Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Silisquish reacted to coolster50 in Get rid of the passive skill system.   
    I really think ACE needs to rename the skill tree to the leveling tree. Skill tree has a bunch of connotations with it which makes people thinks it’s there for customization, but it’s not. Just like leveling up, it’s there for progression. 
  2. Like
    Silisquish reacted to VIKINGNAIL in Get rid of the passive skill system.   
    The sense of persistence it will give, is it really so meaningful and exciting compared to what a different system could offer?  We've heard ACE's point of view on it before, passive stat gain, replaces leveling, etc etc but is it really that fun?  I think they themselves have admitted it's not going to be the most fun aspect of the game, but why hold onto something you know is going to be meh?  Compared to the idea of progressing through the duration of a campaign, resetting, build variety, etc etc, things that have been tried and been huge hits in other seasonal games.  
    Do we really escape uncle bob if joe the newb with no training enters campaigns vs bob the guy that's been training for a year?  Are we really seeing a shallow power curve in this game?  Is time-gating access to content at the lengths it may end up being gated to unlock certain elements of CF really interesting?
    At least if it was on a per-campaign level it could be sped up more in line with the type of element you would expect in action oriented games.  
    Eve is a slow game, CF is not a slow game, it's trying to marry things that just don't go together well.  
    This is not something that will make or break CF, but it is something that players that do play will eventually realize is one of the flaws with the game, not one of the strengths, and the game will have to suffer from "oh man it could have been better if they had just done so and so differently".  
    My idea is transformative, it helps CF become more of a consistent active-thinking game, it needs to achieve this through a multi-pronged approach because the combat isn't good enough to carry the game on its own.  
  3. Like
    Silisquish reacted to ArcJurado in Disappointed in the direction   
    Just because everyone CAN train everything doesn't mean everyone will.  Even if people have the skills trained, there's no guarantee they're going to use them.  Having the skills is one thing but it's how you choose to spend your time that counts.  Everyone could have every single skill unlocked at launch and who you are in the game still comes down to what you choose to do with your time in the game.  Even at the guild level, the crafters and gatherers are the people who spend their time doing those things for the guild, not the people who simply have the skills trained.  
    Take FFXIV as an example, in that game everyone can take every single class/job to cap.  Though despite this there are still known go-to crafters and gatherers in each community.  While people technically can be completely self-sufficient, they're generally few and far between.  The time investment required to reach that point is more than most people want to put in.  In most games, from my experience, crafting and gathering is somewhat of a niche activity even when it's relevant to endgame.  A lot of people just want to fight and they'd rather just pay someone for their gear instead of making it themselves. 
  4. Like
    Silisquish reacted to VIKINGNAIL in Character/Guild Progress- Why People keep playing Mmorgs   
    It's more like he has created a reason in his mind to justify having a game loop na0w.  What's actually most important is getting combat to feel good, without that this game just won't matter at all.
    More eyes on the game right now would be a very bad idea.  
  5. Like
    Silisquish got a reaction from APE in Time Bank: VIP newbies getting gently made love to by devs?   
    VIP time banks only save up to 30 days per each training slot. But someone else in an old post I'm too lazy to dig up mentioned it would take 45-46 days of training in the first Class & Race skill "tab" thingy before unlocking the 3 others where they actually can train two things at once. What this means is you'd have to wait about 16 days into the game, logging on and training every day, before activating VIP or else your time banks would overflow and you'd lose training time.
    Newbies who buy the game at launch and get their hands on a month of VIP to try it out won't know this unless they do thorough research. They'll probably activate VIP on the first day of playing. Their natural reaction to this problem will be to think they've been gently made love to by the game designers because half their first month of VIP will be wasted for Class and Race training purposes.
    They might assume this was done intentionally and maliciously to get them to buy more VIP subs; this is not going to leave a good first impression for newbies... or even for early backers who might also not know about this. This is a simple problem that can easily be fixed by the devs in a few ways:
    1) Change the VIP maximum time bank storage to 60 days. As an added bonus the few people that get hospitalised or have a baby or enter a 59-day crippling depression while subscribed would actually benefit from this. So would people who leave the game and then return to it (but those guys are traitors we don't care about them). The downside: You'll have to write some code so the game checks to see if you have a 2-month VIP sub or if you activated VIP for the second month so it knows whether to stop storing at 30 or 60.
    2) Make it so the first skill tab thingy for Race & Class, and only the first, can have two skills in training at the same time. The downside: You'll have to modify some code, but it should be simpler to program than suggestion #1. [EDIT] doing this would also allow VIP'ers to train the first tab thingy of Race/Class 2x as fast, which may be undesirable; may lead to accusations of P2W.
