Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe a way of making it so you need the map...
This.
The genre really needs to move towards requiring in-game objects which represent character knowledge, and limit the actions a character can take to actions that are consistent with their knowledge.
That's a monumental undertaking, though, and not something I'd want Ryan to try to do in PFO for many years, if ever.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
True, but it would be nice to play without all that.
Wish in one hand and...
Maybe a way of making it so you need the map or find it yourself, will not stop the Net from making it easy, but would make you have to walk there at least once.
If a fast-travel system required maps to use, then you'd have a reason to buy maps in-game even if the information is available online.
When I started EQ there were mobs that would flat out kill you, in the Newbie zones.
I like the idea that you have put a little effort into playing the game.
When EQ started it had very little competition, so it could get away with being a very steep treadmill-powered grindstone. What you enjoy as a form of electronic masochism is what will make most other players say "why am I paying for this?" and leave. PFO will make money from its subscription numbers, not from how much punishment its players will put up with.
Many I have played with over the years say the same thing, they can want to catch that feeling of wonder that they had, that I think comes from learning and finding your own way not being lead from point to point.
Or maybe it had more to do with who you and your friends were at the time, with bigger dreams but fewer responsibilities and fewer expectations.
Can live without the key word typing of EQ, but some of the old ideas would be welcomed again.
The hours of camping the same mob, I can live without though.
But that's what EQ1 was about. It wasn't an adventure or narrative game, it was a test of endurance with just enough reward to keep you salivating at the sound of the bell. You endured the company of a random PUG, parked your butt between repeat battles against the same mob, and when you outlevelled the area or your boredom outpaced your desire for efficiency, you were put in your place by losing XP and levels.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Nonsensical stuff about a great game.
I will be the first to admit that EQ1 best lives on in the memories of those who remember it fondly. Looking back, if you played through the game for the first time now, it would be a wholly different experience IMO. MMOs have evolved and we've become spoiled to a certain number of things and playstyles and tastes in content have shot off in many different directions. Unfortunately, the nostalgic EQ population is a minority.
Personally, I loved the game and hope that GW and crew try to capture a similar "feel" with PfO.
That being said, +1 for the idea of maps having to be crafted.... AND those maps being necessary for fast travel. Great idea.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
EQ1 was like banging your head into a brick wall. It produced some interesting sights, but was ultimately more painful than it was worth.
That being said, +1 for the idea of maps having to be crafted.... AND those maps being necessary for fast travel. Great idea.
Hey, what do you know... putting my words into other people's quotes is more fun than I ever had in EQ1.
Anyway, crafted maps could be single-use, multi-use, or permanent. If the maps were linked to a settlement or other point of interest and could be used from anywhere within a certain range, I'd lean toward single or few uses, so you'd need many copies for places you visit frequently. If the maps covered a specific route from one specific location to another, I'd be more inclined to have them usable many times or to be added to the character's atlas permanently. In either case, cartographers could scout locations or routes, make a master map, and from it, create copies for sale. Of course, new master maps would need to be made if a settlement or point of interest were destroyed or some other significant change occurred. People running fast-travel stables might buy copies of maps for every location/route in range and offer them for convenient resale to their customers.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Some of my fondest gaming memories ever came from EQ1. I completely agree with that sense of wonder that one experienced when searching their way for the first time through the strange world, trying to memorize landmarks well enough to find the nearest orcs and make it home if you managed to live.
I've spent the last 13+ years trying to recapture that feeling and only ever at best doing so in the vaguest sense.
Games often advertise as having these incredible worlds that you'll get lost in and never want to leave. EverQuest really did, and I didn't leave for a good 5 years, not very many games can claim someone's attention that much for that long. I don't believe that at the beginning the use of grinding as a game loop was intentional. I'd be surprised if anything was even framed that eloquently back then. It was probably the only way the devs could make a game they knew everyone could play without breezing through it with no effort. It sure as hell made playing WoW a cake-walk.
Fortunately GW has a decade plus of MMO lessons to learn from.
Mapping in EQ was quaint. The fact that you could download maps into the map directory kinda killed it though. I'd totally like to see some serious cartography in PFO. With many levels of detail possible. Broad maps of the region, down to better define maps of a single hex, or even just a city.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Mapping in EQ was quaint. The fact that you could download maps into the map directory kinda killed it though.
What years did you play? I played right after release and I don't recall any such mapping system. People posted vague flowchart-maps of zone connections on sites like EQVault, but they weren't anything you could display in-game.
