Flapp said:wow. looks like the top 7 Pantheon Forum police are on duty. which is another reason why i post less and less.
You aren't allowed to have an opinion unless you fight about it for 16 friggen pages.... ridiculous...
I want to see what people are wearing, not what they bought in the cash shop. just give me a toggle to see NOTHING but in game armor.
I thought we had beat this horse to death, but i guess not. This is my opinion and I am not going to fight about it. if you don't like my opinion, move on and fight with someone else.
I feel like there are 10 people that are going to decided everything this game has or doesn't have.
The only thing that makes me post again and again is when people persist in spreading untruths, especially in regard to something I've said. I guess it bugs me.
Like "I want to see what people are wearing, not what they bought in the cash shop". There is no cash shop and there will be no cash shop. The devs have spoken on that.
To imply it's either "what people are wearing" or "cash shop" is misleading the discussion and misrepresenting the issue.
Is pointing out that sort of thing being "forum police"? Or is it being helpful and keeping the discussion open and on track? Perhaps other people are being "forum vandals"?
Such fun!
Syrif said:But we have seen things lead to cash shops, even when we were all but certain that wouldn’t happen. Idk I just think the further away we start from anything leading to that, the better.
this thread has proven why cosmetics shouldn't exist at all. it's not like any of this contributes to core pve gameplay. cosmetics is a LUXURY.
stellarmind said:Syrif said:But we have seen things lead to cash shops, even when we were all but certain that wouldn’t happen. Idk I just think the further away we start from anything leading to that, the better.
this thread has proven why no cosmetics should exist at all. it's not like any of this contributes to core pve gameplay. cosmetics is a LUXURY.
Lol really? Threads on fast travel and auction houses have been quite contentious as well. Does that mean no trading at all and only walking just in case we end up with global instant auction houses and instant telelports for everyone?
If the test for not including something is that a few people on the forum disagree and we don't trust the devs to not slide into the worst implementation possible, then the game is going to be pretty feature free.
disposalist said:Lol really? Threads on fast travel and auction houses have been quite contentious as well. Does that mean no trading at all and only walking just in case we end up with global instant auction houses and instant telelports for everyone?
If the test for not including something is that a few people on the forum disagree and we don't trust the devs to not slide into the worst implementation possible, then the game is going to be pretty feature free.
let me ask this:
how does cosmetics and appeareance slot factor into core pve gameplay?
i could tell you how fast travel affect with core pve gameplay.
i could tell you how auction houses affect with core pve gameplay.
if you can give me a valid reason on how appeareance slot contribute with core pve gameplay, i'm listening.
stellarmind said:let me ask this:
how does cosmetics and appeareance slot factor into core pve gameplay?
if you can give me a valid reason on how appeareance slot contribute with core pve gameplay, i'm listening.
I'll try.
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.
Please feel free to discuss the merit of this post.
disposalist said:It's so funny you think you're the misunderstood one then you go on to completely misunderstand and misrepresent others.
"maybe you should understand not everyone is the same" Hilarious. If *you* understood that, you might realise that a proposal that makes *you* happy, but makes others *unhappy* is *not* a compromise.
Once more: A toggle makes you 100% happy and me 0% to 99% happy, depending on how many use the toggle.
No toggle makes me 100% happy and you 0% to 99% happy depending on how many use appearance gear.
So which is best? Me, I say, obviously neither. You seem convinced that the toggle is 'perfect'... So... Who is the one that is understanding?
A toggle makes those interested only in adventuring/real gear 100% happy.
A toggle makes those interested in cosmetics for themselves (who don't care what others see) 100% happy. This is a far more substantial amount of players than I think you give credit to.
A toggle makes those interested in forcing others to view their "creativity"/carefully crafted appearances between 0-99% happy (I'd bet more than 50% of players opt in to this).
2.X out of 3 ain't a bad compromise from where this started, remembering of course that no appearance tab/cosmetics was the default position.
