Tanix said:1) "What obstacles can I create to overcome in play?"
or
2) "What cool things can I get/have/make to excel in play?"
Edit:
To clarify:
When you see VR talk about some feature, concept, or component of play... do you look at that feature in terms of your "suggestions" from a perspective of what cool new thing you think that should be a part of the game (2), or... how that feature should be balanced to insure it provides a proper obstacle in play to promote game play (1).
The reason I bring this question is because of my observations. What I see a lot of people comment on concerning various issues in play are features they think would be cool "ie the tools to overcome the obstacles... such flying, running faster, hitting harder, powers, abilities, bonuses, not specifically the obstacles they think should exist to impede their play or force them to overcome.
Very interesting question. I usually think of how to overcome it, but never in the sense of adding a mechanic to overcome it. I guess that is usually my blind trust in developers to allow for these tough obstacles to be challenged and overcome them. My mindset is usually that everyone is in the same boat as me, unless they are cheating, and have to go through the same motions as me. When I think like this I don't really care how hard a game gets, because everyone is dealing with it together. However, if obstacles are too easy then I ask myself what is the point of playing a game if I have no emotion into the game.?
I take WoW as an example. After Cataclyms, and recently in BFA, I quit because I wasn't enjoying the game at all. I did heroic Uldir as a druid tank (Guardian) and managed to do it without any addons and being under geared. Mythic,however, goes to the extreme and even though it can be done and takes time, I am getting the same gear, just better ilvl, and going against the same bosses that add a few more mechanics to make them tougher. Outside of that boring treadmill the game isn't fun at all. So I quit the game because even though I downed raid bosses I was never happy about it, except for maybe one time on MOTHER(Heroic) because the raid I was with was a fun group and we tried a new way(emergent gameplay) to beat the boss and it worked. Other than that the game sucks and eventually just quit because everyday I kept asking myself, why do I play this game if I am not having fun?
If this game is heavily into the dungeonand group scene...as they have mentioned, then it is vital that they don't have too many QOL mechanics to make the dungeons easy. If grouping is going to be part of end game, then always make it a task to get the camp and a task defeating the bosses. Too many QOL mechanics in thi sense will kill a major part of the game as it becomes another treadmill rather than a task each time you do it.
For the most part after reading all the conversations I will mostly side with Tanix on this one. I see way to many people looking for the easy way to overcome the obstacle...like it is going to be some big secret to them, like in Dark Souls, and no one will figure it out lol. But mainstreamers want to have their cake and eat it to it seems. Hopefully the devs steer clear of these travel suggestions, waystones in dungeons, and COH type of spells, which they probably won't on the COH type fo spell, but we will see.
Percipiens said:Tanix said:
Tanix said:
I'm perfectly fine with both rules and obstacles. I expect this game to challenge us and I expect it to take quite a while to level. 25 minute boat rides, however, aren't a challenge to overcome, they're simply a timesink. Yes, they're great if you want to grab food, bio, etc., or if there are others along for the ride. I don't think we disagree on the principle, I think we disagree on the degree.
In the travel example, we could take it to the extreme. No player may move beyond walking speed. As you walk, you lose stamina and must rest every 4 steps. If you go beyond 4 steps, you fall unconscious and must wait 15 minutes before you revive (and hope a mob doesn't aggro and kill you in the interim). Once you revive, you may only take 2 steps before needing to rest until 30 minutes have passed. This type of movement would, by all definitions, be a serious obstacle. Do you think even the most hardcore person would play (let alone subscribe and pay for) this experience? I doubt I would.
So, there it is. We'll agree to disagree on the degree!
Weak arguement with the boat. So are you for instant dungeon traveling since it will take time to run to a dungeon? Don't be soo nitpicky with what you want and don't want. Instead of a 25 min boat how about we just add that time to the running anyways. Will that make you feel better?
Watemper said:Percipiens said:Tanix said:
Tanix said:I'm perfectly fine with both rules and obstacles. I expect this game to challenge us and I expect it to take quite a while to level. 25 minute boat rides, however, aren't a challenge to overcome, they're simply a timesink. Yes, they're great if you want to grab food, bio, etc., or if there are others along for the ride. I don't think we disagree on the principle, I think we disagree on the degree.
In the travel example, we could take it to the extreme. No player may move beyond walking speed. As you walk, you lose stamina and must rest every 4 steps. If you go beyond 4 steps, you fall unconscious and must wait 15 minutes before you revive (and hope a mob doesn't aggro and kill you in the interim). Once you revive, you may only take 2 steps before needing to rest until 30 minutes have passed. This type of movement would, by all definitions, be a serious obstacle. Do you think even the most hardcore person would play (let alone subscribe and pay for) this experience? I doubt I would.
So, there it is. We'll agree to disagree on the degree!
