Arksien said:First if all, "most" people did not use showEQ, in fact, I'd wager next to no one did, especially since it was a ban worthy offense.
Wrong. Even today, thousands of people use MacroQuest2 and don't have to fear bans because the majority of the modifications would rely on client-side spyware to detect. Until you step into the realm of modifying packets sent to the server, packet sniffing applications are virtually undetectable unless some questionable tactics are used to detect it. VAC (Valve Anti-Cheat) relies on realtime process monitoring to detect this kind of behavior.
Arksien said:Also, yes, many people like games like WoW, which is why games like WoW exist. This game is literally saying "I will not cave in. I will make a good game again, and if the casuals and ADD people of the world don't like it, too bad, this game is not for them."
The fact that you reduce one of the greatest games ever made to "casuals and ADD people" is extremely insulting and leads me to believe that you have a rather self-serving agenda or a very uneducated opinion on the matter.
Arksien said:That is the very mission statement of the game. Your arguments come off as dabgerously close to "let's sell out to the masses and make this game another WoW clone to get more interest," when this game is supposed to be our one safe haven against exactly that.
No. My arguments come from what constitutes objectively good and bad game design. If you think a view vital UI features that have been in MMOs for basically the entire history of the genre make a game a "WoW clone", you're laughably off base.
Arksien said:If this game goes even so much as let's moders put the wow style lowest common denominator style interface in, and ESPECIALLY if it is the default, I won't play, and I bet most of the core demographic this game targets won't either.
You're not even addressing what I said at this point. You're just talking past me to some idiotic strawman that you've constructed.
Arksien said:I wouldn't mind if this game didn't even give yout HP bars for the enemy. I'd like the animations to show how much abuse they are taking with body language. Not a bar. Not with text. And DEFINITELY not an HUD. If I punch a guy, I can tell how much it hurt him by how he reacts. That's what I want in a game. If we wipe, I don't want to know I was only 3% away, I just want to know I failed. I want to feel relief when a mob dies.
You want, I want, we want, etc. etc. etc.
The real question is what compromises are you willing to make for Pantheon to not be a game only a few dozen purists want to play? Do you have any evidence to provide that a game with almost literally no user-interface is something ANYONE other than you wants to play? Reality check?
Arksien said:Sorry if you like the modern gaming HUDs, but I don't and I think they've ruined gaming. I think this game needs modernization and new features, but things that make the game easier are not the type of modernization I'm looking for personally. I should never know my enimies hp or mana, or what class they are. I should have rough guesses based on size/race of the mob, but shouldn't ever be able to take anything for granted.
What makes the game easier about knowing a percentage as opposed to just seeing a bar? It's QOL, not "easy". Your definition of "easy" is ridiculous.
Liav said:Arksien said:First if all, "most" people did not use showEQ, in fact, I'd wager next to no one did, especially since it was a ban worthy offense.
Wrong. Even today, thousands of people use MacroQuest2 and don't have to fear bans because the majority of the modifications would rely on client-side spyware to detect. Until you step into the realm of modifying packets sent to the server, packet sniffing applications are virtually undetectable unless some questionable tactics are used to detect it. VAC (Valve Anti-Cheat) relies on realtime process monitoring to detect this kind of behavior.
Arksien said:Also, yes, many people like games like WoW, which is why games like WoW exist. This game is literally saying "I will not cave in. I will make a good game again, and if the casuals and ADD people of the world don't like it, too bad, this game is not for them."The fact that you reduce one of the greatest games ever made to "casuals and ADD people" is extremely insulting and leads me to believe that you have a rather self-serving agenda or a very uneducated opinion on the matter.
Arksien said:That is the very mission statement of the game. Your arguments come off as dabgerously close to "let's sell out to the masses and make this game another WoW clone to get more interest," when this game is supposed to be our one safe haven against exactly that.No. My arguments come from what constitutes objectively good and bad game design. If you think a view vital UI features that have been in MMOs for basically the entire history of the genre make a game a "WoW clone", you're laughably off base.
Arksien said:If this game goes even so much as let's moders put the wow style lowest common denominator style interface in, and ESPECIALLY if it is the default, I won't play, and I bet most of the core demographic this game targets won't either.You're not even addressing what I said at this point. You're just talking past me to some idiotic strawman that you've constructed.
Arksien said:I wouldn't mind if this game didn't even give yout HP bars for the enemy. I'd like the animations to show how much abuse they are taking with body language. Not a bar. Not with text. And DEFINITELY not an HUD. If I punch a guy, I can tell how much it hurt him by how he reacts. That's what I want in a game. If we wipe, I don't want to know I was only 3% away, I just want to know I failed. I want to feel relief when a mob dies.You want, I want, we want, etc. etc. etc.