    3) Reduce the amount of skills or the time to train skills in the first skill tab thingies. The downside: You'll lose precious minutes of your life reviewing the time it currently takes to unlock the three other skill tab thingies and making sure your modifications mean they can be unlocked within 30 days. If you further modify the starting skill tree you'll have to modify it again so that, again, players can unlock the other skill trees within 30 days. Also maybe for some reason you don't want to cut down the training time as you think it's perfect the way it is?
    EDIT: clarification: Someone calculated that it took 91-92 days to train all of the skills in the first skill tab. You need 50% completion to unlock the other tabs. So, you need approx. 46 days of continuous training, however the VIP time bank will only save 30 days out of those 46 so if you activate VIP as soon as your character is created you'll lose 16 days where you can't train a second skill and the second skill's time bank is overflowing. This means newbie VIP'ers either have to spend their first 16 days as non-VIP'ers or they lose half a month's worth of VIP benefit when it comes to training Class & Race skills (which is very harsh if you only have one month of VIP).
    This a video (at 10m54s) where they talk about the Time Bank:
  6. Like
    Silisquish reacted to jetah in Time Bank: VIP newbies getting gently made love to by devs?   
    I've been on 5.4 test and it only allows me to train 1 skill in Race and Class. I have 2 running on professions.
    I'd personally love to see Basic tree slimmed down to 2 months total with 50% being 30 days to move on. To me Basic should get you in quickly so you can experience and feel the skills giving you some progression. If people see it takes ~90 days for 1 basic group then they might not even play. When I played Eve back in 07 the first month of skills seemed to go very fast and I could feel the changes. Increased mining yield, increased cpu/cap then increased refining, etc. It made me feel like the skills were working. Here however, I don't notice it because it takes so long.
  7. Thanks
    Silisquish reacted to jetah in Time Bank: VIP newbies getting gently made love to by devs?   
    I did those calculations!
    tomes will be the catch up method if you forget a skill or 2 or more or if you leave the game for a few months, years or w/e.
  8. Like
    Silisquish reacted to KrakkenSmacken in Time Bank: VIP newbies getting gently made love to by devs?   
    I've been deliberately avoiding training until 5.4 hits live.  I'll see get to see what happens first hand and report back.
    Todd addressed this during that video above, (8:30). (You started the video too late, the question was answered)
    "I think what we will have to do is speed you through the basics". I would guess that the easiest way to do that, will be to simply start every account, VIP or not, enough time bank to push to that 50% in each basic tree.
  9. Like
    Silisquish got a reaction from Gummiel in Time Bank: VIP newbies getting gently made love to by devs?   
    The problem I'm describing seems like a mistake on the devs' part rather than a feature.
    But some players might not see it that way and they'll feel cheated because they used their VIP immediately instead of waiting 16 days which is the optimal option for those who have 2+ months of VIP. (I'm assuming you can activate/consume it at will as it seems to be treated as an item).
    In fact, if the second skill time bank disappears after your VIP membership runs out this would mean players who only have 1 month of VIP will effectively lose all of their second skill time in Class & Race, making it an even far bigger problem. (hopefully stored time won't disappear when you go non-VIP)
    More importantly reviewers might blame the devs for this and accuse them of malicious intent; of somehow trying to punish those that only have a handful of VIP months so they'll bu more. In reality I'm 95% certain this is just a mistake on their part.
    EDIT: The other problem is, if you have VIPs and you really care about optimal training do you really want to spend the first 16 days of the game in non-VIP just so you can use all of your second skill points? Why would the game itself force you to either do this or sacrifice points? It makes no sense.
  10. Like
    Silisquish reacted to Kee in Please nix the term "early access", for our sanity.   
    This community is great, and there's been a lot of people coming here recently to check out the state of development when is suuuuper duper. HOWEVER, there is a very loud subset of people who do not understand that this game is in pre-Alpha. Yes, I know it says that in many areas - but the front page, and store buttons, and package details all say in big shiny letters "Early access" - which sorta leads people who don't dig much to think that the current available server is just a slightly buggy game.
    Please, beat people over the head with big, obnoxious, flashing signs that say "TESTING - THIS IS A TEST. DEAR GOD, PLEASE DON'T GO IN EXPECTING A FLUFFY BETA."
    The people who do not do the digging to see the current state are getting upset (and yes, they should have done more digging. That's on them.) BUT their frustration is spilling over into the rest of the community. Folks feel baited into buying a full game that's just rough around the edges. They are wrong, of course - there really isn't a lot of alluding to that at all. But the wording should be MUCH clearer, because sometimes you have to hold peoples hands and explain things to them with small words and a pandering tone.

