Since VR said that matched sets will probably drop in different dungeons and level range, it would also be a shame not to be able to use the look because you looted a better chestpiece before completing your set. That's something to take into consideration, especially because 2019+ armor appearance are harder to match than their 1999 counterpart as they were way less elaborated and mostly 2d textures over fixed volumes.
disposalist said:I was worried momentarily about that, but as I said earlier, the set of RP-sensitive folks would probably be similar to the set of appearance-sensitive folks, so the RP server could accomodate.
RP servers: Appearance toggle fixed on. Normal servers: Toggle user set. PvP servers: Toggle fixed off. RP-PvP servers: Toggle user set, but overridden to off in contested areas?
Would that work?
rp servers i agree being always on.
normal servers eh w.e they want i can't speak on behalf of a server i'm probably not going to play on XD
most pvpers themselves are gonna want to look cool, but want to see other players with their actual gear, so toggable.
rp pvp is interesting. i would say always on in safe zones and togglable in contested zones.
pvpers usually prefer having more options.
Trasak said:I think that will largely depend on the total number of players and the target population for each server. I would be surprised if a single server can support more than 5000 concurrent users without instancing. It is possible that a very vast server could support more than 5000 users but with a staff of less than 40 VR is going to have trouble hand crafting enough content to support even concurrent 2000 users. In a previous thread I estimated that a headcount of 20 developers and 20 support staff will require around 110k users to stay profitable in the Southern California area.
This means that there will need to be 20-40 servers to support a profitable population without peak time over crowding. I personally suspect that there will be 1 FFA PVP server, maybe a couple teams PVP servers if they can come up with a good control competition mechanic, 1-2 EQ emulator servers (all QoL features disabled) and the rest will be a mix of RP and modern convenience servers in the 10-30 range. I could even see the appeal of several fast leveling servers with instancing and greater instant gratification tools for people with much lower playing times.
forgive my ignorance i don't know what all the numbers mean >.<
i'll try to understand:
for everyone 1 staff member they essentially care for 2,750 players. kind of like a shepard and a herd kind of ratio :D(that's an insane ratio now that i'm thinking about it. even then a shepard needs a dog maybe even 2 or 3 with those numbers.)
joppa= lead pvp director?
hm. it's interesting to see we choosing to go into a more segregated mmo space than an intergrated one O.o
Very roughly it’s the average salary for a programmer in Southern California (85k) X 4 (only 1/4 of your revenue should go to payroll in order to be profitable) x 2 (Combination of C-Level and support staff to equal the same amount of payroll as primary producers).
This actually comes out to 3777 subscriptions per production unit (programmer + admin and support staff) at $15 a month. 3777 at peak may represent an entire server population if all 3777 users play every day a the same time, in reality though there may be other accounts that play in off hour play times and multiple casual accounts in the same slots.
Weekends though will be when the off hour and casual players all try to play at the same time as the daily users so the question becomes what server load are you targeting. A server that is saturated Monday-Thursday 3-2 EST is unplayable on the weekends and a saturated server on the weekend may feel empty during the week. This is the main reason that instancing became a thing.
Kilsin said:Community Debate - Do you like being able to change your character's appearance in-game or would you rather all players be known for their accomplishments by allowing everyone to see their earned armour and weapons? #MMORPG#CommunityMatters
the statement is counter intuitive if youve earned it shouldnt you be able to choose to change your appearance? perhaps it would not make since in the game world to change ones appearance at will but then again you could have a magical ability to do so but perhaps not being able to have a mix mash of cloth and plate but perhaps just one type of armor type at a time say im wearing generic plate armor and can change my appearance to any earned plate armor this honestly doesnt seem to be a big deal to me it could make sense either way
Trasak said:Very roughly it’s the average salary for a programmer in Southern California (85k) X 4 (only 1/4 of your revenue should go to payroll in order to be profitable) x 2 (Combination of C-Level and support staff to equal the same amount of payroll as primary producers).
