Give me transmog any day of the week. That said, only transmog to things youve earned, or bought, or "converted to an appearance" as with many wardrobe systems like in Rift, Neverwinter, etc etc. No going out and looking like a top end-game player with all the best gear at level 1.
I am always a fan for letting players have his/her character be the way they want it to be to meet their own vision. Not every hero is a serious stoic type and thats toally fine! Worlds (our own included) is better for the flavor and variety.
In an MMO transmog only is an issue to me if it changes functionality. Shields need to be shields, ranged weapons need to be ranged weapons, casting implements need to be casting implements, keeping in mind damage type too (no fire swords freezing me please). "Not knowing what someone else is really wearing" only matters for PvP anyway, as in every other situation (if youre in a group) you can ID/Vet your members. That said, even in PvP I dont care if a set of plate armor looks like a robe. It only matters again with weapons. If I'm dumb enough to make assumptions about whether an unknown opponent is wearing plate or cloth then I'm the fool there. If however I see youre holding a staff/magic casting implement, and suddenly theres an arrow in my chest, thats a problem. To me transmog in PvP is all the difference in attacking/defending. I am OK not always knowing what I am attacking, because I can always adjust after seeing the results. With defense if an incoming attack is disguised, there may not be an opportunity to adjust the strategy based on the results if I am killed outright. One fully allows for a re-assessment and adaptation, the other does not always allow this, thus the reason to make sure wielded gear must be the same "category".
As for the points I saw against transmog, 2 points that I saw a few times really stood out to me. The "it breaks immersion" crowd, the "people who play dress up often are doing it to impress people who dont care or want to see it" notion.
1. The "it breaks immersion" crowd has a point, but only up to a point. There is absolutely an absurdity level that can definitely be crossed. Nobody wants Pantheon to look like a game of Saints Row. That said, this then falls on the devs to create items that are fitting within the world they have made. No banana costumes, no giant Jack In the Box style snowman heads, etc. If however, it is period/thematicly appropriate stuff (wedding gowns/suits, fancy outfits, artisant/craftsman outfits, etc) then to me, go wild! Look at the variety in fasion people wear literally every day. In an even more exotic fantasy world, why someone would ever assume people would just be 1 note or always be "practical" in their attire matching their situation, or assume that the world doesnt have these kinds of insane colorful people and personalities is beyond me.
2. The "youre spending time to impress people who dont want to be impressed anyway" issue is interesting in that in order to hold ANY weight, it has to be assumed that the unimpresesd group is the majority of the population. If the unimpressed people were anything less than that, the majority of the people WOULD be enjoying seeing the outfits. I am honestly not sure if this is (or in fact isnt) the case. I just love that this argument manages to potentially stab itself in the foot because if the logic is "lots of people arent impressed by how your style your character" then it doesnt matter really WHAT you do, whether it be cosmetic or some rare earned item. Additionally, lets just call a spade a spade in that BOTH sides want to be able to show off. One side just has a problem with what the other side may find impressive (look at how stylish/creative I can be, vs look at what I was able to get/do). This usually circles back to point 1. I did see a comment about "low level players being impressed seeing powerful looking players in low level zones" and being in the same vein, this didnt hold much water to me either as an argument to not have some style/transmog/wardrobe system. This may not always be the case as to why a low level player is impressed. In many ways would it not be fair to say that the sheer damage output or ease of combat that is probably more impressive? Who can really say.
Anyway, just my 2 cents towards keeping Pantheon fasionable and eclectic!
Edit:
Letting others change how YOU are seen is so problematic that I just dont even get how that would be a consideration. Additionally, if you want a world whitewashed in only your own desired style, maybe single player games can scratch that itch.
DakmorKavu said:Give me transmog any day of the week. That said, only transmog to things youve earned, or bought, or "converted to an appearance" as with many wardrobe systems like in Rift, Neverwinter, etc etc. No going out and looking like a top end-game player with all the best gear at level 1.
I am always a fan for letting players have his/her character be the way they want it to be to meet their own vision. Not every hero is a serious stoic type and thats toally fine! Worlds (our own included) is better for the flavor and variety.
