Trasak said:Riahuf22 said:And not to change the topic but quite frankly i could see also wanting the chance of changing the way their spells look when they cadt it, I mean it's an extension of themselves right, so my fire bolt can look like a frost bolt for as long it does what a fire bolt is suppose to do right? Or my rain of fire look like a blizzard maybe my poison bolt look like a curse spell. It following the same line of thought correct,
Chabging the way you appear without actually wearing that piece of gear
Changing the way the spells look without actually casting that spell.
Sounds pretty similar I could see this being the next topic.
I don’t think that is really a fair comparison. Slot and base item types would consistent with appearance slots i.e. you would only be able to swap one chain bracer model with a different chain bracer model, not cloth or plate.
A really appearance adjustment to your spells would be more like making your fireball shaped like a fiery phoenix rather than a fiery basketball while in flight rather than changing the effect to a different base spell type.
Now there is also some room to discuss morphing your base fireball spell into a cold ball spell with cold mechanics at which point it would also be reasonable to change the red/orange spell effect to a blue/white effect. Whether or not options like that appear in game will be greatly dependent on final class design and combat system.
And I've already regretted making such a statement.
Riahuf22 said:And I've already regretted making such a statement.
I don’t see why. It’s actually a good idea for a lot of possible horizontal progression and meaningful questlines.
Say a normal wizard learns fireball at level 15. Around level 30 players can end up in a lava zone partially populated by sentient phoenix’s. Through a long series of quests and faction grinds they offer to teach the wizard the essence of phoenix fire energy. After completing the final, very challenging quest, the wizard has the option to change the form of their fireball to mimic the shape of a phoenix.
There could be several different shapes that could be earned all with some small benefit and some small negative over the generic fireball. Which one you choose to have active could be different from one encounter to another or the effect could be small enough to just use the one you like for purely appearance reasons.
100s of hours of possible game play was just added to each character by introducing this concept.
Trasak said:Riahuf22 said:And I've already regretted making such a statement.
I don’t see why. It’s actually a good idea for a lot of possible horizontal progression and meaningful questlines.
Say a normal wizard learns fireball at level 15. Around level 30 players can end up in a lava zone partially populated by sentient phoenix’s. Through a long series of quests and faction grinds they offer to teach the wizard the essence of phoenix fire energy. After completing the final, very challenging quest, the wizard has the option to change the form of their fireball to mimic the shape of a phoenix.
There could be several different shapes that could be earned all with some small benefit and some small negative over the generic fireball. Which one you choose to have active could be different from one encounter to another or the effect could be small enough to just use the one you like for purely appearance reasons.
100s of hours of possible game play was just added to each character by introducing this concept.
To me if they adventure down this path I would rather it gi e you a whole new spell kind of like instead of giving you frost bolt that does 300 damage and strong against elementals based around fire
Than you do a quest and it gives to a variant of a frost bolt but it is called frigid blast does 175 damage, allows creatures that are water based to be easier to hit by melee attackers(thinking it would be hard to hit water with weapons.) And if they are earth based allows melee attackers to do more damage(thinking that earth elementals would be naturally strong against melee attacks since they are made of earth.) And if affected by fire gets rid of fridge blast affect due to being set of fire.
You cod also have it be increase damage to both forms, as usually % to hit is usually extremely powerful and could shift how people make groups, so if that's the case % damage would make a good hit for as long the % is high enough to where it makes a difference for using the spell hut not to the point it does the same thing % hit would of done.
this thread:
golden entertainment XD i'll really end with this. the thread has be hammered out hard and this is a final conclusion i came to(this is just an opinion) at its core.
@riahuf- funny i have my own category ^_^ i would say initially i was okay with a toggle, then i believe that we should have always on appeareance- people should be able to freely express themselves, but give an alternate way to see actual gear via through enchanting(helmet truesight) or alchemy potions(truesight elixir). i flopped to being completely against any appeareance slots because it breaks the original vision and immersion the developers have for the game.
vr designed the game lore from scratch(this is key because the sonic the hedgehog scenario could be used to counter the arguement, but he is an established character in an established universe and would be immersion breaking to alter the original design and feeling to be unfamiliar). it's more important for them(vr) to maintain their grand plan and not have it muddled by passionate players who can't compromise.
