Mag7spy wrote: » Working on one type of mmo does not dictate those people are not keen to work on a mmorpg that targets a different type of audience. How do you know they had no ambition to do to in the first place but corpo's didn't think that type of project would generate money and now it is their chance to do so. Or hearing Steven's vision were on board with it to begin with. We are playing with a lot of assumptions they want to make the same game....That is more in lines with pantheon on being the same type of game.
Mag7spy wrote: » we are going back to this convo again.
Mag7spy wrote: » We are long past saying if he is or isn't the work is showing, what matters is the success and overcoming the experience one lacks with the issue that can come up.
Mag7spy wrote: » To use another example on this gate keeping mentality (most likely stuff you don't watch) we have youtube boxers that are fighting professional fighters. They have been doing it for around 5 years and some people say they aren't fighters while doing the spot and taking it seriously and winning such fights.
I have no clue what you mean by, "They had no ambition to do so in the first place but corpos didn't think that type of project would generate money..." is intended to mean. What is "it"?
I'm not really going back to that conversation since you have no clue what you're talking about.
Except it's been 5+ years and... Steven hasn't won any fights yet.
Mag7spy wrote: » Do you think he works and does his job, his job being a creative director over the game AoC over the past serval years. If he works and you view him working that means is is a game developer.
Mag7spy wrote: » Normally that answer to that would be yes so he would be a game developer else if no it be viewed he doesn't do anything.
Mag7spy wrote: » The only other answer i can see you trying to go is that he is a creative director so it doesn't count as a game developer since he can be a creative director for any other medium the same way. But that angle wouldn't be true to me.
Mag7spy wrote: » Same way blizzard changed directions as a company to chase profit at the loss of creative freedom. That kind of concept.
Mag7spy wrote: » You are giving vibes of gate keeping again,
mcstackerson wrote: » Noaani wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Noaani wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Noaani wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » The issue with what want is the rewards. Not only is there no risk in the rewards but more importantly, by being easier to acquire (because of the decreased risk), It devalues all the rewards in the world, especially those with less power and/or value. Pvp has no rewards on it's own. All the rewards from it come from what you choose to fight over so by devaluing the rewards from the world, you are devaluing the PVP. To be honest, I disagree with your entire premise here. The value of any reward in the game is directly tied to the time spent to get it including any PvP, not just on the PvP. I'm not sure what you mean. You seem to be implying that the more time it takes to get something, the more value it has which is false. Yes, more valuable things usually take longer to acquire but the more time it takes to acquire something doesn't increase it's value. If i auto-attack a boss to death, it's not going to drop more valuable loot because i took longer to kill it. While this is true, it is also true that if I fight you for a boss, it isnt going to drop better gear. It may be that if I fight you for it, you dont get any gear and I do, but if you just auto attack a boss you wont get any either. Again, time is the only thing players put in to an MMO, this is the baseline. You need to put time in to getting geared up, time in to learning your class, your role in a raid, and the encounter itself, then you can spend time working to kill the encounter. If I am working on an open world encounter and you are trying to stop me, you are spending your time in order to prevent me getting the rewards I was after by spending my time on that boss. If I go out harvesting and you attack me, you are risking your time via PvP and potential corruption in order to take the results of the time I spent harvesting. Spending time on something isnt always a guarantee, but time is the only thing we have to spend. If I take something from you in PvP, you have three options to get it back. Spend time fighting me for it, spend time earning gold to buy it, or spend time to get a new one. It literally all comes down to spending time. That doesnt mean we can increase our rewards for time spent by working slowly, all that amounts to is an inefficient use of time. Yes but you kind of jumped past my point in my original reply. As you pointed out, PvP can add time to an encounter which is something you don't have to worry about in an instance. This means the rewards from instances are easier to get when compared to open-world items so people are going to go after the instanced rewards and ignore any rewards in the world that are as good or less powerful than them. Not good if there are a few pieces of instanced content that invalidate almost everything in the world. Right, so in the past I have gone incredibly in depth on how I would add instanced raid content to Ashes. I've done this several times, going back several times. I assumed you'd read that, obviously not. Two key points to make. First, best in slot items in Ashes (or the components to make them) need to come from open world encounters, ideally encounters in battlegrounds so players hav e no need to worry about corruption. Thus, if a guild wants best in slot items, they need to learn how to compete to get them. You cant learn how to do this in an instance, so if all you do is instanced content, you are opting out of the best gear in the game. Second, while P vP does not happen within the I stance, I have always said it needs to be a part of the equation. When you consider players logging on for the nights raidng up until the guild has an equitable item, there are plenty of other opportunities to add PvP that arent just the actual fight. My preferred method for this is for the encounter to drop components that then need to be transported via the caravan system. This then puts the guild at risk of losing those components ( and thus the fruits of the thousands of combined hours put in) to anyone organized enough to take it. Just to add to that, my suggestion also contains the notion that once a raid mob like this is killed (an ev en I expect to happen 3 or 4 times a week at the absolute most), there is a server wide announcement of the fact. So basically, force the guild to put their loot in a slow moving, vulnerable caravan, and then tell the whole server that it's happening. Yeah, low risk. Yes, we have had similar conversations and i disagreed with you on this in the past. Have nothing against the your idea. If there was a situation where the content wasn't as guaranteed and you had to do something like pay resources to enter, I think that would be a way to balance it against other open-world content.