After a long while of trying practically every class in the game to 20 or so, I mostly played a necromancer. I think the corpse-summoning miniature coffins were added around the time I quit, though I didn't have the spells to use them yet. I've heard that later on you could mod the UI so you weren't peering through a tiny window, the trolls weren't so pear-shaped, and the level loss on death was softened or removed. By that point, it was too late, they'd turned me off MMOs altogether for years.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If a fast-travel system required maps to use, then you'd have a reason to buy maps in-game even if the information is available online.
But then you wouldn't really be paying for the map itself but rather for the waypoint, yes? Knowing this, would being a cartographer still feel as satisfying?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Maybe a way of making it so you need the map...This.
The genre really needs to move towards requiring in-game objects which represent character knowledge, and limit the actions a character can take to actions that are consistent with their knowledge.
That's a monumental undertaking, though, and not something I'd want Ryan to try to do in PFO for many years, if ever.
Can't it be done in a less ambitious manner, eg a resource node, mob type, dungeon entry point all are things that don't appear without the cartographer skill that allows players to find them and mark on their version of map and exchange possibly to give access/appear on another's map? Maybe clicking map icon in vicinity then initiates it to materialize?
Basic geographical features of a map I can't see changing beyond procedural generation of exploring "unknown lands", but land that has useful information that is veiled that could work?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...But that's what EQ1 was about. It wasn't an adventure or narrative game, it was a test of endurance with just enough reward to keep you salivating at the sound of the bell. You endured the company of a random PUG, parked your butt between repeat battles against the same mob, and when you outlevelled the area or your boredom outpaced your desire for efficiency, you were put in your place by losing XP and levels.
Utterly false. When EQ opened it was indeed an adventure, and it was like magic. After the first year when organized minmaxing and guild metagaming transformed that magic into humdrum labor, eliminating all sense of story and play by sacrificing individuality and personality as the control obsessed and codependent groups required specific builds and political hierarchy in order to succeed, then yes, it was what you describe. That was not EQ's doing: It was the peer pressure control oriented Hitler wannabes' doing.
Sorry if I sound a touch vehement.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
To build on my previous post: There could be a limit on the number of information points currently discovered at any one time with a decay to them I suppose. The actual finding, I hope would take a certain amount of skill/time also. Lol, I could imagine "Cartographer Wars": "Get off my patch of map-making!" /sends in the heavies.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Can't it be done in a less ambitious manner...
Oh, I'm sure someone more clever than I am could make it work.
The way I see it, you would need a spectacularly large world in order to have an appropriate likelihood of just stumbling upon something you don't have the map to. That means you'd need that world to be procedurally generated and populated. Any world with a map on the scale we've seen in any MMO to-date would probably be several orders of magnitude too small to work as players would simply swarm the area of interest.
Also, relevant.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But then you wouldn't really be paying for the map itself but rather for the waypoint, yes? Knowing this, would being a cartographer still feel as satisfying?If a fast-travel system required maps to use, then you'd have a reason to buy maps in-game even if the information is available online.
I guess that would depend on what they find satisfying. If they want to explore and map for their own knowledge alone, nothing says they have to make and sell copies of their master maps. Of course, funding expeditions to map more dangerous areas would be easier if you're getting some return on that investment.
If one's satisfaction lies in knowing things that no one else knows... well, good luck fighting the entire internet where information eventually becomes free. Making your knowledge valuable to other players will require mechanical functionality that they want to use, but which they don't care to train themselves. Faster and more secure travel is likely to be in high demand and is a natural fit for map functionality.
As I mentioned, if the benefit to fast-travel is less versatile, such as a very specific route with very specific endpoints, then I'd be inclined to make the information it provides more long-lasting. It may be permanent or have very many uses. Significant changes to the details of the endpoints or route might cause the maps to go into 'archive' status where they'd be less effective until a new map is made or purchased. It would also be possible to set the system up so one map is used for every trip, but in that case I would want the maps to be far more versatile. For example, instead of a map just showing how to go from Thornkeep to the Emerald Spire through a specific chain of hexes, it should allow travel to the Emerald Spire from anywhere within a radius. There are a spectrum of possibilities between relatively permanent and very temporary maps, and both types might be available.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Honestly I think that fast travel should follow predetermined routes and a predetermiand speed.
So you hire a coach to take you from city B to City A. All coaches or horses follow the exact same path/road.
Want to make yourself less of a target? Ride your horse and control it yourself.
