Entitled Solo-Players Whiners will Ruin this game.

Not the best at typing. German guy here.

I have been following the game ever since Kickstarter. First-time I feel the urge to actually make a thread forum post. What is up with all this whining about freeholds?! This is not Barbie MMO why am I having a Déjà vu with NEW WORLD ALPHA forums when all the same solo-player whing crybabies showed up and started asking to removal of PVP to Teleportation to easy questing and all the same crap that ended up killing the game?!

Happening all over again Intrepid better just ignore this people they want easy best house in the game playing SOLO?! what the actual f...... If I was Stephen I would just block all the accounts. They are the same that will leave the game after 3 months when League of Legends MMO comes out. We don't need them we need dedicate players. Ignore them. Everyone in guild is happy.

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Songcaller

Is it solo players though? Isn't it the people who have taken any change in stride but have lost the whole purpose of their gaming style?

It's akin to naval content being removed for the pirates, pvp being removed from the pvp players, pve being removed from the pve players etc.

Some of us are fortunate to be better placed than others. We might be happy right now but a lot of people aren't. People deserve to be heard even if no action is taken.

Liniker

I wouldn't put it in those words but, you are not wrong

however, they will definitely not ruin the game - Intrepid constantly reminds us that asking for feedback does not imply game made by committee

they take feedback to see where people are coming from, and in very, very rare occasions when there was a major general agreement about something they have made small changes do the game, again, Small changes - this won't be one of them for sure, as there are many of us actually happy with those changes.

no need to worry about it m8

TheDarkSorcerer

I am a solo player... I despise playing WITH other people, but enjoy playing being around other people. Freehold system is a huge selling point to advertise the game. Why gate it?

The wording of this post is quite immature and not constructive.

ClintHardwood

I am a big guild player in Albion Online, a full loot PvP sandbox. The exclusivity of the freehold system is inviting disaster with how much content is gated behind it. While team play is fun, you still need solo players to fill the world.

BeOwningU

I must disagree. Steven has shown himself open to feedback while also remaining true to the core promises of the game. I believe it is not the solo players who will ruin the game but rather Steven's game that will show them a gaming world where increased interactions in cooperation and team building enlightens them to how gaming can be better.

Xeeg

Well personally I am not a "solo" player, but I also don't want to feel forced to join a guild before the game even launches just to have a shot at end game content. And then the guild already has leaders and lieutenants and people who are calling for the first freeholds, the guild leader is going to be Mayor, and everything is already planned out, etc....

I'd much prefer just playing the game, learning how the game works and meeting people in the game that are at similar stages or with similar goals to me. Maybe join a guild later after a few weeks or something, i dunno, I don't want to have to commit/depend on other players who have lives and things going on outside the game as well.

As long as there is still a robust system for allowing randoms to work together then I'll be happy. I'm not saying a world-wide LFG system, but we shouldn't be forced to join structured guilds just to play with other people and access end game stuff. That's a huge turnoff.

I think the node/citizenship system might already accomplish this, where it might be easier to trade/play with people that are in the same node as you, regardless of guilds. Maybe being in a guild is mandatory for like 1/5th of end game content, but the other 4/5 you can get just by playing with people you meet in the game.

Anyways, that's just my two cents.

BlackBrony

BeOwningU wrote: »

I must disagree. Steven has shown himself open to feedback while also remaining true to the core promises of the game. I believe it is not the solo players who will ruin the game but rather Steven's game that will show them a gaming world where increased interactions in cooperation and team building enlightens them to how gaming can be better.

One of the guilds was requiring access to alpha2, beta2 and assist ALL events of the guild. The game is not even out and I bet you, 100% of things are already planned. If you start day 1 just subbing, you've already lost. Forget anything, large guilds already have it all planned.
You're just gonna be an NPC

TheDarkSorcerer

Xeeg wrote: »

Well personally I am not a "solo" player, but I also don't want to feel forced to join a guild before the game even launches just to have a shot at end game content. And then the guild already has leaders and lieutenants and people who are calling for the first freeholds, the guild leader is going to be Mayor, and everything is already planned out, etc....

