RE: =AQ3D= Feedback Thread


	Home \| Login \| Register \| Help \| Play

RE: =AQ3D= Feedback Thread

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [AdventureQuest 3D] >> AdventureQuest 3D General Discussion >> RE: =AQ3D= Feedback Thread

Page 9 of 30

Forum Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

10/22/2015 14:04:45

David the Wanderer
Legendary AK!

@*Slash*: I don't think that will be fixed, as these quests are only placeholders for the Alpha test. Once we move to the Open Beta, all these quests will probably be changed to something else.

AQW

Post #: 201

10/22/2015 14:43:11

*Slash*
Member

^
Fair enough ! Oh well, if it can help them pay extra extra .... extra attention to those small details, it was still worth mentioning ! :)

AQ	Post #: 202

10/23/2015 10:09:37

RKC
Member

I just wish they remove the cursor and just do a full complete mouse control on your character.

Let the left mouse Button control your basic attack and right mouse button ether dodge or block. God I have a razer naga epic chroma here and I want to use it full on aq3d.

I also wish they would add really time dodge and block like skyrim.

Only wishes that will never be granted

< Message edited by RKC -- 10/23/2015 10:12:07 >

Epic

Post #: 203

10/23/2015 10:26:36

LyRein
Member

@above

That will never happen for AQ3D until 2025, when we learn so much about Pluto, find lighter-than-air material and start a new engineering age so our future generations have floating cities on Venus and where mobiles have all the fancy details like PC.

AQ3D is not multi-platform.
It's a mobile game with different platform ports.

Unlike multi-platform, which has different control schemes and better experience on PC but less on mobile, AQ3D has ports, as in, same experience as the main platform on different ports. This means the game is not at its maximum potential on PC.

< Message edited by LyRein -- 10/23/2015 10:27:39 >

Post #: 204

10/23/2015 12:51:00

Prince tommy
Member

quote:

I just wish they remove the cursor and just do a full complete mouse control on your character.
Let the left mouse Button control your basic attack and right mouse button ether dodge or block. God I have a razer naga epic chroma here and I want to use it full on aq3d.

I also wish they would add really time dodge and block like skyrim.

I know right? I also wish there wouldn't be a loading screen between each map/zone that we enter. I know all MMOs have their loading screens but a majority of them don't have loading screens between each map/zone like AQ3D does. I wanna be able to leave yulgar's inn and goto battleon without having to deal with a loading screen and from battleon to greenguardnorth and so on.

quote:

That will never happen for AQ3D until 2025, when we learn so much about Pluto, find lighter-than-air material and start a new engineering age so our future generations have floating cities on Venus and where mobiles have all the fancy details like PC.
AQ3D is not multi-platform.
It's a mobile game with different platform ports.

Unlike multi-platform, which has different control schemes and better experience on PC but less on mobile, AQ3D has ports, as in, same experience as the main platform on different ports. This means the game is not at its maximum potential on PC.

If that's true LyRein I better find another MMO because I don't plan to wait till 2025 for that. But I will hang around AQ3D till the end of beta then quit.

< Message edited by Prince tommy -- 10/23/2015 12:53:09 >

Post #: 205

10/23/2015 15:11:49

David the Wanderer
Legendary AK!

@Prince Tommy: Not having loading screens at all is pretty unlikely to happen. For example, you need these loading screens to have different background music between areas, and to avoid the game from being too "heavy". Unifying Greenguard and Battleon is unlikely, since they're both big areas. Plus, having two "communicating" areas risks making monsters wander into areas they're not supposed to. When Alpha/Beta ends, and monsters are removed from Battleon, if Battleon was connected directly to Greenguard, Zards might end up inside the town's walls.

Plus, too large areas overload the game. When all of Battleon's shops get opened, your PC would have to run a lot more information than just what's currently outside buildings. The only thing that could be done is adding a pre-rendered animation to "hide" the loading screens, like your character opening a door, or walking along the path from Battleon to Greenguard Forest...

AQW

Post #: 206

10/23/2015 17:41:02

LyRein
Member

@David The Wanderer

That all isn't hard to solve... actually...
The only reason they aren't unified is because (Cysero said himself when previewing Doomwood) is that it will run badly on mobile.

As for monster's glitching that's a coding problem, which should only be occurring in alpha.
If simple things like that aren't fixed either the coder's aren't really experienced or the developers decided to focus on other things first.

Today they're mostly annoyances now rather than problems.

The truth is AE is not giving this game their full potential.
They have 3 other mobile games ready to launch (and a port for AQW) so why they spent all their effort making a full on game (with future patches and updates) mobile-centered is questionable.

Basing it around PC would NOT have stopped them from making mobile versions for it, not at all.
I don't care if a game is open-world or instance based, as long as the gameplay is enjoyable and challenging, I will stay.

AQ3D's combat (as it is) is mundane and lacks that immersive or strategic feel.
It's simply a case of choosing platform port over multi-platform..

Post #: 207

11/11/2015 16:42:02

Rezilia
Member

Continuing a discussion with David here. My discussion pertained to the idea that using 2.5D side-scrolling (100% 3D game with side-scrolling to give it a 2D feel) would allow the team to cut down on production costs and make the game look unique enough that it would gain more potential players than fully 3D-looking copy-paste Unity visuals.

There was confusion as to how this would work. Those who haven't played Elsword, Grand Chase, Trine 2, Dragonica, or any of those games may be confused about this, so I've made some diagrams to show what I mean.

All of these diagrams are top-view meaning it's what you'll see from the sky, not what you'd see in-game. Side-scrolling is like in most AE games where your character walks left and right.

First Diagram: http://s7.postimg.org/9jrgirfsb/2d1.png

This first diagram shows a remake of the forest outside BattleOn in AQ3D. Your character is walking on a road, side-scroll style. Robina is on that road. Think of this as a simple MQ road - nothing special at this point, and the NPC is near/behind you. But it's all 3D.

Now, in this first diagram, you see two terms: 3D and Wall.

3D refers to 3D terrain you can't go into because it's hidden behind an invisible wall - with this, you still see 3D terrain and you can move in 3D directions on the road and turn your camera and all that, but the devs don't have to program the 3D terrain to hold you.

Wall refers to visible rather than invisible walls. These are 3D walls that have drawings on them showing the background of the area, pretty typical stuff. Because the wall is beyond the max zoom range, it will be beyond your camera and you won't get the problem where you notice it's a wall and there's just blue stuff everywhere behind it. In fact, AQ3D already does this - if you're near Robina and walk toward Battleon, you'll see Battleon in the distance; that's really a visible wall with a 2D Battleon drawn into it...but it looks 3D enough, right?

