The 'Unfamiliar' environment syndrome

I have searched on forums and other places to check if this topic was ever discussed. I like that ashes of creation is going for a system that is new to us i.e the node system and it is exciting but can't deny I have one fear. The world is mostly going to be made up of nodes and random point of interests generated by the nodes right? Do you think that the feeling of exploration will be somewhat tainted since everything around you is 'constantly' changing? Maybe since your never done exploring or the feeling of being in the middle of unfamiliar environment all the time somehow gets overwhelming or loose interest to keep exploring new places? Other games all have at least one iconic town/village/point of interest.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Depraved

well, they could add content without adding more land, and eventually they can add more land and nodes.

your #1 is a (inaccurate) generalization. l2 added lots of shit every few months (they didn't have to wait a year), even entire cities, areas, quests, zones, etc. thats the most pvp game you can find out there. not gonna argue if eq added more stuff per year than l2. probably, idk. eq was also instanced, wasn't it?

your 2 and 3, I agree those are potential problems, but there are solutions for them...

Dygz

Less incentive/pressure for the devs to add more content when other gamers are content.

Noaani

Depraved wrote: »

well, they could add content without adding more land, and eventually they can add more land and nodes.

This is exactly what I see them doing.

I see them adding new dungeons and such to start off with, sliding them in to the games node system. As the game progresses and they realize that this is both an inefficient way to add new content, and also has a limited appeal to players, they will have to find ways to add new content in other ways.

I don't see them adding more nodes for many years - at a point in time where they have given up on the game being what it was at launch (what ever the game is at launch). Them adding new nodes is kind of them signalling that they don't really care about the health of the game any more, they just want to hold on to what players they have for as long as they can.

Depraved

Noaani wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

well, they could add content without adding more land, and eventually they can add more land and nodes.

This is exactly what I see them doing.

I see them adding new dungeons and such to start off with, sliding them in to the games node system. As the game progresses and they realize that this is both an inefficient way to add new content, and also has a limited appeal to players, they will have to find ways to add new content in other ways.

I don't see them adding more nodes for many years - at a point in time where they have given up on the game being what it was at launch (what ever the game is at launch). Them adding new nodes is kind of them signalling that they don't really care about the health of the game any more, they just want to hold on to what players they have for as long as they can.

you know every game literally does this (minus lobby or instanced games). all games have nodes and pois and when they add more content and new areas, they are actually adding nodes and pois (and players like it). ashes just choose to call them by their technical name as a brand name thingie as well.

saying that's inefficient and that it doesn't appeal to players is a big stretch. you are basically talking about pretty much every open world mmorpg out there.

Noaani

Depraved wrote: »

you know every game literally does this (minus lobby or instanced games). all games have nodes and pois and when they add more content and new areas, they are actually adding nodes and pois (and players like it). ashes just choose to call them by their technical name as a brand name thingie as well.

This is factually incorrect.

saying that's inefficient and that it doesn't appeal to players is a big stretch. you are basically talking about pretty much every open world mmorpg out there.

It's only a stretch if you don't understand.

It is inefficient because an individual player only cares about the content in front of them, and even if the only thing altering the content in question is the type of node the nearest metropolis is, this still means the developers need to make 4 pieces of content in order to make one piece of content that players have placed in front of them.

I'm more than happy stating that this is inefficient in comparison to games that make one piece of content to achieve this same end.

Your statement that me saying it doesn't appeal to players is not something that deserves a response, as I did not say it doesn't appeal to players - I said it has a limited appeal. These are different statements.

Otr

Dygz wrote: »

Less incentive/pressure for the devs to add more content when other gamers are content.

And they ask "what entices you to not skip cutscenes"

Depraved

Noaani wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

you know every game literally does this (minus lobby or instanced games). all games have nodes and pois and when they add more content and new areas, they are actually adding nodes and pois (and players like it). ashes just choose to call them by their technical name as a brand name thingie as well.

This is factually incorrect.

saying that's inefficient and that it doesn't appeal to players is a big stretch. you are basically talking about pretty much every open world mmorpg out there.

It's only a stretch if you don't understand.

It is inefficient because an individual player only cares about the content in front of them, and even if the only thing altering the content in question is the type of node the nearest metropolis is, this still means the developers need to make 4 pieces of content in order to make one piece of content that players have placed in front of them.

I'm more than happy stating that this is inefficient in comparison to games that make one piece of content to achieve this same end.

