Much Needed Progress Perspective

Hello everyone,

As the title says, I am making this post to provide what, seems to be, MUCH needed perspective for AoC’s development time.

As I’m sure we all know, MMOs are big expensive time extensive games to develop by nature, regardless how ambitious they may be.

Final Fantasy XIV (2010)
• Number of Developers: Unknown (large team, rebuilt under Naoki Yoshida)
• Development Time: 5 years (2005–2010); 3 more years for relaunch
• Total Cost: $40 million

Guild Wars 2 (2012)
• Number of Developers: 150
• Development Time: 5 years (2007–2012)
• Total Cost: $50 million

New World (2021)
• Number of Developers: 100-200
• Development Time: 6 years (2015–2021)
• Total Cost: $100-200 million

World of Warcraft (2004)
• Number of Developers: 60+
• Development Time: 4-5 years (1999–2004)
• Total Cost: $60-80 million

Star Wars: The Old Republic (2011)
• Number of Developers: 800
• Development Time: 5-6 years (2005–2011)
• Total Cost: $200 million

Then there’s AoC a game that started with a team of 16!!! And has just now reached over 200 developers and hasn’t breached the 100 million development cost. Now let’s take into account the scope/ambition of what AoC is striving.
Let’s look at Sea of Thieves:
Developers: over 100
Cost: 120 million
Development time: 4 years to develop

Despite this, Sea of Thieves launched with almost no content and didn’t become good until years later.

AoC is trying to create a BETTER Sea of Thieves inside of their MMO and that isn’t even the most ambitious goal they are aiming for.

I for one have no issue with the time it is taking to develop. The only thing I would change is let us be privy to a little more of what’s under the hood.

Example: I don’t want to wait 2 years before we get a glimpse of in game augmentation, I want the developers to sit down with us and share some of their ideas and concepts long before we get them as a live stream presentation. Same could be said for the naval content or any number of concepts.

I know this was a very long post so I really appreciate everyone who took the time to read it and I would love to hear and thoughts or feelings you’d like to share.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

patrick68794

The comment about Sea of Thieves is very inaccurate considering they're not trying to compete with that game at all. Having ships doesn't mean they're trying to make a "better" Sea of Thieves lol also there's basically zero information about the development cost for SoT.

George_Black

Here is some perspective for you:
Studios behind the names games: big money.
Intrepid behind AoC: first product.

You want to avoid delays? Join my discussion on classes, which is about to get burried in the second page.

RonDog98

patrick68794 wrote: »

The comment about Sea of Thieves is very inaccurate considering they're not trying to compete with that game at all. Having ships doesn't mean they're trying to make a "better" Sea of Thieves lol also there's basically zero information about the development cost for SoT.

I tried to find a clear source for that number, but it turns out it’s just an estimate based on team size, development time, and a few other factors. I apologize for this faulty number.

However, I think the Sea of Thieves comparison makes perfect sense. SoT is pirate role playing game with a heavy focus on adventure, exploration, player interaction, and ship customization.

AoC is doing all of these things and adding, in theory, way more ship variety/customization more dynamic player combat, more dynamic ship combat, way more intense PVE interactions (Giant Sea monster raids) etc.
And on TOP of this they are trying to make the naval system tie directly into the overall economy of the game.

Saying AoC is striving for a better SoT experience seems perfectly fair to me.

RonDog98

George_Black wrote: »

Here is some perspective for you:
Studios behind the names games: big money.
Intrepid behind AoC: first product.

You want to avoid delays? Join my discussion on classes, which is about to get burried in the second page.

I believe I have seen your discussion and honestly I agree with it. I think the 64 class system is too ambitious on top of everything else they are trying to do, but I fear it’s too late to change now so I hope I’m wrong.

George_Black

RonDog98 wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

Here is some perspective for you:
Studios behind the names games: big money.
Intrepid behind AoC: first product.

You want to avoid delays? Join my discussion on classes, which is about to get burried in the second page.

I believe I have seen your discussion and honestly I agree with it. I think the 64 class system is too ambitious on top of everything else they are trying to do, but I fear it’s too late to change now so I hope I’m wrong.

Too many people push for too many unecessary things (vegan options). I am pretty sure that the Devs wont add to their scope, so no worries there.
But there are many things need a reality check because when the time comes and they have to start developing those systems, only to find out that they dont meet the expectations of the players, both from a quality standpoint and balance between all the systems, it might require redevelopment or deletion.
Here are two more:
Animal husbandry/glidding and the BH system.

But comparing IS to squareenix blizzars and such isnt realistic prespective.

