A basic knowledge of human nature and economics should be a pre-requisite for anyone planning to develop a MMORPG--and anyone planning on giving advice to a team of MMORPG developers.
After spending several days interacting with other posters and reading their thoughts, I’ve come away with the following knowledge:
Some posters seem to think that the sense of accomplishment one feels after performing a difficult task to receive reward X would be the same if the difficulty of the task being performed were reduced while the reward stayed the same.
Some seem to think that the rewards found at a destination would summon in them the same amount of satisfaction regardless of the time they had invested in traveling to that destination to receive its rewards.
Some seem to think that traveling in a MMORPG isn’t gameplay (they say playtime), and so they see traveling as something that cuts into their playtime and thus should be reduced or eliminated.
Some seem to think that players shouldn’t have to fully reap the consequences of their free decisions. Very briefly, this means if a player doesn’t like performing task Y, then the rewards tied to performing task Y should be tied to another task that the player would freely perform. Or at the very least, the rewards of the task that the player would freely perform should be roughly equivalent to the rewards tied to task Y. They call this “balance” or “fairness.” In reality, this trivializes the free decisions of players because whatever the player decides will inevitably lead to basically the same rewards. The result is a bunch of players who have chosen their own adventure, which in itself is good, but who have had their outcomes tweaked so that they’re equal to each other. Shouldn’t the outcomes of players be as diverse and unequal as their free decisions? They should be if the primary goal is to make a realistic and compelling virtual world.
Some seem to think that incentives are a bad thing that should be avoided, when incentives are what makes the world go round. Let’s say there’s a grossly underpopulated zone where most choose not to adventure. What this would lead to is more players adventuring in other zones, possibly overcrowding them, leading to its own problems. Moreover, because there’s effectively one less zone, the virtual world becomes that much smaller and that less diverse, provided the vision of the zone is different from the other parts of the virtual world. So, how could a game designer fix this problem? He would work on providing more incentives for players to adventure in that zone. These incentives would be in the form of more quests, more interesting quests, better artwork, more experience, special drops, etc. Once the proper incentives are in place, more players will freely decide to adventure in the underpopulated zone. The role of incentives is an important one and it applies to almost all aspects of an MMORPG.
With that being said, I think I’ll be taking a break from this forum. Hopefully, after months upon months of bad advice from players, the developers don’t cave and create World of Warcraft 2.0—NOW WITH EVERQUEST ART!®. We’ll see.
I think and hope a lot of this is just misunderstanding of other players viewpoints. Although we do see that “traveling through dangerous zones to get from A to B” is “not gameplay” to some, Which imo is kinda bs the whole game isn’t diablo where there’s combat 24/7.
But I know I’m one of the players that talked about incentive. i actually agree with what you are saying, but do not make an incentive that is better for doing less work. I suppose this can be relative to the person though.
Anyways I hope you don’t stay gone long I love some of the discussion you bring up even if I’m not always in agreement, it really makes me think about what others and myself really want.
@manofyesterday - I think it might behoove you to get away from the mindset that anyone who wants A or B in their game is only interested in X type of game. Going straight to the Warcraft rebuttal here might be a little counterproductive. We all have different ideas of what is considered fun, what's considered tedious, what's considered necessary or excessive, and of what's best for the overall health and longevity of Pantheon.
A little disagreement is what these forums are all about, really. How boring would it be if everyone just sat around, patting each others back and agreeing with everything? While I haven't agreed with every point you've made, I appreciate the fact that you make them.
I don't think you should give up on this community. Take a step back, sure. Take a mental break. But from what I've seen, the vast majority of people here all want the same basic things out of Pantheon. Sure, we all differ on the details of how that should be accomplished. But if you look at what really, actually matters... most of us are saying the same things.
I think it's also important that you realize that people's perceptions are colored by the games they have played in the past - even your own. We remember the parts of those games we thought were fun or interesting. And we remember the parts we didn't enjoy. And most importantly, we remember when those games changed and we enjoyed them less afterwards. But that doesn't mean they were bad ideas, they were just bad for that game at that time. It is the whole that truly matters, not the parts.
None of us should come to these discussions with the idea that our way is the best way. We all have reasons we feel the way we do, and everyone is on an equal footing in that regard.
