Starting Cities

1234579

Comments

  • AmatheAmathe Miami, FLMember RarePosts: 2,958
    The childish self important argument that "maybe this game is not for you" assumes that the person in question has thrown down a gauntlet that, absent a change in the game, they will not play. Or that the person is somehow unable to handle a specific game mechanic just because they prefer something else.   

    Personally, I discuss lots of issues that are not "lines in the sand" for me. I would like to be able to roll my character in or near a city where my friends will be, without necessarily choosing their race. But I will play the game whether or not that happens. I am not a "do it like I want or I quit" sort of person. 
    dcutbi001MrMelGibsonZuljan

    EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests

  • LegotheHuttLegotheHutt Astoria, ORMember UncommonPosts: 119
    edited October 22
    Amathe said:
    The childish self important argument that "maybe this game is not for you" assumes that the person in question has thrown down a gauntlet that, absent a change in the game, they will not play. Or that the person is somehow unable to handle a specific game mechanic just because they prefer something else.   

    Personally, I discuss lots of issues that are not "lines in the sand" for me. I would like to be able to roll my character in or near a city where my friends will be, without necessarily choosing their race. But I will play the game whether or not that happens. I am not a "do it like I want or I quit" sort of person. 
    Glad you are open to alternatives Amathe.  The discussion was definitely a line in the sand because Kyleran stated his "friends" wouldn't play if they couldn't group together quickly and easily.  Thus the reason for the niche discussion about it being not for everyone.

    Kyleran said:
    "if they can't group together easily and early they won't be interested." (in the game)

    He definitely "threw down the gauntlet that, absent a change in the game, they will not play."

    Your first sentence seems to show a misunderstanding of what is being discussed.

    Post edited by LegotheHutt on
    Zuljan
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Nashville, TNMember EpicPosts: 2,797
    edited October 22
    Zuljan said:
    Not so sure, I believe Kyleran was likely referring to the fact that, if VR is attempting to cater to the group play niche, there's no real incentive to actively preventing players from being able to play together early on by locking races to such starting cities with no recourse in linking up other than restricting their choices to the same race.

    Where's the benefit in such a restriction, if your primary philosophy revolves around encouraging group play?  The defense that's largely been offered within the context of the thread is the lore/RP aspect, which seems clearly less important to VR than ensuring players enjoy content together.

    The two quotes he supplied offers ample evidence that VR is creating a niche game: one that focuses on player interaction and group play.  Nothing about that would conflict with allowing players to start where they like.

    EDIT- In response to your last comment, I absolutely agree.  I really look forward to seeing how this game shapes up.
    Again, nothing is stopping you from playing with your friends if you really want to (choose races with similar starting points). Apart from that, we have answered, multiple times "incentive to preventing players from starting anywhere together," explaining the immersion factor, and how it directly affects all travel, drama, and thus everything in between. 

    Check out the last Newsletter and the holistic approach to culture and anthropology they adopted for halflings. They left absolutely no stone unturned when it comes to racial qualities and cultural characteristics, going way above and beyond any other mmo, directly stating how all of this detail (the sap, the sigils and designs, geography topagraphy will ALL affect gameplay and lore in various ways). There are over 40 pages of arguments on the class/race matrix (i.e. why elves cant be paladins, halflings can't be warriors etc) which Brad and Kilsin said are absolutely necessary to achieve immersion, holistically (e.g. from travel all the way to perception and everything in between), and will not be changed for this reason.

    If that isn't enough, bounce over to the 30 page FAQ, where there are countless questions that are answered with reasons all  tied to lore and immersion. Brad's entire driving slogan the past 2 months has been "I want to create a world, not a game."

    There is way more advanced NPC ai in Terminus than every seen in an mmo (and I am not only speaking for combat, although when pre-alpha was officially announced last night, they overtly said there will be advanced combat AI like when you enter the room some mobs will rush and charge the healer no matter what), for the sole point of making the world feel more immersive. An example is on a given day, guard x might leave town at 9am to go to the neighboring city to re stock on supplies. If he dies, no one gets those supplies until he respawns (a long time), and he may not even leave at 9am every day if it's snowing or whatever). The point is, quite literally everything they're designing is to make this feel like a "westworld" mmo, where the environment is alive, and culture is thriving. Everything is done to take deep strides for immersion.

    Like Legothehutt said, you are choosing to hit certain points of arguments, and while I originally saw it as bigotry, I really do believe there is just a fundamental issue in perspective, for it is blatant that not having complete liberty to play with your friends the way you want to from day 1 is just too hardcore of a concept for you to feel open to (as of now). This is like the 3rd in depth reasoning we've given, and its virtually been the same response, with a little more detail sprinkled in each time.

    Just one last bit; I can't tell you how many of my fondest/most entertaining times came from having to meet new, random people at various parts of the world in EQ/VG. People are more mature in this game, and I dont have anything fancy to say other than it's just usually a really fun experience, akin to meeting people in real life. I think it stems from the fact that you have to communicate more in this game if you want to do big things, which forces people to come together and humans are a tribal species, so it innately feels good to achieve and accomplish with others. 
    What are you on about with class/race limitations?  I never mentioned that.  I get that you're trying to make the holistic approach argument, but even over on the official VR forums, there are folks who dislike the idea of strictly limited starting areas for races.

    The immersion factor also doesn't really cut it regarding strictly limiting race starter cities.  I'm not sure why you would expect cities to be so racially segregated so as to precludes friendly races from living amongst one another.  I mean, certainly if VR wish to keep races completely segregated, they can write up lore to support the idea, but it quite frankly seems like stretching to attempt to defy logic; races constantly intermingle and live among or adjacent to one another unless there's some sort of strong alienation between the two due to religious or historical differences.  It seems less immersive, from that perspective, to see a city full of nothing but dwarves, than it is to see the odd human or elf mixed in there somewhere, if only as part of an academic or trade expedition.

    Nothing about your comments regarding race/class restrictions or "living world" goals precludes races living amongst one another unless there's a conscious effort to create the world that way that's not really relevant or required to create a living world or provide a high level of immersion.

    Take a look at the Witcher.  It's one of the most immersive modern RPGs ever created, and a lot of that comes from the exploration of racial co-existence, biases, and prejudices.  None of that intrigue is realistically possible if the races were all strictly divided into their own continents.  This idea that complete and utter segregation is needed for immersion just doesn't pass the smell test.