Laetitian

George_Black wrote: »

RonDog98 wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

Here is some perspective for you:
Studios behind the names games: big money.
Intrepid behind AoC: first product.

You want to avoid delays? Join my discussion on classes, which is about to get burried in the second page.

I believe I have seen your discussion and honestly I agree with it. I think the 64 class system is too ambitious on top of everything else they are trying to do, but I fear it’s too late to change now so I hope I’m wrong.

Too many people push for too many unecessary things (vegan options). I am pretty sure that the Devs wont add to their scope, so no worries there.
But there are many things need a reality check because when the time comes and they have to start developing those systems, only to find out that they dont meet the expectations of the players, both from a quality standpoint and balance between all the systems, it might require redevelopment or deletion.
Here are two more:
Animal husbandry/glidding and the BH system.

But comparing IS to squareenix blizzars and such isnt realistic prespective.

I sympathise with your point, but I don't think any of the examples are problematic.

Skill balance doesn't need to be perfect; it's just not the type of game where you need to be overly worried about that. I don't think they're as overwhelmed with class design as you think they are. I'm convinced classes will effortlessly be finished before sufficient biomes, quests, story archs, node development systems, and dungeons for launch will be completed, so why worry about those other things that have separate teams?
(And the things I listed are normal time sinks in any game's development, especially with as much player influence on map changes as Ashes depends on.)

George_Black

I am not worried about the combat balsnce too much. Most will shine in one of the many aspects of the genres gameplays.
I am worried whether the playerbase will be satisfied with the system. And a few other systems.

Classes are the base of mmos.

Dygz

RonDog98 wrote: »

I don’t want to wait 2 years before we get a glimpse of in game augmentation, I want the developers to sit down with us and share some of their ideas and concepts long before we get them as a live stream presentation. Same could be said for the naval content or any number of concepts.

You can't always get what you want.
We've been waiting more than 5 years for the last two Know Your Nodes articles. We can't even get that little.

RonDog98

Dygz wrote: »

RonDog98 wrote: »

I don’t want to wait 2 years before we get a glimpse of in game augmentation, I want the developers to sit down with us and share some of their ideas and concepts long before we get them as a live stream presentation. Same could be said for the naval content or any number of concepts.

You can't always get what you want.
We've been waiting more than 5 years for the last two Know Your Nodes articles. We can't even get that little.

That’s exactly my point, as a community I think we should express that we would like more insight. I’d say go as far as to pressure them.

Noaani

RonDog98 wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

RonDog98 wrote: »

I don’t want to wait 2 years before we get a glimpse of in game augmentation, I want the developers to sit down with us and share some of their ideas and concepts long before we get them as a live stream presentation. Same could be said for the naval content or any number of concepts.

You can't always get what you want.
We've been waiting more than 5 years for the last two Know Your Nodes articles. We can't even get that little.

That’s exactly my point, as a community I think we should express that we would like more insight. I’d say go as far as to pressure them.

How about we let them develop the game at the pace they feel they need to develop the game at?

In what way is rushing the developers going to be good for the end product?

FrootLoopJunkie

There are lots of players that have been following since day 1 because of the features yall are talking about so get out of here w/ the whole "they added them" feature creep BS.

The game comes out when it comes out, sit down and enjoy the community or go play something else. No need to cry about culling to speed it up. You just want them to make others time worse so that you can have it sooner and then complain it's a featureless husk.

RonDog98

Hello,
Sorry I would like to clarify. I’m FIRMLY in the camp that they should develop at their own pace, I’m just saying I believe the community would appreciate more of a look under the hood, that’s all I’m saying.

Noaani

RonDog98 wrote: »

Hello,
Sorry I would like to clarify. I’m FIRMLY in the camp that they should develop at their own pace, I’m just saying I believe the community would appreciate more of a look under the hood, that’s all I’m saying.

That never goes well.

Most players do not uinderstand the concept of "work in progress", which is why Intrepid have moved on to only showing things that are in a state worth showing.

KingDDD

You'll get a better look at how progress is going in a month and a half.

patrick68794

RonDog98 wrote: »

patrick68794 wrote: »

The comment about Sea of Thieves is very inaccurate considering they're not trying to compete with that game at all. Having ships doesn't mean they're trying to make a "better" Sea of Thieves lol also there's basically zero information about the development cost for SoT.

I tried to find a clear source for that number, but it turns out it’s just an estimate based on team size, development time, and a few other factors. I apologize for this faulty number.

However, I think the Sea of Thieves comparison makes perfect sense. SoT is pirate role playing game with a heavy focus on adventure, exploration, player interaction, and ship customization.