For what it's worth, I largely agree with many of your views. However, I still have a lot of respect for those that feel differently, and I'm willing to even concede that often, they have really good points.
It's about the right incentives and the right amount of travel. All up to each person's own opinion of course.
This post reads to me as: "People have their own opinions on things and I think a lot of them are wrong. Maybe things will work out but I can't deal with other people having their own ideas." It's a little insulting.
I get where you're coming from and I share some of those fears and frustrations.
I also know that if Pantheon were actually as unforgiving as I'd like it to be, it probably would not do too well as a game. Like many things in life, it's about finding that compromise that is best for the largest number of people, and best for the game.
Arguing with other backers on here is much like arguing with your sibling about what to get for mother's day.
Don't get too bogged down manofyesterday. It's kind of funny really. The Devs have discussed a number of things that directly speak to what some people are critical of. I still don't comprehend this...skepticism...some people have of just not being okay with a different kind of game. The industry is beyond saturated with easy mode, get anywhere now, level to max in hours, etc. etc. that just the mention of one title trying to develop something that hearkens back to a forlorn day is met with fear, loathing, disconent and an unsatiated desire to add all the elements this one title is moving away from. It's, strange. It's clearly an opposing perspective and rarely is it intrigue, or wonder, or curiousity, or even just "I doubt that, but I am so willing to give it a shot to find out and have fun doing it" mentality.
A few moments ago I was pondering all this and started thinking of creating a new online game. I would take all the convienience of current MMO fodder and condense it into a hyper-exaggerated MMORPG. This game would have only one city called The City; there's no travel in this game so only one city is needed. The city is about a 50 ft by 50 ft box where everyone online exists unless they're out dungeon crawling / raiding. It's great cause you're always close to your friends and so close to everyone else that making new friends is a breeze. Anyway, when you want to go playtime, you have to press on these plaques or switches or clickies that line all the walls of the 50 ft by 50 ft box city to quickly travel to your leet gear dungeon a-la-mode (there are hundreds of choices, thousands!); all your besties in tow; right now; not a second wasted. You enter into the Realm of the Most High Beings this time around (since the ultimate Volcano of Mega Doom and Destruction was just cleared moments ago) ready to slay everything and anything to get phat lewtz, go back to The City and show off your stuff. The dungeon called The Realm of the Most High Beings is basically another room of about 50 ft x 50 ft (in fact all the dungeons and raids are 50 ft x 50 ft rooms just like The City!) and the walls are matte-painted to resemble an ethereal stronghold of immense awe and fortune that appears to float amidst clouds and themost goldenest of sun rays. To the player's PoV it appears three dimensional (though it's really a box wink wink). Anyway, one of the group members pushes a button on one of the walls and the raid/dungeon crawl/experience grind/phat lewtz machine begins. All the mobs come into the room (remember, there's really no travel in this game everything comes to you!). And about 30 minutes later the raid is done; 243 trash mobs destroyed, 6 sub-bosses slain, 2 main boss decimated and the bonus super-bonus mojo-boss also dealt with and much gear was had by all. Instantly teleport back to The City to discuss with all your friends. The developers of this game would save so much money because they didn't have to create a world full of quests, storylines, or lore. They weren't required to design mountains, villages, townships, deserted ruins, oceans, forests, paths, mounts, butterflys, archaic runes on doors to crypts, vases, banks, or grass. Just matte drawings easily layered to a forever design measure of 50 ft x 50 ft cube. There would even be player housing; $25 only. Furnishings would cost extra (a trollish ice chest would cost $10, an elvish nightstand $18 b/c it's elvish, etc. etc. etc.). You could even design your own outfits or purchase one of the more that quarter of a million designs to impress the citizenry with. Anything from an astronaught to the latetest cosplay icon to Lady Ga Ga's infamous meat dress could adorn your pixelated avatar (blinkies and speckles and glowy stuff abound). So Cool!
Just try to understand that we really don't know what Pantheon will ultimately deliver until we actually experience it and that is what really matters. Not this ho humming about what I want or what they want or how it should be or how off so-and-so is about this or that. The forum chatter is just chatter and you should'nt let it get to you. Only you know your interest in this game intimately and I'd recommend keeping yourself firmly there until your experience becomes a reality.