    Bigotry?  You actually implied I'm being a bigot about this?  Because I'm offering alternatives to a strictly "no fly" attitude from some users here and creating arguments to support the idea that it won't destroy all sense of identity among races, immersion, or vastness of world?  Usrs?  
    Post edited by MadFrenchie on

    image
  • LegotheHuttLegotheHutt Astoria, ORMember UncommonPosts: 119
    Many of Pantheon's target demographic played EQ during its prime.  Most of us understand what the result of PoK books was.
  • AmatheAmathe Miami, FLMember RarePosts: 2,958
    Many of Pantheon's target demographic played EQ during its prime.  Most of us understand what the result of PoK books was.
    I also played EQ pre-PoK. But I don't presume to speak for the hundreds of thousands of players who also played EQ at that time. 
    LegotheHuttMendelMrMelGibson

    EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests

  • ZuljanZuljan Member UncommonPosts: 121

    Again, nothing is stopping you from playing with your friends if you really want to (choose races with similar starting points). Apart from that, we have answered, multiple times "incentive to preventing players from starting anywhere together," explaining the immersion factor, and how it directly affects all travel, drama, and thus everything in between. 

    Check out the last Newsletter and the holistic approach to culture and anthropology they adopted for halflings. They left absolutely no stone unturned when it comes to racial qualities and cultural characteristics, going way above and beyond any other mmo, directly stating how all of this detail (the sap, the sigils and designs, geography topagraphy will ALL affect gameplay and lore in various ways). There are over 40 pages of arguments on the class/race matrix (i.e. why elves cant be paladins, halflings can't be warriors etc) which Brad and Kilsin said are absolutely necessary to achieve immersion, holistically (e.g. from travel all the way to perception and everything in between), and will not be changed for this reason.

    If that isn't enough, bounce over to the 30 page FAQ, where there are countless questions that are answered with reasons all  tied to lore and immersion. Brad's entire driving slogan the past 2 months has been "I want to create a world, not a game."

    There is way more advanced NPC ai in Terminus than every seen in an mmo (and I am not only speaking for combat, although when pre-alpha was officially announced last night, they overtly said there will be advanced combat AI like when you enter the room some mobs will rush and charge the healer no matter what), for the sole point of making the world feel more immersive. An example is on a given day, guard x might leave town at 9am to go to the neighboring city to re stock on supplies. If he dies, no one gets those supplies until he respawns (a long time), and he may not even leave at 9am every day if it's snowing or whatever). The point is, quite literally everything they're designing is to make this feel like a "westworld" mmo, where the environment is alive, and culture is thriving. Everything is done to take deep strides for immersion.

    Like Legothehutt said, you are choosing to hit certain points of arguments, and while I originally saw it as bigotry, I really do believe there is just a fundamental issue in perspective, for it is blatant that not having complete liberty to play with your friends the way you want to from day 1 is just too hardcore of a concept for you to feel open to (as of now). This is like the 3rd in depth reasoning we've given, and its virtually been the same response, with a little more detail sprinkled in each time.

    Just one last bit; I can't tell you how many of my fondest/most entertaining times came from having to meet new, random people at various parts of the world in EQ/VG. People are more mature in this game, and I dont have anything fancy to say other than it's just usually a really fun experience, akin to meeting people in real life. I think it stems from the fact that you have to communicate more in this game if you want to do big things, which forces people to come together and humans are a tribal species, so it innately feels good to achieve and accomplish with others. 
    What are you on about with class/race limitations?  I never mentioned that.  I get that you're trying to make the holistic approach argument, but even over on the official VR forums, there are folks who dislike the idea of strictly limited starting areas for races.

    The immersion factor also doesn't really cut it regarding strictly limiting race starter cities.  I'm not sure why you would expect cities to be so racially segregated so as to precludes friendly races from living amongst one another.  I mean, certainly if VR wish to keep races completely segregated, they can write up lore to support the idea, but it quite frankly seems like stretching to attempt to defy logic; races constantly intermingle and live among or adjacent to one another unless there's some sort of strong alienation between the two due to religious or historical differences.  It seems less immersive, from that perspective, to see a city full of nothing but dwarves, than it is to see the odd human or elf mixed in there somewhere, if only as part of an academic or trade expedition.

    Nothing about your comments regarding race/class restrictions or "living world" goals precludes races living amongst one another unless there's a conscious effort to create the world that way that's not really relevant or required to create a living world or provide a high level of immersion.

    Take a look at the Witcher.  It's one of the most immersive modern RPGs ever created, and a lot of that comes from the exploration of racial co-existence, biases, and prejudices.  None of that intrigue is realistically possible if the races were all strictly divided into their own continents.  This idea that complete and utter segregation is needed for immersion just doesn't pass the smell test.

    Bigotry?  You actually implied I'm being a bigot about this?  Because I'm offering alternatives to a strictly "no fly" attitude from some users here and creating arguments to support the idea that it won't destroy all sense of identity among races, immersion, or vastness of world?  Usrs?  
    Lol I specifically did not call you a bigot man. I said "what I initially though was bigotry" is clearly just a misunderstanding and is an issue related to perspective, and the reason I said that is because you directly quoted Kyleran's quotes, backed them up, and further extrapolated on them; therefore making yourself a part of his thought process and reasoning in its entirety. Please, tell me where I ever attempted anything ad hominem. Not sure why I have to explain things like this, and if you don't understand how the class/race matrix specifically ties into lore and culture (even with devs directly stating themselves how it affects immersion) among the other examples I tried to explain, then I'm fresh out of ideas to make you more open to the starting city design (or maybe I'm just not cut out to explain immersion).

    You may also have the wrong idea about reaching friends, maybe seeing things a little too black and white (i.e. you can still get to your friends from level 1, unless it's like a distance of skargol trying to get across to wild's end). Granted it would be extremely difficult depending on the area, but I'm sure it could be done. If not, you're presumably looking at like a level 10-20 time frame, which is really not too demanding in my opinion. 

    If you thought the Witcher was that immersive then I think you'll find Pantheon even better (or maybe your idea of immersion is different). The Witcher shined in it's decision making and replay ability, but it was a lot of the same yellow brick road quests, gather 10 heads, and the cities themselves and the people were almost exclusively human, with almost all of the architecture and land looking very similar during travel. I'd like to hear specifically how you think the Witcher created cultural identities and immersion that are near comparable to what is being created here. The decision making allowed for you to save some, let others die, and ultimately create new endings or quest possibilities, but that is not the same kind of immersion they're going for here at all, and can only be accomplished in a single player rpg (generally speaking).
  • LegotheHuttLegotheHutt Astoria, ORMember UncommonPosts: 119
    edited October 22
    @Amathe Now you are just lashing out because of the previous post a bit up the page.  No one presumes to speak for hundreds of thousands of players.  That is absurd.  I'm guessing you understand the effect PoK books had on EQ and how that relates to this conversation?
    Post edited by LegotheHutt on
  • ZuljanZuljan Member UncommonPosts: 121
    Amathe said:
    The childish self important argument that "maybe this game is not for you" assumes that the person in question has thrown down a gauntlet that, absent a change in the game, they will not play. Or that the person is somehow unable to handle a specific game mechanic just because they prefer something else.   

