Why is it that the people calling out the EQ vets don't seem to have any constructive responses to the points being made other than that we're knee jerk fanboys stuck in the past? Why don't you guys stop and think for a second about what made games like DAOC, AC, EQ, AO great and what the repercutions might be when introducing some of these more modern mechanics? The whole point of a game like PRF is that it is differenct from the cookie cutter, easy mode, non virtual world "mmo" of the last 15 years.
Malsirian said:Well, yes, you can always log an alt in, run them over to where you are fighting and rez everyone (can't rez yourself) but you can't just swap out one of your character for another as needed.
In regards to games like EQ1 and VG, simply running an alt to where there was a party wipe was not realistic depending on where the raid party was. Say in the bottom of a difficult place to break into, or a plane where you need a group or special access.
zewtastic said:Malsirian said:Well, yes, you can always log an alt in, run them over to where you are fighting and rez everyone (can't rez yourself) but you can't just swap out one of your character for another as needed.
In regards to games like EQ1 and VG, simply running an alt to where there was a party wipe was not realistic depending on where the raid party was. Say in the bottom of a difficult place to break into, or a plane where you need a group or special access.
And for darn good reason. Getting places in those games was part of the quest of playing. Trivalizing that trivalizes an amazingly fun and important aspect of those games.
I'm sure many old school EQ1 vets fully remember Wipes in PoH due to crazy pathing and necro pets running amuck. And then, when your back up healer logs in - BAM, another wandering mob takes them out. Even high on the wall crazy pathing/aggro would occur.
Remember everyone in the raid throwing everything at mobs to keep them off healers so they had the precious seconds to log out.
Even Paladin's became valuable when a rez was the key to a failed raid recovering and everyone getting their corpses/gear.
Krixus said:zewtastic said:Malsirian said:Well, yes, you can always log an alt in, run them over to where you are fighting and rez everyone (can't rez yourself) but you can't just swap out one of your character for another as needed.
In regards to games like EQ1 and VG, simply running an alt to where there was a party wipe was not realistic depending on where the raid party was. Say in the bottom of a difficult place to break into, or a plane where you need a group or special access.
And for darn good reason. Getting places in those games was part of the quest of playing. Trivalizing that trivalizes an amazingly fun and important aspect of those games.
thats exactly right
Krixus said:Why is it that the people calling out the EQ vets don't seem to have any constructive responses to the points being made other than that we're knee jerk fanboys stuck in the past? Why don't you guys stop and think for a second about what made games like DAOC, AC, EQ, AO great and what the repercutions might be when introducing some of these more modern mechanics? The whole point of a game like PRF is that it is differenct from the cookie cutter, easy mode, non virtual world "mmo" of the last 15 years.
Typically because several of those conversations go something like this:
FFXI Vet: I think it would be cool if *feature from FFXI* was in PRF, it was something I liked and games still use versions of it occasionally.
EQ Vet 1: That feature is part of the reason why modern MMOs are so bad because *reasons*
EQ Vet 2: I agree with EQ Vet 1, we need to stay pure to PRFs mission.
EQ Vet 3: PRF would be a worse game for including *feature*.
FFXI Vet: Some of *reasons* are valid, but I disagree with these *reasons* and think the root cause is *other issue*
EQ Vet 1: You're wrong this has been proven time and time again.
EQ Vet 4: I agree with the others, this is a terrible idea.
Anti-EQ Vet: You EQ Vets are all not nice people and really not nice and if you can't see that then you're also not nice. These *false reasons* are why this is a good feature and all EQ Vets are bad.
VG Vet: Lets keep it civil and not use profanity. We are hard at work deciding what features to add and not add, but I'll remind everyone that PRF will be closer to VG and EQ than other games. PRF is a throwback to older MMOs.
