Forums » General Pantheon Discussion

I hate QoL Features

    • 1688 posts
    July 11, 2019 8:09 AM PDT

    Kittik said:

    QoL features like "Equip All" after death, cheapen's death.  Know why you feared death in EQ, the dread of knowing you had to re-mem all your spells, loot all the stuff off your corpse and reequip all your gear.  That subcouncious knowledge of knowing all that work lie ahead of you if you died, was a driving force for doing all you could to avoid death.  (And don't give me the "What if I get DC'd and it's not my fault" bruh, if you get DC'd and it's not your fault, we all about to die becasue the only way someone loses connection now is if there is a giant meteor coming at us and it took out 7 or 8 satillites.)

    Re-equiping off your corpse wasn't a time consuming process in the first place.  You could just double click each item and it would appear on your body or inventory if it was a bag.  A full corpse loot was a few seconds (<8 easily).  So the swtich to a 'loot all' did not represent a dramatic increase in your safety as you inaccurately imply.  Now if you actually had to drag-drop each individual item from the corpse onto the appropriate slot and then it was replace with an instant loot-equip all I could see your point.

    Kittik said:

    QoL  features like "Fast Travel" cheapens the adventure of traveling.  It trivalizes content and makes farming a thing.  Fast Travel in any form might as well be the same as ESO dungeon finders, where all you do is stand around queued up for a dungeon without having to go anywhere.

    I'll agree with you insofar as it cheapens the adventure of traveling, but it does not actually trivialize content rather just somewhat reduces the risk associated with travel. A runspeed buff reduces risk, yes, but you can still be snared, rooted or stunned which gives a nearby NPC more than enough opportunity to ruin your day. I'm not sure of your reasoning between equating fast travel with 'makes farming a thing'.  You do not need fast travel to farm a given area of loot, just the right gear, level and skill.

    Kittik said:

    QoL features like "Auto Consume" rations.  Yep, better players don't forget that stuff, it's one of the things that gets them in top end raid guilds, but players who don't pay attention complain and now it's a QoL feature that isn't needed, yet is in there to "level the playing field".

    So long as you have the food/drink, what purpose is served by having to manually consume them every X minutes?  It would be removing the need for food/drink that would be more concerning rather than your idea of the auto-consume if you have it in your inventory.

    Kittik said:

    QoL features like any QoL feature cheapens the experience of the game.  

    QoL features are less QoL features and more, I'm lazy and I just want to see flashy bloom effects on my screen and pretty, big, foating numbers.

    I see QoL features as those things which remove or reduce some activity which itself serves no purpose nor has any intrinsic value to the character or overall game.

    Lets say you want to craft 10 Steel Plates.  The original method of manufacture would be to place 1 iron bar, 1 Coal, 1 Anvil, 1 Hammer into a forge and you hit combine.  After 5 seconds you get 1 Steel Plate (and your anvil/hammer returned.  You do that 9 more times and just over a minute later you have your 10 Steel Plates.  The updated method of manufacture you put in 10 Iron Bar, 10 Coal, 1 Anvil, 1 Hammer into the forge and you hit combine.  60 seconds later out pops 10 Steel Plate.

    Tell me, what benefit is there to the character/player to do 10 manual combines over that of 1 bulk combine given that the time required for both processes are the same? The second method is clearly a QoL improvement..a lot less clicking/dragging.  Does clicking/dragging somehow make the player a better craftsperson?  Does all that clicking/dragging actually increase their enjoyment of the game?

    Here's the thing about your views on QoL:  You would have the option, in nearly every example you gave, of not utilizing the QoL feature you so vehemently hate.  You don't like fast travel?  Don't accept it when offered and never seek it out.  You don't like auto-loot off your corpse?  Don't use that button..click-drag everything to its proper place.

     

     

    • 1412 posts
    July 11, 2019 8:29 AM PDT

    Jabir said:

    No, but it's also not very concrete.

    Some will say that having no interactive map results in unnecessary tedium or complexity that serves no real purpose other than to be complex, while I would argue that the risk of getting totally lost poses an interesting challenge and rewards those who pay attention to their surroundings. And no, simply not using the map does not work as a solution.