When I think someone is wrong I try taking a step back and wonder if I've misread or misunderstood or if it's simply and opinion I don't agree with.
If I still feel the need to comment I try not to be combative, insulting, dismissive or condescending, but it can be hard not to at least be a little passive agressive.
Well, proof is in the pudding. Everquest was very successful, and at the same time very difficult. This means that the devs can make a very difficult game like EQ, and people will still play it.
That being said I hope they don't take the route of least difficulty, but so far, I've really enjoyed what they have streamed, and see that content is not going to be easy. It doesn't sound like they are going to be giving away anything. And I hope it remains that way all the way to the end.
For the most part, a lot of arguments i see on these forums are more self centered than they are community centered. They think about what's best for themselves instead of whats best for this community as a whole pretty much. That being said, I do understand that sometimes even myself can see some of my posts seeming as passive aggresive, even tho that is not my intention, but I want people to stop looking at themselves. This is not going to be a solo game, it is going to be a group game, therefore, yourself does not matter. What should matter in every MMO is the community at large, how something would benefit them or not benefit them, and cut out the self centered arguments all together. Otherwise, whats the point in making it a MMO? I don't play these games for soloability, I play them fro group and raid content. Because if I wanted a solo game I'd just download steam and drop a bunch of money on there, or buy a console, those things are made for single players, MMO's should be made for the players that don't want to solo.
Now, traveling, is what I miss. EQ nailed it in the beginning, you had to be sure this is where you wanted to go, otherwise you were traveling for hours for nothing. It made you think, and plan, and all that kind of stuff. Not only that but if you needed a port, you had to communicate and hoped you could find one. Which most times you could but also had to travel somewhere to meet them too. I hate all this self sufficient fast travel garbage that has been brought about all these MMO's. It's pointless and nothing magical about it.
I will say, when EQ first launched it was probably the most immersive game ever. I could spend hours on it and not even realize i spent hours on it. I want this game with the challenge and everything EQ brought to the table, but with new stuff, if that makes sense lol. Don't get me wrong, I'm not looking for an EQ clone, i just want what EQ brought to the table in tersm of... well... everything. I miss old days where you actually had to sit and wait for the boat, even that was immersive.
I hope you can find your way back again soon mate. Sometimes we (all backers on this forum) have a tendancy to hear of a mechanic or a counter argument for a mechanic that someone puts forward and jump immediately to argue that it is going to destroy the game instead of reading further into it and realising that with correct implementation it wont ruin the game, but may alleviate an issue that a particular type of player experiences. In most cases on this forum because we are all here backing the game for more or less the same reason, the discussion on that mechanic will continue to evolve to ensure if implemented it doesnt effect the primary tenets / aim of the game, and thats a good quality discussion.
Back in the day on the forum there was a lot more decisive replies from Devs as well that often set threads straight when mechanics being discussed were clearly against the games direction, these days the Devs are a bit quieter because they are probably 100000 x busier. Because of this some of the old hats around here have seen these replies back in the day and know that VR isnt going to just let some easy play mechanic invade their game, no matter how loud somone is shouting for it , so we might be more confident than someone who is a bit newer to the forum that their aim is true and the wind is behind their sails and we are heading in the right direction!
I hope you keep engaging with us, its nice to have fresh conversations about new and old topics rehashed, sorry if i have caused you grief personally, we all are passionate.
If you play the game for yourself. It shouldn't matter what other people want or think. Honestly though. I had to take a break from the forums a few months ago too because so many people are headstrong in their own views and un willing to budge at all. It's like having a conversation about gun control.
It has happened repeatedly here on these forums that people can't see the "big picture". They only see...or care...about how an in game system will effect them personally.
I have often tried, and usually failed, to get people to try to understand why a specific concept is good for the game as a whole. It simply doesn't matter to some. It's all about whether they personally would be ok with the penalty involved with earning the reward benefit. Even if there are many benefits to the playerbase as a whole.
Even if it is optional and they wouldn't have to participate. People don't want others to get a reward that they are not willing to make the sacrifice to achieve themselves. It is purely selfishness.