This actually comes out to 3777 subscriptions per production unit (programmer + admin and support staff) at $15 a month. 3777 at peak may represent an entire server population if all 3777 users play every day a the same time, in reality though there may be other accounts that play in off hour play times and multiple casual accounts in the same slots.
Weekends though will be when the off hour and casual players all try to play at the same time as the daily users so the question becomes what server load are you targeting. A server that is saturated Monday-Thursday 3-2 EST is unplayable on the weekends and a saturated server on the weekend may feel empty during the week. This is the main reason that instancing became a thing.
i guess that's why automating the support staff is popular(eases the burden) or outsourcing it to a telecommunication center(way cheaper labour) is the name of the game nowadays. use to work for a company that sold the software for call centers. the world of tech keeps getting deeper. i'm drowning like a fish out of water >.>
85k in california is a medium wage factoring in the standard of living in the state right(that's cash money for where i live O.o i think its like equivalent to 40 or 50k)? is that why so many people are moving out of california and working remotely? pretty sure they'll pass a law to additionally tax those working outside the state for a californian company >.>
To touch up on this topic that we were discussing yesterday
Hiding Helmet/Cloak is completely different than deciding Cosmetic gear and Adventure Gear, they have simlairities for sure, but are on two different levels at the same time.
Because to me if you hide your helmet and cloak it should be hidden to everyone else, simply becuase that is something that someone should have control of because there are instances wher you could like your gear look but your helmet throw it off and therefore want it to not show up so it narually looks better to yourself and to others.
But, on the other hand I don't feel like this falls to people on the cosmetic/adventure gear selection, The person who is supporting the game and paying 15 dollars a month to play it should decide if he sees cosmetic or adventure gear, As this for one is much more impactful, I don't want to see 100 people and it seems like I'm seeing very little difference in appearance just becuase i can't turn off a cosmetic feature, i want them to all look dramatically different to depict what they have done, what they have achieved, and what they have conquered, but i don't want to see 25 of 100 look the same simply becuase they slapped on a cosmetic feature, but each of them have completed different levels of difficulty.
I've even mentioned a option to individually switch Individuals manually from Cosmetic/Adventure so if you know a friend that does Cosmetic heavily you can select this option to see him that way, much like on the other hand you can select Adventure mode as well, but of course was ignored.
I understand people have pointed out i don't see their PoV and therefore they think I guess I don't care, but honestly i could just as easily say that on the other hand, if i really wanted to becuase they sure haven't bought up any ideas to comfort my PoV since this debate has started.
Riahuf22 said:
But, on the other hand i dont feel like this falls to people on the cosmetic/adventure gear selection, The person who is supporting the game and paying 15 dollars a motnh to play it should decide if he sees cosmetic or adventure gear, As this for one is much more impactful, i don't want to see 100 people and it seems like I'm seeing very little difference in appearance just becuase i cant turn off a cosmetic feature, I want them to all look dramatically different to depict what they have done, what they have achieved, and what they have conquered, but be 25 of 100 look the same simply because they slapped on a cosmetic feature, but each of them have completed different levels of difficulty.
I understand people have pointed out i don't see their PoV and therefore they think I guess I don't care, but honestly i could just as easily say that on the other hand, if i really wanted to becuase they sure havent bought up any ideas to comfort my PoV since this debate has started.
The irony in all of this is that many folks want the exact same thing that is highlighted above. We have gone back and forth for several pages trying to explain how appearance slots enhance the ability for players to show what they have achieved, what they have done, what they have conquered ... and alleviate the concern where 25 players look the same. This is a fact, not an opinion. It is impossible for me to try and embrace a PoV that repeatedly ignores facts, repeatedly derails the discussion with unrelated issues/concerns, and blatantly ignores the consistent efforts of others who explain things with logic and reason. You need to stop separating "adventure gear" from "cosmetic gear" -- it's the exact same gear, earned in the exact same way. Players don't get to "slap on a cosmetic feature" that allows them to appear as if they completed content that they did not. This has been refuted countless times!
oneADseven said:Riahuf22 said:
But, on the other hand i dont feel like this falls to people on the cosmetic/adventure gear selection, The person who is supporting the game and paying 15 dollars a motnh to play it should decide if he sees cosmetic or adventure gear, As this for one is much more impactful, i don't want to see 100 people and it seems like I'm seeing very little difference in appearance just becuase i cant turn off a cosmetic feature, I want them to all look dramatically different to depict what they have done, what they have achieved, and what they have conquered, but be 25 of 100 look the same simply because they slapped on a cosmetic feature, but each of them have completed different levels of difficulty.
