If we have EQ style camps, where a person or group has the specific intent of clearing a specific spawn to cause a rare mob to pop, and someone else comes in and starts taking that spawn, that should absolutely be against some kind of policy. I agree that a sense of "ownership" of pixels in a game is odd, but I think there has to be some form of it in these situations.
I've seen some really awful behavior in EQ(Orc Hill in Crushbone I'm looking at you), but for the most part once the servers matured the "camp check" became a thing that almost everyone honored. It was really rare to see a heated issue with someone stealing someone else's camp, in my experience.
Keno Monster said:If we have EQ style camps, where a person or group has the specific intent of clearing a specific spawn to cause a rare mob to pop, and someone else comes in and starts taking that spawn, that should absolutely be against some kind of policy. I agree that a sense of "ownership" of pixels in a game is odd, but I think there has to be some form of it in these situations.
I've seen some really awful behavior in EQ(Orc Hill in Crushbone I'm looking at you), but for the most part once the servers matured the "camp check" became a thing that almost everyone honored. It was really rare to see a heated issue with someone stealing someone else's camp, in my experience.
But even in eq, if you reported this to a GM. They would tell you that camps dont exist. They were something manufactured and respected by the server and community. Not the developers or GMs.
Its all subjective of course. To me having camps is more representative of a living breathing world free of invisible quarantines (FTE locks), within the confines of and while remembering that this is primarily a cooperative PvE game. The real world has plenty of limited resources but they tend to be first come first served or otherwise first to stake the area wins, or resort to violence/nefarious means (which isn't an option without PvP). To me its more conducive to creating a community where their shared struggles and "war stories" are centered around the challenges of the AI/Environment and how hard fought those wins and losses were, not their run ins against other players trying to claim a rare mob when it spawned or how they spent 18 hours camping mob X with nothing to show for it. If I remember correctly even Square started to edge FFXI into more instanced and force popped/triggered content, no? Because botting and throwing massive amounts of bodies dominated notorious monsters?
I'm not saying there shouldn't be some competitive content because I agree most people can enjoy it now and then (random world spawns with assorted interesting and unique items) but it shouldn't just be the rule of the land and how most/everything is handled. Nowhere in the information we have from VR about what this game is about or design goals is competition stressed or encouraged. Again, the only official mentions on this site are in reference to how too much competition in the world has been a "plague" for past open world games and:
"We also understand that while gamers’ tastes don’t fundamentally change over time, their situations, lives, and responsibilities do. Likewise, some game mechanics often associated with earlier MMOs involved inordinate amounts of downtime, overly severe penalties, too much competition over content and resources, and even downright boring or overly repetitive gameplay. Our intention, therefore, is not to bring back ‘everything’ from the old days, but rather to pick and choose those which make sense and are needed to make a fun, social, cooperative, and challenging game."
Sitting in one spot for many consecutive hours for only a chance at trying to learn & defeat a difficult game encounter that then only has a chance at dropping an item of interest/value (a cycle that has to be repeated MANY times no less) strikes me as bad design. Making a whole group of people spend hours sitting in one place doing nothing but staring at other groups and giving them absolutely nothing to show for the time they spent is ridiculous and is the opposite of the goal highlighted above as it is downright boring and overly repetitive gameplay.
Make skill a bigger factor in who can get what, make the mobs more challenging where desired. Add systems that limit monopolizing camps be it variable lockout timers or maybe have some system so that named "camps" have a mounting difficulty associated with them to the point they get so hard/overwhelming that groups will actively seek others to help hold down an area, reinforcing the ideas of building teamwork and cooperation across the server. I want it to be far more common to see a group clear to a "camp" only to get mopped up by the rare/boss than to see them sitting comfortably.
Again, that's just my take on it/where I am coming from as a player. I respect your opinion on this and generally understand where you are coming from regardless, I know we just have largely different playstyles and drives.
Porygon said:But even in eq, if you reported this to a GM. They would tell you that camps dont exist. They were something manufactured and respected by the server and community. Not the developers or GMs.