I would like no mini map, but if you have a in game map someone drew you can click on the map and it pops full screen with a dot for you. So to keep checking where you are you have to stop and reclick the map. However how close to where you actually are to that dot would be based on the quality of the map and your skill in survival.
Someone with a low quality map and no survival skill might not be able to trust what they see on the map. Or they have to compare the map features to what they see on the screen and guess. Hmm to my right is a forest and to my left is a forking river so I must be...here.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Utterly false. When EQ opened it was indeed an adventure, and it was like magic.
How did your subjective experience become objective fact while mine is "utterly false"?
After the first year when organized minmaxing and guild metagaming transformed that magic into humdrum labor, eliminating all sense of story and play by sacrificing individuality and personality as the control obsessed and codependent groups required specific builds and political hierarchy in order to succeed, then yes, it was what you describe. That was not EQ's doing: It was the peer pressure control oriented Hitler wannabes' doing.
Sorry if I sound a touch vehement.
It's always a great idea to finish up one's argument with some good old Godwin's 'Law' hyperbole. No, wait... reverse that.
Those were players reacting to their environment, an environment which punished exploration pretty harshly. My Bartle scores tend to sort out in a Explorer > Achiever > Socializer > Killer order, and regardless of the value of the test as a description of gamer psychology as a whole, that fits me rather well. Spending a lot of time in an area in order to explore another, only to be stomped into level-loss and have to go back, made me see why people gravitated towards the safest drudgery. I saw many people who had been beta testers doing it from day one of release, camping guards in secluded areas of towns. I played that achiever game mostly to facilitate more freedom of exploration, but not having an established group to plug into I had to wait for high-demand soloable camping spots or join PUGs which were just about as frustrating as those 'dung' (the opposite of 'ding') moments.
Utterly false. When EQ opened it was indeed an adventure, and it was like magic.How did your subjective experience become objective fact while mine is "utterly false"?
After the first year when organized minmaxing and guild metagaming transformed that magic into humdrum labor, eliminating all sense of story and play by sacrificing individuality and personality as the control obsessed and codependent groups required specific builds and political hierarchy in order to succeed, then yes, it was what you describe. That was not EQ's doing: It was the peer pressure control oriented Hitler wannabes' doing.
Sorry if I sound a touch vehement.
It's always a great idea to finish up one's argument with some good old Godwin's 'Law' hyperbole. No, wait... reverse that.
Those were players reacting to their environment, an environment which punished exploration pretty harshly. My Bartle scores tend to sort out in a Explorer > Achiever > Socializer > Killer order, and regardless of the value of the test as a description of gamer psychology as a whole, that fits me rather well. Spending a lot of time in an area in order to explore another, only to be stomped into level-loss and have to go back, made me see why people gravitated towards the safest drudgery. I saw many people who had been beta testers doing it from day one of release, camping guards in secluded areas of towns. I played that achiever game mostly to facilitate more freedom of exploration, but not having an established group to plug into I had to wait for high-demand soloable camping spots or join PUGs which were just about as frustrating as those 'dung' (the opposite of 'ding') moments.
I played EQ1 from launch, and to me what made it special was the quest system. There was zero handholding. Sure, it could be quite frustrating at times and a game today using it would probably die a horrible early death(see FF14's soon to come relaunch!). It told you what you needed to do, a vague reference as to where to go and let you figure it out yourself! Of course, the organization of info for online nonexistent, too. For the first year or two, there were websites you could go for hints or you could ask friends and guildies or beg for info in /ooc chat. While the internet has helped gaming in a lot of ways, this is one of the biggest things I miss from EQ1... the sense of achievement from actually figuring out how to do quests on your own. 99% of MMO's give you in game pointers to tell you exactly where to go and precisely what to do.
It's the reason I can't stop from going back to The Secret World. Some of the quests in there are HARD! Sure, you can Google the answer to any of them in seconds... but the in game quest system doesn't hold your hand.
Heck, TSW even has an in game web browser because some of the quests REQUIRE you to do online research at premade game websites for fictional corporations and message boards. It was the most awesome part of that game and really took me back to EQ1 in a lot of ways. It has it's big share of flaws, but the exploration and achievement of the game is pretty awesome. It's funny. They even have a class of quests that has a warning label on it that basically says, 'This is HARD. Put on your thinking caps and prepare to nerdgasm. Also, don't feel TOO bad if you need to Google the answers... we did say this was hard, right?' :)
I wish more games would do something similar, though a sandbox like PFO is probably not an appropriate place for that.
