I just want to start in a city,where i suspect we will start or even a starter isle is ok with me as well.
Just don't drop me down in the middle of nowhere with no plausible reason with an NPC with a yellow marker over it's head,i would scream bloody murder and remove the game so fast,even the registry keys would disappear. I am not a big fan of linear gameplay,connect the dots questing but as long as it looks immersive,no markers i am ok with it.I would love to see noob spots/npcs remain important to the game throughout,example we have to constantly visit npc's and talk to them,maybe a quest opens up 20 levels later.
Nobody is talking about characters starting in the middle of nowhere.
People are complaining because they want a free ride to any possible starting area in the world, completely negating the concept of racial starting cities.
Complaining? No. Trying to be realistic in approaching the issue without a strictly purist view that will likely turn more people off than I think you guys are admitting? Yes.
There are literally hundreds of lobby games that remove travel from the world if that is something you do not wish to deal with.
Echoing what @Kyleran said above me, there's no sense in discussing it if you guys simply want to pose a false dichotomy.
Allowing one to complete a quest early on in the game that would allow them to, say, join an NPC caravan and ride to another starter area to join someone they started the game with seems like a net gain. Specifically if it's a one-time opportunity quest that cannot be revisited or repeated after that point.
The travel needn't be instant- which serves the additional purpose of allowing said player to glimpse the landscapes of the world as they ride by, enticing them to delve deeper into the game until they're strong enough to return to those landscapes to enjoy the content there.
The idea that it's all or nothing will severely limit the prospects of success in today's landscape. I'm all for erring on the side of a slower-paced, more deliberate approach to everything in MMORPGs that allows me to enjoy the community and world thoroughly without feeling rushed or pressured to power level through it, but it also makes no sense to completely ignore opportunities to show those who may not have been around at the dawn of MMORPGs the reasoning for our desire for some of those design tenets to return, simply out of a self-spiting stubbornness.
Allowing one to complete a quest early on in the game that would allow them to, say, join an NPC caravan and ride to another starter area to join someone they started the game with seems like a net gain. Specifically if it's a one-time opportunity quest that cannot be revisited or repeated after that point.
Too bad that's not what certain people are asking for. What is being requested is stuff like:
They could just let people choose where they wish to start in at character creation.
Worry about which area is best would appeal mostly to the min max crowd, but if people believe that to be true Devs can put caps on them when necessary.
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do. Benjamin Franklin
Allowing one to complete a quest early on in the game that would allow them to, say, join an NPC caravan and ride to another starter area to join someone they started the game with seems like a net gain. Specifically if it's a one-time opportunity quest that cannot be revisited or repeated after that point.
Too bad that's not what certain people are asking for. What is being requested is stuff like:
They could just let people choose where they wish to start in at character creation.
Worry about which area is best would appeal mostly to the min max crowd, but if people believe that to be true Devs can put caps on them when necessary.
Net result of either choice is exactly the same, one just takes some additional time.
So should Devs spend a lot of time creating this one time use quest, of which will appeal to a fairly limited audience?
They could just throw some meaningless go kill 10 rats quest, but then why bother, might as well go with my suggestion.
Or they could make it the epic quest and journey of the decade, squandering scarce and valuable resources on content likely to be used by a very small subset of the population.
Or...they could just let players start where they wish, what the hell, sell it as an extra you can buy for each character if desired,
More revenue for the Devs, everybody wins.
(Look Maw, that bad man is trying to destroy our game)
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
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
There are drawbacks to your suggestion too, you just don't agree with them. There are different classes and races and backstory for a reason. In a role playing game, one might argue they are rather important. You're suggestion is that they offer a way of minimizing that.
There are drawbacks to your suggestion too, you just don't agree with them. There are different classes and races and backstory for a reason. In a role playing game, one might argue they are rather important. You're suggestion is that they offer a way of minimizing that.
Ultimately, what it comes down to is what writers call the 'Suspension of Disbelief'. Here, classes, races and backstory are presented as a consistent lore. But the mechanisms of starting (character creation and pregame decisions) present a different 'lore'. Both sides ask the audience to believe along certain lines. In this case, the in-game lore and the pregame mechanisms are slightly out of alignment. Neither is right; neither is wrong.
I don't think @Kyleran is asking for anything world-shattering, just a simple mechanism added to the pregame decisions -- where does my character start? It really doesn't break the in-game lore at all. If anything, it could produce a more rich and vast experience by showing a non-homogeneous society. Yes, there may be orcs living among the humans. That isn't asking any more than a human player playing an orc or troll character.
