[Discussion] Is there enough PvE? Is the game content balanced?

[Introduction]

As a follow up on a discussion from last week I'd like to find out whether the active members of this forum think that the PvE content (whatever they count into that) is enough (1) for them and (2) for the game to gain and retain enough players to keep the game profitable, relevant and active.

[Opinion piece]

While I can see that why some people think that the "pure" PvE might be a bit lacking and could frustrate players in the long term, I don't share this concern - at least not yet, the A2 might change my view. I consider myself primarily a PvE player and though I am aware of the open PvP nature of most content, I feel fairly optimistic that even with low effort it will be able for me to not stand out to the degree that I am forced into PvP all the time and can enjoy the game. Towards that goal I have adjusted what classes I will play to increase my safety and I think that is an acceptable measure to expect from players who want to avoid PvP in this game. The nature of Ashes being a PvX game has been known for long enough for people to make an informed decision of whether or not they like this type of gameplay and for now I don't really see a reason to believe that this would deter players so much that it will lead to the game not being sustainable in the long term.

[Questions]

So what are your thoughts:
~ Are you satisfied with the content balance by amount?
~ Are you satisfied with the amount of isolation between PvE and PvP? (should it be increased?)
~ Do you think that based on what has been shown so far Ashes will be able to retain a sizeable player base - let's say 500'000 active players?

And maybe as a "special" topic question:
~ Do you deem it worthwhile to view Ashes of Creation's content through a lense that always divides between PvE and PvP, would it be more conductive to the discussion to view content as "just PvX" and evaluate the quality and quantity of player interactions with these pieces of content or do you have a completely different perspective on this (like "who care?!")?

Thanks for reading!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Raven016

Azherae wrote: »

We're talking about 'active' as in 'daily average' right?

Yes, that is how I assumed it might end up in 6-12 months after release, given that many players will experience the game in Alpha 2 phase.

Noaani

JustVine wrote: »

I am also expecting them to see the huge flaw of putting some best in slot items in PvP free for all zones with no corruption and others having corruption and will therefore change all dungeons and world bosses to be PvP free for all zones as well.

Yeah, I've been assuming they would make bosses battleground zones at some point, for reasons similar to this.

Not sure about dungeons - I doubt best in slot items will be found there, so I dont see the need.

Kilion

@Raven016 I did some back of the napkin math.

- The average game designer in California earns something like 80k.
- I took that number and assumed for Ashes to be maintained and have enough staff to run the game that they need somethng between 150 and 200 staff members. That puts us at 16M$.
- Add to that the same amount for the building, server structure and so on you are at 32M$.
- Add to all of this around 40% to cover all the taxes and dues that might need to be paid and you have a aroung 44,8 million dollars annual costs.
- On player has a subscription fee of 180$ per year. So without other income streams it would take 248'889 players to bring in that money.

So in theory 250k active players would be slightly profitable. I doubled that player number so that I'd feel confident in saying Intrepid could deem it worthwhile developing and maintaining the game.

With all that said: I have no idea if the building costs etc are too high or too low, neither do I know the american (and Californian) tax system good enough to say if 40% is over the top or maybe too low.

But yeah, to maintain the game according to this (very) rough calculation, I'd say anything below 300k active players is not good.

Raven016

@kilion They can try to keep the game alive after release for a long time.
But some players leave no matter what content comes.
Others stay even if no new content is added.
I have no idea if keeping many developers 1 year after release is profitable.
But those who like to collect cosmetics will pay more than the monthly subscription and might stay longer. How many designers are needed to create these monthly cosmetics?

Kilion

Raven016 wrote: »

@kilion They can try to keep the game alive after release for a long time.
But some players leave no matter what content comes.
Others stay even if no new content is added.
I have no idea if keeping many developers 1 year after release is profitable.
But those who like to collect cosmetics will pay more than the monthly subscription and might stay longer. How many designers are needed to create these monthly cosmetics?

Agreed, they won't need all the developers but some number of them will definitely have to stick around to work on expansions, small content patches and so on. And I tend to make "pessimistic" speculations when it comes to cost structures.

In any way, these numbers are nothing we should take too serious given my lack of expertise - they at best function as a tool to gain a very rough sense of what would probably be necessary to sustain Intrepids commitment to the game.

Child Item