    Another example: Like you I don't want systems and conventions that penalize players who can't spend every waking moment online. But I do think there should be content that can only be obtained by putting in an insane amount of time. That's not a penalty for people with real lives, it's a possibility to excell if you play more than is good for you.

    You're absolutely correct.  My list was conceptual, not specific.  However it's still better than "QoL sucks" ;)

     

    If we're going to debate whether an implementation is good, or bad, we need to be specific and precise.  We can't just say "it's QoL and therefore terrible".  Likewise we can't even say "It's good!" or "It's bad!"  Things are far more nuanced with that.  You included two good examples.

    There are ways to implement maps that absolutely would be bad for the game.  Yet that does not preclude that a map could be implemented in a way that would NOT be bad for the game.  The devil is in the details.

    Likewise, on time to complete content - allowing people to play and progress in short sessions does not preclude there from being things that require a significant time investment to complete.  It's just a matter of whether that is a contiguous time investment or not.

    The thing I wish that more people on these forums would do when talking about how they feel about something is to be specific and precise about what and why, instead of resorting to blanket statements and labels.

    • 373 posts
    July 11, 2019 9:07 AM PDT

    QoL features can be good or bad.  To borrow a phrase from Bazgrim "Trust in Pantheon".   I fully trust in the people behind this game to look at them on a case-by-case basis and decide if they're good for the game.  Especially since we can now look back at all these examples from other MMO's and see how different QoL features worked out.  What were the benefits?  What were the unintended consequences?

    • 325 posts
    July 11, 2019 9:29 AM PDT

    Fragile said:

    Flapp said:

    we need level loss as well as exp loss. 

    That's not really QoL, that's design/challenge. QoL is having a stack of 5 flowers vs. having 5 individual flowers, you can have both but it saves time and inventory space (management). Another example would be being able to right-click equip vs. having to drag & drop. The list goes on and on.

    and I disagree .... Games after EQ took away the fear of losing your level right after learning new spells. To me, not losing a level after dying 100 times is QoL feature added by every single mmo after EQ. I think EQ even took away level loss later in the game. i know what QoL is, and in addition to stacks etc. is not losing a level after death. but thank you for telling me i am wrong. 

    • 1214 posts
    July 11, 2019 10:25 AM PDT

    Jabir said:

    Riahuf22 said:

    Jabir said:

    decarsul said:

    For me, when crafting, i do not mind the eq1 original way, but the revamped way to me was much less time consuming as you didn't have to singularly drag each single item into the crafting slots to recreate the item. Instead you had to do it once with a succesfull craft to 'learn' the recipe and from there on you just needed to have the ingredients. And since i have made A LOT of grobb's liquidised meats, this was a good quality of life improvement in my eye's. Lazy? Maybe, but it definitely saved me from getting RSI.

     

    The above quote is a typical example of such a QoL feature. From a personal perspective it feels like a harmless improvement that crafting has become less tedious, but the poster inadvertently mentions the underlying problem him- or herself: "the revamped way to me was much less time consuming". When crafters can churn out more items per hour, the value of each item is proportionally reduced.

    No it isnt, he alrdy had the materials to create it, the ability to farm is easier than others is what leads to the product losing it value or if it's stats don't match up to another, but spending another 15 minutes making an item doesn't, because he alrdy had the mays to make it.  Stop with the false information of if it can be made faster it cheapens the product, when truly if the product you are trying to make took 30 hours of farming to make 100 of them the price wouldnt fall, but if they took that 30 hours and made it 10 that would cause it to fall, which isn't a QOL feature, but the game in itself becoming easier which is not what we're looking for.

    I've never played EQ, but if you say so... (Actually, I'm far from sure what you tried to say. Proof reading and punctuation are real things.)

    It may well be true that the greatest time sink in EQ was harvesting, but that's completely beside the point. Less time crafting means more time available for harvesting, resulting in more items. The example may not be the best, but my point remains valid. Most QoL features accelerate gameplay.