    Personally, I discuss lots of issues that are not "lines in the sand" for me. I would like to be able to roll my character in or near a city where my friends will be, without necessarily choosing their race. But I will play the game whether or not that happens. I am not a "do it like I want or I quit" sort of person. 
    Most people are in this boat. I don't think the designs are at all perfect (no elven clerics, paladins, ogres as druids seems strange, many other features not tied to race), but I understand and respect their direction, design and desire to create a truly new, fresh mmo with its own standards for fantasy. Seeing their take on the halflings and gnomes so far, I think most people are really beginning to appreciate VR's approach and are starting to "trust" their direction a little more. My goal was to give Kyleran and Frenchie or their friends even more faith in the design.

    Kyleran said his friends and others would absolutely not play with this inaccessible design, so my goal was to try to let them see a broader scope or perspective and be more open to the format, not say "this game isn't for you." With that said, sometimes when all the cards have been laid out and each party has said their piece, if everyone still disagrees and one party feels it is too hardcore or will completely take away their fun, then it may not be the right fit for them, and more often than not discussions just get toxic and are sometimes better to just let go of.
  • ZuljanZuljan Member UncommonPosts: 121
    edited October 22
    Amathe said:
    Many of Pantheon's target demographic played EQ during its prime.  Most of us understand what the result of PoK books was.
    I also played EQ pre-PoK. But I don't presume to speak for the hundreds of thousands of players who also played EQ at that time. 
    What he was trying to say is PoK made everyone accessible to everyone (exactly what people are lobbying for here), making everything at arms reach and it ruined the game in many ways (namely immersion) for it took away the need to ever actually do hard travelling or even go back to your home or explore, for even guild masters, crafting, portal stones anywhere; everything was there, similar to Irongorge or Orgrimmar and the design people want here.

    It's just vital for this design that our decisions all have a heavy sense of risk/reward consequence. By making travel dangerous and time consuming (among other aspects in this game that will require time and careful decision making), you feel you actually made a big decision, even if it was just to travel to Skargol to hunt for the day. Getting their, you're going to have to take a boat, go through a bunch of KoS guards, maybe weather, who knows what else; if you die and have to run all the way back, that is a pain in the ass for a bunch of reasons. Suddenly what used to be a vestigial decision in other MMOs (just pay a griffon to travel to this city), becomes a huge decision (i.e. maybe next time I'm not going to skargol without a full group etc because I just spent 3 hours on a corpse run today). It also allows individual player skill to shine in a variety of ways. Going to be a lot of unskilled players dying a lot while trying to get to a group whose main tank or something had to go to leave or whatnot.
    Post edited by Zuljan on
  • MendelMendel Marietta, GAMember RarePosts: 1,848
    Many of Pantheon's target demographic played EQ during its prime.  Most of us understand what the result of PoK books was.
    Some saw the PoK books as totally evil.  Some saw them as a good thing that cut boring time down, allowing them to get to their camps, groups, raids, quests, crafting, etc. quickly.  I'm probably somewhere in between those extremes -- I valued the convenience, but didn't learn any 'overland' travel routes I didn't already know.  Since most of them were trivial content, I appreciated the lack of having a 4 hour journey through harmless content just to get to the new camp.

    In EQ1, I didn't find the PoK books any more immersion breaking than the loading screen between normal zones.  Some here seem to touch-and-go portals and the zoning screens as two different things.  Both break immersion in almost the same way.  How many of the original EQ1 zones had your character travelling West, only to hit a zone and find you're now travelling East?  People adapted.  (Ocean of Tears was the only one I remember, but there may have been others).

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Nashville, TNMember EpicPosts: 2,797
    Had a long response to ya @Zuljan attempting to explain my perspective, but MMORPG mobile site formatting tools suck and it was giving me a too many characters error, so I'll have to try and rephrase it sometime once I'm able to get on my desktop.


    GG, MMORPG.com!
    XarkoMrMelGibson

    image
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,390
    Mendel said:
    Dullahan said:
    Mendel said:
    So, what is it about the lore ingrained in a starting city that is so fundamental to playing a specific race?  How do you expect Pantheon to support this 'feeling'?  How is this going to be different from previous games?
    What is it about any place a person grows up that makes them feel connected with it? Is it that different than the next one over? Are people from your town different from others? Probably not, but they're your people. They shared your streets, your trees, your parks, your schools, your places of concourse, all of which create a common bond.

    Having played on the pvp servers where roleplaying was still common, people grew loyal to their starting cities, the surrounding areas, and other players they "grew up" with. Much like people grow loyal to their local schools and sports franchises.

    That is what an mmorpg attempts to create to make it more believable and give characters more identity. Not only race, but your class and reputation should open and close doors. A character should be more than just an arrangement of pixels.

    EQ also had a lot more flavor than you give it credit for. I definitely think it's something Pantheon should work on to make it even more central to one's character, but a lot of that already existed. Just by virtue of the fact that you couldn't merely wander to any other town an buy, sell, quest or train, that alone created a sense of belonging. Even an allied city might not regard you high enough to offer certain quests or services.

    That common identity and shared sense of identity and belonging also fosters teamwork and community - something that's gone the way of the dodo with all these wonderful conveniences.
    So, the mere coincidence that they share the environment of a starting city is the main contributor to the feeling of the concept of lore?  Was there nothing that the developers did that explicitly created that common bond?  Just pile a bunch of players in a common area and that's all?  You're talking 'community' and I'm talking 'lore'.  Not the same thing at all.

    I don't blame convenience features with the loss of community.  I haven't gotten a sense of community from SW:TOR or ESO.  Even grouping in those games feels more like a bunch of individuals soloing in the same general area.  The game I felt had the best community was DAoC and even it had a convenience travel system that didn't hurt the sense of community one bit.  That community was based not on a common starting location, but rather a shared goal / objective to set the realms against each other.

    There was nothing in EQ1 that promoted the lore.  Ogre warriors from Ogguk were identical to Half Elf warriors from Feydark.  They could do the same warrior Epic quest at higher levels.  There wasn't anything at the lore level that promoted a feeling of pride or belonging.  There wasn't a vital quest that ogre warriors had to do, nor for warriors of other races.  There wasn't a compelling story line that ogres aspired to follow.  The experience (and abilities) of different races warriors were not appreciably different.