I think there's a bigger reason why VR *might* actually allow variable starting locations. "Separate but equal" didn't work well in life, why try to make it work in a game? The in-game lore that presents segregation might turn out to be an antiquated idea that a sensitive section of the gaming population doesn't agree with. I'm sure that VR doesn't want their game to be a political volleyball that fuels social unrest. Bad for the business image.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
There are drawbacks to your suggestion too, you just don't agree with them. There are different classes and races and backstory for a reason. In a role playing game, one might argue they are rather important. You're suggestion is that they offer a way of minimizing that.
Ultimately, what it comes down to is what writers call the 'Suspension of Disbelief'. Here, classes, races and backstory are presented as a consistent lore. But the mechanisms of starting (character creation and pregame decisions) present a different 'lore'. Both sides ask the audience to believe along certain lines. In this case, the in-game lore and the pregame mechanisms are slightly out of alignment. Neither is right; neither is wrong.
I don't think @Kyleran is asking for anything world-shattering, just a simple mechanism added to the pregame decisions -- where does my character start? It really doesn't break the in-game lore at all. If anything, it could produce a more rich and vast experience by showing a non-homogeneous society. Yes, there may be orcs living among the humans. That isn't asking any more than a human player playing an orc or troll character.
I think there's a bigger reason why VR *might* actually allow variable starting locations. "Separate but equal" didn't work well in life, why try to make it work in a game? The in-game lore that presents segregation might turn out to be an antiquated idea that a sensitive section of the gaming population doesn't agree with. I'm sure that VR doesn't want their game to be a political volleyball that fuels social unrest. Bad for the business image.
To clarify one thing, I'm not asking for this. I have no gaming friends or family I must play along side, so it doesn't matter to me.
I have a circle of friends who are mostly couples, very insular, there's about 10 of them who regularly group together in every game they play, so the last thing they want is to be forced into one area or continent or be kept apart of 10 or more levels.
While I'm the "disloyal" member of the group who frequently goes off to solo level, play other games, or even join different guilds in the same game they won't vary, if a game puts up a bunch of blockers to grouping together they won't play it.
Heck, if preserving the lore is so vital, then add in another new starting location, away from the other's and let these folks start there and then visit the rest of the world as they wish.
Again, I don't really care, other than I would like to see my friends try this game, but if they can't group together easily and early they won't be interested.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
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
There are drawbacks to your suggestion too, you just don't agree with them. There are different classes and races and backstory for a reason. In a role playing game, one might argue they are rather important. You're suggestion is that they offer a way of minimizing that.
Ultimately, what it comes down to is what writers call the 'Suspension of Disbelief'. Here, classes, races and backstory are presented as a consistent lore. But the mechanisms of starting (character creation and pregame decisions) present a different 'lore'. Both sides ask the audience to believe along certain lines. In this case, the in-game lore and the pregame mechanisms are slightly out of alignment. Neither is right; neither is wrong.
I don't think @Kyleran is asking for anything world-shattering, just a simple mechanism added to the pregame decisions -- where does my character start? It really doesn't break the in-game lore at all. If anything, it could produce a more rich and vast experience by showing a non-homogeneous society. Yes, there may be orcs living among the humans. That isn't asking any more than a human player playing an orc or troll character.
I think there's a bigger reason why VR *might* actually allow variable starting locations. "Separate but equal" didn't work well in life, why try to make it work in a game? The in-game lore that presents segregation might turn out to be an antiquated idea that a sensitive section of the gaming population doesn't agree with. I'm sure that VR doesn't want their game to be a political volleyball that fuels social unrest. Bad for the business image.
To clarify one thing, I'm not asking for this. I have no gaming friends or family I must play along side, so it doesn't matter to me.
I have a circle of friends who are mostly couples, very insular, there's about 10 of them who regularly group together in every game they play, so the last thing they want is to be forced into one area or continent or be kept apart of 10 or more levels.
While I'm the "disloyal" member of the group who frequently goes off to solo level, play other games, or even join different guilds in the same game they won't vary, if a game puts up a bunch of blockers to grouping together they won't play it.
Heck, if preserving the lore is so vital, then add in another new starting location, away from the other's and let these folks start there and then visit the rest of the world as they wish.
Again, I don't really care, other than I would like to see my friends try this game, but if they can't group together easily and early they won't be interested.
I may be in the same boat, @Kyleran. I'm an outsider, even in my circle of gaming friends. Of course, we're all kind of individuals prone to going our own way.
I like the idea of a 'neutral' starting zone, like a starter island. If fact, it would be more interesting if the racial starting zones were made into higher level areas. Capitals of great civilizations should be great cities where great deeds and events occur, not a place where newbs gather to whack a few rats.
The arguments in favor of the 'sanctity of the lore' bothers me. It's all lore, and much of it hasn't been written yet.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I just don't want to put in any effort and start killing dragons with my friends who did. Can we get a super buff quest at the beginning of the game so I can go slay dragons too? You know if this game promotes grouping together with friends I see no problems with this....
