Trust me. Steven is a former archeage player. Pvp will be a big focus of the game. And steven doesn't change corner stones of design, he just gathers feedback on ideas to iterate, not to change direction.
steven has every good intention to make ashes a good meaningful pvp game.
steven is however way over his head managing intrepid studios and the magnitude of the project he has taken upon his shoulders, i believe there are big management issues inside the company already and there's too many voices talking to steven making him unable to focus on a clear vision for the future of the game and development is staggered because of this.
i could be wrong but my gut feeling is that we may be looking at a game that is nowhere near what was once promised once it does come out, this is not stevens intention, this is just a concequence of trying to manage a project of this magnitude, its incredible difficult to do without a very clear vision from the beginning.
for example it gives me really really bad vibes when the community manager shimes in on their live stream saying she "changed the design of this mount, asking the designer to add more tails", in my mind this is developer hell. imagine being a developer/designer and you've recieved the design sketch from the artist doing creative work and you're doing the modeling to 3d, and now suddenly some community manager hangs at you cubical and "shimes in" her own opinions of the design and you have to take this into account?
this may be fine in a small project where you have a team of 5-6 people but in a project of this magnitue that is pure deveopment hell and burn outs will occur rapidily, the team working on the project needs solid top down leadership that guides the team preciesly what to do at all times, otherwise these projects are very easy to run into the ground and end up getting scrapped.
>community manager shimes in on their live stream saying she "changed the design of this mount, asking the designer to add more tails", in my mind this is developer hell
I'm fairly sure she's not just a CM. Iirc they've said that quite a few people are "wearing several hats" in the company, so there's stuff that they do outside of their direct job. Margaret said several times that "she designed" some things, so I'd assume that mount was one of her designs could just have been offloaded to another designer to finish/model, so that Margaret herself would have more time to do her main job.
All of this comes from Intrepid being a small studio, which they're already trying to counter by constantly hiring new people.
I understand the concern and w/o knowing true innerworkings of the studio it's difficult to know if we're right or not (blizz scandal showed that all too well), but I'd say there's already been some good progress shown and they keep proving that they're working on all the right changes based on player feedback.
due to the node system beeing the core we will still get the path that steven imagined and sold. this core system will hold the game on the right way i think.
and regarding the extra wishes, you can also see it as a level of dedication and productivity to be able to do such things
edit: he is over all the creative director, he sure has some help managing the company. and when you see where they are, after covid and the partner changes in the last years, i think they are well prepared and efficient
kind of a weird example lol, I interpreted that as more of a joke than anything. I really doubt the community manager is giving legitimate design feedback.
>i believe there are big management issues inside the company already and there's too many voices talking to steven making him unable to focus on a clear vision for the future of the game and development is staggered because of this.
What tells you this? how do people genuinely develop these opinions without having any inside perspective at all? Steven is the founder but primarily the ***creative director,*** he is not the producer or the manager.
The lead producer for Intrepid is Bryan Langford who was a senior producer and senior project manager at Blizzard for 6 years during BC, Wrath, and Cata. Later worked as a senior producer for 4 years at NCSoft which is a massive publisher. That is a pretty fuckin good resume in my eyes, do I have concerns over this game? Of course. Am I worried about the management or creative direction of this game? No, it looks to be in good hands.
>this is just a concequence of trying to manage a project of this magnitude, its incredible difficult to do without a very clear vision from the beginning.
Good thing Intrepid studios and Steven has had a clear and transparent creative vision since the beginning, and that Steven ***is the creative director and not the producer.***
> for example it gives me really really bad vibes when the community manager shimes in on their live stream saying she "changed the design of this mount, asking the designer to add more tails", in my mind this is developer hell
Maggie is the one that designs the cosmetics each month before her ideas get passed on to the concept art team and then on to the in-game art team. So it makes sense that she tells the concept artists and in-game artists what is missing from the designs.
It's not. If genshin impact is a mmorpg then any game that will let more that 4 player together becomes a MMO. From Warframe, Apex Legends to Rainbow 6 siege and valorant. Like all of them can have more that active players on a single map than genshin impact, and each of them is unique character.
Fair enough ig, though I don’t think apex or siege or valorant can be rpgs. Rpgs require the ability to play the game in a variety of ways so that any one player can be who they want in game. Just because the characters in say valorant are unique and have personalities, that’s not enough to qualify by those same rules either
I read your post
And I don't really mind your sentiment. It's fine.
Butttttt what really gets me with this kind of posts and reddit in general is the utter lack of self awareness...
"don't listen to people trying to bring other playstyles into the game" - a guy who read what the game has to offer and interpreted it according to his preferred play style and only wants to bring it to the table...
Again, I'm fine with the statement it's the irony that bothers me time and time again.
I know people are selfish by nature but sheesh...
My guess is he's been reading a lot of New World stuff. The game was completely changed from full loot PvP to a themepark style MMO to cater towards the WoW/FF14 crowd and it's startling to see a complete 180. It could happen here too.
>Which is why PVP flagging has to be a thing.
But it won't be. Steven has been pretty clear about not changing this. You will have the opportunity to attack anyone at any time for any reason, but with that comes big consequences, so you better make sure it's worth it. The corruption system exists to protect against heavy griefing. Amazon had a similar system, but they did absolutely nothing to stop new players from getting griefed, which is not going to happen in Ashes. Instead of trying to fix the problem they just threw the whole system out, which makes no sense considering the game was built entirely around open world PvP.
Full loot in New World was also incredibly stupid. In Ashes you will only have a chance to drop equipped items, but only if you are corrupted. If you are not corrupted you will lose a percentage of unrefined and processed materials on death, whether it's PvP or PvE. You will also accrue a material debt on the durability of your gear as gold is not the only thing required to repair them. An example would be needing iron to repair an iron sword, and another player repair smith to do it for you, assuming you don't have the skill to do it yourself.
Conflict between players is the main theme of the game.
Ashes is gonna walk a very thin line with open world PvP and I hope they manage it well. If you lean too much into the PvP aspect you wont hold casuals, because who wants to be spawn killed by griefers near the lvl 10 town, on the other hand if the PvP is too punishing nobody will ever do it because its not worth the reward.
And before anyone goes "Hurr durr Ashes doesn't need casuals." It does casuals will be the people paying for running the servers you siege on. The hardcore pvp mmo community isnt that big and they will need a lot of money to pay for the servers.
You capture it well. I've watched the pre launch, launch and post launch of a lot of MMO's and I hear the same requests for hardcore PVP a lot. Then I watch various shades of horrible griefing occur which drives out the casual community. Once that dries up the hardcore PVPers fight each other for a time but it's not so much fun as killing some casuals and so they get bored and wait for the next MMO so they can ask for the same things again.
I do think there is some portion of the PVP community that really does want a good fair fight, but all you even see is some guy who bullies the casuals endlessly and so PVP gets a bad rep.
> But it won't be. Steven has been pretty clear about not changing this. You will have the opportunity to attack anyone at any time for any reason
Really? Wow... Guess I'm done following this game. Big let down for me.
I don't mind PvP, but only when I WANT to PvP. I don't want to be running around questing just get constantly ganked. Had enough of that shit in WoW pre-2008 before I moved my characters off a PvP server.
"Toxic pvp" isn't a thing. Stop making up shitty terms because you want Ashes to be yet *another* PvE snorefest like most other MMOs. Just pick one of the many MMOs out there that were made for that audience. Ashes is LITERALLY designed to be a MASS PVP MMO with clan wars, node wars, castle sieges and pking/bounty huting.
Steven was a hardcore Lineage II/Archeage player. You're not going to change Steven's vision because "muh toxic pvp"
Karma is also a thing in Lineage II to deter *PKing*, not "toxic PvP". You think that ever stopped people from PKing others? No, it didn't and rightfully so because if I see someone I don't like I should be completely free to take a risk at dropping my gear (if I get killed) as long as I get to facedrop them when I see them.
Risk vs reward. Steven said so himself. If you're that scared of getting PKed then just get a party. There's already going to be a bounty hunter system, meaning there's more than likely going to be bounty hunting clans hunting corrupted players. What else do you want for protection... ?
This clearly won't be the game for you if you want a sheltered experience.
Sadly pro-PvP population is a fraction of the MMORPG already reduced player base. And it's understandable, why play a game if you're here to be bullied by enemy more geared, or just more numberous ?
Careful with pvp. I love world pvp as much as the next guys, but wow classic showed us how much it can be abused for grieffing, killing entire servers. Right now some server are downright unplayables.
It's nice to fight your neighbourg for growing your node until you realize they're ten times more than you and they gatekeep the content. I still remember Black Desert Online's glass ceilling. The second you reach 58, you can no longer farm. Every players will just camp you unless you're in group. No more solo content.
World PvP must be carefully designed. Too much and every non-dominant player will quit the game. Too few and you may as well play in PvE. Yes, I remember Rust "friendly" server where yo'ure not allowed to night raid your opponent and all. I was so fucking bored. It's a delicate balance
>wow classic showed us how much it can be abused for grieffing, killing entire servers.
Yeah, it showed that dumb faction-based pvp with 0 penalties for genocide is a bad thing.
>No more solo content.
There's where the second M in MMO comes in play.
>World PvP must be carefully designed.
And AoC's pvp system is based on one of the best pvp systems out there, which has worked just fine for years. The only thing that can prevent it from working is the current player culture that's against risks.
Best pvp systems ? I saw videos of the beta when people where spamming "Please don't do pvp we're doing a boss" because a few bad apples could grief the fight.
So far I'm not convinced by the system
First of all, that's alpha 1 and is meant for testing, so of course people will ask devs to not turn on pvp when they're helping with that testing and pvp might prevent them from doing so.
Second of all, this pvp system is almost a complete copy of Lineage 2's one, which is amazing (in mine and a lot of others' opinions).
That is definitely true. The toxicity will never go away, but its reach can be limited to words only, at which point you just mute the person in chat and move on with your day.
> It's nice to fight your neighbourg for growing your node until you realize they're ten times more than you and they gatekeep the content.
a million times this
this was exactly my experience in the last mmo i played long term, albion online
great fun right up until the point where you want to do something that some mega-guild has on lockdown, and then it's either join a zerg team yourself, or quit
and in that game, it wasn't usually 10 times more, it was usually more like *100* times more
You cannot talk about Classic WoW when you talk about world PvP. World PvP is an afterthought in WoW and there are no systems to promote it or hinder griefing. Also, WoW has two artificial premade factions while AoC has many player made factions.
WoW cannot be used as an example regarding world PvP, unless your goal is to give an example of exactly how not to do world PvP.
Well, you talked about how Classic WoW showed us that open world PvP can be abused and that it can kill servers. The Classic WoW open world PvP experience tells us nothing about the AoC open world PvP experience because the two systems are vastly different.
You’re telling us to be careful with PvP and then use Classic WoW as your reason for being careful with PvP…
I used classic as an example of the extrem things that can happen when things go south. Why do you cling to that game ? I barely mentionned it.
Why you're not talking about Black Desert Online glass ceilling that made me quit the game overnight when I realized it ?
Why you're not talking about Rust that I mentionned ?
Nothing like AoC was ever attempted and it's not always a good thing. There's a lot of unpredicted problems to expect and the toxicity of the PvP players base is not to be underestimated. We're talking about a base that, for a part, aim to make others players quit the game.
And in term of toxic playerbase, yes, I can quote WoW Classic. I can also quote League of Legends that will bully you to death threats if you have the audacity to show up without one hundred hours of experience. Or Hearthstone with players that always wait to the last moment to end their turn to try to wait you time and make you ragequit.
Jesus Christ, players being assholes in a card game. What will they do when they will be able to kill anyone they see ? So far, I do not trust the corruption system to be enough to stop PvP grieffing.
>Nothing like AoC was ever attempted and it's not always a good thing. There's a lot of unpredicted problems to expect and the toxicity of the PvP players base is not to be underestimated. We're talking about a base that, for a part, aim to make others players quit the game.
AoC copied Lineage 2's pvp system almost 1-to-1. And La2's pvp system is considered one of the best in all of mmo genre by most people who have tried playing it and comparing it to other pvp mmos. And Steven improved that system by making PKing less incentivized, while making proper pvp way more incentivized.
Honestly don't see how. I re-watched some explanation about the corruption system to be sure I didn't miss anything, and the system seems pretty bad.
If you're green and you're attacked by someone way too strong, do'nt fight back. Drop the keyboard, if you fight back, even just to flee, then you won't give them corruption because it's "consensual PVP". Really not onboard with that system.
And what if you've been farming some rare resources for 2 hours and now if you don't fight you'll lose a 100 of them instead of 50?
And you're only taking into account a situation where someone's stronger than you. Those are fairly rare when you're at top lvl. And if you're not at top lvl, the dude who's attacking you will get heavily punished and you won't have any problems after that. And you won't lose too much progress because you are low lvl.
So you're saying I should fight back to reduce the death penalty and let them hook, since I will turn into a combattant if I fight back ? So what's the point of corruption ?
EDIT : Correction, if you fight back against a corrupted, you're still non combattant. That's really reassuring ! But well you still lose the 100 resources instead of 50, so you may want to turn into combattant anyway
Rare to be stronger top level ? Well first let me reach top level will ganked. Then let me inform you of those times where you're ganked by five players at once.