    Comparing DAoC is apples and oranges. You had community exclusively with your race or allied races. It was build in, whereas EQ was designed without those hardcoded constraints. It also didn't have the sort of fast travel being talked of here, and the only places you could hope to go to were those within your own faction, which was supported by lore.

    In EQ, there was a common goal that created community, and it was surviving against a harsh world with players that shared a common area, backstory, and path. When everything including other races were hostile to you, you had to seek out others of your own kind.

    If you started as a ogre, you couldn't easily survive in Faydark among the elves. You had no way to bank, train or even buy provisions. You could get quest items, but couldn't turn them in. In that way, backstory and lore shaped their experience. In a game that took a long time to progress in, it was inconvenient to travel back across continents through hostile territory every day.

    At endgame, content did become shared, but there were a lot of unique items that came out of cities in the early game (see iksar class quests), and I think it would be great for Pantheon expand that and offer this sort of thing from the start. Maybe not possible though, as that means more content which requires more time and resources.


  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Nashville, TNMember EpicPosts: 2,797
    edited October 23
    Zuljan said:

    Lol I specifically did not call you a bigot man. I said "what I initially though was bigotry" is clearly just a misunderstanding and is an issue related to perspective, and the reason I said that is because you directly quoted Kyleran's quotes, backed them up, and further extrapolated on them; therefore making yourself a part of his thought process and reasoning in its entirety. Please, tell me where I ever attempted anything ad hominem. Not sure why I have to explain things like this, and if you don't understand how the class/race matrix specifically ties into lore and culture (even with devs directly stating themselves how it affects immersion) among the other examples I tried to explain, then I'm fresh out of ideas to make you more open to the starting city design (or maybe I'm just not cut out to explain immersion).

    You may also have the wrong idea about reaching friends, maybe seeing things a little too black and white (i.e. you can still get to your friends from level 1, unless it's like a distance of skargol trying to get across to wild's end). Granted it would be extremely difficult depending on the area, but I'm sure it could be done. If not, you're presumably looking at like a level 10-20 time frame, which is really not too demanding in my opinion. 

    If you thought the Witcher was that immersive then I think you'll find Pantheon even better (or maybe your idea of immersion is different). The Witcher shined in it's decision making and replay ability, but it was a lot of the same yellow brick road quests, gather 10 heads, and the cities themselves and the people were almost exclusively human, with almost all of the architecture and land looking very similar during travel. I'd like to hear specifically how you think the Witcher created cultural identities and immersion that are near comparable to what is being created here. The decision making allowed for you to save some, let others die, and ultimately create new endings or quest possibilities, but that is not the same kind of immersion they're going for here at all, and can only be accomplished in a single player rpg (generally speaking).
    Then I misunderstood your comment about bigotry.  I don't personally even have a reason to widen starting city options, as I don't play with real life friends.  But, in a game with group play as it's primary focus, if only follows logically that you'd need a large detriment to justify restricting the opportunity.

    I backed up Kyleran's post as an alternative that's more palatable to players than forcing one starting area.  I offered another alternative in the form of a single-time opportunity to complete a quest that would allow you to be travel in real-time (not a port or instant travel) to another starter area with the assistance of NPC caravans.  It allows for the developers to create an immersive and logical way for players to meet up with one another early on, and could be balanced on the idea that a player could choose to immediately undertake the endeavor alone or spend time laboring for an NPC entity in return for protection during the travel (again, all in real-time, not a loading screen or instant port).  It's an option that would fit within an immersive experience and wouldn't be a constant option available to the player (being a single opportunity quest), so the vastness of the world remains intact.

    Both would require timesinks, but the player could choose to immediately venture on their own and risk the consequences of repeatedly dying, or spend time completing a specialized quest to curry the favor of a caravan they could make the trip with more reliably.  None of that would preclude the idea that a new player could also simply ask a more powerful player for assistance from the get-go.  If they were able to such a benefactor, they would enjoy the convenience of having a guide/protection without having to spend time in a quest.  Player interaction would still be, by far, the best way to make the trip if players so wanted prior to becoming powerful enough to reliably make the trip on their own.

    I've already mentioned I look forward to Pantheon.  I disdain cross-realm grouping, auto-port queues and the devaluing of player interaction within the PvE content of an MMORPG.  Reputations should matter, and that's been lost along the way from the first-gen MMORPGs to the modern offerings. 

    However, I just don't see such a restrictive starting choice as a great way to go about encouraging such player interaction.  If it makes sense for the lore, more power to VR, but it would be the exception, not the rule, that races are so segregated as to disallow any adventurer to start their story anywhere but their own race's capital/starting city.  Player choice is a good thing, so long as it doesn't destroy the aforementioned values of reputation, interdependency, and player interaction.  I fail to see how allowing a player to start their lives in more than one area destroys those values.  I also fail to see how, if VR was to implement a logical and lore-appropriate quest as I mentioned, it would destroy immersion.  Obviously, I could see races that are hostile towards one another rejecting an adventurer wholesale if they are of the hostile race.  But races that are either neutral or fairly fond of one another?  It makes little sense that they would not accept the offered services of a mercenary/adventurer just because they weren't of the same exact race, unless every kingdom is composed solely of racists of the most egregious order. 

    To offer an example for clarity of point: if I were in need of herbs for medicine for my dying cousin, and an alien zapped down into my living room tonight and offered to go get them for me, I would be cautious, sure, but I wouldn't outright refuse to take them from the alien once he returned with exactly what I needed simply because he's not a Caucasian human being.
    Post edited by MadFrenchie on
    Zuljan

    image
  • KyleranKyleran Paradise City, FLMember LegendaryPosts: 26,669
    edited October 23
    Zuljan said:
    Not so sure, I believe Kyleran was likely referring to the fact that, if VR is attempting to cater to the group play niche, there's no real incentive to actively preventing players from being able to play together early on by locking races to such starting cities with no recourse in linking up other than restricting their choices to the same race.

    Where's the benefit in such a restriction, if your primary philosophy revolves around encouraging group play?  The defense that's largely been offered within the context of the thread is the lore/RP aspect, which seems clearly less important to VR than ensuring players enjoy content together.

    The two quotes he supplied offers ample evidence that VR is creating a niche game: one that focuses on player interaction and group play.  Nothing about that would conflict with allowing players to start where they like.

