Sometimes, this is the dumbest thing people can say, and we hear it a lot when games are in development.
Any criticisms receive a quick comeback of "It's in Alpha" or "It's in development"..."polish comes later"....
While I don't deny this, certain aspects of the game won't be changing, and that should be obvious. Heck, we commonly heard "this game isn't for you" when people requested action combat.
When combat was criticized as bland, months ago, there was a reason for that. You pretty much know, already, what combat will feel like in the future. The same comparative reasoning is being used that allows someone to distinguish between tab action and hybrid combat.
Telling people that "polish comes later" is trickery. Imagine swinging a sword, and the animation looks clunky, and after some "polish" it will look smooth...swinging a sword, however, is still swinging a sword, and what happens when you swing it will remain the same... nothing about that changes.
In this sense, the style of interactions between PCs and NPCs are already established, otherwise you'd have no clue how to even design the game. We will not be getting BDO combat, or Everquest or WoW combat. No amount of "polish" will change this because "polish" has nothing to do with it.
So when combat is criticized as bland, I personally feel it is because of the choices that were made when determining the interactions between PC and NPC. Not polish.
How many games have you seen actual alpha gameplay (not including alpha used as an early access release term or marketing).
1,000!
Anyone able to tell me what combat style of gameplay AOC will have?
this statement is capped, name which games you saw in alpha development.
I can't name a single game Mag. Big zero. Super big 0
Apocalypse wasn’t Ashes of Creation. It was a separate game that shared some of the resources from the game (graphics, sound) but none of the gameplay. That’s a disingenuous argument to make. The point of Apocalypse was to stress test the infrastructure that Ashes would later be hosted on. Apocalypse was a placeholder game.
As far as what might change, it depends on what you mean by “foundation”. They surely aren’t going to ditch everything, but I don’t think any particular thing at this point is immune to change. And as others have said, we’re missing a lot of key things that are critical to combat. I haven’t even seen how they’re mixing action and tab targeting like they’ve always planned.
I don’t even think the foundation is even done yet.
Your last post here suggests that you do need to be reminded how early they still are in all this. You’re implying that you think they have more combat in place than they actually do.
Curious if you were including Apocalypse, and you are not.
With respect to combat, my use of the word foundation doesnt appear to align, so yeah, understandable.
At what point did the method used of engaging in combat transition to a consistent repeatable event?
When did the very basics of combat start looking the same month over month?
No matter what I say, there will be different interpretations of scale.... I need a picture book.
When time allows.
0
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
It's an interesting perspective. There's good room to agree and disagree in it, and I'm sure you'd agree with that. It's easy to over assume what might and might not change though. One shouldn't be afraid to share useful feedback on anything regardless of whether or not they think it will change, but someone fully judging the game based on alpha is indeed a bit premature. Swinging a sword is of course swinging a sword, but a minor change to stance, direction, any little thing could make a noteworthy difference on how it "feels" to swing that sword.
I think how the sword swings is a minor issue when you are not allowed to use it to kill another player and you end up asking if trains should be allowed as an alternative.
September 12. 2022: Being naked can also be used to bring a skilled artisan to different freeholds... Don't summon family!
If "it's still in alpha" is used to dismiss constructive criticism then I would agree it is bad.
But when I read typical twitch chats like
"looks like shit" or "only 5 spells kekw" or "looks unpolished"
then the only reasonable response is that it's still in alpha.
At least you two are agreeing on something for once, glad I could help with that, although the responses still imply a misunderstanding.
And here we go with the derailing of the thread into combat discussion....may as well close it now, there's no point in talking about it, the deal is done.
Hence the overuse of go-to phrases.
You prove my point with your responses and you can't even see it....
You prove my point with your responses and you can't even see it....
I'm honestly not sure your point has been proven at all here.
To me, the situations where it has ever been valid to say "the game is still in alpha" (combat pacing, class abilities, lighting, anything at all to do with content, textures, map layout etc) all still apply.
I just see a lot of potential with the little they have shown between hybrid, class combinations, status, effects of skills, mobility. Plenty of possibilities and depth for the gameplay I don't see things being shallow or lacking as they work towards their final product.
I've said before animation are important,
1. the shield and mace animations were lacking,
2. The hammer they showed clearly has his hand in place like it is meant to hold a shield, and not having unique animations for people that want to use it without a shield.
