Only issue I have with full group content for MMO's is that it feels like a job, either show up or get kicked (unless you're in a guild with your friends) At least give it some solo content so people can do it if they just want to chill and play, not everything has to be the "PARTICIPATE THIS WEEK AT THIS SPECIFIC TIME AND BRING THESE SPECIFIC ITEMS OR FUCK OFF" kind of MMO.
MMO's like Ashes Of Creation aren't just that tho. Let me draw a comparison with Albion because in their core design aspects the games are very similar : In Albion, as a solo player or a player with a handful of friends, you can : Gank gatherers and make profit from their ressources, run solo dungeons, gather materials, join random hunts for pvp if you're part of a guild, run corrupted dungeons or whatever it's called (a PvEvP dungeon where you have to kill your opponent to get out of the dungeon), buy cheap in a town and go sell in another town to make profit (while avoiding gankers, or by hiring guards) etc... In most of the sandbox pvp mmos, there are solo activities, although I agree that you'll be missing on a big part of the game. However, what there isn't, is risk free pve activities. Because everything in those games revolves around risk.
There is solo content, I'm sure you *maybe* aren't talking about Ashes, just a point that other games should have or the video's. But just to clarify, artisan skills and personalized quests for solo people exist here. The only difference to many mmos is that you talk to people to exchange what you want. Goods to money, and money to goods. For the events, nah. I'm also those single player dumb asses who play MMO's for a single player experience, but sometimes you need some meat from time to time. Ashes handles it quite well I think, it's not like you're node is gonna be sieged down 24/7 nor even monthly. Big events would be player-driven or the by-product that the system gives to you, I'm sure it won't be those gacha events or christmas events you have nowadays.
I played the New World alpha. When it was full pvp farming was awful, you either had to go out in big groups to farm effectively, either that or farm naked. Hemp was awful, I remember we built big giant hemp fields behind walls to farm hemp effectively, players were leaving and having toggle was done to save the alpha player base. Of course you got a bunch of neckbeard essays on it in the forums but the fact is if you piss off people with always on pvp they don't complain they just leave.
yeah New world is another themepark MMO, of course it would go the same way as WoW Classic for PVP. What im seeing is A LOT of people that have never played games like archeage, lineage, darkfall, etc. coming in with their themepark MMO guided ideas. Im looking forward to a lot of people being introduced to a completely new type of gameplay that they havent experienced before. And No, I dont even care for PVP at all, these games were still the most fun Ive ever had in MMO's before.
@@thebiggestgamer Well, Lineage 2 had the Karma system, which sort of penalized players of killing other players, was sort of a "safe guard" for solo players, if you killed another player without that player attack you back (PK another player), you accumulated Karma points, more karma you had, bigger was the probability (almost guaranteed) of you dropping stuff from your inventory, including also gear you had equipped if you got killed by someone else, and it was a pain in the ass to get rid of it, was brutal the cost to PK someone, you had to hide and find a place to farm bunch of mobs to bring karma down to 0, so you could farm and pvp relaxed again. In another words, see it as a sort of an anti-douchebag ness. Unfortunately, L2 changed that in later chronicles (for solo players demise), when they introduced some augmentation stones, you could attach them to your gear and weapons, it would give some stats, but also, you no longer would drop those either, even if you died with karma from another player. They kind of self-destruct the system from there on and forth, in one hand, made everyone pvping each other more, but in the other hand, made solo progression unbearable. L2's Karma system wasn't perfect (far from that), but it was the closest to the notion of an organic balance between solo and pvp I've seen in a mmorpg. Karma system in the early chronicles, was actually fairly decent, until they broke down. If Steven from AoC says that will have a similar pvp system than L2, then they must have their own version of a karma system too, one thing will not work well without the other, in my opinion.
NW was no game by the time when it got released. Pvp did not kill the game. It was literally an empty and dead game to begin with. A bug fest beyond wildest imaginations. PVP was their least worries.
Gw2 proved that you need to make travel fun not restrictive, for the majority of players roughly half your game time will be spent fighting so combat needs to be engaging, and challenging with the ability to have different loadouts so you don't get too bored with the monotony and the other roughly half will be spent traveling so having mounts that you level and have skills that make traveling fun and a glider because only the no lives are getting flying mounts...
Yeah I never felt that using 'map travel' took anything away from my immersion in GW/GW2 - in WoW if I need to fly I tab out or leave my computer so basically it's just game wasted.
“The point is to prove that a true open world PVP MMO can thrive in this age of single player trash” So when it has like 10k players or less and dies because it’s hyper niche, does that mean Narc will acknowledge he’s wrong?
No, he'll shift the blame to some other banal and menial decisions the devs made without ever admitting that he's a closet goblin who wants a game only like 5 other people want.
Honestly I would quit a game where people can grief me by tagging mobs, stealing resources, or bots farming zones I need to progress, without the ability to do something about it. In each of those situations I’m firing a warning shot… and killing the other person if they fight back.
Thats my issue. What does it mean "to thrive" for him? For me it is to steadily grow, yet we´ve seen time and time again that PvP centric MMO start big but bleed out really, really fast. They fail to retain any other player that is not already a hardcore one, and I can bet the number of new hardcore players are far lower than the number of veteran hardcore players that have to quit being hardcore because of life responsabilities catching up (work, family, etc). The game will have to cater to more casual players to some extent if it trully wishes to thrive, as Narc said here. Otherwise it will see the same-as-ever dwindling niche hardcore MMO players every other PVP MMO out there has seen, as well as meet the same fate.
@@ipunchedu8884 He completely lost me with the clown skit. He takes Asmon saying "players being able to negatively impact your experience without your consent is bad for the game" as saying "players interacting is bad for the game." He spells out clearly that he can't comprehend the reason PvP MMOs fail is because the early wave players dumpster the late-adopters and stop them from doing. Anything. He blames everything BUT near nil new-player retention because the old guard stops them from playing the game at all on why they failed.
Narc's quite elitist with his view on MMOs that I can't take any of his views on AoC that seriously. It's so obvious how heavily invested he is on it. I don't really care what AoC becomes, it can be whatever it wants to be. But calling people who play WoW and FFIV (I don't play both games) as lazy and shallow is quite a shallow take itself.
It's important to remember though that he was a player of both of those games, quite vehemently too. His content now has just evolved far enough that he keeps riding the train. But even at the very start of his video production he's been saying the same stuff, so I still mostly believe him. Definitely now it's played up for the views though assuredly.
Narc's closing comments in what he wants AoC to be is admirable and he's perfectly in his right to not want the game to change to "be in line" with other popular mmo's or give in to whats popular. Its okay to want and build a niche. My issue is his attitude to literally everything that's not what he wants. Like how can you be so bitter to say that everything was/is trash until now? Like why can't people just say "its not for me?" Like he's literally trying to argue that for AoC. If its not for you, then it aint for you. He doesn't have to be this almighty, higher than thou, cunt about it.
i have no issues with ashes pvp system the thing i despise most from their ideas is the prospect of loosing my stuff i probably spent hours upon hours grinding for as in you will drop gathering mats when you die in pvp, you will loose your house when you loose a nodewar etc etc all that shit just screams backwards progression and i'm not about it at all
@@daroaminggnome "Goes back Steven's whole "this game isn't designed for everyone" mantra." And that is a dumb mantra. This whole "we make the game we want to make, damn marketability" works with smaller scale, single player projects. But an MMO is a money sink. You need to constantly develop the next big content, you need to constantly maintain the current content, fix bugs and exploits lighting fast, keep entire server parks running. On the scale of AoC, this is a LOT of money. Sure, Steven is rich, but not Jeff Bezos rich. If the population is not there, he'll have two choices eventually: shut down the game or squeeze the ever shrinking playerbase for everything they got.
what Asmon said about Solo play is so true and especially overlooked. Maybe it's a prerogative of certain people only, and most people really like Co op, but the experience of bumming around and plundering and pillaging on your own time has always been quite compelling for me. You know i think people definitely differ in this regard, but every MMO or RPG i've played i've felt that often times doing my own thing is at times superior
Im not sure if we're ready to have this talk yet but I think it boils down to everyone just wants to be "the one." Like everyone wants to have challenges, and they want to overcome trials, and be tested, but at the same time they want to win, not lose. Like yeah if they lose, it is what it is, they pick themselves up and try again but obviously they would've really liked it if they won. Thats basic. Now its easier to make a single-player or PVE game where there's obvious avenues to ensure victory despite the difficulty. But some people really want that same gratification in Multiplayer and PVP. Thats just not going to happen. One player must beat the other and often times it just stays that way. And whether by figuring it out through self-reflection or experience, some people just learn that: "Ya know, I want the thrill of overcoming a challenge, but I would also like to just win or ensure victory." Its like writing a hero story. You dont write your favorite main character to be forever curb stomped by some high level antagonist. People can have the thrill of challenge but assured victory through PVE and Co-op experiences. I think more communities just need to come to terms with that. Its okay to just have PVE. Its okay to set a difficulty down a notch. Its okay to use the console command to get by something. Not everything has to be a "rip your nuts off" difficulty or be PVP focused for it to "matter." Only what the players seek and get out of it.
@@Joyappu and Op got it fr. Ppl r diff want and fw diff things and a sandbox mmorpg like Ashes plans to be should let and help its players choose customize and most importantly enjoy/succeed their own style and gameplay experience
Yea what i see as a more obvious issue is a couple massive guilds just taking over and being solo or in a small guild a gank fest where you can't play. Similar to what happens on alot of wow servers where they are 98 percent horde for example.
Guilds will have relatively small member caps, and the skill trees for guilds will allow opportunities for small guilds to be just as effective in guild v guild content as large guilds. So I think there will be fewer massive guild takeovers than some people imagine.
You have to remember that this is an Open World MMO. An every shifting political structure having alliances and enemies so having a single alliance domination is likely but not forever as just like all things good must come to an end.
@@jessemartinez9158 well of these people complaining about it seems to agree with the idea. If they bend and end up with you idea of i just want a solo mmo then I will go play something else but if this game become more than that I hope people who likes to be alone in mmo go somewhere else like a rational person would
I don't really mind traveling in MMO even tho I'm not a hardcore player But my problem with New World, that you spend too much time traveling than actually doing something that you traveling for. You walk for 10-15 min to the quest, spend a minute for the quest then spend another 10min to return. The traveling ratio to actually doing things is just too much. I really like BDO ratio better, once you travel to Grana from Valencia, you might spend hours or even days in Grana.
When I started BDO back in 2016, if I didn't buy a t8 horse as my first big purchase, I probably would have quit the game. Spending 15 mins traveling was fucking awful. The horse saved my BDO gameplay.
Narc says he plays these games for the artisan systems. Be a real shame if people find out what server he plays on and show him what open world always on pvp is like.
You clearly don't know how these type of content actually exist in games with player agency and not just huge grindy lobbies with portals to instanced session based real gameplay :) You can, like, have other people that are interested in your work protect you. You can hide and be careful. Not just /oh how dare you to interrupt my gameplay of rightclicking an ore spot/. Challenges around it is what actually makes it interactive. Not just braindead act of gathering it in the end.
Imagine having more than one characters, multiple peoples or a whole clan of degenerates. People will find a way to cheese the system and they will show him "aLwAys oN pvP"
So? Your point? Do you care deeply about every failure out there? Because that argument can be used for every. single. failure. ever. "easy to not care since you can just move on". Everyone just goes "huh, ok, don't care". Unless it affect them personally in some way. Everyone is like that.
@@kopicat2429 the point would be saying 'don't change anything to make ur game more profitable so it stays the way I want it' is incredibly selfish when you have no actual skin in the game. Not caring about a game failing is different from what he's advocating for in this video. Do you think he couldn't pivot his channel to a new game with some level of manageable sub/view loss? actively advocating for something counter productive and being apathetic are different. If u don't care if ashes of creation succeeds or fails is different from wanting things that will cause it to fail and making videos about why they shouldn't try to make it succeed
The way to make travel matter is to make a long journey matter. Give a place afterwards to camp for weeks. That was what travel was in EQ, it was long, but once you reached your destination, say the Karanas Plains, you might stay there for a month. The issue with New World is you travel a long way, do a quest, and then have to go back, just for one quest. Sigh...there's very little reward for that travel.
Asmon's take that "travel is bad by any metric because in New World it was bad" is just a stupid argument. It's like saying "MMOs can't have good stories because it's bad in Shadowlands." Other games exist and Asmon is ignoring that the same thing implemented in different ways can have dramatically different outcomes.
@@Miff1 He explained why travel was bad. You waste too much time for little reward. The New World Playerbase hated it. It's been refined over and over since EQ, and players in EQ rejoyced years ago when they got horses. Players in WoW spent thousands of gold for epic flying mounts. This isn't isolated to New World.
@@j.d.6915 New World changes the amount of azoth required for teleporting, but they still require you to be in a town or walk all the way to a teleporter. It's not fun and it's incredibly tedious. The only reward is gatherables along the way if you're into that.
@@Miff1 He said there wasn't any metric that showed that travel "mattering" was good at all FOR New World. Not that it is bad, period, for MMO's. And he was right, New World's travel, as J.D. said, has absolutely 0 value because of the way the travel was designed.
@@ToastUsername how is solo-ing Final Fantasy XIV MSQ the best MMO experience? If you don't like interaction with other people why play MMOs? If you want interaction, but also you are a carebear why not play co-op games? There is so much more options for SOLO, PVE players... Where are the options for players who want MASSIVELY ONLINE batles with other people???
Group MMO's shouldnt be a requirement. The sheer fact of the matter is you shouldn't *force* players to play with a group to progress. People don't seem to understand the sheer logistics of having to set up a group. How real life can cause people to not be able to play, to miss a raid, etc. And this is multiplied for *EACH* person required for the content. If *I* am the only variable? Then I have some level of control of how I go about progression. But if you add more people into the mix, then they become an *uncontrollable* variable. Runescape is a great example of this. Raids get released and you can do them *SOLO* if you have the gear. You can get said gear by grinding out money making methods or even brute forcing it with raw stats with decent skill. You are *not* required to go in with a team. Going in with a team increases the loot chances, but if you did it solo you dont have to fight anyone for said loot. Keep in mind Runescape is still incredibly popular and i believe it is still rising steadily in player base till this day. One thing that has always sucked for me is the inability to get into guilds. I simply dont have the time. i could get into a guild and do maybe like a month or 2 of raids but then i get a new job and my schedule cant change and now I cant make raid times. I go to college + work and now my entire week is gone on the days they want to raid and then i have to look for a new guild. I want to still be able to progress reasonably despite not having a team. Being absolutely left behind in an MMO and trying to do content that no one else wants to do because they happen to have a super dedicated group and all the time in the world and you dont is probably one of the shitiest feelings pertaining to gaming.
I think you're using too narrow of scope when you say "progression". Progress what? If you want to progress 10 player content you need 10 players. If you want to progress solo content you need 1. Nature of the beast. What you really want to argue for is to have 10 Player AND Solo content that both can be progressed. Then you can decide if both of those things progress towards the same goal (usually item collection). For example maybe recolors of the same mount for Raids, Pvp, Crafting, etc. Or you can set up progression to acquire different items per game mode. I feel like people fall into this or that when ideally in an MMO you want both. There's nothing wrong with group content. It is quite enjoyable. And while it not be as easily accessible ultimately there's a point where you have to prioritize different parts of your life as a player. If every game was designed for you to just log in, hit 3 crafting nodes, and an epic mount...well you'd have mobile games
@@michaelgray371 Point is that there shouldn't be "X player content". There should be *Content* . That is it. You want to roll up with 10 players? Ok the content lets you. You dont have the ability to roll up with 10 so you go in Solo? The content lets you. You have only 4 friends? Ok you can go in with 4. When I say Progression I mean increasing player power. Keeping up with new item upgrades, not being overleveled and going into old raids for transmog. Like I said before, Runescape already does this so why can't other MMO's? Runescape has raids that can be completed solo. but you can also run several people deep and make it group content that *increases* the amount of loot dropped so people can split the loot. I'm not arguing for 10 player content and Solo player content. I'm arguing that the *SAME* content should be able to be completed by 1 person, or 4 people, or 10 people, or 40 people. Not this separation between content for the number of players. If Runescape got it right, other games don't really have an excuse.
I think the only way to make node pvp work for casuals is to allow them to attach their names to a town rather than a faction. If their town gets captured, every peasant there merely switches flags and moves on with their lives while powerful streamers and guilds play their hardcore war games with each other.
People would be tied to a node rather than a faction, so whenever the dust settles people can take their blueprints and resources they have and scoot on to another town.
That is how it is designed currently. You are attached to the Node, not any other factions. If the Node gets destroyed, you will be mailed your belongings including your house blueprint. You will only need to get the house at another Node. The only thing you lose is your raw materials and gatherables. No completed items will be lost. If you have a Freehold and you successfully defended your Freehold even after your Node gets destroyed in the Siege, your Freehold will have 1 week of grace period to get absorbed by another Node's ZOI. If there's no overlapping ZOI within 1 week (nearby Node didn't level up in time or there isn't any Node nearby) it will be destroyed. If there is, you will need to do set of tasks to have your Freehold be accepted in the new Node's ZOI that your Freehold is currently residing in. If you are a casual, it is unlikely that you will have a Freehold but I digress.
@@jacara1981 Fair enough but don't discount the other players who are not like your typical "MMO players". You cannot lump all players in a single group. MMO players are not a singular entity which agrees that all games have to be super casual friendly. The MMO players you refer to are already thriving, happily playing games that are catered to them. The ones that don't still don't have anything to play. This game is made for those players. Just because it's an MMO doesn't mean it has to cater to the players that isn't meant for the game that it was designed to be. Plus, in the context of sieges, if you decided to not help defend your Node, you're partly the fault why your Node lost the siege to begin with.
@@Iruzi_P My bad, I didn't do enough research apparently. I'm still worried that nodes being blown up would scare away too many players but I guess I'll find out once the game releases.
I don't think you can say for sure that it was the emphasis on the travelling in New World that made thousands of people quit. It could have had some impact but there were much bigger problems like, the constant weekly exploits people would find and the lack of enjoyable endgame. If the stashes were shared in all cities I don't even think people would mention that traveling was bad at all. It was fine to have your routes between cities where you would do faction quests and gather materials. The travel is only bad if the activities you do around the world are bad.
Asmon takes his own impressions and considers them the great truth. He might think he's a god. I got bored at New World because there was only one thing to do, gather materials and fight trash mobs, okay two things. And New World isn't a game where you have time to enjoy the scenery, also the scenery wasn't that great even if the graphics were good.
@@reinhard98 Oh it wasn't the ludicrous amount of mindless traveling one of the biggest if not the biggest takeaway from the game that made a massive amount of player quit! Like lol, just because you enjoyed it, or didn't mind it as much doesn't mean it wasn't true. These people live in fantasyland, they have their head permanently stuck on stupid. It's like commies that always try to say that the fault was actually capitalism, but the problems always have a tendency of coming up after they implemented their little stupid ideas, a fact which they always disregard when they construct their little bs story. And then they come up with their little anecdotal examples that don't even make sense. Yea, traveling around, over and over, was the reason why so many left. Was it the only reason, not really, was it one, if not the biggest reason? Yes.
