guitarsmasher said:Oozu said:I really like what WoW did with their transmog system. I read through a few pages but definatley not all 15 and I wanted to throw in my personal opinion. "Transmogrifiying" your gear, as its called in WoW was a great feature because it allowed you to "keep graphics" of gear you really liked and "reskin" crappy ones you didnt like. I'm sure a lot of us remember Kunark era Everquest obtaining those epics... The power was great but lets all be honest with ourselves we all wanted those epics for the EPIC GRAPHIC that came with them. Come Velious, Luclin and PoP it was hard for some of us to upgrade our epics because who we kidding we didnt want to lose that sweet ass graphic. With "xmogs" we would be able to upgrade those sick ass weapons and keep the graphic.
I brought up WoW's system because the biggest complaint from what I read was "posers". Noone wants to see people faking badass gear etc. In WoW's system your "Appearances" for a piece of gear wasn't unlocked untill you personally looted and or equipped an item. So it wasnt as if level 10 newbs were running around with Tier 10 raid graphics. I also saw someone mention a PVP concern. They didnt want to see people wearing rags secretly wrecking them because they were actually super geared but appeared to be a scrub. In all honesty, I kind of like the idea of that being available. It just adds to the riskyness of PVP. But we already know this game isn't going to be centered or really "hard covered" on pvp. SO do we really care if that were to happen? If we do for some reason WoW has it currently setup where the whole system revolves around talking to an NPC similar to a merchant to actually alter your appearance. For those "pure pvp" servers that i'm sure will come out you could simply remove those "vendors" from the server and thus take away the whole system. For non PVP servers, I'm assuming they're gonna set it up old eq style where you will have to /duel your victim before you fight and whats to stop you from /inspecting their gear before you /duel them? You should be doing that anyways =p
TLDR: No serious con's as long as players can't Xmog into something you havent "obtained". Biggest pro is being able to keep that sexxy "epic graphic" long after "epics" become outdated.
It took me years to finally switch out my Epic weapons in Everquest because of this very reason. With the amount of time I spent on not one but two epics it was very hard to put that epic in the bag and not at least transpose the graphic onto a much more powerful weapon. I think for everquest the tech just wasn't there back then like it is now, or it just never occured to anybody to develope that feature so early on. Afterall MMORPG's were new back then so people weren't concrended with their epeen until much later.
For sure, And honestly EQ1 Epic Graphics and their epicness is the only reason why i'm putting up a fight. I do play WoW from time to time, and i do use the hell out of their xmog system when im playing it. But it definatley doesnt make or break the game. However I dont know what it was about EQ1 Epics. they're just a different story! I'll fight to the ends of the earth if pantheon epics are as epic as eq1 epics to retain those epics! A whole lot of EPIC in that paragraph
tehtawd said:cromwell said:Happytrees said:In my opinion, being able to have gear appear to be other gear is one of the worst features you could have in a MMO.
second this.
I think the direction VR is taken is kind of a ' dont like it? Then dont use it.' Approach.
They understand people have different opinions on this. And there is a way to have your cake and eat it too in regards to this topic.
I really feel at this point the for and against for this topic has been beaten to the ground. People are strongly for their own respective side. We need to realize a decision has been made.
Use it if you like it
Dont use it if you dont like it.
The only thing i could see being argued for at this point is if the feature is active at launch and you have to disable it or the other way around. Which *sigh* is stupid to argue about.
sorry to be blunt about this one.
-Sent via mobile
-Todd
Todd, this could be applied to anything though.
Press button gain levels. If you don't like it, don't use it. Would you agree with that?
There has to be a point where you say you will or will not do something, not take the easy way out and say it's optional.
I vote that if people want to wear "casual/out of character/out of combat good looking gear" then make it a seperate equipment that you have to put on and not allow changing the look of combat gear. If you change the look, how can people know what you are wearing?
bigdogchris said:I vote that if people want to wear "casual/out of character/out of combat good looking gear" then make it a seperate equipment that you have to put on and not allow changing the look of combat gear. If you change the look, how can people know what you are wearing?
