MauvaisOeil said:
Syrif said:The appearance slot isn’t going to work in Pantheon AD7. This thread is just too comical lol. *Slips back into illusion and vanishes*
Cosmetic items are already a pledge reward so...
Hopefully it's the only one at this point t, why should we budge if you won't, only seems fair, maybe if you were trying to be a little bit more understanding, and not trying to be a purists we wouldn't be either.
With all due respect, stellarmind, emergent gameplay is a luxury worth having ... especially when it's supported by the game tenets. It's also a luxury that provides major benefits to the economy and replay value of lower tier zones. It's extremely easy to implement and adds value to the game. I responded to all of your comments and your response is that the benefits are somehow less significant just because they are a result of emergent play? I dont see what the issue is with that? I acknowledged that all of these things were emergent constructs that are facilitated by game design on the very first page. Are in-game player taxi services less significant because they are an emergent form of gameplay that results from meaningful travel and teleportation abilities from druids and wizards? Nobody is saying that appearance slots are "necessary" for core PVE gameplay. That isn't what you asked for. You asked how they could be a "factor" or how they could "contribute" to core PVE gameplay. You got what you asked for and are now moving the goalpost. Disappointing.
oneADseven said:With all due respect, stellarmind, emergent gameplay is a luxury worth having ... especially when it supports the game tenets. It's also a luxury that provides major benefits to the economy and replay value of lower tier zones. It's extremely easy to implement and adds value to the game. I responded to all of your comments and your response is that the benefits are somehow less significant just because they are a result of emergent play? I dont see what the issue is with that? I acknowledged that all of these things were emergent constructs that are facilitated by game design on the very first page. Are in-game player taxi services less significant because they are an emergent form of gameplay that results from meaningful travel and teleportation abilities from druids and wizards?
You can literally have all of this with a toggle, I honestly feel at this point we are just repeating ourselves
Since 1AD7 wants to stay so true to the tenets and everything I have an idea:
Get rid of all Appearance gear
Appearance gear hurts the immersion of others as it has been quite obvious
And since 1AD7 wants to make sure we all see the same thing the easiest fix is Adventure gear only
Adventure gear isn't going to hurt anyone's immersion and we share the same world that 2 tenets in 1
So therefore the best answer is Adventure gear only
Riahuf22 said:You can literally have all of this with a toggle, I honestly feel at this point we are just repeating ourselves
Process of repeating arguments started somewhere around page 5, later it become more like a shouting contest. VR will never be able to please everyone and my only hope is that they'll resort to logic and will take into consideration all pros and cons, rather than looking for the biggest screamer.
Saying that VR should follow MY recommendations, becouse I'm obviously ALWAYS right ;-)
stellarmind said:/facepalm @187 and dispolist
what both of you are saying is emergent gameplay.
appeareance slots provide no additional stats or benefits to any game mechanics other than cosmetics and therefore is a LUXURY.
A TOGGLE/CUSTOMIZATION OF APPEAREANCE IS NOT NECESSARY FOR PVE CORE GAMEPLAY.
sigh with all due respect the thread is so beyond discussing because both you guys stopped listening and trying to understand what i'm saying so i'm going to bow out.
basically u guys pushed me to a point where i agree with a purist no cosmetics at all.
anyways happy thanksgiving i'm gonna go put on 15 pounds cuz this discussion is no longer constructive and i need something worthy to give me a heart attack.
/facepalm @stellarmind
I understood and I answered. You appear not to understand my answer? Something doesn't have to be a core gameplay feature to be a worthwhile addition to a game. As I suggested when you asked me (but you ignored my reply?) we don't need beautiful 3D graphics to deliver the core gameplay - does that make them worthless? Immersion in a fantasy role-playing game is vital.
Also, appearance slots do, as explained by myself and 1AD7 (and others) enhance or improve certain core gameplay aspects.
Also, emergent gameplay is also something very worthy in an MMO. Exactly the kind of thing that world-builders look for to add depth and meaning.
So, I believe I have understood your point, but if you truly believe the only things worthy of discussion are those necessary for core gameplay then, I disagree and I'm not going to stop discussing just because you say so, even if you repeat your opinion in caps.