Depends on the GM/guide, in my experience almost every time one of them needed to be called they gave favor (including the area of whichever named spawn) to the established party at a camp when mandating their "compromise."
It's interesting how social constructs work. If you tried complaining about losing a boss kill in FFXI it would actually harm your reputation. If you complained about getting muscled out of an XP camp, you and the infiltrator would both be called petty (but mostly the infiltrator assuming you didn't go ham with the vitriol). It was considered petty to muscle someone out of a secluded XP camp (competition was okay in some of the more large-area / accessible / convenient locations) but it was also somewhat petty to complain about it because you were probably spending more energy on complaining than it would take to just relocate. If you complained about someone else getting a kill on a named you would basically be labeled a sissy. The server I played on was mostly Japanese and it seems obvious they had a different culture. I guess my whole point in this is that people shouldn't automatically assume that just because something was adopted by a community 17 years ago, it doesn't mean that every server community will feel the same way today. We're either going to have emergent behavior where various types of camps are a possibility or they will be enforced through in-game mechanics, rules, or policies. I like emergent behavior when it comes to interacting with the world but if VR thinks they need to put a leash on people for whatever reason (worried about too many trolls, not enough content to go around, prefers structured behavior instead of emergent, etc) it is what it is. The most important thing to me overall is that there is a clear picture that states what is or is not a thing, and what is or is not allowed.
Porygon said:Keno Monster said:If we have EQ style camps, where a person or group has the specific intent of clearing a specific spawn to cause a rare mob to pop, and someone else comes in and starts taking that spawn, that should absolutely be against some kind of policy. I agree that a sense of "ownership" of pixels in a game is odd, but I think there has to be some form of it in these situations.
I've seen some really awful behavior in EQ(Orc Hill in Crushbone I'm looking at you), but for the most part once the servers matured the "camp check" became a thing that almost everyone honored. It was really rare to see a heated issue with someone stealing someone else's camp, in my experience.
But even in eq, if you reported this to a GM. They would tell you that camps dont exist. They were something manufactured and respected by the server and community. Not the developers or GMs.
This is true. I suppose I contradicted my own point. Perhaps the "camp check" can continue to be an effective player policy, if not an official game policy.
Iksar said:
Porygon said:But even in eq, if you reported this to a GM. They would tell you that camps dont exist. They were something manufactured and respected by the server and community. Not the developers or GMs.
Depends on the GM/guide, in my experience almost every time one of them needed to be called they gave favor (including the area of whichever named spawn) to the established party at a camp when mandating their "compromise."
Because nothing was set in stone. Camps were something people created. The only power a GM had over "camps" is if they felt like it would be in violation of the play nice policy. Which was basically just something each GM interpreted differently.
Kilsin has come in saying that training and griefing is not allowed. But all mobs are open for competition.
I think we all know that they dont really give definitive answers if they arent too sure on what they want to do. So this is the path they are taking. As opposed to arguing it forever... why not figure out ways to band the community together if this actually becomes a problem.
Most that i know respect, without fight and move on. We have very different views from very different people in MMOs but back in the day it was not as bad as it is today. Just reach out and speak to people if you want to share the area. Sometimes people abuse the spot for months on end doing anything possible to RMT stuff. This is a completely different situation. If you walk in and DPS race it and they lose, expect a petition against you.
But there is nothing wrong with it given these new rules after 20 yrs of mmo game time. I guess the generations have changed.
GMs used to actually get involved when someone would bully others like that.
Such was the case in EQ Classic back in 1999, verant would interact with you and tell you to move on. Now your lucky to see 1 Gm beside you interacting with anybody.
Things change, but so does the player base views on Play Nice Rules... which to me is just a lock box for the decent human beings.
Porygon said:But even in eq, if you reported this to a GM. They would tell you that camps dont exist. They were something manufactured and respected by the server and community. Not the developers or GMs.