None of that matters. Having a shared experience is literally a core pillar of this game. Creating visual disparity between players ruins that. 2 out of 3 people seeing the same thing is not a shared experience. You do not compromise game tenets, regardless of what players want.
and it goes full circle for the 16th time, if your not willing to accept the toggle just get rid of the appearance gear, as stated before cosmetic gear should never be viewed to be more important than your adventure gear, in any kind of way. so if your not willing to accept the toggle (which obviously your not) than just get rid of the entire feature im done compromising its not worth it.
As i can say 2 out of 3 the other way around isn't good enough for appearance gear to be allowed as it breaks my immersion just by implying it and their for isnt a world i want to share with other as i want to see adventure gear only.
Not to get too into it but # of positions is not the same as % of the player population. The no cosmetics and toggled cosmetics may only be 2% of the total interested players with 98% wanting owner controlled cosmetics or it could be 33%, 33%, 33%. Only time and a real poll of paying players will actually give VR information on what their players want.
Trasak said:Not to get too into it but # of positions is not the same as % of the player population. The no cosmetics and toggled cosmetics may only be 2% of the total interested players with 98% wanting owner controlled cosmetics or it could be 33%, 33%, 33%. Only time and a real poll of paying players will actually give VR information on what their players want.
yes i understand this i honestly believe the 2nd grp (the ones that care about how they look to themselves) is probably the biggest group, by a landslide, I'm sure most people just don't want to believe that, but I've noticed most people just want to play the game and enjoy themselves without too many features actually affecting them negatively, as most players are extremely casual and for as long as they are entertained they are happy.
As long as armor isn't terribly boring, I don't mind just wearing the armor and that's what I look like. Except... in games which tend to disappear the pants on female characters. I hate that, and in games like that I appreciate wearing a costume that looks more like real armor.
@187 to be clear i'm not criticizing or attacking or whatever nonsense has happened over the last 10 pages. i'm objectively looking at this as modder of skyrim for 7 years that alters gameplay as a whole.
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.
no item can retain its value forever. things devalue over time as new and better things come out. any consumer and manufacturer knows this to be true. if the core pve gameplay affect is based on the economy, do you think appeareance of a said item will still have the same value as when its stats were revelant? the desirability of the appeareance will eventually devalue because fashion is fleeting. yes, we have collectors and hoarders, but this doesn't contribute to core pve gameplay.
to be clear, core pve gameplay of an mmorpg is vertical progression. we agree on that i think.
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.
i'm okay with horizontal progression in this sense, but would you define horizontal progression as core pve gameplay? does this contribute to increasing player progression? does appeareance slot allow the exploration of a new area or improves character performance or functionality?
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.
player to player interaction i can get on board with so let's explore this a bit. if i'm well dressed in a $10k usd suit, would it change your expectation of me? does that really help me have a good conversation? not really. maybe help open the door. how would the other person feel if they thought i was wearing an expensive suit when it was really a cheap one? slighted? embarassed? impressed? what about if i was wearing a cheap suit and they realized i'm a billionaire? misled? deceived? intrigued? the appeareance still doesn't hold true to core ability of an individual to hold a conversation. isn't it better to be honest of who we are?
imagine riahuf pretending to be nice and agree with you only to have him stab you in the back and say bad things behind your back. oops i'm breaking rules pointing out individuals XD ban me and put me out of my misery~
Crowsinger said:As long as armor isn't terribly boring, I don't mind just wearing the armor and that's what I look like. Except... in games which tend to disappear the pants on female characters. I hate that, and in games like that I appreciate wearing a costume that looks more like real armor.
Crowsinger said:As long as armor isn't terribly boring, I don't mind just wearing the armor and that's what I look like. Except... in games which tend to disappear the pants on female characters. I hate that, and in games like that I appreciate wearing a costume that looks more like real armor.
Looking at desing arts (for heavy armed classes at least) VR don't have such tendencies (light armor is different but it makes more sense at least).
stellarmind said:
This is my new favorite video :)
Hegenox said:Crowsinger said:As long as armor isn't terribly boring, I don't mind just wearing the armor and that's what I look like. Except... in games which tend to disappear the pants on female characters. I hate that, and in games like that I appreciate wearing a costume that looks more like real armor.
