Nephele said:I think that the Perception system needs to have some social value - some way that someone being a Keeper can provide a tangible benefit to other players that they interact with.
I also understand the decision not to gate content or have item rewards associated with Perception - because if you do that, players will see it as a requirement, and engage with it for the wrong reasons.
IMO the most fundamental purpose of Perception is to deepen the fun and immersion of each player as they travel through the areas and levels of Terminus. Assuming you choose to be a Keeper, than you will obviously gain the benefits of it directly. But if you choose not to participate in it, then I must ask why you would need or expect to benefit from other players' participation in it when you chose not to?
For example, there's no reason I should have to benefit other players if I choose to be a Crafter. I may choose to sell items on the market, but I may choose to just craft gear for my own characters. It's my choice.
My biggest concern about wanting to define "tangible benefits" that a Keeper can provide to non-Keepers is the same concern you acknowledged in the 2nd line of your quote. Namely, that it moves Perception towards being required - at least for some characters - and approaches the result of players 'grinding' out Perception pings and quests "for the wrong reasons".
Practically speaking, I expect any Keeper in my group who knows more than me about the Lore, and how the various species and individuals in Terminus behave, to be a benefit to me at least occasionally. But I'm strongly against Perception becoming any kind of 'income producing' activity.
While they might not be able to tie rewards directly into the perception system, I don't think that there is anything stopping the dev team from tieing in rewards on a faction quartermaster then locking that quartermaster behind a perception arch (sort of like a rep grind). Sure some players will be able to access this vendor earlier than others, but as long as all roads can eventually lead to Rome nobody would lose out on anything substantial in the long run. Then to further this they could also tie in a reputation grind that is completed by repeatable turn in quest, mob grinds, or both. You can start to see how a dynamic relationship could be built between the perception system and NPC factions.
Jothany said:Nephele said:I think that the Perception system needs to have some social value - some way that someone being a Keeper can provide a tangible benefit to other players that they interact with.
I also understand the decision not to gate content or have item rewards associated with Perception - because if you do that, players will see it as a requirement, and engage with it for the wrong reasons.
IMO the most fundamental purpose of Perception is to deepen the fun and immersion of each player as they travel through the areas and levels of Terminus. Assuming you choose to be a Keeper, than you will obviously gain the benefits of it directly. But if you choose not to participate in it, then I must ask why you would need or expect to benefit from other players' participation in it when you chose not to?...
My biggest concern about wanting to define "tangible benefits" that a Keeper can provide to non-Keepers is the same concern you acknowledged in the 2nd line of your quote. Namely, that it moves Perception towards being required - at least for some characters - and approaches the result of players 'grinding' out Perception pings and quests "for the wrong reasons"....
You're making a valid point there. If perception has a social value. This value should not have direct influence in the outcome of encounters or the presentation of encounters. If that would be the case, you're making becoming a Keeper or having one (or multiple ones) in group with X amount of Perception a requirement. To my understanding, that's not what it's designed for. Also, it might start to lean towards; becoming a personal requirement and thereby moving away from your added social value to begin with.
Perception can pull the player into the world. But so far, it's not a requirement to be succesful in this game. It seems a lot of people are hung up on that idea. Why is it not a requirement? Because, otherwise you'll indeed create the idea or playstyle of following strict lines, going back and trying to start over 'in case you missed something'. And you'll end up with a game that is very similar and linear to what current games offer. In Terminus however, it's not with a ? or ! that you follow but with a purple bar above your head. Didn't catch the fifth purple bar? Run back and look for another. To me, VR is trying to stear away from such a obvious, clear questpath where the focus is on maxing out your updates and leading you by hand along the questlines. And more towards an organic experience of adventure progression.
Thorndeep said:For me, having the opportunity to open up perception paths is not so much about correcting a "faulty" decision but more about having a little flexibility in case things happen that are outside of your control or you happen to be off you game one day....To get locked out of some lore because you were with a group that didn't care feels a little harsh. Or maybe one day I'm tired and miss some vine I was supposed to click so now I'm forever punished? ... It would be like saying once a group fails to defeat a boss they don't get to try again. ...
