Rominian said:I don't recall whether they have confirmed that there will be holiday gear at all, but yeah, it seems if there is that it would fit under cosmetic and having adventure gear toggled on would solve that issue :)
edit: I went and searched and there was a thread on Holidays in game, the majority of people seem to be against RL Holidays being in game, and would rather see events/holidays based on lore etc. I would think that you won't be seeing me running around in a Valentine's day speedo anytime soon in Pantheon. And that's a good thing.:)
Yeah, i mean game related holidays too, dont care for it.
Daloskar said: Please let this relate only to gear obtained via in game methods....no cash shop, even just for cosmetic gear. I hope there's not a need/greed auto system...I will not be super excited if I lose a gear upgrade to someone that "needs" on it for appearance gear. From what I've seen on the streams it's a manual loot system, hopefully it will staythatway :-)
They have stated no cash shop, so I wouldn't worry about that one. As for loot, they don't seem to want any auto systems instead leaving it up to the players. So instead of losing the upgrade to someone needing a piece of gear for appearance you will lose to someone needing for selling...or both actually.
Gnog said: I guess I'm in the minority here. This decision concerns me. One of the principles we've heard from VR is that gear will be distinctive. The example given, I believe, was that a full set of Mithril armor should look unmistakably like a full set of Mithril armor and stand on its own as evidence of the wearer's accomplishments. Creating two alternate realities undermines this principle. It also seems unavoidable that having resources devoted to "cosmetic" artwork will detract from the artwork of ordinary equipment (in "adventure" mode). "Cosmetic" items are also a very common item for sale in in-game cash shops. This raises a red flag for me. Sorry to bring a negative view to this. This decision just feels too much like compromising to interests that have nothing to do with the core game tenets that earned my support for the game. Only love still VR.
Hate to say it but if you think cosmetic gear wouldn't exist in a modern day MMO I'd say you're sorely mistaken. Even if they didn't add it as a "transmog" type thing people would still do it.
Them allowing a toggle means that you never have to see the appearance gear. That makes it so you will only see the distinctive gear if you so choose. Others, will prefer the cosmetic gear.
As for the "red flag", if a cash shop is going to exist, I much prefer it to be cosmetic over p2w. Cosmetic stuff makes the game money without hurting a thing. People really need to stop blowing a fuse when cash shop is mentioned. They can be a good thing so long as the company running it knows what they are doing.
They haven't released any details about the cosmetic system yet. I sorta assumed that people would be restricted to the gear models from the equipment they had already earned. If that's the case, there is no break with the game's tenets and there's no extra labor as far as design goes, because the models would need to be in game anyways.
Gnog said: Enitzu, Your posts are usually thoughtful. This one really disappointed. You didn't give any reason to support this decision, and just say that it's foolish to think a modern MmO wouldn't have a cosmetic option. Doesn't really do anything for me.
Gnog, I think the route the looking to go with allowing you as a player to choose how you see the world and its characters is the best. As for maybe not seeing some cool epic items... who says you have to have any cosmetic gear assigned? Why can't your normal gear show to others as your Cosmetic gear as well?
Gnog said: I guess I'm in the minority here. This decision concerns me. One of the principles we've heard from VR is that gear will be distinctive. The example given, I believe, was that a full set of Mithril armor should look unmistakably like a full set of Mithril armor and stand on its own as evidence of the wearer's accomplishments. Creating two alternate realities undermines this principle. It also seems unavoidable that having resources devoted to "cosmetic" artwork will detract from the artwork of ordinary equipment (in "adventure" mode). "Cosmetic" items are also a very common item for sale in in-game cash shops. This raises a red flag for me. Sorry to bring a negative view to this. This decision just feels too much like compromising to interests that have nothing to do with the core game tenets that earned my support for the game. Only love still VR.
While you should never have to apologize from bringing a negative perspective, I think there's some minor flaws in your logic:
-there's nothing forcing people to wear cosmetic armor. If they want to show off their accomplishments, they can do so by simply not putting on any cosmetic gear. If someone doesn't really care about showing off their accomplishments and would rather look cool, but another player still wishes to see where they've been in be inspired by their gear, they can view them in Adventure mode. Literally everyone wins.
-it's actually completely possible to separate the resources of cosmetic and adventure artwork. They could be totally different teams. It's not going to make it so that the release date of the game is delayed. The details of how they operate is not really any of our business. As long as no one is embezzling money, I'm not gonna tell them how to do their job. It's worth noting that they're not really the bare-bones team that they once were.
