Unofficial Thievery Poll

[finegamingconnoisseur]

Do you believe thievery would be more meaningful to the overall population then an update that adds combat abilities and full speed casting or an instanced dungeon system that has group size restrictions?

I'm looking for dev time spent on meaningful change. We tried thievery before. It wasn't able to interest more then 500 players globally. Those are the facts. Thievery with improved graphics will have a net effect similar to the first thievery, that is to say "little to none".

I'm far too objective and i'm a results oriented pragmatic person. I've seen the system, I was unimpressed, the metrics speak for themselves.

I beg to differ.

The problem with that approach is that the same people that are attracted to this game without thievery implemented, will likely also leave when thievery is implemented.

Bringing in the wrong crowd in the hopes that it would boost player numbers is the same error that Ultima Online made when EA told Origin to implement Trammel.

The player count went up at first, then slowly fizzled out because UO was not and would never be the kind of game that the masses would stay for the long term no matter how many bells and whistles it bolted on.

Not only did the newer crowd leave, but the old vets that were attracted to the game in the first place also left because to them the game had sold them out and lost its soul.

Official UO would never again be what it was when it first launched. It was game over for the original target audience and fans in every way that mattered.

The way SV is going with MO2, it risks repeating history in the same way as UO did by not staying the course and give its target audience what it said it would.

 

[Rhias]

Do you believe thievery would be more meaningful to the overall population then ... an instanced dungeon system that has group size restrictions?

It enrages me when reading somthing about an instanced dungeon system with group size restirctions.

It contradicts the whole initial concept of MO. One big uninstanciated world.

If you want more PVE content then add more dungeons to the world!
And if you want a group size restriction build the dungeon in a way that makes it unattractive for larger groups. Chokepoints, narrow passes, cliffs, rope bridges, jumping parts with limited "platform" size, environment effects (e.g. snowstorms, lava flows, poisonous areas). If you need to rely on group size restrictions than SV basically admits that they think they're unable in doing propert world/level design.

 

[ThaBadMan]

Nobody needs to answer those questions. It’s not our responsibility to figure out how SV can attract new players.

Point is: game was marketed as having thieving. It didn’t. Jokes on us, I guess, but the idea that you’re gonna ask for subs when the feature is still not in the game (and now off the road map for the foreseeable future lmao) is absurd.

Maybe people like me are the minority, but the daily drop in player pops as people’s free months are timing out is telling a different story. Give people what you promised them 2 years ago instead of holding votes on whether to go back on those promises.

Why not give us originals what they promised what 14-15 years ago with the first game ?

This is what SV do, promise us the world and giving us the sewers...Sadly only thing to do is get used to it...

 

[ThaBadMan]

I beg to differ.

The problem with that approach is that the same people that are attracted to this game without thievery implemented, will likely also leave when thievery is implemented.

Bringing in the wrong crowd in the hopes that it would boost player numbers is the same error that Ultima Online made when EA told Origin to implement Trammel.

The player count went up at first, then slowly fizzled out because UO was not and would never be the kind of game that the masses would stay for the long term no matter how many bells and whistles it bolted on.

Not only did the newer crowd leave, but the old vets that were attracted to the game in the first place also left because to them the game had sold them out and lost its soul.

Official UO would never again be what it was when it first launched. It was game over for the original target audience and fans in every way that mattered.

The way SV is going with MO2, it risks repeating history in the same way as UO did by not staying the course and give its target audience what it said it would.

Thing is SV made the UO mistake in MO, so now in MO2 they are simply redoing the mistake for their 2nd time but for us 3rd time.
We lost UO, MO and MO2 to the same crowd, and that crowd still dont understand why we are so against retarded game breaking suggestions from said crowd. We know by now developers somehow always gets attracted by that wrong crowd of game ruining thinking.

 

[Amadman]

Ideally the things that where in the earlier roadmap and pushed back should now have priority.

Thievery was such a thing and really is a core part of the game.

I voted 8 in this poll. I voted similar in the original seeing I weighted it against the other options.


Also how much work already done and work still needed to be done should be a factor in these priorities.

For example the game rooms and such was supposed to already have work done on them.

At one point I heard that the voting options would have these types of details to help us make informed decisions.

But unfortunately that is not what we got.

 

[Yeonan]

As much as I'd like to see thievery because it's a big part of the heart of mortal, I also don't see it pulling in large numbers of players.