The real question is what compromises are you willing to make for Pantheon to not be a game only a few dozen purists want to play? Do you have any evidence to provide that a game with almost literally no user-interface is something ANYONE other than you wants to play? Reality check?
Arksien said:Sorry if you like the modern gaming HUDs, but I don't and I think they've ruined gaming. I think this game needs modernization and new features, but things that make the game easier are not the type of modernization I'm looking for personally. I should never know my enimies hp or mana, or what class they are. I should have rough guesses based on size/race of the mob, but shouldn't ever be able to take anything for granted.What makes the game easier about knowing a percentage as opposed to just seeing a bar? It's QOL, not "easy". Your definition of "easy" is ridiculous.
Again with the ridiculous hyperbole, and YOU call other people out for logical fallacies? Good grief. Kind of, you know, the point of this game is for those "few dozen purists". Of course they need to make appeals to a large audience to succeed, but to suggest that the opinions you don't agree with are shared by only a few dozen people is absolutely laughable. Another troll job.
Krixus said:Again with the ridiculous hyperbole, and YOU call other people out for logical fallacies? Good grief. Kind of, you know, the point of this game is for those "few dozen purists". Of course they need to make appeals to a large audience to succeed, but to suggest that the opinions you don't agree with are shared by only a few dozen people is absolutely laughable. Another troll job.
Jesus dude, I'm not being hyperbolic. This guy is telling me that I want to turn Pantheon into a WoW clone and that it's a game for "casuals and ADD kids". And I'M being hyperbolic?
You are literally incapable of having an adult conversation, seeing as the only thing you're capable is regurgitating "hyperbole" and accusing me of trolling. I'm not trolling, but I'm really irritated with the circlejerk on these forums that lashes out at anyone with a differing opinion from the, yes, "purist" mold.
I've yet to hear it explained how having some numbers available in the game world "breaks immersion". Immersion is still an extremely vague concept and a lot of people here have extremely different definitions of it if their positions on different subjects are anything to go by. Right now, I'd say it could almost be defined as "how I think a game should be" and I wouldn't be too far off base.
You all seem to care so much about Pantheon while simultaneously wanting to exist in an echo chamber of a forum with no sense of pragmatism. It's infuriating.
Krixus said:Hardly reversing my argument. You address one example, the on screen numbers, which is, as you said, the easiet to deal with for everyone. I stand by my point. Why do we need on screen info that explicitly tells us thing we already know or can figure out?
I actually adressed 2 examples, but whatever. You are missing my point. When it comes to UI, options are the way to go. I like something, you like something else. There is no such thing as need.
If some information is delivered to the player, I like it straight up on my screen, where as it might break your immersion and you want it hidden in text form or in your character sheet. This is not about unaccessible information that dev are not willing to share (like enemy mana or aggro numbers).
Di...did...did... you just brag about cheating in EQ on a forum of veteran hardcore gamers and say that the golden standard for a game should have the cheaters mechanics built in from scratch? Seriously?
Look if you liked WoW, great. We can disagree there without any hard feelings. If EQ was too hard for your and you had to cheat, I'm glad games like WoW came along for people like you.
This isn't going to be a game for the masses. Once you openly defended and bragged about cheating with programs like showEQ though you closed the door of opportunity to any respect you might have ever earned of mine.
If you think the tenants of Pantheon are somehow conducive to people who cheated in EQ and call wow the greatest game of all time, then I'd like to congratulate you on your gold metal in mental gymnastics. Unfortunately even the special Olympics frowns on cheating, so they'll likely take it from you down the road when you're busted for doping.
Arksien said:Di...did...did... you just brag about cheating in EQ on a forum of veteran hardcore gamers and say that the golden standard for a game should have the cheaters mechanics built in from scratch? Seriously?
I didn't brag about anything. I simply stated that information is king and even a large number of classic EQ veterans opted for information over a lack of it. These programs had more nefarious uses but downplaying the value of the mechanics themselves due to their source is disingenuous. Consider the merits of the systems themselves rather than looking at them through such a biased lens.
I don't feel like arguing over the ethics of hacking right now, but I will reiterate the fact that Vanguard (another game Brad was involved with) had these user interface elements available and no one complained that it was ruining their immersion. We can extend the line of logic to literally any user interface or the user interface as a whole. However, there comes a point where some user interface elements are required.
How is having hotbars on your screen not ruining your immersion? Or an inventory window? Where do you draw the line between "I like this" and "I don't like this"?
