PresentPotato wrote: » you've done nothing but cope and make excuses for the game dev's. also the game is a PVX game in TESTING i think its important to TEST the X part to include all parts of the game to find flaws. talking to you is as if im speaking to a dev who is really angry and taking it personally. tbh it seems like you might be a fake account and really an angry dev.
Crowigor wrote: » Its_Me wrote: » Crowigor wrote: » I think the topic starter is not concerned about PvP itself, but about the different treatment of players and one streamer. About the need for safe zones, the need to ban PKing up to level 5—all these things testers suggested almost from the beginning of the pre-alpha. And the answer was something like, "There will be guards to protect you." But as soon as one streamer started dying a couple of times, a GM came to help. The sincere bloodthirstiness of those who killed Asmongold was to show the developers that they live in their fantasies. Unfortunately, this is the reality of this studio, and we have nothing left but to accept it. Priority will always be given to top media personalities, then US servers, then guilds associated with employees, then friends and big donors, then everyone else. But there's nothing we can do about that; such is life. On the other hand, we can use this to our advantage. For example, if we figure out how to exploit Asmongold, we can quickly get a fix for this system. If he dies a couple of hundred times up to level 10, maybe they'll start thinking about penalties for newbies, etc. In general, instead of discussing injustice and equality, which only exist in fairy tales, let's think about how we can use this to our advantage. You do realize that safe zone and low level protection was already designed to be in game (based upon earlier feedback) and was just not yet implemented? Steven mentioned this a couple times. I don't understand the over-the-top hostility toward streamers (although it did became a bit more clear as you continued with your list 🤣) . While I will intentionally avoid servers big streamers are on, I do not have any envy or resentment toward them and can see the benefit they provide in helping promote a game, player numbers, and future content development. And Steven also mentioned that this will not happen and there will be guards who will protect against this. And now a random coincidence, after the arrival of one streamer, these systems were given priority. And the main thing is a miracle - these systems are fully operational. That is, they could have been introduced much earlier. The question is not about the situation with Asmon, the question is that for the developers to at least understand something and start doing something, even give it priority, one bald streamer is needed. And that's what's sad.
Its_Me wrote: » Crowigor wrote: » I think the topic starter is not concerned about PvP itself, but about the different treatment of players and one streamer. About the need for safe zones, the need to ban PKing up to level 5—all these things testers suggested almost from the beginning of the pre-alpha. And the answer was something like, "There will be guards to protect you." But as soon as one streamer started dying a couple of times, a GM came to help. The sincere bloodthirstiness of those who killed Asmongold was to show the developers that they live in their fantasies. Unfortunately, this is the reality of this studio, and we have nothing left but to accept it. Priority will always be given to top media personalities, then US servers, then guilds associated with employees, then friends and big donors, then everyone else. But there's nothing we can do about that; such is life. On the other hand, we can use this to our advantage. For example, if we figure out how to exploit Asmongold, we can quickly get a fix for this system. If he dies a couple of hundred times up to level 10, maybe they'll start thinking about penalties for newbies, etc. In general, instead of discussing injustice and equality, which only exist in fairy tales, let's think about how we can use this to our advantage. You do realize that safe zone and low level protection was already designed to be in game (based upon earlier feedback) and was just not yet implemented? Steven mentioned this a couple times. I don't understand the over-the-top hostility toward streamers (although it did became a bit more clear as you continued with your list 🤣) . While I will intentionally avoid servers big streamers are on, I do not have any envy or resentment toward them and can see the benefit they provide in helping promote a game, player numbers, and future content development.
