Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Why did Archeage go down this path?

13»

Comments

  • TheocritusTheocritus Member LegendaryPosts: 9,263
    Viper482 said:
    If XL/Trion were smart they would create a "Alpha Classic" server that started from scratch, was subscription only, and no cash shop. I would join it in a heartbeat.
    Archeage was a bad game period....I didnt even notice the cash shop to be honest.....I had no interest even playing it for free.
  • MultibyteMultibyte Member UncommonPosts: 128
    I enjoyed this game a lot for a short while. I can say it made me feel it was one of the best MMORPG experiences I had until I could not take it anymore how they were aggressively pushing the playerbase towards cash shop. That killed the whole immersion, awesome open game world, great ideas like the gliders and all the other good things. I left and did not look back.

    I agree with those who say this game could have been one of the greats. That damn greed!!! More accurately, the greed for short term profit.

    Imo, the people in charge of these companies probably have the kind of mindset that says "Fu* the long term, I don't even know if I'll be in this company in a few years time." This, I think, is the underlying reason why they don't give damn to that they are sinking the game in the long run as long as they can get some juicy profit now.
  • ThebeastttThebeasttt Member RarePosts: 1,130
    AA felt Archaic the day it launched. The combat was poor, the character builds were disappointing and the lack of races were mind boggling. That said, cash shops are ruining every MMO simply because they make it almost impossible to get immersed in the world.
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    DMKano said:
    Mardukk said:
    I thought the game would be a good themepark sandbox mix.  I was wrong, the themepark side of it was horrible.  Mobs had horrible loot and the quest hubbing was criminally dull.  Mob grinding didn't feel very viable.  They wanted to force everyone to craft and pretty much require you to have land to do anything (which was all taken of course).

    The idea behind ArcheAge is - guild play. I own nonland - but my guild owns so much that I have 4 plots all to myself. 

    The main problem is that players approach this as "solo" play where everyone should have everything - the design behind ArcheAge was purposeful on making land a resource to fight over.

    Again this is a guild game at its core, join a guild that shares land and suddenly the game becomes completely different.

    Solo archeage fails pretty hard, but playing it in an active guild let's you experience all parts of the gane.
    Was in a guild, a very large guild where some of us owned land and most didn't. We would have guildmates going around to every plot looking for land going to expire soon and we would have multiple people sitting on the plot ready to drop our houses/farms. When a house appears out of nowhere from someone who you can't message, search and is a known botter then you just pack up shop and find a different game.

    I will agree AA was a game designed to be played in a guild but Trion screwed the pooch dealing with the hackers, goldsellers and land botters which ended many guilds due to frustration..
  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 4,229
    DMKano said:
    Kefo said:
    DMKano said:
    Mardukk said:
    I thought the game would be a good themepark sandbox mix.  I was wrong, the themepark side of it was horrible.  Mobs had horrible loot and the quest hubbing was criminally dull.  Mob grinding didn't feel very viable.  They wanted to force everyone to craft and pretty much require you to have land to do anything (which was all taken of course).

    The idea behind ArcheAge is - guild play. I own nonland - but my guild owns so much that I have 4 plots all to myself. 

    The main problem is that players approach this as "solo" play where everyone should have everything - the design behind ArcheAge was purposeful on making land a resource to fight over.

    Again this is a guild game at its core, join a guild that shares land and suddenly the game becomes completely different.

    Solo archeage fails pretty hard, but playing it in an active guild let's you experience all parts of the gane.
    Was in a guild, a very large guild where some of us owned land and most didn't. We would have guildmates going around to every plot looking for land going to expire soon and we would have multiple people sitting on the plot ready to drop our houses/farms. When a house appears out of nowhere from someone who you can't message, search and is a known botter then you just pack up shop and find a different game.

    I will agree AA was a game designed to be played in a guild but Trion screwed the pooch dealing with the hackers, goldsellers and land botters which ended many guilds due to frustration..

    When you can't change any of the game code, and you didn't write the code, and if there are any exploits and hacks you have to contact people who wrote the code, wait on a fix and then patch the fix in, and hope they fixed it - well... you could blame Trion, but it's pretty obvious where the real issue is.

    This is the case with every published product, sure we blame the publisher but it doesn't change the simple fact that exploits and hacks due to client/server code are beyond publishers direct control.


    Except that Trion said that the game would be heavily integrated with their platform which is meant to stop the bots. Also when they hand out 1 day bans to people who ruined the economy they showed that they didn't care one crap about the players.
  • zaberfangxzaberfangx Member UncommonPosts: 1,796
    edited August 2015
    Rhoklaw said:
    If a man walked up to me and said he'll pay me $15 a month if I let him play checkers on my patio table. Then 2 weeks later, I got 100 more people asking to pay me $15 a month to play checkers on my patio table. Where in that equation does it look like making money would be difficult? I'm not going to tell these people no. That I only want people who are willing to buy my fake watches, but they can play checkers for free. This argument is definitely a head versus wall conundrum.

    Saying that Trion and XLGames wouldn't profit from a P2P server is just absurd. Again, I'm telling you, it's just easy money. Now that I think about it, Trion and XLGames aren't just lazy. I think doing this would prove both companies don't have a clue about managing a business. The fact AA is bleeding subs is evident. This is probably more of a pride issue than being lazy.


    To much Risk for them to add a P2P, with the risk of that P2P not even covering the cost to run it. Allods Online pretty much show this that high % people will keep coming to the free to play over the sub server anytime, due too don't have to pay and see endgame see if it's there right game for them.  If they started the P2P when the game started the risk been lowered, but changing code cost money atm, as right now for a P2P only and not alot people to fill the server willing to go to it to cover the cost. Business is to make money not to lose it, even if some people don't like there doing but losing money is bad taking to much risk is bad.

    But is hard as mmo pretty much a new ball game, I don't run a mmo my self and other don't as well. But who knows P2P may still work now, but are people willing the risk? if trion need to close down the P2P server if didn't pan out. Tranfer from P2P to free to play is not going work much. It will be more unhappy people then there are now if that end up happen.
Sign In or Register to comment.