In an MMO transmog only is an issue to me if it changes functionality. Shields need to be shields, ranged weapons need to be ranged weapons, casting implements need to be casting implements, keeping in mind damage type too (no fire swords freezing me please). "Not knowing what someone else is really wearing" only matters for PvP anyway, as in every other situation (if youre in a group) you can ID/Vet your members. That said, even in PvP I dont care if a set of plate armor looks like a robe. It only matters again with weapons. If I'm dumb enough to make assumptions about whether an unknown opponent is wearing plate or cloth then I'm the fool there. If however I see youre holding a staff/magic casting implement, and suddenly theres an arrow in my chest, thats a problem. To me transmog in PvP is all the difference in attacking/defending. I am OK not always knowing what I am attacking, because I can always adjust after seeing the results. With defense if an incoming attack is disguised, there may not be an opportunity to adjust the strategy based on the results if I am killed outright. One fully allows for a re-assessment and adaptation, the other does not always allow this, thus the reason to make sure wielded gear must be the same "category".
As for the points I saw against transmog, 2 points that I saw a few times really stood out to me. The "it breaks immersion" crowd, the "people who play dress up often are doing it to impress people who dont care or want to see it" notion.
1. The "it breaks immersion" crowd has a point, but only up to a point. There is absolutely an absurdity level that can definitely be crossed. Nobody wants Pantheon to look like a game of Saints Row. That said, this then falls on the devs to create items that are fitting within the world they have made. No banana costumes, no giant Jack In the Box style snowman heads, etc. If however, it is period/thematicly appropriate stuff (wedding gowns/suits, fancy outfits, artisant/craftsman outfits, etc) then to me, go wild! Look at the variety in fasion people wear literally every day. In an even more exotic fantasy world, why someone would ever assume people would just be 1 note or always be "practical" in their attire matching their situation, or assume that the world doesnt have these kinds of insane colorful people and personalities is beyond me.
2. The "youre spending time to impress people who dont want to be impressed anyway" issue is interesting in that in order to hold ANY weight, it has to be assumed that the unimpresesd group is the majority of the population. If the unimpressed people were anything less than that, the majority of the people WOULD be enjoying seeing the outfits. I am honestly not sure if this is (or in fact isnt) the case. I just love that this argument manages to potentially stab itself in the foot because if the logic is "lots of people arent impressed by how your style your character" then it doesnt matter really WHAT you do, whether it be cosmetic or some rare earned item. Additionally, lets just call a spade a spade in that BOTH sides want to be able to show off. One side just has a problem with what the other side may find impressive (look at how stylish/creative I can be, vs look at what I was able to get/do). This usually circles back to point 1. I did see a comment about "low level players being impressed seeing powerful looking players in low level zones" and being in the same vein, this didnt hold much water to me either as an argument to not have some style/transmog/wardrobe system. This may not always be the case as to why a low level player is impressed. In many ways would it not be fair to say that the sheer damage output or ease of combat that is probably more impressive? Who can really say.
Anyway, just my 2 cents towards keeping Pantheon fasionable and eclectic!
Edit:
Letting others change how YOU are seen is so problematic that I just dont even get how that would be a consideration. Additionally, if you want a world whitewashed in only your own desired style, maybe single player games can scratch that itch.
Or you could just read this thread and if you want to scratch your itch you could simply join a rp server and have other players that want to play it without seeing appearance slots we can and you can be happy in your world, as this has basically been solved from a community standpoint, now if the devs implement it or not is another thing, but at least from a coomuntiy standpoint there isn't much to say its all been said at least 15 times in one way or another.
