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

A Request For A Very Important Stretch Goal...

Recommended Posts

Yeah,

 

I look at GW2 or SWTOR which allows any race to be any class, and it just washes out both the race and class as meh...

 

I'm good with each archetype having it's own criteria of race and class...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TF2 has one gender/class and not many people complain. D3/D3/PoE have the same things. Oh, mindcraft also.

 

Archetype = race and class (some exceptions apply see human for details)

 

I prefer it this way. I see a silhouette and I have an idea what it is. I have an idea what the Archetype is.

Edited by jetah

etDenA9.png
Camaraderie ~ Loyalty ~ Honor ~ Maturity ~ Integrity ~ Duty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before getting to the content of your post, may I suggest making your writing at least slightly legible?  People might take you more seriously if reading your posts was a tad easier.  

 

As for your request, I think it would be a very poor allocation of resources at this time.  I think the vast majority of us have been drawn to CF because of the unique vision the developers have pitched us; it's a game that seems willing to take real risks at a time when much of the genre seems content to recycle stale ideas and concepts.  That being said, using limited funds and resources to create dozens of new character models and animations is only likely to hurt the overall content of the game and detract from ACE's vision.  CF is being touted as a hardcore PVP game, which says to me that character appearance will not be, and should not be, at the top of anyone's priority list. 

 

Finally, there is a very practical reason why this is not a good idea.  Combat in CF has been described as highly strategic, and therefore it will be very useful to know exactly who and what you're fighting.  Being able to easily identify what archetype you're up against by it's race will be a significant aspect of PVP encounters I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before getting to the content of your post, may I suggest making your writing at least slightly legible?  People might take you more seriously if reading your posts was a tad easier.  

 

As for your request, I think it would be a very poor allocation of resources at this time.  I think the vast majority of us have been drawn to CF because of the unique vision the developers have pitched us; it's a game that seems willing to take real risks at a time when much of the genre seems content to recycle stale ideas and concepts.  That being said, using limited funds and resources to create dozens of new character models and animations is only likely to hurt the overall content of the game and detract from ACE's vision.  CF is being touted as a hardcore PVP game, which says to me that character appearance will not be, and should not be, at the top of anyone's priority list. 

 

Finally, there is a very practical reason why this is not a good idea.  Combat in CF has been described as highly strategic, and therefore it will be very useful to know exactly who and what you're fighting.  Being able to easily identify what archetype you're up against by it's race will be a significant aspect of PVP encounters I believe.

 

To avoid such frustrating problems in the future Abel...please simply refrain from reading my posts. My typing abilities and constant use of 7eet speech, as you say, makes my posts illegible. 

 

As to the "vision of the game" ...ie the vision of "eternal characters but dying worlds" ...I see nothing in my suggestion which contradicts this vision. From their use of advantages/disadvantages at character creation to their multiple promotion classes...to their multiple discipline options...the vision for Crowfall IS DIVERSITY. A diversity of builds which makes knowing what your opponent is going to do unknown. Opening up Elken to both Rangers and Stalkers ADDS to that diversity and unknown, rather than detracting from it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Picking any race + class combo is an illusion of choice as there will still be far optimal builds, and cost is driven up significantly for just a minority that may want to try an oddball combo.

 

I applaud them cutting thru the illusion and instead giving us more focused options that, because of an archetype system, can give us more than gear differentiators graphically.


Entropy is not what it used to be.  I am a servant of The Nothing.. The Hunger!

 

https://38.media.tumblr.com/c8b3da04c46297fe112a98ab12ad8e09/tumblr_n5l2imj4NF1qzm5g7o1_500.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Picking any race + class combo is an illusion of choice as there will still be far optimal builds

 

I am sure this is true in some of the games that you have played, but it is not true for all games.  In WoW, race doesn't mean much.  In Shadowbane, different combinations of race and class made for very different characters that played differently.  It was not an illusion.


IhhQKY6.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Picking any race + class combo is an illusion of choice as there will still be far optimal builds, and cost is driven up significantly for just a minority that may want to try an oddball combo.

 

I applaud them cutting thru the illusion and instead giving us more focused options that, because of an archetype system, can give us more than gear differentiators graphically.

 

Then why waste time and resources in giving us the "illusion of choice" when it comes to advantages/disadvantage runes at creation? In giving us multiple promotion classes? In giving us multiple discipline options? If everyone is going to naturally gravitate to only the optimal build anyway...why give us these "illusion of choice"? Unless...of course...they AREN'T illusions...and these choices actually do matter...and if racial diversity did give advantages and disadvantages...just as creation runes/promotion classes/disciplines did...then you would be expanding upon one of the fundamental goals of the game, wouldn't you?  Look...I know the arguments of "costs too much time and money to implement properly" is going to trump this issue. I get that. But I certainly want the Devs to seriously look at this issue before discarding it. 