I just don't want to put in any effort and start killing dragons with my friends who did. Can we get a super buff quest at the beginning of the game so I can go slay dragons too? You know if this game promotes grouping together with friends I see no problems with this....
/sarc
This here's the kind of attitude that, if allowed to govern the direction of the game, will ensure prompt and utter failure of the game.
I just don't want to put in any effort and start killing dragons with my friends who did. Can we get a super buff quest at the beginning of the game so I can go slay dragons too? You know if this game promotes grouping together with friends I see no problems with this....
/sarc
This here's the kind of attitude that, if allowed to govern the direction of the game, will ensure prompt and utter failure of the game.
Catering to convenience will kill this game as it has killed all the others. If you want to group with a friend in a different starting city you are going to have to learn how to get there, It's that simple. You either are a master of dodging mobs or you gain enough levels to get though the zones. A little give here and there that caters to convenience is what kills games.
I also thought the caravan idea was great with one problem. It involved NPC's. I think it would be better if the player had to ask a real person in their zone if they could be escorted. I'm sure a higher level player would come along and do that for you if you actually kept asking. That's what would make the game great, actually having to talk with other real players to get things done, not a convenience ask no one quest that does it for you....
I have a circle of friends who are mostly couples, very insular, there's about 10 of them who regularly group together in every game they play, so the last thing they want is to be forced into one area or continent or be kept apart of 10 or more levels.
If this game is anything like EQ, It's more like an hour or two.
That's how long it takes for a newbie character to run from Qeynos or Halas to Ak'anon. It's less time if everyone meets halfway, say Commonlands tunnel.
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do. Benjamin Franklin
I have a circle of friends who are mostly couples, very insular, there's about 10 of them who regularly group together in every game they play, so the last thing they want is to be forced into one area or continent or be kept apart of 10 or more levels.
If this game is anything like EQ, It's more like an hour or two.
That's how long it takes for a newbie character to run from Qeynos or Halas to Ak'anon. It's less time if everyone meets halfway, say Commonlands tunnel.
Maybe a few hours longer the first time, but yeah. The fact that places are separated by distance and time is one of the most important ways of bringing the world to life. At least to me...
I have a circle of friends who are mostly couples, very insular, there's about 10 of them who regularly group together in every game they play, so the last thing they want is to be forced into one area or continent or be kept apart of 10 or more levels.
If this game is anything like EQ, It's more like an hour or two.
That's how long it takes for a newbie character to run from Qeynos or Halas to Ak'anon. It's less time if everyone meets halfway, say Commonlands tunnel.
There's been varying opinions on this thread. You and DMKano say its pretty easy, others have painted it as a bit of a challenge, depends how much you know I suppose.
Others have said factional differences could be an issue, Orcs would not be welcome in human city, and attacked by the npc guards.
Some say content in the starter cities would be tailored to be race specific, and consistent with the lore.
I'm all for travel time in games, even longer ones but it has to serve a meaningful purpose.
I've yet to hear a convincing argument against making grouping easier on a group centered game for people just starting out.
This does not mean I'm advocating for fast travel everywhere, or dungeon finders, far from it.
But I am in support of mechanics that hold the interest of a reasonable population of players and doesnt obstruct their enjoyment of the early game, as so many fall by the wayside at this critical time.
One of the greatest complaints against VG was the many different unique racial starting areas segregated the player population far too much, and SOEs solution which most appeared enjoy was a single starter island for everyone. (Which other games have also used)
I'm not even suggesting this game take that path, I enjoyed the starting areas in VG, just let people start where they will, or make it easy to get to another one.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
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
I have a circle of friends who are mostly couples, very insular, there's about 10 of them who regularly group together in every game they play, so the last thing they want is to be forced into one area or continent or be kept apart of 10 or more levels.
While I'm the "disloyal" member of the group who frequently goes off to solo level, play other games, or even join different guilds in the same game they won't vary, if a game puts up a bunch of blockers to grouping together they won't play it.
Heck, if preserving the lore is so vital, then add in another new starting location, away from the other's and let these folks start there and then visit the rest of the world as they wish.
Again, I don't really care, other than I would like to see my friends try this game, but if they can't group together easily and early they won't be interested.
Do your friends have : "An understanding
that player involvement is required for progression. All actions (or
lack thereof) should have consequences. Positive actions should be
rewarded. Apathy or lack of action should not be rewarded with
bonuses." and "An understanding that a truly challenging game is
truly rewarding." ?
It seems like, from your description, they may not agree with some of the above tenants that are the foundation for the game.
If your circle of friends won't play a game that doesn't allow them to
group together early and easily, this is likely not the game for them.
That
seems like such a minor hindrance. If you can't even be bothered to
level up a little bit and make a long run to meet your friend, I doubt
their play style is one that agrees with a harsh death penalty or challenging gameplay.