Agreed on all points DakmorKavu. When it comes to the "toggle" compromise, I think this would probably be the fairest way to handle it:
Instead of allowing other players to alter your appearance, they instead get a toggle that allows them to identify players who are leveraging appearance slots. It could be as discreet as a different color name or small indicator on their nameplate. If it really bothers someone that another player is using appearance slots then you can inspect them. If they have /inspect turned off then you can ask them to turn it on. These are very basic social interactions. If another player is using appearance slots (remember, they can only display gear that they have earned, while also adhering to the various restrictions that have been discussed throughout this thread) and refuses to enable /inspect -- so be it. That is their choice. You either try to find a way to obtain the information you seek or you make the conscious decision to avoid that player if you can't handle their choice. Less emphasis on social engineering and more emphasis on emergent social constructs. Players can figure these things out without being subjected to someone else's universal truth.
oneADseven said:Agreed on all points DakmorKavu. When it comes to the "toggle" compromise, I think this would probably be the fairest way to handle it:
Instead of allowing other players to alter your appearance, they instead get a toggle that allows them to identify players who are leveraging appearance slots. It could be as discreet as a different color name or small indicator on their nameplate. If it really bothers someone that another player is using appearance slots then you can inspect them. If they have /inspect turned off then you can ask them to turn it on. These are very basic social interactions. If another player is using appearance slots (remember, they can only display gear that they have earned, while also adhering to the various restrictions that have been discussed throughout this thread) and refuses to enable /inspect -- so be it. That is their choice. You either try to find a way to obtain the information you seek or you make the conscious choice to avoid that player if they aren't willing to share it. Less emphasis on social engineering and more emphasis on emergent social constructs. Players can figure these things out without being subjected to someone else's universal truth.
Of course you agree with it........
And ofcourse I don't
I wonder why that is
Leave the toggle alone
You alrdy can acquire cosmetic gear
Why can't i simply just decide to not see it
IF it is truly that troblesome to you
Join a RP server
And let me have my
Toggle
Riahuf22 said:Of course you agree with it........
And ofcourse I don't
I wonder why that is
Leave the toggle alone
You alrdy can acquire cosmetic gear
Why can't i simply just decide to not see it
IF it is truly that troblesome to you
Join a RP server
And let me have my
Toggle
We have already gone over this ...
oneADseven said:The point of appearance gear is to afford players better control of how their characters appear in the world. Pantheon is a game that has greatly emphasized shared experiences as part of the core gameplay. Giving players a toggle that disables the appearance of others is the same thing as purposely creating/facilitating visual disparity. Purposely creating/facilitating visual disparity is contradictive to creating a shared experience, and as such, I really hope that VR reconsiders their decision. It is contradictive to the essence of Pantheon.
The essence of Pantheon is not exclusive to RP servers. If a toggle existed for everything that players disagreed on we may as well let players run their own servers.
oneADseven said:Riahuf22 said:Of course you agree with it........
And ofcourse I don't
I wonder why that is
Leave the toggle alone
You alrdy can acquire cosmetic gear
Why can't i simply just decide to not see it
IF it is truly that troblesome to you
Join a RP server
And let me have my
Toggle
We have already gone over this ...
oneADseven said:The point of appearance gear is to afford players better control of how their characters appear in the world. Pantheon is a game that has greatly emphasized shared experiences as part of the core gameplay. Giving players a toggle that disables the appearance of others is the same thing as purposely creating/facilitating visual disparity. Purposely creating/facilitating visual disparity is contradictive to creating a shared experience, and as such, I really hope that VR reconsiders their decision. It is contradictive to the essence of Pantheon.
The essence of Pantheon is not exclusive to RP servers. If a toggle existed for everything that players disagreed on we may as well let players run their own servers.
And iwth the inclusion of appearance gear, the devs also have to realize that there will be individuals who do not want to see it, they want to see you as in what you are wearing that gives you stats only, and that should not be taking away from them just becuase you added something to cover it up, they should be able to unsee it, it is that simple, the fact you are so stubborn into thinking you shold be able to control how i see you seems backwards to me, how would you like it with their is a feature that seems to be completely optional to do or not but completely chnage the way you see the world and you not like it and someone tells you rough luck, we don't want you to have any way of midigating its effect on you becuase i want it and want it to hurt your immersion into the world for as long as it makes me happy.