I understand people have pointed out i don't see their PoV and therefore they think I guess I don't care, but honestly i could just as easily say that on the other hand, if i really wanted to becuase they sure havent bought up any ideas to comfort my PoV since this debate has started.
The irony in all of this is that many folks want the exact same thing that is highlighted above. We have gone back and forth for several pages trying to explain how appearance slots enhance the ability for players to show what they have achieved, what they have done, what they have conquered ... and alleviate the concern where 25 players look the same. This is a fact, not an opinion. It is impossible for me to try and embrace a PoV that repeatedly ignores facts, repeatedly derails the discussion with unrelated issues/concerns, and blatantly ignores the consistent efforts of others who explain things with logic and reason. You need to stop separating "adventure gear" from "cosmetic gear" -- it's the exact same gear, earned in the exact same way. Players don't get to "slap on a cosmetic feature" that allows them to appear as if they completed content that they did not. This has been refuted countless times!
Right......the difference is even though i have completed a dungeon doesn't mean i have the same gear you have acquired but, if you and i complete the same dungeon and that so happened to give a cosmetic peice than both of have it along with others, or even a quest, than at the point a ton of players could and would also have that piece and therefore would cuase the same problem i'm trying to prevent.
You can say im cuasing the problem in your eyes, and i say your cuasing the same problem in my eyes, i see it more on your side, i see a cosmetic feature being liked more by the community and gain traction and more and more either go in serach of this gear to acquire it or some to have alrdy have it and which simply becuase it is so popular, (which btw will happen), especially when it comes to people supporting there streamers, or GM, or whatever it was to influence their decision, these things will happen and for the ones that want that to seen "I" am allowing for people to do that and for other that have feature on to see that and be enjoying themselves in that way.
That isn't me though, and i shouldn't be forced to see an entire guild look in a particular way just becuase they choose to look that way, i should be able to see their adventure gear, the gear that is actually giving them stats, the gear that to me is far more important.
On a side note as was seen in WoW before Transmog everyone in the same class and the same content tier looked virtually the same. Any situation where there are clear best in slot or set items the players will gravitate to those exact items. If you cannot modify the appearance of those items, then everyone will look 80% or more the same. As a secondary side note many of those sets looked like utter crap and no-one downgraded for a better appearance other than in town or at RP events.
A lot of this discussion and its inherent issues fade to the background if the art style of Pantheon stays fairly realistic and unadorned. It is the outlandishly shaped and colored items that cause most of the heart ache for both the for cosmetic items (we hate looking like miss matched rodeo clowns) and the those against (who usually hate the outlandish looks of cash shop cosmetic items).
In a different thread I also brought up the idea of Surcoats that could be a top later item with little to no combat value. There could be many art combinations of these surcoats and their fit over cloth, leather, chain and plate would be a little different. The surcoat would supersede the appearance of chest, arms legs, bracers and belt leaving only boots, gloves and helmet visible. Historically some surcoats even covered the head but that gets into the difference between livery and armor.
In game surcoats could have many different 3d art layers as well as areas on the color layers that can draw from different pallets. You could have a fancy dress surcoat that was a side reward for your class epic quest. That surcoat would have a default appearance but you could have areas that could change to your guilds colors with your guild arms on it. Instead of your guild then maybe the modifiable area would draw from a faction achievement title that showed your local rank.
The surcoats could become more or less a billboard for your achievements and affiliations while giving you a fair amount of control on what is visible to other players. The other players still have the option to inspecting you, if you leave that option enabled.