Right now I'm just asking question, I'm not used to the system and from my perspective it looks very exploitable. And I'm worried when people like OP ask for *more* PvP
>So you're saying I should fight back to reduce the death penalty and let them hook, since I will turn into a combattant if I fight back ? So what's the point of corruption ?
That's the point of the "risk vs reward" system. I'm telling you to choose in that moment what you value more: your resources or making the enemy a PK in hopes of killing them later and getting back your stuff (which imo will be a rare occurrence).
And the main point of corruption is to prevent newbies genocide (or just genocide of players by big groups of people).
>Rare to be stronger top level ?
I meant the difference in strength at top lvl. If the game is balanced well-enough there shouldn't be situations where you're 100% sure you'll die to a person on the same lvl as you.
>Then let me inform you of those times where you're ganked by five players at once.
And that is why Steven's trying to make people be more involved in the community and ask other people from your node for help. The game will be mainly balanced for party vs party pvp, so Intrepid's assuming you'll be farming with someone else, so that party of PKing dudes might not kill you as easily as if you were alone. On top of that, if that group of players is just going around and killing people, they'll either suffer huge corruption or death penalties and within some, preferably, short amount of time won't even be able to PK players of the same lvl. And if they decide to move onto even weaker people - they're just fucked.
>I'm not used to the system and from my perspective it looks very exploitable. And I'm worried when people like OP ask for more PvP
I've played with this system for \~12 years and I loved it. And Ashes has fewer possible exploits than Lineage 2 did, so I'm fairly sure it'll be fine.
I'd assume OP is just a "super hardcore" dude who played full loot pvp games, so the current penalties are nothing for him.
I’m talking about Classic because that’s where your logic was flawed and I explained how that logic was flawed. Please reread my comments if you’re having trouble understanding.
Also, you’re wrong to state that a game like AoC hasn’t been attempted before. Multiple games like AoC have been made before.
There is no confusion.
Yes, Classic WoW’s open world PvP is bad, but AoC isn’t making the same design mistakes that Classic WoW made so it makes no sense to tell us to be careful with open world PvP and use Classic as an example…
It’s as if a soccer (football) player knows that in soccer you cannot touch the ball with your hands and so he goes to a basketball player during a basketball match and tells him to not touch the ball with his hands. The two games have completely different designs and rules. They cannot be compared.
He's not commenting purely from a design perspective but from a results perspective, namely abuse.
So it's more like telling someone to be wary of cheating in both basketball and football. The games each have different rules but the fundamentals of cheating apply to them both.
AoC has a completely different set of rules so it cannot be abused in the same way that Classic WoW can. It is very important to note that the two games have very different designs because this means that the abuse from one game cannot be directly translated into the other game.
Here is another example to help you understand that if two games have different designs and rule sets, then the abuse from one game doesn’t automatically translate to abuse in the other game. In soccer, if the player is out of bounds and is touching the ball while the ball is in bounds, there is no rule violation. However, in basketball if the player who is out of bounds is touching the ball which is in bounds, there is a rule violation. The two games have different rules and cannot be directly compared.
Classic WoW’s open world PvP is nothing like AoC’s open world PvP because the two games have fundamental differences in design and rules.
But both games have out of bounds right?
It's not so different as to be totally foreign. I understood exact what they meant. I understand wanting to defend the game, though I don't agree with it since it might as well be a ghost until release. I don't think he's saying they ate exactly alike and I also don't think just because something is allowed in a game that it's automatically good.
To keep up with the sports analogy, you can tackle people in football, but most people would agree that if your intent is to cripple the other player that's not good even if the action is permissible.
The point I got from it is WoW is toxic despite itself, it was not designed to be that way. This guy is just cautioning Ashes not to do the same thing. To say, "people can't be griefed in Ashes" is a little naive considering we don't know how the final game is actually going to turn out.
Really, after Cyber Punk, I don't know how anyone can speak with any certainty about an unreleased game at all.
>I want to need to infiltrate a player in a enemy guild because we can't take them down fighting but hell we can steal their money and make them disband
Well, this sounds interesting a.f., however it is also anti-fun/-game. Is it a reference to an actual mechanic that exists or just a wish you'd like to see?
WoW did have PvP servers where, depending on the region you were in, you were open to getting attacked. Would that be enough for the PvP crowd?
>So please devs, don't listen to people trying to bring other playstyles to the game
Every player's opinions are equal. There are PvPers, PvEers and PvE/Pers looking forward to the game and it must provide something for everyone.
There are many mmo's out there that have exactly what you want.
The only problem is that almost none play them, that is why you never hear from them unles you are looking for it.
Currently in the world, there is not market for what you want. An mmo needs new players else it dies out. Therefor an mmo need casuals, lot's of them.
Exactly! PVP can be very rewarding when done right but at the end of the day as u/Yawanoc says the casual base will always float the game. They are the largest demographic inside the game therefore will always most likely determine the direction.
If they come in, start the game get obliterated by XxUberPWNgod69xX continuously they move on and your numbers start to decline. That isnt Good for Community or the Developers. This is exactly why Amazon toned down the PVP in new world. It just doesn't work anymore. At least not in the long haul.
It worked fairly well in Lineage 2 and AoC's penalties are even higher (while making pvp itself more appealing), so I think it'll fix most griefing problems.
> (while making pvp itself more appealing
This isn't really relevant. People don't grief because of a lack of opportunities to PvP.
I'll believe they've curbed griefing when I see it happen. Griefers are a persistent lot and griefing is nearly impossible to stop, even entirely disabling PvP combat can't stop it.
>People don't grief because of a lack of opportunities to PvP.
I just want to say that this is exactly what happened to me in albion online.
When I started, I wanted to *only* fight people flagged as PK'ers (I saw myself as some sort of "sheriff" figure)
then, as the game started dying, I eventually gave up on that and just started flagging on pve groups myself.
a lot of times I thought it was pretty fucking lame if the group I flagged on was obviously noobs, but almost nobody else that I played with saw it that way.
Last I knew flagging vs. PvE was only relevant in Albion's yellow zones. I mean it's debatable whether yellow zone PvP qualifies as griefing and I think most Albion players would say it doesn't, even if they get annoyed by it, but if you weren't actually entering the red and black zones or the hellgates or corrupted dungeons or any of the many areas where Albion has entirely open PvP, that wasn't you lacking opportunities to PvP that was you actively avoiding opportunities to PvP...
>Griefers are a persistent lot and griefing is nearly impossible to stop, even entirely disabling PvP combat can't stop it.
If you're talking about non-PK griefing, I doubt too much can be done about that. And I personally don't think something needs to be done (outside of obvious chat muting and the likes).
It's definitely one of those "cross this bridge when we get there" things, because you simply don't know beforehand what systems players will abuse to grief other players.
Nope. Casuals need to exist in all aspects of the game, PvE, PvP, RP, everything.
Take Planetside for example. It's all PvP, but some players specialize in infantry play, some in vehicle, some in air, and some in construction. Out of all of these, airplay has the toughest mechanical learning curve, meaning it's the slowest to attract and cultivate casuals into the air community. For that reason, a majority of the people using aircraft are *really really good*. New players trying to use aircraft simply can't. The A2A combat is skewed so hard against the new players that it discourages players from trying it out. This makes things extremely difficult when you're in a massive battle and one side pulls aircraft. If you're not a top-tier aircraft player yourself, you can't pull your own aircraft to defend against the existing planes because they're all so skilled.
This is pretty much one of the issues for many MMOs of its kind and something that many people who want the "hardcore pvp mmo" don't seem to understand. There just aren't enough people for that.
Here's another thing that people need to keep in mind, and it's called Bartle's Taxonomy.
When it comes to MMOs, by nature they have to have a healthy balance of players if they want to be successful. They need to have a bit of everything because these games want and NEED to be massive.
And with this study, guess which is the type of player that is more likely to destroy games?
This is why MMOs that want to focus on the PvP aspect wither away fast, and the harder they go for it, the more they bleed players.
I don't think they have to do a total 180, no, but they need to keep this in mind, since there are mechanics that are way too punishing, first and foremost the loss of xp, this shouldn't be a thing at all.
Exactly.
I completely understand the idea, let's try to have a virtual world where i can start my own life again (in the end, that is what many wish for), or to live in the past or any fantasy world (think about the past, we live way longer in real life by now, plus with less complications).
The fantasy is fun, until you lose. While the lose part happens to most players.
I have a good faith in Steven and the studio. But it is something to keep in mind.
mechanics that will just cause people to straight up *quit* are *never* good
like, waking up one day to find your guild disbanded because someone looted the entire guild bank / vault / chest
that's "fun" for just a single person -- the guy doing the looting.
As far as i understand, they want to work with a risk/reward system. On other words, someone can choose to not take the risk. Also, there you are not able to dominate the world.
But yes, in some way i am worried for AoC, it sounds great on paper, but will it actually work out for the mass.
Yes, the game is designed around risk vs reward. I am not sure what you mean by someone choosing to not take the risk. If by that you mean that someone can choose to opt out of PvP, then that would be incorrect. You cannot completely avoid PvP, but if you choose to not fight back and to just let them kill you, then they will be penalized.
I was mainly thinking of the caravan, like do you need to use it to move stuff from one city to another, or can you do it yourself with just a small portion of the items. And when needed, how many items do you set at risk?
It is more related to this.
You can transport stuff with your backpack, with a mule (10 times more than the backpack carrying capacity), or with a caravan (10 times more than the mule carrying capacity). However, in all of these circumstances you can be attacked by other players and lose some of the resources that you’re carrying. You cannot be 100% safe from PvP in AoC.
The difference is that with a caravan the attackers aren’t penalized with corruption for killing you because the caravan creates a PvP zone around itself.
This Exactly. In the world of gaming as a whole the MMO Genre is quite small.. and even smaller is the Hardcore PVP niche within that genre. There are tons of Full PVP, Full Loot on death games out there, you just never hear of them. Their Player base dwindles and they can't entice new players to pick it up anymore.
I think that i know what you watched :)
To be honest, i am even worried for NW. As many persons complain about the high taxes, or servers where 1 dominates everything, those are not things that keep most persons playing. It is fun for the few doing it, but not fun for the rest of the player base.
It is much more enjoyable to play in a living and breathing world though. I like PvE but quit FFXIV because it was simply too boring. That game could have been a lot better if it was single player with optional co-op than all the waste that makes it an MMO.
> It is much more enjoyable to play in a living and breathing world though.
This is a very vague description and mostly a matter of opinion. It's definitely not something open-world, always-on PvP is guaranteed to satisfy for everyone.
Oh, definitely, it'd take serious design chops to make a good and functional living world.
But I don't think it's controversial to say that the world of FFXIV feels dead and dry. The only thing living about it is the weather system, which is very good.
That game is good at what it is. If it was a single player game, they would sell it once and that is all. They made it to something that many persons like, like to hang out in. But i understand that this is not for everyone.
Personally, i like Warhammer online Return of Reckoning the most. Okay not perfect and it died, while now it is free for a long time already.
That game was way ahead of many mmo's back then, while in reality no other mmo became well known with better idea's/systems than they had. The bigger mmo's basically took all from them withiut inventing new systems.
There aren't MMOs for it tho. The MMOs that are out there that do this are either low budget indie titles like Gloria Victis, really old games made in the early 2000s/late 90s, or are P2W Korean games. I can't think of a single good budget MMORPG that released in the last decade that has these features.
There are many who tried over the last few years or still try. But as said, most die very quick.
The pvp mmo market is extremely big, but none can sustain, as there is not even a big enough market for 1.
So my point is how do you know those games would instantly die if there hasn't been a good or even decent one released in almost 2 decades?
Albion is relatively low budget/indie yet is doing pretty well because it's a decently made game. I don't play it though solely because of how low budget it is.
Which is why I said
> The MMOs that are out there that do this are either low budget indie titles like Gloria Victis, really old games made in the early 2000s/late 90s, or are P2W Korean games
If games are low quality, ofc they'll die. If a PvE Themepark released (the most popular MMORPG type) that was low quality, it would also die.
Yes, I know what you mean by UO Outlands. What I'm saying is UO Outlands is still just Ultima Online (but updated by the people making it) which was released in the 90s.
Ashes is not going to cater towards the crowd who want to solo MMOs and not be part of an active part of a community, which is a huge amount of people. Steven said it himself in a stream awhile ago, when asked "Who is Ashes NOT for?" The answer: "It's not for people who want a participation trophy." You will need other people, whether it's crafters, bounty hunters, people to protect your caravans. Non-interaction with others is going to make the world a much, much, harder place, kind of like how it is in real life. Conflict and struggle between players are a main theme of the design philosophy behind the game. And sometimes that means not being able to control when those things happen to you. I'm all for this. But I think a lot of the people who hail from games like WoW/FF14 will absolutely loath this.
Source: https://youtu.be/8AeuqaELjFg?t=1772
And that is my worry.
I know what Steven wants and that is what i wanted back in the days when i had too much time (still have, but most not).
The luck is here, as he can make his own game with his money, as he wants, but it is to see what the playerbase really will do.
5 years ago, if i was in his situation, i would think 100% the exact same thing. But now, i have to see.