Crowigor wrote: » I think the topic starter is not concerned about PvP itself, but about the different treatment of players and one streamer. About the need for safe zones, the need to ban PKing up to level 5—all these things testers suggested almost from the beginning of the pre-alpha. And the answer was something like, "There will be guards to protect you." But as soon as one streamer started dying a couple of times, a GM came to help. The sincere bloodthirstiness of those who killed Asmongold was to show the developers that they live in their fantasies. Unfortunately, this is the reality of this studio, and we have nothing left but to accept it. Priority will always be given to top media personalities, then US servers, then guilds associated with employees, then friends and big donors, then everyone else. But there's nothing we can do about that; such is life. On the other hand, we can use this to our advantage. For example, if we figure out how to exploit Asmongold, we can quickly get a fix for this system. If he dies a couple of hundred times up to level 10, maybe they'll start thinking about penalties for newbies, etc. In general, instead of discussing injustice and equality, which only exist in fairy tales, let's think about how we can use this to our advantage.
Azherae wrote: » Crowigor wrote: » The question is not about the situation with Asmon, the question is that for the developers to at least understand something and start doing something, even give it priority, one bald streamer is needed. And that's what's sad. At least it livened up the discourse, though? The specifics of Phase I really trended towards 'going back to the beginning of feedback on MMOs', which tbh is super boring for people who play a lot of them seriously. I understand that the feedback equivalent of the "New Player Experience" (by this, I mean 'getting used to thinking about systems and giving feedback) is also something that many of the incoming testers need to go through, but by that metric, the Asmon situation is like 'reaching level 15 and fighting your first mini-boss'. I still can't believe Steven literally, in world chat, referred to him as 'the bald one'. That's a tier of reaction that borders on scripted, even considering Steven's personality. Ah well, assuming they were real people and not part of a performance, those that were banned have been sacrificed to the Others for the glory of AoC. The amount and type of free publicity of this sequence of events is probably a great thing for Intrepid, given their market niche.
Crowigor wrote: » The question is not about the situation with Asmon, the question is that for the developers to at least understand something and start doing something, even give it priority, one bald streamer is needed. And that's what's sad.
Its_Me wrote: » Isn't the bottom line that this protection will be in place for new players and regardless of the timing, it is a good thing for everyone?
Its_Me wrote: » Crowigor wrote: » Its_Me wrote: » It appears that Steven did listen to feedback as he mentioned in a podcast back on Oct 12 before A2 started and well before Asmon logged in, that they were working on safeguards for protecting players on the onset of their experience from immediately having a griefing or PK encounter and that decisions had not yet been made on whether this would be implemented through a level gate or a pvp suppression gate in the starting zone. Steven also stated a week ago that the tech was already created, it just had not been implemented. It might be okay to suggest that the situation with Asmon speeded up the implementation but I don't think it is fair to suggest that Steven said it would not happen and that it is only happening due to one streamer given the podcast a month ago stating it was coming and a recent interview saying the tech was there and not implemented. Isn't the bottom line that this protection will be in place for new players and regardless of the timing, it is a good thing for everyone? I agree with you. I literally think a lot of them didn't believe they needed the protection systems for newbies right now, and they would have time before they needed to fully refine one and test it, but it did lead to a lot of discourse.
Crowigor wrote: » Its_Me wrote: » It appears that Steven did listen to feedback as he mentioned in a podcast back on Oct 12 before A2 started and well before Asmon logged in, that they were working on safeguards for protecting players on the onset of their experience from immediately having a griefing or PK encounter and that decisions had not yet been made on whether this would be implemented through a level gate or a pvp suppression gate in the starting zone. Steven also stated a week ago that the tech was already created, it just had not been implemented. It might be okay to suggest that the situation with Asmon speeded up the implementation but I don't think it is fair to suggest that Steven said it would not happen and that it is only happening due to one streamer given the podcast a month ago stating it was coming and a recent interview saying the tech was there and not implemented. Isn't the bottom line that this protection will be in place for new players and regardless of the timing, it is a good thing for everyone? I agree with you. I literally think a lot of them didn't believe they needed the protection systems for newbies right now, and they would have time before they needed to fully refine one and test it, but it did lead to a lot of discourse.