Weak arguement with the boat. So are you for instant dungeon traveling since it will take time to run to a dungeon? Don't be soo nitpicky with what you want and don't want. Instead of a 25 min boat how about we just add that time to the running anyways. Will that make you feel better?
I don't understand why you made this leap. I'm not arguing for instant travel at all, and never have. The purpose of this thread was to point out different mindsets - people who wanted to be challenged and those who wanted everything handed to them. I do not want, nor have I ever advocated for instant anything. In several threads I clearly state games like these, for me, are about the journey. I think the basic premise of the original question is flawed. It looks at the extremes, where most players are in the middle somewhere. VR can make this as easy or as hard, as vertical or horizontal, as crude or polished, as exclusive or inclusive as they want. It's their game. These forums are a place for all of us to express opinions and support/debate our views. Visionary Realms has given us that voice because I believe they want the feedback.
The point of the thread you quoted was things (travel, combat, surviving, etc.) can be made stupidly difficult, but to what end? This isn't being touted as a survival game, it's a fantasy MMO. Some 'conveniences' will be part of it, we just don't know which ones. That's why we have these conversations.
Right. I was just using the extreme of instant travel like you are using the extreme for the other side, but if you are advocating for something like being against a boat ride that takes 25 mins, but at the same time are okay with a +25 min tacked on to running to a dungeon, then that is your problem and not anyone elses. So then are you the type of person that wants to get anywhere in the world in 15 mins like some people? I am trying to figure out where you stand because if you are going to the extremes, and then throwing in the 25 min boat ride, then it is really disingenious. It's kind of like a lot of the politcal arguments today where they go to the extreme, and then attack the norm as being the same as the extreme.
Percipiens said:Watemper said:Percipiens said:Tanix said:
Tanix said:I'm perfectly fine with both rules and obstacles. I expect this game to challenge us and I expect it to take quite a while to level. 25 minute boat rides, however, aren't a challenge to overcome, they're simply a timesink. Yes, they're great if you want to grab food, bio, etc., or if there are others along for the ride. I don't think we disagree on the principle, I think we disagree on the degree.
In the travel example, we could take it to the extreme. No player may move beyond walking speed. As you walk, you lose stamina and must rest every 4 steps. If you go beyond 4 steps, you fall unconscious and must wait 15 minutes before you revive (and hope a mob doesn't aggro and kill you in the interim). Once you revive, you may only take 2 steps before needing to rest until 30 minutes have passed. This type of movement would, by all definitions, be a serious obstacle. Do you think even the most hardcore person would play (let alone subscribe and pay for) this experience? I doubt I would.
So, there it is. We'll agree to disagree on the degree!
Weak arguement with the boat. So are you for instant dungeon traveling since it will take time to run to a dungeon? Don't be soo nitpicky with what you want and don't want. Instead of a 25 min boat how about we just add that time to the running anyways. Will that make you feel better?
I don't understand why you made this leap. I'm not arguing for instant travel at all, and never have. The purpose of this thread was to point out different mindsets - people who wanted to be challenged and those who wanted everything handed to them. I do not want, nor have I ever advocated for instant anything. In several threads I clearly state games like these, for me, are about the journey. I think the basic premise of the original question is flawed. It looks at the extremes, where most players are in the middle somewhere. VR can make this as easy or as hard, as vertical or horizontal, as crude or polished, as exclusive or inclusive as they want. It's their game. These forums are a place for all of us to express opinions and support/debate our views. Visionary Realms has given us that voice because I believe they want the feedback.
The point of the thread you quoted was things (travel, combat, surviving, etc.) can be made stupidly difficult, but to what end? This isn't being touted as a survival game, it's a fantasy MMO. Some 'conveniences' will be part of it, we just don't know which ones. That's why we have these conversations.
Nobody is accusing people of wanting "instant" travel time (at least I am not in these arguments). My point is that you want travel to not be meaningful and that is based on the fact that you think travel is "boring" and so any level of travel that would take time, would actually be an obstacle (ie you can't get there quickly to where you don't get bored) you view as a waste of time, boring, bad game play.
In all my arguments I keep pointing out how travel needs to be an obstacle, an obstacle in time, to give size to the world, to make the abilities that people have to speed up travel have meaning, purpose.
Also, keep in mind why some of us argue from the perspective of EQ. It is because in EQ, travel did take time (pre-SoL) and it made the world feel bigger, mysterious and there are many layers of play that subtly get layered by this. Modern games eliminated travel time, using the very logic you use (ie its boring, not fun, etc..) but I argue that it is the "boring, not fun" things that make overcoming them all the more fullfilling. Without hardship, there is no overcoming. Without failure, there is no success and the fact is, NOBODY likes failure, hardship, etc... It is NOT FUN, but... it is integral to a "meaningful" world of progression based play.