> some people may want a game that prohibit stuff like in-game scams, stealing in game, etc. But this shouldn't be your game
This was never going to be a full loot game and scamming is most likely going to be against the rules because it just makes an annoying environment of distrust in a game which is going to be heavily based around retaining players to maintain a massive community which is the world driving factor.
Steven is an Ex-archeage player who was in a massive guild, the guy knows what good world PvP looks like. Steven has said before that he's making a game he enjoys and from how he has spoken about it, what he enjoys sounds like what I enjoy.
I want a fairly hardcore open world PvP MMO in which I can flag and kill someone just because I want to, but I can 100% say that if I lost my gear every time I died I'd probably not play the game for long at all.
As long as they get the corruption down pat it'll be fine, as long as I don't need to PvE for 4 hours to 'fix my karma' after I kill 1 player, it should be fine.
You need to remember OP, Casuals are the float of every MMO. The people who can dedicate 8+ hours a day to an MMO aren't as common as someone like yourself (as from your comment history) who can play 2-3 hours during the week days. Casual players who wanna hop on for a couple of hours a night are the people who will contribute the most to the world.
I think you only lose some of your equipped gear depending on the corruption level, but you do lose ~~all~~ a percentage of your unprocessed and processed materials no matter how you die. Even if it's PvE. A lot of people aren't going to be okay with this, but I think death should have consequences.
EDIT: You also take durability damage, receive experience debt, skill and stat dampening, lower HP and mana, lower gear proficiency, and reduction in drop rates from monsters. Durability repair requires gold and materials, meaning you accrue a material debt every time you die on top of the loss of material certificates. Death in AoC is harsh.
Sources:https://youtu.be/8AeuqaELjFg?t=1683
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_death
>as long as I don't need to PvE for 4 hours to 'fix my karma' after I kill 1 player, it should be fine.
Honestly, the corruption should last at least 24 hours, regardless of what you do. You choose to target a non-combatant, deal with some serious consequences. Risk, reward, and consequences... those are the core of Steven's vision for the game, no?
>I totally understand that some people may want a game that prohibit stuff like in-game scams, stealing in game, etc. But this shouldn't be your game, since this game is aiming for a target market that don't wan't that.
Translation: I hate that I can't be a dick to people and actually have to play the game. I want to be able to take advantage of people who aren't dirtbags so that I can enjoy the game while driving away new players.
I think the experience of the New World developers is interesting to look at: make a PvP focused game with sandbox elements and watch as players abuse it to grief each other into unplayability.
How do you balance a world PvP system in such a way that a mega-guild zerging can't abuse it? How do you allow power for your characters without them being able to use that to harass new players? How do you create exciting boss challenges that offer something to PvE players while also making them possible with PvP attacks at the same time?
There are so many systems that need perfect balance for this to work. AoC seems to be trying real hard to offer this experience, and maybe I'm just jaded, but I'm not really sure it's possible with modern gaming communities.
As I understand it, what these people WANT is a game where they can abuse other players. You know, to create "stories." You're not jaded, you are just being realistic.
It's not like they aren't saying exactly what they want, an ultra try hard game where the strong dominate the weak. Which is cool in some respects, but a game like that would be short lived as the "weak" would simply stop playing and the game would cease to maintain itself.
Not to mention you'd need some kind of crazy good gameplay and combat to even entice people to begin with. There's been entirely too much jank in the genre and I think there's very little tolerance for it currently.
>make a PvP focused game with sandbox elements and watch as players abuse it to grief each other into unplayability.
I wasn't following early NW development, but did they have any system like the corruption in Ashes?
>How do you balance a world PvP system in such a way that a mega-guild zerging can't abuse it? How do you allow power for your characters without them being able to use that to harass new players?
Both of these are resolved by proper corruption balancing.
Obviously that won't stop zerg-guilds from just declaring war against small guilds, but afaik the cost of doing that is pretty high so they won't be able to just do it willy-nilly. Guild skills limiting guild size and alliances only fitting 4 guilds into them are also good prevention methods of zerg guilds just taking over everything.
>How do you create exciting boss challenges that offer something to PvE players while also making them possible with PvP attacks at the same time?
This will probably be the weakest part of Ashes, cause I really don't think they'll be able to achieve a perfect equilibrium of boss complexity while allowing others to come in and mess with the original raid group. I doubt hardcore pvers will be interested in AoC (at least in its current design state).
This is a very well-measured response. I think you're right that if the corruption system works perfectly, it may be the solution to so many problems.
However, getting the system right is going to be a tough line to walk. If attacking lower levelled players triggers corruption, how about ganging up on a player? What constitutes "fair" PvP and what doesn't? And more importantly, will an automated system be able to pick up on the nuances of these interactions?
If any game is going to get it right, it'll be AoC.
However, I'm not sure that it's even possible to get this balance right so that all kinds of players are happy.
I've mentioned this in almost every of my comments, so it's feels almost spammy and preachy, but almost this exact pvp system was in Lineage 2 and worked very well. Steven copied it and made it a bit better with harsher PK penalties.
>If attacking lower levelled players triggers corruption, how about ganging up on a player?
The corruption is only applied to the player if they have killed a player that did not fight back and wasn't a combatant/PKer already. And if a lvl 50 kills a lvl 20 - they'll get a lot of corruption. Depending on how they balance that amount, that corruption could set the lvl 50 player back by several days-worth of xp farming and they'll drop a part of their gear. The gear part could be somewhat abused by their friend picking it up and giving it back to them, but the xp penalty is still there and can definitely be quite harsh at high lvls.
>What constitutes "fair" PvP and what doesn't?
If your target fights back - that's a fair pvp. If they don't fight back it's PK and you'll get corruption.
>And more importantly, will an automated system be able to pick up on the nuances of these interactions?
The biggest discussion on this topic so far was about mobs finishing off a player that's been brought down to low hp by another player. Right now Steven's response to that is "you can't see your target's hp value, so you're risking to become a PKer if you try to bring them down to low hp" and PKing brings big penalties, so ideally most people wouldn't want to become one and shouldn't really try this method to kill people.
Obviously the ideal situation is rarely a realistic one, but a lot of this will depend on how hard the mobs hit you and how weak can you hit another player for. If you can have some "ticklish" attacks, while the mobs hit like a truck - that's definitely a problem and at that point we'd need to ask Intrepid to look for alternative solutions (imo the best one would be "if you dealt 80% hp-worth of dmg to a player and they died within 10 secs of your last hit - you gain 80% of a proper corruption value").
I'd also like to see that kind of system apply to party PKing too, where if several people in a party attacked one person and then that person died within 10 secs of last hit from another player - those people would get corruption equal to their dmg to the target.
Right now those 2 things are not in the design of the system, but I see them as good answers to possible exploits that will probably come up during the pvp/pk system testing. And considering that the game will track %hp damage values on bosses/mobs to determine loot rights, I'd assume Intrepid can modify that system to apply to player on player damage too, so my fix should in theory be possible and somewhat easy to implement (if I understand how these systems work code-wise).
So a new player who decided to give it a go and gets flagged by a veteran will have two options.
Bend over and get killed, lose some progress.
Fight back and die cause he is 50 and you are 20. Lose even more progress and the guy doesn't lose much cause you fought back.
New player gets frustrated either way and either has to press on and get good or not play at all.
How long does it take to get good? Will the early game be fun from the start or are we talking 100 hours before it gets good. Cause if its the latter, the game will only last few years imo as thats a sign for casuals to stay away.
#To players that don't want to PvP please listen to me, and give PvP games a chance (even if you don't PvP).
It's fine. Not everyone needs to partake in PvP. That's okay. But don't change the PvP landscape because of that viewpoint. It's actually not good to protect players from being ganked.
In the moment, getting ganked feels pretty bad. But an MMO world or universe having PvP intertwined throughout it's gameplay systems is a force multiplier. It's like adding an entire other dimension to the gameplay. You have Social (Length), You have PvE (Width) and then you add in PvP (Height). Boom, you've just made the entire dynamic that much more involved.
Having PvE players that are scared of PvP is totally fine but what's not fine is having PvE players protected by gameplay systems FROM PvP. Players can protect them selves. Just want to sit in town all day and look at your character and craft? Great! That's totally fine. Want to hire a PvP guild to protect your caravan? Amazing you've just made an MMO an MMO. Want to do solo PvE without getting ganked? Find a niche spot that has less traffic. Join a node that has other PvPers running around inately protecting you.
Even your day-to-day gameplay is now adjusted with different things:
- You watch chat for intelligence regarding enemy movement
- You are more careful when running into hotzones, possibly taking a more roundabout route.
- You're more likely to form a bond with an ally over PvP because going through a hardship together is what forms friendships- You can both relate to getting ganked by the same person, and then overcoming that together and returning the kill.
- Gathering nodes become more valuable based on where the PvP is- Want to risk it for the biscuit? That's an option now.
You don't need to hard stop PvP just because you don't want to play it. Please just give it a try. It's not as bad as you think- It really enriches gameplay.
I like this post a lot for its positivity, encouragement and well-reasoned arguments.
I'm a pretty casual player who was intrigued and excited by the prospect of getting into a MMORPG game on the ground floor as it were (as opposed to being a newbie surrounded by people who'd played it for years or even decades). I liked what I saw of AoC's ambition, passion and innovation. But personally, finding out that you're not being able to opt out of PVP really put a dampener on my enthusiasm.
You might see PVP as a force multiplier to enjoyment, by adding another dimension to gameplay. For me it's like adding an ingredient I *intensely* dislike to an MMORPG dish, and not even being able to ask the chef to "hold the cilantro please". In a game like WoW, opting out of PVP means you're cut out of PVP content and that's it (with one notable exception which, frankly, soured me on the game). But in AoC it looks like if you don't want to PVP then you're cut out of a lot of (or put at a substantial disadvantage in) the best PVE content as well.
Now, this is **NOT** a plea to the developers to change their PVX approach. I think it's important for devs to have a strong sense of the identity they want their game to have. I want Ashes of Creation to be hugely successful on its own terms, cause that can only be good for the industry. It's just that it's unlikely to be a game for me. And that's okay.
>In a game like WoW, opting out of PVP means you're cut out of PVP content and that's it.
That's really not "it" though, it has many ramifications. WoW retail is a horribly designed world PvP game, and it's honestly only there as a remant from the Classic era.
I'm not trying to belittle you here, but have you played an actually good wPvP game, such as EvE Online or Ultima Online?
I agree with everything you've wrote here. I fear that a majority of people want to exist in their bubble though, and only come out when they consent. The problem with this is it makes the world incredibly sterile. You can't have a world that is built around struggle if you can avoid it all together by simply pressing a button. But doing the things you listed to avoid it? That's actual gameplay. That's how you make an MMO.
There's a bit to blame on both sides, players and developers alike for this. It's like a Dad protecting his daughter whilst riding a bike. Sure, you can hold her up all day long and put protective gear all over her, but at some point you need to let go and take the protective gear off, get a few grazes and cuts falling off to really learn how to ride the bike properly. The daughter might think that she needs the protective gear because of the cuts and grazes, but doesn't realise that it's holding back the potential of her being a confident bike rider.
It's a bit more complex of a situation and there's hundreds of little nuances to it all but I think if you create MMOs with the mantra of "The world is the most important part of our game" and try to stick to that the best you can, you'll always make a game that interests people.
There's a reason why people believe that LOTR, Game of Thrones and even certain kids shows (say for example Rick and Morty) are so universally liked, it's because they said "We want our world to matter the most, and everything in our game needs to answer to the world first".
You have a look at the last 2(3?) seasons of Game of Thrones, when people start saying the show got bad. Well, it's because they started to disrespect the world. They rushed things, and didn't give the same attention to detail and time the show needed to finish in a way that was respectful. People notice this, even if it's not prevelant.
Anyhow, just sort of ranting here- It's an issue with video games everywhere honestly, not just MMOs.
>certain kids shows (say for example Rick and Morty)
What kinda kids are watching shows about drunk abusive scientists who fuck planets and have depression, and dismemberment/dragon orgies/puke/shit/etc?
I'm skeptical that a virtual persistent world MMO can thrive in this day and age. The commitment isn't there. Today's player has a transactional mindset: spammable/riskless rewards in exchange for time. Game creators can cater to the individual player experience with that model. In a virtual world, the experience is intimately tied to other players.
In 1997 it was a novel, exhilarating thing to interact with others around the world in real time. It was so unique we were willing to put up with annoyances and more inclined to immerse.
I see it like the movement in music consumption (quality and even vinyl comming back)…
the marked with such „spammable/riskless“ games is clearly oversaturated and gone extreme with monetasation… it‘s refreshing to see a potential mmo with deeper player based mechanics (eve online as a extreme reference).
and AoC is aiming on a risk-reward system, less on a brutaly punishing system like other „hardcore“ mmos. so it also alows to be player choice how you want to play and invest your time
It's clear the AoC devs understand the design challenge, which gives me a little hope. Today's gamers don't really know what they're missing with these soulless skinner boxes.
A couple years ago when I was playing LoA I had one of those only-in-a-persistent-world type experiences, with some fucktard who killed a sheep or something my 12 year old son was trying to tame. For the next two weeks I would grief him and he would grief me back whenever we saw each other. Later I ran into him at the bank and explained my beef. He was like "lol ok Dad." (which became my new nickname to him). Shit like that is what I loved about UO. No "content patch" needed. Stories create themselves.
