NiKr wrote: » Azherae wrote: » "I like this Augment but I have to grind through this Social Organization's Questlines which I don't find appealing, I should just be able to have the Augment now because it would be more fun for me" would be a way someone could uncharitably interpret your position. So far this has been roughly my interpretation. Dodges of direct answers of whether they are ok with a ton of grinding are not helping.
Azherae wrote: » "I like this Augment but I have to grind through this Social Organization's Questlines which I don't find appealing, I should just be able to have the Augment now because it would be more fun for me" would be a way someone could uncharitably interpret your position.
KingDDD wrote: » Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Neurath wrote: » It wasn't an insult. The point stands, do you want to play ashes? If so what drew you to ashes because so far you seem to dislike the basic fundamentals. I love the fundamentals. Nodes are awesome, augemnts are great, open world sounds amazing, a variety of classes and unique customization should be great, graphics look astounding, and the lead dev has actually played an MMO in the past decade as a player with a team that has experience playing MMOs with a variety of skill levels versus someone who's been a lead developer in the industry for 20+ years beholden to turning a profit for shareholders. Awesome, heres another question. Will character levels stop you from playing the game? Depends on how it takes for it to be fun. If I'm playing a tank and my abilities and role are locked behind a timewall, it'll probably be pretty boring unless the starting zone has something to keep my interest. And that doesn't refer to saving a village from a graphically beautiful dragon. I've done that before and don't particularly care to do it again. Well then I finally have a question. Do games like Elder Scrolls where your character COULD theoretically do without 'real levels' but still need to do things like 'Speechcraft to level 100' also cause a negative response? Games of this type tend to have SOME form of progression, would you say that you're opposed to the 'power gap' part of it? For example, I play one where you start with a 'basic generic' Martial Arts kit, and you still have to 'level' by finding opponents to face who know other moves, but you could theoretically win fights with just the base kit, it's not 'weaker', it just possibly isn't 'what you prefer', and even that might not be true. Basically, is it 'having to kill mobs to raise a number' only or is 'having to work toward your customizations because you disprefer the default kit' also an offender in this? The Elder Scrolls (I assume you mean Skyrim, Oblivion, Morrowind etc) are single player games. The leveling aspect is part of the pacing for both design and story. Part of the fun for those games is beating them naked, or under leveled, or over leveled, or with specific classes, or with no heals, etc. The Elder Scrolls also got rid of leveling in the general sense or made things like speech craft unnecessary outside of a specific dialogue tree responses in the later releases. I don't remember if Skyrim had any particular quests locked behind 100 speech or not, it's been awhile since I played it. Obviously, there's mods to change that, but the majority of players don't use mods. This is also true for MMORPGs though, or at least, in some better ones it can be. I'm trying to figure out if you have a design issue with leveling itself, or with 'a thing that comes along with it, which a game could simply choose not to do' (I am not claiming that Ashes has chosen not to do that something, so this probably isn't actually important). So, to repeat the part that might be relevant. I can play certain games where I need to put in time to get through the game's 'gates' to progress, such as 'gathering materials to make better gear' or 'encountering a situation in battle enough times for my character to unlock a related skill', but there are no gates based on initial level, and you could theoretically do all content without doing basically any of that through raw skill. Is this fine? Because it's hard to tell where you draw the line here. "I like this Augment but I have to grind through this Social Organization's Questlines which I don't find appealing, I should just be able to have the Augment now because it would be more fun for me" would be a way someone could uncharitably interpret your position. Ashes story isn't about you, its about the world and how players on a server build it. When you are grinding an augment you're interacting with the world a specific way that intentionally builds the server in a specific manner. Ideally, this will cause social interaction and structures that are unique on a per server basis. In this scenario, I chose to engage with the world and the associated rewards/problems that come with it. Forced grinding through leveling does not allow for this choice. I must engage with the leveling process first before I can interact how and where I want.
Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Neurath wrote: » It wasn't an insult. The point stands, do you want to play ashes? If so what drew you to ashes because so far you seem to dislike the basic fundamentals. I love the fundamentals. Nodes are awesome, augemnts are great, open world sounds amazing, a variety of classes and unique customization should be great, graphics look astounding, and the lead dev has actually played an MMO in the past decade as a player with a team that has experience playing MMOs with a variety of skill levels versus someone who's been a lead developer in the industry for 20+ years beholden to turning a profit for shareholders. Awesome, heres another question. Will character levels stop you from playing the game? Depends on how it takes for it to be fun. If I'm playing a tank and my abilities and role are locked behind a timewall, it'll probably be pretty boring unless the starting zone has something to keep my interest. And that doesn't refer to saving a village from a graphically beautiful dragon. I've done that before and don't particularly care to do it again. Well then I finally have a question. Do games like Elder Scrolls where your character COULD theoretically do without 'real levels' but still need to do things like 'Speechcraft to level 100' also cause a negative response? Games of this type tend to have SOME form of progression, would you say that you're opposed to the 'power gap' part of it? For example, I play one where you start with a 'basic generic' Martial Arts kit, and you still have to 'level' by finding opponents to face who know other moves, but you could theoretically win fights with just the base kit, it's not 'weaker', it just possibly isn't 'what you prefer', and even that might not be true. Basically, is it 'having to kill mobs to raise a number' only or is 'having to work toward your customizations because you disprefer the default kit' also an offender in this? The Elder Scrolls (I assume you mean Skyrim, Oblivion, Morrowind etc) are single player games. The leveling aspect is part of the pacing for both design and story. Part of the fun for those games is beating them naked, or under leveled, or over leveled, or with specific classes, or with no heals, etc. The Elder Scrolls also got rid of leveling in the general sense or made things like speech craft unnecessary outside of a specific dialogue tree responses in the later releases. I don't remember if Skyrim had any particular quests locked behind 100 speech or not, it's been awhile since I played it. Obviously, there's mods to change that, but the majority of players don't use mods. This is also true for MMORPGs though, or at least, in some better ones it can be. I'm trying to figure out if you have a design issue with leveling itself, or with 'a thing that comes along with it, which a game could simply choose not to do' (I am not claiming that Ashes has chosen not to do that something, so this probably isn't actually important). So, to repeat the part that might be relevant. I can play certain games where I need to put in time to get through the game's 'gates' to progress, such as 'gathering materials to make better gear' or 'encountering a situation in battle enough times for my character to unlock a related skill', but there are no gates based on initial level, and you could theoretically do all content without doing basically any of that through raw skill. Is this fine? Because it's hard to tell where you draw the line here. "I like this Augment but I have to grind through this Social Organization's Questlines which I don't find appealing, I should just be able to have the Augment now because it would be more fun for me" would be a way someone could uncharitably interpret your position.
