Tatertoad said:Eliseus said:Some of you thinking not having an in game map in 2017 will give you the same experience that you had in 1999 is going to be disappointed.
I still know what it feels like to be lost. In real life, it's overrated. In a game, it can be fun. Sort of like fighting orcs. Very overrated IRL.
Yup I got lost many times..sometimes I died, sometimes I didn't. I got very aware of where I was as a newbie..over time. It was part of the experience. I can deal with a world map..still like the cartography skill idea, the idea of having to ask directions from guildies/friends, is something I would do. As for alt tabbing..if you have a printer you just print the map off from the exterior sites, I had a binder with my favorite areas in colour..in that book. I guess we're talking about some immersion here, and some seem to wish that they can just rush through the world with no impediments..no effort. Still an interesting conversation..are we having fun yet? :)
Immersion and looking at a piece of paper outsie of the game are about the two most mutually exclusive concepts I've ever heard of.
• My concern is once it starts, where does it end?
I understand VR says a content map.
Then some want a compass.
Then some want a /loc.
Then a basic zone map.
Then a basic zone map showing cities.
Then some will want themselves on gps
Couldn't hurt to add known camps to the maps.
Then what would it hurt to add there group on gps.
You know what would be great, if we could click on the map and set a visual point in the world to move tword.
Wouldn't it be great if it simply set a glowing path to our point we set on the map?
I believe asking for any step further in that chain is asking for one step closer to the end result (that we ALL know to be a mistake). I believe were loosing the RPG in MMORPG. The idea is to be immersed (sp) in the world. PV"Environment" to look at the crooked tree and know you turn left there, and then head to the giant rock. To champion the environment, the world, the land, the terrain that the developers have spent so much time making for us. Even / loc takes this away, and I'm one that uses /loc extensively so I'm not saying this as somebody that Doesn't know how to use it. And when I do I'm no longer in the game or looking at the world I'm staring at the chat window as I click on my /LOC hot key.
I see nothing of the world, what I see is
/loc 125, 1000, 10
/loc 130, 1001, 10
/loc 135, 1000, 10
/loc 140, 1000, 10
I don't think that's what the developers want, I don't think there spending all this time for us to ignore it.
They want us to get lost.
They want us to go with our friends to show them the way, not just give them a loc.
They want us to Conquer the environment, not just bypass it.
I think I really like there idea, a Continent view with our location on this Continent nothing more... want more detail? Look at the world they create.
edit: spell check and clean up from posting by phone
While a valid concern, it's important to realize that you can actually ask for a relatively basic feature in a game without it necessarily being a slippery slope to World of Warcraft or something equally silly.
Liav said:While a valid concern, it's important to realize that you can actually ask for a relatively basic feature in a game without it necessarily being a slippery slope to World of Warcraft or something equally silly.
I'm not so sure.
Yes you can ask for one, and let's say you get it... off YOU go happy playing the game, no more concern about the map's they are JUST as you like them....
Then in comes player X with this next great idea, let's add this "one little thing" (the next step) he's ONLY asking for a "relatively basic feature in a game without it necessarily being a slippery slope to World of Warcraft" just add that one thing too what's already there. And down we slide, a little further.
So yes, a person can ask, but I hope the Devs stand there ground, Make us use the world, or we won't. I think they need to set a boundary, a given question about adding something like map's or /loc, gps, or whatever it might be.
"Will it take away from interacting with the world they have created?"
If the answer to that question is "yes", then no don't implement it. And Zone Maps, and even /loc will indeed take away for using the world,
(concerning 3rd party maps, of course they will happen, nobody can stop them so be it. I just used EQ-Atlas today even though EQ has maps... duel monitors rocks!)
You're right, give a mouse a cookie and it'll want World of Pantheoncraft. Maybe people just shouldn't post their ideas here at all because they all invariably lead to the bottom of this very, very slippery slope you have constructed.
Also, how can you say that a map takes away from the world and then say that running dual monitors to look at third party maps is fine, implying it doesn't take away from the world? Nice contradiction.
But who sets that boundary? And who is to say whats right and whats not?
The 3 main arguments I hear to sensible mechanics are immersion, social interaction and the slippery slope. When you combine all 3 you end up not being able to make rational and sound mechanics. Because even if I try to meet in the middle on the first 2, the 3rd comes along as justification that the first 2 shouldnt even be discussed.
If nothing else, can we not just have faith that whatever those boundaries are that the devs wont give into a slippery slope. Or are we just assuming they 100% will so better set them way back to begin with?