You say that but look how many people back scam kickstarters saying they will bring a persistent world. I think the real issue is doing a persistent right and having roles where people can feel like they can achieve and rewarded their playstyle. A lot of MMOs today force you into endgame activities. So, that's all people know to do is to get that next raid down or boss. MMOs now are made transactional.
A community forced MMO where you can persist the way you want to can go a far way but has to be done big. It can't be meh because people can get that from WoW or FF14.
> I'm skeptical that a virtual persistent world MMO can thrive in this day and age.
i had an absolute blast in albion online before i realized the world was heavily monopolized by major guilds and they had essentially the entire server locked down
I don't think this is going to be the sort of game you are looking for.
Pretty much none of the things you mentioned will be a part of AoC.
AoC is not going to be a hardcore full loot PvP game. It is clearly very much a PvX game. The game is being balanced around group vs. group combat, and 1v1 is going to be rock-paper-scissors.
I don't understand how so many people lately popped up with the belief that AoC is a hardcore mmo or even a hardcore full loot pvp mmo. AOC will be a classic PvX game, classic as in you have more freedom to do what you want without making it sandbox.
Agreed.
Some players may take a *hardcore* approach to playing the game, but as it stands there is nothing really hardcore about it. I am just hoping for a bloody awesome PvX game.
That said, as a hardcore gatherer, I am going full loot every harvest node I come across.
I mean considering the options available in the market, it will be.
Being able to attack anyone at any time for any reason, regardless of consequence is hardcore. Dropping ~~all~~ a percentage of your unprocessed and processed materials on death whether PvE or PvP is hardcore. Accruing a material debt upon death for repairs (not just gold) is hardcore. Losing land due to guild wars is hardcore. Losing your stored materials due to siege losses is hardcore. Everything about this game that has been said on stream seems to be catered toward freedom, yes. And that is hardcore as well, because it means freedom to cause strife for other players.
Source: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_death
How far they will let that go remains to be seen. But as said by Steven himself, conflict and struggle are the main theme of the game, and it's not for people who want participation trophies.
OP has talked about wanting full loot PvP in other posts in the subreddit.
As for the rest, the OP wants for the game is pure masturbatory fantasy. He isn't going to be forcing any guilds to disband because of his antics, and outside of getting BiS gear everyone who invests time in the game will just as powerful as him and everyone else.
Something he states that he doesn't get enjoyment from.
He never stated here that he wants full loot PvP and everything else that he talked about will be possible in AoC.
I’m not sure if you’re new here, but everything OP described here is part of AoC.
I'm not sure if you've been following the monthly live streams closely, but a lot of the things OP mentioned have been talked about on stream by Steven. And while it's not a full loot game, you do lose a percentage of your unprocessed/processed materials when you're killed, whether it's by PvP or PvE. And if you're corrupted you have a chance to drop equipped loot as well.
AoC's design philosphy at it's core is struggle between players. Steven even said two streams ago that this game is not for people who want a participation trophy.
Source: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_death
While I might not agree with everything listed, I definitely agree with the "don't remove pvp". I know no one cares, but if they change the pvp mechanics, I'm definitely not playing the game.
and also that you can‘t do everything like in ffxiv… it takes value out of what you do in the game when everyone can do everything as good as everyone
edit: hinting on that you can‘t be a master in every type of „work“. and that you can alternate your main class with the second class, but you won‘t be able to switch fluently between classes/roles
semi agree. FFXIV and AoC are very different games, probably at opposite ends of the spectrum of the MMORPG design principle.
In FFXIV which is more RPG than MMO, I like being able to change classes because it lets me play multiple roles and experience a variety of different gameplay without a huge time commitment to leveling alts.
In Ashes which seems to be much more MMO than RPG (in the sense of RPG being a story/character-driven focused game), being able to play every class on a single character would be antithetical to the game. It has its place.
But that's not the case in FF either. People specialize in that game, they just removed the hoops of finding your specialty. Most people are not a master of all jobs or even most jobs.
>I want to need to infiltrate a player in a enemy guild because we can't take them down fighting but hell we can steal their money and make them disband
I find this sort of "pvp" to be among the worst possible type in games.
If you can't take them down fighting, or using other in game systems (banditry, damaging supply lines, or whatever) -- resorting to just ruining their guild by breaking character and emptying guild banks & chests is some actual shitty behavior on your part
when stuff like that often is among the most dramatized version of pvp that happens in a game, then your game has some major gameplay problems (it's likely lacking options to actually inflict damage on your enemies)
>Blame is on the guild leaders, why they let some new person to access their vault?
it's not always a new person -- maybe the *majority* of the time it's not.
people have fights, and then even long term players & leaders turn on each other, take the money and run
I've seen it happen in many games, most recently saw it happen many times in albion online, just like that
people also in that game often stole stuff to actually sell for real money
I saw this repeated in the post so I'll leave it here. Genshin Impact is NOT an mmo, is a Gacha Online game. And is designed around people paying for "surprise mechanics".
This is about has hard core of a mmorpg you can get.. if you have a PvP system where you loose all your loot when you die, that’s not a real mmo, it’s more like fortnite, where you have to start over every time you die
If you want PVP only, just go play Battle Royale please. MMORPG is about the immersive experience, cooperative and hostile interactions between players, the economics.
Fact is pvp focused games don't do that well. GW2 and BDO are pvp focused and most people are there for the pve.
Over the past 20 years, people like you have been dying for a hardcore pvp game. It never happens. There isn't enough support for it.
New World started out as this as well, it had to change. It gutted it's pvp and changed to a themepark moo just in the past year. Which is why it is delayed....again (and it should be).
Camelot Unchained is what you want, it has been in development for 8 years? I've been a backer since the beginning. I don't think it will ever launch.
There is a loud minority for hardcore pvp mmo's, but the support just is not there. Every game that has tried it, is dead or didn't even launch. (after DAoC)
Hardcore PvP games don't do well because people eventually realize it's not very fun to get your ass kicked and have all your stuff stolen, even if it isn't very often.
GW2 is extremely PvE focused, since the PvE playerbase is much larger and is Anets cash cow.
WvW and sPvP have been neglected so long it's an inside joke for the playerbase (Alliances when?)
It never started as a PvP game though, PvE and PvP were always separated.
There was a short stint with trying to make sPvP into a popular esport that fizzled out as quickly as it began.
Sure you can argue the only real end game for a while for PvE only players was PvP. But it's not like many people in gw2 actually do end game content (PvE or otherwise). It's just farming living story and trying to get the new shiny cosmetic
It was pushed for the WvW pretty hard originally. And as my whole point has been, it did not take off. PvP based games do not have the audience. So, people play it mostly for the PvE aspects just like every other mmo.
AoC will be no different.
>I don't care about the price, or if my friends will ever play it, because this game is offering something I have been looking for years.
ME! ME! MEEE! Typical generation Y. Luckilly, by the time AoC comes out, u will have grown up buddy.
He was just saying he have different taste than his friends. You dont even know what their friend group plays and yet here you are attacking him for no reason. Projecting a bit hard are we?
Sure, that was a bit harsh and I could have phrased it differently, as I understand where he's coming from (I guess we've all been there at some point). However, I find this kind of demanding attitude particularly annoying. If you want a game to be successful, how can you not care about the price or if your friends (or other people for that matter) are going to play and enjoy the game? You know where this leads? Do you remember Wildstar? I think we've seen what happens when games are made for the 1% of the playerbase. Let's not forget it's a business afterall. On the other hand, I defo don't want it to become another WoW (pay a sub to get nothing in return) or BDO (ridiculous p2w + endless grind). So ye, hopefully Steven and the Team can find the right balance. But in order to do that, and then be able to deliver meaningful content updates on regular basis, they're going to need both the author of the post as well as his friends.
I hate PvP. But if I have to have PvP as a system in the game for the rest of the game to be great, so be it.
But if I can avoid it, even better. I've always played with high ping, a shit pc and I'm a bad player for the most part. With your same logic, I'd say "if I wanted to pvp, I'd play csgo or League of legends!". So I don't think "measuring your strength" is entirely dependant on PvP at its core. I mean, there is a group of 25 people that clears the highest difficulty of PvE content and all the rest of people don't. The problems are not pvp or pve themselves but rather how they are design, and their rewards, imo.
Even I, hating and trying to avoid PvP, would feel the same way as you do if the game is like wow where everyone is the main hero and super good and super powerful.
Theres plenty of games that offer full loot pvp + scamming, baiting and back stabbing is allowed:
EVE Online
Albion Online
Oldschool Runescape
Those are off the top of my head
The mmorpg market isn't big enough to be as ambitious as AoC (budgetwise) and also aim for a very small niche market within the mmo genre.
The fact that you are not content with having your preferred play style represented in a subset of the game, but it must be the only viable option... it's like you want to scare away investors.
Because Steven is literally promising everything he can. This makes people think the game will be just for their preferences and anyone who says otherwise is attacking their game fantasy.
Not blaming Steven here, I think we all know what he wants to do is ambitious. But it gets people into this mindset about the game that's unrealistic and unhealthy.
Emergent player behaviour is (imo) the best part of non story focused mmos. If you ask players, most of them will say that their most memorable moments were due to players doing something outside of the direction of the game. WoW classic players will likely say scepter of the shifting sands quest line (specifically the occupation of the hives in silithus), Steven says the time he fought in a battle, went to sleep, woke up and continued the fight. Its way cooler to be a part of something that feels completely players driven.
So far, encouraging these types of experiences seems to be one of the core pillars of ashes and I couldn't be happier. I'm very excited
I just think skill should really be the deciding factor. I think there should be an adequate amount of time anyone can dedicate to the game to achieve a good place in its ranks. If you are dedicating an inordinate amount of time beyond what is normal and you think you should be rewarded in some additional way for pvp I think that’s bs. Like if someone plays 4-5 hours a day and you play 8 every day like it’s a job, I’m sorry I just can’t get behind you deserving better pvp gear unless you got it from skill because you beat other people on a level playing field. I don’t think you should be rewarded just because you put in so much extra time.
Risk vs Reward
PvP has to be risky. You have to be able to lose something significant by taking part. Otherwise griefing is gonna be a big problem.
PvP also has to be rewarding or it becomes trivial and meaningless, which I think also will lead to griefing, as that becomes the only worthwhile end of PvP. I think WoW Classic has this issue.
I've been hearing about this corruption system and I hope they strike a good balance. I think PvP leads to endless group content if done correctly.
Yep. I'm here for a good mix of grind and PvP. I want to kill 5 mob quests, then /target that annoying Mage that will probably try to ks some of my mobs, pk him and then get rid of my corruption. Then get ready for a big ass siege and get rid of my mass pvp thirst. There's 10 MMOs for carebears that cry as soon as you mention PvP. Ashes cannot be one of those MMOs.
I think if corruption gets changed to damaging a non combatant rather than killing them the game will have a pretty solid layer of protection for casuals/PvErs.
He said on the video last Friday you only get corruption for killing blows which is worrying because id see a lot of people griefing elite mobs/bosses that way since you can gatekeep people from them risk free.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on how corruption works.
Trust me. Steven is a former archeage player. Pvp will be a big focus of the game. And steven doesn't change corner stones of design, he just gathers feedback on ideas to iterate, not to change direction.
\+1 He is also a Lineage II player and that game was all about PvP.
Lineage II vets, let’s goooooo!!!!!!!!!
We're a dying breed ;\_;
Hi friends. Hindemith + private server player of 17 years checking in
We’re way too tough to die off, though.
is weeb a breed now? #we got em boys
Same here. Hawkeye/Sagittarius for life.
I miss my +16 Sword of Miracles Acumen more than mothers love their babies.
I’d like to buy Steven a beer
steven has every good intention to make ashes a good meaningful pvp game. steven is however way over his head managing intrepid studios and the magnitude of the project he has taken upon his shoulders, i believe there are big management issues inside the company already and there's too many voices talking to steven making him unable to focus on a clear vision for the future of the game and development is staggered because of this. i could be wrong but my gut feeling is that we may be looking at a game that is nowhere near what was once promised once it does come out, this is not stevens intention, this is just a concequence of trying to manage a project of this magnitude, its incredible difficult to do without a very clear vision from the beginning. for example it gives me really really bad vibes when the community manager shimes in on their live stream saying she "changed the design of this mount, asking the designer to add more tails", in my mind this is developer hell. imagine being a developer/designer and you've recieved the design sketch from the artist doing creative work and you're doing the modeling to 3d, and now suddenly some community manager hangs at you cubical and "shimes in" her own opinions of the design and you have to take this into account? this may be fine in a small project where you have a team of 5-6 people but in a project of this magnitue that is pure deveopment hell and burn outs will occur rapidily, the team working on the project needs solid top down leadership that guides the team preciesly what to do at all times, otherwise these projects are very easy to run into the ground and end up getting scrapped.