This is a core concept of failure/success in gaming, it is why some of the most memorable games were the ones that we had the most issues with, where we eventually overcame them. It is why old people like me who loved games in the past see most games are "boring" because they are not games, they are entertainment simulators that try to make the player "feel" like they are having fun all the time.
Tanix said:Nobody is accusing people of wanting "instant" travel time (at least I am not in these arguments). My point is that you want travel to not be meaningful and that is based on the fact that you think travel is "boring" and so any level of travel that would take time, would actually be an obstacle (ie you can't get there quickly to where you don't get bored) you view as a waste of time, boring, bad game play.
In all my arguments I keep pointing out how travel needs to be an obstacle, an obstacle in time, to give size to the world, to make the abilities that people have to speed up travel have meaning, purpose.
Also, keep in mind why some of us argue from the perspective of EQ. It is because in EQ, travel did take time (pre-SoL) and it made the world feel bigger, mysterious and there are many layers of play that subtly get layered by this. Modern games eliminated travel time, using the very logic you use (ie its boring, not fun, etc..) but I argue that it is the "boring, not fun" things that make overcoming them all the more fullfilling. Without hardship, there is no overcoming. Without failure, there is no success and the fact is, NOBODY likes failure, hardship, etc... It is NOT FUN, but... it is integral to a "meaningful" world of progression based play.
This is a core concept of failure/success in gaming, it is why some of the most memorable games were the ones that we had the most issues with, where we eventually overcame them. It is why old people like me who loved games in the past see most games are "boring" because they are not games, they are entertainment simulators that try to make the player "feel" like they are having fun all the time.
I get it. I'm an old people, too. One of the things I couldn't stand about EQ was PoK and all the port books for the same reason - it made the world feel very small. Travel can be boring, but I don't ascribe that in a wholesale manner, because it doesn't have to be. I don't know how or even if VR will implement different personal means of travel (or whatever other convenience features), and it really doesn't matter to me. The people working on this game have a very impressive record with games and I'll play it. I wouldn't be here otherwise. We grow by overcoming obstacles and struggles, and we also gain knowledge and wisdom. If we're going to be in the woods cutting trees, eventually we'll figure out that a chainsaw works better than a dull axe. Everything else about our characters will gain experience and levels, it's progression. {Insert QoL or convenience feature here} can be the same way and still retain meaning and not make the world small or meaningless. That's the challenge this talented group of folks at VR has, and I bet they're up for it.
Percipiens said:Tanix said:Nobody is accusing people of wanting "instant" travel time (at least I am not in these arguments). My point is that you want travel to not be meaningful and that is based on the fact that you think travel is "boring" and so any level of travel that would take time, would actually be an obstacle (ie you can't get there quickly to where you don't get bored) you view as a waste of time, boring, bad game play.
In all my arguments I keep pointing out how travel needs to be an obstacle, an obstacle in time, to give size to the world, to make the abilities that people have to speed up travel have meaning, purpose.
Also, keep in mind why some of us argue from the perspective of EQ. It is because in EQ, travel did take time (pre-SoL) and it made the world feel bigger, mysterious and there are many layers of play that subtly get layered by this. Modern games eliminated travel time, using the very logic you use (ie its boring, not fun, etc..) but I argue that it is the "boring, not fun" things that make overcoming them all the more fullfilling. Without hardship, there is no overcoming. Without failure, there is no success and the fact is, NOBODY likes failure, hardship, etc... It is NOT FUN, but... it is integral to a "meaningful" world of progression based play.
This is a core concept of failure/success in gaming, it is why some of the most memorable games were the ones that we had the most issues with, where we eventually overcame them. It is why old people like me who loved games in the past see most games are "boring" because they are not games, they are entertainment simulators that try to make the player "feel" like they are having fun all the time.
I get it. I'm an old people, too. One of the things I couldn't stand about EQ was PoK and all the port books for the same reason - it made the world feel very small. Travel can be boring, but I don't ascribe that in a wholesale manner, because it doesn't have to be. I don't know how or even if VR will implement different personal means of travel (or whatever other convenience features), and it really doesn't matter to me. The people working on this game have a very impressive record with games and I'll play it. I wouldn't be here otherwise. We grow by overcoming obstacles and struggles, and we also gain knowledge and wisdom. If we're going to be in the woods cutting trees, eventually we'll figure out that a chainsaw works better than a dull axe. Everything else about our characters will gain experience and levels, it's progression. {Insert QoL or convenience feature here} can be the same way and still retain meaning and not make the world small or meaningless. That's the challenge this talented group of folks at VR has, and I bet they're up for it.
That however doesn't answer to the issue I am pointing out. You claim it "doesn't have to be", but then your suggestions is that we should eliminate the very thing you said harmed EQ with PoP. That is my point.