    "Early access" has become synonymous with "eh, we have to work on some more polish but it's basically done" - wrongly so, but that's the state of things. The faithful, patient, and level-headed players don't mind. The loud, upset, and frustrated players do - and their behaviors and opinions are being shaped by this inaccurate assumption. Please let the squeaky, impatient wheel get a little grease, and spoon-feed people a very blatant warning of what the state of things are. The salty folk upset that they don't have the lovably buggy beta they were hoping for are really putting a dark cloud over the community.
    People are expecting early access to mean somewhat-buggy, and they're throwing fits that they paid for an alpha test. Please roll your eyes painfully hard, take a drink of something strong, and then type out a condescending tagline that says explicitly "We're currently in Alpha. Alpha means glorified proof of concept. Please exercise patience and don't bark angrily about a lack of content."
  11. Haha
    Silisquish reacted to DocHollidaze in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    I'm 36, co-own a business, and have a family. Old enough and smart enough to identify when one's complaints are pointless and a waste of time. Didn't even need to get my MBA to figure out that one.
    The business model for this game is not changing, as if the investors backing this game cared about the "viewpoint" of some internet rando such as yourself, or even the rest of us here on this forum.
  12. Like
    Silisquish reacted to entityofsin in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    Wildstar lost population cause of balance patches screwing with the pvpers that wanted to play. That game was mostly populated by pvpers and because their balance patches were more tailored to pve raiders, the decline in player population followed it up.
    ESO, it didn't really pick up much a population to begin with cause it was competiting against a lot of other games at the time. As new stuff came out it pulled players from it. Plus the whole combat (dodging or avoiding damage) and questing system (the terrible compass garbage at the top of the screen) of ESO probably is why people tried it out and then left. It didn't feel fun enough to them so they quit.
    Tera coming to the EU and NA markets was already setup for failure. If I am not mistaken it was a game that was already years in after a release in the Asian market. There for it was already behind the times by the time it hit EU and NA markets.
    I can't comment much on AION other than it failed to get enough of a hype for it. People were already playing other MMOs and games by the time this thing hit the market.
    You want to say that a subscription model means the death of a game. It doesn't necessarily mean that. What kills MMOs more often than a subscription model is how the developers behind the game fail to actually listen to their monthly regular customers. You don't make balance changes to certain classes that are so radical that it makes them dominate for the next 3-6 months (this happened to Rift and caused over half the players to leave) and then wonder why the game has a declining population. Poor game management is why these games start dying in population, servers get merged, and resources to support the game get tightened up.
    Albion Online is another great example of a game that started out strong in full swing but has lost a lot of its presence in the market because of how Sandbox Interactive fails to communicate things with the players, fails to listen to them, and continues to make content and balance patches nobody wants cause they don't make the game better.
    What I am tired of seeing is MMO devs that have a game which has pve and pvp content and they only balance for pve. It sours the experience for the other pvpers and if that's most of your game's players then say goodbye to a lot of that revenue. That's honestly one of the most common things I've seen to cause the decline in MMO populations. Balancing for PvE instead of PvP cause PvE can be tuned up to accommodate PvP a lot easier. This is only going to become more apparently as MMOs tailor more towards a pvp focused game design than pve.
  13. Like
    Silisquish reacted to goose in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    This, yes, thank you. Game companies have to walk a razor's edge when it comes to real money influencing their game's economy, because it's a much more complex issue than most people are willing to acknowledge. Blizzard decided to take the more aggressive approach, and it worked out - they had a lot of botters and gold farmers, and in an effort to stop them, they decided to implement an extremely invasive anti-cheat program called The Warden. This happened more than a decade ago, some of its earlier iterations actually predating WoW, since it was originally implemented to stop the rampant hacking in Diablo 2 and Starcraft. There was a bit of a poorly made socksstorm over how invasive it was - it required access to your task manager and reserved the right to examine what tasks were running as a way of ensuring that you weren't running any blacklisted programs, among other things.
    If this sounds like DRM, that's because it is exactly DRM, but unlike so many other implementations, it worked, resulting in a massive reduction in botters and the near-overnight destruction of maphacks.
    However, just because there were so many fewer hackers didn't mean that the cash economy that had utilized them disappeared - places like D2JSP exist even today, allowing you to indirectly exchange cash for in-game items through a secondary market. Basically, you "donate" money to the site to help keep it running, and in exchange you get a currency that can be traded around the forums. That currency is traded between account holders in exchange for in-game trades, and there are various security measures you can utilize to prevent scamming if you so choose. However, as a result of the game preventing easy farming of valuable resources, they became less common and less relevant.