+1
Read through the game tenets and FAQ and you'll see words like "memorable" and "meaningful" and "prestige". Part of creating a memorable, meaningful game where people stand out is to have items that are identifiable. There were loots in EQ that were so rare that for weeks or months individual people were identified by a single item. How many whitened treant fists were there on your server before Kunark? How many rubicite breastplates? I'm all for fashionquest, but not at the expense of seeing those memorable items.
bigdogchris said:tehtawd said:cromwell said:Happytrees said:In my opinion, being able to have gear appear to be other gear is one of the worst features you could have in a MMO.
second this.
I think the direction VR is taken is kind of a ' dont like it? Then dont use it.' Approach.
They understand people have different opinions on this. And there is a way to have your cake and eat it too in regards to this topic.
I really feel at this point the for and against for this topic has been beaten to the ground. People are strongly for their own respective side. We need to realize a decision has been made.
Use it if you like it
Dont use it if you dont like it.
The only thing i could see being argued for at this point is if the feature is active at launch and you have to disable it or the other way around. Which *sigh* is stupid to argue about.
sorry to be blunt about this one.
-Sent via mobile
-Todd
Todd, this could be applied to anything though.
Press button gain levels. If you don't like it, don't use it. Would you agree with that?
There has to be a point where you say you will or will not do something, not take the easy way out and say it's optional.
I vote that if people want to wear "casual/out of character/out of combat good looking gear" then make it a seperate equipment that you have to put on and not allow changing the look of combat gear. If you change the look, how can people know what you are wearing?
Thats not the same. At all. And that correlation is ..., you know what its no matter, I'm done with this topic. As I said a decision looks to have been made. I can tell there are a lot of invested hearts in this. I dont want there to be any hurt due to my input.
-mobile
-Todd
bigdogchris said:Todd, this could be applied to anything though.
Press button gain levels. If you don't like it, don't use it. Would you agree with that?
There has to be a point where you say you will or will not do something, not take the easy way out and say it's optional.
I vote that if people want to wear "casual/out of character/out of combat good looking gear" then make it a seperate equipment that you have to put on and not allow changing the look of combat gear. If you change the look, how can people know what you are wearing?
Not even close to the same thing. Having a toggle to see others in their equipped vs cosmetic gear has zero effect on anyone else or their power in the game. There is absolutely ZERO good arguments for not having the option given you can play like it doesn't even exist either way.
My ideal appearance gear situation would be:
- Only equip appearance items your class can normally equip.
- Restrict appearance slots to items of the same armor type (cloth/leather/chain/plate) currently equipped. (So if you're a Warrior and want to wear a cloth appearance item, you must equip a real cloth armor for that slot).
- Special appearance gear for non-combat stuff like Diplomacy should be it's own armor type and must be equipped normally or used as appearance in the slot where that special appearance gear is already equipped.
- Weapon appearance restricted to what your class can normally equip, but not restricted to the same type aside from normal mainhand/offhand restrictions.
I feel like they will at least restrict appearance items to those your class can equip, but I don't think that is fair enough. If they decide that a Wizard should not wear leather or chain or plate appearance items due to realism then to be fair, a Warrior should not be able to wear cloth appearance over the top of their plate while they are in combat. Yes a Warrior can always wear cloth normally if they want to but it will hurt their combat prowess to do so. So that's why I say make appearance slots for armor locked to the same type of armor currently equipped. The warrior could still put cloth appearance items on, but they would have to put them on over the top of their equipped cloth armor to be realistic and fair. With my D- high school programming knowledge I can confidently say that this would not take much coding at all :)
Good to see there are PLENTY of good arguments people are making for other ideas on this issue.
Iksar said:bigdogchris said:Todd, this could be applied to anything though.
Press button gain levels. If you don't like it, don't use it. Would you agree with that?
There has to be a point where you say you will or will not do something, not take the easy way out and say it's optional.
I vote that if people want to wear "casual/out of character/out of combat good looking gear" then make it a seperate equipment that you have to put on and not allow changing the look of combat gear. If you change the look, how can people know what you are wearing?