    EDIT- In response to your last comment, I absolutely agree.  I really look forward to seeing how this game shapes up.
    Again, nothing is stopping you from playing with your friends if you really want to (choose races with similar starting points). Apart from that, we have answered, multiple times "incentive to preventing players from starting anywhere together," explaining the immersion factor, and how it directly affects all travel, drama, and thus everything in between. 

    Check out the last Newsletter and the holistic approach to culture and anthropology they adopted for halflings. They left absolutely no stone unturned when it comes to racial qualities and cultural characteristics, going way above and beyond any other mmo, directly stating how all of this detail (the sap, the sigils and designs, geography topagraphy will ALL affect gameplay and lore in various ways). There are over 40 pages of arguments on the class/race matrix (i.e. why elves cant be paladins, halflings can't be warriors etc) which Brad and Kilsin said are absolutely necessary to achieve immersion, holistically (e.g. from travel all the way to perception and everything in between), and will not be changed for this reason.

    If that isn't enough, bounce over to the 30 page FAQ, where there are countless questions that are answered with reasons all  tied to lore and immersion. Brad's entire driving slogan the past 2 months has been "I want to create a world, not a game."

    There is way more advanced NPC ai in Terminus than every seen in an mmo (and I am not only speaking for combat, although when pre-alpha was officially announced last night, they overtly said there will be advanced combat AI like when you enter the room some mobs will rush and charge the healer no matter what), for the sole point of making the world feel more immersive. An example is on a given day, guard x might leave town at 9am to go to the neighboring city to re stock on supplies. If he dies, no one gets those supplies until he respawns (a long time), and he may not even leave at 9am every day if it's snowing or whatever). The point is, quite literally everything they're designing is to make this feel like a "westworld" mmo, where the environment is alive, and culture is thriving. Everything is done to take deep strides for immersion.

    Like Legothehutt said, you are choosing to hit certain points of arguments, and while I originally saw it as bigotry, I really do believe there is just a fundamental issue in perspective, for it is blatant that not having complete liberty to play with your friends the way you want to from day 1 is just too hardcore of a concept for you to feel open to (as of now). This is like the 3rd in depth reasoning we've given, and its virtually been the same response, with a little more detail sprinkled in each time.

    Just one last bit; I can't tell you how many of my fondest/most entertaining times came from having to meet new, random people at various parts of the world in EQ/VG. People are more mature in this game, and I dont have anything fancy to say other than it's just usually a really fun experience, akin to meeting people in real life. I think it stems from the fact that you have to communicate more in this game if you want to do big things, which forces people to come together and humans are a tribal species, so it innately feels good to achieve and accomplish with others. 
    Every reply I've given has directly refuted the argument that allowing players to start where they will destroys the lore some how.

    I've even offered multiple options including a neutral starting city, setting the characters faction to that of the starting city, allowing a one time fast travel options between cities, someone even suggested a caravan between cities. 

    Yet for all your claims that I'm ignoring the arguments in favor of the lore the other side is failing to come up with any reasonable arguments against my points. 

    Instead I get suggestions that my friends and I lack character,  that this isn't the game for us, or that it is a niche game. (Which favors grouping according to Brads post)

    Speaking of which, the header of that post said it was part of a much needed course correction,  perhaps the heavy emphasis on grouping means less of a focus on lore concerns, who knows?

    Fact is, nothing in any part of Brads post refutes any of my suggestions, which you must clearly realize as you've abandoned it to reference other documentation and divert the conversation to other topics. 

    As I've stated before, none of this matters because Brads going to make the game he wishes regardless of the conversation here.

    Only thing really left to do is start taking bets on the final outcome.


    Post edited by Kyleran on
    Sovrath

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    On hiatus from EVE Online since Dec 2016 - CCP continues to wander aimlessly

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon




  • cheyanecheyane EarthMember EpicPosts: 4,866
    In Project 1999 the minute a character is made they come out and are shouting for a port off the place. This is the reality. 

    It was never like this in the original Everquest but everyone playing this genre now knows all the tricks. They buy all the fast earning experience items and turn them in to jump through the harder levels to get to to where they get spells or better abilities. People are no longer hampered by any faction restrictions or distance they solve every obstacle easily and not quite in the way it was intended.

    People will create porter alts immediately and get that going like Dial-a-Porter and whatever you were hoping about old school ain't going to happen in the way you imagined. Everyone wised up.
    This is how it will be in Pantheon.
    KyleranMendel
    image
  • ZuljanZuljan Member UncommonPosts: 121


    Check out the last Newsletter and the holistic approach to culture and anthropology they adopted for halflings. They left absolutely no stone unturned when it comes to racial qualities and cultural characteristics, going way above and beyond any other mmo, directly stating how all of this detail (the sap, the sigils and designs, geography topagraphy will ALL affect gameplay and lore in various ways). There are over 40 pages of arguments on the class/race matrix (i.e. why elves cant be paladins, halflings can't be warriors etc) which Brad and Kilsin said are absolutely necessary to achieve immersion, holistically (e.g. from travel all the way to perception and everything in between), and will not be changed for this reason.

    If that isn't enough, bounce over to the 30 page FAQ, where there are countless questions that are answered with reasons all  tied to lore and immersion. Brad's entire driving slogan the past 2 months has been "I want to create a world, not a game."

    There is way more advanced NPC ai in Terminus than every seen in an mmo (and I am not only speaking for combat, although when pre-alpha was officially announced last night, they overtly said there will be advanced combat AI like when you enter the room some mobs will rush and charge the healer no matter what), for the sole point of making the world feel more immersive. An example is on a given day, guard x might leave town at 9am to go to the neighboring city to re stock on supplies. If he dies, no one gets those supplies until he respawns (a long time), and he may not even leave at 9am every day if it's snowing or whatever). The point is, quite literally everything they're designing is to make this feel like a "westworld" mmo, where the environment is alive, and culture is thriving. Everything is done to take deep strides for immersion.

    Like Legothehutt said, you are choosing to hit certain points of arguments, and while I originally saw it as bigotry, I really do believe there is just a fundamental issue in perspective, for it is blatant that not having complete liberty to play with your friends the way you want to from day 1 is just too hardcore of a concept for you to feel open to (as of now). This is like the 3rd in depth reasoning we've given, and its virtually been the same response, with a little more detail sprinkled in each time.

    Just one last bit; I can't tell you how many of my fondest/most entertaining times came from having to meet new, random people at various parts of the world in EQ/VG. People are more mature in this game, and I dont have anything fancy to say other than it's just usually a really fun experience, akin to meeting people in real life. I think it stems from the fact that you have to communicate more in this game if you want to do big things, which forces people to come together and humans are a tribal species, so it innately feels good to achieve and accomplish with others. 
    Every reply I've given has directly refuted the argument that allowing players to start where they will destroys the lore some how.