3. The two handed sword and daggers both having same block pose
4. etc
It its clear they are working on the groundwork and will be adding more polish later on a lot of elements game play included obviously.
You prove my point with your responses and you can't even see it....
I'm honestly not sure your point has been proven at all here.
How come some people understand but you seem to always have trouble?
This is like $100,000 Pyramid, where you have to guess the word from a category such as "Things these Animals have" and the word to guess is Feather .. the player providing the clue would say Bird.... the player guessing would say Beak...the player providing the clue would again say...Bird....essentially meaning, think of something else on a Bird other than a Beak, you're almost there....now they guess Wings.....the player providing the clue would say, yet again, BIRRRRD.... and finally they guess correctly and say Feather.
I dont know how long we would have to play to arrive at the correct answer for you. I dont think its possible.
You will need to keep reading over the same text that has already been given until the answer presents itself to you, because I cant think of any other clues.
You will need to keep reading over the same text that has already been given until the answer presents itself to you, because I cant think of any other clues.
No, I'm good.
I pointed out all I wanted to point out in the post you quoted - the comment that "it's still in alpha" is as valid to use now as it ever has been, and the situations in which it is valid have not changed. I'm obviously not the first to point that out in this thread, but that doesnt mean I cant state it as well.
The point at which the comment ceases to become valid to use in the appropriate situations is when the game enters beta. Until the game enters beta, it is perfectly valid to state that the game is still in alpha, if the subject of discussion is a specific design element, rather than a design philosophy.
If you dont see that for what ever reason (I think you do, it just seems as if you are pissed off at something tangentially related), then maybe I should mumble something unintelligible about birds and beaks and feathers.
Anyone that says "its still in Alpha" doesnt understand.
They can revamp everything if they wanted...will they? No, you would never get a game if someone didnt make a decision one day, even while its still in Alpha....and now you'll say, we wont know until beta because you dont understand how someone can arrive at this conclusion... assign a probability to various aspects of the game that you have seen, and try to figure out whats the probability of that being retained...what happens to increase this probability? You dont know and You dont get it. Youll say you do and still tell me its still in alpha as you already have.... you cant think outside of the box, as ive said before...
Anyone that says "its still in Alpha" doesnt understand.
They can revamp everything if they wanted...will they? No, you would never get a game if someone didnt make a decision one day, even while its still in Alpha....and now you'll say, we wont know until beta because you dont understand how someone can arrive at this conclusion... assign a probability to various aspects of the game that you have seen, and try to figure out whats the probability of that being retained...what happens to increase this probability? You dont know and You dont get it. Youll say you do and still tell me its still in alpha as you already have.... you cant think outside of the box, as ive said before...
No 80% atleast don't understand it's in alpha even if they say it and even if they agree with it. Unless you are working in the industry and know all the issues and challenges and how much things change you just don't fully comprehend true alpha development.
Throne and liberty is a great example in how that had its gameplay completely changed from being top down like Lost ark.
Time that term is going to be used when they ask for feedback and people start talking about balancing and saying that is an issue and the games balance is bad as one example. That feedback isn't helping anything or drowning out feedback they had asked for. And again that is only one example where people try to critique something that development wise right now doesn't make a lot of sense to do so in that way. Rather than start offering ideas or asking people what kinds of challenges they would like to see from forms of content, or combat.
How do you get from alpha to beta to release without making decisions? Are you guys all telling me that decisions are never finalized along the way? When they decide to transition to Beta, what has happened? They decided to keep things a particularly way.... no? At what point in Alpha is that decision made? Because it is made...obviously...not every decision is made at the very end of Alpha... How can you assign a probability, at any given point of development, that what you see wont change? The choice to use Unreal Engine 5... that gonna change? It could but whats the liklihood that this happens? Im going to say zero... "BUT ITS IN ALPHA"....
Anyone that says "its still in Alpha" doesnt understand.
They can revamp everything if they wanted...will they? No
They dont need to revamp it in order to change it.
All they need to do is perform the next pass on it, and the one after, and the one after.
In development, you dont just "make" a section of the product and then consider it done and move on to the next part. You first of all implement a general outline of your product, then you start adding in the outlines of different systems and mechanics, and you keep refining them in kind of a circular manner.