Edited by Gradishar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, I totally get where you are coming from.  

 

But you need to understand: this is a multi-million dollar request.    Let me build a simple example, to explain why:

 

X is your number of races.

Y is your number of classes.

Z if your number of unique armor sets (or equipment pieces, really) per race/class.

 

So, if I have 5 races, 5 classes, 2 genders and 5 armor sets per, that's 5 (races) * 5 (classes) * 2 (genders) * 5 (sets) = 250 unique "looks".  if an armor set has 4 visible slots (gloves, boots, torso, helm), that's * 4 (items), so we're talking about 1000 unique art assets.

 

...and this is just the equipment pieces.  For simplicity, I'm not covering concept, animation, particles, etc.

 

If you lock race and class, and then you cut that number down to 5 (archetypes) * (2 genders) * 5 (sets) = 20 unique "looks", and with 4 visible slots thats 80 unique art assets.

 

Starting to see the difference?

 

The upfront contrast between the approaches is significant, but the REAL win is the cost-over-time.  The first system is exponential; meaning that if we want to a new race, or class, or even just add "plate" armor for Frostweavers, we have to pay an exponential price.  and EVERY time we add one, we make that price gets even worse, because it's a multiplicative result.  We don't just add one new armor set, we add one new armor set for every race, class and gender.

 

(And truth be told, in most MMOs, only a subset of the branches are popular anyway.  You're incurring a massive cost to support options that most players will never use, because they are just going to pick the most effective race/class combinations, anyway.)

 

This is HUGE savings.  I'm not going to debate "which system is cooler" any more than I will debate whether a space shuttle is cooler than a motorcycle.  The cost is so castly different as to make the debate irrelevant.

 

Instead, we're going to make you the most bad-ass motorcycle you've ever seen.

 

See, here's the cool part : in taking this approach, we faced certain limitations, true -- but it also opens up some avenues that weren't available before!  

 

1. Since the archetypes are linear in cost, we don't have to try and "bend the concepts" to try and make them similar to each other.  We can offer crazy options like Centaurs and Guineceans, and we can we can add a ton of customization to each character to make them individually thematic and detailed.  The tree has fewer branches, but because of that fact, we can spend more time on each branch to polish it, and make it really unique.

 

2. The cost to add new archetypes is both linear and predictable.  That means we can grow the game without the cost scaling out of control.  Given the time and money, we can add dozens of new archteypes.  

 

3. Lastly (and yes, this one is just my opinion) the archetypes also feel more thematic.  

 

"Elven blademasters" are cooler than "<insert whichever race> blademasters" because I can write a backstory about...

 

...how the Elven Blademasters believe the stars are a gift from Gaea, and that they use the constellations in the night sky to map every cut, parry and riposte  -- the body of knowledge they call the Dance of the Heavens.  And how they believe that, when an Elven blademaster dies, that his soul will come to rest in the night sky as a new star, adding new elements to the Dance for future generations of Elven blademasters.  

 

To which the Human Loremaster says, "Nonsense.  The stars are pinholes in D'orion's cloak, from the time he chased Malekai across the Sky and was bitten by a thousand, thousand spiders."

 

and Dwarven Forgemaster responds, "That's ridiculous.  The stars in the sky are nothing more than the light of the Sun, glinting off the scales of Lyessa, the Serpent Mother."

 

(see? cooler.)

 

Todd


J Todd Coleman

ArtCraft Entertainment, Inc.

Follow us on Twitter @CrowfallGame | Like us on Facebook

[Rules of Conduct]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, I totally get where you are coming from.  

 

But you need to understand: this is a multi-million dollar request.    Let me build a simple example, to explain why:

 

X is your number of races.

Y is your number of classes.

Z if your number of unique armor sets (or equipment pieces, really) per race/class.

 

So, if I have 5 races, 5 classes, 2 genders and 5 armor sets per, that's 5 (races) * 5 (classes) * 2 (genders) * 5 (sets) = 250 unique "looks".  if an armor set has 4 visible slots (gloves, boots, torso, helm), that's * 4 (items), so we're talking about 1000 unique art assets.

 

...and this is just the equipment pieces.  For simplicity, I'm not covering concept, animation, particles, etc.

 

If you lock race and class, and then you cut that number down to 5 (archetypes) * (2 genders) * 5 (sets) = 20 unique "looks", and with 4 visible slots thats 80 unique art assets.

 

Starting to see the difference?

