Alpha One started, and it's been over 18 months since they opened the applications for the new content creator program, but they still haven't started inviting people in because apparently, they decided to create a new program to train content creators and hired someone for that(?)

- I don't like when we are in 5+ years in development and they still want to ask for feedback about stamina, races, or basic stuff that should already be decided, I hope this is not the case, but it appears that they are not confident in what they can do, and want to make feedback driven decisions from players... players that don't know what they want, I think most if not all people that are unhappy about something will always complain, while the large majority that is happy won't even bother saying it, so I worry about these decisions and whom they are trying to please. I trust Intrepid to make a good game, I don't trust the playerbase, people are more often than not, really stupid.

I think that's it... overall, I'm really happy and positive about the future of AoC and the game design, which is the most important.

Yours truly is not particuarly bothered by any of the content-creator decisions, since the world of content creators seems to be based upon a world of whimsy and popularity - both things that SS seems to (rightfully!) bear little regard for; If he did, then AoC would just be developed as another soul-less cash-grab, pandering to modern corporate profit-projections, such as the need to dumb-down games for the context of mindless mobile games that value your currency-sacrifice over both your commitment of time and dedication, as a player.

@Nerror brings up a valid point in the cosmetic building skins. This isn't much of a complaint to me, since most of what's been presented so far is obviously either a Stronghold skin, or a merchant-booth skin, given the limited scope of possibility.

@George_Black 's points come up with a bit less gravitas for me, since AoC's intrinsic appeal for yours truly is its unique game-mechanics; Why NOT have more in-depth systems, than generic? Why should the Nodes be the only significant game-mechanic that separates AoC from projects/games of the past?

Ultimately? All mediums have both their great and unique characteristics, as well as their draw-backs - pretty much the same as any other medium that has existed in any context, throughout all of history. Chess was once new and exciting to the world - but it is limited to 2 players and VERY structured unit capacities; AoC will have it's awesome unique features, some commonly-shared traits with other games of the past, and also it's downright unpleasant aspects, by the time Launch finally arrives.

It's a passion-project, at the end of the day. Yours truly is happy to wait as long as it takes, to see a game possessing both strong vision and unique promise come to its fruition!

wow. You said 'yours truly' three times in this post. that HAS to be a record of some kind.

Voxtrium

I agree with Liniker regarding players that disagree with a system complaining and players who are happy not piping up.

It is also worrying to hear that IS is unsure about active blocking and stamina.

I am most worried about what George_black said, animations for each weapon seems like one of those QOL additions that really add up to make a game what it is, of course the game will be fun regardless but I think IS is shooting long term here, not a 3 month fiasco like so many other new mmo's.

I am probably most worried that IS tries to incorporate too many opinions and instead lose a clear path for themselves. I am not talking about losing sight of their goal but instead creating a game that has defining characteristics.
Personally I have enjoyed much of what IS has shown, but until I feel the game I am going to be worried.

Mag7spy

Trenker wrote: »

Instant mounts - I prefer persistent NPC mounts that you have to park and protect.

Naval combat - I would rather play the game and have that added later.

Decision times - I would prefer a team of professional game designers deciding how to implement specifics like blocking instead of iterating through multiple stages of communication with players. Read our suggestions, chat to the management, bang go for it. Then don't redesign until Alpha 2 and even then take community feedback lightly.

Text on screen - I dread the day 500 player name tags appear on my screen! Plus guild tags etc.

Lack of roadmap - This is open development, let's be open about our future goals. What, for example, was the future massive staff ramp up [accidentally?] alluded to at the start of the Dec stream by the guy on the left?

They did roadmaps but people complained not realizing this is actually development (people not understanding the challenges with it) and not an already finished game. People complained and so they don't do that anymore and will only let you know when it's much closer to being fully ready.

Which im fine and agree with open development is good for feedback, but anyone not in the industry doesn't know or even care about the challenges in general they just want what they want. Giving roadmaps only backfires on you and you waste pr time that could be spent better elsewhere during this stage in development.

Liniker

Mag7spy wrote: »

People complained and so they don't do that anymore and will only let you know when it's much closer to being fully ready.

Let's be real here, that's not the reason they stopped doing it. This was their roadmap....

They don't do it because they missed it by Years and they acknowledge the mistakes on what they did wrong, so let's not pretend it was the players fault.

Mag7spy

Liniker wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

People complained and so they don't do that anymore and will only let you know when it's much closer to being fully ready.

Let's be real here, that's not the reason they stopped doing it. This was their roadmap....

They don't do it because they missed it by Years and they acknowledge the mistakes on what they did wrong, so let's not pretend it was the players fault.

I'm talking about the last roadmap about the alpha -1 with people complaining.

Yes that is development things get delayed by years this is a mmorpg, it me it's not a surprise i understand things. When issues come up you need to work towards fixing them and getting your game towards a proper state in development.

Its why i say there is no point sharing it, players can give good feedback but players don't understand the process and challenges of development. If the thought is "it is the developers problem for not sticking to a timeline or following what they said." So you don't give a long term timeline (as they are doing), and development wise again no normal player will know the challenges or care about it so it just causes more issues giving them things to hold onto. Most people can't handle the hype of wanting something but than seeing everything that goes on behind the scenes. Ie (Why did you remove a feature i wanted in the game you somewhat showed, this is taking too long to develop, you are adding things I don't want and i don't think you need, etc)

Long story short this si development things take years and long delays can happen its part of the process. It isn't a developer issue to me anyone can see things are being made, this is just the general challenge of building a game and the more difficult the game the more challenges and roadbumps that will pop up that will cause more delays. It's part of the process, so it can lead to some issues if consumers see too much.

Azherae

We (my group) don't like the fact that, for us, all the 'hype' died off in a weird way around when Jeff left.

Everything else I could mention is just unfair doomsaying/speculation, but while the game was never 'super impressive' conceptually for us, having to switch back to 'imagination' for all the cool stuff that would keep our attention was kind of a letdown, and we wish they had been able to keep the drip going.

Hopefully 2023 will bring that magic back, Bard or not.

(oh, and that Open Seas no Corruption thing, but even that is just speculation)

Dolyem

-Not a fan of the disregard for the potential of using low level characters to progress in artisan classes as a way to avoid being killed by other players while still being able to gather higher level materials. I definitely believe artisan class progression should be gated by class level progression as well. This concern also goes hand in hand with how it may affect offensive environment resource activities against enemy nodes.

-Ability visual clutter is a concern but seems to have been addressed in this December dev video.

-concern about node type feature balances vs metas for which type to progress. I personally think only 2 of any 1 node type should be able to progress to metropolis stage on a server.

-concerns with making sure there are sorts of "time-gates" for progression and testing builds, as to slow the emergence of META builds over the lifetime of the game.

JamesSunderland

I would say the only thing i explicitly dislike about Ashes currently would be profession level progression not being directly bound to class level progression. Which could open up possibilities of "exploiting" the system with low class level master Gatherers/crafters.

Child Item