There eventually comes a point where you have to decide what you want, Riahuf. You don't get to keep playing both sides and suggest that you want players to look different and show off their achievements while also saying that allowing it to happen is a "problem." You have to choose. What is more important? Seeing the gear that is providing stats? Or seeing the gear that players want to display in an effort to show off their achievements?
What does this even mean?
Riahuf22 said:Right......the difference is even though i have completed a dungeon doesn't mean i have the same gear you have acquired but, if you and I complete the same dungeon and that so happened to give a cosmetic piece than both of having it along with others, or even a quest, then at the point a ton of players could and would also have that piece and therefore would cause the same problem I'm trying to prevent.
You seem to imply that multiple players earning the same piece of gear are a problem that you are trying to prevent? Where does "a ton of players" enter the equation, here? Remember the discussion about how players earning full sets of gear would be considered a rare accomplishment? What should be the rare accomplishment? Earning the full set of gear, or finding a situation where it's practical to display it? (Like sitting in town where the gear that is providing stats is mostly pointless.) In my experience, the latter does ultimately end up being the "rare accomplishment" -- but not in a good way. A very very bad way. A way that pigeonholes players into looking the same whenever "stats matter." A way that removes player agency with respect to how they can portray the gear they have earned.
Trasak said:On a side note as was seen in WoW before Transmog everyone in the same class and the same content tier looked virtually the same. Any situation where there are clear best in slot or set items the players will gravitate to those exact items. If you cannot modify the appearance of those items, then everyone will look 80% or more the same. As a secondary side note many of those sets looked like utter crap and no-one downgraded for a better appearance other than in town or at RP events.
A lot of this discussion and its inherent issues fade to the background if the art style of Pantheon stays fairly realistic and unadorned. It is the outlandishly shaped and colored items that cause most of the heart ache for both the for cosmetic items (we hate looking like miss matched rodeo clowns) and the those against (who usually hate the outlandish looks of cash shop cosmetic items).
In a different thread I also brought up the idea of Surcoats that could be a top later item with little to no combat value. There could be many art combinations of these surcoats and their fit over cloth, leather, chain and plate would be a little different. The surcoat would supersede the appearance of chest, arms legs, bracers and belt leaving only boots, gloves and helmet visible. Historically some surcoats even covered the head but that gets into the difference between livery and armor.
In game surcoats could have many different 3d art layers as well as areas on the color layers that can draw from different pallets. You could have a fancy dress surcoat that was a side reward for your class epic quest. That surcoat would have a default appearance but you could have areas that could change to your guilds colors with your guild arms on it. Instead of your guild then maybe the modifiable area would draw from a faction achievement title that showed your local rank.
The surcoats could become more or less a billboard for your achievements and affiliations while giving you a fair amount of control on what is visible to other players. The other players still have the option to inspecting you, if you leave that option enabled.
AS i do agree this can and could happen, i see this as if this does happen, it is becuae eof the lack of content coming out and not so much a flaw in the actual feature itself, and as I've said there is also the option i put in to switch between individuals manually which as been still ignored by anyone reading my posts. So if you see a bunch of people in BiS gear and get tired of seeing it you could simply turn on the cosmetic feature in that manner to eliminate it.
oneADseven said:There eventually comes a point where you have to decide what you want, Riahuf. You don't get to keep playing both sides and suggest that you want players to look different and show off their achievements while also saying that allowing it to happen is a "problem." You have to choose. What is more important? Seeing the gear that is providing stats? Or seeing the gear that players want to display in an effort to show off their achievements?
What does this even mean?
Riahuf22 said:Right......the difference is even though i have completed a dungeon doesn't mean i have the same gear you have acquired but, if you and I complete the same dungeon and that so happened to give a cosmetic piece than both of having it along with others, or even a quest, then at the point a ton of players could and would also have that piece and therefore would cause the same problem I'm trying to prevent.