Arksien said:Look if you liked WoW, great. We can disagree there without any hard feelings. If EQ was too hard for your and you had to cheat, I'm glad games like WoW came along for people like you.
I'm not going to respond to you anymore if all you're going to do is insult me.
I'm a 13-14 year EQ veteran and I have one of the best geared Monks on my server even today despite the fact that I haven't played in a year. I've played a plethora of games. I'm a "veteran" of the genre just like you, so don't talk down to me.
Arksien said:This isn't going to be a game for the masses. Once you openly defended and bragged about cheating with programs like showEQ though you closed the door of opportunity to any respect you might have ever earned of mine.
I'm aware that Pantheon isn't a game for the masses. However, I don't think this game is going to have a population AT ALL if you strip the UI down to being barely existent. I ask again, where do you draw the line between "good" and "bad" UI functions?
Also, I never stated whether or not I used the programs in question. I only stated that some of their functionality is desirable to a lot of players, and a lot of the functionality was included in games like Vanguard as very basic UI functions (like numerical values for health and whatnot). If you want to say Vanguard is a bad game then that's on you, because a lot of people who post here played it, including Kilsin who is now on the staff. Are you saying that we're all ADD WoW kids?
Arksien said:If you think the tenants of Pantheon are somehow conducive to people who cheated in EQ and call wow the greatest game of all time, then I'd like to congratulate you on your gold metal in mental gymnastics. Unfortunately even the special Olympics frowns on cheating, so they'll likely take it from you down the road when you're busted for doping.
Once again you resort to ad hominem for lack of a better argument. The irony is really thick here.
Liav said:The fact that you reduce one of the greatest games ever made to "casuals and ADD people" is extremely insulting and leads me to believe that you have a rather self-serving agenda or a very uneducated opinion on the matter.
Based on our previous discussions, I'm assuming I fit into your 10-15 poster narrative as well, and the fact that you regard WoW as one of the greatest games ever made is why we'll most likely never agree. WoW was by far one of (if not the most) successful and popular game ever created, but that in no way makes it one of the greatest. There's plenty of forms of entertainment that follow the "WoW" model and attempt to cash in. Look at Boy Bands, Britney Spears, etc. etc. Many of them were highly successful and popular, but they were in no way great music. The greatest feat of WoW was to be amazing at marketing and appealing a game world to the masses. Obviously, every business needs to make money, but I'm hoping VRI is willing to forgo marketing to all and a game that appeals to all, for the benefit of an improved gameplay experience.
Basically, Popularity + Success/Subscriptions does not equal a Great Game, but a great game may have both.
And without just saying "this game won't be for you," I'd really like to hear the changes that modern MMOs made in a separate thread that have improved on gameplay since 1999. Maybe, give a pro/con list so I (and others) can get a better idea of where you stand. I think that would help shed a lot of light on your postings, because they often do read as pot-stirring or trolling, even if it is not your intention. Obviously you don't have to listen to me, but I think that could help with your frustrations here.
.
There are plenty of drastically differing opinions on these forums, so claiming this forums is a circlejerk echo chamber is both wildly innacurate, childish and nothing short of trolling.
I also say this agreeing that we do need a useful HUD/UI, and that its not yet practical to have a game without numbers and other data readily available. With animations, particle effects and everything else that is involved in combat, it would be extremely problematic to know what enemy to attack at any given time without status indicators.
Raidan said:And without just saying "this game won't be for you," I'd really like to hear the changes that modern MMOs made in a separate thread that have improved on gameplay since 1999. Maybe, give a pro/con list so I (and others) can get a better idea of where you stand. I think that would help shed a lot of light on your postings, because they often do read as pot-stirring or trolling, even if it is not your intention. Obviously you don't have to listen to me, but I think that could help with your frustrations here.
It's pretty simple really. Give players the information they want. That is the major thing that modern games have improved on since 1999.
There is zero justification that I can see for restricting it until someone cites a peer reviewed psychological study that that having HP represented in a numerical format decreases the mental involvement of the player in the game.
Some information obviously needs to be restricted, such as (for instance) whether or not a boss is up in a dungeon without manually going into the dungeon, because that defeats the purpose of the game. However, there simply seems to be two extremes that people are focusing on instead of trying to find a middle ground. I don't want Pantheon to be World of Warcraft. If I did, I'd go play World of Warcraft. However, I also don't want Pantheon to be 1999 EQ in the Unity engine, because I could just hack my textures on P99 to make it look pretty and I'm already there.
