AOC is NOT a PVP game.

AoC is a PVX game and that means something.

This started as a reply during another Forum post but It became long winded so I just made a post. As always any thoughts of your own are appreciated.

I think there is a general confusion on what AoC is trying to be and why some people incorrectly think that this game is being designed around Nostalgia or PVP. Its not.

I look at this game as closer to a Story to be read, or something you could write about and even if you didn't play there would be stories you would want to hear. You can have a version of meaningful conflict with out PVP for sure but the more you risk the bigger the conflict and the more interesting the story. Just look at Eve Online, I've barely touched that game but I've heard the stories and there's a chance you have to.

The idea isn't that you need to focus on your inventory when out collecting but that its a dangerous world full of conflict(terror). You need to address that, no one will likely disturb you but there is a chance and that chance pushes players in to Social content essentially. Players may provide protection services or people will group to collect to ensure safety or be aware of the other players and maybe be a little more friendly etc. Its simply not as simple as "other players want to kill me while I collect flowers and that's silly". Its that with out that you are sacrificing the core of the game and reducing the need for players to rely on each other.

Even the Nodes are designed to create conflict. So the goal is to create a world that feels in conflict. (Ideally they do add corruption effects to your character when you increase in corruption.) Where you are going out in to the world and your safety isn't guaranteed. When you see a player you ask yourself, who is that? what are they doing? what do they want? If they are corrupted, what do I do ? Did they kill someone that pissed them off or are they just out to cause trouble? You have just entered into conflict simply by being there.

People should be very clear that this is NOT a progression train that you hop on and off with no need to interact with other players and even when you do they might as well be AI for the value that it brings to the experience. I think In-fact you are most likely to prefer bots because the players tend to gravitate towards toxic behavior with a " if you slow me down you are hurting me and now I am pissed off" style of development. When i say Modern MMO's/RPGs feel empty it barely seems to even scratch the surface.

I played Wayfinder and that games feels so dam empty just like so many before it, for what it is its probably decent but I am not interested. There are a lot people that are upset that T&L has auto-play but because there is such a focus on just instant gratification that players and companies seem to just assume that anything outside that wont work, they design games that are one breath away from being AutoPlay. So clearly Autoplay was the next logical step.

Which is probably why it takes someone like Steven Shariff to change things. Remember WoW had 0 experience going in to making their MMO with only a vision and not enough money, before WoW they made RTS's and Action RPGs in a world where gaming itself was certainly not mainstream. If anyone remembers how silly their launch was and how little content the game had it would probably blow them away. It took them a full year or more to even get their servers in line. Either way they developed a game that everyone wanted to play for that time. Everyone projected a massive failure. They came out on top because their vision of WOW at that time hit the right chord.

Despite being the most popular MMORPG to date Blizzard are also oddly enough the last developer anyone should talk to before making their own MMORPG. They made what they made and that worked for them and that's it, even recently though it seems they don't understand why anyone keeps playing their own game.

Main Point is this, stop focusing on if this game is PVP or PVE, they operate together to achieve a larger goal from a Man who made a world as a Dungeon Master and wants to see that world live. Telling him to reduce the conflict points would be like telling GRR Martin to stop killing characters.

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Otr

One day I will learn how to count in Erlang too.

nanfoodle

Azherae wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

I'm not sure how people still don't know what flavour of MMO this is? I can't count the number of people that are confused about Ashes being PvX.

I definitely have the tools to count them, so just point me at them and I'll do it.

I generally only hang around here, when it comes to Ashes, so I don't see them.

I'm on other gaming forums and people are often shocked when I start talking about what ever update, how it applies to PvX. Often leading to people being shocked or arguing that Ashes is a PvE game with optional PvP.

Azherae

nanfoodle wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

I'm not sure how people still don't know what flavour of MMO this is? I can't count the number of people that are confused about Ashes being PvX.

I definitely have the tools to count them, so just point me at them and I'll do it.

I generally only hang around here, when it comes to Ashes, so I don't see them.

I'm on other gaming forums and people are often shocked when I start talking about what ever update, how it applies to PvX. Often leading to people being shocked or arguing that Ashes is a PvE game with optional PvP.

Oh, well I'd make that argument too.

I'm sure we'll see some PvX stuff eventually, but I'm with those people. Ain't seen any yet.

So yeah, I'm in the 'PvE game with optional PvP' crowd, for now. I'll count myself.

Otr

When a thread about this topic gets 10+ pages and there is no consensus, Steven is happy.

Ludullu

PvX can be whatever we want

Fiddlez

Azherae wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

I'm not sure how people still don't know what flavour of MMO this is? I can't count the number of people that are confused about Ashes being PvX.