Im actually in favor of no maps too, but just disagree with being overly worried about a slippery slope.
Lastly I want to see a game with a healthy balance of immersion, social interaction, and sound gameplay mechanics. There is such a thing as too much of a good thing.
That's the issue. The developers are not gods and they are not impartial. They can and likely will make mistakes and bad decisions. That isn't to say that Pantheon will be a bad game, but we can't just defer to their judgment on everything, either. It is in our best interest to maintain a dialogue for that reason.
I don't think there is such a thing as a hard boundary on most or all of the topics we discuss. Things are a lot more fluid than that, and in all likelihood every single thing in Pantheon will be a shade of grey that errs on one side or the other of the spectrum of all of the potential elements you mentioned, Amsai.
I don't believe maps compromise immersion whatsoever. I do believe that maps slightly impede the social aspect of navigation, however not entirely, and I don't believe that impedance on the social aspect is necessarily bad. Self sufficiency to some extent is a reasonable expectation. I do not believe that maps are a slippery slope to a World of Warcraftesque map with quest waypoints and whatever else, unless the developers are just incompetent.
I personally believe that the #3 option in Ainadak's post is the middleground.
Liav said:You're right, give a mouse a cookie and it'll want World of Pantheoncraft. Maybe people just shouldn't post their ideas here at all because they all invariably lead to the bottom of this very, very slippery slope you have constructed.
Also, how can you say that a map takes away from the world and then say that running dual monitors to look at third party maps is fine, implying it doesn't take away from the world? Nice contradiction.
What I said is "it rocks", I did not say "it's fine" and I expecally did not say it's fine for Pantheon! The point I was trying to express is if it's there I will use it, just like my main on EQ is a Wizard and I use the POK books more than I use my own Teleport spells, I mean WTF talk about a totally ruined class, a Wizard with Port's that seldom ever cast them. If I group the only teleport they want me to use is back to POK when were done, and the casters don't even want that as they are all bound by the bank
I want something NEW (old) from Pantheon... I don't want what I already have, I have learned by having it I don't even know my way arround POX, I can't even find my own trainners without using the Glowing gold path. I'm a pathetic Wizard!!
But it sure is EASY
Amsai said:But who sets that boundary? And who is to say whats right and whats not?
The 3 main arguments I hear to sensible mechanics are immersion, social interaction and the slippery slope. When you combine all 3 you end up not being able to make rational and sound mechanics. Because even if I try to meet in the middle on the first 2, the 3rd comes along as justification that the first 2 shouldnt even be discussed.
If nothing else, can we not just have faith that whatever those boundaries are that the devs wont give into a slippery slope. Or are we just assuming they 100% will so better set them way back to begin with?
Im actually in favor of no maps too, but just disagree with being overly worried about a slippery slope.
Lastly I want to see a game with a healthy balance of immersion, social interaction, and sound gameplay mechanics. There is such a thing as too much of a good thing.
Thats going to have to be the Development Team that would set that boundry (I would like to hear one from them, maybe a new Tenet?). And I'm having faith they won't be sliding down the sloap. but damn I don't know how they couldent under the pressure there going to be on from the masses even after launch, I could easly see myself caving if I was in thier position. Just going to have to trust them I suppose.
Zorkon said:What I said is "it rocks", I did not say "it's fine" and I expecally did not say it's fine for Pantheon! The point I was trying to express is if it's there I will use it, just like my main on EQ is a Wizard and I use the POK books more than I use my own Teleport spells, I mean WTF talk about a totally ruined class, a Wizard with Port's that seldom ever cast them. If I group the only teleport they want me to use is back to POK when were done, and the casters don't even want that as they are all bound by the bank
I want something NEW (old) from Pantheon... I don't want what I already have, I have learned by having it I don't even know my way arround POX, I can't even find my own trainners without using the Glowing gold path. I'm a pathetic Wizard!!But it sure is EASY
You're really just ranting about several mechanics that cumulatively made EQ a simpler game. Maps are really independent from Plane of Knowledge and the Find function, and pretty much everything else. This is wayyyyyy off topic for this thread.
Zorkon said:Thats going to have to be the Development Team that would set that boundry (I would like to hear one from them, maybe a new Tenet?). And I'm having faith they won't be sliding down the sloap. but damn I don't know how they couldent under the pressure there going to be on from the masses even after launch, I could easly see myself caving if I was in thier position. Just going to have to trust them I suppose.