We have to be realistic, in terms of ROI, it's pretty low compared to new dungeons and polish etc. So I can get why SV isn't prioritizing it.

 

[allut]

mages have gotten spellschools, pets users have gotten alot of pets, melee is getting abilities. its time for thievery to come

 

[CherryKush]

As much as I'd like to see thievery because it's a big part of the heart of mortal, I also don't see it pulling in large numbers of players.

We have to be realistic, in terms of ROI, it's pretty low compared to new dungeons and polish etc. So I can get why SV isn't prioritizing it.

I'm going to argue that adding Thievery will bring money and people to the game and I'm going to use MO1 as the proof. So MO1 had a free to play option allowing you to level your skills up to a max of 70, BUT! you could not use any of the Thievery skills as a free to play player, you had to subscribe to the monthly subscription before you could use the Thievery skills.

Now this tells me Thievery was in HIGH demand and SV knew people would pay the sub to play the class. They were right, I had no problems subbing so I could play my desired class. This time around with Twitch exposure, people watching all the fun shenanigans a thief can do will surely draw in a large Rouge/Thief/Assassin player base. Back in the day you had to be lucky enough to stumble onto a Grey Fox YouTube video to see that

 

[fartbox]

Because thievery taps in to an entirely new audience. Because mechanics based around thievery would tap into a style of game that is host to some of the most popular franchises of all time. I already went through the list before on a different thread, but just type in "stealth games" into google. Or the fact that pretty much every MMORPG has a class with stealth mechanics or a means of playing via subterfuge.

It adds a whole different dimension to the game. Right now? The game doesn't feel very dynamic because of the lack of this dimension. This is a game that is heavily inspired by some level of realism, as much as it can in a fantasy setting.

Sneaking and stealth is a thing people can do realistically. You're only building on the core intent of the game by implementing it. That, and a rogue style of play is a key archtype to the fantasy RPG genre across the board.

Also, you want to bring up how MO1 didn't have more players, and pin the blame on thievery? No. Sorry, there are too many other factors that could've played into the failure of that game that have nothing to do with thievery. I for one never heard of MO1, but would've gladly played it if i'd known it existed. I have a feeling that may have had something to do with it's failure. That or a host of other potential issues completely unrelated to thievery.

The fact is, people like you are not thinking about what is good for the game, you are thinking about what will be more hassle for yourself. Thievery will most certainly be good for this game. It is an entirely new way of playing with a style of play that has a MASSIVE audience. You're worried about having to be on your toes in the "safe" zones. You feel entitled to a safe space where you can let your guard down in a game that is supposed to be brutal and punishing. You're one of these people who just don't belong on a game like this, and you contaminate the vision and drag it down with your selfishness.

Its a good write up but if any of this were true then MO1 wouldn't of had 500 players. There would functionally be little difference between thievery MO1 vs MO2.

If they did implement thievery in the near future (they wont) my argument would be vindicated in that that outside of the MO1 community, very few people would be excited about it and it wouldn't draw any additional new players or improve retention rates which should be the priority right now.

 

[Amelia]

I voted 8, not the very most important like general optimizaion (fps, freeze, etc ) but one of the most.

 

[allut]

Its a good write up but if any of this were true then MO1 wouldn't of had 500 players. There would functionally be little difference between thievery MO1 vs MO2.

If they did implement thievery in the near future (they wont) my argument would be vindicated in that that outside of the MO1 community, very few people would be excited about it and it wouldn't draw any additional new players or improve retention rates which should be the priority right now.

And what on the roadmap really brings in new people in your opinion? new armorset? more poi? I think a whole new way of playing the game is much more attractive

 

[Amadman]

As much as I'd like to see thievery because it's a big part of the heart of mortal, I also don't see it pulling in large numbers of players.

We have to be realistic, in terms of ROI, it's pretty low compared to new dungeons and polish etc. So I can get why SV isn't prioritizing it.

I am not so sure that adding more of content already in game is going to bring in many new players.

At least with thieving you bring in other types of players that may be on the fence.

The game needs to appeal to more types of players.

 

[fartbox]

And what on the roadmap really brings in new people in your opinion? new armorset? more poi? I think a whole new way of playing the game is much more attractive

Lol I said that no less then twice earlier in the thread; Combat overhaul and size restricted dungeons.