I'd much prefer just playing the game, learning how the game works and meeting people in the game that are at similar stages or with similar goals to me. Maybe join a guild later after a few weeks or something, i dunno, I don't want to have to commit/depend on other players who have lives and things going on outside the game as well.

As long as there is still a robust system for allowing randoms to work together then I'll be happy. I'm not saying a world-wide LFG system, but we shouldn't be forced to join structured guilds just to play with other people and access end game stuff. That's a huge turnoff.

I think the node/citizenship system might already accomplish this, where it might be easier to trade/play with people that are in the same node as you, regardless of guilds. Maybe being in a guild is mandatory for like 1/5th of end game content, but the other 4/5 you can get just by playing with people you meet in the game.

Anyways, that's just my two cents.

I agree with you fully!

All the friends i met in ESO where people i played with when i first started to play and got to know the game. I don't want to be forced into a cult right away where a bunch of people decide how and when i should play. We have enough of that dictatorship in our daily lives as is.

AnimusRex

Xeeg wrote: »

Well personally I am not a "solo" player, but I also don't want to feel forced to join a guild before the game even launches just to have a shot at end game content. And then the guild already has leaders and lieutenants and people who are calling for the first freeholds, the guild leader is going to be Mayor, and everything is already planned out, etc....

I'd much prefer just playing the game, learning how the game works and meeting people in the game that are at similar stages or with similar goals to me. Maybe join a guild later after a few weeks or something, i dunno, I don't want to have to commit/depend on other players who have lives and things going on outside the game as well.

As long as there is still a robust system for allowing randoms to work together then I'll be happy. I'm not saying a world-wide LFG system, but we shouldn't be forced to join structured guilds just to play with other people and access end game stuff. That's a huge turnoff.

I think the node/citizenship system might already accomplish this, where it might be easier to trade/play with people that are in the same node as you, regardless of guilds. Maybe being in a guild is mandatory for like 1/5th of end game content, but the other 4/5 you can get just by playing with people you meet in the game.

Anyways, that's just my two cents.

I'm very similar. My 2 big wants for this game personally are immersion and DISCOVERY. I want that old school feeling of being the first person to lay down footprints in a certain area, and maybe also be the last footprints made there.

That exploration, both of physical area and quest lines, takes time. I don't want to speed race to level 50 or be denied content.

A core of what we are told by Intrepid is that anything without risk isn't worth achieving. I don't disagree with that.. But equally, if everything is PLANNED, to me, it's also hollow.

I haven't seen any solo or more casual players say they want obtaining a freehold to be easy. But once you've done the hard work and met the criteria for ownership, they should be available if you want one.

Raven016

MageC wrote: »

We don't need them we need dedicate players. Ignore them. Everyone in guild is happy.

If developers will not change their decision, does not mean they ignore feedback on the pinned threads.
They cannot simply satisfy contradictory requirements.

Caww

AnimusRex wrote: »

I haven't seen any solo or more casual players say they want obtaining a freehold to be easy.

*raises hand*

Fantmx

MageC wrote: »

Not the best at typing. German guy here.

I have been following the game ever since Kickstarter. First-time I feel the urge to actually make a thread forum post. What is up with all this whining about freeholds?! This is not Barbie MMO why am I having a Déjà vu with NEW WORLD ALPHA forums when all the same solo-player whing crybabies showed up and started asking to removal of PVP to Teleportation to easy questing and all the same crap that ended up killing the game?!

Happening all over again Intrepid better just ignore this people they want easy best house in the game playing SOLO?! what the actual f...... If I was Stephen I would just block all the accounts. They are the same that will leave the game after 3 months when League of Legends MMO comes out. We don't need them we need dedicate players. Ignore them. Everyone in guild is happy.

I still never know who most of these threads are targeting. I see "solo" and "casual" and assume that the OPs are meaning the same thing but solo and casual of course are not the same thing and they both have a few different meanings. It would be helpful, in order to better understand these rants, if the OPs were clearer on who they were raging about.

I have also been following this game since before Kickstarter. Backer number 3.

This is not even close to what New World alpha went through.