So, you said "travel can be boring", so how do you make travel not boring AND retain its length as an obstacle? See, my point is that you don't have to entertain someone constantly in a game. What you may call "boring" in travel, I call a part of the balance in play which gives depth and meaning to the world. Did I like it taking me an enormous amount of time to run from Qeynos to Freeport without any type of travel aid? No.. I did not "like" it, but then I don't like having to go back and retrieve my corpse when I die, or the time it took to kill a mob in EQ. I did not "like" them, but I liked what feeling I got when I was able to overcome them.
Them being an obstacle, something "not fun", something that is "boring" or a hardship I have to deal with IS the point. The need to keep people from being "bored" in play is how we ended up with mainstream WoW because "boring" is entirely subjective. What you may call "not boring", someone else is going to come along and claim IS boring.
You have to have obstacles, you have to have times in a game where people aren't having fun, because it is the times of not having fun that make success all the more fun. Point to a game where you are having fun 24/7 and you will have pointed out,not a game, but some random form of entertainment.
Tanix said:
That however doesn't answer to the issue I am pointing out. You claim it "doesn't have to be", but then your suggestions is that we should eliminate the very thing you said harmed EQ with PoP. That is my point.
No, that was not my suggestion. I didn't say eliminate slow travel. If that were the case, I'd be an advocate for removing all travel and movement perks - no ports, no SoW, no Selo's, nothing.
Tanix said:So, you said "travel can be boring", so how do you make travel not boring AND retain its length as an obstacle? See, my point is that you don't have to entertain someone constantly in a game. What you may call "boring" in travel, I call a part of the balance in play which gives depth and meaning to the world. Did I like it taking me an enormous amount of time to run from Qeynos to Freeport without any type of travel aid? No.. I did not "like" it, but then I don't like having to go back and retrieve my corpse when I die, or the time it took to kill a mob in EQ. I did not "like" them, but I liked what feeling I got when I was able to overcome them.
Them being an obstacle, something "not fun", something that is "boring" or a hardship I have to deal with IS the point. The need to keep people from being "bored" in play is how we ended up with mainstream WoW because "boring" is entirely subjective. What you may call "not boring", someone else is going to come along and claim IS boring.
We agree here. Again, I'm not against obstacles. What I'm against is tedium and repetition just for the sake of tedium and repetition. The Korean games are bad about this with insane grinds just so players don't devour the content in two days. In the context of your statements above, it would be like making that corpse run the exact same way every single time you died, regardless of where your corpse actually was.
Tanix said:You have to have obstacles, you have to have times in a game where people aren't having fun, because it is the times of not having fun that make success all the more fun. Point to a game where you are having fun 24/7 and you will have pointed out,not a game, but some random form of entertainment.
We agree here, too. What we don't seem to see eye-to-eye on is the degree, severity and permanence of those obstacles. The Iksar from EQ were KoS everywhere, but if they stayed in Kunark, it wasn't an issue. Neither was travel much of an issue, as it was essentially a complete game in their home. They never had to leave.
Percipiens said:Tanix said:
That however doesn't answer to the issue I am pointing out. You claim it "doesn't have to be", but then your suggestions is that we should eliminate the very thing you said harmed EQ with PoP. That is my point.
No, that was not my suggestion. I didn't say eliminate slow travel. If that were the case, I'd be an advocate for removing all travel and movement perks - no ports, no SoW, no Selo's, nothing.
Tanix said:So, you said "travel can be boring", so how do you make travel not boring AND retain its length as an obstacle? See, my point is that you don't have to entertain someone constantly in a game. What you may call "boring" in travel, I call a part of the balance in play which gives depth and meaning to the world. Did I like it taking me an enormous amount of time to run from Qeynos to Freeport without any type of travel aid? No.. I did not "like" it, but then I don't like having to go back and retrieve my corpse when I die, or the time it took to kill a mob in EQ. I did not "like" them, but I liked what feeling I got when I was able to overcome them.
Them being an obstacle, something "not fun", something that is "boring" or a hardship I have to deal with IS the point. The need to keep people from being "bored" in play is how we ended up with mainstream WoW because "boring" is entirely subjective. What you may call "not boring", someone else is going to come along and claim IS boring.
We agree here. Again, I'm not against obstacles. What I'm against is tedium and repetition just for the sake of tedium and repetition. The Korean games are bad about this with insane grinds just so players don't devour the content in two days. In the context of your statements above, it would be like making that corpse run the exact same way every single time you died, regardless of where your corpse actually was.
Tanix said:You have to have obstacles, you have to have times in a game where people aren't having fun, because it is the times of not having fun that make success all the more fun. Point to a game where you are having fun 24/7 and you will have pointed out,not a game, but some random form of entertainment.
We agree here, too. What we don't seem to see eye-to-eye on is the degree, severity and permanence of those obstacles. The Iksar from EQ were KoS everywhere, but if they stayed in Kunark, it wasn't an issue. Neither was travel much of an issue, as it was essentially a complete game in their home. They never had to leave.