Thank you. Exactly this. Correlation does not mean causation. I think both ends of this discussion has brought up a lot of personal opinions like this and presented them as facts
I quit very soon after hitting lvl 50 due to a lack of endgame, and the constant stream of new game-breaking exploits every week and trading getting shut down, etc. was getting a little old. I didn't mind travel at all, I used it to my advantage by buying and selling in different towns to amass a small fortune. And even with all the fast travel I did, I still never ran out of Azoth. I mean, this is just my own personal experience, so I can't really say I know for sure that it was the most widely shared reason for quitting.. However I'm preeeeetty certain that more people quit over the horrendous launch than being forced to run places.
If you ask anyone what their favorite memory in a mmo is, its usually grouping with someone for a hard quest and becoming friends, or a guild beating a hard boss for the first time, I doubt most people would say my favorite memory is ganking people or being ganked
Yeah, or doing instanced pvp like battlegrounds and arena, ganking is pathetic, when it's done against you it just makes you unable to play, and when you are the one ganking the gratification is little since it is not a challenge at all, well, unless you are the type of person who likes feeling mighty crushing ants, that is
I like the commentary on the narc videos but he continually tells us what made MMOs great but he's missing a lot of what actually made it great I went from a Commodore+4 to a NES to a SNES PS1 then Everquest came out I'd never seen a game that seemed so huge it's that sense of wonder that makes an MMO great that need to log in and explore more and its that joint experience that brings people together.
Everquest was awesome when it was group mandatory for most classes and friends matterd. I never liked WOW but I understand it's appeal to a wider audience that whould quit because of a bad corpse run or big exp loss.
UO T2A was a good example. Crafting was a huge part of the game, exploration, treasure hunting, taming, RPing, etc etc. PvP was also a part of the game, mainly through guild vs. guild combat and factions (Order vs. Chaos), where you were perma-flagged and could fight anywhere and everywhere but it was opt-in. Ganking existed but was limited to certain areas in the game. If you went to Minoc, you knew you were really putting yourself at risk. Certain dungeons also were popular spots for reds to frequent, so you avoided them if you did not want to risk being ganked. The game worked though and was quite popular at the time. The karma system kept the gankers in check by pretty much ruining their character if they went red. You would be better off re-rolling than trying to get back to blue (non criminal). Harsh penalties are fine and work well in policing, a similar method was used in Lineage 2, as Narc mentioned. You very rarely saw people go red in that game because it made it so you could drop your equipment and losing a piece of gear would be catastrophic. Most MMO's today are not MMO's, they are single player games with the illusion of multi-player, Narc is correct. There is a whole other experience out there for people to enjoy that has not been explored since... probably Star Wars Galaxies, although SWG did not have very good PvE in general. I suppose Ragnarok Online is another example of a successful game that was pretty close to being a true MMO, at least for the era.
Ultima online and the original everquest in its prime are the only two true mmorpgs, players That didn't experience these and started with wow just don't get it.
@@Shmandalf open world pvp with no penalty for griefing/ganking is not conducive to a successful long-lived game, but that's the key. opt-in open world pvp, and the threat of being killed (for everyone) creates community. harsh penalties are needed to keep random ganking and griefing in check, but on the other hand it helps to build community. if your crafters want to go out and gather materials and whatnot, escort them to dissuade people from doing anything foolish. nobody on that you know? figure out something to do on your own, or go make some new friends - that's the part that's missing from MMO's today, there is little to no social aspect beyond seeing the names of other players in a queued dungeon. people don't go out and encounter others in the world, strike up a conversation and end up making a new buddy, i certainly haven't done that in a long, long time in any of the modern MMO's, and it's not because I don't want to, it's because the games actively discourage interaction. it sounds to me like the Ashes team wants to bring the social aspect of MMO's back while incorporating the learnings of the last 20 years into their more "oldschool" game. hopefully they can pull it off.
@@encouraginglyauthentic43 incorrect. opt-in doesn't have to mean a stupid toggle, it means people can choose to be permanently flagged via guild wars, nation territory wars, or optional faction wars. a system can be set up where you gain benefits from participating like titles and cosmetics, etc. leave nonconsensual pvp in but give the aggressor harsh penalties, that way people will still need to be cautious about what they are doing so they dont drive someone crazy and end up killed.
My personal favorite PvP system is what was implemented back in tera. It worked like this: 1. You could not paricipate in any kind of pvp (aside form duels) until you reached lvl 10 2. After reaching lvl 10 you got a quest which brought you into the games first main city and taught you how to "flag for pvp" or rather mark yourself as a criminal 3. There are safezones around the world (mostly town, quest hubs and dungeon entrances) where noone could attack anyone 4. Someone marked for pvp can attack anyone and can be attacked by anyone 5. If you were marked and killed someone of lower lvl than you by i believe 3 or 5 you would receive pk points (about 60 i believe) those points disabled your ability to turn of pvp and lossing 1 point took about 10 minutes i think (timer not counting while offline i believe, been a couple years) 6. If you arent flagged for pvp but kill someone who is flagged you will never get pk points no matter the lvl difference Obviously this isnt perfect but i dont believe there is a system that CAN make everyone happy
Adding the map visibility that AoC will have as well as nerfed dmg/healing would make this more than fair in my opinion. I am not a fan of loosing items in pvp but then again i usually dont hunt low lvls either.
No system will make everyone happy because PvErs want to just be left alone, not dictate what others can do among the willing, while PvPers want to force PvErs into PvP.
The Division pvp is pretty good. You can go rogue, and kill others but then your location is displayed on the map for anyone rogue or good player to come take you out and get rewarded to do so. Edit: this why I said Division not Division 2.
Yup, having loot you can only get via the Quarantine zone (open world PVP zone) and being able to steal from others is great, you can either cooperate or kill that person last minute or just help them and leave. Divison 1 mainly did this best, Divison 2 lacked a lot of it
The problem with pvp is that the attacker is always max level max gear dude and has a friend with him, while the defender is some casual low geared guy trying to get geared.
Honestly was very open to AoC as a mostly solo experience enjoyer to get outta my anxiety box, but this has made me rethink that now. I'm more than happy to stay "lazy" in XIV and my third shift job if that's how Narc really feels. I want ppl that love and want pvp and group stuff to have their desired content, but the presentation of the argument Narc had here just really rubbed me the wrong way.
my man if you like sw try swtor it mostly solo you can do the whole story and most dungs solo . and it free to play with a sub sistem for the full game.
Narc on the beginning of the video: This is a PvX game where you can do everything you can, I'll be a Artisan that don't care or do pvp. Narc by the end of the video: THIS WILL BE THE PERFECT WORLD PVP GAME, IF YOU DON'T LIKE PVP THIS GAME IS NOT FOR YOU, YOU ARE A LAZY TRASH THAT DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT A REAL MMO IS. PLEASE LET THIS GAME BE OUR WORLD PVP HEAVEN!!!
Yup, you might think those 2 statements are disagreeing with eachother, but not necessarily. I also like to be mainly a crafter/trader, but also love open world PVP. I never gank anybody, but I like the risk and thrill of possibly getting ganked. Griefing is what needs to be prevented as much as possible. But as a crafter/gatherer, that gives more value to the ressources you get and actually makes gameplay variable, instead of repeatedly farming the same ressources without anything ever happening, cutting trees for 300 hours. Beyond increasing the value of the ressources, makes the gameplay more exciting, it makes you consider the risks of where you are going to farm (high vs low value/risk areas), how much you carry, makes you consider playing with others or even paying players for protection and it makes it so even as a gatherer or crafter you'll want better gear to be able to defend yourself, it makes it into a game instead of a thing where you just click trees. I played Archeage a decent amount and the game was really really fun before it got ruined by P2W, however, the game had too many choke-points for trading, especially once they reworked ports and there was 0 reason not to kill people of the opposite faction where here there is a punishing mechanic for the agressor.
@@donpablo59 Doubt to a certain extent with corruption/trying to actively avoid getting ganked, besides its not like players know what you're carrying, people are seldom going to risk the gear they're wearing for no reason. The most dangerous moment would be when using a caravan from one town to the other, where we stand to lose pretty much everything in one go and are pretty much flagged as hoarding lewt, but I would say that's what guilds are for.
@@MyN0N4M3 Except that's not possible in an mmorpg. It's a world and everyone is needed to make it prosper. You might be an adventurer, but ultimately, the person that made your gear is more valuable to the game.
Well, if guy doesn' understand that being repeatedly murdered by people who you can't hope to beat is a quit moment for many, then he really is a clown.
right, when the max levels decided its time to camp all the leveling areas in WoW, you still had dungeons to fall back on funny enough he never once mentioned mortal online 2 when talking about "real" mmos
@@daveygravy1234 Not enough that it will have a big effect. If you cant handle getting ganked once or twice a year, then you're not playing the right genre.
There is absolutely a market and niche for a PvP focused mmo that is free from p2w mechanics. That said it is also stupid to think that such a game would have as big of an audience as modern "casual" mmos that are deliberately designed to appeal to a larger audience. Where there is concern is if the game's other systems and goals can function/be achieved with the smaller player base. Also if you want something like travel to matter or have value, than you need to make it fun. It doesn't matter if something is valued if the act of doing it sucks.
So Narc is saying that Ashes is going to somehow succeed by having only 10% of the mmo base and showing 90% of the base that are playing games like WoW and FFXIV (Pretty much own the market). Then you somehow think that ashes will still have enough money to thrive being a niche game.
@@shrubninja6444 Or Player B decides to do something about it, most often they would join an active guild that could protect each other. and fight for another. Which creates immersion and social interactions (which is fun). It's OK for a game to allow players to stop others players character progression if it's done right. I hope they do both Non-PvP Servers (Limited PvP) & PvP Servers (Always On).
@@LewisFeasts No, Player B will probably rather leave the game, together with player C and D, until the devs create Servers for PvE only etc...anyone thinking else is delusional...
@@shrubninja6444 Fortunate for me I've atleast experienced what I said, still experiencing a lot of those elements in Rust. Which btw is very popular. Filthy casuals... swear to god man.
One of the big problems, I honestly am starting to have with a lot of Narc’s videos is a lack of nuance. On the note of PvP in other games/game genres, the reason most people probably find them more enjoyable than MMORPG PvP is balance. Realistically no game is perfectly balanced based on the sheer fact that different character archetypes have different toolsets that aren’t directly comparable, however because MOBAs, fighting games and FPS are usually instances and reset, there’s at least an illusion of balance. The problem with balancing PvP in MMOs is not that the world is persistent, it’s that the player’s characters are and that by having the agency to make build choices, you’re introducing a ton more variables for comparison and balancing. That before getting into issues of having people of vastly varying skill level fight each at all times. The reason other games have a Ranked mode is so people of a supposedly similar skill level can play against each other (granted implementation can suck). So having said that, here’s the question: why do you think PvP in an MMORPG is fun like this? Because I’d argue PvP that is not balanced has more to do with build than skill most of the time, but alas I’m interested to see how AoC will handle things.
One trick pony I guess. Narc has a few things he always brings up: 1. MMOs are just themepark corporate cash grab trash now 2. Other people's opinions are Wrong MMOs should be hardcore 3. Will shit talk everyone else and take a line out of context I find it funny because Ashes hasn't shown me anything substantial and watching the last beta footage it was clunkly as hell yet he's giving shit to other indies. It was funny at first but it's like a parrot every video. The guy really just has no content unless you consider him bashing others' opinions as content.
The funny thing about people saying "MMOs are meant to play in groups and this solo shit has to go" are mostly those that spend way to much time in a game to be better than the rest, so the rest HAS TO play with them. They are basically irrelevant if the system doesn't force people to play with them because they actually lack social skills, aka being likeable. In a system where people have the choice to team up with who ever they want, they only can team up with people like themself, and where they are in direct competition with the same "weight" of their voice. MMO does not say in any of its defining words that you "have to play with pther people or you can't play". Not. In. A. Single. Word.
It sounds so absurd to me that Narc is insinuating that the creators of the game is literally making a gigantic MMO game, big in both scale and ambitions, for a playerbase in which 90% will not enjoy, that the creators are deliberately weeding out spesific kind of players to make room for a very niche playerbase to enjoy a game which thrives upon and even only survives on having alot of players in it
MMOs are a multiplayer game....i know people have forgotten that but thats what they are. And i know its hard to imagine a dev team not trying to maximize profits at the cost of the quality and vision of the game. Imagine that.
@@An.Unsought.Thought I just think MOST people and this includes u proving my point dont know shit about what steps are already in place to make sure repeated grieifng will be almost near impossible to do without massive time and asset loss. I have zero bias i just believe in the vision that is layed out from the dev team how can u say i am biased at all lol. The goal is to get as many players as possible but for Ashes that isnt the bottom line. The vision comes first Steven wanted to make an mmo free of appealing to the lowest common denominator aka you and wanted to make a fun game. My point finally is very simple and thats mmos were created to be in a world and interact with others...i know imagine that and mmos nowadays ahve found most ppl are fucking autistically non social and want to play an mmo like its a single player game. Which is fine...but not every mmo need to be this way. Ashes isnt and never will be. If u dont know that u havent done any research. Its not trying to make the most money its trying to make a fun niche game for people that think mmos should be social experiences with tons of freedom.
The take that "90% of playerbase will not enjoy it" is just wrong, idk where ppl get that from. Also Ashes is not the main source of income for Steven like other corporate games. He's making money from real estate and already invested over 35 mil from his own pocket so it's not like the game will die if only part of the playerbase plays it
Albion Online have 130k-150k daily players which has travel fee + PvP On all the time. Saying that this kind of game doesn't work is not true at all. New world died not because of these features but because it has so many bugs and no real end game content.
Narc will most likely learn the difference in the community that is in a closed alpha , and the general population doing degenerative things to ruin others time.
Honestly I'm more excited to see what the aftermath of AoC's launch will be like rather than actually playing the game. It's like a season finale of a bunch of people arguing online about the right way to enjoy MMOs. We'll get to see if Ashes of Creation burns out into a pile of ashes or if it ends up creating something lasting and special.
@@bjni dont expect much all i own is this banged up pc, my clothes and some books.....searching the trash containers to eat towards the end of every month
As Josh Strife Hayes said: there is a market for it, it is just not as big as you think. This whole video screams: I want to dunk on people minding their own business. Toggleable PvP means you only meet people who are ready for you, which is apparently not "fun" (read: I only want to fight people who are not ready for it).
As a non-ganker - I hate the toggle. I like the thrill of possibly getting ganked, but whenever it's added to a game, it makes it too easy/convenient to turn off pvp whenever. It devalues ressources for the entire server a there is basically no more risk in farming. No gatherer will EVER turn pvp on if given the choice. Some guild drama, your guild and another have beef, turn pvp off. You want to carry expensive ressources ? turn pvp off. Want to farm, turn pvp off. You pked a bunch of players and you dropped all your gear and now you're weak and everyone hates your guts ? turn pvp off. -- Want to pvp ? No one has pvp on as there is no proper incentive to do so and people in high value areas will have pvp off for sure. The corruption system -should- make it undesirable to gank others for no reason. But the game is about exploring and collecting ressources fighting both players and environment. Without the pvp aspect the game would be alot more bland as it's not going to be designed like WoW or XIV with a large focus on regular raid/dungeons. If anything though, I am in support of areas with PVP turned off and there being other more rewarding lawless zones. Keeps everyone playing in the same instance, keeps the world feeling whole, keeps the bounty hunter system functional, keeps the economy in whatever state it should be in, gatherers still need decent gear and player protection for farming high value ressources, etc.
Travel in NW was pointless though... you had to constantly run across the world for quests that were mindless. It forced you to waste time without any benefit...
The concept worked perfectly well in Lineage 2. I assume this is where Ashen takes their world PVP inspiration from. When you initiate PVP (start attacking another player), you get "flagged" (temporarily). Your nickname changes color, and anyone around can kill you without consequences. However, attackers will get flagged too, and here we go, the entire zone population owning each other. However, when you gank players, you get Karma points. Your name changes to red, and with the same logic, anyone around can kill you. However, players that attack you will not get the PVP flag; you become the hunted target. If you have Karma points and die, you will not spawn in town. You will be prohibited from entering towns and other safe places for players. I don't know whether there will be other negative aspects to ganking. However, in Lineage 2, people with Karma would drop their gear on the ground once killed. It was not easy to obtain gear; the entire guild would have to farm a lot for a few pieces. Thus, it was a big deal if you gank people in good gear; you can imagine the tragedy if your top-end game sword drops and some noob picks it up. In addition, you needed to find a place where you could kill monsters to redeem yourself and get rid of karma by killing a bunch of them. It wasn't easy, because anyone could attack you. That said, the system was very engaging, and there were clan wars, castle sieges, a lot of local drama, and fights.
That's what it makes an engaging game. AoC has improved that system and it works different now. People who knew the ins and outs of that system knew how to abuse it in L2 and that is not the case in AoC anymore for instance punishments are far harsher and greater for killing non-combatant players than it used to be. Also no grieving with alt PK accounts punishment is to great for that too. Good old times I hope a game like L2 makes his entrance in these times.
@@xKinjax and I disagree with him. I think WoW has completely lost the plot with Wrath. Vanilla was still quite close but gentrified. Wrath is when the game became a lobby game fully with the introduction of RDF but it was already on the way with TBC thanks to flying mounts and such.
I think there’s valid points on both sides. I view myself as a “PvPer” I have played 3600 hours in ESO and have spent a majority of my end game in Cyrodiil. I have said many times that I wish I didn’t have to leave Cyrodiil and that if I could do dungeons and obtain gear in Cyrodiil then I would do it. When I played New World I was flagged Probly 480/500 hours.. only times I wasn’t flagged was when guild mates didn’t want me to be flagged so we could do something. I look forward to ashes. I think Cyrodiil proves that open world PvP can work and there’s a lot of people that want to be flagged 24/7 and those that don’t want to don’t have to play.
the corruption system seems like a natural progression of Ultima Onlines Pk flag system. you would be flagged red for a certain amount of time after killing a player. if you kill to many players in to short a time you were perma flagged and could be openly attacked every single place in the game. it actually made the game fun to work around that flag system.
I just feel like the main thing an MMO needs is interactivity between the players and world. The world needs to seem alive without any players being there, for example in Wrath in thr frozen wastes the armies fighting the scourge, and the scourge walking and ressing the dead soldiers. I think that is the mark of a great mmo
The fact that there is an existing element like housing in game, that needs crafters for furniture, collectors, then the owner hires an architect or designer in game to fancy up his/her home, worth ten times more than some random ganker yelling "thIs iS pVp haHa"
@@Ar1AnX1x The main issue is it's a fun idea short-term because it invite party engagement, but long term it attracts annoying elitism. People get frustrated at their party leader yelling at them because they messed up on a mob's attack pattern, get frustrated, and then eventually leave. Eventually the entire MMO dies or switches to a P2W DPS-check MMO to make up for lost profit.
@@Ar1AnX1x what do you mean by intelligent mobs? Games just comes down to dodge aoes and to make sure your hp has to be >1 before the enemies hp reaches 0.
Agree 100% man because whenever i played any other mmo or mmorpgs ive been missing that detail and i quit the game fairly quickly. Also in todays society its more important now than it was 20 years aggo because people seem to be more reliant on social interaction online than they are on social interaction in real life so if the game dont provide that then.. packing my bags.
All the people who think that the game NEEDS to have open world PVP that no one can opt out of to be a "real" MMO or to "not cater to carebears" or to "not cater to lazy modern players" is simply not mature enough to realize that not every person out there wants to play an MMO in the same way as they do, and many people simply dont like games that waste their time, which is what most older "real MMOs" do and what PVP always on MMOs do.