As I mentioned previously, I would rather see appearance slots removed than have to deal with a toggle that is contradictive to the game tenets. Allowing players to disable appearance slots isn't that much different than allowing players to disable illusions or /hidehelm -- if one person sees it then everybody should see it. That's how a shared experience works. I understand your argument. I disagree with it. If another player chooses to use /hidehelm or cast an illusion, that is changing how you see the world and it isn't something you should be able to disable just because you feel like it. If another player kills a guard and then dances on its corpse in front of someone else, it is what it is. That action is going to occur regardless of whether others want to see it. This is player agency 101. We should be cultivating this phenomenon rather than bastardizing it.
oneADseven said:As I mentioned previously, I would rather see appearance slots removed than have to deal with a toggle that is contradictive to the game tenets. Allowing players to disable appearance slots isn't that much different than allowing players to disable illusions or /hidehelm -- if one person sees it then everybody should see it. That's how a shared experience works. I understand your argument. I disagree with it. If another player chooses to use /hidehelm or cast an illusion, that is changing how you see the world and it isn't something you should be able to disable just because you feel like it. If another player kills a guard and then dances on its corpse in front of someone else, it is what it is. That action is going to occur regardless of whether others want to see it. This is player agency 101. We should be cultivating this phenomenon rather than bastardizing it.
Your tying illusions and /hidehelm like they are the feature exact thing when they are completely different, if a enchanter cast an ogre illusion to than look like an ogre, shouldn't really be immersikon breaking he is still an Elf or human, he simply is trying to appear like something else through a spell that he/she has, saying that is immersion breaking is like me saying i see casters on Final fantasy casting massive Fireballs the size of meteors but when the the cast is done their isn't even a dent into the ground or a huge ice spell but when the cast is done nothing is frozen, i understand it wants to look powerful so i don't let it break my immersion by doing these thing even though i know in real life it would easily, much like how a enchanter casting an illusion should be small potatoes compared ot it but yet it bothers you.
And /hidehelm is simply a feature that hides a helmet it doesn't render anyone in anyway, and honestly if they spent a lot of time configuring how their face looks and don't want it to be covered up with a helmet than that is their chice and doesn't affect somone who wants to see adventure gear or cosmetic gear in anyway, so again even tohugh you try to tie them together and make them sound alike doesn't actually make it so, they aren't the same stop trying to make them sound like they are, when the goal of the features are completely different.
Riahuf22 said:And /hidehelm is simply a feature that hides a helmet it doesn't render anyone in anyway, and honestly if they spent a lot of time configuring how their face looks and don't want it to be covered up with a helmet than that is their chice and doesn't affect somone who wants to see adventure gear or cosmetic gear in anyway, so again even tohugh you try to tie them together and make them sound alike doesn't actually make it so, they aren't the same stop trying to make them sound like they are, when the goal of the features are completely different.
I honestly find your opinion pretty biased on that way. Hiding a helm is exactly like not showing a piece of equipped gear, having it baseline in most MMO's since Wow doesn't make it something different. Hiding your chestpiece should not be unbalanced if you like to see how your torso look even while wearing plate as well. Isn't it immersion breaking to see people tanking blows bare headed while it's absurd ? It is.
There is no logic into saying one is totally different from the other, while one might be LESS of an issue than the other can be admitted, them beeing different isn't.
MauvaisOeil said:Riahuf22 said:And /hidehelm is simply a feature that hides a helmet it doesn't render anyone in anyway, and honestly if they spent a lot of time configuring how their face looks and don't want it to be covered up with a helmet than that is their chice and doesn't affect somone who wants to see adventure gear or cosmetic gear in anyway, so again even tohugh you try to tie them together and make them sound alike doesn't actually make it so, they aren't the same stop trying to make them sound like they are, when the goal of the features are completely different.
I honestly find your opinion pretty biased on that way. Hiding a helm is exactly like not showing a piece of equipped gear, having it baseline in most MMO's since Wow doesn't make it something different. Hiding your chestpiece should not be unbalanced if you like to see how your torso look even while wearing plate as well. Isn't it immersion breaking to see people tanking blows bare headed while it's absurd ? It is.
There is no logic into saying one is totally different from the other, while one might be LESS of an issue than the other can be admitted, them beeing different isn't.