Pantheon is going to be a rude awakening for a lot of people, but once they get over it they'll end up admitting it's refreshing and more enticing to continue playing.
Pantheon is going to be a rude awakening for a lot of people, but once they get over it they'll end up admitting it's refreshing and more enticing to continue playing.
@kyleran I really agree with this. A lot of the meaning behind the significance of non-trivial travel at early levels is hard to put into words that haven't already been expressed. In a nutshell, it drastically affects immersion. This game really thrives on getting us attached emotionally to our race and starting city (read the racial lore if you haven't, the stories are masterfully executed). You need to be isolated at the start for this absorption effect to really sink in, for quick travel would ultimately take away the drastic commitment of class/race choice, which will inevitably leave us with a much more casual/loose feel.
Forcing us to accept and endure the consequences of our starting race (if you're KOS in certain cities, how far you are from your friends, some races like halflings get experience bonus and levels much faster etc) affords us with the feeling that we made a very "big decision" right from the start of the game (i.e. risk vs reward). You feel INVESTED in what you chose, because the consequences are severe (for better and worse).
It's such a big commitment that you subconsciously end up having pride for your race and city (sounds cheesy but it's true). The cities and cultures are just so vastly different. I mean imagine if we could instantly teleport to China, London, Cape Town, whatever. Would vacationing and seeing other cultures be as fun, important, or influential to us? Over time everything in the world would seem like it's within arms reach, which would take away the immersion and excitement we get when we travel to far away places. It works the same way here. And honestly, worst case scenario, if people care so little about lore and the significance of the risk/reward for travelling at early levels, there is already a built in system for you to play together with friends; choose the same race or races who's starting cities are close together.
I have a circle of friends who are mostly couples, very insular, there's about 10 of them who regularly group together in every game they play, so the last thing they want is to be forced into one area or continent or be kept apart of 10 or more levels.
While I'm the "disloyal" member of the group who frequently goes off to solo level, play other games, or even join different guilds in the same game they won't vary, if a game puts up a bunch of blockers to grouping together they won't play it.
Heck, if preserving the lore is so vital, then add in another new starting location, away from the other's and let these folks start there and then visit the rest of the world as they wish.
Again, I don't really care, other than I would like to see my friends try this game, but if they can't group together easily and early they won't be interested.
Do your friends have : "An understanding
that player involvement is required for progression. All actions (or
lack thereof) should have consequences. Positive actions should be
rewarded. Apathy or lack of action should not be rewarded with
bonuses." and "An understanding that a truly challenging game is
truly rewarding." ?
It seems like, from your description, they may not agree with some of the above tenants that are the foundation for the game.
If your circle of friends won't play a game that doesn't allow them to
group together early and easily, this is likely not the game for them.
That
seems like such a minor hindrance. If you can't even be bothered to
level up a little bit and make a long run to meet your friend, I doubt
their play style is one that agrees with a harsh death penalty or challenging gameplay.
To turn that back around, if it's a minor hindrance then it's mostly
useless and there should be no major issue letting them start together
or get together quickly.
Flawless execution of a logical fallacy, Ad hominem attacks are a
well worn technique when you can't present a reasonable argument.
But you could be right, perhaps its not the game for them, and I'm sure the developers don't need their money.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
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
Just because something is minor doesn't mean it should be done away with or is useless. This is not a logical response:
Kyleran said: "if it's a minor hindrance then it's mostly
useless and there should be no major issue letting them start together
or get together quickly."
Kyleran said: "But you could be right, perhaps its not the game for them, and I'm sure the developers don't need their money. "
Yep, it has always been advertised as a niche game and not for everyone. Here is an article stating Brad's opinion. The part relevant to this discussion starts in paragraph 2 and goes from there.
Pantheon is going to be a rude awakening for a lot of people, but once they get over it they'll end up admitting it's refreshing and more enticing to continue playing.
I really agree with this. A lot of the meaning behind the significance of non-trivial travel at early levels is hard to put into words that haven't already been expressed. In a nutshell, it drastically affects immersion. This game really thrives on getting us attached emotionally to our race and starting city (read the racial lore if you haven't, the stories are masterfully executed). You need to be isolated at the start for this absorption effect to really sink in, for quick travel would ultimately take away the drastic commitment of class/race choice, which will inevitably leave us with a much more casual/loose feel.
Forcing us to accept and endure the consequences of our starting race (if you're KOS in certain cities, how far you are from your friends, some races like halflings get experience bonus and levels much faster etc) affords us with the feeling that we made a very "big decision" right from the start of the game (i.e. risk vs reward). You feel INVESTED in what you chose, because the consequences are severe (for better and worse).