I hope, in the the back of my mind, that VR is aware of this and the responses we receive that "smooth things over" are just that. Telling the customer what they want to hear because the customer doesn't actually know what is best no matter how much they think they do. VR really needs to stick to their guns and err on the harsh side of all penalties in the game. We all know it is easier to tune things down than make penalties more harsh later on. Challenge and harsh penalties is the premise that brought many of us here originally. Don't half-ass the penalties required to earn benefits.
Personally, I think VR and brad in particular had a very strong idea of what this game would be from day one. thus, i think the comments here (in the forum) will have little effect on the things discussed in this post.
that said, of course the posts are about what individuals think is best for themselves. whether they fear tediousness or oversimplicity, they are saying what they want. those who say it is what the community wants are simply extrapolating that the community must want what they do. certainly the, 'i hate this feature, but the game needs it' posts have eluded me, anyway.
alephen said:Personally, I think VR and brad in particular had a very strong idea of what this game would be from day one. thus, i think the comments here (in the forum) will have little effect on the things discussed in this post.
that said, of course the posts are about what individuals think is best for themselves. whether they fear tediousness or oversimplicity, they are saying what they want. those who say it is what the community wants are simply extrapolating that the community must want what they do. certainly the, 'i hate this feature, but the game needs it' posts have eluded me, anyway.
This is beyond untrue. The people who want what's best for the community general know a lot of people. My EQ friends list was massive, i think in the beginning they had a limit of like 100 people or something like that, and i had to write a bunch of names down. Anyways, not basing my point off that, but the fact that I have spent time with more than just a small group of people, if you were in my guild you weren't on my friends list because i already had that list, why make it twice. Anyways, I've made friends with thousands of people, and there are tons of people that never did make it to the friends list that should have. But going off my interactions with thousands of people as well as taking the time to read other forums and get other ideas I understand not what the community wants per se, but what is best served in the community. Let's face it, no one is going to get exactly what they want, I know I won't at least. I have my ideas but if i implemented them no one but me and maybe a handful would play that game. That being said, i understand the benefit of meeting people in the middle, usually brings 2 sides together and allows them to stay together.
So when i do say something for the community, usually i mean it. Like I could see how this could benefit the community, and not just one person, or even myself. I wish the community wanted what i do, but it doesn't work like that. We all gotta meet in the middle. Otherwise we get a one sided game where half the people targeted will play. Just wanted to say that. I don't pretend to know the community here at all, but i know what would work and what wouldn't, as a community, and only because i've seen other things fail horribly.
Keep in mind the forum posters are a minority as well, as in every game. There are 1000+ presentation of backers on the related forum, which is probably even lower than the real backers number, most of them only have 2 to 10 posts, and what you're seeing here is only the voice of at most, a hundred of people.
Whoever we are, and how clever we think we are, we are just a minority with a big voice that should mean nothing in the game's future. And if VR devs are as smart as I do think they are, they will simply NOT listen to us whatever we ask, argue, or counter argue.
As players, we want to play, but we are really bad in knowing what is good for the game because we want shortcuts and convenience, which are great in destroying the game's interest and long term viability.
MauvaisOeil said:Keep in mind the forum posters are a minority as well, as in every game. There are 1000+ presentation of backers on the related forum, which is probably even lower than the real backers number, most of them only have 2 to 10 posts, and what you're seeing here is only the voice of at most, a hundred of people.
Whoever we are, and how clever we think we are, we are just a minority with a big voice that should mean nothing in the game's future. And if VR devs are as smart as I do think they are, they will simply NOT listen to us whatever we ask, argue, or counter argue.
As players, we want to play, but we are really bad in knowing what is good for the game because we want shortcuts and convenience, which are great in destroying the game's interest and long term viability.
Well, let's apply this same logic to real life then. In presidential elections of 2016, total ballots counted were a little over 57.6 million people, and about 28.5% of the US Registered voter population, AKA, the minority of people spoke for what president they wanted.
Do you think they should have filled in that other 71.5% of votes with what they felt like the rest wanted? No, if you want something, you speak up, sure we are the minority, but we are what can be refered to as the passionate minority, the ones that care will speak, the ones that don't care will brush it off. How many times have you seen the silent ones get what they wanted? If they don't voice their opinions, they can't influence change, if you don't influence change, then you have no right to complain about change either.