Back to the OP. Most game try to simulate this by using a fog of war system. Guild Wars 2 does an ok job with it. Unfortunately, I think that with today's generation of instant gratitude seeking online gamers, trained by WoW, it would be very difficult to get something like your idea in game. That's no reason not to try!
Sounds cool to me...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Utterly false. When EQ opened it was indeed an adventure, and it was like magic.How did your subjective experience become objective fact while mine is "utterly false"?
When your experience was not what I experienced of course. My subjective experience was in objective fact my experience while yours is only a report, a rumor, to me. My subjective experience was different from yours but it still was my experience. Your assertion that your subjective experience was Truth was the absurd contention. You said:
But that's what EQ1 was about. It wasn't an adventure or narrative game, it was a test of endurance with just enough reward to keep you salivating at the sound of the bell. You endured the company of a random PUG, parked your butt between repeat battles against the same mob, and when you outlevelled the area or your boredom outpaced your desire for efficiency, you were put in your place by losing XP and levels.
Not 'I thought that was EQ, or "my experience was.." you said EQ was something absolutely not the case in my experience... yet here you are pretending that it was MY contention that my subjective experience was the case. Your experience of EQ was not EQ, your experience was only your own.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I thought it would be understood that my words in my posts are an expression of my perspective on my experiences, and that expression in the context of a game must necessarily be subjective. Perhaps I give too much credit to certain members of my audience. I think it's simple enough to be practically tautological, but if you need a disclaimer...
I make no claims of possessing the property of omniscience, and therefore do not claim to know the contents of anyone else's brain. My words express my thoughts; in this case they're about my experience of whether a recreational activity was 'fun'. That's a matter of qualia, which is subjective.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Mapping in EQ was quaint. The fact that you could download maps into the map directory kinda killed it though.What years did you play? I played right after release and I don't recall any such mapping system. People posted vague flowchart-maps of zone connections on sites like EQVault, but they weren't anything you could display in-game.
From pretty close to launch for a good 5 years. I think Omens was about the time I finally gave it up, though my playing had diminished since a bit before Gates came out.
I want to say it was Ykesha or so that maps came into existance, and EQVault, along with EQMaps and a few others were the place to go for premade maps. (EQMaps in its prime, to this day is still one of the best game reference sites I've had the pleasure of using.. the only I've been more than happy to pay for.)
The /loc system in EQ was for a long time the only way to locate things with any degree of accuracy. Even then it was a pain in the arse.
Ideally I would want to see a map that I either made myself or purchased from a professional cartographer that showed me where I was at, and assuming the map was accurate, that's where I would be standing. A labelling system would be needed, as would the ability to see coordinates at a glance through an x/y key on the edges; as a matter of convenience I'd be fine with a popup on the mouse cursor while pointing out a place on the map as well (preferably only when using a modifier key, like alt or shift). If the cartographer took the time to detail elevations, that would be nice, but it would certainly require a bit of clever design to make a system that was able to handle that elegantly enough to be worth using. Structures with multiple levels should also be mappable as such, being able to link stairs as clickable to the next level without having to shuffle through the controls to ascend or descend levels would be very, very nice.
What I do NOT want to see is 'click to go here' or 'show me the magic path to this location' BS. I don't feel like there's any danger of the former, but I really don't want to see the latter either. If you need to highlight an establishment's sign, that's ... distasteful, but not exactly hand holding since you'd have to be there (hopefully the marker effect has a fairly restricted range clip).
On that note, will we be able to design our own establishment's signs?
It would be a shame to not allow taverns to have their distinctive markings. Those are supposed to be expensive enough that it shouldn't be too bad to submit those to GW moderation.
Edit:
FWIW, I could give a rats ass about what kind of information is going to be made available online. It's the game I'm interested in, not listening to some self-important sod prattling on about how they found strats for how some other people killed some boss, or how to accomplish an epic quest step by step. I don't mind that people use the info, I'll do it myself from time to time, but it doesn't really have much place in the discussion of what game mechanics should be included and how.
If the information is online, fine, whatever; the information that I'm going to use in the game, needs to be in the game.
Ideally I just want to see the information the character would or should have available to them and avoid breaking the 4th wall too often.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I thought it would be understood that my words in my posts are an expression of my perspective on my experiences, and that expression in the context of a game must necessarily be subjective. Perhaps I give too much credit to certain members of my audience. I think it's simple enough to be practically tautological, but if you need a disclaimer...
