Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Comments
Oh, I am no shepherd, Neurath. "Shepherds don't look after sheep because they like them. They either want to fuck them...fleece them...or eat them.” -Christopher Hitchens
I am highlighting what I deem to be toxic behavior.
I agree that the majority of the topics on this forum are not toxic at all. I noticed a considerable unfair backlash with the last developer update and I am concerned that it will get worse with every future developer update as the hype builds up.
I think that a hyped-up, entitled fraction of our community is misled to think this game is almost ready for Alpha 2 and that we are months away from a release, hence they assume anyone else viewing these pre-alpha 2 videos will think the game is garbage. This, in my opinion, is false, that, most "interested" people out there who are not as invested in this game, understand we are years away and are a little less biased as to what they expect from a pre-alpha2 game development update video.
I hope you see the blind spot some of us have here. Overhype causes false expectations at this early stage. Intrepid Studios will have all the time in the world in the next two years to expand and fund their marketing team better, putting out professionally recorded and edited videos showcasing all classes exhaustively with high-quality gameplay. It appears to me that Steven and the team are not there yet for that investment, and I wholeheartedly agree. None of that is required at the moment, and demanding that it should be now, and it should be high quality is unreasonable. We don't even have an alpha 2 announced yet. The majority of MMORPGs in development don't even release videos at this stage.
That is thoughtful and I agree. That's why I aim to raise some awareness for those of us who are a little too ineloquent and impatient at a somewhat toxic level with their demands at this early stage.
Since these class reveals have happened we are introduced to different devs who play the other toons. There isn't a core gameplay and development demarcation and that is what caused a disconnect and the dysfunction. Sometimes I feel a dev is thrown into the gameplay just to answer questions which used to have a dedicated section.
I'm aware we are months away from A2. I hope launch isn't until 2026 or beyond. There was always going to be hit and miss reactions from Jan livestream because the tank was shown. Luckily we also got a glimpse of the cleric again and we saw the disposition of the group play.
The devs are hyper focused on what they lacked - like potions, but, they didn't notice that what they had was very flawed. Often the flaws are hidden with dev cheats but we saw the dysfunction due to limited cheats being used.
We're all on the same side and same team, even if we have different opinions or preferences. We love the MMORPG genre and we can't wait to play Ashes of Creation, right?
We should take it as what it is, they were NOT trying to show a fully fleshed gameplay from the very beginning but highlighted partly complete features as their progress update, and hear our opinions on their "direction". I am supportive of this and take it as it is. Even if it is half-baked, I enjoyed watching it as the direction they are following.
I imagine that some misled individuals miss the point and took this as a way to criticize how unfleshed these features are, how the team is not playing the game well, or how all the animations and skills are not working properly and as intended yet, etc... The unfair disappointment from the cleric update spilled over to the January update with the further hype through the roof in the past 2 months.
My opinion is, as I highlighted above, our sense of dysfunction is somewhat rooted in our misled expectations. These videos are supposed to give us the direction they are following, rather than showing us fully developed, release-ready gameplay. That's why each session has only a few main focuses, as in discussion threads asking for our opinions prior to and after these videos. If anything, these dysfunctions observed should be a clue for how far we are off from the alpha2 rather than how bad this game is going to be, and raise "concerns" and "unjustified demands"...
Since A1 these classes have been changed (haven't seen mage recently though). Hence the backlash is somewhat linked to the functions lost and the functions changed. I fully expect the classes to be different after A2 too which is why I feel there is a push to get a2 sooner rather than later.
What's not needed is the Endless cycle of show, feedback, change, show, feedback, change. Hence why the hype can turn to dismay. If A1 hadn't happened and the reveals were the first seen i doubt there would've been so much backlash. Yet, the changes were made and the people demonstrating the changes struggled with the changes too.
Part of the official feedback request asks everyone to state their concerns about what was shown...
Fair enough, perhaps I should have labeled them as "unjustified concerns"... I'd agree with the validity of these concerns (and not consider them "entitled") if they take into account the true purpose of these videos, how early stage we are in the development of the game, and the qualities and other priorities of the staff preparing them.
.
Agreed, voicing opinions, and suggestions are all fair game, especially (but not limited to) in the direction Steven and other developers are asking our opinions about.
My problem is when a fraction of the community starts demanding things (they are not entitled to) as described in my post.
It is really perplexing to me why it is difficult for some of you to grasp the contrast between voicing opinions (as graciously awarded to you by Intrepid) and making demands (as if Intrepid owes you stuff at this early stage of a game development phase).
I am using the clearest words, reiterating the same statements using the most basic words and statements, yet here we are. Disagree by all means, but at least show me that you understand the point I am trying to make if you will respond to this post - otherwise it's pure clutter.
Fair point. Please expand on what you see as the context of these entitlements in my OP so we are on the same page.
Margaret could be playing these games, but she is not if that's what you are suggesting. The team of game developers and Steve have other higher priorities for sure. It is most definitely not in their job title or description to showcase games to a community. If you are suggesting that they should have a staff of people hired for the purpose of showcasing, recording, editing, and preparing professional videos; I believe it is too early for that. As Steve eluded in this month's update, they will eventually shift more funds towards marketing when the time is right. We can all assume, and I highly agree, that currently, this stage of development is too early for such an expense.