I'm tired of having people argue with a strawman every time I post here, because the moment I say something like "I think World of Warcraft did this right", I get accused of trying to turn Pantheon into WoW. I would bet my left nut that the developers of Pantheon at least have taken a glance at WoW to see some of the cool things they do there, even if only for some vague inspirational quality it has.
EQ wasn't a perfect game, and WoW isn't a completely terrible game. It's just two extremist positions that have no place in a debate, especially when you (not you specifically) consider that arguing about extremes does very little to make Pantheon a better game.
Liav said:Krixus said:Again with the ridiculous hyperbole, and YOU call other people out for logical fallacies? Good grief. Kind of, you know, the point of this game is for those "few dozen purists". Of course they need to make appeals to a large audience to succeed, but to suggest that the opinions you don't agree with are shared by only a few dozen people is absolutely laughable. Another troll job.
Jesus dude, I'm not being hyperbolic. This guy is telling me that I want to turn Pantheon into a WoW clone and that it's a game for "casuals and ADD kids". And I'M being hyperbolic?
You are literally incapable of having an adult conversation, seeing as the only thing you're capable is regurgitating "hyperbole" and accusing me of trolling. I'm not trolling, but I'm really irritated with the circlejerk on these forums that lashes out at anyone with a differing opinion from the, yes, "purist" mold.
I've yet to hear it explained how having some numbers available in the game world "breaks immersion". Immersion is still an extremely vague concept and a lot of people here have extremely different definitions of it if their positions on different subjects are anything to go by. Right now, I'd say it could almost be defined as "how I think a game should be" and I wouldn't be too far off base.
You all seem to care so much about Pantheon while simultaneously wanting to exist in an echo chamber of a forum with no sense of pragmatism. It's infuriating.
You absolutely are. Just because someone else is as well doesn't mean you aren't. You frequently make gross exaggerations and all or nothing statements. Just read your owns posts. It's hilarious that you say I can't have an adult conversation when you aren't even aware of your own behavior.
Just a couple of examples in the last 2 days. You've said:
"Immersion: A vague term generally cited as an objection to any form of modernity in video games."
Any form, really? That's not an exaggeration? You don't think? Mmkay. You don't like the way people are pigeon holing you, yet you do the exact same thing.
"a few dozen purists"
hahahahaha! This game is designed for those purists. A few dozen? Good grief, you are beyond out of touch with what this game is about if you really believe that. I know you don't.
"You are literally incapable of having an adult conversation"
Again, your arrogance is astounding. YOU get to define "adult conversation"? Come on now. You don't like people calling you out, despite the fact the indicments of your lazy generalizations are completely valid.
Things HAVE been explained to you, multiple times, and you choose to disregard the valid points that make up the opinions you don't agree with. People have said multiple times and ways that these "numbers" have a negative effect on their immersive experience. And you turn around and say nobody can define immersion or explain why numbers are bad? They have. You are dismissing the opinions of others because they don't jive with yours. You're doing the exact same thing you accuse the "purists" of doing to you.
Why is is "pragmatic" to have LEVEL 47 WARRIOR above a mobs head when you already know the mob is 44-47 and a warrior?
Krixus said:Liav said:Krixus said:Again with the ridiculous hyperbole, and YOU call other people out for logical fallacies? Good grief. Kind of, you know, the point of this game is for those "few dozen purists". Of course they need to make appeals to a large audience to succeed, but to suggest that the opinions you don't agree with are shared by only a few dozen people is absolutely laughable. Another troll job.
Jesus dude, I'm not being hyperbolic. This guy is telling me that I want to turn Pantheon into a WoW clone and that it's a game for "casuals and ADD kids". And I'M being hyperbolic?
You are literally incapable of having an adult conversation, seeing as the only thing you're capable is regurgitating "hyperbole" and accusing me of trolling. I'm not trolling, but I'm really irritated with the circlejerk on these forums that lashes out at anyone with a differing opinion from the, yes, "purist" mold.
I've yet to hear it explained how having some numbers available in the game world "breaks immersion". Immersion is still an extremely vague concept and a lot of people here have extremely different definitions of it if their positions on different subjects are anything to go by. Right now, I'd say it could almost be defined as "how I think a game should be" and I wouldn't be too far off base.
You all seem to care so much about Pantheon while simultaneously wanting to exist in an echo chamber of a forum with no sense of pragmatism. It's infuriating.
You absolutely are. Just because someone else is as well doesn't mean you aren't. You continually make gross exaggerations and all or nothing statements. Just read your owns posts. It's hilarious that you say I can't have an adult conversation when you aren't even aware of your own ridiculous hyperbole.