We can't hold any players from survivals or other MMO's because:

1: the combat in Mortal is ass. Both the mage and melee combat is ass. Outside of this community it is hated, it's the chief complaint among players that quit within 24 hours of game time and that number is somewhere north of 90% of all players who buy the title.

and

2: Lack of solo/small group content. The game revolves around large groups which translates poorly for the average gamer. Especially casual gamers with less then 3 hours per day to play.

Either of these updates would be magnitudes more impactful to the population and health of the game then thievery. The only people who even know about thievery are MO1 players and guess what. You're all still here, still subbed, still playing the game. Its not MO1 players that Henrik needs to convince to play the game, it's guys from Albion, OSRS, EVE, Rust, Dayz, Vrising, Valheim, ETC ETC who make up numbers hundreds and even thousands of times greater then the MO1 community. ( A single OSRS server has more players then MO2, there are 200 OSRS servers.)

 

[allut]

Lol I said that no less then twice earlier in the thread; Combat overhaul and size restricted dungeons.

We can't hold any players from survivals or other MMO's because:

1: the combat in Mortal is ass. Both the mage and melee combat is ass. Outside of this community it is hated, it's the chief complaint among players that quit within 24 hours of game time and that number is somewhere north of 90% of all players who buy the title.

and

2: Lack of solo/small group content. The game revolves around large groups which translates poorly for the average gamer. Especially casual gamers with less then 3 hours per day to play.

Either of these updates would be magnitudes more impactful to the population and health of the game then thievery. The only people who even know about thievery are MO1 players and guess what. You're all still here, still subbed, still playing the game. Its not MO1 players that Henrik needs to convince to play the game, it's guys from Albion, OSRS, EVE, Rust, Dayz, Vrising, Valheim, ETC ETC who make up numbers hundreds and even thousands of times greater then the MO1 community. ( A single OSRS server has more players then MO2, there are 200 OSRS servers.)

thievery would be helpful for soloplayers. what is size restricted dungeon? you join with 5 ppl and nobody can kill you? free loot? oraganized 5v5v5(with possible exploiting(letting 1 team win quick and go again)?
every farm in the game is more or less solo/small group content. except for minotaur king maybe. Only problem i guess is guilds holding the dungeons down

 

[fartbox]

thievery would be helpful for soloplayers. what is size restricted dungeon? you join with 5 ppl and nobody can kill you? free loot? oraganized 5v5v5(with possible exploiting(letting 1 team win quick and go again)?

Yea I already said it would be a powerful end-game tool for solo players to "win" on page 1 of this thread and while it sounds good in theory it won't translate into more then a handful of players who exclusively thieve or have alts to thieve. Unless they decide to make it profession points and just give it to everyone, which I have sincere doubts on.

I already said thievery could be a good update in the future, just not right now or anywhere near right now because there are so many other areas of the game that are struggling that the players we want to attract to the game will never get to thievery in the first place.

We have to assume based on SV's previous performance that any update is going to take 6months. I don't see the value in thievery right now. There are too many other critical areas that need addressing first.

PVP Games revolve around combat, when new players load in and they see what MO2 combat has to offer they quickly log out in *most* cases. Dont believe me? Go ahead and check out any of the hundreds of youtube review videos. You will find it is a chief complaint. When you have a PVP game with combat as bad as mortals is it's very hard to do anything else to convince someone to stick around.

Whatever updates you throw on top of a turd is still just covering the turd. Everyone can smell it, most people can still see it and no one wants to step in it.

 

[CherryKush]

1: the combat in Mortal is ass. Both the mage and melee combat is ass.

It really sounds like Mortal is not the game for you then, it might be more productive if you just moved on to something else you do enjoy as the combat in this game will never change.

 

[fartbox]

It really sounds like Mortal is not the game for you then, it might be more productive if you just moved on to something else you do enjoy as the combat in this game will never change.

If it doesn't change the game will be locked into a state of mediocrity until its eventual demise. It enjoys a passable population right now because there are so few options in the MMO genre, even with those limited options the game can not even hit 2k concurrent.

Imagine going to a beauty pageant, winning third place and no one showed up besides you. Thats MO2 in a nutshell. But there are competitors in the market, most of them are 20 year old titles with the exception of Albion but quite a few new ones on the horizon. The combat needs to be addressed before those new games release (looking at AOC and Pax) or you might as well burry the game.