One potential example of this would be attack animations. You can create the basic animation really early on in development, and have no issues. However, you dont want to fine tune the animation, add particle effects or tweak things to make the animation work in conjunction with other character models too early.
Before you do any of that, you want to have the class kit that the animation will be a part of basically finished. This is because there is always a chance that balance will see any given ability swing from more powerful to less powerful, and the finer details of the animation needs to match. There is also no point in adding particle effects until this point.
Hooking up animations to correctly collide with other models isnt something you do until basically all models are made, etc.
So, until we have all models created and all class kits basically finalized, we need to assume that all combat animations are effectively temporary - or in an alpha state.
So, any complaints that attack animations dont look fluid enough (as just one of many examples) ABSOLUTELY needs to be met with "the game is still in alpha",as making those animations more fluid isnt something that can happen at this point in development.
Is there a specific portion of the above you disagree with?
Do you, perhaps, believe developers should spend time - and therefore money - on "finishing" animations at a point in development that is before they actually know exactly how to finish those animations?
Because that would be a really interesting position to have - asking developers to finish things before they have any idea what the final product should look like.
Even more interesting would be if you actually agree with all of the above, but still hold the view that we shouldn't point out that such things are still in alpha.
So, either way, your current stance is some form of interesting.
No man, you're thinking of the wrong things and are just way off... bird man, bird!
No I'm not.
As I have said, as everyone has said, there are some things that some people complain about that do not have "the game is still in alpha" as a response.
However, there are many, many things where it is still the appropriate response - these are what I am talking about.
I have a question for you, can you point us to any complaint or point made on these forums about the game where someone seriously said "the game is still in alpha", but where that wasn't an appropriate response?
The fact that you asked me that question and said it yourself in this thread just validates my assessment of your ability to continue to fail at understanding what Im talking about.
You wont get it, cant get it, and are not capable of understanding what was understood by a small few.
Keep reading, reread it and reread again. Youre the one who spends obscene amounts of time living in these forums... I dont and Im not your secretary. This thread contains enough information for you to understand but you havent been able to do it.
Comments
I can't name a single game Mag. Big zero. Super big 0
Curious if you were including Apocalypse, and you are not.
With respect to combat, my use of the word foundation doesnt appear to align, so yeah, understandable.
At what point did the method used of engaging in combat transition to a consistent repeatable event?
When did the very basics of combat start looking the same month over month?
No matter what I say, there will be different interpretations of scale.... I need a picture book.
When time allows.
Understood. I don't think we know enough to answer that. My guess is that we won't get to this point until Beta.
When we get to beta, if I even remember to bring this up, Ill ask you whats the same from alpha.
I honestly think that would be very interesting and I look forward to it.
Do they? Because I don't see that.
It is a conceptual issue, Clint is correct.
I see people bringing up issues with the games concept all the time - I do it fairly often.
I dont see people attempting to wave that away saying the game is still in alpha.
But when I read typical twitch chats like
"looks like shit" or "only 5 spells kekw" or "looks unpolished"
then the only reasonable response is that it's still in alpha.
Not everyone understands what other people are talking about which can explain blind dismissals.
Indeed.
This one isnt even a case of being alpha. It's a case of "the content you are looking at is supposed to be kind of bland".
And here we go with the derailing of the thread into combat discussion....may as well close it now, there's no point in talking about it, the deal is done.
Hence the overuse of go-to phrases.
You prove my point with your responses and you can't even see it....
I'm honestly not sure your point has been proven at all here.
To me, the situations where it has ever been valid to say "the game is still in alpha" (combat pacing, class abilities, lighting, anything at all to do with content, textures, map layout etc) all still apply.
I've said before animation are important,
1. the shield and mace animations were lacking,
2. The hammer they showed clearly has his hand in place like it is meant to hold a shield, and not having unique animations for people that want to use it without a shield.
3. The two handed sword and daggers both having same block pose
4. etc
It its clear they are working on the groundwork and will be adding more polish later on a lot of elements game play included obviously.
How come some people understand but you seem to always have trouble?
This is like $100,000 Pyramid, where you have to guess the word from a category such as "Things these Animals have" and the word to guess is Feather .. the player providing the clue would say Bird.... the player guessing would say Beak...the player providing the clue would again say...Bird....essentially meaning, think of something else on a Bird other than a Beak, you're almost there....now they guess Wings.....the player providing the clue would say, yet again, BIRRRRD.... and finally they guess correctly and say Feather.
