If history remains the rule then the player who had that name on the target server will get to keep it and the player who was merged into the target will have to come up with a new name. It sucks, I've been the mergee on occasion and had to change several characters' names. But I'm not sure game-wide name locking from the start would be better.
Then again, I'm certainly not against the idea if there isn't a bunch of collateral damage. It's annoying to move to another server and not get the names you've been playing with for years, the ones every one of your friends know.
Some games only force uniqueness on your first+last name combination. Maybe that would work here.
Global names are a solution to this, and one that I wouldn't mind too much if there's a first and last name system for naming our characters. Unfortunately, if names aren't global then this issue is a tricky one to solve, there's not really a method that will leave both players satisfied if there are ever server merges and someone has to change their name. Names generally mean a lot to players, especially for those interested in a game like Pantheon.
The last I heard of it from a dev was about this time last year, and at that point, Brad was heavily leaning toward requiring a unique first and last name combination. The reason being:
"This greatly helps with realm/server transfers. No more issues there we hope. Will a name, first and last, need to be together unique not just across a realm but across all realms? Likely so, yes."
(Source: https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/3639/character-names-important/view/page/4 )
Nothing confirmed. But that's the direction it's headed.
I understand people being attached to their names as am i.
I think the best solution is first in first served. If a person would like a name thats already in use they could simply add a number after it or similar.
This also rewards those that invest in the game earlier.
That was one of the many reasons i chose to pledge well before the game is finished. The ability to reserve my name.
Geea.
Geea said:I understand people being attached to their names as am i.
I think the best solution is first in first served. If a person would like a name thats already in use they could simply add a number after it or similar.
This also rewards those that invest in the game earlier.
That was one of the many reasons i chose to pledge well before the game is finished. The ability to reserve my name.
Geea.
Soooo, two people pledging, both want the same name? What happens.
zewtastic said:Geea said:I understand people being attached to their names as am i.
I think the best solution is first in first served. If a person would like a name thats already in use they could simply add a number after it or similar.
This also rewards those that invest in the game earlier.
That was one of the many reasons i chose to pledge well before the game is finished. The ability to reserve my name.
Geea.
Soooo, two people pledging, both want the same name? What happens.
First to pledge gets the name. The second can add a digit to it.
Bazgrim is, of course, correct and so this issue may never arise. But it is always possible that VR will go a different route and so this topic may yet prove to be relevant. As with many of us I have been faced with this issue many times over the years and have developed some firm opinions.
1. In the case of a voluntary transfer the person transferring should *never* be able to take a name away from someone on the destination server. Regardless of how long the person transferring has had the name. Even if the character on the destination server was just created.
2. In the case of a merger, whoever had the name first should keep it. Simple and fair. But if a character has not been played for a long period of time - maybe a year - the name should be takeable. If, and only if, the player is given a significant amount of time to reactivate the name by playing the character. Thus if a merger is announced players should be told at least a month in advance that priority goes to the character first created but not if the character has never been played over the 12 months preceeding the merger.
3. If a server is elminated and transfers to a surviving server are allowed this should be treated the same as a merger. Bad enough to lose one's home of many years - it is infuriating to have every character on every other server given priority of name because the developers do not call it a merger - even though it is just as involuntary as a merger.
4. Pledge status should not matter except maybe as a tie-breaker. If two characters are created on the first day of the game I can see using pledge status to overide the fact that one was created at 9AM and the other at 2PM. But as a pledger my 2 year old character should not be able to take the name from an equally active five year old character. People foam at the mouth at the phrase "pay to win". Pay to name will not be any more popular.
I, too, look forward to naming all my characters Zqifolmnb Vbzunak and similar. ;)
Name reservations were part of the pledges 4-5 years ago, no surprises here.
Just one name? Oh the horror! I will have half a dozen characters by the first *hour* on release day (assuming that number of slots are available). They will all need names.
((plaintive look)) Please, VR, can I have more?
My own guess is that they will let us name as many characters as we have slots for.
If they go to unique first names rather than unique full names there will be far more importance to getting the name one wants. Maybe then they will keep the number lower though my guess is they won't want to "nerf" a pledge benefit for the sake of people that haven't even subscribed yet.
Not all of us will be able to log in and get a name immediately. Some of us may not have *immediate* access to a computer or the internet. Time zones will make the start time more convenient to some of us than others. Some of us aren't millenials and may have jobs. Just kidding on that last one!!
But it may be a *very* good idea for fairness among ourselves to allow only one name the first day. To give those that can't get on immediately a fairer chance.
I say this from niceness not selfishness. I have no job or school and will quite likely be one of the first people on grabbing names.