someone is going to have some appeareance that is going to triggers someone elses immersion. it is better to have no appeareance slot at all so that the triggering can't occur. i understand that some players love collecting things, rp, dressup, however, these are emergent gameplay or a result of appeareance slots. this, even if it extrends gameplay, is a luxury and serves no other function outside of LOOKS.
to refine this point, we'd open up the high probability of max level players farming certain lower level appeareance rare equipment. lower level characters then get locked out of content that is appropriate for them(great point kass). typically i don't care too much since i'll be on a pvp server and things can be personally resolved(putting my pvp biased aside), but this emergent gameplay is going to have more reprecussions on pve servers.
eh i'm tired of this thread so i'll let you guys scrap at it more. gonna get some tuesday tacoes and roam some other threads :D
great job on both sides of the table. serious, golden entertainment.
I didnt try to single you out, you were just bouncing all over the place @stellarmind plus I thought you would of found it hilarious to realize you saw yourself in a category of your own lol, but also with the knowledge of you were switching sides way more than others, and I wasn't trying to single you out in anyway that could be viewed as negative at least not from me.
Riahuf22 said:I didnt try to single you out, you were just bouncing all over the place @stellarmind plus I thought you would of found it hilarious to realize you saw yourself in a category of your own lol, but also with the knowledge of you were switching sides way more than others, and I wasn't trying to single you out in anyway that could be viewed as negative at least not from me.
eh im pretty open minded about stuff for a dirty pvper. if it's reasonable, i'm going to lean towards it. there's good points on both sides tbh, but creative freedom of the creator is very... fragile in this day and age where everyone is a critic with an agenda. putting my personal takes and wants aside, i prefer not to tread on vr for something as frivolous(opinion) as appearance slots.
disposalist said:Not really. The reason we are all so excited about Pantheon is there has been nothing like it in way more than 10 years.
.
I was talking about appearance gear being featured into MMO's in general and it has been about 10 years.
Riahuf22 said:disposalist said:Riahuf22 said:Now I'd their is something else other than some weird perceptive system mechanic someone else brought up that essentially is the toggle to come up with, than maybe but let's be honest if their was truly a better choice don't you think over the mast 10 years of it coming out of appearance gear their might of been found by now?
Not really. The reason we are all so excited about Pantheon is there has been nothing like it in way more than 10 years.
I was talking about appearance gear being featured into MMO's in general and it has been about 10 years.
Yes, I understood. You suggested that because appearance gear systems in other MMOs haven't been something that might work with Pantheon, there isn't a solution.
I was saying that Pantheon will intentionally not be like MMOs from the last 10+ years in many ways, so what other MMOs have or haven't done isn't usually relevant and certainly doesn't mean VR can't do a good job of it or that there isn't a way to do it at all.
disposalist said:Riahuf22 said:disposalist said:Riahuf22 said:Now I'd their is something else other than some weird perceptive system mechanic someone else brought up that essentially is the toggle to come up with, than maybe but let's be honest if their was truly a better choice don't you think over the mast 10 years of it coming out of appearance gear their might of been found by now?
Not really. The reason we are all so excited about Pantheon is there has been nothing like it in way more than 10 years.
I was talking about appearance gear being featured into MMO's in general and it has been about 10 years.
Yes, I understood. You suggested that because appearance gear systems in other MMOs haven't been something that might work with Pantheon, there isn't a solution.
I was saying that Pantheon will intentionally not be like MMOs from the last 10+ years in many ways, so what other MMOs have or haven't done isn't usually relevant and certainly doesn't mean VR can't do a good job of it or that there isn't a way to do it at all.
Just confused on how people can be upset about a toggle when it allows you to see your world 100% the way you want to
And allows the other people on the other side of the spectrum see their world 100% the way they want to
But you want to take our 100% simply just becuase of some "feeling" you have.
You can say i am saying this becuase of a feeling
But at least my "feeling" isn't hindering the way you can see your world
Unlike what your "feeling" is doing to mine.
And people can keep saying I'm being Biased but at least me being biased approach gives everyone what they visually want to see in a world they want to get lost in, can you say the same?
If not than maybe you can come up with an idea that makes both worlds available to everyone and keeps everyone happy from a visual prespective, especially since the feature we are talking about is a visual feature.