Depending on the camp, your attitude, and the Guide you talked to really. If you were holding down a camp of 20 mobs and someone showed up and started killing some of them and you threw a fit, chances are the Guide would tell you to split the camp or leave. However if you were a 45 warrior and cleric camping frenzied ghoul for an FBSS and had been there for 6 hours and some necro showed up hoping to bully you out of the camp so he could sell the item for cash, chances are the guide would tell him to GTFO. If you're a constant whiner or someone known to be locking down popular camps for hours on end for personal gain chances are a snarky guide would tell you to share every other spawn.
It's like dealing with the police. If you are polite, answer their questions, apologize for speeding, and don't act the fool they may let you off with a warning. You may still lose out. If you are a pain in the ass chances are you are definitely getting a ticket and he might even add that your tail light is out, your license plate is obscured by the cover from the dealership, or even put you through a sobriety test.
This is why I feel like what should be put in place are guidelines for good behavior rather than hard and fast rules or game mechanics that limit the possibility of nuanced interactions. Killstealing can mean a lot of things. You being in an amazing group in an overcrowded dungeon and taking a large portion of the available mobs then getting bent out of shape because people are "stealing your mobs" is silly behavior, you should probably keep that to yourself, and if you petition the GM should tell you not to waste their time, force you to give up half your spawns, and tell you not to be a greedy whiner. Now on the flip side, if you are camping a named on a 12 hour timer and have been sitting there for 6 hours and some wizard shows up and 5 minutes later the named pops and you attack it and he outdamages you... You might elicit a little more sympathy from a GM. Whether or not there should be drops off mobs on a 12 hour timer is a completely different subject.
Whatever 1AD7 is talking about in FFXI would never ever ever work in Everquest. I did not play FFXI but I can guarantee you there is/was something about the way things worked there that was vastly different than Everquest. Either the loot did not matter as much (i.e. there were comparable items), these types of named were not required to complete quests, the way the spawns worked or their locations was different, the named or their drops were less rare, classes had some chance of competing against other classes, or maybe that game just attracted a special breed of human being that was far less selfish than those who played EQ. I do not know.
People who are here coming from an Everquest background are looking at this in terms of their past experiences. They know that were it left up to the community or "reputation" to encourage good behavior in these types of scenarios that the game would have simply died off. The vast majority of classes and players in EQ had no chance to compete directly with other specific classes in the vast majority of encounters. Without some general guidelines discouraging such behavior a very few players would without question ruin the entire gameplay experience of the majority.
Now, what this does not account for is how gameplay will eventually work out in Pantheon. Maybe items won't be as rare, maybe most classes can directly compete, maybe everything good will only come from group content that no class ever will be able to solo, maybe no quests will be gated behind single NPCs on 18+ hour timers with variance, maybe Brad himself will personally show up at your house and hand deliver you a special code you can enter daily to roll the dice on a chance to complete a certain quest, who knows.
I think maybe the way this should be phrased is... "If gameplay is mostly similar to Everquest in terms of the way mobs spawn, how rare/difficult some items are to acquire, and/or how vastly different the classes are in their ability to directly compete with one another... Then there needs to be some sort of general guidelines in place for how players treat one another with regard to advancement within the game." Maybe that makes more sense. It feels to me like people are talking around each other based on experiences in games that share similarities but are not really similar enough for there to be an apples to apples discussion about what constitutes competition and fair play.
Porygon said:Kilsin has come in saying that training and griefing is not allowed. But all mobs are open for competition.
I think we all know that they dont really give definitive answers if they arent too sure on what they want to do. So this is the path they are taking.
I think what we all know is that nothing they say is definitive and the official stance on almost everything at this point (regardless of any forum comments) is that they are considering options and will determine more during testing.
jezebel said:Porygon said:But even in eq, if you reported this to a GM. They would tell you that camps dont exist. They were something manufactured and respected by the server and community. Not the developers or GMs.
Depending on the camp, your attitude, and the Guide you talked to really. If you were holding down a camp of 20 mobs and someone showed up and started killing some of them and you threw a fit, chances are the Guide would tell you to split the camp or leave. However if you were a 45 warrior and cleric camping frenzied ghoul for an FBSS and had been there for 6 hours and some necro showed up hoping to bully you out of the camp so he could sell the item for cash, chances are the guide would tell him to GTFO. If you're a constant whiner or someone known to be locking down popular camps for hours on end for personal gain chances are a snarky guide would tell you to share every other spawn.
