Porygon said:This exactly. Wow was exponentially more challenging than eq1 raids. And there was 0 fear of death.
Besides, once every cleric had an epic, no raids feared death. It was a negligible exp loss, and when most people were playing with 90/10 into aas it never really mattered.
So, we've disproven the need for death penalty in high level raids, in a game that will thankfully not be based around high level raids. Perhaps death penalty could be different in different zones?
I still think fearing death makes things much more suspenseful, and suspense is arguably a good thing to have in many forms of entertainment.
Jesus this is crazy....
I love all the "Artifical mechanics" comments as well...stop this line of bullshit. They are both artifical mechanics...you just don't like one so its "Artifical"
Example..
Corpse run - Only your physical body is resurrected and you have to get your items that are left on your corpse. Seems logical to me. The *magic* only brings back the physical body.
No Corpse run - you are resurrected with your body and all your items...Seems logical to me. The *magic* brings back the body and items.
Neither is artifical, they both are grounded in what the *magic* allows you to do....so can we stop with ridiculous "Artifical mechanic" bs we get 2 types of recovery....one is meant to be a penalty and one is not.
Good lord i hope they don't cave to this bs or we will end up with an easy mode hand holding mmo again were you can just zerg the **** out of encounters because no one fears failure.
Lets just keep throwing **** a the encounter until we figure it out and please don't penalize us...good lord.
I didn't bring up penalties, i brought up corpse runs which is 1 penality.
Penalize by all means, break equipment, delevel, lose hours, that i acutally don't care about.. it's the stupid run to the corpse naked that should be eliminated forever.... OR as a compromise, respawn with your gear and leave the corpse out there with a timer to recover some xp. You could even make it sexier but recovering some XP and providing a small XP buff for 30min to recover xp faster to make it more enticing to recover.
Jahosphat said:I didn't bring up penalties, i brought up corpse runs which is 1 penality.
Penalize by all means, break equipment, delevel, lose hours, that i acutally don't care about.. it's the stupid run to the corpse naked that should be eliminated forever.... OR as a compromise, respawn with your gear and leave the corpse out there with a timer to recover some xp. You could even make it sexier but recovering some XP and providing a small XP buff for 30min to recover xp faster to make it more enticing to recover.
I underlined the key to everything you said...many of us do not fear any of the things you mentioned...personally i could care less....but when our items get messed with it becomes more painful and becomes a real penalty.
I did my fair share of naked corpse runs, some where my own fault from pushing myself way to far, others were bad luck and others were bad groups, but through all of the deaths only one thing feared me...losing my items...xp loss, item repair all of that is a joke in the end. We will have 90/100 xp rezs, item repair has never been a big deal. These things are like a mosquito, mildy aggravating at best.
Losing my items so that i may have to actually request assistance is scary, but i always found someone to help and usually paid them in kind for their services. (community matters)
Now if they would do xp loss and stop the ridiculous xp rezs that would be great...say 6 deaths and you delevel...this would change how the game is played by everyone...no longer would raid guilds spend a night wiping wiping wiping. They would have to break and regain their power after a certain number of deaths, this would in turn slow progression down which is never a bad thing. If we as a raid die multiple times we should be penalized heavily just as a group or individual should. Groups would have to actually be tactically sound as each death could be hours of xp loss...
Serious xp penalties could change the behavior of an mmo drastically but people would just whine about that instead of corpse runs because in general people want path of least resistance.
Of course not. Bad experiences are necessary in order to really make things fun. That is why so many of us get jobs we really hate with bosses that are horrible. I mean If we liked our jobs, how could we possibly enjoy our time off? It is impossible to enjoy spending time with ones family if one also enjoys the work they do on a day in day out basis.
People have always done it. The pains of the past have faded, the pains of the today are fresh. Even if the new ones were not even close to as bad as the old, they hurt more today.
Edit: My personal feelings, I find the notion of paying for someone to help me on a corpse run like paying for someone to fill a group. Which is to say, distasteful. Paying for something being crafted seems like buying something at a store. Paying to get my corpse feels like paying for a friend or at best paying to get scammed.
Porygon said:Naunet said:Tralyan said:This is confusing. There is absolutely no challenge at all if there isn't a fear of failure/dying.A thing can be as hard as it wants, but if you can't fail at it, what's the point? Otherwise it's like joining a race when you're the only contender. That's not a race - that's called practice.
