Are we losing faith in Ashes of Creation?

 Ashes of Creation has reached a noteworthy milestone—launching Phase III of its second alpha test. This update expands the world significantly, introduces new playable races, brings in a new archetype, enhances the initial player experience, tweaks guild systems, and advances the node progression system—among other improvements.

 Yet, community sentiment seems divided, and some players are expressing growing frustration.

 I came across a video from content creator Jamie Kaos expressing discouragement with the game's current pace. In the clip, Jamie appears disillusioned—indicating he may no longer have the time or interest to continue investing in Ashes testing. He even hints that his guild, formed around the game, is losing momentum—a tone best described as “disappointment.”

 I’ve navigated these waters before—especially during the “Narc” controversy, where community members took sides. Initially, I leaned toward Narc, but later recognized the nuance and re-centered my perspective. At that time, Narc voiced frustration over delayed updates that didn’t match his expectations.

 Now, Jamie echoes similar concerns, though with a more level head than Narc. He questions whether the development team can deliver the scale and frequency of updates being promised—and whether the team is moving in a direction that aligns with his expectations.

 While Jamie suggests the game might be targeting a younger audience and not the "old guard" I think that’s misguided. The average MMO or PC gamer is getting older; current surveys place that average in the mid-to-late 30s (around 36–38 years old), not younger. So, if anything, Ashes is being built for “us”—the seasoned MMO veterans. Even Steven Sharif (creative director) is in his 40s or 50s and has crafted this game as a passion project. It's the “old guard” who are most likely to carry it forward.

 Another factor at play is content creator fatigue. When updates come slowly or are thin in scope, creators struggle to stay engaged. Jamie—much like Narc—faces the challenge of producing content when testing is grind-heavy and lacks fresh hooks. It’s only natural that he’d compare it to established games like World of Warcraft, which regularly provides new content and consistent deliveries.

 All this brings me back to my own stance post-Narc: the most impactful statement I can make about Ashes is whether I choose to participate in the Alpha. Right now, I haven’t. That speaks louder than any number of words I've put on page here.

Note: this post was edited with the help of AI (ChatGPT). The thoughts are my own.  The grammatical correctness and em dashes (—) are the AI.   

All in the Name: Reaper Actual

 Minecraft.  A game where you mine and then craft.  World of Warcraft. A game where you explore the world behind the Warcraft universe.  Everquest. A game where you quest ever on.  Battlefield.  A game where you fight on a battlefield.  Reaper Actual.  A game.  Err; wait... what actual reaping is being done?

 John Smedley, of SOE and Daybreak fame (or not-fame), is up to new things in an MMOFPS game going by the title of Reaper Actual.  Per their Steam page:

Reaper Actual is an Open-World Persistent Shooter where hundreds of players engage in FPS combat against each other and 5 NPC Factions on the massive war-torn island of Marova. 

 Terrible name aside I am always interested in new MMOs; especially MMOFPS.  Even more interested considering Matt Higby, creative director of Planetside 2, is involved in the project.  I lost many a good hour in Planetside 2 and would play a modern day version of it in a heartbeat.

 There are some concerns to get out of the way first.  The game is intending to feature NFTs in the versions of the game.  Fortunately NFTs won't be included in the Steam and Epic Game Store versions.  However, it remains to be seen what NFTs will impact since the game is an MMO and while my version may not have NFTs if someone elses version does that impacts me. Also someone should tell them they are a couple years late to capitalize on the NFT fad... lol.

 Secondly there is plans to use generative AI in the game.  Think ChatGPT generating a sidequest for players.  For some gamers this is a dealbreaker.  For me, I'm still on the fence with AI but tend to be an optimist for it's use in games.  Technology aside; the important thing is how the game plays and if it plays well then I don't care about if AI is being used.

 The game intends to be a full "drop loot on death" game and Smedley compared it to extraction shooters like Escape from Tarkov.  The promise being if you get killed and looted that you will be able to track down your killer and get a shot at getting the loot back.  This includes possibly raiding their base.