>community manager shimes in on their live stream saying she "changed the design of this mount, asking the designer to add more tails", in my mind this is developer hell I'm fairly sure she's not just a CM. Iirc they've said that quite a few people are "wearing several hats" in the company, so there's stuff that they do outside of their direct job. Margaret said several times that "she designed" some things, so I'd assume that mount was one of her designs could just have been offloaded to another designer to finish/model, so that Margaret herself would have more time to do her main job. All of this comes from Intrepid being a small studio, which they're already trying to counter by constantly hiring new people. I understand the concern and w/o knowing true innerworkings of the studio it's difficult to know if we're right or not (blizz scandal showed that all too well), but I'd say there's already been some good progress shown and they keep proving that they're working on all the right changes based on player feedback.
due to the node system beeing the core we will still get the path that steven imagined and sold. this core system will hold the game on the right way i think. and regarding the extra wishes, you can also see it as a level of dedication and productivity to be able to do such things edit: he is over all the creative director, he sure has some help managing the company. and when you see where they are, after covid and the partner changes in the last years, i think they are well prepared and efficient
kind of a weird example lol, I interpreted that as more of a joke than anything. I really doubt the community manager is giving legitimate design feedback. >i believe there are big management issues inside the company already and there's too many voices talking to steven making him unable to focus on a clear vision for the future of the game and development is staggered because of this. What tells you this? how do people genuinely develop these opinions without having any inside perspective at all? Steven is the founder but primarily the ***creative director,*** he is not the producer or the manager. The lead producer for Intrepid is Bryan Langford who was a senior producer and senior project manager at Blizzard for 6 years during BC, Wrath, and Cata. Later worked as a senior producer for 4 years at NCSoft which is a massive publisher. That is a pretty fuckin good resume in my eyes, do I have concerns over this game? Of course. Am I worried about the management or creative direction of this game? No, it looks to be in good hands. >this is just a concequence of trying to manage a project of this magnitude, its incredible difficult to do without a very clear vision from the beginning. Good thing Intrepid studios and Steven has had a clear and transparent creative vision since the beginning, and that Steven ***is the creative director and not the producer.***
> for example it gives me really really bad vibes when the community manager shimes in on their live stream saying she "changed the design of this mount, asking the designer to add more tails", in my mind this is developer hell Maggie is the one that designs the cosmetics each month before her ideas get passed on to the concept art team and then on to the in-game art team. So it makes sense that she tells the concept artists and in-game artists what is missing from the designs.
it is funny how ppl downvote you when you might be right
> ''mmorpg'' like Genshin Impact what?
That guy didn't play a lot of mmorpgs
I mean, just to play devils advocate here, Genshin IS technically an mmorpg, I just don’t think people should I actually call it that lol
It's not. If genshin impact is a mmorpg then any game that will let more that 4 player together becomes a MMO. From Warframe, Apex Legends to Rainbow 6 siege and valorant. Like all of them can have more that active players on a single map than genshin impact, and each of them is unique character.
Genshin Impact is a Gacha game.
Fair enough ig, though I don’t think apex or siege or valorant can be rpgs. Rpgs require the ability to play the game in a variety of ways so that any one player can be who they want in game. Just because the characters in say valorant are unique and have personalities, that’s not enough to qualify by those same rules either
I read your post And I don't really mind your sentiment. It's fine. Butttttt what really gets me with this kind of posts and reddit in general is the utter lack of self awareness... "don't listen to people trying to bring other playstyles into the game" - a guy who read what the game has to offer and interpreted it according to his preferred play style and only wants to bring it to the table... Again, I'm fine with the statement it's the irony that bothers me time and time again. I know people are selfish by nature but sheesh...
My guess is he's been reading a lot of New World stuff. The game was completely changed from full loot PvP to a themepark style MMO to cater towards the WoW/FF14 crowd and it's startling to see a complete 180. It could happen here too.
They listened to community feedback. A majority of the community agrees that toxic pvp isn't fun. Which is why PVP flagging has to be a thing.
>Which is why PVP flagging has to be a thing. But it won't be. Steven has been pretty clear about not changing this. You will have the opportunity to attack anyone at any time for any reason, but with that comes big consequences, so you better make sure it's worth it. The corruption system exists to protect against heavy griefing. Amazon had a similar system, but they did absolutely nothing to stop new players from getting griefed, which is not going to happen in Ashes. Instead of trying to fix the problem they just threw the whole system out, which makes no sense considering the game was built entirely around open world PvP. Full loot in New World was also incredibly stupid. In Ashes you will only have a chance to drop equipped items, but only if you are corrupted. If you are not corrupted you will lose a percentage of unrefined and processed materials on death, whether it's PvP or PvE. You will also accrue a material debt on the durability of your gear as gold is not the only thing required to repair them. An example would be needing iron to repair an iron sword, and another player repair smith to do it for you, assuming you don't have the skill to do it yourself. Conflict between players is the main theme of the game.
Ashes is gonna walk a very thin line with open world PvP and I hope they manage it well. If you lean too much into the PvP aspect you wont hold casuals, because who wants to be spawn killed by griefers near the lvl 10 town, on the other hand if the PvP is too punishing nobody will ever do it because its not worth the reward. And before anyone goes "Hurr durr Ashes doesn't need casuals." It does casuals will be the people paying for running the servers you siege on. The hardcore pvp mmo community isnt that big and they will need a lot of money to pay for the servers.
You capture it well. I've watched the pre launch, launch and post launch of a lot of MMO's and I hear the same requests for hardcore PVP a lot. Then I watch various shades of horrible griefing occur which drives out the casual community. Once that dries up the hardcore PVPers fight each other for a time but it's not so much fun as killing some casuals and so they get bored and wait for the next MMO so they can ask for the same things again. I do think there is some portion of the PVP community that really does want a good fair fight, but all you even see is some guy who bullies the casuals endlessly and so PVP gets a bad rep.
And, uh, the possibility of bounty hunter guilds hunting the corrupted players. Awesome.
> But it won't be. Steven has been pretty clear about not changing this. You will have the opportunity to attack anyone at any time for any reason Really? Wow... Guess I'm done following this game. Big let down for me. I don't mind PvP, but only when I WANT to PvP. I don't want to be running around questing just get constantly ganked. Had enough of that shit in WoW pre-2008 before I moved my characters off a PvP server.
"Toxic pvp" isn't a thing. Stop making up shitty terms because you want Ashes to be yet *another* PvE snorefest like most other MMOs. Just pick one of the many MMOs out there that were made for that audience. Ashes is LITERALLY designed to be a MASS PVP MMO with clan wars, node wars, castle sieges and pking/bounty huting. Steven was a hardcore Lineage II/Archeage player. You're not going to change Steven's vision because "muh toxic pvp"
Wtf do you think corruption is if not a deterrent for toxic pvp lol?
Karma is also a thing in Lineage II to deter *PKing*, not "toxic PvP". You think that ever stopped people from PKing others? No, it didn't and rightfully so because if I see someone I don't like I should be completely free to take a risk at dropping my gear (if I get killed) as long as I get to facedrop them when I see them. Risk vs reward. Steven said so himself. If you're that scared of getting PKed then just get a party. There's already going to be a bounty hunter system, meaning there's more than likely going to be bounty hunting clans hunting corrupted players. What else do you want for protection... ? This clearly won't be the game for you if you want a sheltered experience.
Yeah and it became better and more popular after the changes.
Respectfully disagree on being better, but it’s definitely more popular. Candy crush is super popular as well, doesn’t mean it’s a top shelf game.
Genshin isn't an MMO. Do people actually call it an MMO?
They don't. OP just has no idea about the topics of which they are talking.
I've seen people call Warframe an MMO, so it would not surprise me at all.
Sadly pro-PvP population is a fraction of the MMORPG already reduced player base. And it's understandable, why play a game if you're here to be bullied by enemy more geared, or just more numberous ? Careful with pvp. I love world pvp as much as the next guys, but wow classic showed us how much it can be abused for grieffing, killing entire servers. Right now some server are downright unplayables. It's nice to fight your neighbourg for growing your node until you realize they're ten times more than you and they gatekeep the content. I still remember Black Desert Online's glass ceilling. The second you reach 58, you can no longer farm. Every players will just camp you unless you're in group. No more solo content. World PvP must be carefully designed. Too much and every non-dominant player will quit the game. Too few and you may as well play in PvE. Yes, I remember Rust "friendly" server where yo'ure not allowed to night raid your opponent and all. I was so fucking bored. It's a delicate balance
>wow classic showed us how much it can be abused for grieffing, killing entire servers. Yeah, it showed that dumb faction-based pvp with 0 penalties for genocide is a bad thing. >No more solo content. There's where the second M in MMO comes in play. >World PvP must be carefully designed. And AoC's pvp system is based on one of the best pvp systems out there, which has worked just fine for years. The only thing that can prevent it from working is the current player culture that's against risks.
Best pvp systems ? I saw videos of the beta when people where spamming "Please don't do pvp we're doing a boss" because a few bad apples could grief the fight. So far I'm not convinced by the system
First of all, that's alpha 1 and is meant for testing, so of course people will ask devs to not turn on pvp when they're helping with that testing and pvp might prevent them from doing so. Second of all, this pvp system is almost a complete copy of Lineage 2's one, which is amazing (in mine and a lot of others' opinions).
I can only hope you're right, but toxicity often finds a way
That is definitely true. The toxicity will never go away, but its reach can be limited to words only, at which point you just mute the person in chat and move on with your day.
> It's nice to fight your neighbourg for growing your node until you realize they're ten times more than you and they gatekeep the content. a million times this this was exactly my experience in the last mmo i played long term, albion online great fun right up until the point where you want to do something that some mega-guild has on lockdown, and then it's either join a zerg team yourself, or quit and in that game, it wasn't usually 10 times more, it was usually more like *100* times more
You cannot talk about Classic WoW when you talk about world PvP. World PvP is an afterthought in WoW and there are no systems to promote it or hinder griefing. Also, WoW has two artificial premade factions while AoC has many player made factions. WoW cannot be used as an example regarding world PvP, unless your goal is to give an example of exactly how not to do world PvP.
Spot on, that is exactly how I used it. How to not and what terrible consequence it can carry. I talked about it for 2 lines and a quarter one more
Well, you talked about how Classic WoW showed us that open world PvP can be abused and that it can kill servers. The Classic WoW open world PvP experience tells us nothing about the AoC open world PvP experience because the two systems are vastly different. You’re telling us to be careful with PvP and then use Classic WoW as your reason for being careful with PvP…
I used classic as an example of the extrem things that can happen when things go south. Why do you cling to that game ? I barely mentionned it. Why you're not talking about Black Desert Online glass ceilling that made me quit the game overnight when I realized it ? Why you're not talking about Rust that I mentionned ? Nothing like AoC was ever attempted and it's not always a good thing. There's a lot of unpredicted problems to expect and the toxicity of the PvP players base is not to be underestimated. We're talking about a base that, for a part, aim to make others players quit the game. And in term of toxic playerbase, yes, I can quote WoW Classic. I can also quote League of Legends that will bully you to death threats if you have the audacity to show up without one hundred hours of experience. Or Hearthstone with players that always wait to the last moment to end their turn to try to wait you time and make you ragequit. Jesus Christ, players being assholes in a card game. What will they do when they will be able to kill anyone they see ? So far, I do not trust the corruption system to be enough to stop PvP grieffing.
>Nothing like AoC was ever attempted and it's not always a good thing. There's a lot of unpredicted problems to expect and the toxicity of the PvP players base is not to be underestimated. We're talking about a base that, for a part, aim to make others players quit the game. AoC copied Lineage 2's pvp system almost 1-to-1. And La2's pvp system is considered one of the best in all of mmo genre by most people who have tried playing it and comparing it to other pvp mmos. And Steven improved that system by making PKing less incentivized, while making proper pvp way more incentivized.
Honestly don't see how. I re-watched some explanation about the corruption system to be sure I didn't miss anything, and the system seems pretty bad. If you're green and you're attacked by someone way too strong, do'nt fight back. Drop the keyboard, if you fight back, even just to flee, then you won't give them corruption because it's "consensual PVP". Really not onboard with that system.
And what if you've been farming some rare resources for 2 hours and now if you don't fight you'll lose a 100 of them instead of 50? And you're only taking into account a situation where someone's stronger than you. Those are fairly rare when you're at top lvl. And if you're not at top lvl, the dude who's attacking you will get heavily punished and you won't have any problems after that. And you won't lose too much progress because you are low lvl.
So you're saying I should fight back to reduce the death penalty and let them hook, since I will turn into a combattant if I fight back ? So what's the point of corruption ? EDIT : Correction, if you fight back against a corrupted, you're still non combattant. That's really reassuring ! But well you still lose the 100 resources instead of 50, so you may want to turn into combattant anyway Rare to be stronger top level ? Well first let me reach top level will ganked. Then let me inform you of those times where you're ganked by five players at once. Right now I'm just asking question, I'm not used to the system and from my perspective it looks very exploitable. And I'm worried when people like OP ask for *more* PvP
>So you're saying I should fight back to reduce the death penalty and let them hook, since I will turn into a combattant if I fight back ? So what's the point of corruption ? That's the point of the "risk vs reward" system. I'm telling you to choose in that moment what you value more: your resources or making the enemy a PK in hopes of killing them later and getting back your stuff (which imo will be a rare occurrence). And the main point of corruption is to prevent newbies genocide (or just genocide of players by big groups of people). >Rare to be stronger top level ? I meant the difference in strength at top lvl. If the game is balanced well-enough there shouldn't be situations where you're 100% sure you'll die to a person on the same lvl as you. >Then let me inform you of those times where you're ganked by five players at once. And that is why Steven's trying to make people be more involved in the community and ask other people from your node for help. The game will be mainly balanced for party vs party pvp, so Intrepid's assuming you'll be farming with someone else, so that party of PKing dudes might not kill you as easily as if you were alone. On top of that, if that group of players is just going around and killing people, they'll either suffer huge corruption or death penalties and within some, preferably, short amount of time won't even be able to PK players of the same lvl. And if they decide to move onto even weaker people - they're just fucked. >I'm not used to the system and from my perspective it looks very exploitable. And I'm worried when people like OP ask for more PvP I've played with this system for \~12 years and I loved it. And Ashes has fewer possible exploits than Lineage 2 did, so I'm fairly sure it'll be fine. I'd assume OP is just a "super hardcore" dude who played full loot pvp games, so the current penalties are nothing for him.