BTW saying something isn't good when it keeps both worlds happy from a visual prespective is a huge win, and a rare occasion and normally never available in most situations, such a shame people are willing to ruin that just becuase they want to control something when most of the time they probably wouldn't even care what i think about it anyway.
disposalist said:I do want a compromise. The best one I see is to have no toggle on RP servers, but I know that will not be good for some, so I'm happy to discuss further.
Scroll down page 24 and stop when you see yellow. Kass and I have been interested in your feedback on what I would consider a potential compromise but I understand that posts have a high chance of being buried into irrelevancy on this thread.
See I find it funny how people think im trolling when i mention the toggle, but they think they are correct or something when forcing "fake" "unimmersive" gear into my face and tihnk they are not trolling, see how when using the same line of thought simply can be used the other way around and proves nothing.
I gues with that said maybe we should just take appearance gear out all the way.
they aren't wanting to compromise, even this 15-20 second window isn't a compromise, I simply just don't want to see it.
At least with adventure gear everytihng is solved and everyone can be happy.
Riahuf22 said:Thats merely a toggle tied into a skill of the game, so what exactly do you achieve from this that you wouldn't from a toggle to begin with, at the end its all the same.
Glad how you think other peoples posts are also irrelevant to you as well, thats clears a lot of things up.
I already explained why I think it would be a compromise. I'm not going to explain it to you again because you have a consistent pattern of misunderstanding my posts, just like you are here. I never said anything about other posts being irrelevant. I was talking about my suggestion ... the same one I have brought up multiple times since page 6, which has gained zero traction due to the ridiculous 9-headed hydra circular arguments.
oneADseven said:Riahuf22 said:Thats merely a toggle tied into a skill of the game, so what exactly do you achieve from this that you wouldn't from a toggle to begin with, at the end its all the same.
Glad how you think other peoples posts are also irrelevant to you as well, thats clears a lot of things up.
I already explained why I think it would be a compromise. I'm not going to explain it to you again because you have a consistent pattern of misunderstanding my posts, just like you are here. I never said anything about other posts being irrelevant. I was talking about my suggestion ... the same one I have brought up multiple times since page 6, which has gained zero traction due to the ridiculous 9-headed hydra circular arguments.
Did you ever think it never caught traction becuase it sucked?
Hmm. Riahuf. You have convinced me to a "toggle", but whats wrong with tying that into the games mechanics like 1ad7 and kass are suggesting? This seems like the perfect solution as well as implementation of the "toggle". It would add more depth to in game mechanics rather than an artificial flip of a switch. As a person in the middle I dont see how it could get any better than this. The only downside is for the purists in either direction. I hope youll consider this angle.
It's a band aid, it solves nothing, i simply want to see adventure gear and with their line of thinking and with Investigation being on a CD and i can only do it on one player at a time for 15-20 seconds at a time, that almost a slap in the face and wouldn't even want it at all.
The toggle at least from a visual prespective fulfills both worlds completely, and will alow you to become immersived into a world they are want you to be involved in.
And the adventure gear side has alrdy lost their purists side of things, as appearance gear will probably be in the game, (It's in plegde rewards)
So why cant The appearance side give up something, even a little bit, but yet we get nothing
And again i don't even seeing me getting asked what anyone looks like, i hardly in eq, or any other game i've ever played.
So why can't i simply see a world i want to see while they see the world they want to see, thats the biggest part that stumps me, and they see becuase they want me to see them the way they want me to, but yet simply walk past me without asking what i think, but than try to say im not compromising when mentioning the toggle when it fully and completely still allows them to see the world they are wanting too.
Riahuf22 said:Did you ever think it never caught traction becuase it sucked?
Ironically, that thought did occur. I figured I would bring it up again anyway, just in case.
Riahuf22 said:See I find it funny how people think im trolling when i mention the toggle, but they think they are correct or something when forcing "fake" "unimmersive" gear into my face and tihnk they are not trolling, see how when using the same line of thought simply can be used the other way around and proves nothing.
I gues with that said maybe we should just take appearance gear out all the way.
they aren't wanting to compromise, even this 15-20 second window isn't a compromise, I simply just don't want to see it.