Not even close to the same thing. Having a toggle to see others in their equipped vs cosmetic gear has zero effect on anyone else or their power in the game. There is absolutely ZERO good arguments for not having the option given you can play like it doesn't even exist either way.
Given you can hide appearance gear, yes it isn't critical to restrict appearance gear. Then again, I haven't heard a good argument for it either. I'd argue that, whenever possible, they should conform to standards of realism lest they slip and start gamifying the entirety of Pantheon.
In a game like Pantheon, everything should be weighed in the balance of whether any feature compliments a virtual world and suspension of disbelief, or a video game free of rules. Are we in their world, or our own world?
In the case of appearance gear, is it not already possible to wear your fancy armor whenever you want? Yes? Then does appearance gear lean more towards virtual world or video game? What are the benefits of such a system that makes it worth breaching those design tenets? In this case, I'd say a great deal to a some, little to most, and not at all to others (based on what my experience and what I've seen here).
What so many people do not like is when they start to compromise over little things, because it always leads to more down the road. Immersion or suspension of disbelief, truly is a design philosophy that allows for little compromise before it goes completely out the window.
With EQ: You're In Our World Now. Today: I just want to do whatever I want, and I don't care about the consequences.
Edit: Remembered why I stopped posting here.
Liav said:I haven't seen any good argument against appearance gear, either.
"It'll hurt PvP" - It demonstrably won't. I can prove it with math.
"I don't like it" - That's great but it's not an argument.
"Unrealistic" - You're playing a game with Wizards.
"Immersion" - You won't even know someone is using appearance gear unless you inspect them and figure out that the visual doesn't match the name of the item.
"Slippery slope to making Pantheon a WoW clone" - Not necessarily. Emphasis on necessarily. That is why slippery slopes are considered fallacies, because it isn't necessarily true that making one change will necessarily lead to another change.
The most valid of all of these is "I don't like it", because it doesn't actually try to appeal to some objective truth about how appearance gear will be damaging to the game. In EQ2 I collected enough appearance gear that I required 700 bank slots to store all of it. It's obviously important to me, so to me personally it would improve the game over the rainbow Dwarf situation early EQ had. I won't pretend that it will make Pantheon a better game though, at least not as some statement of fact independent of my own lens.
Actually, being able to appear like you're wearing something that you're not has a direct and powerful impact on PvP. See EQ and illusions for data to correct that math.
Disregarding unrealistic claims because wizards are in the game is not an argument. Wizards are an accepted fantasy norm. Hiding a full set of epic raid gear under harlequin costume is not.
Okay, so immersion is a bad argument... until you inspect someone. Then it becomes perfectly legitimate (so no one ever inspect anyone. problem solved amirite?).
Pointing out an actual slippery slope ... is not a slippery slope fallacy. An actual slippery slope, as in what we can plainly look back and observe happening over and over again in MMOs (including EQ) since the 90's.
What you meant to say is that you just don't like those other perfectly valid arguments, because your claims of fallacies were full of fallacies.
Dullahan said:Actually, being able to appear like you're wearing something that you're not has a direct and powerful impact on PvP. See EQ and illusions for data to correct that math.
Disregarding unrealistic claims because wizards are in the game is not an argument. Wizards are an accepted fantasy norm. Hiding a full set of epic raid gear under harlequin costume is not.
Okay, so immersion is a bad argument... until you inspect someone. Then it becomes perfectly legitimate (so no one ever inspect anyone. problem solved amirite?).
Pointing out an actual slippery slope ... is not a slippery slope fallacy. An actual slippery slope, as in what we can plainly look back and observe happening over and over again in MMOs (including EQ) since the 90's.
What you meant to say is that you just don't like those other perfectly valid arguments, because your claims of fallacies were full of fallacies.
Again, these are not good arguments against the proposed cosmetic/appearance gear system for this game. Points A, B, & C specifically have zero relevance since YOU get to decide how you see other players, making them a non-issue as an entirely personal decision. Immersion itself is entirely subjective.