 

The upfront contrast between the approaches is significant, but the REAL win is the cost-over-time.  The first system is exponential; meaning that if we want to a new race, or class, or even just add "plate" armor for Frostweavers, we have to pay an exponential price.  and EVERY time we add one, we make that price gets even worse, because it's a multiplicative result.  We don't just add one new armor set, we add one new armor set for every race, class and gender.

 

(And truth be told, in most MMOs, only a subset of the branches are popular anyway.  You're incurring a massive cost to support options that most players will never use, because they are just going to pick the most effective race/class combinations, anyway.)

 

This is HUGE savings.  I'm not going to debate "which system is cooler" any more than I will debate whether a space shuttle is cooler than a motorcycle.  The cost is so castly different as to make the debate irrelevant.

 

Instead, we're going to make you the most bad-bottom motorcycle you've ever seen.

 

See, here's the cool part : in taking this approach, we faced certain limitations, true -- but it also opens up some avenues that weren't available before!  

 

1. Since the archetypes are linear in cost, we don't have to try and "bend the concepts" to try and make them similar to each other.  We can offer crazy options like Centaurs and Guineceans, and we can we can add a ton of customization to each character to make them individually thematic and detailed.  The tree has fewer branches, but because of that fact, we can spend more time on each branch to polish it, and make it really unique.

 

2. The cost to add new archetypes is both linear and predictable.  That means we can grow the game without the cost scaling out of control.  Given the time and money, we can add dozens of new archteypes.  

 

3. Lastly (and yes, this one is just my opinion) the archetypes also feel more thematic.  

 

"Elven blademasters" are cooler than "<insert whichever race> blademasters" because I can write a backstory about...

 

...how the Elven Blademasters believe the stars are a gift from Gaea, and that they use the constellations in the night sky to map every cut, parry and riposte  -- the body of knowledge they call the Dance of the Heavens.  And how they believe that, when an Elven blademaster dies, that his soul will come to rest in the night sky as a new star, adding new elements to the Dance for future generations of Elven blademasters.  

 

To which the Human Loremaster says, "Nonsense.  The stars are pinholes in D'orion's cloak, from the time he chased Malekai across the Sky and was bitten by a thousand, thousand spiders."

 

and Dwarven Forgemaster responds, "That's ridiculous.  The stars in the sky are nothing more than the light of the Sun, glinting off the scales of Lyessa, the Serpent Mother."

 

(see? cooler.)

 

Todd

Fewer branches but more leaves. (meant as a good thing fyi)


A ninja does not know how to fall. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be clear: the cost issue is driving *appearance* customization, not *design* customization.  I'm all about being able to modify your build in crazy ways; hence the advantages/disadvantages/promotion/disciplines system.  

 

Min/Max'ers need not be concerned; you'll have the ability to dramatically tweak your characters to fit your play style.  We just can't afford to go with a combinatory approach when it comes building all the character art.

 

Todd

ACE


J Todd Coleman

ArtCraft Entertainment, Inc.

Follow us on Twitter @CrowfallGame | Like us on Facebook

[Rules of Conduct]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead, we're going to make you the most bad-bottom motorcycle you've ever seen.

 

See, here's the cool part : in taking this approach, we faced certain limitations, true -- but it also opens up some avenues that weren't available before!

 

1. Since the archetypes are linear in cost, we don't have to try and "bend the concepts" to try and make them similar to each other. We can offer crazy options like Centaurs and Guineceans, and we can we can add a ton of customization to each character to make them individually thematic and detailed. The tree has fewer branches, but because of that fact, we can spend more time on each branch to polish it, and make it really unique.

 

2. The cost to add new archetypes is both linear and predictable. That means we can grow the game without the cost scaling out of control. Given the time and money, we can add dozens of new archteypes.

 

3. Lastly (and yes, this one is just my opinion) the archetypes also feel more thematic.

 

"Elven blademasters" are cooler than "<insert whichever race> blademasters" because I can write a backstory about...

 

...how the Elven Blademasters believe the stars are a gift from Gaea, and that they use the constellations in the night sky to map every cut, parry and riposte -- the body of knowledge they call the Dance of the Heavens. And how they believe that, when an Elven blademaster dies, that his soul will come to rest in the night sky as a new star, adding new elements to the Dance for future generations of Elven blademasters.

 

To which the Human Loremaster says, "Nonsense. The stars are pinholes in D'orion's cloat, from the time he chased Malekai across the Sky and was bitten by a thousand, thousand spiders."

 

and Dwarven Forgemaster responds, "That's ridiculous. The stars in the sky are nothing more than the light of the Sun, glinting off the scales of Lyessa, the Serpent Mother."