Noaani wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Noaani wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Noaani wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » The issue with what want is the rewards. Not only is there no risk in the rewards but more importantly, by being easier to acquire (because of the decreased risk), It devalues all the rewards in the world, especially those with less power and/or value. Pvp has no rewards on it's own. All the rewards from it come from what you choose to fight over so by devaluing the rewards from the world, you are devaluing the PVP. To be honest, I disagree with your entire premise here. The value of any reward in the game is directly tied to the time spent to get it including any PvP, not just on the PvP. I'm not sure what you mean. You seem to be implying that the more time it takes to get something, the more value it has which is false. Yes, more valuable things usually take longer to acquire but the more time it takes to acquire something doesn't increase it's value. If i auto-attack a boss to death, it's not going to drop more valuable loot because i took longer to kill it. While this is true, it is also true that if I fight you for a boss, it isnt going to drop better gear. It may be that if I fight you for it, you dont get any gear and I do, but if you just auto attack a boss you wont get any either. Again, time is the only thing players put in to an MMO, this is the baseline. You need to put time in to getting geared up, time in to learning your class, your role in a raid, and the encounter itself, then you can spend time working to kill the encounter. If I am working on an open world encounter and you are trying to stop me, you are spending your time in order to prevent me getting the rewards I was after by spending my time on that boss. If I go out harvesting and you attack me, you are risking your time via PvP and potential corruption in order to take the results of the time I spent harvesting. Spending time on something isnt always a guarantee, but time is the only thing we have to spend. If I take something from you in PvP, you have three options to get it back. Spend time fighting me for it, spend time earning gold to buy it, or spend time to get a new one. It literally all comes down to spending time. That doesnt mean we can increase our rewards for time spent by working slowly, all that amounts to is an inefficient use of time. Yes but you kind of jumped past my point in my original reply. As you pointed out, PvP can add time to an encounter which is something you don't have to worry about in an instance. This means the rewards from instances are easier to get when compared to open-world items so people are going to go after the instanced rewards and ignore any rewards in the world that are as good or less powerful than them. Not good if there are a few pieces of instanced content that invalidate almost everything in the world. Right, so in the past I have gone incredibly in depth on how I would add instanced raid content to Ashes. I've done this several times, going back several times. I assumed you'd read that, obviously not. Two key points to make. First, best in slot items in Ashes (or the components to make them) need to come from open world encounters, ideally encounters in battlegrounds so players hav e no need to worry about corruption. Thus, if a guild wants best in slot items, they need to learn how to compete to get them. You cant learn how to do this in an instance, so if all you do is instanced content, you are opting out of the best gear in the game. Second, while P vP does not happen within the I stance, I have always said it needs to be a part of the equation. When you consider players logging on for the nights raidng up until the guild has an equitable item, there are plenty of other opportunities to add PvP that arent just the actual fight. My preferred method for this is for the encounter to drop components that then need to be transported via the caravan system. This then puts the guild at risk of losing those components ( and thus the fruits of the thousands of combined hours put in) to anyone organized enough to take it. Just to add to that, my suggestion also contains the notion that once a raid mob like this is killed (an ev en I expect to happen 3 or 4 times a week at the absolute most), there is a server wide announcement of the fact. So basically, force the guild to put their loot in a slow moving, vulnerable caravan, and then tell the whole server that it's happening. Yeah, low risk.