The point is to challenge yourself with the mechanics of an encounter. I disagree completely that you need to fear failure. I enjoy many of the most challenging raid encounters I've had the pleasure of working on in WildStar; fearing death did not play one iota into the challenge or my enjoyment.
Fearing death isn't challenge. The mechanics are what bring challenge.
This exactly. Wow was exponentially more challenging than eq1 raids. And there was 0 fear of death.
Besides, once every cleric had an epic, no raids feared death. It was a negligible exp loss, and when most people were playing with 90/10 into aas it never really mattered.
I would argue that, even though it's true that WoW raids were objectively more challenging - insofar as mechanics - that they weren't as suspenseful and were less memorable than EQ raids. I'd even wager that the fierce nostalgia so many people feel for EQ is directly related to the death penalties.
Taking the example I used before, with a foot race. Athletes don't remember the times they practiced, but they DO remember the times they competed. The competition came with an inherent fear of failure by racing other people. EQ raids may not have been harder, but they absolutely were more competitive simply by virtue of the price of failure.
As for the cleric epic - yeah, that's true. So let's just hope VR doesn't add that. Or at least makes the use of it punishing.
BeaverBiscuit said:So, we've disproven the need for death penalty in high level raids, in a game that will thankfully not be based around high level raids. Perhaps death penalty could be different in different zones?
I could actually get behind this idea. But I don't see too many "raid" zones in pantheon.
Tralyan said:I would argue that, even though it's true that WoW raids were objectively more challenging - insofar as mechanics - that they weren't as suspenseful and were less memorable than EQ raids. I'd even wager that the fierce nostalgia so many people feel for EQ is directly related to the death penalties.
I both agree and disagree. I think it depends on what drives you. For Me, raising has always been my goal, and while there were a few events in eq1 that I really enjoyed. There's so many more in WoW (before the watering down of course, think vanilla and BC).
If you dont really care about raids. Even something like killing Vindi for the first time can seem ridiculously amazing.
To me it's not just about 1 argument or decision, whether it's offline travel or rested exp or no corpse runs or 200 hours to max level or instances or auction houses, it's about what those things represent, and how they, as a collection, contradict the core values/philosophy of a game. So while Pantheon may not have any corpse run mechanic and still end up being the best game ever, it's logical to look at each issue in a vacuum and think "that's a bad idea", because if they "cave" on too many of these issues, then the game will end up like everything else out there. And I'll shy from speaking for anyone else, but I believe that's why the vast majority of us are here, because we don't want what's out there right now.
If there are caravans for offline travel in the game, is it doomed? No.
If there's a global auction house, is it doomed? No.
If there's global chat, is it doomed? No.
If half the classes can rez, is it doomed? No.
If half the classes can teleport, is it doomed? No.
If there's EXP debt instead of level loss, is it doomed? No.
If there's a match maker, is it doomed? No.
If there are no corpse retreivals, is it doomed? No.
If there's very limited instancing, is it doomed? No.
If there's rested EXP bonus, is it doomed? No.
If you can solo to max level in a month, is it doomed? No.
However, if all, or imo, even a few of those things are in the game, is it doomed? To me the answer is: absolutely. And this is why people are concerned about the "catering" to what people claim are simply QoL mechanics, but really are the neutering of the world. I'm not sure if slippery slope is the proper argument, but at the very least it's analogous.
Keno Monster said:To me it's not just about 1 argument or decision, whether it's offline travel or rested exp or no corpse runs or 200 hours to max level or instances or auction houses, it's about what those things represent, and how they, as a collection, contradict the core values/philosophy of a game. So while Pantheon may not have any corpse run mechanic and still end up being the best game ever, it's logical to look at each issue in a vacuum and think "that's a bad idea", because if they "cave" on too many of these issues, then the game will end up like everything else out there. And I'll shy from speaking for anyone else, but I believe that's why the vast majority of us are here, because we don't want what's out there right now.
If there are caravans for offline travel in the game, is it doomed? No.
If there's a global auction house, is it doomed? No.
If there's global chat, is it doomed? No.
If half the classes can rez, is it doomed? No.
If half the classes can teleport, is it doomed? No.
If there's EXP debt instead of level loss, is it doomed? No.
If there's a match maker, is it doomed? No.
If there are no corpse retreivals, is it doomed? No.
If there's very limited instancing, is it doomed? No.
If there's rested EXP bonus, is it doomed? No.
If you can solo to max level in a month, is it doomed? No.