We may be the minority, but we are the speaking minority, the passionate minority that actually wants to influence change. I'm not saying follow every idea that we throw at VR, that would not work, but when I say I can speak for the community, it's because i have inquired, i have gathered data, I know what the ones that speak like, and the ones that don't speak just don't care.
Dubah said:MauvaisOeil said:Keep in mind the forum posters are a minority as well, as in every game. There are 1000+ presentation of backers on the related forum, which is probably even lower than the real backers number, most of them only have 2 to 10 posts, and what you're seeing here is only the voice of at most, a hundred of people.
Whoever we are, and how clever we think we are, we are just a minority with a big voice that should mean nothing in the game's future. And if VR devs are as smart as I do think they are, they will simply NOT listen to us whatever we ask, argue, or counter argue.
As players, we want to play, but we are really bad in knowing what is good for the game because we want shortcuts and convenience, which are great in destroying the game's interest and long term viability.
Well, let's apply this same logic to real life then. In presidential elections of 2016, total ballots counted were a little over 57.6 million people, and about 28.5% of the US Registered voter population, AKA, the minority of people spoke for what president they wanted.
Do you think they should have filled in that other 71.5% of votes with what they felt like the rest wanted? No, if you want something, you speak up, sure we are the minority, but we are what can be refered to as the passionate minority, the ones that care will speak, the ones that don't care will brush it off. How many times have you seen the silent ones get what they wanted? If they don't voice their opinions, they can't influence change, if you don't influence change, then you have no right to complain about change either.
We may be the minority, but we are the speaking minority, the passionate minority that actually wants to influence change. I'm not saying follow every idea that we throw at VR, that would not work, but when I say I can speak for the community, it's because i have inquired, i have gathered data, I know what the ones that speak like, and the ones that don't speak just don't care.
I wish you understood this is a game development and not a democracy. Here, nothing forces no one to listen to the loudest. I feel you thought your example was clever, but it relates to a situation where to vox populli is required to make decisions while here it's not.
MauvaisOeil said:Dubah said:MauvaisOeil said:Keep in mind the forum posters are a minority as well, as in every game. There are 1000+ presentation of backers on the related forum, which is probably even lower than the real backers number, most of them only have 2 to 10 posts, and what you're seeing here is only the voice of at most, a hundred of people.
Whoever we are, and how clever we think we are, we are just a minority with a big voice that should mean nothing in the game's future. And if VR devs are as smart as I do think they are, they will simply NOT listen to us whatever we ask, argue, or counter argue.
As players, we want to play, but we are really bad in knowing what is good for the game because we want shortcuts and convenience, which are great in destroying the game's interest and long term viability.
Well, let's apply this same logic to real life then. In presidential elections of 2016, total ballots counted were a little over 57.6 million people, and about 28.5% of the US Registered voter population, AKA, the minority of people spoke for what president they wanted.
Do you think they should have filled in that other 71.5% of votes with what they felt like the rest wanted? No, if you want something, you speak up, sure we are the minority, but we are what can be refered to as the passionate minority, the ones that care will speak, the ones that don't care will brush it off. How many times have you seen the silent ones get what they wanted? If they don't voice their opinions, they can't influence change, if you don't influence change, then you have no right to complain about change either.
We may be the minority, but we are the speaking minority, the passionate minority that actually wants to influence change. I'm not saying follow every idea that we throw at VR, that would not work, but when I say I can speak for the community, it's because i have inquired, i have gathered data, I know what the ones that speak like, and the ones that don't speak just don't care.
I wish you understood this is a game development and not a democracy. Here, nothing forces no one to listen to the loudest. I feel you thought your example was clever, but it relates to a situation where to vox populli is required to make decisions while here it's not.
What is vox pupuli? Can we stop using these big words that the general population doesn't understand? Is this a video game forum or a rocket science forum?
Anyways, what's the difference? In both scenario's the minority that speaks is paving the way for the content in the future. It's the same thing here, VR can only listen to those that speak up, the others that stay silent they can't hear, it's pretty simple honestly. Game developers listening to their consumers, and governemnt listening to their population, same exact thing, different levels. Obviously government is more serious than a gaming forum, but the same rules apply.
