Feedback: Dear Moon

Been waiting until patch 2 to bother getting to this discussion out of curiosity for what lies ahead.

I think Moon Studios owes us all a well thought out plan and or sense of direction for NRFTW. The road map has no context to anyone outside of your studio. An honest plan, saying “we dunno” is completely acceptable because at least it’s real and gives us all a point of reference when providing feedback. My issue with patch 2 is that it feels like a clear plan is becoming apparent and yet there’s no dialogue from Moon so… Ick.

The current road map reads: launch EA, multiplayer, some content with a name, some content without a name. And don’t get me wrong, Moon has enough good credit built up I’d get on that ship and set sails.

Call it my profession getting in the way of my care free enjoyment here, but patch 2 hit me in the wrong way on several levels.

We still don’t have a comprehensive list of known issues. This subject doesn’t need to be belabored. Caiden_Boulton does a great job making sure people who are bothering to post bugs feel heard. Beyond this it would go a long way to have a list at the end of patch notes which has much greater visibility than scattered posts.

“Hidden gems” aka unlisted changes. I’m not saying Moon has to be on the forums 24/7 responding to every single topic; quite the opposite, we want you all working on the game. That said when you do address community especially in writing… Communication needs to be accurate. Especially given how little we hear from you all on the bear bones of the game. I said it above and I’ll repeat it because I really mean it. Just keep it real with the community and saying we don’t know what we want is still viable. At least then feedback will continue to come based around that understanding.

Listed and unlisted changes and focus… Yes this is a focus post in disguise :disguised_face:.

Short backstory here, I piicked up the game shortly before patch 1 and played it out blind. By the time I got into caring about gear it seems focus Regen was fixed from a broken stat so maybe this change was little more than correcting an overcorrection but that’s not what it feels like. Patch 2 clearly said focus is not mana. And the infusions nerfs to focus on damage and focus on ability tell me this game is heading in a direction.

I’m not thrilled by the idea of NRFTW being isometric dark souls with terrible crafting (over simplification). My stance is that Moon doesn’t need our help telling a good story. The level design in NRFTW is amazing and the art style is refreshing and polished. So what is Moon bringing to shake up the stale scene of attack speed/cast speed/move speeds we don’t introduce mechanics just increase mob health ARPGs?

Another oversimplified take but the only really new things we have that distinguish this title from OG souls is parry on every weapon, and access to more abilities through runes than weapon arts along provided.

And don’t get me wrong I’m still going to play this game when it’s released but if all we’re doing here is adding MMO style tedious elements to a souls game and wrapping it up nicely in a good in depth story… I just don’t see where the community fits in, and Id go so far to say it’s a bold marketing farce to call the game and ARPG…

So where does this nerd rage stem from? There has been an awful lot of discussion on this forum regarding what is the intended experience and what combat should be modeled around as a community but not from Moon. That said I feel like patch 2 is a pretty clear albeit underhanded nod from Moon that this is little more than a souls game in terms of combat and gearing.

Skipping over the current crafting system which again I can only hope is part of a larger system we know nothing of…

Traditionally combat style and gearing are integral to ARPGs because the common theme is you build into something and it becomes impactful. The recent patch hit focus in a way that in my eyes says, focus isn’t mana we want something else. The unlisted changes to focus tell me we’re still at the beginning of a long journey of continued nerfs until we just have isometric dark souls.

This is how you can get focus as of Patch 2.
Consumables
Parrying
Focus Regen
% Focus on damage delt

These values can be modified by focus gain %.

Only my own opinion but I think consumables feel shitty to use and should be avoided in combat as the break up the flow so much.
Focus Regen has been nerfed to the point that it no longer represents something akin to mana Regen and does little more than provide focus for buffs between engagements.
Focus on damage delt has been nerfed yet again so I guess next week we’ll go from 1-2% to 1% before it’s removed, who knows.
This leaves parrying. I love it, but I also think a lot of people wont and I also believe it significantly restrictes play styles. Aka this is the answer to the circular discussion around the intended experience. Building focus now means much more investment into your focus pool for starters and the impact of passive sources is not meant to be an alternative to parry which is a significant element of the games combat systems.

This change says, get in there and mix it up. We like the idea of y’all using a bunch of spells/abilities but not without being active, focus isn’t a resource it’s a mechanic.

