EvE, PS2, and Lineage 2 all have massive battles. This looks very similar to the L2 siege system also. All in all there appear to be some good ideas but until it can be played (which is why CU is invalid as well) it just that, ideas.
I hope it happens, I really enjoy large castle sieges, it was really the only reason to play L2. Unless you enjoy spending days mindlessly grinding trying to get one level.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Castle sieges in Lineage weren't even the best part of the game or pvp. They were fun, kind of, for a bit but it was all the stuff in between that made the game. The resource competition, mob farming, social alliances, character building, and politics were what made the game. I wonder if these guys get that.
Why does something have to be "the most". CUs obsessive quest for the most massive battles that no other engine can even come close to doesn't impress me at all. These guys trying the "the most" title with their sieges, unimpressive and juvenile. Just make something good and quit dicking around with "perfect". I'm sure CU will crush this claim, if they ever actually make a game, but is that really the point? If so then things are more screwed than I imagined.
What good are castle sieges in Ashes, if the entire rest of the game context is mediocre and forgettable. These guys should be focusing on what made their archetype predecessor (Lineage) the king it is today instead of making big blowhard claims and putting out fluff updates. That's yet another problem with all of these crowd funded MMOs, they spend way too much time keeping the hype up for funding rather than just doing the job.
oh man I disagree. The Castle Sieges were why I played the game. My best times were the castle sieges.
Oh sure, I had some open world pvp fun but the sieges for me were THE reason to play Lineage 2.
So maybe what they get is that they want to appeal to players like me? just sayin'
Maybe they do want to appeal to players like you along with the Battle Royale players. There is definitely a big market for people who want big action with none of the depth and filler in between getting in the way.
Castle sieges can have depth. Perhaps most players can't play that way? (edit: or most games aren't set up that way, hence the claims in this article)
There is also a lot of excitement and energy. I find small group pvp rather lackluster, tepid. And usually over rather quickly. 1:1 is fine though, that can be enjoyable.
But yeah, I'd pay top dollar for a strictly siege game. Bring it on developers.
The new Mount and Blade looks right up my alley, for example.
edit: come to think of it I rather enjoyed the warhammer battlegrouds. Running around a large map to find very small stints of pvp was never exciting.
Now, in Lineage 2, when we had large clan/alliance fights, that was enjoyable. At least there was some give and take, winning and losing.
Post edited by Sovrath on
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Castle sieges in Lineage weren't even the best part of the game or pvp. They were fun, kind of, for a bit but it was all the stuff in between that made the game. The resource competition, mob farming, social alliances, character building, and politics were what made the game. I wonder if these guys get that.
Why does something have to be "the most". CUs obsessive quest for the most massive battles that no other engine can even come close to doesn't impress me at all. These guys trying the "the most" title with their sieges, unimpressive and juvenile. Just make something good and quit dicking around with "perfect". I'm sure CU will crush this claim, if they ever actually make a game, but is that really the point? If so then things are more screwed than I imagined.
What good are castle sieges in Ashes, if the entire rest of the game context is mediocre and forgettable. These guys should be focusing on what made their archetype predecessor (Lineage) the king it is today instead of making big blowhard claims and putting out fluff updates. That's yet another problem with all of these crowd funded MMOs, they spend way too much time keeping the hype up for funding rather than just doing the job.
oh man I disagree. The Castle Sieges were why I played the game. My best times were the castle sieges.
Oh sure, I had some open world pvp fun but the sieges for me were THE reason to play Lineage 2.
So maybe what they get is that they want to appeal to players like me? just sayin'
Maybe they do want to appeal to players like you along with the Battle Royale players. There is definitely a big market for people who want big action with none of the depth and filler in between getting in the way.
Castle sieges can have depth. Perhaps most players can't play that way? (edit: or most games aren't set up that way, hence the claims in this article)
There is also a lot of excitement and energy. I find small group pvp rather lackluster, tepid. And usually over rather quickly. 1:1 is fine though, that can be enjoyable.
But yeah, I'd pay top dollar for a strictly siege game. Bring it on developers.
The new Mount and Blade looks right up my alley, for example.
edit: come to think of it I rather enjoyed the warhammer battlegrouds. Running around a large map to find very small stints of pvp was never exciting.
Now, in Lineage 2, when we had large clan/alliance fights, that was enjoyable. At least there was some give and take, winning and losing.
Castle sieges can be fun as a mechanic, but what I think makes them memorable are all those things in between: The political alliances between guilds that form to try and get the best owners in place. The need to gather resources, the subterfuge, and pvp that springs up between competing guilds. Trying to farm certain pieces of gear, spells, or whatever before the next siege starts. Trying to farm the dungeon or resource controlled by the winning guild before ownership passes to a potential enemy guild. That stuff is what makes sieges memorable to me.
I can't for the life of me remember one WvW siege-like event in GW2. I know I've done them but it also felt pointless. I didn't do a lot of them because it felt more like a scrimmage with meta builds. On the other hand I can remember several castle sieges in Lineage 1. That's why the "in the middle" stuff is so important. It provides incentive and relationships (friends and foes) for participating.
Siege mechanics can be deep, but all alone they don't make for a very deep experience. They are an important part of the experience because they're also a catalyst for cooperation or combat. I have no doubt the team can come up with an interesting siege mechanic. I am seriously skeptical they any team can replicate the glue stuff in the middle that matters.(my emphasis added)
This is the million dollar question for Ashes, Crowfall, CU.
And, related: can they tie the economy, world changes and other kinds of combat to the sieges so that we get emotionally invested in the outcome, not just the process or rewards of the siege?
Comments
Sounds like the world will be small
~15 people coming to a glow stick lightsaber cash shop near you!
[twitch clip]
they also timidly confirmed they will not be meeting their "before 2020" release too, to the surprise of no one.
[twitch clip]
p.s. on monday their official forums will now have been offline due to 'website issues' for 3 months... (a.k.a. a Quarter of a year)
I hope it happens, I really enjoy large castle sieges, it was really the only reason to play L2. Unless you enjoy spending days mindlessly grinding trying to get one level.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
And, related: can they tie the economy, world changes and other kinds of combat to the sieges so that we get emotionally invested in the outcome, not just the process or rewards of the siege?