Except the casual players are the ones who demand AoC to cater to them, their original vision was PvX, with people being able to flag at anytime. It was literally inspired by Archeage an Open World PVP MMO. I think if they ruined New World's original PvP vision they should at least leave AoC alone. go play FFXIV or something they have great PvE
@@KathaMK94 casual players dont demand that everyone caters to them, in my exerpiance its quite the opposite and you can see it in the videos asmo responded to recently. If casual players try an 'always on pvp game' they will just realize its lame being griefed all the time and quit, but the "hardcore pvpers" are the ones who claim that all modern MMOs are for 'carebears' and that their old games that no one plays anymore are the 'real MMOs' or that modern MMOs "arent real MMOs they are just single player games"
@@destinl8382 Except that's literally what's happening now. AoC is not even out yet and people are already asking the devs to change from PvX to PvE. And pvp games do well it's how they're mostly handled is what screws them over. But Albion is a great example of a PvP game that's doing good. They should not stray from their original plan which was PvX. At least not until later when people can experience it.
@@KathaMK94 the orignal video that they were talking about here didnt want the game to be a PVE game. He suggested either PVE servers or a good and effective flagging system. I dont see how having a PVe server people can play on would be bad for the game. If anything, choosing not to make a PVE server is far more detrimental to the game. If you want a game that forces players to PVP when they dont want to you also have to except that the vast majority of players will not find that fun. People dont find being griefed fun, or being ganked fun, its not fun to have to be in a guild to protect you just so you can do a simple quest, its not fun to have people interupt your dungon just to mess with you. These are all just things that waste your time, and thats why most people dont like them, and its why not a single one of the currently most successful MMOs forces you to PVP.
What I'm hearing from Narc is something like if you can't negatively interact with another person, the question is can you really interact with them at all. By requiring group tagging you allow griefing by stealing tags, but by removing tagging you no longer have to communicate at all with other players (e.g. rare spawns in WoW, or world boss kills). By trying to remove negative interaction without consent you remove the need to interact at all.
@@scythianking7315 they got banned cuz they were being fucking annoying, ff14 has a great community bunch of pussies mostly who don’t wanna get serious for ultimate but all in all pretty good
I think that an issue that needs to be addressed is the fact that PVPers depend on casual players. Because when the casual players leave, the game dies, and the PVPers then are forced to quit the game as it dwindles. As a game developer, their main concern should be to try and cater to the largest denominator so that they can make back their investment of the game through retention of players who will continually buy items and convince others to keep playing and invest their time and money into it as well. Not Narc or anybody trying to use a game that they haven't worked on, invested in, or have any consequences should it fail, as a political/propaganda tool to prove what a "real MMO" should be like. Thats like asking a new business owner to practically make bad business decisions on your behalf because you think they are "cool". Not that the ideas you give will make money, or that are good for business (which is to retain a player-base). But to make poor decisions not based on statistics but a random strangers feelings who will not lose their job if it fails. Its okay to give your thoughts on the game. But its a difficult argument when what you want is not in line with statistics or what the game developers want. Criticism should be trying to help the creators improve the game in a way that not only makes the game better, but also helps them fulfill their needs for making the game more enjoyable to a group NOT at the expense of the highest denominator. You can improve PVP, but if the changes will ultimately herd casual players away, which make up the base of any MMO... Then you are effectively cutting your own nose to spite your own face. Or being self-destructive to the overall health of the game. If your suggestion isn't doing at least these two things, then it may be a bad idea: 1.Improving the game in some manner. 2.Improving the retention rate and a way for the company to make money. Catering to the 10% of PVPers isn't going to make the company money. Catering to the 90% of casuals is more likely to make sure the game retains a strong base and revenue stream. So forcing always on PVP is sure to make 10% of vocal players happy, but will ultimately gut the player-base as the PVPers goals is literally counter productive to retention, but to make people LEAVE.
So... they introduced a system called "corruption" to disincentive players from PKing. So if the game doesn't want you to PK then why is PKing a thing in the first place? It's like leaving a loaded gun on the table and tell your kid not to touch it. I'm seeing a contradiction in the design philosophy here.
Narc is trhe prime example of "fake it til you make it" And farksake. Asmongold isnt saying interaction is bad. Hes just concluding that if we have a game were the players is swimming around in a blender, chances are; someone will turn on the blender. That simple
Well, for me, I've never enjoyed pvp. I work from dawn to dusk, and have maybe three hours to play, during the week, if I don't want to watch a movie. I'm not much into crafting, but I do enjoy doing quests and leveling. I was off work today and spent all day doing dungeons and quests, and if I was on a heavy server with pvp I wouldn't have got shit done. I very much agree with you, Asmongold, and hope you keep up the good work of telling people to fuck right off.
"If it fails then it fails but at least we've tried" I mean... There's a reason why open world PVP sandbox MMOs all backpedal on this or end up with 250 daily players like Mortal online. It's been attempted times and times again with no real success...
What is frustrating is that so so soooo many people are talking about how bad AOCs pvp will be and how it will instantly die etc. Only thing is that these people mostly never tried such systems and if they did they didn’t like it, so why are they trying to change the path AOC is going, ESO was about open world pvp in Cyrodiil but the devs went away from it to chase after money and now the game itself is dying, same with WoW. Just stay in your generic grey box and leave us alone, or atleast deal with the fact that it’s a foundational system of the game.
On the note of the BDO inspired Karma system, here's a few takeaways, enjoy: 1. PK'ing is allowed: You're farming a spot. A sweatlord with a bigger sword comes along and makes a pancake out of you. If you return he'll do it 20 more times, if need be. He has more time than you. 2. PK'ing is allowed but disincentivised by Karma system: You'll get duel-for-spot messages every 1.5 minutes. Where you'll have to spend more time duelling other people (with no reward incentive) than interacting with your intended PVE mechanic. Well that's stupid, I'll just ignore them. Nope, he starts running in front of you and killing your trash-mobs. This continues as long as you wish to ignore it, the edgelord has more time than you. You get annoyed of getting 1/2 of your expected money/h and start PK'ing the troll. You manage to kill him, he returns, you do it again, 2, 3, 20 more times. He has more time than you. You're at maximum negative Karma. You've been effectively "Karma-bombed". Enjoy not being able to enter cities. Using utilities. Being PK'ed left and right by either his guildies or other random sweatlords above your gearlevel. Open PvP games are beautiful, aren't they.
Not as frequent as you make it seem and guild declarations help combat karmabombers by allowing you to fight back without losing karma( takes 15 minutes for a dec to go through or its instant if both guilds declare on eachother). Sure there are people who are guildless making them non decable but they are also the minority. If you get shit on just go to the other 4 grind spots at the same grind spot or change channels. This was more of a problem back in the day due to only like 2-3 viable grind spots but there are so many in the game now. .Sometimes you're the shitter and sometimes you're the one shitting on thee other either by having better skill/gear. A few these fights for grind spots become great nights of gvg battles that last hours if you're in a decent guild who likes to fight in a pvp game.
My problem with PvP in MMO's is making a skill gap is really hard. In order for there to be a legit skill gap everyone would need to be on the same level playing field with gear which is almost impossible in an MMO. As long as i'm not getting clapped constantly by zergs or dudes with 2000 hours than I don't see that big of a problem, but having PvP always on will be interesting. I need to feel like I have at least a chance at putting up a fight against someone with better gear. I do think it could work for this game, but we'll see. Most PvE players probably won't enjoy it at all.
Skill gap comes from skill. If youre under geared or under leveled and win then its not a miracle, its skill. If you win versus someone at the same everything as you then you really didnt achieve anything unless you each pushed eachother that far. Its easy to make a skill gap opportunity, just get rid of level entirely. Stats have to be the same and only thing different is gear stats. Mortal online does this best.
@@theshut-in1097 There's only skill gap when gear is similar. You are not gonna win if your under-geared unless the person your fighting is absolutely terrible. If you beat someone who has similar gear level to you then therefore your better than them. Beating someone who has worse gear achieves nothing compared to beating someone who has better gear. Most people with better gear will have higher skill as they have more hours, but people who have low gear won't even stand a fighting chance cause the gear difference is so big. It really depends on how games balance PvP. In some games gear will give you a slight edge, but someone with worse gear can still easily destroy you where as other games good gear makes a massive difference.
I'm not a PvP player, I'm not someone who can spend all day playing, yet I'm still gonna try it and hopefully love it. I have high hopes. I think it'll be a fun main game
@@anteprs7908 plenty. Dungeons, world bosses, quests (they aren't pointless or unimportant lmao), helping build the nodes, etc. There is just as much of not more for people who don't actively PvP.
@@BaxxyNut bs pure bs questing and dungs is basic rpg stuff ever single mmo has it, it can have the rpg part without it ,world bosses is fine but outside that casuals player wont have much to do and questing wont be easy with ppl being able to gank you and steal you loot and gear.Building not is crafting and trading most casual and pve player dont play mmorpg to be a shop keeper or carpender .
@@anteprs7908 and yet here we are, all the top mmos thriving with strong communities of players who may only enjoy pvp casually or not at all. If the game does it right there will be plenty for non-pvp players to engage in. Sure they'll have to consent to dealing with pvp and the occasional gankers and griefers, but if it goes as they say it is, then that may not occur often. (I don't believe that, I think griefing will be huge and many players will get chased from the game because sweaty neckbeards are going to use always pvp as an excuse to chase anyone who isn't interested until that's all that's left. Then the game will die a slow painful death a la Eve Online.) But IF they manage to balance it so that it works as they dream it should, then pve players may in fact have plenty to do. As an aside, being a player who started in FF11, you will in fact find players who literally do nothing but craft. Engaging in story content only if its a means to continue their crafting. FF11 was full of players like that during their peak and you can still find people like that in all current mmos.
Traveling can provide a good experience while being costly, but only if it doesn't feel like a complete waste of time. In most MMOs where there is some optimal route to follow for the quickest progression you need to get from place to place to follow it. If you forgo traveling you waste time grinding or questing sub-optimally, and if you do travel you waste time. If you want to sort this issue you can either reduce/remove travel cost, make traveling itself worthwhile, give players enough options for places to be in so that they don't feel forced to travel far away, make it so that players don't know the most optimal route. The easiest thing to do is to remove traveling cost, which is what most MMOs do. I do believe, however, that for an open world PVP game, having costs and time associated with traveling can lead to much deeper and more complex conflicts, since now you need to make sure to properly coordinate your forces, and mistakes in that regard have meaning for both the short and long-term. The two following options are therefore much more appealing. The issue here is that they require more work to be put into the game, as well as careful development and planning. It may simply be untenable to implement traveling activities that would make traveling worthwhile, and it may also be that the amount of work required to create enough areas to satisfy the player base is impractical to do within the expected time frame until release. The last option would be interesting. It would require either making a game so complicated it's impossible to find an optimal route, or make so information about the most optimal route is inaccessible to most players. The first options is likely not practical in an MMO, and even if it was, players would still create and follow a meta. The only difference is that it will change and improve over time. There would still be a trend to follow, it would just change every so often. The other option is therefore more interesting. You obviously can't shut down all wikis and forums, and you can't make players not analyze the game. You can, however, make an environment dynamic enough in the right places that it meaningfully changes what should be the meta faster than the community can keep up with. The challenge here is two fold: achieving that goal, and making sure the players don't feel too lost. You want to encourage players to explore and travel, but you don't want them to feel as though choosing where to go has no consequence, so planning what varies and how often is going to be extremely important. Overall neither option excludes the others, and neither is binary. In addition, there are a lot of ways to structure a system that would be based on any of those basic general ideas, and a lot of ways to tweak the variables within each of those. The point of it all is: It's complicated, and even if no one has truly manged it yet, it doesn't mean it's impossible(though it doesn't bode well for it if no one has managed it).
Unless corruption completely decimates a gankers ability to win in PvP then large groups will just run rampant. Nothing is stopping you from killing greens with your friends, using fall damage to die to lower corruption and getting ur friends to loot ur corpse to give u ur stuff back before killing more
@@daroaminggnome yes it does read the official wiki. I ripped the quote and posted it below: "The primary means to remove corruption is through death. Multiple deaths may be necessary to remove all corruption. Dying removes a significant portion of a player's corruption score. Gaining experience will also slowly reduce a player's corruption score."
@@verazion7451 you are nitpicking information. you will not only lose 4X more gear on death, but you also get 4X more experience debt when you die compared to a green (non combatant). you will also get a scaling DEBUFF on EVERYTHING you do in pvp. there is also not a guarantee that the people who will loot you will be your friends. you do not get flagged when you loot someones corpse, so it would be EXTREMELY easy to simply wait for the corrupted player to die and pick up the loot they drop. you CAN reduce your corruption score, but it wont be as easy as you imply. it takes a long time to level in this game, and you also lose a lot of experience when you die corrupted. so, logically, gaining back the experience you lose will also take a LONG TIME. corruption needs to be tested. do not make conclusions on whether it WILL or WILL NOT work BEFORE ITS TESTED.
>Unless corruption completely decimates a gankers ability to win in PvP then large groups will just run rampant. It will. >Nothing is stopping you from killing greens with your friends, using fall damage to die to lower corruption and getting ur friends to loot ur corpse to give u ur stuff back before killing more thats now how you remove corruption, not even logging off will remove it you have to play the game. Not only will you be decimates stats and damage wise your name will be seen on the map.
@@Azeroh I've never played the game only bought alpha 2 access recently. I was going off the wiki to come up with a way people might try to cheese the system based on the info in the wiki. People will still gank I wasn't making a conclusion, it's an obvious fact based on human nature and the fact that people find that fun no matter the cost. Also I am free to make a conclusion on something if I want just as I am free to be wrong about said conclusion or right about ti before hand lol its a game not the end of the world either way no need to get so heated bro
@@rdcepcvip based on the wiki it was I can only go off the information given as the alpha 2 has yet to be opened. If I am wrong then I admit that 100% but based on what the wiki says death does indeed remove corruption. so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Dekaron had the same corruption system in 2004. You could PK anyone in high level zones, and freely kill them if they attacked back with no penalty, but if they didn't attack back and you've still killed them, you'd gain corruption stacks. A corrupted player would be like a monster, anyone could attack and kill them freely with no penalty. You could lose corruption stacks by simply waiting or killing high level monsters. It didn't work back then and it won't work in any game.
It's all about CONSEQUENCES. Compare killing in an MMO vs Real Life. The consequences are what keep the practice in check. If the consequences in MMOs continue to be so low, killing/griefing continues increasing.
Pretty much. In the end the final consequence will always be griefed players refunding/unsubscribing and moving on to other games. In other words the PvP gankers are not killing lowlevel players, they are killing their own game. Then moving on to another one like a plague of locusts. Anonymity + no consequences = degeneracy, the cornerstone of the internet.
To me MMO is exactly what it says Massive Multiplayer Online. A game where you log into and see people from all over the world partaking in the world you all have chosen. Allowing you to group together and tackle amazing feats and also allowing you to explore an amazing world created by artists. To me MMO is everything possible from PvP, PvE and RP. It allows people you have never met to come together to share in a common interests. That could be of course PvP but the most important aspect of MMO to me is Choice. You get to find similar minded people to do things together. For instance, I think since FFXIV really has everything except PvP(viable) and because of that it will never be the BEST MMO. I think WoW has everything except RP(viable) is why it will never be the BEST MMO. Those two games are in its own aspect great MMO's two of the best out there now but it is missing one of those three elements, well at least not good enough anyways. So if AOC wants to be the BEST MMO then it has to have great PvP, PvE and RP. Or it will, at best be just another MMO with Great PvP. It will just be like every other MMO who came on to the screen with this new amazing systems to compete with the Big Two and then settle down behind them. People like to play differently depending on real life happenings and the amount of time available for play. So if a person has only one hour to play but every time he logs in and gets killed just trying to mine a node or something, that person will eventually quit and move on to other games. That is reality. I think if that is the case you will see an initial spike but eventually it will drop off like every other MMO that tried to capture the Big Two. Look at the last two Major releases, those populations have shrunk to a point it is basically hanging on by their finger tips. Stick to what has worked, provide the most variety of content to capture more people with varying interests.
Ashes of Creation doesn't aspire to be the perfect MMO, it's trying to replicate an experience that is near and dear to the heart of the lead designer and also a lot of us. It's okay if it doesn't get the entire planet playing it. It doesn't matter. Dark Souls never tried to get the casuals to play it yet it's one of the best games of all time. Games shouldn't try to be for everyone lest they become middling, uninteresting crap. MMOs should not try to be for everyone. Ashes of Creation should not, and IS not, trying to be for everyone. Don't like it, don't play it. The amount of melodrama about OH NOES THIS GAEM COULD POSSIBLY NOT BE FOR MOI is as useless as it is annoying. Stop.
@@poiumty then when the game eventually dies cause of lack of players dont be surprised, at the end of the day a MMO is a a product and if a product doesnt sell well enough then that product is taken out of the market or changed so it makes money, cause the developers need to pay bills and get food
@@kaminozt-t1436 If it dies, it dies. I'd rather have an ambitious MMO that fails trying to recapture the L2 feeling than yet another middling wow clone that chugs along for a few years and dies without anyone giving a shit.
@@kaminozt-t1436 The dev team supports the idea so your feigned concern is of use to no one. We usually get risk-averse bullshit like this from publishers, not consumers. You should be happy the devs are taking risks in order to make the game they want. Try to look beyond your own self for a moment.
How about y'all show me these thriving MMO-s with forced pvp and let's compare their current and past player count with all the MMO games you called trash. I'm sorry for the rude awakening, but it's not the PvE MMO-s that are going to shit.
Asmond is not wrong. I know a lot of my friends who quit new world because of how long it took to do quests because of the travel time. Like it would be good if you traveled to a point and did quests around that point and move on. No the quests had to be litterally all over the territory and had to constantly run back and forth cross the whole territory.
Asmond isn't completely right either. The problem wasn't purely the travel time, but the rewards you got in those quest, not worth enough to make you go back and forth.
there is a very clear flaw in the pvp system when it comes to resource gatherers. Steven has said that when u die without fighting back , u drop MORE resourcers than when u do fight back. the problem is that WHEN u fight back, the person bothering you or fighting for resources are not "punished" by any means. so if ur just out gathering and someone stronger than u starts killing u, u have 2 choices. Drop a lot more of your resources and make the guy Pk/corrupted OR fight back, not giving the person any side efects from simply being stronger and decided that ur not gonna farm that day. i really, REALLY doubt that the anti corruption/griefing systems will be good enough to stop players for abusing it. although we have to wait and see, i'm not super optimistic given my past experiences with the "mother" system in lineage 2
If you are mostly an artisan, a person that collects materials, creates weaponry and armor, people will want to protect you, since you are a valuable person. And if no one volunteers, you can still hire people/npc guards to protect you, since you would be making a good amount of money if you focused primarily on your artisan job.
A lot of people have never played a game like Archeage and it shows. Cross continent trading is a good example of why travel matters. Let’s let Steven make the game he set out to make.
@@xExekut3x lmao yep, heard somethin similar to that from multiple people about their exodus from AA. But it was never about the risky and rewarding PvP. I think Narc said people don’t really quit these games because the PvP system, it’s more so the poor management that does it.
The only thing that worries me about a corruption/bounty mechanic is hardcore griefers setting up an alt guild where they just PK their alt guild corrupted buddies to clear flags.