Gurt said:Krixus said:Why is it that the people calling out the EQ vets don't seem to have any constructive responses to the points being made other than that we're knee jerk fanboys stuck in the past? Why don't you guys stop and think for a second about what made games like DAOC, AC, EQ, AO great and what the repercutions might be when introducing some of these more modern mechanics? The whole point of a game like PRF is that it is differenct from the cookie cutter, easy mode, non virtual world "mmo" of the last 15 years.
Typically because several of those conversations go something like this:
FFXI Vet: I think it would be cool if *feature from FFXI* was in PRF, it was something I liked and games still use versions of it occasionally.
EQ Vet 1: That feature is part of the reason why modern MMOs are so bad because *reasons*
EQ Vet 2: I agree with EQ Vet 1, we need to stay pure to PRFs mission.
EQ Vet 3: PRF would be a worse game for including *feature*.
FFXI Vet: Some of *reasons* are valid, but I disagree with these *reasons* and think the root cause is *other issue*
EQ Vet 1: You're wrong this has been proven time and time again.
EQ Vet 4: I agree with the others, this is a terrible idea.
Anti-EQ Vet: You EQ Vets are all not nice people and really not nice and if you can't see that then you're also not nice. These *false reasons* are why this is a good feature and all EQ Vets are bad.
- This post has been editied by VG Vet.
VG Vet: Lets keep it civil and not use profanity. We are hard at work deciding what features to add and not add, but I'll remind everyone that PRF will be closer to VG and EQ than other games. PRF is a throwback to older MMOs.
LOL dude! I wish I could like this post! The example seems to be pretty accurate forum blueprint to what Ive seen sometimes. Down to the one or 2 folks that just seem to be hostile just to be hostile. You forgot the eventual long Dev response, and it would be perfect.
Amsai said:Gurt said:Krixus said:Why is it that the people calling out the EQ vets don't seem to have any constructive responses to the points being made other than that we're knee jerk fanboys stuck in the past? Why don't you guys stop and think for a second about what made games like DAOC, AC, EQ, AO great and what the repercutions might be when introducing some of these more modern mechanics? The whole point of a game like PRF is that it is differenct from the cookie cutter, easy mode, non virtual world "mmo" of the last 15 years.
Typically because several of those conversations go something like this:
FFXI Vet: I think it would be cool if *feature from FFXI* was in PRF, it was something I liked and games still use versions of it occasionally.
EQ Vet 1: That feature is part of the reason why modern MMOs are so bad because *reasons*
EQ Vet 2: I agree with EQ Vet 1, we need to stay pure to PRFs mission.
EQ Vet 3: PRF would be a worse game for including *feature*.
FFXI Vet: Some of *reasons* are valid, but I disagree with these *reasons* and think the root cause is *other issue*
EQ Vet 1: You're wrong this has been proven time and time again.
EQ Vet 4: I agree with the others, this is a terrible idea.
Anti-EQ Vet: You EQ Vets are all not nice people and really not nice and if you can't see that then you're also not nice. These *false reasons* are why this is a good feature and all EQ Vets are bad.
- This post has been editied by VG Vet.
VG Vet: Lets keep it civil and not use profanity. We are hard at work deciding what features to add and not add, but I'll remind everyone that PRF will be closer to VG and EQ than other games. PRF is a throwback to older MMOs.
LOL dude! I wish I could like this post! The example seems to be pretty accurate forum blueprint to what Ive seen sometimes. Down to the one or 2 folks that just seem to be hostile just to be hostile. You forgot the eventual long Dev response, and it would be perfect.
Good grief. Read through this very thread again. An "EQ Vet" with a polite response detailing reasons why he doesn't like the idea, followed by Liav and Duffy crapping all over the EQ vets without saying ANYTHING about his points. PLEASE link me the replies disecting his post with valid rebuttals explaining why his concerns are inflated.
Well remeber Dullahan most of those "reasons" no matter who is posting, are not facts but opinions or opinions backed up by facts which are still opinions. And Im saying everyone is guilty of this. There truly isnt really a right or wrong in a lot of cases (relating to this game) so much as there are opinions about how things should be. And even in the rare case that someone says something that is an absolute fact, doesnt mean the other person would agree that it is or isnt an issue.