They are completely different, having a helmet hidden to see someone face, is completely different than making the helmet look mlike something it isn't and in this regard they are completely different. And in the overall view if i can see everything but your helmet and i can see you have decent gear your helmet being missing isn't going to change my mind, even if it completely gargabe. much like if someone only sees cosmetic gear and you cant see their helmet but you like the way it looks the helmet didn't make a idfference, now if your trying to get all "real" on me and saying that it simply doesn't make sense to tank a mob with no helmet than thats your opinoin.
I also find it funny how you take a small picture of cosmetic gear of changing the way a helmet looks and than compare it to the entire picture of /hidehelm and than say they are the same, clearly our definition of the same is completely different, but than again i wouldnt try to pick up a rock and say this is earth and therefore they are the same.
oneADseven said:As I mentioned previously, I would rather see appearance slots removed than have to deal with a toggle that is contradictive to the game tenets. Allowing players to disable appearance slots isn't that much different than allowing players to disable illusions or /hidehelm -- if one person sees it then everybody should see it. That's how a shared experience works. I understand your argument. I disagree with it. If another player chooses to use /hidehelm or cast an illusion, that is changing how you see the world and it isn't something you should be able to disable just because you feel like it. If another player kills a guard and then dances on its corpse in front of someone else, it is what it is. That action is going to occur regardless of whether others want to see it. This is player agency 101. We should be cultivating this phenomenon rather than bastardizing it.
I just can’t see how appearance slots are good for a game like this period.
Riahuf22 said:MauvaisOeil said:Riahuf22 said:And /hidehelm is simply a feature that hides a helmet it doesn't render anyone in anyway, and honestly if they spent a lot of time configuring how their face looks and don't want it to be covered up with a helmet than that is their chice and doesn't affect somone who wants to see adventure gear or cosmetic gear in anyway, so again even tohugh you try to tie them together and make them sound alike doesn't actually make it so, they aren't the same stop trying to make them sound like they are, when the goal of the features are completely different.
I honestly find your opinion pretty biased on that way. Hiding a helm is exactly like not showing a piece of equipped gear, having it baseline in most MMO's since Wow doesn't make it something different. Hiding your chestpiece should not be unbalanced if you like to see how your torso look even while wearing plate as well. Isn't it immersion breaking to see people tanking blows bare headed while it's absurd ? It is.
There is no logic into saying one is totally different from the other, while one might be LESS of an issue than the other can be admitted, them beeing different isn't.
They are completely different, having a helmet hidden to see someone face, is completely different than making the helmet look mlike something it isn't and in this regard they are completely different. And in the overall view if i can see everything but your helmet and i can see you have decent gear your helmet being missing isn't going to change my mind, even if it completely gargabe. much like if someone only sees cosmetic gear and you cant see their helmet but you like the way it looks the helmet didn't make a idfference, now if your trying to get all "real" on me and saying that it simply doesn't make sense to tank a mob with no helmet than thats your opinoin.
I also find it funny how you take a small picture of cosmetic gear of changing the way a helmet looks and than compare it to the entire picture of /hidehelm and than say they are the same, clearly our definition of the same is completely different, but than again i wouldnt try to pick up a rock and say this is earth and therefore they are the same.
I'll just put my last sentance that you seem to have missed :
There is no logic into saying one is totally different from the other, while one might be LESS of an issue than the other can be admitted, them beeing different isn't.
Honestly this turns more about you willing to see your character's face than anything objective or rationnal.
Don't think I missed anything at all, your comparing a small picture of one feature and than comparing it to an entire picture of a different picture and saying they are the same. Yes changing the way your helmet looks, and hiding it does chnage the "way" you look, but /hidehelm simply only changes ONE piece of gear, and it doesnt exactly change it, it makes it invisible.
And again trying to tie to things together and saying they are the same doesn't make it so, no matter how hard you try and if they aren't the same their isnt much of a reason to bring it up and than try to say "if you like /hidehelm you should also like appearance gear," no i shouldnt, becuase i dont and unlike you i know they aren't the same and shouldn't be treated like it.
Syrif said:I just can’t see how appearance slots are good for a game like this period.