However, if all, or imo, even a few of those things are in the game, is it doomed? To me the answer is: absolutely. And this is why people are concerned about the "catering" to what people claim are simply QoL mechanics, but really are the neutering of the world. I'm not sure if slippery slope is the proper argument, but at the very least it's analogous.
I don't always agree with your posts, but this was very well said.
Tralyan said:Keno Monster said:To me it's not just about 1 argument or decision, whether it's offline travel or rested exp or no corpse runs or 200 hours to max level or instances or auction houses, it's about what those things represent, and how they, as a collection, contradict the core values/philosophy of a game. So while Pantheon may not have any corpse run mechanic and still end up being the best game ever, it's logical to look at each issue in a vacuum and think "that's a bad idea", because if they "cave" on too many of these issues, then the game will end up like everything else out there. And I'll shy from speaking for anyone else, but I believe that's why the vast majority of us are here, because we don't want what's out there right now.
If there are caravans for offline travel in the game, is it doomed? No.
If there's a global auction house, is it doomed? No.
If there's global chat, is it doomed? No.
If half the classes can rez, is it doomed? No.
If half the classes can teleport, is it doomed? No.
If there's EXP debt instead of level loss, is it doomed? No.
If there's a match maker, is it doomed? No.
If there are no corpse retreivals, is it doomed? No.
If there's very limited instancing, is it doomed? No.
If there's rested EXP bonus, is it doomed? No.
If you can solo to max level in a month, is it doomed? No.
However, if all, or imo, even a few of those things are in the game, is it doomed? To me the answer is: absolutely. And this is why people are concerned about the "catering" to what people claim are simply QoL mechanics, but really are the neutering of the world. I'm not sure if slippery slope is the proper argument, but at the very least it's analogous.
I don't always agree with your posts, but this was very well said.
I felt the same way about the first half. But then I got to the examples. And I'm not entirely sure if you were just reaching on some for quantity. Or if you really feel several of these could impact the game in a negative way.
It's clear that I view things very different than most. I've said before that I dont mind playing a video game as opposed to being immersed in a world...
But would this game having, say, global auction house, exp debts, rested exp and limited instancing REALLY doom it to failure.
I definitely feel a lot of your examples are much much more powerful than some (like most classes rezzing/teleporting).
Idk, just trying to understand.
Porygon said:I felt the same way about the first half. But then I got to the examples. And I'm not entirely sure if you were just reaching on some for quantity. Or if you really feel several of these could impact the game in a negative way.
It's clear that I view things very different than most. I've said before that I dont mind playing a video game as opposed to being immersed in a world...
But would this game having, say, global auction house, exp debts, rested exp and limited instancing REALLY doom it to failure.
I definitely feel a lot of your examples are much much more powerful than some (like most classes rezzing/teleporting).
Idk, just trying to understand.
In a nutshell, I think all of those things are negative, yes. But I don't want to argue about individuals, that's beyond the point.
Those examples represent a theme, a philosophy. If you have too many of those things in the game, it will cease to be what many of us signed up for, and I think particularly the people who kickstarted and early backed.
These "negative" elements move the game further away from the core values that made EQ magic. Yes, this isn't EQ. But if they move too far away from those values, they will lose a great many people.
We can say "this isn't EQ" all we want, but it's being intellectually dishonest, imo, to ignore that EQ is exactly why a huge portion of the supporters are backing this game.
Keno Monster said:These "negative" elements move the game further away from the core values that made EQ magic. Yes, this isn't EQ. But if they move too far away from those values, they will lose a great many people.
We can say "this isn't EQ" all we want, but it's being intellectually dishonest, imo, to ignore that EQ is exactly why a huge portion of the supporters are backing this game.
I'm not trying to argue. Just genuinely curious. I understand where you're coming from. But my question is.
If one or more of those elements would bring in significantly more players, would you still be largely opposed to it. I dont think anyone wants to play a game that has a terrible population, no matter how good it is.
If sacrificing some of the tenants that "old school" mmos usually favored, in return to double your playerbase. Would that really be a bad thing?
Like, do you value the lack of QoL mechanics in eq so much that you would rather play a game similar to other with a low population vs a game with some added "bonuses" and a much healthier population.
I know it's kinda reaching to the far end of the spectrum, but it piqued my curiosity.
Porygon said:Keno Monster said:These "negative" elements move the game further away from the core values that made EQ magic. Yes, this isn't EQ. But if they move too far away from those values, they will lose a great many people.
We can say "this isn't EQ" all we want, but it's being intellectually dishonest, imo, to ignore that EQ is exactly why a huge portion of the supporters are backing this game.