So TLDR… It would be nice to hear from Moon directly on where they see the game heading. The changes indicate to me we’re not sailing aimlessly so why the lack of transparency O captain my captain?

IMO only after Moon makes clear the intent behind the games mechanics can we provide meaningful feedback. Until then call it what it really is, just a wish list.

Just one old nerds take.

2 Likes

I don’t think the game is gonna be too different from say, a Diablo and Souls style game. They borrow from both these games and MMO/ resource management games and try to make something that meets you in the middle, so to speak.

What I’m trying to say is that they were pretty explicit that they aren’t necessarily going for “breaking the wheel”, more so reinventing or building upon wherever they can.

They love all those games and are actively taking from whatever they love best to put into their dream game. Having said all that, I don’t see how much more transparent they could be than they are already. I like their vagueness regarding the rest of the game and get the main concept they are going for, having seen what I’ve seen from EA so far.

Isn’t it a bit too soon to ask for a clearer roadmap? The fat of the game’s content should, technically, be kept under wraps for all to properly experience come 1.0’s launch. In fact, I think we’ve gotten to play a pretty substantial piece of content considering this is just Early Access, to the point I’m feeling a bit guilty of playing so much of it.

Not a stretch either, currently forcing myself to stop playing further so as to keep my 1.0 experience as fresh as possible, just because overall it’s felt so fulfilling so far.

2 Likes

Nah, B… Moon Studios is a business. They got bills, they pay humans to do tasks, they… have a plan.

I just think it’s fair they shead some light on it so the communities feed back can be constructive. We can report bugs and give feedback on available content but what little information we have is that much of the content is incomplete. IMO its like going to a nice dinner and the chef comes out to the table after appetizers asking how the meal tastes. Like, chef I haven’t had it yet so how can I form a complete opinion on the matter? I like that little app you let me snack on but I’m very curious about the main course.

Moon has my support but things are changing quickly without a clear “this is what we want to achieve with this change” kind of dialogue from the devs. Yet the community the most active threats are people talking in circles over what the game should be? Feels like only Moon knows that at this point and they’re keeping the cards pretty close. I can’t even articulate how badly I want this to be good. How I want this game to be worth playing and replying. The ARPG scene is stale and crusty, we keep getting the same game with another skin/art style. What I’m getting at is there is so much that more that could be addressed as a community given a clearer direction.

[quote=“Mk_0taid, post:2, topic:12176”]
What I’m trying to say is that they were pretty explicit that they aren’t necessarily going for “breaking the wheel”, more so reinventing or building upon wherever they can.

From a combat, gear, loot perspective they play completely differently so care to elaborate?

Why so?

1 Like

Well we are only a month after Early Access’ launch. I do believe they are going to reveal more as we’re moving forward and with what we’ve got now I think it’s enough to built a pretty solid picture of what kinda game they want to do.

Elaborating on before, I don’t believe the game is too similar to Souls or Diablo, but it clearly borrows systems like the stamina based combat, action commits, the random enemy loot drops, item rarity and the isometric view. It builds upon each, at first glance they look similar - you play about 15 ~ 30 minutes and then you get how it does it’s own thing.

At any rate backing up, not understanding how clear you want the vision drafted for it to be satisfactory or what other game’s early access to compare Wicked’s to, so as to get the idea.

For example in Baldur’s Gate 3’s EA we only had the first Act to play ~ 25 hours of content and the final product obviously had times more content and stuff we didn’t hear about. Entire NPCs’ arcs, storylines, quests etc. etc. were completely rewritten and the end product varied quite a lot to what we had to play with for a while. Too much of their plan/game’s extra planned content wasn’t revealed till months or years after the launch of the EA.

In Hades 1’s EA the very same applied. In both examples a lot of content that made it to release was formulated on player feedback, based on what the players had to play with at the time. I think a big reason as to not reveal too much of the game’s content during these periods is to restrict how much of your work your community could potentially influence (ofc depends on how much you take feedback to heart but still).

These are my two cents. Not disagreeing with having a clearer picture, just not thinking it’s necessarily the time for that just yet. I’m sure they’ll find a way to reveal more when the time is right.

there is always a small line between transparency and oversharing, especially early during development.

pumping up expectations and promising features, that might be in discussion now, but also might not make it to the final product can cause quite a stir.

so i partly agree, i would love a roadmap with more details, but i am rather positively surprised by some goodie that was not announced than be disappointed because a promised feature takes 2 more “patch runs” to implement.