Please see my previous post where several benefits were explained:
oneADseven said:1) Minimizing item value deflation
Appearance slots provide an additional type of value to weapons and armor. Using an example from some of my previous posts, the "Bloodstone Breastplate" could end up being an item that maintains a high perceived value well beyond the shelf life of a typical piece of armor. Appearance slots allow certain items to have a timeless value that is otherwise impractical when the value of gear is measured by combat efficiency alone.
2) Content Relevance
This benefit is directly attached to the above. Whenever you have an item that has a "timeless value" it would make sense, then, that the content associated with that item would have it as well. This means that the NPC that drops the "Bloodstone Breastplate" or the faction merchant that sells it will continue to be relevant for as long as that value is maintained.
3) Horizontal Progression
I think it's fair to say that any time spent on acquiring gear for the sole purpose of leveraging its appearance would be considered horizontal progression. This serves as the catalyst for both of the above benefits. While the appearance of our gear does not offer a direct combat advantage, it does have minor tactical/strategic implications. A player could be deceptive about their power and purposely appear as weak. That sounds like emergent gameplay to me and I don't see any reason why we should purposely restrict that from happening. Reputation is supposed to be important.
4) Player Agency / Self-Expression
Allowing players to influence the world around them is one of the biggest draws to open-world MMORPG's. Developers have been trying to capture this phenomenon in single-player games for ages. It typically involves an advanced node system where the choice a player makes can lead to one of several outcomes. One of the most popular implementations is to create multiple endings. Does the hero vanquish the antagonist while also saving the princess? Does the hero sacrifice themself in order to save others or does he survive at the expense of the local orphanage? Over time we saw these types of multiple-outcome-scenarios become more commonplace throughout the entirety of an RPG story. MMORPG's are uniquely positioned to offer a sense of player agency that is persistent throughout the entire game. Allowing a player to control the appearance of their character has an impact on every other player they interact with. This can be good or bad depending on the options available to the player. If someone can equip santa hats and candy cane swords then there is a very valid argument that it ruins the immersion of being in a fantasy world. As long as the options are consistent with the overall theme of the game, this sense of player agency can be used to amplify the sensation of enjoying a shared experience with others.
#1 is directly attached to this game tenet:
A belief that game economies should be predicated on delaying and minimizing item value deflation.
#2 is directly attached to these game tenets:
A belief that game economies should be predicated on delaying and minimizing item value deflation.
An awareness that content is king.
#3 is directly attached to these game tenets:
An awareness that content is king.
An understanding that player involvement is required for progression. All actions (or lack thereof) should have consequences. Positive actions should be rewarded. Apathy or lack of action should not be rewarded with bonuses.
A belief that meaningful character progression will always involve a player increasing in both power and prestige.
#4 is directly attached to these game tenets:
A belief that meaningful character progression will always involve a player increasing in both power and prestige.
A belief that the greatest sense of accomplishment comes when it is shared - and earned.
The correlations between the benefits of appearance slots and game tenets are all quite obvious. Pantheon will be an objectively better game, in that regard.
Syrif said:I just can’t see how appearance slots are good for a game like this period.
I'm with Syria on this. I would prefer there just wasn't any appearance slots at all. If I wanted to dress up a doll I'd go buy a doll. Hopefully Pantheon is so much more than a dress up game.
If they do choose to have the slots, let me turn them off. (And, no, I don't care if you "want" me to see your character "that" way)
Zorkon said:I'm with Syria on this. I would prefer there just wasn't any appearance slots at all. If I wanted to dress up a doll I'd go buy a doll. Hopefully Pantheon is so much more than a dress up game.
If they do choose to have the slots, let me turn them off. (And, no, I don't care if you "want" me to see your character "that" way)
Interesting way to look at things. If you want to attack things with a sword, would you go and buy a real-life sword instead? Does the existence of swords in Pantheon result in the same logic, where hopefully it would be so much more than just a hack and slash game?
Bottom line is that appearance slots do not turn the World into a "dress up game" any more than the existence of food/drink turns it into a virtual restaurant. No idea where you are getting that from but it's a mega stretch.