@@zannynyx4297 you forgot abut the whole xp debt, that would make a permared character way weaker than it should be if he doesn't spend all of his time grinding it back. (That death penalty is 400% when you're red, and you need to grind to get rid of it)
Travel would have had impact in new world if it had anything tied to it other than gaurunteed cost/time without a risk/reward aspect. Nobody complained or quit archeage for the same reasons because traveling with your trade packs or resources was a risk vs reward scenario that made the travel and cost associated with it an actually engaging activity that was part of progression rather than just an unnecessary inconvenience. New world could have had the same system, but it starts to feel like an unnecessary inconvenience the moment anybody can do the same thing all the time with no risk/reward. Being able to be a pirate or pvp was a huge initial selling point that brought many people to archeage rather than making it lose players, the game would have arguably died much faster if progression consisted of back and forth travel with no risk, they were able to make it feel more rewarding BECAUSE of the risk involved. What's important is that this wasn't forced, there were non risky ways to progress, they just weren't as rewarding, players shouldn't feel entitled to the track with the fastest potential progression being risk free. After all, being the fastest doesn't usually matter if you're not a pvp player as long as you're able to keep up in terms of pve, yes completionists and first completions are important to some people, but ashes have already stated that certain gear and progression paths may be different for pve and pvp, so I doubt pve players will be locked out of being able to do those things. And since ashes won't have identifical servers, and has scalable content, so its questionable how much that would be affected anyways. Narc being a crafter and wanting non consensual pvp also aren't mutually exclusive, he wants it because he knows that artisan systems always feel more rewarding and engaging when there's risk involved in that progression path.
I am a PvE MMO player. I play mmos to explore the world, experience the content, and relax with other players. I personally dont enjoy dueling in anygame, mmo or otherwise. I know im not good at pvp which is why i dont want to do it. I play league, i deal with enough getting shit on. I enjoy New World because its optional. I see plenty of PvP toggled people in New World but they are all lv 60 so even if I did want to PvP i would want to wait till im lv 60 to be on an even playing field. I will say though, I have seen large scale wars in New World and that does look like something that I as a heavy PvE player may be interested in participating in.
The only problem with long travel times is when the trip is boring. If the world is alive and there are plenty of things to do on your trip that are actually relevant or matter for your character progression, and these things do not become too repetitive over time (like in New World) then travel times can be long. But this is very difficult to achieve I would say so...
@@dahyar1 except it still might feel boring and timewaste if there's too much long travel. It is fine only in the begining (be it 5 hours or 50, or even 100hours depending on the scacle of the game) Doesn't matter how engaging the world is. If you don't get convinient way to move around faster/instantly - you'll get annoyed and tired of it anyway.
@@zenixvampirchik652 Not if it is meaningful. Exemple : In albion, when you travel in order to sell goods to another city, or just to reach a juicy dungeon far from the city, you can get ganked at any time. This puts pressure on you, but it also means traveling to sell goods is very profitable because of the risk involved, and traveling far to get to a better dungeon is also worth it. This also create content and gameplay opportunities because suddenly, you could pay people to protect you during the trip, or if you're into PvP, you could gank someone doing those trading routes and profit from it. The problem with New World is that traveling was designed around this full loot PvP idea and a risk / reward balance. Once they removed it, it completely negated the need for having foot/mount(soon) traveling without conveniance like teleports.
I played Asheron's Call in 1999. I played solo most of the time. Doing a useful dungeon on Darktide (always on PVP) would be a no go unless you went on at like 6AM or were in Blood (a guild). I just followed the advice and went back to Frostfell and played with the toggle PVP when I felt like it. What can corruption mean if it's mutiple people like a guild- would a corruption matter if you have a guild of murderhobos?
Well yeah if there's an entire guild of players killers whenever those players I'm that guild die they'll lose their gear. A guild with 0 gear isn't a feasible guild since they won't be able to do anything and due to the negative status of the guild I doubt crafters would make them any more gear to replace the gear they lose from bounty hunters. They'd eventually get shoved out of the game
@@imaginationcore2104 Does the gear disappear or is it K+L. BTW in Asheron's Call death involved losing gear so you would carry death items (high monetary value with little to no usefulness) that would drop instead of gear. Killing one of the guild matters little if you are still outnumbered and can't loot the body- unless you just automatically get the gear like an autoloot. Are bounty hunters only flagged to the one person (like SWG) or everyone that is flagged as corrupted?
@@johnnycrash_ I belive the gear Is dropped although I might be wrong and although you're right that looting the gear would be challenging the attacker of the corrupted player literally has nothing to lose. The system actively encourages people to kill corrupted players and debuffs them. You would need such a large scale operation of players to pull of a player grifing guild and have it be viable (in theory) that just don't think it would happen
@@imaginationcore2104 It was possible 20 years ago. It would be easier to organize now. The debuff would have to be so great that one player could kill 5 corrupted players at least. It would have to be very harsh for it to be effective.
I hate all of those people who hype AoC to the moon. Their words are condescending and deceitful. They desperately try to paint the narrative that "MMORPG players don't understand basic MMO systems and they shouldn't criticize AoC because of their lack of knowledge". Which is a disgusting lie. People do understand that systems in MMOs are interconnected. Because of that, people do realize the toxic snowball effect that PvP MMORPGs create. People with better gear and bigger numbers will dominate the weak. Strong become even stronger, while the weak lose motivation to play, because they can't compete on a level-playing field. As a result, the PvP MMORPGs quickly die and become niche and obscure.
I think open will PVP is almost always a bad thing because it forces players who don't want to do PVP to have to do PVP if it was going to do something other than that then you could just have like a dueling system or an arena mode instead. So that players who want to do PVP can but it's not like that you have to do.
I'm not sure you get what open world pvp-advocates actually want. It's not about the PvP in itself, it's about the danger and excitement of a living, perilous world. I get that that's not everyone's cup of tea, but just wanted to point out how your solution isn't one for players like that.
A couple things first on the travel, so putting a value on travel is a simple but bad way to fill your game with content you don't have. An open world should be like the Assassin creed games, where it may take a min to travel across but there's ways to make that travel shorter, sometimes instant. It is also filled to the brim with open world content around every corner there's something new, a new weapon you havnt seen a funny npc, a cool mini game, thats what open world is. If you fill your world with basic monsters then say the content is pvp, there is no content. Now second on the caravans (correct me if I'm wrong) when you transport stuff in ur storage from one place to another or the auction it travels through a caravan, now if someone is able to steal what is already yours it will be one of the worst systems ever put in place in mmos. If you want a system like that to work look at the last 5 sold and make a gold value from the items in it and add an equal amount to the caravan of different things, sometimes make a royal caravan protected by insane guards that has a legendary in it or something boom fixed
I disagree with the killing low levels, it should incentivize higher levels to help them and can lead to relationships. Vanilla WoW for me was getting killed by a high level around Taren mill/SM area. A high level came and helped and I ended up joining his guild. I was not mad about getting killed, it gave me the drive to get high level myself and exact revenge on lowbie alliance. And I did, I had over 25k honorable kills before I was level 50. I was addicted to fighting alliance in Ashenvale/Astranaar on Norgannon server.
I should add I mean getting killed once or twice is ok. When a high level is legit camping a low level for hours is just awful if there is no escape. I liked how Tera would make them hostile to everyone if they did naughty things like that.
@@JJLL195 It led to some great battles on the server. But then again how rare or situational is it that people want to help low levels at a similar rate of people wanting to camp them.
Funny how I was previously into Ashes of Creation and now I will probably never actually touch it since the community is like this towards the idea of maybe making it so that people who are into PVE can have a bit of fun. 😐 Like, good luck with exclusively trying to cater to the hardcore PVP sweat lords who makes up 10% of the entire MMO population. There's a good reason why New World quickly abandoned it's original vision of an PVP centeric MMO and introduced PVE elements just like everyone else. Guess I'll just keep playing the same old MMOs that are on the top of the market because they actually cater to more than one type of person.
Tell me you don't understand AoC gameplay mechanics with out actually telling me you don't understand or listen or try to learn about AoC gameplay mechanics..... my God stick to your instanced content on wow with lobby simulator.
@@Vsg45 I don't even play WoW but you aren't really giving me a good look on what AoC is like. Maybe instead of like, insulting me, you can properly show how the game is actually like lmao?
@@Vsg45 Completely dodged what I asked you lmao. And the wiki is probably not going to explain that the community is probably too toxic for someone who isn't a PVP Lose Loot When You Die sweat lord.
"it alienates people who want to play the game normally" Yea, no. They want to play the game "specially". That's what "im untouchable dont bother me" button is. Yes, it stops harassment. We can talk later if that's a good or a bad thing. But game's intention is to have people fight over resources. You going god mode and "just playign the game normally" is not, in fact, normal at all. Why not just give Steven a chance to realise his vision instead of insisting he creates yet another themepark for casuals? If he fails, he fails. If he succeeds, wow new game that's not like the others is out.
I completely disagree with Narc on the topic of world PvP, and judging by the behavior of players in both retail and classic WoW, I'm not the only one. What I mean is that 90% of the time that I encounter a player of the opposite faction in the open world we mutually ignore each other since we both have better things to do and fighting each other would just delay us from completing whatever we are doing. I think world PvP should be incentivized not forced upon players. If you want to quest or gather resources in the open world you should be able to do that uninterrupted. Nobody wants to play an MMO where at all times you can get ganked and die even though you have no intention to partake in world PvP (like STV in Vanilla). I really liked the way BfA did it. World PvP was concentrated to end game zones and the rewards tied to it created demand for World PvP from both factions and led to somewhat of an equilibrium where it wasn't just a group of 5 people bullying solo players, but multiple groups on both sides fighting each other. I had a great time playing that and usually I only engage with instanced PvP (BGs, arena).
RuneScape’s pvp concept was my favorite. When you died pvping you’d lose what you had on your player and the opponent was able to loot what you had. Also what was nice is if you died a player was able to pick up your loot if you didn’t make it back to where you died in time.
Narc opinion: If you are a player that only have a few hours a day to play, you are not an MMO player. You can only be an MMO player if you have 15 hours a day of which you can get fun 12 hours. If you play 2 hours to have 1 hour wasted walking or getting killed, you are not welcome.
I think the solo experience is highly important for any MMO. As much as I loved Classic WoW and meeting new people, they either came and went or we constantly had different goals/outleveled. Contrast that with Elder Scrolls Online, it feels like ESO is too much of a solo experience. I never feel the need to interact with anyone and i'm just purely questing with no variety. A game that encourages player interaction naturally without forcing them out of their current goal would be ideal.
Dare I say, I haven't finished the video, but wouldn't PVP zones that are clear to players be a good compromise? I mean OSRS was successful back in the day because you opted into such areas by wandering into these zones even though it was clearly delineated. I think understanding these ramifications allowed one to accept your fate if the worst were to occur. As opposed to having no counterplay because the server allowed you to get ganked by a a more veteran player for simply existing anywhere in the world.
That is their ambition for this game, essentially no safe zones or turn off pvp. Which is quite bold and risky but has a potential for high rewards. Though yeah this would definitely drive out players like me who atleast wanted a safe zone to take a breather and afk to get something to snack on, then continue playing. Maybe a corruption or bounty system could help minimize this problem. But at this point, I'd rather stay away from this game... Considering I like hoarding items
PvX means it's both PvP and PvE. Meaning you can't remove the PvP part and saying "Now the game function as normally". Because there are core designs in the game that is dependent on the PvP part Same with PvE. We could not remove the PvE of the game, because then the core mechanics stops working
I feel like the people i spoke to who stopped playing New World early on didn't even mention traveling being a problem. Everyone i spoke to brought up the plethora of bugs, technical problems, lag and poor combat balance. Maybe that was just my bubble.
I feel a good MMORPG should have fun elements for people to choose playing solo and/or group as they wish. As for PVP I don't like it so I don't bother with any kind of MMORPG that forces it. If people want to play those games then cool for them, no need to insist every single game has to have it.
If I have to log on to do x or y in game, on a almost daily basis, I immediately don't want to play the game as a whole. I choose the times I wanna play at, and won't be forced by a guild or by a system in the game (fomo) to log on and do things, my free time is too valuable for me to turn a videogame into a job. But that doesn't mean the game should be different. It just means I won't play it much.
I think what narc means is that the sense of urgency that potential conflicts bring add to the wonder and immersion that an mmo has. I'd like to have pvp as it allows for those immersive social interactions like you'd see in a game like dayz.
then they should make a dayz or battle royal clone...ffs...everyone thinks PVP = WoW/PUBG/Fortnite ganking...that is NOT the case. PvP in WoW includes battlegrounds and arena as well. The problem with WoW ganking is it wastes the victims' time and like Asmon says, makes people quit when it becomes commonplace. IF you're going to have PVP in an MMORPG then you HAVE to mitigate the griefing PERIOD. That's the argument Asmon is making and he's correct. PVP should be high risk high reward and have a fair balance to it which is what AOC is pushing towards...not pwn lvl 1 noobs cuz haha...fuk man its not rocket science.
These so called immersive social interactions you are talking about in pvp situations are extremely rare and tend to occur only when a game is newly released, has a small tight-nit niche community and players are still working it all out. Once the game hits mainstream and becomes popular with player counts rising the experience 99.9% of the time is just toxic shoot on sight, gank, greif, troll etc.... This pattern has repeated in so many games now I've lost count.
@@JohnDoe-ix4kx Shooting on sight is a stupid thing to do with AoC's design. You would get flagged, get little reward and then get killed by bounty hunters / drop your gear as you're a PK and couldn't get near towns anymore without risking everything, unless you have massive ressources to waste and give bounty hunters or a large guild supporting you, it would generally by a bad idea for the average player. If balanced properly, as a PKer you would want to go after people you think or know are carrying high value ressources, caravans being the highest value target. That or just eliminating competition for ressources you want to collect :o
@@DarkAztaroth Sure a perfect system with perfect design would create a perfect outcome. Unfortunately such a system as you describe has never existed in any mmo thus far and any anti greifing system will ultimately be imperfect in practice and greifers will ALWAYS work to exploit any flaws in the systems design to fuck with other players. Also wouldn't opt in pvp with options like arenas, battlegrounds, duels, specific pvp trading routes/zones for caravans, or dare I say it pvp specific servers already cover all the gameplay features you mentioned? Why drag pver's with no interest in pvp into your preferred style of play?
What happened to the days of MMORPGs being like secondary worlds we live in? Now they just feel like games we spend a lot of time in, not a world we transport into with all these arbitrary disallowments of actions in the world
“We’re all talking about a theoretical” is the most accurate statement I’ve heard out of any of the videos I’ve saw. I’m personally an advocate for open world PvP as long as there is a protection system to keep the more casual, less skilled, less geared players from being constantly grieved. Wether that’s a toggle(I hate it in NW rarely any PvP encounters on my server) or a flagging system like they have implemented currently(we’ll have to see how that performs) I hate the idea of two separate server types though because I makes for empty servers and none of us want that regardless if you’re a PvP or PvE player.
"I'd be okay with only a few hundred thousand players"... ...Um...wat? That's best case scenario. Thousands is more likely. MAYBE they get to tens of thousands. Maybe...
Only issue I have with full group content for MMO's is that it feels like a job, either show up or get kicked (unless you're in a guild with your friends)
At least give it some solo content so people can do it if they just want to chill and play, not everything has to be the "PARTICIPATE THIS WEEK AT THIS SPECIFIC TIME AND BRING THESE SPECIFIC ITEMS OR FUCK OFF" kind of MMO.
MMO's like Ashes Of Creation aren't just that tho. Let me draw a comparison with Albion because in their core design aspects the games are very similar :
In Albion, as a solo player or a player with a handful of friends, you can : Gank gatherers and make profit from their ressources, run solo dungeons, gather materials, join random hunts for pvp if you're part of a guild, run corrupted dungeons or whatever it's called (a PvEvP dungeon where you have to kill your opponent to get out of the dungeon), buy cheap in a town and go sell in another town to make profit (while avoiding gankers, or by hiring guards) etc...
In most of the sandbox pvp mmos, there are solo activities, although I agree that you'll be missing on a big part of the game. However, what there isn't, is risk free pve activities. Because everything in those games revolves around risk.
There is solo content, I'm sure you *maybe* aren't talking about Ashes, just a point that other games should have or the video's. But just to clarify, artisan skills and personalized quests for solo people exist here. The only difference to many mmos is that you talk to people to exchange what you want. Goods to money, and money to goods.
For the events, nah. I'm also those single player dumb asses who play MMO's for a single player experience, but sometimes you need some meat from time to time. Ashes handles it quite well I think, it's not like you're node is gonna be sieged down 24/7 nor even monthly. Big events would be player-driven or the by-product that the system gives to you, I'm sure it won't be those gacha events or christmas events you have nowadays.
so WoW, or FFXIV, or GW2, or ESO... What MMOs require you to participate with large groups?
Don't play the game then. All other games are open to you.
@@roamingmillennial2200 EVE Online
Narc: if you don't like to play exactly like I do, and have the same expections of an MMORP as I do, then you are a lazy carebear dad player.
yep, he is an a aggressive fanboy
He’s trash and treats others like trash
No, I think what he was saying is... Those negative social interactions are part of the game. And are apart of what makes the world feel alive.
If only you saw the irony in this…
Kinda shocking how delusional he is
I played the New World alpha. When it was full pvp farming was awful, you either had to go out in big groups to farm effectively, either that or farm naked. Hemp was awful, I remember we built big giant hemp fields behind walls to farm hemp effectively, players were leaving and having toggle was done to save the alpha player base. Of course you got a bunch of neckbeard essays on it in the forums but the fact is if you piss off people with always on pvp they don't complain they just leave.
yeah New world is another themepark MMO, of course it would go the same way as WoW Classic for PVP.
What im seeing is A LOT of people that have never played games like archeage, lineage, darkfall, etc. coming in with their themepark MMO guided ideas. Im looking forward to a lot of people being introduced to a completely new type of gameplay that they havent experienced before.
And No, I dont even care for PVP at all, these games were still the most fun Ive ever had in MMO's before.
Did they have a corruption system like ashes?
@@thebiggestgamer we don't know how it actually works
@@thebiggestgamer Well, Lineage 2 had the Karma system, which sort of penalized players of killing other players, was sort of a "safe guard" for solo players, if you killed another player without that player attack you back (PK another player), you accumulated Karma points, more karma you had, bigger was the probability (almost guaranteed) of you dropping stuff from your inventory, including also gear you had equipped if you got killed by someone else, and it was a pain in the ass to get rid of it, was brutal the cost to PK someone, you had to hide and find a place to farm bunch of mobs to bring karma down to 0, so you could farm and pvp relaxed again. In another words, see it as a sort of an anti-douchebag ness.
Unfortunately, L2 changed that in later chronicles (for solo players demise), when they introduced some augmentation stones, you could attach them to your gear and weapons, it would give some stats, but also, you no longer would drop those either, even if you died with karma from another player. They kind of self-destruct the system from there on and forth, in one hand, made everyone pvping each other more, but in the other hand, made solo progression unbearable. L2's Karma system wasn't perfect (far from that), but it was the closest to the notion of an organic balance between solo and pvp I've seen in a mmorpg.
Karma system in the early chronicles, was actually fairly decent, until they broke down.
If Steven from AoC says that will have a similar pvp system than L2, then they must have their own version of a karma system too, one thing will not work well without the other, in my opinion.
NW was no game by the time when it got released. Pvp did not kill the game. It was literally an empty and dead game to begin with. A bug fest beyond wildest imaginations. PVP was their least worries.
Gw2 proved that you need to make travel fun not restrictive, for the majority of players roughly half your game time will be spent fighting so combat needs to be engaging, and challenging with the ability to have different loadouts so you don't get too bored with the monotony and the other roughly half will be spent traveling so having mounts that you level and have skills that make traveling fun and a glider because only the no lives are getting flying mounts...
