Enitzu just to be clear, on the matron kill using the charmed pet, this was way after our first kill (ww7) and having it on farm status for several months. And to be fair, we did report the issue afterwards. They let us keep the rewards because we were honest and did not try to use the charmed pet on future attempts.
It also got us beta access for the entire guild for future expansions. We demonstrated that we were capable of finding bugs that basically broke the hardest encounter in the game. It was a big deal and the deva actually appreciated how we went about things
We also used corpse flames as a charmed pet on mutagenic outkast. They did pretty good damage but not want game breaking. It was the one fight where I remember enchanter actually doing a little more damage than conjures or necros.
Mod Edit: Consolidated multiple double posts as it is against forum guidelines.
oneADseven said: Enitzu just to be clear, on the matron kill using the charmed pet, this was way after our first kill (ww7) and having it on farm status for several months. And to be fair, we did report the issue afterwards. They let us keep the rewards because we were honest and did not try to use the charmed pet on future attempts.
Fair enough then. So long as it wasn't a first kill I can see it. We've found bugs like that many times but we always opted to do things the right way and reported the bugs. Hell we actually had a boss bug out and stop doing anything at 10%. It was a kill either way but since it bugged we purposely wiped it and started over.
Ainadak said:I would like to clarify the intention of the thread. I wasn't trying to start a discussion on what defines emergent gameplay, but to initiate a discussion on what the developers can do, if anything, to affect emergent gameplay. Can they make a game that enables the creation of positive emergent gameplay mechanics? Can they trick us all into doing what they intend without us knowing like puppet masters hiding behind veil of denial/omission?
@Shucklighter and Maximis
I find it funny that you both bring that up, because I also played on Veeshan. I never knew about the EC tunnel until well after I stopped playing EQ, but figured it was used in the majority of servers.
@Bazgrim
If the developers anticipate the behavior, but nobody knows, then isn't the developer the only one that knows it's not emergent? What is the practical implication to the developers anticipating a style of gameplay?
I'd hazard to say that, due to the very definition of emergent gameplay, the absolute best and only thing the developers can actually do is create a game that allows the most freedom. The least arbitrary restrictions you have, the better the success rate of emergent gameplay.
Leashing mobs is something I would consider arbitrary restrictions, or arbitrary "laws". Another would be having falling not take damage as an example of an arbitrary "law". Social aggro, I believe, is another example. Restrictions and physical limitations or made-up physics simply for the sake of expediency or convenience or ease. Those are the things that get in the way of emergent gameplay.
The EC tunnel just made sense, really. Freeport was surrounded by starting area in such a way that Qeynos, for example, was not. In Povar, the trading was done in Gfay, another area that you could argue was a crossing point for a large number of different races. These aren't things that were created or put in such a way as to force trading to happen in those area - this was just a world that the devs were passionate about, that conformed to the lore, and we the players made what we made out of it.
If you want emergent gameplay, the best thing to do is to let go of the reigns. Create the world, make it as realistic and as FREE as possible. That will allow us, the players, to create the game.
Tralyan said:
I'd hazard to say that, due to the very definition of emergent gameplay, the absolute best and only thing the developers can actually do is create a game that allows the most freedom. The least arbitrary restrictions you have, the better the success rate of emergent gameplay.
Leashing mobs is something I would consider arbitrary restrictions, or arbitrary "laws". Another would be having falling not take damage as an example of an arbitrary "law". Social aggro, I believe, is another example. Restrictions and physical limitations or made-up physics simply for the sake of expediency or convenience or ease. Those are the things that get in the way of emergent gameplay.
The EC tunnel just made sense, really. Freeport was surrounded by starting area in such a way that Qeynos, for example, was not. In Povar, the trading was done in Gfay, another area that you could argue was a crossing point for a large number of different races. These aren't things that were created or put in such a way as to force trading to happen in those area - this was just a world that the devs were passionate about, that conformed to the lore, and we the players made what we made out of it.
If you want emergent gameplay, the best thing to do is to let go of the reigns. Create the world, make it as realistic and as FREE as possible. That will allow us, the players, to create the game.
I couldn't couldn't have said this any better! I really hope the devs hear this one.