Then there's two paths. As you move on a path, your camera angle turns to accommodate your character's movement on the path. You can see other players on the other path for a distance until you see a visible wall that gives the illusion that you've moved farther away from the other road than you really have.

On these paths are monsters you can fight. You follow these paths like you would in the current AQ3D forest, whether they're roads or grass or whatnot, and eventually go into other areas; the paths can even reconnect.

Because this is side-scrolling, 2D animations in the 3D area look more classy when near the backgrounds. The amount of time put into the environment decreases while the quality increases. Plus, because the area now has less elements in it, it's easier on players' computers and smartphones.

Second Diagram: http://s23.postimg.org/anzd6zm6z/2d2.png

This better shows how the visible walls are outside of the viewing range, keeping you from seeing that ugly blue stuff. See how the area is even smaller but the wall can be used to make it look bigger?

Now you see the point where the game eases up on the side-scrolling a bit and focuses on areas with more possible movement.

Third Diagram: http://s14.postimg.org/acjh8rfr5/2d3.png

This is where the aestheticism of side-scrolling really kicks in. You all remember how DF and AQW had the character go slightly "uphill" when changing scenes? This does the same thing, making it so that you can see most NPC by left and right movement while allowing more up, down, forward, and backward movement. The difference is that there's no scene change. Because the area now requires less resources, you can even have the G Tower in the same location without the game crashing.

David, you said you liked the ability to look around a tree. This shows how the ability to look around still exists, even when the explorable terrain has decreased physically.

This town structure focuses on the use of height. While there are other ways to design hubs, I like this one because it shows the height mechanics of 3D without players jumping off cliffs...

This structure has two paths you can go to that are accessed by moving toward the screen. You can move your camera around to see them, but you can also walk toward them to see how the path changes.

One way to use this structure is to make the zoom automatically go out when you get farther away from the screen. Some players might not like that, however.

As for buildings, they are can either side-scroll normally or have the camera follow your character's direction; it depends on what players would want, as either would look fine.

This would make it so that the devs wouldn't have to skin everything in the area or make everything explorable. You could even have 3D objects in the walls, like a waterfall that is 3D and is attached to the wall that is static 2D. You could even create really small birds to fly near the wall and it would look like they're far away in a 3D environment even though they're just next to...a wall. :/

And because AE has such great artists, the walls and environment could look waaaaaay better with this method since they don't have to tailor every single object.

AQW

Post #: 208

11/11/2015 17:11:35

David the Wanderer
Legendary AK!

I admit, I understand your point better now. Thanks for the clarifications. And I do agree, it still looks good and does allow for some degree of freedom of exploration, and is probably a bit lighter on devices used to run the game. Not sure about reducing time spent on each area (telling the ground to support the player is a single line of code, really), but I think that's beside the point. AQ3D won't get weekly updates anyway, so the team can take a few extra days when creating a new area.

However, I doubt it's feasible to change how the game works on such a basic gameplay element (that of how walking around works). This is one of these things that gets decided very early during game design, and which would need to rewrite a lot of code for it to change. While an interesting idea, I don't think it can be applied to AQ3D at this point in time. If we were still in the stage of design when the game exists at a purely theoretical level, with no code having been written and no area having been designed, I might even support this, but as I said, it's too late to change this aspect of the game.

In the end, I think it's really just a creative choice which won't affect the game's reception too much. A choice to which the dev team is perfectly entitled, which is no worse or better than others.

AQW

Post #: 209

11/11/2015 17:22:58

Rezilia
Member

I fully agree.

I didn't mean that you'd be forced to only see or move in sidescroll. You'd be able to move in any direction and see the game at any angle, but the paths of the game would make it where it could easily be side-scrolled, kind of like how it is in DF and ED already where you can move in four directions but you're still moving down a two-way path. As for the camera moving to accommodate the path, this would be a slight change where your current viewing angle would remain; so if you had your camera behind your character's back, moving down the path would keep it on their back even though they're turning.

As for implementing it, this was why I had the initial question of why they didn't do this instead, because I believe they have a good answer for it. :)

They could still implement it to some degree, too. Let's say that one area had you moving down a path with a highly condensed forest you can't go into...or that you're moving on a road on a mountain. These specific areas could have this effect instead in order for that update to go quicker. :)

I feel as if their current terrains could easily lead into other terrains with the 2.5D effect for certain areas, rather than them having to replace the areas they already have. This would be great for creating areas with more content without stressing our devices. :)

The only problem I see with this is that there's currently no keys for moving sideways. As long as they implemented those keys and have the character facing the screen and walking toward you when D is pressed, it should be fine. :)

< Message edited by ckdragonck -- 11/11/2015 23:29:11 >

AQW

Post #: 210

11/15/2015 9:55:23

LyRein
Member

@above

I don't know why you would want to make it a 3D/2.5D abomination.
It works on games like Elsword, Dragonica as you said, where you can spam and combo to your hearts desire.
It works on games like Path of Exile, Diablo, where you can combo to your hearts desire.

But on this game, which is more focused on soloing and socializing (~~mark my words mmorpg and solo-focus don't mash well together~~) I don't see the advantages in gameplay.

Also a wall just so the game doesn't have to switch camera angles? I'd prefer the zoom in zoom out feature over this, you know so I can walk where I want without a wall because i'm in a 3.5D area.

quote:

or make everything explorable.

Why is this a bad thing though, it actually makes the areas interesting instead of POINT A TO POINT B.

If the devs continue making games like this they'll never get the full idea of 3D, they've already dumbed it down so that it works on mobile, ~~unfortunately for other platforms that can't go full on~~.

What's the point in a zoom-in zoom-out feature then?
Also remember the game has auto-walk, this just makes it easier to let the game play for you (like who would want that).

With 4 skill combat system this is basically a mix of AQW, every sidescroller ever and generic mmo features.
Tell me if that will work out in the long run, where the maps become less about exploring and more about getting to the other side mixed in with tedious mob clearing.

I might aswell add the /join feature making this completely unnecessary.
Instead of using this everyone will just teleport to where they want to go.

Arguing by saying: you don't have to use /join makes no sense because why won't anyone use it if there's nothing to explore in an area and it's just a path to the next area?

~~Tbh though it's not like anyone plays AE games for the exploration anyways~~

just my thoughts.

Post #: 211

11/15/2015 18:28:42

Vice
Member

My feedback: AQW + Sherwood Dungeon = AQ3D
Looks good, excited for beta! Hopefully the quests won't be so mundane and grindy

Post #: 212

11/16/2015 0:02:29

Rezilia
Member

quote:

where you can spam and combo to your hearts desire

While it's true that those games are hack n slash while AQ3D is skill-spam, a game's visuals have nothing to do with its combat. Remember that FPS games used to be 2D...

quote:

Also a wall just so the game doesn't have to switch camera angles? I'd prefer the zoom in zoom out feature over this

In my example, you can still zoom in and out, turn your camera around, etc. The 2.5D would not take away camera options.

quote:

so I can walk where I want without a wall because i'm in a 3.5D area.

