PvE Players tell me why you follow Ashes of Creation

Doesn't matter if the first time you saw Ashes was in kickstarter, or just learned of the project 2 weeks ago.

As a PvE first player, what makes you look forward to PvE in AoC or what was the defining feature that you're looking forward to?

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Dygz

NiKr wrote: »

This is also a reason why pvp inclined people get kinda butthurt when pvers ask for pve servers. Because in that case they'd be getting higher reward for less risk.

Also, if Intrepid make a system that tracks player interactions (mainly pvp encounters) and then showcase that during the server choice, your server with less pvp might attract more people. Which might then lead to more pvp, because there'd be more competition. And Dolyem's server might lose some people to your server or just to other games (would depend on how good AoC is as a game).

So the risk/reward equation of both servers would balance out in the long run.

It's all backwards, though...
Because PvP was not really a thing in TT RPGs. PvP occurred less than .5% of the time.
I've encountered PvP twice in the 40+ years of playing D&D.
Gamers who crave competition want to take what they love from their favorite games and glob it onto other genres - which is how we got UO.
Of course, then we got EQ. And PvPers complain that it always seems like an after-thought - as if the MMORPGs are designed for PvE first and PvP later. Which makes total sense because RPGs are foundationally PvE first.
But, the PvPers want to make it out as if PvE-ers are ruining their game genre.

So, yes, if you are adding PvP to every aspect of PvE - making PvP an integral part of all PvE, that is actually an obsessive amount of PvP for an RPG.
Of course, now we've had 20+ years of UO, L2, EvE Online and AA... We have a whole generation of gamers who think that MMORPGs should be a PvP/PvX game and that it's the PvEers who are ruining their gameplay.

(People who play on PvE-Only servers typically ask for PvE-Only servers the first couple of days after they discover Ashes. We tell them that's not going to happen. Explain Corruption and most of them leave to wait until Corruption can be tested.)

Ludullu

Dygz wrote: »

Of course, now we've had 20+ years of UO, L2, EvE Online and AA... We have a whole generation of gamers who think that MMORPGs should be a PvP/PvX game and that it's the PvEers who are ruining their gameplay.

But mmos have existed for pretty much that long. And pvpers had great experiences in those old pvp mmos, so they want at least 1 or 2 new ones to try and reexperience it all again (obviously won't happen, but people will always hope).

PvE mmos always make more money so any logical company would of course go down the route of "let's listen to the pvers, because that's where the money is at". Which is why pvpers then feel like the entire genre hates them. And it just turns into a vicious cycle of arguments and namecalling.

Dygz wrote: »

(People who play on PvE-Only servers typically ask for PvE-Only servers the first couple of days after they discover Ashes. We tell them that's not going to happen. Explain Corruption and most of them leave to wait until Corruption can be tested.)

And I do hope that corruption is balanced well enough to keep those players w/o also alienating the pvpers.

Dygz

NiKr wrote: »

But mmos have existed for pretty much that long. And pvpers had great experiences in those old pvp mmos, so they want at least 1 or 2 new ones to try and reexperience it all again (obviously won't happen, but people will always hope).

The first MMORPG is UO.
So... I dunno what you're trying to say.

NiKr wrote: »

PvE mmos always make more money so any logical company would of course go down the route of "let's listen to the pvers, because that's where the money is at". Which is why pvpers then feel like the entire genre hates them. And it just turns into a vicious cycle of arguments and namecalling.

But... again, this is backwards when you have EQNext announce no PvE-Only servers and when asked why the answer is: We don't want to split the playerbase. And the playerbase is already split.

Same for when the main Lead devs for Ashes are from SOE/Daybreak/EQ/EQ2 and the Ashes game design is basically a simplified version of the EQNext game design. Obviously the EQ fans who play on PvE-Only servers are going to be asking about PvE-Only servers.

It's not like the Lead devs came from UO, EvE Online and L2.

And then we have Steven saying that Ashes is not a PvP game and it's not a PvE game. It's PvX.
And that Corruption should minimize griefing enough that only players who want 0 PvP should feel comfortable playing.
So then you have players, like me, who enjoy PvP sometimes thinking we might be in the target audience.
Especially, since EQ devs should want to retain EQ fans Especially if they enjoy some PvP - since the Ashes PvP is supposed to be Meanigful Conflict.

I notice, though, that the Open Seas and the obsession with Risk v Reward were revealed after the EQ Leads were no longer working at IS.

NiKr wrote: »

And I do hope that corruption is balanced well enough to keep those players w/o also alienating the pvpers.

We'll see.
There is now more PvP that is Corruption-free.
And the Risk v Reward obsession is out of control.
When I'm playing D&D or any RPG - I do not really want to have to be thinking about economic warfare every time I leave the house to pick some flowers.
I want to pick some flowers and there's cake smeared all over the outside of the bag and cake crumbs inside the bag...
🙄

Ludullu

Dygz wrote: »

The first MMORPG is UO.
So... I dunno what you're trying to say.

Iirc that term was simply coined at UO, but the general feel/design of what an mmo is existed before UO. Maybe I just need to rewatch the "history of mmos" video again.

Dygz wrote: »

I notice, though, that the Open Seas and the obsession with Risk v Reward were revealed after the EQ Leads were no longer working at IS.

Yeah, it does seem that way. We have Bill now though, so maybe there's gonna be a swing back? We'll have to see.

Dygz wrote: »

I want to pick some flowers and there's cake smeared all over the outside of the bag and cake crumbs inside the bag...