Sorry if the expression made you feel that way, Vox populi is the latin for "Voice of the people", and despite beeing on a gaming board it's sometimes used as a reference for puns in videogames (example : http://heroesofthestorm.wikia.com/wiki/Pox_Populi ), I simply thought it was a way to add some diversity into the conversation.
What is the difference you ask me ? With election, the government is asking you to choose a representative. This forum, except for the topics where question are asked by kilsin, is mostly about "Talk together if you want to.", but nothing make us directing or aiming the game towards what we would want. The game itself is already designed on most aspects, and while some ideas could sprout out of our discussions, there is no hope (hopefully at last) that a few big voices claiming for something to be removed/changed would have any results.
As said, we are backers of a project that has been presented and is beeing developped, and our power to make it change to our will is limited if not non-existent, as this is not democracy. This is a private company forum on which we have a granted acces, and a premium sight on novelties and changes, but that's all. The developers are VR's team, and we're not in.
Dubah said:MauvaisOeil said:Dubah said:MauvaisOeil said:Keep in mind the forum posters are a minority as well, as in every game. There are 1000+ presentation of backers on the related forum, which is probably even lower than the real backers number, most of them only have 2 to 10 posts, and what you're seeing here is only the voice of at most, a hundred of people.
Whoever we are, and how clever we think we are, we are just a minority with a big voice that should mean nothing in the game's future. And if VR devs are as smart as I do think they are, they will simply NOT listen to us whatever we ask, argue, or counter argue.
As players, we want to play, but we are really bad in knowing what is good for the game because we want shortcuts and convenience, which are great in destroying the game's interest and long term viability.
Well, let's apply this same logic to real life then. In presidential elections of 2016, total ballots counted were a little over 57.6 million people, and about 28.5% of the US Registered voter population, AKA, the minority of people spoke for what president they wanted.
Do you think they should have filled in that other 71.5% of votes with what they felt like the rest wanted? No, if you want something, you speak up, sure we are the minority, but we are what can be refered to as the passionate minority, the ones that care will speak, the ones that don't care will brush it off. How many times have you seen the silent ones get what they wanted? If they don't voice their opinions, they can't influence change, if you don't influence change, then you have no right to complain about change either.
We may be the minority, but we are the speaking minority, the passionate minority that actually wants to influence change. I'm not saying follow every idea that we throw at VR, that would not work, but when I say I can speak for the community, it's because i have inquired, i have gathered data, I know what the ones that speak like, and the ones that don't speak just don't care.
I wish you understood this is a game development and not a democracy. Here, nothing forces no one to listen to the loudest. I feel you thought your example was clever, but it relates to a situation where to vox populli is required to make decisions while here it's not.
What is vox pupuli? Can we stop using these big words that the general population doesn't understand? Is this a video game forum or a rocket science forum?
Anyways, what's the difference? In both scenario's the minority that speaks is paving the way for the content in the future. It's the same thing here, VR can only listen to those that speak up, the others that stay silent they can't hear, it's pretty simple honestly. Game developers listening to their consumers, and governemnt listening to their population, same exact thing, different levels. Obviously government is more serious than a gaming forum, but the same rules apply.
Yeah I just don't think you can try to make an analogy between elections for the US presidency and a video game's features...
The only way that analogy works is if they would have given us 3-4 candidates for CEO of VR, each with their own ideals on the game and own tenets...and have us vote for which one we wanted.
There is no voice of the minority. It's like Mauvais Oeil said...you already made a conscious choice regardless of anybody else's input - you backed the game, and you get to discuss and speculate on the game like everybody else here. We are not here to pick features or alter the direction of the game, except maybe through Kilsin's posts that asks for specific elements.
I'm pretty sure this thread started out as a general rant about what jerks many of us forum members supposedly are for voicing our opinions, and has since evolved into a debate about how much of an effect those opinions have on the game's development.
I don't have an opinion on the topic. Just thought I'd acknowledge that in case anyone else found it amusing. :)
Alright I'm back. Two days is basically several months. :)
To clarify, I'm a free speech advocate and I enjoy interacting with other people's ideas. I also don't think the people here are jerks.
I made this thread to sum up the red flags that I saw from other posters. I believe people are free to give their opinions and I'm free to tell them how wrong they are.