Looking at desing arts (for heavy armed classes at least) VR don't have such tendencies (light armor is different but it makes more sense at least).
That's been my impression. In general MMOs in those early days were much better about that sort of immersion. I like the art I'm seeing on the pantheon site.
stellarmind said:
no item can retain its value forever. things devalue over time as new and better things come out. any consumer and manufacturer knows this to be true. if the core pve gameplay affect is based on the economy, do you think appeareance of a said item will still have the same value as when its stats were revelant? the desirability of the appeareance will eventually devalue because fashion is fleeting. yes, we have collectors and hoarders, but this doesn't contribute to core pve gameplay.
I didn't really mean to imply that the monetary value would be truly timeless and without fluctuation. It is the perceived value that can be timeless. "New and better" are relative terms. If the bloodstone breastplate has a unique graphic then it's entirely possible that "new and better" never even happens because for certain players, that bloodstone graphic is their favorite. This creates a more dynamic market for items where the value is relative to taste rather than stat comparison alone. Appearance value is far more likely to stand the test of time than stat value, especially when appearance slots are available.
stellarmind said:to be clear, core pve gameplay of an mmorpg is vertical progression. we agree on that i think.
Not exactly. If the bloodstone breastplate drops from a level 25 boss then players have to engage in "core PVE gameplay" in order for a new item to enter the world. Some players may do this to try and acquire the item for themselves while others do it in an effort to sell it. Either way, the reward is derived from very basic PVE and could be flipped for monetary gain that contributes to vertical progression.
stellarmind said:i'm okay with horizontal progression in this sense, but would you define horizontal progression as core pve gameplay? does this contribute to increasing player progression? does appeareance slot allow the exploration of a new area or improves character performance or functionality?
If players have to engage in PVE content for a player-driven goal, that would qualify as core PVE gameplay. Whether it's horizontal or vertical doesn't really matter ... the content that drops the desired items can offer both, depending on the player engaging it. I may want the bloodstone breastplate to add it to my collection. Another player may want to sell it so that they can afford better weapons/armor/spells. Either way, the "content" (the NPC that drops the item and it's surrounding area) continues to be relevant due to the perceived/relative value that would not exist without appearance slots.
stellarmind said:player to player interaction i can get on board with so let's explore this a bit. if i'm well dressed in a $10k usd suit, would it change your expectation of me? does that really help me have a good conversation? not really. maybe help open the door. how would the other person feel if they thought i was wearing an expensive suit when it was really a cheap one? slighted? embarassed? impressed? what about if i was wearing a cheap suit and they realized i'm a billionaire? misled? deceived? intrigued? the appeareance still doesn't hold true to core ability of an individual to hold a conversation. isn't it better to be honest of who we are?
Better is relative, and since we're talking about self-expression, "who we are" is something that we should be able to manage. There is nothing dishonest about displaying your character the way you want to as long as every item being used was earned fairly in-game and every other player has the opportunity to do the same. As far as players feeling slighted/embarrassed/impressed or misled/deceived/intrigued -- these are all normal human emotions. I think it would be fantastic if we allow players to create those types of experiences. As long as players aren't abusing/harassing others or doing anything that violates the ToS/EULA ... then yes, the world will be far more interesting when those kinds of social interactions are possible.
stellarmind said:disposalist said:Lol really? Threads on fast travel and auction houses have been quite contentious as well. Does that mean no trading at all and only walking just in case we end up with global instant auction houses and instant telelports for everyone?
If the test for not including something is that a few people on the forum disagree and we don't trust the devs to not slide into the worst implementation possible, then the game is going to be pretty feature free.
let me ask this:
how does cosmetics and appeareance slot factor into core pve gameplay?
i could tell you how fast travel affect with core pve gameplay.
i could tell you how auction houses affect with core pve gameplay.
if you can give me a valid reason on how appeareance slot contribute with core pve gameplay, i'm listening.
