Githal wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Still restricting the servers you can play on is not a good feeling for the people who supported the game's release, especially if you aren't part of a guild and want to play with some friends who aren't part of the alpha. Yes, someone who bought an earlier pack won't have access to your skins but anyone who just bought the key that is available now is only losing access to the $15 of embers and 1 month of game time (another $15) that are included. Not a high price if you are circumventing this to "control" the server. Well this "bad feeling" can be compensated by giving the testers access to the game like 3 days early access to the game. So for them the game launches with their servers 3 days ahead. then after 3 days Intrepid opens new servers for everyone else.
mcstackerson wrote: » Still restricting the servers you can play on is not a good feeling for the people who supported the game's release, especially if you aren't part of a guild and want to play with some friends who aren't part of the alpha. Yes, someone who bought an earlier pack won't have access to your skins but anyone who just bought the key that is available now is only losing access to the $15 of embers and 1 month of game time (another $15) that are included. Not a high price if you are circumventing this to "control" the server.
Its_Me wrote: » The learning curve is not linear tho. Never stated it was. Simply pointing out that catering to anyone in an attempt to make things 'equal' is futile. For 99% of the games that you tested, the experience wont matter at all. Why? Because If the game you tested is MMO - then its PVE focused. So it doesnt matter. Or if its not MMO - then doesnt mater even more. You make a lot of assumptions so you might want to inquire before insisting something does not matter. I do not play PVE games, I play games with a PVP focus (this is less focused than I like) and my favorite genre is survival. The problem with AOC will be that for 1 month players can get insane amount of advantage. Everything you spewed after this ^ is not really any different (mayors, castles, cities) than other games I tested and played such as BDO, New World ect. Oddly, didn't hear the whining about how unfair of an advantage testers had in these games. I think parents just need to start doing better.... And no, Steven said that the game wont be P2W. What you want to say is: "pay and you will have same amount of experience as the rest testers". No, this is just you once again twisting what someone said to fit your agenda. The point of my message was that people should not sit back and whine about being equal without doing anything to better their position such as watching dev streams, reading the patch notes, reading the forums, understanding classes, skills, mechanics, watching content developer streams ect. What you suggest is p2w is not my definition of p2w and there will be players that tested from A1 on that will not be able to keep up or compete with players that log in for the first time at launch. The difference will come down to individual effort and a positive rather than victim mindset. I have played in games where other clans/guilds had players that had 2 years of testing prior to launch and this did not prevent me or my guild from quickly rising and overtaking these groups. I guarantee you that had we sat back with a victim mindset complaining about these people having access to the game in test rather than focusing on being the better clan/guild, we might have failed. Since A2 launched last week, there are streamers out there doing very detailed streams on systems and mechanics and just because someone isn't physically clicking keys on their keyboard or mouse, this does not mean they cannot gain the game knowledge and experience being shared that will give them benefit at launch. Suggesting that someone has an extreme advantage that cannot be overcome simply because they physically clicked some keys seems bizarre to me. I don't need to use every skill in game to understand them, I can read about the skills/abilities and understand. Same with just about any mechanic in this game, pvp combat, node reputation, elections, xp gain, xp loss, ect. You have pure P2W mentality. and i dont like it You come across as delusional with your blatant misinterpretation and false proclamation of what others have said or what others intend and I don't care for that either. 😁 1 more question for you: Does Not wanting equal start with everyone else in your server (experience wise) means that you are too bad skill wise, and cant win if you dont have the advantage? Change of tactic, resort to insults now when unable to reply productively? As previously stated, it is not realistic to try to cater to an equal start given what you are using as an example of inequality. Experience will be based on who pulls up those big boy/girl panties like I suggested. If someone elects to sit back and whine playing the victim rather than be proactive and do something productive like read up on the game or watch some streams and/or videos to help them understand the mechanics of the game, making them mayor at the start and giving them a gold crown will not even help. But to answer your trolling provoke, I rely on skill for any game I play, I do not rely on FOMO, snowflake, victim or entitlement tactics, even if I do not do any testing prior to the launch. I just find that being proactive and taking it upon myself to gather information about the game (I do not need to physically click my keys to get it), gives me an advantage over others, even some of those that have done testing. Testing is starting soon so I feel fairly confident in suggesting you just scroll back and read what I have already written for any valid (where you are not twisting what I have written) rebuttal you might have .