In the event of merges the name should go the person according to the following...
If a player has not been logged in for a certain amount of time (60 days) they should forfeit that name in the event of a merge.
If there are multiple players "active" with the same name. The name should go to the person who has the most /played time. I dont think creation date should matter.
I would also love to see VR have a section of their website that shows the name changes. Whether requested by a GM, forced in a merger, or paid for by the player.
That way ninjalooter smith cant just change his name to altruistic smith and get rid of his previous rep.
It surprises me to see everyone in a tussel over this.
It seems like a no brainer that whatever name you reserve, no other player could make a character with that name. Period. Across all shards. It doesn't matter if you don't login for the entire first week - you're name will be reserved. My guess would be that they will rollout name reservations by teir (maybe week by week), to allow people to reserve their names. Or perhaps it will be a free for all. There are not millions of people reserving names though, so there shouldn't be that many poeple fighting over a name... Or are there like 100 people going with Robert Smith?
As far as server mergers/transfers, you guys pretty much covered it. I'm sure it will be handled like any other MMO handles it.
As far as having unique first/last name across all shards, that seems like a great way to do it. The only downside being when I try to /whisper /tell /? someone and I have to try to spell out 19 characters of a first and last name - with accent marks! That won't be fun.
((If there are multiple players "active" with the same name. The name should go to the person who has the most /played time. I dont think creation date should matter.))
Losing a name will be less painful if the person losing it believes the system under which they lost it was both logical and fair. And not subject to manipulation. I believe this proposal fails that test.
1. Time /played can be manipulated. If there is a way of doing so, some players will leave characters in the world afk overnight just to build up credit for a potential future merger. Why not?
2. Time /played is not the traditional test used, and players tend to assume that a test that they have seen used repeatedly in other games is more fair and reasonable than something unusual.
3. First come first served is a traditional test and people are conditioned to thinking of it as reasonable. Some exceptions such as for an old character that hasn't been played in a long time are viewed as reasonable, but not losing a name to a character created 3 years after yours and then played endlessly by a "no lifer". Or, worse, left afk for the month preceding the merger in order to ninja a name.
Given a choice I would prefer a test based on combined adventure and crafting levels to one based on time /played. But date of creation with reasonable exceptions has proven to be workable and accepted by most players.
Kass said:It surprises me to see everyone in a tussel over this.
It seems like a no brainer that whatever name you reserve, no other player could make a character with that name. Period. Across all shards. It doesn't matter if you don't login for the entire first week - you're name will be reserved. My guess would be that they will rollout name reservations by teir (maybe week by week), to allow people to reserve their names. Or perhaps it will be a free for all. There are not millions of people reserving names though, so there shouldn't be that many poeple fighting over a name... Or are there like 100 people going with Robert Smith?
As far as server mergers/transfers, you guys pretty much covered it. I'm sure it will be handled like any other MMO handles it.
As far as having unique first/last name across all shards, that seems like a great way to do it. The only downside being when I try to /whisper /tell /? someone and I have to try to spell out 19 characters of a first and last name - with accent marks! That won't be fun.
Name ownship today is much more important than it was say 20 years ago when EQ1 went viable.
Many people have marketing associated with their names. Content developers, streamers, youtubers, etc.
Some people try and troll others and steal well known names, holding them hostage.
And there still is no clear explanation for who gets to own a name between two or more pledgers.
((And there still is no clear explanation for who gets to own a name between two or more pledgers.))
As far as I know they have never said any more than a simple we get early name reservation.
My assumption has been that they open up whatever system they will use for name reservations and we get to select whatever number of names they permit.
But they have never said.
It may be the first X people to pledge get to go before anyone else and so on in order. Maybe people with the highest pledge amounts get to go before anyone else and so on in order.
Either of these might generate screams from people not in the preferred subclass saying that they never would have pledged had they known that early name reservation meant after 10,000 other people.
Then again anything they do will please some and leave others less pleased.
As far as precedence or order of selection, the way that Shroud of the Avatar did it was by pledge value. The more you pledged, the earlier in the queue you got to "go" or select.
Not very many were happy about the system, but it's what they used. To be fair, in that case, it wasn't name selection, it was lot selection for virtual housing plots in very limited regions that were intended to be popular.
But I can see VR using a similar system to avoid the congestion problems that would arise by attempting to use equality.
I hope it's not "Main Character's Name", because mine is blank in my profile. hehehe.
But if that's what it is, then Visionary Realms needs to confirm that sooner rather than later.
Also, it doesn't have first/last name, which is... not aligned with the idea of unique first+last mentioned above.