Obviously in a high fantasy game nothing is 'realisitc'. What I do is think to myself, "If this fantasy world were real, what would be realistic"? That's why it's easy for me to use blanket statements like "Pure melee's should not get gate spells" or "trivial loot code shouldn't be the game". To me, there's nothing stopping you from picking up a weapon as long as it's not magically enchanted to not allow you to pick it up (say a race or class restriction), or warriors are going to be too dumb to know magic. I suppose that would be my definition of realism in a game.
(0 ~ 1,000 scale)
You have become better at: safe fall (12)...
two months later...
You have become better at: safe fall (27)...
It doesn't matter what skill.. block, intimidate, disarm, feign death, dual wield, sense heading... etc. Those are skills, that have their own progression based on use. Your skills in Pantheon will matter more than your gear. How skillfull and able your Character is.. will be more important and matter more.. than what you are able to wear.
Hieromonk said:It doesn't matter what skill.. block, intimidate, disarm, feign death, dual wield, sense heading... etc. Those are skills, that have their own progression based on use. Your skills in Pantheon will matter more than your gear. How skillfull and able your Character is.. will be more important and matter more.. than what you are able to wear.
Based on what? Nothing?
Exactly how do you know what systems are in place for pantheon before the game is even built? I actually question that skills will be as important as you think considering the emphasis on situational gear and environmental danger (could easily see skill doing very little in how you interact with a blizzard condition). That isn't to say they could not be, it all depends on how things are designed and nobody knows how that is yet.
Mephiles said:Hieromonk said:It doesn't matter what skill.. block, intimidate, disarm, feign death, dual wield, sense heading... etc. Those are skills, that have their own progression based on use. Your skills in Pantheon will matter more than your gear. How skillfull and able your Character is.. will be more important and matter more.. than what you are able to wear.
Based on what? Nothing?
Exactly how do you know what systems are in place for pantheon before the game is even built? I actually question that skills will be as important as you think considering the emphasis on situational gear and environmental danger (could easily see skill doing very little in how you interact with a blizzard condition). That isn't to say they could not be, it all depends on how things are designed and nobody knows how that is yet.
I personally hope gear is more important than skills. Making skills more important places the emphasis on the grind and getting to max. When the emphasis is on gear, it helps people focus on the journey and the need for other people (at least, in a truly multiplayer MMO).
Don't do bright, overly vibrant graphics. Don't take something and saturate it to death. It's bloody offensive! I can't even consider touching a lot of MMO's because of it. Fortunately, the colour pallete that's being used in Pantheon so far looks spot-on for the most part of what I really like. Great job there! If I want to watch a cartoon I'll hit up Cartoon Network.
Gear should be proportonate to the character model. I'm sure in the database depending on race you can have settings that x and y race should have item b and a scale to a proper size for a character model.
In EverQuest I had a problem with say a Dwarf running around with a lance that was ten miles long, there was no jousting in the game, it shouldn't have happened to begin with. With a lance you're lucky to hold the thing still and make minute changes to its orientation as you're bouncing along on horseback, let alone running with it. Really? ...
Then again if there's a specific reason why you're doing something totally unrealistic like walking on water courtesy of a walk-on-water spell, I dig it. That's cool, there's a reasoning for it.
I want a magical land that could theoretically be possible provided magic can be, however I don't like physical abomination unless it's a monster or a hideously warped creature. A three armed player character race or a tail on a human/elf/etc. model would totally turn me off but if you're fighting against these types of things around an area high in radiation I could see it being explained ...
Vade said:In EverQuest I had a problem with say a Dwarf running around with a lance that was ten miles long, there was no jousting in the game, it shouldn't have happened to begin with. With a lance you're lucky to hold the thing still and make minute changes to its orientation as you're bouncing along on horseback, let alone running with it. Really? ...
I always thought it was hysterical that a spear was many times listed as a 1HP weapon and watching dwarves and gnomes backstab using spears just had me laughing every time.
Dullahan said:I personally hope gear is more important than skills. Making skills more important places the emphasis on the grind and getting to max. When the emphasis is on gear, it helps people focus on the journey and the need for other people (at least, in a truly multiplayer MMO).
It could really be done either way. I liked in EQ1 that you didn't go looking into your bag after every kill to see if an upgrade dropped. It was about the gameplay for the most part. Being in the high 20's and the finally having a Fine Steel whatever.... They didn't go nuts with stats and items... not that was really noticeable. I hate how in most recent games you have to constantly check your gear to see if you could put something new on.
Hieromonk said:(0 ~ 1,000 scale)
You have become better at: safe fall (12)...
two months later...
You have become better at: safe fall (27)...