There's no such thing as 3.5D (but there are 4D games, so 3.5D is technically possible).

AQ3D already has you walking into both visible and invisible walls. The only difference is how far you can go off a path.

quote:

Why is this a bad thing though, it actually makes the areas interesting instead of POINT A TO POINT B.

As it is now, there's no reason to waste time creating that much space. The mobs are still in groups down a single path with simple entrances to other areas (which 2.5D would still allow), the majority of the objects in the game world have no purpose other than just being there, there's no parkour or agility mechanics, you're still bound to a very small area, and overall they're not really using the 3D game world for any reason other than for it to look 3D. 2.5D would still look 3D, would still do everything they're doing in the game now, etc, but would cost less resources and time to use. They wouldn't even need to rewrite anything - they can make 2.5D areas right now with the features they already have in-game.

quote:

they've already dumbed it down so that it works on mobile

They dumbed it down because they used Unity. There are plenty of mobile games - MMOs, in fact - and browser games that have superior graphics and mechanics yet cost less money to make. Most of the mobile games in question use HTML5 or something similar instead of Unity.

quote:

With 4 skill combat system this is basically a mix of AQW, every sidescroller ever and generic mmo features.
Tell me if that will work out in the long run, where the maps become less about exploring and more about getting to the other side mixed in with tedious mob clearing.

There's absolutely no exploration elements in AQ3D. It's already just about getting to the other side with tedious mob clearing. In fact, all of AE's games take longer to get to new locations and longer to clear mobs than hack n slash sidescrollers do, so I don't know what you're comparing it to...

Sidescrollers generally don't use 4 skill systems, they use combos. AQ3D could still be a 2.5D sidescroller and use its current skill system. Are you suggesting that generic MMO skill-spam is a good thing?

I absolutely love exploration in MMOs. But AQ3D doesn't have any exploration elements at all, so your argument is invalid.

quote:

I might aswell add the /join feature making this completely unnecessary.

The /join feature already exists in AQ3D.

Making the game a 2.5D sidescroller would not force a person to walk everywhere.

quote:

if there's nothing to explore in an area and it's just a path to the next area?

It literally takes 10 seconds to get from the entrance of an area to the exit.

quote:

Tbh though it's not like anyone plays AE games for the exploration anyways

I do. DF and AQW both have more to explore in each area than AQ3D does and possibly ever will. That's the beauty of cutting costs in order to insert more content.

AQW

Post #: 213

11/16/2015 3:34:55

David the Wanderer
Legendary AK!

Let's remember that AQ3D is still in its early stages of development. It's a bit too soon to declare that it will never have explorable areas, or that it can never compare to DF and AQW. During its testing phase, DF was effectively Falconreach; not today's Falconreach: a much smaller and less detailed Falconreach. In fact, Cysero has stated he'd like there to be sort-of-achievements for reaching hidden areas in the game maps, as an incentive to explore more.

@LyRein: There is no autowalk function implemented in the game, AFAIK.

AQW

Post #: 214

11/16/2015 11:28:03

Rezilia
Member

As true as that may be, the current state of the game's areas worries me a bit. Other browser Unity games such as FusionFall and Milmo already had things like Mario 64 style obstacles and velocity with cannons, respectively. I'm not seeing any of those in AQ3D and we already know that the areas are currently limited due to what they think users' devices can handle. So to declare exploration mechanics without any testing of agility features...is just something that's hard for me to believe. :/

Of course, what worries me the most is the idea that AQ3D will start off with the areas it currently has. I loved the fact that Legends of Lore had its own unique maps and starting areas, meant for its own story. If they're just going to copy Battleon, Greenguard, and Doomwood again, will any exploration elements actually allow us to discover anything new?

< Message edited by ckdragonck -- 11/16/2015 11:29:36 >

AQW

Post #: 215

11/17/2015 14:49:58

LyRein
Member

@David

Press down the scroller button

quote:

While it's true that those games are hack n slash while AQ3D is skill-spam, a game's visuals have nothing to do with its combat. Remember that FPS games used to be 2D...

No I meant spamming in Elsword.
2.5D HELPS Elsword's gameplay.

quote:

In my example, you can still zoom in and out, turn your camera around, etc. The 2.5D would not take away camera options.

I meant because zooming out is basically 3.5D view.

I'm getting confused atm, it sounds like basic 3D now.

quote:

There's no such thing as 3.5D (but there are 4D games, so 3.5D is technically possible).

That was a word I made up just for you! So it's easier to talk about 2.5D + 3D mesh.

quote:

AQ3D already has you walking into both visible and invisible walls. The only difference is how far you can go off a path.

Yes but this only limits it more doesn't it?

quote:

As it is now, there's no reason to waste time creating that much space. The mobs are still in groups down a single path with simple entrances to other areas (which 2.5D would still allow)

AE has a tendency to keep old gameplay mechanics and rarely fix or update them unless visually which happens often.

My point is not to keep these kinds of features but to make them better.
Instead of keeping single path mobs with an easier way to implement them why not learn to make them more interesting in terms of placement?

quote:

the majority of the objects in the game world have no purpose other than just being there, there's no parkour or agility mechanics, you're still bound to a very small area, and overall they're not really using the 3D game world for any reason other than for it to look 3D. 2.5D would still look 3D, would still do everything they're doing in the game now, etc, but would cost less resources and time to use. They wouldn't even need to rewrite anything - they can make 2.5D areas right now with the features they already have in-game.

Again the problem isn't resources the problem is AE not actually using the 3D mechanics.
Which you kind of highlighted (i made it bold).

quote:

They dumbed it down because they used Unity. There are plenty of mobile games - MMOs, in fact - and browser games that have superior graphics and mechanics yet cost less money to make. Most of the mobile games in question use HTML5 or something similar instead of Unity.

I was talking about gameplay wise.
Graphics are decent actually.

Apparently the likelihood of updated and a better combat system is low, four skills aren't satisfying enough but anymore and the screen get's covered up - basically what Cysero said.

Even low graphic games (as in details not overall) like DragonNest has an original and organic combat style. It was one of the first to use that kind of style. The developers risked it not being similar or recognizable but it paid off because of that reason.

Mobile can't handle that.
This game is centered around that device, so other platforms have to use the same performance the mobile has in terms of visuals or U.I.

quote:

There's absolutely no exploration elements in AQ3D. It's already just about getting to the other side with tedious mob clearing. In fact, all of AE's games take longer to get to new locations and longer to clear mobs than hack n slash sidescrollers do, so I don't know what you're comparing it to...