It's disappointing you think 1AD7 (and other "guys" like me) have "stopped listening" when it's you that is being dismissive and wanting to close down the discussion. I'm genuinely surprised by you in this.
To be honest, the whole discussion might well die down if people would stop with the strawmen and hyperbole and implying those that are interested in the appearance slot concept are somehow plain 'wrong'.
Yes, the constant re-stating of opinion is somewhat pointless when done without further clarification and thought. I would love to get back to discussing the topic as I think there is more to explore and I've tried to do that a couple of times. When people keep asserting that the discussion should stop because they are 'right' and others' 'wrong' it is pretty much guaranteeing a response, though, no?
@disposalist
I haven't kept up with the thread lately, but I saw an idea that there be some sort of idicator (albeit sublte) on the nameplate, character, or character pane, to denote that a player is using appearance gear.
Just wondering thoughts from your side of the house on that one.
TBH, the more I've thought about it, I'm more on the side for having it. My main concerns were PvP, but now that I realize that lack of PvP interest VR seems to be putting into the game, I might just play PvE. It's a little disheartening because world PvP has always been an aspect of MMOs I thoroughly enjoy.
Either way, I still would like to see it take significant effort to actually acquire/use appearance gear (ie through crafting, fees, material turn-in).
Kass said:@disposalist
I haven't kept up with the thread lately, but I saw an idea that there be some sort of idicator (albeit sublte) on the nameplate, character, or character pane, to denote that a player is using appearance gear.
Just wondering thoughts from your side of the house on that one.
TBH, the more I've thought about it, I'm more on the side for having it. My main concerns were PvP, but now that I realize that lack of PvP interest VR seems to be putting into the game, I might just play PvE. It's a little disheartening because world PvP has always been an aspect of MMOs I thoroughly enjoy.
Either way, I still would like to see it take significant effort to actually acquire/use appearance gear (ie through crafting, fees, material turn-in).
Yeah I'd be fine with an indicator. Kinda like when people used to go /anon so they couldn't be /inspected in EQ. Their name would be a different colour, if I recall. They clearly didn't want people knowing exactly what they were wearing, but others would know that they were /anon and they would need to ask if they wanted to /inspect.
I think there was a similar indication when people chose /roleplay, which also turned off /inspect - I may be mis-remembering slightly.
To be clear, I'd like an appearance slot system, but I'm actually ok with not having appearance slots at all or having them on RP servers only (with no toggle). It's the toggle I disagree with, for the reasons I've covered ad nauseum.
Of course, though a similar issue, /inspect and related options in EQ is different to appearance slots in Pantheon, because in EQ people could still mostly tell what you were wearing even with /inspect turned off, but for me, since the point of appearance slots would be to have a consistent way of defining my own external image, other people knowing I'm using them would make no difference at all to me. I wouldn't be wearing appearance gear to make my gear a 'secret', I'd be using it to look how I like, or more usually, to stop something looking how I don't like.
My favourite implementation is LOTRO where you consume a previously worn item to make it available as a 'wardrobe' item, but I wouldn't be against making it more complex and costly by adding a crafter/enchanter type process. It would be fun to make appearance gear even tougher to obtain and use than normal gear. I don't think it should be a frivolous thing.
disposalist said:Yeah I'd be fine with an indicator. Kinda like when people used to go /anon so they couldn't be /inspected in EQ. Their name would be a different colour, if I recall. They clearly didn't want people knowing exactly what they were wearing, but others would know that they were /anon and they would need to ask if they wanted to /inspect.
I think there was a similar indication when people chose /roleplay, which also turned off /inspect - I may be mis-remembering slightly.
To be clear, I'd like an appearance slot system, but I'm actually ok with not having appearance slots at all or having them on RP servers only (with no toggle). It's the toggle I disagree with, for the reasons I've covered ad nauseum.
Of course, though a similar issue, /inspect and related options in EQ is different to appearance slots in Pantheon, because in EQ people could still mostly tell what you were wearing even with /inspect turned off, but for me, since the point of appearance slots would be to have a consistent way of defining my own external image, other people knowing I'm using them would make no difference at all to me. I wouldn't be wearing appearance gear to make my gear a 'secret', I'd be using it to look how I like, or more usually, to stop something looking how I don't like.