    If you really think that clicking on each component to craft an item actually increases the value of it than I'm sorry but that's simply not true.  In what world of thinking does that even make sense, maybe to you it does, but I'm sure most people wouldnt pay you more money simply because you dragged the items over to right window instead of just clicking "create item", sense the item is exactly the same and will be looked at it that way, regardless of what system is used.

    Now with this said I wouldn't mind you simply clicking on "create item" and you have to do something properly to get the best results, as this seems fun, and a good way to make tradeskilling alot more interactive than a simple click this button and walk away type of function, but I think the simple just clicking the button to get it all started is just fine.


    This post was edited by Riahuf22 at July 11, 2019 12:02 PM PDT
    • 151 posts
    July 11, 2019 12:35 PM PDT
    @Dorotea
    Given that each of us has his or her own definition of whether a design choice is a quality of life feature, an essential element of gameplay, or an abominable atrocity which if implemented we will refuse to play the game, I see no benefit to debating the pros or cons of quality of life. Better to focus the discussion on specific decisons as we have so often been doing in other threads.

    Bump for being reasonable
    • 1616 posts
    July 11, 2019 1:39 PM PDT

    Riahuf22 said:

    If you really think that clicking on each component to craft an item actually increases the value of it than I'm sorry but that's simply not true.  In what world of thinking does that even make sense, maybe to you it does, but I'm sure most people wouldnt pay you more money simply because you dragged the items over to right window instead of just clicking "create item", sense the item is exactly the same and will be looked at it that way, regardless of what system is used.

    Now with this said I wouldn't mind you simply clicking on "create item" and you have to do something properly to get the best results, as this seems fun, and a good way to make tradeskilling alot more interactive than a simple click this button and walk away type of function, but I think the simple just clicking the button to get it all started is just fine.

     

    It does. It's named "workforce", and is why in real life, most automated business have become cheaper because they no longer require time and employees.

     

    If you have a cheap recipe that takes you a negligible amount of component but 1 hour of active crafting, it will be more expensive than the same components with 15s of crafting, because most people would rather pay than make it themselves, and sellers won't bother doing it for profit because it's long and might not pay enough for the time they put in it. That's amongst the basic of any business including creating or transforming something. Time is money, and it's as true in game than it is in real life.

    • 1688 posts
    July 11, 2019 1:50 PM PDT

    MauvaisOeil said:

    Riahuf22 said:

    If you really think that clicking on each component to craft an item actually increases the value of it than I'm sorry but that's simply not true.  In what world of thinking does that even make sense, maybe to you it does, but I'm sure most people wouldnt pay you more money simply because you dragged the items over to right window instead of just clicking "create item", sense the item is exactly the same and will be looked at it that way, regardless of what system is used.

    Now with this said I wouldn't mind you simply clicking on "create item" and you have to do something properly to get the best results, as this seems fun, and a good way to make tradeskilling alot more interactive than a simple click this button and walk away type of function, but I think the simple just clicking the button to get it all started is just fine.

     

    It does. It's named "workforce", and is why in real life, most automated business have become cheaper because they no longer require time and employees.

     

    If you have a cheap recipe that takes you a negligible amount of component but 1 hour of active crafting, it will be more expensive than the same components with 15s of crafting, because most people would rather pay than make it themselves, and sellers won't bother doing it for profit because it's long and might not pay enough for the time they put in it. That's amongst the basic of any business including creating or transforming something. Time is money, and it's as true in game than it is in real life.

    The concept issue at the heart of this is this: Time = Money.  Not the number of clicks, but how long does it take to get from A to B.  If, as I alluded to above, the first version of manufacture requires 30 click/drags and takes you 10 minutes to produce the item and the process gets changed to just 1 click/drag but the outcome still requires 10 minutes your total time investment is unchanged.  You are still stuck standing there at the forge/whatever for 10 minutes. You cannot argue that the first manufacturing process results an intrisically higher value of the output than the second process.