AoC is doing all of these things and adding, in theory, way more ship variety/customization more dynamic player combat, more dynamic ship combat, way more intense PVE interactions (Giant Sea monster raids) etc.
And on TOP of this they are trying to make the naval system tie directly into the overall economy of the game.

Saying AoC is striving for a better SoT experience seems perfectly fair to me.

lol most PvX online games have a heavy focus on adventure, exploration, and player interaction. Sea of Thieves is a very different experience compared to what AoC is going to be providing. They're not really comparable at all beyond some extremely vague concepts that apply to almost every online game that isn't purely PvP and having ships, which plenty of other online games also have.

Some people really need to learn how to temper expectations...

Dygz

RonDog98 wrote: »

That’s exactly my point, as a community I think we should express that we would like more insight. I’d say go as far as to pressure them.

Steven already knows we would like more insight.

TheAshen

That's a great break down, thank you.

When you consider most games don't announce until part way and only get feedback from players close to launch, it's part of why you notice it pass slowly.

I think people also overlook how much having an existing IP or games helps speed up concepts and production which Intrepid doesn't have.

They're also trying to innovate which most game's seem to have given up on.

RonDog98

patrick68794 wrote: »

RonDog98 wrote: »

patrick68794 wrote: »

The comment about Sea of Thieves is very inaccurate considering they're not trying to compete with that game at all. Having ships doesn't mean they're trying to make a "better" Sea of Thieves lol also there's basically zero information about the development cost for SoT.

I tried to find a clear source for that number, but it turns out it’s just an estimate based on team size, development time, and a few other factors. I apologize for this faulty number.

However, I think the Sea of Thieves comparison makes perfect sense. SoT is pirate role playing game with a heavy focus on adventure, exploration, player interaction, and ship customization.

AoC is doing all of these things and adding, in theory, way more ship variety/customization more dynamic player combat, more dynamic ship combat, way more intense PVE interactions (Giant Sea monster raids) etc.
And on TOP of this they are trying to make the naval system tie directly into the overall economy of the game.

Saying AoC is striving for a better SoT experience seems perfectly fair to me.

lol most PvX online games have a heavy focus on adventure, exploration, and player interaction. Sea of Thieves is a very different experience compared to what AoC is going to be providing. They're not really comparable at all beyond some extremely vague concepts that apply to almost every online game that isn't purely PvP and having ships, which plenty of other online games also have.

Some people really need to learn how to temper expectations...

I’m sorry, but I don’t understand how I can list out a full breakdown or similar features between the two and you just go, “nah”.

What does sea of thieves do literally or thematically that you think ashes wont?

patrick68794

RonDog98 wrote: »

patrick68794 wrote: »

RonDog98 wrote: »

patrick68794 wrote: »

The comment about Sea of Thieves is very inaccurate considering they're not trying to compete with that game at all. Having ships doesn't mean they're trying to make a "better" Sea of Thieves lol also there's basically zero information about the development cost for SoT.

I tried to find a clear source for that number, but it turns out it’s just an estimate based on team size, development time, and a few other factors. I apologize for this faulty number.

However, I think the Sea of Thieves comparison makes perfect sense. SoT is pirate role playing game with a heavy focus on adventure, exploration, player interaction, and ship customization.

AoC is doing all of these things and adding, in theory, way more ship variety/customization more dynamic player combat, more dynamic ship combat, way more intense PVE interactions (Giant Sea monster raids) etc.
And on TOP of this they are trying to make the naval system tie directly into the overall economy of the game.

Saying AoC is striving for a better SoT experience seems perfectly fair to me.

lol most PvX online games have a heavy focus on adventure, exploration, and player interaction. Sea of Thieves is a very different experience compared to what AoC is going to be providing. They're not really comparable at all beyond some extremely vague concepts that apply to almost every online game that isn't purely PvP and having ships, which plenty of other online games also have.

Some people really need to learn how to temper expectations...

I’m sorry, but I don’t understand how I can list out a full breakdown or similar features between the two and you just go, “nah”.

What does sea of thieves do literally or thematically that you think ashes wont?

Those weren't actual features though, aside from "having ships" they're just extremely vague concepts that apply to most online PvX games. If you want to compare AoC to something, Black Desert is a much more apt comparison. Sea of Thieves is an entirely different type of game. It's not an MMO it's a session based PvX game, there is no real progression, and the main focus of the game is just grabbing a couple friends and going out and looking for treasure and fighting other players in a big, mostly static sandbox that has no persistence. It's entirely first person with 100% action oriented combat and everything in the game is completely player skill based. AoC is not going to be anything like SoT...

Child Item