 

(see? cooler.)

 

Todd

Damn it Todd.

giphy.gif

 

Seriously, this is awesome. This is what fuels my Hype.

Edited by kiroelmarok

[TB] The Balance
Nation of Equilibrium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, I totally get where you are coming from.  

 

But you need to understand: this is a multi-million dollar request.    Let me build a simple example, to explain why:

 

X is your number of races.

Y is your number of classes.

Z if your number of unique armor sets (or equipment pieces, really) per race/class.

 

So, if I have 5 races, 5 classes, 2 genders and 5 armor sets per, that's 5 (races) * 5 (classes) * 2 (genders) * 5 (sets) = 250 unique "looks".  if an armor set has 4 visible slots (gloves, boots, torso, helm), that's * 4 (items), so we're talking about 1000 unique art assets.

 

...and this is just the equipment pieces.  For simplicity, I'm not covering concept, animation, particles, etc.

 

If you lock race and class, and then you cut that number down to 5 (archetypes) * (2 genders) * 5 (sets) = 20 unique "looks", and with 4 visible slots thats 80 unique art assets.

 

Starting to see the difference?

 

The upfront contrast between the approaches is significant, but the REAL win is the cost-over-time.  The first system is exponential; meaning that if we want to a new race, or class, or even just add "plate" armor for Frostweavers, we have to pay an exponential price.  and EVERY time we add one, we make that price gets even worse, because it's a multiplicative result.  We don't just add one new armor set, we add one new armor set for every race, class and gender.

 

(And truth be told, in most MMOs, only a subset of the branches are popular anyway.  You're incurring a massive cost to support options that most players will never use, because they are just going to pick the most effective race/class combinations, anyway.)

 

This is HUGE savings.  I'm not going to debate "which system is cooler" any more than I will debate whether a space shuttle is cooler than a motorcycle.  The cost is so castly different as to make the debate irrelevant.

 

Instead, we're going to make you the most bad-bottom motorcycle you've ever seen.

 

See, here's the cool part : in taking this approach, we faced certain limitations, true -- but it also opens up some avenues that weren't available before!  

 

1. Since the archetypes are linear in cost, we don't have to try and "bend the concepts" to try and make them similar to each other.  We can offer crazy options like Centaurs and Guineceans, and we can we can add a ton of customization to each character to make them individually thematic and detailed.  The tree has fewer branches, but because of that fact, we can spend more time on each branch to polish it, and make it really unique.

 

2. The cost to add new archetypes is both linear and predictable.  That means we can grow the game without the cost scaling out of control.  Given the time and money, we can add dozens of new archteypes.  

 

3. Lastly (and yes, this one is just my opinion) the archetypes also feel more thematic.  

 

"Elven blademasters" are cooler than "<insert whichever race> blademasters" because I can write a backstory about...

 

...how the Elven Blademasters believe the stars are a gift from Gaea, and that they use the constellations in the night sky to map every cut, parry and riposte  -- the body of knowledge they call the Dance of the Heavens.  And how they believe that, when an Elven blademaster dies, that his soul will come to rest in the night sky as a new star, adding new elements to the Dance for future generations of Elven blademasters.  

 

To which the Human Loremaster says, "Nonsense.  The stars are pinholes in D'orion's cloat, from the time he chased Malekai across the Sky and was bitten by a thousand, thousand spiders."

 

and Dwarven Forgemaster responds, "That's ridiculous.  The stars in the sky are nothing more than the light of the Sun, glinting off the scales of Lyessa, the Serpent Mother."

 

(see? cooler.)

 

Todd

Math, your friend and helper.

 

That should help here.

 

I really like this way of going.

In the end, we will have more distinct choices.

 

I really hope that someday we will have so many archetypes, that selling slots to people will help ... produce even more archetypes!

Like a endless slope of epic.

 

Pleaes stay on that route.

I personally come from a game, where the only items you could changes visible... where headgears. Hats, Sunglasses, Cigars etc.

(Ragnarok Online)

 

Was that bad? -Seriuosly no ... people killed for certain headgears. In real life.

 

We will have here more choice then that. Add possible cosmetics, that are hopefully done. And we will have a lot of fun on customization.

 

Cosmetics:

-cigars (easy to alter to the models)

-Monocles

-Hats

-Bunny Ears/ Kitten Ears

-etc

 

Simply smal things, you can patch on the head or on a set of armor. Through an overlay.

Nearly no cost to create. Nearly endless ways to pronounce "that is me", with 20 unique sets and a few cosmetics.

 

Like a Ranger with bunny ears, a carrot amulet and a rabbits paw earring. (If campaign allows it to show or only on EK.)