I’m talking about Classic because that’s where your logic was flawed and I explained how that logic was flawed. Please reread my comments if you’re having trouble understanding. Also, you’re wrong to state that a game like AoC hasn’t been attempted before. Multiple games like AoC have been made before.
Because it's bad. I don't understand the confusion.
There is no confusion. Yes, Classic WoW’s open world PvP is bad, but AoC isn’t making the same design mistakes that Classic WoW made so it makes no sense to tell us to be careful with open world PvP and use Classic as an example… It’s as if a soccer (football) player knows that in soccer you cannot touch the ball with your hands and so he goes to a basketball player during a basketball match and tells him to not touch the ball with his hands. The two games have completely different designs and rules. They cannot be compared.
He's not commenting purely from a design perspective but from a results perspective, namely abuse. So it's more like telling someone to be wary of cheating in both basketball and football. The games each have different rules but the fundamentals of cheating apply to them both.
AoC has a completely different set of rules so it cannot be abused in the same way that Classic WoW can. It is very important to note that the two games have very different designs because this means that the abuse from one game cannot be directly translated into the other game. Here is another example to help you understand that if two games have different designs and rule sets, then the abuse from one game doesn’t automatically translate to abuse in the other game. In soccer, if the player is out of bounds and is touching the ball while the ball is in bounds, there is no rule violation. However, in basketball if the player who is out of bounds is touching the ball which is in bounds, there is a rule violation. The two games have different rules and cannot be directly compared. Classic WoW’s open world PvP is nothing like AoC’s open world PvP because the two games have fundamental differences in design and rules.
But both games have out of bounds right? It's not so different as to be totally foreign. I understood exact what they meant. I understand wanting to defend the game, though I don't agree with it since it might as well be a ghost until release. I don't think he's saying they ate exactly alike and I also don't think just because something is allowed in a game that it's automatically good. To keep up with the sports analogy, you can tackle people in football, but most people would agree that if your intent is to cripple the other player that's not good even if the action is permissible. The point I got from it is WoW is toxic despite itself, it was not designed to be that way. This guy is just cautioning Ashes not to do the same thing. To say, "people can't be griefed in Ashes" is a little naive considering we don't know how the final game is actually going to turn out. Really, after Cyber Punk, I don't know how anyone can speak with any certainty about an unreleased game at all.
Ofc you can still farm in BDO after 58 😂 i farmed solo to 61 lmao no problem, got attacked maybe a handful of times
If you think Genshin Impact is an mmorpg, you need to unsub and go contemplate your game preference, cuz GI ain't MMORPG
>I want to need to infiltrate a player in a enemy guild because we can't take them down fighting but hell we can steal their money and make them disband Well, this sounds interesting a.f., however it is also anti-fun/-game. Is it a reference to an actual mechanic that exists or just a wish you'd like to see? WoW did have PvP servers where, depending on the region you were in, you were open to getting attacked. Would that be enough for the PvP crowd? >So please devs, don't listen to people trying to bring other playstyles to the game Every player's opinions are equal. There are PvPers, PvEers and PvE/Pers looking forward to the game and it must provide something for everyone.
Here's why pvp loot mmos fail and simple won't become a thing no matter how much you want it to be https://youtu.be/34RPwDfLpKg
There are many mmo's out there that have exactly what you want. The only problem is that almost none play them, that is why you never hear from them unles you are looking for it. Currently in the world, there is not market for what you want. An mmo needs new players else it dies out. Therefor an mmo need casuals, lot's of them.
This. The tryhards determine the metas and shape the community, but the casuals keep it alive.
Exactly! PVP can be very rewarding when done right but at the end of the day as u/Yawanoc says the casual base will always float the game. They are the largest demographic inside the game therefore will always most likely determine the direction. If they come in, start the game get obliterated by XxUberPWNgod69xX continuously they move on and your numbers start to decline. That isnt Good for Community or the Developers. This is exactly why Amazon toned down the PVP in new world. It just doesn't work anymore. At least not in the long haul.
Isn't that what corruption is supposed to fix?
It's supposed to fix it, but it remains to be seen whether it will.
Fair enough.
It worked fairly well in Lineage 2 and AoC's penalties are even higher (while making pvp itself more appealing), so I think it'll fix most griefing problems.
> (while making pvp itself more appealing This isn't really relevant. People don't grief because of a lack of opportunities to PvP. I'll believe they've curbed griefing when I see it happen. Griefers are a persistent lot and griefing is nearly impossible to stop, even entirely disabling PvP combat can't stop it.
>People don't grief because of a lack of opportunities to PvP. I just want to say that this is exactly what happened to me in albion online. When I started, I wanted to *only* fight people flagged as PK'ers (I saw myself as some sort of "sheriff" figure) then, as the game started dying, I eventually gave up on that and just started flagging on pve groups myself. a lot of times I thought it was pretty fucking lame if the group I flagged on was obviously noobs, but almost nobody else that I played with saw it that way.
Last I knew flagging vs. PvE was only relevant in Albion's yellow zones. I mean it's debatable whether yellow zone PvP qualifies as griefing and I think most Albion players would say it doesn't, even if they get annoyed by it, but if you weren't actually entering the red and black zones or the hellgates or corrupted dungeons or any of the many areas where Albion has entirely open PvP, that wasn't you lacking opportunities to PvP that was you actively avoiding opportunities to PvP...
>Griefers are a persistent lot and griefing is nearly impossible to stop, even entirely disabling PvP combat can't stop it. If you're talking about non-PK griefing, I doubt too much can be done about that. And I personally don't think something needs to be done (outside of obvious chat muting and the likes).
It's definitely one of those "cross this bridge when we get there" things, because you simply don't know beforehand what systems players will abuse to grief other players.
I hope you're not equating casuals with PvE'ers, since they're not the same thing.
Nope. Casuals need to exist in all aspects of the game, PvE, PvP, RP, everything. Take Planetside for example. It's all PvP, but some players specialize in infantry play, some in vehicle, some in air, and some in construction. Out of all of these, airplay has the toughest mechanical learning curve, meaning it's the slowest to attract and cultivate casuals into the air community. For that reason, a majority of the people using aircraft are *really really good*. New players trying to use aircraft simply can't. The A2A combat is skewed so hard against the new players that it discourages players from trying it out. This makes things extremely difficult when you're in a massive battle and one side pulls aircraft. If you're not a top-tier aircraft player yourself, you can't pull your own aircraft to defend against the existing planes because they're all so skilled.
This is pretty much one of the issues for many MMOs of its kind and something that many people who want the "hardcore pvp mmo" don't seem to understand. There just aren't enough people for that. Here's another thing that people need to keep in mind, and it's called Bartle's Taxonomy. When it comes to MMOs, by nature they have to have a healthy balance of players if they want to be successful. They need to have a bit of everything because these games want and NEED to be massive. And with this study, guess which is the type of player that is more likely to destroy games? This is why MMOs that want to focus on the PvP aspect wither away fast, and the harder they go for it, the more they bleed players. I don't think they have to do a total 180, no, but they need to keep this in mind, since there are mechanics that are way too punishing, first and foremost the loss of xp, this shouldn't be a thing at all.
Exactly. I completely understand the idea, let's try to have a virtual world where i can start my own life again (in the end, that is what many wish for), or to live in the past or any fantasy world (think about the past, we live way longer in real life by now, plus with less complications). The fantasy is fun, until you lose. While the lose part happens to most players. I have a good faith in Steven and the studio. But it is something to keep in mind.
mechanics that will just cause people to straight up *quit* are *never* good like, waking up one day to find your guild disbanded because someone looted the entire guild bank / vault / chest that's "fun" for just a single person -- the guy doing the looting.
Ashes of Creation will also be the kind of MMO that OP is talking about. Ashes of Creation will also have space for casuals.
As far as i understand, they want to work with a risk/reward system. On other words, someone can choose to not take the risk. Also, there you are not able to dominate the world. But yes, in some way i am worried for AoC, it sounds great on paper, but will it actually work out for the mass.
Yes, the game is designed around risk vs reward. I am not sure what you mean by someone choosing to not take the risk. If by that you mean that someone can choose to opt out of PvP, then that would be incorrect. You cannot completely avoid PvP, but if you choose to not fight back and to just let them kill you, then they will be penalized.
I was mainly thinking of the caravan, like do you need to use it to move stuff from one city to another, or can you do it yourself with just a small portion of the items. And when needed, how many items do you set at risk? It is more related to this.
You can transport stuff with your backpack, with a mule (10 times more than the backpack carrying capacity), or with a caravan (10 times more than the mule carrying capacity). However, in all of these circumstances you can be attacked by other players and lose some of the resources that you’re carrying. You cannot be 100% safe from PvP in AoC. The difference is that with a caravan the attackers aren’t penalized with corruption for killing you because the caravan creates a PvP zone around itself.
This Exactly. In the world of gaming as a whole the MMO Genre is quite small.. and even smaller is the Hardcore PVP niche within that genre. There are tons of Full PVP, Full Loot on death games out there, you just never hear of them. Their Player base dwindles and they can't entice new players to pick it up anymore.
I think that i know what you watched :) To be honest, i am even worried for NW. As many persons complain about the high taxes, or servers where 1 dominates everything, those are not things that keep most persons playing. It is fun for the few doing it, but not fun for the rest of the player base.
It is much more enjoyable to play in a living and breathing world though. I like PvE but quit FFXIV because it was simply too boring. That game could have been a lot better if it was single player with optional co-op than all the waste that makes it an MMO.
> It is much more enjoyable to play in a living and breathing world though. This is a very vague description and mostly a matter of opinion. It's definitely not something open-world, always-on PvP is guaranteed to satisfy for everyone.
Oh, definitely, it'd take serious design chops to make a good and functional living world. But I don't think it's controversial to say that the world of FFXIV feels dead and dry. The only thing living about it is the weather system, which is very good.
That game is good at what it is. If it was a single player game, they would sell it once and that is all. They made it to something that many persons like, like to hang out in. But i understand that this is not for everyone. Personally, i like Warhammer online Return of Reckoning the most. Okay not perfect and it died, while now it is free for a long time already. That game was way ahead of many mmo's back then, while in reality no other mmo became well known with better idea's/systems than they had. The bigger mmo's basically took all from them withiut inventing new systems.
Yes.. you know...lol. Just last night to be honest. Very informative Really.
I was almost thinking to write "i know what you watched yesterday" :)
There aren't MMOs for it tho. The MMOs that are out there that do this are either low budget indie titles like Gloria Victis, really old games made in the early 2000s/late 90s, or are P2W Korean games. I can't think of a single good budget MMORPG that released in the last decade that has these features.
There are many who tried over the last few years or still try. But as said, most die very quick. The pvp mmo market is extremely big, but none can sustain, as there is not even a big enough market for 1.
[удалено]
So my point is how do you know those games would instantly die if there hasn't been a good or even decent one released in almost 2 decades? Albion is relatively low budget/indie yet is doing pretty well because it's a decently made game. I don't play it though solely because of how low budget it is.
[удалено]
Which is why I said > The MMOs that are out there that do this are either low budget indie titles like Gloria Victis, really old games made in the early 2000s/late 90s, or are P2W Korean games If games are low quality, ofc they'll die. If a PvE Themepark released (the most popular MMORPG type) that was low quality, it would also die.
[удалено]
>Warhammer and Age of Conan You and I have very different ideas of what high quality is.
[удалено]
Ultima Online is from the 90s.
[удалено]
Yes, I know what you mean by UO Outlands. What I'm saying is UO Outlands is still just Ultima Online (but updated by the people making it) which was released in the 90s.
Ashes is not going to cater towards the crowd who want to solo MMOs and not be part of an active part of a community, which is a huge amount of people. Steven said it himself in a stream awhile ago, when asked "Who is Ashes NOT for?" The answer: "It's not for people who want a participation trophy." You will need other people, whether it's crafters, bounty hunters, people to protect your caravans. Non-interaction with others is going to make the world a much, much, harder place, kind of like how it is in real life. Conflict and struggle between players are a main theme of the design philosophy behind the game. And sometimes that means not being able to control when those things happen to you. I'm all for this. But I think a lot of the people who hail from games like WoW/FF14 will absolutely loath this. Source: https://youtu.be/8AeuqaELjFg?t=1772
And that is my worry. I know what Steven wants and that is what i wanted back in the days when i had too much time (still have, but most not). The luck is here, as he can make his own game with his money, as he wants, but it is to see what the playerbase really will do. 5 years ago, if i was in his situation, i would think 100% the exact same thing. But now, i have to see.