You seem to imply that multiple players earning the same piece of gear are a problem that you are trying to prevent? Where does "a ton of players" enter the equation, here? Remember the discussion about how players earning full sets of gear would be considered a rare accomplishment? What should be the rare accomplishment? Earning the full set of gear, or finding a situation where it's practical to display it? (Like sitting in town where the gear that is providing stats is mostly pointless.) In my experience, the latter does ultimately end up being the "rare accomplishment" -- but not in a good way. A very very bad way. A way that pigeonholes players into looking the same whenever "stats matter." A way that removes player agency with respect to how they can portray the gear they have earned.
The biggest difference is that I'm giving people options to choice what they want to see as for your not giving them options, you shouldnt decide what i see, even if it is yourself your talking about, unless if i want to see you that way, that is what im trying to achieve.
And if by now you haven't seen that than that is more your problem than mine and you can stop replying me if that is the case.
Riahuf22 said:The biggest difference is that I'm giving people options to choice what they want to see as for your not giving them options, you shouldnt decide what i see, even if it is yourself your talking about, unless if i want to see you that way, that is what im trying to achieve.
And if by now you haven't seen that than that is more your problem than mine and you can stop replying me if that is the case.
If only there was consistency in your logic!
Riahuf22 said:Hiding Helmet/Cloak is completely different than deciding Cosmetic gear and Adventure Gear, they have simlairities for sure, but are on two different levels at the same time.
Because to me if you hide your helmet and cloak it should be hidden to everyone else, simply becuase that is something that someone should have control of because there are instances wher you could like your gear look but your helmet throw it off and therefore want it to not show up so it narually looks better to yourself and to others.
The explanation you provided for the helmet/cloak is the exact same reason why players should be able to 100% control how they appear in the world. Imagine how ridiculous it would be if everybody got the option to "disable" the /hidehelm command from others. It has never happened in any MMO that I am aware of, which isn't surprising, because the very idea of it is absurd.
"If someone doesn't want to appear as not having a helmet on ... they should unequip their helmet! Meaningful choice! They should not be able to dictate to me that I cannot see their helmet while they are using the /hidehelm command. It is my right. It is my Freeeeeeeedom!"
So i should have no say on how i want to see or play my game? maybe i shouldn't be able to hide my helmets or cloaks either, or disbale shadows, or maybe even choose different resolutions either. Your making it sound like toggles are evil and should be avoided at all times, when in fact these toggles you don't even realize becuase it isn't on your pc but on mine and it makes me see pantheon the way I want them to be seen, which is by far the way it should be.
Riahuf22 said:AS i do agree this can and could happen, i see this as if this does happen, it is becuae eof the lack of content coming out and not so much a flaw in the actual feature itself, and as I've said there is also the option i put in to switch between individuals manually which as been still ignored by anyone reading my posts. So if you see a bunch of people in BiS gear and get tired of seeing it you could simply turn on the cosmetic feature in that manner to eliminate it.
Riahuf if anything you being able to selectively turn specific players appearance gear back on is worse than a toggle for everything being of or on. You are personally, directly in control of how I look. Any time you stream or post screen shots I will look like how you want me to look rather than how I want to look.
That is honestly unacceptable as it violates my own personal in game brand. If I were to stream in game as well I would have an identifiable look that I would want to be recognizable by. If I happened to get a mechanical upgrade that was incongruous visually with the rest of my gear it would damage my personal brand. Cosmetic slots would allow me to maintain a degree of control of my personal brand though the life of my character. If you were then to see me in game and decide to disable my desired appearance you would be damaging my personal brand (there is actually some precedence for players owning the visual rights to their ingame image and the ULA usually stipulates that the company can choose to use it at their discretion but that usually does not extend to other players using or modifying it).
This is obviously an extreme case from the perspective of a player actually running a business through playing a game but equally obviously there are many people out there doing exactly that.