It's like dealing with the police. If you are polite, answer their questions, apologize for speeding, and don't act the fool they may let you off with a warning. You may still lose out. If you are a pain in the ass chances are you are definitely getting a ticket and he might even add that your tail light is out, your license plate is obscured by the cover from the dealership, or even put you through a sobriety test.
This is why I feel like what should be put in place are guidelines for good behavior rather than hard and fast rules or game mechanics that limit the possibility of nuanced interactions. Killstealing can mean a lot of things. You being in an amazing group in an overcrowded dungeon and taking a large portion of the available mobs then getting bent out of shape because people are "stealing your mobs" is silly behavior, you should probably keep that to yourself, and if you petition the GM should tell you not to waste their time, force you to give up half your spawns, and tell you not to be a greedy whiner. Now on the flip side, if you are camping a named on a 12 hour timer and have been sitting there for 6 hours and some wizard shows up and 5 minutes later the named pops and you attack it and he outdamages you... You might elicit a little more sympathy from a GM. Whether or not there should be drops off mobs on a 12 hour timer is a completely different subject.
Whatever 1AD7 is talking about in FFXI would never ever ever work in Everquest. I did not play FFXI but I can guarantee you there is/was something about the way things worked there that was vastly different than Everquest. Either the loot did not matter as much (i.e. there were comparable items), these types of named were not required to complete quests, the way the spawns worked or their locations was different, the named or their drops were less rare, classes had some chance of competing against other classes, or maybe that game just attracted a special breed of human being that was far less selfish than those who played EQ. I do not know.
People who are here coming from an Everquest background are looking at this in terms of their past experiences. They know that were it left up to the community or "reputation" to encourage good behavior in these types of scenarios that the game would have simply died off. The vast majority of classes and players in EQ had no chance to compete directly with other specific classes in the vast majority of encounters. Without some general guidelines discouraging such behavior a very few players would without question ruin the entire gameplay experience of the majority.
Now, what this does not account for is how gameplay will eventually work out in Pantheon. Maybe items won't be as rare, maybe most classes can directly compete, maybe everything good will only come from group content that no class ever will be able to solo, maybe no quests will be gated behind single NPCs on 18+ hour timers with variance, maybe Brad himself will personally show up at your house and hand deliver you a special code you can enter daily to roll the dice on a chance to complete a certain quest, who knows.
I think maybe the way this should be phrased is... "If gameplay is mostly similar to Everquest in terms of the way mobs spawn, how rare/difficult some items are to acquire, and/or how vastly different the classes are in their ability to directly compete with one another... Then there needs to be some sort of general guidelines in place for how players treat one another with regard to advancement within the game." Maybe that makes more sense. It feels to me like people are talking around each other based on experiences in games that share similarities but are not really similar enough for there to be an apples to apples discussion about what constitutes competition and fair play.
Great post, Jez :)
Different culture, different game. Totally understand that, and that was a major underlying point I was trying to make as well. The important distinction in my eyes is that a lot of players feel that Pantheon/Everquest comparisons are automatically apples to apples while Pantheon/FFXI (or any other game besides VG) are apples to oranges. This would be a mistake. Pantheon is taking the best pieces and parts from the old school MMORPG genre -- I know there are a lot of people who truly feel that EQ represents the lion's share of that and maybe they are right. But there are similarities between EQ and FFXI ... and I do think it is an apples to apples comparison rather than an apples to oranges comparison.
But let's not forget that there are 7,500 different kind of apples in the world and that isn't considering the many different ways you can use them. Far too often discussions on this forum turn into "It was done this way in EQ so it's going to be like this in Pantheon." When it comes to this particular topic, I feel those 7,500 types of apples might be narrowed down to 10. There are elements of other games that can be drawn from and seeing that Pantheon is going to be a game that does indeed feature "comparable items" as a way to alleviate the "too much competition" feeling that may have been observed in EQ when it came to camps like FBSS, it's worth highlighting some of the nuances of other games that may have been ahead of the curve in that regard.