My favourite implementation is LOTRO where you consume a previously worn item to make it available as a 'wardrobe' item, but I wouldn't be against making it more complex and costly by adding a crafter/enchanter type process. It would be fun to make appearance gear even tougher to obtain and use than normal gear. I don't think it should be a frivolous thing.
The color of the nameplate was only for /roleplay (dark purple). Anon was blue as others with no guild shown (no surname as well perhaps).
The discussion isn't dead, it just loops because some consider their opinion is truth and not just an opinion so it circles continuously to the same arguments while going progressively more defensive.
MauvaisOeil said:disposalist said:Yeah I'd be fine with an indicator. Kinda like when people used to go /anon so they couldn't be /inspected in EQ. Their name would be a different colour, if I recall. They clearly didn't want people knowing exactly what they were wearing, but others would know that they were /anon and they would need to ask if they wanted to /inspect.
I think there was a similar indication when people chose /roleplay, which also turned off /inspect - I may be mis-remembering slightly.
To be clear, I'd like an appearance slot system, but I'm actually ok with not having appearance slots at all or having them on RP servers only (with no toggle). It's the toggle I disagree with, for the reasons I've covered ad nauseum.
Of course, though a similar issue, /inspect and related options in EQ is different to appearance slots in Pantheon, because in EQ people could still mostly tell what you were wearing even with /inspect turned off, but for me, since the point of appearance slots would be to have a consistent way of defining my own external image, other people knowing I'm using them would make no difference at all to me. I wouldn't be wearing appearance gear to make my gear a 'secret', I'd be using it to look how I like, or more usually, to stop something looking how I don't like.
My favourite implementation is LOTRO where you consume a previously worn item to make it available as a 'wardrobe' item, but I wouldn't be against making it more complex and costly by adding a crafter/enchanter type process. It would be fun to make appearance gear even tougher to obtain and use than normal gear. I don't think it should be a frivolous thing.
The color of the nameplate was only for /roleplay (dark purple). Anon was blue as others with no guild shown (no surname as well perhaps).
The discussion isn't dead, it just loops because some consider their opinion is truth and not just an opinion so it circles continuously to the same arguments while going progressively more defensive.
Truth:
Cosmetic Gear hurts other peoples immersion into the game
VR Said they are trying to make an immersive world for all to share
Can't be Immersive and shared if Cosmetic Gear is in the game due to breaking Immersive aspect part of the game
So if you want it Shared and Immersive, Take out Cosmetic Gear and have it be Adventure game only
Adventure gear CAN'T be immersive breaking since to deals with Vertical and Horizontal progression into the game
And It can be shared and be immersive to everyone that is playing the game, and sticks to the Devs Tenets.
These are truths
I prefer that there not be the ability to modify the apearance of a particular item. It's more interesting to me to know what a person is wearing based on how they look rather than inspecting people to determine what they are really do have equipped. I enjoy the progression of appearance in gear as a player levels that demonstrates what they have accomplished or experienced, and appearance gear defeats that. I even like the extra factor in deciding what to equip based in part on what it looks like. When the balance is that the item is a slight upgrade but is less appealing visually, I'll sometimes pass on using it. Likewise, when something has stellar stats but I really dislike the look of it, I'll use it but remain highly motivated to find a replacement.
In the past there have been games with some really poor art for some of the gear. Everquest certainly fits that bill. But this doesn't have to be the case. While it makes sense for a rather mundane item to have a rather mundane appearance, it doesn't need to look ridiculous. If the art direction sticks to more traditional high fantasy style (as has been said of Pantheon in the past), there shouldnt commonly be cases in which the gear just looks stupid. It might not look flashy, but that doesn't mean that it looks jarringly silly.
Even tint for gear really aggravated me in EQ. People running around like the Jolly Rancher monster puked on them.
All this coming from an Everquest Necromancer that carried around that g** d*** duck stick for years. Seriously, who came up with that?