    • 3175 posts
    July 11, 2019 2:34 PM PDT

    Vandraad said:

    The concept issue at the heart of this is this: Time = Money.  Not the number of clicks, but how long does it take to get from A to B.  If, as I alluded to above, the first version of manufacture requires 30 click/drags and takes you 10 minutes to produce the item and the process gets changed to just 1 click/drag but the outcome still requires 10 minutes your total time investment is unchanged.  You are still stuck standing there at the forge/whatever for 10 minutes. You cannot argue that the first manufacturing process results an intrisically higher value of the output than the second process.

    I would argue that the time investment is still being reduced.  Just because the final outcome results in 10 minutes in both examples doesn't mean that players aren't spending more time being involved in the process.  The player who clicks one time for the same outcome is clearly spending less time "focused" on the process.  You click once and watch Netflix for 10 minutes.  Compare this to the guy who has to click something every 20 seconds.  If he isn't attentively clicking every 20 seconds that process is going to take more than 10 minutes.  It could take 20 minutes if he is operating at 50% efficiency.  This does have an impact on the relative value of an item because it allows players to mass-produce merchandise with very little effort or focus.  The entire concept of being focused/attentive goes out the window.  I'm not saying that having to click something every 20 seconds is challenging or even good design ... but streamlining the process of large-scale crafting would absolutely have an impact on the supply/demand, and thus the value of the items being produced.  This is why it's extremely difficult for real players to try and compete with the crafting/harvesting bots that have plagued so many games.


    This post was edited by oneADseven at July 11, 2019 2:41 PM PDT
    • 1688 posts
    July 11, 2019 2:51 PM PDT

    oneADseven said:

      I'm not saying that having to click something every 20 seconds is challenging or even good design.

    We at least agree on this point.

    • 3175 posts
    July 11, 2019 3:01 PM PDT

    I think the same can be said about many QoL features though.  If it takes someone 10 dedicated/focused/efficient minutes to run from Point A to Point B ... but another player can get there in the exact same amount of time by using a one-click "flight path" that veers off in weird directions and does a few unnecessary loops  --  just because those two outcomes can be the same doesn't mean that they will.  The person who has to run may face potential threats along the way.  They may mistime a jump and fall down a ravine that requires them to take a 3-minute detour.  They have to pay attention to what they are doing for the sake of efficiency.  When you remove the need for focus then anybody/everybody ( that is willing to click once per 10 minutes rather than once per 20 seconds) can do things at 100% efficiency.  This waters down the value of "achieving" the final "outcome."  In other words, "QoL" in the context of what is being discussed is "I want the highest quality outcome possible with the minimum amount of effort."  As soon as you create a feature that accommodates that, you basically kill off any meaning that is associated with the process of doing things manually.  In these two examples ... that has a negative impact on the supply/demand aspect of the economy and any sense of meaningful travel.


    This post was edited by oneADseven at July 11, 2019 3:02 PM PDT
    • 928 posts
    July 11, 2019 3:03 PM PDT

    Vandraad said:

    MauvaisOeil said:

    Riahuf22 said:

    If you really think that clicking on each component to craft an item actually increases the value of it than I'm sorry but that's simply not true.  In what world of thinking does that even make sense, maybe to you it does, but I'm sure most people wouldnt pay you more money simply because you dragged the items over to right window instead of just clicking "create item", sense the item is exactly the same and will be looked at it that way, regardless of what system is used.

    Now with this said I wouldn't mind you simply clicking on "create item" and you have to do something properly to get the best results, as this seems fun, and a good way to make tradeskilling alot more interactive than a simple click this button and walk away type of function, but I think the simple just clicking the button to get it all started is just fine.

     

    It does. It's named "workforce", and is why in real life, most automated business have become cheaper because they no longer require time and employees.

     

    If you have a cheap recipe that takes you a negligible amount of component but 1 hour of active crafting, it will be more expensive than the same components with 15s of crafting, because most people would rather pay than make it themselves, and sellers won't bother doing it for profit because it's long and might not pay enough for the time they put in it. That's amongst the basic of any business including creating or transforming something. Time is money, and it's as true in game than it is in real life.