Your statement that me saying it doesn't appeal to players is not something that deserves a response, as I did not say it doesn't appeal to players - I said it has a limited appeal. These are different statements.

what?

ok imagine you are playing any mmorpg that isn't ashes. eventually there is an update. new city added. with the new city comes 2 more areas (or dungeons) where you can farm stuff and maybe 1 or 2 new more areas later on.. these areas are nodes and pois in game development terms...that game decides to use the term "area" and ashes uses the term "node" they are the same thing.

the limited appeal is basically everyone who likes non lobby mmorpg.

even in a game where you walk to a dungeon, and the dungeon creates instances to accommodate all the players, the very entrance to that dungeon is a node/poi.

Noaani

Depraved wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

you know every game literally does this (minus lobby or instanced games). all games have nodes and pois and when they add more content and new areas, they are actually adding nodes and pois (and players like it). ashes just choose to call them by their technical name as a brand name thingie as well.

This is factually incorrect.

saying that's inefficient and that it doesn't appeal to players is a big stretch. you are basically talking about pretty much every open world mmorpg out there.

It's only a stretch if you don't understand.

It is inefficient because an individual player only cares about the content in front of them, and even if the only thing altering the content in question is the type of node the nearest metropolis is, this still means the developers need to make 4 pieces of content in order to make one piece of content that players have placed in front of them.

I'm more than happy stating that this is inefficient in comparison to games that make one piece of content to achieve this same end.

Your statement that me saying it doesn't appeal to players is not something that deserves a response, as I did not say it doesn't appeal to players - I said it has a limited appeal. These are different statements.

what?

ok imagine you are playing any mmorpg that isn't ashes. eventually there is an update. new city added. with the new city comes 2 more areas (or dungeons) where you can farm stuff and maybe 1 or 2 new more areas later on.. these areas are nodes and pois in game development terms...that game decides to use the term "area" and ashes uses the term "node" they are the same thing.

This is all incorrect.

It is correct in some games - it is not universally true as you are trying to make out.

In some games, nodes are what would be called "quest hubs" in some other games. A town could well have a dozen or more nodes, a large city could have hundreds. Nodes are also points in various storytelling systems in some games.

the limited appeal is basically everyone who likes non lobby mmorpg.

No, the limited appeal is because people will eventually get bored of updates where all they do is add a new variation of a dungeon.

For a while, people will be happy with it - but only for a while.

even in a game where you walk to a dungeon, and the dungeon creates instances to accommodate all the players, the very entrance to that dungeon is a node/poi.

In some games, sure.

The thing is, you are trying to make an absolutely pointless argument. You are arguing against "words" that I used, trying to state that those "words" always mean things they only sometimes mean, and are forgetting or ignoring what the words you are arguing about actually mean in the context of Ashes.

That said, this is all just another day with you...

Dygz

Depraved wrote: »

ok imagine you are playing any mmorpg that isn't ashes. eventually there is an update. new city added. with the new city comes 2 more areas (or dungeons) where you can farm stuff and maybe 1 or 2 new more areas later on.. these areas are nodes and pois in game development terms...that game decides to use the term "area" and ashes uses the term "node" they are the same thing.

Node is not the same thing as "Area".
A "Node" dynamically changes content as Villages/Towns and buildings rise and fall and as different Races dominate the Node while that Node progresses from Stage to Stage.
I'm not aware of any other MMORPG that has Nodes.
EQNext had a similar concept in their design but that became vaporware.

Depraved

Noaani wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

you know every game literally does this (minus lobby or instanced games). all games have nodes and pois and when they add more content and new areas, they are actually adding nodes and pois (and players like it). ashes just choose to call them by their technical name as a brand name thingie as well.

This is factually incorrect.

saying that's inefficient and that it doesn't appeal to players is a big stretch. you are basically talking about pretty much every open world mmorpg out there.

It's only a stretch if you don't understand.

It is inefficient because an individual player only cares about the content in front of them, and even if the only thing altering the content in question is the type of node the nearest metropolis is, this still means the developers need to make 4 pieces of content in order to make one piece of content that players have placed in front of them.

I'm more than happy stating that this is inefficient in comparison to games that make one piece of content to achieve this same end.

Your statement that me saying it doesn't appeal to players is not something that deserves a response, as I did not say it doesn't appeal to players - I said it has a limited appeal. These are different statements.

what?

ok imagine you are playing any mmorpg that isn't ashes. eventually there is an update. new city added. with the new city comes 2 more areas (or dungeons) where you can farm stuff and maybe 1 or 2 new more areas later on.. these areas are nodes and pois in game development terms...that game decides to use the term "area" and ashes uses the term "node" they are the same thing.

This is all incorrect.

It is correct in some games - it is not universally true as you are trying to make out.