Ok, then explain what is an acceptable obstacle? You see, the difference between you and I is that I don't base my expectation of travel as an obstacle on the condition that it not be "boring, tedious" as those are entirely subjective means. As I said, what is tedious to you, may not be to another. So what is acceptable?
I disagree with Kunarks hub based design and obvious catering to Iksars (they were overpowered in their race bonuses). I thought it was a bit of a gimmick to market a new race. I also disagreed with Verants choice to make monks gear dependent, so while I do use EQ a lot, don't think I blindly accept it.
@Percipiens
You are pretty much right on the money and the majority of posters on the boards agree with you 75-90%. The difference would primarily be on how much travel is too much but that is something that can only really be determined once we see the size of the world so it’s all a relative guess at this point.
The balance of travel time, travel challenge, adventure time, the effect of the Perception system and target play session length is something we will need to rely on VR to handle until pledgers get into the open world. Those who are in PA, Alpha and Beta will be the ones who can give feedback to VR on travel before the game releases and that is only once multiple greater zones are connected. Until that time comes arguing about the length of a specific time invested in a specific leg of travel is an exercise in frustration.
Tanix said:Ok, then explain what is an acceptable obstacle? You see, the difference between you and I is that I don't base my expectation of travel as an obstacle on the condition that it not be "boring, tedious" as those are entirely subjective means. As I said, what is tedious to you, may not be to another. So what is acceptable?
I disagree with Kunarks hub based design and obvious catering to Iksars (they were overpowered in their race bonuses). I thought it was a bit of a gimmick to market a new race. I also disagreed with Verants choice to make monks gear dependent, so while I do use EQ a lot, don't think I blindly accept it.
I can't explain what is an acceptable obstacle for Pantheon. I won't know until I have the chance to get in and see for myself. What I can give is my expectation. I expect travel (and everything else) to provide a meaningful experience that leads to a great sense of accomplishment. I also expect to find better (yes, another subjective term) ways to do things, either by emergent play or by things coded directly into the game. The base definition of meaningful will be decided by VR, and we will provide feedback once we've gotten the chance to see how they define it.
Ah, so an unwillingness to commit to any sort of concept of the issue? I am not looking to hold you to an exact, but you were the one that brought up the boring aspect. I said it doesn't matter if a person finds travel boring, it doesn't exist to entertain them, it is an obstacle in play, just like death. You aren't supposed to go "Oh goody! I love running for hours!", the obstacle isn't supposed to dance for you, play cards with you, or keep you from losing interest. It is an obstacle meant to impede you, to bring meaning to traversing accross the world. You being bored or not is irrelevant because as I said, that is entire subjective.
I have actually seen people take your argument and use it to explain why they shouldn't have to level a second character from scratch. Like you, they said that the first time is fine, but after that, to go all through the process of leveling is boring, tedious and frustrating. They argued they should be able to auto-level an alt to max level because they already experienced the content once before. They made the same level of argument you made, so why are they wrong and you are right? Why is their opinion of being "bored" invalid, but yours is acceptable?
See, I am not sure how long it should take either, but I do think that if you were to travel from one side of the game to the other on foot with no aids, it should take hours... I would like it to take maybe 3-4 hours to run without any assistance. With a port, cut it in half, with a run speed buff, drop about 30 mins off that. So... maybe with all the special help, you can get across the world in 1 1/2 hours. I could live with that, maybe more would be better. Now keep in mind that is without any sort of stops, no going slow, having to invis or sneak around areas, waiting for pathers, etc... This is more of you know the route inside and out, the quickest paths, etc... and run with all the special spells non-stop with ports to quick drops.
This is certainly not set in stone, but if gives you an idea of how meaningful I think travel time should be. This is travel time, not difficulty, not dancing bears to watch along the way, no special "entertainment" shows to keep people from getting bored. This is you running, seeing the scenery, listing to the sounds and simply.. running from one end to the other.
Now how long it takes to get from town to the nearest dungeon, well... that is realtive to many variables.
See, I can give a general idea in what I would like, why can't you? I mean, other than essentially using vague meaningless words that are entirely subjective and lack any means to properly communicate your point. I have NO clue what you want because you have refused to use any quantifiable means to even explain your position. Why bother even discussing then?
You don't speak for everyone, so please spare us 90% of everyone agrees with us line, because I am 99.9 % sure you made that number up.
I would stake my house on the fact that 51% of those who have pledge agree with at least 75% of what Percipiens over your extreme views, its just the law of averages an reading a lot of posts. Percipiens is taking a very reasoned approach to the general concept understanding that there is a give an a take to all aspects not the hard line Either/OR that you state, over and over and over and . . . you get the picture.