Just a couple of examples in the last 2 days. You've said:
"Immersion: A vague term generally cited as an objection to any form of modernity in video games."
Any form, really? That's not an exaggeration? You don't think? Mmkay. You don't like the way people are pigeon holing you, yet you do the exact same thing.
"a few dozen purists"
hahahahaha! This game is designed for those purists. A few dozen? Good grief, you are beyond out of touch with what this game is about if you really believe that.
"You are literally incapable of having an adult conversation"
Again, your arrogance is astounding. YOU get to define "adult conversation"? Come on now. You don't like people calling you out, despite the fact the indicments of your lazy generalizations are completely valid.
Things HAVE been explained to you, multiple times, and you choose to disregard the valid points that make up the opinions you don't agree with.
I'm willing to overlook it if you are. Going back and forth like this is getting boring.
Let's take it down a notch and relax please guy's, there is no point in arguing over opinions, everyone has their take on "immersion" as it can mean different things to different people, so please stop the personal attacks and back and forth arguments or the thread will need to be closed.
The topic is "What is "Immersion" to you, and how important is it to", if you do not agree with someone else's opinion, either politely engage with them or ignore them and move on. :)
@Liav
I appreciate the clarification, but I should have been a bit more clear in my post. I knew what you were wanting overall in this thread, but I was meaning in the overall gameplay experience (i.e. death penalty mechanics, combat mechanics, travel, etc. etc.) as it seems many of your wants contradict some of the tenets that have already been presented, or if they don't, many of your posts read as such.
Maybe I'm wrong and misinterpreting your posts, but I think sharing your views of what you want in Pantheon would be of benefit (and less frustrations for you). Again, obviously feel free to ignore my suggestion. I don't disagree with EQ not being perfect and WoW not being perfectly awful either. And, I don't want Pantheon to be an EQ clone either, but, until more solid gameplay mechanics are released, I'm going to suggest what mechanics worked in EQ (in my opinion) be considered for Pantheon as I do believe many of the mechanics in 1999 added to immersion and overall gameplay (which is subjective I agree).
I understand what immersion means in a movie, it means a suspension of disbelief. While you're watching you are not thinking "hey I'm watching a movie." In a video game I have a much harder time with it. I can play arcade games, where there's no attempt at realism and be concentrating so hard on not dying I forget I'm playing a game. To me, things like whether I can use something in my inventory, or other restrictions just are, they don't somehow jar me out of being involved in the game.
Raidan said:@Liav
I appreciate the clarification, but I should have been a bit more clear in my post. I knew what you were wanting overall in this thread, but I was meaning in the overall gameplay experience (i.e. death penalty mechanics, combat mechanics, travel, etc. etc.) as it seems many of your wants contradict some of the tenets that have already been presented, or if they don't, many of your posts read as such.
I see. Well, for instance, I don't think corpse runs are really a positive thing in a modern game. EQ, to me, became a better game when I respawned with my gear upon death. I also don't think losing levels is a good mechanic, and I prefer to see experience debt or a loss of experience that caps at 0% of a level but doesn't delevel you. I'm not a huge fan of fast travel and travel is something I think classic EQ got almost 100% correct. Combat mechanics wise, EQ was too unreliant on player skill in the early day. Melee combat was reduced to auto attack and mashing Backstab (or your associated ability) every 10 seconds.
I don't think any of these things contradict any of the tenets set forth by the Pantheon designers. For instance, not having corpse runs doesn't contradict making death meaningful. There are a dozen ways to make death painful without using corpseruns.
Does any of that clarify?
I've heard a lot of people claim there are "other ways to make death meaningful" or immersive, but to this day I've never heard one example that improves upon the EQ system and doesn't stand to remove the strategy, intensity and sense of accomplishment that death with corpse recovery had.
Dullahan said:I've heard a lot of people claim there are "other ways to make death meaningful" or immersive, but to this day I've never heard one example that improves upon the EQ system and doesn't stand to remove the strategy, intensity and sense of accomplishment that death with corpse recovery had.
On the same topic, I haven't heard much justification for why the death mechanic has to be equally as punishing, either. I've played P99 a lot recently and the corpse runs are just really annoying. I don't feel like they have the same impact that they used to, instead they just make groups split up earlier when we're strapped for time and have to spend the next 30 minutes getting our stuff back because we're unlucky enough to not have a 60 Cleric nearby.
I would say your annoying death is someone else's "line in the sand."
Why do I say that? The old school crowd has spent the past dozen years being told that it is out of touch, passe, that the MMO world has passed us / them by. Always in those arguments is the conversation around death penalties.