It doesn't matter what skill.. block, intimidate, disarm, feign death, dual wield, sense heading... etc. Those are skills, that have their own progression based on use. Your skills in Pantheon will matter more than your gear. How skillfull and able your Character is.. will be more important and matter more.. than what you are able to wear.
I think I got 150 safe fall increases waiting for the boat in BB one day, just running up and falling down the cliffs outside the docks.
Rubezahl said:Dullahan said:I personally hope gear is more important than skills. Making skills more important places the emphasis on the grind and getting to max. When the emphasis is on gear, it helps people focus on the journey and the need for other people (at least, in a truly multiplayer MMO).
It could really be done either way. I liked in EQ1 that you didn't go looking into your bag after every kill to see if an upgrade dropped. It was about the gameplay for the most part. Being in the high 20's and the finally having a Fine Steel whatever.... They didn't go nuts with stats and items... not that was really noticeable. I hate how in most recent games you have to constantly check your gear to see if you could put something new on.
That is not even close to what I said.
I simply said that items should carry more weight than your skills (ie level). When your skills are more powerful, then players only want to get the highest skills, ie. highest level. When your gear determines your ability to progress, it frees the player from the rush to end game mentality and allows them to concentrate on how to improve their character today.
Dullahan said:Rubezahl said:Dullahan said:I personally hope gear is more important than skills. Making skills more important places the emphasis on the grind and getting to max. When the emphasis is on gear, it helps people focus on the journey and the need for other people (at least, in a truly multiplayer MMO).
It could really be done either way. I liked in EQ1 that you didn't go looking into your bag after every kill to see if an upgrade dropped. It was about the gameplay for the most part. Being in the high 20's and the finally having a Fine Steel whatever.... They didn't go nuts with stats and items... not that was really noticeable. I hate how in most recent games you have to constantly check your gear to see if you could put something new on.
That is not even close to what I said.
I simply said that items should carry more weight than your skills (ie level). When your skills are more powerful, then players only want to get the highest skills, ie. highest level. When your gear determines your ability to progress, it frees the player from the rush to end game mentality and allows them to concentrate on how to improve their character today.
That is not even close to what I said.
I simply said that skills should carry more weight than your items (ie item level). When your items are more powerful, then players only want to get the highest items, ie. highest level. When your skill determines your ability to progress, it frees the player from the rush to end game mentality and allows them to concentrate on how to improve their character today.
See what I did there? All I am doing is playing devil's advocate. Personally I think the skills and items need to be balanced so neither one gets in the way of gameplay, yet there can be a feeling of progression that some people really seem to crave... And frankly, the devs who are working on this did fairly well in past games, so I'm not too worried what system they put in. I don't have one system that is going to make or break my experience. If you are hanging on by that kind of thread, then there is probably not a game out there that will ever satisfy you... because EQ, as great as it was... wasn't always that great. The game had a lot of issues. But it was your first... so you remember it fondly for taking your MMO cherry.
EQ was fantastic, but it was the only game in town. It was buggy as heck, customer service was almost a nightmare, and time. I was able to be successful because I had tons of time to dedicate to it. EQ wasn't nearly as hard as it was time consuming. And, understand, I LOVED EQ... but perhaps we are just glamorizing it a bit because of how much all these quest games suck right now. I thought Vanguard was an improvement to a lot of those EQ elements, and would have done fantastic if it weren't for the troubles in the beginning. These are my opinions and I understand if they upset you.
But, can we stop stating opinions as if they are fact? Just because you did or did not enjoy an aspect of a game does not mean that is the definitive way it should or should not be done. Just like mine... it is just an opinion, and in the end we just look like some message board morons arguing over politics... and neither of us is a politician...
Rubezahl said:Dullahan said:Rubezahl said:Dullahan said:I personally hope gear is more important than skills. Making skills more important places the emphasis on the grind and getting to max. When the emphasis is on gear, it helps people focus on the journey and the need for other people (at least, in a truly multiplayer MMO).
It could really be done either way. I liked in EQ1 that you didn't go looking into your bag after every kill to see if an upgrade dropped. It was about the gameplay for the most part. Being in the high 20's and the finally having a Fine Steel whatever.... They didn't go nuts with stats and items... not that was really noticeable. I hate how in most recent games you have to constantly check your gear to see if you could put something new on.
That is not even close to what I said.
I simply said that items should carry more weight than your skills (ie level). When your skills are more powerful, then players only want to get the highest skills, ie. highest level. When your gear determines your ability to progress, it frees the player from the rush to end game mentality and allows them to concentrate on how to improve their character today.
That is not even close to what I said.
Looking for items in your bags after every kill holds no relevance to what I was saying.