While it is not a fallacy to suppose that after the first stride further steps might be taken towards unpleasant consequences, it is usually an error to suppose that they must.
Azraell said:If I would choose I would skin all my gear that would make me look like a hobo. =)
This would be very appropriate I think! Think of Lord of the Rings movies, pretty much all the wizards looked like hobos there (not elves, someone please show me an elven hobo it'd be so much fun) as well as Strider :D.
Again this is a massive thread with pretty much everything said already but my viewpoints shortly are:
-I wants cosmetic armor very much thank you, I'd absolutely adore it if I could choose between showing my stat greaves but cosmetic gloves for example, because appearances are important ;).
-I'd love it if the player / everyone could choose to display or view either cosmetic or stat armor as they wished, freely. The option to display helmets or hoods or not imo should always be up to the wearer themself because, privacy, buh! X)-
-Someone already mentioned the cosmetic armor to be class specific if people are concerned about plate wearing wizards or whatnots. I think it's great idea though personally I don't mind.
-Please no silly animal backpacks or other horribly unbecoming of high fantasy theme -things some of my fellow forumgoers have already posted.
-I always spend mah moneys on cash shops for cosmetic things because it's fun to have variety/look pretty or if not for other reason then for supporting the game, and as long as it doesn't feel overpriced (like BDO for example)
-I like the option to dye armor, perhaps this could be something that only crafters can do for other people if one doesn't want it to be an ability for everyone, I've no strong feelings on that point. Just dyeing things would be cool.
-Please give us the option to make our characters look fat :D.
And it's kind of great to see how many views this thread has already gotten! Looks matter in games :D.
Rubicite Plate Armor / Ceremonial Vestment / Spectre Robe from EQOA are 3 examples of appearance gear that I would love to see in Pantheon. I love the idea of appearance gear as long as players have to earn the gear prior to wearing it. Being an armor collector was a player initiated side quest. I like the idea of rare, cool looking gear being scattered all around the world. It's like playing Pokemon ... gotta catch 'em all! I remember farming for rubicite and it took forever to get the helmet. I got a ton of doubles/triples of the other pieces while I farmed for that helmet and hooked up some of my friends so we could match. I don't want to see dyes. You can achieve amazing results by making red, green, blue, black sets of plate armor. It sounds very basic but there was so much satisfaction in aquiring the full sets back then. Don't let players ruin that by altering the existing look of gear. We should have to farm the full set organically.
bigdogchris said:Todd, this could be applied to anything though.
Press button gain levels. If you don't like it, don't use it. Would you agree with that?
There has to be a point where you say you will or will not do something, not take the easy way out and say it's optional.
There is a massive difference between "click to level" and appearance gear. I agree there has to be a line drawn somewhere and a good place to draw that line is somewhere waaay before catering to players whose entire opposition stems from this distorted opinion that they are entitled to impose aesthetic restrictions on another.
Dullahan said:Disregarding unrealistic claims because wizards are in the game is not an argument. Wizards are an accepted fantasy norm. Hiding a full set of epic raid gear under harlequin costume is not.
You realize "epic raid gear" is unrealistic right? I hate the "there are wizards so anything is possible" argument as much as the next guy but this particular issue is based around purely unrealistic stats on armor/clothes. "Disregarding unrealistic claims" go out the window when you use unrealistic under the hood stats to make your point. So some people dont like a certain "unrealistic" game mechanic (appearance) because it allows an "unrealistic" game mechanic (stats) on a certain piece of armor to not match the arbitrary "unrealistic" game mechanic (stats) of the one shown? How am I the only one who sees a massive hole with that entire thought? So long as a Warrior is wearing heavy armor while adventuring and looks like a Warrior doing it there is 0 problems with immersion or realism.
Okay, so immersion is a bad argument... until you inspect someone. Then it becomes perfectly legitimate (so no one ever inspect anyone. problem solved amirite?).