In some games, nodes are what would be called "quest hubs" in some other games. A town could well have a dozen or more nodes, a large city could have hundreds. Nodes are also points in various storytelling systems in some games.

the limited appeal is basically everyone who likes non lobby mmorpg.

No, the limited appeal is because people will eventually get bored of updates where all they do is add a new variation of a dungeon.

For a while, people will be happy with it - but only for a while.

even in a game where you walk to a dungeon, and the dungeon creates instances to accommodate all the players, the very entrance to that dungeon is a node/poi.

In some games, sure.

The thing is, you are trying to make an absolutely pointless argument. You are arguing against "words" that I used, trying to state that those "words" always mean things they only sometimes mean, and are forgetting or ignoring what the words you are arguing about actually mean in the context of Ashes.

That said, this is all just another day with you...

so basically everything you add can be considered a node, except different games use different names instead of nodes, but steven decided to use the generic name "nodes", as I said.

...

my argument wasn't against your words. my argument was that you said that the way they plan to add more content is inefficient and wont be appealing to most people...and I'm arguing that this is pretty much how every game adds content and how it will appeal to most people, since this is already how its done .-.

Dygz wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

ok imagine you are playing any mmorpg that isn't ashes. eventually there is an update. new city added. with the new city comes 2 more areas (or dungeons) where you can farm stuff and maybe 1 or 2 new more areas later on.. these areas are nodes and pois in game development terms...that game decides to use the term "area" and ashes uses the term "node" they are the same thing.

Node is not the same thing as "Area".
A "Node" dynamically changes content as Villages/Towns and buildings rise and fall and as different Races dominate the Node while that Node progresses from Stage to Stage.
I'm not aware of any other MMORPG that has Nodes.
EQNext had a similar concept in their design but that became vaporware.

no dygz. a node is an element in a tree data structure.

Dygz

Dygz wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

no dygz. a node is an element in a tree data structure.

Trolly Troll Troll Troll

Noaani

Depraved wrote: »

so basically everything you add can be considered a node, except different games use different names instead of nodes, but steven decided to use the generic name "nodes", as I said.

No, nodes are used differently in Ashes still than in most other games.

For example, if a node in Ashes was at level 0, the equivalent area in a different MMORPG wouldn't be called a node, even if they did use that term.

On the other hand, if you had a town, it would probably be made up of many nodes. If the game was using the term "node" to define a part of the game world assigned hardware, then a games market NPC may well be the center of its own node, as will other important frequently visited areas.

In Ashes, the term "node" is referring to a pre-determined portion of the game world that may contain thousands of players, thousands of mobs and/or dozens of NPC's, or may be desolate.

No other game on the market does that. This isn't a bad thing, I am simply pointing out to you that you can't just transpose the term "node" from other games and use it in the same way in Ashes.

my argument wasn't against your words. my argument was that you said that the way they plan to add more content is inefficient and wont be appealing to most people...and I'm arguing that this is pretty much how every game adds content and how it will appeal to most people, since this is already how its done .-.

I said nothing of the way they plan on adding new content to the game, because none of us know how they plan to add new content.

I was talking about the way I can see them adding it.

You really need to not just substitute in your own words. People use the specific words they use because those words in that order are what they are actually trying to say.

Now, back to the point. I can see Intrepid adding more dungeons and dungeon states to the game first. This is what will have limited appeal - because it is proven to have limited appeal in every other MMO in history.

People want new land, not just new dungeons. New dungeons and such is great - but it has limited appeal and can't be the only thing added to a game long term.

In order to add new lands in Ashes, Intrepid have four options. They can add new land with new nodes, accepting the impact this will have on old nodes, they can add new land without nodes, going against the general concept of the game, they can add new lands expanding the range of the outer most nodes, ignoring the fact that this makes these node the most powerful in the game, or they can add new land and redistribute nodes.

None of these options are ideal for Ashes - yet at some point they will have to pick one.

Aszkalon

Turjilin wrote: »

The 'Unfamiliar' environment syndrome

Just enjoy the Experience of being in a wondrous World you haven't explored since Ages, other like in WoW or other MMO's.

It will be worth your while. Promise. At least if Ashes of Creation is a Game for you in the first place.

Atomiku

I disagree with some people here. "Exploring is meaningless if the world you're exploring is in constant change", true, I can understand that, but it really depends on how quickly the world is changing and how much it actually changes. Finding a balance in the "known" becoming the "unknown" is key to keep players engaged, if that makes sense.

Noaani

Atomiku wrote: »

I disagree with some people here. "Exploring is meaningless if the world you're exploring is in constant change", true, I can understand that, but it really depends on how quickly the world is changing and how much it actually changes. Finding a balance in the "known" becoming the "unknown" is key to keep players engaged, if that makes sense.