KingDDD wrote: » Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Neurath wrote: » It wasn't an insult. The point stands, do you want to play ashes? If so what drew you to ashes because so far you seem to dislike the basic fundamentals. I love the fundamentals. Nodes are awesome, augemnts are great, open world sounds amazing, a variety of classes and unique customization should be great, graphics look astounding, and the lead dev has actually played an MMO in the past decade as a player with a team that has experience playing MMOs with a variety of skill levels versus someone who's been a lead developer in the industry for 20+ years beholden to turning a profit for shareholders. Awesome, heres another question. Will character levels stop you from playing the game? Depends on how it takes for it to be fun. If I'm playing a tank and my abilities and role are locked behind a timewall, it'll probably be pretty boring unless the starting zone has something to keep my interest. And that doesn't refer to saving a village from a graphically beautiful dragon. I've done that before and don't particularly care to do it again. Well then I finally have a question. Do games like Elder Scrolls where your character COULD theoretically do without 'real levels' but still need to do things like 'Speechcraft to level 100' also cause a negative response? Games of this type tend to have SOME form of progression, would you say that you're opposed to the 'power gap' part of it? For example, I play one where you start with a 'basic generic' Martial Arts kit, and you still have to 'level' by finding opponents to face who know other moves, but you could theoretically win fights with just the base kit, it's not 'weaker', it just possibly isn't 'what you prefer', and even that might not be true. Basically, is it 'having to kill mobs to raise a number' only or is 'having to work toward your customizations because you disprefer the default kit' also an offender in this? The Elder Scrolls (I assume you mean Skyrim, Oblivion, Morrowind etc) are single player games. The leveling aspect is part of the pacing for both design and story. Part of the fun for those games is beating them naked, or under leveled, or over leveled, or with specific classes, or with no heals, etc. The Elder Scrolls also got rid of leveling in the general sense or made things like speech craft unnecessary outside of a specific dialogue tree responses in the later releases. I don't remember if Skyrim had any particular quests locked behind 100 speech or not, it's been awhile since I played it. Obviously, there's mods to change that, but the majority of players don't use mods.
Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Neurath wrote: » It wasn't an insult. The point stands, do you want to play ashes? If so what drew you to ashes because so far you seem to dislike the basic fundamentals. I love the fundamentals. Nodes are awesome, augemnts are great, open world sounds amazing, a variety of classes and unique customization should be great, graphics look astounding, and the lead dev has actually played an MMO in the past decade as a player with a team that has experience playing MMOs with a variety of skill levels versus someone who's been a lead developer in the industry for 20+ years beholden to turning a profit for shareholders. Awesome, heres another question. Will character levels stop you from playing the game? Depends on how it takes for it to be fun. If I'm playing a tank and my abilities and role are locked behind a timewall, it'll probably be pretty boring unless the starting zone has something to keep my interest. And that doesn't refer to saving a village from a graphically beautiful dragon. I've done that before and don't particularly care to do it again. Well then I finally have a question. Do games like Elder Scrolls where your character COULD theoretically do without 'real levels' but still need to do things like 'Speechcraft to level 100' also cause a negative response? Games of this type tend to have SOME form of progression, would you say that you're opposed to the 'power gap' part of it? For example, I play one where you start with a 'basic generic' Martial Arts kit, and you still have to 'level' by finding opponents to face who know other moves, but you could theoretically win fights with just the base kit, it's not 'weaker', it just possibly isn't 'what you prefer', and even that might not be true. Basically, is it 'having to kill mobs to raise a number' only or is 'having to work toward your customizations because you disprefer the default kit' also an offender in this?
KingDDD wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Neurath wrote: » It wasn't an insult. The point stands, do you want to play ashes? If so what drew you to ashes because so far you seem to dislike the basic fundamentals. I love the fundamentals. Nodes are awesome, augemnts are great, open world sounds amazing, a variety of classes and unique customization should be great, graphics look astounding, and the lead dev has actually played an MMO in the past decade as a player with a team that has experience playing MMOs with a variety of skill levels versus someone who's been a lead developer in the industry for 20+ years beholden to turning a profit for shareholders. Awesome, heres another question. Will character levels stop you from playing the game? Depends on how it takes for it to be fun. If I'm playing a tank and my abilities and role are locked behind a timewall, it'll probably be pretty boring unless the starting zone has something to keep my interest. And that doesn't refer to saving a village from a graphically beautiful dragon. I've done that before and don't particularly care to do it again.
Dolyem wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Neurath wrote: » It wasn't an insult. The point stands, do you want to play ashes? If so what drew you to ashes because so far you seem to dislike the basic fundamentals. I love the fundamentals. Nodes are awesome, augemnts are great, open world sounds amazing, a variety of classes and unique customization should be great, graphics look astounding, and the lead dev has actually played an MMO in the past decade as a player with a team that has experience playing MMOs with a variety of skill levels versus someone who's been a lead developer in the industry for 20+ years beholden to turning a profit for shareholders. Awesome, heres another question. Will character levels stop you from playing the game?
KingDDD wrote: » Neurath wrote: » It wasn't an insult. The point stands, do you want to play ashes? If so what drew you to ashes because so far you seem to dislike the basic fundamentals. I love the fundamentals. Nodes are awesome, augemnts are great, open world sounds amazing, a variety of classes and unique customization should be great, graphics look astounding, and the lead dev has actually played an MMO in the past decade as a player with a team that has experience playing MMOs with a variety of skill levels versus someone who's been a lead developer in the industry for 20+ years beholden to turning a profit for shareholders.
Neurath wrote: » It wasn't an insult. The point stands, do you want to play ashes? If so what drew you to ashes because so far you seem to dislike the basic fundamentals.
KingDDD wrote: » From a basic Google Search around 5% of the people playing on a F2P account for GI complete the content. Sounds pretty beneficial to pay, no?
KingDDD wrote: » In DMC 5 Dante has 4 unique weapons with 4 unique styles with 4 unique guns. Nero has a completely different playstyle with his own unique mechanics; same for V. The combined inputs between them is significantly larger than the proposed button inputs per class in Ashes. As for learning other classes, how does leveling my class teach me anything about your class? I can watch a mage cast X but do I actually learn anything from that? There isn't any teaching in this.
KingDDD wrote: » Ashes planning to have a mentor system doesn't have anything to do with leveling being a positive experience. Most mentor systems I've seen across the MMO sphere are widely under utilized.
KingDDD wrote: » Player ability in that situation has nothing to do with the math behind winning due to level differences. Player knowledge is not garnered from leveling. How "old" my character is is not synonymous with game knowledge. Can you give an example of a game where players go through the leveling process and have the necessary knowledge to play the game? In a game like Ashes my progress will be represented by the evolution of the world. Which nodes progress and why. The world is the story, not my individual character.
KingDDD wrote: » Again you argue for player skill to matter less. That's not the selling point you think it is.
KingDDD wrote: » No i started Dota at >1k. The average player gets around 3-4 in a two year time frame. I was able to achieve better results because I played better. There were people around my MMR because of match making. Ashes won't have server based match making.
KingDDD wrote: » The difficulty going up eventually isn't fun. I most definitely won't be able to do whatever activity I want, because the content will be mathematically impossible for me to do.
