What Does “Open Development” Mean in Ashes of Creation?

Most players hear that Ashes of Creation is being developed “in the open,” but not everyone understands what that actually means in practice.

In general, open development means the developers regularly show unfinished systems, talk openly about design goals, and explain why certain decisions are made. Instead of only sharing polished trailers or press releases, Intrepid Studios streams development updates, runs long Q&A sessions, and lets players test early builds.

For most players, this means you often see features that are incomplete, unbalanced, or missing content. The goal is not to impress, but to gather feedback early and reduce the risk of major design mistakes later.

This approach is different from how many MMORPGs are developed, where most systems stay hidden until late beta or launch.

Why Did the Developers Choose a Transparent Approach?

The developers have been clear that they believe developing behind closed doors creates bigger problems later.

Usually, when studios hide development, players only see the game once the core systems are already locked in. If combat feels bad, monetization feels unfair, or social systems do not work, it is often too late to fix them.

With Ashes of Creation, the idea is to expose these risks early. Most players would rather see problems during Alpha than discover them at launch when change becomes expensive or impossible.

The team has also stated that transparency helps align expectations. Instead of promising a perfect product, they show the work-in-progress reality of building a large MMORPG.

How Much Does Player Feedback Actually Matter?

Player feedback matters, but not in every area.

In general, the developers draw a clear line between core vision and adjustable systems.

The core identity of Ashes of Creation—things like its node system, open-world PvP risk, social dependency, and long-term progression—is not up for debate. The developers believe this vision already appeals to a large enough group of MMORPG players to be sustainable.

However, most players will notice that feedback is actively used to adjust:

• Combat feel and responsiveness

• Ability visuals and clarity

• UI usability

• System pacing and friction

• Quality-of-life improvements

Usually, when feedback aligns with improving usability or reducing unnecessary frustration without undermining the core design, it is more likely to be considered.

Why Won’t the Developers Change the Core Vision?

Many players ask why the team does not simply change major systems when criticism appears.

The reason is consistency.

Most MMORPGs fail not because they lack ideas, but because they try to please everyone. When developers constantly shift direction, systems stop supporting each other and the game loses identity.

The Ashes of Creation team believes that a strong, focused design—even if it is not for everyone—is better than a watered-down game with no clear audience. In practice, this means some players will decide early that the game is not for them, and the developers are okay with that.

Usually, this honesty saves time for both players and the studio.

How Does Alpha Testing Fit Into Open Development?

Alpha testing in Ashes of Creation is not about providing a polished experience.

Most players joining Alpha-2 should expect:

• Bugs and crashes

• Missing features

• Frequent balance changes

• Systems being added, removed, or redesigned

The purpose of Alpha is to stress-test ideas, not to judge the final quality of the game. Players who treat Alpha like an early-access launch often end up frustrated.

In general, the developers expect Alpha testers to focus on reporting problems and giving structured feedback, not on long-term progression or competition.

Doesn’t Open Development Hurt First Impressions?

This is one of the most common concerns.

Traditionally, studios believe you only get one chance to make a first impression. That belief has led many developers to hide their games until they are nearly finished.

The Ashes of Creation team openly disagrees with this idea. They argue that hiding development increases the risk of launching systems players fundamentally dislike, such as poor combat, weak social mechanics, or monetization issues.

By showing the game early, they believe they reduce long-term damage—even if early impressions are rough.

In practice, most players who follow development understand that Alpha footage does not represent the final product. Those who do not usually were never the intended audience for early testing.

How Should Players Interpret What They See in Development Streams?

When watching development updates, context matters.

Most players should assume:

• Visuals are unfinished

• Animations may be placeholders

• Balance is temporary

• Performance is not optimized

It is usually more helpful to look at design direction rather than current quality. Ask questions like:

• Does this system encourage player interaction?

• Does it support long-term progression?

• Does it reward cooperation or risk-taking?

Judging raw polish too early often leads to misunderstanding what the game is trying to achieve.

Does Transparency Affect the In-Game Economy?

Indirectly, yes.

Because systems are tested publicly, players already discuss things like trading routes, crafting scarcity, and risk versus reward. This gives insight into how the future economy might behave.

Some players also speculate about gold value, time investment, and efficiency long before launch. You will occasionally see discussions mentioning phrases like safe place to buy AoC gold U4N, usually as part of broader conversations about player behavior rather than official systems.

In general, however, the developers have been clear that the economy is designed to be player-driven and risk-based, and that testing phases are not meant to represent final economic balance.

Who Is Open Development Actually For?

Open development is not for everyone.

It usually appeals most to:

• Players who enjoy understanding systems deeply

• Players who like giving structured feedback

• Players who accept delays and iteration

• Players who value long-term vision over short-term polish

Players who prefer surprise reveals, fast launches, or fully polished early access builds may find this approach frustrating.

That difference in expectations explains much of the debate surrounding the game.

What Should Players Realistically Expect Going Forward?

Most players should expect continued iteration, delays, and visible changes.

Open development means mistakes will be visible, and not every experiment will succeed. Some systems will be redesigned multiple times. Others may be removed entirely.

In general, if the developers stay consistent with their philosophy, players can expect:

• A clear design direction

• Ongoing communication

• A game that prioritizes social interaction and world impact

Whether that results in a game you personally enjoy depends on how well that vision aligns with your preferences.