It seems obvious to me that VR is intent on making "Competition fun again." Fun is subjective but I think most of us are here for the same reasons. Some players look at competition as something that produces anxiety, specifically while imagining "competition in an EQ environment." Something has to give. I would put my money on how the world is being contructed, how loot is handled, how bottlenecks are alleviated, how spawn mechanics are implemented, and how all of these things tie together. I would agree with Jez that what flied in FFXI probably wouldn't have flied in EQ. That's fair -- both games featured "social constructs" in regards to how camps formed and whatnot. Again, though, we have to get past the idea that Pantheon is going to be exactly like EQ. This includes how the world is being constructed, how loot is handled, how bottlenecks are alleviated, how spawn mechanics are implemented, and how all of that ties together.
Terminus will be a new frontier that is literally being designed with all of these things in mind so rather than assuming that competition is automatically a bad thing, or that Pantheon will be a redux of EQ while considering all of those elements, let's breath some life into what things could look like. I just so happen to remember a game where competition was embraced rather than feared, and where players still had the opportunity to kick back and camp without being trampled by other players. I'm not saying FFXI did everything right but I am saying that it's far closer to a comparable species of apple than it is an orange, and when it comes to everyday regular interaction with other players in the world, I would love to relive the type of experience where players are free to happily go about their business, and the CS team isn't getting spammed with hundreds of tickets from people complaining about "too much competition." Fun competition was a beautiful thing that elicited plenty of excitement from everyone involved, even those who didn't necessarily "win."
One thing that struck out to me in this thread is that in EQ, it was considered good etiquette to never bother a player who is camping a named. If someone is there, you leave. You don't compete. Or better yet, you /ooc at the zoneline and ask people exactly who doesn't want to be bothered with seeing other players. That isn't really much of a fun interaction between players in an open-world game. In FFXI, players were more than happy to interact with each other. There were no imaginary waiting lines, and there was no fear about having a GM called on you when you stepped over them. Good etiquette was congratulating another player who managed to get the very item that you yourself wanted. It doesn't sound like this "interaction" would have been even remotely possible in EQ. Instead of congratulating the other player, you would undoubtedly be sending in a "report." What sounds better for an open-world MMO where social interaction is key?
jezebel said:Porygon said:But even in eq, if you reported this to a GM. They would tell you that camps dont exist. They were something manufactured and respected by the server and community. Not the developers or GMs.
Depending on the camp, your attitude, and the Guide you talked to really. If you were holding down a camp of 20 mobs and someone showed up and started killing some of them and you threw a fit, chances are the Guide would tell you to split the camp or leave. However if you were a 45 warrior and cleric camping frenzied ghoul for an FBSS and had been there for 6 hours and some necro showed up hoping to bully you out of the camp so he could sell the item for cash, chances are the guide would tell him to GTFO. If you're a constant whiner or someone known to be locking down popular camps for hours on end for personal gain chances are a snarky guide would tell you to share every other spawn.
It's like dealing with the police. If you are polite, answer their questions, apologize for speeding, and don't act the fool they may let you off with a warning. You may still lose out. If you are a pain in the ass chances are you are definitely getting a ticket and he might even add that your tail light is out, your license plate is obscured by the cover from the dealership, or even put you through a sobriety test.
This is why I feel like what should be put in place are guidelines for good behavior rather than hard and fast rules or game mechanics that limit the possibility of nuanced interactions. Killstealing can mean a lot of things. You being in an amazing group in an overcrowded dungeon and taking a large portion of the available mobs then getting bent out of shape because people are "stealing your mobs" is silly behavior, you should probably keep that to yourself, and if you petition the GM should tell you not to waste their time, force you to give up half your spawns, and tell you not to be a greedy whiner. Now on the flip side, if you are camping a named on a 12 hour timer and have been sitting there for 6 hours and some wizard shows up and 5 minutes later the named pops and you attack it and he outdamages you... You might elicit a little more sympathy from a GM. Whether or not there should be drops off mobs on a 12 hour timer is a completely different subject.