They've already said that this game isn't being designed for mass appeal and is instead geared towards a niche. The tenets already pretty well address your concerns. I simply don't believe that maps run against the tenets of the game.
I have a question for those who don't like "No maps" idea, have you played EverQuest at least during Vanilla/Kunark or Velious expansions?
I'm just curious I want to see how many of those who dislike the idea of no maps are who haven't tried it before. Also, for those who actually played EQ classic and still prefer to have an in-game map; how many MMORPG have you played post 2004? (maybe because you haven't played as much new MMO you might not understand where we're coming from).
Now, No-Maps has several meaning but two are; No GPS maps (so there are maps but you don't know where you are so you can't open the map and travel by simply looking at the map) or No Maps at all except for drawn in-game map that you buy from a cartographer but there are very little details. Those maps simply give you a general idea like if you want to go to Zone X you should head North for instance.
As for GPS Maps (you can see yourself as an arrow with many details around area of interests and your objective location...etc), I believe they are out of the question (thankfully so).
I played the classic EQ Laura and i loved the no maps. I can still get to the chess board in dwarf noob area lol and other places. Just off the top of my head and I hadnt played since Wow released I jumped on that band waggon for updated graphics lol. Anyways I believe the size of the game has alot to do with it the more travel we can do the more mingling we will see. Maps make it easier to travel obviously but i totally see where your coming from with no maps and having a sense of adventure you never know whats over the hill or threw the cave or where the loading zones are. I see both sides and both have pros and cons. Im honestly leaning towards dumb maps like a topographical map just shows terain no camps no citys no nothing just elevation and landmarks like rivers lakes caves. That way your not stuck in your comfort zone but still get a sense of adventure because you still dont know whats over that hill.
Zorkon: Your slope is quite steep. I know you're worried that we'll end up with a find-by-numbers game, a watch the minimap game, or something worse. However, this group is actually quite mixed on this topic and is probably the best group for discussion that you're going to find. At release and past there may well be swathes of people expecting WoW and being upset at their perceived/actual inconveniences, but that time has not (and may not) come. You have clearly stated what you don't want, but haven't been quite as clear on what you do want. So I ask you, what do you want out of a navigation system? Are there any mechanics/features or group thereof that satisfies what you want?
Laura: I am unsure that having no maps and no /loc would produce the best experience for me. I like getting lost and I like finding my way. However, I do know from my early experiences with vanilla EQ and real life that I have a terrible sense of direction. This actually inhibited my exploration of zones in EQ, because I knew that after 3 turns I'd have no idea where I was anymore. This is just my personal experience and maybe it was in some sense the best one. I wasn't willing to explore because I was worried I would get lost and die. That meant there were scary places hidden around every unexplored corner that my imagination would fill with vicious beasts and monsters. Maybe (for me) just not being a tween anymore would change everything. Who knows.
I want to reassert something I said in a previous post. Having no maps and no /loc doesn't mean maps can't be created. Player maps can be created regardless (especially if you have sense heading) and many map making techniques that work in the real world can be simply extended to the game world. In this situation you will still have many players (myself included for the reasons previously stated) seeking external maps to guide themselves. There is no way around it that the game's competition will be externally produced maps. With nothing provided by the developers whatsoever you could expect maps like the following easily be produced externally (minus the location grid).
I should, again, be as clear as I can that this is NOT a terrible solution. It will just result in a lot of players seeking external maps. Without /loc we still maintain the requirement that they need to compare where they think they are (based on surroundings and landmarks) to the map to find their way.
If the developers chose to provide no maps, then that is their choice. However, if I were in their shoes, I would try and produce an in-game map that is competitive with, but slightly less detailed than what players will create for themselves. As I see it, the goal should be to provide just enough information in your map to disincentivize the use of external maps.
Some players have suggested the use of topographical maps, and while that would produce entirely compelling gameplay, I know that I would just seek out external maps in that situation. As much as I don't want to be that person, somewhere in my brain I will apply the cost function and it will tell me that I'll spend 2 hours in a topo map trying to find the lost treasure, but only 30 minutes if I use an external map. Spending 3 minutes finding and referring to that external map is going to win out.
I would argue that the best approach would be to provide something stylistically more appealing than the map above, but with a similar level of detail. Something like...
I played Vanilla EQ and am in favor of no maps as well. I feel like we are becoming dependant on maps in video games to the point that travel is trivial and we are annoyed when we have to think about travel. The mentioned mechanics take away the excitement of finding out where things are on your own. I feel if people want to use out of game maps that are drawn by players and stored on a website that's fine, but there shouldn't be anything in game.