Yeah I never felt that using 'map travel' took anything away from my immersion in GW/GW2 - in WoW if I need to fly I tab out or leave my computer so basically it's just game wasted.
Is that why GW2 is played by so few people kekw
@@stahliboi6249 300k players daily is few?
HEY! I HAVE FLYING MOUNTS AND I HAVE A LIVE >:( :copium:
@@frustratedlemur Cuz there is no traveling? You open map , click tp use mount for 3.5 secs and you reached your destination.
“The point is to prove that a true open world PVP MMO can thrive in this age of single player trash”
So when it has like 10k players or less and dies because it’s hyper niche, does that mean Narc will acknowledge he’s wrong?
No, he'll shift the blame to some other banal and menial decisions the devs made without ever admitting that he's a closet goblin who wants a game only like 5 other people want.
Honestly I would quit a game where people can grief me by tagging mobs, stealing resources, or bots farming zones I need to progress, without the ability to do something about it. In each of those situations I’m firing a warning shot… and killing the other person if they fight back.
Argument of players count would lead you to making every single mmo game into genshin impact, and thats not really something you guys want, huh?
Thats my issue. What does it mean "to thrive" for him? For me it is to steadily grow, yet we´ve seen time and time again that PvP centric MMO start big but bleed out really, really fast. They fail to retain any other player that is not already a hardcore one, and I can bet the number of new hardcore players are far lower than the number of veteran hardcore players that have to quit being hardcore because of life responsabilities catching up (work, family, etc).
The game will have to cater to more casual players to some extent if it trully wishes to thrive, as Narc said here. Otherwise it will see the same-as-ever dwindling niche hardcore MMO players every other PVP MMO out there has seen, as well as meet the same fate.
@@ipunchedu8884 He completely lost me with the clown skit. He takes Asmon saying "players being able to negatively impact your experience without your consent is bad for the game" as saying "players interacting is bad for the game." He spells out clearly that he can't comprehend the reason PvP MMOs fail is because the early wave players dumpster the late-adopters and stop them from doing. Anything. He blames everything BUT near nil new-player retention because the old guard stops them from playing the game at all on why they failed.
Narc's quite elitist with his view on MMOs that I can't take any of his views on AoC that seriously. It's so obvious how heavily invested he is on it. I don't really care what AoC becomes, it can be whatever it wants to be. But calling people who play WoW and FFIV (I don't play both games) as lazy and shallow is quite a shallow take itself.
It's important to remember though that he was a player of both of those games, quite vehemently too. His content now has just evolved far enough that he keeps riding the train.
But even at the very start of his video production he's been saying the same stuff, so I still mostly believe him.
Definitely now it's played up for the views though assuredly.
Narc's closing comments in what he wants AoC to be is admirable and he's perfectly in his right to not want the game to change to "be in line" with other popular mmo's or give in to whats popular. Its okay to want and build a niche.
My issue is his attitude to literally everything that's not what he wants. Like how can you be so bitter to say that everything was/is trash until now? Like why can't people just say "its not for me?" Like he's literally trying to argue that for AoC. If its not for you, then it aint for you. He doesn't have to be this almighty, higher than thou, cunt about it.
Narc’s views about mmos are about as bad as the sports’ opinions of Skip Bayless
The only thing I am hoping AoC has is that socialization is more encouraged.
i have no issues with ashes pvp system
the thing i despise most from their ideas is the prospect of loosing my stuff i probably spent hours upon hours grinding for
as in you will drop gathering mats when you die in pvp, you will loose your house when you loose a nodewar etc etc
all that shit just screams backwards progression and i'm not about it at all
It gives you a reason to defend your node. If you had nothing to lose, what/why would you fight?
@@JonBondgsr The better question is why a casual would even bother installing the game when they know they will not find fun?
That's a good point about backwards progression with node wars.
@@JonBondgsr rewards are a better incentive to motivate players
@@daroaminggnome "Goes back Steven's whole "this game isn't designed for everyone" mantra."
And that is a dumb mantra. This whole "we make the game we want to make, damn marketability" works with smaller scale, single player projects. But an MMO is a money sink. You need to constantly develop the next big content, you need to constantly maintain the current content, fix bugs and exploits lighting fast, keep entire server parks running. On the scale of AoC, this is a LOT of money. Sure, Steven is rich, but not Jeff Bezos rich. If the population is not there, he'll have two choices eventually: shut down the game or squeeze the ever shrinking playerbase for everything they got.
what Asmon said about Solo play is so true and especially overlooked. Maybe it's a prerogative of certain people only, and most people really like Co op, but the experience of bumming around and plundering and pillaging on your own time has always been quite compelling for me. You know i think people definitely differ in this regard, but every MMO or RPG i've played i've felt that often times doing my own thing is at times superior
Im not sure if we're ready to have this talk yet but I think it boils down to everyone just wants to be "the one." Like everyone wants to have challenges, and they want to overcome trials, and be tested, but at the same time they want to win, not lose. Like yeah if they lose, it is what it is, they pick themselves up and try again but obviously they would've really liked it if they won. Thats basic.
Now its easier to make a single-player or PVE game where there's obvious avenues to ensure victory despite the difficulty. But some people really want that same gratification in Multiplayer and PVP. Thats just not going to happen. One player must beat the other and often times it just stays that way. And whether by figuring it out through self-reflection or experience, some people just learn that: "Ya know, I want the thrill of overcoming a challenge, but I would also like to just win or ensure victory."
Its like writing a hero story. You dont write your favorite main character to be forever curb stomped by some high level antagonist. People can have the thrill of challenge but assured victory through PVE and Co-op experiences.
I think more communities just need to come to terms with that. Its okay to just have PVE. Its okay to set a difficulty down a notch. Its okay to use the console command to get by something.
Not everything has to be a "rip your nuts off" difficulty or be PVP focused for it to "matter." Only what the players seek and get out of it.
People like to have control over their gameplay experience rather than put it in the hands of others. So yeah this makes total sense.
@@Joyappu and Op got it fr. Ppl r diff want and fw diff things and a sandbox mmorpg like Ashes plans to be should let and help its players choose customize and most importantly enjoy/succeed their own style and gameplay experience
Yea what i see as a more obvious issue is a couple massive guilds just taking over and being solo or in a small guild a gank fest where you can't play. Similar to what happens on alot of wow servers where they are 98 percent horde for example.
Guilds will have relatively small member caps, and the skill trees for guilds will allow opportunities for small guilds to be just as effective in guild v guild content as large guilds. So I think there will be fewer massive guild takeovers than some people imagine.
You have to remember that this is an Open World MMO. An every shifting political structure having alliances and enemies so having a single alliance domination is likely but not forever as just like all things good must come to an end.
That's how it went in L2
A lot of people just like being alone together.
there are mmo like that, I glad this is not one of them
@@Kngly1 You actually don't know that yet. You assume it's not one of them.
@@jessemartinez9158 well of these people complaining about it seems to agree with the idea. If they bend and end up with you idea of i just want a solo mmo then I will go play something else but if this game become more than that I hope people who likes to be alone in mmo go somewhere else like a rational person would
@@Kngly1 what makes you the arbiter of what is rational?
@@jessemartinez9158 Arbiter? thats your words not mine. you can pick a dictionary and see for youself what rational and logical is.
I don't really mind traveling in MMO even tho I'm not a hardcore player
But my problem with New World, that you spend too much time traveling than actually doing something that you traveling for.
You walk for 10-15 min to the quest, spend a minute for the quest then spend another 10min to return.
The traveling ratio to actually doing things is just too much.
I really like BDO ratio better, once you travel to Grana from Valencia, you might spend hours or even days in Grana.
When I started BDO back in 2016, if I didn't buy a t8 horse as my first big purchase, I probably would have quit the game. Spending 15 mins traveling was fucking awful. The horse saved my BDO gameplay.
Narc says he plays these games for the artisan systems. Be a real shame if people find out what server he plays on and show him what open world always on pvp is like.
And then ppl will kill him?
So what? Some ppl just come and defend him. Ends up being mini war between ppl and that sounds super fun.
You kill him once, get a bounty on your head aswell as a major debuff to your stats. Do it again and its doubled and you're gonna get hunted down 100%
You clearly don't know how these type of content actually exist in games with player agency and not just huge grindy lobbies with portals to instanced session based real gameplay :)
You can, like, have other people that are interested in your work protect you. You can hide and be careful.
Not just /oh how dare you to interrupt my gameplay of rightclicking an ore spot/.
Challenges around it is what actually makes it interactive. Not just braindead act of gathering it in the end.
Imagine having more than one characters, multiple peoples or a whole clan of degenerates. People will find a way to cheese the system and they will show him "aLwAys oN pvP"
@@attilakiss5504 this. people forget that the big groups always run together for the degen pking
"if it fails it fails" - narc. it's easy to be ok with a game failing when the failure doesn't impact you and you just get to move on to a new game.
His whole Channel is about ashes of creation, what are you talking about
@@dooddoingstuff a failing game will support him with years of content, even after the servers are shut down. Now, the devs are a whole new page.
So? Your point? Do you care deeply about every failure out there? Because that argument can be used for every. single. failure. ever. "easy to not care since you can just move on". Everyone just goes "huh, ok, don't care". Unless it affect them personally in some way. Everyone is like that.
@@kopicat2429 the point would be saying 'don't change anything to make ur game more profitable so it stays the way I want it' is incredibly selfish when you have no actual skin in the game. Not caring about a game failing is different from what he's advocating for in this video. Do you think he couldn't pivot his channel to a new game with some level of manageable sub/view loss? actively advocating for something counter productive and being apathetic are different. If u don't care if ashes of creation succeeds or fails is different from wanting things that will cause it to fail and making videos about why they shouldn't try to make it succeed
tbh to the people who pre-ordered the voyager packs being up to $250 or higher would be awful for them if the game fails.
The way to make travel matter is to make a long journey matter. Give a place afterwards to camp for weeks. That was what travel was in EQ, it was long, but once you reached your destination, say the Karanas Plains, you might stay there for a month. The issue with New World is you travel a long way, do a quest, and then have to go back, just for one quest. Sigh...there's very little reward for that travel.
Asmon's take that "travel is bad by any metric because in New World it was bad" is just a stupid argument. It's like saying "MMOs can't have good stories because it's bad in Shadowlands." Other games exist and Asmon is ignoring that the same thing implemented in different ways can have dramatically different outcomes.
@@Miff1 He explained why travel was bad. You waste too much time for little reward. The New World Playerbase hated it. It's been refined over and over since EQ, and players in EQ rejoyced years ago when they got horses. Players in WoW spent thousands of gold for epic flying mounts.
This isn't isolated to New World.
@@j.d.6915 Yeah make it fun
@@j.d.6915 New World changes the amount of azoth required for teleporting, but they still require you to be in a town or walk all the way to a teleporter. It's not fun and it's incredibly tedious. The only reward is gatherables along the way if you're into that.
@@Miff1 He said there wasn't any metric that showed that travel "mattering" was good at all FOR New World. Not that it is bad, period, for MMO's. And he was right, New World's travel, as J.D. said, has absolutely 0 value because of the way the travel was designed.
What I got from all of this is that niche Hardcore MMO players want to stay niche
@@MrRavmoor I agree. I just hope we dont end up seeing the same old charade of "why is my game dying" and "Why does nobody new want to join my game?"
@@MrRavmoor the problem is when the niche community is trying to tell everyone that their genre is the true mmo experience
@@ToastUsername how is solo-ing Final Fantasy XIV MSQ the best MMO experience? If you don't like interaction with other people why play MMOs? If you want interaction, but also you are a carebear why not play co-op games? There is so much more options for SOLO, PVE players... Where are the options for players who want MASSIVELY ONLINE batles with other people???
YES!
You have no idea how big the marked is for people that want just that.
Group MMO's shouldnt be a requirement.
The sheer fact of the matter is you shouldn't *force* players to play with a group to progress. People don't seem to understand the sheer logistics of having to set up a group. How real life can cause people to not be able to play, to miss a raid, etc. And this is multiplied for *EACH* person required for the content.
If *I* am the only variable? Then I have some level of control of how I go about progression. But if you add more people into the mix, then they become an *uncontrollable* variable.
Runescape is a great example of this. Raids get released and you can do them *SOLO* if you have the gear. You can get said gear by grinding out money making methods or even brute forcing it with raw stats with decent skill. You are *not* required to go in with a team. Going in with a team increases the loot chances, but if you did it solo you dont have to fight anyone for said loot. Keep in mind Runescape is still incredibly popular and i believe it is still rising steadily in player base till this day.
One thing that has always sucked for me is the inability to get into guilds. I simply dont have the time. i could get into a guild and do maybe like a month or 2 of raids but then i get a new job and my schedule cant change and now I cant make raid times. I go to college + work and now my entire week is gone on the days they want to raid and then i have to look for a new guild.
I want to still be able to progress reasonably despite not having a team. Being absolutely left behind in an MMO and trying to do content that no one else wants to do because they happen to have a super dedicated group and all the time in the world and you dont is probably one of the shitiest feelings pertaining to gaming.
I think you're using too narrow of scope when you say "progression". Progress what? If you want to progress 10 player content you need 10 players. If you want to progress solo content you need 1. Nature of the beast. What you really want to argue for is to have 10 Player AND Solo content that both can be progressed. Then you can decide if both of those things progress towards the same goal (usually item collection). For example maybe recolors of the same mount for Raids, Pvp, Crafting, etc. Or you can set up progression to acquire different items per game mode. I feel like people fall into this or that when ideally in an MMO you want both. There's nothing wrong with group content. It is quite enjoyable. And while it not be as easily accessible ultimately there's a point where you have to prioritize different parts of your life as a player. If every game was designed for you to just log in, hit 3 crafting nodes, and an epic mount...well you'd have mobile games
@@michaelgray371 Point is that there shouldn't be "X player content". There should be *Content* . That is it. You want to roll up with 10 players? Ok the content lets you. You dont have the ability to roll up with 10 so you go in Solo? The content lets you. You have only 4 friends? Ok you can go in with 4.
When I say Progression I mean increasing player power. Keeping up with new item upgrades, not being overleveled and going into old raids for transmog.
Like I said before, Runescape already does this so why can't other MMO's? Runescape has raids that can be completed solo. but you can also run several people deep and make it group content that *increases* the amount of loot dropped so people can split the loot.
I'm not arguing for 10 player content and Solo player content. I'm arguing that the *SAME* content should be able to be completed by 1 person, or 4 people, or 10 people, or 40 people. Not this separation between content for the number of players.
If Runescape got it right, other games don't really have an excuse.
@@MaleficArken The worst is if story progression is locked behind party dungeons and raids like in WoW.
I think the only way to make node pvp work for casuals is to allow them to attach their names to a town rather than a faction. If their town gets captured, every peasant there merely switches flags and moves on with their lives while powerful streamers and guilds play their hardcore war games with each other.
People would be tied to a node rather than a faction, so whenever the dust settles people can take their blueprints and resources they have and scoot on to another town.
@@fredrickordo5828 yes thats called being a refugee
That is how it is designed currently. You are attached to the Node, not any other factions. If the Node gets destroyed, you will be mailed your belongings including your house blueprint. You will only need to get the house at another Node. The only thing you lose is your raw materials and gatherables. No completed items will be lost.
If you have a Freehold and you successfully defended your Freehold even after your Node gets destroyed in the Siege, your Freehold will have 1 week of grace period to get absorbed by another Node's ZOI. If there's no overlapping ZOI within 1 week (nearby Node didn't level up in time or there isn't any Node nearby) it will be destroyed. If there is, you will need to do set of tasks to have your Freehold be accepted in the new Node's ZOI that your Freehold is currently residing in. If you are a casual, it is unlikely that you will have a Freehold but I digress.
@@jacara1981 Fair enough but don't discount the other players who are not like your typical "MMO players". You cannot lump all players in a single group. MMO players are not a singular entity which agrees that all games have to be super casual friendly.
The MMO players you refer to are already thriving, happily playing games that are catered to them. The ones that don't still don't have anything to play. This game is made for those players. Just because it's an MMO doesn't mean it has to cater to the players that isn't meant for the game that it was designed to be.
Plus, in the context of sieges, if you decided to not help defend your Node, you're partly the fault why your Node lost the siege to begin with.
@@Iruzi_P My bad, I didn't do enough research apparently.
I'm still worried that nodes being blown up would scare away too many players but I guess I'll find out once the game releases.
I don't think you can say for sure that it was the emphasis on the travelling in New World that made thousands of people quit. It could have had some impact but there were much bigger problems like, the constant weekly exploits people would find and the lack of enjoyable endgame. If the stashes were shared in all cities I don't even think people would mention that traveling was bad at all. It was fine to have your routes between cities where you would do faction quests and gather materials. The travel is only bad if the activities you do around the world are bad.
Asmon takes his own impressions and considers them the great truth. He might think he's a god. I got bored at New World because there was only one thing to do, gather materials and fight trash mobs, okay two things. And New World isn't a game where you have time to enjoy the scenery, also the scenery wasn't that great even if the graphics were good.
Bricking my GPU lol
@@reinhard98 Oh it wasn't the ludicrous amount of mindless traveling one of the biggest if not the biggest takeaway from the game that made a massive amount of player quit!
Like lol, just because you enjoyed it, or didn't mind it as much doesn't mean it wasn't true.
These people live in fantasyland, they have their head permanently stuck on stupid.
It's like commies that always try to say that the fault was actually capitalism, but the problems always have a tendency of coming up after they implemented their little stupid ideas, a fact which they always disregard when they construct their little bs story.
And then they come up with their little anecdotal examples that don't even make sense. Yea, traveling around, over and over, was the reason why so many left. Was it the only reason, not really, was it one, if not the biggest reason? Yes.
Thank you. Exactly this. Correlation does not mean causation. I think both ends of this discussion has brought up a lot of personal opinions like this and presented them as facts
I quit very soon after hitting lvl 50 due to a lack of endgame, and the constant stream of new game-breaking exploits every week and trading getting shut down, etc. was getting a little old.
I didn't mind travel at all, I used it to my advantage by buying and selling in different towns to amass a small fortune. And even with all the fast travel I did, I still never ran out of Azoth.
I mean, this is just my own personal experience, so I can't really say I know for sure that it was the most widely shared reason for quitting..
However I'm preeeeetty certain that more people quit over the horrendous launch than being forced to run places.
If you ask anyone what their favorite memory in a mmo is, its usually grouping with someone for a hard quest and becoming friends, or a guild beating a hard boss for the first time, I doubt most people would say my favorite memory is ganking people or being ganked
Yeah, or doing instanced pvp like battlegrounds and arena, ganking is pathetic, when it's done against you it just makes you unable to play, and when you are the one ganking the gratification is little since it is not a challenge at all, well, unless you are the type of person who likes feeling mighty crushing ants, that is
vanilla wow open world pvp was by far the most memorable part for me.
I like the commentary on the narc videos but he continually tells us what made MMOs great but he's missing a lot of what actually made it great I went from a Commodore+4 to a NES to a SNES PS1 then Everquest came out I'd never seen a game that seemed so huge it's that sense of wonder that makes an MMO great that need to log in and explore more and its that joint experience that brings people together.
Everquest was awesome when it was group mandatory for most classes and friends matterd. I never liked WOW but I understand it's appeal to a wider audience that whould quit because of a bad corpse run or big exp loss.