    I've even offered multiple options including a neutral starting city, setting the characters faction to that of the starting city, allowing a one time fast travel options between cities, someone even suggested a caravan between cities. 

    Yet for all your claims that I'm ignoring the arguments in favor of the lore the other side is failing to come up with any reasonable arguments against my points. 

    Instead I get suggestions that my friends and I lack character,  that this isn't the game for us, or that it is a niche game. (Which favors grouping according to Brads post)

    Speaking of which, the header of that post said it was part of a much needed course correction,  perhaps the heavy emphasis on grouping means less of a focus on lore concerns, who knows?

    Fact is, nothing in any part of Brads post refutes any of my suggestions, which you must clearly realize as you've abandoned it to reference other documentation and divert the conversation to other topics. 

    As I've stated before, none of this matters because Brads going to make the game he wishes regardless of the conversation here.

    Only thing really left to do is start taking bets on the final outcome.


    You have no problem agreeing you took a quote from Brad completely out of context (thus ubsubstantiating that argument in its entirety), but even then your evidence is "the fact is there is nothing saying he doesn't say that he isn't designing people to all start off together?" I'm sorry, cogent reasoning or any kind of reason does not permit one to take thoughts or ideas expressed by someone out of context, and then say "well it can't be wrong if he doesn't outright say it isn't" lol. Furthermore, you say there is nothing to refute your argument...or did you just not read the paragraphs of examples and evidence from us (including direct quotes from multiple devs regarding why/how starting cities and restrictions are necessary to supplement immersion by means of travel among many other listed details), or did you miss the 25 lore related responses from devs in similar questions on the FAQ I told you to review, or maybe you just missed the 50+ pages of back and forth on the ideas you think are actually able to work, that have not only been done in multiple MMOs before, but even EQ did already with the PoK stone.

    Your ideas are long outdated and discussed, where, on the contrary, at least Sovrath, Amathe and others have given nascent ideas the community has actually never heard of and may be implemented (and I passed those on directly to development, which were also bounced back and forth for a few pages recently for you to reference). You provided nothing to the discussion that is constructive or that hasn't already been discussed months or a decade ago in other games.

    Your entire attitude is negative, the only person sounding like an upset child saying "this is all just pointless discussion because Brad is going to ignore everything anyway." So you're saying you're literally arguing for no reason at all, which is complete bigotry, not to mention Brad and Kilsin have in the past and continue to tell us when we've come up with a solid, well rounded idea ready for development (again, why are you so afraid to read the forums?).

    Even Frenchie goes out of his way  - in depth, with premise and examples - to articulate and argue his thoughts. He cleared up his thoughts, with premises and conclusions, and has positive enough attitude and outlook to say he made a mistake interpreting what I said, and anyone can tell he is trying to provide constructive criticism for the game, apart from his admitted excitement for the game. 

    You stand alone in your methodology of reasoning and premises to support your conclusions as a whole in this thread. Last straw for me was when you take yet another non-sequitur leap and a quote out of context, saying I or others said you and your friends "lack character," by us simply suggesting the game may be too hardcore in starting city design for you or them to want to play (the EXACT thing you yourself said at the start, which catalyzed this entire discussion lol). Pure toxic.
    Kyleran
  • ZuljanZuljan Member UncommonPosts: 121
    edited October 23
    Zuljan said:

    Lol I specifically did not call you a bigot man. I said "what I initially though was bigotry" is clearly just a misunderstanding and is an issue related to perspective, and the reason I said that is because you directly quoted Kyleran's quotes, backed them up, and further extrapolated on them; therefore making yourself a part of his thought process and reasoning in its entirety. Please, tell me where I ever attempted anything ad hominem. Not sure why I have to explain things like this, and if you don't understand how the class/race matrix specifically ties into lore and culture (even with devs directly stating themselves how it affects immersion) among the other examples I tried to explain, then I'm fresh out of ideas to make you more open to the starting city design (or maybe I'm just not cut out to explain immersion).

    You may also have the wrong idea about reaching friends, maybe seeing things a little too black and white (i.e. you can still get to your friends from level 1, unless it's like a distance of skargol trying to get across to wild's end). Granted it would be extremely difficult depending on the area, but I'm sure it could be done. If not, you're presumably looking at like a level 10-20 time frame, which is really not too demanding in my opinion. 

    If you thought the Witcher was that immersive then I think you'll find Pantheon even better (or maybe your idea of immersion is different). The Witcher shined in it's decision making and replay ability, but it was a lot of the same yellow brick road quests, gather 10 heads, and the cities themselves and the people were almost exclusively human, with almost all of the architecture and land looking very similar during travel. I'd like to hear specifically how you think the Witcher created cultural identities and immersion that are near comparable to what is being created here. The decision making allowed for you to save some, let others die, and ultimately create new endings or quest possibilities, but that is not the same kind of immersion they're going for here at all, and can only be accomplished in a single player rpg (generally speaking).
    Then I misunderstood your comment about bigotry.  I don't personally even have a reason to widen starting city options, as I don't play with real life friends.  But, in a game with group play as it's primary focus, if only follows logically that you'd need a large detriment to justify restricting the opportunity.

    I backed up Kyleran's post as an alternative that's more palatable to players than forcing one starting area.  I offered another alternative in the form of a single-time opportunity to complete a quest that would allow you to be travel in real-time (not a port or instant travel) to another starter area with the assistance of NPC caravans.  It allows for the developers to create an immersive and logical way for players to meet up with one another early on, and could be balanced on the idea that a player could choose to immediately undertake the endeavor alone or spend time laboring for an NPC entity in return for protection during the travel (again, all in real-time, not a loading screen or instant port).  It's an option that would fit within an immersive experience and wouldn't be a constant option available to the player (being a single opportunity quest), so the vastness of the world remains intact.

    Both would require timesinks, but the player could choose to immediately venture on their own and risk the consequences of repeatedly dying, or spend time completing a specialized quest to curry the favor of a caravan they could make the trip with more reliably.  None of that would preclude the idea that a new player could also simply ask a more powerful player for assistance from the get-go.  If they were able to such a benefactor, they would enjoy the convenience of having a guide/protection without having to spend time in a quest.  Player interaction would still be, by far, the best way to make the trip if players so wanted prior to becoming powerful enough to reliably make the trip on their own.