Yall are so damn hungry with these food analogies

D&D seems to be a way more cooperational game than mmos usually are. Obviously there's mmos that lean more towards that kind of design, but from the mmos I've seen there's always at least several parts of the game that are really competitive. Hell, even Palia's dev showcase stream mentioned "p2w avoidance". And p2w only applies if there's a competition "2 WIN". So if they're trying to avoid that feature, I'd assume there's some form of competition in a game that's supposed to be the coziest mmo to ever cozy.

Pyrolol

I think the whole dungeon system is interesting
So how you and your party performed in previous bosses will either increase the difficulty for the next boss (increasing rewards etc)

As someone who has mainly focused on PvP in games I’ve played
Even I’m excited to give these dungeons and raids including the open world ones a go

This game has a lot of things that have never been attempted before so keen to see it play out

Dolyem

Dygz wrote: »

Dolyem wrote: »

The problem for PvE-only players is they want absolutely nothing to do with PvP, so even a PvX game which is perfectly balanced in utilizing both PvE and PvP sounds abhorrent to them, while a majority of the PvP players will be happy to play the full experience.

At least 30% of the players on PvE-Only servers enjoy some PvP.

I said PvE only players

Koopasu

Crafting and Fishing, and potentially play like an NPC with goodies to spare.

Noaani

George_Black wrote: »

One more thing. NONE of that has happened in any mmo without owpvp.

Happened in EQ2, my dude.

My guild killing a specific encounter on our server directly caused a guild on a different server to disolve, which then set off a chain of events that many guilds merge, split and disolve across a number of servers. By the time the dust had settled, it impacted every server in some manner other than the RP server.

That is just one example that I was directly involved in, but there are many, many such stories like that throughout the games history.

PvP is not a requirement for any of what you are talking about, but conflict of some form is *probably* a requirement.

Vyril

Pyrolol wrote: »

I think the whole dungeon system is interesting
So how you and your party performed in previous bosses will either increase the difficulty for the next boss (increasing rewards etc)

As someone who has mainly focused on PvP in games I’ve played
Even I’m excited to give these dungeons and raids including the open world ones a go

This game has a lot of things that have never been attempted before so keen to see it play out

80% of raids and dungeons are open world. With 20% being instanced story content. Subject to change.

Pyrolol

Vyril wrote: »

Pyrolol wrote: »

I think the whole dungeon system is interesting
So how you and your party performed in previous bosses will either increase the difficulty for the next boss (increasing rewards etc)

As someone who has mainly focused on PvP in games I’ve played
Even I’m excited to give these dungeons and raids including the open world ones a go

This game has a lot of things that have never been attempted before so keen to see it play out

80% of raids and dungeons are open world. With 20% being instanced story content. Subject to change.

Excited for that too

Krakhun

I like this question. I am 50+ years old and I still get nervous when fighting other players. lol But, in my opinion UO ruined the game when they created separate pve/pvp servers. When it was a game with both player types there was more danger, more excitement, more community in the world. There were pk guilds and anti pk guilds that would help and look after new players. After splitting the servers the game became boring and mundane. The only times I died after that, was if I did something dumb. The reason I didn't just go to the pvp server was because I sucked at it. lol

Dygz

NiKr wrote: »

Yeah, it does seem that way. We have Bill now though, so maybe there's gonna be a swing back? We'll have to see.

I dunno that we need a swing back.
I'd rather they keep forging ahead. I would like the game to release some time.

NiKr wrote: »

Yall are so damn hungry with these food analogies

Hahaha!

NiKr wrote: »

D&D seems to be a way more cooperational game than mmos usually are. Obviously there's mmos that lean more towards that kind of design, but from the mmos I've seen there's always at least several parts of the game that are really competitive.

Gamers will try to make games as competitive as they can - sure.

NiKr wrote: »

Hell, even Palia's dev showcase stream mentioned "p2w avoidance". And p2w only applies if there's a competition "2 WIN". So if they're trying to avoid that feature, I'd assume there's some form of competition in a game that's supposed to be the coziest mmo to ever cozy.

P2W is kinda generalized - it can include pay to convenience.
I can't think of anything to win or any competition in Palia.
Name 2 competitive things we can win in Palia.

Dygz

Dolyem wrote: »

I said PvE only players

Just because you say something doesn't mean it's relevant or valid.

Dolyem

Dygz wrote: »

Dolyem wrote: »

I said PvE only players

Just because you say something doesn't mean it's relevant or valid.

Bro, I mean I wasn't referring to servers. I was literally talking about PvE-only players.

Dygz

I know what you meant.

Dolyem

Dygz wrote: »

I know what you meant.

Then what's isn't relevant or valid?

Dygz

PvE-Only players are going to find servers with PvP to be abhorrent, so they are not going to want to play Ashes anyway.
Same as the PvPers who find Corruption to be too restrictive.

So, these two playstyles are moot from jump.

Dolyem

Dygz wrote: »

PvE-Only players are going to find servers with PvP to be abhorrent, so they are not going to want to play Ashes anyway.
Same as the PvPers who find Corruption to be too restrictive.

So, these two playstyles are moot from jump.

My point is most PVE only players don't put up with any PvP, while most PVP only players will put up with PvE if the PvP is good enough.

Dygz

LMAO
PvP-Only players will not put up with PvE. It's inherent in the definition.
So again, absurd. Not a logically coherent concept. And moot.

Pyrolol

Dygz wrote: »

LMAO
PvP-Only players will not put up with PvE. It's inherent in the definition.
So again, absurd. Not a logically coherent concept. And moot.

If they need to do it for gear they will

Child Item