Depends on your definition.

There are hidden areas in Doomwood areas you can find and you can climb structures.
There's no reward or purpose but it's there.

I agree, exploration does seem non-existent when you first look, but they still have a chance to build on it.

It seems to me instead of changing these things you want them to be implemented easier.

Which won't help the developers to learn in 3D code. So any other 3D game attempt will become very (VERY) similar in design and they'd have not learnt anything new.

Instead of avoiding these things we need to confront them.

Towards your end comment..
I meant, using your idea it becomes sidescroller in style, it already has the generic mmo feel and it seems heavily inspired by AQW.

quote:

Sidescrollers generally don't use 4 skill systems, they use combos. AQ3D could still be a 2.5D sidescroller and use its current skill system. Are you suggesting that generic MMO skill-spam is a good thing?

No they don't I didn't say that.
I already said they use combos :)

When did I ever imply generic spam is a good thing?
I'm against it. I HATED AQW for this. I've been arguing on these forums about the four skill problems for a while now.

quote:

The /join feature already exists in AQ3D.

Making the game a 2.5D sidescroller would not force a person to walk everywhere.

You just said it exists when I know it exists.

My post was saying implementing this is unnecessary since people just /join from hub to hub and your main areas for this system are in wild areas. Yes, people will go there for quests but then it would just get irritating and could distract some people with the sudden change of view.

quote:

It literally takes 10 seconds to get from the entrance of an area to the exit.

Is this going to make me and a majority of the community (which is taken up by AQW) not use /join? No.

quote:

I do. DF and AQW both have more to explore in each area than AQ3D does and possibly ever will. That's the beauty of cutting costs in order to insert more content.

Yes but both have limits because they are flash and 2D.

DF is long and you can get lost easily or end up in dead ends with not much. Oh and monsters every corner that can get tedious and halt your exploration.

AQW has exploring where the main story takes place, not like extra side things which is what exploring should be.

AQ3D is 3D, is a new game, will use modern ideas and therefore will benefit from not copying (different from inspiration) previous games.

quote:

As true as that may be, the current state of the game's areas worries me a bit. Other browser Unity games such as FusionFall and Milmo already had things like Mario 64 style obstacles and velocity with cannons, respectively. I'm not seeing any of those in AQ3D and we already know that the areas are currently limited due to what they think users' devices can handle. So to declare exploration mechanics without any testing of agility features...is just something that's hard for me to believe. :/

Of course, what worries me the most is the idea that AQ3D will start off with the areas it currently has. I loved the fact that Legends of Lore had its own unique maps and starting areas, meant for its own story. If they're just going to copy Battleon, Greenguard, and Doomwood again, will any exploration elements actually allow us to discover anything new?

Agreed with everything.

< Message edited by LyRein -- 11/17/2015 14:53:11 >

Post #: 216

11/17/2015 16:07:24

Rezilia
Member

quote:

Mobile can't handle that.

Yes, they can. Go look up Kritika: White Knights.

quote:

so other platforms have to use the same performance the mobile has in terms of visuals or U.I.

In actuality, mobile games can often handle more than browser games can.

quote:

Which won't help the developers to learn in 3D code.

It's not about making things easier. Making the game in 2.5D will not be any easier or harder than making it as it is now, nor will it give them more or less experience in 3D code.

The only difference is that it'll cut down on the time and resources required to make the game, thus allowing them to create more new content over time than they could in their current model.

quote:

Is this going to make me and a majority of the community (which is taken up by AQW) not use /join?

You stated that there's nothing to explore if an area is just a path from one place to another.

I replied stating that the areas are so small that they are already just paths from one place to another.

quote:

AQ3D is 3D, is a new game, will use modern ideas and therefore will benefit from not copying (different from inspiration) previous games.

The problem is that it is copying the other games. Making the game 3D does not exempt it from being a clone. This is why I'm so confused as to why they spent the time and resources building battleon, doomwood, and greenguard, when they should have been re-building the Legends of Lore areas instead.

AQW

Post #: 217

11/17/2015 17:42:00

Caststarter
Member

Let me address some things to two separate folks.

@Ck:

quote:

As true as that may be, the current state of the game's areas worries me a bit. Other browser Unity games such as FusionFall and Milmo already had things like Mario 64 style obstacles and velocity with cannons, respectively. I'm not seeing any of those in AQ3D and we already know that the areas are currently limited due to what they think users' devices can handle. So to declare exploration mechanics without any testing of agility features...is just something that's hard for me to believe. :/

Of course, what worries me the most is the idea that AQ3D will start off with the areas it currently has. I loved the fact that Legends of Lore had its own unique maps and starting areas, meant for its own story. If they're just going to copy Battleon, Greenguard, and Doomwood again, will any exploration elements actually allow us to discover anything new?

Right now they are just doing iconic areas so players at least have some familiar territory. It was already confirmed that AQ3D will not follow the AQW continuity. It will have its own original story and characters. Plus stats in items is much more important to look at compared how it was in AQW. Yes, iconic characters like Robina, Cysero, and Artix do come up. Yet they are iconic. They are three characters that you would usually think first in your average AE, fantasy game. Nothing out of the ordinary.

Also, it has been quite some time since I heard of FusionFall... I think it says something. In fact, I may want to wager that FusionFall had some... less than adequate platforming. Not good design now is it? Just because one game did something that was out of the norm does not mean it is worth emulating. Doing something just for the sake of being "different" is NEVER a good direction to take in. Even then, AQ3D is in Alpha. Right now, AE wants to have the core basics (IE: questing and combat.) down where they are not a hassle later on. Maybe in beta, there COULD be jumping. Just not now.

quote:

There's no such thing as 3.5D (but there are 4D games, so 3.5D is technically possible).

Unless somehow a game incorporates space and time, there is no 4D game at all. Space and time is not just some "dimension" that involves shapes on a certain plane or planes. It is literally in a class of its own where objects in space warps the space around them as if they are making a depression, where light(which is actually time in this case) is affected as a result. Look at Black Holes. Impossible that AQ3D can do such a thing. Even games maybe in a century will not be able to do such a dimension unless the setting is out of a planet's atmosphere and even then, it might be just a basic 3D game. With just that information, it should be apparent that since space and time, in order to be a dimension, can NOT be separated. So no. 3.D is IMPOSSIBLE.

quote:

As it is now, there's no reason to waste time creating that much space. The mobs are still in groups down a single path with simple entrances to other areas (which 2.5D would still allow), the majority of the objects in the game world have no purpose other than just being there, there's no parkour or agility mechanics, you're still bound to a very small area, and overall they're not really using the 3D game world for any reason other than for it to look 3D. 2.5D would still look 3D, would still do everything they're doing in the game now, etc, but would cost less resources and time to use. They wouldn't even need to rewrite anything - they can make 2.5D areas right now with the features they already have in-game.