Image is very important, and I could see a case for disabling cosmetic gear all together but long term the appearance of a character should only be modified by either the player or the data owning company. Giving the rights to modify the appearance of a character to a third party even if it is only from the perspective of that 3rd party is a very slippery slope that likely could have actual grounds for legal challenge in some states as it falls into the perpetually grey area of Intellectual Property.
oneADseven said:Riahuf22 said:The biggest difference is that I'm giving people options to choice what they want to see as for your not giving them options, you shouldnt decide what i see, even if it is yourself your talking about, unless if i want to see you that way, that is what im trying to achieve.
And if by now you haven't seen that than that is more your problem than mine and you can stop replying me if that is the case.
If only there was consistency in your logic!
Riahuf22 said:Hiding Helmet/Cloak is completely different than deciding Cosmetic gear and Adventure Gear, they have simlairities for sure, but are on two different levels at the same time.
Because to me if you hide your helmet and cloak it should be hidden to everyone else, simply becuase that is something that someone should have control of because there are instances wher you could like your gear look but your helmet throw it off and therefore want it to not show up so it narually looks better to yourself and to others.
The explanation you provided for the helmet/cloak is the exact same reason why players should be able to 100% control how they appear in the world. Imagine how ridiculous it would be if everybody got the option to "disable" the /hidehelm command from others. It has never happened in any MMO that I am aware of, which isn't surprising, because the very idea of it is absurd.
"If someone doesn't want to appear as not having a helmet on ... they should unequip their helmet! Meaningful choice! They should not be able to dictate to me that I cannot see their helmet while they are using the /hidehelm command. Freeeeeeeedom!"
With different questions comes different answers, duh. If you cant see how having a option to hide helmets and being able to see cosmetic to adventure gear or simply put which is pretty much real gear to transmog gear(in a sense they are very close related). Than i don't know what to say, i want to see the gear that matters to me, And I don't see the problem with this. and honestly me seeing you the way i want to see you doesn't even hurt you!!!!!!!!!!!!! you wouldn't even know unless i told you !!!!!!!!!!! so why are you trying so hard to stop me from playing pantheon the way i want to when im stop stopping you from doing anything other than dicating how i want to see you when it shouldn't even be that important to you when you wouldnt even know,
Trasak said:
Riahuf if anything you being able to selectively turn specific players appearance gear back on is worse than a toggle for everything being of or on. You are personally, directly in control of how I look. Any time you stream or post screen shots I will look like how you want me to look rather than how I want to look.
That is honestly unacceptable as it violates my own personal in game brand. If I were to stream in game as well I would have an identifiable look that I would want to be recognizable by. If I happened to get a mechanical upgrade that was incongruous visually with the rest of my gear it would damage my personal brand. Cosmetic slots would allow me to maintain a degree of control of my personal brand though the life of my character. If you were then to see me in game and decide to disable my desired appearance you would be damaging my personal brand (there is actually some precedence for players owning the visual rights to their ingame image and the ULA usually stipulates that the company can choose to use it at their discretion but that usually does not extend to other players using or modifying it).
This is obviously an extreme case from the perspective of a player actually running a business through playing a game but equally obviously there are many people out there doing exactly that.
Image is very important, and I could see a case for disabling cosmetic gear all together but long term the appearance of a character should only be modified by either the player or the data owning company. Giving the rights to modify the appearance of a character to a third party even if it is only from the perspective of that 3rd party is a very slippery slope that likely could have actual grounds for legal challenge in some states as it falls into the perpetually grey area of Intellectual Property.
Fantastic point Trasak!
Trasak said:Riahuf22 said:AS i do agree this can and could happen, i see this as if this does happen, it is becuae eof the lack of content coming out and not so much a flaw in the actual feature itself, and as I've said there is also the option i put in to switch between individuals manually which as been still ignored by anyone reading my posts. So if you see a bunch of people in BiS gear and get tired of seeing it you could simply turn on the cosmetic feature in that manner to eliminate it.
Riahuf if anything you being able to selectively turn specific players appearance gear back on is worse than a toggle for everything being of or on. You are personally, directly in control of how I look. Any time you stream or post screen shots I will look like how you want me to look rather than how I want to look.