I find it fascinating that one minute you ask what it would achieve that a toggle could not, claiming that "in the end, it is all the same" but the next minute you edit your post and say that it's no longer an acceptable compromise and that instead, appearance gear should just be removed altogether because ... you're being trolled by people that aren't willing to compromise? Seriously? You then resort to trigger words like "fake" and "unimmersive" but seemed to miss the point that the entire purpose behind my suggestion was to remove the "fake" and "immersion-breaking" qualities of the toggle that you have been championing. It seems like you are going out of your way to give me a hard time and the "sucky idea" comment truly does clear a lot of things up.
oneADseven said:Riahuf22 said:Did you ever think it never caught traction becuase it sucked?
Ironically, that thought did occur. I figured I would bring it up again anyway, just in case.
Riahuf22 said:See I find it funny how people think im trolling when i mention the toggle, but they think they are correct or something when forcing "fake" "unimmersive" gear into my face and tihnk they are not trolling, see how when using the same line of thought simply can be used the other way around and proves nothing.
I gues with that said maybe we should just take appearance gear out all the way.
they aren't wanting to compromise, even this 15-20 second window isn't a compromise, I simply just don't want to see it.
I find it fascinating that one minute you ask what it would achieve that a toggle could not, claiming that "in the end, it is all the same" but the next minute you edit your post and say that it's no longer an acceptable compromise and that instead, appearance gear should just be removed altogether because ... you're being trolled by people that aren't willing to compromise? Seriously? You then resort to trigger words like "fake" and "unimmersive" but seemed to miss the point that the entire purpose behind my suggestion was to remove the "fake" and "immersion-breaking" qualities of the toggle that you have been championing. It seems like you are going out of your way to give me a hard time and the "sucky idea" comment truly does clear a lot of things up.
didn't recognize the 15-20 window comment thats when i changed it.
Look I'm looking as the Appearance Feature as a Visual Effect onto the world
And when i can add something in and can make it to where you can see a world exactly the way you want to, thats a win
But when i can also add in the exact same option and have it mke my world look exactly the way i want to without actually affecting you at all from a visual prespective, that is ahuge win
So the way I am looking at it is that their are 2 bowls of cereal on a table and one is your visual way of how you are seeing your world, and than i have my bowl which is how i am seeing mine, and than you decide to take my bowl and decide to eat it and smile and than say "Man that cereal was a really good to bad its gone now."
Hmmm I was thinking if we tied the perception system to the appearance gear that the appearance people would then agree to having to earn the ability to use the appearance gear and create an illusion. Likewise the non appearance people would need to also access the perception system in order to see through the illusion. Basically equates to a toggle, but makes use of the games core mechanics instead of an artificial flip of the switch. As for the cool down times etc thats just them spit balling. Maybe the ability improves with perception? Maybe it simply turns on a "toggle" at a certain skill level? Those things are refinable.
Alyonyah said:Hmmm I was thinking if we tied the perception system to the appearance gear that the appearance people would then agree to having to earn the ability to use the appearance gear and create an illusion. Likewise the non appearance people would need to also access the perception system in order to see through the illusion. Basically equates to a toggle, but makes use of the games core mechanics instead of an artificial flip of the switch. As for the cool down times etc thats just them spit balling. Maybe the ability improves with perception? Maybe it simply turns on a "toggle" at a certain skill level? Those things are refinable.
With this line of thinking, if with the insight ability if it can uncover people from a LoS point of view into seeing them the way you want to for as long your preception system is high enough, i could kind of agree to this, a little bit of a pain in the butt to get something to work like this but if i had to than sure no problem, but i dont tihnk it should be tied to the investigate system due to it being single target and a CD, i would still much rather have the toggle as at the end of the day will would mean the exact same tihng and therefore almost just a pain in general, but at least it does tie the two features togetehr in a feature the devs are trying to use.
Storytime:
[redacted]
Riahuf22 said:
Just confused on how people can be upset about a toggle when it allows you to see your world 100% the way you want to
And allows the other people on the other side of the spectrum see their world 100% the way they want to
But you want to take our 100% simply just because of some "feeling" you have.
Okay. Now that we all know I'm falling for this bait willingly, I am really confused here. You assured me you understood my toggle gripe toward you, yet the above comment contradicts that statement.