I make no claims of possessing the property of omniscience, and therefore do not claim to know the contents of anyone else's brain. My words express my thoughts; in this case they're about my experience of whether a recreational activity was 'fun'. That's a matter of qualia, which is subjective.
Keovar I understand you feel the need to have the last word, but you did not say that your subjective experience was X you said the readers' experience was X, when this reader's experience was wholly other than what you asserted it was. Your statement was simply false and whatever excuse you scurry to it remains false.
Now go ahead and defend yourself but I am done with the distraction unless you pull an ad hominem or some other unworthy ploy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Keovar I understand you feel the need to have the last word, but you did not say that your subjective experience was X you said the readers' experience was X, when this reader's experience was wholly other than what you asserted it was. Your statement was simply false and whatever excuse you scurry to it remains false.
Now go ahead and defend yourself but I am done with the distraction unless you pull an ad hominem or some other unworthy ploy.
The "you feel the need to have the last word" bit is a cheap way to say "shut up" indirectly enough to avoid moderation.
You're one to talk about ad hominems when your posts boil down to calling me a liar.
Enjoyment isn't an objective experience, so specifying that my experience is subjective shouldn't be necessary. If I say some genre of music sucks, reasonable people understand that I'm talking about my own experience of it without me having to bracket my statement in disclaimers about it being my opinion.
"Your experience was only your own." = DUH.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...Or we can say what we mean and expect others are not mind readers, hence the use of words.
As far as I am concerned, Keovar can take a long hike off a short pier.
It was not EQ that was bad, it was Keovar playing EQ that was bad, in his reported subjective experience. There is a meaningful difference between those two estates.
Sorry, Nihimon, it isn't 'bickering', either. There is a serious problem of communication between people who decide that whatever they happen to believe is just as valid as whatever actually is the case. Part of the cause of that, IMO, is the decidedly sloppy way many of us, myself included, state what we say.
If you are going to provide a review of a game, or an opinion about my tendency to bicker, it should be clearly identified that it is an opinion if it is an opinion. That way you provide the understanding that it is your true apprehension you are describing, rather than a false identification of the case.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... it should be clearly identified that it is an opinion if it is an opinion.
This is what I reject. You - and all the other readers - should be smart enough to know that "the game uses three red balls" is a statement of fact, while "the game was not fun" is a statement of opinion. It's noble to correct someone's erroneous statement of fact. It's childish to "correct" someone's "erroneous" statement of opinion.
And yes, this is all compounded by our pride, which refuses to let the other guy have a dignified retreat from a pointless debate. I've done it myself a number of times, some with you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Sounds rather pointless. As mentioned people would just look up maps on the internet. Heck with the "Unofficial Pathfinder Online Map" and the one we saw in the video last week, I already have a rough outline. Certainly for those who wish to needlessly cripple themselves, go right ahead. I got my map disabled in skyrim along with the rest of my interface to give me the true RPG experience!
And most often in MMO's I prefer to wander and explore myself. I know a lot of neat little locations in SWTOR I could only guide you to, sense I know exactly where to find them. But not where they are on a map.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Sounds rather pointless. As mentioned people would just look up maps on the internet. Heck with the "Unofficial Pathfinder Online Map" and the one we saw in the video last week, I already have a rough outline. Certainly for those who wish to needlessly cripple themselves, go right ahead. I got my map disabled in skyrim along with the rest of my interface to give me the true RPG experience!
And most often in MMO's I prefer to wander and explore myself. I know a lot of neat little locations in SWTOR I could only guide you to, sense I know exactly where to find them. But not where they are on a map.
I like this idea. Give me a basic mini-map that I can toggle on and off at will, and I'll be happy.
Please note that I'm not asking for pixie dust trails to lead me anywhere I want to go, just a basic overhead view of my immediate surroundings, with simple icons representing the people and critters that would be in my line of sight if I did a spontaneous pirouette on the battlefield.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Good lord at the ridiculousness.
Personally, I loved original EQ. I played from Classic to shortly after Ykesha, though Planes of Power was where most of my interest waned. My character was a Wood Elf Druid, I made a fortune with my taxi service pre PoP.
For me, no game has been able to capture the sheer immersion EQ provided. Exploring a was both exciting and dangerous, you were always on your toes, as death was something to fear. I think lack of serious death penalties in most modern MMO's has taken a great deal of that immersion (and enjoyment) away.
The game encouraged us to be sociable, from boat rides, to groups, to EC Tunnel trading. And the best part was, everyone made a name for themselves and had a reputation. There were no server transfers, no name changes, so if someone developed a reputation as a douchebag word would get around quick, and then they were going to feel the consequences of that in the game. A game that encourages people not to be douchebags is a good thing.