    At the time, though, Blizzard took issue with this secondary market, and as a result attempted to implement their own version of it in Diablo 3. You may have heard of the Auction House debacle, but if not, let me describe it for you in one sentence: Blizzard tried to do that thing I just described all official-like and it was a dumpster fire.
    At the end of the day, Blizzard - and every game company - has to make a decision. They can either find a way to prevent people from cheating by force, or they can find a way to dissuade them from cheating by making it easier for them to get what they need in-game through various means. The alternative is just letting cheating run rampant and hoping it doesn't tank the game's economy.
    The reality, though, is that most game companies opt for somewhere in the middle of the two, because neither of those options is a good one in the eyes of most gamers, and most game developers realize this. But the common thread is that, no matter what game developers do, if a game is popular enough, people will try to make money off of it, and how a developer chooses to limit this is always going to offend somebody's delicate sensibilities, because this is the internet where everybody is equal and no opinion is invalid.
  14. Like
    Silisquish reacted to goose in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    I...sincerely hope this was sarcasm. But it's too early in the morning for me to tell, so on the off chance that it wasn't, let me point out Final Fantasy XIV and World of Warcraft?
  15. Like
    Silisquish reacted to entityofsin in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    Archeage didn't die in popularity cause of some subscription model or VIP-like thing. It died cause XLGames told Trion to put Thunderstruck trees in a loot box and sell it on the cash shop to dope people into spending thousands on the crap. That was the tipping point of when people started quitting very fast. Archeage is still a pretty solid game but a lot of gamers rage quit in protest cause of that BS move XLGames did. So the hell with both of those companies. Trion even did something similar to their own MMO Rift within the first 6 months of its release by making broken balance patches for a game that was populated by mostly pvpers and not pve raiders. So yeah, screw both of those companies.
    A lot of these things you think are assumptions aren't actually assumptions. We give ACE our feedback on things, they address those concerns and questions by clarifying the direction of stuff. They've said multiple times that VIP isn't going to be this huge game breaking thing in Crowfall and if it ends up being just that then they are fully aware, even have admitted to it, that the majority of the player base will bail on them. They understand the pitfalls more than any of us probably think they do.
    Btw, happy New Year!
  16. Like
    Silisquish reacted to Frykka in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    I am weary of the in-game itemization of the VIP monthly subscription.  Months purchased with real $ should stay account based and trade-able account to account outside of the game as it is now.   This makes direct trade for gear or in-game goods sketchy as far as commercial gains for sellers because of scam potential....  you just cannot trust promise delivery in-game after making a trade account to account.  Sure it could be done among trusting friends and family, guild and the like but not as an open market.  This is really the only PtW potential I see...  Buying VIP months and trading it for high end gear.   
    If VIP becomes and in-game item then the potential for the in game economy to rise and fall due to an influx of real $ spent is high, just as it would be if you would be allowed to buy in-game crowns with real $.   Either of these scenarios still involve people crafting and selling the goods they craft which is a far cry from loot boxes or special gear being sold, but the receiving end is still skipping in-game work (time sink) using real $...   however, it is still the same stuff everyone else has access to craft and sell through in game currency and that gear still breaks from durability loss...  the proverbial whale is not buying any permanent gains, the only permanent gain is skills and everyone can buy the VIP which is itself limited for power curve gain.

    I don't see tomes as an issue due the the skill tree rules they will place on them and the fact that one player is giving up gain to create the tomes.  Tomes will help you catch up to launch players but will not ever get you ahead.
  17. Like
    Silisquish reacted to entityofsin in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    Blizzard is one of the only companies that really comes to mind that is an exception. They've invested a lot of money into their anti-cheating software that they've created for their games. Specifically to combat all the botting and gold selling in WoW. It has, for the most part, been extremely successful but the cost to gain that success has probably been just as huge. I haven't seen a company defend their games from cheating programs as well as Blizzard.
  18. Like
    Silisquish reacted to Brindylln in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    I think the industry standard practice in this area is:
    Claim that you are against RMT and botting Implement some sort of totally ineffective system that appears to back up your claim Don't waste any resources on it because it's impossible to stop it In reply to the OP, Crowfall's funding strategy is long since written in stone. They are skirting the edge of what is and what isnt P2W. They made promises in their kickstarter, and they can't take them back. They also need to give people some sort of incentive to pay for VIP.  Personally I would have preferred a subscription based game, but it is way too late for that.