I'm not sure how that adds to the social value topic. But I couldn't resist to not reply. The link to the OP here would be; It's ok to join groups that are not perception minded. The game should allow you to pick up later where you were before joining that group. At least if you didn't make any storyline decisions along the way.
What I'm making out of the design is that there is no faulty decision when it comes to following perception pings. It's part of your personal story. In yet another stream, a very early one (showing off the monk running in open ground and passing a campfire by the lakeside, if I'm not mistaking) they are discussing the fear of missing a ping. The same perception ping could occur when you pass it for a second time, unless you've engaged in it further along the line. So, from that perspective, as long as you're not actively making choices in the perception dialogue or related storyline (excuse me that I can't describe it more accurately), you'll have that story still available to you.
This was discussed in an early stream, so that might have changed along the way.
I believe your making a valid point with having an off day. To me that's actually encouraging me to think that this game will be that more immersive. You don't want to rush things being a Keeper. You really want to seek out things to engage with. I can only see that as a plus for this game. The underlying question here is; Would you accept that you will not know every questdialogue or Ping-update that the game has to offer? Can you live with that idea?
Let's take this from another angle: You're main has gone through Faerthale. Now you're bring your first alt (not even going to touch on the progeny thing). And you decide to answer differently during your Perception story. That's a boon for replayability, no? Or are you more a fan of: I know how I did it with my main, I'll do the same thing? Which is also possible but not horribly wrong to be offered both options, right? Going even further in, let's say that alt is of an opposite faction, you might be wanting to approach Faerthale from an entirely different perspective and you're questline story might be different compared to previous one with your main. Even though it's in the same surroundings. It might touch some of the perception updates you had with your main but not all. There lies the Role playing aspect of MMORPG's.
It's my understanding that if you're following perception pings and you join a group that states: Let's run into X, skip the pings. You can do so. If you accept to be in such a group, (I'd just advice you not to engage in upcoming dialogues or perception choices that hint towards the storyline you were on before you joined that group. ) Any other perception ping or just common awareness pings might be just fine. (if you catch my drift here) This is something most of us haven't tested yet, so we don't know if you can run a dungeon without losing Perception pings or joining groups and missing out on those by pure groupambience.
Perhaps it should be possible to pauze or hide further perception pings, due to your own choice of having a different playsession this time. Ones you enable it again, you'ld be able to continue on your perception hunt in another session.
Going off topic here slightly: When it comes to really taking a faction hit because you've slain or 'wrongfully' engaged a challenge. It's part of the game, where actions matter. Are you in halfling dungeon and you're killing halflings, well...accept that it could have consequences. You might need to take those things into consideration before you start the encounter. If you're not ok with what the group is stearing towards, just say so and depending on how that group responds you'll continue your groupplay session differently or not at all. And that's ok as it's part of the game's Identity/incentives.
It's perhaps similar to the faction system with regards to grouping. To me, it makes sense that you need to take care the kind of people you join with *shrug* I'm not so sure that's a 'bad' thing at all.
Want to follow the Dragons storyline? Well, you can't group with people killing dragons then, or, if you do, you need to do some serious counter-faction work to get in their good books again in order to start that storyline again.
Not sure I was sold on the perception system from this Stream. I liked what it could have been, but it seems not to fit with a group centric challenging content game? Particularly if its more or less a one shot attempt with little clues. I could see it working mechanically better, if after talking with Val Mir you got varying responses til you had clicked on all three items. That way you would be getting feed back prompting you to be more observant and then again to know there was more to see and finally getting all the flags would open up the options (still requires perseverance).
Admittedly in RL there are people who would probably treat you this way, but this is a game a it should follow a bit better. I also agree that this would be alot harder in an agro area were you couldn't solo it, or as would be more appropriately termed "ëxplore":)
This is the difficult balance I have found with group centric games, is that there is rarely time for reading quest content let alone lore based stuff. So much like quest updates, it needs to be flexible so that those interested can get bits done overtime. I could see in this instance, maybe getting the first response on one visit then maybe getting a few clickies on future visits to the area.
Having it not road block items or content etc is a good thing, but it also doesn't incentivise groups to do it and would leave it more as an RP element, If you did questline it to good items then people would just google it and straightline the quest so it wouldn't be much better.