It's such a big commitment that you subconsciously end up having pride for your race and city (sounds cheesy but it's true). The cities and cultures are just so vastly different. I mean imagine if we could instantly teleport to China, London, Cape Town, whatever. Would vacationing and seeing other cultures be as fun, important, or influential to us? Over time everything in the world would seem like it's within arms reach, which would take away the immersion and excitement we get when we travel to far away places. It works the same way here. And honestly, worst case scenario, if people care so little about lore and the significance of the risk/reward for travelling at early levels, there is already a built in system for you to play together with friends; choose the same race or races who's starting cities are close.
While you're perfectly right in what you say, there is an equal side that doesn't believe that Pantheon is going to be that perfect game. There is a major deja vu aspect of having 'been there, done that' that no one really has a clear handle on. Maybe it happens, maybe it doesn't. There are also questions about the size of the population this game will attract. Will there be enough to sustain a profitable business with their business model, or will there be financial issues that force VR to change their plans. It proves to be a fascinating few years that will go some way to answering some of these questions. I've said it before, but I'm glad its not my money on the line.
---------- I wonder exactly what lore / culture / societies prior games have established in their starting cities that formed such loyalty to the concept of lore. What makes these starting cities that have been discussed so different from one another? To me, Grobb and Qeynos aren't very different. Yes, the NPCs are hostile to other factions, and both sell every item a player can ever need from NPC vendors. Both support the main classes that these races can be, selling spells, skills, and consumables.
There are quest lines there, but are there really any vital quests for Trolls in Grobb in EQ1, or essential quests for Humans in Qeynos? Not really. There's nothing to do that impacts the character to such a degree that the starting city imparts more 'humanity' for human characters, or makes troll characters identify more with the troll race? If there are, I certainly can't think of them.
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?
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Pantheon is going to be a rude awakening for a lot of people, but once they get over it they'll end up admitting it's refreshing and more enticing to continue playing.
I really agree with this. A lot of the meaning behind the significance of non-trivial travel at early levels is hard to put into words that haven't already been expressed. In a nutshell, it drastically affects immersion. This game really thrives on getting us attached emotionally to our race and starting city (read the racial lore if you haven't, the stories are masterfully executed). You need to be isolated at the start for this absorption effect to really sink in, for quick travel would ultimately take away the drastic commitment of class/race choice, which will inevitably leave us with a much more casual/loose feel.
Forcing us to accept and endure the consequences of our starting race (if you're KOS in certain cities, how far you are from your friends, some races like halflings get experience bonus and levels much faster etc) affords us with the feeling that we made a very "big decision" right from the start of the game (i.e. risk vs reward). You feel INVESTED in what you chose, because the consequences are severe (for better and worse).
It's such a big commitment that you subconsciously end up having pride for your race and city (sounds cheesy but it's true). The cities and cultures are just so vastly different. I mean imagine if we could instantly teleport to China, London, Cape Town, whatever. Would vacationing and seeing other cultures be as fun, important, or influential to us? Over time everything in the world would seem like it's within arms reach, which would take away the immersion and excitement we get when we travel to far away places. It works the same way here. And honestly, worst case scenario, if people care so little about lore and the significance of the risk/reward for travelling at early levels, there is already a built in system for you to play together with friends; choose the same race or races who's starting cities are close.
While you're perfectly right in what you say, there is an equal side that doesn't believe that Pantheon is going to be that perfect game. There is a major deja vu aspect of having 'been there, done that' that no one really has a clear handle on. Maybe it happens, maybe it doesn't. There are also questions about the size of the population this game will attract. Will there be enough to sustain a profitable business with their business model, or will there be financial issues that force VR to change their plans. It proves to be a fascinating few years that will go some way to answering some of these questions. I've said it before, but I'm glad its not my money on the line.
---------- I wonder exactly what lore / culture / societies prior games have established in their starting cities that formed such loyalty to the concept of lore. What makes these starting cities that have been discussed so different from one another? To me, Grobb and Qeynos aren't very different. Yes, the NPCs are hostile to other factions, and both sell every item a player can ever need from NPC vendors. Both support the main classes that these races can be, selling spells, skills, and consumables.
There are quest lines there, but are there really any vital quests for Trolls in Grobb in EQ1, or essential quests for Humans in Qeynos? Not really. There's nothing to do that impacts the character to such a degree that the starting city imparts more 'humanity' for human characters, or makes troll characters identify more with the troll race? If there are, I certainly can't think of them.
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?
With all respect, I wasn't trying to sell the game and nowhere did I say it's going to be perfect; no one could possibly know that. I was explicitly addressing the ease of starting city travel. If you wanted to compare/contrast the old school cities and what gave races and identity, I definitely wouldn't use quests as any example for cultural immersion. In fact, quests were almost non-existent?