 

Who wouldn't want that?

Or scars.

Pflasters.

Bandages.

Glowing effects.

Blood dripping effects.

 

q.q!

 

... my poor budget for gameing ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[...]

1. Since the archetypes are linear in cost, we don't have to try and "bend the concepts" to try and make them similar to each other.  We can offer crazy options like Centaurs and Guineceans, and we can we can add a ton of customization to each character to make them individually thematic and detailed.  The tree has fewer branches, but because of that fact, we can spend more time on each branch to polish it, and make it really unique.

[...]

Todd

 

Does the "ton of customization to each character" mean that we have a real Character editor like Black Desert or other MMO's where you can really create your individual face and stuff or does it only mean, the general tone of each archetype will be really unique (don't interpret the "only" here like I would not value that one). Because I really really love to create a unique to me fitting character and the face is the highest priority on that creation list for me.

 

For the other stuff: I love your concept and that you actually seem to realise (in comparison to other companies) how to manage the money and time right: High quality product with little money. Thats what todays multi million dollar projects are lacking. They could make so much more out of their money, like you guys seem to do.

Edited by Dwayna

GWH5xXf.jpg?1


,,...You get killed over and over again, that doesn't mean the game is unbalanced - it means that You are a bad player" -JTC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's so cool to see how developers lay out the brick work, always things I've never considered or realized before. Thank you for sharing that :)


The most important thing is to enjoy your life - to be happy - it's all that matters. - Audrey Hepburn “:♡.•♬✧⁽⁽ଘ( ˊᵕˋ )ଓ⁾⁾*+:•*∴
Read more at brainyquote.com/search_results.html#KTJ4dHyeiltlKOTM.99

mz_Yr9k_I.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the "ton of customization to each character" mean that we have a real Character editor like Black Desert or other MMO's where you can really create your individual face and stuff or does it only mean, the general tone of each archetype will be really unique (don't interpret the "only" here like I would not value that one). Because I really really love to create a unique to me fitting character and the face is the highest priority on that creation list for me.

 

They've actually said they don't intend to allow much of any customization to faces because they are always covered with gear and it's just another thing to render.  The extent of customization that I expect is hair color and skin color and then adding crests to gear to be able to identify team mates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1. Since the archetypes are linear in cost, we don't have to try and "bend the concepts" to try and make them similar to each other.  We can offer crazy options like Centaurs and Guineceans, and we can we can add a ton of customization to each character to make them individually thematic and detailed.  The tree has fewer branches, but because of that fact, we can spend more time on each branch to polish it, and make it really unique.

 

2. The cost to add new archetypes is both linear and predictable.  That means we can grow the game without the cost scaling out of control.  Given the time and money, we can add dozens of new archteypes.  

 

3. Lastly (and yes, this one is just my opinion) the archetypes also feel more thematic.  

 

"Elven blademasters" are cooler than "<insert whichever race> blademasters" because I can write a backstory about...

 

...how the Elven Blademasters believe the stars are a gift from Gaea, and that they use the constellations in the night sky to map every cut, parry and riposte  -- the body of knowledge they call the Dance of the Heavens.  And how they believe that, when an Elven blademaster dies, that his soul will come to rest in the night sky as a new star, adding new elements to the Dance for future generations of Elven blademasters.  

 

To which the Human Loremaster says, "Nonsense.  The stars are pinholes in D'orion's cloak, from the time he chased Malekai across the Sky and was bitten by a thousand, thousand spiders."

 

and Dwarven Forgemaster responds, "That's ridiculous.  The stars in the sky are nothing more than the light of the Sun, glinting off the scales of Lyessa, the Serpent Mother."

 

(see? cooler.)

 

Todd

making archetypes similar to each other would be repeating the same mistake most mmo's have been making all this time.
in dutch we have a saying literally translated;
"a donkey does not crash into the same stone 8 times" but the english version seems to be "fool me seven times,shame on you" :lol:
But that is exactly what mmo's have been doing past decade.
 
I think instead of focus too much on balance, you should go for archetype diversity,and even create different categories like infantry and siege units like in rts games.Bye bye flavor of the month with all those classes similar to each other;its just about the numbers then.Away with min maxing since all unit categories have different setups:
Its ok if some archetypes are slower than others or have a total different setup.
That creates a beautiful interdependence between players & lots of tactical consideration on the battlefield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've actually said they don't intend to allow much of any customization to faces because they are always covered with gear and it's just another thing to render.

Where'd you see/hear the part about faces?  While I agree that they won't have much in the way of customization options, I don't recall ever hearing that reason for it.


[@--(o.O)@]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...