    The concept issue at the heart of this is this: Time = Money.  Not the number of clicks, but how long does it take to get from A to B.  If, as I alluded to above, the first version of manufacture requires 30 click/drags and takes you 10 minutes to produce the item and the process gets changed to just 1 click/drag but the outcome still requires 10 minutes your total time investment is unchanged.  You are still stuck standing there at the forge/whatever for 10 minutes. You cannot argue that the first manufacturing process results an intrisically higher value of the output than the second process.

    I would love to see the crafting system be based on an actual pattern of actions in conjunction with materials to create an object.  Ideally you should be able to fail utterly just by doing it wrong or making too many wrong choices. If the crafting system involves a combine button at all then Corey is going to get the nostril flare of total rejection from me (see Kronk for a visual).

    If the crafting system is designed to take at least a similar amount of time to craft an object as an adventurer of the same level takes to solo a mob, then I think we are in the correct scale for crafting to be a value-added system, rather than a way to decrease the market value of raw materials by actually crafting with them.

     

     

    • 1688 posts
    July 11, 2019 3:22 PM PDT

    oneADseven said:

    I think the same can be said about many QoL features though.  If it takes someone 10 dedicated/focused/efficient minutes to run from Point A to Point B ... but another player can get there in the exact same amount of time by using a one-click "flight path" that veers off in weird directions and does a few unnecessary loops  --  just because those two outcomes can be the same doesn't mean that they will.  The person who has to run may face potential threats along the way.  They may mistime a jump and fall down a ravine that requires them to take a 3-minute detour.  They have to pay attention to what they are doing for the sake of efficiency.  When you remove the need for focus then anybody/everybody ( that is willing to click once per 10 minutes rather than once per 20 seconds) can do things at 100% efficiency.  This waters down the value of "achieving" the final "outcome."  In other words, "QoL" in the context of what is being discussed is "I want the highest quality outcome possible with the minimum amount of effort."  As soon as you create a feature that accommodates that, you basically kill off any meaning that is associated with the process of doing things manually.  In these two examples ... that has a negative impact on the supply/demand aspect of the economy and any sense of meaningful travel.

    Oh, we're very much in agreement that QoL features cannot be applied globally becuase, as you point out with the travel example, one clearly has an advantage over another in terms of risk even though the time to complete is the same.  Each one needs to be addressed per application.

    Clearly performing some task AFK is to be avoided.  How, then, do you reach that balance between AFK and excessive repetitive clicking, aka 'focus'.  Would the introduction of stop-points into a process keep player focus while reducing the repetitive clicking?

    I do hate to keep going back to crafting, but that really is the singular example of where the number of clicks and mouse movements is far higher than any other activity.  I'll go back to my example of making the 10 Steel Plates.  If, instead, of the version where you put in 10 Iron Bar, 10 Coal, 1 Hammer, 1 Anvil into the forge and click combine and 60 seconds later you get 10 Steel Plates, the game would go through the process of 1 combine (6 seconds) and if the combine were successful it would start the next combine.  If you failed, the process stops.  You then need ot restart the process with the remaining items.  Yes, the number of clicks is reduced, but the need for focus remains as a failure early on halts the entire process.  Such a system does not decrease the focus needed when the character skill is low (high chance of failure), but only when the combine is trivial.  Yet even with a trivial combine the chance of failure is still not zero.

    The crafting system in EVE Online has an extremely high degree of automation built in, yet costs for produced items hold for very long periods of time. EVE Online crafting is all real-time based. You literally can't much to craft things faster than the game allows.  There are methods to reduce production times, but the skillpoint investment needed to see noticeable reduction can take several months to reach.  With EVE Online it's the pre-production, the gathering of materials, the setup of the manufacturing facilities, the researching of blueprints, etc that represents the greatest portion of 'focus'.

    • 1412 posts
    July 11, 2019 3:23 PM PDT

    Ya'll know I have strong opinions on crafting, so I'll spare you :)

    But I think the design process for *any* aspect of gameplay should look something like this:

    1) Is it fun and engaging to participate in?

    2) Does it fit with the overall vision and line up with other adjacent systems or gameplay aspects well?

    3) Does it have any potential impacts on player behavior that might become problems down the line?  If yes, can those be mitigated or not?