  19. Like
    Silisquish reacted to APE in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    While I agree for the most part that games focused on players competing should limit or entirely avoid cash impacting gameplay, I disagree that going down the Pay for ..... route "kills" them.
    How many quality MMOs have actually shut down due to the pay model specifically?
    You are a bit late to be hoping ACE will avoid this, especially considering they said that VIP would be for trade from the start. VIP benefits, tomes, approved 3rd party sellers, cash shop goods for trade, etc all show plainly (to me) that ACE sees profit in such things and intends to use them for their benefit.
    Regardless of how you see other games with "P2W" models, they likely still have enough players logging in, probably much more than CF will have at its peak. Some people enjoy dumping cash into virtual goods/power to cheese their way while others don't seem to care enough to quit. Companies sit back and win.
    I'd look to Camelot Unchained and possibly Ashes of Creation as they so far seem much more against this model than Crowfall. Of course they seem further away as well.
    Unfortunately, unless a company/game takes a hard stand from the start and shows zero sign of cash for advantage, it is bound to happen in some form. ACE didn't do that and isn't going to start now.
    Your definition of P2W might make your statement true, but CF will clearly allow cash to impact gameplay through multiple means. Being able to buy power through stats boosts or advantage with resources/equipment influences outcomes. One might not be able to literally "pay to win" but paying to be 5, 10, 100 steps ahead can make a huge difference to the point where victory is all but guaranteed after a point.
    IMO, saying the system will "kill the game" is as off as saying it won't be influenced at all by cash. Truth is in the middle.
  20. Like
    Silisquish reacted to elvo in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    too bad we dont have a sub model, would solve all of these problems
  21. Like
    Silisquish reacted to Armegeddon in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    So... much.. this. Look at the cost to value for entertainment derived. I could never understand the market in this respect. Entitlement society I guess? If one delivers a good product it will succeed. If one fails to deliver a good product to market, it will not succeed, at least not for a sustained amount of time.
    If I play this game for 15 hours a month, i have derived enjoyment for the grand total of 1 USD an hour....yet there are gamers that would easily triple that amount of playtime and balk at a 15 dollar sub? I guess Game Studios should donate millions as an altruistic endeavor to bring entertainment to the masses free of charge?
     Regardless, ACE has chosen their business model,  I hope it is successful, I have six years of VIP. I think it will be.
  22. Like
    Silisquish reacted to entityofsin in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    I would support Crowfall having a monthly sub. Cuts out a lot of the whining but the only thing I don't like about that is how much limited time I have now for video games. Makes the $15 seem expensive if I am not playing a lot each day.
    Luckily Crowfall isn't going to have any P2W. Just some whiny people who think there is. lol
  23. Sad
    Silisquish reacted to Kobold Princess in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    I think saying it kills games is a bit of a stretch! Sure, games like GW2, Eve, or even WoW now basically allow anyone with a bit of money out of the game to have as much money in the game as they want, but those games are hardly dead! And, honestly, to a lot of people, they're still super fun games! Plus most of the time you can't buy anything you can't actually work for an earn in-game, even though it'll take you a lot longer than the people who just swipe for it!
    It's kind of hard not to have an MMORPG nowadays that *doesn't* offer some 'official' way to funnel / convert USD into Ingame currency, it's almost the standard for the industry! Is it a sad state of affairs that being stuck in a late-stage capitalist hellscape in the making means that it's nearly impossible to actually find a game where it's not the case? Sure. But it's kind of already a lost battle, in my opinion!
    Sure, if everyone stopped buying and playing games with those types of systems, developers / publishers / etc would stop being able to include that sort of thing in their games, but let's be honest that aint gonna happen!
  24. Like
    Silisquish reacted to Kirves in Please, no advantage for $$$   
    I’d rather there just be a subscription personally but I think their plan with the VIP is an acceptable compromise 
    I want the game to keep p2w out but at the same time I want the game to be around a long time if I like it and that requires ACE making money.  Since people hate subscriptions they’re making it optional for a SMALL gain...I honestly don’t see what you have to complain about
  25. Like
    Silisquish reacted to Stehlen in Player Created Content - EK Campaign Scenarios   
    I don't think being able to lock into more than one campaign world at a time is a good idea, especially if you can only take out all of your earnings if you win. If I can lock into three worlds at once then I'd invest my time into the one where I have the biggest chance of taking my earnings with me. So if my side is losing in two of the three but winning in one, I would only go to the one where I'm winning so I can get my stuff. As a side effect of that, there would be fewer people to contest the winners in the other worlds, thus there would be less meaningful engagement. If I can only put all my eggs in one basket I'd make sure that basket is as well protected as I can make it.
  • Create New...