Theres no loyalty among the veterans here and most are here because there isn't anywhere else to go. Even the guys who depend on Mortal for a living are constantly looking/talking about jumping ship(tatsuya) and are in a state of limbo until the next big release.

I know that SV knows that MO2 combat is the number 1 complaint among players who quit >24 hours. Whether or not they act on it is to be seen. So lets see . They wouldn't put combat abilities on the poll for nothing would they?

 

[allut]

PVP Games revolve around combat, when new players load in and they see what MO2 combat has to offer they quickly log out in *most* cases. Dont believe me? Go ahead and check out any of the hundreds of youtube review videos. You will find it is a chief complaint. When you have a PVP game with combat as bad as mortals is it's very hard to do anything else to convince someone to stick around.

what new players are we talking about here. wow players who only wants to click spells/attacks? Counter-strike players? We have many from other melee games like mordhau, chivraly etc. Mortal can never have that deep combat system because of 1 big server etc. Henrik has explained this many times. Soon we get Combat polish and some melee abilities. I dont think much more will happen soon after that, maybe some tweaks here and there.
thievery will come with poison weapons and traps too. And if im not mistaken some kind of bounty hunter for murderers. So in my opinion it unlocks a big part of what the game is missing. And thats why i do not agree with you and i think thievery is most necessary (ofc with fixes for freezes etc and other stuff)

 

[fartbox]

what new players are we talking about here. wow players who only wants to click spells/attacks? Counter-strike players? We have many from other melee games like mordhau, chivraly etc. Mortal can never have that deep combat system because of 1 big server etc. Henrik has explained this many times. Soon we get Combat polish and some melee abilities. I dont think much more will happen soon after that, maybe some tweaks here and there.
thievery will come with poison weapons and traps too. And if im not mistaken some kind of bounty hunter for murderers. So in my opinion it unlocks a big part of what the game is missing. And thats why i do not agree with you and i think thievery is most necessary (ofc with fixes for freezes etc and other stuff)

I love this argument everytime someone raises it. They jump straight to the nuclear tab target, world is falling. There are maybe 2 relevant tab target games? I don't know why you guys have such a hard on for them.

Most survival games/mmo's fall into aimed skillshot abilities with a heavy emphasis on mobility/counters. The survival FPS shooters rely on mobility and a low TTK. Given that MO2 is a MMO and a FPS it makes sense thematically to combine aimed abilities and a moderate to low TTK. A great thing about abilities is that they are anti-zerg if implemented correctly. Aimed abilities with small radius friendly-fire aoes that don't hit the caster are pretty much the standard when there are no group size restrictions on the map.

Combat abilities could be a huge value to the game, accomplishing two objectives at once: Giving the combat more appeal to the average survival/mmo gamer and providing solo/small groups the tools necessary to survive and contest content.

Thievery appeals to a 500 global subset of the demographic that enjoyed thievery enough to sub to MO1. The value is not there, it doesn't hit enough players to justify the time it would take to implement. (at least not now). The entirety of the global gaming population that wants thievery is here in this thread right now. IF thievery was truly groundbreakingly good content, then MO1 would of had more players, but it didn't.

Chiv and mordhau aren't relevant. They aren't survival games, they aren't MMO's and they have like 2000 players each. They are about as successful as MO2 which is to say not very. An MMO has massive in the title. There's nothing massive about 2000 players.

 

[allut]

A great thing about abilities is that they are anti-zerg if implemented correctly. Aimed abilities with small radius friendly-fire aoes that don't hit the caster are pretty much the standard when there are no group size restrictions on the map.

sounds like fireball or auw surge, so we already have that ingame.
Then yeah combat abilities is good.
You make it sound like we only want thievery then no update is ever needed again.
And your stupid argument blaming thievery for MO1 player count is just ridiculous.
Here they offer poisons and traps too and another task vendor ontop of thievery also its not just pickpocketing and lockpicking

And why do you want to size restrict everything? and think that's a solution to a sandbox. Your solutions is reworking the whole core of the game and turn it into something completely different thing than its meant to be. Size restictions would invalidate the whole TC system. Then even if it only was special places what would stop you from going in untagged or just teamwork with friends without being in the same (group? team?) or whatever, even if you are solo you can abuse it with friends not tagged in same guild or whatever. its just complete nonsense