I definitely have the tools to count them, so just point me at them and I'll do it.

I generally only hang around here, when it comes to Ashes, so I don't see them.

I'm on other gaming forums and people are often shocked when I start talking about what ever update, how it applies to PvX. Often leading to people being shocked or arguing that Ashes is a PvE game with optional PvP.

Oh, well I'd make that argument too.

I'm sure we'll see some PvX stuff eventually, but I'm with those people. Ain't seen any yet.

So yeah, I'm in the 'PvE game with optional PvP' crowd, for now. I'll count myself.

Well I just think where the focus or vision is.

Can either be PVP focused, PVE focused or how I feel about Ashes is that every single aspect of this game is mixed with PVP and PvE. So the entire focus has always has both in mind

CROW3

nanfoodle wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

I'm not sure how people still don't know what flavour of MMO this is? I can't count the number of people that are confused about Ashes being PvX.

I definitely have the tools to count them, so just point me at them and I'll do it.

I generally only hang around here, when it comes to Ashes, so I don't see them.

I'm on other gaming forums and people are often shocked when I start talking about what ever update, how it applies to PvX. Often leading to people being shocked or arguing that Ashes is a PvE game with optional PvP.

Is that consistent across game type boards or are you getting different responses depending on the game?

For instance, I’d imagine MO2 boards seeing Ashes as a PvE game, while more PvE boards seeing Ashes as a PvP game.

nanfoodle

CROW3 wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

I'm not sure how people still don't know what flavour of MMO this is? I can't count the number of people that are confused about Ashes being PvX.

I definitely have the tools to count them, so just point me at them and I'll do it.

I generally only hang around here, when it comes to Ashes, so I don't see them.

I'm on other gaming forums and people are often shocked when I start talking about what ever update, how it applies to PvX. Often leading to people being shocked or arguing that Ashes is a PvE game with optional PvP.

Is that consistent across game type boards or are you getting different responses depending on the game?

For instance, I’d imagine MO2 boards seeing Ashes as a PvE game, while more PvE boards seeing Ashes as a PvP game.

Most gamers are confused on most forums. My guess is about 10-20% people not following closely get it.

Otr

CROW3 wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

I'm not sure how people still don't know what flavour of MMO this is? I can't count the number of people that are confused about Ashes being PvX.

I definitely have the tools to count them, so just point me at them and I'll do it.

I generally only hang around here, when it comes to Ashes, so I don't see them.

I'm on other gaming forums and people are often shocked when I start talking about what ever update, how it applies to PvX. Often leading to people being shocked or arguing that Ashes is a PvE game with optional PvP.

Is that consistent across game type boards or are you getting different responses depending on the game?

For instance, I’d imagine MO2 boards seeing Ashes as a PvE game, while more PvE boards seeing Ashes as a PvP game.

And both those boards say AoC is bad?

Noaani

hleV wrote: »

You thinking you make sense doesn't mean you are. Am I doing this right? Boy that's gonna win me so many arguments!

Who said anything about trying to win an argument?

I said a thing, you didn't understand it. What argument is being had here?

Noaani

CROW3 wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

nanfoodle wrote: »

I'm not sure how people still don't know what flavour of MMO this is? I can't count the number of people that are confused about Ashes being PvX.

I definitely have the tools to count them, so just point me at them and I'll do it.

I generally only hang around here, when it comes to Ashes, so I don't see them.

I'm on other gaming forums and people are often shocked when I start talking about what ever update, how it applies to PvX. Often leading to people being shocked or arguing that Ashes is a PvE game with optional PvP.

Is that consistent across game type boards or are you getting different responses depending on the game?

For instance, I’d imagine MO2 boards seeing Ashes as a PvE game, while more PvE boards seeing Ashes as a PvP game.

From my perspective, the general concensus in most other games is that this game will be shit, but for different reasons.

People I know in EQ and EQ2 say the game doesn't appeal to them because of the constant conflict inherent to basically every aspect of the game.

People I know from back when I played EVE say the game will be shit because it wants to try and compete with EVE's economy, yet can't find a developer with anything close to the right skillset to realize that.

People I know in Archeage say the game isn't for them because the rigid class structure (as opposed to Archeages) will lead to players being left out of organized PvP if their primary archetype is deemed less useful than other archetypes.

People I know that still play Rift think Ashes will fail because of the reliance they see the game having on events and other open world set pieces, and how quickly they have seen populations get bored with such content.

I don't know anyone from when I played BDO, so can't speak to what they think of the game.