Maybe a better example would be wood elves vs dark elves or ogres. Wood elves' entire city is in the trees. You use wooden elevators that lift you to the sky, you forage items for tradeskills and food, living off the land as you fight wisps, wasps, and things sylvan/pure by nature. The music is calm and reassuring. The items and drops are nature centric. The sun is always shining during the day. Guards and guildmasters' entire dialogue is a 180 compared to DEs and Ogres. WE NPCs are kind, intelligent, warm, loving, resolute/pure in their goals. The bordering zones, too, play on the theme of nature, and the invading orcs in butcherblock, along with some things in lesser faydark, which they hint that you will need to return there at some point to rid various evils. Your entire experience is tied to a pure sense of nature, preservation, and "good," for quite a while.
Dark elves are literally evil, they talk evil, the snicker at you and laugh wildly, they look evil, the city is Gothic and dark with a lot of water (and it's tucked away completely underground). The music is entirely foreboding and different. They worship dark gods and you feel like the villain/outlaw at every turn. You are warned of how threatening your race is to others. No one is there to help you, you feel alone, like you have to earn your black stripes like all of the other DEs. They seek death and harbor the dead for their bidding, almost constantly. They wield things like scythes and have a harsh language. You're killing skeletons and apparitions that laugh and scream creepy in a misty, dreary looking zone and the surrounding zones play to that as well, collecting bone chips and other depressing/dark items. It feels dark and cold, and dank everywhere. The land is barren with no living nature if I recall. You can't understand what other people say because you know can't speak common tongue, and of course your KOS to half the world, so you have to slink around everywhere like a criminal. I dont know if you could even get to boats without being killed.
I could go on for days about the cultural differences and feeling. I remember first rolling a DE necro and just didn't like the feel of it. It's not like choosing Horde in WoW...you feel evil playing a DE or troll, and so many of their elements affect your day to day process. And we might even think of EQ/VG as a black and white movie and Pantheon a movie in color; the dramatic graphic and technical changes is just going to make the world and the aforementioned details feel even more palpable.
All of this is, however, is like a book or movie; everyone will take from it as much as they put into it. You can choose to attach yourself to the world or not, but playing it like a movie or book, emotionally attaching yourself to your character in its entirety and the players around you make for the most rewarding experience in my opinion.
Just because something is minor doesn't mean it should be done away with or is useless. This is not a logical response:
Kyleran said: "if it's a minor hindrance then it's mostly
useless and there should be no major issue letting them start together
or get together quickly."
Kyleran said: "But you could be right, perhaps its not the game for them, and I'm sure the developers don't need their money. "
Yep, it has always been advertised as a niche game and not for everyone. Here is an article stating Brad's opinion. The part relevant to this discussion starts in paragraph 2 and goes from there.
The "relevant" part is right here, where Brad clearly states this is a game focused on getting people adventuring together again.
Not very likely they will purposely support mechanics which might inhibit this in the name or lore or unnecessary challenge.
"We've decided to attract gamers who love to team up with each other and take on the AI -- cooperative gamers who want more than session based games but to work together in a truly persistent environment. We've decided to go after people who want to explore and experience vast handcrafted worlds with compelling storylines and quests. We've targeted the online gamer who when they experience something emotionally intense would rather experience that with other people -- that, to them at least, experiencing challenges and even overcoming them together and as a team provides for muchmore memorable shared experiences"
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
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
Just because something is minor doesn't mean it should be done away with or is useless. This is not a logical response:
Kyleran said: "if it's a minor hindrance then it's mostly
useless and there should be no major issue letting them start together
or get together quickly."
Kyleran said: "But you could be right, perhaps its not the game for them, and I'm sure the developers don't need their money. "
Yep, it has always been advertised as a niche game and not for everyone. Here is an article stating Brad's opinion. The part relevant to this discussion starts in paragraph 2 and goes from there.
The "relevant" part is right here, where Brad clearly states this is a game focused on getting people adventuring together again.
Not very likely they will purposely support mechanics which might inhibit this in the name or lore or unnecessary challenge.
"We've decided to attract gamers who love to team up with each other and take on the AI -- cooperative gamers who want more than session based games but to work together in a truly persistent environment. We've decided to go after people who want to explore and experience vast handcrafted worlds with compelling storylines and quests. We've targeted the online gamer who when they experience something emotionally intense would rather experience that with other people -- that, to them at least, experiencing challenges and even overcoming them together and as a team provides for muchmore memorable shared experiences"
Your interpretation is interesting. I think you're taking a statement a bit out of context to tailor to your argument...If he overtly said "we've decided to attract gamers who know each other in real life to team up with each other," that would be an entirely different story and I think we would all unanimously agree; however, no where does he say anything like that..he is encouraging the general population to work together; that is the only thing we can definitively confirm...the starting cities (as I explained because you had "yet to hear a good argument for starting cities") are pivotal for plot foundation and immersion.
