Posts made by Phaethonas

@logain said in First Fractured Gameplay Video Released!:

@phaethonas said in First Fractured Gameplay Video Released!:

(...)I noticed that there is friendly fire (yahoo!). In case grouping is possible, is friendly fire possible for players within the group?(...)

I'm not sure, but I think we have a different definition of 'friendly fire'? When arrows/ice beam/ice spray/AoE jump damage would have 'hit' the other player, he didn't seem to take damage, did he? Only once targeted, he took damage and that's not friendly fire, that's intentionally attacking (though with a 'miss-click')?
Don't get me wrong, I'd LOVE to have friendly fire (it's way too easy without, as you could see in the video just walking through killing everything in the way), but I thought the PvE/PvP thread mentioned friendly fire won't exist?

Good question. Did we see friendly fire? Hmmm

@neves said in Weekly Drawings:

Ok. Not to offend the artist out there, but the ability to draw is earning the right to play the game?!

Can all the fans and the developers work together for a solution where our mmo abilities in combat and knowledge, also in community, give the minority of players a chance to balance those points?

weekly drawings and not weekly drawings. I was confused at the beginning as well.

Apparently I am the first that has questions!!

So here comes the storm;

1. Is it possible to zoom in/out and change the camera angle?
2. I noticed that you were not grouped with the other player. Is grouping possible?
3. I noticed that there is friendly fire (yahoo!). In case grouping is possible, is friendly fire possible for players within the group?
4. I noticed that you bumped on a tree once or twice and once a plant "reacted" when stepped on. The latter is very nice, and shows some good work. Now to the question. What about player collision? Does this exist? Is there a distinction between "friendly" and "enemy" collision (see GW2)?
5. Supposedly there are "fully interactable environments", mentioned at the site and the gameplay video (I think). Does this mean that those trees and those rocks are "farmable"? For example, will I be getting (pine) wood from a pine tree?
6. How did you control the character? Both movement and combat wise.
7. Would it be possible to jump into the water/river and what would have happened then?
8. Is this procedural generation algorithm, in house tech or did it came with Unity/SpatialOS?

Daily post.

Daily post.

@specter what a tease

Ever since yesterday, when I go to my overview -> quests, I can see that there are 14 available blog articles instead of 13. As such I have 1300/1400 available foundation points.

I can't find the article though, and from what I gather reading the forum, there is no new article.

What is going on?

I tried to log out and log back in, but that didn't help!

Daily post.

Daily post.

Daily post.

Daily post.

Daily post.

Daily post.

Daily post.

Daily post.

Daily post.

Daily post

@tulukaruk said in Feature Spotlight #6 - PvP, Alignment & Crime:

@phaethonas in instanced PvP there is a difference between small scale instance and large scale. In non-instanced you have to balance for both as you will have both huge sieges and small scale skirmishes.

So, as I said instanced/open world pvp are different and need different balancing.

It's a bit different with PvE but not that much and balance in PvE isn't as important as in PvP.

So, despite any considerations you may have, you are basically are telling us that different balancing will be required as well. It may be easier, or not as important, but it will be required.

That said, you are wrong. If PvE balancing isn't important people wouldn't be raging when devs were trying to balance classes for pvp and in the process they were "ruining the pve balance".

And exactly as @Finland said in open world pvp you have to build for PvP not PvE.

(In general) That makes no sense whatsoever. That would make sense only in one case actually. Assuming an open world game in which you can either pvp or pve. Then yes, it makes sense to always have the pvp build active. But this isn't the case with Fractured. The pvp/pve ratio/balance (call it what you like) will be different at each planet.

At Tartaros it will make sense to always be on a pvp build, where at Arboreus it won't, especially with the harsh restrictions that have been announced. Even without them though, it still would be better to be on a pve build instead of a pvp build. At Syndesia it would make sense to use a hybrid (of sorts) or to have two (one for pvp and one for pve) and swap accordingly, if the game allows that.

@finland said in Feature Spotlight #6 - PvP, Alignment & Crime:

@phaethonas open world pvp and open world pve are the same. You go with pvp build not pve.

:man_facepalming:

@tulukaruk said in Feature Spotlight #6 - PvP, Alignment & Crime:

@phaethonas do you think and are you trying to say that if we have no instances they can leave small scale PvP and PvE unbalanced because who cares? Cause otherwise I'm not getting your point about balance and instances problem.

No, I am not saying that. What I am saying is that you can have four combinations (instanced pvp, open world pvp, instanced pve, open world pve) with all four having different gameplay. This results at requiring to balance the game four times!

And what you're saying about PvE group only makes sense if you're talking about instance because otherwise you will always have too many players there and it will not matter what are the requirements - if you need 1 burst, 1 sustain, 2 range, 2 tanks, 2 healers it will just go with 50 burst and 1 tank And everyone will have to have build prepared for PvP anyway.

Indeed the example was orianted towards instanced pve, which is the simplest to theorize about. With variations similar situations can be theorized about the rest.

Your argument would be valid if that was the other way - if we had instances and wanted open world PvP. Then it would require more balancing, the other way around is already included in non-instanced.

What you are saying makes no sense.