WoW Vet: Instancing has to happen!
EQ Vet: Instancing eliminates certain social aspects and ruins immersion of an open world.
WoW vet: And?
Dullahan said:^Lol, that post is hilarious, even if the nondescript "reasons" is sadly an accurate description of how everything is interpreted by some people. No matter how detailed or correct those reasons may be.
Originally I was going to have EQ Vet 1 address *other issue* and have a back and forth with FFXI Vet with other EQ Vets parroting EQ Vet 1 and generally putting FFXI Vet down to illustrate how when two people are in a well constructed debate the extras can lead to one feeling ganged up on before Anti-EQ Vet showed up, but I felt that was too long winded and brevity is the soul of wit.
I do think the exchange is unfourtunately more or less accurate, however. We should be fostering debate and expressing our own opinions, not ganging up on one or two people who are just trying to express themselves.
@ Krixus
I dont think he means in this specific thread. I have seen it go down exactly like that in a number of threads both here and over at MMORPG.com. True its very oversimplified but cant argue with the pattern. I myself have given many detailed responses to reasons why I am against or for a thing in the past, and have even tried half measures to meet in the middle. But a lot of the time it devolves into me getting ganked. But I try not to fly off the handle, but then someone who cant reply in a calmer manner takes up the torch and sometimes gets to the point I dont even want to back them up.
Gurt said:Dullahan said:^Lol, that post is hilarious, even if the nondescript "reasons" is sadly an accurate description of how everything is interpreted by some people. No matter how detailed or correct those reasons may be.
Originally I was going to have EQ Vet 1 address *other issue* and have a back and forth with FFXI Vet with other EQ Vets parroting EQ Vet 1 and generally putting FFXI Vet down to illustrate how when two people are in a well constructed debate the extras can lead to one feeling ganged up on, but I felt that was too long winded and brevity is the soul of wit.
I do think the exchange is unfourtunately more or less accurate, however. We should be fostering debate and expressing our own opinions, not ganging up on one or two people who are just trying to express themselves.
When we argue about instancing, for example, NOBODY denies that there is an issue which instancing is being used to help fix. Yet when we(EQ vets hereby referred to as we) lay out detailed valid points(after points after points) as to why we don't like instancing, the people who disagree can't seem to acknowledge anyone else's point.
I can acknowledge that kill stealing sucks and therefore it is valid for a player to want encounters locked to them.
I can acknowledge that poop socking sucks and that instancing solves this problem.
I can acknowledge that time sinks in games are harder to deal with today than in 1999 and that things like auction houses and caravans can make time spent in game more efficient.
Why, seemingly, can the EQ vet haters not acknolwedge post after post with extremely well thought out points as to why the current "modern" solutions to the above problems are problems in and of themselves? That is exactly why we start saying thing like "you don't get it". Because people continue to demonstrate that they cannot appreciate where we are coming from. If you do not understand what it means to play a 3d mud, in a virtual world, without instancing and fast travel and automated mail flying items through the air, then you don't have a leg to stand on in the argument. If you can't see both sides, it's not a discussion, it's a p!ssing match.
It's all about identifying problems and coming up with solutions that aren't throwing the baby out with the bath water. Eliminating kill stealing, for example, at the expense of some other core tenet of the game is not worth it(to me). People see the mitigation of one thing they don't like and yet seemingly refuse to see that the fix created another really bad problem.
Bottom line, EQ vets are smarter, better looking people, who know better about pretty much evertying, make more money and are straight up just better people than those who disagree with us.
Amsai said:Well remeber Dullahan most of those "reasons" no matter who is posting, are not facts but opinions or opinions backed up by facts which are still opinions. And Im saying everyone is guilty of this. There truly isnt really a right or wrong in a lot of cases (relating to this game) so much as there are opinions about how things should be. And even in the rare case that someone says something that is an absolute fact, doesnt mean the other person would agree that it is or isnt an issue.