The above all said, that is still a select group of people from each of these games, not necessarily the entire population of the game.

Perhaps my point here is - none of the people I know currently playing an MMORPG are looking at Ashes favorably.

Aszkalon

To PvP, or not to PvP - that is here - the Question.

And the Answer is : Y~ES !!!

Depraved

95% of the time in game will be spent killing mobs.

hleV

Noaani wrote: »

hleV wrote: »

You thinking you make sense doesn't mean you are. Am I doing this right? Boy that's gonna win me so many arguments!

Who said anything about trying to win an argument?

So you're arguing for the sake of arguing, with no intention of being right (therefore "winning the argument")? Figures.

Noaani wrote: »

I said a thing, you didn't understand it. What argument is being had here?

I understood what you wrote. I also pointed out that it's an irrelevant nonsense. If you don't think it is, then what you wrote must have a different meaning in your head than the rest, and I don't read thoughts, so I really don't get what you wanted to write.

You really have nothing going for your argument, so yeah, might as well keep repeating "you don't get it", seeing how great it's working out for you.

Nerror

AoC is a PvE game. Except for arenas, everything has PvE in it.

Dracmire

So you have a game where you can be griefed, you will drop a percentage of the things you have collected in the short time you have to play. That person has done nothing really to get it, and can keep doing it just building up corruption. Then if they are smart, use a second account to kill this one corrupted and get everything for free.

But lets be clear, the game requires the casual player doing PVE, so many of the game mechanics can be completed. So tell me why do you think they should play?

If you say it's not a casual game, then you better hope all the PVE based mechanics are really easy to complete.

Always PVP game will be full of griefers everyone knows it, they won't care about the corruption, as they know they will kill some people easily, especially as many will not even fight back! So you have PVP mechanics that mean there is no real reason not to grief
A game is not social because you need protection, a game is social because people want to play together. PVP'ers don't want to play with PVE'ers, they want easy kills, well at least some do (and that's enough to stop PVE'ers Playing).

So a game that could be great, may well be limited by it's low population of PVP'ers.

Azherae

Dracmire wrote: »

So you have a game where you can be griefed, you will drop a percentage of the things you have collected in the short time you have to play. That person has done nothing really to get it, and can keep doing it just building up corruption. Then if they are smart, use a second account to kill this one corrupted and get everything for free.

Basically this part.

Let's not act like Ashes players have to PvE much, unless we're counting quests. Honestly, possibly 'not at all'.

Would it be inefficient to not PvE? Sure. But there's nearly no point at which you would need to make PvE activity your focus. And the argument of 'well, inefficient people will be too weak and won't matter', if made, only applies when the inefficient player is falling behind their target.

Aszkalon

Depraved wrote: »

95% of the time in game will be spent killing mobs.

When You are a "normal" Player - then probably Yes.

When You are a Troll trying to make other Players' daily Business a living Hell, well not so much.

Otr

Dracmire wrote: »

Then if they are smart, use a second account to kill this one corrupted and get everything for free.

You assume death is balanced like in other games.
In AoC death causes gear to lose durability. We do not know how it will be balanced. Can be done so that a highly corrupted player will lose more durability on death than a light corrupted player. Repairing epic gear can be expensive.
You don't even need an Alpha 2 test to figure out the balance ratios, to prevent such simple tricks.
The only reason to ask a friend to kill and clean corruption should be to deny enemy to do that. And in special cases should be a valid solution.

But if a player can kill many with common gear and get corruption, then those greens are either passive and have no place in the game or do not cooperate. The corrupted player cannot CC greens and gets weaker and weaker. And greens remain green while fighting the corrupted player.

Azherae

Otr wrote: »

Dracmire wrote: »

Then if they are smart, use a second account to kill this one corrupted and get everything for free.

You assume death is balanced like in other games.
In AoC death causes gear to lose durability. We do not know how it will be balanced. Can be done so that a highly corrupted player will lose more durability on death than a light corrupted player. Repairing epic gear can be expensive.
You don't even need an Alpha 2 test to figure out the balance ratios, to prevent such simple tricks.
The only reason to ask a friend to kill and clean corruption should be to deny enemy to do that. And in special cases should be a valid solution.

But if a player can kill many with common gear and get corruption, then those greens are either passive and have no place in the game or do not cooperate. The corrupted player cannot CC greens and gets weaker and weaker. And greens remain green while fighting the corrupted player.

To be clear, would we actually want 'going red' to be strongly disincentivized because your gear gets shredded?

Also, who would PK in good gear even now? The entire point of PK is that you are killing someone who doesn't even check if they could kill you.

Child Item