It is a matter of how much time Intrepid is willing to invest in these videos given their priorities are not to market or promote the game but to showcase it to a small community who enjoys getting dev updates.
If they decide it's worth that investment, we will start seeing these more professional videos in the future. By all means, make this suggestion, but do not feel you have a sense of entitlement to these higher-quality videos right now. They have specific goals in each and every update video, most people do stick to those "directions" when they share their opinions as asked by the developers. This is productive. The moment you are "demanding" polish, your unjustified entitlement is speaking. These videos do not necessarily have that purpose.
The updated second video is the best example of the correct suggestions and constructive criticism in effect. They were asking for our opinions on aspects of tank play, we don't necessarily see that in the first video clearly, but the next video addressed those issues. If the "polish" that you are referring to limited to that progress? Yes, please! If the polish requires 2-3 days of advanced preparation for a progress update video this early in the cycle as some people argued here and there in the forums in the past couple of days? I think that is not the goal they set for these videos, yet. We are not entitled to demand that kind of polish. I hope the distinction is clearer. Of course, they can. Agreed, but better videos come at the expense of these game developers' time from building the game.
Again, I'm open to responding to your opinions about the topic in this post. I will not exchange personal attacks.
Some of your post.
These:
Do you feel the game developers did not put enough time into preparing for a showcase?
Do you hate the creative director's ability (or, inability) to play and genuinely enjoy as he demos the game he is building brick by brick with his own money?
Are fair comments.
If the point of open development is for the community to provide feedback, but if the content on which we are basing our feedback is of poor quality, then we are not be able to provide effective and actionable feedback. That is a fair criticism.
Do they have to do monthly discussions? Nope, they can stop whenever if they feel the need to. But as long as they advertise and promote showcases or discussions, they should be done in a professional manner, and for the most part they have aside from a few exceptions. Without demand for quality, you promote laziness and poor, misleading content.
Agreed. Would you agree that the second video they posted was based on some constructive criticism that they valued, and is on par with what is sufficient given their other responsibilties?
The goal of the video was supposed to be a focused, narrow introduction to some tank skills and use cases, as well as the tank role in a party, and they wanted our opinion about their direction on these topics. It was more difficult to assess them based on the first video compared to the second video. My opinion is that a retake was not necessary, but I get it. I find that fair.
I argue that asking for 2-3 days of preparation, finding other staff to play the game, or hiring a team to prepare higher-quality videos was not the purpose. Demanding that they should spend more time on preparation to provide such videos (as some proposed on this thread and in other threads) is unjustified, it is a form of entitlement.
Steven, indeed, promised a tank showcase. I actually think both videos pretty much accomplished it, just that the second video was more organized and direct. If that's the level of "higher quality" and "professionalism" that you are demanding, I empathize with that. The second video they posted this month is based on some constructive criticism and seemed to me like a fair compromise between effort and quality. Again, both videos offer more or less the same information, it's just the second was better organized.
I would not call that demanding or entitlement, but... I don't recall that they promised a high-quality video that some in the community are insisting on, that they should spend hours or days preparing for it, and that we are entitled to demand a change if it's not done in a professional manner. Some even went as far as saying "we will not settle for less", or that "we should not be ok with it". There is a contrast here, I hope you can see it.
"Professional" in the true sense of the word is asking too much because they are not "professional showcase presenters", so, it's a false expectation.
If Steven advertised or promoted a quick ask from 3 developers to join a live stream in which Steven asks them some questions as they are all casually showcasing the content they recently developed - which was the goal of this showcase - they delivered. You are missing the point of these pre-alpha2 developer updates. This content was never meant to be "high quality", or "professional".
Please check with your mental timeline and kindly point to me when you raised your expectations to that level, based on what statement Steven suffered.
You are "demanding quality" and arguing that lack of this "demand" promotes laziness and poor, misleading content. To begin with, that is a false dichotomy. There is a whole scale in between, but I won't diverge further to that topic.
More importantly, a lack of quality in these showcase videos should not be attributed to "laziness". These developers simply have other priorities. I think this distinction may be the root of the sense of entitlement some in the community must feel for better-quality videos.
I am starting to understand that, perhaps, some in our community simply think that the reason why these videos are not on par with their expectations is that the game developers who prepare them are lazy, who otherwise sit on their asses and have nothing better to do. Only if they spent 2 more hours or 2 more days, we would get top-notch videos... as if a high-quality video is what Steven promised us, as if it's in their payroll, and it must be their priority. This is categorically wrong to assume. This assumption may explain the (false) sense of entitlement in your and others' responses.
I will highlight again, that these game developers have a lot of other responsibilities, of which none are related to showcasing the features they are building. Steven may have promised to showcase the abilities of a tank, invited 3 developers to showcase the gameplay, and I think they somewhat delivered on that promise even on the first take. We all could already tell the skills and the gameplay from the first video, including several boss fights that demo them in action. The second video is welcome but was not necessary. The order of things presented was just a little better and more organized. Good, they learned how to organize the format of these class showcases better now.
We were never promised more than that, and neither should we have been. Voice your opinions for better quality videos, by all means, but consider the current stage of the development cycle we are in. Demanding it? Asking for a professional video? Change the person who presents it? "Not settling with it if not received"? Those sentiments carry a lot of sense of entitlement.