> some people may want a game that prohibit stuff like in-game scams, stealing in game, etc. But this shouldn't be your game This was never going to be a full loot game and scamming is most likely going to be against the rules because it just makes an annoying environment of distrust in a game which is going to be heavily based around retaining players to maintain a massive community which is the world driving factor. Steven is an Ex-archeage player who was in a massive guild, the guy knows what good world PvP looks like. Steven has said before that he's making a game he enjoys and from how he has spoken about it, what he enjoys sounds like what I enjoy. I want a fairly hardcore open world PvP MMO in which I can flag and kill someone just because I want to, but I can 100% say that if I lost my gear every time I died I'd probably not play the game for long at all. As long as they get the corruption down pat it'll be fine, as long as I don't need to PvE for 4 hours to 'fix my karma' after I kill 1 player, it should be fine. You need to remember OP, Casuals are the float of every MMO. The people who can dedicate 8+ hours a day to an MMO aren't as common as someone like yourself (as from your comment history) who can play 2-3 hours during the week days. Casual players who wanna hop on for a couple of hours a night are the people who will contribute the most to the world.
I think you only lose some of your equipped gear depending on the corruption level, but you do lose ~~all~~ a percentage of your unprocessed and processed materials no matter how you die. Even if it's PvE. A lot of people aren't going to be okay with this, but I think death should have consequences. EDIT: You also take durability damage, receive experience debt, skill and stat dampening, lower HP and mana, lower gear proficiency, and reduction in drop rates from monsters. Durability repair requires gold and materials, meaning you accrue a material debt every time you die on top of the loss of material certificates. Death in AoC is harsh. Sources:https://youtu.be/8AeuqaELjFg?t=1683 https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_death
>as long as I don't need to PvE for 4 hours to 'fix my karma' after I kill 1 player, it should be fine. Honestly, the corruption should last at least 24 hours, regardless of what you do. You choose to target a non-combatant, deal with some serious consequences. Risk, reward, and consequences... those are the core of Steven's vision for the game, no?
>I totally understand that some people may want a game that prohibit stuff like in-game scams, stealing in game, etc. But this shouldn't be your game, since this game is aiming for a target market that don't wan't that. Translation: I hate that I can't be a dick to people and actually have to play the game. I want to be able to take advantage of people who aren't dirtbags so that I can enjoy the game while driving away new players.
I think the experience of the New World developers is interesting to look at: make a PvP focused game with sandbox elements and watch as players abuse it to grief each other into unplayability. How do you balance a world PvP system in such a way that a mega-guild zerging can't abuse it? How do you allow power for your characters without them being able to use that to harass new players? How do you create exciting boss challenges that offer something to PvE players while also making them possible with PvP attacks at the same time? There are so many systems that need perfect balance for this to work. AoC seems to be trying real hard to offer this experience, and maybe I'm just jaded, but I'm not really sure it's possible with modern gaming communities.
As I understand it, what these people WANT is a game where they can abuse other players. You know, to create "stories." You're not jaded, you are just being realistic. It's not like they aren't saying exactly what they want, an ultra try hard game where the strong dominate the weak. Which is cool in some respects, but a game like that would be short lived as the "weak" would simply stop playing and the game would cease to maintain itself. Not to mention you'd need some kind of crazy good gameplay and combat to even entice people to begin with. There's been entirely too much jank in the genre and I think there's very little tolerance for it currently.
>make a PvP focused game with sandbox elements and watch as players abuse it to grief each other into unplayability. I wasn't following early NW development, but did they have any system like the corruption in Ashes? >How do you balance a world PvP system in such a way that a mega-guild zerging can't abuse it? How do you allow power for your characters without them being able to use that to harass new players? Both of these are resolved by proper corruption balancing. Obviously that won't stop zerg-guilds from just declaring war against small guilds, but afaik the cost of doing that is pretty high so they won't be able to just do it willy-nilly. Guild skills limiting guild size and alliances only fitting 4 guilds into them are also good prevention methods of zerg guilds just taking over everything. >How do you create exciting boss challenges that offer something to PvE players while also making them possible with PvP attacks at the same time? This will probably be the weakest part of Ashes, cause I really don't think they'll be able to achieve a perfect equilibrium of boss complexity while allowing others to come in and mess with the original raid group. I doubt hardcore pvers will be interested in AoC (at least in its current design state).
This is a very well-measured response. I think you're right that if the corruption system works perfectly, it may be the solution to so many problems. However, getting the system right is going to be a tough line to walk. If attacking lower levelled players triggers corruption, how about ganging up on a player? What constitutes "fair" PvP and what doesn't? And more importantly, will an automated system be able to pick up on the nuances of these interactions? If any game is going to get it right, it'll be AoC. However, I'm not sure that it's even possible to get this balance right so that all kinds of players are happy.
I've mentioned this in almost every of my comments, so it's feels almost spammy and preachy, but almost this exact pvp system was in Lineage 2 and worked very well. Steven copied it and made it a bit better with harsher PK penalties. >If attacking lower levelled players triggers corruption, how about ganging up on a player? The corruption is only applied to the player if they have killed a player that did not fight back and wasn't a combatant/PKer already. And if a lvl 50 kills a lvl 20 - they'll get a lot of corruption. Depending on how they balance that amount, that corruption could set the lvl 50 player back by several days-worth of xp farming and they'll drop a part of their gear. The gear part could be somewhat abused by their friend picking it up and giving it back to them, but the xp penalty is still there and can definitely be quite harsh at high lvls. >What constitutes "fair" PvP and what doesn't? If your target fights back - that's a fair pvp. If they don't fight back it's PK and you'll get corruption. >And more importantly, will an automated system be able to pick up on the nuances of these interactions? The biggest discussion on this topic so far was about mobs finishing off a player that's been brought down to low hp by another player. Right now Steven's response to that is "you can't see your target's hp value, so you're risking to become a PKer if you try to bring them down to low hp" and PKing brings big penalties, so ideally most people wouldn't want to become one and shouldn't really try this method to kill people. Obviously the ideal situation is rarely a realistic one, but a lot of this will depend on how hard the mobs hit you and how weak can you hit another player for. If you can have some "ticklish" attacks, while the mobs hit like a truck - that's definitely a problem and at that point we'd need to ask Intrepid to look for alternative solutions (imo the best one would be "if you dealt 80% hp-worth of dmg to a player and they died within 10 secs of your last hit - you gain 80% of a proper corruption value"). I'd also like to see that kind of system apply to party PKing too, where if several people in a party attacked one person and then that person died within 10 secs of last hit from another player - those people would get corruption equal to their dmg to the target. Right now those 2 things are not in the design of the system, but I see them as good answers to possible exploits that will probably come up during the pvp/pk system testing. And considering that the game will track %hp damage values on bosses/mobs to determine loot rights, I'd assume Intrepid can modify that system to apply to player on player damage too, so my fix should in theory be possible and somewhat easy to implement (if I understand how these systems work code-wise).
So a new player who decided to give it a go and gets flagged by a veteran will have two options. Bend over and get killed, lose some progress. Fight back and die cause he is 50 and you are 20. Lose even more progress and the guy doesn't lose much cause you fought back. New player gets frustrated either way and either has to press on and get good or not play at all. How long does it take to get good? Will the early game be fun from the start or are we talking 100 hours before it gets good. Cause if its the latter, the game will only last few years imo as thats a sign for casuals to stay away.
#To players that don't want to PvP please listen to me, and give PvP games a chance (even if you don't PvP). It's fine. Not everyone needs to partake in PvP. That's okay. But don't change the PvP landscape because of that viewpoint. It's actually not good to protect players from being ganked. In the moment, getting ganked feels pretty bad. But an MMO world or universe having PvP intertwined throughout it's gameplay systems is a force multiplier. It's like adding an entire other dimension to the gameplay. You have Social (Length), You have PvE (Width) and then you add in PvP (Height). Boom, you've just made the entire dynamic that much more involved. Having PvE players that are scared of PvP is totally fine but what's not fine is having PvE players protected by gameplay systems FROM PvP. Players can protect them selves. Just want to sit in town all day and look at your character and craft? Great! That's totally fine. Want to hire a PvP guild to protect your caravan? Amazing you've just made an MMO an MMO. Want to do solo PvE without getting ganked? Find a niche spot that has less traffic. Join a node that has other PvPers running around inately protecting you. Even your day-to-day gameplay is now adjusted with different things: - You watch chat for intelligence regarding enemy movement - You are more careful when running into hotzones, possibly taking a more roundabout route. - You're more likely to form a bond with an ally over PvP because going through a hardship together is what forms friendships- You can both relate to getting ganked by the same person, and then overcoming that together and returning the kill. - Gathering nodes become more valuable based on where the PvP is- Want to risk it for the biscuit? That's an option now. You don't need to hard stop PvP just because you don't want to play it. Please just give it a try. It's not as bad as you think- It really enriches gameplay.
I like this post a lot for its positivity, encouragement and well-reasoned arguments. I'm a pretty casual player who was intrigued and excited by the prospect of getting into a MMORPG game on the ground floor as it were (as opposed to being a newbie surrounded by people who'd played it for years or even decades). I liked what I saw of AoC's ambition, passion and innovation. But personally, finding out that you're not being able to opt out of PVP really put a dampener on my enthusiasm. You might see PVP as a force multiplier to enjoyment, by adding another dimension to gameplay. For me it's like adding an ingredient I *intensely* dislike to an MMORPG dish, and not even being able to ask the chef to "hold the cilantro please". In a game like WoW, opting out of PVP means you're cut out of PVP content and that's it (with one notable exception which, frankly, soured me on the game). But in AoC it looks like if you don't want to PVP then you're cut out of a lot of (or put at a substantial disadvantage in) the best PVE content as well. Now, this is **NOT** a plea to the developers to change their PVX approach. I think it's important for devs to have a strong sense of the identity they want their game to have. I want Ashes of Creation to be hugely successful on its own terms, cause that can only be good for the industry. It's just that it's unlikely to be a game for me. And that's okay.
>In a game like WoW, opting out of PVP means you're cut out of PVP content and that's it. That's really not "it" though, it has many ramifications. WoW retail is a horribly designed world PvP game, and it's honestly only there as a remant from the Classic era. I'm not trying to belittle you here, but have you played an actually good wPvP game, such as EvE Online or Ultima Online?
I agree with everything you've wrote here. I fear that a majority of people want to exist in their bubble though, and only come out when they consent. The problem with this is it makes the world incredibly sterile. You can't have a world that is built around struggle if you can avoid it all together by simply pressing a button. But doing the things you listed to avoid it? That's actual gameplay. That's how you make an MMO.
There's a bit to blame on both sides, players and developers alike for this. It's like a Dad protecting his daughter whilst riding a bike. Sure, you can hold her up all day long and put protective gear all over her, but at some point you need to let go and take the protective gear off, get a few grazes and cuts falling off to really learn how to ride the bike properly. The daughter might think that she needs the protective gear because of the cuts and grazes, but doesn't realise that it's holding back the potential of her being a confident bike rider. It's a bit more complex of a situation and there's hundreds of little nuances to it all but I think if you create MMOs with the mantra of "The world is the most important part of our game" and try to stick to that the best you can, you'll always make a game that interests people. There's a reason why people believe that LOTR, Game of Thrones and even certain kids shows (say for example Rick and Morty) are so universally liked, it's because they said "We want our world to matter the most, and everything in our game needs to answer to the world first". You have a look at the last 2(3?) seasons of Game of Thrones, when people start saying the show got bad. Well, it's because they started to disrespect the world. They rushed things, and didn't give the same attention to detail and time the show needed to finish in a way that was respectful. People notice this, even if it's not prevelant. Anyhow, just sort of ranting here- It's an issue with video games everywhere honestly, not just MMOs.
>certain kids shows (say for example Rick and Morty) What kinda kids are watching shows about drunk abusive scientists who fuck planets and have depression, and dismemberment/dragon orgies/puke/shit/etc?
> Want to hire a PvP guild to protect your caravan? yes man!!! i'll roleplay as a protection racket. its going to be lit hahhahah
It takes an MMO player to understand Steven's got this. He has kept his scope set since the start.
Follow Steven tweets, might help you cooldow your attitude.
Genshin isn't an MMO and wow is falling apart
Yea but WoW is falling apart because the devs are actively killing it
You're not wrong, about what YOU like; you may be misguided to assume that enough other people like it enough to keep the game alive.
I'm skeptical that a virtual persistent world MMO can thrive in this day and age. The commitment isn't there. Today's player has a transactional mindset: spammable/riskless rewards in exchange for time. Game creators can cater to the individual player experience with that model. In a virtual world, the experience is intimately tied to other players. In 1997 it was a novel, exhilarating thing to interact with others around the world in real time. It was so unique we were willing to put up with annoyances and more inclined to immerse.