An interesting question though is all perception going to be like this, or is some going to lead to epic quests? as I thought it was meant to be limited but greater quest lines like legenday/ epic quests of old?
Personally I felt there was two types of perception being shown in the video, the innate perception granted though race or class? shown automatically to the player as they approached an area And active perception demonstrated as by the interactions with Vha Ryn and vay Mir.
For me, the active perceptions had to much hand holding, The hand icon when hovering over the tree or mushroom should not appear without an action taken by the player, a search ability for example, the perceptions should be rewarded from the players natural playstyle to want to find out more, and not from accident observations of a hand icon popping up, or text clues that you missed something.
A player who zipped though an area should be completely oblivious to active perceptions they missed.
This isn't necessarily a social value question, but when engaging in perception where you need to choose one of two responses, is one right and the other wrong? If you can choose the wrong one, can you then just exit out and restart to pick the right one? if you cannot pick a wrong answer, then what is the point of the choice in the first place? That then means you aren't making any choice, just clicking a button. Where is the reward in that activity?
One and done disposable quests are exactly what created the solo culture in every other modern MMO. They are antithetical to a game with a supposed ideal of group based gameplay. We even saw it in the stream, another party member couldn't participate because they had already done the quest. Instead of experiencing the game with actual other people you are reading text dialogue windows and killing 10 rats looting 10 berries.
To me it seemed these weren't really quests at all, but more like lore activities, whose soul purpose was for Keeper acolades. Kind of an achievement system that didn't really serve any purpose. The trouble is in putting them in the game to explain some of the lore, but make them "mess it up and your done" seems to doublely defeat the purpose. I can see merits in less hand holding, but not if you can't get there eventually. Now they did say its possible some other perception or flag might open up other paths, but that seemed a little random and would put people off try it.
I would be interested to know if there are any purposeful quests, that do have rewards etc using the perception system, or would that just be talking with NPC's like in Thronefast PA quests or will even those change to a perception like system?
In every situation knowing more then others can give you real benefits why shouldn it be like that in Pantheon. If theres just some text to be read without any tangible changes because of it ...(just in your imagination) then im honestly absolutely not interested in perception. It just would be boring to me, like killing a monster and you just get a text that tells you you have become stronger (but nothing happens you wont ever lvl up) or harvesting something with a text (you harvested it you got good food but actually nothing changes no bonuses at all). Kinda reminds me to todays pvp battle royal games the only thing that changes is your look but actually you get nothing and im kinda not into it. Player skill is good n fine but i like some tangible changes too.
After re-watching the video and watching PantheonPlus's show last night I'm pretty confident there is a LOT more to the preception system than we know right now. There might not be exp rewards or amazing item rewards, but there are many other ways the system can be rewarding. I get the feeling it will be quite rewarding for those that choose to go that route.
Vandraad said:... if you cannot pick a wrong answer, then what is the point of the choice in the first place? That then means you aren't making any choice, just clicking a button. Where is the reward in that activity?
If I may cut in here. The point of having a choice is that it leads you to follow different paths. They shape your role in the world and the information you're able to obtain in that world based on your background/history/choices.
The 'reward' as it were, is that your character is portrayed or personalized by your direct actions/choices.
Stearing this back to the OP... the reward as a social value could be that your presence in a social content adds different world experiences for that group. Experiences in the world that they might not have had without you. Because based on your background (as a designated keeper in that social environment (yes I'm also taking this outside of combat environment here) you offer a different game experience.
The same social content with another keeper might turn out quite differently for you. The added value is here; keepers can provide you with a different game experience, within the same settings/regions. That I think is a big added value by A PLAYER, not by pure gamedesign!
Still, I get that it's not tangible enough for some people.
I did me some Pantheonrewinding myself just now (haven't missed one btw). And I did have some comments on this, Nephele.
A keeper as replacement for a class which might be more efficient within a group.
The keeper also has a combatclass (a healer, tank or whatnot), so you might end up with 2 tanks in a group.The rest of the group would have to be really friendly to be ok with not having an optimal group setup. As you well know by now, combat will go much slower in this game. So having a keeper as(...LF a keeper in group because...) could really drag the overall session experience to as stickinthemud pace. This purely based on the concept of NOT having the whole quatrinity or optimal group setup for a decent dungeon grind.