In reference to Kunark and Velious I don't recall when drawn maps entered into the game. I do remember Kunark had some nasty zones. The art work was done in such a way that it was diffciult to tell where a zone wall was and even if you were able to follow it there were always mobs wandering to those areas. IMO this was a good thing because you could never get to comfortable camping an area. There was always some risk and danger involved.
Honestly I would perfer there isn't even an loc in game. There is just to much information about these games and even loc would likely make finding things and traveling a bit to comfortable and not give you that sense of adventure and danger.
I don't mind there being an ways to find corpses like spells. That is something that needs to be in game.
Classes like Rangers and possible Druids should be able to track and have abilities that are like sense heading as it makes sense for them and is part of their role in game IMO.
Ainadak said:Laura: I am unsure that having no maps and no /loc would produce the best experience for me. I like getting lost and I like finding my way. However, I do know from my early experiences with vanilla EQ and real life that I have a terrible sense of direction. This actually inhibited my exploration of zones in EQ, because I knew that after 3 turns I'd have no idea where I was anymore. This is just my personal experience and maybe it was in some sense the best one. I wasn't willing to explore because I was worried I would get lost and die. That meant there were scary places hidden around every unexplored corner that my imagination would fill with vicious beasts and monsters. Maybe (for me) just not being a tween anymore would change everything. Who knows.
I think this is the point. I had experiences in EQ where I couldn't find my way through a tunnel because it was so dark and twisted or I couldn't see in the snow and fog. I might lose my sense of direction a bit and find myself somewhere unexpected and dangerous. To me this is the exprience I am looking for. It may not be the same with others. I don't just want to go through the motions and look attempt to get the best loot. I want to explore a dangerous world and have some adventures in it. That is just my opinion though.
UnknownQuantity said:...I had experiences in EQ where I couldn't find my way through a tunnel because it was so dark and twisted or I couldn't see in the snow and fog. I might lose my sense of direction a bit and find myself somewhere unexpected and dangerous. To me this is the exprience I am looking for. It may not be the same with others. I don't just want to go through the motions and look attempt to get the best loot. I want to explore a dangerous world and have some adventures in it. That is just my opinion though.
I think everyone posting here is in the same boat for the spirit of what you're seeking. Do you believe maps and the dangerous experience you're seeking are mutually exclusive? If you campaign for no in-game maps, then you have to accept that there is an incentive to finding external maps.
I guess what I'm asking for is your opinion on the tradeoff that comes from having no maps. Some players will not use maps at all and have a dangerous and immersive experience. The flip side is that some (likely many) players will seek external maps, resulting in a less immersive experience for them.
I personally think it's more important NOT to have the /loc than whether or not we have maps. Built in GPS?! We're not cyborgs... Maybe a spell that gives you direction and position, or a skill, but I think not having /loc will create more use for summon corpse and locate corpse and create more interdependance on players. Make more classes have those type of spells. It also forces you to be more aware of your surroundings.
If we do have maps, I personally think fog of war is a must and server side storage is a must. Selling maps or finding them via quests is very cool. Character skill in making those maps should come into play.
Whether or not 100% of the population will have those maps in a week is not relavent. You still have to buy them... and you can deal with this in certain ways... you can influence the price to make them costly. Personally as a newb choosing between buying a map and buying new armor, I will choose the armor. Unless it's a dungeon or zone and I really really need it, then sure. Otherwise I'd rather rely on my own exploration skills. Maps should be expensive. I always made them expensive but obtainable in my DND games. The same should apply here.
But yeah I'd rather have an in game map without a dot for my location than have an out of game map.
I personally think using 'realism' (within a fantasy context) is the best guide. Is this something I would or should have in this setting? If not then I shouldn't. It makes the experience more realistic and immersive. That goes for EVERYTHING from maps to white lines guiding you to an NPC, to NPC quest symbols, to anything else you can think of.
Ainadak said:UnknownQuantity said:...I had experiences in EQ where I couldn't find my way through a tunnel because it was so dark and twisted or I couldn't see in the snow and fog. I might lose my sense of direction a bit and find myself somewhere unexpected and dangerous. To me this is the exprience I am looking for. It may not be the same with others. I don't just want to go through the motions and look attempt to get the best loot. I want to explore a dangerous world and have some adventures in it. That is just my opinion though.
I think everyone posting here is in the same boat for the spirit of what you're seeking. Do you believe maps and the dangerous experience you're seeking are mutually exclusive? If you campaign for no in-game maps, then you have to accept that there is an incentive to finding external maps.