UO T2A was a good example. Crafting was a huge part of the game, exploration, treasure hunting, taming, RPing, etc etc. PvP was also a part of the game, mainly through guild vs. guild combat and factions (Order vs. Chaos), where you were perma-flagged and could fight anywhere and everywhere but it was opt-in. Ganking existed but was limited to certain areas in the game. If you went to Minoc, you knew you were really putting yourself at risk. Certain dungeons also were popular spots for reds to frequent, so you avoided them if you did not want to risk being ganked. The game worked though and was quite popular at the time. The karma system kept the gankers in check by pretty much ruining their character if they went red. You would be better off re-rolling than trying to get back to blue (non criminal).
Harsh penalties are fine and work well in policing, a similar method was used in Lineage 2, as Narc mentioned. You very rarely saw people go red in that game because it made it so you could drop your equipment and losing a piece of gear would be catastrophic. Most MMO's today are not MMO's, they are single player games with the illusion of multi-player, Narc is correct. There is a whole other experience out there for people to enjoy that has not been explored since... probably Star Wars Galaxies, although SWG did not have very good PvE in general. I suppose Ragnarok Online is another example of a successful game that was pretty close to being a true MMO, at least for the era.
Ultima online and the original everquest in its prime are the only two true mmorpgs, players
That didn't experience these and started with wow just don't get it.
@@Shmandalf and now you got an awesome story to tell. That's an experience non open world pvp games can't create.
@@Shmandalf open world pvp with no penalty for griefing/ganking is not conducive to a successful long-lived game, but that's the key. opt-in open world pvp, and the threat of being killed (for everyone) creates community. harsh penalties are needed to keep random ganking and griefing in check, but on the other hand it helps to build community. if your crafters want to go out and gather materials and whatnot, escort them to dissuade people from doing anything foolish. nobody on that you know? figure out something to do on your own, or go make some new friends - that's the part that's missing from MMO's today, there is little to no social aspect beyond seeing the names of other players in a queued dungeon. people don't go out and encounter others in the world, strike up a conversation and end up making a new buddy, i certainly haven't done that in a long, long time in any of the modern MMO's, and it's not because I don't want to, it's because the games actively discourage interaction. it sounds to me like the Ashes team wants to bring the social aspect of MMO's back while incorporating the learnings of the last 20 years into their more "oldschool" game. hopefully they can pull it off.
@@to-yg1tx OPT in essentially makes it useless, because everyone would just keep it off.
@@encouraginglyauthentic43 incorrect. opt-in doesn't have to mean a stupid toggle, it means people can choose to be permanently flagged via guild wars, nation territory wars, or optional faction wars. a system can be set up where you gain benefits from participating like titles and cosmetics, etc. leave nonconsensual pvp in but give the aggressor harsh penalties, that way people will still need to be cautious about what they are doing so they dont drive someone crazy and end up killed.
My personal favorite PvP system is what was implemented back in tera.
It worked like this:
1. You could not paricipate in any kind of pvp (aside form duels) until you reached lvl 10
2. After reaching lvl 10 you got a quest which brought you into the games first main city and taught you how to "flag for pvp" or rather mark yourself as a criminal
3. There are safezones around the world (mostly town, quest hubs and dungeon entrances) where noone could attack anyone
4. Someone marked for pvp can attack anyone and can be attacked by anyone
5. If you were marked and killed someone of lower lvl than you by i believe 3 or 5 you would receive pk points (about 60 i believe) those points disabled your ability to turn of pvp and lossing 1 point took about 10 minutes i think (timer not counting while offline i believe, been a couple years)
6. If you arent flagged for pvp but kill someone who is flagged you will never get pk points no matter the lvl difference
Obviously this isnt perfect but i dont believe there is a system that CAN make everyone happy
Yes i wanted to mention Lineage 2 pvp, tk and karma system but this is similar to Terra. IMO it was a good enough system
Archeage did it best. Essentially the same as above, but with a player driven jury system
Adding the map visibility that AoC will have as well as nerfed dmg/healing would make this more than fair in my opinion.
I am not a fan of loosing items in pvp but then again i usually dont hunt low lvls either.
Whats funny is before that, TERA sent players to first city lv 1 and theyd fight eachother outside the city sometimes it was awesome.
No system will make everyone happy because PvErs want to just be left alone, not dictate what others can do among the willing, while PvPers want to force PvErs into PvP.
This guy talks like he's the creative director of Ashes of Creation WHILST talking like he's the god-king representative of the MMORPG genre
The Division pvp is pretty good. You can go rogue, and kill others but then your location is displayed on the map for anyone rogue or good player to come take you out and get rewarded to do so.
Edit: this why I said Division not Division 2.
Yup, having loot you can only get via the Quarantine zone (open world PVP zone) and being able to steal from others is great, you can either cooperate or kill that person last minute or just help them and leave. Divison 1 mainly did this best, Divison 2 lacked a lot of it
Its already been confirmed that bounty hunting will be a thing in AoC. Going corrupt? Lawful players will be hunting you.
The problem with pvp is that the attacker is always max level max gear dude and has a friend with him, while the defender is some casual low geared guy trying to get geared.
The overwhelming majority of division 2 players never enter the dark zone.
@@JohnDoe-ix4kx Can confirm. DZ is toxic af.
Honestly was very open to AoC as a mostly solo experience enjoyer to get outta my anxiety box, but this has made me rethink that now. I'm more than happy to stay "lazy" in XIV and my third shift job if that's how Narc really feels.
I want ppl that love and want pvp and group stuff to have their desired content, but the presentation of the argument Narc had here just really rubbed me the wrong way.
my man if you like sw try swtor it mostly solo you can do the whole story and most dungs solo . and it free to play with a sub sistem for the full game.
@@anteprs7908 yeah, never been big on anything related to SW other than the first 6 movies.
@@behemothking6081 that fine :)
Lmfao this guys only way to make an argument against asmon was to take what he said and misconstrue it
Narc on the beginning of the video: This is a PvX game where you can do everything you can, I'll be a Artisan that don't care or do pvp.
Narc by the end of the video: THIS WILL BE THE PERFECT WORLD PVP GAME, IF YOU DON'T LIKE PVP THIS GAME IS NOT FOR YOU, YOU ARE A LAZY TRASH THAT DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT A REAL MMO IS. PLEASE LET THIS GAME BE OUR WORLD PVP HEAVEN!!!
Yup, you might think those 2 statements are disagreeing with eachother, but not necessarily. I also like to be mainly a crafter/trader, but also love open world PVP.
I never gank anybody, but I like the risk and thrill of possibly getting ganked. Griefing is what needs to be prevented as much as possible.
But as a crafter/gatherer, that gives more value to the ressources you get and actually makes gameplay variable, instead of repeatedly farming the same ressources without anything ever happening, cutting trees for 300 hours. Beyond increasing the value of the ressources, makes the gameplay more exciting, it makes you consider the risks of where you are going to farm (high vs low value/risk areas), how much you carry, makes you consider playing with others or even paying players for protection and it makes it so even as a gatherer or crafter you'll want better gear to be able to defend yourself, it makes it into a game instead of a thing where you just click trees.
I played Archeage a decent amount and the game was really really fun before it got ruined by P2W, however, the game had too many choke-points for trading, especially once they reworked ports and there was 0 reason not to kill people of the opposite faction where here there is a punishing mechanic for the agressor.
You shouldn't pay for likes, looks really desperate for validation from bots.
@@donpablo59 Doubt to a certain extent with corruption/trying to actively avoid getting ganked, besides its not like players know what you're carrying, people are seldom going to risk the gear they're wearing for no reason. The most dangerous moment would be when using a caravan from one town to the other, where we stand to lose pretty much everything in one go and are pretty much flagged as hoarding lewt, but I would say that's what guilds are for.
Soloing in a MMO is also a power fantasy just like all the shows based on mmos
@@MyN0N4M3 Except that's not possible in an mmorpg.
It's a world and everyone is needed to make it prosper. You might be an adventurer, but ultimately, the person that made your gear is more valuable to the game.
Well, if guy doesn' understand that being repeatedly murdered by people who you can't hope to beat is a quit moment for many, then he really is a clown.
right, when the max levels decided its time to camp all the leveling areas in WoW, you still had dungeons to fall back on
funny enough he never once mentioned mortal online 2 when talking about "real" mmos
Yep a clown , who has no experience with mmos that have failed due to pvp
But no one is going to want to do that, because you'll get hunted and lose your equipment by doing so.
@@Raffalius lol these systems aren't new, people will still do it
@@daveygravy1234 Not enough that it will have a big effect. If you cant handle getting ganked once or twice a year, then you're not playing the right genre.
There is absolutely a market and niche for a PvP focused mmo that is free from p2w mechanics. That said it is also stupid to think that such a game would have as big of an audience as modern "casual" mmos that are deliberately designed to appeal to a larger audience. Where there is concern is if the game's other systems and goals can function/be achieved with the smaller player base.
Also if you want something like travel to matter or have value, than you need to make it fun. It doesn't matter if something is valued if the act of doing it sucks.
@@jacara1981 indeed i dont know what the small bald man smokes but i want some ASAP
So Narc is saying that Ashes is going to somehow succeed by having only 10% of the mmo base and showing 90% of the base that are playing games like WoW and FFXIV (Pretty much own the market). Then you somehow think that ashes will still have enough money to thrive being a niche game.
@@shrubninja6444 Or Player B decides to do something about it, most often they would join an active guild that could protect each other. and fight for another. Which creates immersion and social interactions (which is fun). It's OK for a game to allow players to stop others players character progression if it's done right. I hope they do both Non-PvP Servers (Limited PvP) & PvP Servers (Always On).
@@LewisFeasts No, Player B will probably rather leave the game, together with player C and D, until the devs create Servers for PvE only etc...anyone thinking else is delusional...
@@voxdraconia4035 That's why they should have servers for both PvP and PvE.
@@shrubninja6444 Fortunate for me I've atleast experienced what I said, still experiencing a lot of those elements in Rust. Which btw is very popular. Filthy casuals... swear to god man.
The fact that he puts his hand towards where Asmon usually is on videos is so subtle but so good.
One of the big problems, I honestly am starting to have with a lot of Narc’s videos is a lack of nuance.
On the note of PvP in other games/game genres, the reason most people probably find them more enjoyable than MMORPG PvP is balance. Realistically no game is perfectly balanced based on the sheer fact that different character archetypes have different toolsets that aren’t directly comparable, however because MOBAs, fighting games and FPS are usually instances and reset, there’s at least an illusion of balance.
The problem with balancing PvP in MMOs is not that the world is persistent, it’s that the player’s characters are and that by having the agency to make build choices, you’re introducing a ton more variables for comparison and balancing. That before getting into issues of having people of vastly varying skill level fight each at all times. The reason other games have a Ranked mode is so people of a supposedly similar skill level can play against each other (granted implementation can suck).
So having said that, here’s the question: why do you think PvP in an MMORPG is fun like this?
Because I’d argue PvP that is not balanced has more to do with build than skill most of the time, but alas I’m interested to see how AoC will handle things.
One trick pony I guess. Narc has a few things he always brings up:
1. MMOs are just themepark corporate cash grab trash now
2. Other people's opinions are Wrong MMOs should be hardcore
3. Will shit talk everyone else and take a line out of context
I find it funny because Ashes hasn't shown me anything substantial and watching the last beta footage it was clunkly as hell yet he's giving shit to other indies. It was funny at first but it's like a parrot every video. The guy really just has no content unless you consider him bashing others' opinions as content.
The funny thing about people saying "MMOs are meant to play in groups and this solo shit has to go" are mostly those that spend way to much time in a game to be better than the rest, so the rest HAS TO play with them. They are basically irrelevant if the system doesn't force people to play with them because they actually lack social skills, aka being likeable. In a system where people have the choice to team up with who ever they want, they only can team up with people like themself, and where they are in direct competition with the same "weight" of their voice.
MMO does not say in any of its defining words that you "have to play with pther people or you can't play". Not. In. A. Single. Word.
It sounds so absurd to me that Narc is insinuating that the creators of the game is literally making a gigantic MMO game, big in both scale and ambitions, for a playerbase in which 90% will not enjoy, that the creators are deliberately weeding out spesific kind of players to make room for a very niche playerbase to enjoy a game which thrives upon and even only survives on having alot of players in it
MMOs are a multiplayer game....i know people have forgotten that but thats what they are. And i know its hard to imagine a dev team not trying to maximize profits at the cost of the quality and vision of the game. Imagine that.
I too like using unfounded percentages to make my point!
@@An.Unsought.Thought I just think MOST people and this includes u proving my point dont know shit about what steps are already in place to make sure repeated grieifng will be almost near impossible to do without massive time and asset loss. I have zero bias i just believe in the vision that is layed out from the dev team how can u say i am biased at all lol. The goal is to get as many players as possible but for Ashes that isnt the bottom line. The vision comes first Steven wanted to make an mmo free of appealing to the lowest common denominator aka you and wanted to make a fun game. My point finally is very simple and thats mmos were created to be in a world and interact with others...i know imagine that and mmos nowadays ahve found most ppl are fucking autistically non social and want to play an mmo like its a single player game. Which is fine...but not every mmo need to be this way. Ashes isnt and never will be. If u dont know that u havent done any research. Its not trying to make the most money its trying to make a fun niche game for people that think mmos should be social experiences with tons of freedom.
The take that "90% of playerbase will not enjoy it" is just wrong, idk where ppl get that from. Also Ashes is not the main source of income for Steven like other corporate games. He's making money from real estate and already invested over 35 mil from his own pocket so it's not like the game will die if only part of the playerbase plays it
Albion Online have 130k-150k daily players which has travel fee + PvP On all the time. Saying that this kind of game doesn't work is not true at all.
New world died not because of these features but because it has so many bugs and no real end game content.
Narc will most likely learn the difference in the community that is in a closed alpha , and the general population doing degenerative things to ruin others time.
Honestly I'm more excited to see what the aftermath of AoC's launch will be like rather than actually playing the game.
It's like a season finale of a bunch of people arguing online about the right way to enjoy MMOs.
We'll get to see if Ashes of Creation burns out into a pile of ashes or if it ends up creating something lasting and special.
id bet all i own on the 1st option without second thought
@@kokocaptainqc ill take you up on that bet, i will bet your networth on the second option.
@@bjni dont expect much all i own is this banged up pc, my clothes and some books.....searching the trash containers to eat towards the end of every month
As Josh Strife Hayes said: there is a market for it, it is just not as big as you think.
This whole video screams: I want to dunk on people minding their own business. Toggleable PvP means you only meet people who are ready for you, which is apparently not "fun" (read: I only want to fight people who are not ready for it).
that's only for a small group of people. People play Battlegrounds all the time. Fuk the griefers.
As a non-ganker - I hate the toggle. I like the thrill of possibly getting ganked, but whenever it's added to a game, it makes it too easy/convenient to turn off pvp whenever. It devalues ressources for the entire server a there is basically no more risk in farming. No gatherer will EVER turn pvp on if given the choice. Some guild drama, your guild and another have beef, turn pvp off. You want to carry expensive ressources ? turn pvp off. Want to farm, turn pvp off. You pked a bunch of players and you dropped all your gear and now you're weak and everyone hates your guts ? turn pvp off. -- Want to pvp ? No one has pvp on as there is no proper incentive to do so and people in high value areas will have pvp off for sure.
The corruption system -should- make it undesirable to gank others for no reason. But the game is about exploring and collecting ressources fighting both players and environment. Without the pvp aspect the game would be alot more bland as it's not going to be designed like WoW or XIV with a large focus on regular raid/dungeons.
If anything though, I am in support of areas with PVP turned off and there being other more rewarding lawless zones. Keeps everyone playing in the same instance, keeps the world feeling whole, keeps the bounty hunter system functional, keeps the economy in whatever state it should be in, gatherers still need decent gear and player protection for farming high value ressources, etc.
@@DarkAztaroth honestly, RuneScape has it right.
Wolves need sheep to eat to survive, without the sheep they would have to eat each other.. why go after something that poses a threat?
Travel in NW was pointless though... you had to constantly run across the world for quests that were mindless. It forced you to waste time without any benefit...
The concept worked perfectly well in Lineage 2. I assume this is where Ashen takes their world PVP inspiration from.
When you initiate PVP (start attacking another player), you get "flagged" (temporarily). Your nickname changes color, and anyone around can kill you without consequences. However, attackers will get flagged too, and here we go, the entire zone population owning each other.
However, when you gank players, you get Karma points. Your name changes to red, and with the same logic, anyone around can kill you. However, players that attack you will not get the PVP flag; you become the hunted target. If you have Karma points and die, you will not spawn in town. You will be prohibited from entering towns and other safe places for players.
I don't know whether there will be other negative aspects to ganking. However, in Lineage 2, people with Karma would drop their gear on the ground once killed. It was not easy to obtain gear; the entire guild would have to farm a lot for a few pieces. Thus, it was a big deal if you gank people in good gear; you can imagine the tragedy if your top-end game sword drops and some noob picks it up. In addition, you needed to find a place where you could kill monsters to redeem yourself and get rid of karma by killing a bunch of them. It wasn't easy, because anyone could attack you.
That said, the system was very engaging, and there were clan wars, castle sieges, a lot of local drama, and fights.
That's what it makes an engaging game. AoC has improved that system and it works different now. People who knew the ins and outs of that system knew how to abuse it in L2 and that is not the case in AoC anymore for instance punishments are far harsher and greater for killing non-combatant players than it used to be. Also no grieving with alt PK accounts punishment is to great for that too. Good old times I hope a game like L2 makes his entrance in these times.
as someone that can't get people on my friend list for my life in any game, if I can't solo a game then rip
"MMO" is just a genre. Genres are categories we should retroactively "sort" games into. Not ideals games should be built around.
@@xKinjax and GW1 is fairly modern. It came out after WoW, ffs, aka, after modern MMOs already took over.
@@xKinjax and I disagree with him. I think WoW has completely lost the plot with Wrath. Vanilla was still quite close but gentrified. Wrath is when the game became a lobby game fully with the introduction of RDF but it was already on the way with TBC thanks to flying mounts and such.
I think there’s valid points on both sides. I view myself as a “PvPer” I have played 3600 hours in ESO and have spent a majority of my end game in Cyrodiil. I have said many times that I wish I didn’t have to leave Cyrodiil and that if I could do dungeons and obtain gear in Cyrodiil then I would do it. When I played New World I was flagged Probly 480/500 hours.. only times I wasn’t flagged was when guild mates didn’t want me to be flagged so we could do something. I look forward to ashes. I think Cyrodiil proves that open world PvP can work and there’s a lot of people that want to be flagged 24/7 and those that don’t want to don’t have to play.
the corruption system seems like a natural progression of Ultima Onlines Pk flag system. you would be flagged red for a certain amount of time after killing a player. if you kill to many players in to short a time you were perma flagged and could be openly attacked every single place in the game. it actually made the game fun to work around that flag system.
In Ashes, it's not time-based. One Green kill and you get Corruption. You will need to work them off to remove them.
@@Iruzi_P Hard work in the Acid mines to get that corruption away.
I just feel like the main thing an MMO needs is interactivity between the players and world. The world needs to seem alive without any players being there, for example in Wrath in thr frozen wastes the armies fighting the scourge, and the scourge walking and ressing the dead soldiers. I think that is the mark of a great mmo
The fact that there is an existing element like housing in game, that needs crafters for furniture, collectors, then the owner hires an architect or designer in game to fancy up his/her home, worth ten times more than some random ganker yelling "thIs iS pVp haHa"
@@Ar1AnX1x The main issue is it's a fun idea short-term because it invite party engagement, but long term it attracts annoying elitism. People get frustrated at their party leader yelling at them because they messed up on a mob's attack pattern, get frustrated, and then eventually leave. Eventually the entire MMO dies or switches to a P2W DPS-check MMO to make up for lost profit.