I'm not trying to argue. Just genuinely curious. I understand where you're coming from. But my question is.
If one or more of those elements would bring in significantly more players, would you still be largely opposed to it. I dont think anyone wants to play a game that has a terrible population, no matter how good it is.
If sacrificing some of the tenants that "old school" mmos usually favored, in return to double your playerbase. Would that really be a bad thing?
Like, do you value the lack of QoL mechanics in eq so much that you would rather play a game similar to other with a low population vs a game with some added "bonuses" and a much healthier population.
I know it's kinda reaching to the far end of the spectrum, but it piqued my curiosity.
I would absolutely pay $30 a month to support a lower population game that was more aligned with my ideals.
I don't have all the answers. To an extent, it's all a hypocrisy. I don't want changes made that I feel are catering to a specific demographic(EZ MODE), which in turn means that I want to be catered to myself(HARDCORE RAAAAR!). The reality is somewhere in between.
You say QoL, I say destruction of emergent gameplay, and ultimately the virtual world.
I don't think any of the issues would bolster the playerbase significantly if added. While I'd like the game to be a massive success I would prefer it be from their core vision and sticking to that instead of being because they pandered to the masses. If they somehow ended up with tens of thousands total well then I'd play on and enjoy the populated servers until such a time that VR has to close up shop.
BeaverBiscuit said:So, we've disproven the need for death penalty in high level raids, in a game that will thankfully not be based around high level raids. Perhaps death penalty could be different in different zones?I still think fearing death makes things much more suspenseful, and suspense is arguably a good thing to have in many forms of entertainment.
I personally don't find that particular "suspense" fun. I hated that my crystals could break upon death in TERA, for example. It made doing anything potentially challenging extremely expensive, especially if you were going in with a PUG (and therefor, a much higher chance of death). High level raids or otherwise, it's just never been a positive aspect in my game experiences in any way.
I dont "mind" having a severe death penalty. But the corpse run aspect is annoying. Especially naked corpse runs. I definitely feel you can get a very similar level of "suspense" by having a harsh death penalty and allowing an amount of exp "returned" for getting to your corpse. It would still give players a reason to avoid death, but also a way to incentivize returning to your corpse.
(I'm fully aware naked corpse runs will most likely be in the game and I'm ok with it. They are just annoying)
I think a core aspect of an MMO is the sense of danger. MMO's are all about adventuring in the unknown, and having to do a corpse run made it from being a looking at the map and auto running to where I need to be, to being aware of my surroundings and setting that paranoi in dungeons. Game mechanics and raid mechanics aside, the death penalty, and the corpse run was one of the most significant penalties that brought people together. That's a fact. I've done hardcore raiding on WoW for awhile and yes, the raiding is fun and has an achievement to it and brought people together, but the death penalty in EQ also did, and too a much greater extent imo. I am all for engaging raid bosses like WoW, but I don't see why we can't have corpse run penalties also. If spending more time raiding than dying is a problem, then maybe they can have something to where in raid groups they can have some sort of banner or spell or massive bind that can have people spawn back much closer. They could also take the having to memorize your spells again after death gone, and a lot of dumb tedious things like that.
Anyways the fear of losing your gear, just like any survival type of game, like DayZ, just amps up the tension and fun that much more. Same reason why people like playing hardcore on Diablo 2 and 3, losing your stuff, and in this case your character, gets that adrenaline going like no other.
While this topic has derailed a bit from Nostalgia - I wanted to link this Wolfshead article again as its extremely relevant to the back and forth on risk, death penalties, etc. which many argue as nostalgic mechanics and why I and others feel they are absolutely necessary.
http://www.wolfsheadonline.com/the-death-penalty-mechanic-and-loss-aversion-in-mmo-design/
He summarizes my thoughts on it much better than I could write. Well worth the read if you haven’t read it (or his other articles).
Yes, sometimes it take a more eloquent person to say what we are all thinking. Wolfshead hits it on the head. Nostalgia can be triggered by many different things. I personally get nostalgia for my childhood when i smell road tar getting put down, does it stink? Heck yes, but it brings back my childhood. The same for when i think about Corpse Runs i get nostalgic and remember all the really bad ones that took hours upon hours to complete or having a corpse rot because i was unable to find a solution.
