i have to side with many others. a system like this can be abused too easily. I get what you are saying, and i understand your fears, but nah.
i hope we can /report and /petition etc and that we have several GMs / Guides around for those type of people.
P.S. i will pay extra for a live support (GM) 24/7
They could always take the EQ Legends server route if GMs are too expensive to have to any real active attention. Back then, you paid 40 bucks a month to have a server where GMs were on call 24/7 and very quick to respond. I think the longest I ever waited for a GM to respond (usually by teleporting right to you) was 5 mins. Now granted the server had other features such first web integrated system for guilds/players, google like map system that I hated because I saw it as a cheat, and a raid calendar system where guilds tested and then signed up into a rotation to kill raid mobs among many other little features, but the GM service thing was the biggest issue. Because of it, there were very few issues of guilds causing problems. In fact, I had seen entire guilds banned from the server for bad behavior, so people were more on their best behavior.
So, back then we were paying 10 bucks a month for normal servers, making the legends server 40 bucks a month. If we scaled that to today's costs, a similar server would cost around 60 bucks a month for each player. If the server only ever had top notch GM support for the money, I would say it would be an excellent value as those GMs were very interactive with the players (they ran lots of special server events and even would name some first time drops after players/guilds when they defeated an encounter). It kept out a lot of the fly by nighters (people didn't want to get banned from the server, so there was pretty civil actions by many) away and it had a much tighter community (not as tight as Test server, but it was more so than the standard production servers).
I would gladly pay 60 bucks a month for a special server if it was able to achieve similar results in Pantheon.
kreed99 said: Ugh. Really? Pay for content? Or pay for GM? No. Just have good quality paid “ content controllers” that are server specific like early eq1. And dont lose faith in how a good GM can impact a server. Infact give good GM’s raises based on server population/interaction resolution. Think of good GM’s as community managers per server. Its a good quality job that can be rewarding if you work with your server. Heck, if your server is genocidal - hire a genocidal community manager to handle that specific server. To me its a win for the server and for GM content control. Honestly, all servers will progress at different rates and as long as GM’s dont give up secrets, but are involved in the community i dont see why things cant be amiable. Lets have some g dang fun with this game. If one server gets how dynamic content works why do we have to hold them back while another server figures it out?
This costs money and VR has already stated due to the nature of their situation, having a large staff of GMs is not going to be something they can reasonably afford as it concerns intimate such detailed responsiblities. This was a problem also in EQ, hence the special server that covered the additional costs to staff and provide these specialized services.
I think this is better left with the GM's and the GM's/Devs have whatever system they choose (like "soulstamps") to provide their feedback on dealing with certain characters.
I could see this not as judgmental but rather to allow the next Dev or GM to see where said PC was coming from previously. For instance, first time: PC keeps dying because of hole in world and petitons, GM gets them out but cannot replace exp. PC loses exp and is bummed. Second time, same PC petitions GM's a month later because of a botched quest and instantly starts bitching at the GM's and life in general. The GM's now looking at the PC history or "soulstamp" can then tailor their response to give better customer service, if the GM's know this player character found a hole and died alot previously, that might explain why they are so bitchy about this botched quest and the GM can manage their response to the PC accordingly.
The second part is drudgery from a GM perspective, like petitions over griefing or training or "bad behavior" which is prone to being subjective in nature. GM shows up and then is silent for 20-30, maybe 45minutes. Players are getting antsy- on both sides- as they want instant gratification. What is the GM doing? s/he listened to the issue, then pulled up the game parse and is reading line by line the things that happened to see if they can find where the alleged griefing took place, and if it is indeed griefing or something else like lack of communication and if so, if that can be resolved with an admonition about what the "play nice" policy means but loots or exp cannot be changed or re-done.
Being human, the GM might not find reviewing the parse to be fun and instead hope they can gloss over it under the banner of "play nice". If it IS actually a bug then the first complainer can only be consoled with bragging rights " I knew it then! I demand justice for this thing that happened 2 years ago! I was the first!" and be an irate player- which makes soulstamps useful tp GM's Dev's.