The learning curve is not linear tho.
For 99% of the games that you tested, the experience wont matter at all. Why? Because If the game you tested is MMO - then its PVE focused. So it doesnt matter. Or if its not MMO - then doesnt mater even more.
The problem with AOC will be that for 1 month players can get insane amount of advantage.
And no, Steven said that the game wont be P2W. What you want to say is: "pay and you will have same amount of experience as the rest testers".
You have pure P2W mentality. and i dont like it
1 more question for you: Does Not wanting equal start with everyone else in your server (experience wise) means that you are too bad skill wise, and cant win if you dont have the advantage?
Maybe you didnt hear coz first the advantage of the testers was not that big, and second the testers were not 100-200k.
What is P2W for you? For me is spending money to have advantage. Isnt all this considered as advantage? Didnt you pay money for this advantage? Then its P2W
And 1 more thing. You disagreeing that this is P2W proves that you have P2W mentality."You are jealous that i had $ to spend on a game and you didnt / My wallet is skill / If you cant compensate the advantage of my $ with your skill, then you should spend $ also". something like this right?
Did you really try to convince me that you have no P2W mentality by saying that you were tester in many games?
Like you Pay for a lot of games to have the learning experience before the game launch.
And oh ye, New World. Coz you needed learning curve there .
Its_Me wrote: » No, I paid for a package that happened to also include the option to test. As previously stated, someone could watch streams, read patch notes, follow updates and the game development to gain much of the same knowledge.
Its_Me wrote: » No clue what you are even talking about....nor do I really care as nothing you have said so far has led to anything productive, just constant corrections on things you falsely twist and claim.
Githal wrote: » how many testers the other games had? 1k? 3k? New world had 1500 testers. So my argument for the 100k players in AOC still dont count?
Noaani wrote: » Githal wrote: » how many testers the other games had? 1k? 3k? New world had 1500 testers. So my argument for the 100k players in AOC still dont count? It negates your argument even fruther. Lets assume there is a real advantage to this. If you are in a game and you are one of 1500 people with that advantage, that could be something you could use. On the other hand, if you are in a game where you are one of 100,000 people with that advantage, that isn't an advantage, it is the baseline. Also, if you are in that first game and are not one of that 1500, you only have 1500 people to get information from in order to assist you in keeping up. In that game with 100,000 people, you have all of those 100,000 people to get that information from, making it much easier for you. On the other hand, if you are the kind of player that doesn't go out and get what ever information you can find on the competitive game you are playing, then none of this matters because you will literally always be behind everyone else.
Githal wrote: » The whole point of the discussion is how this will affect the players that are not testers. Its not about weather those 1500 players will have bigger advantage, because they are small count and wont affect all other players that much.
Noaani wrote: » Also, if you are in that first game and are not one of that 1500, you only have 1500 people to get information from in order to assist you in keeping up. In that game with 100,000 people, you have all of those 100,000 people to get that information from, making it much easier for you.
Noaani wrote: » Githal wrote: » The whole point of the discussion is how this will affect the players that are not testers. Its not about weather those 1500 players will have bigger advantage, because they are small count and wont affect all other players that much. Indeed. Noaani wrote: » Also, if you are in that first game and are not one of that 1500, you only have 1500 people to get information from in order to assist you in keeping up. In that game with 100,000 people, you have all of those 100,000 people to get that information from, making it much easier for you.