    I've already mentioned I look forward to Pantheon.  I disdain cross-realm grouping, auto-port queues and the devaluing of player interaction within the PvE content of an MMORPG.  Reputations should matter, and that's been lost along the way from the first-gen MMORPGs to the modern offerings. 

    However, I just don't see such a restrictive starting choice as a great way to go about encouraging such player interaction.  If it makes sense for the lore, more power to VR, but it would be the exception, not the rule, that races are so segregated as to disallow any adventurer to start their story anywhere but their own race's capital/starting city.  Player choice is a good thing, so long as it doesn't destroy the aforementioned values of reputation, interdependency, and player interaction.  I fail to see how allowing a player to start their lives in more than one area destroys those values.  I also fail to see how, if VR was to implement a logical and lore-appropriate quest as I mentioned, it would destroy immersion.  Obviously, I could see races that are hostile towards one another rejecting an adventurer wholesale if they are of the hostile race.  But races that are either neutral or fairly fond of one another?  It makes little sense that they would not accept the offered services of a mercenary/adventurer just because they weren't of the same exact race, unless every kingdom is composed solely of racists of the most egregious order. 

    To offer an example for clarity of point: if I were in need of herbs for medicine for my dying cousin, and an alien zapped down into my living room tonight and offered to go get them for me, I would be cautious, sure, but I wouldn't outright refuse to take them from the alien once he returned with exactly what I needed simply because he's not a Caucasian human being.
    I really respect the time and effort you put into this response. I had faith you would provide one, which is why I didnt saying anything when you commented about not being able to properly reply to me. You took a well rounded approach that made it clear to me where you're coming from in addition to your ability to be more amorphous/malleable in your thought process, leaving you more open to some of the exciting (but admittedly transgressive) approaches they are taking to give their mmo a truly fresh, original feel.

    I just got to work, so now I have to hit you with the "have to give you a better explanation later" thing when I have the time my friend. We should all be aiming to be constructive like this as a community, as opposed to the direction others have chosen to take. None of us would be here if we didn't care about this game in some capacity. It makes no sense for us not to put in our due diligence to research forums and such before jumping to negative conclusions. Thanks again for taking the high road man.
    Post edited by Zuljan on
    MadFrenchie
  • MendelMendel Marietta, GAMember RarePosts: 1,848
    Dullahan said:
    Mendel said:
    Dullahan said:
    Mendel said:
    So, what is it about the lore ingrained in a starting city that is so fundamental to playing a specific race?  How do you expect Pantheon to support this 'feeling'?  How is this going to be different from previous games?
    What is it about any place a person grows up that makes them feel connected with it? Is it that different than the next one over? Are people from your town different from others? Probably not, but they're your people. They shared your streets, your trees, your parks, your schools, your places of concourse, all of which create a common bond.

    Having played on the pvp servers where roleplaying was still common, people grew loyal to their starting cities, the surrounding areas, and other players they "grew up" with. Much like people grow loyal to their local schools and sports franchises.

    That is what an mmorpg attempts to create to make it more believable and give characters more identity. Not only race, but your class and reputation should open and close doors. A character should be more than just an arrangement of pixels.

    EQ also had a lot more flavor than you give it credit for. I definitely think it's something Pantheon should work on to make it even more central to one's character, but a lot of that already existed. Just by virtue of the fact that you couldn't merely wander to any other town an buy, sell, quest or train, that alone created a sense of belonging. Even an allied city might not regard you high enough to offer certain quests or services.

    That common identity and shared sense of identity and belonging also fosters teamwork and community - something that's gone the way of the dodo with all these wonderful conveniences.
    So, the mere coincidence that they share the environment of a starting city is the main contributor to the feeling of the concept of lore?  Was there nothing that the developers did that explicitly created that common bond?  Just pile a bunch of players in a common area and that's all?  You're talking 'community' and I'm talking 'lore'.  Not the same thing at all.

    I don't blame convenience features with the loss of community.  I haven't gotten a sense of community from SW:TOR or ESO.  Even grouping in those games feels more like a bunch of individuals soloing in the same general area.  The game I felt had the best community was DAoC and even it had a convenience travel system that didn't hurt the sense of community one bit.  That community was based not on a common starting location, but rather a shared goal / objective to set the realms against each other.

    There was nothing in EQ1 that promoted the lore.  Ogre warriors from Ogguk were identical to Half Elf warriors from Feydark.  They could do the same warrior Epic quest at higher levels.  There wasn't anything at the lore level that promoted a feeling of pride or belonging.  There wasn't a vital quest that ogre warriors had to do, nor for warriors of other races.  There wasn't a compelling story line that ogres aspired to follow.  The experience (and abilities) of different races warriors were not appreciably different.

    Comparing DAoC is apples and oranges. You had community exclusively with your race or allied races. It was build in, whereas EQ was designed without those hardcoded constraints. It also didn't have the sort of fast travel being talked of here, and the only places you could hope to go to were those within your own faction, which was supported by lore.

    In EQ, there was a common goal that created community, and it was surviving against a harsh world with players that shared a common area, backstory, and path. When everything including other races were hostile to you, you had to seek out others of your own kind.

    If you started as a ogre, you couldn't easily survive in Faydark among the elves. You had no way to bank, train or even buy provisions. You could get quest items, but couldn't turn them in. In that way, backstory and lore shaped their experience. In a game that took a long time to progress in, it was inconvenient to travel back across continents through hostile territory every day.

    At endgame, content did become shared, but there were a lot of unique items that came out of cities in the early game (see iksar class quests), and I think it would be great for Pantheon expand that and offer this sort of thing from the start. Maybe not possible though, as that means more content which requires more time and resources.
    Still nothing about lore.  Even the Iksar class quests that you mention aren't mandatory to playing an Iksar.  Neither were the various newbie class armor quests that were added in the Velious-Luclin era.  The community forming had nothing to do with the lore that 989 / Verant / SOE put in the game.

    And wasn't inconvenience one of the main arguments for Pantheon not incorporating any form of fast travel to allow people to group with friends in this very thread?  Post PoP, it was simple to book to Pok, rebind, and book to Qeynos or Butcherblock and level up from level 1.  (Not that there were many players with new characters by that time).  

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAMember LegendaryPosts: 23,081
    Kyleran said:

    Every reply I've given has directly refuted the argument that allowing players to start where they will destroys the lore some how.




    I haven't been following this whole lore development but of course it doesn't break lore.

    People travel, people go places. What, if there was a game based off my life players would have to start in a small town in Connecticut? When they were old enough "not to be in a small town in Connecticut"?

    that's like saying if you see someone who is Asian then they must be from an Asian country when they could have been born "anywhere".