Generally speaking, I think there would have to be two kinds of GM's. GM's that love parsing(and there are some and usually they are the coolest) and GM's that love helping and doing events, maybe sneaking in Monsters from time to time to mess with uber guilds or even throw the fight unbeknownst for some earnest newbies so they can smile, hidden, while the newbies excitedly roll on the really nice loot! they thought they could never get. (and there are many and usually they are the funnest). Woe to PC's when the parser GM creates a "fun" event- heh.
Everything else would have to be reputation and best policed by the community. However this also puts responsibility on the community to guard against gaslighting which means speaking up if Joppa accuses Kilsin of being a ninja looter but Manouk knows Kilsin and she's not like that, sure she pickpockets but shes a rogue but she never ninja-loots so Manouk has to speak up and say thats not so. Where people can hear and hopefully Aradune would speak up as well and say Kilsin is not a ninja looter but everyone would have their own internal reputation soulstamps and think Aradune is a lousy puller and weigh that against his speaking up for kilsin.
Regarding using volunteers as GM's, guides, or similar..
From here (which is geo-locked, unfortunately, but those in the USA should be fine):
" Under FLSA regulations, an individual cannot volunteer services to a private, for-profit company.
...
There are no general regulations that permit volunteering of services to an employer in the private sector. All hours worked must be paid. "
These types of systems lead to abuse quite easily. You may think all the good people will use it, but the baddies who like to ruin others gameplay can also report. If there are enough baddies doing it to one innocent person then that innocent person will probably be screwed. I know the developers don't have the man power to babysit something like this since it can get out of hand quickly.
People lose their conflict resolutions skills with a /report option.
The great this about EQ was that the mainstream did not have the Mob "rage" mentality that is out there now. You appreciated playing with people, because you didn't want to go back to "Pac Man" and repeated level patterns for a static experience. The players are the dynamic magic of the world.
The ambiguity of internet, like traffic, makes people rude, disrespectful and possessive of things they can’t control. They forget to be human Those same people put in a room with the same people (Face to Face), all of sudden treat each other with respect.
So I hope as people “settle in” and play Pantheon; the ambiguity of the internet falls off as players become friends and guilds become families. Many friendly guilds become neighborhoods. The neighborhoods talk. People learn who the bad eggs are. Then the bad eggs, frustrated that the neighborhoods learned of them, create ALT characters, but this time they have modified their behaviors and reintegrate into the neighborhoods.
I will create a guild and be chill. Help one another and have a good time.
Caine said:People lose their conflict resolutions skills with a /report option.
The great this about EQ was that the mainstream did not have the Mob "rage" mentality that is out there now. You appreciated playing with people, because you didn't want to go back to "Pac Man" and repeated level patterns for a static experience. The players are the dynamic magic of the world.
Pac Man? Really? You do realize EQ was released in 1999, not the 1980s?
There were numerous single and multiplayer games back then. Heck, Half life was a very popular game at the time, and there were numerous games in the 90's which were more than a simple arcade style game.
Fact is, idiots existed in mass back then just as they do now. I find it quite amusing how people go on about generations they know nothing about.
Tanix said:Pac Man? Really? You do realize EQ was released in 1999, not the 1980s?
There were numerous single and multiplayer games back then. Heck, Half life was a very popular game at the time, and there were numerous games in the 90's which were more than a simple arcade style game.
Fact is, idiots existed in mass back then just as they do now. I find it quite amusing how people go on about generations they know nothing about.
Perfect example. Thank you Tanix.
Caine said:Tanix said:Pac Man? Really? You do realize EQ was released in 1999, not the 1980s?
There were numerous single and multiplayer games back then. Heck, Half life was a very popular game at the time, and there were numerous games in the 90's which were more than a simple arcade style game.
Fact is, idiots existed in mass back then just as they do now. I find it quite amusing how people go on about generations they know nothing about.
Perfect example. Thank you Tanix.
I choose Pac Man because it was a good example of a repetitive game, that once you new the pattern it became a static boring endeavor, not that it was of a particular time period.But you attacked here first because this is were you perceived weakness. Also, typical of the internet "Mob culture" today, you needed to attack it. Tear it down reduce it's merit, devalue it. Providing a good example of exactly what I am talking about.In all things there is an exception to the rule "80/20". All things evolve over time.Instead of acknowledging the idea that the nature of "internet culture" was different 20 years ago, again you just attack it.If you are going to attack it, at least qualify it. Why is it amusing that people go on about generations they know nothing about? Which people are you talking about?If your generalizing, then again, you prove my point "Mob internet culture loves to generalize", just open twitter if you can stomach it. If it was about me, well that is just silly, cause you know nothing about me.But you did add a good point about idiots, which was good. There are idiots everywhere. Creating an ALT character will not cure it.