I guess what I'm asking for is your opinion on the tradeoff that comes from having no maps. Some players will not use maps at all and have a dangerous and immersive experience. The flip side is that some (likely many) players will seek external maps, resulting in a less immersive experience for them.
I believe most people will take whatever helpe they can get to make things easier for them in game. Regardless of if people use maps from outside of the game or not they could still get lost if they don't have a GPS, maps with guides, or some type of /loc/sense heading to assist them. Especially if there are zones with few landmarks and a lot of the area looks fairly similar. That is often how I got lost in EQ. Large areas looked the same and sometimes I would end up going in the wrong direction accidentally. I think this could be taken a step further and the areas could be made even more diffciult to get a good grip on where you are traveling to. Having natural weather and night impediments can also make navigation difficult/dangerous. Being deistracted trying to follow a map outside of the game can also cause you to end up getting killed in game. Alll areas of EQ presented the risk of death even if you were a high level player. A hill giant might come along and start wacking on your or some other nasty mob. Even the low level mobs could whittle your health down over a period of time. I don't believe maps outside of the game will make traversing the world that much easier, but as you said I would rather play without a map as I wouldn't want to cheat myself of the experience.
CanadinaXegony said:
Tatertoad said:Eliseus said:Some of you thinking not having an in game map in 2017 will give you the same experience that you had in 1999 is going to be disappointed.
I still know what it feels like to be lost. In real life, it's overrated. In a game, it can be fun. Sort of like fighting orcs. Very overrated IRL.
Yup I got lost many times..sometimes I died, sometimes I didn't. I got very aware of where I was as a newbie..over time. It was part of the experience. I can deal with a world map..still like the cartography skill idea, the idea of having to ask directions from guildies/friends, is something I would do. As for alt tabbing..if you have a printer you just print the map off from the exterior sites, I had a binder with my favorite areas in colour..in that book. I guess we're talking about some immersion here, and some seem to wish that they can just rush through the world with no impediments..no effort. Still an interesting conversation..are we having fun yet? :)
You do know what immersion is right? Immersion in this type of game and on subject involves maps.
Liav said:That's the issue. The developers are not gods and they are not impartial. They can and likely will make mistakes and bad decisions. That isn't to say that Pantheon will be a bad game, but we can't just defer to their judgment on everything, either. It is in our best interest to maintain a dialogue for that reason.
I don't think there is such a thing as a hard boundary on most or all of the topics we discuss. Things are a lot more fluid than that, and in all likelihood every single thing in Pantheon will be a shade of grey that errs on one side or the other of the spectrum of all of the potential elements you mentioned, Amsai.
I don't believe maps compromise immersion whatsoever. I do believe that maps slightly impede the social aspect of navigation, however not entirely, and I don't believe that impedance on the social aspect is necessarily bad. Self sufficiency to some extent is a reasonable expectation. I do not believe that maps are a slippery slope to a World of Warcraftesque map with quest waypoints and whatever else, unless the developers are just incompetent.
I personally believe that the #3 option in Ainadak's post is the middleground.
Maps predate both swords and armor by quite a while. How can the idea of your adventurer character making use of a map break your immersion? I think it's safe to say that paper and/or vellum scrolls exist in Terminus. I think it's more than reasonable to think that a character in Terminus could carry around a map and, indeed, would have the sense to procure one before heading to an unfamiliar area. The hardest part of reading a map is finding your position on it in the first place. The issue I have is with a map that shows you exactly where you are at all times. That too could be explained away with magic, but I think almost all of us agree that it's something we don't want in PRF.
I prefer no minimaps, no GPS, no /loc, and in-game maps with rudimentary detail. An ability to add your own notes to the map would be nice. I also like Ainadak's idea to have in-game maps be pieces of art.
I could get on board with a generic map that shows basic overland layout but with no grids, coordinates, player position or markers. Shows the basic features, and maybe major cities. Would definately want fog of war. Purchasing, making, or questing are all fine, but still would say fog of war as well. So even if you had the map until you discover it personally then its fogged. A basic compass would be ok. No maps for dungeons, temples, ruins, crypts, etc. Having certiain classes with tracking skills could work if done carefully. Maybe something subtle with like a 6th sense sort of deal.
Amsai senses a place of danger to the North.
Amsai senses a place of safety to the East.
Amsai senses someone extremely dangerous to the South.
Amsai senses someone someone Friendly to the West.
Or maybe just part of the whole perception system thing?