-just because cosmetic items in cash shops are popular in other games, does not mean that will be the case here. They've made it abundantly clear there won't be a cash shop. There's nothing stopping them from making it so that cosmetic gear just drops in-game. Or perhaps a system like EQ2 where you have separate slots that you can put regular "adventure" gear in, but it only applies the appearance, not the stats. In fact, this would be yet ANOTHER way that cosmetics don't necessarily detract from designing adventure gear. You kill two birds with one stone, so to speak. If you want to look like you're wearing full Mithril because it looks cool, but that stats aren't good enoug for you anymore, you can have the best of both worlds. You have a different inventory for gear that you actually want the stats from. But of course someone else viewing you can switch between which one they see. Assuming this is a sign of cash shops to come is really jumping to conclusions.
Cosmetic: How you'd like other players to see you.
Adventure: How you actually look.
Toggle Cosmetic on: "I want to see everybody at their coolest / most interesting!"
Toggle Adventure on: "I want to know more about the player's strength / role."
Neither of these affect game balance as it's your choice which to view the world in.
As for cash shops, any additional income VR can muster from a willing customer base is fine by me, as long as it's not a shop for game advantages, except MAYBE minimal type things like exp potions after each server has been out for long enough for most main characters to already have hit level caps without them. But cosmetic stuff / cosmetic mounts / flare / titles / etc. that doesn't affect game balance & power is fine. We WANT VR to be successful, do well, and have resources for continuing development, keeping staff, and keeping the game the one we all choose to play for years to come. Why begrudge them of opportunities for growth? If you don't like it, don't use it and keep adventure mode on, and you will suffer little.
Eh, my issue with cosmetic cash shop items in games like these is that those resources should go toward just making that item a REAL in-game item with stats etc instead of some cool looking armor/weapon/etc that is just for artificially looking cool.
In fact I think cosmetic items themselves should be limited to maybe town wear and "regular" clothing, everything else should just be gear you've found that your class can otherwise equip.
Gnog said: I appreciate the responses, and I can see how people might support this decision. But the argument that I can just "turn off" the cosmetic artwork, or that the cosmetic artwork doesn't affect me, is not very compelling to me. The same kind of argument is made for instanced content and other quality-of-life improvements (fast travel or dungeon queues for instance) that ruined modern MMOs and made me support PRF in the first place. Fast travel doesn't affect you if you don't use it. The dungeon queue doesn't affect you if you don't use it. Instances don't affect you because everyone can just have their own instance, so who are you to demand that people compete for content in the open world. This decision about cosmetics just makes me scratch my head. To whom is this alternate cosmetic reality catering? Which game tenet does this further? None that I can find in any Pantheon materials before this FAQ. And I don't think you've really addressed my point about VR's statements about Mithril Armor. If we can use cosmetics to drape ourselves in the best looking gear, without having to accomplish anything in game to get there, the significance of appearing to be dressed in full Mithril is diminished. Anyway, I'm just being honest, as a backer of this game. This decision does not cohere with my expectations for the game, which I have based on the game tenets and other prior statements by VR. /shrug
Cosmetic option isn't the same as altering the fundamentals of the game mechanics like instancing or easy travel/porting. Those other things listed are things that would otherwise put you at a disadvantage if you chose to not use them whereas choosing to view cosmetics or adventure gear does not.
The alternate cosmetic reality is for those who have a character in their head and want a specific look, or more particularly: roleplayers.
I imagine you can't just choose to be in full mithril without having obtained it and being able to equip it in the first place, so you would HAVE to have accomplished getting it.
Gnog said: As for the revenue argument (cosmetics generate revenue), now you're on a very slippery slope. The company devotes resources ($) to a peripheral aspect of the game, which detracts from the focus on core mechanics and functionality. It seems incredible to believe that the artwork for the cosmetics would be created by a totally different team than the artwork for normal items. At some level, there will be decisions made about what cosmetic appearances to make available in the game as compared to normal appearances. If the cosmetic appearances are not generating any additional revenue (through a cash shop) then they're detracting resources from the normal artwork. If the cosmetic appearances are generating additional revenue, then the institutional pressures will lead to the best artwork being diverted to cosmetics. I look at this decision and I say, hmmm, what values are reflected in this decision. And I am concerned. And this is the first time I've had this thought since I've been following Pantheon (and promoting it whenever I can).
I mean, this is still in their FAQ after update so I imagine they are sticking to their guns here...
We are considering either using the traditional subscription based model or a model where the player buys the game and then has the option of purchasing mini-expansions or ‘modules’ after launch. Either way, the game’s world will continue to expand, more content will be added, as well as new features and mechanics. Visionary Realms strongly believes that the revenue model of an MMO needs to match the game’s target audience. Because of this, Pantheon will not be ‘freemium’ or have ‘cash shops’ -- building your character and advancing in-game will be based on time invested and tactics used, not on how much money the player has in real life.