Another point I wanted to make here: A presence of a keeper within your group should not allow for content to be skip and by doing so leaping in front of groups that do not have a keeper in their group.
As they become a required tool to bypass what’s not to designed to be experienced in that way. A group without keeper might feel left out or malfunctioning purely based on that aspect.
Add value? yes! Add content yes, but skip content? No please. Where is the actual added value there? Is skipping content conceived as added social value? Really? Not in my book.
Why can’t having a keeper lead to a dungeon experience where there is a story being developed during that period? Short story or different sequences of a script unfolding due to that keeper’s actions in that session. No, I’m not talking about having keepers in group results in rare drops or exclusive bosses.
Scenario: two groups start at a dungeon at the same time. Each one has a keeper. Due to their keeper's actions/replies/background each follows different direction. The keeper gets a perception ping, they respond. Communicates this to the group, the scout advances and the rest follows. Two groups, two possibly different dungeon pathways/experiences. Now during their time there, the path of the two groups might cross. So you’d still have those moments of who got there first and possible camping.
A third group starts of without a keeper, they just tag and burn using scouts and their own potential. They could have the same path of one of the other groups, but not entirely. Sometimes, the keeper group ahead just disappears or is able to reach /pass areas. The keeper groups and third group each have equal mobs to kill, but the setting and the actual road taken differs slightly. A third group might not be able to tail a keeper’s group to their full extent. Just imagine the experience of that third group, seeing that keeper’s group move somewhere, they can’t. If that isn’t added social value, I don’t know what is.
They don’t know where that keeper’s group went to, what they are experiencing, why it’s different and what that third group is missing out on. And in this session, they’ll never know by direct means. Wouldn’t you like to revisit that dungeon with a keeper. And in the case keepers have various dialogue options, would you be interested to see what paths are there in that same dungeon? Or would you just turn of your brain and say, well as long as I’ve reach boss X and Y I’m content with this dungeon experience.
Barin999 said:Another point I wanted to make here: A presence of a keeper within your group should not allow for content to be skip and by doing so leaping in front of groups that do not have a keeper in their group.
As they become a required tool to bypass what’s not to designed to be experienced in that way. A group without keeper might feel left out or malfunctioning purely based on that aspect.
Add value? yes! Add content yes, but skip content? No please. Where is the actual added value there? Is skipping content conceived as added social value? Really? Not in my book.
I am slightly confused by this. When you say "skip content" what exactly do you mean? I wouldn't personally consider finding a shortcut or bypassing some mobs as skipping content any more than I would consider skirting the edge of a zone as you pass through safely skipping content. Are you suggesting that every group should kill all the same mobs in order to reach a certain point in a zone? Eh, I have no problem with players finding shortcuts...and if that DOES end up being something cool a keeper gets to do I'll also have no problem doing the content in my group if we don't happen to have a keeper in the group that day. Just seems like you took such a strong stance on this "skipping" idea, and I'm not sure what you're imagining is so bad about it.
Ranarius said:I'll also have no problem doing the content in my group if we don't happen to have a keeper in the group that day.
There is no real downside though. Everyone will be a keeper.
I guess the downside is having pop ups on your screen at times...which kind of sucks but if it gives you the benefit of a key that you cant get otherwise (like we have seen) then it seems like it is worth the annoyance of pop up notifications. There are no benefits for not being a keeper and no negatives for being one. It basically is mandatory in a very loose sense since there is no reason not to be a keeper.
Ranarius said:The negative for being one (for a lot of people) is that they're just not interesting in spending their game time that way. I won't be surprised if most people are keepers, but I also won't be surprised if only 20% of people are. Guess we'll find out more soon!
I have no interest in becoming a keeper but I will still be one...because there is no downside. I'm not going to go out of my way to raise the skill unless there is some other benefit but if there is something in front of me i will click it.
I feel like being a keeper should be included as one of the crafting spheres that you can only choose one of. That would solve a lot of the problem.
That would make people choose whether they wanted to be a keeper or not. Otherwise, even if someone chooses not to be a keeper originally, the way it will work currently is that player will feel forced to go back and choose to become a keeper later when they learn there is no reason not to.
