Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Coffee House' started by Fuli, Oct 14, 2018.
Activision Stock Plunges After Report CEO Bobby Kotick Knew Of Employee Rape Allegations For Years
Shocka, I tell ya. Absolute shocka.
I really enjoy questing and have found DDO to be just right for me. It's a bit complex and I have no idea what group play is like, but that's ok. I like solo questing, so it's been a perfect fit.
Been years since I've played DDO, but I liked it. I enjoyed the twitch combat and loved that itemization mattered in a mob or environment specific way. Loved the puzzles.
Hated the crafting system, the prevelance of zergers, and would eventually get bored and drift off.
AoC has begun migrating to Unreal 5. Gotta say, the differences in the aesthetics are AWESOME.
Now, those of you still throwing salt because the game has pvp can move along. However, for those who're interested in observing said awesomess can do so by watching the Dec dev stream.
I'm barely on ESO anymore. I spend more time on Destiny 2 or Minecraft than I do a proper MMO anymore.
Refresh my memory, is AoC all-PvP no-opt out?
You can opt out of PvP in AoC. However, there's no pvp immunity setting. Instead, the game utilizes a corruption system to apply severe punishements to players who kill other players flagged for non-pvp status.
Those punishements include severe debuffs to health and abilities, bounty hunting, and no restrictions on dropped gear (both bags and equiped). In addition, there is no time decay on corruption. The only way to lose it is to die from pvp or grind cleansing repeatables that force the player to venture back out into the world.
I believe the devs have recently opened a player feedback environment to discuss concerns over griefing.
So if you get ganked, do you lose your stuff? (I'm not looking at consequences for the ganker, griefers gonna grief and will always find a way around the penalties.) It doesn't sound like "opting out" is much practical protection at all.
The most you can lose is some of your harvestables. That's also true for regular pvp (irc) The only folks at risk for losing gear are gankers, and they can lose anything equiped or in their bags.
There are no safe zones for corrupted players, so for example, they can't park in their home cities. They also show up on bounty hunter maps.
People with little to no experience with pvp play seem to be having a hard time believing that AoC corruption mechanics will impactfully disincentive ganking/griefing. But those of us that do pvp know they will.
AoC's corruption mechanics are intended to (imo) confront two problems: (1) Immunuty buttons are eady to turn into exploitable mechanics, and (2) They're immersion-breaking.
AoC is a pvp environment that allows folks to opt out of pvp and play the game in all kinds of different ways, but I've abandoned any attempt to persuade people that its corruption system will work. Some people will simply refuse to play a game where they can be killed by another player, even if the odds of that happening are unlikely and the stakes trivial. /shrug
Take this as saltily as you wish , but this seems like a hell of a lot of lipstick to put on a pig with complicated, potentially buggy systems to try to walk the line when PvP could simply be completely opt-out and accomplish the exact same thing and not require 5 paragraphs to explain to new users. People only read the headlines and the headline here is "PvP is mostly opt outable but it depends" which will be hard NO for thousands of players still chapped from Ultima Online 25 years ago.
It's only "lipstick on a pig" if one believes it's a pig. The game has more than enough support to succeed and be profitable. I like the corruption system, and so do lots of others. Already explained why.
At the end of the day, there will be some traditionally pve-only folks who give this game a shot, and their opininion is what's going offer credibility to the rest.
Still, as previously noted, there will be a healthy chunk of the pve crowd who will never accept this game because they cannot manipulate or evade 100% of the danger contained within the environment, and that's fine. To each their own.
P.S. I'm also not saying corruption can't be improved. I'd like to see even harsher penalties, and the dev's are currently taking active feedback on that. Never the less, snd as previously noted, the risks to flagged players are likely to be low, and in the event of an unfortunate encounter, the costs trivial. In fact, the best way to exact vengeance for such encounters is to die without fighting back.
I suppose the proof will be in the playing. The summary "yes you can be ganked, but it's risky and you won't lose your gear" isn't the worst in the world (though losing harvestables may have ramifications on server economies).
I won't be in, but I seem to be out of the MMO space altogether for the most part, so that's neither endorsement nor indictment.
Okay, so yeah, I agree that LOTRO's monetization structure is goofy, but low and behold, Ji Ham takes over, and now SSG is trying to build a path down the loot box rabbit hole.
As current/former EQ2 players, we already know how this is going to end.
Microsoft buying Activision-Blizzard for $69B.
Microsoft to buy 'Call of Duty' maker for $68.7 bln in gaming push
Microsoft has typically been very good to the devs they buy, and this is also a great deal for gamepass and Xbox, but I can't help but feel uneasy about Microsoft buying yet another huge dev.
Activision-Blizzard is in such an incredibly vulnerable position with their anti-customer policies and sexual harassment problems boiling to the front page every few weeks, it was almost inevitable that someone would buy them. Lego was seriously about to cancel their Overwatch sets.