Comments
Allowing one to complete a quest early on in the game that would allow them to, say, join an NPC caravan and ride to another starter area to join someone they started the game with seems like a net gain. Specifically if it's a one-time opportunity quest that cannot be revisited or repeated after that point.
The travel needn't be instant- which serves the additional purpose of allowing said player to glimpse the landscapes of the world as they ride by, enticing them to delve deeper into the game until they're strong enough to return to those landscapes to enjoy the content there.
The idea that it's all or nothing will severely limit the prospects of success in today's landscape. I'm all for erring on the side of a slower-paced, more deliberate approach to everything in MMORPGs that allows me to enjoy the community and world thoroughly without feeling rushed or pressured to power level through it, but it also makes no sense to completely ignore opportunities to show those who may not have been around at the dawn of MMORPGs the reasoning for our desire for some of those design tenets to return, simply out of a self-spiting stubbornness.
Too bad that's not what certain people are asking for. What is being requested is stuff like:
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do.
Benjamin Franklin
So should Devs spend a lot of time creating this one time use quest, of which will appeal to a fairly limited audience?
They could just throw some meaningless go kill 10 rats quest, but then why bother, might as well go with my suggestion.
Or they could make it the epic quest and journey of the decade, squandering scarce and valuable resources on content likely to be used by a very small subset of the population.
Or...they could just let players start where they wish, what the hell, sell it as an extra you can buy for each character if desired,
More revenue for the Devs, everybody wins.
(Look Maw, that bad man is trying to destroy our game)
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
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
I don't think @Kyleran is asking for anything world-shattering, just a simple mechanism added to the pregame decisions -- where does my character start? It really doesn't break the in-game lore at all. If anything, it could produce a more rich and vast experience by showing a non-homogeneous society. Yes, there may be orcs living among the humans. That isn't asking any more than a human player playing an orc or troll character.
I think there's a bigger reason why VR *might* actually allow variable starting locations. "Separate but equal" didn't work well in life, why try to make it work in a game? The in-game lore that presents segregation might turn out to be an antiquated idea that a sensitive section of the gaming population doesn't agree with. I'm sure that VR doesn't want their game to be a political volleyball that fuels social unrest. Bad for the business image.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I have a circle of friends who are mostly couples, very insular, there's about 10 of them who regularly group together in every game they play, so the last thing they want is to be forced into one area or continent or be kept apart of 10 or more levels.
While I'm the "disloyal" member of the group who frequently goes off to solo level, play other games, or even join different guilds in the same game they won't vary, if a game puts up a bunch of blockers to grouping together they won't play it.
Heck, if preserving the lore is so vital, then add in another new starting location, away from the other's and let these folks start there and then visit the rest of the world as they wish.
Again, I don't really care, other than I would like to see my friends try this game, but if they can't group together easily and early they won't be interested.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
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
I like the idea of a 'neutral' starting zone, like a starter island. If fact, it would be more interesting if the racial starting zones were made into higher level areas. Capitals of great civilizations should be great cities where great deeds and events occur, not a place where newbs gather to whack a few rats.
The arguments in favor of the 'sanctity of the lore' bothers me. It's all lore, and much of it hasn't been written yet.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
/sarc
If this game is anything like EQ, It's more like an hour or two.
That's how long it takes for a newbie character to run from Qeynos or Halas to Ak'anon.
It's less time if everyone meets halfway, say Commonlands tunnel.
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do.
Benjamin Franklin
Others have said factional differences could be an issue, Orcs would not be welcome in human city, and attacked by the npc guards.
Some say content in the starter cities would be tailored to be race specific, and consistent with the lore.
I'm all for travel time in games, even longer ones but it has to serve a meaningful purpose.
I've yet to hear a convincing argument against making grouping easier on a group centered game for people just starting out.
This does not mean I'm advocating for fast travel everywhere, or dungeon finders, far from it.
But I am in support of mechanics that hold the interest of a reasonable population of players and doesnt obstruct their enjoyment of the early game, as so many fall by the wayside at this critical time.
One of the greatest complaints against VG was the many different unique racial starting areas segregated the player population far too much, and SOEs solution which most appeared enjoy was a single starter island for everyone. (Which other games have also used)
I'm not even suggesting this game take that path, I enjoyed the starting areas in VG, just let people start where they will, or make it easy to get to another one.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
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
Do your friends have :
"An understanding that player involvement is required for progression. All actions (or lack thereof) should have consequences. Positive actions should be rewarded. Apathy or lack of action should not be rewarded with bonuses."
and
"An understanding that a truly challenging game is truly rewarding." ?
It seems like, from your description, they may not agree with some of the above tenants that are the foundation for the game.