So I will oblige you one last time with an explanation at risk of being baited and trolled:
While the first two lines are mostly technically true, you are missing or refusing to acknowledge the other side of the argument (the true other side, not want you want the other side to be). Hopefully we can agree that somewhere above 5% of the population cares about how others see them - the toggle takes 100% of that away - therefore it is not a compromise to that population. I say again - MANY (some percentage between 5% and [InsertRandomNumberThatBacksMyPostion]%) PEOPLE CARE ABOUT HOW OTHERS SEE THEM, AS IT IS A REPRESENTATION OF THEMSELVES THROUGH THEIR CHARACTERS APPEARANCE - the toggle does NOTHING for them.
Perhaps a lightbulb finally turned on --- or more likely you will continue to ignore this fact.
Riahuf22 said:
Thats merely a toggle tied into a skill of the game, so what exactly do you achieve from this that you wouldn't from a toggle to begin with, at the end its all the same.
I agree with you on this :)
But for some reason you edited your post between the time I went from my phone to my computer to respond. Luckily 1ad7 quoted it so I could agree with you.
Riahuf22 said:
Glad how you think other peoples posts are also irrelevant to you as well, thats clears a lot of things up.
Not to put words into other people's mouths, but this is exactly what I was trying to convey to you in my previous comments. ---> When you show extreme and clear bias to an arguement, refuse to accept other's opinions as valid, and continue to insist that the Toggle is a compromise that makes everyone happy (because you said so - it's a fact - any logical person must be happy with the toggle) ......... Then, guess what? Many people that have seen this mindset will begin to dismiss your other GOOD thoughts/ideas, because your're the stubborn toggle guy.
I'll get off my soapbox now, and I'll try my best not to address this anymore beyond this post.
Riahuf22 said:
See I find it funny how people think im trolling when i mention the toggle, but they think they are correct or something when forcing "fake" "unimmersive" gear into my face and tihnk they are not trolling, see how when using the same line of thought simply can be used the other way around and proves nothing.
The difference is that I have seen no one dismiss the opinion of not wanting appearance gear as wrong. On the other hand, you have done that. You have clearly stated over and over again (indirectly) that people that care about how they're seen are illogical / wrong and that your desire to be immersed in adventure gear is more important than their desire that you see them the way they want to be seen (in their appearance gear).
Riahuf22 said:
At least with adventure gear everytihng is solved and everyone can be happy.
I understand you're ranting and maybe there is some sarcasm in this statement, but everyone will not be happy. You will be happy, I will be happy, the other 34+ people you tallied in this thread will be happy, but the 24% on this thread (your data) will not be happy to some degree about that choice.
You consistently speak in absolutes, which ostracizes the people that disagree with 'your' absolute - further pushing others to begin to ignore your good ideas/thoughts.
Alyonyah said:
Hmm. Riahuf. You have convinced me to a "toggle", but whats wrong with tying that into the games mechanics like 1ad7 and kass are suggesting? This seems like the perfect solution as well as implementation of the "toggle". It would add more depth to in game mechanics rather than an artificial flip of a switch. As a person in the middle I dont see how it could get any better than this. The only downside is for the purists in either direction. I hope youll consider this angle.
To be clear, this was all 1ad7's idea and suggestion. I personally don't like it much more than a toggle if at all.
Riahuf22 said:
Did you ever think it never caught traction becuase it sucked?
As much as I appreciate bluntness and honesty, that's quite a rude and disrespectful way to put it, but I see that 1ad7 handled that with more grace and class than you showed him.
My opinion: Most likely it got lost in the myriad of posts between the bulk of us arguing with you over how good/bad the toggle is - Can we please be done with the "toggle is 100% the best option" argument? I'm not saying we (you and others) can't still want a toggle, but stop force feeding it to us like we are idiots for not seeing how it's a perfect solution. There are 10 pages that could be deleted out of here so that idea's like 1ad7's could actually be discussed.
That being said, it very well may suck, but so far only 3 people have had a chance to weigh in on the idea, so that's hardly a fair sample size.
Riahuf22 said:
Also you are talking about feelings, I'm here to discuss a topic and what I believe is correct or to find a compromise.
When you see someone in appearance gear that makes you "feel" something right? Maybe sad, frustrated, angry, disconnected, etc. Those are feelings. Everyone's opinions are based on feelings and how they want to feel as they experience the game.
You feel strongly that your immersion would be ruined by appearance gear.