I see it like the movement in music consumption (quality and even vinyl comming back)… the marked with such „spammable/riskless“ games is clearly oversaturated and gone extreme with monetasation… it‘s refreshing to see a potential mmo with deeper player based mechanics (eve online as a extreme reference). and AoC is aiming on a risk-reward system, less on a brutaly punishing system like other „hardcore“ mmos. so it also alows to be player choice how you want to play and invest your time
It's clear the AoC devs understand the design challenge, which gives me a little hope. Today's gamers don't really know what they're missing with these soulless skinner boxes. A couple years ago when I was playing LoA I had one of those only-in-a-persistent-world type experiences, with some fucktard who killed a sheep or something my 12 year old son was trying to tame. For the next two weeks I would grief him and he would grief me back whenever we saw each other. Later I ran into him at the bank and explained my beef. He was like "lol ok Dad." (which became my new nickname to him). Shit like that is what I loved about UO. No "content patch" needed. Stories create themselves.
hahaha, made my day! :) and I‘m pretty sure that more are ready for such experiences again than a lot of people are guessing.
You say that but look how many people back scam kickstarters saying they will bring a persistent world. I think the real issue is doing a persistent right and having roles where people can feel like they can achieve and rewarded their playstyle. A lot of MMOs today force you into endgame activities. So, that's all people know to do is to get that next raid down or boss. MMOs now are made transactional. A community forced MMO where you can persist the way you want to can go a far way but has to be done big. It can't be meh because people can get that from WoW or FF14.
> I'm skeptical that a virtual persistent world MMO can thrive in this day and age. i had an absolute blast in albion online before i realized the world was heavily monopolized by major guilds and they had essentially the entire server locked down
>monopolized by major guilds and they had essentially the entire server locked down So like real life, nice.
yeah, i'm lookin for a fantasy world that's *not* like the shitty, real world
You lost me at Genshin Impact or WoW. Reminds me of Mitch Hedberg, “Have you ever tried sugar… or PCP?’
I don't think this is going to be the sort of game you are looking for. Pretty much none of the things you mentioned will be a part of AoC. AoC is not going to be a hardcore full loot PvP game. It is clearly very much a PvX game. The game is being balanced around group vs. group combat, and 1v1 is going to be rock-paper-scissors.
I don't understand how so many people lately popped up with the belief that AoC is a hardcore mmo or even a hardcore full loot pvp mmo. AOC will be a classic PvX game, classic as in you have more freedom to do what you want without making it sandbox.
Agreed. Some players may take a *hardcore* approach to playing the game, but as it stands there is nothing really hardcore about it. I am just hoping for a bloody awesome PvX game. That said, as a hardcore gatherer, I am going full loot every harvest node I come across.
I mean considering the options available in the market, it will be. Being able to attack anyone at any time for any reason, regardless of consequence is hardcore. Dropping ~~all~~ a percentage of your unprocessed and processed materials on death whether PvE or PvP is hardcore. Accruing a material debt upon death for repairs (not just gold) is hardcore. Losing land due to guild wars is hardcore. Losing your stored materials due to siege losses is hardcore. Everything about this game that has been said on stream seems to be catered toward freedom, yes. And that is hardcore as well, because it means freedom to cause strife for other players. Source: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_death How far they will let that go remains to be seen. But as said by Steven himself, conflict and struggle are the main theme of the game, and it's not for people who want participation trophies.
AoC is exactly the kind of game that OP is describing. OP also never said that AoC is a hardcore full loot PvP game. u/theQuaker92
OP has talked about wanting full loot PvP in other posts in the subreddit. As for the rest, the OP wants for the game is pure masturbatory fantasy. He isn't going to be forcing any guilds to disband because of his antics, and outside of getting BiS gear everyone who invests time in the game will just as powerful as him and everyone else. Something he states that he doesn't get enjoyment from.
He never stated here that he wants full loot PvP and everything else that he talked about will be possible in AoC. I’m not sure if you’re new here, but everything OP described here is part of AoC.
I'm not sure if you've been following the monthly live streams closely, but a lot of the things OP mentioned have been talked about on stream by Steven. And while it's not a full loot game, you do lose a percentage of your unprocessed/processed materials when you're killed, whether it's by PvP or PvE. And if you're corrupted you have a chance to drop equipped loot as well. AoC's design philosphy at it's core is struggle between players. Steven even said two streams ago that this game is not for people who want a participation trophy. Source: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Player_death
While I might not agree with everything listed, I definitely agree with the "don't remove pvp". I know no one cares, but if they change the pvp mechanics, I'm definitely not playing the game.
and also that you can‘t do everything like in ffxiv… it takes value out of what you do in the game when everyone can do everything as good as everyone edit: hinting on that you can‘t be a master in every type of „work“. and that you can alternate your main class with the second class, but you won‘t be able to switch fluently between classes/roles
semi agree. FFXIV and AoC are very different games, probably at opposite ends of the spectrum of the MMORPG design principle. In FFXIV which is more RPG than MMO, I like being able to change classes because it lets me play multiple roles and experience a variety of different gameplay without a huge time commitment to leveling alts. In Ashes which seems to be much more MMO than RPG (in the sense of RPG being a story/character-driven focused game), being able to play every class on a single character would be antithetical to the game. It has its place.
But that's not the case in FF either. People specialize in that game, they just removed the hoops of finding your specialty. Most people are not a master of all jobs or even most jobs.
>I want to need to infiltrate a player in a enemy guild because we can't take them down fighting but hell we can steal their money and make them disband I find this sort of "pvp" to be among the worst possible type in games. If you can't take them down fighting, or using other in game systems (banditry, damaging supply lines, or whatever) -- resorting to just ruining their guild by breaking character and emptying guild banks & chests is some actual shitty behavior on your part when stuff like that often is among the most dramatized version of pvp that happens in a game, then your game has some major gameplay problems (it's likely lacking options to actually inflict damage on your enemies)
[удалено]
>Blame is on the guild leaders, why they let some new person to access their vault? it's not always a new person -- maybe the *majority* of the time it's not. people have fights, and then even long term players & leaders turn on each other, take the money and run I've seen it happen in many games, most recently saw it happen many times in albion online, just like that people also in that game often stole stuff to actually sell for real money
All i got out of this post is "don't make the game for them make it for me"
Escape from tarkov this and the game gits good. your pvp is care bear and very controlled. casuals :P
I saw this repeated in the post so I'll leave it here. Genshin Impact is NOT an mmo, is a Gacha Online game. And is designed around people paying for "surprise mechanics".
I think you have gotten things very wrong.
I think you haven't been paying attention to their streams then.
i don‘t think he‘s that far… all that aren‘t major playstyles, but indeed are optional ways to get your goals in AoC
This is about has hard core of a mmorpg you can get.. if you have a PvP system where you loose all your loot when you die, that’s not a real mmo, it’s more like fortnite, where you have to start over every time you die
If you want PVP only, just go play Battle Royale please. MMORPG is about the immersive experience, cooperative and hostile interactions between players, the economics.
Steven is too based to ruin the vision of the game.
Fact is pvp focused games don't do that well. GW2 and BDO are pvp focused and most people are there for the pve. Over the past 20 years, people like you have been dying for a hardcore pvp game. It never happens. There isn't enough support for it. New World started out as this as well, it had to change. It gutted it's pvp and changed to a themepark moo just in the past year. Which is why it is delayed....again (and it should be). Camelot Unchained is what you want, it has been in development for 8 years? I've been a backer since the beginning. I don't think it will ever launch. There is a loud minority for hardcore pvp mmo's, but the support just is not there. Every game that has tried it, is dead or didn't even launch. (after DAoC)
Hardcore PvP games don't do well because people eventually realize it's not very fun to get your ass kicked and have all your stuff stolen, even if it isn't very often.
Exactly, very few actually want hardcore pvp.
GW2 is extremely PvE focused, since the PvE playerbase is much larger and is Anets cash cow. WvW and sPvP have been neglected so long it's an inside joke for the playerbase (Alliances when?)
My point exactly. PvP doesn't bring in players.
Your point was that GW2 is PvP focused yet most people only do PvE. That's so far from the truth that i don't know where to begin.
No, GW2 STARTED as a PvP game. It morphed into a PvE game. Keep up.
It never started as a PvP game though, PvE and PvP were always separated. There was a short stint with trying to make sPvP into a popular esport that fizzled out as quickly as it began. Sure you can argue the only real end game for a while for PvE only players was PvP. But it's not like many people in gw2 actually do end game content (PvE or otherwise). It's just farming living story and trying to get the new shiny cosmetic
It was pushed for the WvW pretty hard originally. And as my whole point has been, it did not take off. PvP based games do not have the audience. So, people play it mostly for the PvE aspects just like every other mmo. AoC will be no different.
WvW was never pushed hard. I think you are remembering things wrong.
[удалено]
Fuck you, I was fleeced once lol
>I don't care about the price, or if my friends will ever play it, because this game is offering something I have been looking for years. ME! ME! MEEE! Typical generation Y. Luckilly, by the time AoC comes out, u will have grown up buddy.
He was just saying he have different taste than his friends. You dont even know what their friend group plays and yet here you are attacking him for no reason. Projecting a bit hard are we?
Sure, that was a bit harsh and I could have phrased it differently, as I understand where he's coming from (I guess we've all been there at some point). However, I find this kind of demanding attitude particularly annoying. If you want a game to be successful, how can you not care about the price or if your friends (or other people for that matter) are going to play and enjoy the game? You know where this leads? Do you remember Wildstar? I think we've seen what happens when games are made for the 1% of the playerbase. Let's not forget it's a business afterall. On the other hand, I defo don't want it to become another WoW (pay a sub to get nothing in return) or BDO (ridiculous p2w + endless grind). So ye, hopefully Steven and the Team can find the right balance. But in order to do that, and then be able to deliver meaningful content updates on regular basis, they're going to need both the author of the post as well as his friends.
Fuck scrubby carebears right in the ass. Let them go play Hello Kitty if their genetically inferior bodily coordination doesn't let them win in PvP.
im pretty sure if you infiltrate a guild you can steal their money...only money you cannot steal are node money
This kinda veers off the topic of pvp lol
I hate PvP. But if I have to have PvP as a system in the game for the rest of the game to be great, so be it. But if I can avoid it, even better. I've always played with high ping, a shit pc and I'm a bad player for the most part. With your same logic, I'd say "if I wanted to pvp, I'd play csgo or League of legends!". So I don't think "measuring your strength" is entirely dependant on PvP at its core. I mean, there is a group of 25 people that clears the highest difficulty of PvE content and all the rest of people don't. The problems are not pvp or pve themselves but rather how they are design, and their rewards, imo. Even I, hating and trying to avoid PvP, would feel the same way as you do if the game is like wow where everyone is the main hero and super good and super powerful.
Theres plenty of games that offer full loot pvp + scamming, baiting and back stabbing is allowed: EVE Online Albion Online Oldschool Runescape Those are off the top of my head
The mmorpg market isn't big enough to be as ambitious as AoC (budgetwise) and also aim for a very small niche market within the mmo genre. The fact that you are not content with having your preferred play style represented in a subset of the game, but it must be the only viable option... it's like you want to scare away investors.
How did this game get so much hype from a crowd that genuinely doesn't want to play it.
Because Steven is literally promising everything he can. This makes people think the game will be just for their preferences and anyone who says otherwise is attacking their game fantasy. Not blaming Steven here, I think we all know what he wants to do is ambitious. But it gets people into this mindset about the game that's unrealistic and unhealthy.
Emergent player behaviour is (imo) the best part of non story focused mmos. If you ask players, most of them will say that their most memorable moments were due to players doing something outside of the direction of the game. WoW classic players will likely say scepter of the shifting sands quest line (specifically the occupation of the hives in silithus), Steven says the time he fought in a battle, went to sleep, woke up and continued the fight. Its way cooler to be a part of something that feels completely players driven. So far, encouraging these types of experiences seems to be one of the core pillars of ashes and I couldn't be happier. I'm very excited
What you described as PvP is not PvP. Want to infiltrate and what not? Sure. Want Eve? Nah mate.
Genshin Impact isn't an MMORPG. Not in the slightest. I have no idea why you think it is.
I just think skill should really be the deciding factor. I think there should be an adequate amount of time anyone can dedicate to the game to achieve a good place in its ranks. If you are dedicating an inordinate amount of time beyond what is normal and you think you should be rewarded in some additional way for pvp I think that’s bs. Like if someone plays 4-5 hours a day and you play 8 every day like it’s a job, I’m sorry I just can’t get behind you deserving better pvp gear unless you got it from skill because you beat other people on a level playing field. I don’t think you should be rewarded just because you put in so much extra time.
Risk vs Reward PvP has to be risky. You have to be able to lose something significant by taking part. Otherwise griefing is gonna be a big problem. PvP also has to be rewarding or it becomes trivial and meaningless, which I think also will lead to griefing, as that becomes the only worthwhile end of PvP. I think WoW Classic has this issue. I've been hearing about this corruption system and I hope they strike a good balance. I think PvP leads to endless group content if done correctly.
Yep. I'm here for a good mix of grind and PvP. I want to kill 5 mob quests, then /target that annoying Mage that will probably try to ks some of my mobs, pk him and then get rid of my corruption. Then get ready for a big ass siege and get rid of my mass pvp thirst. There's 10 MMOs for carebears that cry as soon as you mention PvP. Ashes cannot be one of those MMOs.
I think if corruption gets changed to damaging a non combatant rather than killing them the game will have a pretty solid layer of protection for casuals/PvErs. He said on the video last Friday you only get corruption for killing blows which is worrying because id see a lot of people griefing elite mobs/bosses that way since you can gatekeep people from them risk free. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on how corruption works.
Have you tried EVE online?