     

    If the final answer to any of those questions is "no" then obviously the design isn't where it needs to be.

     

    • 1214 posts
    July 11, 2019 3:52 PM PDT

    MauvaisOeil said:

    Riahuf22 said:

    If you really think that clicking on each component to craft an item actually increases the value of it than I'm sorry but that's simply not true.  In what world of thinking does that even make sense, maybe to you it does, but I'm sure most people wouldnt pay you more money simply because you dragged the items over to right window instead of just clicking "create item", sense the item is exactly the same and will be looked at it that way, regardless of what system is used.

    Now with this said I wouldn't mind you simply clicking on "create item" and you have to do something properly to get the best results, as this seems fun, and a good way to make tradeskilling alot more interactive than a simple click this button and walk away type of function, but I think the simple just clicking the button to get it all started is just fine.

     

    It does. It's named "workforce", and is why in real life, most automated business have become cheaper because they no longer require time and employees.

     

    If you have a cheap recipe that takes you a negligible amount of component but 1 hour of active crafting, it will be more expensive than the same components with 15s of crafting, because most people would rather pay than make it themselves, and sellers won't bother doing it for profit because it's long and might not pay enough for the time they put in it. That's amongst the basic of any business including creating or transforming something. Time is money, and it's as true in game than it is in real life.

    For one this definition had nothing to do with what i said in anyway, I never mentioned anything about time, just the beginning of how to start the process of crafting, yes if certain recipes do take an hour to make than yes they would be more expensive because of it.  So I can agree that you are definately correct that duration of the process can affect the pricing of a item but the simple click of the begin crafting vs drag n drop each item to begin crafting does not.


    This post was edited by Riahuf22 at July 11, 2019 3:55 PM PDT
    • 1228 posts
    July 11, 2019 4:58 PM PDT

    Kittik said:

    So many threads now and everyone's bringing up, "Oh, but it's QoL, no one wants to play a game with the mechanics of game from 1776!"  

    I do! 

    Oregon Trail Online Confirmed.

    LOL, I think I would play this actually ;P

     


    This post was edited by Aich at July 11, 2019 5:01 PM PDT
    • 2501 posts
    July 11, 2019 6:09 PM PDT

    In LOTRO you get the materials. click and go afk for half an hour (slight simplification of how it works there but essentially accurate). 

    In Vanguard you start the process, various events occur or do not occur and you need to click on various occasions to react to those events or make other choices. 

    In SWTOR you don't actually craft at all you send companions out to craft while you are doing other things.

    Saying the LOTRO or SWTOR designs provide quality of life would be an uncalled for and inaccurate insult to those that want more "quality of life" features. A group which includes me on some issues but has me adamantly opposed on other issues. I mention the dichotemy only because crafting has been discussed - and to give examples as to where probably *all* of us will agree that speed and ease of performing an operation to not improve a game's quality.


    This post was edited by dorotea at July 11, 2019 6:10 PM PDT
    • 825 posts
    July 11, 2019 6:24 PM PDT

    oneADseven said:

    I think the same can be said about many QoL features though.  If it takes someone 10 dedicated/focused/efficient minutes to run from Point A to Point B ... but another player can get there in the exact same amount of time by using a one-click "flight path" that veers off in weird directions and does a few unnecessary loops  --  just because those two outcomes can be the same doesn't mean that they will.  The person who has to run may face potential threats along the way.  They may mistime a jump and fall down a ravine that requires them to take a 3-minute detour.  They have to pay attention to what they are doing for the sake of efficiency.  When you remove the need for focus then anybody/everybody ( that is willing to click once per 10 minutes rather than once per 20 seconds) can do things at 100% efficiency.  This waters down the value of "achieving" the final "outcome."  In other words, "QoL" in the context of what is being discussed is "I want the highest quality outcome possible with the minimum amount of effort."  As soon as you create a feature that accommodates that, you basically kill off any meaning that is associated with the process of doing things manually.  In these two examples ... that has a negative impact on the supply/demand aspect of the economy and any sense of meaningful travel.