Githal wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Githal wrote: » The whole point of the discussion is how this will affect the players that are not testers. Its not about weather those 1500 players will have bigger advantage, because they are small count and wont affect all other players that much. Indeed. Noaani wrote: » Also, if you are in that first game and are not one of that 1500, you only have 1500 people to get information from in order to assist you in keeping up. In that game with 100,000 people, you have all of those 100,000 people to get that information from, making it much easier for you. Information =/= playtime experience
Githal wrote: » blah, blah, twist lie, insert strawman argument, blag blah
Its_Me wrote: » \I am convinced that there will never be a productive conversation with you involved so just go back and reread my previous comments for a rebuttal to anything valid you might possibly come up with. When you attempt to dismiss the point that players without testing access can gain valuable knowledge from keeping up with the game development by watching streams and videos suggesting this will spoil the gameplay and fun of exploring (like testing access won't), I realized that you are incapable of an actual discussion. My time is better spent in game testing than feeding trolls. Happy gaming (or not gaming).
Till now you didnt give a single argument AGAINST the OP suggestion. You realize that right? All you talk about is excuses why testing games is not P2W.
Its_Me wrote: » I gave several arguments against the OP's suggestion in my first post alone, you just have reading comprehension issues and/or fail to see or acknowledge valid points. I never even mentioned p2w, that was you flinging another desperate claim into the discussion and me having to take the time to address the troll suggestion that I test because I like p2w due to not having skill. 🤣 As suggested multiple times, go back and take the time to actually read prior posts and pay attention to the mention of the impossible task to ever make anything equal (examples were given) and that attempts to cater to this results in a vicious circle of issues, my suggestion that mandating testers to a specific server is placing a negative restriction on people that supported the developers and game, and that most of the knowledge gained during testing can be achieved via other routes. I have a game to test so you are on your own to continue to spew and twist, toodles.
Caeryl wrote: » This is an open Alpha/Beta game. The information is publicly accessible and easy to find, with dozens of people streaming it. Everyone is already starting on an even playing field at launch time. There's no gold coming from the testing phases, no free levels, no tester-exclusive 1000% damage buff. It'd be like complaining someone did better than you on a test because they took a mock exam and studied while you didn't.
Kilion wrote: » Githal wrote: » Kilion wrote: » Where exactly does it say I am "against" that? I just put forth a few points that might make OP consider whether this is indeed the only solution acceptable to him/her. Well most problems have multiple solution, so if your question is "if this is the only solution", probably there would be some other solutions as well. But if your question is weather this is real problem? then the answer is - YES. And no. What you put forth was a try to make the problem seems like its something meaningless. And that it is not a problem at all. And if you asking what other solutions there possibly can be: Well for example - to have the Beta testings to be Open for everyone. So like everyone would experience the game for 2-3 months. After this the progress will be wiped before the launch so people will have so so similar start. Oh great, another one mind reader who already knows better than others what they are trying to say. Since thats the case, have this conversation by yourself - you already know it all, aren't you?
Githal wrote: » Kilion wrote: » Where exactly does it say I am "against" that? I just put forth a few points that might make OP consider whether this is indeed the only solution acceptable to him/her. Well most problems have multiple solution, so if your question is "if this is the only solution", probably there would be some other solutions as well. But if your question is weather this is real problem? then the answer is - YES. And no. What you put forth was a try to make the problem seems like its something meaningless. And that it is not a problem at all. And if you asking what other solutions there possibly can be: Well for example - to have the Beta testings to be Open for everyone. So like everyone would experience the game for 2-3 months. After this the progress will be wiped before the launch so people will have so so similar start.
Kilion wrote: » Where exactly does it say I am "against" that? I just put forth a few points that might make OP consider whether this is indeed the only solution acceptable to him/her.
Keisener wrote: » If it is not possible to provide a solution from launch, all the clans and hardcore players who participated in the Alphas will be the rulers of the nodes from the beginning due to their prior knowledge of all the content.