I think we old school folks get a tad touchy and defensive - because in short, you're using "fight'n words" when you say some of the things you are saying.
Now... are the statements from the old school folks completely rational? Maybe not. VG (for as much as I played it) had a fairly acceptable death penalty for old school folks. For that matter, I think EQ II did at launch with the soul shard idea (you respawned with your stuff, but left a soul shard where you died that would reduce your death penalty if you recovered it).
Neither of those were EQ's death penalty.
But the broader question is - what the blazes do things like death penalties or too many or the wrong kind of numbers on your screen have to do with immersion?
I'll tackle the easy one first. Oddly, that's death penalties (and other old school mechanics). Things like really stiff death penalties add immersion not because of the actual penalty, but because of fear of the penalty / excitement about avoiding the penalty. It's a similar thing to watching a really good movie. Those feelings of fear and excitement draw you in. Being drawn in equates to immersion. Refer to my first post on this thread. Anything that illicits emotional response from you is something that can result in immersion. That's not to say that everyting that illicits emotion will result in immersion. That thing that really annoys you (like the harsh death penalty) might in and of itself be immersion breaking (annoyed out of immersion) - but that is a price you are willing to pay for the longer spans of immersion you do experience while your avatar is alive.
When it comes to UI elements, I favor as minimal as possible. I often say I want to play the game, not the UI... now, of course you actually are playing the UI - but there is a line where the UI becomes invasive to your experience. That line is likely different for different people. There are some for sure who actually want absolute boat loads of data while they play. You know this because you can see how much "information providing" elements are on some folks screens when they post screen shots. I sometimes wonder how some of those folks even see the game with all of that on their screen.
BUT - for those folks, that is a contributing factor in their immersion. They get lost in the data they are consuming and processing and reacting to just the same way I might get lost in reacting to what my avatar is doing on screen.
The devs certainly have their work cut out for them striking the balance.
On EQ combat being unreliant on player skill... I think that depends on what you mean. If you are talking about "I'm in a group and a mob was pulled and all I need to do is stand here and kill that mob" then I would say yes - it amounted to not much. But then so do today's MMO's... with the added thing that in today's MMO's you might also have to dance while you kill - avoiding fires on the floor or whatever.
The skill though comes in when you talk about the game around the fight. In today's MMO's you typically need to know how to deal with the encounter, period. In EQ you needed to understand the game at a deeper level... knowing what could happen in the game that was intended (and unintended) - skill in EQ was actually knowledge... where skill in a game like WoW is, in my opinion, less knowledge and more hand / eye coordination and finger dexerity (of course you do need to know the fights)
Back in EQ you had much more to "know" - intended stuff within the game like "that mob will run at about 15% health" or "that type of mob has a much larger agro radius" or an understanding of what kill order shoud be in a given situation and why or a whole bunch of other things.
You also had to "know" the unintended things - like "don't cast an AOE her because you will pull mobs from other floors of the dungeon"
So - it's not that you need to know nothing in today's games. You need to know how to play your class, and you need to learn discrete fights / encounters. EQ required a broader undersanding of the whole game. Good players understood the game - bad players did not.
Or so I think.
Wandidar said:So - it's not that you need to know nothing in today's games. You need to know how to play your class, and you need to learn discrete fights / encounters. EQ required a broader undersanding of the whole game. Good players understood the game - bad players did not.
This is pretty accurate but I disagree that there is a lower knowledge requirement. Most raids in modern games are a culmination of years worth of fundamental game mechanics, so while the discrete encounters differ a lot, there is still a pretty deep understanding required.
I think the perception of EQ requiring a "deeper" understanding was due to the fact that the game was extremely ambiguous in the way that it provided mechanical information to you. The same level of knowledge is required in most games, it just doesn't require years of intimate digging around in order to fully grasp things.
I'm going to be honest and say that even if a game didn't provide this information, players would probably be able to extrapolate the game mechanics pretty rapidly just based on our decade+ of experience with the genre. I think it's pretty far-fetched to think that there are enough "original" mechanics left to implement into this genre that would give a game a learning curve as steep as classic EQ.
Liav said:I see. Well, for instance, I don't think corpse runs are really a positive thing in a modern game. EQ, to me, became a better game when I respawned with my gear upon death. I also don't think losing levels is a good mechanic, and I prefer to see experience debt or a loss of experience that caps at 0% of a level but doesn't delevel you. I'm not a huge fan of fast travel and travel is something I think classic EQ got almost 100% correct. Combat mechanics wise, EQ was too unreliant on player skill in the early day. Melee combat was reduced to auto attack and mashing Backstab (or your associated ability) every 10 seconds.