Some people feel like it doesn't matter either way.
Others feel that if they can't represent themselves the way they want through appearance gear that it will lessen or even ruin their experience.
Alyonyah said:
Hmmm I was thinking if we tied the perception system to the appearance gear that the appearance people would then agree to having to earn the ability to use the appearance gear and create an illusion. Likewise the non appearance people would need to also access the perception system in order to see through the illusion. Basically equates to a toggle, but makes use of the games core mechanics instead of an artificial flip of the switch. As for the cool down times etc thats just them spit balling. Maybe the ability improves with perception? Maybe it simply turns on a "toggle" at a certain skill level? Those things are refinable.
Yes, I think that is 1ad7's thinking in a nutshell. I however don't see it being much better, if at all, than the toggle option.
Which is why I (as well as 1ad7 reiterating above) am interested in @dispoalist 's opinion / perspective on it as an appearance gear advocate. I don't want to speak for him.
I appreciate your valiant effort to get us all on the same page, Kass. I have a tendency to post long walls of text and I'm going to try and avoid doing that with this one in particular but I'd like to touch on a few things, in no particular order of significance:
1) If it is ultimately decided that retaining the toggle is the path that we are set upon, I think tying it into perception would make it feel more authentic in the context of a living/breathing world. The feature as it is described seems like a natural fit based on public design goals. I understand that this is a bit subjective but I tried to highlight how I came to this conclusion in the post where I made the suggestion. One important takeaway that may not be apparent is that "flavor text" would be tied to the investigate skill. One of the biggest gripes with the toggle is that it would create a visual disparity in the world that compromises the integrity of having a shared experience. I need to know how my character is perceived by other characters in order for the experience to feel genuine. Reputation is supposed to be important in Pantheon and our appearance plays a major role in how our characters are perceived (hence why I think Perception is a natural fit) by those that we share the world with.
By making the toggle an action (investigate ability with flavor text) rather than an imaginary filter, players will be able to better understand how they are being viewed by others. In other words ... if someone temporarily disables my appearance slots, it will be an interaction that I can identify as the player and thus meets the "shared experience" criteria. A persistent toggle prevents players from being able to do that and would create countless situations where multiple players involved in the same scene are seeing drastically different things, thus shattering immersion. There are a few other reasons why I think the perception angle would work really well but I wanted to highlight that aspect in particular because it could potentially solve what has been expressed as a major pain point by a number of people.
2) The list Riahuf presented after you challenged the validity of his "5% remark" has some critical flaws. While it doesn't seem like it was intentional, many folks were definitely misrepresented in what has been advertised as something that "proves a point" and "clearly" shows a majority. It's hard for me to appreciate the conditional apology that Riahuf gave in the event that he accidentally misrepresented someone when I reflect on the dozens and dozens of posts (from myself and others) that explained our position in excruciating detail. I wasn't going to waste time bringing any of this up but now that the numbers in question have been exchanged back and forth a few times, in what has appeared to be an honest acceptance of good faith intent, I would be remiss if I didn't shine a light on the obvious issues that undermine any inference from that data.
-- The list suggests that there are 3 distinct camps; "For Appearance" / "Against Appearance" / "In the Middle." The reality is that many of the responses that were used to qualify someone for a camp were nuanced. I'm not going to go through the entire list but here are a few examples:
Damion -- (Against Appearance) suggested that he doesn't want to see "Ken & Barbie" dress-up. He also said that he doesn't want to see level 1 characters running around like "glowing unicorns."
Vjek -- (Against Appearance) included this in his post: "On a related topic, for me, in every MMO I've played, there are slots I would like to disable the visibility of, and slots I would like to alter the appearance of."
The issue with dividing players into opposing sides on this list is that it would appear that those who are "For Appearance" are advocating for an implementation that those who are "Against Appearance" do not want. This is an unfounded correlation and I certainly don't want my name tossed in a hat that is pro Ken & Barbie, or pro level 1 characters running around like glowing unicorns. I have gone out of my way to make that clear throughout this thread but here we are on page 26 and somehow we got to the point where we are creating camps that were never properly qualified and using them to support an argument that is based on popularity rather than merit. That is a great way to misrepresent a lot of people whether it was intentional or not. At this point, I have failed in my desire to not create a huge wall of text but I have already committed to seeing this through.