If your circle of friends won't play a game that doesn't allow them to group together early and easily, this is likely not the game for them.
That seems like such a minor hindrance.
If you can't even be bothered to level up a little bit and make a long run to meet your friend, I doubt their play style is one that agrees with a harsh death penalty or challenging gameplay.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Forcing us to accept and endure the consequences of our starting race (if you're KOS in certain cities, how far you are from your friends, some races like halflings get experience bonus and levels much faster etc) affords us with the feeling that we made a very "big decision" right from the start of the game (i.e. risk vs reward). You feel INVESTED in what you chose, because the consequences are severe (for better and worse).
It's such a big commitment that you subconsciously end up having pride for your race and city (sounds cheesy but it's true). The cities and cultures are just so vastly different. I mean imagine if we could instantly teleport to China, London, Cape Town, whatever. Would vacationing and seeing other cultures be as fun, important, or influential to us? Over time everything in the world would seem like it's within arms reach, which would take away the immersion and excitement we get when we travel to far away places. It works the same way here. And honestly, worst case scenario, if people care so little about lore and the significance of the risk/reward for travelling at early levels, there is already a built in system for you to play together with friends; choose the same race or races who's starting cities are close together.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
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
Kyleran said: "if it's a minor hindrance then it's mostly useless and there should be no major issue letting them start together or get together quickly."
----------
I wonder exactly what lore / culture / societies prior games have established in their starting cities that formed such loyalty to the concept of lore. What makes these starting cities that have been discussed so different from one another? To me, Grobb and Qeynos aren't very different. Yes, the NPCs are hostile to other factions, and both sell every item a player can ever need from NPC vendors. Both support the main classes that these races can be, selling spells, skills, and consumables.
There are quest lines there, but are there really any vital quests for Trolls in Grobb in EQ1, or essential quests for Humans in Qeynos? Not really. There's nothing to do that impacts the character to such a degree that the starting city imparts more 'humanity' for human characters, or makes troll characters identify more with the troll race? If there are, I certainly can't think of them.
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?
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Maybe a better example would be wood elves vs dark elves or ogres. Wood elves' entire city is in the trees. You use wooden elevators that lift you to the sky, you forage items for tradeskills and food, living off the land as you fight wisps, wasps, and things sylvan/pure by nature. The music is calm and reassuring. The items and drops are nature centric. The sun is always shining during the day. Guards and guildmasters' entire dialogue is a 180 compared to DEs and Ogres. WE NPCs are kind, intelligent, warm, loving, resolute/pure in their goals. The bordering zones, too, play on the theme of nature, and the invading orcs in butcherblock, along with some things in lesser faydark, which they hint that you will need to return there at some point to rid various evils. Your entire experience is tied to a pure sense of nature, preservation, and "good," for quite a while.
Dark elves are literally evil, they talk evil, the snicker at you and laugh wildly, they look evil, the city is Gothic and dark with a lot of water (and it's tucked away completely underground). The music is entirely foreboding and different. They worship dark gods and you feel like the villain/outlaw at every turn. You are warned of how threatening your race is to others. No one is there to help you, you feel alone, like you have to earn your black stripes like all of the other DEs. They seek death and harbor the dead for their bidding, almost constantly. They wield things like scythes and have a harsh language. You're killing skeletons and apparitions that laugh and scream creepy in a misty, dreary looking zone and the surrounding zones play to that as well, collecting bone chips and other depressing/dark items. It feels dark and cold, and dank everywhere. The land is barren with no living nature if I recall. You can't understand what other people say because you know can't speak common tongue, and of course your KOS to half the world, so you have to slink around everywhere like a criminal. I dont know if you could even get to boats without being killed.
I could go on for days about the cultural differences and feeling. I remember first rolling a DE necro and just didn't like the feel of it. It's not like choosing Horde in WoW...you feel evil playing a DE or troll, and so many of their elements affect your day to day process. And we might even think of EQ/VG as a black and white movie and Pantheon a movie in color; the dramatic graphic and technical changes is just going to make the world and the aforementioned details feel even more palpable.
All of this is, however, is like a book or movie; everyone will take from it as much as they put into it. You can choose to attach yourself to the world or not, but playing it like a movie or book, emotionally attaching yourself to your character in its entirety and the players around you make for the most rewarding experience in my opinion.
Not very likely they will purposely support mechanics which might inhibit this in the name or lore or unnecessary challenge.
"We've decided to attract gamers who love to team up with each other and take on the AI -- cooperative gamers who want more than session based games but to work together in a truly persistent environment. We've decided to go after people who want to explore and experience vast handcrafted worlds with compelling storylines and quests. We've targeted the online gamer who when they experience something emotionally intense would rather experience that with other people -- that, to them at least, experiencing challenges and even overcoming them together and as a team provides for muchmore memorable shared experiences"
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
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