@@attilakiss5504 bruh 😂
@@Ar1AnX1x what do you mean by intelligent mobs? Games just comes down to dodge aoes and to make sure your hp has to be >1 before the enemies hp reaches 0.
Agree 100% man because whenever i played any other mmo or mmorpgs ive been missing that detail and i quit the game fairly quickly. Also in todays society its more important now than it was 20 years aggo because people seem to be more reliant on social interaction online than they are on social interaction in real life so if the game dont provide that then.. packing my bags.
All the people who think that the game NEEDS to have open world PVP that no one can opt out of to be a "real" MMO or to "not cater to carebears" or to "not cater to lazy modern players" is simply not mature enough to realize that not every person out there wants to play an MMO in the same way as they do, and many people simply dont like games that waste their time, which is what most older "real MMOs" do and what PVP always on MMOs do.
Except the casual players are the ones who demand AoC to cater to them, their original vision was PvX, with people being able to flag at anytime. It was literally inspired by Archeage an Open World PVP MMO. I think if they ruined New World's original PvP vision they should at least leave AoC alone. go play FFXIV or something they have great PvE
@@KathaMK94 casual players dont demand that everyone caters to them, in my exerpiance its quite the opposite and you can see it in the videos asmo responded to recently. If casual players try an 'always on pvp game' they will just realize its lame being griefed all the time and quit, but the "hardcore pvpers" are the ones who claim that all modern MMOs are for 'carebears' and that their old games that no one plays anymore are the 'real MMOs' or that modern MMOs "arent real MMOs they are just single player games"
@@destinl8382 Except that's literally what's happening now. AoC is not even out yet and people are already asking the devs to change from PvX to PvE. And pvp games do well it's how they're mostly handled is what screws them over. But Albion is a great example of a PvP game that's doing good. They should not stray from their original plan which was PvX. At least not until later when people can experience it.
@@KathaMK94 the orignal video that they were talking about here didnt want the game to be a PVE game. He suggested either PVE servers or a good and effective flagging system. I dont see how having a PVe server people can play on would be bad for the game. If anything, choosing not to make a PVE server is far more detrimental to the game. If you want a game that forces players to PVP when they dont want to you also have to except that the vast majority of players will not find that fun. People dont find being griefed fun, or being ganked fun, its not fun to have to be in a guild to protect you just so you can do a simple quest, its not fun to have people interupt your dungon just to mess with you. These are all just things that waste your time, and thats why most people dont like them, and its why not a single one of the currently most successful MMOs forces you to PVP.
So what you're saying is that as a casual player yourself you dislike that he's picking on casual players.
What I'm hearing from Narc is something like if you can't negatively interact with another person, the question is can you really interact with them at all. By requiring group tagging you allow griefing by stealing tags, but by removing tagging you no longer have to communicate at all with other players (e.g. rare spawns in WoW, or world boss kills). By trying to remove negative interaction without consent you remove the need to interact at all.
@@Frzned9x Except that's false.
No one interacts in Final Fantasy until they are done with the story.
@@Frzned9x Because FFXIV banned literally everyone who even breathed the wrong way. Hell of a way to create a "non-toxic" environment
@@scythianking7315 they got banned cuz they were being fucking annoying, ff14 has a great community bunch of pussies mostly who don’t wanna get serious for ultimate but all in all pretty good
@@Frzned9x if you ever played fo4 you would know that one option to do something is pretty boring
@@encouraginglyauthentic43 no they do interact. Stop lying
I think that an issue that needs to be addressed is the fact that PVPers depend on casual players. Because when the casual players leave, the game dies, and the PVPers then are forced to quit the game as it dwindles. As a game developer, their main concern should be to try and cater to the largest denominator so that they can make back their investment of the game through retention of players who will continually buy items and convince others to keep playing and invest their time and money into it as well. Not Narc or anybody trying to use a game that they haven't worked on, invested in, or have any consequences should it fail, as a political/propaganda tool to prove what a "real MMO" should be like. Thats like asking a new business owner to practically make bad business decisions on your behalf because you think they are "cool". Not that the ideas you give will make money, or that are good for business (which is to retain a player-base). But to make poor decisions not based on statistics but a random strangers feelings who will not lose their job if it fails.
Its okay to give your thoughts on the game. But its a difficult argument when what you want is not in line with statistics or what the game developers want. Criticism should be trying to help the creators improve the game in a way that not only makes the game better, but also helps them fulfill their needs for making the game more enjoyable to a group NOT at the expense of the highest denominator. You can improve PVP, but if the changes will ultimately herd casual players away, which make up the base of any MMO... Then you are effectively cutting your own nose to spite your own face. Or being self-destructive to the overall health of the game.
If your suggestion isn't doing at least these two things, then it may be a bad idea:
1.Improving the game in some manner.
2.Improving the retention rate and a way for the company to make money.
Catering to the 10% of PVPers isn't going to make the company money. Catering to the 90% of casuals is more likely to make sure the game retains a strong base and revenue stream. So forcing always on PVP is sure to make 10% of vocal players happy, but will ultimately gut the player-base as the PVPers goals is literally counter productive to retention, but to make people LEAVE.
So... they introduced a system called "corruption" to disincentive players from PKing. So if the game doesn't want you to PK then why is PKing a thing in the first place? It's like leaving a loaded gun on the table and tell your kid not to touch it. I'm seeing a contradiction in the design philosophy here.
Narc is trhe prime example of "fake it til you make it" And farksake. Asmongold isnt saying interaction is bad. Hes just concluding that if we have a game were the players is swimming around in a blender, chances are; someone will turn on the blender. That simple
Well, for me, I've never enjoyed pvp. I work from dawn to dusk, and have maybe three hours to play, during the week, if I don't want to watch a movie. I'm not much into crafting, but I do enjoy doing quests and leveling. I was off work today and spent all day doing dungeons and quests, and if I was on a heavy server with pvp I wouldn't have got shit done. I very much agree with you, Asmongold, and hope you keep up the good work of telling people to fuck right off.
the fact he goes and calls people lazy for enjoying ff14 or wow, its hilarious, yeah if being lazy means respecting my own time.
"If it fails then it fails but at least we've tried"
I mean... There's a reason why open world PVP sandbox MMOs all backpedal on this or end up with 250 daily players like Mortal online.
It's been attempted times and times again with no real success...
Isn't Mortal Online sort of purposfuly made without any protection against griefers? Where as AoC is actively working out a system to prevent that?
What is frustrating is that so so soooo many people are talking about how bad AOCs pvp will be and how it will instantly die etc. Only thing is that these people mostly never tried such systems and if they did they didn’t like it, so why are they trying to change the path AOC is going, ESO was about open world pvp in Cyrodiil but the devs went away from it to chase after money and now the game itself is dying, same with WoW. Just stay in your generic grey box and leave us alone, or atleast deal with the fact that it’s a foundational system of the game.
On the note of the BDO inspired Karma system, here's a few takeaways, enjoy:
1. PK'ing is allowed: You're farming a spot. A sweatlord with a bigger sword comes along and makes a pancake out of you. If you return he'll do it 20 more times, if need be. He has more time than you.
2. PK'ing is allowed but disincentivised by Karma system: You'll get duel-for-spot messages every 1.5 minutes. Where you'll have to spend more time duelling other people (with no reward incentive) than interacting with your intended PVE mechanic. Well that's stupid, I'll just ignore them. Nope, he starts running in front of you and killing your trash-mobs. This continues as long as you wish to ignore it, the edgelord has more time than you. You get annoyed of getting 1/2 of your expected money/h and start PK'ing the troll. You manage to kill him, he returns, you do it again, 2, 3, 20 more times. He has more time than you. You're at maximum negative Karma. You've been effectively "Karma-bombed". Enjoy not being able to enter cities. Using utilities. Being PK'ed left and right by either his guildies or other random sweatlords above your gearlevel.
Open PvP games are beautiful, aren't they.
Not as frequent as you make it seem and guild declarations help combat karmabombers by allowing you to fight back without losing karma( takes 15 minutes for a dec to go through or its instant if both guilds declare on eachother). Sure there are people who are guildless making them non decable but they are also the minority. If you get shit on just go to the other 4 grind spots at the same grind spot or change channels. This was more of a problem back in the day due to only like 2-3 viable grind spots but there are so many in the game now. .Sometimes you're the shitter and sometimes you're the one shitting on thee other either by having better skill/gear. A few these fights for grind spots become great nights of gvg battles that last hours if you're in a decent guild who likes to fight in a pvp game.
My problem with PvP in MMO's is making a skill gap is really hard. In order for there to be a legit skill gap everyone would need to be on the same level playing field with gear which is almost impossible in an MMO. As long as i'm not getting clapped constantly by zergs or dudes with 2000 hours than I don't see that big of a problem, but having PvP always on will be interesting. I need to feel like I have at least a chance at putting up a fight against someone with better gear. I do think it could work for this game, but we'll see. Most PvE players probably won't enjoy it at all.
@@vallejomach6721 Yea thats what im thinking too.
Skill gap comes from skill. If youre under geared or under leveled and win then its not a miracle, its skill. If you win versus someone at the same everything as you then you really didnt achieve anything unless you each pushed eachother that far. Its easy to make a skill gap opportunity, just get rid of level entirely. Stats have to be the same and only thing different is gear stats.
Mortal online does this best.
@@theshut-in1097 There's only skill gap when gear is similar. You are not gonna win if your under-geared unless the person your fighting is absolutely terrible. If you beat someone who has similar gear level to you then therefore your better than them. Beating someone who has worse gear achieves nothing compared to beating someone who has better gear. Most people with better gear will have higher skill as they have more hours, but people who have low gear won't even stand a fighting chance cause the gear difference is so big. It really depends on how games balance PvP. In some games gear will give you a slight edge, but someone with worse gear can still easily destroy you where as other games good gear makes a massive difference.
@@punchykarma6685 would you consider real life as a pvp mmo in the middle or pve mmo?
Can we just take a moment and address the mount at 7:08 that slugger went and stood up like something outta Avatar hahaha!!
Slugger: this shot too slow! EVOLUTION GO BRRRRrr
I'm not a PvP player, I'm not someone who can spend all day playing, yet I'm still gonna try it and hopefully love it. I have high hopes. I think it'll be a fun main game
Right? I would never call myself a PvPer but I do think it can add something special to existing in that world.
what would the content even be for non pvpers outside crafting and non important questing
@@anteprs7908 plenty. Dungeons, world bosses, quests (they aren't pointless or unimportant lmao), helping build the nodes, etc. There is just as much of not more for people who don't actively PvP.
@@BaxxyNut bs pure bs questing and dungs is basic rpg stuff ever single mmo has it, it can have the rpg part without it ,world bosses is fine but outside that casuals player wont have much to do and questing wont be easy with ppl being able to gank you and steal you loot and gear.Building not is crafting and trading most casual and pve player dont play mmorpg to be a shop keeper or carpender .
@@anteprs7908 and yet here we are, all the top mmos thriving with strong communities of players who may only enjoy pvp casually or not at all. If the game does it right there will be plenty for non-pvp players to engage in. Sure they'll have to consent to dealing with pvp and the occasional gankers and griefers, but if it goes as they say it is, then that may not occur often. (I don't believe that, I think griefing will be huge and many players will get chased from the game because sweaty neckbeards are going to use always pvp as an excuse to chase anyone who isn't interested until that's all that's left. Then the game will die a slow painful death a la Eve Online.)
But IF they manage to balance it so that it works as they dream it should, then pve players may in fact have plenty to do. As an aside, being a player who started in FF11, you will in fact find players who literally do nothing but craft. Engaging in story content only if its a means to continue their crafting. FF11 was full of players like that during their peak and you can still find people like that in all current mmos.
Traveling can provide a good experience while being costly, but only if it doesn't feel like a complete waste of time.
In most MMOs where there is some optimal route to follow for the quickest progression you need to get from place to place to follow it. If you forgo traveling you waste time grinding or questing sub-optimally, and if you do travel you waste time.
If you want to sort this issue you can either reduce/remove travel cost, make traveling itself worthwhile, give players enough options for places to be in so that they don't feel forced to travel far away, make it so that players don't know the most optimal route.
The easiest thing to do is to remove traveling cost, which is what most MMOs do. I do believe, however, that for an open world PVP game, having costs and time associated with traveling can lead to much deeper and more complex conflicts, since now you need to make sure to properly coordinate your forces, and mistakes in that regard have meaning for both the short and long-term.
The two following options are therefore much more appealing. The issue here is that they require more work to be put into the game, as well as careful development and planning. It may simply be untenable to implement traveling activities that would make traveling worthwhile, and it may also be that the amount of work required to create enough areas to satisfy the player base is impractical to do within the expected time frame until release.
The last option would be interesting. It would require either making a game so complicated it's impossible to find an optimal route, or make so information about the most optimal route is inaccessible to most players. The first options is likely not practical in an MMO, and even if it was, players would still create and follow a meta. The only difference is that it will change and improve over time. There would still be a trend to follow, it would just change every so often. The other option is therefore more interesting. You obviously can't shut down all wikis and forums, and you can't make players not analyze the game. You can, however, make an environment dynamic enough in the right places that it meaningfully changes what should be the meta faster than the community can keep up with. The challenge here is two fold: achieving that goal, and making sure the players don't feel too lost. You want to encourage players to explore and travel, but you don't want them to feel as though choosing where to go has no consequence, so planning what varies and how often is going to be extremely important.
Overall neither option excludes the others, and neither is binary. In addition, there are a lot of ways to structure a system that would be based on any of those basic general ideas, and a lot of ways to tweak the variables within each of those. The point of it all is: It's complicated, and even if no one has truly manged it yet, it doesn't mean it's impossible(though it doesn't bode well for it if no one has managed it).
Unless corruption completely decimates a gankers ability to win in PvP then large groups will just run rampant. Nothing is stopping you from killing greens with your friends, using fall damage to die to lower corruption and getting ur friends to loot ur corpse to give u ur stuff back before killing more
@@daroaminggnome yes it does read the official wiki. I ripped the quote and posted it below:
"The primary means to remove corruption is through death. Multiple deaths may be necessary to remove all corruption.
Dying removes a significant portion of a player's corruption score.
Gaining experience will also slowly reduce a player's corruption score."
@@verazion7451 you are nitpicking information. you will not only lose 4X more gear on death, but you also get 4X more experience debt when you die compared to a green (non combatant). you will also get a scaling DEBUFF on EVERYTHING you do in pvp. there is also not a guarantee that the people who will loot you will be your friends. you do not get flagged when you loot someones corpse, so it would be EXTREMELY easy to simply wait for the corrupted player to die and pick up the loot they drop.
you CAN reduce your corruption score, but it wont be as easy as you imply. it takes a long time to level in this game, and you also lose a lot of experience when you die corrupted. so, logically, gaining back the experience you lose will also take a LONG TIME.
corruption needs to be tested. do not make conclusions on whether it WILL or WILL NOT work BEFORE ITS TESTED.
>Unless corruption completely decimates a gankers ability to win in PvP then large groups will just run rampant.
It will.
>Nothing is stopping you from killing greens with your friends, using fall damage to die to lower corruption and getting ur friends to loot ur corpse to give u ur stuff back before killing more
thats now how you remove corruption, not even logging off will remove it you have to play the game. Not only will you be decimates stats and damage wise your name will be seen on the map.
@@Azeroh I've never played the game only bought alpha 2 access recently. I was going off the wiki to come up with a way people might try to cheese the system based on the info in the wiki. People will still gank I wasn't making a conclusion, it's an obvious fact based on human nature and the fact that people find that fun no matter the cost. Also I am free to make a conclusion on something if I want just as I am free to be wrong about said conclusion or right about ti before hand lol its a game not the end of the world either way no need to get so heated bro
@@rdcepcvip based on the wiki it was I can only go off the information given as the alpha 2 has yet to be opened. If I am wrong then I admit that 100% but based on what the wiki says death does indeed remove corruption. so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Dekaron had the same corruption system in 2004. You could PK anyone in high level zones, and freely kill them if they attacked back with no penalty, but if they didn't attack back and you've still killed them, you'd gain corruption stacks. A corrupted player would be like a monster, anyone could attack and kill them freely with no penalty. You could lose corruption stacks by simply waiting or killing high level monsters. It didn't work back then and it won't work in any game.
honestly narc kills my vibe for the game sometimes, he's so hyperbolic
It's all about CONSEQUENCES. Compare killing in an MMO vs Real Life. The consequences are what keep the practice in check. If the consequences in MMOs continue to be so low, killing/griefing continues increasing.
Pretty much. In the end the final consequence will always be griefed players refunding/unsubscribing and moving on to other games. In other words the PvP gankers are not killing lowlevel players, they are killing their own game. Then moving on to another one like a plague of locusts. Anonymity + no consequences = degeneracy, the cornerstone of the internet.
To me MMO is exactly what it says Massive Multiplayer Online. A game where you log into and see people from all over the world partaking in the world you all have chosen. Allowing you to group together and tackle amazing feats and also allowing you to explore an amazing world created by artists. To me MMO is everything possible from PvP, PvE and RP. It allows people you have never met to come together to share in a common interests. That could be of course PvP but the most important aspect of MMO to me is Choice. You get to find similar minded people to do things together. For instance, I think since FFXIV really has everything except PvP(viable) and because of that it will never be the BEST MMO. I think WoW has everything except RP(viable) is why it will never be the BEST MMO. Those two games are in its own aspect great MMO's two of the best out there now but it is missing one of those three elements, well at least not good enough anyways. So if AOC wants to be the BEST MMO then it has to have great PvP, PvE and RP. Or it will, at best be just another MMO with Great PvP. It will just be like every other MMO who came on to the screen with this new amazing systems to compete with the Big Two and then settle down behind them. People like to play differently depending on real life happenings and the amount of time available for play. So if a person has only one hour to play but every time he logs in and gets killed just trying to mine a node or something, that person will eventually quit and move on to other games. That is reality. I think if that is the case you will see an initial spike but eventually it will drop off like every other MMO that tried to capture the Big Two. Look at the last two Major releases, those populations have shrunk to a point it is basically hanging on by their finger tips. Stick to what has worked, provide the most variety of content to capture more people with varying interests.
Ashes of Creation doesn't aspire to be the perfect MMO, it's trying to replicate an experience that is near and dear to the heart of the lead designer and also a lot of us. It's okay if it doesn't get the entire planet playing it. It doesn't matter. Dark Souls never tried to get the casuals to play it yet it's one of the best games of all time.
Games shouldn't try to be for everyone lest they become middling, uninteresting crap. MMOs should not try to be for everyone. Ashes of Creation should not, and IS not, trying to be for everyone.
Don't like it, don't play it. The amount of melodrama about OH NOES THIS GAEM COULD POSSIBLY NOT BE FOR MOI is as useless as it is annoying. Stop.
@@poiumty
then when the game eventually dies cause of lack of players dont be surprised, at the end of the day a MMO is a a product and if a product doesnt sell well enough then that product is taken out of the market or changed so it makes money, cause the developers need to pay bills and get food
@@kaminozt-t1436 If it dies, it dies. I'd rather have an ambitious MMO that fails trying to recapture the L2 feeling than yet another middling wow clone that chugs along for a few years and dies without anyone giving a shit.