 Yes, the game will supposedly have player bases that can be raided.  Group together with friends and bigger and badder bases can built.  Bigger and badder bases means bigger base raids and battles.  Up to 200-player base raids apparently will be supported. Apparently and supposedly because, well, we all know Smedley's history.

 My interest is piqued and I'll keep tabs on the game.  It may be worth a few cycles worth of play when it eventually lands.

Hideouts and Raider Dens

Raider dens are coming to ARC Raiders!

 A pair of game updates came across my plate in the last few days that I wanted to share.  Valve has made updates to Deadlock and added a social lobby they are calling the Hideout where players can hang out before and in between games.  Then, much to my excitement, ARC Raiders announced they are adding Raider Den's which will be apartments that player's adorn with items as they progress in the game.  Hideouts and Raider Dens add a layer on top of the core game underneath; a layer that makes the games feel a little more like home than just a game and I'm all for it.

 Deadlock's update was shared in their latest post: https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1422450/view/669466707009471267?l=english

 Welcome to the Hideout! The Hideout replaces the existing Dashboard UI and is your personal area to play around in while waiting for a match. You can invite friends to your hideout, or join them in theirs. We hope it will be a fun place to spend time as well as provide future opportunities for personalization, achievements, and events.

 ARC Raiders update was hosted in Discord so I copied the text below:

We’re making room for you in Speranza, quite literally! Here’s an update from the team on what to expect when it comes to lodging:

As every experienced Raider knows, the abandoned wilderness of the Rust Belt is vast and unforgiving. Missions Topside are necessary, but even the tireless Raider needs a place to lay their bruised head - and all their souvenirs - after a long day of gunning down ARC.

Enter, the Raider Den. Shani will be kind enough to lend you a cozy bedroom to call your own. Well, “cozy” might be stretching it. “Bedroom,” too. When you arrive, you’ll be greeted by a metal cot, peeling decorations, and a door frame with a notable lack of door. But hey, it’s better than living Topside! 

Fortunately, you won’t have to live in squalor forever. As you progress through ARC Raiders, your Den will progress with you. As players ourselves, we know how rewarding it is for you to visually see the progress your Raider is making, and the loot they’re accumulating, so our intention with the Den is to do just that. Trinkets you find Topside will litter the floors and the shelves of your den. Your best guns will be proudly displayed on the walls. 

Your Raider Den screen will be a living representation of your progress. Your highest-value items will be proudly displayed on your shelves. (Even if the most valuable thing you own at the moment is fifteen rubber ducks.) Think of the Den as a bird’s nest for all your trinkets, old world oddities, guns, and fancy weapon attachments.

We plan to continue refining the Den. We’ll also try to get some of those mystery stains off the walls before you get here… 

 Of the two updates; I think Deadlock's is the most promising as it allows players to enter and interact in the space where as ARC Raider's is described as a "screen" which indicates you won't set foot in it with your character and likely more have a static view similar to what we saw in Tech Test 2 for the workshop.  Hopefully over time Embark will improve on the concept for ARC Raiders.  There is no doubt Valve will continue to iterate on the Hideout.

 For anyone that followed my posts about ARC Raiders they will know one of my biggest requests was to add a social hub for us to interact in.  Raider Dens is a step in that direction and I was excited to see this update for the game.  October can't get here soon enough so I can check it out!

 

Battlefield 2042 is FUN

 

We're back on Iwo Jima in Battlefield 2042!

 With the Battlefield 6 open beta behind us and its release imminent, EA/DICE has decided to have one last hurrah in Battlefield 2042 with a special event that brings the famed Iwo Jima map from past Battlefields into the specialist-laden 2042. And boy, is it fun.

 First, the size of Iwo Jima puts everything in Battlefield 6 to shame. If someone told me you could fit all of the BF6 maps into Iwo Jima in 2042, I would believe it. That’s how big the map feels and plays. The map features everything from a naval fleet offshore—where the attackers launch from—all the way up to a volcano riddled with a maze of caves (as was common on Japanese-held islands during WWII). Everything about the map screams “this is Battlefield.”