If they succeed with situational gear and horizontal progression then appearance tabs will lead to players seeing fewer differences in appearance among the playerbase. Absent an appearance tab you would see player A wearing W, X, Y, or Z depending on where in the world they are and what they are doing, yet with an appearance tab you will only ever see Player A with their chosen outfit regardless of where they are or what they are doing until such a time they opt for a change, if ever. Now apply that to all players at all parts of their journey, way more diversity as players will be changing their equipment fairly often.
Iksar said:If they succeed with situational gear and horizontal progression then appearance tabs will lead to players seeing fewer differences in appearance among the playerbase. Absent an appearance tab you would see player A wearing W, X, Y, or Z depending on where in the world they are and what they are doing, yet with an appearance tab you will only ever see Player A with their chosen outfit regardless of where they are or what they are doing until such a time they opt for a change, if ever. Now apply that to all players at all parts of their journey, way more diversity as players will be changing their equipment fairly often.
Situational gear could apply to appearance as well. I wouldn't have a "chosen outfit" that applies to every situation universally. I would want my character to look different depending on where I'm at and what I'm doing. If my character is in the tundra then I would want to wear a thick cloak trimmed with fur if I have one. I wouldn't use that same cloak in the desert. If I'm in a dark cave, I may want to wear something that is shiny/reflective, or something that is dark/matte, depending on what I'm doing. Even if VR does succeed in offering a bunch of situational gear, it's extremely farfetched that all of it would align perfectly with the context of the world. It is far more likely that we end up seeing players wear their thick fur cloak while adventuring through the desert because of the stats provided. Appearance slots allow players to "look the part" and for all intents and purposes are considered a form of horizontal progression.
Joppa mentioned that earning a full set of matching gear is supposed to be a rarer accomplishment in Pantheon. Appearance slots allow those accomplishments to be timeless. If there is an extremely rare set of red plate mail that can only be found in the level 20-30 range, and someone manages to get their hands on a full set, why shouldn't they be allowed to show off that accomplishment in the future? Eventually, that gear will pale in comparison to stuff found in later zones. Appearance slots make that accomplishment (earning the full set of red plate mail) more meaningful and the content associated with it more relevant. Without appearance slots, the "extremely rare" stuff from lower levels isn't worth going after because the window of opportunity where you can wear it while still being functional is extremely small. It is beyond ridiculous to suggest that allowing players more options is going to result in fewer differences. Without appearance slots, characters are far more likely to look the same. Instead of players spending time trying to acquire that red set of plate mail they want, nobody bothers, and you never see it. Instead, they spend all of that time on the same "situational gear" that everybody else needs.
Riahuf22 said:Don't think I missed anything at all, your comparing a small picture of one feature and than comparing it to an entire picture of a different picture and saying they are the same. Yes changing the way your helmet looks, and hiding it does chnage the "way" you look, but /hidehelm simply only changes ONE piece of gear, and it doesnt exactly change it, it makes it invisible.
And again trying to tie to things together and saying they are the same doesn't make it so, no matter how hard you try and if they aren't the same their isnt much of a reason to bring it up and than try to say "if you like /hidehelm you should also like appearance gear," no i shouldnt, becuase i dont and unlike you i know they aren't the same and shouldn't be treated like it.
I'm sorry if you can't see ties you don't want to. Pieces of a big picture remain pieces of it, even if opting for one is not like opting for the big full picture. But it's still part of it. If you want to hide your helm other will want to hide their cloak, their shoulder slot, their pants (heh). In the end, if everyone gets a piece of the full picture then everything can be hidden and we're fully into what you don't want here.
I'm not advocating anymore for or against the cosmetic / whatever, either solution is fine by me (cosmetic slots or just good looking gear), simply over the fact you consider cosmetic an heresy but hiding helm a norm, which isn't objective of realistic but just taught "as a norm" by games, and just fits your desire in that regard.
MauvaisOeil said:Riahuf22 said:Don't think I missed anything at all, your comparing a small picture of one feature and than comparing it to an entire picture of a different picture and saying they are the same. Yes changing the way your helmet looks, and hiding it does chnage the "way" you look, but /hidehelm simply only changes ONE piece of gear, and it doesnt exactly change it, it makes it invisible.