That being said the majority of the things you say have at least some basis for consideration but usually as guide lines to keep in mind rather than driving forces. We can just never have a discussion with you on it as you drive all the way to the extreme any time your concern is even remotely infringed on.
The discussion we had on mobs having a follow distance vs following to the zone line every time is a good example. All of the posters (see # of individual posters and not total number of posts) recognized the fact that we want carelessly or needlessly agroing mobs to be a bad thing. Where we differed was how to make it a bad thing. Infinite follow is a way to make it bad but it is very reliable and there for exploitable in some ways and too limiting design wise in other ways. It kills any concept of disengaging from a failing encounter which should be a tactical decision. The exact mechanics of mob chasing and players disengaging is something that would need to be tested within the game world and tweaked when unacceptable bugs are found.
I will continue to encourage you to become more open minded and lenient to your fellow posters. Every statement is not an extreme. At the very least give people the room to be not great at written expression. I know I have to use a word processor and edit my posts several times before I post them and I still end up with a few unintelligible posts or posts that seem to say almost the opposite of what I intended to say.
Trasak said:
I would stake my house on the fact that 51% of those who have pledge agree with at least 75% of what Percipiens over your extreme views, its just the law of averages an reading a lot of posts. Percipiens is taking a very reasoned approach to the general concept understanding that there is a give an a take to all aspects not the hard line Either/OR that you state, over and over and over and . . . you get the picture.
That being said the majority of the things you say have at least some basis for consideration but usually as guide lines to keep in mind rather than driving forces. We can just never have a discussion with you on it as you drive all the way to the extreme any time your concern is even remotely infringed on.
The discussion we had on mobs having a follow distance vs following to the zone line every time is a good example. All of the posters (see # of individual posters and not total number of posts) recognized the fact that we want carelessly or needlessly agroing mobs to be a bad thing. Where we differed was how to make it a bad thing. Infinite follow is a way to make it bad but it is very reliable and there for exploitable in some ways and too limiting design wise in other ways. It kills any concept of disengaging from a failing encounter which should be a tactical decision. The exact mechanics of mob chasing and players disengaging is something that would need to be tested within the game world and tweaked when unacceptable bugs are found.
I will continue to encourage you to become more open minded and lenient to your fellow posters. Every statement is not an extreme. At the very least give people the room to be not great at written expression. I know I have to use a word processor and edit my posts several times before I post them and I still end up with a few unintelligible posts or posts that seem to say almost the opposite of what I intended to say.
What style home you have? Calling Tanix philophy extream is a little extream. I agree with alot of his points, not all, but thats ok.
What's the point of a virtual world of challange and adventure where you introduce a bunch of conveniences to by-pass the virtual world you just created.
If you follow The Tao and "some" of the aspects of Ying and Yang. There can not be exciting adventure without downtime moments, one can not exist without the other. In fact the exciting moments are more memorable when you have moments of peace and calm. This philosphy of reality (or whatever, you get the gist) governs all of reality. Light/Dark, Good/Evil, Chaos/Peace, Struggle/fufillment. etc... So Tanix's core philosophy is valid. What happens is we begin to try to pick fly poo out of pepper. Sometimes as a player, you are in charge of making your own entertainment. Having the freedom to do so in a virtual world is addicting.
The trick here is not to make downtime boring. If I can take a boat ride where I can sell to a vendor, or use a crafting station (stick something on the boat so it's not boring...simple!), or auction to other players This would be peaceful downtime moments that are not boring. In fact sometimes you must nurture your character, grow into your class. Then when you battle and are successful, it makes the nurturing parts more appealing.
I see this as a Virtual World Role-Playing game. I am playing a role in a virtual world. I don't think Visionary Realms is making an action game, they are making virtual realms (worlds).
@Caine
I indeed agree and attempted to acknowledge that Tanix ideas usually have merit. Its just that if there is a slider to two points of view he is usually all the way on the far end of the slider while from my reading I interpret most other posters to be closer to the middle than on either end.
I would actually guess that virtually no pledgers have any desire to have a game with all the modern immediate gratification game structures. Where we usually have differing opinions is exactly which QoL functions can be added without hurting what Pantheon could be. If Immediate gratification, everyone gets a trophy, was -100 on the slider and the most hardcore tribal survival game is +100 then Pantheon appears to be somewhere in the +50 range and I believe the pledgers understand that.
I do like your Tao reference. I have studied a fair amount of Eastern philosophy so I have a little knowledge and its a very good system to reference. There is no achievement without struggle, there is no creation without destruction, there is no reward without risk. I would personally enjoy a fantasy survival game with only enough QoL mechanics to make of for the fact that its a computer game and not real life.
*edit* Got a stand up desk 2 years ago and they are great both at home and work *end edit*.