I don't think any of these things contradict any of the tenets set forth by the Pantheon designers. For instance, not having corpse runs doesn't contradict making death meaningful. There are a dozen ways to make death painful without using corpseruns.
Does any of that clarify?
I appreciate it - it does clarify your postion. And, we disagree on many things but that's ok - it's why the forums exist. And, as a friendly piece of advice, I think you'd get met with a lot less hostility if you presented all your "debate" posts like this by giving reasoning to why you feel X is bad or why Y should be implemented or with Z is better. And, you definitely seem like a very intelligent person - so I'm sure you know in advance what will be the "hot button" topics on Pantheon's forum. For better and worse, there's a lot of cynical old schoolers here that have seen one MMO after another that have promised old-school style gameplay ultimately change prior to launch. And, I know many of us, myself included, scream "get off my lawn" to any suggestions of new age mechanics which we believe trivialize gameplay. But, that doesn't mean we (or at least I) don't want to see innovation, there's just some core mechanics that I'm not willing to budge on.
Now back on point. Where we differ in opinion is on necessary timesinks and the value of them, but I don't disagree fully with you on the EQ death penalty. It was frustrating. It did cause groups to break up. It did cause you to lose levels. It did make you lose time (finite resource to all). Now, why is that a good thing and why are corpse runs necessary? Because it adds an element (time) that mangifies the overall risk/reward of the encounter. In most new MMOs, the death penalty is so trivial, even at VG launch, that the reward for trying the "challenging" named mob/dungeon/raid is a no brainer. Why wouldn't you when there's no punishment for failure? With EQ, the addition of the corpse run/harsh death penalty required you to truly weigh the risk/reward. And, because the "risk" was so much more mangified in EQ, so was feeling of accomplishment when you achieved that reward. So, am I clammoring for the harsh death penalty because I love corpse runs? No, absolutely not - I don't think anyone is that big of a masochist. I want them because of what they add to the overall gameplay; however, I'd be interested to hear on your ways of making death painful that could be greater than/equal to corpse runs.
We agree 100% that early EQ nailed meaningful travel and early EQ combat mechanics were simplistic (for pure melees); however, where we disagree is simplistic doesn't mean without skill. A bad warrior was easy to spot. I'll expand a bit.
EQ combat in and of itself wasn't "challenging" in a new-age MMO sense of twitch, fast, reflex-oriented combat, but it was challenging in the strategy within the combat. Wandidar hit on a few points, but there were others as well. I'll take the warrior as an example since they really only have 1-2 skills. Taunt/Slam (or bash if you weren't a large race). Even though, as you stated at face value I only hit "A" and 1 & 2 - there was much deeper strategy involved. I used more strategy as my warrior in EQ than I ever did in a series of rotations playing a warrior in a group in WoW.
Example: Prior to breaking a mes, I would /taunt the mob several times to obtain agro. A cleric healing creates agro - I would advise not to heal until I drew proper agro. A wizard "blasting" at full health would draw immediate agro, etc. And, as a warrior pulling (it happened) and attempting to pull constant pulls I would need to manage the group and watch available resources (mana) of the healers/casters etc. If multiple casters were pulled and there was no enchanter, I'd often switch targets when a mob was casting to /slam and then return to the original target. A mob was about ready to run away and a snare was resisted or no snarer/rooter in group? I /slammed to give a second stun for a caster to kill the mob and not draw agro from the wanderer in the hall. I would need to /taunt adds while turning auto attack off so an enchanter could mes the adds without breaking their mes. Often, I'd try to pull a mob away from a group if there was no CC and only a caster with root was available, so "ghetto-crowd control" could be used to root a second add away from the group. And, many other examples similar to this I could provide outside other than breaking down EQ combat to "just" hitting A, 1, 2. Simple mechanics, but there was deeper strategy and my knowledge/skill saved more than a few groups. And, that's using a warrior. It can become much more complex if I discussed a Bard, Enchanter, Necro, etc.
And, I know you gave the example of the rogue, and an EQ rogue was simplistic and less skill/strategy than a warrior, but really, in what game is a rogue challenging to play (outside of PVP a completely different animal). Most new games it's just a rotation of 5-10 abilities - yes, some rogues are "better" at maximizing their rotations, but a pure melee class will never be that complex, but the strategy within the combat can be - which is why I prefer the EQ mold.