I am very excited by the potential prospects of EQ Next and I'm anxiously waiting for the full unveiling on August 2nd.
With that all said, Keovar is definitely the one in the wrong here, his first post is him unprovokingly quoting the OP and basically saying "no, you're wrong, because I say so". He could have just responded in general and said "I personally wasn't fond of EQ, it was too grindy and too punishing for my tastes", but instead he decided to go another route.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yes, there were a lot of weight to the PVE consequences in EQ. Technically there were PVP consequences, but they were frowned upon. Heavily. Training people was bad form for sure, it was also the only real recourse one had in some cases when players felt their actions had no consequences. Having had it happen to me more than a few times (accidentally and purposefully), it was definitely a point of contention where player reputation was concerned.
When you died and left your corpse on the ground and needed player assistance to retrieve it, or to have clerics resurrect you to offset some of the exp loss from dying.. or druid and wizard teleportation among other things.. you really just did not want to have a rap for being a dick. Those were the PVP consequences, though you could not directly attack each other (excepting the very few PVP servers).
Early EQ easily required the most maturity in general to do well in, of the games I have played; it also taught hard lessons about improper and/or reckless behavior.
I am definitely glad to see both the players interested in providing ample opportunities for conflict and the players steadfastly dedicated to keeping that kind of playstyle in check. I wish both sides much success and hope that a strong balance is struck, offering later players a good example from which to draw from.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For me, no game has been able to capture the sheer immersion EQ provided. Exploring a was both exciting and dangerous, you were always on your toes, as death was something to fear. I think lack of serious death penalties in most modern MMO's has taken a great deal of that immersion (and enjoyment) away.
Roguelike-likes have suggested this adds the correct level of decision-making on taking risks and earning rewards ie thinking about what you're going to do as much as doing it. Hopefully PvP and PvE will produce this. Dangerous PvE through variety, randomness and numbers would be a good starter for AI mobs, and PvP could excel here.
The game encouraged us to be sociable, from boat rides, to groups, to EC Tunnel trading. And the best part was, everyone made a name for themselves and had a reputation. There were no server transfers, no name changes, so if someone developed a reputation as a douchebag word would get around quick, and then they were going to feel the consequences of that in the game. A game that encourages people not to be douchebags is a good thing.
Hopefully Alignment, Reputation and gameplay that relies on collective organisation will help a lot.
When you died and left your corpse on the ground and needed player assistance to retrieve it, or to have clerics resurrect you to offset some of the exp loss from dying
I'm hoping pathfinder can replicate some of this with group mates guarding a corpse etc. I'm curious if soul-binding points will have a signal range they can get your soul back? If you go "out of range" on the map I wonder if that might increase your losses should you die? That could extend the "danger" of exploring further in a map.
Looking back, if you played through the game for the first time now, it would be a wholly different experience IMO.
Yea. going back on a free invite, my wife and I were struck dumb, literally. We kept asking ourselves "Was it really this way the first time we played it?" Race home cities moved out into the middle of dangerous zones, story lines written for on expansion destroyed in another, then compensated for in yet later expansions. No one even around because all the characters are ultra leveled. The graphics and interface were the least part of how 'original' eq was. We gave up and kept looking for a wow alternative.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
With that all said, Keovar is definitely the one in the wrong here, his first post is him unprovokingly quoting the OP and basically saying "no, you're wrong, because I say so". He could have just responded in general and said "I personally wasn't fond of EQ, it was too grindy and too punishing for my tastes", but instead he decided to go another route.
If I say "coffee is crap", do you assume I happen to dislike its flavour, or that I'm claiming it is literally made of feces?
Experiences like flavours and fun had (or not) in gaming are always subjective. Am I overestimating your intelligence to think that you should be able to figure that out without a load of qualifiers and disclaimers?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you're going to call someone out for the tone they used in an exchange that didn't involve you, you probably want to make sure your own tone is pitch-perfect...
I don't know which 'you' you're intending to address, but my name was the one called out.
@Keovar: Even better would be: "Coffee is not my cup of tea." :D
Clever, but that wouldn't have worked as an analogous statement.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you're going to call someone out for the tone they used in an exchange that didn't involve you, you probably want to make sure your own tone is pitch-perfect...I don't know which 'you' you're intending to address, but my name was the one called out.
I thought it was obvious that my statement was directed at Gambit, while also being offered as general advice.