Trasak said:@Caine
I indeed agree and attempted to acknowledge that Tanix ideas usually have merit. Its just that if there is a slider to two points of view he is usually all the way on the far end of the slider while from my reading I interpret most other posters to be closer to the middle than on either end.
I would actually guess that virtually no pledgers have any desire to have a game with all the modern immediate gratification game structures. Where we usually have differing opinions is exactly which QoL functions can be added without hurting what Pantheon could be. If Immediate gratification, everyone gets a trophy, was -100 on the slider and the most hardcore tribal survival game is +100 then Pantheon appears to be somewhere in the +50 range and I believe the pledgers understand that.
I do like your Tao reference. I have studied a fair amount of Eastern philosophy so I have a little knowledge and its a very good system to reference. There is no achievement without struggle, there is no creation without destruction, there is no reward without risk. I would personally enjoy a fantasy survival game with only enough QoL mechanics to make of for the fact that its a computer game and not real life.
*edit* Got a stand up desk 2 years ago and they are great both at home and work *end edit*.
If posts had the like button I'd click this!
I think a seperate thread can be branched off of this to talk about the design of voluntary, and involuntary time sinks and how to make them engaging.
A voluntary time sink would be a tavern and all that is in it- gaming tables for NPC run VR created gambling games and a stage for emergent PC entertainment and all the other nice ideas presented
An involuntary time sink would be a boat ride. How would you make this engaging? maybe different gambling games or fishing? there have been other posts on this as well that cover this gamut(sp?) pretty well I think, including player involvement with sailing or minor shipping quests.
- then by extention, non boat-ride travel. how would you make that long run engaging? to me the scenery alone would do it, even seeing the beasts or avoiding them would do it. Jump scares not so much as that would be a delay in getting to the place I want to go unless I have the mind set of not being in a hurry to get to a place. I think a lesson can be learned from spielbergs early roller coaster filming experiments where he found that a fixed camera was not so great, but a camera that leaded ahead a little? like pointed ahead of the curve a bit before the cart travelled and then centered back once the turn was made was a better view.
So how does the game present the obstacle to give me the mind set: to NOT be in a hurry to get to a place and instead slowly, (PuG-ingly at first?), adventure forth?
*personal note: I always thought boat trips like on a cabin cruiser or even a cruise were kind of like voluntary incarceration, you can't leave unless the boat heads to shore. Unlike a rowboat or something where you can manipulate it yourself and get to shore when you want or just stop being on the water.
This is ancedotal, but out of the several groups of 10+ people that I have met through eq progression, or Project 1999 that don't post on forums....most don't even want any sort of auction house, lfg, fast travel, etc. Once Alpha comes around you will see the so called 51% of the pledgers be the minority really quickly.
When alpha comes - may all Gods grant that the blessed day comes reasonably soon - many of us will see how the game looks in a relatively advanced form and can (without violating the NDA) comment on what are now purely theoretical points with a bit more background. I agree.
That the people Watemper refers to want far fewer modern "conveniences" than current games have I do not doubt for a second. We all feel that way or we would not be here.
But I suspect that while they have expressed this opinion in general, I doubt very much if most or perhaps *any* of them want
(1) No means of trading items, even low value crafting materials, other than standing in a tunnel or Pantheon equivilent spamming /say or standing in a zone doing little or nothing other than spamming zone chat. No broker or auction house of any type not even regional ones limited to a particular race or faction.
(2) No means, in a heavily group oriented game, of actually *forming* a group other than spamming chat. The number of people that object to any lfg tool even one that just helps people communicate and doesn't automatically form groups or teleport anyone to the action has to be miniscule.
(3) No means of quick travel. Not even between continents.
So I suspect that "don't even want *any* sort of auction house, lfg, fast travel" (emphasis added) is substantially oversimplified.
Watemper said:
This is ancedotal, but out of the several groups of 10+ people that I have met through eq progression, or Project 1999 that don't post on forums....most don't even want any sort of auction house, lfg, fast travel, etc. Once Alpha comes around you will see the so called 51% of the pledgers be the minority really quickly.
You may be right and only time will tell. I believe at this point there are 1000s of pledgers in total and maybe 10% have posted more than once or twice. And as I tried to say most of those pledgers are interested in a +50 or higher game.
Auction houses: Low Quality of life, high interaction to high quality of life, low interaction
Player to Player trade only with no posting tool, Player to Player trade only with a consignment board for offline communication, Player rented non searchable vendors, Player controlled NPC bazaars with local only search function, local only NPC auctioneer, global auction houses.
LFG: Low Quality of life, high interaction to high quality of life, low interaction
Local Shouting only, FLG flag, zone LFG sorting tool, global LFG sorting tool, semi automatic group suggesting, automatic group filling, automatic group filling with teleportation to adventure location
Fast Travel: Low Quality of life, high obstacle to high quality of life, low obstacle (for the purposes of this argument assume that druid and wizard ports are point to point travel tools and so the two locations are effectively adjacent to each other)
No movement speed increases and slow movement, item and spell movement increases with slow base movement, both magical and mundane movement increases and decreases, many movement increasing tools that are always on, automated very fast travel, flying mounts (crow fly short cuts that avoid content), at will teleportation for all classes.