Such things are perfectly feasible in a 2D, Sprite-based game. Such things have nothing to do with being 3D. In all honesty, what would be the point of such "parkour"? From the looks of it, the "feature" would be so hardly used that you would honestly ask what is the point of it? There really is no need for it. Even if there were aesthetic reasons for it, it would not be there for 99% of the game where AQ3D is not based on parkour at all, where all it will do is distract development that would go to more essential, more important, and more worthwhile features and mechanics. This is saving money afterall, no? Why waste it?
@Lyrein:

quote:

AE has a tendency to keep old gameplay mechanics and rarely fix or update them unless visually which happens often.

AQ is incredibly different. DF is incredibly different. MQ is incredibly different. AQW is incredibly different. ED is incredibly different. Bladehaven is incredibly different. Battlegems is incredibly different. Only as of now, HS and AQW are the games that have the most similarities and even THEN HS has something to make it stand-out in terms of gameplay. (Which is I remember... NO CLASSES.) So no, AE does not have a tendency in keeping old gameplay mechanics. Do you mean updating them in the games themselves? Well I am afraid to tell you that programming makes it rather difficult to do.

quote:

Again the problem isn't resources the problem is AE not actually using the 3D mechanics.

AE is actually using "3D" mechanics. What are they? A free-range camera. Open fields as if it was Ocarina of Time. And that is it. Why? Simply because that those are the only true "unique" features that 3D games bring. Being 3D is just an expansion and creativity choice. As well as allowing AE to actually practice doing a 3D game. For the first time. Stop giving such high bars on AE on something that they are NOT used to doing. Look at the console generation that introduced 3D gaming and the Wii. A lot of developers went in blind and there were a lot of screw-ups because of it. Let AE take the time and be prepared for later 3D projects, where they might include more focus on the features you all want due to having a better understanding on how to run everything.

quote:

I'm against it. I HATED AQW for this. I've been arguing on these forums about the four skill problems for a while now.

AE is already taking steps to counter such a problem. Even then, players HAVE expressed feedback that is very good where they have brought forth ideas that still kept four skills but added things that would make skills have more than one use, expanding options. Even AQW is doing this!

quote:

Is this going to make me and a majority of the community (which is taken up by AQW) not use /join? No.

So allow me to understand you. You are arguing against something that is solely meant for convenience yet do not like it where you have the option of not using it at all yet you would use it anyways? Sorry, but it sounds to me that it is there as it is meant to be, especially for people who are short on time, where it isharmless.

In general, I would like to make a note for everything that it may be more beneficial to offer suggestions on how to improve things rather than lamenting on "what could have been"'s AE DOES know what goes on here and I think they would greatly appreciate the help that you all can bring. Really, suggest on! It is perfectly fine! All ideas are taken into consideration!

< Message edited by Caststarter -- 11/17/2015 17:51:37 >

DF	Post #: 218

11/17/2015 18:33:46

Rezilia
Member

quote:

Yet they are iconic. They are three characters that you would usually think first in your average AE, fantasy game. Nothing out of the ordinary.

The problem is that they stated that Legends of Lore would not have any locations from previous games nor NPCs from previous games, with the staff making new variants for themselves in-game. The fact that AQ3D is already having old areas and NPCs shows that the game might have more copy-paste, something that we players do not want.

quote:

Also, it has been quite some time since I heard of FusionFall... I think it says something. In fact, I may want to wager that FusionFall had some... less than adequate platforming. Not good design now is it?

FusionFall had absolutely astounding platforming. The reason why it failed was that the programmers - who were some of the best in the business - were using Unity in its infancy and just got so tired of its problems that they stopped trying to fix things. Most players, frustrated with those problems, left. That decreased FusionFall's revenue and CN decided that it wasn't worth funding the project anymore.

The gameplay was amazing. Unity was the problem. 99% of Unity games have bugs, errors, and other problems that the majority of developers cannot fix, no matter how hard they try. This is why I'm so critical of AE using Unity to make an Omni game instead of more user-friendly alternatives like HTML5.

Unity only seems more viable in the short run. In the long run, it becomes too much of a pain to sustain a game with.

quote:

Maybe in beta, there COULD be jumping. Just not now.

Legends of Lore had platforming. AQ3D, so far, does not. They intended to implement platforming already; if they aren't going to do so now, it's a turn-off.

quote:

Unless somehow a game incorporates space and time, there is no 4D game at all.

We're talking about 4-Dimensional Space in Mathematics, not 4-Dimensional Time in Physics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-dimensional_space

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_four-dimensional_games

quote:

From the looks of it, the "feature" would be so hardly used that you would honestly ask what is the point of it?

If the point of AQ3D is for them to get experience in making 3D, parkour is something that is vital to that experience. Even without parkour, basic agility and/or platforming mechanics are still a necessity.

quote:

Look at the console generation that introduced 3D gaming and the Wii.

Starting back with the PS1, Xbox, and equivalent Nintendo devices, most 3D games were platformers that sought to utlilize velocity, collecting, full exploration, unique bosses with unique attacks and good AIs, and did all of that with amazing graphics that did not require them to use advanced lighting or object detail. Spyro, Kya, and Mario 64 are the best examples, although there are many, many others.

The earliest 3D developers experimented way more than you're giving them credit for. Plus, their games rarely, if ever, broke. The consoles back then had more problems than the games did.

Then the modern age happened and there are very, very few 3D mechanics, only basic Point A to Point B functions. Even Assassin's Creed, praised for its parkour, uses only very limited platforming and combat mechanics.

quote:

Even AQW is doing this!

That is...wholly unnecessary. I'd understand changing it on AQ3D since it's still in development, but AQW? That'll completely break AQW's combat.

AQW

Post #: 219

11/17/2015 19:30:08

Caststarter
Member

Just simply because the game already has three areas, three areas that are universal across AE, does not mean they will just "copy-and paste" everything? AQW had battleon and greenguard. Did it copy and paste everything else based in AQ? No. It did not. Guess what as well. Soon, DF implemented Battleon after a certain-point. Did it copy things from there? No, it did not. It was only re-running an iconic event that happened originally in AQ. I expect no different here. Each game brought a different myriad of NPCs to look at. Just having three-five reoccurring ones might not mean anything in the long run.