Its_Me wrote: » It appears that Steven did listen to feedback as he mentioned in a podcast back on Oct 12 before A2 started and well before Asmon logged in, that they were working on safeguards for protecting players on the onset of their experience from immediately having a griefing or PK encounter and that decisions had not yet been made on whether this would be implemented through a level gate or a pvp suppression gate in the starting zone. Steven also stated a week ago that the tech was already created, it just had not been implemented. It might be okay to suggest that the situation with Asmon speeded up the implementation but I don't think it is fair to suggest that Steven said it would not happen and that it is only happening due to one streamer given the podcast a month ago stating it was coming and a recent interview saying the tech was there and not implemented. Isn't the bottom line that this protection will be in place for new players and regardless of the timing, it is a good thing for everyone?
foxstalvind wrote: » You are not Players, you are Testers.
Crowigor wrote: » Its_Me wrote: » Isn't the bottom line that this protection will be in place for new players and regardless of the timing, it is a good thing for everyone? The technology is already working on the PTR. And yes, you're right, it's good. But besides the goal itself, the reasons are also important.
Its_Me wrote: » Crowigor wrote: » Its_Me wrote: » Isn't the bottom line that this protection will be in place for new players and regardless of the timing, it is a good thing for everyone? The technology is already working on the PTR. And yes, you're right, it's good. But besides the goal itself, the reasons are also important. But as I mentioned, it appears the reason for creating the safety mechanic for new characters came from older feedback as Steven indicated more than a month ago that it would be in game? I have no idea if they planned to implement it last weekend and it didn't happen, this upcoming weekend or if it was planned for a later date and they decided to rush it due to the Asmon situation, I am just glad that they listened to the older feedback and created it so that it was ready to implement.
Crowigor wrote: » It's not some complicated technology. It's just a buff that is applied in a certain area when entering with specific parameters. It doesn't differ much mechanically from node buffs. So I don't know whether they made it in advance or in one day.
It's just that such coincidences and banning players who followed the game mechanics, I don't like very much. All this can be very much abused.
Its_Me wrote: » Crowigor wrote: » It's not some complicated technology. It's just a buff that is applied in a certain area when entering with specific parameters. It doesn't differ much mechanically from node buffs. So I don't know whether they made it in advance or in one day. Perhaps so but at least we had confirmation on Oct 12th that it would be in game at some point and was not a reversal on a decision just for Asmon. It's just that such coincidences and banning players who followed the game mechanics, I don't like very much. All this can be very much abused. Just so I understand.... Your belief is that griefing is fine in the game or that someone that stream snipes to know a streamer will be logging in who then creates a character named KO followed by the streamers name and waits for him to first log in and repeatedly killing the player so they can do nothing in game is not griefing?
Crowigor wrote: » And yes, I wouldn't call these players griefers. They're just fools if they really did that. A real griefer doesn't break the rules. He uses them. For example, forcing a person to kill themselves 10 times, complain, and send that player to a ban. That's how a smart griefer acts.
Its_Me wrote: » Crowigor wrote: » And yes, I wouldn't call these players griefers. They're just fools if they really did that. A real griefer doesn't break the rules. He uses them. For example, forcing a person to kill themselves 10 times, complain, and send that player to a ban. That's how a smart griefer acts. Right, but this was not the situation, it was literally someone that followed the stream, knew he was logging in, made a character named KOAsmon, waited at the spawn point for asmon to log in, and relentlessly attacked and killed him every time he would respawn. I would classify this person as a giefer and a fool in this situation. I also disagree with you that a real griefer does not break the rules, it is very common for griefers to intentionally break rules (especially the rule of 'no griefing') in many of the games I have played. Developers cannot spell out every single possibility for griefing so they often place a 'not limited to' under the rule so that when someone kills someone for the 27th time 20 yards from the same spawn point declaring it is not griefing because they were not standing on the spawnpoint, bye bye.
