DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Uh. No.
Expansions take 12 to 18 months to design, develop, test and implement.
Seasonal content takes 3-4 months to design, develop, test and implement.
If it doesn't have it at launch (or within the first three months), there is literally no point in adding it later.
P~RRR~etty sure we saw lots and lots of PvE-Content already when Sir Steven went to "a Minotaur-Camp" because he took a Quest from a Nail Bord with Quests at the Nodes Entrance.
Or when he and his Allies went into a Castle which was partially Ruins and full of Goblins - and "took a Quest" from a wandering Spirit.
Also while i am aware that not all of this is a Quest, the World is full with PvE-Mobs who are quite happy to attack You when you get close.
No PvE ?
In Ashes ?
Please don't make it seem as if EA is making that Game. It makes me cringe somewhere deep, deep inside. I STILL remember the absolute Shitshow that is "The Old Republic" (MMO) and which was suddenly "BUGGED" for my Brother and me - and we could no longer log in after we had both reached around LvL 14 to 15 ... ...
While the content you add needs to be objectively good, it also needs to be targeted at existing groups of players that need content.
while I agree with this, I'm extremely surprised seeing you say this, since you are always saying that ashes wont have top pve content and needs top pve content.
If it doesn't have it at launch (or within the first three months), there is literally no point in adding it later.
Content additions do not attract entire population segments to your game - you need to attract them from the start, and then work at keeping them.
If Intrepid has top end raid content at launch, then it needs to add top end raid content with it's content additions - along with group content, PvP content, crafting content, naval content etc. If it doesn't have it, it doesn't need to add it, and would be a waste of resources to do so.
I have always said Ashes needs top end PvE content to be successful (more successful than, say, Archeages NA/EU servers). Me saying this is something that it needs to break above that level of success hasn't changed.
However, I have no reason to think that Ashes will reach the success Archeage NA/EU had.
but if the target audience isn't top pve raiders (maybe 1% of mmorpg players), why would ashes needs to add top pve raid content to be successful? cant they just be successful adding the best content for PVP players and people who arent op pve raiders?
No PvE ?
In Ashes ?
Please don't make it seem as if EA is making that Game.
Please be aware of what you are replying to before replying.
No one is saying Ashes has no PvE content. What we are talking about is top end PvE content - as viewed from the perspective of all MMORPG's. We have not seen any, and there is no indication that Ashes even has the systems in place to enable it.
The PvE we have seen so far would be considered mid to low.
but if the target audience isn't top pve raiders (maybe 1% of mmorpg players), why would ashes needs to add top pve raid content to be successful? cant they just be successful adding the best content for PVP players and people who arent op pve raiders?
Why are you trying to rehash a discussion we have had many times over?
My point here is - if Ashes has a specific segment of content at or soon after launch, and that segment of content proves popular with players, content additions should add more of it. On the other hand, if Ashes does not have a specific segment of content at or soon after launch, they shouldn't add it with content additions, as it will not attract those players to the game.
Basically, content additions need to be targeted at your existing players and to entice more in that are like them, not at trying to attract entire new player segments to the game.
because i dont remember everything i talk about with ppl
Fair enough.
A quick overview of our previous discussion on the topic;
I believe that Ashes needs PvE players (I am broadly dividing players in to just PvE and PvP, even though very few people are only one or the other, and no such people will likely play Ashes - most players still identify as mostly one or the other, however) in order to survive, as they will be the people that stay in the game even if they lose more PvP than they win. PvP players tend to eventually leave a game when they are in this situation - and statistically speaking, some people need to be in this situation.
In order for a game like Ashes to attract PvE players, it needs to have PvE that is at least as good (arguably better) than a game that is focused on just PvE. The PvE needs to be good enough to encourage players and guilds that are primarily about PvE to come to Ashes, knowing there will be losses of PvE rewards via PvP.