And by my experience, FusionFall had mediocre platforming. Not to mention that it was nothing really "special", which is what you are looking for, in it.Plus, it does not mean that it was "astounding" if the developers did not even take the time to actually properly program it. Mario 64 pretty much set the standard for your average 3D platformer. Without a stupid array of screw-ups. Also, take a look at my point of developers going at things blind in regards to new technology. Of course you are going to see huge screw-ups when the technology is new. That is to be expected. With more experience, developers WILL learn. Also, care to give me this 99% of games that have errors that a majority of developers cannot fix? Which by a way, if it is a majority in terms of skill, it actually means ALL developers can fix it, where some are just more willing to do the proper amount of time to do what it is needed. You also said that the programmers for FusionFall were among the best in the business. Tell me. What has that not applied to yet in terms of new technology? The best programmers would have dealt with programming in 3D, which would lead to "problems that can not be fixed." They still screwed-up with GIGANTIC failures. Even in respected companies and series, these sort of mistakes happen. Even in Ocarina of Time, one of the most beloved Zelda games of all time, there were bugs and glitches. Just having those sort of errors does not mean anything. If anything, it is just something that just happens where all programmers will face where it might not even affect the final product. But in the case of FusionFall. Sorry, but it was due to inadequate design. Not programming. Something like HTML5 will also run into these problems. It is universal.

Legend of Lore had no platforming at all by the way. I certainly know this since I played the Alpha. If it was planned, it was certainly not in Alpha. Just like in AQ3D.

Mathematics in regards to dimensions is not exactly a "dimension" at all though. Tell me. How would that translate in the natural world? An optical illusion, I am pretty sure. Let me ask you this. How would that add to AQ3D?

I will say this again. Parkour, agility, or platforming mechanics are not unique to 3D nor are they vital. Getting used to 3D environments is actually along the lines of figuring out depth, 3D camera, advanced scaling of the environment to the player, and many more things that involved incredibly basic mechanics to most players. How much do you think of the workings of a camera? Not much huh? Well here is the thing. It is one of the most important things to figure out as a very bad camera could easily mean a bad game. A bad camera in itself can lead to an awful game. It is that simple.

I am also addressing your points specifically, not giving credit in terms of experimentation(I do acknowledge the fact that when new technology comes, a lot of experimentation is involved. Guess what. Experimentation leads to a LOT of screw-ups. Just like science...). But if you want to find you a way to show why those things are not exactly necessary, let us look at FFVII. It is easily one of the most popular FF's IN THE FRANCHISE. Well here is the thing. LOTS of glitches and bugs people fine. VERY dated graphics. (Super Mario 64 also suffers from this.) Where all of this was due to the game's programming rather than limitations on technology. (Look at FFIX. It did not have FFVII's problems to such a degree. Yet it was still on the PS1.) Yet there are a lot of things that you mentioned that people love about FFVII... is not there. I can argue it is also Point A to Point B. Yet that is not a problem in itself. Good AI is not specific to 3D games where many could argue that even back then, AI was still rudimentary. That is not a problem though. People love the materia system in FFVII, which is simply an expansion of FFVI's Esper system. They are not 3D oriented though. They were just regular design. It is nothing unique to 3D. 3D at this point is more of a creative choice more than anything. Let it be. Actually, I probably should talk about Etrian Odyssey for a few moments since I believe it is one of the best examples of how the number of dimensions is irrelevant to such programming and design. The bosses there had their own unique attacks! They also had specific patterns that you WANT to find where EVERY true final-boss in the series have their very specific pattern. (Ur-Child is the epitome of this.) Well here is the thing... Etrian Odyssey is a very simple game by Atlus. It was originally a game where you move in a rudimentary 3D environment based on tiles where the entire place was an labyrinth. Yet battles used 2D sprites. Why? To capture the feel of very old CRPGs like Wizardry. This was a creative choice that made Etrian Odyssey extremely niche. Yet it has quite the fanbase in Japan and a fanbase in the West and Europe. They then moved to 3D and want to know what happened. Etrian Odyssey Four: Legend of the Titan was the first game to fully incorporate 3D graphics and INSTANTLY became the most popular with the series, having the highest sales of any of the games. Including both in Japan and the West. Yet it was the same Etrian Odyssey that I came to expect. The third game is still my favorite but I will never discredit Etrian Odyssey four, as it is also a fantastic game. I think that should say something. AQ3D's decision to go 3D is both a creative choice... and a method to get used to making 3D games. Let it have a chance.

Though I want to say that you might actually give developers too much credit. Many people do not realize that ALL games are linear, to a degree. Even Mario 64, things were linear. It was also Point A to Point B. Even with full freedom to explore, many people did not like the 100 coins to get a star, even though it was meant to help make the game fully explorable with prices at every turn, since it was annoying to even do it in the first place. That was a design flaw where it was criticized as such. Yet it would have happen if the game was also 2D. Design flaws are universal.

Also, it did not break AQW's combat. There are classes that are more simplistic that are still very much overpowered. If anything, such decisions actually HELP to balance classes as it means their full array of options are not always readily available. This might be what AQ3D is trying to avoid.

DF	Post #: 220

11/17/2015 22:01:16

Rezilia
Member

quote:

Guess what as well.

There's no need to be rude.

quote:

Just simply because the game already has three areas, three areas that are universal across AE, does not mean they will just "copy-and paste" everything?

You're correct. That doesn't mean they'll copy-and-paste everything. I never said they would copy-and-paste everything. What I said was that the first areas being iconic and the first NPCs being iconic shows that AQ3D may be leaning on iconic rather than original. Even if they implement new areas, it won't matter if incoming players are turned off by seeing BO and AQW all over again instead of original content. It doesn't matter if they have 70 new regions if the first influx of players sees they're in Battleon and leaves because they think that there isn't anything different.

quote:

it does not mean that it was "astounding" if the developers did not even take the time to actually properly program it.

They did take the time to properly program it. At the time, Fusionfall had one of the most massive gameworlds in the MMO genre and still holds the record for having the most platforming elements of any MMO period. Please do not diss developers if you do not know what they were going through. They spent years, working from sweat to bone, getting Fusionfall produced only for them to be unable to fix Unity problems on their players' ends. The problem was NOT with their game - it was with Unity itself.

While it's true than any language will have problems, Unity has had the most problems for developers, second only to Shockwave3D.

Ocarina of Time actually wasn't that good. I'm not saying it was bad, it's simply overrated. The AIs in the game were terrible, the story and dialogue were incredibly bland, literally every texture in the game had less detail than other games at the time, and - as you said - it had mountains of bugs and glitches. It also shouldn't be used in a discussion that has nothing to do with it.

quote:

if it is a majority in terms of skill, it actually means ALL developers can fix it, where some are just more willing to do the proper amount of time to do what it is needed

That is completely incorrect. Most developers do not have the same skills or experience. Please remember that Fusionfall was one of the first games to use Unity ever and as such the programmers went in blind, yet tried to fix things in that terrible language for about 7 years, with 5 of those years being part of the game's release.