mcstackerson wrote: » Noaani wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Noaani wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » The issue with what want is the rewards. Not only is there no risk in the rewards but more importantly, by being easier to acquire (because of the decreased risk), It devalues all the rewards in the world, especially those with less power and/or value. Pvp has no rewards on it's own. All the rewards from it come from what you choose to fight over so by devaluing the rewards from the world, you are devaluing the PVP. To be honest, I disagree with your entire premise here. The value of any reward in the game is directly tied to the time spent to get it including any PvP, not just on the PvP. I'm not sure what you mean. You seem to be implying that the more time it takes to get something, the more value it has which is false. Yes, more valuable things usually take longer to acquire but the more time it takes to acquire something doesn't increase it's value. If i auto-attack a boss to death, it's not going to drop more valuable loot because i took longer to kill it. While this is true, it is also true that if I fight you for a boss, it isnt going to drop better gear. It may be that if I fight you for it, you dont get any gear and I do, but if you just auto attack a boss you wont get any either. Again, time is the only thing players put in to an MMO, this is the baseline. You need to put time in to getting geared up, time in to learning your class, your role in a raid, and the encounter itself, then you can spend time working to kill the encounter. If I am working on an open world encounter and you are trying to stop me, you are spending your time in order to prevent me getting the rewards I was after by spending my time on that boss. If I go out harvesting and you attack me, you are risking your time via PvP and potential corruption in order to take the results of the time I spent harvesting. Spending time on something isnt always a guarantee, but time is the only thing we have to spend. If I take something from you in PvP, you have three options to get it back. Spend time fighting me for it, spend time earning gold to buy it, or spend time to get a new one. It literally all comes down to spending time. That doesnt mean we can increase our rewards for time spent by working slowly, all that amounts to is an inefficient use of time. Yes but you kind of jumped past my point in my original reply. As you pointed out, PvP can add time to an encounter which is something you don't have to worry about in an instance. This means the rewards from instances are easier to get when compared to open-world items so people are going to go after the instanced rewards and ignore any rewards in the world that are as good or less powerful than them. Not good if there are a few pieces of instanced content that invalidate almost everything in the world.
Noaani wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Noaani wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » The issue with what want is the rewards. Not only is there no risk in the rewards but more importantly, by being easier to acquire (because of the decreased risk), It devalues all the rewards in the world, especially those with less power and/or value. Pvp has no rewards on it's own. All the rewards from it come from what you choose to fight over so by devaluing the rewards from the world, you are devaluing the PVP. To be honest, I disagree with your entire premise here. The value of any reward in the game is directly tied to the time spent to get it including any PvP, not just on the PvP. I'm not sure what you mean. You seem to be implying that the more time it takes to get something, the more value it has which is false. Yes, more valuable things usually take longer to acquire but the more time it takes to acquire something doesn't increase it's value. If i auto-attack a boss to death, it's not going to drop more valuable loot because i took longer to kill it. While this is true, it is also true that if I fight you for a boss, it isnt going to drop better gear. It may be that if I fight you for it, you dont get any gear and I do, but if you just auto attack a boss you wont get any either. Again, time is the only thing players put in to an MMO, this is the baseline. You need to put time in to getting geared up, time in to learning your class, your role in a raid, and the encounter itself, then you can spend time working to kill the encounter. If I am working on an open world encounter and you are trying to stop me, you are spending your time in order to prevent me getting the rewards I was after by spending my time on that boss. If I go out harvesting and you attack me, you are risking your time via PvP and potential corruption in order to take the results of the time I spent harvesting. Spending time on something isnt always a guarantee, but time is the only thing we have to spend. If I take something from you in PvP, you have three options to get it back. Spend time fighting me for it, spend time earning gold to buy it, or spend time to get a new one. It literally all comes down to spending time. That doesnt mean we can increase our rewards for time spent by working slowly, all that amounts to is an inefficient use of time.
mcstackerson wrote: » Noaani wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » The issue with what want is the rewards. Not only is there no risk in the rewards but more importantly, by being easier to acquire (because of the decreased risk), It devalues all the rewards in the world, especially those with less power and/or value. Pvp has no rewards on it's own. All the rewards from it come from what you choose to fight over so by devaluing the rewards from the world, you are devaluing the PVP. To be honest, I disagree with your entire premise here. The value of any reward in the game is directly tied to the time spent to get it including any PvP, not just on the PvP. I'm not sure what you mean. You seem to be implying that the more time it takes to get something, the more value it has which is false. Yes, more valuable things usually take longer to acquire but the more time it takes to acquire something doesn't increase it's value. If i auto-attack a boss to death, it's not going to drop more valuable loot because i took longer to kill it.