    QFT!

    • 133 posts
    July 11, 2019 6:50 PM PDT

    I feel like QoL changes and how well they are received is dependant on a person to person view.  

    Some of these QoL that I have liked are. 

    1. A shared bank that makes it easier to send money/items to other characters without having to blindly trust someone to hand it off.
    2. A mailbox system can enable communication with offline players, as well as be used to send things to fellow guildies who are in need. This system can also allow the use of C.o.D. which can give crafters another way to sell their goods. That being said I am personally not a fan of C.o.D. as I have seen players abuse this system in order to control market prices. The C.o.D feature needs to come with a collection limitation of 2 hours, and if the receiver can't (or doesn't) collect within this time frame it needs to be sent back to the sender with the standard collection time of 30 days
    3. Transmog/ armor dying.
    4. Player Housing (though I'm not sure if this counts as a quality of life implementation). 

    There are also some QoL features that are nice but I don't find them needed are"

    1. auto looting
    2. group looting mobs
    3. shared crafting bag
    4. zone mapping ( I feel like the more experience you get in a zone the more familiar you get with it how it works)
    5. Zone pathfinding sort of like EQ1 has done with the glowing yellow tether that shows players to NPCs or zone lines. (Again I think the more familiar you get with a zone, the easier it is to find people of intrest and zone lines)

    Then you have the features I haven't personally liked

    1. Linked AH system. ( I found that it removed the need to travel to other areas and thus limited player community in a way.) 

    Then you have the features that people claim to be quality of life implementations but in reality, are not. 

    These features include.

    1. LFD (Removes communication within the player base when it comes to forming groups thus limiting player community)
    2. LFR ( basically the same thing as LFG only on a larger scale. It removes the need for communication between players to form a group and depending on its implementation it either invalidates raiding difficulty by having an easier version of the raid, or it invalidates aspects of guild recruitment for raiding.) 
    3. Flex Raiding ( Again invalidates raiding difficulty)  
    4. Making PvP ranking easier as time progresses 
    5. Cross server (this comes with its own limitations on grouping, guild formations, raiding, etc... I honestly am ok with MEGA servers if a game starts off with those, however, I personally feel server merging is a reflection of games overall health, and it leads to complications in guild formation and grouping. 

     

     

     


    This post was edited by Baldur at July 11, 2019 10:19 PM PDT
    • 373 posts
    July 11, 2019 7:16 PM PDT

    Baldur said:

    Then you have the features that people claim to be quality of life implementations but in reality, are not. 

    These features include.

    1. LFG (Removes communication within the player base when it comes to forming groups thus limiting player community)

    I think it's important to distinguish between LFG and LFD (as they are commonly called).  

    Typically, LFG refers to a system where players can flag themselves as LFG and get a list of players that have flagged themselves.  Some systems allow you to form a group and others to search for groups.  Although there are a lot of variations on the LFG system in different games, the distinguishing feature of LFD ('looking for dungeon") is that LFD is a system that you queue into and automatically places you into a group with random players.  This usually includes teleporting you to the dungeon and returning you after you finish.

    VR has stated that while they are very much opposed to the LFD-like features,  they intend on having several LFG-like features in the game to support people finding other players and forming relationships.  

    • 133 posts
    July 11, 2019 10:17 PM PDT

    zoltar said:

    Baldur said:

    Then you have the features that people claim to be quality of life implementations but in reality, are not. 

    These features include.

    1. LFG (Removes communication within the player base when it comes to forming groups thus limiting player community)

    I think it's important to distinguish between LFG and LFD (as they are commonly called).  

    Typically, LFG refers to a system where players can flag themselves as LFG and get a list of players that have flagged themselves.  Some systems allow you to form a group and others to search for groups.  Although there are a lot of variations on the LFG system in different games, the distinguishing feature of LFD ('looking for dungeon") is that LFD is a system that you queue into and automatically places you into a group with random players.  This usually includes teleporting you to the dungeon and returning you after you finish.

    VR has stated that while they are very much opposed to the LFD-like features,  they intend on having several LFG-like features in the game to support people finding other players and forming relationships.  