Beyond what was stated above, it's also very unfair to haphazardly place those who were willing to accept a toggle into the "Against Appearance" camp. As you can see in that quote from Vjek, it seemed pretty obvious that he did have an interest in altering at least some appearance slots. Then we also see this post from Arazon who was placed in the "Against Appearance" camp:
arazons said:I am all for cosmetic / appearance equipment slots. With an option to hide appearance slots.
I'm not going to delve into this any further because I feel that the air has been sufficiently cleared here. The moral of the story is that discussions like these can spiral out of control when there isn't any solid context to keep everything on track. I applaud Disposalist for trying to create that context on page 16 with a list of "Definitions" but it appears to have been too little, too late. In the meantime, I think it would be a good idea if we all leave the polling metrics to VR.
So basically you agree to disagree that's fine, still just proves where people are willing to compromise and your not wanting yo move an inch, I mean that is quite frankly what it is that you have been saying this entire time, and that okay I'm not going to just repeatedly say something and over again anymore.
Like I said I would look at fulfilling both worlds be 100% immersive to both sides of the spectrum and to the ones in the middle as if they fill like switching from time to time, than essentially take that world away from others and completely ruin, destroy, and get trolled by the opposite minded people and than they basically trigger you everything you log on, but than again that's what you want, even though that's not exactly what you are doing when you are expressing yourself directly but it is what you are doing without even trying.
So again you either don't understand (even though you say you do) and you don't realize how it affects us.
Or you do understand and your simply willing to break our immersion to make yourself happy.
Again we are talking about a game, it is to be visually immersive into this game, as at it core everything is simply based on what you see, and how they can reel you in to be immersed into their game. If you take that way from people that is a terrible idea.
So on the grand scheme of things I would rather both worlds be filled to where all parties can be immersed visually than to take it away from one group to have another completely immersed over some "feeling."
And btw the 100% visually isn't technically true, it's simply just true there isn't some hidden technically to it.
and if you think I should have to understand what this feeling is that you are talking about, hoe about you understand that at least by what people have posted you are hurt over 50% immersion simply just so you can have "fake control" of what people see just so you can be happy.
When hurting their immersion in the process so let's use a thing like this Kass, if .01% want to not see appearance gear it should be something they can have because it allows them to be immersed into the world, and by your own logic they should be accomdatec that to have them be happy, so how about you just give it to us, and have us be happy in our tiny world.
oneADseven said:I'm not going to delve into this any further because I feel that the air has been sufficiently cleared here. The moral of the story is that discussions like these can spiral out of control when there isn't any solid context to keep everything on track. I applaud Disposalist for trying to create that context on page 16 with a list of "Definitions" but it appears to have been too little, too late. In the meantime, I think it would be a good idea if we all leave the polling metrics to VR.
The Definitions really are important especially when filtering the for or against camps. There is a huge difference between silly non-thematic costume items, thematic costume items, free form transmog, appearance slots on the paper doll in addition to mechanical slots where a different item can be equipped solely for the appearance, base type restricted transmog, item sacrifice with base type matching permeant transmog, post looting/crafting dye/layer modifications and crafting with a large amount of control on style and color pallet.
In general the early part of the list is more controversial with the latter being more commonly acceptable. I would be curious to see who all would check against all of those options vs only a few of the early ones.
In the end though who has the right to set the appearance of a specific character, viewer or controller, is almost philosophical in nature and unlikely to ever have a compromise. Way back on my first post in this thread I suspected that RP servers would have full appearance modification but no non-thematic costumes and the EQ emulation server (there is a hardcore EQ purist crowd that is a large enough segment to get their own server) would have no cosmetic options what so ever. The balance of servers will likely be determined by direct requests of the subscribing population. Would actually like to see a bit of a transfer/vote mechanic when a new server is being proposed to set all the optional rules and possibly a way to modify the rules on a server at a later date through player voting.
The Renowned Gnoll Slayer Lord Kittik Mcboing of Bristlebane
This is what I currenlty see while running around in EQ2. This is annoying as crap to see running around on the screen all the time. Please limit this, or allow controls where all we can see is the name.
Try being in a raid of 24 people all with Title, Prefixes, names and ser names on the screen. I don't even know what we're fighting half the time.