Please do not diss those who worked insanely hard to produce one of the most sophisticated games of all time in one of the worst programming languages ever. Remember that AE is the same way, as they've had to deal with Flash for almost 15 years. The difference is that Flash is easier to handle than Unity.

quote:

Mathematics in regards to dimensions is not exactly a "dimension" at all though. Tell me. How would that translate in the natural world? An optical illusion, I am pretty sure.

Mathematics is the only objective subject that has the most validity. While our universe is 3-Dimensional, we will eventually be able to create simulations that run in full 4-Dimensionality. It's not an illusion - it's how space works.

As for spacetime, Physics is 100% theoretical. Mathematics can attempt to apply the theories, but Physics cannot directly apply anything. So 4-Dimensional Space has more validity than 4D spacetime.

quote:

Legend of Lore had no platforming at all by the way. I certainly know this since I played the Alpha. If it was planned, it was certainly not in Alpha. Just like in AQ3D.

I don't remember exactly when, but Cysero and Artix at one time got excited and told everyone they released an obstacle course in L.O.L. They can verify this.

quote:

Parkour, agility, or platforming mechanics are not unique to 3D nor are they vital. Getting used to 3D environments is actually along the lines of figuring out depth, 3D camera, advanced scaling of the environment to the player, and many more things that involved incredibly basic mechanics to most players. How much do you think of the workings of a camera? Not much huh? Well here is the thing. It is one of the most important things to figure out as a very bad camera could easily mean a bad game.

They've already finalized the camera, so I don't see your point. It's true that those are things vital to 3D, but so are agility mechanics and the z-axis. If they had not already finished the things you listed, I would have brought them up too.

quote:

Yet there are a lot of things that you mentioned that people love about FFVII... is not there.

This is because Square Enix used 3D in order to expand the environment, not to gain experience doing 3D. AQ3D is being done in order to gain experience in 3D.

What made FF7 good was the story, not the mechanics. No FF fan ever asks for any new games to use FF7's mechanics. When SE announced that the HD version of FF7 would use the same mechanics, everyone raged.

quote:

Etrian Odyssey is a very simple game by Atlus. It was originally a game where you move in a rudimentary 3D environment based on tiles where the entire place was an labyrinth. Yet battles used 2D sprites. Why? To capture the feel of very old CRPGs like Wizardry.

I've played EO. It was good. I don't see what it has to do with this discussion.

quote:

AQ3D's decision to go 3D is both a creative choice... and a method to get used to making 3D games. Let it have a chance.

I'd love for AQ3D to succeed. I simply suggested a way for them to get the same amount of experience while cutting costs and thus producing more content (2.5D) and stated how them attempting to have exploration elements without testing agility mechanics will make the exploration dull.

quote:

Though I want to say that you might actually give developers too much credit.

I personally think you give developers too little credit. Game development is one of the hardest jobs in existence. There's always a breaking point, and they should not be dissed for hitting that breaking point. Even the AE Staff have hit breaking points; I simply don't want them to give up on AQ3D because of how terrible Unity is and because of the time and resources they'll be putting into it while having limited content and limited options.

quote:

Many people do not realize that ALL games are linear, to a degree. Even Mario 64, things were linear. It was also Point A to Point B.

There are many non-linear games, such as RuneScape and Skyrim. If that's not what you're talking about, then you've confused me.

quote:

Even with full freedom to explore, many people did not like the 100 coins to get a star, even though it was meant to help make the game fully explorable with prices at every turn

I would understand not liking that in most games, but Mario 64 was a collect-a-thon, so that's excusable. Personally, I've never heard anyone complain about having to collect 100 coins in that game.

quote:

Also, it did not break AQW's combat. There are classes that are more simplistic that are still very much overpowered. If anything, such decisions actually HELP to balance classes as it means their full array of options are not always readily available.

The more options you add to combat, the harder it is to balance. It's true that the classes are imbalanced, but that has nothing to do with there only being 4 skills.

< Message edited by ckdragonck -- 11/17/2015 22:42:05 >

AQW

Post #: 221

11/18/2015 9:18:15

David the Wanderer
Legendary AK!

I feel the need to say a few things: This is the "AQ3D Feedback Thread". This thread is for discussing this game and your opinions on it. Brining up other games as an example to better explain your opinions is ok, but do not turn this in a discussion about games that are not AQ3D. I also would like to remind everybody of Constructive Criticism and that that's what this thread is for.

With that out of the way, I'm now going to talk as a player and forum member, not an AK. My following statements are mine, not AE's or the Forum Staff's.

On the subject of combat: It's not the four-skills system that ruined AQW combat. What made AQW a mess was the constant power creep of new classes. Until recently, every new class released was stronger than the one before, making all previous classes outdated. AQW also suffers greatly from HP-sponge bosses, something which AQ3D will most likely avoid, as they have stated the game will be balanced towards solo play. There will probably still be bosses with a lot of HP which you can only take down with a party, but they probably would be challenge bosses. AQW doesn't suffers from bad combat mechanics: it suffers from poor balance.

@ckdragonck:

I'm going to address some of your points.

quote:

You're correct. That doesn't mean they'll copy-and-paste everything. I never said they would copy-and-paste everything. What I said was that the first areas being iconic and the first NPCs being iconic shows that AQ3D may be leaning on iconic rather than original. Even if they implement new areas, it won't matter if incoming players are turned off by seeing BO and AQW all over again instead of original content. It doesn't matter if they have 70 new regions if the first influx of players sees they're in Battleon and leaves because they think that there isn't anything different.

From my personal experience with AE, all their games have their own distinctive feel and areas. Even "common" areas are very different between the various games (go through AQW's Greenguard Forest, and then through AQ3D's. The differences in even the basic layout are very big), but have always kept a familiar feeling to them. That's part of AE's charm: they manage to make me feel at home while still giving me new experiences. Veteran players of AE know that no game is a copy-paste of another; even with all the similarities, it will be an unique product. New players, on the other hand, have had no experience with previous AE games, so the game world will be fully new for them.
Also, keep in mind this is still Alpha. The finished product could be wildly different.

quote:

Mathematics is the only objective subject that has the most validity. While our universe is 3-Dimensional, we will eventually be able to create simulations that run in full 4-Dimensionality. It's not an illusion - it's how space works.

As for spacetime, Physics is 100% theoretical. Mathematics can attempt to apply the theories, but Physics cannot directly apply anything. So 4-Dimensional Space has more validity than 4D spacetime.

Excuse me, but the inverse is actually true. Mathematics is a purely theoretical subject, while Physics are, by definition, applied to real life.

quote:

I don't remember exactly when, but Cysero and Artix at one time got excited and told everyone they released an obstacle course in L.O.L. They can verify this.