I dont know how long we would have to play to arrive at the correct answer for you. I dont think its possible.
You will need to keep reading over the same text that has already been given until the answer presents itself to you, because I cant think of any other clues.
I pointed out all I wanted to point out in the post you quoted - the comment that "it's still in alpha" is as valid to use now as it ever has been, and the situations in which it is valid have not changed. I'm obviously not the first to point that out in this thread, but that doesnt mean I cant state it as well.
The point at which the comment ceases to become valid to use in the appropriate situations is when the game enters beta. Until the game enters beta, it is perfectly valid to state that the game is still in alpha, if the subject of discussion is a specific design element, rather than a design philosophy.
If you dont see that for what ever reason (I think you do, it just seems as if you are pissed off at something tangentially related), then maybe I should mumble something unintelligible about birds and beaks and feathers.
They can revamp everything if they wanted...will they? No, you would never get a game if someone didnt make a decision one day, even while its still in Alpha....and now you'll say, we wont know until beta because you dont understand how someone can arrive at this conclusion... assign a probability to various aspects of the game that you have seen, and try to figure out whats the probability of that being retained...what happens to increase this probability? You dont know and You dont get it. Youll say you do and still tell me its still in alpha as you already have.... you cant think outside of the box, as ive said before...
No 80% atleast don't understand it's in alpha even if they say it and even if they agree with it. Unless you are working in the industry and know all the issues and challenges and how much things change you just don't fully comprehend true alpha development.
Throne and liberty is a great example in how that had its gameplay completely changed from being top down like Lost ark.
Time that term is going to be used when they ask for feedback and people start talking about balancing and saying that is an issue and the games balance is bad as one example. That feedback isn't helping anything or drowning out feedback they had asked for. And again that is only one example where people try to critique something that development wise right now doesn't make a lot of sense to do so in that way. Rather than start offering ideas or asking people what kinds of challenges they would like to see from forms of content, or combat.
This is logic guys...cmon.. for the love of...
They dont need to revamp it in order to change it.
All they need to do is perform the next pass on it, and the one after, and the one after.
In development, you dont just "make" a section of the product and then consider it done and move on to the next part. You first of all implement a general outline of your product, then you start adding in the outlines of different systems and mechanics, and you keep refining them in kind of a circular manner.
One potential example of this would be attack animations. You can create the basic animation really early on in development, and have no issues. However, you dont want to fine tune the animation, add particle effects or tweak things to make the animation work in conjunction with other character models too early.
Before you do any of that, you want to have the class kit that the animation will be a part of basically finished. This is because there is always a chance that balance will see any given ability swing from more powerful to less powerful, and the finer details of the animation needs to match. There is also no point in adding particle effects until this point.
Hooking up animations to correctly collide with other models isnt something you do until basically all models are made, etc.
So, until we have all models created and all class kits basically finalized, we need to assume that all combat animations are effectively temporary - or in an alpha state.
So, any complaints that attack animations dont look fluid enough (as just one of many examples) ABSOLUTELY needs to be met with "the game is still in alpha",as making those animations more fluid isnt something that can happen at this point in development.
Is there a specific portion of the above you disagree with?
Do you, perhaps, believe developers should spend time - and therefore money - on "finishing" animations at a point in development that is before they actually know exactly how to finish those animations?
Because that would be a really interesting position to have - asking developers to finish things before they have any idea what the final product should look like.
Even more interesting would be if you actually agree with all of the above, but still hold the view that we shouldn't point out that such things are still in alpha.
So, either way, your current stance is some form of interesting.
No I'm not.
As I have said, as everyone has said, there are some things that some people complain about that do not have "the game is still in alpha" as a response.
However, there are many, many things where it is still the appropriate response - these are what I am talking about.
I have a question for you, can you point us to any complaint or point made on these forums about the game where someone seriously said "the game is still in alpha", but where that wasn't an appropriate response?
You wont get it, cant get it, and are not capable of understanding what was understood by a small few.
Keep reading, reread it and reread again. Youre the one who spends obscene amounts of time living in these forums... I dont and Im not your secretary. This thread contains enough information for you to understand but you havent been able to do it.