Whatever 1AD7 is talking about in FFXI would never ever ever work in Everquest. I did not play FFXI but I can guarantee you there is/was something about the way things worked there that was vastly different than Everquest. Either the loot did not matter as much (i.e. there were comparable items), these types of named were not required to complete quests, the way the spawns worked or their locations was different, the named or their drops were less rare, classes had some chance of competing against other classes, or maybe that game just attracted a special breed of human being that was far less selfish than those who played EQ. I do not know.
People who are here coming from an Everquest background are looking at this in terms of their past experiences. They know that were it left up to the community or "reputation" to encourage good behavior in these types of scenarios that the game would have simply died off. The vast majority of classes and players in EQ had no chance to compete directly with other specific classes in the vast majority of encounters. Without some general guidelines discouraging such behavior a very few players would without question ruin the entire gameplay experience of the majority.
Now, what this does not account for is how gameplay will eventually work out in Pantheon. Maybe items won't be as rare, maybe most classes can directly compete, maybe everything good will only come from group content that no class ever will be able to solo, maybe no quests will be gated behind single NPCs on 18+ hour timers with variance, maybe Brad himself will personally show up at your house and hand deliver you a special code you can enter daily to roll the dice on a chance to complete a certain quest, who knows.
I think maybe the way this should be phrased is... "If gameplay is mostly similar to Everquest in terms of the way mobs spawn, how rare/difficult some items are to acquire, and/or how vastly different the classes are in their ability to directly compete with one another... Then there needs to be some sort of general guidelines in place for how players treat one another with regard to advancement within the game." Maybe that makes more sense. It feels to me like people are talking around each other based on experiences in games that share similarities but are not really similar enough for there to be an apples to apples discussion about what constitutes competition and fair play.
Very well said, this post defines my previous experience with EQ very well from both the player side and from my time serving as a guide. It also exemplifies the sort of experience I am looking for in pantheon and have previously tried in other threads to relay, but failed to accomplish with such clarity as you have. For me, I don't necessarily want to see specific terms and actions codified as absolute rules, but rather to make "guidelines" as you say. The purpose of a PnP to me isn't about codifying that punishments will be handed out for this action but not that action, rather its about giving the community some direction on how they are expected to act and treating each other. Respecting your fellow player should be a baseline for any PnP, that doesn't mean you have to bend over backwards for them but at the very least try to find a way to coexist. If that can't be done, then guides/gm's should be on hand to show the abusive players to the door (as in leave the area, not the game) and help arbitrate disputes that may arise between non-abusive players. I firmly believe if you give a community a solid foundation and direction that they typically will take it from there a build a solid community.
If Visionary says all mobs are killable by anyone then that means all mobs...bosses with loot included....take what you want because it sounds like there is no legal issue with doing that.
Who cares if you have been camping a mob for 10 hours and someone rolls in and takes it...ya it sucks (had it done to me) but no rules are being broken.
It is not harrasment or griefing moving in and killing a mob, it is being opportunistic. The mob ain't yours. (it's actually visionary realms :) )
Not sure why the uproar about this honestly. If you want mobs for yourselves play a game with instancing.
K
Maybe I shouldn't say "great post oneADseven" I don't want Kilsin upset at me for ....linestealing. But I agree.
Having GMs involved in disputes between players is a last resort - the game should be designed to minimize the need for this and the rules should discourage it.
What DAOC did - and it may not have been EQ but it was an old school game with a respect for camps. Camps were not officially recognized and GMs wouldn't normally get involved in disputes over camps since under the rules no one owned a camp or a mob. But if someone tried to "grief" another player - repeatedly interfered with their camps and mobs - a GM might go so far as to ban them in extreme cases - not for camp stealing but for griefing. Conduct legal in and of itself but *not* permitted when clearly directed at hurting another player.