Well, 1AD7 has answered very well as I slept, but I will still answer.
For one thing, not everything has to contribute to core gameplay to be a valid and valuable addition to the game. High resolution graphics and effort in art direction aren't necessary to core gameplay. Sometimes they even detract and they certainly take a lot of development effort away. We could all move plain coloured counters around on a 2D hexagon sheet and it would be essentially the same gameplay. It seems a trivial concept to me that immersion is a *massively* important aspect of a fantasy role-playing game and the graphical portrayal of the world, especially of it's player characters, is possibly the most important aspect of that immersion. External image is very important to many players when it comes to their character and their immersion. To be able to define your own adds to that.
So, I would contend that whether or not it contributes to core gameplay is pretty much immaterial to justifying its existence, but let's go there anyway.
People (including myself and 1AD7) have pointed out in this thread some gameplay aspects that appearance slots add or enhance.
Those things just appear to largely get ignored in the face of "no cash shop banana outfit" strawman comments and more legitimate "I just want to see what's real" or "I need to know how powerful everyone is" comments.
Looking back a few pages when I tried to get away from 'argument' and back to 'discussion', to paraphrase myself: -
Crafting
Related and worth considering that appearance slots aren't simply a non-gameplay thing
Transmogrification or some enchanter-based illusion work could expand traditional crafting
Dyes and other modifications could expand crafting
Accessories could expand crafting
Appearance could be a reason in and of itself for crafted items
FashionQuesting
Appearance slots expand that dimension of existing loot
Loot gains more value beyond its stats. Loot not valuable for stats might be valuable for appearance
Characters have more reason to explore beyond power progression.
Will lead to characters exploring areas not of their level.
Will lead to characters exploring areas not of their culture or race (to find cultural/race specific gear).
Role-Playing
Those that feel it vital to portray a particular image. You may not consider Role-Playing to be a gameplay thing. I hopefully obvious that, in a fantasy role-playing game, a lot of people do.
Role-players don't just role-play in non-adventuring situations, though some may be ok with that
What you wear needs to match biography and project an image. The need can change per situation, mood, event, etc.
Fast travel and auction houses of course effect gameplay. Some would say in a wholly negative way. Some say the same of appearance slots. Some say we could do without fast travel and auction houses and rely on walking and player-to-player trading. Some say we could do without appearance slots and just show what is real.
So, back to your question: Does any of that constitute valid reasoning? I'm listening.
Liav said:Next dev topic: Why are people so bad at arguing?
People seem great at arguing. It's discussing that seems to be tough.
I'm sure some will look at my rather defensive and overly frequent comments and say I'm 'arguing'.
*shrug* I'm even responding to someone who is suggesting we're arguing... Maybe I have an issue ;^)
I like to think, though, that I have been trying to keep the thread an open 'discussion' and have only challenged people who suggest their opinions are somehow 'the truth' and we should stop talking because the issue is 'solved' by their ideal ideas.
The Enchanter is the Illusionist of false appearances. I do not believe the other classes should get this benefit.
I am definitely against the appearance slots & transmog that is discussed in this thread though.
Syrif said:The Enchanter is the Illusionist of false appearances. I do not believe the other classes should get this benefit.
Ok, if that's how you feel, but clerics are the ones that get magical healing: Should everyone else have to go to a hospital for weeks after each fight?
Wizards/Druids get teleports: Should everyone else have to walk everywhere, always?
Also, as suggested previously, appearance slots could require enchanter-crafters to make gear usable as appearance items (much like Wizards/Druids will be able to teleport other classes). That would be a good addition to crafting and the economy and interdependent gameplay, no?
Disposalist - Teleportation and healing are not appearances. Reminder: this is going to be a world, less so a game. A sword will be a sword. A breastplate will be a breastplate. Don’t like what you are wearing? Then adventure, acquire, and equip what you want to wear instead. Lol. No circle needed. This thread is just silly, as others have pointed out. :) That’s all.
Syrif said:I am definitely against the appearance slots & transmog that is discussed in this thread.