I must not understand this correrctly. I was under the impression that it IS something you have to choose to be. I assumed at some point you'd meet an NPC that wants to teach you how to become a keeper, and from that point on the pings start coming in. I didn't assume that all players would get those pings until after they chose that. But, I'm probably wrong.
Edit: and once again, the reason not to is that some people just don't feel like it.
It provides useful meta for a potentially enjoyable exploration accolade system. To incentivise one wanting to cover the entirety of the game world. Considering that most perception triggers, from what we have seen, have been based on player position/location. Socially? Perhaps some triggers could be "group only" triggers, where it requires a certain number of people to get.
Ranarius said:I must not understand this correrctly. I was under the impression that it IS something you have to choose to be. I assumed at some point you'd meet an NPC that wants to teach you how to become a keeper, and from that point on the pings start coming in. I didn't assume that all players would get those pings until after they chose that. But, I'm probably wrong.
Edit: and once again, the reason not to is that some people just don't feel like it.
You do have to "choose" to do it. We have seen the NPC in thronefast in a stream that presents you with the option to be a keeper or not.
But that's the thing though: "the reason not to is that some people just don't feel like it." is not a reason. There is no reason not to. If you say no to being a keeper you can always go back and change your mind later.
Saying no is saying: I don't want keys and short cuts in dungeons. I don't want extra benefits without any negatives attached. There is no downside unless you consider more interaction with the world a downside... pop ups on your screen and extra stuff to click.
I have waited years for them to show a reason why anyone wouldn't want to be a keeper? Why we are even given the choice?
Ranarius said:I am slightly confused by this. When you say "skip content" what exactly do you mean? I wouldn't personally consider finding a shortcut or bypassing some mobs as skipping content any more than I would consider skirting the edge of a zone as you pass through safely skipping content. Are you suggesting that every group should kill all the same mobs in order to reach a certain point in a zone? Eh, I have no problem with players finding shortcuts...and if that DOES end up being something cool a keeper gets to do I'll also have no problem doing the content in my group if we don't happen to have a keeper in the group that day. Just seems like you took such a strong stance on this "skipping" idea, and I'm not sure what you're imagining is so bad about it.
This is just a very simplified example to get the point of skipping across.
Imagine a keep. Two groups in front of them. In the back area of the keep, players know that are riches to find or bosses to slay. The group without a keeper, goes in and starts clearing room by room to advance to the back. The group of the keeper has a different path. The keeper located a tunnel which runs under the first half of the zone and leads to the far west quarter of the keep. In the tunnel might be fewer mobs or none at all. The suggested social value was, that the keeper can provide ways to shortcuts or ways to get past content that other groups could not. Both groups might be capable of reaching the back area and the boss. But it's no longer a contested dungeon in this fashion, the competition between both groups is skewed.
Next time around, what will happen? Everyone who knows about the tunnel, might say; Well if we aren't using the tunnels I won't come, because I can spend the increased time investement elsewhere, where I can also find bosses and chests. I'm not going to grind through all the sections if I know there is a way to skip them. (I'm not saying all players are like this, but I bet ye, quite a few have this mindset.) Especially in a game that is already slower paced in combat and where dropped loot will not be so abundant. It will have an impact, for sure on how players plan and invest their time. Don't forget, people are lazy by instinct, least effort for max result.
Now if the path of a keeper takes near to equal the amount of time to get to a place as a regular group would. Then that's fine. But jumping in front of players purely based on keeper's role in the group? A group with a keeper might experience a lot more things to see, click or locate other mobs. So when both groups leave the dungeon, they might have a different story to tell back home. However, they should still be able to compete with the same desired bosses or treasure chests. Keepers might offer the groupmembers new npc's or interactables during their playsession which the regulars might not have. And with this added knowledge, they might set out new goals within that dungeon or beyond that dungeon. Such as; we found this dwarf in dungeon X, he told our keeper about a cave to the west and about a wizard in there. We would not have known about this if the keeper wasn't with us. And our only goal would have been to clear the dungeon and go home to return to the same dungeon the next day. Now, we'll set off to the cave tomorrow instead. How do you know where that cave is or how to enter it? The keeper of our group will find out if our scout doesn't find it.