I trust the team, and so far my hype has not gotten any weaker :slight_smile:

4 Likes

Ok you’ve convinced me. Imma make a post about how absolutely terrible the “crafting” is without any further knowledge of the game beyond what we have.

I think this is a terrible idea, but control what you can control n all that.

This was posted by Thomas Mahler on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/thomasmahler

Alright folks, let’s discuss content updates and how we’re going about this stuff! 👍 We initially had the entire first month after launch pegged as a ‘fixes and patches’ period since it was foreseeable that we’d need to fix bugs and react to the community a lot right after launch. Reflecting on this month since launch, I think we’ve done quite well in that regard! But we’ve also been busy since launch working in the background on a bunch of the stuff we had to cut just to make the Early Access Release. So the most obvious step regarding content was to first deliver on the final vision for the content that didn’t make it for release: As you’ve probably already noticed, areas like Nameless Pass and the Black Trench were initially cut short a bit. So with our upcoming patches, you’ll see content updates to all the areas you’ve already been playing through so that they reflect the original vision and so that these areas have even more meat on their bones 👍 We’ve been working on adding even more depth to these areas that actually goes way beyond the original plan - We’ve been working on new caverns, places that are hulled in darkness that lead to new challenges and things to farm, trap doors that can be opened that lead to entirely new sections, etc. The goal with this stuff is not just to provide more space, but also to introduce new gameplay loops so that you’ll always have places in Isola Sacra pegged as ‘I’m gonna go to X to get a bunch of Y’. At the same time, we’ve already announced during our Wicked Inside Showcase that one of the first major content updates we’ll introduce is ‘The Breach’, which adds another two large, fully featured areas to Wicked: The Marin Woods and the Lowland Meadows. A ton of work has already been put into those areas (we even teased those already during our Wicked Inside 😄) and those will dramatically increase the scope of Wicked already. Those areas will also unlock all of our Tier 4 gear, so that you’ll be able to craft entirely new builds! At the same time, we also see a ton of value in our Crucible. What we shipped was really only a tease of what’s to come. The ultimate goal for the Crucible is to turn that section into a rogue-lite that would basically get you the same kick you get in games like Hades, Dead Cells, etc. BUT since we already have a ton of our systems in place, I think we can do all kinds of things you don’t usually see in other rogue-lites. We can feature intricate levels that bring a ton of verticality into play, feature deeper combat mechanics, allow you to play those sections with your friends in Multiplayer, introduce new Crucible Statues that offer entirely new ways of playing Wicked, etc. You’d want to play the Crucible with the character you’ve been playing so far being the base, but with every section you clear, our plan is that you can pick from a boon and through completing the various sections you’re basically creating a class on top of your current class that would - hopefully - allow you to defeat the boss and get all the rewards in the end! 👍😄 Basically, our goal with the Crucible is that you get the satisfaction you normally get from playing an ARPG for 30-40 hours within a shorter period of time so that ultimately you have your normal RPG experience in Wicked where you build out your character and the world over a longer period of time while also featuring a section that allows for super exciting, insanely fun 15-20 minute runs that still give you that full RPG kick, but in a more condensed form. I think all that stuff is insanely exciting and should give players countless of hours of fun on top! ❤️ And with all that, we also have to always keep an eye towards our end-goal of shipping our 1.0 release. We’ve been analyzing exactly what we’ll still need to change on a more systemic level in order to reach that. So far we’ve only found one big ‘heart surgery’ change design-wise that we think is necessary, but the ultimate goal with 1.0 is to get as close to my final vision for Wicked as possible and hopefully at that point we’ll have crafted one of most exciting ARPGs in recent years that will feel like a game that our small team shouldn’t have been able to make. And to leave you with one more sneak peek behind the scenes, let’s quickly bring up our ‘Plague System’: Right now this system is set to ‘static’, meaning, new states unlock statically as a player progresses through the realm. The end-goal here though is to flip the switch so that our Plague System is dynamic so that Isola Sacra will always be alive, new states get enabled dynamically with enemy levels increasing so that the world evolves just as your character evolves, introducing all new challenges and rewards throughout all of Isola Sacra. Right now there’s a clear ‘end-state’ that can be reached, but ultimately there should never be a point where you can’t find any new challenge anymore. Every day you dive into Sacra, you should never quite know what to expect. There’s a lot of work still ahead of us, but I hope this mammoth breakdown gives some clarity as to where we’re heading! 👍❤️

Cool seen that. Feel free to look at time stamps next time. This post was put out hours before the tweet. Thanks for contributing? I guess???