@@poiumty
Easy to say, when your livelihood doesn't depend on the game being successful, if it fails then what about all the people who work on it.
@@kaminozt-t1436 The dev team supports the idea so your feigned concern is of use to no one. We usually get risk-averse bullshit like this from publishers, not consumers. You should be happy the devs are taking risks in order to make the game they want. Try to look beyond your own self for a moment.
How about y'all show me these thriving MMO-s with forced pvp and let's compare their current and past player count with all the MMO games you called trash. I'm sorry for the rude awakening, but it's not the PvE MMO-s that are going to shit.
Asmond is not wrong. I know a lot of my friends who quit new world because of how long it took to do quests because of the travel time. Like it would be good if you traveled to a point and did quests around that point and move on. No the quests had to be litterally all over the territory and had to constantly run back and forth cross the whole territory.
Asmond isn't completely right either. The problem wasn't purely the travel time, but the rewards you got in those quest, not worth enough to make you go back and forth.
there is a very clear flaw in the pvp system when it comes to resource gatherers. Steven has said that when u die without fighting back , u drop MORE resourcers than when u do fight back. the problem is that WHEN u fight back, the person bothering you or fighting for resources are not "punished" by any means. so if ur just out gathering and someone stronger than u starts killing u, u have 2 choices. Drop a lot more of your resources and make the guy Pk/corrupted OR fight back, not giving the person any side efects from simply being stronger and decided that ur not gonna farm that day. i really, REALLY doubt that the anti corruption/griefing systems will be good enough to stop players for abusing it. although we have to wait and see, i'm not super optimistic given my past experiences with the "mother" system in lineage 2
If you are mostly an artisan, a person that collects materials, creates weaponry and armor, people will want to protect you, since you are a valuable person. And if no one volunteers, you can still hire people/npc guards to protect you, since you would be making a good amount of money if you focused primarily on your artisan job.
A lot of people have never played a game like Archeage and it shows. Cross continent trading is a good example of why travel matters. Let’s let Steven make the game he set out to make.
i played archeage solo no issue .. up until i spent $700 on it and had to have an intervention
@@xExekut3x lmao yep, heard somethin similar to that from multiple people about their exodus from AA. But it was never about the risky and rewarding PvP. I think Narc said people don’t really quit these games because the PvP system, it’s more so the poor management that does it.
Depending on how easily destroyed the nodes will be, this kind of pvp might as well make the nodes system completely meaningless.
The only thing that worries me about a corruption/bounty mechanic is hardcore griefers setting up an alt guild where they just PK their alt guild corrupted buddies to clear flags.
Congratulations u found one of the most obvious loopholes
A good idea. Ill add it to my testing notes to try out as feedback for Alpha 2
@@zannynyx4297 you forgot abut the whole xp debt, that would make a permared character way weaker than it should be if he doesn't spend all of his time grinding it back. (That death penalty is 400% when you're red, and you need to grind to get rid of it)
@@Vihara2 grinding mobs, there will be religious quests you can undertake, gaining experience generally. Etc
Travel would have had impact in new world if it had anything tied to it other than gaurunteed cost/time without a risk/reward aspect. Nobody complained or quit archeage for the same reasons because traveling with your trade packs or resources was a risk vs reward scenario that made the travel and cost associated with it an actually engaging activity that was part of progression rather than just an unnecessary inconvenience. New world could have had the same system, but it starts to feel like an unnecessary inconvenience the moment anybody can do the same thing all the time with no risk/reward. Being able to be a pirate or pvp was a huge initial selling point that brought many people to archeage rather than making it lose players, the game would have arguably died much faster if progression consisted of back and forth travel with no risk, they were able to make it feel more rewarding BECAUSE of the risk involved. What's important is that this wasn't forced, there were non risky ways to progress, they just weren't as rewarding, players shouldn't feel entitled to the track with the fastest potential progression being risk free. After all, being the fastest doesn't usually matter if you're not a pvp player as long as you're able to keep up in terms of pve, yes completionists and first completions are important to some people, but ashes have already stated that certain gear and progression paths may be different for pve and pvp, so I doubt pve players will be locked out of being able to do those things. And since ashes won't have identifical servers, and has scalable content, so its questionable how much that would be affected anyways. Narc being a crafter and wanting non consensual pvp also aren't mutually exclusive, he wants it because he knows that artisan systems always feel more rewarding and engaging when there's risk involved in that progression path.
PVP isn't just direct combat, its economic warfare, territory denial, resource denial/extraction.
Back in 2001 DAOC had two forms of travel. 1. Take the horse ride or find a Skald to group with and run there. Not the best, but not the worst
Archeage's Map PVP was the best I have seen, there is a war phase and then there was a peace phase.
Yeah and people left because waiting 2hrs to quest because the unbalanced server has domination ISN'T FUN
I am a PvE MMO player. I play mmos to explore the world, experience the content, and relax with other players. I personally dont enjoy dueling in anygame, mmo or otherwise. I know im not good at pvp which is why i dont want to do it. I play league, i deal with enough getting shit on. I enjoy New World because its optional. I see plenty of PvP toggled people in New World but they are all lv 60 so even if I did want to PvP i would want to wait till im lv 60 to be on an even playing field. I will say though, I have seen large scale wars in New World and that does look like something that I as a heavy PvE player may be interested in participating in.
The only problem with long travel times is when the trip is boring. If the world is alive and there are plenty of things to do on your trip that are actually relevant or matter for your character progression, and these things do not become too repetitive over time (like in New World) then travel times can be long. But this is very difficult to achieve I would say so...
Great fan,❣️❣️you. Use the 👆👆👆 above name toacknowledge our price ❣️❣️. You are among the shortlisted winners
Exactly.
Like, people removing any danger and challenge from activity X, then moaning about how activity X is boring and timewaste.
@@dahyar1 except it still might feel boring and timewaste if there's too much long travel. It is fine only in the begining (be it 5 hours or 50, or even 100hours depending on the scacle of the game) Doesn't matter how engaging the world is. If you don't get convinient way to move around faster/instantly - you'll get annoyed and tired of it anyway.
@@zenixvampirchik652 Not if it is meaningful. Exemple : In albion, when you travel in order to sell goods to another city, or just to reach a juicy dungeon far from the city, you can get ganked at any time. This puts pressure on you, but it also means traveling to sell goods is very profitable because of the risk involved, and traveling far to get to a better dungeon is also worth it. This also create content and gameplay opportunities because suddenly, you could pay people to protect you during the trip, or if you're into PvP, you could gank someone doing those trading routes and profit from it. The problem with New World is that traveling was designed around this full loot PvP idea and a risk / reward balance. Once they removed it, it completely negated the need for having foot/mount(soon) traveling without conveniance like teleports.
It feels like Narc purposefully misrepresented Asmon's point in order to make it easier to counter argument
I played Asheron's Call in 1999. I played solo most of the time. Doing a useful dungeon on Darktide (always on PVP) would be a no go unless you went on at like 6AM or were in Blood (a guild). I just followed the advice and went back to Frostfell and played with the toggle PVP when I felt like it. What can corruption mean if it's mutiple people like a guild- would a corruption matter if you have a guild of murderhobos?
Hell yeah, AC was my favorite MMO as they got pvp spot on.
Well yeah if there's an entire guild of players killers whenever those players I'm that guild die they'll lose their gear. A guild with 0 gear isn't a feasible guild since they won't be able to do anything and due to the negative status of the guild I doubt crafters would make them any more gear to replace the gear they lose from bounty hunters. They'd eventually get shoved out of the game
@@imaginationcore2104 Does the gear disappear or is it K+L. BTW in Asheron's Call death involved losing gear so you would carry death items (high monetary value with little to no usefulness) that would drop instead of gear. Killing one of the guild matters little if you are still outnumbered and can't loot the body- unless you just automatically get the gear like an autoloot. Are bounty hunters only flagged to the one person (like SWG) or everyone that is flagged as corrupted?
@@johnnycrash_ I belive the gear Is dropped although I might be wrong and although you're right that looting the gear would be challenging the attacker of the corrupted player literally has nothing to lose. The system actively encourages people to kill corrupted players and debuffs them. You would need such a large scale operation of players to pull of a player grifing guild and have it be viable (in theory) that just don't think it would happen
@@imaginationcore2104 It was possible 20 years ago. It would be easier to organize now. The debuff would have to be so great that one player could kill 5 corrupted players at least. It would have to be very harsh for it to be effective.
I hate all of those people who hype AoC to the moon. Their words are condescending and deceitful. They desperately try to paint the narrative that "MMORPG players don't understand basic MMO systems and they shouldn't criticize AoC because of their lack of knowledge". Which is a disgusting lie. People do understand that systems in MMOs are interconnected. Because of that, people do realize the toxic snowball effect that PvP MMORPGs create. People with better gear and bigger numbers will dominate the weak. Strong become even stronger, while the weak lose motivation to play, because they can't compete on a level-playing field. As a result, the PvP MMORPGs quickly die and become niche and obscure.
I think open will PVP is almost always a bad thing because it forces players who don't want to do PVP to have to do PVP if it was going to do something other than that then you could just have like a dueling system or an arena mode instead. So that players who want to do PVP can but it's not like that you have to do.
It does not, no. It just gives a choice: engage in pvp, or make builds that are good at escaping pvp.
I'm not sure you get what open world pvp-advocates actually want. It's not about the PvP in itself, it's about the danger and excitement of a living, perilous world. I get that that's not everyone's cup of tea, but just wanted to point out how your solution isn't one for players like that.
A couple things first on the travel, so putting a value on travel is a simple but bad way to fill your game with content you don't have. An open world should be like the Assassin creed games, where it may take a min to travel across but there's ways to make that travel shorter, sometimes instant. It is also filled to the brim with open world content around every corner there's something new, a new weapon you havnt seen a funny npc, a cool mini game, thats what open world is. If you fill your world with basic monsters then say the content is pvp, there is no content. Now second on the caravans (correct me if I'm wrong) when you transport stuff in ur storage from one place to another or the auction it travels through a caravan, now if someone is able to steal what is already yours it will be one of the worst systems ever put in place in mmos. If you want a system like that to work look at the last 5 sold and make a gold value from the items in it and add an equal amount to the caravan of different things, sometimes make a royal caravan protected by insane guards that has a legendary in it or something boom fixed
Narc is smoking some of that good stuff, an open world PVP game is a PVP game.
Don’t think he said it wasn’t.
@@theshut-in1097 he said it was PVX
I disagree with the killing low levels, it should incentivize higher levels to help them and can lead to relationships. Vanilla WoW for me was getting killed by a high level around Taren mill/SM area. A high level came and helped and I ended up joining his guild. I was not mad about getting killed, it gave me the drive to get high level myself and exact revenge on lowbie alliance. And I did, I had over 25k honorable kills before I was level 50. I was addicted to fighting alliance in Ashenvale/Astranaar on Norgannon server.
I should add I mean getting killed once or twice is ok. When a high level is legit camping a low level for hours is just awful if there is no escape. I liked how Tera would make them hostile to everyone if they did naughty things like that.
So the question here is should high level have an option to spawn camp low level, because i’d just do that if i’m given the option to
@@JJLL195 It led to some great battles on the server. But then again how rare or situational is it that people want to help low levels at a similar rate of people wanting to camp them.
Funny how I was previously into Ashes of Creation and now I will probably never actually touch it since the community is like this towards the idea of maybe making it so that people who are into PVE can have a bit of fun. 😐
Like, good luck with exclusively trying to cater to the hardcore PVP sweat lords who makes up 10% of the entire MMO population. There's a good reason why New World quickly abandoned it's original vision of an PVP centeric MMO and introduced PVE elements just like everyone else.
Guess I'll just keep playing the same old MMOs that are on the top of the market because they actually cater to more than one type of person.
Tell me you don't understand AoC gameplay mechanics with out actually telling me you don't understand or listen or try to learn about AoC gameplay mechanics..... my God stick to your instanced content on wow with lobby simulator.
@@Vsg45 I don't even play WoW but you aren't really giving me a good look on what AoC is like.
Maybe instead of like, insulting me, you can properly show how the game is actually like lmao?
@@vent5900 educate yourself and form your own opinion. Do research the wiki has tons of information
@@Vsg45 Completely dodged what I asked you lmao. And the wiki is probably not going to explain that the community is probably too toxic for someone who isn't a PVP Lose Loot When You Die sweat lord.
"it alienates people who want to play the game normally"
Yea, no. They want to play the game "specially". That's what "im untouchable dont bother me" button is.
Yes, it stops harassment. We can talk later if that's a good or a bad thing.
But game's intention is to have people fight over resources. You going god mode and "just playign the game normally" is not, in fact, normal at all.
Why not just give Steven a chance to realise his vision instead of insisting he creates yet another themepark for casuals?
If he fails, he fails.
If he succeeds, wow new game that's not like the others is out.
I completely disagree with Narc on the topic of world PvP, and judging by the behavior of players in both retail and classic WoW, I'm not the only one. What I mean is that 90% of the time that I encounter a player of the opposite faction in the open world we mutually ignore each other since we both have better things to do and fighting each other would just delay us from completing whatever we are doing.
I think world PvP should be incentivized not forced upon players. If you want to quest or gather resources in the open world you should be able to do that uninterrupted. Nobody wants to play an MMO where at all times you can get ganked and die even though you have no intention to partake in world PvP (like STV in Vanilla). I really liked the way BfA did it. World PvP was concentrated to end game zones and the rewards tied to it created demand for World PvP from both factions and led to somewhat of an equilibrium where it wasn't just a group of 5 people bullying solo players, but multiple groups on both sides fighting each other. I had a great time playing that and usually I only engage with instanced PvP (BGs, arena).
RuneScape’s pvp concept was my favorite. When you died pvping you’d lose what you had on your player and the opponent was able to loot what you had. Also what was nice is if you died a player was able to pick up your loot if you didn’t make it back to where you died in time.
It ok some ppl like getting pegged
@@anteprs7908 damn I hope to be clever like you one day.
@@iTzMuscles it ok i am not kink shaming we all can understand liking being punished by dady players.
Narc opinion: If you are a player that only have a few hours a day to play, you are not an MMO player. You can only be an MMO player if you have 15 hours a day of which you can get fun 12 hours. If you play 2 hours to have 1 hour wasted walking or getting killed, you are not welcome.
I think the solo experience is highly important for any MMO. As much as I loved Classic WoW and meeting new people, they either came and went or we constantly had different goals/outleveled. Contrast that with Elder Scrolls Online, it feels like ESO is too much of a solo experience. I never feel the need to interact with anyone and i'm just purely questing with no variety. A game that encourages player interaction naturally without forcing them out of their current goal would be ideal.
I don't like how he states what an mmo is, when that is clearly subjective to everyone. That fella kinda turned arrogant did he.
Dare I say, I haven't finished the video, but wouldn't PVP zones that are clear to players be a good compromise? I mean OSRS was successful back in the day because you opted into such areas by wandering into these zones even though it was clearly delineated. I think understanding these ramifications allowed one to accept your fate if the worst were to occur. As opposed to having no counterplay because the server allowed you to get ganked by a a more veteran player for simply existing anywhere in the world.
That is their ambition for this game, essentially no safe zones or turn off pvp. Which is quite bold and risky but has a potential for high rewards.
Though yeah this would definitely drive out players like me who atleast wanted a safe zone to take a breather and afk to get something to snack on, then continue playing.
Maybe a corruption or bounty system could help minimize this problem. But at this point, I'd rather stay away from this game... Considering I like hoarding items
PvX means it's both PvP and PvE. Meaning you can't remove the PvP part and saying "Now the game function as normally". Because there are core designs in the game that is dependent on the PvP part
Same with PvE. We could not remove the PvE of the game, because then the core mechanics stops working
I feel like the people i spoke to who stopped playing New World early on didn't even mention traveling being a problem. Everyone i spoke to brought up the plethora of bugs, technical problems, lag and poor combat balance. Maybe that was just my bubble.
I feel a good MMORPG should have fun elements for people to choose playing solo and/or group as they wish. As for PVP I don't like it so I don't bother with any kind of MMORPG that forces it. If people want to play those games then cool for them, no need to insist every single game has to have it.
If I have to log on to do x or y in game, on a almost daily basis, I immediately don't want to play the game as a whole. I choose the times I wanna play at, and won't be forced by a guild or by a system in the game (fomo) to log on and do things, my free time is too valuable for me to turn a videogame into a job.
But that doesn't mean the game should be different. It just means I won't play it much.
I think what narc means is that the sense of urgency that potential conflicts bring add to the wonder and immersion that an mmo has. I'd like to have pvp as it allows for those immersive social interactions like you'd see in a game like dayz.
then they should make a dayz or battle royal clone...ffs...everyone thinks PVP = WoW/PUBG/Fortnite ganking...that is NOT the case. PvP in WoW includes battlegrounds and arena as well. The problem with WoW ganking is it wastes the victims' time and like Asmon says, makes people quit when it becomes commonplace. IF you're going to have PVP in an MMORPG then you HAVE to mitigate the griefing PERIOD. That's the argument Asmon is making and he's correct. PVP should be high risk high reward and have a fair balance to it which is what AOC is pushing towards...not pwn lvl 1 noobs cuz haha...fuk man its not rocket science.
These so called immersive social interactions you are talking about in pvp situations are extremely rare and tend to occur only when a game is newly released, has a small tight-nit niche community and players are still working it all out. Once the game hits mainstream and becomes popular with player counts rising the experience 99.9% of the time is just toxic shoot on sight, gank, greif, troll etc.... This pattern has repeated in so many games now I've lost count.
@@enderfawx3063 yep and im gunna make a guild of like minded freebooters stieal all we can game allows it ill do it.
@@JohnDoe-ix4kx Shooting on sight is a stupid thing to do with AoC's design. You would get flagged, get little reward and then get killed by bounty hunters / drop your gear as you're a PK and couldn't get near towns anymore without risking everything, unless you have massive ressources to waste and give bounty hunters or a large guild supporting you, it would generally by a bad idea for the average player.
If balanced properly, as a PKer you would want to go after people you think or know are carrying high value ressources, caravans being the highest value target. That or just eliminating competition for ressources you want to collect :o
@@DarkAztaroth Sure a perfect system with perfect design would create a perfect outcome.
Unfortunately such a system as you describe has never existed in any mmo thus far and any anti greifing system will ultimately be imperfect in practice and greifers will ALWAYS work to exploit any flaws in the systems design to fuck with other players.
Also wouldn't opt in pvp with options like arenas, battlegrounds, duels, specific pvp trading routes/zones for caravans, or dare I say it pvp specific servers already cover all the gameplay features you mentioned? Why drag pver's with no interest in pvp into your preferred style of play?
What happened to the days of MMORPGs being like secondary worlds we live in? Now they just feel like games we spend a lot of time in, not a world we transport into with all these arbitrary disallowments of actions in the world
“We’re all talking about a theoretical” is the most accurate statement I’ve heard out of any of the videos I’ve saw.
I’m personally an advocate for open world PvP as long as there is a protection system to keep the more casual, less skilled, less geared players from being constantly grieved. Wether that’s a toggle(I hate it in NW rarely any PvP encounters on my server) or a flagging system like they have implemented currently(we’ll have to see how that performs) I hate the idea of two separate server types though because I makes for empty servers and none of us want that regardless if you’re a PvP or PvE player.
"I'd be okay with only a few hundred thousand players"...
...Um...wat? That's best case scenario. Thousands is more likely. MAYBE they get to tens of thousands. Maybe...