    Your right there is a difference and I probably shoud have made the distinction and I'll go back up and fix that. I just find that most people are used to how LFG has been incorporated into LFD and for the most part, most people use the terms synonymously. I find that the number of people who actually understand that there is/ use to be a difference is a decreasing minority when compared to the majority of MMO players out there. 

    Just for the sake of clarification though, I was referring to LFD and passive matchmaking. 

    Traditional LFG promotes active looking and active communication. I am not opposed to players having the ability to flag themselves as LFG, having a specialized general chat designed around the future, or even having a way for players to "Que" for specific dungeons (and or raids) to have their names populated on an lfg list where group leaders can actively recruit. As long as the system requires active communication and puts the power, responsibility, and decision making in the hands of the player base than it is fine. 

    • 133 posts
    July 11, 2019 10:17 PM PDT

    Double posting like a pro


    This post was edited by Baldur at July 11, 2019 10:18 PM PDT
    • 1645 posts
    July 11, 2019 11:04 PM PDT

    To the OP. I love you. Keep fighting the good fight. 

    • 1616 posts
    July 12, 2019 1:10 AM PDT

    Vandraad said:

    MauvaisOeil said:

    It does. It's named "workforce", and is why in real life, most automated business have become cheaper because they no longer require time and employees.

     

    If you have a cheap recipe that takes you a negligible amount of component but 1 hour of active crafting, it will be more expensive than the same components with 15s of crafting, because most people would rather pay than make it themselves, and sellers won't bother doing it for profit because it's long and might not pay enough for the time they put in it. That's amongst the basic of any business including creating or transforming something. Time is money, and it's as true in game than it is in real life.

    The concept issue at the heart of this is this: Time = Money.  Not the number of clicks, but how long does it take to get from A to B.  If, as I alluded to above, the first version of manufacture requires 30 click/drags and takes you 10 minutes to produce the item and the process gets changed to just 1 click/drag but the outcome still requires 10 minutes your total time investment is unchanged.  You are still stuck standing there at the forge/whatever for 10 minutes. You cannot argue that the first manufacturing process results an intrisically higher value of the output than the second process.

     

    Please reread my post. I specifically mensionned active crafting. Because I used time to measure a serie of actions instead of an arbitrary amount of clics or operations. Let's elaborate it with arbitrary clics : At 1 clic a second, the first item would require an amount of 3.600 clics or "operations" while the second would require 15 clics or "operations".

     

    Riahuf22 said:

    For one this definition had nothing to do with what i said in anyway, I never mentioned anything about time, just the beginning of how to start the process of crafting, yes if certain recipes do take an hour to make than yes they would be more expensive because of it.  So I can agree that you are definately correct that duration of the process can affect the pricing of a item but the simple click of the begin crafting vs drag n drop each item to begin crafting does not.

    Because you don't get the relation doesn't mean it doesn't exist, please reconsider your own comprehension, and let me paste arbitrary numbers like I did for Vandraad :

     

    At 2 clic a second, the first item would require an amount of 3.600 clics or "operations" while the second would require 15 clics or "operations".

     

    How do you consider the number of operations included in the process of crafting the first item (1 hour ACTIVE crafting with 3.600 clics) versus the second (15s of ACTIVE crafting, with 15 clics) to have an effect on the inflation of the item price while considering both require exactly the same starting components with no added costs. You specifically stated that "clicking each item" should not increase the price of the item, and I'm simply making an example to show you it DOES. Because everyone value it's time doing something, and clicking on box with a craft doing everything automatically is worth less than clicking multiple time for each recipe and sub component included, the same would goes depending on how crafting is designed. If crafting is tedious (for some) and considered a clickmachine, then crafting will be worth more because :

     

    -Less crafters will be involved.

    -Crafting will require more dedication, concentration and manual work.

    -The amount of items on the market will be lower.

    • 401 posts
    July 12, 2019 1:57 AM PDT
    I hear ya, Kittik! I hope VR will keep this spirit close throughout game design. It seems theyre doing a good job so far considering this kind of balance along each step of the way.