Noaani wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » The issue with what want is the rewards. Not only is there no risk in the rewards but more importantly, by being easier to acquire (because of the decreased risk), It devalues all the rewards in the world, especially those with less power and/or value. Pvp has no rewards on it's own. All the rewards from it come from what you choose to fight over so by devaluing the rewards from the world, you are devaluing the PVP. To be honest, I disagree with your entire premise here. The value of any reward in the game is directly tied to the time spent to get it including any PvP, not just on the PvP.
mcstackerson wrote: » The issue with what want is the rewards. Not only is there no risk in the rewards but more importantly, by being easier to acquire (because of the decreased risk), It devalues all the rewards in the world, especially those with less power and/or value. Pvp has no rewards on it's own. All the rewards from it come from what you choose to fight over so by devaluing the rewards from the world, you are devaluing the PVP.
Dygz wrote: » Mag7spy wrote: » Do you think he works and does his job, his job being a creative director over the game AoC over the past serval years. If he works and you view him working that means is is a game developer. Steven is a gamer who has the funds and the managerial skills to hire competent game devs to create the MMORPG of his dreams. And I have a reasonable amount of faith in his fundraising skills and managerial skills to think it's more likely than unlikely that he will be able to eventually release the game and keep it running for several years. You can label him whatever you want. But, he is still very inexperienced as a game dev - even after 5+ years as Creative Director of IS. Which is why it's imperative that he hire an experienced Lead Game Designer. Which he did. Mag7spy wrote: » Normally that answer to that would be yes so he would be a game developer else if no it be viewed he doesn't do anything. What you think is normal is irrelevant. What I mean when I say Steven is not a game dev and what you think I mean when I say Steven is not a game dev are not the same thing. And what you think I mean is irrelevant. Mag7spy wrote: » The only other answer i can see you trying to go is that he is a creative director so it doesn't count as a game developer since he can be a creative director for any other medium the same way. But that angle wouldn't be true to me. I'm not surprised by your limited thinking. And I don't really care what would be true to YOU.
Vaknar wrote: » This thread is steering away from its original purpose. Please keep conversations constructive, and be well unto one another. It's generally not awesome to commandeer a thread for personal arguments that are generally irrelevant or not conducive to the overall conversation. Those can be had in DMs. I'd prefer not to close this thread or issue warnings because there are meaningful conversations to be had Thanks, all
Dygz wrote: » Um… 1: Steven is not a game dev. 2: Steven hired a bunch of leads from EQ/EQ2. So, while one person hired might not make a difference. I expect a bunch of devs as leads on a game in the same game genre to be interested in retaining the playerbase that worked on their previous game. 3: Ashes Nodes system seems like a simplified version of EQNext. 4: I don’t know anything about L2, so I cannot think of Ashes from the perspective of L2 gamers. 5: Steven answered my question well enough in 2018. At that time, Ashes game design did not have any permanent zones that auto-flag to (Corruption-free) FFA PVP. The moment Steven announced, a year ago, that they made a significant change to the game design - adding the Open Seas as a permanent zone that auto-flags to (Corruption-free) FFA PVP, I placed Ashes in the same category as EvE Online and ArcheAge. That change occurred after the EQ/EQ2 leads left IS and a year after Steven began acting as Lead Game Designer. Which is OK. But when people ask why were you thinking you might play after launch right up until the announcement of the Open Seas - that’s the answer. 6: Also, after the EQ/EQ2 Leas devs left IS and Steven took over as Lead Game Designer is when Steven began to, more and more, stress the adrenaline rush of Risk v Reward being tied to every aspect of the game, rather than discussing Meaningful Conflict. Meaningful Conflict is a hype for me. Obsession with Risk v Reward is anti-hype for me. 7: If you look at the Wiki, you will see now that it says EvE Online and ArcheAge and L2 are inspirations for Ashes, so I’m not sure why it would be surprising for me to ask Steven to compare the levels of PvP he hopes Ashes will have with the levels of PvP in those games. 8: If Ashes did not have so many Lead devs from EQ/EQ2 and if Steven had always been the Lead Game Designer and if the Node system did not seem to be a simplified version of EQNext’s StoryBricks, I would have had 0 interest in backing the Ashes Kickstarter. (I also notice that we’ve had no updates on Nodes since the EQ/EQ2 left IS and that our new info on Nodes will be coming a few months after another EQ/EQ2 dev becomes Lead Game Designer. Which could be coincidence, but again makes it seem to me that the Nodes system is a simplified version of StoryBricks.)