There actually was an obstacle course in AQ3D. It has been removed with the latest update because it was simply meant as something for the testers to have fun with. It was a Mario-like series of platforms. By the way, you CAN jump in AQ3D: just press space.

On that note, the devs ARE working on using the perks of 3D at full potential. But they are still learning the basics, so you've got to give them time. You can't pretend they immediately use the full potentiality of 3D on their first months of coding in 3D.
As an addendum: one of the most popular MMOs, if not THE most popular, Worlds of Warcraft, uses 3D graphics, but very little 3D mechanics. Personal opinions on WoW not withstanding, it's obvious you can make a 3D game without making full use of the potentiality of three dimensions and still be successful.

AQW

Post #: 222

11/18/2015 10:09:21

Rezilia
Member

quote:

It's not the four-skills system that ruined AQW combat. What made AQW a mess was the constant power creep of new classes.

I completely agree. Then again, AQW isn't the only game that suffers from this - most AE games have class imbalance because of P2W classes forcing their way into the game, each trying to be better than the last.

quote:

From my personal experience with AE, all their games have their own distinctive feel and areas.

I never said they didn't. I said that having iconic areas as the first areas is a turn-off. It's fine to do what DF did and introduce them later on, but AQ3D shouldn't start with BattleOn. It just shouldn't; it can be a major turn-off for returning players.

quote:

Mathematics is a purely theoretical subject, while Physics are, by definition, applied to real life.

There is nothing about Geometry that is purely theoretical. 4D Space is part of Geometry. All branches of Mathematics are based on objective proof, completely upon practice and not theory. Every formula in Mathematics continuously proves every other formula, meaning that even 4D Space is proven as long as it adheres to previous mathematical concepts.

But, if you don't want to take my word for it, and because this is getting off-topic, here's xkcd: https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/purity.png No one questions xkcd. :/

quote:

By the way, you CAN jump in AQ3D: just press space.

I never said we couldn't. Most 3D games have jump. I was talking about velocity.

quote:

But they are still learning the basics, so you've got to give them time.

I don't have a problem with them taking their time. I'm just worried that they're going to take so much time that they won't be able to create enough content for AQ3D to get enough revenue to match the costs for creating the game. Unity will already slow them down more than HTML5, and full 3D will take them way longer than 2.5D.

quote:

Worlds of Warcraft, uses 3D graphics, but very little 3D mechanics.

While I don't like WoW, I have to defend it in this case. It has swimming, no invisible edges on any objects, telescope functions ever since Cataclysm, and enemy AoEs that specify targets instead of always attacking just a 360* angle. It might not have dodging, but it definitely has many 3D mechanics.

AQ3D, on the other hand, has no swimming, objects are divided into blocks with invisible edges, very basic AoE effects, etc. So while it also uses 3D mechanics, it uses less.

The reason why I specify swimming is that it works, for the most part, very differently from swimming in 2D and requires programming of entirely different set of character movements.

Thank you for bringing that up, though, as it's a good comparison...in this case. :)

AQW

Post #: 223

11/18/2015 15:29:42

David the Wanderer
Legendary AK!

@ckdragonck: Uh, that wasn't my point. I know math is the "purest" subject, but exactly because it IS pure it belongs in the realm of theory. Mathematics applied to real life is physics.

Also, as I said, at this point there's no chance the game won't be in 3D or in Unity. Switching to another coding language would mean throwing months of work down the drain. That point is moot. Yes, maybe in your opinion it could have been done better, but it can't be changed now. Again, this is the Feedback thread. Feedback is about what IS, not what could have been.

Also, about all those neat things WoW has... With time, AQ3D might implement them as well, plus original innovations of its own. The dev team right now is working on making the game work its basic functions (walk, battle, quests, rewards, etc.). More complex and interesting things will come in the future.

AQW

Post #: 224

11/18/2015 16:35:11

LyRein
Member

I dunno but I feel like they want to release this game TOO soon.

Like on the kick-starter design notes, the original plan was to have the game be released around this time.

The new plan is to have open beta by December. I dunno what happened to closed beta.

quote:

AQ is incredibly different. DF is incredibly different. MQ is incredibly different. AQW is incredibly different. ED is incredibly different. Bladehaven is incredibly different. Battlegems is incredibly different.

To be fair ED was not originally an AE game IIRC, the devs were brought into AE.
Battlegems has had little to no updates.
Bladehaven felt like a one-shot.

quote:

Do you mean updating them in the games themselves? Well I am afraid to tell you that programming makes it rather difficult to do.

You can't use programming is hard as an excuse not to update your game's mechanics (fun fact, there's a difference between update and change! alpha is the only chance they will change any mechanics).

Yes programming a game is hard.
But that's why the developers learned how to program in the first place. So they can, even if it is hard.

quote:

AE is actually using "3D" mechanics.

I hope you know the difference between mechanics and aesthetics.

3D offers a new view point. That's aesthetic.
3D offers interactive obstacles, swimming, mounts that can fly, open-world features, etc. That's mechanics.
AE is only using aesthetics.

No point in 3D if it's just for viewing.

Gameplay > graphics majority of gamers would agree.

quote:

So allow me to understand you. You are arguing against something that is solely meant for convenience yet do not like it where you have the option of not using it at all yet you would use it anyways? Sorry, but it sounds to me that it is there as it is meant to be, especially for people who are short on time, where it isharmless.

What are you talking about.

btw if your short on time you shouldn't be playing grindy linear mmorpgs and trying to rush it.

quote:

AE is already taking steps to counter such a problem. Even then, players HAVE expressed feedback that is very good where they have brought forth ideas that still kept four skills but added things that would make skills have more than one use, expanding options. Even AQW is doing this!

Still doesn't give me an explanation as to why they CHOSE 4 skills combat system with no variety or unique feature to make it interesting. You'll probably have to buy classes and equip them separately to use certain skills.

Making one skill have more than one use is not a bad idea.
But using this type of system with limited (very limited) amount of skills is.

Because AE's fanbase will get bored of using one class over and over they'll beg for another one that basically serves the same purpose but looks different and is slightly more overkill.

Then how will they make more interesting classes?

I can't be bothered arguing anymore tbh.

Post #: 225

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [AdventureQuest 3D] >> AdventureQuest 3D General Discussion >> RE: =AQ3D= Feedback Thread

Page 9 of 30

Jump to:

Icon Legend

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Forum Content Copyright © 2018 Artix Entertainment, LLC.

"AdventureQuest", "DragonFable", "MechQuest", "EpicDuel", "BattleOn.com", "AdventureQuest Worlds", "Artix Entertainment"
and all game character names are either trademarks or registered trademarks of Artix Entertainment, LLC. All rights are reserved.
PRIVACY POLICY