Riahuf22 said:Truth:
Cosmetic Gear hurts other peoples immersion into the game
VR Said they are trying to make an immersive world for all to share
Can't be Immersive and shared if Cosmetic Gear is in the game due to breaking Immersive aspect part of the game
So if you want it Shared and Immersive, Take out Cosmetic Gear and have it be Adventure game only
Adventure gear CAN'T be immersive breaking since to deals with Vertical and Horizontal progression into the game
And It can be shared and be immersive to everyone that is playing the game, and sticks to the Devs Tenets.
These are truths
I always get a chuckle out of your arguments.
Is your immersion so fragile that if I am wearing a cloak colored black that you think should be grey, your immersion is destroyed?
In every MMO that I have ever played, they regularly reuse art assets, simply reskinning the color or adding a minor flourish. So, if I wore the Tier 3 black color instead of the Tier 4 grey color, your immersion would just explode? If you look past your blinders and really consider things honestly, unless you were able to inspect me and see that I was actually wearing, you wouldn't even know that I was wearing something cosmetic.
Most of the anti-cosmetic gear people point to strange and bizarre items harming them. This is simply more straw man crap. Most of us are not even arguing for that type of gear. In fact, I agree that there should not be separate cosmetic gear that is not available through adventuring. Separate gear like that leads to cash shops. We should simply be allowed to wear the appearance of gear that we actually achieved through adventuring.
People say they want realism. Look to any combat zone in history. Soldiers, nobles, and everyone else have always added some flair to their uniforms, such as dyeing a cloak to symbolize a religious order or specific unit, adding some symbol or flourish. If someone dyes their leather armor black or red instead of brown cow, this would break your immersion? Especially when that exact same armor is available for others already?
The TRUTH: The fake outrage is getting ridiculous.
disposalist said:My favourite implementation is LOTRO where you consume a previously worn item to make it available as a 'wardrobe' item, but I wouldn't be against making it more complex and costly by adding a crafter/enchanter type process. It would be fun to make appearance gear even tougher to obtain and use than normal gear. I don't think it should be a frivolous thing.
This, to me, is the best option. Don't add a bunch of weird cosmetic gear. Instead, just let us wear the appearance of gear we already earned.
Beefcake said:This, to me, is the best option. Don't add a bunch of weird cosmetic gear. Instead, just let us wear the appearance of gear we already earned.
The Big problem there is gear is then made to appear as something that it’s not. That would be terrible and is not the best option - far from it. If you don’t like your appearance, then equip something else.
Syrif said:Beefcake said:This, to me, is the best option. Don't add a bunch of weird cosmetic gear. Instead, just let us wear the appearance of gear we already earned.
The Big problem there is gear is then made to appear as something that it’s not. That would be terrible and is not the best option - far from it. If you don’t like your appearance, then equip something else.
Or, not. See, we can be absolute also.
Beefcake said:Riahuf22 said:Truth:
Cosmetic Gear hurts other peoples immersion into the game
VR Said they are trying to make an immersive world for all to share
Can't be Immersive and shared if Cosmetic Gear is in the game due to breaking Immersive aspect part of the game
So if you want it Shared and Immersive, Take out Cosmetic Gear and have it be Adventure game only
Adventure gear CAN'T be immersive breaking since to deals with Vertical and Horizontal progression into the game
And It can be shared and be immersive to everyone that is playing the game, and sticks to the Devs Tenets.
These are truths
I always get a chuckle out of your arguments.
Is your immersion so fragile that if I am wearing a cloak colored black that you think should be grey, your immersion is destroyed?
In every MMO that I have ever played, they regularly reuse art assets, simply reskinning the color or adding a minor flourish. So, if I wore the Tier 3 black color instead of the Tier 4 grey color, your immersion would just explode? If you look past your blinders and really consider things honestly, unless you were able to inspect me and see that I was actually wearing, you wouldn't even know that I was wearing something cosmetic.
Most of the anti-cosmetic gear people point to strange and bizarre items harming them. This is simply more straw man crap. Most of us are not even arguing for that type of gear. In fact, I agree that there should not be separate cosmetic gear that is not available through adventuring. Separate gear like that leads to cash shops. We should simply be allowed to wear the appearance of gear that we actually achieved through adventuring.