To minimize GM time spent on camp issues there could be a way for players to erect a visible banner in effect meaning "we claim anything close to this banner". Even if the rules don't enforce camp claiming, this will minimize disputes with other players that respect camps. The banner can have a time limit (no claiming a camp endlessly), a cooldown timer and an activity requirement (no pulls for x minutes the banner poofs and the cooldown timer kicks in). If rules do recognize camps, a GM can take action against players that insist on interfering within the area claimed after being asked to leave. This banner suggestion is only if VR feels the need to encourage respect for camps - leaving it purely to the community would eat up less GM time.
On killstealing I strongly feel that the best approach is to simply not *allow* someone to do this. Not by GM enforcement but by game mechanics. Give shared credit if multiple people attack the same mob or give credit to the puller even if outdamaged by someone else.
My concern is not primarily directed at people that steal major bosses that drop wonderful items. Though this should be prevented. Maybe if the rules permit claiming a camp, any boss that spawns near the area claimed should only be killable by the claiming group subject to restrictions and time limits such as those alluded to above. My concern is with people that cannot finish a quest or get loot because classes that do more damage - or higher levels - or groups - keep taking mobs they are already fighting.
My greater concern is lower level areas with people deciding whether they like the game having mobs they have pulled taken away from them and getting neither loot nor credit. Rude community crappy rules VR doesn't want new players I am out of here is likely to be the reaction of many.
kridak said:If Visionary says all mobs are killable by anyone then that means all mobs...bosses with loot included....take what you want because it sounds like there is no legal issue with doing that.
Who cares if you have been camping a mob for 10 hours and someone rolls in and takes it...ya it sucks (had it done to me) but no rules are being broken.
It is not harrasment or griefing moving in and killing a mob, it is being opportunistic. The mob ain't yours. (it's actually visionary realms :) )
Not sure why the uproar about this honestly. If you want mobs for yourselves play a game with instancing.
K
@Kridak gets it. This is the design.
oneADseven said:One thing that struck out to me in this thread is that in EQ, it was considered good etiquette to never bother a player who is camping a named. If someone is there, you leave. You don't compete. Or better yet, you /ooc at the zoneline and ask people exactly who doesn't want to be bothered with seeing other players. That isn't really much of a fun interaction between players in an open-world game. In FFXI, players were more than happy to interact with each other. There were no imaginary waiting lines, and there was no fear about having a GM called on you when you stepped over them. Good etiquette was congratulating another player who managed to get the very item that you yourself wanted. It doesn't sound like this "interaction" would have been even remotely possible in EQ. Instead of congratulating the other player, you would undoubtedly be sending in a "report." What sounds better for an open-world MMO where social interaction is key?
This is actually a really interesting point. Having never played FF11 and understanding everyone's experience is different... but going off what you say the culture was like. It ALMOST makes eq1 seem selfish. The mentality of "I was here first noone should bother me" is extremely selfish. Especially in a game that thrives (or at least is supposed to exhibit some form) of competition between players.
I have had a few times in eq1 where I did compete directly against someone... and if they won I would "grats" them. But that's definitely not the norm..
Very interesting thought.
oneADseven said:One thing that struck out to me in this thread is that in EQ, it was considered good etiquette to never bother a player who is camping a named. If someone is there, you leave. You don't compete. Or better yet, you /ooc at the zoneline and ask people exactly who doesn't want to be bothered with seeing other players. That isn't really much of a fun interaction between players in an open-world game. In FFXI, players were more than happy to interact with each other. There were no imaginary waiting lines, and there was no fear about having a GM called on you when you stepped over them. Good etiquette was congratulating another player who managed to get the very item that you yourself wanted. It doesn't sound like this "interaction" would have been even remotely possible in EQ. Instead of congratulating the other player, you would undoubtedly be sending in a "report." What sounds better for an open-world MMO where social interaction is key?
There is more to it than simply leaving. Often times exstensive interaction takes place as player talk to each other to figure out the status of each camp, how long have you been there, how long are you planning on staying, if the mob drops X next cycle are you leaving, can you let me know if you leave, do you have spots in your group, has he dropped anything good yet, etc. You seem to be far over simplifying the level of interaction taking place. I could easily do the same with the FFXI model by suggesting that no interaction is actually taking place other than the 2 groups rushing to tag first. casting a single spell to get the tag then watching the other group move on isn't a ton of community interaction IMO, now mind you thats a vast over simplification but I'm just using it as an example to help you understand the broader point I'm speaking to.