Rubezahl said:I simply said that skills should carry more weight than your items (ie item level). When your items are more powerful, then players only want to get the highest items, ie. highest level. When your skill determines your ability to progress, it frees the player from the rush to end game mentality and allows them to concentrate on how to improve their character today.
See what I did there?
Ya, or rather what you tried to do. Unfortunately, it made as much sense as pickles in icecream. In a system where items are more important, getting the "highest items" can only be achieved by getting the items currently available to you. However, when it comes to skills or specifically levels, there have always been ways to circumvent most of the game in order to grind to the end. That cannot be the case when both content and even gaining experience is heavily gated behind improving your gear.
Rubezahl said:All I am doing is playing devil's advocate. Personally I think the skills and items need to be balanced so neither one gets in the way of gameplay, yet there can be a feeling of progression that some people really seem to crave... And frankly, the devs who are working on this did fairly well in past games, so I'm not too worried what system they put in. I don't have one system that is going to make or break my experience. If you are hanging on by that kind of thread, then there is probably not a game out there that will ever satisfy you... because EQ, as great as it was... wasn't always that great. The game had a lot of issues. But it was your first... so you remember it fondly for taking your MMO cherry.
I agree, level and skill works together with gear. With only gear based progression, it diminishes the sense of accomplishment in finally achieving higher level spells and abilities as well as access to new places.
Rubezahl said:EQ was fantastic, but it was the only game in town. It was buggy as heck, customer service was almost a nightmare, and time. I was able to be successful because I had tons of time to dedicate to it. EQ wasn't nearly as hard as it was time consuming. And, understand, I LOVED EQ... but perhaps we are just glamorizing it a bit because of how much all these quest games suck right now. I thought Vanguard was an improvement to a lot of those EQ elements, and would have done fantastic if it weren't for the troubles in the beginning. These are my opinions and I understand if they upset you.
Why would your opinions upset me. Who are you that your opinions should matter to me at all? Think highly of ourselves do we?
Rubezahl said:But, can we stop stating opinions as if they are fact? Just because you did or did not enjoy an aspect of a game does not mean that is the definitive way it should or should not be done. Just like mine... it is just an opinion, and in the end we just look like some message board morons arguing over politics... and neither of us is a politician...
Its not about what I think, these are very straight forward concepts. Like you said, things have changed and there is no guarantees that anything will work, but then again, I never claimed anything I said to be absolute as you are once again trying to imply.
Mephiles said:Hieromonk said:It doesn't matter what skill.. block, intimidate, disarm, feign death, dual wield, sense heading... etc. Those are skills, that have their own progression based on use. Your skills in Pantheon will matter more than your gear. How skillfull and able your Character is.. will be more important and matter more.. than what you are able to wear.
Based on what? Nothing?
Exactly how do you know what systems are in place for pantheon before the game is even built? I actually question that skills will be as important as you think considering the emphasis on situational gear and environmental danger (could easily see skill doing very little in how you interact with a blizzard condition). That isn't to say they could not be, it all depends on how things are designed and nobody knows how that is yet.
Based on the fact Brad said himself.
That skills (amassed) and how you play your character, will define you more than the equipment you are wearing. Gear is situational, but if YOUR warrior has a taunt skill (better than BASH), and doesn't need a shield to use... , then his situation is different than THEIR warrior, who needs a shield...
Not every Class is going to have the same skills, this is not cookie cutter stuff. Two monks might have went off in different direction, met different master and learned different things.. what each can do is situationally dependant on what skills they know.
One's GEAR will help you mitigate situations, not solve them.
So just like in real life... you don't show up to a Football game in Soccer gear. Crafting and GEAR will be important, it just won't make the character. You have to have a good healthy economy and a real market. Gear must be real.. and must have maintenance cost.. and must be tailored to your particular role.
Swimming underwatrer in full Platemail... how real is that?
This kind of conjecture is exactly why I stopped using these forums. Delusions, citing opinion as fact, citing fabrications as fact. God damn, just stop already. We know literally next to nothing about the mechanics of the game, and what mechanics we do know, we have literally zero information regarding implementation.
Liav said:This kind of conjecture is exactly why I stopped using these forums. Delusions, citing opinion as fact, citing fabrications as fact. *** ****, just stop already. We know literally next to nothing about the mechanics of the game, and what mechanics we do know, we have literally zero information regarding implementation.
LOL, thanks for this. I think everyone is just excitied.
Hieromonk said:
Based on the fact Brad said himself.
That skills (amassed) and how you play your character, will define you more than the equipment you are wearing. Gear is situational, but if YOUR warrior has a taunt skill (better than BASH), and doesn't need a shield to use... , then his situation is different than THEIR warrior, who needs a shield...
Where did he say that? If you don't mind me asking.