Thus, Ashes needs to have great PvE - and a sign of great PvE to PvE players is the quality of your very top end raids. If a game has good top end PvE content, then it stands (based on experience) that the game will have good PvE content the whole way down. On the other hand, games that do not have good top end PvE content do not have good PvE content the whole way down, and often have entire gaps (no group content for 15 levels, the gear from one dungeon not being good enough for the next dungeon, etc - kind of the PvE equivlent of a game having level 1 - 10, then picking back up again at level 16).
While you have agreed in the past that Ashes will need players that are more interested in PvE than PvP, you have not really made the connection that this means the game needs to have PvE content that would attract PvE players from other games. Steven also seems to not have made this connection.
However, none of that is really what I was talking about in this thread.
Please be aware of what you are replying to before replying.
I acknowledge i might misunderstand Sentences a bit from time to time. Please rest easy, Noaani. It is not meant to be rude or offensive towards you.
It's fine, it happens. It just needs to be corrected so that others don't think that is what was said without actually looking at what was originally written.
Comments
Expansions take 12 to 18 months to design, develop, test and implement.
Seasonal content takes 3-4 months to design, develop, test and implement.
P~RRR~etty sure we saw lots and lots of PvE-Content already when Sir Steven went to "a Minotaur-Camp" because he took a Quest from a Nail Bord with Quests at the Nodes Entrance.
Or when he and his Allies went into a Castle which was partially Ruins and full of Goblins - and "took a Quest" from a wandering Spirit.
Also while i am aware that not all of this is a Quest, the World is full with PvE-Mobs who are quite happy to attack You when you get close.
No PvE ?
In Ashes ?
Please don't make it seem as if EA is making that Game. It makes me cringe somewhere deep, deep inside.
but if the target audience isn't top pve raiders (maybe 1% of mmorpg players), why would ashes needs to add top pve raid content to be successful? cant they just be successful adding the best content for PVP players and people who arent op pve raiders?
No one is saying Ashes has no PvE content. What we are talking about is top end PvE content - as viewed from the perspective of all MMORPG's. We have not seen any, and there is no indication that Ashes even has the systems in place to enable it.
The PvE we have seen so far would be considered mid to low.
Why are you trying to rehash a discussion we have had many times over?
My point here is - if Ashes has a specific segment of content at or soon after launch, and that segment of content proves popular with players, content additions should add more of it. On the other hand, if Ashes does not have a specific segment of content at or soon after launch, they shouldn't add it with content additions, as it will not attract those players to the game.
Basically, content additions need to be targeted at your existing players and to entice more in that are like them, not at trying to attract entire new player segments to the game.
Fair enough.
A quick overview of our previous discussion on the topic;
I believe that Ashes needs PvE players (I am broadly dividing players in to just PvE and PvP, even though very few people are only one or the other, and no such people will likely play Ashes - most players still identify as mostly one or the other, however) in order to survive, as they will be the people that stay in the game even if they lose more PvP than they win. PvP players tend to eventually leave a game when they are in this situation - and statistically speaking, some people need to be in this situation.
In order for a game like Ashes to attract PvE players, it needs to have PvE that is at least as good (arguably better) than a game that is focused on just PvE. The PvE needs to be good enough to encourage players and guilds that are primarily about PvE to come to Ashes, knowing there will be losses of PvE rewards via PvP.
Thus, Ashes needs to have great PvE - and a sign of great PvE to PvE players is the quality of your very top end raids. If a game has good top end PvE content, then it stands (based on experience) that the game will have good PvE content the whole way down. On the other hand, games that do not have good top end PvE content do not have good PvE content the whole way down, and often have entire gaps (no group content for 15 levels, the gear from one dungeon not being good enough for the next dungeon, etc - kind of the PvE equivlent of a game having level 1 - 10, then picking back up again at level 16).
While you have agreed in the past that Ashes will need players that are more interested in PvE than PvP, you have not really made the connection that this means the game needs to have PvE content that would attract PvE players from other games. Steven also seems to not have made this connection.
However, none of that is really what I was talking about in this thread.
I acknowledge i might misunderstand Sentences a bit from time to time. Please rest easy, Noaani. It is not meant to be rude or offensive towards you.
It's fine, it happens. It just needs to be corrected so that others don't think that is what was said without actually looking at what was originally written.