KingDDD wrote: » I played Overwatch for the first time a few weeks ago, my first rank was Gold. I completely skipped the first 50% of the "levels" within a few hours of playing the game. The analogy you use isn't equivalent.
Strevi wrote: » Everyone has a place. Our place is here.
KingDDD wrote: » Where have I done this?
Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Neurath wrote: » It wasn't an insult. The point stands, do you want to play ashes? If so what drew you to ashes because so far you seem to dislike the basic fundamentals. I love the fundamentals. Nodes are awesome, augemnts are great, open world sounds amazing, a variety of classes and unique customization should be great, graphics look astounding, and the lead dev has actually played an MMO in the past decade as a player with a team that has experience playing MMOs with a variety of skill levels versus someone who's been a lead developer in the industry for 20+ years beholden to turning a profit for shareholders. Awesome, heres another question. Will character levels stop you from playing the game? Depends on how it takes for it to be fun. If I'm playing a tank and my abilities and role are locked behind a timewall, it'll probably be pretty boring unless the starting zone has something to keep my interest. And that doesn't refer to saving a village from a graphically beautiful dragon. I've done that before and don't particularly care to do it again. Well then I finally have a question. Do games like Elder Scrolls where your character COULD theoretically do without 'real levels' but still need to do things like 'Speechcraft to level 100' also cause a negative response? Games of this type tend to have SOME form of progression, would you say that you're opposed to the 'power gap' part of it? For example, I play one where you start with a 'basic generic' Martial Arts kit, and you still have to 'level' by finding opponents to face who know other moves, but you could theoretically win fights with just the base kit, it's not 'weaker', it just possibly isn't 'what you prefer', and even that might not be true. Basically, is it 'having to kill mobs to raise a number' only or is 'having to work toward your customizations because you disprefer the default kit' also an offender in this? The Elder Scrolls (I assume you mean Skyrim, Oblivion, Morrowind etc) are single player games. The leveling aspect is part of the pacing for both design and story. Part of the fun for those games is beating them naked, or under leveled, or over leveled, or with specific classes, or with no heals, etc. The Elder Scrolls also got rid of leveling in the general sense or made things like speech craft unnecessary outside of a specific dialogue tree responses in the later releases. I don't remember if Skyrim had any particular quests locked behind 100 speech or not, it's been awhile since I played it. Obviously, there's mods to change that, but the majority of players don't use mods. This is also true for MMORPGs though, or at least, in some better ones it can be. I'm trying to figure out if you have a design issue with leveling itself, or with 'a thing that comes along with it, which a game could simply choose not to do' (I am not claiming that Ashes has chosen not to do that something, so this probably isn't actually important). So, to repeat the part that might be relevant. I can play certain games where I need to put in time to get through the game's 'gates' to progress, such as 'gathering materials to make better gear' or 'encountering a situation in battle enough times for my character to unlock a related skill', but there are no gates based on initial level, and you could theoretically do all content without doing basically any of that through raw skill. Is this fine? Because it's hard to tell where you draw the line here. "I like this Augment but I have to grind through this Social Organization's Questlines which I don't find appealing, I should just be able to have the Augment now because it would be more fun for me" would be a way someone could uncharitably interpret your position. Ashes story isn't about you, its about the world and how players on a server build it. When you are grinding an augment you're interacting with the world a specific way that intentionally builds the server in a specific manner. Ideally, this will cause social interaction and structures that are unique on a per server basis. In this scenario, I chose to engage with the world and the associated rewards/problems that come with it. Forced grinding through leveling does not allow for this choice. I must engage with the leveling process first before I can interact how and where I want. But this is an assumption you are making. Basically, you don't know that. I don't even know why you think it. Based on my time in Alpha-1, I never felt like this at all. Do you just not like fighting mobs? Even that, you could get around outside of quests. I don't get it. Assume that I'm COMPLETELY in agreement with you on the basic idea, but I don't agree that what you are saying is even likely to happen in Ashes just because the game contains levels. Maybe then you can explain it to me, if you care? I think you could get to level 10 in Alpha-1 without fighting a single non-quest mob. I fought mobs because I like doing that and I didn't like certain quests. Other people did quests and didn't fight mobs. Maybe you don't want to do quests OR fight early mobs? Or maybe you're not as familiar with the style of EXP gain that certain games use? In Ashes Alpha, if you could manage to kill something 5 levels above you, you would get 4x the exp that you get for killing something at your own level. I didn't bother doing it, but I feel like I could have hit level 10 in 2h, and that was with at least 30 minutes of it just 'wandering all the way to the Node I was helping test' every time. What is it that you're imagining is locked behind leveling that ALSO won't have a 'lower level version' to engage with?
KingDDD wrote: » Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Neurath wrote: » It wasn't an insult. The point stands, do you want to play ashes? If so what drew you to ashes because so far you seem to dislike the basic fundamentals. I love the fundamentals. Nodes are awesome, augemnts are great, open world sounds amazing, a variety of classes and unique customization should be great, graphics look astounding, and the lead dev has actually played an MMO in the past decade as a player with a team that has experience playing MMOs with a variety of skill levels versus someone who's been a lead developer in the industry for 20+ years beholden to turning a profit for shareholders. Awesome, heres another question. Will character levels stop you from playing the game? Depends on how it takes for it to be fun. If I'm playing a tank and my abilities and role are locked behind a timewall, it'll probably be pretty boring unless the starting zone has something to keep my interest. And that doesn't refer to saving a village from a graphically beautiful dragon. I've done that before and don't particularly care to do it again. Well then I finally have a question. Do games like Elder Scrolls where your character COULD theoretically do without 'real levels' but still need to do things like 'Speechcraft to level 100' also cause a negative response? Games of this type tend to have SOME form of progression, would you say that you're opposed to the 'power gap' part of it? For example, I play one where you start with a 'basic generic' Martial Arts kit, and you still have to 'level' by finding opponents to face who know other moves, but you could theoretically win fights with just the base kit, it's not 'weaker', it just possibly isn't 'what you prefer', and even that might not be true. Basically, is it 'having to kill mobs to raise a number' only or is 'having to work toward your customizations because you disprefer the default kit' also an offender in this? The Elder Scrolls (I assume you mean Skyrim, Oblivion, Morrowind etc) are single player games. The leveling aspect is part of the pacing for both design and story. Part of the fun for those games is beating them naked, or under leveled, or over leveled, or with specific classes, or with no heals, etc. The Elder Scrolls also got rid of leveling in the general sense or made things like speech craft unnecessary outside of a specific dialogue tree responses in the later releases. I don't remember if Skyrim had any particular quests locked behind 100 speech or not, it's been awhile since I played it. Obviously, there's mods to change that, but the majority of players don't use mods. This is also true for MMORPGs though, or at least, in some better ones it can be. I'm trying to figure out if you have a design issue with leveling itself, or with 'a thing that comes along with it, which a game could simply choose not to do' (I am not claiming that Ashes has chosen not to do that something, so this probably isn't actually important). So, to repeat the part that might be relevant. I can play certain games