>The mentality of "I was here first noone should bother me" is extremely selfish.<
Really?
If you stand in line at a store or amusement park and someone shoves in ahead of you they are OK and you are "extremely selfish" if it bothers you? Very ...unusual .... attitude if you actually mean it.
> Especially in a game that thrives (or at least is supposed to exhibit some form) of competition between players.<
I would have said that Pantheon was intended to thrive on some form of cooperation between players. I don't interpret "social game" as meaning the core design philosophy is competition.
Fair enough Keldaria but that is all stuff that can be done from another zone. You can send a /tell to someone from anywhere in the world. I don't consider that a "fun" interaction. Congratulating someone (jumping up and down, bowing, waving, cheering, emotes) who is competing with you? That's a visceral feeling and it makes the world feel more alive. I want to play in a living breathing world not a glorified chatroom.
dorotea said:>The mentality of "I was here first noone should bother me" is extremely selfish.<
Really?
If you stand in line at a store or amusement park and someone shoves in ahead of you they are OK and you are "extremely selfish" if it bothers you? Very ...unusual .... attitude if you actually mean it.
> Especially in a game that thrives (or at least is supposed to exhibit some form) of competition between players.<
I would have said that Pantheon was intended to thrive on some form of cooperation between players. I don't interpret "social game" as meaning the core design philosophy is competition.
If I build a mcdonalds in an area where no fast food restaurants are... anyone else who wants to should be able to build a burger king next door.
It's not a perfect analogy, but its along the lines of what were talking about. You want something. I also want something... just because you were there first doesnt mean you should have free reign...
Let's remember that "standing in line at a store or an amusement park" is a huge part of the problem. If people have that mentality it really feels like an empty soulless world. When my character is running around in Terminus, I sure as hell don't want to be comparing in-game geography with grocery story or concession lines. I don't want an NPC I am engaged with to feel like an item in my "shopping cart." When you think like that, this is exactly what leads up to people calling GM's for every other little thing. Suddenly the entire world is filled with concession stands and lines and ticket stampers and marked up prizes that you win when you finally get your ring on the bottle. I understand that an MMO world is ALSO a video game but it should never cease being a world. If I want to go out and explore and hunt something, I want it to feel like a wild adventure ... not a freaking trip to the gas station.
Keldaria said:]There is more to it than simply leaving. Often times exstensive interaction takes place as player talk to each other to figure out the status of each camp, how long have you been there, how long are you planning on staying, if the mob drops X next cycle are you leaving, can you let me know if you leave, do you have spots in your group, has he dropped anything good yet, etc. You seem to be far over simplifying the level of interaction taking place. I could easily do the same with the FFXI model by suggesting that no interaction is actually taking place other than the 2 groups rushing to tag first. casting a single spell to get the tag then watching the other group move on isn't a ton of community interaction IMO, now mind you thats a vast over simplification but I'm just using it as an example to help you understand the broader point I'm speaking to.
This is largely exaggerated from my experience. Unless it was a camp you "absolutely needed"... like an epic piece of the last piece of gear you need. Most people asked in "ooc" for a camp check, and went somewhere else if the one they needed was taken.
The amount of times I was asked when I was leaving was extremely minimal and it only ever happened of I had been at said camp for several hours.
The most common thing was someone sending a basic tell. "Let me know when you leave". Which isnt really "sparking socialization".
Again. This is just how I experienced it.
Porygon said:.... Especially in a game that thrives (or at least is supposed to exhibit some form) of competition between players.
I have had a few times in eq1 where I did compete directly against someone... and if they won I would "grats" them. But that's definitely not the norm..
Very interesting thought.
Seems a Social PVE game should less about competition between the players and more about the players against the environment.
If someone wants to compete against other players, they have PvP server for that.