George_Black wrote: » Vaknar wrote: » This thread is steering away from its original purpose. Please keep conversations constructive, and be well unto one another. It's generally not awesome to commandeer a thread for personal arguments that are generally irrelevant or not conducive to the overall conversation. Those can be had in DMs. I'd prefer not to close this thread or issue warnings because there are meaningful conversations to be had Thanks, all This is your strongest reply to a topic yet. I think as we get deeper in development there needs to be more order in topics. Also the official Dev Feedback threads dont need people quoting one another, rather just straight, direct answers to the Dev positions.
Noaani wrote: » George_Black wrote: » Vaknar wrote: » This thread is steering away from its original purpose. Please keep conversations constructive, and be well unto one another. It's generally not awesome to commandeer a thread for personal arguments that are generally irrelevant or not conducive to the overall conversation. Those can be had in DMs. I'd prefer not to close this thread or issue warnings because there are meaningful conversations to be had Thanks, all This is your strongest reply to a topic yet. I think as we get deeper in development there needs to be more order in topics. Also the official Dev Feedback threads dont need people quoting one another, rather just straight, direct answers to the Dev positions. This is why I rarely post in those threads. They are for telling Intrepid what we think, the rest of the threads are for discussion. I prefer discussion.
Abarat wrote: » Noaani wrote: » George_Black wrote: » Vaknar wrote: » This thread is steering away from its original purpose. Please keep conversations constructive, and be well unto one another. It's generally not awesome to commandeer a thread for personal arguments that are generally irrelevant or not conducive to the overall conversation. Those can be had in DMs. I'd prefer not to close this thread or issue warnings because there are meaningful conversations to be had Thanks, all This is your strongest reply to a topic yet. I think as we get deeper in development there needs to be more order in topics. Also the official Dev Feedback threads dont need people quoting one another, rather just straight, direct answers to the Dev positions. This is why I rarely post in those threads. They are for telling Intrepid what we think, the rest of the threads are for discussion. I prefer discussion. you would rather discuss with idiots than address the developers? You are a strange man. (or woman or nonbinary or furry or what ever)
Noaani wrote: » Liniker wrote: » just another day with Noaani being wrong. To be clear, I said the page, not the video. Yes, the video is embedded on the page, but still. The fact is - and you have not refuted or disproven this at all - if you read the kickstarter page and are a PvE focused player, this game would appeal to you.
Liniker wrote: » just another day with Noaani being wrong.
Babayugah wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Liniker wrote: » just another day with Noaani being wrong. To be clear, I said the page, not the video. Yes, the video is embedded on the page, but still. The fact is - and you have not refuted or disproven this at all - if you read the kickstarter page and are a PvE focused player, this game would appeal to you. If you are investing in any Kickstarter about literally ANYTHING and you do not do your due diligence to read/watch the information given to you, that's your problem lol. Lack of accountability on the individual is where that blame would lay.
Raven016 wrote: » The PvP depends on how corruption is balanced. When Alpha 2 ends, it could be harsh. The game could be closer to PvE than PvP. Actually I find it quite unlikely Steven to start with a harsh corruption and to make it more lenient toward the end of Alpha, to encourage PvP everywhere.
Noaani wrote: » What I said was there is no mention of PvP on the kickstarter page.
Liniker wrote: » It's hard not to laugh when I remember you said that, that was dumb lol video is literally the first thing on the page and first 2 minutes in the video