Of the list for Auction Houses I would personally pick: Player rented non searchable vendors or Player controlled NPC bazaars with local only search function mostly depending on size of the server populations.
Of the LFG tools I would pick global LFG sorting tool or semi automatic group suggesting. Depends how the PantheonHarmony tool works. The group suggesting could be pretty cool if accepting was optional.
Of the Fast Travel options I prefer both magical and mundane movement increases and decreases with mounts really only being carry capacity tools rather than movement speed increases. Horses really only walk at 4mph rather than humans walk at 3mp just that their sprint speeds and short duration running speed is significantly faster. Flying mounts are just too hard to balance unless the game world is truly enormous, far larger than any game yet made.
I would actually be really curious what others would pick and if there are other options that I failed to capture. The fast travel one is a little muddled as it encompasses mounts, foot speed, boat travel, teleportation and environmental challenges. So it will likely require many different options to cover different opinions.
Trasak said:
I would stake my house on the fact that 51% of those who have pledge agree with at least 75% of what Percipiens over your extreme views, its just the law of averages an reading a lot of posts.
My views are not extreme for gamers of EQ's time. Considering this game is centered around why EQ was successful in its features and why modern mainstream games have failed in theirs, I would say that within the "target" audience I am more of a staunch classical gaming idealist.
Now if your point is to say that I am extreme when compared to mainstream, absolutely I am. Why do you think that I point out that some mainstream ideals are at complete odds with my points and with even the tenants of this game? So yes, if this entire community were comprised with mainstream gamers, I would likely be the minority view. Somehow I doubt that is the case though which is why I called you out on making wild assumptions. Regardless, that form of mob argument isn't productive. If you want to say that the bulk of people here are mainstream and my arguments are at a loss due to that, then I can accept that, but as I said I don't think this crowd is comprised of mainstream players, I think they are the minority (until Beta/open beta and then they will be the majority view as people flock to try out the game). I mean, MMORPG.com having this game at or near the number one antcipated isn't because of the traditionalist, it is because there is a much interest by the mainstream community. So if you think I ruffle feathers now with some of you guys, wait until they get here and the lamentations will be deafening.
@Trasak
LFG: I am fine with what EQ has now...which is just a list of people to send tells to that are lfg around your level to meet up at a dungeon/camp and begin the grind.
Auction Houses: I don't like AH's at all. I would prefer a market place in the major cities that can have booths be rented out and people having to be there selling goods. But if the whiny people want...I will go as far as regional...or main city AHs, which will be better, than something dumb like global AH.
Travel: EQ did a pretty good job in traveling imo. You had speed buffs and ports. Once you got high in the levels you could just tip port and get to most places in 10 mins. I would like to see longer travel than EQ when using the ports.
Death Penalty: Only death penalty I see that will ever make me respect my surroundings is a corpse run and exp penalty.
So yeah...mine are more along those lines..which isn't extreme at all tbh. Many people overcame those situations with only 2-3 hours of gameplay a day with all the boat travels and 1 - 2 hour runs along the way without ports or sow and managed to hit max level and raid on atleast one character. People are just too soft with the mainstream QOL mechanics now that this is somehow hard now lol.
This whole topic feels like it was set up to be either you like obstacles or you want easy mode. There doesn't seem to be much room in these discussions for a middle ground. I do not want EQ reskined and VR has stated they are not making a reskin of EQ. There has to be some give and take as far as QoL goes between what WoW has and what EQ had. Somewhere in the middle is probably the best.
Every obstacle is subjective. If I have 12 hours to play a 2 hour travel time isn't a big deal, if I have 4 hours to play a 2 hour travel becomes half my session. Everyone thinks their view is correct and that most people agree with them. I have friends I've game with multiple times a week and have for 20 years and we can't even agree on what we think should and shouldn't be, I doubt strangers on a forum really share your exact view.
I want obstacles and I want them to mean something but I also don't want them in the game for the sake of making the game take longer. Gamers can see through a shallow attempt at a time sink. Having a vast open world that takes two hours to cross, that is uninhabited serves no purpose other than making something take longer. I would prefer a 30 minute walk that is populated with NPCs, KOS and non KOS, than 2 hours of nothing. Again there is a slider here, everyone has a different idea of what the right amount of time is.
It's also hard to design in a vacuum. Each aspect of the game plays into another apsect. I can't say what a good travel time will be until I find out how long it will take to find a group, how hard getting to that group once in the zone will take, how the zone mob level is going to be laid out, how ports work. All of these factor in to what an obstacle is.