For sure - different people will have a different point at which they are happy with re-exploring old areas as opposed to exploring a new area. As far as I am aware though, everyone does have that point where they are over re-exploring old areas though.

Sengarden

No offense to OP or anyone who agrees with them, but this honestly sounds like such a WoW-brain take, thinking that the game only truly starts once you’ve seen and done everything. What kind of sense does that make? An MMO is a game you’re supposed to have fun playing for months and years between major content updates, why would you want the world and its content to be static, giving you no reason to ever revisit a place you’ve already been to unless it’s to do a boring ass gathering grind or mob farm in the same place that’s exactly the same way you’ve always known it?

Nothing in life is ever static, no discovery ever gives you a permanent leg-up, no mastery over a subject is ever complete, no list of experiences is ever finished. Why some people fantasize about the virtual world they spend their free time in having the nuances, evolution, and dynamism of life dumbed down and be made more boring for themselves, I’ll never know.

It keeps things interesting. It makes sure there’s always a reason to keep exploring. It breathes new life in an organically fluctuating way into places that might have laid stagnant for too long. It keeps surprising you. That’s what makes me excited about playing Ashes.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Noaani

Sengarden wrote: »

No offense to OP or anyone who agrees with them, but this honestly sounds like such a WoW-brain take, thinking that the game only truly starts once you’ve seen and done everything.

This is not something that anyone in this thread has said.

Sengarden

Noaani wrote: »

Sengarden wrote: »

No offense to OP or anyone who agrees with them, but this honestly sounds like such a WoW-brain take, thinking that the game only truly starts once you’ve seen and done everything.

This is not something that anyone in this thread has said.

It doesn't have to be said word for word. The stated opinion indicates a desire for most, if not all the content in the game to be readily available like a giant checklist that's ready for you whenever you are, so that you can make your way through all of it in a neat and tidy fashion, completing it all zone by zone as efficiently as possible, leaving behind not a single reason to ever go back to any place you've already been - other than mindless resource or mob grinds, passing through in your caravan, or changing the node you live in - exploring the world and learning everything there is to know about it with no major changes or anything unexpected until every encyclopedia is bound in leather and every corner of the map is filled in.

Once you've done it all, you... what, exactly? Do the same type of "end-game" content in the world you already understand that never changes or presents any new challenges or opportunities for discovery or wonder, just like everyone does in every other MMO on the market? It's a live service MMORPG with a focus on dynamic geopolitical shifts and content availability. The sense of wonder and discovery is supposed to last a long time. If everything was available right off the bat at will, and nothing ever changed, people would make their way through all the content in a matter of months, then never be surprised or left in wonderment over anything in the game again until a new major content patch is dropped a year or two later, which would take even less time for people to gobble up than the content in the initial launch if it was designed in the same way.

Your suggestion that Ashes should approach new content drops with new landmasses only reinforces the point I'm making. Adding new landmasses as content expansion highlights encourages everyone to go spend all their time in the new zones, or push conflicts towards the new zones to capture them and little else, abandoning the old world and leaving it to rot. If players lose interest in the old world due to its abandonment post-launch in favor of expanding or adding newly discovered landmasses where everyone will dogpile into to spend all their time (because they already discovered everything in the old world, because it's piss-easy to see it all) then the game becomes an island hopping simulator from expansion to expansion, where large swaths of the old world become little more than largely dead leveling zones. Now THAT is a waste of content.

Adding new zones without nodes doesn't work, because node development is largely how content availability is controlled. Expanding coastal zones doesn't work, because it skews power in favor of coastal nodes. Adding new land and then redistributing the nodes is exactly the same as just adding new landmasses with new nodes lol, someone's node is going to end up on the new landmass and cause the same problems as the first suggestion.

However this game succeeds long term, it's not going to be by doing things exactly the same way every other MMO does things. That's all.

Noaani

Sengarden wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Sengarden wrote: »

No offense to OP or anyone who agrees with them, but this honestly sounds like such a WoW-brain take, thinking that the game only truly starts once you’ve seen and done everything.

This is not something that anyone in this thread has said.

It doesn't have to be said word for word. The stated opinion indicates a desire for most, if not all the content in the game to be readily available

No, that isn't what this thread is about at all.

This thread is about exploration of the world.

To some people, that is a lot of the game, to others, it is a small part of the game.

The things you are talking about are absolutely not at all what this thread is about. Not even close.

Sengarden wrote: »

Your suggestion that Ashes should approach new content drops with new landmasses only reinforces the point I'm making.

That wasn't a suggestion I was making.

---

Skim reading threads and then thinking you understand enough to reply doesn't alwats work.

Child Item