Saw your timestamp. How would I know you saw the tweet? Just tried being helpful since it kinda relates to your post. No need to be passive aggressive next time. I guess??

2 Likes

They never said they saw the tweet, their point was that their post went out BEFORE the tweet, meaning that if their post says “I think they should do x” and your point is “hey they already did that,” it doesn’t apply to their original post when the thing you point out wasn’t out when their post was.

Don’t need to get all high and mighty when you’re the one completely misunderstanding what they said.

Nah I am with @Wizard on this.

He was just trying to be helpful and post information since not everyone is on X. Then he is met with passive aggressive behavior rather than understanding. The other guys could have went about it in a better way. There is no need to be rude to people with good intentions.

2 Likes

doubly so with @Wizard that was just an unnecessary passive-aggressive response when he posted something directly linked to your original post that talks about the roadmap @BowUser . I also find it weird that this game feels like so many people’s 1st Early Access you saw patch 2 get delayed by a week, what is there to gain by Moon trying to give hard deadlines for something like MP only for it to get delayed? To quote you they’re a business they can operate however they want, but then you want a clear roadmap as well that’s not a normal business modus that’s an indie talking casually to you modus. I get that everyone wants content NOW NOW NOW but it’s been 5 weeks, by a AA studio, making a AAA scope game, using Early Access and they are not operating on a smaller timescale than your average Early Access. In fact they are outputting on par with your average Early Access … so far.

2 Likes

My issue with wizards post at the time that that it was nothing short of a quote with no added context. Like someone walking past you having a discussion with a college and going “oh did ya know…” And not adding anything to the conversation.

And for that I replied how I did, and when they added back… Hey no reason to be an ass I liked that comment and moved on. Because there was indeed no reason to be an ass.

And no I’m not starving for content, I want CONTEXT…

I’m in the process of some long winded post about the subject but it in summary it relates to the strong use of buzzwords and lack of communication from the developers as to what the games intended outcome looks like. And it’s very possible they don’t have their hearts made up but that’s not the indication I get from the changes and what we have heard from Moon.

I’m enjoying the game, but certainly have feedback on what I’d like to see in the game. But I’m also aware that because of early access there’s a lot that can change and even more we’re making assumptions on a system we don’t have fully released.

I simply want a more articulated sense of direction beyond what we have now. Especially with regards to the combat system and what the unreleased content may entail.

For example, I can’t stand the 100% RNG system of enchantment because it has a stronger impact on values that infusions and even more so we don’t have infusions for all the affixes that can roll with enchantment. Now again I feel very strongly against the current system but I don’t assume it completed. Therefore I’d like to keep my mouth shut on the topic until I can form a better opinion on the matter. So if there was some added context to the roadmap it could be as simple as “completing weapon/armor upgrade mechanics” regardless of date. Or something like in the EA notes these systems are completed… Something along those lines. No different than the comments they’ve made regarding the nameless pass in mentioning it was cut short for EA. I just want context…

As far as EA personally I’m just coming off Last Epoch for years to launch. And since they broke the mold so to speak with offline and online play in the same game I’d assumed this game could carry a similar ARPG feel but because there will be no MTX. It seems pretty clear to me there no live support and the games lifespan will be little different than elden ring, etc. My bias coming in was live support ARPG, information I’d missed and the wish was more at face value. We have to look in too many different places for pieces of this information. A more specific road map would go a long way in managing expectations, and the communities ability to provide meaningful feedback and not just a wish list of ideas shot out of a cannon.

Also Ive not once questioned the output from Moon. They’re extremely active in patching issues and I’m certain they’ll figure out the performance and the rest of the game in due time.

And whatever that timeframe is, I’m good with it cause I’m not the one doing the work. Something I think we should all be able to agree on…