No Caine, thank you.
You see, what you have just shown us is the type of behavior that is overly sensitive and demands rules, regulations and protections from everything because basic ability to deal with any form of disagreement or debate is seen as agressive abusive behavior.
You think my response is an "attack" on you personally, as a means to discredit by dismissing you, not your argument. Your response is a typical victim fallacy which redirects the argument away from any failed premise.
You provided an invalid premise, stating that "mob culture" was somehow a new thing, but then to go on and claim that my disagreement with you was "mob culture", defined as simply someone "needing" to attack you. Do you think someone disagreeing with another is a new thing on the internet? You do realize that logical fallacies (more specifically the Ad hominem) existed long before the Al Gore created the internet (/sarc) and that your argument that some how with the internet, people have changed and now "attack" all the time is a generalization, rather ignorant of the history of basic argument and human behavior?
You also went on to claim that the reason people back in EQ didn't act this way was because of the fancy new dynamic world that EQ brought and they didn't want to go back to the old static games of the time. Again, EQ was not innovative in the basic concepts of this play. MUDs, MUSHs, existed in dynamic environments long before EQ and the behavior you describe existed then too. Games like UO, and other multiplayer systems had this. Also, single player games had dynamic worlds of interaction (Elder Scrolls series and Wizardry 7 actually had a dynamic encounter system where the NPCs acted and quested on their own). So, your argument was not valid.
People attacked in EQ (and in history) long before now. There were all types, people who would directly harrass, and specifically argue against another. The concept of the Troll existed long before the internet gave it a nifty little title. The behavior is not new, and this generation is not special. In fact, a common problem today is the belief that somehow people are experiencing some type of behavior that is new when I posit that many today "feel" this way because they were never taught to deal with basic concepts like failure, rejection, and disagreement. Nor do they know how to handle themselves in situations where there is an agressive conflict.
Because of this, they feel that when someone disagrees with them, or calls them out on something, it is an attack on them directly and they immediately go into a mode of desparate accusation due to this lacking. In many ways this is called being sheltered, or immature in the basic concepts of social interaction. That is, it is a lacking in the basic ability to deal with social discourse that is not personally flattering or appealing and much less that of any direct confrontational behavior.
I think this is why it is common with many of those who have this issue to constantly seek solutions for all behavior that they find displeasing to be moderated or banned (ie modern MMOs attempt to socially engineer play so that players can all be protected from such possible interaction, ie.. they are sheltered). It is why in this discussion, rather than accepting a failed premise and realizing that the world is filled with people who are disagreeing on many levels, even less than civil ones, that there is a need to correct it, or remove it from any experience.
The thing is, this problem won't go away with moderation as it is not the problem, no more than a scorpion that stings is a problem, rather it is how people deal with such. Rather than having a bunch of aritficial mechanics put into a game to protect people from the ability to deal with the various levels of social behaviors, it would be better that people either learn to deal with such as most adults do, or... they avoid the experience entirely.
Very plainly, you are going to run into bad behaviors, this is life and you can't moderate your encounter with life, only how you personally deal with it. This really is something that being mature is about, and not getting offended at everything is a part of that responsibility.
/shrug
Tanix said:No Caine, thank you.
( see above.Wall text)
/shrug
Caine said:Tanix said:No Caine, thank you.
( see above.Wall text)
/shrug
My basic premise on Commend report system, is if you put in a "/report" thing. people will "tend" to default to that and no to try and solve conflicts on their own. the system does not work and gets abused.It like being in a workplace, you are better off solving a conflict with someone on your own. Bringing in management usually does not work out for either side. The managed more generalize solution is usually worse.Not going to wall text you. it's forums. I did read it though. it actually seems we agree on some things.I didn't take it personally.Muds were not a "mainstream" thing in 1999, I didn't play them, I was playing pencil and paper D&D. I am talking about main steam social media.
Fair enough Caine, point taken.