That is honestly unacceptable as it violates my own personal in game brand. If I were to stream in game as well I would have an identifiable look that I would want to be recognizable by. If I happened to get a mechanical upgrade that was incongruous visually with the rest of my gear it would damage my personal brand. Cosmetic slots would allow me to maintain a degree of control of my personal brand though the life of my character. If you were then to see me in game and decide to disable my desired appearance you would be damaging my personal brand (there is actually some precedence for players owning the visual rights to their ingame image and the ULA usually stipulates that the company can choose to use it at their discretion but that usually does not extend to other players using or modifying it).
This is obviously an extreme case from the perspective of a player actually running a business through playing a game but equally obviously there are many people out there doing exactly that.
Image is very important, and I could see a case for disabling cosmetic gear all together but long term the appearance of a character should only be modified by either the player or the data owning company. Giving the rights to modify the appearance of a character to a third party even if it is only from the perspective of that 3rd party is a very slippery slope that likely could have actual grounds for legal challenge in some states as it falls into the perpetually grey area of Intellectual Property.
Image is important, but i can say it on the opposite foot, i can say that i think Cosmetic gear is Fake, and which to me it actually is it serves no importance to stats or gameplay in any way, it just gives flare and nothing more, and i feel like i dont want to see this flare i should have the option to not see it, if they want to avoid this entirely i say take cosmetic gear out completely bam no more problems, no more split decisions, no more anything, but i know people want cosmetic items, i know people want to wear them, but they can also understand people don't want to see them, so i am acepting that there can be cosmetic items people can wear, why cant i have an option to turn them off if i don't I';m honestly not asking to much. and again you wouldn't know.
@Riahuf22
I hear you loud and clear. You attach a great deal of importance to the visual cues give you about the mechanical power of a specific character. You also desire to have 100% control of what visually shows up on your screen.
In a single player game you are 100% right that you should have control over everything but in a multiplayer game you are sharing the space with other users who also have a share in the right to control the game environment. The in game compromise of control is that players can only control what is personal to them and what is generically available to all in the game engine itself. If the game offers the ability to change your personal characters appearance, then it is not proper for another player to gain control of your personal appearance as that is your sphere of control.
This is largely why I suggested the fact that the only real option is to create servers with different rule sets based on cosmetic appearance slots. There could be: No Cosmetic, Cosmetic only in Safe Areas, Cosmetic on. At no point should one player be able to choose what another player appears as and I would personally rather play on a server with no cosmetic gear than on a server where a 3rd party can choose how I look.
Riahuf22 said:
Image is important, but i can say it on the opposite foot, i can say that i think Cosmetic gear is Fake, and which to me it actually is it serves no importance to stats or gameplay in any way, it just gives flare and nothing more, and i feel like i dont want to see this flare i should have the option to not see it, if they want to avoid this entirely i say take cosmetic gear out completely bam no more problems, no more split decisions, no more anything, but i know people want cosmetic items, i know people want to wear them, but they can also understand people don't want to see them, so i am acepting that there can be cosmetic items people can wear, why cant i have an option to turn them off if i don't I';m honestly not asking to much. and again you wouldn't know.
Saying that cosmetic gear is "fake" doesn't make it true. A player could just as easily say that the /hidehelm feature is "fake" and that it serves no importance to stats or gameplay in any way, and that it just gives flair and nothing more. Someone could argue that they should have the option of seeing whether or not someone else is truly wearing a helmet, and then convince others that they are actually being very generous and understanding by accepting/allowing a toggle that disables the command, claiming that "everybody wins."
The issue, Riahuf, is that appearance does have an impact on gameplay. Appearance affects how our characters are perceived by others and how their accomplishments can be measured. Both of those things have an impact on reputation which has been consistently touted as really important in this game. If someone is wearing a full set of awesome looking armor but their helmet is ridiculous looking ... people are more likely to remember the goofy and out-of-place helmet than everything else. Players should be able to control their own brand. Characters are not cell-phone contacts that we can customize on our phones ... where we can name people what we want, assign whatever picture we want, or give them a custom ring-tone. Self-expression should be sacred as long as folks are playing by the rules.