Its_Me wrote: » Crowigor wrote: » And yes, I wouldn't call these players griefers. They're just fools if they really did that. A real griefer doesn't break the rules. He uses them. For example, forcing a person to kill themselves 10 times, complain, and send that player to a ban. That's how a smart griefer acts. Right, but this was not the situation, it was literally someone that followed the stream, knew he was logging in, made a character named KOAsmon, waited at the spawn point for asmon to log in, and relentlessly attacked and killed him every time he would respawn.
Crowigor wrote: » I know how on one server they killed one person at a point more than 200 times and it wasn't griefing.
And if what you're saying really was the case, then Asmongold should be banned as a griefer.
And here's the question of who is really the griefer. The one who was unhappy with this behavior and attacked, and was killed over and over again, and then was banned altogether. Or the one who provoked all this, earned millions of views on it, and got special treatment from the GM.
P.S. If I make a character named "KOIts_me" and accidentally kill you in the game, will they ban me for griefing?
Azherae wrote: » Its_Me wrote: » Crowigor wrote: » And yes, I wouldn't call these players griefers. They're just fools if they really did that. A real griefer doesn't break the rules. He uses them. For example, forcing a person to kill themselves 10 times, complain, and send that player to a ban. That's how a smart griefer acts. Right, but this was not the situation, it was literally someone that followed the stream, knew he was logging in, made a character named KOAsmon, waited at the spawn point for asmon to log in, and relentlessly attacked and killed him every time he would respawn. "It boosts engagement!" ~Mantra of the great YouTubers/Content Creators of the decade. This all was totally worth $120, don't you think? $120 is incredibly cheap for what Intrepid/Asmon got out of this. If it wasn't even either of those 'sides' involved in this (and I can absolutely believe it was not) then they just got all this for free. Maybe even at a profit if that player actually keeps going somehow. Y'all see griefers, I see $_$.
Y'all see griefers, I see $_$.
Its_Me wrote: » Azherae wrote: » Its_Me wrote: » Crowigor wrote: » And yes, I wouldn't call these players griefers. They're just fools if they really did that. A real griefer doesn't break the rules. He uses them. For example, forcing a person to kill themselves 10 times, complain, and send that player to a ban. That's how a smart griefer acts. Right, but this was not the situation, it was literally someone that followed the stream, knew he was logging in, made a character named KOAsmon, waited at the spawn point for asmon to log in, and relentlessly attacked and killed him every time he would respawn. "It boosts engagement!" ~Mantra of the great YouTubers/Content Creators of the decade. This all was totally worth $120, don't you think? $120 is incredibly cheap for what Intrepid/Asmon got out of this. If it wasn't even either of those 'sides' involved in this (and I can absolutely believe it was not) then they just got all this for free. Maybe even at a profit if that player actually keeps going somehow. Y'all see griefers, I see $_$. Help me here with your point (and I am praying to God that you are capable of having a rational discussion 🙏) as I do not watch Asmongold Are you suggesting that Asmon should be griefed because it helps his viewership? Are you suggesting that Asmon wanted to be griefed because it helped his viewership? Are you suggesting Asmon set this up and the KOAmon dude repeatedly killing him was a buddy of his? Are you suggesting Steven had a hand in this to boost sales?.... While I am waiting for an answer, I think this was damaging to Intrepid and may have helped Asmon. Steven seemed to be in full damage control mode after this with the interview and quick implementation of upcoming new player protection in start zones ect.
PresentPotato wrote: » ANY toolbag spawn camping newbies should not only get banned but punch it the dangly bits every time they kill someone in a starter area.
Azherae wrote: » Hm, it would be a push to say I'm 'suggesting' it, but I can say that none of those things would surprise me.
As for 'damage control mode', I'll just say that now, there's a lot more discussion of, and knowledge of, the fact that this change (which was already planned) is being made. So well played to someone, I guess. I don't really care who, winning is winning.