Players were told they could achieve a freehold soloing if they completed the prerequisite requirements. They still can technically achieve a freehold solo but now have to spend all their money to buy it from someone else rather than earn it, or so we are told.

If there was going to be any blocking it would be of players who drive away paying customers, not the paying customers. Of course that would require some sort of TOS violation.

If you create a good game, the players will not leave for anything. See WoW.

"We need dedicate players." Are you saying that solo players are not dedicated to the game? How did you come up with that determination?

Abarat

BlackBrony wrote: »

BeOwningU wrote: »

I must disagree. Steven has shown himself open to feedback while also remaining true to the core promises of the game. I believe it is not the solo players who will ruin the game but rather Steven's game that will show them a gaming world where increased interactions in cooperation and team building enlightens them to how gaming can be better.

One of the guilds was requiring access to alpha2, beta2 and assist ALL events of the guild. The game is not even out and I bet you, 100% of things are already planned. If you start day 1 just subbing, you've already lost. Forget anything, large guilds already have it all planned.
You're just gonna be an NPC

LOL. What a dark and dreary world you live in. Perhaps time to just log out and find another game?

Or, at least wait until you have played the actual game before making such definitive statements?

I find this very interesting from a psychological perspective. Players that are very invested, but say they will never play, people who have not even played alpha 1 saying the game is dead. Weird shit, imo.

Wandering Mist

Hi all.

Just a reminder to keep these discussions civil. Everyone has their own opinion and your opinion might differ from someone else's, but that doesn't mean you should resort to personal insults (towards individuals OR groups of players).

Attack the argument, NOT the person.

Thanks.

Abarat

yeah <scolding voice>

Vaknar

Wandering Mist wrote: »

Hi all.

Just a reminder to keep these discussions civil. Everyone has their own opinion and your opinion might differ from someone else's, but that doesn't mean you should resort to personal insults (towards individuals OR groups of players).
Attack the argument, NOT the person.

Thanks.

+1 to this.

Also, be sure to leave your constructive criticism on the official thread, here: https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/55773/feedback-request-alpha-two-freehold-preview-shown-in-june-livestream/p1

Abarat

i meant to say that <scolding voice>

Chicago

Im not a solo player, and i dont even really think ill go after having a freehold, im also one of the people who is lucky enough to most likely have enough time to grab one if i wanted to and i 100% think this is a terrible design, gated content especially high end game content is not good game mechanics, furthermore gated behind 5% of the population is even worse, i can get onboard with the 1% having flying mounts but freeholds should be less scarce,
Obviously this needs to be tested and hopefully we can in alpha 2 and ill be the first one to admit it might work really well, but i doubt it, alot of the player base that are excited for this type of game are the people that played wow back on 2003, by now they are parents with full time jobs and cant commit 13 hours a day to a game like alot of the sweatys that will aquire free holds, and even if they do manage to get a hold of one, theres no real possible way to defend it when you have other life commitments.

We saw this type of game design with the r14 system in wow classic, 0 skill involved just people that can give their life to the game bet rewarded over everyone else, and even the people that did the rank will be the first to admit it was bad game design

RazThemun

If intrepid sticks to their vision they should be fine. If the game is not meant to be solo centered then solo players will not run the mill! However if they start changing everything to gear to that audience, it certainly can cause trouble! Really will come down to player retention though. If they start off with 1 million players in the first 3 months and then free fall to lets say 200,000 players once the hype runs down... that will be when we truly see, what are they willing to change to keep their game relevant. HOPEFULLY though Intrepid's vision of what makes MMORPG fun, will resonate with many players, so intrepid can just run their vision and still have 1million plus players remain invested. Only time will tell! Will be interesting to see where their sub count are at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 3 years, and then 5 years....

Dhaiwon

Fantmx wrote: »

After spending far too much time thinking about it for a few days, my mind is beginning to settle on "level of competitiveness" as the defining difference between different groups of people in these kinds of games.

Most people enjoy competing and winning, but some thrive on it, need it to truly enjoy a game. Others will be perfectly fine enjoying other aspects of a game.

But then again, I'm still actively theory-crafting so this might be a just a "milestone thought".

Child Item