I just don't see how I see people, affects you in a way that takes away a option form me. I'm not hurting you, or making you feel less than anything than before i logged on or after i log off, I'm merely seeing a world i want to see it. I understand you want to wear cosmetic gear, you want to have your character look a particular way and you have that right to view yourself in that way, but for you to try and make me see you that way i feel oversteps my bounds much like how you think me not seeing you in a way you want over steps your bounds.
But I don't care if you turn on your cosmetic toggle and see me in a cosmetic gear, when ill be traveling in my adventure mode, so why are you so determined to have me see you in a way i dont want to. your going for an ultimate win in a way that will make many people unhappy over a feature that shouldn't be such a big deal, and within a months it wouldn't be anyway.
Riahuf22 said:I just don't see how I see people, affects you in a way that takes away a option form me. I'm not hurting you, or making you feel less than anything than before i logged on or after i log off, I'm merely seeing a world i want to see it. I understand you want to wear cosmetic gear, you want to have your character look a particular way and you have that right to view yourself in that way, but for you to try and make me see you that way i feel oversteps my bounds much like how you think me not seeing you in a way you want over steps your bounds.
But I don't care if you turn on your cosmetic toggle and see me in a cosmetic gear, when ill be traveling in my adventure mode, so why are you so determined to have me see you in a way i dont want to. your going for an ultimate win in a way that will make many people unhappy over a feature that shouldn't be such a big deal, and within a months it wouldn't be anyway.
Again ... self-expression should be sacred, as long as folks are playing by the rules. It has been established how important character appearance is when it comes to reputation. If I wanted to create the largest possible ogre, or the small possible gnome, those are options that I will likely be able to choose from. They will help establish the identity of my character. Now imagine players saying that they want to see the world their way ... they want a toggle that makes all ogres/gnomes appear as default size. They don't want to see the modifications that I made to my character appearance, and they feel that looking at my character the way they want to see it is justified. They wouldn't be "hurting" my character, they would just see what they want. It doesn't really work that way. I understand that appearance slots are different than basic character appearance changes but the fundamental concept beneath both of them is the same.
The idea is to allow players to create a character and display them as they see fit. Self-expression is a very basic concept. Pantheon is an MMORPG -- there has to be integrity and consistency in the roleplaying department. Pantheon emphasizes shared experiences, reputation, community, player-driven social constructs, etc. Regardless of how things pan out ... if players decide that they simply do not want to see naked characters -- that isn't something they can control. Players may not like what they see but the idea that someone could simply click a toggle and put a "default appearance" on naked characters that overrides their nakedness ... it's absurd. That isn't a persistent world with shared experiences. Appearance slots should be universally applied, the same as a /hidehelm command. There should be consistency in the logic that regulates appearance slots and /hidehelm -- they serve the same purpose. Applying a toggle to one but not the other would show a lack of conviction to underlying principles.
Riahuf22 said:But I don't care if you turn on your cosmetic toggle and see me in a cosmetic gear (1), when ill be traveling in my adventure mode, so why are you so determined to have me see you (2) in a way i dont want to. your going for an ultimate win in a way that will make many people unhappy over a feature that shouldn't be such a big deal, and within a months it wouldn't be anyway.
(1) SUPER creepy, no no no no no no. No game should EVER let you put cosmetics on another player. That is a very bad road to go down and should not take much imagination why.
(2) You are seeing me. Full stop. Not an avatar you control. Maybe you could ask for an ignore button that also made characters disappear from the world or have all characters in cosmetic gear not appear in game for you but you have no right to change me. Knowing anyone has the right to change my appearance is where the hurt comes from.
Part of playing in an MMO is giving up some of the control of your game experience in order to collaboratively play. Another characters experience and appearance is one of those things you will never have control over. The only option is to have server rules that are always the same for everyone on that server.
So in this way yes my right to be seen as my equipped gear (including cosmetic slots) supersedes your right to see the game in a way that is different from what my equipped gear would indicate.