People say they want realism. Look to any combat zone in history. Soldiers, nobles, and everyone else have always added some flair to their uniforms, such as dyeing a cloak to symbolize a religious order or specific unit, adding some symbol or flourish. If someone dyes their leather armor black or red instead of brown cow, this would break your immersion? Especially when that exact same armor is available for others already?
The TRUTH: The fake outrage is getting ridiculous.
I could also easily say is your feelings so fragile to where if I see you in a different way or actually seeing your adventure gear hurt you in a way you think I should not see it? You Can't even see my screen as im sure your well over 100 miles away but yet you try to deny a simple toggle that does nothing to you, but can do something for me. It's honestly a win/win, unless if your so fragile, as you think I am on the other side of the spectrum, and if you think I don't think your arugment isn't as ridiculous than obviously you haven't been reading my post.
And again if your side is going to use tenets to prevent a toggle, I will use tenets to prevent cosmetics, it's that simple, becuase where you call my outrage "fake," doesn't make it so, I do not want to see cosmetics, me and many others have easily made that quite clear so why call it fake? Do you think I should call all those who don't want a toggle fake supporters? seems quite flat to me.
And as I've seen it when the french went into war they wore french armor, and didn't cosmetically change it into english armor just becuase they thought it looked better, yeah I think that wouldn't be too smart of a thing to do, would you?
May I also add weren't you the one that said I should be a purists of one side or the other and when I did a while back and you said you could respect that, but now that I have been now you call my outrage fake, I'm honestly confused, either you didn't mean what you said back than or you didn't mean what you said now, becuase obviously both can't be true.
And if you like the only difference between cloaks is going to be different shades of color than i find that i like the cloaks, at least the ones that are truly going to matter and going to be extremely different looking and not just a black or gray cloak.
Maybe stop saying i am making straw man comments when I'm not even the one saying those things, i am simply saying give me my toggle ot take away cosmetic gear completely, the toggle does nothing to you, or even really the game, it will be shared and viewed in the way of the one actually playing the game, and if the way he is seeing it bothers you that is honestly your problem and not mine or the games but you simply being "fragile," as you seem to like to call me.
MauvaisOeil said:Man after so much back and forth about a toggle no one is even talking about anymore, you should really marry it.
Deleted it, simply becuase this statement had nothing to do wkith the topic at hand, and was only directed at me personally, and I'm not even going to acknowledge it anymore.
Kass said:@disposalist
I haven't kept up with the thread lately, but I saw an idea that there be some sort of idicator (albeit sublte) on the nameplate, character, or character pane, to denote that a player is using appearance gear.
Just wondering thoughts from your side of the house on that one.
TBH, the more I've thought about it, I'm more on the side for having it. My main concerns were PvP, but now that I realize that lack of PvP interest VR seems to be putting into the game, I might just play PvE. It's a little disheartening because world PvP has always been an aspect of MMOs I thoroughly enjoy.
Either way, I still would like to see it take significant effort to actually acquire/use appearance gear (ie through crafting, fees, material turn-in).
I suggested something to that effect a few pages back. I had another suggestion early on in the thread that didn't get much traction but the basic idea was to tie the perception system into all of this. Let's assume that players have a subtle indicator as discussed. (It's also worth considering that this indicator is potentially connected to the passive "insight" skill.) This informs folks that the player they are looking at is utilizing at least 1 appearance slot. From there, they have a few options for trying to learn more about the character in question. They can /inspect the character that is using the appearance slots and see what they have equipped (in both standard and appearance slots). If that player has /inspect disabled then they can message them and request for them to turn it back on. It really just depends on the situation. The other option would be using the "investigate" skill that is tied to the perception system. If your investigate skill is high enough to work on the player you are targeting, it would allow you to temporarily "see through" their appearance slots and potentially uncover other sorts of information as well. I feel this would be a pretty good compromise that actually makes sense in the context of a living/breathing world and would add some value to one of the flagship features of this game. What do you think?