So, would our 10+ years of MMO experience trivialize the resource management and strategy that was in EQ? I don't think so, but I'm also not naive to think that players won't be "better" and potentially burn through content quicker than at EQlaunch (which is why I'm hoping Pantheon has even more difficult/unique mechanics in place). And, I'm not aganist warriors/rogues in Pantheon having many more skills/abilities also than were in EQ, but I would want them to have a resource to manage as well if that were the case (endurance) in order to not create gimmicky/spammy combat with infinite resources.
So, to conclude, I'm not aganist innovation, but I'm aganist changing mechanics that worked for the sake of it. I'd rather improve on the mechanics that "worked" while innovating in other areas which would add to the overall gameplay (the crafting thread that's currently running for example).
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
On topic point for Kilsin :) - The hightened risk/reward make me more "invested" which adds more to my overall immersion in the game as well and when a game has more depth within combat, it makes me gain a greater understanding of game mechanics, which again makes the world feel more alive/real.
Raidan said:Snip.
Yeah, I tend to be hostile, probably as a result of my own brand of cynicism. It's hard to restrain.
That said, I'm really torn.
EQ's combat was a bit overly simplistic in my opinion, even still. However, Vanguard's combat could be pretty obnoxious with the required 10 line macros and GCD. I kind of think my optimal version of combat mechanics (within the spectrum of hard targeting, so not counting MOBA-style combat) is somewhere around DoDH era EQ. At this stage, a larger variety of clickable abilities existed which removed a lot of the monotony from combat. Auto attack was still huge, but activated abilities started becoming more mainstream and the game felt a lot more interactive.
Unfortunately, around this era of EQ is when the accelerated HP/mana regeneration while rested debuted. All of the downtime was gone from the game and instances were the status quo. Velious era EQ with the activated ability spectrum of the later expansions is a nice middle ground that I feel could work really well. I could be wrong, however, it's just my opinion.
In regards to the death penalty, well, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't want it but I'll deal with it one way or the other because it won't make or break the game for me. I still play P99 occasionally despite the extreme annoyance of the mechanic.
As for everything else, I think we're pretty much on the same page, I just have a poor way of expressing it.
@ Wandidar and Raidan
Id like to thank both you guys for the detailed responses. As a person who has nothing against immersion, but doesnt want it at the expense of bad game mechanics and systems. I have to say the way you 2 presented it was pretty balanced. Presenting in the way you did, lets those of us not from EQ know that your thought process isnt all "Its EQ or nothing!". And while I wouldnt use the words echo chamber, it can be pretty daunting to an outsider when the EQ defense force shouts you down for daring to express a difference of opinion. Its not all the time, but it has felt that way to me more than a few times since the original KS. So I can understand where Liav is coming from, if not his approach. So again I appreciate your efforts in this thread.
One thing I wanted to mention specifically is I am a UI minimalist, and while it helps with immersion, my major reason is I dont like too much crap on my screen. Drives me nuts. I would like some very very basic info. And I dont know if its really an immersion issue or maybe you classify it as a different kind of skill? But I am a fan of developing knowlegde of an area, mob types, and behaviors from experience. There is a lot of information that I think players should develop a "feel" for. For instance, knowing your max casting range, knowing the minimum safe distance before you get agrro, having a sense for how much dps you can pump out before you pull enmity from the tank, getting a sense for racast times, developing a sense of direction, etc. These are not things I want clearly spelled out in the UI. I want to develop a feel for them.
Also, lets not forget about the perception system. This could play a large roll in knowing our surroundings and enemies as each class provides insight for the group. Instead of it being in the UI, it might be a collaborative effort from the group. Who knows.
I'm a UI minimalist as well, which might seem contrary to what I've said about my UI desires, but not exactly.
I like my UIs to take up ~25% of my screen real-estate at maximum, but be very information dense. A first-person shooter is a good example. The UI elements are bare minimum, but every single one serves an important function and does so in a very straightforward way.
I'm fine with most UIs but I absolutely can't stand having an experience bar that doesn't display a number. It drives me insane.
Liav said:I'm a UI minimalist as well, which might seem contrary to what I've said about my UI desires, but not exactly.
I like my UIs to take up ~25% of my screen real-estate at maximum, but be very information dense. A first-person shooter is a good example. The UI elements are bare minimum, but every single one serves an important function and does so in a very straightforward way.
I'm fine with most UIs but I absolutely can't stand having an experience bar that doesn't display a number. It drives me insane.
You're right that there needs to be an evolution over what the UI of EQ gave us, and overall the info that the players get. I just don't want it delivered in a way that isn't...organic. Exp %, mob HP %, exact stat explanations, I'm all for those. I just don't think we need ShowEQ in a swirly colorful graphic around the mob we have targeted.