WoW Vet: Instancing has to happen!
EQ Vet: Instancing eliminates certain social aspects and ruins immersion of an open world.
WoW vet: And?
I think this might be the real issue here. You see, our discussions are not always a matter of opinions. Often preferences do play a part, but they are usually rooted in facts that are quickly dismissed as opinions or prejudice.
Dullahan said:Amsai said:Well remeber Dullahan most of those "reasons" no matter who is posting, are not facts but opinions or opinions backed up by facts which are still opinions. And Im saying everyone is guilty of this. There truly isnt really a right or wrong in a lot of cases (relating to this game) so much as there are opinions about how things should be. And even in the rare case that someone says something that is an absolute fact, doesnt mean the other person would agree that it is or isnt an issue.
WoW Vet: Instancing has to happen!
EQ Vet: Instancing eliminates certain social aspects and ruins immersion of an open world.
WoW vet: And?
I think this might be the real issue here. You see, our discussions are not always a matter of opinions. Often preferences do play a part, but they are usually rooted in facts that are quickly dismissed as opinions or prejudice.
No............ Im pretty sure anything in a game or how a game should or shouldnt be is an opinion. I absolutely do believe in right and wrong and fact and fiction to be clear. We might disagree on some issues Dullahan but I can tell fact from fiction ya know. Is there something you think I cant tell the difference on? Id love to hear it. And again just because I acknowledge something as factually true does not mean I have to agree or disagree with it being an issue.
Krixus said:When we argue about instancing, for example, NOBODY denies that there is an issue which instancing is being used to help fix. Yet when we(EQ vets hereby referred to as we) lay out detailed valid points(after points after points) as to why we don't like instancing, the people who disagree can't seem to acknowledge anyone else's point.
I can acknowledge that kill stealing sucks and therefore it is valid for a player to want encounters locked to them.
I can acknowledge that poop socking sucks and that instancing solves this problem.
I can acknowledge that time sinks in games are harder to deal with today than in 1999 and that things like auction houses and caravans can make time spent in game more efficient.
Why, seemingly, can the EQ vet haters not acknolwedge post after post with extremely well thought out points as to why the current "modern" solutions to the above problems are problems in and of themselves without being labeled a fan boy. That is exactly why we start saying thing like "you don't get it". Because people continue to demonstrate that they cannot appreciate where we are coming from. If you do not understand what it means to play a 3d mud, in a virtual world, without instancing and fast travel and automated mail flying items through the air, then you don't have a leg to stand on in the argument. If you can't see both sides, it's not a discussion, it's a p!ssing match.
It's all about identifying problems and coming up with solutions that aren't throwing the baby out with the bath water. Eliminating kill stealing, for example, at the expense of some other core tenet of the game is not worth it(to me). People see the mitigation of one thing they don't like and yet seemingly refuse to see that the fix created another really bad problem.
I think the issue here is less that the people who disagree can't seem to acknowledge anyone else's point (although there are a few to be certain) and more that they disagree with the notion that they're throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Krixus said:Bottom line, EQ vets are smarter, better looking people, who know better about pretty much evertying, make more money and are straight up just better people than those who disagree with us.
On this much, I can agree 100%. Some of us blessed to be vets of the Master Game are called to care for our unwashed lessers.
Krixus said:Gurt said:Dullahan said:^Lol, that post is hilarious, even if the nondescript "reasons" is sadly an accurate description of how everything is interpreted by some people. No matter how detailed or correct those reasons may be.
Originally I was going to have EQ Vet 1 address *other issue* and have a back and forth with FFXI Vet with other EQ Vets parroting EQ Vet 1 and generally putting FFXI Vet down to illustrate how when two people are in a well constructed debate the extras can lead to one feeling ganged up on, but I felt that was too long winded and brevity is the soul of wit.