Inspecting someone? As in right clicking on their portait>clicking inspect>and being shown every bit of info in a neatly organized UI? Yeah thats an unrealistic game mechanic that has zero bearing on immersion or anything adhering to a realistic virtual world. As far as realism and immersion is concerned, your character only knows that guy over there has an aesthetically pleasing sword.
The bottom line is Appearance is an under the hood solution to a problem posed by the fact MMO's have a constant flow of gear of many different designs whose entire effectiveness is based mostly on level of content. Should be no different than the supension of disbelief afforded toward stats and level.
Gnog said:This thread again!
Iksar, You are arguing this topic as if you have a perfect solution and disregarding the valid counterpoints.
There are several drawbacks to the toggle system:
- VR has limited resources. I'd prefer they make armor look good, not devote any artistic talent to pure cosmetics. If the "real" gear looks good, less need for cosmetics. No, you can't just say there will be separate art teams for the two universes. Time and money are limited.
- Shared experience. If most people toggle on cosmetics, then they will comment on the cosmetic art. The comments will be made in chat and in voice. As someone who prefers that fear have a single look (maybe with options to embellish on the foundation) I am stuck with the choice between turning on cosmetics (and suffering what I will likely view as an eyesore) or being an leaving cosmetics toggles off and suffering from the loss of a shared experience. To me this is bad.
- Prestige items. If everyone can cosmetic their way to cool looking, matching sets of armor (or whatever), it devalues the accomplishment of that guy or gal who manages to get a full set of matching Rubicite or whatever. Devaluing those outstanding accomplishments is a step toward the special snowflake world of WoW. It's a step in the wrong direction.
- Immersion. Just because the rules in a fantasy world are different than the rules in our human world, it doesn't mean we should throw out all the rules or attack anyone who thinks the world should abide by certain traditions . For some of us (most of us?) there is a canon of fantasy genre books movies and games that follow some basic rules, like that wizards don't shoot bows and big hulking warriors don't shoot fireballs or cast portals or whatever. Do these traditional notions have any intrinsic claim over whatever alternative you want to create with cosmetic items? No, but they are traditional notions that have emerged in a genre that this game is supposedly within (I think). So breaking those rules breaks immersion for anyone who has a, let's say, traditional Tolkien-Esque view of fantasy heroes. Your crazy pink leotards (or whatever) break immersion for me
The same way I would feel immersion broken if all the classes turned out to use laser beams as their only weapon. It doesn't fit. And if your answer is "Then just turn it off!" See point 2 above.
My hope is that cosmetic gear will be allowed in the form of ornamental items, not skins that conceal the combat items underneath . If a warrior goes out wearing a pink leotard, he or she should get one shotted. That seems like a fair trade off!
1) Nowhere has it been said that I know of that they will have purely cosmetic items (and they have stated you will have to EARN all your gear anyhow), and even if they did it is VR's decision as to what is a waste of time/resources and what is not. What looks good is entirely subjective, one person might love the new armor they found and another might find it gaudy and prefer to keep their old armor's appearance.
2) That's fair, I understand the desire for a shared experience. Personally I am willing to overlook something that I would consider non-game changing like people sometimes seeing a different view of other characters and talking about it. To me it's no different than if you went to a concert and some people saw the band wearing black and blue while the rest saw them wearing white and gold; the important part of the shared experience to me is that we all hear them play the same performance.
3) Not sure I understand what you are saying here. If you wanted to look like you have a full set of Rubicite you would still have to go out and get that set in order to have the appearance. You will have to earn every piece of armor you want to show in your appearance tab. The accomplishment will still be theirs to earn in order to show off. No matter what you put together, you have to obtain it first...
4) Again, immersion is different things to different people. On top of which, that is jumping to conclusions to assume there will be pink leotards or wacky lore defying outfits in this game (pretty sure VR has said they aren't going to do that). For some people who want to immerse themselves in the world and/or roleplay, it is important to them that their character look/be a certain way. They don't want the stats on the armor to matter as much as the armor itself, and it's a leap to think that a +5 STR piece of armor couldn't just as easily look like any other piece of equipment anyway. In DnD there are plenty of armors that are enchanted to be stronger than regularly probable, like leather with the protection of plate etc.