Gnog said: But the argument that I can just "turn off" the cosmetic artwork, or that the cosmetic artwork doesn't affect me, is not very compelling to me. The same kind of argument is made for instanced content and other quality-of-life improvements (fast travel or dungeon queues for instance) that ruined modern MMOs and made me support PRF in the first place. Fast travel doesn't affect you if you don't use it. The dungeon queue doesn't affect you if you don't use it. Instances don't affect you because everyone can just have their own instance, so who are you to demand that people compete for content in the open world.
I have to be honest with you... you lost me... How did you go from allowing another character to view pretty colors if people have pretty colors to show to major game mechanics and functionality? Do you think that me choosing to see Kilsin in a pink mini skirt vs his raw hide leggings is going to change the game for you? The way the intend to have it is so that you can choose if you want to see his mini skirt or leggings as well. And if you want your leggings to show in both views them you can just not have any cosmetic items so you show the same way in both views.
Again completely lost me, and I'm not saying you can't voice your concerns, but you really can't compare major game functionality and mechanics to seeing Kilsin in a pink mini skirt or raw hide leggings. Thats like saying if an item in the game has pink in it then the whole game is ruined if anyone wears it...
I think the value that is reflected is in the compromise reached through the Devs reaching out to the community. While its not a tenet or feature, I do think it was a good compromise. Everyone has their own opinion about things, including what is old school and what is not. I dont see this as being specifically old school or not. It seems like it would actually be very valuable to the crafting and the RP community, which are important to VR.
@Gnog
Those examples you gave dont really fit to me. Because those actually can effect on the game due to actual gameplay mechanics. An appearance tab would be purely cosmetic. So its not really even in the same time zone let alone same ball park to me. The only thing it might not help is immersion. And that is very subjective. Some people will claim to different realities are too immersion breaking. However some would say they cant get immersed into their character without being able to control their characters looks. Paricularly if they are RPers.
I personally will never use it but I think what VR is doing will be good in the long run. The thing is they need to pick and chose their battles, and yet they are still a business. Some times you have to stand your ground on an important concept or feature, and other times its not worth it and possibly too damaging to the game. Brad himself has said that while they want to create a game that pulls from the oldschool games of the past, they still want to use new tech and newer features if it makes sense to do so. And there are some standard things in modern MMOs that it would be foolish to ignore without good reason.
If you havent read this, Id suggest it. Its a good read and might help:
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/blogs/151/176/pantheon-new-features-and-new-players
I'm actually pretty satisfied with this decision. It's a compromise, and by definition, that means that neither side of the equation is getting exactly what they want, but each side is giving up some small part so that both sides can be decently happy. Good move. :)
My only concern with this is how exactly the cosmetic gear works. My assumption (and some dev input would be fabulous) is that you can "glamour" the look of one item onto the stats of another item, so that you get the best of both worlds. I'm just hoping that there are rules to prevent people from "glamouring" cloth appearances over heavy armor, or vice versa.
Furthermore, I hope that there is a distinction between "clothing" and "cloth armor" to prevent cloth armor wearers from running around in a bikini in combat.
Gnog said: Let me fill in the gap for you. If a character's appearance is itself an accomplishment, then a system to circumvent what I reasonably expected to be the method for achieving said accomplishment (acquiring actual, non-cosmetic items in game) detracts from an aspect of the game I view as important. Implicit in the distinction you're making between cosmetics and "mechanics" is a value judgment that killing stuff and character progression are more important than putting together a pleasing appearance using normal items in the game. This option of cosmetics changes the basic elements of the "fashion-quest" dimension to an MMO, the same way instances change the basic elements of the gear-progression dimension to an MMO. I of course acknowledge that a cosmetic option has far less impact on the content progression and competition dimensions of the game.
But you can choose what gear you want to show and what gear you want to see! By you selecting you want to see Adverture Gear ONLY you will never see anything different... Again you can not say that core game mechanics and whether you want to see Kilsins Mini skirt or not are the same lol... I don't get it, are we speaking different languages cause you act as though you will ever even know people have Cosmetic gear... Truthfully you will select Adverture Gear only, and NEVER See a difference therefore it has zero impact at all..
Sorry just frustrated as I and what appears to be many others don't understand the reasoning behind your thought process. I'm not trying to be a Dk, but man it doesn't make sense. VR is giving us the best of both worlds, and yet you have found a way to be unhappy about it. Then again why am I typing this out? Why even bother lol. Let's try this. I see the route for cosmetics as a plus in that is allows everyone to choose how they see the game, and even allows everyone to choose how they are seen in both views. It has been stated many times. This game isn't for everyone, so maybe its just a lost cause to discuss any further. I love the route the are taking and believe they have found the best way possible to give everyone the best of both worlds. Go VR! Well done! Sorry if you disagree, and hopefully those pink mini skirts you will never see don't impact your game play too much.