    KyleranZuljan



  • ZuljanZuljan Member UncommonPosts: 121
    edited October 23
    Sovrath said:
    Kyleran said:

    Every reply I've given has directly refuted the argument that allowing players to start where they will destroys the lore some how.




    I haven't been following this whole lore development but of course it doesn't break lore.

    People travel, people go places. What, if there was a game based off my life players would have to start in a small town in Connecticut? When they were old enough "not to be in a small town in Connecticut"?

    that's like saying if you see someone who is Asian then they must be from an Asian country when they could have been born "anywhere".


    You're beginning to outline the exact point that's somehow being missed. They don't want Asians born "anywhere" AKA real life, where they retain no Asian culture/way of life because they grew up in America or wherever instead. By forcing you to grow up in North Korea for instance, you're being forced (and only at the immediate beginning!) to be engrossed by that race's culture and story-driven lore, and gain values and perspective (for better or worse) that you would not gain growing up anywhere else...Forced to feel the Skars, struggle and curse put upon them in their ashen, dark land and all of their hatred and fury that comes along with it...forced to deal with the hurt the elves feel because their original world and life tree was destroyed, only to be sent to Terminus by their gods tomeet the same fate of pain and strife, causing the elves to become divided, with some not believing in the gods anymore. Many of the races are directly at war/dubious to one another and were completely dismantled because of other races.

    What is your reasoning for denying the fact that segregated countries (or states in your minor example) does not directly impact one's culture, lore, mores and values by an Asian growing up anywhere?. You can't have true immersion, a true north korean with north korean values by allowing him to grow up in the land of the free or somewhere in Europe; they're going to be an entirely difference person in a multitude of ways. They want us to truly think, feel, and be a part of the world and fighting for our race. It's literally a driving force that sets this game apart, and I'm having a hard time seeing how this continues to be overlooked.
    Post edited by Zuljan on
  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,390
    edited October 23
    Mendel said:

    Still nothing about lore.  Even the Iksar class quests that you mention aren't mandatory to playing an Iksar.  Neither were the various newbie class armor quests that were added in the Velious-Luclin era.  The community forming had nothing to do with the lore that 989 / Verant / SOE put in the game.

    And wasn't inconvenience one of the main arguments for Pantheon not incorporating any form of fast travel to allow people to group with friends in this very thread?  Post PoP, it was simple to book to Pok, rebind, and book to Qeynos or Butcherblock and level up from level 1.  (Not that there were many players with new characters by that time).  
    The reputation that allows you to bank in one place and not another is based on lore. In an open roleplaying game, lore should not bind you (you can choose to change faction), it should influence you. Still, nothing a developer does will magically transform players into roleplayers.

    At the same time, just because it doesn't force you to only group with your alliance, it doesn't mean it should encourage players to skip that part of the game. I contend that part of what made EQ so great was that it was created for roleplayers, and had that flavor and atmosphere which caused players to immerse themselves in their character's backstory and culture. Those who played EQ know it worked, and did not need to be forced.

    This is probably getting away from the topic and into game theory, but the idea is to encourage players to seek out others, generally from their own starting race or faction, in order to survive from the very start. Shared adversity breeds community. The game should constantly seek to bring people together. Someone that wants to go somewhere else should have to make that choice on their own, otherwise people would most likely all gravitate to the same places using this character creation instant travel option, rendering content and backstory pointless.

    For illustrative purposes: someone creates a halfling. They're born in the Shire. They grew up there. They're level one and they decide they want to become an adventurer. What is more believable at this point? To go outside the gates with your fellow halflings discovering the outskirts of your home, or magically transporting to the orc capital where you are bequeathed a magical disguise to start your journey having never left your home?

    It's not that hard to know which one makes more sense. An mmorpg shouldn't just be a game; it should be a world.
    Post edited by Dullahan on
    svann


  • AmatheAmathe Miami, FLMember RarePosts: 2,958
    I respect roleplay and roleplayers. I also respect concerns about immersion. So point well taken, except ....

    I become a bit dubious when roleplay is used to justify some things but not others.

    For example, ever since there has been a way to write (or draw) there have been maps. From an article, "Archaeologists have discovered what they believe is man's earliest map, dating from almost 14,000 years ago." 

    The idea that a culture or major city would not have any maps available is absurd. But a lot of people insist that the residents of Pantheon must stumble blindly on, without the benefit of mapping. Nary a word about roleplay or immersion concerns on that one.

    EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests

  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,390
    edited October 23
    Amathe said:
    I respect roleplay and roleplayers. I also respect concerns about immersion. So point well taken, except ....

    I become a bit dubious when roleplay is used to justify some things but not others.

    For example, ever since there has been a way to write (or draw) there have been maps. From an article, "Archaeologists have discovered what they believe is man's earliest map, dating from almost 14,000 years ago." 

    The idea that a culture or major city would not have any maps available is absurd. But a lot of people insist that the residents of Pantheon must stumble blindly on, without the benefit of mapping. Nary a word about roleplay or immersion concerns on that one.
    There already is a world map. I wouldn't be surprised if crude overworld maps exist in-game in some form. They just won't be extensively detailed or show your gps location.

    I would actually be all for there being a cartography tradeskill.
    Post edited by Dullahan on


  • svannsvann san jose, CAMember UncommonPosts: 2,013
    Amathe said:
    I respect roleplay and roleplayers. I also respect concerns about immersion. So point well taken, except ....

    I become a bit dubious when roleplay is used to justify some things but not others.

    For example, ever since there has been a way to write (or draw) there have been maps. From an article, "Archaeologists have discovered what they believe is man's earliest map, dating from almost 14,000 years ago." 

    The idea that a culture or major city would not have any maps available is absurd. But a lot of people insist that the residents of Pantheon must stumble blindly on, without the benefit of mapping. Nary a word about roleplay or immersion concerns on that one.
    I dont think anyone at all has asked that there be no maps of cities, and very few that want no maps of adventure zones. 
  • AmatheAmathe Miami, FLMember RarePosts: 2,958
    What I think would be fun is if there were actual world features by which someone could learn to guide themselves.

    For example, in our world, if you draw a line that connects the horns of a crescent moon and then extend this line down to the horizon, in northern latitudes this will give an approximate indication of south. 

    Also, moss grows either on the north or south side of trees (depending on what hemisphere you are in).

    What if there were things like this in Pantheon, where you could orient yourself based on the actual game world, rather than just sense headings or the ilk. 
    Dullahan

    EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests

Sign In or Register to comment.