Are there drawbacks for some? Sure, just as there are people who can find issue with anything else in the world. But a toggle is a very reasonable middle ground that doesn't impose one way (my way or the highway) on everyone.
First and foremost, I didn't read the entire topic, 16 pages about cosmetics, I pass.
The current cosmetic options VR has in place are "adventuring gear option" where you see yourself and all the other players with the gear they're actually wearing. And the "Cosmetic gear option" where you see yourself and all the other players with their choosen cosmetic looks.
It's great that VR leets you choose how you see others, but lets be realistic not many players will use the "adventuring gear option" (I know I will, I'm a sucker for the oldschool way of "you show what you equip") I don't care if the gear looks bad, missmatched or ugly and stupid, the gear represents my personal achievements it tells a story and it carries a different kind of weight when you only have one option, to display the items you equiped. No one wans to look like the missmatched hobo, so the "cosmetic gear option" will no doubt be the more popular one.
What I would like to see, is taking the system of "cosmetic gear option" one step further, instead of displaying your characters "cosmetic looks" to everyone who chooses to the same option as you, it only displays the "cosmetic gear" to yourself. This way you can choose to see your character looking good (AKA no like a hobo), but everyone sees your accomplishments and you see everyone elses accomplishments.
Well I just LIVE to have the chance to wear fluffy bunny slippers and a pink tutu when playing any game. If you believe that I have a blue bridge to sell you. :) I'll be happy to wear what I get for armor, if I make it myself or gain it from an adventure. Don't care what other people put on their characters.. some of what I've seen, just seems to look out of place to me, but whatever.
Kayo said:Dullahan said:Disregarding unrealistic claims because wizards are in the game is not an argument. Wizards are an accepted fantasy norm. Hiding a full set of epic raid gear under harlequin costume is not.
You realize "epic raid gear" is unrealistic right? I hate the "there are wizards so anything is possible" argument as much as the next guy but this particular issue is based around purely unrealistic stats on armor/clothes. "Disregarding unrealistic claims" go out the window when you use unrealistic under the hood stats to make your point. So some people dont like a certain "unrealistic" game mechanic (appearance) because it allows an "unrealistic" game mechanic (stats) on a certain piece of armor to not match the arbitrary "unrealistic" game mechanic (stats) of the one shown? How am I the only one who sees a massive hole with that entire thought? So long as a Warrior is wearing heavy armor while adventuring and looks like a Warrior doing it there is 0 problems with immersion or realism.
Okay, so immersion is a bad argument... until you inspect someone. Then it becomes perfectly legitimate (so no one ever inspect anyone. problem solved amirite?).
Inspecting someone? As in right clicking on their portait>clicking inspect>and being shown every bit of info in a neatly organized UI? Yeah thats an unrealistic game mechanic that has zero bearing on immersion or anything adhering to a realistic virtual world. As far as realism and immersion is concerned, your character only knows that guy over there has an aesthetically pleasing sword.
The bottom line is Appearance is an under the hood solution to a problem posed by the fact MMO's have a constant flow of gear of many different designs whose entire effectiveness is based mostly on level of content. Should be no different than the supension of disbelief afforded toward stats and level.
Again, those are norms. Contrary to popular misinformation, immersion is not "entirely subjective". It's not even mostly subjective. Good fiction or fantasy is always heavily grounded in reality or accepted fantasy norms. Otherwise, it's not considered "good" fiction.
So no, it's not okay to hold out accepted norms of both the fantasy and gaming realm, long established in fictions centuries ago, as "unrealistic" to defend something that is in any realm, time or story, not realistic.
Ok, this, like many other threads lately, has spiralled down into arguments over opinions, we have given an official reply to this, I suggest you read it and wait for testing to see how we implement it before suggesting any alternatives, I will go ahead and close my thread now.
You folks need to remember that we are not new to this, we have extremely experienced members on the team who have created and played most of the games similar to ours and we have learned from past mistake sand user feedback, leave it with us and wait until you get to try it for yourself before arguing with others and casting judgement please.