I'm not sure what most people do, but I don't think I personally see the old games through rose-colored memory specs. There was a lot in EQOA (never played the original EQ) that needed improving, but also so much that was just magical. Ironically, I thought WoW fixed most of the problems EQOA had, but then proceeded to lose all the magic as well. I think it's very possible, though, to separate the good and the bad in our memories and want to play (and make) games that keep the best elements of yesteryear while also improving on what wasn't so good.
Watemper said:Anyways the fear of losing your gear, just like any survival type of game, like DayZ, just amps up the tension and fun that much more. Same reason why people like playing hardcore on Diablo 2 and 3, losing your stuff, and in this case your character, gets that adrenaline going like no other.
Those games are very different from a persistent world MMORPG. Having death knock your character back in progress removes fun from challenge and replaces it with fear and anxiety - not positive experiences. It also means if there is any kind of raid/dungeon-like group progression, you're going to be frustratingly limited in what you can try. I don't want to have to go grind mobs mindlessly for hours to get XP back that I'd already earned previously after a night on a boss just because we wiped a bunch. That is the exact opposite of fun.
I mean, I don't autorun through zones in any MMO I play, unless I way overlevel the zone. I still care about my character not dying, even when I know I don't have to deal with a loss of XP or items or whatever (just a loss of durability to gear that I can repair with some gold, and a bit of lost time). I could not disagree more that those kinds of penalties are necessary for a rewarding experience, and in fact I find that their presence takes away from an otherwise positive experience.
kreed99 said:The same for when i think about Corpse Runs i get nostalgic and remember all the really bad ones that took hours upon hours to complete or having a corpse rot because i was unable to find a solution.
Really though, who has time anymore to spend "hours upon hours" just trying to get back to your stuff and then having to redo whatever leveling you'd done in that session due to xp loss? Most people only have a couple hours at a time to play.
I get the nostalgia, but some things are better left in the past
I totally get what you mean. Yes the past is gone and done with, but by having witnessed the past i am more prepared for a future game that does have CR's and Death Penalties. Will i get fed up and ragequit for a week? Probably, and probably a couple times. Do i want CR's to be super hard? No, i want them to be comparable to the content i am experiencing. So a raid zone might have a worse CR than a normal zone. And if i am dumb and bind on the other side of the world. Well..... thats just... on me.
Yeah. Having well over a decade of the WoW and beyond MMOs, I can honestly say I'd rather have a death penalty at least equal to that of EverQuest.
Other than EQ, FFXI, and to a lesser extent DAoC - I have not respected or feared death in any other MMO. In fact there is pretty much no risk at all in most MMOs I have played since those early days. No danger or risk at all; no loss beyond a few pennies in the bucket for repairs and maybe a couple minutes time and in most cases players can just keep throwing themselves against a wall/problem until it eventually falls without a care in the world.
Of course fear of punishment isn't enjoyable but it isn't supposed to be. There is a distinct difference when there is some sort of risk involved when it comes to feeling reward and accomplished though, putting it on the line and pulling through. I could play a million League of Legends or Overwatch casual matches without a care in the world and half asleep if I wanted, but going into ranked play changes the whole dynamic and things get "real." The fear of loss is there sure but it fuels the drive to perform and win, and those wins feel waaaay better than any casual match.
Raidan said:While this topic has derailed a bit from Nostalgia - I wanted to link this Wolfshead article again as its extremely relevant to the back and forth on risk, death penalties, etc. which many argue as nostalgic mechanics and why I and others feel they are absolutely necessary.
http://www.wolfsheadonline.com/the-death-penalty-mechanic-and-loss-aversion-in-mmo-design/
He summarizes my thoughts on it much better than I could write. Well worth the read if you haven’t read it (or his other articles).
I enjoyed that article. Thanks for sharing that.
This is my question. According to this article the amount of "loss aversion" is directly correlated to the penalties for death. And I agree 100% with this. But how do we measure this? At some point, there's going to start being death mechanics that lower "loss aversion" (significant exp loss, level loss [complete levels], loss of gear, permanent death).
So how do we determine whether the eq1 equation for loss aversion based on death penalties is the best one. We know it's better than wow, and most other modern mmos. But would it be better or worse if, per say, you didn't spawn naked. Still have the exp loss return to bind, the need to retrieve your corpse... but you get to do all of that as your full character.
Or what if there isn't an exp loss. But you do spawn naked...
We all know that they are toying with the difference between being able to lose levels vs exp debt, so there's already going to be some potential differences between pantheons death penalties and everquests.
So I mean, what would be the best "amount" of penalties for death that would create the most excitement, but also not deter players from tasks?