 Another winning aspect of 2042 compared to 6 is the presence of tons of vehicles. Iwo Jima, for example, features upwards of 17 vehicles fighting it out. Helicopters are constantly overhead, tanks and IFVs are always pushing forward, and boats come rushing through the water during the initial sea deployment. A moment rarely goes by without a vehicle causing havoc, and it creates the glorious Battlefield experience I expect. Compare that to BF6, where the largest beta map featured, at most, four vehicles. Vehicles you rarely saw, either because they were paper-thin or—like jets—spent their time a mile away from the actual map thanks to the tiny ground area compared to the vast overhead airspace.

 You might think that with 2042’s vehicle count, the infantry experience would be miserable, but that’s far from the truth. Infantry gameplay is really solid on Iwo Jima. While it’s a big map, there are numerous compact points of interest with good fortifications that let infantry dodge and weave incoming vehicle fire and fight it out for final control of the points. On top of that, the map’s size allows anti-air players to step back from the frontline and focus on harassing air targets.

 Then there are the specialists, which many Battlefield players felt were a huge misstep for 2042, pushing it closer to a hero shooter than a Battlefield title. While that may have been the case at launch when there was no corresponding class system, that’s no longer true. Specialists now fit neatly into the class system and offer a ton of fun gameplay options thanks to their unique gadgets. Honestly, I’m a little sad they’re missing in BF6. I don’t think they were absolutely necessary, but in terms of fun, specialists add a lot of variety. In their current state in 2042, they complement the Battlefield classes really well.

 Overall, I’m having a blast jumping back into 2042. I’m not even performing well—I’ve placed in the bottom half of the scoreboard each match, my K:D ratio is below 1, and I’ve been on the losing side more often than not. In fact, I was doing much better in the Battlefield 6 beta, where I had close to a 2:1 K:D ratio and regularly topped the scoreboard. Yet I wasn’t having fun in 6, while I’m having an absolute blast in 2042.

 2042 just has so much more to offer thanks to the maps, specialist shenanigans, and the vehicle-vs-infantry balance. All of that to say: if you want a FUN Battlefield experience, jump into 2042 and skip 6’s launch. Maybe BF6 will turn things around, and years from now, we’ll be having the same comeback discussion about it—just like we’re having now about 2042, years after its launch.

Note: this post was edited with the help of AI (ChatGPT). The thoughts are my own.  The grammatical correctness and em dashes (—) are the AI.   

Battlefield 6's Trailer Was A Lie

 Battlefield 6 just wrapped its second beta weekend and the community is divided. Some players swear it’s the next big thing, but I walked away shaking my head. This wasn’t the Battlefield I grew up on. Instead of sprawling, all-out-warfare, we got jammed into tiny, overcrowded maps that felt more like that other shooter. And after rewatching that first reveal trailer, I can say it outright: it was a lie.

 I grabbed some screen grabs from that original trailer (which you can view on YouTube here).  Comments are added in the caption of each image.  Where, oh where, are these epic Battlefields we see in the trailer because they certainly were not in the open beta weekends.

There is in fact no vehicles, let alone helicopters, on this map.  The bridge as well is not part of the map.  This could have been such a cool experience if the bridge and adjoining housing area were all part of the map.  But nope; instead we get a couple blocks of murder tunnel buildings.

 

Remember Gulf of Oman?  Heartlessgamer does.  This clip from the video led me to believe maybe we'd be heading back to that classic map.  Maybe it'll be included upon release?

Multiple vehicles!? Tanks no less!  Sign me up.  Oh wait; sorry the best the Battlefield 6 beta could offer is two vehicles and zero open spaced on the map.

An army running off to fight?  Not in Battlefield 6 beta where most matches felt like a couple squads.  Battlefield 6 also did the rare thing in the series and took a step back on max player count on a map.  Apparently 128 was too many so we have to go back to 64.  I guess that's fine since they also made tiny little maps instead of sprawling battlefields.

This image is the heart breaker because what is shown here would be an amazing start to a Gulf of Oman style map made in a modern Battlefield game.  None of the maps have anything close to this image. How the hell did they put this in the trailer and miss that this, THIS, is what we expect of Battlefield games?

See; they were trying to warn us in the trailer.  The trailer, in fact, wasn't anywhere close to the actual game we were going to get.