And again trying to tie to things together and saying they are the same doesn't make it so, no matter how hard you try and if they aren't the same their isnt much of a reason to bring it up and than try to say "if you like /hidehelm you should also like appearance gear," no i shouldnt, becuase i dont and unlike you i know they aren't the same and shouldn't be treated like it.
I'm sorry if you can't see ties you don't want to. Pieces of a big picture remain pieces of it, even if opting for one is not like opting for the big full picture. But it's still part of it. If you want to hide your helm other will want to hide their cloak, their shoulder slot, their pants (heh). In the end, if everyone gets a piece of the full picture then everything can be hidden and we're fully into what you don't want here.
I'm not advocating anymore for or against the cosmetic / whatever, either solution is fine by me (cosmetic slots or just good looking gear), simply over the fact you consider cosmetic an heresy but hiding helm a norm, which isn't objective of realistic but just taught "as a norm" by games, and just fits your desire in that regard.
What in the world are you talking about, how are you going to go and say if someone want ot hide their helmet or cloak (whch are common amongst other mmos) and than say that others will want to hide their pants and chest piece, no i don't believe anyone would want this. you simply just keep twisting the story into a narrative that doesn't exsist. and again i connected the dots of where they meet, so again i did acknowledge it and than explained clearly on how they are different. So now instead of twisting something into smoething no one wants how about just acknowledge that in a very small way are the similair, in many other ways they are extremely different.
That remains quite interesting because you keep saying you showed how they weren't the same thing which didn't convince me, and I keep showing how they are and you're not convinced.
However, beeing "common in an MMO" doesn't mean it should be. Auto LFG tools are common in MMO's now but they doomed the genre, not every common thing should be !
Yeah, I have to agree with Iksar again, especially if they are going to put a HUGE mechanic like the different types of weather we will have to be attune to and such, than seeing adventure gear is even more important than it is according to many other games, so again taking it away form us is honestly a huge disadvantage to making approiate groups.
And before it gets said /inspect should be an option to get turned off, so i don't see /inspect as an option to overcome appearance gear.
MauvaisOeil said:That remains quite interesting because you keep saying you showed how they weren't the same thing which didn't convince me, and I keep showing how they are and you're not convinced.
However, beeing "common in an MMO" doesn't mean it should be. Auto LFG tools are common in MMO's now but they doomed the genre, not every common thing should be !
Right let's just be honest I'm probably never going to see things your way, becuase you want cosmetic gear and you dont care if i want to see it or not (or care that fi it hurts my immersion for as long as you are happy)
As for I don't care if you can get cosmetic gear for as long i can choice if i want to see it or not(becuase your style of gaming shouldn't affect my way of gaming)
And my way doesn't hurt your immserion in anyway, as for yours does hurt mine, but yet again don't care for as long as your happy.
Riahuf22 said:And before it gets said /inspect should be an option to get turned off, so i don't see /inspect as an option to overcome appearance gear.
It is an option depending on the willingness of the other player. This is a social hurdle that players should have to overcome. There is nothing stopping a group leader from explaining why they want to inspect another player and ensure that they have the appropriate gear for a given situation. Most players would be happy to oblige if the situation calls for it. If someone refuses then you either work it out or part ways. These are very basic social interactions that reinforce player agency and meaningful reputation.
oneADseven said:Riahuf22 said:And before it gets said /inspect should be an option to get turned off, so i don't see /inspect as an option to overcome appearance gear.
It is an option depending on the willingness of the other player. This is a social hurdle that players should have to overcome. There is nothing stopping a group leader from explaining why they want to inspect another player and ensure that they have the appropriate gear for a given situation. Most players would be happy to oblige if the situation calls for it. If someone refuses then you either work it out or part ways. These are very basic social interactions that reinforce player agency and meaningful reputation.
Deleted, tired of repeating myself, especially as I've said before after like 1 to 3 months most people probably wouldn't even care if they see cosmetic or adventure gear anymore, it's being completely blown out of ptoportion, and I'm tired of giving them the attention that they want.