I do think the exchange is unfourtunately more or less accurate, however. We should be fostering debate and expressing our own opinions, not ganging up on one or two people who are just trying to express themselves.
When we argue about instancing, for example, NOBODY denies that there is an issue which instancing is being used to help fix. Yet when we(EQ vets hereby referred to as we) lay out detailed valid points(after points after points) as to why we don't like instancing, the people who disagree can't seem to acknowledge anyone else's point.
I can acknowledge that kill stealing sucks and therefore it is valid for a player to want encounters locked to them.
I can acknowledge that poop socking sucks and that instancing solves this problem.
I can acknowledge that time sinks in games are harder to deal with today than in 1999 and that things like auction houses and caravans can make time spent in game more efficient.
Why, seemingly, can the EQ vet haters not acknolwedge post after post with extremely well thought out points as to why the current "modern" solutions to the above problems are problems in and of themselves without being labeled a fan boy. That is exactly why we start saying thing like "you don't get it". Because people continue to demonstrate that they cannot appreciate where we are coming from. If you do not understand what it means to play a 3d mud, in a virtual world, without instancing and fast travel and automated mail flying items through the air, then you don't have a leg to stand on in the argument. If you can't see both sides, it's not a discussion, it's a p!ssing match.
It's all about identifying problems and coming up with solutions that aren't throwing the baby out with the bath water. Eliminating kill stealing, for example, at the expense of some other core tenet of the game is not worth it(to me). People see the mitigation of one thing they don't like and yet seemingly refuse to see that the fix created another really bad problem.
Bottom line, EQ vets are smarter, better looking people, who know better about pretty much evertying, make more money and are straight up just better people than those who disagree with us.
I'll take a stab at it. I think its as simple as my EQvet vs WoW vet example. Its not that they dont get it. They do! They just dont see it being a problem and definitely dont see it as a cure worse than the disease thing. I.E. They neither care about immersion, RP, or social interaction. Or at the very least they dont care about it nearly as much as others.
FYI I have posted my solution to replace the idea that Instancing is needed several times in different threads here and over at MMORPG.com. The only real feedback I go was from Raidan and Dullahan. In which both had some positive things to say about it but wouldnt want it for all content or in place of Raid content. I can try to dig it up if you like but not tonight.
The question/s I want to ask is/are simple.
What positive element is added to the game by requiring you to run your alt to a group rather than use a caravan system? Why was this really stupid, inflammatory title chosen for this thread?
Why am I being accused of being "anti-EQ vet" when I myself have played EQ for as long or longer than most of the self-proclaimed EQ vets here? Maybe I just dislike the bias that the overwhelming majority of you bring to the table. =/
Liav said:The question/s I want to ask is/are simple.
What positive element is added to the game by requiring you to run your alt to a group rather than use a caravan system? Why was this really stupid, inflammatory title chosen for this thread?
Why am I being accused of being "anti-EQ vet" when I myself have played EQ for as long or longer than most of the self-proclaimed EQ vets here? Maybe I just dislike the bias that the overwhelming majority of you bring to the table. =/
You calling someone else's post stupid and inflammatory = hi-larious!
Sevens, from the bottom of my heart, I really didn't try to insult you or anybody. Really. My apologies if I wasn't clear enough and yes, it was a heated reply and my apologies also, if it was too heated and unnecessarily so. But I never, ever try to insult anybody here or in other forums on purpose and if I ever plan to, it would be something really inept because the subtleties of English are lost on me.
Duffy said:Sevens, from the bottom of my heart, I really didn't try to insult you or anybody. Really. My apologies if I wasn't clear enough and yes, it was a heated reply and my apologies also, if it was too heated and unnecessarily so. But I never, ever try to insult anybody here or in other forums on purpose and if I ever plan to, it would be something really inept because the subtleties of English are lost on me.
Duffy just to be clear I wasnt meaning you...we may disagree on alot of thing but I have never once thought of you as a toxic poster. I totally respect that you have certain ideas about how the game should be and I have no problem with a heated debate.