where I need to put in time to get through the game's 'gates' to progress, such as 'gathering materials to make better gear' or 'encountering a situation in battle enough times for my character to unlock a related skill', but there are no gates based on initial level, and you could theoretically do all content without doing basically any of that through raw skill. Is this fine? Because it's hard to tell where you draw the line here. "I like this Augment but I have to grind through this Social Organization's Questlines which I don't find appealing, I should just be able to have the Augment now because it would be more fun for me" would be a way someone could uncharitably interpret your position. Ashes story isn't about you, its about the world and how players on a server build it. When you are grinding an augment you're interacting with the world a specific way that intentionally builds the server in a specific manner. Ideally, this will cause social interaction and structures that are unique on a per server basis. In this scenario, I chose to engage with the world and the associated rewards/problems that come with it. Forced grinding through leveling does not allow for this choice. I must engage with the leveling process first before I can interact how and where I want. But this is an assumption you are making. Basically, you don't know that. I don't even know why you think it. Based on my time in Alpha-1, I never felt like this at all. Do you just not like fighting mobs? Even that, you could get around outside of quests. I don't get it. Assume that I'm COMPLETELY in agreement with you on the basic idea, but I don't agree that what you are saying is even likely to happen in Ashes just because the game contains levels. Maybe then you can explain it to me, if you care? I think you could get to level 10 in Alpha-1 without fighting a single non-quest mob. I fought mobs because I like doing that and I didn't like certain quests. Other people did quests and didn't fight mobs. Maybe you don't want to do quests OR fight early mobs? Or maybe you're not as familiar with the style of EXP gain that certain games use? In Ashes Alpha, if you could manage to kill something 5 levels above you, you would get 4x the exp that you get for killing something at your own level. I didn't bother doing it, but I feel like I could have hit level 10 in 2h, and that was with at least 30 minutes of it just 'wandering all the way to the Node I was helping test' every time. What is it that you're imagining is locked behind leveling that ALSO won't have a 'lower level version' to engage with? The entire game is based around Vera. Its a new world where the players build up the social infrastructure via the node system. Converse that with WoW where you are the Champion, or Hero, or some other meaningless title that slays the big monster every expansion. Will there be important players who have their own story and are impactful? Absolutely, there will be players like the Mittani, but the story is about how the world evolves around them not the other way around. They can change whatever they want. The experience required to level is a variable in the code. Alpha 1 was really just a tech demo with a wrapper around it to make it more interesting than a graybox and as a marketing vessel to illustrate a proof of concept. The xp system you mention were there to illustrate that the knob to do it exists in the code, but doesn't necessitate that it'll be there at launch. There's nothing wrong with the game containing levels. They act as a tutorial for basic gameplay, like movement, vendoring, opening bags, skill training, etc. Once I've learned these things, I should be released into the world to choose my own adventure relative to what I want to do and how I want to exist within the world. Leveling only serves as a means to hinder my ability to do just that based on an arbitrary timesink that doesn't teach you how to play. Unique play spaces, combat/noncombat play styles, social activities with people I want to interact all come secondary to leveling. Unless, I want to be wildly less efficient at them to the point where its an even larger time sink to not level first.
NiKr wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » From a basic Google Search around 5% of the people playing on a F2P account for GI complete the content. Sounds pretty beneficial to pay, no? Could I get a link that shows that? I'm curious how exactly the measure that. KingDDD wrote: » In DMC 5 Dante has 4 unique weapons with 4 unique styles with 4 unique guns. Nero has a completely different playstyle with his own unique mechanics; same for V. The combined inputs between them is significantly larger than the proposed button inputs per class in Ashes. As for learning other classes, how does leveling my class teach me anything about your class? I can watch a mage cast X but do I actually learn anything from that? There isn't any teaching in this. Like I said before, DMC is a single player game while mmos are not. You talk to other people and learn from them how their classes work. That socialization and learning takes time. And the amount of stuff to learn is way more than the DMC stuff. Though what's more important in an mmo is how you use your abilities in cooperation with your groupmates. And just like absolutely perfecting combos in DMC takes a ton of time, learning how to play with others does too. KingDDD wrote: » Ashes planning to have a mentor system doesn't have anything to do with leveling being a positive experience. Most mentor systems I've seen across the MMO sphere are widely under utilized. Great! You can now give feedback on how Intrepid could make the best system. KingDDD wrote: » Player ability in that situation has nothing to do with the math behind winning due to level differences. Player knowledge is not garnered from leveling. How "old" my character is is not synonymous with game knowledge. Can you give an example of a game where players go through the leveling process and have the necessary knowledge to play the game? In a game like Ashes my progress will be represented by the evolution of the world. Which nodes progress and why. The world is the story, not my individual character. Your knowledge of the game will progress with your character's lvl. Your mastery of the game will most likely come after your character has hit max lvl. Also, you're only a small cog in a huge Node machine, so the world changing around you will not depend purely on your singular actions. This is not a single player game where everything depends purely on you, so while your character will have its own story, it'll be a small speck in the world's overall history. The only way to increase your influence is to become a GL of a huge guild, but that would take even more time than maxing out your lvl. KingDDD wrote: » Again you argue for player skill to matter less. That's not the selling point you think it is. To you it isn't. To most RPG players out there - it is. KingDDD wrote: » No i started Dota at >1k. The average player gets around 3-4 in a two year time frame. I was able to achieve better results because I played better. There were people around my MMR because of match making. Ashes won't have server based match making. You don't need matchmaking to match people of roughly the same lvl. You just put content of that level in the same location, so people of that lvl will come to that location to do content there. KingDDD wrote: » The difficulty going up eventually isn't fun. I most definitely won't be able to do whatever activity I want, because the content will be mathematically impossible for me to do. That will depend on how far into tab Intrepid will go with their design of mob combat. And on how tight the gear balancing will be. And on how easy/difficult it'll be to get that gear. In other words, it will depend on stuff that we don't currently know, so we don't know how skill-dependent the game will be. Though I'm fairly sure that you'll need to reach certain lvls to fight against enemies of certain higher lvls, just cause that's how rpgs work. KingDDD wrote: » I played Overwatch for the first time a few weeks ago, my first rank was Gold. I completely skipped the first 50% of the "levels" within a few hours of playing the game. The analogy you use isn't equivalent. Again, there's a chance that you'll be able to beat lvl 30 mobs after just a few hours of lvling, if you're skilled enough and if the mobs' attacks depend more on action targeting that purely on tab. It would be a much bigger test of your skills than fighting mobs of your own lvl, but if you're such a pro gamer I'm sure you'll handle it.
NiKr wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Where have I done this? Ok, I guess I misunderstood some comment of yours. So you're saying that you're completely fine with grinding gear/cosmetics/artisan abilities for over 200h to get stronger and be able to clear other content? Or do you, in fact, just want all the content given to you within the first few hours of the game?
Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Azherae wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Dolyem wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Neurath wrote: » It wasn't an insult. The point stands, do you want to play ashes? If so what drew you to ashes because so far you seem to dislike the basic fundamentals. I love the fundamentals. Nodes are awesome, augemnts are great, open world sounds amazing, a variety of classes and unique customization should be great, graphics look astounding, and the lead dev has actually played an MMO in the past decade as a player with a team that has experience playing MMOs with a variety of skill levels versus someone who's been a lead developer in the industry for 20+ years beholden to turning a profit for shareholders. Awesome, heres another question. Will character levels stop you from playing the game? Depends on how it takes for it to be fun. If I'm playing a tank and my abilities and role are locked behind a timewall, it'll probably be pretty boring unless the starting zone has something to keep my interest. And that doesn't refer to saving a village from a graphically beautiful dragon. I've done that before and don't particularly care to do it again. Well then I finally have a question. Do games like Elder Scrolls where your character COULD theoretically do without 'real levels' but still need to do things like 'Speechcraft to level 100' also cause a negative response? Games of this type tend to have SOME form of progression, would you say that you're opposed to the 'power gap' part of it? For example, I play one where you start with a 'basic generic' Martial Arts kit, and you still have to 'level' by finding opponents to face who know other moves, but you could theoretically win fights with just the base kit, it's not 'weaker', it just possibly isn't 'what you prefer', and even that might not be true. Basically, is it 'having to kill mobs to raise a number' only or is 'having to work toward your customizations because you disprefer the default kit' also an offender in this? The Elder Scrolls (I assume you mean Skyrim, Oblivion, Morrowind etc) are single player games. The leveling aspect is part of the pacing for both design and story. Part of the fun for those games is beating them naked, or under leveled, or over leveled, or with specific classes, or with no heals, etc. The Elder Scrolls also got rid of leveling in the general sense or made things like speech craft unnecessary outside of a specific dialogue tree responses in the later releases. I don't remember if Skyrim had any particular quests locked behind 100 speech or not, it's been awhile since I played it. Obviously, there's mods to change that, but the majority of players don't use mods. This is also true for MMORPGs though, or at least, in some better ones it can be. I'm trying to figure out if you have a design issue with leveling itself, or with 'a thing that comes along with it, which a game could simply choose not to do' (I am not claiming that Ashes has chosen not to do that something, so this probably isn't actually important). So, to repeat the part that might be relevant. I can play certain games where I need to put in time to get through the game's 'gates' to progress, such as 'gathering materials to make better gear' or 'encountering a situation in battle enough times for my character to unlock a related skill', but there are no gates based on initial level, and you could theoretically do all content without doing basically any of that through raw skill. Is this fine? Because it's hard to tell where you draw the line here. "I like this Augment but I have to grind through this Social Organization's Questlines which I don't find appealing, I should just be able to have the Augment now because it would be more fun for me" would be a way someone could uncharitably interpret your position. Ashes story isn't about you, its about the world and how players on a server build it. When you are grinding an augment you're interacting with the world a specific way that intentionally builds the server in a specific manner. Ideally, this will cause social interaction and structures that are unique on a per server basis. In this scenario, I chose to engage with the world and the associated rewards/problems that come with it. Forced grinding through leveling does not allow for this choice. I must engage with the leveling process first before I can interact how and where I want. But this is an assumption you are making. Basically, you don't know that. I don't even know why you think it. Based on my time in Alpha-1, I never felt like this at all. Do you just not like fighting mobs? Even that, you could get around outside of quests. I don't get it. Assume that I'm COMPLETELY in agreement with you on the basic idea, but I don't agree that what you are saying is even likely to happen in Ashes just because the game contains levels. Maybe then you can explain it to me, if you care? I think you could get to level 10 in Alpha-1 without fighting a single non-quest mob. I fought mobs because I like doing that and I didn't like certain quests. Other people did quests and didn't fight mobs. Maybe you don't want to do quests OR fight early mobs? Or maybe you're not as familiar with the style of EXP gain that certain games use? In Ashes Alpha, if you could manage to kill something 5 levels above you, you would get 4x the exp that you get for killing something at your own level. I didn't bother doing it, but I feel like I could have hit level 10 in 2h, and that was with at least 30 minutes of it just 'wandering all the way to the Node I was helping test' every time. What is it that you're imagining is locked behind leveling that ALSO won't have a 'lower level version' to engage with? The entire game is based around Vera. Its a new world where the players build up the social infrastructure via the node system. Converse that with WoW where you are the Champion, or Hero, or some other meaningless title that slays the big monster every expansion. Will there be important players who have their own story and are impactful? Absolutely, there will be players like the Mittani, but the story is about how the world evolves around them not the other way around. They can change whatever they want. The experience required to level is a variable in the code. Alpha 1 was really just a tech demo with a wrapper around it to make it more interesting than a graybox and as a marketing vessel to illustrate a proof of concept. The xp system you mention were there to illustrate that the knob to do it exists in the code, but doesn't necessitate that it'll be there at launch. There's nothing wrong with the game containing levels. They act as a tutorial for basic gameplay, like movement, vendoring, opening bags, skill training, etc. Once I've learned these things, I should be released into the world to choose my own adventure relative to what I want to do and how I want to exist within the world. Leveling only serves as a means to hinder my ability to do just that based on an arbitrary timesink that doesn't teach you how to play. Unique play spaces, combat/noncombat play styles, social activities with people I want to interact all come secondary to leveling. Unless, I want to be wildly less efficient at them to the point where its an even larger time sink to not level first. Ok, I don't think you would find too many people who disagree with that feedback. There are multiple reasons in MMOs to have levels, but none of them have to do with players at your skill level, and mostly, I feel like the game's goal should be to get it out of your way as much as is reasonable, while allowing it to function for others who need it. Simple hot take: Levels are a psychological crutch that are used to keep certain tiers of player skill/investment stratified properly, and to give players who don't do well a good 'excuse' why, because they're often casual enough to never go check 'what other people are doing'. What you want is for Leveling to not hinder you in Ashes. Sure. What I want is for leveling to be at worst a mild inconvenience for you, and a nice huge emotional cushion for those players who get frustrated easily at failing. I really don't know what game you played where levels meaningfully hinder your ability to follow your chosen path on a macro-level, but I hope you found something better. Grati pur data.
KingDDD wrote: » This reality combined with the gameplay information apparatus aka youtube guides makes leveling a pointless timesink.
KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » None of those things will require you to be max level, but all of them will be balanced around you being max level. Tell me how farming ore in any MMO goes when a level 1 heads into a level capped area. KingDDD wrote: » If the low level stuff is worth the time to farm, it'll be gobbled up by high level players. As much as I enjoy asking other people for help that have zero incentive to help me, I think Id rather see content not restricted from me. It sounds to me like you just want maximum efficiency, without putting the effort in to achieve that. Fun fact, while it may be true that high levels will dominate lower level content if it is profitable for them to do so, if you remove the need to gain levels, if you remove that time investment, players will dominate all content. At that point, there is nothing stopping anyone from dominating any content. The thing with genesis that the setup is as important as the payoff. A game that is all payoff and no setup is a game with a very short lifespan. Most people prefer working towards a goal and then achieving said goal, rather than just having that reward handed to them. The reward is more appreciated and more enjoyed when it is worked for. The more it is worked for, the more it is enjoyed. If you want to be a pirate in Ashes, work towards being a pirate in Ashes. You'll enjoy it more if you put that effort in. I don't need to eat a bowl of feces to appreciate a perfectly cooked/seasoned meal. Oh, you want to do a food analogy? An MMO is like a restaurant's degustation menu. Its 10 courses, and each course is designed to be a part of the meal as a whole. Each course builds on the previous course in some way. What you are saying here is that you want to go to a restaurant, order the degustation menu, but you only plan to eat one of the ten courses - and you expect to be satisfied by that. If all you want is one plate of food, order that plate of food off of the a la carte menu. That menu is designed to satisfy people with individual dishes. In terms of our discussion here, the a la carte menu would be other individual games. If you want to play a game to just be a pirate, dont play a game where being a pirate is about 2% of the whole and expect to be satisfied. Rather, go play Sea of Thieves or something. Or learn to accept the rest of the game. I'm allergic to tree nuts. The third item on your ten-course meal has tree nuts in it. Must I partake in this item to continue progressing in the "experience"? What you consider what percentage of a game is irrelevant as what you want is different than what others want. MMOs thrive when players with a variety of playstyles come together to partake in a shared world. If you have an allergy, we can work with that. If you just have a dislike of treenuts, however, try that course anyway. You are not allergic to grinding, you just dont like it. You didn't answer the question. Must I partake in the third course in order to move on to the fourth?
Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » None of those things will require you to be max level, but all of them will be balanced around you being max level. Tell me how farming ore in any MMO goes when a level 1 heads into a level capped area. KingDDD wrote: » If the low level stuff is worth the time to farm, it'll be gobbled up by high level players. As much as I enjoy asking other people for help that have zero incentive to help me, I think Id rather see content not restricted from me. It sounds to me like you just want maximum efficiency, without putting the effort in to achieve that. Fun fact, while it may be true that high levels will dominate lower level content if it is profitable for them to do so, if you remove the need to gain levels, if you remove that time investment, players will dominate all content. At that point, there is nothing stopping anyone from dominating any content. The thing with genesis that the setup is as important as the payoff. A game that is all payoff and no setup is a game with a very short lifespan. Most people prefer working towards a goal and then achieving said goal, rather than just having that reward handed to them. The reward is more appreciated and more enjoyed when it is worked for. The more it is worked for, the more it is enjoyed. If you want to be a pirate in Ashes, work towards being a pirate in Ashes. You'll enjoy it more if you put that effort in. I don't need to eat a bowl of feces to appreciate a perfectly cooked/seasoned meal. Oh, you want to do a food analogy? An MMO is like a restaurant's degustation menu. Its 10 courses, and each course is designed to be a part of the meal as a whole. Each course builds on the previous course in some way. What you are saying here is that you want to go to a restaurant, order the degustation menu, but you only plan to eat one of the ten courses - and you expect to be satisfied by that. If all you want is one plate of food, order that plate of food off of the a la carte menu. That menu is designed to satisfy people with individual dishes. In terms of our discussion here, the a la carte menu would be other individual games. If you want to play a game to just be a pirate, dont play a game where being a pirate is about 2% of the whole and expect to be satisfied. Rather, go play Sea of Thieves or something. Or learn to accept the rest of the game. I'm allergic to tree nuts. The third item on your ten-course meal has tree nuts in it. Must I partake in this item to continue progressing in the "experience"? What you consider what percentage of a game is irrelevant as what you want is different than what others want. MMOs thrive when players with a variety of playstyles come together to partake in a shared world. If you have an allergy, we can work with that. If you just have a dislike of treenuts, however, try that course anyway. You are not allergic to grinding, you just dont like it.
KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » None of those things will require you to be max level, but all of them will be balanced around you being max level. Tell me how farming ore in any MMO goes when a level 1 heads into a level capped area. KingDDD wrote: » If the low level stuff is worth the time to farm, it'll be gobbled up by high level players. As much as I enjoy asking other people for help that have zero incentive to help me, I think Id rather see content not restricted from me. It sounds to me like you just want maximum efficiency, without putting the effort in to achieve that. Fun fact, while it may be true that high levels will dominate lower level content if it is profitable for them to do so, if you remove the need to gain levels, if you remove that time investment, players will dominate all content. At that point, there is nothing stopping anyone from dominating any content. The thing with genesis that the setup is as important as the payoff. A game that is all payoff and no setup is a game with a very short lifespan. Most people prefer working towards a goal and then achieving said goal, rather than just having that reward handed to them. The reward is more appreciated and more enjoyed when it is worked for. The more it is worked for, the more it is enjoyed. If you want to be a pirate in Ashes, work towards being a pirate in Ashes. You'll enjoy it more if you put that effort in. I don't need to eat a bowl of feces to appreciate a perfectly cooked/seasoned meal. Oh, you want to do a food analogy? An MMO is like a restaurant's degustation menu. Its 10 courses, and each course is designed to be a part of the meal as a whole. Each course builds on the previous course in some way. What you are saying here is that you want to go to a restaurant, order the degustation menu, but you only plan to eat one of the ten courses - and you expect to be satisfied by that. If all you want is one plate of food, order that plate of food off of the a la carte menu. That menu is designed to satisfy people with individual dishes. In terms of our discussion here, the a la carte menu would be other individual games. If you want to play a game to just be a pirate, dont play a game where being a pirate is about 2% of the whole and expect to be satisfied. Rather, go play Sea of Thieves or something. Or learn to accept the rest of the game. I'm allergic to tree nuts. The third item on your ten-course meal has tree nuts in it. Must I partake in this item to continue progressing in the "experience"? What you consider what percentage of a game is irrelevant as what you want is different than what others want. MMOs thrive when players with a variety of playstyles come together to partake in a shared world.
Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » None of those things will require you to be max level, but all of them will be balanced around you being max level. Tell me how farming ore in any MMO goes when a level 1 heads into a level capped area. KingDDD wrote: » If the low level stuff is worth the time to farm, it'll be gobbled up by high level players. As much as I enjoy asking other people for help that have zero incentive to help me, I think Id rather see content not restricted from me. It sounds to me like you just want maximum efficiency, without putting the effort in to achieve that. Fun fact, while it may be true that high levels will dominate lower level content if it is profitable for them to do so, if you remove the need to gain levels, if you remove that time investment, players will dominate all content. At that point, there is nothing stopping anyone from dominating any content. The thing with genesis that the setup is as important as the payoff. A game that is all payoff and no setup is a game with a very short lifespan. Most people prefer working towards a goal and then achieving said goal, rather than just having that reward handed to them. The reward is more appreciated and more enjoyed when it is worked for. The more it is worked for, the more it is enjoyed. If you want to be a pirate in Ashes, work towards being a pirate in Ashes. You'll enjoy it more if you put that effort in. I don't need to eat a bowl of feces to appreciate a perfectly cooked/seasoned meal. Oh, you want to do a food analogy? An MMO is like a restaurant's degustation menu. Its 10 courses, and each course is designed to be a part of the meal as a whole. Each course builds on the previous course in some way. What you are saying here is that you want to go to a restaurant, order the degustation menu, but you only plan to eat one of the ten courses - and you expect to be satisfied by that. If all you want is one plate of food, order that plate of food off of the a la carte menu. That menu is designed to satisfy people with individual dishes. In terms of our discussion here, the a la carte menu would be other individual games. If you want to play a game to just be a pirate, dont play a game where being a pirate is about 2% of the whole and expect to be satisfied. Rather, go play Sea of Thieves or something. Or learn to accept the rest of the game.
KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » None of those things will require you to be max level, but all of them will be balanced around you being max level. Tell me how farming ore in any MMO goes when a level 1 heads into a level capped area. KingDDD wrote: » If the low level stuff is worth the time to farm, it'll be gobbled up by high level players. As much as I enjoy asking other people for help that have zero incentive to help me, I think Id rather see content not restricted from me. It sounds to me like you just want maximum efficiency, without putting the effort in to achieve that. Fun fact, while it may be true that high levels will dominate lower level content if it is profitable for them to do so, if you remove the need to gain levels, if you remove that time investment, players will dominate all content. At that point, there is nothing stopping anyone from dominating any content. The thing with genesis that the setup is as important as the payoff. A game that is all payoff and no setup is a game with a very short lifespan. Most people prefer working towards a goal and then achieving said goal, rather than just having that reward handed to them. The reward is more appreciated and more enjoyed when it is worked for. The more it is worked for, the more it is enjoyed. If you want to be a pirate in Ashes, work towards being a pirate in Ashes. You'll enjoy it more if you put that effort in. I don't need to eat a bowl of feces to appreciate a perfectly cooked/seasoned meal.
Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » None of those things will require you to be max level, but all of them will be balanced around you being max level. Tell me how farming ore in any MMO goes when a level 1 heads into a level capped area. KingDDD wrote: » If the low level stuff is worth the time to farm, it'll be gobbled up by high level players. As much as I enjoy asking other people for help that have zero incentive to help me, I think Id rather see content not restricted from me. It sounds to me like you just want maximum efficiency, without putting the effort in to achieve that. Fun fact, while it may be true that high levels will dominate lower level content if it is profitable for them to do so, if you remove the need to gain levels, if you remove that time investment, players will dominate all content. At that point, there is nothing stopping anyone from dominating any content. The thing with genesis that the setup is as important as the payoff. A game that is all payoff and no setup is a game with a very short lifespan. Most people prefer working towards a goal and then achieving said goal, rather than just having that reward handed to them. The reward is more appreciated and more enjoyed when it is worked for. The more it is worked for, the more it is enjoyed. If you want to be a pirate in Ashes, work towards being a pirate in Ashes. You'll enjoy it more if you put that effort in.
KingDDD wrote: » None of those things will require you to be max level, but all of them will be balanced around you being max level. Tell me how farming ore in any MMO goes when a level 1 heads into a level capped area.
KingDDD wrote: » If the low level stuff is worth the time to farm, it'll be gobbled up by high level players. As much as I enjoy asking other people for help that have zero incentive to help me, I think Id rather see content not restricted from me.
Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » None of those things will require you to be max level, but all of them will be balanced around you being max level. Tell me how farming ore in any MMO goes when a level 1 heads into a level capped area. KingDDD wrote: » If the low level stuff is worth the time to farm, it'll be gobbled up by high level players. As much as I enjoy asking other people for help that have zero incentive to help me, I think Id rather see content not restricted from me. It sounds to me like you just want maximum efficiency, without putting the effort in to achieve that. Fun fact, while it may be true that high levels will dominate lower level content if it is profitable for them to do so, if you remove the need to gain levels, if you remove that time investment, players will dominate all content. At that point, there is nothing stopping anyone from dominating any content. The thing with genesis that the setup is as important as the payoff. A game that is all payoff and no setup is a game with a very short lifespan. Most people prefer working towards a goal and then achieving said goal, rather than just having that reward handed to them. The reward is more appreciated and more enjoyed when it is worked for. The more it is worked for, the more it is enjoyed. If you want to be a pirate in Ashes, work towards being a pirate in Ashes. You'll enjoy it more if you put that effort in. I don't need to eat a bowl of feces to appreciate a perfectly cooked/seasoned meal. Oh, you want to do a food analogy? An MMO is like a restaurant's degustation menu. Its 10 courses, and each course is designed to be a part of the meal as a whole. Each course builds on the previous course in some way. What you are saying here is that you want to go to a restaurant, order the degustation menu, but you only plan to eat one of the ten courses - and you expect to be satisfied by that. If all you want is one plate of food, order that plate of food off of the a la carte menu. That menu is designed to satisfy people with individual dishes. In terms of our discussion here, the a la carte menu would be other individual games. If you want to play a game to just be a pirate, dont play a game where being a pirate is about 2% of the whole and expect to be satisfied. Rather, go play Sea of Thieves or something. Or learn to accept the rest of the game. I'm allergic to tree nuts. The third item on your ten-course meal has tree nuts in it. Must I partake in this item to continue progressing in the "experience"? What you consider what percentage of a game is irrelevant as what you want is different than what others want. MMOs thrive when players with a variety of playstyles come together to partake in a shared world. If you have an allergy, we can work with that. If you just have a dislike of treenuts, however, try that course anyway. You are not allergic to grinding, you just dont like it. You didn't answer the question. Must I partake in the third course in order to move on to the fourth? You said you had an allergy, so I addressed that. If you now want to ignore your own analogy of allergies to treenuts, sure, we can do that. Yes, you will be served the course. And the following course will jot be served until all are ready for it. If you chose to not partake in any one specific course, that is on you. However, the remaining courses will not be altered just because of your decision to not fully participate in the 10 course meal. Keep in mind though, if we were to try and accurately transfer what you are complaining about to a 10 course meal, you would be refusing to eat 9 out of the 10 courses, not just one. If you were to say you didnt want to participate in one aspect of the game (crafting, as an example), this would be like skipping one course. In both cases, that's fine - there should be enough left to still satisfy a reasonable person. However, tiu saying you want to skip everything other than being a pirate is like you saying you want to only have course number 7, and expect it to be done in a way where it satisfies you on its own.
KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » None of those things will require you to be max level, but all of them will be balanced around you being max level. Tell me how farming ore in any MMO goes when a level 1 heads into a level capped area. KingDDD wrote: » If the low level stuff is worth the time to farm, it'll be gobbled up by high level players. As much as I enjoy asking other people for help that have zero incentive to help me, I think Id rather see content not restricted from me. It sounds to me like you just want maximum efficiency, without putting the effort in to achieve that. Fun fact, while it may be true that high levels will dominate lower level content if it is profitable for them to do so, if you remove the need to gain levels, if you remove that time investment, players will dominate all content. At that point, there is nothing stopping anyone from dominating any content. The thing with genesis that the setup is as important as the payoff. A game that is all payoff and no setup is a game with a very short lifespan. Most people prefer working towards a goal and then achieving said goal, rather than just having that reward handed to them. The reward is more appreciated and more enjoyed when it is worked for. The more it is worked for, the more it is enjoyed. If you want to be a pirate in Ashes, work towards being a pirate in Ashes. You'll enjoy it more if you put that effort in. I don't need to eat a bowl of feces to appreciate a perfectly cooked/seasoned meal. Oh, you want to do a food analogy? An MMO is like a restaurant's degustation menu. Its 10 courses, and each course is designed to be a part of the meal as a whole. Each course builds on the previous course in some way. What you are saying here is that you want to go to a restaurant, order the degustation menu, but you only plan to eat one of the ten courses - and you expect to be satisfied by that. If all you want is one plate of food, order that plate of food off of the a la carte menu. That menu is designed to satisfy people with individual dishes. In terms of our discussion here, the a la carte menu would be other individual games. If you want to play a game to just be a pirate, dont play a game where being a pirate is about 2% of the whole and expect to be satisfied. Rather, go play Sea of Thieves or something. Or learn to accept the rest of the game. I'm allergic to tree nuts. The third item on your ten-course meal has tree nuts in it. Must I partake in this item to continue progressing in the "experience"? What you consider what percentage of a game is irrelevant as what you want is different than what others want. MMOs thrive when players with a variety of playstyles come together to partake in a shared world. If you have an allergy, we can work with that. If you just have a dislike of treenuts, however, try that course anyway. You are not allergic to grinding, you just dont like it. You didn't answer the question. Must I partake in the third course in order to move on to the fourth? You said you had an allergy, so I addressed that. If you now want to ignore your own analogy of allergies to treenuts, sure, we can do that. Yes, you will be served the course. And the following course will jot be served until all are ready for it. If you chose to not partake in any one specific course, that is on you. However, the remaining courses will not be altered just because of your decision to not fully participate in the 10 course meal. Keep in mind though, if we were to try and accurately transfer what you are complaining about to a 10 course meal, you would be refusing to eat 9 out of the 10 courses, not just one. If you were to say you didnt want to participate in one aspect of the game (crafting, as an example), this would be like skipping one course. In both cases, that's fine - there should be enough left to still satisfy a reasonable person. However, tiu saying you want to skip everything other than being a pirate is like you saying you want to only have course number 7, and expect it to be done in a way where it satisfies you on its own. An allergy acts as an inciting incident. You can replace the word allergy with dislike the taste, hate the smell, walnuts personally harmed me as a child; it doesn't matter.
In the restaurant example for leveling, i cannot go to any other course until i eat one specific one first. Like leveling itself I am locked out of participating in what I want because I don't want to eat one course. There were plenty of people who played Archage specifically for the boat-based content. If that's the starting point for content in Ashes, there will be plenty of engaging activities to do around that.
Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » Noaani wrote: » KingDDD wrote: » None of those things will require you to be max level, but all of them will be balanced around you being max level. Tell me how farming ore in any MMO goes when a level 1 heads into a level capped area. KingDDD wrote: » If the low level stuff is worth the time to farm, it'll be gobbled up by high level players. As much as I enjoy asking other people for help that have zero incentive to help me, I think Id rather see content not restricted from me. It sounds to me like you just want maximum efficiency, without putting the effort in to achieve that. Fun fact, while it may be true that high levels will dominate lower level content if it is profitable for them to do so, if you remove the need to gain levels, if you remove that time investment, players will dominate all content. At that point, there is nothing stopping anyone from dominating any content. The thing with genesis that the setup is as important as the payoff. A game that is all payoff and no setup is a game with a very short lifespan. Most people prefer working towards a goal and then achieving said goal, rather than just having that reward handed to them. The reward is more appreciated and more enjoyed when it is worked for. The more it is worked for, the more it is enjoyed. If you want to be a pirate in Ashes, work towards being a pirate in Ashes. You'll enjoy it more if you put that effort in. I don't need to eat a bowl of feces to appreciate a perfectly cooked/seasoned meal. Oh, you want to do a food analogy? An MMO is like a restaurant's degustation menu. Its 10 courses, and each course is designed to be a part of the meal as a whole. Each course builds on the previous course in some way. What you are saying here is that you want to go to a restaurant, order the degustation menu, but you only plan to eat one of the ten courses - and you expect to be satisfied by that. If all you want is one plate of food, order that plate of food off of the a la carte menu. That menu is designed to satisfy people with individual dishes. In terms of our discussion here, the a la carte menu would be other individual games. If you want to play a game to just be a pirate, dont play a game where being a pirate is about 2% of the whole and expect to be satisfied. Rather, go play Sea of Thieves or something. Or learn to accept the rest of the game. I'm allergic to tree nuts. The third item on your ten-course meal has tree nuts in it. Must I partake in this item to continue progressing in the "experience"? What you consider what percentage of a game is irrelevant as what you want is different than what others want. MMOs thrive when players with a variety of playstyles come together to partake in a shared world. If you have an allergy, we can work with that. If you just have a dislike of treenuts, however, try that course anyway. You are not allergic to grinding, you just dont like it. You didn't answer the question. Must I partake in the third course in order to move on to the fourth? You said you had an allergy, so I addressed that. If you now want to ignore your own analogy of allergies to treenuts, sure, we can do that. Yes, you will be served the course. And the following course will jot be served until all are ready for it. If you chose to not partake in any one specific course, that is on you. However, the remaining courses will not be altered just because of your decision to not fully participate in the 10 course meal. Keep in mind though, if we were to try and accurately transfer what you are complaining about to a 10 course meal, you would be refusing to eat 9 out of the 10 courses, not just one. If you were to say you didnt want to participate in one aspect of the game (crafting, as an example), this would be like skipping one course. In both cases, that's fine - there should be enough left to still satisfy a reasonable person. However, tiu saying you want to skip everything other than being a pirate is like you saying you want to only have course number 7, and expect it to be done in a way where it satisfies you on its own. An allergy acts as an inciting incident. You can replace the word allergy with dislike the taste, hate the smell, walnuts personally harmed me as a child; it doesn't matter. An allergy is a medical condition with potentially fatal repercussions. You can not replace it with the word dislike. In the restaurant example for leveling, i cannot go to any other course until i eat one specific one first. Like leveling itself I am locked out of participating in what I want because I don't want to eat one course. There were plenty of people who played Archage specifically for the boat-based content. If that's the starting point for content in Ashes, there will be plenty of engaging activities to do around that. If you dont want the 10 course menu at the restaurant, dont order it. Dont order it and then complain that it isnt what you want. That is the point.
Dolyem wrote: » Well I suppose the positive of this post shows which(leveling or not leveling) is the preferred majority in this community.
